I was watching 300, the adaptation of Frank Miller graphic novel yesterday and couldn't help reflecting on the way history has been taught to us, through books and other popular media.
The moot point - how did the small army of Spartans led by Leonidas lose against the mighty Persian army of Xerxes. It was a traitor who betrayed the secret of a goat's trail which helped Xerxes surround Leonidas's army from all sides.
Doesn't it sound similar to all that we have read about our Indian history? Be it Rani Lakshmi Bai, Siraj-Ud-Daula of Bengal, Tipu Sultan, Prithvi Raj Chauhan and countless. Why is it always that people lose because of a traitor. And I think , if there was no traitor could they have won the wars ? Why is the failure just attributed to the betrayal of some confidante? or will their bravery be lessened if we were told that they lost because the opposite army was just more powerful, more sophisticated and had better weapons ? I really don't know the answer.
But I feel happy that I could question that which is almost a given truth.
Random Thoughts on Republic Day
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comments:
Exactly, even i too had the feeling that it cant be 'the traitor' all the time ;)(Rani Lakshmi Bai, Tipu Sultan, chanakya et al, from TV serials ofcourse) Well i guess that would be so not chauvinistic if the defeat was attributed to fact that the opposite army was just more powerful and sophisticated (like the british), That wouldnt make them look 'the villains' :D
Post a Comment