Mixing up history and fantasy may be titillating but it sends out a wrong message, especially to the young, who tend to believe in it as the truth. These days a serial on the invasion of Alexander in 327 BC is being televised. In that year after winning over the support of the Raja of Taxila, Ambhi, the Greek conqueror attacked Puru or Porus, a giant of a man, who fought with great valour at the Jhelum. His territory lay between that river and the Chenab but the Greeks called the Jhelum Hydaspes and the battle was recorded as such. The opposing armies faced each other for long and then one stormy night the Greeks set up a commotion, beating drums and blowing trumpets. Sensing an attack, Porus’ troops rushed out but found it to be a ruse. Meanwhile, the Greek army outflanked them and attacked from the other side. In the surprise assault, Porus was captured mainly due to Alexander’s trickery. He was asked what treatment should be meted out to him and the Raja replied, “Like a King”. Pleased with the reply and the Raja’s bravery, the conqueror treated him courteously and reinstated him in his kingdom.
Fanciful story
The serial is woven around a fanciful story in which Porus is shown as defender of “Akhand Bharat”, kicking down “a puny Alexander” in combat twice and making life hell for him and his army. To top it all, the Machiavellian Chanakaya, author of “Mudrarakashas”, is shown as Porus’ adviser. How, he landed up in the remote northern region from distant Patliputra is a mystery. Starvation and epidemic deaths among the Raja’s people are also highlighted and Alexander is portrayed as a womaniser, who had not only brought his wife and mother (seemingly a guest for some time in Porus’ palace) and a whole lot of other women with whom he makes merry and takes a second wife, leaving the first one furious. This is not true. He came with his troops but not a harem certainly. Fancy may be exciting but facts are sacred and not to be dabbled with.
Now a Delhi legislator has announced that three bronze equestrian statues of Sikh generals, Baghel Singh, Jassa Singh Alhuwalia and Jassa Singh Ramgarhia, “who captured the Red Fort during the reign of Shah Alam in 1783”, were being made in Gwalior and will be installed at various places in the Capital. While it is true that Baghel Singh and the other two attacked Delhi, they did not capture the Red Fort. Baghel Singh’s 30,000 troops were camped outside the Kashmere Gate while he laid siege to Delhi. The place where they camped is still known as Tis Hazari because of the number of troops amassed there. Baghel Singh was paid a huge ransom at the behest of Begum Sumroo, who had come to the aid of the emperor and negotiated the deal with all her craftiness.
The Red Fort was captured from time to time by various others, among them foremost Aurangzeb, then Nadir Shah, the Persian ruler, who invaded Delhi at the time of Mohammad Shah Rangilla in 1739 and ordered the massacre of the city from the Sunheri mosque in Chandni Chowk. He left only after a booty of ₹ 70 crores was paid to him. Besides that, he also carried away the fabulous Peacock Throne (Thakt-e-Taus) and the priceless Kohinoor diamond. After him, Delhi was at the mercy of his successor, Ahmed Shah Abdali and then the Marathas under Mahadji Scindia, who took virtual possession of the fort and posed as “protectors” of the emperor whom their leader regarded as a “father-figure”.
Terrible ordeal
But the Marathas did not attack the fort as such, nor did the Jats of Bharatpur. That was done by Ghulam Qadir Rohilla. It is recorded that in 1788 two of his men seized the emperor Shah Alam’s hands and another two his legs, while the Rohilla leader gouged out his eyes in a terrible ordeal for the old Mughal. He also left after plundering the fort and setting up a dummy king but was hunted down by Mahadji Scindia, captured in Mathura and executed in Delhi with great cruelty. A worthless grandson of Hafiz Rahmat Khan, tragic hero of the Battle of Mirankatra, he met the fate he deserved.
It’s not only the TV channel on Porus that has fanciful history, it has been done earlier too, starting with films like Alam Ara in the early 1930s and then Anarkali, Taj Mahal and Mughal-e-Azam. In Taj Mahal, Mumtaz Mahal is shown as coming down from heaven at night to meet the grieving Shah Jahan and in Mughal-e-Azam Akbar and Salim (Jahangir) are shown as engaged in combat (which never happened) during the prince’s purported rebellion over Anarkali. Anarkali was not the cause of the rebellion, incidentally.
Similarly, at the Battle of Haldighati Akbar was not present to fight with Maharana Pratap, as is popularly believed. It was Raja Man Singh who led the Mughal troops. Another liberty with history is taken when some affirm that Prithviraj Chauhan assassinated Mohd Ghori. Actually, after his defeat in the second battle of Tarain, Prithviraj was killed in 1193. Ghori was assassinated 13 years later in 1206 by a fanatic of the Mulahida sect while he was returning to Ghazni. Entertainment that falsifies facts is the biggest disservice to Clio, the muse of history.
Please Email the Editor