Marathas obeyed the Mughals?
Against the British
East India Company rebel sepoys
Seven Indian princely states
Mughal Empire
Gwalior factions
Rani Laxmi bai, the deposed Maratha ruler of the independent state of Jhansi
Nana Sahib Peshwa, the adopted son of Maratha Peshwa Baji Rao II
Followers of Birjis Qadra, the son of the deposed Nawab of Oudh
Some Indian civilians, notably retainers of talukdars (feudal landowners) of Oudh and Muslim ghazis (religious fighters)
British Side
British Empire
East India Company loyalist sepoys
Native irregulars
East India Company British regulars
United Kingdom British and European civilian volunteers raised in the Bengal Presidency
21 princely states
Ajaigarh
Alwar
Bharathpur
Bhopal
Bijawar
Bikaner
Bundi
Hyderabad
Jaipur
Jaora
Kapurthala
Kashmir
Kendujhar
Jodhpur
Patiala
Rampur
Rewa
Sirmur
Sirohi
Udaipur
India, as we know now, did not exist.
So, how does one show nationalism to a non existent entity?
What exactly do you want to say?
Nationalism is a modern idea from Europe, yes modern sense of Nationalism(borrowed from Europe based on language) did not exist, but this country is ours, not for some people who came from far distance, the will to uproot foreigner British rule and instead positioning local rulers, does not it indicate they wanted to get rid off Foreigners? And wanting to get rid off foreigners, does not it mean they had a feeling that this country is theirs? What do you call it?
What exactly is national flag? Republic of India's National flag is tricolour, Mughals had different, National flag evolves with the change of Government.
Mughals ruled most of India(some them even now are not Indian territory) and Mughal flag was hoisted through out their empire, and hoisting any other flag with out their permission was considered offence, so?
For Marathas after 1720's Mughal Government weakened, if Marathas wanted they could have displaced Mughals, but they did not. You know in 1770's Marathas positioned Mughal emperor and crushed some anti-Mughal rebellion?
Even Mughal emperor was called Emperor of India up to 1857, all though Company ruled practically.
When transportation system was very primitive then it is very natural people of different area would unite under banner of local lords and local lords in turn unite under any bigger banners.
Delhi was capital of India, and yes, not always rulers of Delhi had control over other parts. So many regional states were established only to be annexed again by next powerful ruler from Delhi in future.
Example-Alauddin Khilji expanded Sultani rule to South India defeating Hindu rajas(1290's AD.), all most after his death, South again became separated from Sultani rule this time by both Hindu and Muslim kings, Muhammad Bin Tughlaq again captured south, but just within 10 years Harihar and Bukka established Vijoynnagar, in north Bahman Shah established Bahmani state, Bahmani state broke up, Vijonagar collapsed, again South was conquered by Mughals.(17th century)
It was struggle between regionalism and unity.
May be we can see the same in Republic of India, 60 years are a very short time in perspective History(Akbar alone ruled 49 years!!!)
India was created by British, it is the worst work British did to rewrite India's history.