Review of Lords of the Deccan

Anirudh Kanisetti

History is fascinating. Bharat’s history is enthralling.

Not the version we were taught in schools. That kind of history is dry, sanitized, told from a jaundiced perspective, and full of propaganda. We are taught about the Indus Valley civilization (our history is ancient as we are often told), the Mauryas (the greatest dynasty ever), Ashoka (brilliant), Mughals (benign rulers despite being from a different culture and religion) and the British (bad colonizers).

Of course, none of this is even close to the truth. For one, there were other civilizations that were equally old and made as much progress as the Harappans did. The Aryan invasion theory is now proved to be defunct, as is the fact that Dravidians were not backward, but rather had a thriving culture of their own.

The Mauryas were great but so were the Chalukyas, Rashtrakutas, Cholas, Cheras, Pandyas, Pratiharas, Palas etc, If Ashoka was brilliant, so were Narasimha Varman, RajaRaja Chola, Bhoja of Dhara, Amoghavarsha, and many kings, who actually had longer lasting dynasties.

The Mughals were not benign in any sense of the world. They and their predecessors, like Alauddin Khilji, came with the explicit intent to loot, ravage and kill as many infidels as possible. They inflicted countless genocides, which have been swept under the carpet, under the guise of maintaining the peace. In terms of lasting achievements, they fall short of the other dynasties that I have mentioned before.

The atrocities of the British have been documented in our history books. But again, this is not a nuanced view. It doesn’t cover the Indophiles and others who were genuinely passionate about our country, its history and culture. And it does a disservice to the freedom struggle, by focusing exclusively on a few personalities.

However, the greatest failing of this curriculum is how it skips over centuries of local and subcontinental history to present a warped view of our history.

OK, now that rant’s over. How do we find out what our history actually is. Thankfully, there are quite a number of historians who have taken the pains to dredge through the millennia of history and come with a coherent, multi-faceted and nuanced points of view. Anirudh Kanisetti is one such historian,  and the Lords of the Deccan is a brilliant look at South India and the Deccan between 600 AD to around 1200 AD. It is not comprehensive (indeed it cannot be since South India is huge), but it does show us the dynasties here that set up Bharat for the world stage and their achievements.

Let me address a few of the concerns that other reviewers have raised. Some of them have said that there is no basis for the conclusions that Anirudh has drawn. I am uncertain if they read the same book as I did because Lords of the Deccan is one of the most comprehensive books, in my experience, when it comes to listing references. Every chapter ends with a long list of references / explanation of the reasoning for almost every event written in that chapter. Some other reviewers have said that there are a lot of maybes and what-ifs. This kind of speculation is unavoidable when it comes to history of millennia past, and the author does a good job of showing where he is making assumptions and the reasoning for these assumptions. While personal bias does exist (when it comes to the Kannada culture and language), I think Anirudha keeps it in check and presents a decently impartial view of events and personalities. That said, this book is like other history books, there is a certain amount of creative liberty that has been taken to keep it interesting. But, to reiterate, this creative liberty applies to customs like applying sandalwood etc, and not events.

Lords of the Deccan is presents history in an easy-to-read and engrossing fashion. Reality is stranger than fiction,  and the machinations of the kings and emperors reads like a Game of Thrones novel. The people and kings of Bharat were neither completely saints, nor completely sinners. Like us, they were human and subjects to every kind of emotion out there. This book does a fantastic job of showing us the pride, vanities, lust for power, charity, dharma of these kings. Some of them are warlike, while some of them are more inclined to peaceful pursuits. But, all of them have indulged in war when it suited them, and have supported the arts and religion as well. The effect of religion and the resurgence of Hinduism in South India is inextricably linked to the kings and their politics. Various dynasties commissioned temples, pratihastis, poems, and other creative endeavours to show their piety as well as their prowess. Indeed, there seems to be at least three battlefields that they all had to showcase their strength - war, building temples and monuments, and trade. We see the effect of these status moves today in the form of the temples in South India.

Broadly, speaking Anirudha deals with three groups - the Deccan (mainly current Karnataka and Maharastra), the Tamilakam (Tamil Nadu, southern Andhra Pradesh and Kerala), and the North. Most of the book focuses on the achievements of the Chalukyas & Rashtrakutas (Deccan) and the Pallavas & Cholas (Tamilakam) as well as the interminable conflicts between the two superpowers. While the existence of Tamil & Sanskrit are a given when this era begins, Anirudh shows us where Kannada and Telugu start gaining prominence, due to the exigencies of local politics. I found the book to be mostly even-handed, though the bit of partiality towards Kannada is understandable. I, for one, would love to read about Mahendra Varman or Amogavarsha or RajaRaja Chola’s life in detail, thanks to the light shed by this book on these great personalities.

In conclusion, I highly recommend this book for anyone interested in the real history of Bharat. The linkages to religion and language are bound to annoy a few sensitive individuals. If you are one of those, then history is not for you.