 |
| Dr. S. Chandnibi of Aligarh Muslim University.
|
 |
| Epigraphical Reading in the Chola History |
|
 |
| The nine foot
tall stucco statue of Nandi installed on a twelve foot pedestal about
four hundred years ago stands out majestically on the baked |
Think history, think of the Mauryas, the Guptas, the Sultanate and the
Mughals. Maybe, somewhere down the line sneak in a chapter on the
Cholas, and a paragraph or two on the likes of the Pandeyas, the Cheras,
the Vakatakas and the rest. Some though have gone beyond this lopsided
approach to our history and focussed on the achievements of the Cholas,
the empire that lasted more than a millennium. Many years ago, the
venerable Nilakant Sastri came up with a landmark study of the Cholas.
Recently, S. Chandnibi, an academic at Aligarh Muslim University,
concentrated on epigraphical data from the dynasty in her book,
“Epigraphical Reading in the Chola History” to reveal to us some of the
evidence of the vastness of the empire.
Beyond Nilakant Sastri, not many top historians seem to have focussed
exclusively on the Cholas. Your book fills that vacuum. How challenging
was it to do a book on the Cholas that goes beyond academic circles?
I dare not to be placed anywhere near K.A. Nilakanta Sastri. He a giant,
never left a stone unturned in the field of Cholas, which itself is too
big a challenge for anyone to progress further. Next handicap is the
sources, where we should look to epigraphy only, as we lack literary
sources as compared to contemporary north India. Among the painstakingly
copied inscriptions, ASI has published little, and also the efforts of
the State government are too little when compared to other neighbouring
States. So one has to wait for permission
The Cholas were renowned for local self-administration. Were they the harbingers of local self government in modern India?
We may say so. The ancient north Indian literature refers to republican
States and two different houses of the State, viz Sabha and Samithi, and
we hardly see its practicality here. But Sabha and its full fledged
functions are quite obvious in the regime of the Cholas. In certain
issues —irrespective of the difficulties of matching with the exact
perspectives of present-day democracy — definitely we are yet to catch
up with the Chola system, especially in dealing with corruption in
general and politicians in particular. The most amazing aspect was their
effort to maintain zero tolerance towards public corruption. Public
money swindlers were debarred from contesting the elections for life.
Could you elaborate on the Cholas’ justice system?
It was more practical in a certain sense, like when two brothers fought
with each other and one was murdered, the other was exempted from
imprisonment taking into account the aged parents left with no other
sons; he was left free with a caution to guard his parents. The
caste-based justice of Manu did not find routes with the Cholas’
justice. At the village level grievances were dissolved by discussion,
unmindful of whether it was day or night. Traditions were given
importance but overcome if documental evidence was produced. The various
stages of the present system, right from filing a case to the final
judgement including the right to appeal, was followed in the Chola
judiciary. The king’s court was the only court of appeal. Even the
Brahmins were not spared; they were imprisoned, fined, had their
property confiscated and were deprived of their professional duties in
the temples for generations. Special care was taken to collect the
swindled public money. We do not hear about hard punishments like
thrashing, being trampled under elephants and amputation. An example is
the case of the murder of a prince by a group of Brahmins; the royal
authority did not execute them but confiscated all their and their
relatives’ property. At the same time, a very little parallel to Manu’s
influence could also be felt.
As youngsters we learn about Mauryan Emperor Ashoka’s expedition to
Sri Lanka as also the Battle of Kalinga. Yet we are told little about
how Raja Raja Chola I’s empire included Sri Lanka as well as Kalinga.
How do you explain this dichotomy?
This particular question may open a Pandora’s box. The historians of
north India really far exceed in the subject while the south is not yet
close to them. Eventually these developments led to a mental picture
that the history of north of the Vindayas is the history of the country
itself. The historical writings undermined the south and used a blanket
term “Indian” — though neglecting the southern touch. I can list at
least 50 such books, from my very department’s library . The chapter
“Feudalism in South Indian Context” of my book is self-explanatory in
this context. Though scholars the world over accept that the so-called
undeciphered Harappan script has links to languages of the Dravidian
family, we prefer to leave it aside as undeciphered. Though the familiar
division of Indian society into four on caste basis has been checked
and opposed right from its initiation in the Vedic age, still the basic
text books do not show this. All this implies the need for rewriting our
history books with absolute objectivity. A senior historian has voiced
long back that Indian history should start from the banks of river
Kaveri instead of the Ganga.
On similar lines our students are told about southern kings in one
single chapter, in which the Cholas, Pandeyas, Cheras are all clubbed
together despite the fact that often Cheras, Sinhalas as also the
Pandeyas allied against the Cholas. Doesn’t this short shrift to an
important Indian dynasty deprive our students of a more balanced
representation of our past?
Of course, there is no other dynasty in the whole of Indian history,
perhaps the universe, that has survived and continued to rule right from
B.C to the 13th A.D — which includes the complete ancient period and
partially the medieval one, with ups and downs, except the three, viz
the Cheras, Cholas and Pandeyas. The Greek and Roman writers exhibit a
sense of fear over the gold drain into these kingdoms caused by the
excessive imports in the Augustus Era. The two epics of India, Ramayana
and Mahabharata, do refer to them. Some of the tribes in the South East
Asian islands go with the names of the three dynasties. Asokan
inscriptions refer to them as neighbours, meaning they were independent
of the Mauryan yoke. Kharavela of Kalinga perceived the confederation of
these three dynasties as a threat. Even in Pakistan, Afghanistan and
the land beyond carry these dynastical names as their place names today
too. The Cholas were the first to excel in a navy and succeeded in
subduing the Far East islands politically, culturally and commercially.
Until the advent of the Europeans in sea commerce, the southern powers
had both east and west overseas commerce in their hands. Embassies were
sent to China as an extension of commerce. The dialogue can go on.
Yes, our younger generations are deprived of a marvellous piece of their history, which is definitely very unfortunate.
The Hindu November 28, 2014
