Entertaining Romp Through India's History

Sanjeev Sanyal’s Land of Seven Rivers is an entertaining romp through India’s history, with endless tidbits, and the author’s own opinion on events. The book starts off with the plate tectonics that caused the Indian landmass to break away from Africa/Madagascar and set it off on its course to its present location. Unfortunately, that fact leads many to the erroneous conclusion that it explains why India and Africa share animals like elephants and lions. But:

“This cannot be the case because India separated from Africa during the age of the dinosaur.”

In fact, the reality is far more weird. Thanks to DNA analysis, we know that:

“The Asian elephant is more closely related to the mammoth than to the African elephant.”

Sanyal talks about the tendency of kings from time immemorial to try and present their best (and not entirely true?) persona for posterity to remember them by. Take Ashoka’s famous edicts on rocks and stone pillars:

“One should always take statements by politicians with a pinch of salt… Notice that Ashoka expresses regret (about Kalinga) but does not offer to free Kalinga and its inhabitants.”

And did Ashoka start an all too familiar trend, he wonders, of not retiring?

“The problem of ageing rulers would haunt through the centuries.”

From Ashoka to Aurungzeb to every politician today.

The book also talks about an aspect India shares with China and Iran/Persia:

“India’s influence is civilizational rather than narrowly religious.”

You can see that all over South Asia and parts of Korea even today:

“It is amazing how the essence of a civilization can survive over large distances in space and time… The point is that India’s civilizational nationhood includes people who are neither citizens nor live in the subcontinent.”

All this may explain a trend we increasingly see, writes Sanyal:

“In recent years, the Indian Republic has tried to deal with this by creating, perhaps clumsily, different shades of citizenship in the form of Overseas Citizen of India and Person of Indian Origin.”

It was all too common for the hordes of Central Asia to invade and loot India (Ghazni being the most infamous). But I didn’t know that prisoners were often marched away to be sold as slaves:

“Unused to the extreme cold of the Afghan mountains, they died in such large numbers that the range would come to be known as the Hindukush meaning ‘Killer of Hindus’.”

It is against this backdrop of invade-loot-and-return-back that a Turko-Mongol adventurer named Babur came in 1526:

“Babur had impeccable lineage… a direct descendent of Genghis Khan from his mother’s side and… Taimur the Lame on his father’s side.”

The author calls him a “shameless opportunist” who projected himself as a “lovable rogue” in his diaries! We learn that Babur started the Mughal (Mongol?) dynasty, yet, the author says:

“(Babur) hankered for Samarkhand. His opinion of India (in his dairies) is rather unflattering.”

And Babur died within 5 years of coming to India. His son, Humayun, was defeated by Afghans under Sher Shah Suri, and fled to Persia:

“If Sher Shah Suri had lived longer, it is possible that we would not remember Mughal rule as anything more than one more Central Asian raid.”

But Suri died soon, and Humayun returned. And died soon, and it was Akbar who decided to settle in India and do all the empire building and the associated administrative system building that it takes to hold an empire.

And then came the British, which leads to the question:

“Why did the Indians not oppose British rule more aggressively?”

Sanyal’s opinion is that the collapse of the Mughal empire had “left the country in chaos”:

“The East India Company was far from benign but, in comparison, did offer some semblance of order.”

When the British introduced English education, it is generally believed that the reason was to “create a class of Indians who would be loyal to them”. Sure, there’s that, but were may have been other factors at play as well, asks Sanyal:

“The early reformers were very conscious that Indian civilization had been in decline for a long time… The knowledge of English was seen as a window to the world of ideas emanating from Europe.”

We can’t be sure, but that point could well be true. After all:

“Far from creating a class of loyal Indians, the English-educated middle-class would be at the forefront of India’s struggle for independence.”

Like I said, if you’re into serious, factual-only history (to the extent that such a thing is even possible), look elsewhere. But if you’re looking for history that’s easy to read, and covers a wide variety of topics, then this book is a must-read.