The Politics of Symbolism and Contemporary Critique: A Comparative Study of Chhatrapati Shivaji and Ahilyabai Holkar

Abstract

This paper undertakes a comparative analysis of the concepts of 'Swarajya and welfare administration associated with Chhatrapati Shivaji and Ahilyabai Holkar. Shivaji is regarded as the founder of Swarajya and a pioneer of people-centric governance. As a male figure, the socio-political space and societal acceptance he received were shaped by intersecting factors of caste, religion, feudalism, watandari (hereditary rights), power struggles, protective mechanisms, and violence. In contrast, Ahilyabai a woman from the nomadic Dhangar community, positioned as "mother" and benevolent ruler-administrator is examined within 18th–19th century contexts. Her popular image as "Punyashloka" (virtuous) or "Lokmata" (mother of the people) extends beyond mere public perception to define societal psychological boundaries. Feudal Indian societal consciousness does not fully accept her as a warrior, capable administrator, diplomat, or welfare-oriented ruler.

Aspects such as the reasons for Shivaji's two coronations, the contemporaneous socio-political realities of Jat-feudal-religious norms embedded therein, and the welfare concept of "Kulwadi Bhushan" remain underexplored. Likewise, Ahilyabai's contributions her performance as a welfare administrator, the challenges faced by a nomadic woman within feudal and priest-centric governance, and the resulting constraints on her administrative space have been overlooked. No comprehensive comparative study has yet addressed these figures across caste-feudal transitions from the medieval to late medieval periods, gender dynamics, geography, or the social factors influencing welfare policies.

This article comparatively examines the *swarajya* concepts, public images, and contemporary political symbolism of Chhatrapati Shivaji and the exemplary administrator Ahilyabai Holkar, while articulating the contemporary relevance of such research. These two figures warrant symbolic study because they occupy foundational, primary, and distinctly gendered positions in historical and ongoing symbolic discourses.