Rise of New Regional Powers

As the Mughal Empire crumbled under the weight of internal decay and external pressures, a new political landscape began to take shape across India. This period witnessed the rise of “Insurgent States” — regional powers like the Marathas, Afghans (Rohillas), Jats, and the Sikhs of Punjab — which did not emerge through royal succession or imperial patronage, but rather through rebellion against Mughal authority.

Unlike the successor states led by Mughal nobles, these insurgent powers had deeper social roots. Many of them, especially the Maratha, Jat, and Afghan states, began as mass-based movements of resistance, often drawing strength from peasants, local chieftains, and warrior communities. Their rise reflected a shift in political legitimacy — from dynastic entitlement to popular assertion.

These new states would go on to challenge not just the remnants of Mughal power, but also redefine the regional balance of power in 18th-century India.

The Rise and Fall of the Marathas

A Story of Regional Assertion and Lost Opportunity

The Historical Context: A Fracturing Empire

As the Mughal Empire entered a phase of irreversible decline in the early 18th century, the vacuum of power gave birth to what historians call “insurgent states” — states that were born out of rebellion against centralized Mughal authority. Among these, the Marathas emerged as the most formidable.

Unlike dynasties that grew from court intrigues or foreign invasions, Maratha power was a product of popular resistance, particularly the peasant insurgency against Mughal oppression in the Deccan. Alongside them, the Afghans, Jats, and Sikhs too asserted their autonomy. But it was the Marathas alone who posed a real all-India challenge to Mughal supremacy.

The Dual Character of Maratha Rise

The rise of the Marathas was not merely political. It reflected:

• A regional reaction to Mughal over-centralization.
• An upward socio-political aspiration — particularly of the Maratha peasant castes who desired Kshatriya status, legitimizing their rise in the traditional varna order.

This dual character gave the Marathas both depth and volatility. While they expanded swiftly, they often lacked the ideological unity and administrative vision required to replace an empire like the Mughals.

Foundation of Peshwa Supremacy (1707–1740)

Shahu Maharaj’s Return & Civil War

In 1707, after Aurangzeb’s death, Shahu (grandson of Shivaji) was released from Mughal captivity. A civil war broke out between Shahu and his aunt Tara Bai, each claiming the Maratha throne. Into this struggle stepped a clever assistant — Balaji Vishwanath.

Balaji Vishwanath (1713–1720): The Architect of Political Supremacy

Balaji played a pivotal role in convincing Maratha sardars that Shahu was the legitimate heir. For his loyalty and strategic vision, Shahu appointed him Peshwa (Mukhya Pradhan).

He transformed the Peshwa’s role from a minister to the de facto ruler, using diplomacy and alliances:

• Aligned with the Saiyid brothers to secure recognition of Maratha claims.
• Acquired the right to collect Chauth and Sardeshmukhi — taxes symbolic of sovereignty — over large parts of the Deccan.
• Initiated the assignment system, giving Maratha sardars specific territories to collect revenue.

🔴 But this assignment system sowed seeds of future weakness. Sardars became semi-independent, cared more for their revenue than central coordination, and often colluded with enemies when restrained.

Baji Rao I (1720–1740): The Sword of the Maratha Empire

At just 20 years old, Baji Rao I, son of Balaji Vishwanath, became Peshwa. Often called “the greatest exponent of guerrilla warfare after Shivaji”, he gave the Maratha movement its imperial shape.

Major Military Campaigns:

• Nizam of Hyderabad: Defeated at Palkhed (1728) and Bhopal (1737). These victories reinforced Maratha control in the Deccan and Central India.
• Portuguese: His brother Chimaji Appa defeated them and captured Bassein and Salsette.
• North India: Expanded into Malwa, Bundelkhand, and Gujarat.

⚠️ However, Baji Rao’s focus was military conquest — he neglected administration. Newly acquired territories remained loosely governed, making them vulnerable.

Balaji Baji Rao (1740–1761): Zenith and the Collapse

Known as Nana Saheb, he took the Maratha Empire to its greatest extent:

• East: Secured Orissa from Bengal’s Alivardi Khan.
• South: Defeated Nizam in Udgir (1760) and extracted massive tributes.
• North: Became kingmakers at Delhi. In 1752, the Mughal Emperor signed a treaty with them, recognizing them as defenders of the empire.

The Ahmad Shah Abdali Crisis and Panipat (1761)

But the Marathas’ success generated many enemies:

• Northern rulers saw them as outsiders from the South.
• Jats, Rajputs, and Rohillas resented Maratha interference.
• Abdali, invited by Najib-ud-Daulah, led an alliance against them.

The result was the Third Battle of Panipat (14 Jan 1761) — a disaster for the Marathas:

• 28,000 troops dead, including Sadashiv Rao Bhau and Vishwas Rao.
• Prestige lost, leadership vacuum created.
• British East India Company (EIC) quietly capitalized on the chaos.

🧠 A profound insight: “The battle did not decide who would rule India, but who would not.”

Madhav Rao I (1761–1772): A Flicker of Revival

Just 17, Madhav Rao I rebuilt the empire in just 11 years:

• Defeated Nizam and Haidar Ali.
• Restored Shah Alam II to the Delhi throne under Maratha protection.
• Reasserted Maratha influence in the North.

But his early death in 1772 marked the beginning of internal factionalism.

Nana Phadnavis & Mahadji Sindhia: The Dual Revivalists

• Nana Phadnavis: Handled administration in Poona, stabilized finances and politics.
• Mahadji Sindhia: Restored Maratha power in Delhi, managed Shah Alam, and reestablished Maratha supremacy in the North using a French-trained army.

But with their deaths — Mahadji (1794), Nana (1800) — the empire entered terminal decline.

Decline and Disintegration (1795–1818)

Baji Rao II (1795–1818): The Last Peshwa

• Weak and manipulative, Baji Rao II sought British help against his rivals, triggering the First Anglo-Maratha War.
• Failed leadership led to British divide-and-rule policies and defeats in the Second (1803–05) and Third (1817–19) Anglo-Maratha Wars.
• The Peshwa’s office was abolished, and the dream of a pan-Indian Maratha Empire died.

Why Did the Marathas Fail?

Despite heroic efforts, the Marathas could not replace the Mughals. Key reasons include:

1. Decentralized polity: Sardars became semi-independent.
2. Poor governance: Conquest wasn’t followed by administrative consolidation.
3. Lack of vision: No systematic encouragement of trade, science, or innovation.
4. Leadership loss: All able leaders (Madhav Rao, Nana, Mahadji) died before 1800.
5. British diplomacy: Exploited internal divisions cleverly.

Panipat – The Graveyard of Empires

A quick recap of the Three Battles of Panipat:

Battle	Year	Participants	Outcome	Significance
1st	1526	Babur vs Ibrahim Lodhi	Babur won	Foundation of Mughal Empire
2nd	1556	Akbar vs Hemu	Akbar won	Restoration of Mughal rule
3rd	1761	Abdali vs Marathas	Abdali won	Collapse of Maratha imperial dream

Why Panipat?

• It lay along traditional invasion routes from the Northwest.
• Its flat terrain was ideal for cavalry warfare.
• It was close to Delhi, the symbolic centre of India’s power.

Final Reflection: Could the Marathas Have Replaced the Mughals?

Yes — had they won at Panipat. But even victory would have required:

• Centralized administration
• Social and economic reform
• Unity among Sardars

The Marathas fought for Bharatiya Swaraj — but lacked the institutional strength to sustain it. Their fall marked the rise of the British Empire, which would now control the fate of the subcontinent.

The Rise and Fall of the Sikh Empire: From Bhakti to Battlefield

Background: Punjab’s Unique Path Post-Mughal Disintegration

While Bengal, Awadh, and Hyderabad saw provincial governors turning autonomous, Punjab witnessed something different: a people’s movement evolved into a sovereign political power.

The Sikhs, born out of a spiritual tradition, transformed into a military and administrative force — not through inheritance or Mughal appointment, but through resilience, ideology, and unity in adversity.

Sikhism: Spiritual Origins to Political Assertion

Guru Nanak (1469–1539): The Founder of Sikhism

• Born at Talwandi (now Nankana Sahib, Pakistan).
• Emphasized universal brotherhood, devotion (bhakti), equality, and social justice.
• Guru Nanak never intended to start a new religion — he critiqued orthodoxy and emphasized Nam, Daan, and Seva.
• Over time, his followers developed a distinct identity and practices, slowly forming a religio-political community.

Militarization under Guru Gobind Singh (1666–1708)

• Created the Khalsa in 1699, symbolizing the birth of a martial Sikh identity.
• Adopted titles like Singh (Lion) for males and Kaur (Princess) for females.
• Constantly fought with Aurangzeb — refusing to submit spiritually or politically.
• After his death, he declared the Guru Granth Sahib as the eternal Guru. With that, personal Guruship ended, and community leadership passed to Banda Singh Bahadur.

Banda Singh Bahadur (1670–1716): The Revolutionary Commander

• Banda Bahadur launched a mass-based peasant revolt.
• Abolished zamindari and granted land rights to tillers — a radical act for its time.
• Established Sikh rule briefly, issuing coins and edicts in his name.
• Captured and executed by the Mughals in 1716, halting Sikh ambitions for a generation.

🔴 Significance: Banda’s rule is considered the first formal political assertion of Sikh sovereignty, but his execution marked a temporary setback.

The Misl Period (1716–1799): Confederal Militarism

After Banda’s death, Sikh resistance went underground but didn’t disappear. The 18th century saw:

• Continued foreign invasions (Nadir Shah in 1739, Abdali in 1757),
• Mughal decline,
• Internal conflict in Punjab.

Taking advantage of this, Sikh warriors organized into 12 Misls.

What is a Misl?

• A military brotherhood (akin to a regiment or clan) — each operating semi-independently.
• Based on equality and democratic principles at first, but later dominated by powerful feudal chiefs.
• Functioned like mini republics or oligarchies with their own territory and armies.

Between 1765 and 1800, the Misls consolidated Sikh control over Punjab, Jammu, and parts of present-day Himachal.

Ranjit Singh (1780–1839): The Architect of the Sikh Empire

Early Life and Rise

• Born to Sardar Mahan Singh, chief of the Sukerchakia Misl.
• Became chief at 10 years of age, and by 1799, captured Lahore.
• Recognizing the danger of fragmented power, Ranjit Singh systematically subdued other Misls.

Political and Military Achievements

• Declared Maharaja of Punjab in 1801, beginning the Sikh Empire.
• Conquered:
  • Amritsar (1802)
  • Kashmir (1819)
  • Hazara (1820)
  • Peshawar & Khyber Pass (1834)

🧠 His empire extended from Sutlej to the Indus, and from Kashmir to Multan — the last major indigenous Indian empire before the British consolidated power.

Administration and Army: Modern Yet Indigenous

• Army Reform: With the help of European officers like:
  • Jean-Baptiste Ventura (Italian) – infantry modernization.
  • Jean-Francois Allard (French) – cavalry modernization.
• Built Fauj-i-Khas (elite unit) on European lines — second only to the British in India.

Administration:

• Strong revenue system, locally adapted.
• Ensured religious tolerance — Hindus and Muslims held key offices.
• Supported Gurudwaras, including renovation and gold-plating of Harmandir Sahib, leading to the name: Golden Temple.

🟡 Even the Nizam of Hyderabad is said to have contributed to the gold plating — showing pan-Indian reverence.

Decline After Ranjit Singh’s Death (1839–1849)

• After 1839, court factions and infighting broke the empire:
  • Frequent assassinations,
  • Rise of powerful but uncontrolled army generals,
  • Weak successors.

Anglo-Sikh Wars:

• First Anglo-Sikh War (1845–46): British victory, partial control.
• Second Anglo-Sikh War (1848–49): Complete annexation.

In 1849, the British dissolved the Sikh Empire, and Punjab became part of the British Indian Empire.

Why Did the Sikh Empire Fall?

Reason	Explanation
⚔️ Leadership Vacuum	After Ranjit Singh’s death, no strong heir emerged.
🪖 Army Overreach	The Khalsa army became politicized and undisciplined.
🧱 Lack of Institutions	Strong personal rule, but weak institutional structures.
🤝 British Intrigue	The British played on court rivalries and broke internal unity.

Legacy of Ranjit Singh and the Sikh Empire

• Last major indigenous empire in North India.
• Represented inclusive governance, military modernization, and secular nationalism.
• Golden Temple’s gold plating, his secular court, and his symbolic stature as Sher-e-Punjab make him one of the most respected Indian rulers of the 18th–19th century.

The Jats – From Rebellion to Regional Power

Let us first understand the Jats. They were an agriculturist community primarily concentrated in the fertile regions around Delhi, Agra, and Mathura. While today they are often seen as landowners or peasants, in the context of 17th-century India, their role became politically significant due to repeated revolts against Mughal authority.

⚔️ Jat Revolts: A Peasant Uprising Turns Political

In the latter half of the 17th century, especially in 1669 and 1688, Jat peasants—led by their own Zamindars—rose up in rebellion, particularly around Mathura. These revolts were not minor disturbances—they struck at the heart of the Mughal Empire, destabilizing its core territories.

Initially, the revolt had the character of a peasant uprising, driven by agrarian discontent. But gradually, it morphed into a predatory movement. Jat leaders began to organize bands that engaged in plunder and raiding—not just of Mughal estates but of all sections of society, irrespective of religion or class. Jagirdars and peasants, Hindus and Muslims—all became targets.

Interestingly, the Jats didn’t remain isolated from imperial politics. They frequently engaged in intrigues at the Mughal court, shifting alliances to suit their own interests. This demonstrates how even a peasant movement could evolve into a politically manipulative force during the Empire’s decline.

🏰 The Jat State of Bharatpur

With the decline of centralized Mughal authority, the Jats aspired for more than rebellion—they tried to establish an autonomous state.

• This effort was led by two Jat chieftains—Churaman and Badan Singh—who laid the foundations of the Jat State of Bharatpur.
• But it was under Maharaja Suraj Mal (r. 1756–1763) that the Jat state reached its pinnacle of glory.

🌟 Suraj Mal: The Philosopher King of Bharatpur

Suraj Mal was not just a brave warrior; he was also an astute administrator. His kingdom expanded from:

• Ganga in the east
• Agra in the west
• Chambal in the south
• Delhi in the north

This shows the strategic location and political influence the Jat state had achieved under his rule.

However, despite its peasant origins, the Jat polity retained a feudal structure. Zamindars remained powerful, handling both administration and revenue collection.

After Suraj Mal’s death in 1763, the state began to fragment. It lost its centralized cohesion and was split among petty zamindars, many of whom turned to plunder as a means of livelihood.

Rohilkhand: The Rohilas of the North

Another regional power that emerged in the early 18th century was Rohilkhand, located in the foothills of the Himalayas, between the Ganga River and the Kumaon Hills.

• Ali Muhammad Khan, adopted son of Sardar Daud Khan, established the Kingdom of Rohilkhand in 1721.
• The people of this region, known as Rohilas, were of Afghan origin and known for their military prowess.

The Rohilas were constantly involved in territorial conflicts—with the Jats, Nawabs of Awadh, Marathas, and eventually, the British.

Ultimately, in 1774, the Nawab of Awadh, with the help of the British, defeated Rohilkhand. It was then converted into the princely state of Rampur, marking the end of Rohila autonomy.

Farrukhabad: An Afghan Kingdom in the Ganga Valley

Next is Farrukhabad, a smaller but strategically important Afghan kingdom.

• It was established by Muhammad Khan Bangash, an Afghan military leader, in 1714, east of Delhi.
• Though smaller in comparison, Farrukhabad held its own in the chaotic political environment of early 18th-century India.