Dissension in Marathas

The dissension in the Maratha Empire refers to the internal divisions, rivalries, and political fragmentation that emerged among the Maratha chiefs and confederates during the late 18th and early 19th centuries. These conflicts weakened the unity that had once enabled the Marathas to challenge the Mughals and dominate much of India. The decline in central authority, personal ambition of regional leaders, and lack of coordinated policy ultimately contributed to the downfall of Maratha power and facilitated British supremacy in India.

Background

The Maratha Empire was founded in the 17th century by Chhatrapati Shivaji Maharaj (1674–1680), who established a strong and efficient state based on the ideals of Hindavi Swarajya (self-rule). Under his successors and especially under the leadership of the Peshwas, the Marathas expanded rapidly, emerging as the most powerful political and military force in India by the mid-18th century.
The administrative centre of the empire was at Satara, while the Peshwa, originally the chief minister, gradually became the de facto ruler. Under Balaji Vishwanath, Baji Rao I, and Balaji Baji Rao (Nana Saheb), the Maratha influence extended from the Deccan to northern India. However, after the Third Battle of Panipat (1761), the unity and strength of the Maratha Confederacy began to crumble, giving rise to internal conflicts and dissension.

Causes of Dissension

Several interrelated political, military, and personal factors contributed to the disunity among the Marathas:
1. Weakening of Central Authority: After the death of Balaji Baji Rao (Nana Saheb) in 1761, the Peshwa’s authority weakened. The central administration at Poona (Pune) lost control over regional Maratha chiefs who began asserting autonomy in their respective territories.
2. Rise of the Maratha Confederacy: Instead of a unified empire, the Maratha state evolved into a confederation of powerful chiefs. Prominent among them were:

• Peshwa of Poona – nominal head of the confederacy.
• Gaekwad of Baroda – ruling over Gujarat.
• Holkar of Indore – controlling Malwa.
• Scindia (Shinde) of Gwalior – dominant in north-central India.
• Bhonsle of Nagpur – influential in central and eastern India.

Each of these houses maintained separate armies, treasuries, and foreign policies, leading to frequent conflicts among themselves.
3. Rivalries among Chiefs: Personal and political rivalries among the confederate leaders were a major cause of dissension. The Holkars and Scindias often clashed for supremacy in northern India, while the Bhonsles of Nagpur and the Gaekwads of Baroda pursued independent ambitions. These disputes frequently turned into open hostilities, draining the resources of the confederacy.
4. Influence of British Diplomacy: The British East India Company exploited the internal rivalries of the Marathas through a policy of divide and rule. By offering treaties, alliances, and military support to individual Maratha chiefs, the British systematically undermined Maratha unity. The Subsidiary Alliance system, introduced by Lord Wellesley, further deepened these divisions.
5. Failure of Leadership: The later Peshwas lacked the vision and leadership qualities of their predecessors. Peshwa Madhav Rao I (1761–1772) temporarily restored order, but his premature death plunged the empire once again into turmoil. His successors, especially Peshwa Baji Rao II, were indecisive, self-centred, and heavily influenced by court intrigues.
6. Economic Strain and Administrative Corruption: Continuous wars and internal strife weakened the Maratha economy. The collection of revenue became inconsistent, and corruption spread within the administration. The lack of a centralised fiscal system hindered the ability to maintain large armies or conduct coordinated campaigns.

Major Phases of Maratha Dissension

1. After the Third Battle of Panipat (1761): The catastrophic defeat at Panipat dealt a severe blow to Maratha morale and leadership. While Madhav Rao I managed to revive Maratha fortunes temporarily, the empire never regained the cohesion it had under earlier Peshwas.
2. The First Anglo-Maratha War (1775–1782): This war arose partly from internal dissension. Following the death of Madhav Rao I, a succession dispute broke out between Raghunath Rao (Raghoba) and the infant Madhav Rao II. Raghoba sought British assistance to secure the Peshwaship, leading to the Treaty of Surat (1775). However, the conflict ended inconclusively with the Treaty of Salbai (1782), restoring a fragile peace.
3. Conflicts between Holkars and Scindias: In the late 18th century, the rivalry between Yashwantrao Holkar and Daulat Rao Scindia intensified. Holkar’s attack on Pune in 1802 forced Peshwa Baji Rao II to flee and seek British help, resulting in the Treaty of Bassein (1802). This event marked a decisive loss of Maratha independence and triggered the Second Anglo-Maratha War (1803–1805).
4. British Manipulation and Decline: The Treaty of Bassein deeply divided the Maratha chiefs. While Scindia and Bhonsle opposed the British alliance, Holkar remained independent. Their disunity allowed the British to defeat them separately, consolidating control over large parts of India.

Consequences of Dissension

The internal dissensions among the Marathas had profound consequences for the political destiny of India:

• Loss of Unity: The absence of collective strategy and mutual trust among Maratha chiefs destroyed their ability to resist external forces effectively.
• British Supremacy: The British took advantage of the divisions, defeating the Marathas in successive wars and establishing their dominance.
• Treaty of Bassein (1802): Often called the “death warrant” of Maratha independence, this treaty made the Peshwa a dependent ally of the British East India Company.
• End of the Confederacy: The final defeat of the Marathas in the Third Anglo-Maratha War (1817–1818) led to the annexation of their territories and the dissolution of the confederacy.
• Annexation of Peshwa’s Territory: The Peshwa’s domains were annexed to the British Empire, and Baji Rao II was pensioned off to Bithoor near Kanpur.

Analysis of the Maratha Decline

The dissension in the Maratha confederacy highlights the contrast between their earlier unity under Shivaji and their later fragmentation:

• Absence of Centralised Authority: Unlike the Mughal system, the Marathas failed to evolve a stable central administration that could bind their confederacy.
• Regionalism over Nationalism: The chiefs prioritised personal and regional interests over the collective goal of defending Indian sovereignty.
• Lack of Diplomatic Unity: While the British acted as a unified force with strategic coherence, the Marathas operated as competing powers.
• Inconsistent Foreign Policy: Their alternating alliances with and against the British weakened their diplomatic credibility.
• Dependence on Traditional Warfare: The Marathas relied heavily on cavalry and traditional military tactics, which proved ineffective against British artillery and disciplined infantry.