Ponniyin Selvan vs real history

Tamilian friends,

Would much appreciate if you could give a rundown of the real history behind the book before I set out to buy. All I know is what I got from high school textbooks.

Having read quite a few MBh retellings, I have a great deal of skepticism with re: historical fiction. Many readers believe

Panchali called Karna suthaputra

She called Suyodhana blind

Krishna chastised Panchali

Karna was refused an education

Karna was poor

Yudhistira

So on and so forth

All lies.

Then there was a movie called Oru Vadakkan Veeragatha in Malayalam which told the story of Unniyarcha. That woman was a warrior and martial arts expert and a skilled swordsman, who rescued her husband and troops. She was turned into a manipulative b**** and the villain into a tragic hero. To this day, there are Mallus who believe that version.

Mani Ratnam himself has done this in Thalapathi, whitewashing Surya/Karna and ignoring his sexual assault. He also romantically paired the assault survivor with that wannabe rapist.

Before reading/watching Ponniyin Selvan, would love to know the actual history. Any discrepancies, etc.

Please?

Not a Tamilian but from what I gathered, it seems it’s a fictional story about the real historical character PS Chola who stayed away from the throne despite being the first in line for unknown reasons. The novel simply explored that reason to be the politics played behind the scenes by the two women- the antagonist and the protagonist.

Tamilian here. I have read Ponniyin selvan. PS, at the best can be called as Historical Fiction . The Characters were real( Adhitha Karikalan, Kundhavi and Arul mozhi Aka PS, Madurantaka) and Nandhini is fictional. The author did carry out extensive research but again, most of it is fiction. It also white washes Cholas. But all kingdoms were built graves of millions, and cholas are no exception. Though, they built temples which till now exists, as a sample for their exceptional architecture.I read it long back ( at least 12-15 years 😂) and I couldn't sleep until I finished all 5 volumes. Don't know if I might have same enthusiasm in me. If you want to read, go ahead, you won't regret it. Just read it as any other fiction. Most of the characters ( the names) are real but that's about it.

Originally posted by: SillyPepper

Tamilian here. I have read Ponniyin selvan. PS, at the best can be called as Historical Fiction . The Characters were real( Adhitha Karikalan, Kundhavi and Arul mozhi Aka PS, Madurantaka) and Nandhini is fictional. The author did carry out extensive research but again, most of it is fiction. It also white washes Cholas. But all kingdoms were built graves of millions, and cholas are no exception. Though, they built temples which till now exists, as a sample for their exceptional architecture.I read it long back ( at least 12-15 years 😂) and I couldn't sleep until I finished all 5 volumes. Don't know if I might have same enthusiasm in me. If you want to read, go ahead, you won't regret it. Just read it as any other fiction. Most of the characters ( the names) are real but that's about it.

Thanks so much. Going to watch and read.

Most of the characters are real except Nandini(one of the best fictional women characters) There is a mystery to his ascending the throne as he was not the first born and there was huge conflict after his grandfather's death on the crown succession.

Some say that there were multiple conspiracy theories on him attaining the throne(murders) etc.

But once he ascended the throne he was one among the most famous rulers of Chola from conquering lands, to architecture (brihadeeshwara) also supposed to be one of the best administrator

my point of puzzlement was the depiction of pandyas ( I read the books ages ago so dont remember if it was so in the books),

they are also as great as cholas with madurai as their seat and great temples and architecture to their credit,

here they are like some jungle folk and very "tribal" while cholas are like kings

of course they are defeated in exile but still

Originally posted by: vcs17

my point of puzzlement was the depiction of pandyas ( I read the books ages ago so dont remember if it was so in the books),

they are also as great as cholas with madurai as their seat and great temples and architecture to their credit,

here they are like some jungle folk and very "tribal" while cholas are like kings

of course they are defeated in exile but still

This is what I was asking. A lot of these historical adaptations tend to be biased.

Pandya dynasty extended back to Iron Age if Mahabharata is taken at its word. Highly doubt they were tribals.

Time to brush up on my high school history 😆.

Originally posted by: HearMeRoar

This is what I was asking. A lot of these historical adaptations tend to be biased.

Pandya dynasty extended back to Iron Age if Mahabharata is taken at its word. Highly doubt they were tribals.

Time to brush up on my high school history 😆.

yeah, they are equals, rastrakutas, pallavas are all great dynasties

if chola had tanjavur, pandyas had madurai

as others said this is fiction with some historical and some fictitous figures thrown in

the setting is historical

which is why i am surprised ppl are saying this is our history

it is historical fiction

once it is fiction, there will be the authors perspective

even the movie is books adaptation, so directors pespective is also there

Originally posted by: vcs17

yeah, they are equals, rastrakutas, pallavas are all great dynasties

if chola had tanjavur, pandyas had madurai

as others said this is fiction with some historical and some fictitous figures thrown in

the setting is historical

which is why i am surprised ppl are saying this is our history

it is historical fiction

once it is fiction, there will be the authors perspective

even the movie is books adaptation, so directors pespective is also there

And that's a source of annoyance for me. Audience ends up believing these adaptations over actual history. Am still not over Vadakkan Veeragatha's impact😆. I think you're a Mallu too, so you'll know what I mean.

Originally posted by: HearMeRoar

And that's a source of annoyance for me. Audience ends up believing these adaptations over actual history. Am still not over Vadakkan Veeragatha's impact😆. I think you're a Mallu too, so you'll know what I mean.

i am not mallu but i understand, i have given up, they have no comprehension of relatives, there is a whole spectrum, like if baahubali is fiction/fantasy doesnt mean ps is on other end 😆

unfortunate state, actually the so called recent historicals are all like this