By Harsha Gunasena –
Harsha Gunasena
I have watched this film directed by Mani Ratnam which was released worldwide recently. The epic film was based on a novel by Kalki Krishnamurthy written in 1955. The period was the tenth century. It was focused on Chola dynasty and there was uncertainty about the successor of Parantaka (Sundara) Chola II, the father of Rajaraja Chola who was supposed to be the greatest king of Chola dynasty.
At the time of the film (and the novel) the Cholas have defeated Vira Pandyan of the Pandyan dynasty. Vira Pandyan was killed by Aditya Karikalan the eldest son of Sundara Chola. Vira Pandyan was the lover of Nandhini. She wanted to take the revenge of the killing of her lover and later became the young wife of Periya Pazhavetturayar, chancellor of the Chola kingdom. The film revolves around this and there were spies roaming around conspiracies were carried out and reconciliations were waged.
In the film, Arulmozhi Varman who was the youngest son of Sundara Chola and who became Rajaraja Chola later, was in Sri Lanka fighting against Mahinda V, the Sri Lankan king at that time. In relation to Sri Lankan history many think that there were eternal fights between Sinhalese and Tamils which was not the case. In the film it was depicted that the fights were among the kings and princes for the sake of power. There was no ethnic rivalry in ancient Sri Lanka as of now. There were rivalries between Cholas and Pandyas as depicted in the film. In addition to that there were Cheras and Sinhalese. In certain cases, Sinhala kings brought Pandyan armies against their rivals in the island. Pandyan origin princes ruled Sri Lanka and got their names entered in chronicles.
According to Chulavamsa ( Chapter 55) Mahinda V was a weak king. “As he wandered from the path of statecraft, and was of very weak character, the peasants did not deliver him his share of the produce. As the Prince in his tenth year has entirely lost his fortunes, he was unable to satisfy his troops by giving them their pay. All the Keralas who got no pay planted themselves one with another at the door of the royal palace, determined on force, bow in hand, armed with swords and (other) weapons with a cry ‘so lang as there is no pay, he shall not eat’ “
The king escaped by an underground passage and ruled the country from Rohana, the south. The rest of the country was ruled by Keralas, Sinhalas and Kannatas. Thereafter Cholas invaded Sri Lanka and they captured the king and imprisoned him. He ruled the county for 36 years out of which was from Ruhuna and was imprisoned for 12 years. The Kerala army referred to in Chulavamsa were the mercenaries of Kerala origin hired by the king.
In the film there was a fight between the forces of Mahinda V and Arulmozhi Varman. The king was defeated and subsequently the Bhikkhus of Anuradhapura offered the crown to the Chola Prince. He refused the crown saying that his father was already holding the crown of Chola empire and cannot accept a separate crown. This was a great gesture in a period where there were fights even among close relatives for power.
In real life Arulmozhi Varman took the initiation to give the crown to his uncle after the demise of his father. He took the crown after his uncle’s 15 year reign. Maybe the film maker/novelist have created the above incident in the film taking that quality from the character of Arulmozhi Varman.
In the film we can see Mahinda V in his palace probably at Ruhuna, after his defeat. According to Chulavamsa he fled to Ruhuna due to the rebel of his soldiers and not due to a Chola invasion.
It was clearly visible that the Buddha statues in the film were of Thai origin since it was filmed in Thailand. Director, I believe, was forced to ignore this point. Shyam Fernando portrays the image of a weak ruler. All the other actors and actresses also played their roles well.
It is considered that Mahinda V was the weakest king of Sri Lanka. Gotabaya Rajapaksa may be the close second. Mercenaries employed by Mahinda V surrounded his palace and the people of Aragalala surrounded the presidential house of Gotabaya Rajapaksa. Both fled. The problems of the both started from the point that the income of the state reduced due to the reduction of the tax revenue. In the case of Mahinda V peasants refused to pay their taxes due to inefficiencies of the king. Gotabaya Rajapaksa took the decision of reducing the taxes taking the wrong advice. History repeats itself.
Published in Colombo Telegraph on 11 October 2022
https://www.colombotelegraph.com/index.php/a-brief-comment-of-ponniyin-selvan-i/
No comments:
Post a Comment