Talk:Execution of Sambhaji

Speederzzz, I am new here. You just reverted my sourced content because it was copied from the Maratha Empire article. I want the readers to know that eventually a Maratha Empire was established. How best can we do that?-UnprejudicedObserver1 (talk) 17:11, 22 February 2025 (UTC)

The problem is that the Maratha confederacy wasn't "eventually" established. It was founded by the father of Sambhaji, so it wouldn't fit within the "aftermath" section. What would still be useful in my eyes is that the end of the Deccan wars is not described in the section. Which is a bit weird since Sambhaji was executed because of the war.

Speederzzz (Talk) (Stalk) 17:17, 22 February 2025 (UTC)

@Speederzzz: So why don't you add what happened eventually. I am scared to do it myself because you or someone else may revert it.-UnprejudicedObserver1 (talk) 17:37, 22 February 2025 (UTC)

You can propose something here or on my talk page and we can workshop it together. I've not been feeling well lately, so I don't really feel like researching a lot right now. however, I'm always happy to help someone!

Speederzzz (Talk) (Stalk) 18:53, 22 February 2025 (UTC)

@Speederzzz: I propose adding a sentence like this in the, "Aftermath" section, "The beheading of Sambhaji lead to the deccan wars^[1] which eventually lead to the establishment of the Maratha Empire.^[2][3][4]".-UnprejudicedObserver1 (talk) 03:20, 23 February 2025 (UTC)

only, according to our Deccan wars page and the Maratha Confederacy page the deccan wars and the maratha confederacy started with Sambhaji's father Shivaji. I have been trying to find out more information on the Influence of the Deccan wars on the on the later rise of the Marathas, but some of our pages seem to contradict eachother (The Deccan wars page is of suprisingly poor quality with much of the text having citation needed tags), or themselves. It seems to me right now that the deccan wars didn't have much of an effect on the later rise, except that Sambhaji's son got taken hostage by the Mughal emperor, providing him a privileged position that he could exploit later on in life. But I can't read more now because I have an appointment.

Speederzzz (Talk) (Stalk) 13:02, 23 February 2025 (UTC)

Incorrect information of why Aurangzeb decided to launch campaign against Marathas. Rape and murders by Maratha Army was never the reason. Aurangzeb was ambitious to rule India and his dream could not be completed without ruling the Deccan plataeu which was under the rule of Marathas. Hence Aurangzeb launched the campaign. Anikane (talk) 19:02, 22 February 2025 (UTC)

And what's your reliable academic source you're basing that statement off of in contrast to said sources already in use in the article, Anikane? Silverseren^C 19:20, 22 February 2025 (UTC)

https://acrobat.adobe.com/id/urn:aaid:sc:AP:4ece9fb8-5732-443b-9c69-df9c9c1ac5ee

Go through the above link and multiple reliable sources are mentioned here. I have read it, you may read it as well. Subhasad Bakhar, Shivdigvijay have clear mention of same. 58.84.61.174 (talk) 19:41, 22 February 2025 (UTC)

I think simply giving a book and saying 'that's how it is' isn't going to help anyone, you're going to need to tell us what pages we need to look at. Besides, this seems like a school book and it doesn't have a title or author (things editors need to evaluate the validity of a source). The book itself seems to reference a few books, perhaps those are better sources to refer to.

Speederzzz (Talk) (Stalk) 20:47, 22 February 2025 (UTC)

@Speederzzz: I am unrelated to the IP above but using your suggestion, I found this, "The flight of the defeated rebel Akbar to the Maratha king drew Aurangzib to Southern India.^[1][2][3][4]" Can you paraphrase and add this sentence as the reason for Aurangzeb coming to the Deccan? UnprejudicedObserver1 (talk) 03:18, 23 February 2025 (UTC)

The sentence can be paraphrased to, "Aurangzib was drawn to Southern India due to the vanquished rebel Akbar fleeing to the Maratha monarch, Sambhaji.-UnprejudicedObserver1 (talk) 06:38, 23 February 2025 (UTC)

What’s the issue, please delete this page or else amend what is written, this is clear disrespect of Chatrapati Shambaji Maharaj, and like NCERT history textbooks, shown the false narrative of aurangzeb, who have given no right to disrespect like this. 152.59.5.185 (talk) 09:11, 23 February 2025 (UTC)

You have to provide a reliable source for any sentence you want to add to any article of wikipedia. What we now have is based on reliable sources provided by editors who support, "the false narrative of aurangzeb". You can see the above two sections of what reliable sources I have provided (and I am neutral). More about those reliable sources can be read by clicking this: WP:RS.-UnprejudicedObserver1 (talk) 10:56, 23 February 2025 (UTC)

@UnprejudicedObserver1, I saw you added a new sentence to the aftermath section, but I'm a bit confused about it. You say "The beheading of Sambhaji lead to the deccan wars which eventually lead to the establishment of the Maratha Empire." However, the page for Maratha Empire states that it was founded by Sambhaji's father. The Deccan Wars page states that the deccan wars actually started with the death of Sambhaji's father.(although that page is pretty bad and the source cited does not explicitly name the series of conflicts the deccan wars).

Reading the sources your provided, I cannot see how they actually validate your claims. The first source provided states:

"From the Mughal point of view, the hostilities between the Company Bahadur and the Marathas could appear as a troublesome contest for power between the Imperial Diwan of Bengal and the Vakil-i Mutlaq or Imperial Regent. The actual participants of course were considerably more cynical of the position of the Emperor, both the English and Scindia treating their suzerain lord with scant respect..The paramount position of the Mughal within the rituals of supreme and sovereign authority may be amply demonstrated by reference to the coins of the late eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries. Following the doctrine of khutba and sikka, new claimants to hegemony could be expected to be revealed on the coins of different jurisdictions. Yet for much of India they are not to be found. Reference to the graph at the end of this paper will confirm that both the Marathas and the British coined in the name of the Mughal."

This doesn't reference Sambhaji once, unless "Company Bahadur" is somehow related to him. And it seems to discuss the power of the mughal emperor and the cultural power of using the mughal title to claim legitimacy.

The second source states:

"Vishwanath consolidated the Maratha power in the Deccan and led an expeditionary force to Delhi (1718–19) as an ally of the Sayyad brothers. He made the Maratha presence felt at the metropolis for the first time, secured the release of Shahu's family members from Mughal captivity, and obtained the confirmation of the Mughal-Maratha Treaty of 1718 from the emperor. This treaty, by which Shahu accepted the nominal suzerainty of the Mughal Crown in return for his right to collect chauth and sardeshmukhi from all the six provinces of 'the Mughal Deccan'...Delhi became the hub of Maratha political and military activities with effect from 1752, and they used the Mughal emperor as a mere tool in their hands to wield the imperial powers in his name and under his nominal suzerainty."

This is later than the deccan wars, which ended in 1707 when the Mughal emperor died. Thus not supporting your statement. It only supports that a descendant of Sambhaji obtained favourable treaties from the Mughal emperor, eventually Seizing de-facto control over the Mughal empire.

I will remove the addition for now, since both sources fail verification.

Speederzzz (Talk) (Stalk) 19:12, 23 February 2025 (UTC)

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Chatrapathi Shambhaji Maharaj , also known as one of the bravest maharatha ruler and the son of chatrapathi shivaji maharaj , was brutally tortured and executed on 11 march 1689 and the torture was carried for 40 days before his execution , (the wrong information -X- that is provided says that shambhaji was offered to convert to islam but to save his life but in response Shambhaji asked for aurangzeb daughter , which is not true i have read all the articles aswell as books depicted on this and none of the books or articles suggest suggest that shambhaji was a rapist or asked to marry any of aurangzeb's daughter) , (the correction which should be is -Y- Shambhaji maharaj declined to convert into islam and furter on insulted aurangzeb infront of his courtier for his cowardly behaviours which enraged aurangzeb and then the Torture was held for 40 days in which shambhaji maharaj and kavi kalesh both were brutally tortured , mutilated and executed .

Wrong information/Wrong Data - X , Correction- Y

Please look into this matter as Chatrapathi Shambhaji Maharaj is known as one of the bravest warriours of india and if such wrong information are made on him will cause the next generations to learn wrong about him and his sacrifice would be never remembered Garv Chaudhary Singh (talk) 06:18, 24 February 2025 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. Cannolis (talk) 07:32, 24 February 2025 (UTC)

I can’t find any relevance to information “ . Unlike his father, Sambhaji tolerated instances of rape and murder committed by his army during these conflicts.” in execution of Sambhaji. The source attached also doesn’t mention it. So I propose it should be removed from this page. Rushikesh90 (talk) 01:11, 25 February 2025 (UTC)

The source does mention it, and his preference for rape is a big part of his character Shambhuraje is a chump (talk) 03:52, 25 February 2025 (UTC)

Your claim is demonstrably untrue. It's right there on page 218, Shambhaji, in contrast to his father's practice, condoned casual rape and violence by his troops. The reduced Mughal garrison of Burhanpur remained penned up in the citadel as the raiders burnt, loot, raped and tortured. The Marathas "plundered lakhs of rupees in cash from the bankers and merchants of every Purah [quarter], and set fire to them. Some men of noble birth killed their women and received martyrdom as they fell in fighting..." CoffeeCrumbs (talk) 05:10, 25 February 2025 (UTC)

I am not questioning the source here but how is this related to the page title Execution of Sambhaji? It is well known that Aurangzeb captured Sambhaji thats why execution happened. There is another page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sambhaji where this can be debated or mentioned. If the same information is repeated here it does not makes sense. 2402:E280:3E02:46C:5847:B43B:E5F9:5FC7 (talk) 15:59, 25 February 2025 (UTC)

@CoffeeCrumbs The IP seems to be right. The inclusion of "Sambhaji tolerated instances of rape and murder committed by his army during these conflicts" seems reduntant for this topic, it should only stay on Sambhaji. I find no reason for such Inclusion. Heraklios 16:06, 25 February 2025 (UTC)

I have no strong opinion one way or the other; the editor I was responding to, who was continually yelled at us for not removing negative things, said "The source attached also doesn't mention it," which is clearly untrue, so I wanted to get the exact quote from the source in question. CoffeeCrumbs (talk) 01:37, 26 February 2025 (UTC)

The recent change by a user by removing "rape torture and robbery.." from convictions is cleary a POV move. From John F Richards, it makes a quotation that "The reduced Mughal garrison of Burhanpur remained penned up in the citadel as the raiders burnt, loot, raped and tortured." from page 218, the very next page states "For the dominant notables of Burhanpur, Shambhaji's raid was not simply an outrage against public order, but it was a blow directed against the Muslim community by an infidel. If the Mughal empire could not safeguard Muslim lives and property, the Friday congregational prayers could not include Aurangzeb's titles as ruler." The following paragraph states that "Stung by this appeal, and dismayed by his son's rebellion, Aurangzeb marched towards south..." A person who read from page 218 to 224 will understand that his act at Burhanpur made Aurangzeb pressed by the Muslim Ulemas to attack Marathas. And what was his acts at Burhanpur per John F Richards? See the first quotation. And I can see another person removed the part Aurangzeb marched towards south for not for this issue, but because of his rebellious son. Well, both are cited by the source. So I am hoing to add this too. Tagging @CoffeeCrumbs, please confirm this. Hionsa (talk) 09:38, 25 February 2025 (UTC)

Just to be clear, I am not denying that the source mentions the fact that Sambhaji tolerated instances of rape and murder committed by his army during these conflicts or anything of the sort.

But he was not convicted for it, quote:

"A panel of ulema sentenced him to death for having slain and captured good Muslims." AlvaKedak (talk) 10:50, 25 February 2025 (UTC)

For others who want to check it, it's page 223.

Speederzzz (Talk) (Stalk) 12:11, 25 February 2025 (UTC)

Correct, if he had not dishonored women and killed citizens, he would not have been executed. He chose to be a war criminal. The sources are clear. Big fan of the Mughals (talk) 02:08, 2 March 2025 (UTC)

What do you mean? Did you even read the source (specifically page 223) provided by User Speederzzz? AlvaKedak (talk) 15:14, 2 March 2025 (UTC)

I don't find any imperial orders for the conviction of Sambhaji such as "rape torture and robbery" or "Wars with the Mughal Empire" in the source. You should refrain from pushing your original research (more like fantasies) which are nowhere backed by the sources. If only Slaying and capturing Muslims during the Sacking of Burhanpur (1681) should be there, presenting the official order, which I guess is already added by Alvakedak. I'll be removing another conviction: Wars with the Mughal Empire as it's nowhere to be found in the source. Heraklios 16:04, 25 February 2025 (UTC)

That is correct, @HerakliosJulianus. I have also found from the Pawar source that this passage:

“Aurangzeb also offered him to become a Muslim.[14] During the interrogation with the Mughal officers, Sambhaji insulted both the emperor and the Islamic prophet Muhammad. As a result, a panel of Ulema sentenced him to death for the killing and capturing of Muslims.[12]

According to Maratha sources, Aurangzeb, wanting to spare Sambhaji’s life, offered him the choice to convert to Islam. Sambhaji replied that he would do so only if Aurangzeb gave him his daughter. [14]” is also disputed.

Quote:

Again according to Chitnis, when Sambhaji was produced before the Mughal Emperor, he was asked by latter to embrace Islam to save his life. Chitnis further tells that Sarnbhaji bluntly told the Emperor that he would accept Islam if he would give his daughter in marriage to him, This is really a flight of imagination of Chitnis. No contemporary record, even the eye-witness historians do not mention such a dialogue between two.

Should we remove that part too since it is also controversial and only do something about this after a consensus\mutual understanding has been reached? What do you say? AlvaKedak (talk) 13:50, 26 February 2025 (UTC)

Removed inflammatory contents per WP:BRD. You're right, one should refer here before adding any controversial or rather PoV additions. Heraklios 16:56, 26 February 2025 (UTC)

I think a good way to implement this is by saying that Chitnis said "X", However [Author of the quote] disputes this, stating that no contemporary records or eye-witness accounts mention this dialogue.

Speederzzz (Talk) (Stalk) 17:56, 26 February 2025 (UTC)

That's being discussed at Talk:Sambhaji. Although we may proceed to craft this article with your suggestion. Heraklios 20:15, 26 February 2025 (UTC)

Oh, I'm not on that page. We could put my suggestion as a temporary way of writing it untill the larger discussion has come to a conclusion. But I'd like to hear from others before I unilaterally change it.

Speederzzz (Talk) (Stalk) 11:30, 27 February 2025 (UTC)

@HerakliosJulianus, @Speederzzz I am willing to do these changes, based on our discussion. Please feel free to correct my mistakes here, I will try my best to fix the NPOV issues. AlvaKedak (talk) 21:23, 28 February 2025 (UTC)

Thanks!

Speederzzz (Talk) (Stalk) 21:54, 28 February 2025 (UTC)

Providing a map with the various places mentioned here would, perhaps, make the article more readable. Pldx1 (talk) 18:32, 27 February 2025 (UTC)

No map needed. This happened in a small area. Sambhaji was turned in by local Hindus who observed him, and he was executed within a day. Not much movement. Aurangzeb the Hero (talk) 03:37, 7 March 2025 (UTC) — Aurangzeb the Hero (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

The lede says Sambhaji was tortured to death, but the body says he was beheaded. Which is right? Nawab Shivaji (talk) 03:35, 10 March 2025 (UTC)

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made.

SMYTI (tk|CNTBTN)

22:38, 29 March 2025 (UTC)

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

You need a reliable source written to say that the lead and body of this article don't match? What? 107.116.165.135 (talk) 01:39, 30 March 2025 (UTC)

 Done

SMYTI (tk|CNTBTN)

09:27, 30 March 2025 (UTC)

insult chhtrapati sambhaji personality 2409:4081:2CB0:7628:1585:CB83:371F:1CFA (talk) 08:20, 11 September 2025 (UTC)

If there is a specific edit you'd like to make, please read WP:EDITREQ about what an edit request is and how to properly make one. Otherwise, only extended-confirmed editors may make edits in this topic, and this is WP:NOTFORUM. CoffeeCrumbs (talk) 08:45, 11 September 2025 (UTC)

Hi @Rzvas,

I want to clarify the reasoning behind my edit to the lead. The phrasing "Sambhaji, the second Chhatrapati of the Marathas" was not intended as honorific styling. In this context, "Chhatrapati" refers to the sovereign office of the Maratha ruler rather than functioning as a stylistic title before the name.

This follows a common structure used on other execution articles to identify the office held by the person being discussed. For example, the lead of the Saddam Hussein article begins "Saddam Hussein, the former president of Iraq..." and the Charles I article begins "Charles I, King of England, Scotland and Ireland...". In both cases, the office is identified in apposition after the name rather than treated as an honorific prefix.

Similarly, "Sambhaji, the second Chhatrapati of the Marathas" simply identifies the office he held. The Sambhaji article itself also lists his position in the infobox succession parameter as "Chhatrapati of the Marathas," so the wording was intended to reflect what was already used there rather than introduce honorific styling such as "Chhatrapati Sambhaji."

— Prakashs27 (talk) 21:48, 7 March 2026 (UTC)

Chatrapati is just a title that has been used by a variety of Monarchs, not just Maratha king Shivaji and his descendants. Chatrapati is not an office, no source treats it as one unlike those you have named. Rzvas (talk) 15:33, 23 March 2026 (UTC)

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Please remove the part where condones the rape of women and he was held captive. He was just kept there for safety and avoiding any conflicts between Soyarabai. ~2026-22780-77 (talk) 05:30, 28 May 2026 (UTC)

 Not done:: Not in the form of X->Y, not uncontroversial change, so not eligible for an WP:EDITREQUEST. CoffeeCrumbs (talk) 06:17, 28 May 2026 (UTC)