Mohenjo-Daro Updates-Thread closed - Page 57

The only reason we've been incessantly posting #MohenjoDaroTrailer reactions is to show how the West is embracing it and lauding it for its visual brilliance, the not at all wrong VFX,the costumes that instantaneously giving them a pre-historic feeling and of course the man called Hrithik Roshan whose magical screen presence pulls you like magnet.Something that a section of our Indian audiences are failing to as they found new side to their persona, that is of a scholar, aiming to protect our historical heritage,our glorious past demolished by a Bollywood film resulting them to share their fragments of information's on social media platforms, earning them momentary fame. But the question is how well researched they themselves are?

Objections have been raised about the modern treatment of the civilisation in the trailer forgetting the fact that its too early to conclude on the treatment of the civilisation before watching the movie.But those who objected forgot that it was an urban civilisation so much so that the city was created with engineered town planning by skilled urban town planners that boasts of The Great Bath, presence of several wells and nearly every house contained a bathing area and drainage system. As per their objection even if the civilisation received a modern treatment,going by the historical facts it was indeed a modern civilisation belonging to the proto-historic period.The only question that arises's: What's the problem with its modern depiction then?

Another objection is raised with the presence of horses in the trailer as its claimed that horses came with the invasion of Aryans very much unlike what is shown in the trailer. But archaeologists indeed got hold of seals depicting unicorns.Here's quoting an article by Archaeology Online that provides evidences that horses were indeed present in #MohenjoDaro period:

"In India the ... true horse is reported from the Neolithic levels at Kodekal [dist. Gulbarga of Karnataka] and Hallur [dist. Raichur of Karnataka] and the late Harappa levels at Mohenjo-daro (Sewell and Guha, 1931) and Ropar and at Harappa, Lothal and numerous other sites. ... Recently bones of Equus caballus have also been reported from the proto-Harappa site of
Malvan in Gujarat.

Mortimer Wheeler, a flamboyant proponent of the Aryan invasion theory if ever there was one, admitted long ago that "it is likely enough that camel, horse and ass were in fact a familiar feature of the Indus caravan."2 The well- known archaeologist B. B. Lal refers to a number of horse teeth and bones reported from Kalibangan, Ropar, Malvan and Lothal.3 Another senior archaeologist, S. P. Gupta, adds further details on those finds, including early ones.4 In the case of Lothal, the archaeozoologist Bhola Nath certified the identification of a tooth;5 he also made similar observations regarding bones from #MohenjoDaro and #Harappa.

A. K. Sharma's well-known identification of horse remains at Surkotada (in Katchchh) was endorsed by the late Hungarian archaeozoologist Sndor Bknyi, an internationally respected authority in the field; in 1991, taking care to distinguish them from those of the local wild ass (khur), he confirmed several of them to be "remnants of true horses,"7 and what is more, domesticated horses."

Fingers shave been raised on the costumes of the films. The leading lady Pooja Hegde received flack for her elaborate silk costume and headdresses. Here's what Jane McIntosh {Ph.D in Indian Archeology from Cambridge University,author of A Peaceful Realm : The Rise And Fall of the Indus Civilization and The Ancient Indus Valley: New Perspectives(Understanding Ancient Civilisation)} has to say about the clothes of the Indus people:

"Textiles are rarely preserved and Harappan figurines are usually unclothed, so there is not much evidence of Harappan clothing. Small fragments of cloth preserved in the corrosion products of metal objects show that the Harappans wove a range of grades of cotton cloth. Flax was grown and may have been used for fibres (alternatively it was grown for its oil seed). Native Indian species of silkworm may have been utilised for silk (inferior to Chinese silk), as they were a little later in South Asia. It is not known whether the Harappans raised woolly sheep, but their trade with Mesopotamia probably brought them abundant supplies of Mesopotamian woollen textiles. The Harappans also probably continued the earlier tradition of making clothing from leather. Dyeing facilities indicate that cotton cloth was probably dyed a range of colours, although there is only one surviving fragment of coloured cloth, dyed red with madder; it is likely that indigo and turmeric were also used as dyes.

The limited depictions of clothing show that men wore a cloth around the waist, resembling a modern dhoti and like it, often passed between the legs and tucked up behind. The so-called "Priest-king" and other stone figures also wore a long robe over the left shoulder.Some male figurines are shown wearing a turban. Woman's clothing seems to have been a knee-length skirt. Figurines and finds in graves show that Harappans (Indus Valley people) of both sexes wore jewellery: hair fillets, bead necklaces and bangles for men; bangles, earrings, rings, anklets, belts made of strings of beads, pendants, chokers and numerous necklaces for women, as well as elaborate hairstyles and headdresses."

Richard Meadow states its totally wrong to conclude what the Indus people actually wore based on the figurines and iconographies. Here's what he has to say:

" The only evidence we have is from iconography and figurines as far as dress styles are concerned, and it is not sure that these even represent what was worn by everyday people. Quite possibly dress may have been based on lengths of cloth that were folded and draped in different ways. Such cloth could have been made of linen, cotton, or wool/animal hair. Skins also may have been used for cold weather and to make items like belts, quivers, etc. Reeds/straw may have been woven for foot wear, although how often foot wear may have been used is not known. Evidence comes not so much from preserved textiles but from pseudomorphs preserved because of proximity to copper and from impressions made into clay. An early form of silk was used to string tiny beads and wound copper necklaces."

As far as the objection regarding the material of the film's leading lady, Pooja Hegde is concerned archaeologists hint to availability of Silk in Indus Valley Civilisation. Here's what Good Kenoyer has to say about the same:

"Recent work at Harappa (e.g., Meadow and Kenoyer 2005, 2008) has been carried out by the Harappa Archaeological Research Project (HARP), directed by Richard H. Meadow (Harvard University), Jonathan Mark Kenoyer (University of Wisconsin at Madison), and Rita P. Wright (New York University) in collaboration with the Department of Archaeology and Museums of the Government of Pakistan. A new study of artefacts recovered from the 1999 and 2000 seasons at the site has revealed the presence of silk. The silk is not degummed but contains sericin-coated twinned brins, or filaments, of fibroin. Micromorphological study indicates that the silk derived from wild silkmoth species rather than Bombyx mori. To assess the culture-historical significance of these new silk finds we take into account several wild silkmoth species known to South Asia, understanding that the real nature and extent of sericulture in antiquity is at present unknown."

Those complained about the film's leading man Hrithik Roshan's short hairs, archaeologists have found blades in the sites of excavations. Hence it wouldn't be difficult to make an assumption that not all men sported long hairs, some rooted to short hairs all thanks to the blades.

Lastly, as far as the kiss between Hrithik Roshan and Pooja Hegde is concerned, the the society back then were pretty liberal.The civilisation is faceless as most of is destroyed and rests mostly on assumptions on the basis of availability of the remains. Its not difficult to digest an act of love between a man and a woman as love existed then as much as it exists now. And a filmmaker is allowed of this much creative liberty as it is a movie not a documentary.

We, as audiences should be proud of Mr. Gowariker for attempting something no one has ever dared to.The entire team of MohenjoDaro deserves applause for attempting to bringing to life of a forgotten era.Asutosh Gowariker received unnecessary flack for Jodhaa-Akbar over the name of the Hindu Rajputh Jodhaa Bai. the film even faced ban in several cities, only to be silenced by everyone including the descendants of the Royal Rajput Princess's family who questioned the directors research only to get a green signal later by lifting the ban. So before questioning Asutosh's research for MohenjoDaro here is what the director has to say about the same:

"Since this was a make believe world so when I started my research, during the initial phase, I came across Mr. Jonathan Mark Kenoyer's books Ancient India: Land of Mystery' and 'Excavations at Mohenjo Daro'. I immediately got in touch with Mr. Kenoyer, Dept. of Anthropology, University of Wisconsin to seek his assistance. He has worked at the Mohenjo Daro excavation site for the past 35 years. To my good fortune, he agreed to participate to help me realize the true potential of the story on film. He then suggested to me other esteemed names who could give me inputs on the undeciphered Sindhu script, culture, the town planning and any and every other aspect that seems necessary. They were -R. S. Bisht, Ex-Director, ASI; Prof. Vasant Shinde Jt. Director, Puna University; Dr. P. Ajithprasad, Dept. of Archaeology and Ancient History, MSU, Baroda; K. Krishnan, Dept. of Archaeology, MSU, Baroda; and V.N.Prabhakar, Deputy Superintending Archaeologist, Aurangabad. It was wonderful that they could impart their study, analysis and knowledge to this project."

So here's a suggestion, don't judge the film by watching its trailer. And before questioning its authenticity question your own knowledge of history.