Talk:Battle of Pavan Khind

Untitled
Spelling rh as in Aligarh is particular in Northern India. But in Maharashtra, d is used and not rh. Note that Raigad is different that Raigarh. Name of the fort is spelled as Vishalgad and not as Vishalgarh. Yogesh Sawant 12:49, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
 * +1. Needs correction throughout the article. -- अभय नातू (talk) 17:47, 4 September 2021 (UTC)

Maratha
The Marathas were clearly not an Empire, they deny being a Confederacy...therefore they should just be called Marathas — Preceding unsigned comment added by 182.182.56.188 (talk) 08:34, 30 May 2012 (UTC)

POV concerns
This article appears to primarily depict a (somewhat folkloric/pop-culture) view of the battle from the Maratha culture. It makes no mention of commonly-cited claims that Shivaji negotiated a surrender of the fort, it casts the rearguard action in legendary terms ("They were fatally wounded, soldiers of Siddi Masood were taken-aback by the sight of those 300 soldiers bleeding heavily but fighting brutally with swords in both hands they kept fighting"), and it makes uncited major statements such as that this battle defined the Marathas as an independent power. Lacking strong sourcing it is very likely that this article, much like Shivaji before our major cleanup of the last year and some, is heavily impacted by historical-fiction accounts of events (television serials, pop-history accounts, etc) rather than by serious scholarship. MatthewVanitas (talk) 20:27, 13 August 2013 (UTC)


 * The battle and its background are two different things. To truncate the narration of battle based on some lack of mention of negotiation by Shivaji looks more like an excuse for truncation. As for POV, it IS part of Maratha conquests and just because it is "rearguard" it does not diminish its importance to Marathas or the greatness of achievements. The author of this "POV concern" note must to well to read through the exaggerated glorification of battles all through wiki right from the spartan one. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.167.254.136 (talk) 19:37, 7 August 2015 (UTC)

Potential for vandalism
After an event in which this page was wiped by a wiki user for being "False content" I have reinstated the page, however, these actions signify that there is a potential for vandalism for emotionally motivated reasons. Because of this I ask that editors review edits made to this page carefully in order to protect the contents of the page and keep the knowledge alive. AnyOwl (talk) 15:57, 6 June 2019 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 16 April 2021
Change Result = Maratha Victory to Result = Mughal Victory Change Strength 1 = 600 to Strength 1 = 300 Change Casualties 1 = 300 to Casualties = 200 Change Casualties 2 = 5000 to Casualties 2 = 1400 122.177.198.97 (talk) 06:58, 16 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made.  Angry Harpy   talk 08:37, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 16 August 2021
Please change Shivaji to Chhatrapati Shivaji Maharaj. 122.169.91.149 (talk) 16:00, 16 August 2021 (UTC)
 * ❌ - our article is Shivaji and we don't use honorific titles like Chhatrapati - Arjayay (talk) 16:10, 16 August 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 14 March 2022
Sergin joseph 22 (talk) 16:02, 14 March 2022 (UTC) Hi myself Sergei Joseph and I read about the Battle of Pavankhind with some additional References and texts. I just wanted to edit this page, so plz give me a chance to edit this masterpiece Battle. Thankyou
 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done: this is not the right page to request additional user rights. You may reopen this request with the specific changes to be made and someone may add them for you, or if you have an account, you can wait until you are autoconfirmed and edit the page yourself. Terasail [✉️] 16:17, 14 March 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 3 April 2022
"CHANGE 5 HRS BATTLE TO 18 HRS. BAJI PRABHU AND BANDAL SENA HAD STOPPED THE BIJAPUR ARMY FOR 18 HOURS" 2402:8100:3096:93E3:1:1:F0CE:4019 (talk) 18:38, 3 April 2022 (UTC)
 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 21:14, 3 April 2022 (UTC)

Respect
Where ever is it shivaji replace it with “shivaji maharaj” That name should be called with respect 103.242.120.111 (talk) 13:30, 4 April 2022 (UTC)

Add citations
Add citations for the 'strength' in the template infobox military conflict. It seems to be exaggerated. Ajayraj890 (talk) 12:46, 3 July 2023 (UTC)

Improving article with historical content & new sources
@Abecedare At First I would like to tell that what are those sources. Source list:- (Due to its old publication I am can't able to find it on websites,you can add it in reference section and battle template where I will mention as it is, without link. If someone have question that how should we consider that this type of source also was present & how could we rely on it as about it link is also not provided,then the answer is worlds one of the most recognised historians including James grant duff and Jadunath Sarkar mentioned about it on their books so they can check it in their book).
 * 1) The History of mahrattas- James Grant Duff pg.151-153
 * 2) Shivaji and his Times- Sir Jadunath Sarkar pg.83-85
 * 3) Sawant, Indrajit. Parnalparvat Panhalgad pg.11-19 (it is already present on reference section you just need to cite at there on battle template where I will mention)
 * 4) Sardesai, Govind Sakharam (1957) [1946], New History of the Marathas: Shivaji and his line (1600–1707), Phoenix Publications
 * 5) Gordon, Stewart (1 February 2007). The Marathas 1600-1818. Cambridge University Press. p. 58. ISBN 978-0-521-03316-9.
 * 6) Kulkarni, A. R. (2007). Jedhe Shakavali Kareena. Diamond Publications. p. 7. ISBN 978-81-89959-35-7.
 * 7) Shri-Shiva-Prabhuche-Charitra also known as Sabhasad Bakhar is the "oldest(published in 1697) source book when it's come to studying history about Shivaji as almost all renowned historians had taken information about Shivaji from this Bakhar!

Now Some Changes which should be done. The Names should remove in battle templates:- 1)The names in Side of Marathas:- Shambhu singh Jadhav,rayaji bandal. (As they would be in that battle but as for now I didn't find any source citing them) 2)The name in side of Bijapur Sultanate:- Siddi Johar himself (yes he was not present in that battle as he was still present at seige of panhala that time, neither any source mentioned that he was in that battle)


 * The Names Should be added:- As for now No need to add names in side of Marathas but in other side it should be!

Names should add in Bijapur's Side:- 1)Siddi Aziz(with citing all sources which I mentioned in source list) 2)Fazl Khan(with citing all sources which added in mentioned in source list) Here,this has to be noted that Siddi Aziz was the son of Siddi Johar & Fazl Khan was the son of Afzal Khan & names of both of them are present on all sources!

Names Should stay as before from Maratha Side:- 1) Bajiprabhu Deshpande(with citing all sources which I mentioned in source list) 2) Fulajiprabhu Deshpande (with citing source number 3,4 & 7 which I mentioned in source list.

Name Should stay as before from Bijapur Side:- 1) Siddi Masud(with citing source number 3,4,6 & 7 which I mentioned in source list)

One section of 300 army had gone with Shivaji to further & 300 army was with Bajiprabhu in actual battle.
 * Maratha Side with 600 army should be removed as when shivaji left panhala He was 600 army with him,but when it was decided that bajiprabhu will fight and will stop Bijapur army from proceeding to capture shivaji,the Maratha forces were divided in parts

We should create 2 sections for strength1(maratha strength):- 1) 300(with citing Source number 3,4,6 & 7 which I mentioned in source list) 2) 700(According to Jadunath Sarkar)As Jadunath Sarkar mentioned that Maratha Army was 700 in numbers which all of them died in that battle including Bajiprabhu.

We Should create 2 sections for casualties1 (Maratha casualties) also. 1)300(with citing source number 3,4,6 & 7 which I mentioned in source list) 2)700(according to Jadunath Sarkar)

Strength2(Bijapur strength):- Same as before (10000) with citing Source Number 1,3,4,6 & 7 which I mentioned in source list. Here this should be noted that source number 1(History of mahrattas-James grant duff) doesn't mentioned actual 10000 army but he mentioned that out of whole strength half of the Bijapur army was killed which matches with source number 3,4,6 & 7 which I mentioned in source list. as they mentioned that Bijapuri army was approximately 10000. My suggestion:- ~10000(approximately 10000)(with citing source number 1,3,4,6 & 7 which I mentioned in source list)

For casualties2(casualties of bijapur):- Same as before (5000) with citing Source number 1,3,4,6 &7. As all of them mentioned this.

Huh! So here it is whole research of more 6 hours! Now it's your turn to add them in article. we are here to build Wikipedia. Thank You. Aryan330 (talk) 16:26, 4 July 2023 (UTC)


 * , the above is tough to follow but I'll try!
 * First lets begin with the a review of the sources you have presented.
 * : Not a usable source on wikipedia; see WP:HISTRS and WP:RAJ
 * pretty dated source but may be okay for non-controversial claims (other editors may disagree)
 * : I don't know what this book is; please provide complete biobliographic information and (scholarly) reviews, if available
 * : dated but may be okay (other editors may disagree)
 * : No issues
 * : not sure what this book is; if it is a tranlslation of Jedhe Shakawali then it would be a primary source and essentially unusable
 * : Not usable directly on wikipedia; see WP:HISTRS
 * Keep in mind that there is vast difference between sources preferred by historians who try to look up contemporaneous primary sources and wikipedia, which as a tertiary source, relies on recent (secondary) scholarship. So please provide the details of the Sawant book, and let me know if you or anyone else objects to my gloss about the preferred (essentially only Gordon (1993)) in the above list) and usable (Gordon (1993), along with Sarkar (1919) and Sardesai (1946)) sources. Abecedare (talk) 17:46, 4 July 2023 (UTC)
 * @Abecedare
 * At first add pg.number for Sardesai- pg no 133&pg.no 134
 * Now coming to indrajit sawant,He is considered as one of the greatest historians of Maharashtra,as the history textbooks of Maharashtra board also take his book as reference!
 * This book is not famous outside especially at international level because it is present in Marathi only,but he provided every historical evidence for important incidents of shivaji.
 * Actually he made several books on Shivaji and Sambhaji also but instead of that he made only two books in detail
 * One is Gatha pratapgadachi where he written whole book on about only revolving around fort pratapgarh and especially battle of Pratapgarh
 * while second book about Panhala(the source I have mentioned)which we need.
 * Believe me none of the historian researched deeply as he researched about every battle Releted to Shivaji.
 * Not only battle but that battle place or fort, about that also he researched in deep by personally visiting there!
 * He also added several sources found on inscriptions or fort documents which never researched by any historian!
 * He gave this type of dedication for more than 20 years to alone Shivaji.
 * For Shivaji or related to shivaji none of the historian,I repeat none of the historian researched as Indrajit Sawant researched!
 * As I also didn't getting his works copy on websites because he neither used technical sources for his promotion.his book is already famous at such level that peoples read only hard copy of it.
 * Respective to that I also mentioned page numbers at where this battle is mentioned.so who wants to see it they can check on it.
 * Ohh that was not,I think I mentioned wrong work of Kulkarni!
 * Here the three sources of Kulkarni are:-
 * 1. V. B. Kulkarni (1963). Shivaji: The Portrait of a Patriot. Orient Longman
 * 2. Kulkarni, Prof A. R. (1 July 2008). The Marathas. Diamond Publications. ISBN 978-81-8483-073-6.
 * 3. Kulkarni, A.R., 1990. Maratha Policy Towards the Adil Shahi Kingdom. Bulletin of the Deccan College Research Institute
 * Also I want to add some more sources:-
 * 1. Shripad Dattatraya Kulkarni (1992). The Struggle for Hindu supremacy. Shri Bhagavan Vedavyasa Itihasa Samshodhana Mandira (Bhishma). p. 90. ISBN 978-81-900113
 * 2. Marathi book Shivkaal (Times of Shivaji) by Dr V G Khobrekar, Publisher: Maharashtra State Board for Literature and Culture, First edition 2006.
 * James Grant Duff's sources are widely accepted and used on many Wikipedia articles too!
 * Infact the authors who made their book by using the references of him,that are also present on Wikipedia articles.
 * So why this not?
 * As I don't say you have to copy content from it,I Just want to say that he had also provided information about this battle.
 * I think there is no offense to atleast cite his book as source on battle template where I mentioned. Aryan330 (talk) 18:47, 4 July 2023 (UTC)
 * You still haven't provided the bibliographic information for Sawant or links to any external scholarly reviews of his book. Abecedare (talk) 19:04, 4 July 2023 (UTC)
 * @Abecedare processing.
 * But sir,why Sabhasad Bakhar shouldn't be mentioned as it is the oldest and relevant with time period!
 * I am not talking about "Chitnis Bakhar" which has vast inaccuracies,I am talking about "Sabhasad Bakhar which provided deeply information about this battle"
 * See Page number 6, paragraph no 2 of Sarkar, Jadunath (1919). Shivaji and His Times. M.C. Sarkar & Sons ,see what he said about sabhasad Bakhar,it was not primary but also reviewed,corrected & researched by historians of for 40 years!
 * You didn't replied about James Grant Duff,see what I mentioned in my previous reply from 13th line from last. Aryan330 (talk) 03:26, 5 July 2023 (UTC)
 * I have no issues with citing modern historians who base their work on primary documents such as Sabhasad Bakhar, or older works like those of Duff. If you wish to reconfirm that these century-old works should not be cited directly on wikipedia, I'd suggest that you ask at WP:RSN since I'll just be repeating what I said above and at Talk:Battle of Umberkhind (regarding Shri Shivbharat). Abecedare (talk) 03:44, 5 July 2023 (UTC)
 * @Abecedare Is Dennis Kincaid Usable then?
 * As it is also placed at important articles releted to Marathas!
 * More importantly he taken most of information from Duff's works.
 * & Give you review about true 3 sources I provided previously.
 * & Also those 2 sources which I added later.
 * Waiting. Aryan330 (talk) 04:01, 5 July 2023 (UTC)

Quick comments: Having now commented upon a dozen publications, I'll stop this exercise now. If you want to propose some content based on Gordon (1993), Sarkar (1919) and Sardesai (1946) please propose it along with the exact relevant quote from the source. If you diasgree with any of my source evaluations, or want an opinion on any other source, please post a question at WP:RSN. Abecedare (talk) 04:58, 5 July 2023 (UTC) (Revised view on the Kulkarni (2008). Abecedare (talk) 21:57, 5 July 2023 (UTC))
 * : This is a novelistic "impression" of Shivaji by a British civil servant; not a usable source for history
 * : A hagiography
 * : a summary of older sources (Duff, Kinkaid, Sardesai etc) simplified for a lay audience; not a good source for wikipedia while indeed a summary of literature, and not an original study of the Marathas, that should be fine for wikipedia editing esp. given the author's background and expertise in the area.
 * : Haven't seen the full-text but appears to be a a piece of revisionist history issued by a religio-political organization; may be okay to present their attributed views, if WP:DUE, but not for factual claims
 * : Didn't find any information about the book although the author is/was an historian active in the area in the 1960s/70s; will need more information to evaluate.


 * @Abecedare
 * Hello sir,
 * My last Suggestion:-
 * As after researching for more 2 days till now.
 * I am coming to a conclusion that as you said that primary sources should not be cited directly on Wikipedia like Sabhasad Bakhar,but we can take another sources of authors who has taken information from it and also from another works.
 * So in respective to that we can cite 5 sources:-
 * 1. Stewart Gordon's- Marathas 1600-1818
 * 2. Sarkar's - Shivaji and times
 * 4. Indrajit Sawant's - parnalparvat Panhalgad (for now we would or would not be as I am unable to find any link about his book on internet,this is because he didn't want to share anything on internet as he mentioned in his Facebook post we can call him anti website publisher.
 * But believe me he is widely renowned across maharastra and his works are praised by Government of Maharashtra that his book is used to cite sources on history textbooks of Maharashtra.
 * It's not only that but also government take any decision as what is the correct portrait of shivaji historically or what should be Sambhaji's official picture on his birth anniversary this all information is taken from his works and his research.
 * That's why I want to say that mark his source for respective needed spaces and in the reference section just add a page no 11-19 for checking.
 * As he taken all his information from Bakhars(oldest) and historical documents of respective forts so we can't ignore his source for citation just because his link is not available on websites!
 * 5. A New Source which I not mentioned earlier because I am was researching on that for previous 1 & half day.
 * - Mehendale, Gajanan Bhaskar (2011). Shivaji his life and times. India: Param Mitra Publications. p. 1147. ISBN 978-93-80875-17-0. OCLC 801376912.
 * This source is also present in reference section of Wikipedia page of Shivaji.
 * This source would be the turning point and ending for more research as this author provided every single evidences which Sarkar or Gordon also missed!
 * He not just mentioned information from Bakhars but also from 3 different shakavalis(not jedhe shakavali as he himself proved that it was wrong by giving opposite references for it)
 * He literally cited every source for single line.
 * Don't worry its not a novelist impression like Kincaid neither simplified version as kulkarni.
 * He just written about every incident of shivaji by providing every single source releted to it:- let it be Maratha bakhar,Poet padmanand(court poet of shivaji), shakavalis (except jedhe), Tarikh-i-ferista of Ali Adil shah-2,Khafi khans works, British letters,Dutch letters, Portuguese letters,letters of shivaji etc.
 * He literally used every sources which are comtampory and was in similar time of shivaji (not only Maratha side but of literally every source which releted to Shivaji)
 * See His praising or review by india's most viewed newspaper's website Times of India https://m.timesofindia.com/life-style/books/features/6-books-on-chhatrapati-shivaji-maharajs-life-and-rule/photostory/99209773.cms

Times of india said this about book:-Published in 2016, 'Shivaji- His Life and Times' By Gajanan Bhaskar Mehendale is a comprehensive account of Chatrapati Shivaji’s life. The book is an authentically researched biography and is packed with maps drawn with the most state-of-the-art methods, footnotes and bibliography. It explores Chatrapati Shivaji’s life as a statesman, administrator, king, and warrior. The book covers Shivaji’s life and time along with the strategic and administrative intelligence and excellence.
 * At Amazon:- https://amzn.eu/d/b6DI5g4.
 * It is also launched my Prime Minister of India you can see his picture with prime minister in at Amazon the link which I mentioned above.
 * Shivaji: His Life and Times https://amzn.eu/d/b6DI5g4
 * he also provided Exact number of strength of both sides with casualties which we need here,he used Bakhar,Kavi padmanand's record, Tarikh-i-ferista of Ali Adil shah-2 etc for citation.
 * This would be our last and accurate source for our article & I am going to cite it because no other source is missing in Mehendale's book.
 * For me, kindly overview this book by personally visiting that content, specially see the reference lists which he provided at last it's not less that whole Wikipedia article of complete reign of Shivaji as he cited every relevant source at literally every line!
 * So please visit it for me as it can be a turning point not only for this article but for every article releted to Shivaji!
 * He done the same work for Shivaji as Jadunath Sarkar worked for Aurangzeb!
 * As like Jadunath Sarkar mentioned every incident with citing all sources let it be persion,Hindi,Marathi.like that he had done it for Shivaji by citing sources persion,Marathi,Hindi & also letters of foreigners.
 * For me, please personally download pdf of this book.
 * It would be a turning point & so we can further improve this article. Aryan330 (talk) 08:47, 5 July 2023 (UTC)
 * I'll take a look at Mehendale (2011) in a day or so. The others, including Sawant (?), I have already commented upon. Abecedare (talk) 15:42, 5 July 2023 (UTC)
 * Ok, regarding
 * This is indeed long and monumental but it is written by a non-historian (by education) who doesn't seem to have published any peer-reviewed work; published by a non-academic press with likely no editorial oversight per the author himself; and, a lot of original, including redflag, claims that haven't been evaluated in any detailed academic review or follow-up publications. No significant library holdings or citations either. With its extensive citations to primary documents, it may provide good material for historians to explore but not for wikipedia editors to regurgitate. Note that the The Times of India "review" is just a minor rewrite of the publisher's PR blurb.
 * PS: By the way, I have revised my views on Kulkarni (2008); see above. Abecedare (talk) 21:57, 5 July 2023 (UTC)
 * @Abecedare I am not saying that we should take a many information from Mehendale's book,
 * I am only saying that we should use it here only for numbers regarding battle templates as I checked he had given that from Bakhars,shekhavli and Tarikh-i-ferista of Ali Adil shah-2,which indeed can't be untrue!
 * Please try to understand what I am saying that the information we need here is only little and that is present on it!
 * yes even if he is not a historian we can't neglect his works and dedication while see again in his every pages last side,he literally provided this in that is untrue because according to this letter this was not a date in that time.
 * So try to understand what we need is very little and Indeed very evaluated in his work!
 * Thanks for your revised view,now we can use it for Wikipedia.
 * Kindly reply about mehendale. Aryan330 (talk) 03:03, 6 July 2023 (UTC)
 * As far as I can tell, there are no reliably sourced numbers for the Shivaji vs Jauhar forces at the mountain pass that we can cite in wikipedia's voice. Even setting aside the question of the reliability of Mehendale (2011), the author himself says, citing different primary sources, that Shivaji escape Panhala with 600 infantry men (footnote 1412) while Jauhar sent 1000 infantry + 2000 cavalry in pursuit (footnote 1415); or, that Shivaji escaped with 40,000 men, half of whom were left to guard the pass (footnote 1419) and blocked an unspecified number of Jauhar forces. Sarkar (1919), on the other hand, says that Shivaji escaped Panahala with 5-6,000 men, leaving 5,000 to guard the pass.
 * Mehendale devotes roughly 2 pages of his roughly 1200 pages of maintext (ie, excluding notes) to "Shivaji’s escape from Panhala (July 1660)", part of which involves the encounter at the pass, which is the subject of this article. Sarkar devoted 2.5 pages out of about 500 to "Shivaji besieged in Panhala fort". Neither name the mountain pass. Modern scholarship, afaict, pay even less attention (Gordon (1994) mentions neither the pass nor Panhala).
 * So given the above, what reliable sources exactly provide enough in depth coverage of the Maratha stand at a pass in 1660 to justify a stand-alone article? Where is the name "Battle of Pavan Khind" even coming from? Abecedare (talk) 05:13, 6 July 2023 (UTC)
 * @Abecedare I think you had not seen what I said at last.
 * As there was not such as thing called "Pavankhind". It's a later name given for Ghodkhind which in respect for Bajiprabhu and his men.so it can be battle of ghodkhind or battle of Pavankhind, you can think what it should be.
 * Again I am telling that he not mentioned about 40000 troops,he just said that A.K. chronology mentioned it which is completely false,as the total number of troops in Shivaji's entire force was not more than 30000 at that time as I mentioned the largest men's till 1672 were present at battle of Pratapgarh which number goes near to 7000!
 * It's Ok if Gordon didn't mentioned because we can't neglect the fact that Bajiprabhu and his bandal troops were died in the pass while blocking it against bijapuri forces.
 * I said you that Sarkar has taken those numbers from Tarikh-i-ali which taken it from court poet
 * h
 * of Bijapur,so there is better to rely on Source of Shivaji's court poet padmanand and bakhar.
 * Thank you Aryan330 (talk) 15:37, 6 July 2023 (UTC)
 * @Abecedare glad you get it,he cited many errors of some shekhavli's especially jedhe shekhavali.he literally used more than 10 sources to every incidents to find exact date,exact number of forces as he done on it.i can't able to memorize it what exactly he said like he tressed many errors of multiple historians for example to see for one error of jedhe shekhavali he used many sources including Mughal sources and proved that this this was not happened in that month it should be of another month.
 * I just want to clear you doubt regarding his claim that no editorial cite by author himself:- see : The Swantah Sukhaya initiatives are meant to provide internal happiness. and a sense of achievement. he said this while he was doing work on his another book World war 2,this statement was given by him after long time of this books launching & there is a reason for that is he doesn't like that history written by political view he said that history should be as it is as it mentioned in sources, that's his work is like Jadunath Sarkar which readers would not like for entertainment because it's totally written sourceful which can be only use for sources & that's what Wikipedia needs!
 * Actually the controversy was one political party had burned work of an author which doesn't suit for their political view that what mehendale opposed see: https://m.timesofindia.com/city/pune/scholar-destroys-own-work-on-shivaji/articleshow/385627.cms
 * The interview which you provided,see the last paragraph where he mentioned that historians should write history as it is mentioned,they shouldn't mention that whatever they think.
 * See what The Wire said:- Even though Sarkar’s sympathies lie definitely with Shivaji, not all Maharashtrian historians take kindly to his scepticism about the veracity of Maratha sources. The military historian Gajanan Bhaskar Mehendale is deeply critical of Sarkar’s dismissal of the Maratha sources. And yet, even Mehandale is clear in his opinion that the letter with the ‘Hindavi Swaraj’ reference, is a fabrication. Accordingly, Mehandale makes no reference whatsoever to the incident of the Raireshwar oath in his magnum opus Shivaji, His Life and Times.
 * I don't found any single material which say he is not a historian!
 * See what historian or researcher medha bhaskaran(recently published her books Frontier, challenging destiny & The life & death of Sambhaji) said about him:-   Gajanan Bhaskar Mehendale – Shivaji – ‘His Life and Times’ which is a Bhagwat Gita of the Maratha History. Published by Param Mitra Publications on December 7, 2011
 * His Work is exact what we nee
 * d.
 * Now coming to you claim:-
 * No he doesn't mean that Shivaji Left panhala with 40000 men!
 * He said that A.k. Chronical mentioned it is!
 * & If you read further he even mentioned that it's totally distorted and imagination story.
 * See Page number 364(source cite 1263) where it is mentioned that Shivaji's overall forces which he can use was not gone upper than 7000!(at combat against Afzal Khan which happened just some months ago before this seige where the largest troos ever were raised till 1659 which were supported by several vantandars,Kanhoji jedhe is notable at there)
 * Infact the last combat which was in kolhapur where Shivaji defeated Rustam e zaman there also mentioned on page of battle of kolhapur that Shivaji's troops were not more than 3000!
 * & After that combat he captured panhala and stationed there.
 * & Also at the time of that seige,Netoji palakar who was storming to cut off supply of Adilshahi also had many troops!
 * There is no point that Shivaji had contain more than 5000 troops or even more than 2000 troos at panhala as I mentioned the troop numbers on combat of kolhapur was not more than 2000 !
 * Even when shivaji escaped large number of troops were still stationed on fort of panhala,that's why siddi Johar had himself not gone to chase Shivaji, instead of that he continued to laid the seige!
 * Talking about Jadunath Sarkar,then the thing is to noted that Sarkar had taken these numbers from Tarikh-i-ali which taken this from court poet singer of bijapur!
 * Now,the court poet of shivaji Shivanand mentioned troops number as 600,bakhar also noted it,James grant duff mentioned that it was small force,Dennis Kincaid had said that bajiprabhu had a very small band of force with him & the Most noted Sardesai mentioned that the persion sources, bijapur sources simply doesn't mentioned about bijapur forces retreat or loss because of reputation.
 * Here is to noted that Shivaji's forces were no more than 600 as mehendale mentioned & it's also divided when Bajiprabhu decided to stay back,300 is most relevant number because here the thing should be noted that the troops were stationed at this pass was called as Bandals which was a small number of band of community bandal,not more than 500 was joined shivaji along with Bajiprabhu and the term bandal was mentioned in almost all sources.the shivbharat and shivanand had tell in detail about them!
 * & As Sardesai mentioned, After that we can't rely on opposite side's mention!
 * As I give you example which is very famous,
 * In the battle of Haldighati the rajput sources claim that the numbers were more than 80000 but Mughal sources (Abul fazl) called that they were not more than 10000.
 * As in that battle was won by Mughals then we consider the Mughals sources as the true.
 * In that way here we can rely on the numbers of opposite side's claim as they even doesn't mentioned about their retreat due to their reputation!
 * For siddis troop number,see 1st page of chapter 7,where a Dutch resident clearly mentioned that Siddi Johar had generally 35-40000 infantry and cavalry of 15-16000 cavalry troops with him!
 * As further in one incident one band of 7000 cavalry had gone to Bijapur capital.
 * Further no mention that this number of troops were reduced.
 * So we can assume that in that seige he had 35-40000 troops with him,as I already mentioned due to siddi himself laided seige even after escape of shivaji he send some part of his troops to chase shivaji but that doesn't mean that the fort was more important than Shivaji!
 * According to one letter Adilshah strictly warned siddi that he wanted Shivaji to be captured that's why and also according to Jadunath Sarkar he sent strong force to capture Shivaji.
 * According to Mehendale he sent siddi masud with force of 3000 but the thing has to be noted that Fazal khan(son of Afzal Khan) & aziz khan(son of Siddi Johar) also joined siddi masud after sometime!
 * As being son of Afzal Khan,fazal khan contains very large number of troops under his command & Siddi Aziz had also large number of troops being son of Siddi jauhar!
 * So according to all of these the numbers of troops should be same as previously given in article.But yes some changes should be done that Bajiprabhu's army should be written as 300-700 & Adilshahi's army should be written as 5000-10000(with sign of approximately)
 * Thats would be the full and final edit on this article.
 * How can we expect that it should be written as Pavankhind when there was no khind by that name in those times!
 * Actually the real name of that pass was Ghodkhind which was later renamed as Pavankhind!
 * As tribute to Bajiprabhu & his troops as they sacrificed their life for king and make the whole pass Pavan(the term in Marathi)
 * Hope you are clear.
 * By the way I learned about how can we cite a source on battle template,now I can cite it well!
 * Thanks. Aryan330 (talk) 06:54, 6 July 2023 (UTC)
 * I still haven't seens any WP:HISTRS-sources that cover the topic of this article in depth or under the rubric of "Battle of Pavan Khind". If no such sources are available, this page should be merged or redirected; it could be renamed to something like "Shivaji besieged in Panhala fort", as Sarkar calls it, though that too is unlikely to justify a stand-alone article. Abecedare (talk) 15:02, 6 July 2023 (UTC)
 * @Abecedare
 * Actually about this battle the historian wouldn't able to write it more as that was a pass where only skirmishes between Bajiprabhu's troops and bijapur. Just imagine yourself as a historian,what more can you write on that battle which happened only in one pass of ghat.as in battles of open field
 * Historians can write many things as left wing of army attacked first or the centre was commanded by this leader.
 * But how can we write in couple of pages of that only skirmishes battle where only battle with sword happened as that pass was such small that at one time more than 10 men's couldn't able to move further Same time.i think this would be logic for it that s why historians like Gordon doesn't mentioned it.
 * & For Sarkar I already mentioned & you also know that information from persion source had a first choice for him & as I and one of History Men's Sardesai (other two's are raghubir and Jadunath Sarkar) mentioned that persion sources remained silent on this battle and also doesn't mentioned about bijapur's retreat because of Reputation.for your information he was also very close friend to Sarkar.
 * Here we have to accept it that persion sources can't be used for this battle,for it we can take shivaji's court poet Shivanand's accounts, Sardesai's accounts,bakhars, shekhavli's, Mehendale's works for some parts, Gordon stewarts works for some parts,Shivaji sawant's parnalparvat panhala(I am not able to find about this on web,the reason I already told you that he didn't put his information on web & for some parts we can take Sarkar's work.
 * we aan can call it "Seige of Panhala" but it would also become not appropriate as the seige was not that serious seige actually as siddi had cut down all supplies,was there for some months but he didn't attacked the fort as for him Capture of Shivaji was more important than capturing the fort!
 * The later period was damn important as Shivaji Left panhala, Bajiprabhu's last stand on pass,shivaji's battle with surve(who were at vishalgad(Rangna),after that the attempt of siddi masud to capture the fort(actually about this incident has very less information available) all this was happened in period.
 * If we merge all of this in "Seige of Panhala" then the section of Aftermath would be more bulky.
 * If you ask me,then Battle of Ghodkhind or Maratha bijapur skirmish of pass or capture attempt on shivaji would be relevant.
 * Thank you. Aryan330 (talk) 17:43, 6 July 2023 (UTC)
 * If reliable secondary sources haven't written about a topic in sufficient detail (as appears to be the case for this skirmish), wikipedia, a tertiary source, should not have an article on it. That's the essense of notability. Abecedare (talk) 17:49, 6 July 2023 (UTC)
 * @Abecedare we can merge it with Shivaji's escape of Panhala,with writting background as a situation at seige,Battles as Battle of Ghodkhind& battle of vishalgad.we don't need to make a battle template on battle of vishalgad,but for Ghodkhind (Pavankhind) it has to be as this version of page.for battle of vishalgad we can just mention that Shivaji defeated surve's forces at vishalgad and goes on fort(as this was happened).
 * In aftermath section,we can mention about Masud's intention to capture fort but was retreated and Shivaji's next movements.
 * That can be happen.
 * Thank you Aryan330 (talk) 17:59, 6 July 2023 (UTC)


 * With the caveat that I haven't read the discussion above (too long), Jadunath Sarkar is, generally speaking, not an acceptable source. --RegentsPark (comment) 18:06, 6 July 2023 (UTC)
 * @RegentsPark & about this battle it should not as his works are primarily depend on persion sources and sardesai said that persion sources remained silent on this Battle for reputation. Aryan330 (talk) 18:08, 6 July 2023 (UTC)


 * I think a simple redirect to Shivaji should suffice. Even the main Shivaji article needs a significant clean up and if the content of the linked subsection ever expands beyond a paragraph (highly doubtful), then a breakaway article can be (re)created. Abecedare (talk) 18:12, 6 July 2023 (UTC)
 * @Abecedare what are your views on my suggestion? Aryan330 (talk) 18:13, 6 July 2023 (UTC)

Poorly Written
This Article is poorly written. Many sections are either unsourced or cite an unreliable source. This also has Issues with WP:MOS and NPOV SKAG123 (talk) 20:46, 9 August 2023 (UTC)

Maratha victory?
@Sudsahab, where does the "Shivaji His Life and Times" says it was a Maratha victory? Provide quotations. Imperial [AFCND]  07:53, 16 April 2024 (UTC)


 * Siddi Jauhar laid siege to Panhala. When Shivaji came down from the fort and was coming to Khelna [i.e. Vishalgad], Siddi Jauhar came in pursuit. At that time Shivaji stationed Baji Prabhu, the Deshpande, and the contingent of Bandals in the Gajapur pass and went to Khelna. Baji Prabhu and [his] men fought valorously. Baji Prabhu and some men perished. The enemy was not allowed to ascend [the pass]. Siddi Jauhar went back. Here Sudsahab (talk) 04:01, 18 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Pinging @ActivelyDisinterested. I don't know if its my problem or not. I can't see any point that can say it is Maratha victory. This is original research imho. Imperial  [AFCND]  06:19, 18 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Pls it is not a WP:OR, read the last line The enemy was not allowed to ascend [the pass]. Siddi Jauhar went back. Sudsahab (talk) 14:48, 18 April 2024 (UTC)
 * It was the retreat of Shivaji. I will propose for an AFD since no WP:RS calls this by "Battle of Pavan Khind". Imperial  [AFCND]  15:03, 18 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Would pyrrhic victory be more fitting. From my (admittedly hasty and limited) reading it appears the Maratha were trying to stall the advance and did so, but at the cost of their own destruction. -- LCU A ctively D isinterested  «@» °∆t° 16:34, 18 April 2024 (UTC)
 * According to the infobox guidance, pyrrhic victory cannot be added. Right? Imperial  [AFCND]  17:14, 18 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Could be I deal with RS more than conflict infoboxes. Maybe 'See aftermath' would be more appropriate then, the context the the result could then be explained in detail in the article. -- LCU A ctively D isinterested  «@» °∆t° 20:21, 18 April 2024 (UTC)
 * @Based Kashmiri, can't you see the above discussion? Link to see Aftermath or just keep the older version. You're reverting in favour of a blocked user. Imperial  [AFCND]  17:01, 7 May 2024 (UTC)