We had a lot of fun, the past two weeks, blogging here at the Antiquity blog VOICE. So we thought that we would interview that one person in whose ideas the genesis of the blog lay. So here we are, in conversation, with Diksha Jhalani.


 Q1. What does Antiquity 2013 mean to you? How does it feel to have the burden of hosting such a large-scale event on your shoulders?

Ans: . Antiquity 2013 for me is definitely the biggest event that I have worked for. I feel its the best platform for undergraduate students belonging to any and every field to come and display their talents as well as learn more about the subject.

Organising a department fest is definitely a difficult and daunting task for the entire union since its our first time too. But it's a learning experience at the end of the day and nothing could have been possible without the support of faculty and enthusiasm of department students.

Q2. What are your expectations from Antiquity 2013?

Ans: Being the secretary and having put in so much effort I definitely expect a lot from Antiquity 2013. It's after a long time that we have a theme for our fest and I hope people participate in events and attend guest lectures since we have kept the lectures on topics that are non-academic and deal with that segment of history which fascinates all.

Q3. Why is the theme myths and legends? What does it mean to you personally, and as a History student?

Ans: Myths and legends are a part of our lives, something that we keep hearing while growing up, something that affects our thinking and perception of things. As students of History, we need to understand their value as a source of tracing history as well as an integral part of our intangible heritage. As a source, myths and legends, when interpreted properly reveal a lot, and as part of intangible heritage they are reflection of our culture. Yet, myths and legends are not documented and it will not be long before they are gone, if their value is not realised. Hence, we kept the theme as myths and legends to celebrate them, understand their importance and make others realise the same.

-As told to Harnidh Kaur.

There it lay in the middle of the universe, a shapeless form of matter, resembling chaos, in the midst of a static, soundless surrounding. Over thousands of years, soft sounds evolved signifying the movement of particles, one unprecedented in the history of the universe where millions of particles rose, differentiating between light and the particles with the lowest density. Light ascended at a faster pace than the rest and once, it reached its limit, the light formed the top of the universe and the particles below it formed first the clouds and then Heaven.  The particles that had not risen formed a huge mass, dense and dark which came to be called Earth. From Heaven emerged the first three Gods.This narrative, also known as Tenchikaibyaku, constitutes the Japanese Creation Myth which is described first hand in the texts of Kojiki and Nihon Shoki.

Creation myths or cosmogony is a symbolic narrative of the creation and organization of the world defined by a certain culture. The three stages of creation usually comprise firstly, of the primordial beings or Gods, secondly of human ancestors who are semi divine and lastly, humans themselves. While in some creation myths like the Japanese narrative, the gradual emergence of the world highlights the latent power of the earth, others, like in the Hindu tradition, speak of the world being the offspring of primordial parents.  

Following the great dissolution of the universe or the mahapralaya, there was complete darkness and everything remained in a dormant, inactive state. In this context arose the Self manifested Being, ultimately responsible for the creation of primordial waters in which the seed of creation was sown. The seed grew into a golden womb or the Hiranyagarbha, following which, the Svayambhu penetrated the egg.

This narrative forms the base of a range of Hindu texts. While the Isvara Upanisad identifies Isvara (God) to have pervaded every aspect of the universe, becoming omnipresent, the Vedanta Sutra states that from the Brahman the Universe proceeds and eventually returns. The Samkhya school highlights the two primary principles- Purusa and Prakriti where creation is only a manifestation or evolution of the constituents of Prakriti as a result of Purusa’s Conciousness. In the Mahabharata, Narayana  stood alone as the Seed of all Creation, the ultimate creator. He was the source of the principles of creation, sustenance and dissolution (the Hindu Trinity of Brahma, Visnu and Siva). According to the Manu Smriti, in the beginning, all the present features of life were entirely undifferentiated and indefinable. In this context, the Universe of ‘name and form’ emerged through the medium of the Self-existent Creator, Svayambhu.   

Hwanung, the son of Hwanin, an important character in Korean mythology, longed to live on earth among the valleys and mountains. One day his father granted him his wish and allowed him and 3000 followers to descend from heaven to a Sandalwood tree on the Baedu Mountain. On his arrival, Hwanung founded Sinsi (the city of God) and gave himself the title ‘Heaven King.’ A bear and tiger residing in a cave near the Sandalwood tree would visit the tree everyday to pray to him. One day, Hwangung gave the bear and the tiger twenty bulbs of garlic and some divine mugwort. Hwanung promised that if they managed to eat only his garlic and mugwort and remained in the cave, out of sunlight for 100 days, he would allow for their metamorphosis into humans. During their time inside the cave, the tiger got hungry and impatient, eventually leaving the cave before their time was up. However, the bear remained, and on the 21st day, it was transformed into a beautiful woman, who gracefully honored Hwanung with offerings. With time the woman grew lonely, and prayed to Hwanung that she might have a child. So Hwanung made her his wife and gave her a son called Dangun.

Chinese texts recording creation myths speak of heaven and earth being joint together in the beginning of time to resemble the shape of a chicken’s egg. Within this shape remained P’anku (referring to ‘Coiled up Antiquity’).  Over the span of 18,000 years, the mass of life split apart to differentiate the brightly lit Heaven from the dark and gloomy Earth. During the next 18,000 years, Heaven rose above by ten feet in height every day, while Earth increased ten feet in thickness and their midpoint or P’anku increased by 10 feet in size. Thus, Heaven and earth came to be separated by their present distance of 30,000 miles.

The myths, comprising elaborate details about the creation of Earth, raise a range of doubts that cannot be scientifically verified. However, they do indeed present intriguing religious perspectives. The various classical texts of the different regions of Asia highlight how creation myths tend to validate existing beliefs and in turn justify patterns of life and culture. 


-Flavy Sen Sharma, IInd Year, History

A strong feeling of suspense, mystery and awe surrounds the legend of Anarkali and the story has intrigued and baffled historians in particular and people in general. It has been treated as a traditional legend which travelled verbally from generation to generation. 

The basic story begins with Prince Saleem (later Emperor Jahangir), the son of Akbar the Great returning back home after military training. Since this day was one of great celebration, the harem of Akbar decided to hold a great Mujra (dance performance) by a beautiful girl named Nadeera, daughter of Noor Khan Argun. Akbar likened her beauty to a blossoming flower and called her Anarkali (blossoming pomegranate). During her first and famous Mujra in Lahore Prince Saleem fell in love with her and it later became apparent that she was also in love with him. They both gradually began to see each other although the matter was kept quiet. When Saleem conveys his intention of marrying Anrkali to his father, there is a huge fight and Akbar orders the arrest of Anarkali and places her in one of the jail dungeons in Lahore.

After many attempts, Saleem and one of his friends help Anarkali to escape and hid her near the outskirts of Lahore. Then, the furious Prince Saleem organises an army (from those loyal to him during his fourteen years there) and attacks the city; Akbar, being the emperor, had a much larger army and quickly defeats Prince Saleem's force. Akbar gives his son two choices: either to surrender Anarkali to them or to face the death penalty. Prince Saleem, out of his true love for Anarkali, chooses death penalty. Anarkali, however, unable to allow Prince Saleem to die, comes out of hiding and approaches the Mughal emperor. She asks him if she could be the one to give up her life in order to save Prince Saleem, and after Akbar gives his consent, she asks for just one wish, which is to spend just one night with Prince Saleem.

After her night with Saleem, Anarkali drugs Saleem with a pomegranate blossom. After a teary goodbye to the unconscious Saleem, she leaves the royal palace with guards. She was taken to the area near present-day Anarkali Bazaar in Lahore, where a large ditch was made for her. She was strapped to a board of wood and lowered in it by soldiers belonging to Akbar. They closed the top of the large ditch with a brick wall and buried her alive. A second version of the story says that the Emperor Akbar helped Anarkali escape from the ditch through a series of underground tunnels with her mother, only with the promise of Anarkali to leave the Mughal empire and never return. Thus it is not known whether Anarkali survived or not. Another quite popular version states that she was immured alive in a wall.

It is baffling that neither Jahangir mentioned her in his book Tuzk-i-Jahangiri, nor any contemporary historian has left any clue of her saga. The Akbarnama, the official court history of Akbar, records an incident where Akbar became angry with Salim for some reason and sent a noble to admonish him. It is unknown whether this is a reference to the legend or not.

The first historical mention of Anarkali is found in the travelogue of the British tourist and trader, William Finch, who came to Lahore during 1608 to 1611. According to Finch’s account, Anarkali was one of the wives of Emperor Akbar and the mother of his son Danial Shah. Akbar developed suspicions that Anarkali had incestuous relations with Prince Saleem (Jahangir) and, on this ground had her buried alive in the wall of Lahore Fort. Jahangir, after ascending the throne, had a splendid tomb constructed, at the present site, in memory of his beloved. However, other foreign visitors who arrived here during the next two centuries, including Haggle, Prince and Mason, only mentioned the charming gardens and fascinating architecture of the tomb, but nothing about the person buried in the grave or the incident of Anarkali.

Edward Terry who visited a few years after William Finch writes that Akbar had threatened to disinherit Jahangir, for his liaison with Anarkali, the emperor’s most beloved wife. But on his death-bed, Akbar repealed it.

Basing his analysis on the above two Britishers’ accounts, Abraham Eraly, the author of The Last Spring: The Lives and Times of the Great Mughals, suspects that there "seems to have been an oedipal conflict between Akbar and Salim. He also considers it probable that the legendary Anarkali was nobody other than the mother of Prince Daniyal. Eraly supports his hypothesis by quoting an incident recorded by Abul Fazl, the court-historian of Akbar. According to the historian, Salim was beaten up one evening by guards of the royal harem of Akbar. The story is that a mad man had wandered into Akbar’s harem because of the carelessness of the guards. Abul Fazl writes that Salim caught the man but was himself mistaken to be the intruder. The emperor arrived upon the scene and was about to strike with his sword when he recognised Salim. Most probably, the intruder was no other than Prince Salim and the story of the mad man who was concocted to put a veil on the indecency of the Prince.

But the accounts of the British travellers and consequently the presumption of Eraly is falsified when one comes to know that the mother of prince Daniyal had died in 1596 which does not match the dates inscribed on the sarcophagus.

Anarkali has been the subject of a number of Indian, Bangladeshi and Pakistani books, plays and films. Noor Ahmed Chishti, in his book Tehqiqaat-i-Chishtia (1860), has provided some details about the grandeur of the building and the episode of Anarkali, based on his personal observations as well as traditional tales. He writes, “Anarkali was a beautiful and a favourite concubine of Akbar the Great and her real name was Nadira Begum or Sharf-un-Nissa. Akbar’s inordinate love for her made his other two ladies jealous and hostile towards Anarkali. Now, some say that Akbar was on a visit to Deccan when Anarkali fell ill and died and the other two concubines committed suicide to avoid the emperor’s wrath. When the emperor came back he ordered to create this grand tomb.” Chishti also relates: “I saw the marble grave that has 99 names of Allah inscribed on it, and the name Sultan Saleem Akbar was written on the head side”.

Syed Abdul Lateef, in his book Tareekh-i-Lahore (1892), mentions that Anarkali’s actual name was Nadira Begum or Sharf-un-Nisa and she was one of Akbar’s concubines. He suspected illegitimate relations between Prince Saleem and Anarkali and, therefore, ordered that Anarkali be burried alive in a wall, and the tomb was later built there by Jahangir (Saleem) when he succeeded to the throne. A couplet by Jahangir written on the grave in Persian reads, “If I could behold my beloved only once, I would remain thankful to Allah till doomsday”.  This clearly infers a passionate affair between Saleem and Anarkali. Two dates have been mentioned on the grave: 1008 Hijri (1599AD) and 1025 Hijri (1615AD) — perhaps the date she died and the date of the completion of the tomb.

In his compilation, titled Tareekh-i-Lahore (1897), Kanhaya Laal writes that Nadira was a beautiful concubine in the court of Akbar and was endowed with the name Anarkali on the basis of her pink complexion and ravishing beauty. He also opines that she died a natural death when Akbar was on a tour of Deccan. Later on, Akbar got this graceful tomb built, but it was destroyed by the Sikh rulers and was later converted into a Church by the British.

Abdullah Chagatai, a 18th century historian and architect, has given a very different version. He opines that the tomb, basically built in the centre of a pomegranate garden, contains the grave of Jahangir’s wife Saheb Jamal who was very dear to him. With the passage of time the lady’s name disappeared into oblivion and the tomb was christened by the people as the tomb of Anarkali on the basis of the surrounding pomegranate gardens.

Another scholar, Muhammad Baqir, the author of Lahore Past and Present is of the opinion that Anarkali was originally the name of the garden in which the tomb was situated, but with the passage of time, the tomb itself came to be named as that of Anarkali’s. This garden is mentioned by Dara Shikoh, the grandson of Jahangir, in his work Sakinat al-Auliya, as one of the places where the Saint Hazrat Mian Mir used to sit. Dara also mentions the existence of a tomb in the garden but he does not give it any name. Muhammad Baqir believes that the so-called tomb of Anarkali actually belongs to the lady named or entitled Sahib-i Jamal, another wife of Salim.

Noted art-historian R. Nath argues that there is no wife of Jahangir on record bearing the name or title of Anarkali to whom the emperor could have built a tomb and dedicated a couplet with a suffix Majnun. He considers it absolutely improbable that the grand Mughal emperor would address his married wife as ‘yar’ designate himself as ‘majnun’ and aspires to see her face once again. He reasons that she was not his married wife but only his beloved, to whom he would take the liberty to be romantic and a little poetic too, and it appears to be a case of an unsuccessful romance of a disappointed lover.

The more commonly known version is the one portrayed in the historically famed Indian film Mughal-e-Azam. Emperor Akbar (Prithviraj Kapoor) and his Rajput wife, Jodha Bai (Durga Khote) pray for a son. The news of their prayer being answered is brought to the emperor by a maid.  The overjoyed Emperor gifts his ring to the maid and promises to grant her any one wish she asks. The son, Prince Salim, grows to be a weak and pleasure-loving boy. His father sends him off to war in order to teach him courage and discipline. After 14 years, Salim returns as a distinguished soldier (Dilip Kumar). Salim falls in love with Anarkali (Madhubala), a court-dancer. Salim wants to marry Anarkali and arranges for secret meetings. However, the jealous Bahaar (Nigar Sultana), a dancer of a higher rank, wants the crown of India and she attempts to make the prince love her so that she may ascend to queen-ship. Being unsuccessful in her venture, she vents her disappointment by exposing the love between him and Anarkali. Salim pleads for Anarkali's hand, but his father objects and throws Anarkali into prison. Despite imprisonment, Anarkali refuses to reject Salim. Salim rebels and amasses his own army to confront Akbar. Salim is defeated in battle and is sentenced to death by his own father, but is told that the sentence will be revoked if Anarkali, now in hiding, is handed over to face death in his place. Akbar's subjects plead for the Emperor to spare his son, and Anarkali comes out of hiding to save the prince's life. She is condemned to death by entombment alive. Before her sentence is carried out, she pleads to have a few hours with Salim as his make-believe wife. She is granted the wish, as she agrees to drug him afterwards so that he cannot interfere with her entombment. As she is being walled up, Akbar is reminded that he still owes a favour to Anarkali's mother, since she was the one to whom Akbar gave his ring after she informed him of the birth of his son. Anarkali's mother takes advantage of this, and begs for her daughter's life. The emperor relents, and arranges for Anarkali's secret escape with her mother into exile. He stipulates, though, that they are to live in total obscurity, and that Salim is never to know that Anarkali still lives.

The saga of Anarkali and the crown prince Salim has been dubbed as one of the greatest love stories of all time. Despite the fact that it is unknown whether it is just a myth or has historical truth under it, it has been immortalized in numerous books and movies, some of which are epics in their own right.

Delhi is a never-ending maze. It’s alive, writhing and growing, changing at every turn and metamorphosing into a new place every day. It’s progressing and contemporary at every turn, rising and dipping into something so unique, it can never be replicated. Like a game of Snake, it grows, feeding on the hopes, aspirations, and dreams of its citizens, and produces even higher aspirations. There is, however, another part of Delhi. The city of djinns, the abode of magic, and home of legends, where a large part of life is still associated with myths and rumours, with ghosts and supernatural activities. Tales, often told in a slow, gravelly voice of a old person, can be heard in the long-forgotten, and some newly discovered nooks and crannies of Delhi, particularly those in Purani Dilli, an place that feels forgotten in time.

Just below the walls of the citadel is the shrine of Bhure Mian, whose "jalal" was such that not even a bird could fly over his grave. If it did so, it just dropped dead. Old Delhiwallahs believe that every Thursday a procession, led by the last Mughal emperor, Bahadur Shah Zafar and his queen, Zeenat Mahal, comes out of the Lahore Gate, and after going around the Red Fort, goes back inside silently. Many years ago, the caretaker of the fort, Asghar Ali Khan, disclosed that he had seen medieval spirits in the Diwan-i-Aam and the Diwan-i-Khas while on his nightly rounds.

Another story heard time and again in the lanes of Old Delhi is of the cemetery at Kashmiri Gate. While going towards Kashmiri Gate, there comes the Lothian Bridge. The road running along it leads to an old cemetery in Delhi, and has graves that date back to the time of the East India Company. This place is apparently haunted by spirits of white men and women buried here. Kashmiri Gate itself was believed to be haunted by a white lady who sat outside it smoking a cigarette and surprising travellers by suddenly appearing in front of them. Sadly, the gate has been closed and a new entrance to ISBT made by knocking off a part of the old city wall. So the white lady seems to be passing her nights alone, as nobody goes past her now. Just across the road is Nicholson's Cemetery, where the legendary Brigadier-General John Nicholson is buried. He died during the Mutiny and is believed to have a restless spirit. People try not going to the cemetery in the evening, but till recently, drug addicts found it a safe haven.

New Delhi, too, has its share of ghosts. The Khooni Darwaza is believed to be haunted by the three princes who were shot dead there by Lieutenant William Hodson in 1857. The grounds around a newspaper office near Bahadur Shah Zafar Marg are apparently haunted by an old man who annoys anyone found sleeping outside. There's a resident ghost in Connaught Circle too, who goes past Scindia House, but only those with a sixth sense can see the burly spectre.


All in all, Delhi is simply the most fascinating place to live in. Beyond the political intrigues, lies a world so mystical and enchanting, one can get lost in it without trying. At all.

Greeks are widely rumored-known to have had practiced and actively embraced same sex relationships which was formalized in relationships like pederasty which was an accepted form of relationship between a man and an adolescent boy wherein they were to remain together while the elder of the two behaved as a teacher, mentor and a lover. While “gay” relationships are extensively mentioned and hinted at, female same sex references are sparse and tend to wear off when the polis starts to crystallize. Still, one finds a strong reminder in the word “ lesbian” as it derives from the island of Lesbos, home of the most famous Greekwoman who wrote songs about love for women, Sappho.
In Sparta where boys were separated from family at the tender age of eight to train, one finds very clear examples of young boys living with adult men of age 20-25, and being educated and loved by the latter. It is said that Spartan women dressed like a man on their wedding night in order to make the transition for their husbands smoother.
Sculpture and myth alike shared the theme and fascination for gay love :  whether it be Zeus descending as an eagle to carry off Ganymede, the most beautiful boy on Earth, to be his lover on Mount Olympus, or Apollo and Hyacinth’s ill fated love. While in Thebes, the general Epaminondas commanded a regiment composed of 150 pairs of lovers. This 'Band of Lovers' became a formidable fighting force, with lover defending lover until death, and this tale is recounted even today in many hill villages of north Greece.

The Greek ideal of ’beautiful and good’ meaning that beauty of body and goodness of soul were the essence of human i.e. male perfection. Homosexual love between men and youths striving together to develop these virtues was seen as the most effective way to cultivate that ideal. Hence Greek pedagogy encouraged homosexual love, though with time it came to loggerheads with the citizenship ideal of equality and sovereignty as one partner had to acquire a passive role and feign or even assume submission. 
Aditi Saraswat, History, IInd Year

The unique nature of Hitler’s character and of his place in the history of our times inspires an endless stream of comment. Few, if any, twentieth century political leaders have enjoyed greater popularity among their own people than Hitler in the decade or so following his assumption of power on 30th January, 1933. It has been suggested that at the peak of his popularity nine Germans in ten were, ‘Hitler supporters, Fuhrer believers’. Acclaim for Hitler went way beyond those who thought themselves as Nazis, embracing many who were critical of the institutions, policies and ideology of the regime. This was a factor of fundamental importance in the functioning of the Third Reich. The adulation of Hitler by millions of Germans who might otherwise have been only marginally committed to Nazism meant that the person of the Fuhrer, as the focal point of basic consensus, formed a crucial integratory force in the Nazi system of rule.

Biographical concern with the details of Hitler’s life and his bizarre personality- fully explored in numerous publications- falls some way short of explaining the extra- ordinary magnetism of his popular appeal. According to popular perception, the ‘Hitler myth’- by which I mean a heroic image and popular conception of Hitler imputing to him characteristics and motives for the most part at crass variance with reality- served its vitally important integratory function in providing the regime with its mass base of support. There is a need to ascertain the central foundations of the ‘Hitler myth’; on what basis it was erected, and how it was maintained. In doing so, there should be an attempt to establish the main elements of consensus which the myth embodied, and finally, to suggest the implications of the ‘Hitler myth’ for the implementation of Nazi ideological aims.

Hitler is the most prominent power figure in world history since Napoleon and by a concentrated application of will, Hitler created his own movement and his own dictatorship. No matter how much we may detest everything for which Hitler and Nazism stood, we must reckon with the incredible fact that in ten years Hitler went from a petty political demagogue to absolute master of Germany; ten years later again he would commit suicide after failing to maintain an Empire which had stretched from the Atlantic seaboard to the environs of Moscow and Stalingrad and from the Arctic circle to the Mediterranean. He possessed the mystique of power, the capacity to move great assemblies of people by speech and by his presence at the centre of mass spectacles staged to enhance the legend of his all- pervading will. According to Roger Manvell and Heinrich Fraenkel[1], Hitler’s life is the Cinderella story, the tale of the unlikely boy, born with no social advantages, who rises from orphan poverty to inhabit great palaces and command great armies.

Hitler was born in the border town of Branau- on- the inn, on April 20, 1889, which he left when he was three years old. Later, while writing Mein Kampf, Hitler considered himself lucky to have been born in a town on the border of Germany and Austria. According to him:

“It has turned out fortunate for me today that Destiny appointed Branau-on- the- inn to be my very birthplace. For that little town is situated just on the frontier between these two states the reunion of which seems, at least to us of the younger generation, a task to which we should devote our lives, and in the pursuit of which every possible mean should be employed[2].”

Family relations were complicated. Hitler was the product of his father’s third marriage to Klara nee Polzl, who was 23 years her husband’s junior. In the household were also two half siblings from the father’s second marriage, Alois Jr born in 1882 and Angela, born in 1883. Family life was not peaceful: the father had fits of rage and battered his oldest son, Alois, who in turn was jealous of Adolf, pampered by his young mother. But Adolf, too was sometimes subjected to his father’s rage.

At the end of 1898 the family moved to the village of Leonding, south of Linz, where for 7,700 kronen Alois Hitler acquired a small house next to the cemetery. The nine- year- old Hitler entered the village school in Leonding, where he was a happy rogue, and saw himself as a young scamp:

“Even as a boy I was no ‘pacifist’, and all attempts to educate me in this direction came to nothing.”

One of his schoolmates from Leonding, Abbot Baldaun of Wilhering, recalled, and  by no means unkindly: “Playing war, always nothing but playing war, even we kids found that boring after a while, but he always found some children, particularly among the younger ones, who would play with him.” Otherwise, young Hitler practiced his “favourable sport”: shooting at rats with his handgun in the cemetery next to his parents’ house[3].

Around 1900, the Boer war began, which was a summer lightning for Hitler: “Everyday I waited impatiently for the newspapers and devoured dispatches and news reports, happy at the privilege of witnessing this struggle even at a distance. The boys now preferred the game, “Boers against the English”, with no one wanting to be an Englishman and everybody wanting to be a Boer.

In 1900, Adolf’s six year old brother Edmund died in Leonding of measles and eleven year old Adolf was left the only son in the family. The difficulties with his father began to increase. Hitler’s schoolmates described himself as “hardly an engaging person, neither in his external appearance nor in his character.” Old Mr. Alois demanded absolute obedience. Adolf greatly suffered from his father’s harshness. Adolf liked to read, but the old man was a spendthrift and didn’t hand out any money for books. Alois Hitler’s only book is said to have been a volume on the Franco- Prussian war of 1870-71: ‘Adolf liked looking at the pictures in that book and was a Bismarck enthusiast.”

Young Hitler made no effort at advancing in school. According to a schoolmate, Klara frequently had to go to school, ‘to check on him’. Klara was an exemplary mother. As Hitler put it, “My mother would have cut a poor figure in the society of our cultivated women. She lived strictly for her husband and children. They were her entire universe.” Alois determined that his son should become a civil servant. His father had dragged him at the age of thirteen into Linz’s main customs office, a genuine state cage. Thus he had learned to deplore thoroughly the career of a civil servant.

Hitler’s revenge for his father’s opposition to his desire to train as an artist was to do badly at school. He attended the Realschule at Linz from September 1900, till 1904, and his school record was so poor that he was forced to leave. The education given in his school stressed on  non- classical subjects, educating the pupil for a practical career rather than one that required academic training. However, Hitler’s own comments on his schooling in the autobiographical section of Mein Kampf are almost wholly misleading. Hitler’s trouble with authority, both parental and educational, related therefore directly with the period when he says in Mein Kampf, he had decided he wanted to be an artist. ‘This happened when I was twelve years old,’ he wrote. ‘How it came about I can not exactly say now, but one day it became clear to me that I would be a painter- I mean, an artist.’ This conviction never left him, when he failed as an artist on canvas, he dreamed of becoming an architect, a builder of cities. When this too, failed, he had passed through the experience of war, he dreamed of becoming an artist in politics. In this, he succeeded. But when, he finally dreamt of becoming an artist in war, he failed once again. This was to be his final, most extravagant dream, and it cost him his life.

The years between 1905 to 1908 were crucial in Hitler’s youth. In May 1906, when he was seventeen, he spent about a month in Vienna, staying possibly with his Godparents. The trip is estimated to have cost his mother some 200 kronen from her savings. Once home, he began to learn to play the piano. He also took endless walks around Linz with Kubizek, re- planning the city and drawing innumerable sketches. In his ambition to be an art student, however, he failed. On October 1907, his application to enter the Vienna academy of fine arts was rejected on the ground that his best work was not good enough. However, he treated the rejection as a revelation that he was destined for different work: ‘Within a few days I... knew that I ought to become an architect.”

He had drawn his patrimony from his mother before leaving for Vienna- a sum amounting to some 27 euros. However, a further blow was to follow in December when his mother died. The family doctor, Edward Blouch, has recalled: ‘In all my career I have never seen anyone so prostrate with grief.’

There can be no question that Hitler was devoted to his mother in his own peculiar way. His developing self indulgent egocentricity meant that any affection he experienced was coloured by what he instinctively felt to be his own needs; in this sense, he exploited his mother’s affection for him in his moody adolescence and felt entitled to draw on her modest resources in order to indulge his genius, as he believed it to be. The importance of the relationship of Hitler to his mother was such that it affected his attitude to women of his own generation throughout his life. He overrated them, and when they responded to him, he exploited them. Psychologists have made their own assumptions concerning Hitler’s childhood orientation to his mother.

There can be little doubt that Hitler’s development was to be a considerable degree abnormal. Because of lack of demonstrable evidence, he has been variously accused of being homosexual, a chronic masturbator, impotent and a practitioner of masochistic conversions. Dr. Walter Lagner, who was responsible during the war for the secret compilation of psychological observations on Hitler for the American Office of Strategic services, claims that there was a strong masochistic streak in Hitler, as well as a powerful feminine element in his psychological make- up, with its pronounced emotional characteristics. Langer asserts that his sexual relations with women were apparently of an unusual nature, and account for the suicide of his niece Geli Raubal and the two successive suicide attempts made by Eva Braun[4].

Hitler stayed in Vienna from 1908 to 1913 without any settled occupation. In Mein Kampf he took pleasure in creating an image of himself as a martyr to suffering and neglect, against which he pitted his calm, his resolution and his unconquerable will. His educational qualifications were insufficient for him to get accepted as a student of architecture. From Vienna, Hitler emerged as a young man of deeply serious outlook, enjoying no youthful gaiety, expending his restless energy on walking, reading, drawing. More importantly, he was fostering his hatred to a point when he seemed ‘almost sinister’. He hated Viennese society, smoking, drinking, Marxism, the Jews, etc. By December 1909, due to lack of finances, Hitler had joined a large tramp population of Vienna. Hitler now came into contact with fellow tramps, unemployed men and the police during this period. The first of these was Reinhold Ramisch, with whom Hitler set up a home in the State Men’s hostel in the industrial suburb of Brittgenau. He produced now a steady streak of paintings which he regularly sold to Jewish dealers.

What finally drove Hitler to leave for Munich in May 1913 at the age of 24, was his conviction that he had been successful in his annual evasion of military service, for which he had been first due to report in 1909. In Mein Kampf he claims he left Austria because he could no longer stand living there. As a true German, he was impatient to know the happiness of living and striving in the ‘common Fatherland’, ‘The German Reich.’ He was soon to volunteer for the German army. After a period of training, he left the Front in October, 1914, serving in the List regiment. By now he was serving as a runner, carrying messages between the regiment and head quarters. After further hard frontline service with the rank of Lance corporal, he was severely gassed and temporarily blinded in October, 1918. He was still in hospital when the war ended. He was 29.

His comrades thought him strange, one eyewitness report comments on the way he would sit brooding, silent and unapproachable, while at other times he would rage against the Communists and Jews. In Vienna, before the war, he had acquired, his more lasting prejudices: against the Hapsburg monarchy and empire, against social democracy, against the Marxists, against the Jews and Eastern Europeans of mixed race who filled Vienna. He hated alike the capitalists and the left wing trade unionists, both of whom he identified with the Jews. His exclusive German racialism and nationalism were fostered by his dislike of the polyglot humanity which had drifted through the Mens’ hostel.

However, Hitler left the army in 1920, and joined the famous German Workers Party, which was later renamed as the Nationalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei, NSDAP, or more famously known as, the Nazi party. During this period, Hitler’s social life had widened considerably. In his field, he had become something of a local ‘star’ among those members of upper class society who were susceptible to his particular outlook. His effect was much like that of an actor, according to an observer Ludecke:

‘When he stopped speaking, his chest still heaving with emotion, there was a moment of dead silence, then a storm of cheers[5].’

In upper class society he was uneasy and exaggeratedly polite until he gradually learnt how to mix socially. Ernst ‘Putzi’ Hanfstaengl was one of his instructors. Hanfstaengl claims he tried to civilize Hitler through the influence of music; he played Wagner for him, whole sections of whose works Hitler learned to hum and whistle. He found Hitler’s domestic habits completely undisciplined; he devoured unlimited quantities of cakes and cream, and loved sweet things. He was persistently unpunctual, caring as little about time as he did about money. He was apparently hopeless as an administrator, driving his helpers at Party headquarters or at the office of Volkischer Beobachter to despair. In private, he continued to read voraciously within his limited sphere of interest- History, the life of Frederick the Great, the French Revolution and the works of Clausewitz, the German philosopher of war. Another characteristic of Hitler was his appeal to children. He pretended to enter their imaginary world and was an expert and entertaining mimic, his imitations including women and children.

The key issue in historical- philosophical terms is the role of the individual in shaping the course of historical development, as against the limitations on the individual’s freedom of action imposed by impersonal ‘structural determinants’. In the present case, this focuses upon the question of whether the terrible events of the Third Reich are chiefly to be explained through the personality, ideology and will of Hitler, or whether the Dictator himself was not at least in part a (willing) prisoner of forces, of which he was the instrument rather than the creator, and whose dynamic swept him too along in its momentum. The historiographical positions are graphically polarized in the frequently cited comment of the American Historian Norman Rich, that ‘the point cannot be stressed to strongly: Hitler was master in the Third Reich’, and in the diametrically opposed interpretation of Hans Mommsen, of a ‘Hitler unwilling to take decisions, frequently uncertain, exclusively concerned with upholding his prestige and personal authority, influenced in the strongest fashion by his current entourage, in some respects a weak dictator.’

Studies founded upon the centrality of Hitler’s personality, ideas, and strength of will to any explanation of Nazism take as their starting point the premise that, since the Third Reich rose and fell with Hitler and was dominated by him throughout, ‘National Socialism can indeed be called “Hitlerism”.’ The 1970’s saw the appearance of a number of Hitler ‘biographies’- amid the outpouring of mainly worthless products of the so- called Hitler- wave, indicating a macabre fascination with the bizarre personality of the Nazi leader[6]. One of the most famous work is of Joachim Fest. However, Fest’s work is rather unbalanced in coverage, for instance, in devoting undue attention to Hitler’s early years, it downplays socio- economic issues; it is excessively concerned with the historically futile question of whether Hitler can be attributed with the qualities of ‘negative greatness’. The apogee of Hitler- centrism is reached in the psycho- historical approach characterizing a number of new studies in the 1970’s and coming close to explaining the war and the extermination of Jews through Hitler’s neurotic psychopathy, oedipal complex, monarchism, disturbed adolescence and psychic traumas. Even if the findings were less dependent on conjecture and speculation, it is difficult to see how this approach could help greatly in explaining how Hitler could become a ruler of Germany and how his ideological paranoia came to be implemented as government policy. According to Wehler, “Does our understanding of National Socialist politics really depend on whether Hitler had only one testicle?... Perhaps the Fuhrer had three, which made things difficult for him- who knows?... Even if Hitler could be regarded irrefutably as a sadomasochist, which scientific interest does that further?... does the final solution of the ‘Jewish question’ thus become more easily understandable or the ‘twisted road to Auschwitz” become the one- way street of a psychopath in power?”

The wide range of works by Bracher, Hillgruber, Hildebrand and Jackel have made a major contribution to our understanding of Nazism. What links their individually different approaches together is the notion that Hitler had a ‘programme’, which in all essentials he held to consistently from the early 1920’s down to his suicide in the Berlin bunker in 1945. His own actions were directed by his ideological obsessions; and the Third Reich was directed by Hitler; therefore the Fuhrer’s ideology became implemented as government policy. This is the basis of ‘programmatist’ type of interpretation.

An examination of Hitler’s power, whether he is to be seen as ‘master in the Third Reich’ or a ‘weak dictator’, must begin with some conception of what, potentially might comprise his ‘strength’ and ‘weakness’ within the overall power constellation in the Third Reich. At least three categories of possible weakness appear to be distinguishable:

1. It might be argued that Hitler was ‘weak’ in the sense that he regularly shirked making decisions, and was compelled to do so in order to protect his own image and prestige, dependent upon the Fuhrer remaining outside factional politics and unassociated with mistaken or unpopular decisions. This would mean that the chaotic centrifugal tendencies in the Third Reich were ‘structurally conditioned’ and not simply or mainly a consequence of Hitler’s ideological or personal predilections, or of a Machiavellian ‘divide and rule’ strategy.

2. Hitler could be regarded as ‘weak’ if it could be shown that his decisions were ignored, watered down, or otherwise not properly implemented by his subordinates.

3. It might be claimed that Hitler was ‘weak’ in that his scope for inaction, his manoeuvrability, was preconditioned and limited by factors outside his control but immanent to the ‘system’, such as the demands of the economy or fear of social unrest.

What does seem clear is that Hitler was hypersensitive towards any attempt to impose the slightest institutional or legal restriction upon his authority, which had to be completely untrammelled, theoretically absolute, and contained within his own person. Hitler was correspondingly distrustful of all forms of institutional loyalty and authority – of army officers, civil servants, lawyers and judges, of Church leaders and of cabinet ministers.

According to Stephen J. Lee, the main reason for positive support was the personal popularity of Hitler. To many, he was a direct successor to the populist vision of the Kaiser during the second reich. Hitler filled the gap and greatly extended the leadership cult. He offered something different to each class and yet pulled them all together with the uniqueness of his own vision for the future. Ian Kershaw states that he was seen as ‘representing the national interest’, putting the nation first before any particularist cause and wholly detached from any personal, material and selfish motives. He struck a chord with the widespread disillusionment with the institutions, parties and leaders of the Weimar republic. He had, of course, the considerable advantage of a monopoly of the media. But in a sense Hitler transcended the manufactured image- as an overall synthesizer of Nazi messages.

The most extreme manifestation of Nazi racial policies was the Holocaust, in which over six million Jews and several hundred thousand gypsies were killed from 1941 onwards by SS squads, in gas chambers at Auschwitz, Treblinka, Maidenek, Sobibor, and Chelmo. Race is usually seen as the most illogical component of the entire Nazi system, the one which made it a totalitarian regime capable of committing great acts of evil. This is, of course, the truth, but not the whole truth. Race was also the fundamental rationale for all social developments within Nazi Germany: indeed race and society were inseparable. The foundation of the Nazi race doctrine was the concept of the survival of the fittest from the animal to the human world. the biologist Haeckel argued that ‘the theory of selection teaches us that organic progress is an inevitable consequence of the struggle for existence. Hitler took this a stage further and based his whole ideology on the premise of struggle, which he saw as the ‘father of all things.’ From this emerged the right of the strong to triumph over the weak. Indeed, this was essential since the strong created, while the weak undermined and destroyed. He emphasised that ‘All human culture, all the results of art, science and technology that we see before us today, are almost exclusively the creative product of the Aryan. Conversely, ‘All the great cultures of the past were destroyed only because the originally creative race died from blood poisoning.’ The solution was obvious, ‘therefore, he who would live, let him fight, and he who would not fight in this world of struggle is not deserving of life.’

To be fully effective the Volksgemeinschaft (racial purity theory) needed to have its ‘impurities’ removed. The victims were all those who, for genetic reasons, did not fit into the stereotype of Aryanism. There were three broad types. First, there were threats from ‘biologically impaired’ individuals. Some of these might have been Aryan by origin, but for a specific reason, now threatened to pollute the community through diseases or defects which were transmissible to future generations. Second, individuals or groups following certain lifestyles threatened to undermine the social integrity or economic performance of the Volksgemeinschaft; these included vagrants, alcoholics and homosexuals. Third, groups classified by membership of an ‘inferior’ race had to be prevented from ‘contaminating’ the Volksgemeinschaft by being deprived of certain forms of contact with it. Among these targets were Sinti and Roma, Negroes and Slavs. The last of these became far more important with the expansion of the Reich into Eastern Europe in 1939 and again in 1941.  The most important racial ‘threat’ of all came from the Jews. 

Hitler’s own views on Jews were the main driving force behind the whole Nazi ideology and movement; anti- Semitic policies were therefore a sublimation of his personal obsession. Mein Kampf and his speeches are full of the most inflammatory references. In the former, he created the stereotype of the Jew as a parasite and pollutant: ‘Culturally he contaminates art, literature and the theatre, makes mockery of national feeling, overthrows all concepts of beauty, and instead drags men down into the sphere of his own base nature.’ Official policy towards the Jews unfolded in two broad stages. Pseudo- legal measures removed Jewish civil servants in April 1933and dismissed Jews from public employment the following month. The two key measures, were, however, introduced in November 1935 under the collective name of the Nuremberg laws. The Law for the Protection of German blood and Honour prevented mixed marriages, while the Reich citizenship law removed basic civil rights from all Jews, effectively expelling them from the Volksgemeinschaft. Legislation was combined with indoctrination and propaganda, anti- Semitism acting as the negative pole of ‘race education’ in schools. During the second stage such moderation disappeared as the government gave ground to the SS as the chief enforcer of policy. The third stage, which was launched by Germany’s invasion of Poland, saw the SS regain the ascendancy, this time with full government approval. The fourth phase was the invasion of the Soviet Union. In summary, Nazi race policy did three things. First, it converted traditional etatism into a more radical Aryanism, the ultimate thrust of which was Lebensraum. Second, it substituted for the older class divisions of German society the new unity of the Volksgemeinschaft. And third, this German unity was maintained at the expense of minorities which had no place within it. Some, the ‘community aliens’, were removed with as little fuss as possible. Hitler remained convinced of the rightness of his cause to the very end. In his Political Testament, he wrote, a few days before his suicide, ‘Above all, I charge the leadership of the nation, as well as its followers, to a rigorous adherence to our racial laws and to a merciless against the prisoner of all peoples- international Jewry.’

Although Nazi Germany collapsed in 1945, in final, ignominious defeat, it took the combined forces of several determined nations to overthrow it. The European empire Hitler built during his brief, twelve- year dictatorship is unique in modern times. Hitler derived his power solely from himself. The State was he and he the state; the Party was he and he the party. It will be wrong, indeed ignorant, to underestimate Hitler because of the exorbitant nature of his crimes against humanity. his lack of human feeling, his wholesale, uncompromising approach to the creation of history at the expense of large numbers of innocent people who lay in his path as he had conceived and determined it, should not blind us to a certain negative greatness in the man, and the significance of the hypnotic power he was capable of exercising over others. Hence, there is a grave necessity to arrive at some degree of understanding of him, his psyche, the reason for his behaviour. A person is shaped by his surroundings, the circumstances in which they are brought up. In fact, in one of Hitler’s most famous interviews taken by American journalist, Hans V. Kalterborn, in April, 1932, Hitler reflects his aggressive upbringing through his behaviour with his dog- he expects absolute obedience from his dog, and makes him comply to his wishes, the same way his father behaved with him. There is a need to understand the great Fuhrer of Germany and analyse the ‘myth’ he embodied. No personality in the world has succeeded by chance, and there is an urgent need to overlook the myths and legends surrounding Hitler, his rise to power, and his aversion to Jews. Also, as students of History, we need to ascertain facts from fiction. Yes, Hitler was an anti- Semite. No, he did not become one because of catching syphilis from a Jewish prostitute. Myths are necessary for constructing images of great personalities, but one needs to be careful in using them, as they can be distorted images too.

Ankita Mukhopadhyay

B.A History (Hons.)

III year

 


[1] Manvell Roger, Fraenkel Heinrich, ‘Adolf Hitler: The Many and the Myth’, Granada Publishing, 1977


[2] Hitler, Adolf, ‘Mein Kampf’


[3] Hamann, Brigitte, ‘Hitler’s Vienna’, Tauris Parke Paperbacks, 2010


[4] Manvell Roger, Fraenkel Heinrich, ‘Adolf Hitler: The Many and the Myth’, Granada Publishing, 1977


[5] Stackelberg, Roderick, ‘Hitler’s Germany’, Routledge, 2009


[6] Kershaw, Ian, ‘The Nazi dictatorship’, Edward Arnold, 1985

The worship of the Scandinavian gods ended a thousand years ago and the myths are now exotic and foreign to most people, but we make implicit reference to the gods and myths almost every day of our lives. The names of the weekdays Tuesday, Wednesday, Thursday and Friday all contain the names of old Scandinavian gods(Ty´r, Odin, Thor, and

Frigg; the Old English forms were Tiw, Wodan, Thunor, and Friija) and the choice of the gods for each of these days was based on myths about them. Also, names and characters from Norse mythology make frequent appearances in modern fiction, literature and movies. Fenrir Grayback in the Harry Potter books is named after Fenrir, the wolf who was the offspring of the trickster god Loki. J. R. R. Tolkien's fantasy works The Hobbit and The Lord of the Rings as admitted by its author were to be heavily influenced by the myths of the Northern Europeans. Movies like Thor and The Mask feature Thor, the strongest of the gods with fiery temper, always engaged in war with giants and Loki, who creates dangerous situations for the gods and then comes rescue them.

For these and many more contributions, we are indebted to the Norse, known today as Scandinavians-people of Norway, Sweden, Denmark, Iceland, and the Faeroe Islands. Mistakenly, Norsemen are often thought of only as the fierce warriors of the Viking Age (A.D. 780–1070); however, Norse culture originated long before the dramatic explorations of the Vikings. It probably started to take root during the Bronze Age. The mythology of these people is rich, vigorous, and clever.

Materials relevant to the study of Scandinavian mythology span two millennia or more. According to experts, Norse mythology originated in Asia, was modified in the European Mediterranean lands, and eventually was carried north and west by migrating Teutonic tribes in the third to sixth centuries A.D. during the breakup of the Roman Empire. As the migrating tribes settled, the old stories they brought with them began to change with the local geography, climate, and temperament of the people. Later, during the Viking Age, the Norse began to explore and populate countries from the British Isles and the rest of Europe to Iceland, America, the Near East, Byzantium and Russia, taking with them, too, their myths and their culture. However, the Norse myths were not written down until the 13th century.

According to the sources, the Norse believed that before Odin, the all-Father there was the emptiness of Ginnungagap which was so vast that it extended forever in every direction. After the beginning of the world, there came into being two regions, Muspellhiem and Nuflheim. Muspellhiem was a region of fire in the South and means "Home of the destroyers of the world." because the fire giants made it their home later. The heat and flame from that region was so intense that even from a million miles away it scorched and shriveled everything. Surt, the fiercest of all giants, stood guard at Muspelhiem's borders barring any intruders, even the Gods. Niflheim was the second of the great regions in the northern part of Ginnungagap. Niflheim was a region of ice and snow and in its centre was the mighty fountain of all waters called Vergelmir, the roaring cauldron. It was said that all rivers came from Vergelmir.

Inevitably after aeons the regions of fire and ice met, there was a tremendous explosion. The venomous scum from Elivagar was fused into life by the intense heat of the fire. And across the yawning void of Ginnungagap there formed the body of an evil giant called Ymir. For many aeons Ymir lay asleep in his bath of poisonous mud and ice. At last he became solid and began to sweat. Under his armpit sprang new life, a male and female and from the mating of his feet came a six headed son. From them came the first frost giants.

However not all of the ice of Niflheim was poisoned, and in a place which remained pure despite being melted by the fires of Muspellhiem there formed a cow named Audhumla meaning "The great nurse" for from her great udder there flowed four rivers of milk and it was in this milk that the evil Ymir found his nourishment. But Audhumla needed nourishment as well so she licked the salty continents of ice and something new began to happen. On the first day, she licked out the form of hair and on the second, she formed the head of a man and by the third day she had licked out a complete man. He was Buri a great and mighty God, after some time he begot a son called Bor who married Bestla the daughter of one of the frost giants. They in turn had three sons: Odin, Vili and Ve.

Although Buri and his descendants were good Ymir and his were evil. Odin and his brothers hated the evil Ymir and they slew him. So much blood flowed from the slaughtered giant that it drowned all the frost giants except Bergelmir and his wife. Odin, Vili and Ve dragged Ymir's body into the middle of Ginnungagap so that the blood flowing from his body formed the sea. From his flesh they formed the Earth and from his shattered bones and teeth they made the rocks and stones. His blood circled the Earth as the sea and made the rivers and lakes. They set his skull in the sky secured by four dwarfs called North, South, East and West. They flung sparks of fire from Muspelhiem to make the Sun, Moon and stars. From his brains they made the clouds but still they had no wind so they placed one of Bergelmirs giant sons at the ends of the Earth in the form of an eagle so that he could flap his wings forever and make the wind.

Interestingly, Thor, the most renown God in Norse mythology, was the son of Odin and Fjorgyn(earth). He was the god of thunder and storms.  Thor had two wives: Jarnsaxa (Ironstone), who bore him two sons, Modi and Magni; and golden-haired Sif, who gave him two daughters, Lora and Thrud . His realm was Thrudheim; his hall was Bilskirnir (Lightning), which had 540 rooms, fittingly large for this giant of a god who loved to feast and entertain. Thor was strong and fiery of temper, but he was well loved by the gods, respected by the giants, and worshiped by the ordinary people. Thor did not ride a horse; instead he had a chariot pulled by two enormous billy goats, Tanngniost and Tanngrisnir. The wheels of the chariot made a noise like thunder when Thor raced across the heavens. Thor’s greatest possession was his hammer, Mjollnir. When he hurled it, the hammer always hit its mark and then returned to Thor like a boomerang. Mjollnir was not only a weapon but a symbol of fertility, used at weddings, and of resurrection, used at burials. Thor also had iron gauntlets with which he could crush rocks, and a belt, Megingjardir, which doubled his mighty strength. At Ragnarok, the end of the world, Thor killed the Midgard Serpent, his ancient enemy, but himself was killed by the poisonous fumes of the dying serpent. Worship of Thor continued for centuries after the coming of Christianity. His hammer, Mjollnir, was a potent weapon, the gods’ only real defense against the giants. Worshipers of Thor made wooden oak chairs with high backs, called “high seats,” to ensure Thor’s blessing on the house (protecting it from lightning) and the well-being and fruitfulness of the family and its lands. In addition to bringing thunder and lightning and storms, Thor sent the rain that made the fields fertile. Evidence of Thor’s popularity is found in the name Thursday (the fifth day of the week), and in numerous English place-names, such as Thundersley, in Essex; Thunderfield, Surrey; Thundridge, Hertfordshire; and many others in England and elsewhere.

The Norse mythology is a pertinent example for the fact that myths are as ancient as humankind and have their origin in the efforts of primitive people to explain the mysteries of the world around them and they fulfilled the need of people to believe in some higher being or beings who have power over the daily lives and fate of humankind. Despite the fact that euhumerization of these myths is not possible, they reflect the codes of behaviour, cultural customs, rites and ways of worship of people who lived millions of years ago.

The love story of Shakuntala and King Dushyanta is undoubtedly among the most narrated and discussed legends in India. Vyasa, the author of this legend, mentions it as an episode in the Mahabharata. Kalidasa recounts this legend through his play, Abhijnana-shakuntala which is regarded as an exemplar in Sanskrit drama.

The structure of the legend in both the versions is similar. Shakuntala was the progeny of the sage Viswamitra and Apsara Menaka.  Menaka had come at the behest of the King Indra, to distract the great sage from his profound meditation. She manages to seduce him, as a result of which they beget a child. However, infuriated at the loss of his chastity, Viswamitra distances himself from his wife and daughter to return to his work. Realizing that she could not leave the child with him and having to return to the heavenly realms, Menaka leaves the infant in the forest. As fate would have it, Sage Kanava happens to pass by that forest and spots the new-born child surrounded by Shakunta birds. Taken by kindness, he decides to take the child home and names her 'Shakuntala' or one fed by Shakunta birds.

Shakuntala grows up to be a beautiful young lady. One day, King Dushyant, while returning from a deer hunt, stops by the hermit's cottage where he sees Shakuntala and immediately falls for this beautiful, innocent girl. Shakuntala too finds him handsome and virile and the two develop an emotional bond. They courted and mated without social sanction, not even her father’s approval. After some days, the King is summoned to the court due to unrest in his city. Having to leave in haste, he promises to be back and meet Kanva to ask her hand in marriage.

In Vyasa’s version, written 2,000 years ago, Kanva returns to find that his daughter has given birth to a son. The child is raised by Kanva and Shakuntala. When the child grows up, he wonders who his father is. So Shakuntala takes him to meet Dushyanta. The king, however, does not remember her. He insults her as a woman of loose morals and accuses her of trying to stake claim over his kingdom. Shakuntala, unperturbed by his outburst, declares him to be the father of her son and leaves with dignity.

The gods intervene to reiterate her truth and Dushyanta is forced to apologise and take back his words. He claims to have spoken thus because he wanted the support of his people so that no one challenges his legitimacy because Shakuntala is a forest maid and does not beget social approval.

Kalidasa’s version, written in the Gupta period mentions that after some days of Dushyanta’s exit, the great sage Durvasa visits the Ashram. Lost in reverie, Shakuntala fails to greet him. Incensed by this slight, the rishi curses Shakuntala, saying that the person she was dreaming of would forget about her altogether. After Shakuntala and her friends explain the situation to him, he realises that his extreme wrath was unwarranted and modifies his curse by saying that the person who had forgotten Shakuntala would remember everything again if she showed him a personal token that had been given to her. When Dushyanta does not return, Kanva insists that the pregnant Shakuntala should go to him, as his wife. On her way, she loses the ring Dushyanta had gifted to her. In the court, Dushyanta cannot remember her because of Durvasa’s curse. Heartbroken, she leaves the king’s palace and returns, some say to the forest, some say to her mother’s abode. After she departs, a fisherman finds the ring and gives it to the king and the memory returns. A shattered Dushyanta searches for his beloved everywhere, in vain.

Years later, as a reward for helping the Devas defeat the Asuras, Indra leads Dushyanta to his son and wife. Thus Shakuntala is reunited and there is a happy ending, after long years of longing and separation.

The different courses that the story takes in the two prominent versions of this legend are a reflection of change in social values and gender identity over time. Vyasa is considered to have written in the early Vedic period where the subordination of women is not as rampant as it becomes in the later times. Also, in this period, rigid caste structure and ostracizing of lower castes wasn’t prevalent. Therefore, Vyasa’s Shakuntala is autonomous and dignified, seeks her son’s father and is indifferent to social stigma.

The Gupta period is characterised by rigidity in caste structure. Also, women were considered to be subordinate to men and had to conform to the male ideals of perfect women. Therefore, in Kalidasa’s play, Shakuntala is portrayed to be a frail lovelorn heroine who she seeks her husband and very conscious of social stigma. 


This legend begs questioning. Are we really progressing where the view of women is concerned? How is it that Kalidasa's adaptation is accepted in all modern day adaptations of the story and we never seek to question why such standards are placed on women. Myths that have set a precedence or a code of conduct should be looked into, especially myths and legends like these and here at antiquity blog we seek to do the same.

Mythology has pervaded deep into our lives especially in this decade, of that there cannot be any doubt. They have moved beyond being just our grandmother’s tales and questions in quiz shows and the basis on which some of us are named.

Indian literature in English is increasingly grabbing eyeballs and the one genre that is helping it rise above the rest is historical fiction. Debut authors are increasingly dependent upon Indian mythology to carve a niche for themselves. Today we take a look at some of these books, the myth behind them and what makes these books so appealing.

Once upon a time, the way to familiarize students with Indian mythology was Amar Chitra Katha’s comics. Everything from Ramayana to Mahabharata and the pantheon of 33 million Gods was dealt with. Comics evolved to graphic novels and everything from princes fighting epic battles to nature taking on human forms was laid out to capture our imaginations. Sarnath Banerjee is one such graphic novelist whose work has been taken note of by the Indian audiences.

But that’s not where it stops. Authors are not only taking up mythology and visualizing it the way they want to, but also moulding and interpreting it to tell beautiful stories and look at mythology from different perspectives.

 Chitra Banerjee Divakaruni’s ‘Palace of Illusions’, which released in 2008, is a re-telling of Mahabharata from Draupadi’s point of view. With gender studies as an upcoming area of interest, this is a highly relevant piece of work which traces Mahabharata right from the time of Draupadi’s birth till the death of Draupadi and explores interesting issues like the genesis of the war and also Draupadi’s unrequited love for Karana. Crisp writing defines this book and it proves to be a rewarding read.

Taking inspiration from mythology is Ashwin Sanghi. His book ‘Chanakya’s Chant’ is the story of Pandit Gangasagar Mishra and Chandni, parallels of Chanakya and Chandragupta Maurya in the modern times. This premise is interesting because it is disputable whether anyone called ‘Chanakya’ as such ever existed. Ashwin Sanghi has also written books like the Rozabal Line which talks about Jesus surviving the crucifixion and living in India and The Krishna Key which talks about a mass murderer who believes that he is the re-incarnation of Lord Krishna.

Ashok Banker has recently gained renown as his Ramayana Series which includes his notable work- “The Forest of Stories”- climed to the top to become the number one ebook. His freely imaginative retelling in fact is held largely responsible for this current resurgent interest of Indian audiences in mythology.

Calling himself a mythologist by profession is Dr. Devdutt Pattanayak, whose books Jaya- which is his retelling of the Mahabharata and Mithya=Myth- a handbook on Indian mythology have gained considerable popularity. Dr. Pattanayak concentrates on making mythology accessible to the masses, which is perhaps the reason for his popularity.

Historical fiction and mythology is a broad genre with scope for some brilliant writing. The authors that we deal with here are only some of the more popular examples which we recommend you start reading with, if you haven’t already. If you know of any other author writing in this genre, who has caught your fancy, please feel free to add to this list.

We can ascribe to the legend of the monkeys in the Vanara army having constructed a 30km long bridge for King Ram to rescue his wife from the clutches of the demon king Ravana and call it Ram Setu. Or, rest our beliefs in the Islamic legend according to which Adam used the bridge to reach a peak, where he stood repentant on one foot for 1000 years leaving a large hollow mark resembling a footprint and call it Adam’s bridge. Taking science and geography as gospel and considering it nothing but a chain of limestone shoals between Pamban island and Mannar island is an alternative as well. But it is indisputable that this 18 miles strip has captured the limelight because of the controversies and difference of opinions that have surrounded it for the last two decades.

There are different geological theories behind the origin of the ridge, one of which even says that Sri Lanka was a part of Indian landmass and that the calcareous rectangular blocks are testimony of Lanka breaking away from the mainland about 1,25,000 years ago.

The depth of the sea along the 30-km-long stretch varies between 3 feet and 30 feet, thus making navigation by ships impossible. Today, ships bound for India's eastern coast have to circle around the entire island of Sri Lanka to reach the Indian ports. Therefore, a project titled Sethusamudram Shipping Canal Project was mooted by the Government of India which calculated that successful completion of the project would cut travelling by about 350 nautical miles and save 10 to 30 hours' sailing time. The project involves creating an 83-km-long deepwater channel that will link Mannar with Palk Strait by extensive dredging and removal of the limestone shoals that constitute the Ram Sethu.

The project has been condemned and opposed by a wide spectrum of the Indian people. Religious right wing parties have come down on the plans to destroy something built by Lord Rama. Environmentalists have opposed it as they hold it would destroy and destabilise the aquatic flora and fauna of the area. There is another group which has criticised the project as economically unviable. 

Sri Lanka has reservations on this venture as well, but chooses to remain silent fearing strains in bilateral relations. Aside from environmental and livelihood concerns of its fishermen, Sri Lanka is more concerned about the loss of container traffic at its Colombo and Galle ports. Interestingly, the LTTE is also opposed to the project. Its naval activities might be hindered as and when the Canal becomes operational.

The legend of Ram Setu exemplifies the fact that myths and legends are relevant not only because they cause debate among different factions of the society regarding their historical basis, but also influence the policy making of the government and its international relations. As R S Sharma puts it, even though their historical basis cannot be proved, they dwell in the minds and souls of the people.