Executive Summary Chhatrapati Sambhaji Maharaj (1657–1689), the second ruler of the Maratha Empire, inherited a kingdom under existential threat from the Mughals, Siddis, Portuguese, and regional rivals. His reign was defined by adaptive military strategies that combined his father Shivaji’s guerrilla tactics with bold offensive campaigns, economic pressure, and diplomatic maneuvering. Sambhaji’s approach delayed Mughal expansion into the Deccan for nearly a decade, preserved Maratha sovereignty, and expanded influence in southern India. However, his reliance on rapid raids, internal betrayals, and resource limitations ultimately led to his capture and execution. This report analyzes his key strategies, their tactical execution, and their long-term impact on the Maratha-Mughal conflict.
Military Strategies and Tactical Execution
- Guerrilla Warfare and Asymmetric Combat Sambhaji refined Shivaji’s Ganimi Kava (guerrilla tactics) to counter the Mughals’ numerical superiority. His forces avoided large-scale battles, instead launching lightning raids on supply lines, outposts, and revenue centers.
Burhanpur Raid (1680): Sambhaji’s most audacious strike targeted Burhanpur, a wealthy Mughal trade hub. Disguising his movements, he bypassed fortified positions, looted the city’s treasury, and executed officials enforcing jizya (Islamic tax on non-Muslims). The raid crippled Aurangzeb’s revenue stream and diverted Mughal forces from the Deccan.
Scorched-Earth Tactics: To deny resources to advancing Mughal armies, Sambhaji ordered the burning of villages and crops in Konkan and Maharashtra. This forced Aurangzeb’s troops into protracted sieges, exacerbating supply shortages.
Effectiveness: These tactics stretched Mughal logistics, buying time for Maratha regrouping. However, they alienated local populations, weakening grassroots support.
- Fortification Networks and Defensive Warfare Sambhaji prioritized fortifying key strongholds like Raigad, Panhala, and Purandar, which served as supply depots and fallback points.
Multi-Layered Defense: Forts were reinforced with hidden escape routes, water reservoirs, and overlapping artillery positions. For example, during the 1682 siege of Ramsej, Maratha defenders repelled Mughal mining attempts and artillery bombardments for five months.
Strategic Withdrawals: When outnumbered, Sambhaji abandoned indefensible positions—such as retreating from Goa in 1684 to avoid encirclement by Mughal-Portuguese forces—preserving manpower.
Effectiveness: Forts delayed Mughal advances but required constant reinforcement. By 1687, Aurangzeb captured Satara and Wai, exposing the limitations of static defenses.
- Naval Blockades and Coastal Campaigns Sambhaji inherited Shivaji’s navy but expanded its role in disrupting enemy trade.
Goa Invasion (1683): Maratha ships blockaded Portuguese ports, capturing Salsette and Bardez. Sambhaji’s forces nearly overran Goa before Mughal reinforcements arrived, forcing a retreat.
Alliance with Arab Pirates: To counter the Siddis of Janjira, Sambhaji partnered with Arab naval powers, enhancing his fleet’s reach. Despite repeated attempts, Janjira’s island fortress remained unconquered.
Effectiveness: Naval campaigns secured coastal revenues but failed to dislodge entrenched rivals like the Siddis. The 1684 treaty with the English for artillery supplies highlights resource gaps.
- Economic Warfare: Chauth and Sardeshmukhi Sambhaji enforced Shivaji’s taxation system (Chauth: 25% revenue; Sardeshmukhi: 10% levy) in conquered territories, crippling Mughal-affiliated economies.
Targeted Looting: Raids on Surat (1680) and Bharuch (1685) focused on Mughal treasuries and trade caravans, funding Maratha campaigns.
Resource Denial: By sacking Bijapuri and Portuguese outposts, Sambhaji starved Aurangzeb’s allies of funds, forcing them into unfavorable alliances.
Effectiveness: Economic pressure strained Mughal campaigns but provoked retaliatory raids, exacerbating Maratha resource shortages.
- Diplomatic Maneuvering and Alliances Sambhaji leveraged regional rivalries to isolate Aurangzeb.
Harboring Mughal Rebels: He sheltered Prince Akbar, Aurangzeb’s son, for five years (1681–1686), using him to legitimize Maratha resistance. However, Akbar’s eventual flight to Persia undermined this strategy.
Southern Coalitions: Treaties with the Qutb Shahis of Golkonda and Chikkadevaraja of Mysore initially checked Mughal expansion. Mysore’s later defection to Aurangzeb, however, exposed diplomatic fragility.
Effectiveness: Alliances provided temporary respite but collapsed under Mughal pressure. The 1684 pact with the English East India Company secured firearms but failed to ensure lasting support.
Assessment of Effectiveness Short-Term Successes Delaying Aurangzeb’s Advance: Sambhaji’s guerrilla campaigns forced Aurangzeb to remain in the Deccan for 27 years, preventing Mughal consolidation in the north. Economic Resilience: The Chauth system funded Maratha operations despite losing territorial control. By 1687, Sambhaji still held critical forts like Raigad and Sinhagad. Psychological Impact: High-profile raids (e.g., Burhanpur) demoralized Mughal commanders and boosted Maratha morale.
Long-Term Limitations Overextension: Simultaneous wars against the Mughals, Portuguese, Siddis, and Mysore stretched Maratha resources thin. The failed 1686 Mysore invasion marked a strategic overreach. Internal Betrayals: Sambhaji’s harsh punishments for dissent (e.g., executing 24 conspirators in 1683) bred resentment. His 1689 capture resulted from intelligence leaks by disgruntled nobles. Lack of Technological Edge: Despite English artillery imports, Maratha forces lagged in siegecraft, failing to breach Janjira or Portuguese forts.
Legacy and Historical Impact
-
Foundation for Maratha Resurrection Sambhaji’s resistance bought critical time for Rajaram and Tarabai to regroup after his death. By 1707, the Marathas under Shahu I reversed Mughal gains, validating Sambhaji’s attritional approach.
-
Influence on Mughal Decline Aurangzeb’s Deccan campaigns drained the Mughal treasury, with Sambhaji’s raids contributing to a 50% revenue drop in Surat by 1689. This financial collapse accelerated the empire’s fragmentation post-1707.
-
Strategic Innovations Mobile Governance: Sambhaji’s court often operated from forts like Panhala, prefiguring mobile command centers in modern warfare. Hybrid Warfare: Blending guerrilla tactics, economic pressure, and psychological operations presaged 20th-century insurgency models.
