Nawab of Arcot and the King of Tanjore

Marathadi-Saamiyaar wrote:

Didn't you just post this last week?

Why again ? attention seeking? sadism? Narcissism? Obsession? OCD ?

Or. are you just proving what I asked you 2 days back ?

Rashmun wrote:On 13th August 1773, the Nawab's army entered Tanjore and the Rajah was made a prisoner. By the 27th August 1773, the whole of Tanjore was captured by the Nawab's army. When the news of the victory was conveyed to the Nawab, he was overjoyed, at the prospect of accreation of land and wealth to his kingdom. But the Nawab met with his first disappointment when he found that nothing was left in the Rajah's Toshe Khana (Storehouse) except a few jewels and dresses of the ladies of the Palace, which he ordered his son, who conducted the campaign to return to the owners; which was duly done out of compassion. When the Rajah was defeated, Nawab Wallajah gave strict instructions to his son, Amir-ul-Umra that the Rajah's family should be treated with the utmost respect. He sent his pranam to the Mathaji, the mother of the Rajah and instructed his officers to attend to her comfort.

[url=http://www.princeofarcot.org/nawabs.html#8th

Merlot Daruwala wrote:

Rashmun wrote:On 13th August 1773, the Nawab's army entered Tanjore and the Rajah was made a prisoner. By the 27th August 1773, the whole of Tanjore was captured by the Nawab's army. When the news of the victory was conveyed to the Nawab, he was overjoyed, at the prospect of accreation of land and wealth to his kingdom. But the Nawab met with his first disappointment when he found that nothing was left in the Rajah's Toshe Khana (Storehouse) except a few jewels and dresses of the ladies of the Palace, which he ordered his son, who conducted the campaign to return to the owners; which was duly done out of compassion. When the Rajah was defeated, Nawab Wallajah gave strict instructions to his son, Amir-ul-Umra that the Rajah's family should be treated with the utmost respect. He sent his pranam to the Mathaji, the mother of the Rajah and instructed his officers to attend to her comfort.

[url=http://www.princeofarcot.org/nawabs.html#8th

http://www.princeofarcot.org/nawabs.html#8th[/quote[/url]]

But why would this epitome of enlightened governance, piety, kindness, nobility and all-round goodness invade and forcibly take over a vassal kingdom - that too a penniless one?

Rashmun wrote:

Merlot Daruwala wrote: But why would this epitome of enlightened governance, piety, kindness, nobility and all-round goodness invade and forcibly take over a vassal kingdom - that too a penniless one?

Because a lot of money had been spent by the Nawab on tackling rebels (particularly one muslim rebel commander whose name i forget now) and because of this the Nawab was pretty much bankrupt. He was hoping that capturing Thanjavur, and collecting tax revenue from the people of Thanjavur, would help offset his financial deficit.

Merlot Daruwala wrote:

Rashmun wrote:

Merlot Daruwala wrote: But why would this epitome of enlightened governance, piety, kindness, nobility and all-round goodness invade and forcibly take over a vassal kingdom - that too a penniless one?

Because a lot of money had been spent by the Nawab on tackling rebels (particularly one muslim rebel commander whose name i forget now) and because of this the Nawab was pretty much bankrupt. He was hoping that capturing Thanjavur, and collecting tax revenue from the people of Thanjavur, would help offset his financial deficit.

Are you sure? Doesn't at all sound noble or even vaguely enlightened to try to solve one's financial problems by incurring further military expenses towards robbing an equally bankrupt vassal king.

Rashmun wrote:i may as well confess that there is an element of jest in these Nawab of Arcot posts. If i tell you the reason for the jest it would spoil the effect, but it has something to do with what Max has said (not once but quite a few times) in the past.