Niazi’s gun and Auranagazeb’s sword

Gen. J.F.R. Jacob was of two-star rank during the 1971 Bangladesh War. You can see him watching over the signing ceremony when Gen Niazi of Pakistan surrendered to Gen Aurora of the Indian Army.

In 1996, when India was observing the 25^th anniversary of the Bangladesh War, Jacob wrote a piece in the Indian Express, in which he recalled examining the revolver that Gen Niazi had surrendered. It was an old, rusted one, certainly not the kind that would have been the personal firearm of a general. This was the final joke that Niazi was playing on India, Jacob surmised.

During a recent visit to the Victoria Memorial Museum, Kolkata, I saw two swords. One was of Aurangazeb, with his name inscribed on it, and the other of Mir Jafar, the general of the then Nawab of Bengal Siraj ud-Daulah. Jafar is said to have betrayed Daulah that led to the defeat of the last Nawab of Bengal in the Battle of Plassey in 1757. That was the end of Mughal domination and beginning of the British Empire in India.

The Museums of India record of Aurangazeb's sword. http://museumsofindia.gov.in/repository/record/vmh_kol-R10268-16659

Both Aurangazeb and Jafar used thin, long, slightly curved blades. The non-cutting edge has a perpendicular reinforcement to strengthen the cutting weapons. The handles would have been the ultimate in ergonomic design of those days, because both were powerful men. Aurangazeb’s grip is simple, whereas Jafar’s is made of ivory with stone inlay.

The victory at Plassey was the crowning glory for Robert Clive, the man who started as a writer (clerk) in the East India Company’s office in Fort St. George, Chennai. In fact, Clive and his bunch of military adventurists were surprised at the ease with the Indian kingdoms fell like dominoes in the 50 years between 1707 (when Aurangazeb died and the decline of the Mughal Empire started) and 1757. 

Clive was a colonel at the time of Plassey, which is the equivalent of a unit commander in the present-day Indian Army. And this man spearheaded the defeat of a large country.

If any Indian power could have offered resistance against this onslaught, it could have been the Marathas, who had by then a group of kingdoms in their command. But then they were busy fighting amongst themselves.

At the Victoria Museum, I saw the personal weapons of two men – one who was the last custodian of the idea of India before it was colonised, and the other who helped destroy this idea. The country had to wait another 190 years before the idea could return.

History is value neutral. It happened, that’s it. But when we try to make sense of it we add value, prejudice and bias.

In these recent years, when the Aurangazeb Road in Delhi was renamed to A.P.J. Abdul Kalam Road, history rewriters were punishing the Mughal Emperor for his atrocities against the Hindus. Kalam was a nice man; affable, avuncular and with an ability to goad youngsters to success. But as a historical figure he never was and never will be a patch on Aurangazeb.

Aurangazeb's tomb near Aurangabad in Maharashtra. Photo by SGW.