Which structural weakness of the Maratha political system most directly contributed to their defeat in the Third Battle of Panipat (1761)?
At Panipat, the Maratha army was a collection of individual contingents rather than a unified force. Sadashivrao Bhau lacked the absolute authority to command veteran chiefs like Malharrao Holkar, who often disagreed with his tactics. This lack of a “centralized command” led to strategic confusion, poor intelligence gathering and a failure to coordinate movements during the heat of the battle against the disciplined Afghans. ANSWER: (B) Absence of centralized command and coordination
Share
The “Confederacy” model of the Marathas was ill-suited for a large-scale pitched battle like Panipat. The various sardars—Scindia, Holkar, Gaekwad—prioritized the safety of their own troops and interests. This lack of coordination meant that when the Afghans cut off their supply lines, the Maratha leadership could not agree on a cohesive breakout strategy. The friction between the traditional guerrilla-style generals and Bhau’s European-style artillery focus created a tactical rift. Abdali’s success was largely due to his unified command, while the Marathas fell because of their structural inability to act as one.