U.N. adds Chhau Dance to Heritage List

A United Nations committee added Chhau dance, a traditional dance of eastern India to a list of "intangible heritages" that need preservation. Chhau dance, prevalent in parts of the states of Orissa, West Bengal and Jharkhand, has been included in the list along with two other Indian performing art forms - Kalbelia folk songs and dances of Rajasthan and Mudiyettu, a ritual theatre of Kerala.

The additions were among 51 items added to The Representative List of the Intangible Cultural Heritage of Humanity. The list highlights elements needing protection against the increasing urbanization and globalization.

The Chhau dance, famed for its crafted masks and mock combat movements, is in need of support due to the backwardness of the area where this dance form is practised.

The Representative List of the Intangible Cultural Heritage of Humanity now comprises 213 elements.

Mattavilas-prahasana: Masterpiece of Sanskrit Literature

Mattavilasa-prahasana, one of the masterpieces of Sanskrit literature, was written by Mahendravarman I of the Pallava dynasty of south India. Mahendravarman I (571– 630CE), also known as Mahendravikramavarman, was a contemporary of Harshavardhan of Kanauj. The Pallava ruler is credited with the introduction of the cave style of architecture. He is known for assuming the significant title of Vichitrachitta, “curious minded.” 

Mattavilasa (the Sport of the Drunkards) is a one-act play, full of rollicking satire. This little farce tells the story of a drunken Shaivite (follower of Shaivism, the cult of the god Shiva) ascetic, who accuses a Buddhist monk of stealing the skull which he uses as a begging bowl. This leads to the scene of acrimonious debate, full of satirical dialogue, among ascetics of different sects and both sexes. In the end it is found that the skull was stolen by a dog.

Nataraj... Lord of the Dance

Of various forms in which Shiva is worshipped, Nataraja is one of the most important. Shiva is the Lord of Dance (Nataraja). Popularity of this aspect of Shiva in south India is due to the fact that religious dancing was very much in vogue there. In this aspect, Shiva is depicted as dancing on the high slopes of the Himalayan Mount Kailasha or in the temple of Chidambaram or Tillai, located near the seacoast in Cuddalore District of Tamil Nadu and 78 km south of Pondicherry. 

The temple of Chidambaram is mystically identified with Kailasha. This Nataraj has been described as the cultural epitome of the Chola empire which was at its zenith of glory for three hundred years from about 850AD to 1150AD. 

Shiva is credited with the invention of 108 different forms of dances. Some of these dances are calm and gentle while others are fierce. Of the latter, tandava is the most famous. In tandava, Shiva, flanked by his drunken attendants (ganas) dances terribly to the accompaniment of wild rhythm which destroys the world at the end of cosmic cycle. 

The term 'Nataraj' literary means 'King of Dancers'. According to eminent historian Ananda K. Coomaraswamy in his The Dance of Shiva, Nataraj is the "clearest image of the activity of God which any art or religion can boast of…A more fluid and energetic representation of a moving figure than the dancing figure of Shiva can scarcely be found anywhere,"

Decline of the Pala Empire

After the death of 3rd Pala ruler Devapala, the Pala kingdom was on its way to decline. Till the rule of Devapala, Bengal ranked high among the important powers in the history of mediaeval India. He was succeeded by Vigrahapala I, whose short reign was devoid of any important event. After him, his son Narayanapala ascended the throne in 854 A.D. He showed little interest in military conquests because he was a peace loving and religious person.

During the rule of Narayanapala, the Pala kingdom fell prey to the invading armies of the Rashtrakutas in 860 A.D. He was thoroughly defeated. The Pala Empire also could not escape the invasion of the Pratiharas who dealt a severe blow to the body-politic of the kingdom. Bhoja I of the Pratihara kingdom and his son Mahendrapala succeeded in seizing Magadha from Narayanapala. The Paharpur Pillar Inscription attests to the conquests by the Pratihara rulers. Taking advantage of the weakening condition of the Pala kingdom, the rulers of Kamarupa and the Sailodbhaba dynasty of Orissa threw of their allegiance to the Palas and declared their independence.

However, at the end of his rule Narayanapala was able to recover North Bengal and South Bihar from the Pratiharas. After a long rule of 53 years, Narayanapala was succeeded by Rajyapala who ruled for a short period. He was succeeded by his son Gopala II who in turn was succeeded by Vigrahapala.

The rule of these Pala rulers was characterized by increase in the weakening of the Pala Empire. Added to this, the kingdom was ravaged by the armies of the Chandellas, Kalachuris and Kambojas at regular intervals.

Pala dynasty regained some of its lost glory during the rule of Mahipala I. who ruled from 995 to 1043. He is rightly called the second founder of the Pala Dynasty. After the death of Ramapala, the last important Pala king, the Pala dynasty was nearing its end. After the death of Ramapala in 1130 Kumarapala became the next Pala ruler. He was succeed by Gopala III and Madanapala. Gradually the Pala kingdom went into oblivion.

Can Harappan Script be Deciphered?

The language of the Indus Civilization, also known as Harappan Civilization in popular parlance, is still unknown. This will remain so until the Indus Civilization script is deciphered. Broadly there are two schools of thoughts as to the nature of the language of the Harappan civilization. According to one, the language belongs to the Indo-European or even Indo-Aryan family. The other school is of the opinion that the language belonged to the Dravidian family. 

Notwithstanding of the close scrutiny of some more than 2500 Harappan inscriptions, the task of decipherment remains arduous. Added to this the shortness of the inscriptions nearly all on seals or amulets tablets, renders it difficult to interpret. 

It’s is due to these challenges the associated problems have attracted a whole lot of authorities, scholars and experts to attempt their solution. What’s your take on that?

Foreign sources of Mauryan history

As a result of Alexander’s invasion of India, a number of Greek travelers came to India. They were first to communicate to the outside world what they saw of India. Famous among them are Onesicritus of Astypalaea, Aristobulus of Cassandreia and Nearchus.

Onesicritus and Nearchus ware officers in Alexander’s army during his invasion of India. Aristobulus was the Greek historian who accompanied Alexander on his campaigns.

Subsequent to these writers came the ambassadors from the Hellenistic kingdoms to the Mauryan court. Their accounts of India were based on a wider and closer observance of the country. Among them the most famous was Megasthenes, who was sent as ambassador to the court of Chandragupta Maurya by Seleucus Nikator, Alexander’s general and the Greek ruler of Persia and Babylon. Other Greek ambassadors or travelers who visited India were Deimachus, Patrocles, Dionysius and Timosthees. Deimachus came to Patliputra as ambassador to the court of Bindusara, son and successor of Chandragupta Maurya.

But none of these above mentioned writers seem to have added anything of real importance to what Megasthenes had written about India. His record of Mauryan India, compiled in Indika, has not survived to us. We learn about his record of Mauryan empire from the quotations of the later Greek writers among whom Strabo, Diodorous, Pliny the Elder, Arrian, Plutarch and Justin are notable.

Apart from the Greek sources mentioned above, the travel accounts of the famous Chinese travellers Fahien and Huen-tsang, who visited India in the 4th and 7th century AD respectively are also useful for the study of the Mauryan empire. While compiling their travelogues about India both these Chinese pilgrims referred to a number of Mauryan monuments.

Nasiruddin Mahmud: Puppet Ruler of Delhi Sultanate

A man of pious disposition, Nasiruddin Mahmud (rule 1246-66) was a grandson of Iltutmish. According to some experts, he was the youngest son of Iltutmish. He succeeded Alauddin Masud Shah to the throne of Slave Dynasty at the age of sixteen. 

Nasiruddin Mahmud was ill-qualified to rule. A puppet in the hands of his courtiers, he was married to the daughter of Ghiyasuddin Balban, one of the leading Turkish nobles. In reciprocation to this Balban was appointed to the post of regent (naib-i-mamlakat) and was conferred with the title of Ulugh Khan (premier Khan) by the Sultan. Except for a brief period (1253-55) when some nobles opposed to Balban instigated Nasiruddin to exile him, Balban was the de facto ruler of the Delhi Sultanate during the Sultan’s reign. Nasiruddin Mahmud died in 1266. Since he had no male heirs, he designated Balban to be the Sultan. 

The fourteenth century historian Isami as well as African traveller Ibn Batuta clearly mention that Nasiruddin was murdered by Balban. However, Yayiha bin Ahmad Sarhindi, author of Tarikh-i-Mubarak Shahi, does not accuse Balban of regicide and according to him, Nasiruddin Mahmud died a natural death.