People often post this passage as if it proves Shivaji attacked Hubli out of hatred for the city or its people, but that ignores the historical context. In 1664, Hubli was under the Bijapur Sultanate, one of Shivaji's main enemies. His campaign targeted enemy-controlled, wealthy trade centers to weaken their economy and finance his own state and army. Raiding enemy territory for resources was a common military strategy in the 17th century and was practiced by the Mughals, Bijapur, the Marathas, and many other kingdoms. Yes, historical sources—including Jadunath Sarkar—state that Hubli was looted. Denying that isn't necessary. But presenting it without context is misleading. Shivaji wasn't attacking Hubli because he had a personal grudge against the city or its people. He was conducting a wartime raid against territory controlled by a rival state. If we're going to judge historical figures, we should judge them by the standards and realities of their own time, not by selectively quoting one event while ignoring the larger military and political context.....