Talk:Kanhoji Angre

Requesting Protection from a Vandal Editor LukeEmily

This user: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/MrLukeMsEmily

Has been vandalizing major longstanding Maratha-figure pages using multiple accounts to present an overwhelming Sub-Altern narrative.

Kanhoji Angre page was brutally subjected to false propaganda by using a synthesis of Surendranath Sen's source and various other modern Sub-Altern books. A modern acclaimed Scholar Rene Barendse was deleted without for the sake of another scholar which supports this vandal agenda-driven obfuscation spree.

Current User ID of this Vandal Editor is: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:LukeEmily&action=view

I request the senior Wikipedia Editors to look into this. 2409:4040:E86:51A4:0:0:E489:5008 (talk) 13:11, 21 July 2020 (UTC)

An Update into the Bilge spammed by this agenda-driven editor, the banal content propagated by this Editor has been directly copy-pasted from this Agri-Koli caste alliance chauvinist Facebook page where their assembled IT Cells are trained to vandalise Maratha pages systemically with the prepared sources:

https://www.facebook.com/HinduMarathaAgri/posts/318056121612093

It is a sincere request to the gullible Admins who are ignorant of Indian caste propaganda politics, to become more aware and ensure they do not spread misinformation. 2409:4040:E98:1115:0:0:E489:A0A (talk) 07:51, 22 July 2020 (UTC)

Please stop using words like Vandalism. All content is sourced. You need to stop reverting sourced content. You yourself added Surendranath Sen as source to add the word "Kshatriya" that he called himself. Sen is used multiple times on the Shivaji page. If you use a source like Sen, do not cherry pick. Rene Barendse is very valid and there was no need to remove his text. The last part is by a publication that DR. ARUNCHANDRA S. PATHAK, in 2007, (not facebook) considers contains "authentic and useful ". Best Regards LukeEmily (talk) 21:31, 22 July 2020 (UTC)

• Its actually the ip who is spreading caste propaganda by classifying all Maratha commanders as kshatriya as we all know not all kings were kshatriya.Heba Aisha (talk) 01:04, 15 August 2020 (UTC)

WikiProject class rating

This article was automatically assessed because at least one WikiProject had rated the article as start, and the rating on other projects was brought up to start class. BetacommandBot 18:24, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

Regarded as pirate or naval commander by the Mughal government?

The article makes it sound as if only the European traders regarded Kanhoji Angre as a pirate. But was the Maratha Navy considered as a legitimate naval power, or merely a collection of pirates, by the Mughal government that had heretofore ruled most of India? The article only makes the briefest reference to Kanhoji Angre's conflict with the Mughal Emperor Aurangzeb, and doesn't really make clear whether this was a battle of two independent nations or a revolt against the Mughals' authority. Pirate Dan (talk) 20:05, 25 May 2010 (UTC)

You will find the reply for your doubts in the section mentioned below as POV Abhishek Pujari (talk) 16:50, 2 January 2018 (UTC)

It is strange page edit has been protected removing comments about being termed pirate as legal or not. Natives right to own the place they have been living for centuries and govern the sea is fundamental. Before codification of law, it was not possible to get justice against an act of aggression and might was seen as the right way. In such a context, labelling pirate is illegal. Would the editor who has put a protection allow outsider to take possession of his items in the house? It is clear way of misuse of the rights by the editor to lock the page from editing. Herewith the editor who has removed the word illegal is requested to restore the edits done by me. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Igurusachin (talk • contribs) 16:19, 27 March 2019 (UTC)

POV tag

This whole article is very dubious. It wants to present him as a major naval figure, but if you look at the list of victories, they are all minor skirmishes by the standards of the European navies of the day. His biggest victory was against a force led by a commander. A commander in the Royal Navy was not a very important person at all. He usually commanded only a single small ship, and he ranked below a post captain, who ranked below three grades of admiral. We are told that the force consisted of four men of war with six thousand soldiers, but this gives rise to further doubts. Man of war is a very vague term. What were these ships? Armed merchantmen, cutters, sloops, frigates, ships-of-the-line? Something towards the beginning of the list is more likely. And six thousand soldiers? Not likely, as even a first rate only had a crew of eight hundred, and most of them were sailors, not soldiers. Thus "six thousand soldiers" is probably a wildly inaccurate number, taken from an exaggerated source, and repeated uncritically. Greg Grahame (talk) 21:46, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

In the context of Indian naval history, Kanhoji Angre was notable. He was the major naval figure of Shivaji's Navy. The small size of the Maratha Navy vis-a-vis the Royal Navy is not relevant. As far as accuracy of these figures is concerned, we require better referencing and probably rewriting of parts of the article too. While the article is reverential in tone which needs to be improved by a copy-edit, I fail to see the basic point of dispute. He may be a minor captain in the size of his command but he was a major naval figure in his time, his area of operations and his context. Source-bashing without giving specifics does not help either. AshLin (talk) 03:35, 26 January 2011 (UTC)

"Source bashing without giving specifics" is merely a slur against critical thinking. Greg does not claim to be an expert on this area, but he has correctly diagnosed apparent biases in the article. If no expert in the field comes forward, then we should value others who do so: wikipedia is desperately in need of any help it can get to address its bias problems. Angre cannot have been a major naval figure unless he held large commands and inflicted defeats on significant enemy forces. In the 18th century, global naval power was dominated by European powers. Unless Angre had forces sufficient to confront significant European naval squadrons, he was not a major naval figure in his time. 217.137.151.41 (talk) 15:41, 4 September 2011 (UTC)

He was called as "Admiral" of Shivaji, sometimes as "great Maratha admiral" [1](this may look too flowery), and in Indian context, he was notable navy force. He was the only notable navy admiral of India upto 18th century. If we view in this angle, the POV angle looses importance. I propose to remove POV tag. Rayabhari (talk) 06:37, 12 December 2012 (UTC)

Kanhoji Angre was a reputed admiral in the Maratha navy. By the time he was at the peak of his career, the Maratha Empire has gained a recognized king in the name of Chatrapati Shivaji Maharaja. The legitimacy of the kingdom was even taken care of by all the European powers who also established trade with the Maratha Empire. So saying that he was just a pirate or not a notable figure, would be incorrect on so many accounts. By questioning his legitimacy, you are also questioning the authority and legitimacy of the Maratha Empire as a separate nation. Abhishek Pujari (talk) 16:49, 2 January 2018 (UTC)

Caption for Kanhoji Angre's Tomb

Kanhoji Angre's tomb is in Alibag and not in Chaul. Alibag is my native place and i have seen it for years. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dabholkar.gauri (talk • contribs) 03:37, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

Kanhoji Angre an Indian admiral of the Maratha Navy. Vyom Bhosle (talk) 01:37, 9 October 2022 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Kanhoji Angre. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090706210636/http://lite.epaper.timesofindia.com/mobile.aspx?article=yes to http://lite.epaper.timesofindia.com/mobile.aspx?article=yes&pageid=23&sectid=edid=&edlabel=BGMIR&mydateHid=13-11-2009&pubname=&edname=&articleid=Ar02300&publabel=MM

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 23:24, 30 December 2017 (UTC)

Koli

To the IPs who are repeatedly adding Kanhoji Angre: please find a WP:HISTRS-compliant source for this claim. The source should preferably be an author whose area of expertise is Maratha / Koli / Indian history. Also, castecruft doesn't belong in the lead, unless it was an important part of the person's identity. utcursch | talk 19:30, 16 July 2018 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 27 March 2019

Labelling Kanhoji as pirate is an incorrect view and it needs to be emphasised rather than propagated. A search on Kanhoji on google shows immediately that he was a pirate. Since this then point of view and not shared by "majority" of people alive today, it needs to be reflected. Basis of using majority is simple, rather 100% of the people today believe in codified law, seen differently do not believe in might is right philosophy. Thus terming him a pirate is not correct and I would like my changes restored with immediate effect. These have been edited out.16:38, 27 March 2019 (UTC)Igurusachin (talk)

 Not done: The article does not call him a pirate. The article calls him a naval chief, and tells us that his enemies labeled him a pirate after he captured some of their ships. – Þjarkur (talk) 19:48, 27 March 2019 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 9 October 2022

Pirate needs to be changed to : Maratha Navy Officer

https://indianculture.gov.in/node/2790245

Please refer to the post and information of Kanhoji Maharaj. The info should not be taken from British POV, it should be taken from Indians as he was an Indian and Maratha Navy officer 103.51.75.63 (talk) 07:56, 9 October 2022 (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. Article currently reads "Kanhoji Angre, also known as Conajee Angria or Sarkhel Angré (August 1669 – 4 July 1729) was an Indian admiral of the Maratha Navy. " The single instance of "pirate" in the article is "He also employed a Jamaican pirate named James Plantain". Not sure what the issue is at this time Cannolis (talk) 08:38, 9 October 2022 (UTC)

Effort to change this page

Please note there are concerted efforts to white-wash this page. See this news article. Thanks. Kiran_891 ^(TALK) 18:21, 9 October 2022 (UTC)

From the screenshot on that article, the pirate thing all these folks are up in arms about is from Google. The article even tells their readers how to complain to Google - "Go to Google, search for Kanhoji Angre - After that, on the page that opens, where this pirate is written, there will be 3 vertical dots in the right corner and then click on it and report the feedback as incorrect." - yet somehow they're all here, not reading our article, and proceeding to complain about it. Cannolis (talk) 22:01, 9 October 2022 (UTC)

Wrongfully depiction and narrative

Angre ji was an admiral in the Navy. It was his duty to protect his nation and the sea from colonial looters, plunderers and thieves who came as traders and looted Hindustan. To say that colonial ship were innocent victims and Angre was looting them is like saying you go to someone's house and rob and the when you are caught you call the house owner a thief for taking back from what is theirs in the first place. You guys have funny way of giving narratives. 103.235.122.123 (talk) 08:42, 10 October 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 10 October 2022

2402:3A80:1B3A:56C8:80FE:1B92:1CF6:DFD5 (talk) 09:54, 10 October 2022 (UTC)

Kanhoji Angre was Indian Navy commander in Maratha Empire led by Chhatrapati Shivaji Maharaj. He was not a pirate.

 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. Where in our article does it say he was a pirate? Cannolis (talk) 10:05, 10 October 2022 (UTC)

Naval strategy and type of boats

There is not much on the types of boats used by Kanhoji in his work. Where were these boats built, their designs etc. Also there should be more information on the staff he employed. Also how far away from the shore did could his boats go, i.e. were they deep sea vessels? Lot of practical information missing. Thanks.Jonathansammy (talk) 19:24, 10 October 2022 (UTC)

Family background

Is it important to speculate too much on the origins of the Angre family? How does it help to understand Kanhoji's achievements? Thanks. Jonathansammy (talk) 19:55, 11 October 2022 (UTC)

Hi Jonathansammy, given the controversy, it is very interesting to non-Indians also and is rather unique considering the timeframe. It is small considered to the rest of the page. Clement Downing has given so many specific details of Angre's family background in his book that either he was someone with an overactive imagination(which cannot be ruled out!) or he was telling the truth as he knew it(perhaps based on rumours). Downing was apparently the first Biographer of Angre who actually might have even seen him. He and or his superiors definitely had encounters with Angre. As you may know, Prince Charles is supposed to have indian ancestry. Ironically, less racism in those days! Downing's writings are referenced by several modern scholars(you can search google books)LukeEmily (talk) 14:15, 12 October 2022 (UTC)

Hi LukeEmily. This section on his family origin sounds like an article from a British tabloid or the American National Enquirer. Grose wrote his Voyage to the Indies in the 1750s, nearly a century after the birth of Kanhoji.The introduction section of Clement Downing's History of Indian wars doubts veracity of many incidences he mentions. Also that a footnote in that section casts doubt on the african ancestry of the Angre family.The African Siddis of Janjira remained undefeated during maratha rule, and survived as British vassal until 1947. Siddi Malik Ambar was a mentor to Maloji Bhosle.So there is lot to be proud in having African ancestry. You also don't cite Arunchandra Pathak.In my honest opinion the whole section is a big mess.Regards.Jonathansammy (talk) 17:53, 12 October 2022 (UTC)

King Charles III may have African ancestry through one of his ancestors, Charlotte of Mecklenburg-Strelitz. [2].His son and heir, Prince William will have African ancestry through his father, and Indian on his maternal side.[3]Jonathansammy (talk) 17:53, 12 October 2022 (UTC)

Hi Jonathansammy,Dr Pathaks statement is here. Wikipedia is not saying that Downing is correct. Sharma and Berendse say he was Koli. Berendse says he "used" his vaunted (or praised about) Ethiopian descent . We can delete gazeeteer as per WP:RAJ. If Pathak had not made his statement, gazeeteer would not be used at all. Roy is a modern 2010 source. Regards,LukeEmily (talk) 18:46, 12 October 2022 (UTC)

Hi LukeEmily, Even Kaushik Roy regurgitates Clement Downing.We can keep this in the Note section but I don't think anything based on Downing and Grose should be in the main body.Their accounts of Kanhoji's origin are based on the gossip and heresay amongst European trading communities of the day.Thanks.Jonathansammy (talk) 20:41, 12 October 2022 (UTC)

Hi Jonathansammy, Kaushik Roy does not even mention any other opinion - he only mentions Downing. Every historian chooses what he finds most appropriate. Barendse gives a great summary. In fact, Grose and Downing are the only 3rd person written accounts that early. Everything else was carried by word of mouth across the centuries and written centuries later or self-claimed. In the early 19th century, a Bakhar mentions his father working for Shivaji(see Sen). Did not understand why we should censor his possibly non-Indian origin especially since even modern scholars mention it. No one can prove his origin one way or the other. I mean no one can prove that he was African and no one can prove he was not African. It will always be an unsolved puzzle. But what is clear is that people thought he was african during his lifetime and he used it to his advantage. If you think it is offensive, we can try to reword or put some stuff in footnotes. What do you suggest? Please can you also look at the Oxford University press publication (Downing). He does not make a passing mention of his heritage but goes on to discuss family members in great detail. Reading that made me think that Downing knew a lot about him and it is understandable since he was a contemporary sailor. Also, Downing had no vested interest portraying him as African or Indian since he was neither. He might have made an honest mistake though.LukeEmily (talk) 00:39, 13 October 2022 (UTC)

Hi LukeEmily, As I may have mentioned earlier in this thread, even a 1924 reprint of Downing's book says that the "usual account is is that Kanhoji's father was a Maratha employed by Shivaji and their original surname was Sankpal"[4]. Unless there is any brand new evidence to say otherwise we should have Downing and Grose only in the footnote. Nothing wrong with african heritage, I am more concerned about a muslim becoming Hindu during that period.There was the case of Netaji Palkar but he was born a Hindu, but later adopted islam and then taken back in Hindu fold on the orders of Shivaji. Here we are saying Tukoji Angre, a muslim became Hindu which doesn't sound plausible. Muslims at that time of Tukoji had no incentive to become Hindus.I hope you get my point.Thanks.Jonathansammy (talk) 14:50, 13 October 2022 (UTC)

Hi .Jonathansammy, you may be right as being Muslim at the time was more "profitable". Let me dig into the sources. We can resolve this in a couple of days. LukeEmily (talk) 04:33, 18 October 2022 (UTC)

hi Jonathansammy, I am OK with moving Downing and Grose in the footnotes. One point though: Would it not be benefit him to convert to Hinduism if he was serving the Maratha empite?LukeEmily (talk) 17:16, 27 October 2022 (UTC)

Hi LukeEmily.Thanks. Throughout the history of the Maratha empire, they had muslims in high position such as Ibrahim Khan Gardi. The Bhat Peshwas also allowed their own blood, i.e. Shamsher Bahadur, the son of Bajirao I and Mastani to practice islam rather than accept him as a hindu.They also had European officers and mercenaries in Maratha army in many instances, particularly during Mahadji Shinde's time. Pune had mosques and churches to serve the spiritual needs of these soldiers. I hope this helps. Thanks.Jonathansammy (talk) 17:33, 27 October 2022 (UTC)

References

Semi-protected edit request on 11 October 2022

Kanhoji angre was not a pirate actually he is most remarkable Admiral of Maratha Empire.he Never attack any foreign ship's for money or gold. He just defended Indian cost and forts of Maratha Empire as he appointed for the same from Maratha king. 2401:4900:5602:E984:D1D8:2392:911:EAB0 (talk) 22:59, 11 October 2022 (UTC)

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 23:05, 11 October 2022 (UTC)