Discuss the views of different historians on the Maratha state system.Was fitna an integral part of the way the Marathas operated?

The Maratha state system, which emerged in the 17th century, is a subject of historical analysis with varied interpretations among historians. The term "fitna" refers to internal strife, conflict, or discord within a community or political entity. The views on fitna as an integral part of the way the Marathas operated vary among historians, reflecting diverse perspectives on the nature of the Maratha state.

1. Expansion and Consolidation:
The Marathas, under the leadership of Chhatrapati Shivaji and subsequent rulers, embarked on a remarkable period of expansion in the Deccan. Their military prowess and guerrilla warfare tactics allowed them to carve out a substantial empire. Historians often emphasize Shivaji's administrative reforms and the establishment of a decentralized administrative structure that included the concept of "swarajya" or self-rule.

2. Maratha Confederacy:
After Shivaji's death, the Maratha state evolved into a confederacy led by the Chhatrapatis, Peshwas, and powerful Maratha chieftains (sardars). The Peshwas, as prime ministers, played a crucial role in centralizing administrative and military authority. This confederacy facilitated Maratha expansion across India, reaching its zenith in the mid-18th century.

3. Administrative Structure:
The Maratha state's administrative structure, particularly under the Peshwas, is a subject of historical scrutiny. The Chauth and Sardeshmukhi system, involving the collection of taxes from conquered territories, was employed to sustain the Maratha military apparatus. However, administrative centralization also led to discontent among regional chieftains who sought greater autonomy.

4. Fitna in Maratha Politics:
The concept of fitna is often associated with internal conflicts within the Maratha confederacy. Historians like Stewart Gordon argue that fitna was inherent in the Maratha political structure due to power struggles among the Peshwas, chieftains, and other factions vying for influence. The first Anglo-Maratha War (1775-1782) and subsequent conflicts are cited as instances of internal discord.

5. Decline and Fragmentation:
The Maratha state faced challenges from external powers, including the British East India Company. The Third Battle of Panipat in 1761 was a significant setback for the Marathas. The subsequent decades witnessed internal power struggles, with the Peshwas becoming weaker and regional chieftains asserting greater autonomy. This period is often characterized by fitna, as different factions within the Maratha confederacy sought to assert their dominance.

Historical Perspectives:

• J.N. Sarkar: Views the Marathas as successful warriors but criticizes their inability to establish stable political institutions. He highlights internal conflicts and the lack of a strong central authority.
• James Grant Duff: Emphasizes the role of fitna in the decline of the Maratha power, attributing internal discord as a significant factor in their inability to withstand external pressures.
• Stewart Gordon: Argues that fitna was integral to Maratha politics, with power struggles and conflicts defining their political landscape. Points to internal rivalries as contributing to the Maratha decline.

In conclusion, while the Maratha state system witnessed periods of expansion and military success, internal conflicts, power struggles, and fitna were significant aspects of their political landscape. The inability to address internal discord contributed to the decline and fragmentation of the Maratha confederacy, ultimately impacting their ability to withstand external pressures. Different historians offer nuanced perspectives on the role of fitna, highlighting the complexities of the Maratha state system and its ultimate unraveling in the 19th century.