Unicorn

Noun: unicorn 'yooni'korn An imaginary creature represented as a white horse with a long horn growing from its forehead. Though the popular image of the unicorn is that of a white horse differing only in the horn, the traditional unicorn has a billy-goat beard, a lion's tail, and cloven hoofs, which distinguish him from a horse. Interestingly, these modifications make the horned ungulate more realistic, since only cloven-hoofed animals have horns.

Thursday, September 29, 2005

A peek into a foot-note in Indian History

"Mangal Pandey". A name that does not reverberate in Indian history. A name forgotten among the countless sons of the soil who died for this motherland, A name that is more of a folklore than fact. A name that has been reduced to a mere foot note in the annals of Indian History until an actor plans to paint it on the magnificent canvas called "Celluloid" to satisfy his creative urge!

"Mangal Pandey - The Rising" is the story of Mangal Pandey, a sepoy in the East India Company. A soldier who rose in rebellion against an empire. Mangal Pandey's name is usually associated with the start of the revolt of 1857 (dubbed the First War of Indian Independence). I have never come across any bigger reference to Mangal's life than the 4-page article in the Dean's Big Book of Knowledge Encyclopedia (Hamlyn Publishers, London) on "The Revolt of 1857" during my readings. Even the best treatise on Indian History that I have read so far -"The Discovery of India" by Jawaharlal Nehru also just makes a fleeting mention of Mangal Pandey. Why was not he credited with lighting the wick for the bomb that finally ended "company-raj" (rule of the East India Company) in India? Probably having his roots in the masses, representing the common man was his undoing. Historians might have dismissed this "sepoy" as a minor character. All the other heroes of the first war of independence were Kings, Nawabs and a Queen.

The only other celluloid work that depicts the life of Mangal Pandey, as far as I know, was a lone episode of the TV series "Bharat: Ek Khoj" by Shyam Benegal (Which was aired on Doordarshan) on the first war of Indian Independence. The work of the director should be commended in translating less than two pages of history into an over two-hour movie on celluloid. The actor and star of the movie, Aamir Khan deserves a pat in the back not only for his performance but also for giving away the project four years of his life at the peak of his career to satisfy the perfectionist in him. Special mention needs to be made of Toby Stephens (plays Major William Gordon in the movie) who has almost as much footage in the movie as Aamir Khan. The director Ketan Mehta tries to portray the Indian society at that point of time with the untouchability and sati. Mangal Pandey's character is shown practicing "untouchability" while Major Gordon was shown with a "Bentick-ish" bent of mind who opposed social evils. The director shows justification for this sort of behavior by a "firang" by giving a brief biography of Gordon in the voice over attributing it to Gordon's birth in the lower social strata of the English society. The main reason for the anger of the sepoys was shown to be the newly arrived greased catridges. The catridges were supposedly greased with the fat of cows which the Hindus consider sacred and that of pigs which the Muslims hate. History shows that this was that lead to the spark of mutiny among the sepoys. The director follows the time-tested pattern of presenting folklore in Indian cinema: "Singing Minstrels". Even the film is titled "The ballad of Mangal Pandey". This was precisely the same technique which Shyam Benegal used in "Bharat: Ek Khoj", successfully. The character which plays another crucial role in the film is the "untouchable" sweeper who brings all the gossip and grapevine to Mangal. The director was correct in making the character a harbinger of news, both good and bad, in the absence of news sources. He being a sweeper only helped the cause because a sweeper can mix into the surroundings and become anonymous and yet can hear what people were talking about while going about his job. Om Puri, who played a crucial role in the TV series (apart from doing the voice-over he played the roles of Ravana, Duryodhana, Mohummud Ghori, Srikrishna Devaraya as far as I can remember) also plays a pivotal role here by doing the voice over. The movie ends with the public hanging of Mangal Pandey. The revolt made Queen Victoria abolish the rule of the Company and bring India under her rule. In a way Mangal's objective was achieved. I think with this movie Mangal Pandey was given his due share of credit in history. Truly the team of this movie deserves a standing ovation.

Why did the Queen bring India under her rule? Was it sympathy towards our suffering? I would doubt that because East India Company was rampant with corruption and the officers were making money. Instead the Queen probably wanted the revenue to be directed to the treasury of England! Were the catridges the only reason why the revolt occurred? Probably not the only reason: The Company introduced policies like "Doctrine of Lapse" that annexes local kingdoms into British territory when the King has no lawful heir! So the kings and Nawabs united. The farmers were forced to grow opium and indigo which were the items the East India Company traded in instead of rice or wheat. So farmers who could not subsist on the meager price the company paid and were dying of hunger. The Kings and Nawabs either surrendered or were subjugated. Now comes the most important question - Why did Indians join the army and help the English in conquest of our own motherland? They say it was the uniform, the pay and finally the guns. In the absence of good means of livelihood the people probably joined the Company's army in large numbers. At this point of time it would be good to bring the fact that Indians in English army were not promoted beyond the post of a "Subedar" into light. This point was also a major cause of unrest in the Indians in the Company's army.

The question that comes to my mind when I think of the first war of Indian Independence is "Were we ready to rule ourselves at that point of time?" Ruling ourselves was probably the most outrageous paradigm people then might have heard! What would independence 90 years ahead of time do to India? Would we have been on par with US or China today? Or would we have been plunged into civil war to decide who rules the people? We will never know. But the fact remains that we have always been comfortable under the rule of Kings and Dynasties (even to the present day).

Note:
1. Lord William Bentick was the Governor-General of East India Company who ushered in a many a social reform in the Indian society by abolishing child marriages and Sati.

2. The Doctrine of Lapse was introduced by Lord Dulhousie.

3. "Bharat: Ek Khoj" was the most ambitious project on Indian Television with the series spanning over two and a half years!


2 Comments:

At 9/29/2005 11:22:00 AM, Blogger S V said...

I have never heard this name "Mangal Pandey" before. I saw the first half of the movie(the print was very bad in the second part). Greased catridges i believe is the reason behind the mutiny. So the rebellion didnt start to free our country from the British Raj. Anyways there has to be a starting point, no matter where it comes from.

 
At 9/29/2005 03:43:00 PM, Blogger Xenas said...

Yes the rebellion didnt start to free the country but towards the end of the movie Mangal says "Ab baath Kaartoos ki nahi hai. Hamare man par jo zang lagi thi woh thode se charvi daalne se saaf ho gayi. Ab hamaara maqsad desh ki azaadi hai" (Catridges are no longer the issue. A little bit of grease had cleaned up our rusted minds. Freedom is the issue). And please donot call it "mutiny" like some British historian. It is infact or first war of independence.

 

Post a Comment

<< Home