The coincidence between Shivaji's foreign policy and that of a Quranic sovereign is so complete that both the history of Shivaji by his courtier Krishnaji Anant and the Persian official history of Bijapur use exactly the same word, mulk-giri, to describe such raids into neighbouring countries as a regular political ideal. The only difference was that in theory at least, an orthodox Muslim king was bound to spare the other Muslim States in his path and not to spoil
or shed the blood of true believers, while Shivaji (as well as the Peshwas after him) carried on his mulk-giri into all neighbouring States, Hindu no less than Islamic, and squeezed rich Hindus as mercilessly as he did Muhammadans. Then, again, the orthodox Islamic king, in theory at least, aimed at the annexation and conversion of the other States, so that after the short sharp agony of conquest was
over the latter enjoyed peace like the regular parts of his dominion. But the object of Shivaji's military enterprises, unless his Court-historian Sabhasad has misrepresented it, was not annexation but mere
plunder, or to quote his very words, "The Maratha forces should feed themselves at the expense of foreign countries for eight months every year, and levy blackmail." (Sabh., 29.)
Thus, Shivaji's power was exactly similar in origin and theory to the power of the Muslim States in India and elsewhere, and he only differed from them in the use of that power. Universal toleration and equal justice and protection were the distinctive
