भारतीय इतिहास के ६ स्वर्णिम पृष्ठ (वीर सावरकर - विदेशी आक्रान्ताओं पर विजय गाथा)

be prolonged. The haughty Alexander could not bear it. He thought of
ordering the ladders to be put up on the ramparts of the enemy stronghold,
and commanding his Greek soldiers to climb them up and straightaway
storm the city.
52. But the same sort of unrest and disaffection against Alexander began
to be seen in his army, as was once experienced at the time of the crossing
of the Vyas. The Greek army was avowedly wending its way homeward in
order to avoid new wars. But all along the bank of the Indus, they had to
fight fresh battles. And they knew that unless Alexander gave up his
aggressive designs calculated to pacify his unsatiable lust for conquests,
brutal wars were unavoidable. Because of this bitter war with the Malava-
Shudrak combined forces, the Greek discontent reached the climax and
there were rebellious whispers openly flouting Alexander’s commands.
52A. When the Macedonian soldiers found that they had still on hand a
fresh war in which the most war-like nations (गणs) would be their
antagonists, they were struck with unexpected terror and began again to
upbraid the King in the language of sedition. (Curtius Bk. IX Ch.IV. as
quoted in ‘Hindu Polity’) {Mc Crindle I.L. by Alexander P. 234).
53. Still, in the end, Alexander promulgated his command to his soldiers
to climb up the ladders and leap straight into the enemy stronghold, which
valiantly defied the Greek siege. Seeing that his Greek soldiers hesitated to
undertake the daring feat, that exceptionally valiant commander of the
Greeks, the mighty Alexander, himself began to climb one of the ladders
put up against the ramparts of the stronghold. At this, the whole
Macedonian army was suddenly inspired to do the great deed, and all began
to climb instantaneously. Once at the top of the ramparts, Alexander
straightaway jumped down in the midst of the enemy and there ensued a
hand-to-hand fight between the Indian and the Greek forces.
And Suddenly
54. And suddenly an Indian warrior took out an envenomed arrow from
his sheath and applied it to his bowstring, and let it fly with an unmistakable
aim at the place where Alexander stood edging on his warriors, and shining
in his golden helmet.
55. It was not an arrow, it was, in fact, Indian revenge incarnate. To use
the lines of poet Moropant (with a slight variation of course) we can say—
तो शर गरधरवरसा पविसा रविसा स्मरारिसायकसा।

म्लेंच्छ हृदंतरि घुसिला वल्मीका माजि नागनायकसा ॥
(with apologies to Moropant आर्याभारत-कर्णपर्व)
Alexander Rolled into a pool of Blood
56. The shaft of the Indian warrior unmistakably pierced the heart of
Alexander, and suddenly the emperor rolled down unconscious. A Greek
soldier immediately covered him with his shield. There was a sudden hue
and cry in the Greek ranks that Alexander had been wounded, that he had
fallen unconscious. With exceptional daring, the Greeks lifted him from the
pool of blood and carried him safely to his camp. There, with great
difficulty that terrible shaft of the Indian warrior was extricated. The Greeks
heaved a sigh of relief when after a long time of patient nursing, Alexander
gradually regained consciousness. It took several days for the wound to heal
up. During all this time, Alexander was confined to bed.
57. But everywhere in Babylon and Greece the news that was received,
reported that Alexander was killed in the war by an Indian arrow.
Consequently, there were some uprisings in Gandhar and Persia. But later
on, when it was known that Alexander was only severely wounded and was
now recovering, the situation came
to normalcy.
58. No wonder whatsoever, if the news of Alexander’s having fainted by a
bowshot was greeted cheerfully throughout the Malava-Shudrak republic.
Alexander was so much puffed up with pride when King Pourav (Poros)
was wounded in the battle, that he circulated a new coin with a picture
showing his fall stamped on it. The coin is still to be seen as a mark of his
vanity. That insult inflicted on India was fully avenged by the Indian arrow,
which sent the Greek emperor rolling down on the battlefield in pools of
blood. The Ionian Emperor, Alexander, who unjustifiably shed Indian
blood, was made to atone for it personally by the shedding of his blood.
59. The Malava-Shudrak republic too should have stamped on some golden
coin the picture of Alexander, fallen in a pool of blood with an arrow deeply
thrust into his chest. Possibly they did.
60. According to his cruel military code, he had been cruelly rushing
down the states, which had opposed him. But whenever there appeared any
foe, who was equally strong and who retaliated furiously, Alexander had the
cunning to dissemble nobility and frankness of heart. When he recovered
from his wound, he began to make overtures of peace to the commanders of

the Malava-Shudrak army, instead of dictating his usual arrogant terms. For
ceasefire talks, a hundred representatives of the joint Malava-Shudrak
republic were elected, and for them, Alexander held a grand reception
ceremony in his camp. Detailed and very entertaining descriptions of this
reception are available in the books of Greek historians. But for want of
space, we have to satisfy ourselves with a brief reference to it. The hundred
representatives were, even according to the Greek standards, of uncommon
height, heavily built, having handsome muscular bodies. They were clad in
valuable embroidered clothes and had worn beautiful ornaments of gold and
pearls and precious stones. Everyone of them went to the Greek camp in his
well-decorated and well-equipped golden chariot. They had with them
elephants, too, with costly and beautiful outfits. The Greeks had always felt
a special fascination for the elephants.
61. Although rankling in his mind was the fact that these very
representatives of the Malava-Shudrak joint republic had brought upon him,
a little while ago, a mortal danger, Alexander showed his magnanimity in
that reception ceremony and paraded his own imperial splendour. For every
one of those hundred representatives, there was a special golden seat. The
banquet given in their honour was attended with costly wines and excellent
savoury dishes. The grand banquet was followed by various field games and
tournaments, music and dancing. In the end, a treaty was signed by the
Malava-Shudrak representatives and Alexander.
62. The divergent accounts given about this treaty by various Greek
writers of the time have, at least, this much in common to tell. The Greeks
and the Indians had jointly agreed to put a stop to their hostilities and that
the Malava-Shudrak republic was not to cause any harassment to the
retreating army of Alexander, while it was progressing on its way home
along the Indus. Of these, two valiant republics, the Malavas will be
referred to later on, when I shall be describing the wars with the Sakas, the
Yucchis and other Mlenchha powers. The fact that this Malava republic had
been prosperous and strong for many centuries to come, therefore, need not
be specially proved.
63. Even the Greek writers could not help recording some more acts of
valour during the Indian resistance to the Greek onslaught, although the
details of the time and place of their happenings are not available. Two of
them are cited here to serve as specimens.
The Treacherous attack of Greeks on Masaga Tribe

64. At Masaga, Alexander captured a small armed community of seven
    thousand, which included several women. Alexander promised them their
    lives on condition that they should join his army and fight with his Indian
    enemies, or else, he threatened them with wholesale man-slaughter, or, as a
    third alternative he said, he would carry them off as slaves! The leaders of
    the community agreed to his first proposal, but requested that they should
    be allowed one night for mutual exchange of views. Alexander agreed.
    Thereupon, these seven thousand Indians marched towards a hill, some nine
    miles ahead of the Greek camp. Writes Vincent Smith, “The Indians being
    unwilling to aid the foreigners in the subjugation of their countrymen
    desired to evade the unwelcome obligation.” So, they decided to give the
    slip to the Greeks, but Alexander came to know of their intention. So, while
    they were sleeping for a little rest, Alexander fell upon them, all of a
    sudden, with his huge army and began to cut down eveyone. There was a
    great havoc amongst those Indians. But within a short time, they drew up
    their swords and other weapons. They made a hollow circular formation,
    gathering the women and children inside it, and faced the Greek attack most
    heroically. A good number of women were also found desperately fighting
    with the foe. Till almost all of them were killed, they kept on fighting for
    the freedom of their nation.
    64A. “The gallant defenders met a glorious death they would have
    disclaimed to exchange for a life with dishonour.” (Early History of India
    by Vincent Smith 1924, p. 59)
    The Agrashrenis
65. This little Indian republic of the Agrashrenis too, instead of
    surrendering, fought to the last with the vast Greek navy of Alexander, as it
    was making its headway to the sea through the course of the Indus. When
    the Greeks attacked their very capital, these brave Indian warriors erected
    blockades and barricades at different intervals, and fought every inch of
    their ground so tenaciously that Alexander could not enter the city before he
    had sacrificed many Greek lives. According to Curtius, “When those brave
    fellows could not further resist the odds, they (the Agrashrenis) set their
    houses on fire, and their wives and children and all threw themselves into
    the flames!” That is to say, they ‘made johar’ (to use a latter day
    phraseology).
    This is the Aame Johar!—Jai Har!!

66. We generally believe that this magnificent and awe-inspiring tradition
    of ‘johar’ or self-immolation of large groups of men and women in times of
    national crisis was originally practised by the Rajputs only. But instances
    like the one just mentioned, cited by the Greek writers who were astounded
    to witness them, go to prove that even before the name of the Rajputs was
    ever heard of, this splendid tradition was followed by our Indian warriors
    right from the ancient days. The word ‘johar’ is comparatively modern. It
    was perhaps derived from the war cry ‘Jai Har’! The Indian God of war and
    destruction is Har, Har, Mahadev! That is why, the Indians fought
    desperately, inspired by this deafening war cry! The Marathas too used the
    same war cry ‘Har, Har, Mahadev!’ After fighting to the last, when every
    hope of success was over, or every chance of escape from the enemy was
    lost, this johar, this martyrdom, this noblest type of self-sacrifice was
    resorted to by the Hindus as the last unfailing weapon to save their religion,
    their nation, their own self-respect and to avoid captivity, abject slavery and
    hateful conversion! As soon as all men of fighting age were slain on the
    battlefield after taking the greatest toll of the enemy blood, their wives,
    mothers, daughters, hundreds of them, with babies at their breasts, used to
    leap into the burning pyres, specially kept ready for the purpose and were
    reduced to ashes. This was what was known as ‘Johar’! It was not an easy
    job! It was the limit of valour and endurance for the sake of keeping up the
    prestige of one’s self and one’s own religion!
67. Whoever had donned this exceptional armour of ‘Johar’ and its
    leaping flames were beyond all attempts of an Alexander, an Alla-ud-Din or
    a Salim-why, even of Satan himself—to pollute them and convert them to
    his religion! Confronted with this horrible sacrificial fire, the enemy stood
    aghast, discomfited and crestfallen.
68. The above-mentioned ‘Johar’—collective immolation of lives—by the
    Agrashrenis is one of the many described by the astounded Greek writers,
    which the Indians preferred to the humiliation of being the captives of the
    Greeks.
    The Janapad Republic of Brahmanakas!
69. At last, when Alexander’s naval force reached the mouth of the Indus,
    fighting incessantly all the way, it met with yet other independent republics.
    These ‘janapadas’ or ‘Ganas’ were like the small Greek city-states, and had
    none amongst them, which could ably withstand with equal numbers, the
    mighty and numerous army of Alexander. Still one of them, the

‘Brahmanak janapad’ made up its mind to cross swords with, rather than
submit to Alexander. This was the same ‘Brahmanak janapad’, that is
referred to by Panini, says Dr. Jayaswal. It is already told how, while
fighting in the Panchanad (the Punjab) Alexander had wreaked his
rancorous revenge against the clan of philosophers, especially the
Brahmins. When Alexander learnt that it was the same clan of Brahmins,
this small state belonged to, he decided to whack his malicious stroke upon
it with all his might. Plutarch (McCrindle ‘Invasion of India by Alexander’
p. 306; V.A. Smith E.H.I. p. 106) writes in his ‘Life of Alexander’, “These
philosophers were specially marked down for revenge by Alexander as they
gave him no less trouble than the mercenaries. They reviled the princes who
declared for Alexander and encouraged free states (in India) to revolt
against his authority. On this account, he hanged many of them”. (ChLIX)
69A. That little ‘Janapad’ too fought to the last with these Greeks for the
sake of its national honour and independence.
Pattanprastha
70. What now is called by the Muslims, Sindh Hyderabad, was at that
time known as Pattanprastha. In Sanskrit language, the cities along the
seashore, or at the mouths of rivers, were mostly called ‘Pattan’. Pattan is
equivalent to the English word ‘port’. Perhaps the English word ‘port’
might have been a corruption of the Sanskrit ‘Pattan’. When Alexander
neared the sea, this small state of Pattranprastha was confronted with a
dilemma: to surrender to the enemy was most hateful to the
‘Pattanprasthis’, but they knew fully well that they would never be able to
fight with the powerful Greek army on equal ground. So they resolved the
dilemma by forsaking, collectively their native country, their homes and
landed property and motherland with sad hearts.
Alexander’s Homeward Voyage
71. That part of the ocean, where the Indus flows into it, should really be
called Sindhusagar. Sindhusagar, a name for the sea to the west of India, is a
fitting counterpart for the Gangasagar, a traditional name for the eastern sea.
72. On first reaching the sea, Alexander divided his army into two parts.
The first batch he sent back to Iran (Persia) by a land route through what
now goes by the name of Baluchistan. The whole of Alexander’s army had
been thoroughly exhausted in this expedition to India. Moreover,
Baluchistan at that time, was full of impregnable forests, thoroughly
unknown to the Greeks. So, the Greek division, sent this way, somehow

reached Persia, after so many hazards and privations. On the other hand,
Alexander himself set sail by the sea-route with another division of his
army, and reached Persia. As the whole of the old Persian Empire had now
formed a part of Alexander’s greater demesne, he went to his capital,
namely Babylon. But he did not return to the capital in that same
triumphant spirit he had started on his Indian campaign two years ago, with
a view to winning for himself the vauntful title of the Emperor of India. Not
only did he not return like the Emperor of India, he did not even appear to
be an emperor at all. He returned just like an ordinary commander of an
army, despaired and worn out, after a long-drawn and hazardous campaign.
India was not Persia
73. The cause of this disappointment of Alexander was that the Greeks up
to that time, knew only one empire worth the name—much more extensive
than their own—that of Persia! When these Greeks marched upon that
Persian emipre under their uncommonly brave and brilliant commander,
Alexander, and when after only two or three campaigns the vast Persian
empire fell before them like a paper palace, they were so much flushed with
their victory, that they fondly considered their commander to be endowed
with divine qualities, and as such unconquerable. Alexander himself could
not escape the infection of pride. His ambition to win for himself the
overlordship of the whole world soared to the sky. Bharat appeared to him
just next to and as easy a prey as, Persia. So very vast a land and so very
weak! So, he wanted to crown his Persian conquest with the glittering
diadem of the Indian imperial authority. Greedily enough, he ran to have it
with all haste.
74. But the experience he had was quite contrary to what he had expected.
In India, he had to face the bitterest opposition at every step. Although he
never lost a battle as such, his Greek army was completely exhausted and
exasperated in the very process of winning them. These victories were far
too costlier than the ones in Persia, and all their vauntful declarations of
conquering India as easily as Persia proved to be empty words ‘full of
sound and fury signifying nothing‘. And in the end, he had to return with
the acquisition of only a small all of land along the Indus river.
75. Thus was Alexander disappointed and to a certain extent insulted. But
that valiant emperor was not downcast. He was itching to return once again
to India after stabilizing things in the newly conquered regions of India and

annexing them permanently to his vast empire like those of Syria, Persia,
Babylon and others.
76. Alexander declared the annexation of the region from Hindukush and
Gandhar to Taxila (Takshashila), half of the Panchanad up to the river Vyas,
and that from the confluene of the Vitasta with the Indus to the sea. He
appointed the Indian King Ambuj or Ambhi of Taxila his governor (satrap)
of the Hindukush region, and King Porus as his governor of the Panchanad.
To the third but narrow strip of land along the Indus were appointed his two
trusted Greek generals, Philip and Nicanor, under whom he placed the
mobile force of Greeks. He established in India some townships too, one of
which was Alexandria in the direction of Taxila.
Alexander’s Death
77. Before Alexander decided to stabilize things in the Indian territory he
had recently captured, he learnt that the local democratic institutions
refused to accept his overlordship. Even while Alexander was in Sind, he
received intelligence of a revolt by the Indian subjects in Gandhar. He was
about to send a fresh and large Greek army to Gandhar. But in quick
succession followed another disturbing news of a fresh conspiracy being
hatched in Punjab (Panchanad) to overthrow Alexander completely. But
Alexander could at that time do nothing to thwart any such attempts at
revolt. During his campaign against India not only his army but he himself
was completely exhausted. To add to it, his addiction to drinking had grown
beyond all limits of safety; he suddenly took ill and died in B.C. 323. That
is to say, hardly within a-year-and-a-half of his return from India with all
his army, the great Greek (Macedonian) Emperor breathed his last at
Babylon.
Indian Politicians Conspire
78. As has already been told, as soon as Alexander began to retreat along
the Indus, some of the Indian politicians began hatching out a secret plan
against the Greeks in Punjab to win back their lost freedom. But it was not
merely aimed at the recovery of the lost territory. It was essentially to
overhaul and revolutionize the whole gamut of the political life of India and
to bring about a sweeping change in the internal life of the country. Even if
Alexander had not died so soon, the deep-laid Indian plot was destined to
achieve this daring political revolution. This sudden death of Alexander,
however, gave Indian political workers an unexpected golden opportunity

and they were quick enough to utilize it, for the overthrow of the Greek
power.
Greek Governors Beheaded
79. Alexander had left behind Nicanor and Philip as the chief
representatives of Greeks. When the news of Alexander’s death reached
India, the Indians in the republic of the Ashvinis suddenly fell upon the
Greek Governor, Philip, and assassinated him along with his small Greek
regiment. The second, Nicanor, was also similarly despatched, and all those
monarchies and republics along the banks of the Indus, which had
acquiesced in the Greek overlordship, shook it off at once and proclaimed
their independence forthwith. Greek colonies, Greek ensigns and standards
— whatever signified the Greek power — were completely destroyed on the
spot. The whole of the tract along the banks of the Indus right from the
Panchanad to Sindh, which Alexander had conquered and annexed for ever
and anon to his empire, became independent within six months of
Alexander’s death.
80. Alexander had conquered states and countries and empires like
Greece, Syria, Persia, Babylon, Egypt and the likes. There he founded
Greek cities and Greek colonies, and even after the division of his vast
empire, just after his death, his governors and military commanders and
their descendants, ruled the respective regions like Babylon for centruries,
together. Even now in some other countries cities exist with the name
Alexandria, and Alexander’s name is ever crowned with the honorifix ‘The
Great’ throughout ancient histroy.
81. But what happened in Bharat? The small states and republics in the
farthest corner of India, that Alexander had annexed to his empire under the
impression that he had conquered them for ever and for ever, after fighting
incessantly on various battlefields for two long years and shedding the
blood of millions of Greek and Hindu soldiers — those very Indian states
and republics and monarchies literally uprooted his power, his standard, the
Greek colonies and every hateful sign of the Greek victory — and that too
within six months or at the most a year!
82. At last, not to speak of the city of Alexandria, which he had
established, his own name too is not to be traced anywhere in Indian
history, as if there never was any invasion, any aggression on India’s
borderland of any Mlenchh (Yavan) emperor, named Alexander, who
dinned the ears of the people throughout Europe with his proud title, ‘The

Great’! Curiously enough, not even a stray reference has yet been
discovered in Vedic or Jain or Buddhist ancient literature.
83. Writes Vincent Smith in his famous Early History of India: “All these
proceedings prove conclusively that Alexander intended the permanent
annexation of those (Indian) provinces to his empire.... But within three
years of his departure from India (from 325 BC to 322 BC), his officers in
India were ousted, his garrisons destroyed and all traces of his rule had
disappeared. The colonies he founded in India, unlike those established
elsewhere in Asiatic provinces, took no root. His campaign, though
carefully designed to secure a permanent conquest, was in actual effect not
more than a brilliantly successful raid on a gigantic scale, which left upon
India no mark save the horrid scars of a bloody war. India remained
unchanged. She continued her life of splendid isolation and soon forgot the
passing of the Macedonian storm. No Indian author—Hindu, Buddhist or
Jain—makes even the faintest allusion to Alexander or his deed.” (p. 117)
84. Who were the most prominent leaders of this political conspiracy,
which wiped out, within a period of six months or a year, the whole of the
foreign political dominance caused by Alexander’s aggression right from the
Panchanad to Sindh? Histroy, as yet, is ignorant of their names! Still two of
them, at least, have become immortal. They are the same two men whom I
have mentioned while describing Alexander’s advance up to Taxila. The
first was a brilliant and smart youth, who had just completed his studies at
the University of Taxila, Chandragupta. And the other was Acharya
Chanakya, who had been a teacher at that University and who, later on, gave
a practical lesson in political craft and political revolutions to the young
Chandragupta! As they were to lead the whole of Bharat, hereafter, it is fit
and proper that they should be introduced here.
The Story of Chandragupta’s Birth
85. Like all other great men of the ancient world, Chandragupta and
Chanakya have their life stories clouded with legends, anecdotes and
imaginary accounts. Those who are interested in them for the sake of
intellectual entertainment may profitably read Radhakumud Mukherjee’s
‘Chandragupta Maurya and His Times’. We shall give here only so much of
their lives as appear to us to have historical sanction.
86. Some small bands of the Shakyas, amongst whom was born the great
Lord Gautam Buddha, had at one time to shift to far-off regions, because of
some disastrous calamity that had befallen them. They called themselves

Kshatriyas. However, in those adverse days, those displaced Shakyas began
to follow other professions for their livelihood. There happened to be a
plentiful breed of peacocks in the forest, where these tribes later on lived.
To keep these peacocks and sell them became one of their professions. So
they had ‘Moriya’ as their nickname, and the Moriya formed a class by
themselves. One family of these Moriyas came back to settle in the vicinity
of Pataliputra. One woman of that Moriya tribe named Mura (Mayura)
somehow got access to the harem of the royal palace and soon became the
concubine of the Emperor, Mahapadmanand or ‘Dhananand’, as he was
generally called. Her son from this Nanda Emperor was the Emperor
Chandragupta.
87. However, when Chandragupta became an emperor, the story of his
birth might have appeared derogatory to his greatness and, therefore in
some books of the time, the story was slightly altered to mean that
Muradevi was the wedded queen of the Nanda emperor, not his concubine,
which in consequence meant that Chandragupta was a legitimate royal
prince and not an illegitimate one.
88. But a third anecdote seems to outdo both the above stories, saying that
Mura and Emperor Nanda were in no way connected. Mura had a son from
her husband of the same clan and that son was Chandragupta himself. Later
on, with the help and guidance of Arya Chanakya and with his own valour,
he raised his poor father and mother to eminence, and after wresting the
imperial power from the Nandas, he founded the Maurya Dynasty.
89. It seems a common weakness among all human societies and
communities, in a greater or lesser degree, to attempt to judge the greatness
or meanness of an individual, not so much from his manifest virtues or
vices as from the race, the community or the family he is born in. That is
why, as the time passes, such inflated anecdotes about their family tradition
are propagated and popularized through plays, poems and novels or through
folk-lores. There are other anecdotes too besides the ones referred to above,
which seek to ascribe greatness or meanness to Chandragupta. But for the
reasons given above, they need not be mentioned here.
90. Was Chandragupta a concubine’s son? Was he not a Kshatriya? What
matters though! Chandragupta could have said with justifiable pride, “More
than any of you, nominal caste-born Kshatriyas, who bowed your heads to
the Mlenchchas, the Greek emperor and his commanders, I, a ‘peerless’
Chandragupta, have a greater claim to being a Kshatriya in as much as with

my sword, I have completely vanquished those very Mlenchchas in every
battlefield.” With the same haughty affront of Kama, he could have flung in
the face of those railing enemies, the following words:
सूतो वा सूत पुत्रों वा यो वा को वा भवाम्यहम्
दैवायत्तं कुले जन्म मदायत्तं तु पौरुषम॥
वेणोसंहार of Bhatta Narayan, Act III, 37
[“ Whether a charioteer or a charioteer’s son, or whoever (else) I may be,
(that is of no consequence!) Birth in a (noble) family depends on fate; but
manliness depends on me!”]
91. The son of Mura is a Maurya! That is precisely why Chandragupta is
called a Maurya. Proud of his maternal extraction, Chandragupta designated
his royal family as Maurya and immortalized the name of his mother,
Muradevi, in Indian history. The Maurya emperors accepted the same
Moriya caste too (one traded in peacocks) that belonged to his mother. The
guardian deity of the Maurya family is also a ‘peacock’. This fact is
corroborated by rock inscriptions. The Ashoka pillar found at Nandangad
bears at the foot, a picture of a peacock. The stories from the life of Ashoka
inscribed on the celebrated ‘stupas’ at Sanchi have similar figures of
peacocks carved beside them.
The Emperor of Magadha
92. Mahapadmanand was the emperor ruling at that time over the vast
Magadha empire. He was already very unpopular because of his many vices.
His subjects were exasperated because of the heavy taxes, levied on them, in
order to satisfy his lust for gold. People called him Dhananand instead of
Mahapadmanand, in order to deride him for his excessive lust for money. He
could come to the throne because he happened to be the brother of the
earlier emperor, but he had not a single virtue, fit for an emperor. He would
have proved his worth had he but taken up the challenge of Alexander and
crushed him in the Panchanad, when the latter had marched on India, and
when he had proudly declared his intention of conquering Magadha and
becoming the emperor of India. He should have at least undertaken such a
great expedition as to overthrow the Greeks, and free the Indian territory
subjugated by them to deserve the title of an emperor! But he did nothing of
the kind, and meekly swallowed the insult hurled at him by Alexander! This
cowardliness on his part made, on the one hand, every self-respecting and
nationalist Indian despise him, while, on the other, made him crafty. He

hated the selfless national politicians. In order to undermine their prestige,
he insulted them publicly. A really capable person was invariably an object
of his hatred and was subjected to malicious treatment.
93. From this Mahapadmanand, it is said his concubine, Mura, had the
illustrious son, Chandragupta. Some anecdotes pertaining to
Chandragupta’s childhood are available, but they are far too few and merely
hearsay stories. What appears to be certain is only this, that the cowardly
but crafty Mahapadmanand began to fear the young Chandragupta, shining
with his sharp wit, his daring and ambitious spirit, seeking to exercise his
rights as the heir to the throne, bastard as he was. He feared that under the
leadership of this unrestrained bastard son, his antagonists would not fail to
dethrone him! Mahapadmanand very well knew how his very Nanda
forerunners had vanquished the original Shishunag dynasty of Magadha and
usurped the throne! Under some such apprehension, there appears to have
occurred some clash that Mahapadmanand used as a pretext to banish
Chandragupta out of the precincts of the Magadha empire. The intervening
account is permanently lost to oblivion. Hereafter, Chandragupta makes his
appearance in the University of Taxila (Takshashila) as a royal prince
having his lessons in politics and the science and art of war. An anecdote
that is current in that region viz. that he got access to this university mainly
through the good offices of the renowned and learned Arya Chanakya may
have some grain of truth in it. Chandragupta had already been studying in
the manner described above at this university for about six or seven years
when Alexander attacked India. There, for the first time, this illustrious
disciple of Chanakya, this young Chandragupta, began to shine with his
exceptional brilliance in the sacred national conspiracy, that was being
hatched by the Indian patriots and politicians to avenge the insults heaped
on the Indian nation by the Greeks and to liberate the territory lost to them.
A Marvellous half-hour in History
94. Young Chandragupta seems to have secretly wandered through the
Greek camps in order to study the peculiar features of the Greek armoury,
the Greek military formations and war strategy. For, he was once caught by
the Greek sentries on suspicion that he was reconnoitring in the emperor’s
camp. The report reached Alexander himself, and the Macedonian emperor
summoned the disguised Indian youth to his presence. Some even think that
the said youth went to see Alexander by previous appointment.

95. That valiant Macedonian supreme commander and emperor
    Alexander, in his thirties, and the future Indian captain-general and emperor
    Chandragupta just on the threshold of his twenties, but as yet merely a
    wandering nonentity, stood face-to-face, sizing up each other for a few
    moments! It appeared as if two lustrous suns, one fast approaching his
    zenith and the other, not as yet risen fully, out of the misty shroud of the
    early dawn, were staring at each other’s eyes.
96. This strange interview is not likely to have lasted for more than half an
    hour. But it has truly proved to be a historical marvel of perennial interest!
97. Even while almost all the Greek writers allude to this strange
    interview, nobody can say for certain what exactly transpired between the
    two, or what words were exchanged between them. One or two of them
    write only this much that Chandragupta said distinctly that he was related to
    the royal family of Magadha, or something to that effect. This much is
    certain that to the question put by Alexander, Chandragupta answered
    boldly and resolutely! In that strange parley, something went wrong and
    Alexander ordered the youth to be taken out of the camp forthwith.
    Instantly, the fiery youth left the camp, but in the meanwhile, when
    Alexander changed his mind and called again for the youth in his presence,
    he was nowhere to be found again.
    The Story of Chanakya’s Family
98. Arya Chanakya was born in a Brahmin family and his name was
    Vishnugupta. His name Chanakya must have probably been derived from
    his native town of Chanak. But he is more particularly known by his name
    Chanakya, Koutilya is one more name by which he is equally well-known.
    His great and abiding work is known as Koutiliya Arthashastra. Koutilya
    must have been formed from his original family (गोत्र नाम) name Kutal.
    He was well-versed in almost all the sciences of the time and was renowned
    at the University of Taxila and also amongst the learned circles of India, as
    a great scholar. He was ugly in apearance. Later on, when after the imperial
    revolution of Magadha, his name gained great fame not only all over India,
    but even in Greece and other foreign countries as the guide and preceptor of
    Chandragupta’s early years, and later as the chief minister of the Indian
    empire, several hearsay stories sprang up as to his early age, as they did
    regarding Chandragupta and Alexander. Several references to them based
    on solid grounds or otherwise are to be found in many literary works,
    dramas, folklores written many centuries after the deaths of both

Chandragupta and Chanakya. These references in Jain, Buddhist and Vedic
literatures are not wholly reliable. Even in a Sanskrit drama, his character
has been depicted in an unrealistic manner, for the sake of dramatic effect.
As such, the ridiculous descriptions of his ugliness, or of his ungainly teeth,
or the childish reports that he picked up from amongst the uneducated rustic
children playing in the street one reckless Chandragupta, to be made the
future emperor of India simply because he took a fancy for the child, or
because his knowledge of palmistry guided his choice, cannot be taken as
historical truths. However, more discerning research-workers should
necessarily investigate if there is any basis for them.
The Perverted Report of Chanakya’s vow
99. One such anecdote about Arya Chanakya should be discussed here as
an illustration. For, it is being taught in the present-day schools in that very
perverted form. The said anecdote purports to say that because he became
famous as a great scholar in the University of Taxila (Takshashila) and the
regions round about, Arya Chanakya was appointed the Chairman of the
Grants Commission (दानाध्यक्ष) in the royal palace of Mahapadmanand at
Pataliputra. While he was working in that high office, Emperor
Mahapadmanand came there one day on his inspection rounds. But he
laughed at his teethless ugly mouth and his unshapely body, at which
Chanakya took a great affront. Therefore, Nanda pulled him down instantly
and, as is written in some books, pulled his tuft of hair, till it was uprooted
and finally ordered him to be driven out of the palace. The fiery Brahmin
instantly retorted saying, “I shall drag you down from your throne and
completely destroy the Nanda dynasty and then and then alone shall tie up
my tuft of hair.” With this grave vow, he marched straight out of the palace.
100. But let it be remembered that Emperor Nanda had come there to
inspect the work of the Charity Department, not to visit a beauty parlour!
How is it plausible, then, that Mahapadmanand, who had himself appointed
that learned scholar to the high office of the Chairman of the Charitable
Grants Department, would now say that because of his ugly features Arya
Chanakya was unfit for that post? The office of the Chairman of the said
Grants Department required the expert knowledge of the religious sciences
and judicial procedure, not physical beauty! But there is a more potent
objection than this one to disprove this foolish anecdote. This anecdote
implies that Chanakya revolted against Emperor Nanda, because of his
personal insult alone, and that, had he not been thus insulted, he would have

remained a loyal servant of Mahapadmanand, that the India-wide revolution
that he successfully brought about, was not for the sake of freeing the
Indian land from the foreign Mlenchcha domination, but only to avenge his
personal insult! For this very reason, this anecdote is clearly perverted.
101. When as a strategy in politics, Shivaji went to Agra accepting the
overlordship of Aurangzeb, the latter insulted him, and when there was a
clash of words, Shivaji was put under arrest. But Shivaji slipped away most
miraculously and skilfully, and declared war against Aurangzeb. If, after
telling this story, any wiseacre were to conclude that it was because he was
personally insulted, that Shivaji bore a grudge against Aurangzeb and
established an independent kingdom for himself, that he had no higher
motive of the emancipation of his religion and country, it would be the
height of absurdity and foolishness. Equally absurd and foolish would it be
to say that it was only to avenge his personal insult by Emperor Nanda, that
Arya Chanakya brought about a political revolution by exterminating the
Nanda dynasty.
That Anecdote should be Explained thus
102. It is not true to say that because of his personal insult, Shivaji
revolted against Aurangzeb. On the contrary, Aurangzeb had taken a fright
that it was to overthrow his alien religious domination, that Shivaji had
taken arms, fired as he was with a glowing fervour for Hindutwa. That is
why, he insulted Shivaji and relegated him to captivity! In a similar way,
because Mahapadmanand had secret reports that, availing himself of the
weakness of the reigning monarch, Arya Chanakya was busy conspiring
against him so as to overthrow the Nanda empire, the Emperor Nanda
insulted him in his royal palace, and at that very moment, the illustrious
Brahmin Arya Chanakya retorted boldly, "If I am a true Chanakya I shall
see to it that your tyrannical rule is overthrown so that Bharat might
prosper." This is how the anecdote should be explained.
103. A very solid proof for this is available to us in the very Koutiliya
Arthashastra written by Chanakya himself. While introducing the writer, it
is said (in the very book):
चाणक्य इति विख्यातः श्रोत्रीयः सर्वधर्मविद्
—मुद्राराक्षस उपोद्घात Telang's edition p.44
येन शस्त्रं व शास्त्रं च नन्दराज गताच भूः ॥

अमर्षेणोरुधृतान्याशु तेन शास्त्रमिदं कृतम्॥
—अर्थशास्त्र p. 429
“He who destroyed the Nanda and rejuvenated the national armed strength
as also the national scientific advance which were decaying under the
Nanda regime, and thus caused the uplift of his Bharatbhoomi, has written
this treatise.” He has not used even a single word in the introductory lines to
say that he destroyed Nanda to avenge his personal insult. It is for the
progress and prosperity of his own nation and motherland, that Nanda was
destroyed! Chanakya’s great work itself tells it clearly!
104. The anecdote that is told in a downright dramatic way perhaps means
only this, that his original nationalistic animus towards Nanda was whetted
more because of this personal insult.
Chanakya’s Political Activities Preceded Alexander’s onslaught
105. Chanakya had been living in the vicinity of Taxila for good many
years before the aggression of Alexander. He had a first-hand knowledge of
the political situation in the Bharatiya frontier territories right up to the
Indus.
106. Just adjoining the borderland of India had stretched far and wide,
the unitary and centrally well-organised nation, inimical to India.
Chanakya was shrewd enough to understand that in the event of an
aggression by such a well-organised and inimical country, the small native
democracies and monarchies from the Panchanad to the Indus would
utterly fail in the open battlefield, if they were to fight separately.
The Greek city-states too perished precisely for this reason
107. Just then a practical demonstration of the above-mentioned axiom
took place in Greece. The moment the Persian Emperor invaded Greece, the
small Greek city-states like their prototypes in India, were convulsed to
their bones. In the end, it is only when Philip and Alexander conquered all
of those separatist Greek city-states, forged them into a powerful empire,
was it possible for them to vanquish the Persian empire. Chanakya was not
slow to understand its significance.
108. He arrived at the firm conviction that vis-a-vis a powerful and
extensive inimical empire as its neighbour, India had only one way to
defend its independence and make its administrative machinery strong
enough to withstand any foreign aggression and that was to boil down all

the smaller monarchies and republics and to forge out of them, a centralized
unitary and strong empire.
For the Entire Undivided India
108A. But there was not a single Indian monarchy or republic throughout
the whole of the region right from Gandhar, Punjab to the Indus delta,
which could execute this plan of Chanakya, who had already appraised
their capability and inclination. Naturally, his next choice fell on the only
mighty empire of North India, namely Magadha. His head full of plans for
the future Indian revolution, Arya Chanakya came again to Magadha in
order to study secretly the political situation, visiting every place right from
a poor man’s cottage to the royal palace. As such, he was trying to get
access to the King’s court on some pretext or the other. When the question
of the appointment of Arya Chanakya as the Chairman of the ‘Grants’
Department’ (दानाध्यक्ष) was mooted, Nanda did not object to it, because
till then, he had known nothing else of Arya Chanakya, but of his
scholarship. This appointment greatly helped Arya Chanakya perfect his
secret revolutionary plans.
109. But before long, Emperor Nanda had reports that Arya Chanakya
was not a scholar pure and simple, but an expert organiser of secret plots
and was at that time busy plotting against him. Enraged at this, he publicly
insulted Arya Chanakya as already told before, deprived him of his
authority as the Chairman of the Grant’s Department, and expelled him out
of his imperial precincts. Being thus outlawed, Chanakya returned again to
Taxila.
110. In the meanwhile, the young bastard son Chandragupta, being exiled,
as has been already told, from the Magadhan court by Emperor Nanda,
went to Taxila and joined Chanakya—an incident that proved most
favourable to that patriot’s ambitious plans of establishing an all-India
empire.
Why did Chanakya back Chandragupta alone?
111. If he were to dethrone the weak and wicked Nanda, and crown in his
place on the throne of the Magadha empire any outsider, the tradition-
loving important persons from amongst the feudatories, the Indian princes
and even the common people would probably have opposed vehemently,
even though the chosen person had been endowed with the most excellent
qualities, whereas Chandragupta, though not a lawful royal prince, had yet
some native blood-relation to the throne as the bastard son of the Emperor

of Magadha. He was, moreover, endowed with valour and other qualities of
head and heart. As such, the arch-diplomat Chanakya shrewdly guessed that
even these votaries of tradition were far less likely to oppose
Chandragupta’s election to the throne of Magadha. He, therefore,
determined to champion the claim of Chandragupta to the emperorship of
Magadha—why even to that of the whole of India.
112. While the grand plan of an India-wide empire of Chanakya-and-
Chandragupta was thus being set afoot, the unfortunate event of a foreign
invasion was reported towards Persia. Alexander had already destroyed the
empire of Persia and had invaded India. Although as has been related in the
foregoing pages, he was staunchly opposed by the Bharatiya valour and
forced to retreat home, it was plain that Alexander’s well organised
imperial military might was not totally annulled.
113. Even out of this evil, some good did emerge. The republican subjects
of the frontier regions, with their faith in democratic principles shaken
rudely by the heavy knock of a foreign invasion and the bloody wars that
followed, began to agree with Chanakya and other patriotic prophets that
national independence was in peril, unless a countrywide Indian empire
was established on the lines of the vast, highly centralized well-organized
and unitary form of empire of the enemy.
114. The first happy sign of this revolutionary spirit was seen in the
general uprising throughout the smaller states and republics, conquered by
Alexander and annexed to his empire and in the fact that hardly within six
months or a year of Alexander’s death, these Indian territories shook off
the foreign rule and became independent. Justin, an ancient renowned
writer, credits the leadership of Chandragupta with the authorship of this
wonderful and noble collective uprising. “India after the death of
Alexander had shaken, as it were, the yoke of servitude from its neck and
put his governors to death. The author of this liberation was Sandrocottus.”
The ‘Sandrocottus’ of this quotation is Chandragupta. The Greeks
pronounced the name of Chandragupta in this very way.
The only way to repel re-invasion?
115. Although the general rising in these frontier provinces was successful
under the guidance of Chandragupta, Chanakya and others, the followers of
Chanakya began to warn all princes and political leaders, that it had not as
yet made Indian independence completely safe from the future Greek
onslaught. They went on preaching everywhere that Alexander himself had

vowed till the day of his death, that he would invade India once again and
conquer it thoroughly, that the chief officers of his state and commanders
were at war with one another for the division of the Greek empire, that the
triumphant one among them who would ascend the throne at Babylon
would not fail to attack India with an army more powerful than before, and
that the first victims to that aggression would be these very people, if they
remained disunited as separate Rajakas (monarchies) and Prajakas
(republics). But if they availed themselves of this opportunity of the civil
feuds of the Greeks, and they could merge the whole of India into a strong
empire with an efficient administration at the centre, this new Indian
empire, stronger than that of the Greeks, could very easily beat the
Mlenchchas, were they to come once again aggressively. Hence, they said
India should be built into one strong nation!
Invasion of Chandragupta and Chanakya on Magadha
116. Without wasting even a single moment of the golden opportunity of
the Greek internecine wars, Chandragupta and other followers of Chanakya
began openly to raise a powerful army to march first of all against
Magadha, according to Chanakya’s plan of the political revolution. A few
but very telling references to this fact are to be found in the critique named
‘Mahavamsha’. From these and from other sources, it appears that this
invading army of Chandragupta was mainly composed of the soldiers from
Panchanad, the Pauravas and the republics that were inspired with the
preaching of Chanakya for a unitary Indian empire. In order to enlist the
sympathies of the Parvateshwara, i.e. King Paurav, who was a powerful
king in those provinces, Chanakya is said to have met him secretly. As
Alexander’s sway had been completely thrown off from the Indian
territories, King Paurav was no longer a subordinate satrap of the Greeks.
From stray references in some books, it appears that not only King Paurav
offered his support for Chanakya’s cause, but some wealthy people too
helped him actively. Chanakya offered the command of the whole army to
Chandragupta. After establishing their hold on all possible regions of
Panchanad, they marched speedily on Magadha. The Indian populace and
the local powers disgusted with and enraged at the tyrannical and weak rule
of Nanda, and inspired by Chanakya’s ideal of a strong unitary empire of
the whole of India, joined Chandragupta’s army as it marched ahead
fighting.