Oxford’s Apology and the Long Shadow of History: Revisiting the Shivaji Maharaj Controversy

Oxford’s Apology and the Long Shadow of History: Revisiting the Shivaji Maharaj Controversy

The world of academia and publishing encountered a moment of reckoning early in January 2026 when Oxford University Press (OUP) India issued a heartfelt apology over content about Chhatrapati Shivaji Maharaj that had sparked one of the most intense historical controversies in modern Indian memory. The apology did not emerge in isolation but was a culmination of decades of public debate, legal battles, heated protests and emotional appeals from scholars, devotees and descendants of the legendary Maratha king.

More than twenty years after the original uproar, OUP India formally acknowledged that certain passages in the book Shivaji: Hindu King in Islamic India contained “unverified statements” about Shivaji Maharaj — statements that caused deep hurt among those who reverence the 17th-century warrior king as a symbol of valour, self-rule (Swaraj) and cultural pride. This book, authored by American academic James Laine and first published in 2003, was meant to be an academic examination of Shivaji’s life but included phrases and anecdotes that many felt were derogatory, insensitive and failing to capture the revered legacy of Shivaji Maharaj’s campaigns and governance.

The apology took the form of a public notice published in widely circulated newspapers, in which OUP India explicitly stated that it regretted publishing those unverified statements on specific pages of the book — notably pages 31, 33, 34 and 93 — and expressed sincere remorse for the distress they caused. The notice was directed especially at Chhatrapati Udayanraje Bhosale, the 13th direct descendant of Shivaji Maharaj, and extended broadly to the public at large for any anguish and misunderstanding that had arisen from the book’s content.

To understand why this apology carries such weight, one must go back to the controversy that erupted almost immediately after the book’s publication. Soon after the book came out in 2003, groups such as the Sambhaji Brigade objected strongly to its characterisations, accusing Laine and the publishing institute of disrespecting Shivaji Maharaj’s memory. The dispute escalated dramatically in January 2004 when more than 150 activists vandalised the Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute (BORI) in Pune, arguing that the institute had assisted the author in his research — a charge that led to nationwide debate about academic freedom versus cultural respect.

Legal repercussions followed. Defamation proceedings were initiated in Indian courts, and for years the matter simmered in legal and public forums. At one point, OUP India itself withdrew the book from circulation in the country and pledged to revise future editions. The Supreme Court of India, the Bombay High Court, scholars, and politicians all entered the discourse, wrestling with questions of historical interpretation, freedom of speech, and accountability of international publishers dealing with culturally sensitive topics. That complex backdrop makes the 2026 apology even more significant — not merely as a publisher’s expression of regret but as a recognition of the deep bond between historical narrative and cultural identity in India.

In its statement, the publishing house said it deeply regretted any distress caused by the controversial content and acknowledged that the language used in those sections was not adequately verified before publication. The apology came to many as a long-awaited closure to an episode that had affected not just the immediate community of scholars but countless people in Maharashtra and beyond who look upon Shivaji Maharaj as a national icon.

As this story continues to reverberate through academic and cultural circles, it underlines how historical discourse — especially involving towering figures like Chhatrapati Shivaji Maharaj — must balance scholarly inquiry with sensitivity to sentiments deeply rooted in collective memory. OUP’s public apology, however belated, reflects how publishers today navigate those responsibilities in an increasingly interconnected and culturally conscious world.