1.

What are the things you like and dislike most about Prithvi Narayan shah as a
leader?
Prithvi Narayan Shah (1769-1775), with whom we move into the modern period of Nepal's
history, was the ninth generation descendant of Dravya Shah (1559-1570), the founder of the
ruling house of Gorkha. Prithvi Narayan Shah succeeded his father King Nara Bhupal Shah to the
throne of Gorkha in 1743 AD (The Editors of Encyclopaedia Britannica, 2020). King Prithvi
Narayan Shah was quite aware of the political situation of the Valley kingdoms as well as of the
Bayisi and Chaubisi principalities. He foresaw the need for unifying the small principalities as an
urgent condition for survival in the future and set himself to the task accordingly. The following
point highlights the positive contribution of Prithvi Narayan Shah (hereafter also called P.N.
Shah) as a leader of Nepalese society.

 Strengthening of his army to conquer

When he ascended to the Gorkha throne, the kingdom was weak economically and militarily.
Hence Gorkha faced constant threat of invasion from the powerful neighboring states of
Lamjung, Palpa and Tanahu. As first step in the campaign, Prithvi Narayan Shah wanted to
strengthen his army and so mobilized all the youth of his kingdom, regardless of caste.

 Inclusion of different castes in nation building process

Going against tradition, he recruited Rana (Magars) to increase the participation of the people
in the nation-building process, rather than leave it to an elite class. In his Divyopadesh, Prithvi
Narayan describes himself as king of "Magarat" and talks about the need to involve "Pandes,
Pant, Arjyal, Khanal, Rana, Bohora" (representing the major castes of the Chhetris, Brahmins
and Magar people in Gorkha) in strengthening of the kingdom

 Defeat of British Army in 1767

Nepali military defeated the British army in 1767. In the battle of Sindhuligadhi the Gorkhalis
defeated a British troop commanded by Captain Kinloch. This defeat had been of paramount
importance to Nepal for two reasons. In the first place, it had stopped the potential British
presence in the Kathmandu .Success of the British to enter the valley at that time would be the
beginning of a military presence of the colonizers, and could be a great hindrance in the course
of unification. Secondly, this prevented the British design to make Nepal a regular route to
Tibet. Thus, this not only hindered the British policy of expansion, but also gave P. N. Shah the
awareness that any further move of British to Nepal would be a greater threat to Nepal’s
sovereignty (Marahatta, 2015).

 Promoting a policy of defense and opposition

Since the relationship with British was not good at that time, he proactively promoted the
policy of defense and opposition in view of potential future encounter with the British, and in
order to ensure enough time for military and economic consolidation of the country.
  Strategy of self-determination:
With the policy of resistance against and isolation from the British
India, it was also important to maintain self-reliance and self-sufficiency, mainly in economy
and culture. He encouraged the cultivation of native crops and preservation of agricultural
land. Prithvi Narayan strongly advocated self-sufficiency, self-reliance and believed in the
concepts of sustainability. He wanted settlements on fertile lands moved to make way for
irrigation channels and agriculture. True to those projectionist times, he encouraged export but
discouraged import that would drain the country's wealth. Also he took steps for the
promotion of local culture (watching the dances of Newars of three cities of Nepal) which was
the best mechanism to unite people (Kafle, 2008).

However, following illustrates most common criticisms about P.N. Shah.

 Brutality
After the victory over rulers of Kritipur, victorious Gorkha state humiliated the losers. It was
also documented that soldiers of P N Shah cut the nose of the local residents. These bitter scars
of P N Shah’s victorious celebrations have created enough hatred.
It has been agreed that local peoples of Kritipur still hates P.N. Shah’ successors and this was
one of the main reason for the increased participation of people of Kritipur in Janaandolan- II,
which was also conducted for abolishment of monarchy.

 Ignorance to people of Terai

“Madhesis are Indians. They should never be appointed to the civil service posts higher than
Kharidar and Mukhiya.’” This statement is attributed to King Prithvi Narayan Shah as his
upadesh’ by a Madhesis activist Bijaya Karna in the opening sentence of his article. No source is
cited from which he has quoted the statement. But this sentence is not traceable in Prithvi
Narayan Shah’s Dibya Upadesh. Still nobody will dispute the fact that Madhesis are still looked
at with a jaundiced eye by the Pahadia political elites, most agree that this was the main reason
behind Madhesis Angolan, as Madhesis were ignored in government services- Army and others
from the beginning of Shah’s regime as a unified modern Nepal.

This is further justified by the challenge came from Jaya Krishna Goit, the leader of Janatantrik
Mukti Morcha, an armed group fighting for the “liberation” of Terai. Goit declared a “quit Terai”
campaign against the rulers of Nepal like Mahatma Gandhi's “quit India” against the British. His
principal claim (and dissatisfaction) has been that the Nepalese have been ruling the Terai as
the British ruled India.

 Discrimination based on caste

Prithvi Narayan Shah had started the feudal state structure. Prithvi Narayan Shah used to
measure Khas-Arya castes in higher level whereas the other castes as people of lower level. The
state created by Prithvi Narayan is based on caste and class exploitation." All the political and
administrative posts/offices were held by Brahmin (in Nepali called Bahun) and Kshatriya (in
Nepali called Chettri) people. All the political powers have rested on these two groups for past
240+ years since the founding of modern Nepal by P.N Shah. And probably this is the main
reason behind the political unrest today.

2. The article goes on to explain that Prithvi Jayanti, for an ordinary citizen, has
turned into yet another national holiday and a forced annual ritual. Explain why.

Though Prithvi Narayan Shah still retains a sizeable number of devotees among the Nepali
people, there are many others who strongly condemn and vilify him. The emotion that
underscores this polarity is obvious. Those who benefitted, or are still benefitting, as a result of
Shah’s plunder, will not stop glorifying him and those who have suffered, or are still suffering,
as a result of his ambition of Gorkha’s expansion will not stop condemning him. Similarly, while
a number of historians have tried their best to deify Shah by ignoring the brutalities he
committed, there are others who are not averse to mentioning the cruelties he inflicted on
those he subjugated during his reign.

Soon after the political change of 2006, by rejecting the earlier projection of Shah as a symbol
of national unity, the Cabinet led by the then Prime Minister Girija Prasad Koirala, scrapped a
government holiday that celebrated his birth anniversary. A large section of Nepali people
heartedly welcomed the decision while another section has been making hue and cry against
this move. These year we see much enthusiasm among the monarchists and their allies in
celebrating his birthday (SHRESTHA, 2016).

It is not surprising to find staunch monarchists such as Kamal Thapa pleading to honor Shah, but
to find Nepal’s self-declared communists praising a feudal warlord is totally absurd. Some of
Nepal’s ruling communists, such as the present Prime Minister KP Sharma Oli, and his deputy
CP Mainali—who have already been unmasked as the proponents of Khas-Arya Bahun
hegemony in Nepal—were busy promoting Shah as the builder of modern Nepal (Kathmandu
Post, 2017).

Most hagiographies of Shah that credited him with unifying Nepal were popularized during the
time of king Mahendra. Shah’s conquests may have inadvertently given shape to the
geographical expansion and consolidation of what we visualize as modern Nepal. But that does
not absolve him of the many crimes he committed along the way—much in the same way that
the British colonial rulers of India cannot be forgiven for the oppression and the plunder they
subjected the Indians to, even as over the course of their rule, they may be credited with having
put together ‘India’ as a modern political entity (Basnyat, 2019).

Nepal as a geographical and territorial entity is no modern creation; it has existed from
Prehistoric times. For instance, the late historian Dhanavajra Vajracharya asserts that the
geography of Nepal was already as big as present-day Nepal during the Licchavi reign, although
there were some ruptures along the way. But Shah’s imperial ambitions brought together the
disintegrated kingdoms and principalities. He and his many successors were only essentially
interested in expanding their Gorkha Empire and had no political motivation or a moral vision
to establish a unified ‘Nepal’. The Nepal that emerged out of this process was only a byproduct
of their expansionist ambitions.

It needs to be remembered that it was only during the Rana rule (1846-1951) that Nepal
became the accepted name of our country. The Rana oligarchy enforced their imperial will on
the Nepali people and imposed their language, ‘Parvate’ or ‘Khas’, on the natives, who
otherwise spoke local languages, including ‘Nepal Bhasa’. In fact they changed the name of
‘Nepal Bhasa’ to ‘Newari’, a term considered derogatory by the Newar people, while they
renamed their language ‘Nepali’. The Newar people think of themselves as the original
inhabitants of ‘Nepal’, a territory that connotes the Kathmandu Valley and surrounding areas
(SHRESTHA, 2016).

Even with all this growing awareness, it has not discouraged Shah’s surrogates to continue to
Impose their language, religion and culture on the Nepali people in the name of ‘rastriya ekata’
(National unity). However, the Nepali people who have already dumped the Shah dynasty will
not let the oppressive power of the new regime go unchallenged for long (SHRESTHA, 2016).
References
Basnyat, P. S., 2019. The king who saved Nepal. [Online]
Available at: https://myrepublica.nagariknetwork.com/news/the-king-who-saved-nepal/
[Accessed 9 May 2020].

Kafle, H. R., 2008. Bodhi. Prithvi Narayan Shah and Postcolonial, pp. 136-146.

Kathmandu Post, 2017. Patriotic Nepali should respect Prithvi Narayan Shah: Chairman Thapa. [Online]
Available at: https://kathmandupost.com/miscellaneous/2017/01/10/patriotic-nepali-should-respect-
prithvi-narayan-shah-chairman-thapa
[Accessed 9 May 2020].

Marahatta, C. M., 2015. INTELLIGENCE MECHANISM AND WAR TACTICS OF PRITHIVI NARAYAN SHAH,
kathmandu: ARMY COMMAND AND STAFF COLLEGE.

SHRESTHA, B. G., 2016. Less of a hero, Kathmandu: s.n.

The Editors of Encyclopaedia Britannica, 2020. Prithvi Nārāyaṇ Shah. [Online]

Available at: https://www.britannica.com/biography/Prithvi-Narayan-Shah