Top

Many errors in Gautamiputra Satakarni

Experts seek withdrawal of tax waiver.

Hyderabad: Leaders of Telangana associations, including historians, have found fault with the Telangana government’s decision to waive entertainment tax for a historically inaccurate movie like Gautamiputra Satakarni.

Addressing a news conference here, leaders of various Telangana fora, led by Captain L. Panduranga Reddy, demanded an immediate withdrawal of the tax sop.

“We have no problem with the film if they stop claiming it as a historical film. They must admit that it is a fictional movie,” he told this newspaper.

Mr Reddy, who is the president of Voice of Telangana, said that the movie misleads people into believing that Gautamiputra Satakarni is a Telugu.

“In fact, there is a wrong notion that the Satavahanas were Telugu people; for a long time, they had ruled their kingdom from an area, which is currently in Maharashtra,” he said.

For most part of their history, the kings of the Satavahana dyna-sty had ruled their kingdom from Paithan and not Kotilingala as depicted in the movie.

While there are some claims the Satavahana rulers might have ruled from Kotilingala on the basis of coins being found there, Mr Reddy said that it is highly inaccurate to say this because one cannot claim that the Roman empire had extended till Tamil Nadu coast as some Roman coins were found there.

Other factual errors in the film include the use of stirrups by horse riders when stirrups were not known to Indians at that time.

He said Demitrius was shown in the film as fighting against Gautamiputra Satakarni. However, he said Demitrius is not a contemporary of Gautamiputra Satakarni as there exists a gap of hundreds of years.

The Shakas continued in power until the early 5th Century AD and are credited with the introduction of the Shaka era in 78 AD. The Shaka era begins in 78 AD, not the Satavahana era.

Mr Reddy said the Satavahana did not shift their capital at the peak of their rule.

“It was Rudradaman, a Saka ruler from Western Kshatrapa dynasty, who defeated Pula-mavi and pushed him down to the south — coastal AP. As a result, Pulamavi made Dhara-nikota his capital.”

“This means Pulamavi came to Andhra as a fugitive, not as a conqueror, which is what the film tries to convey,” he said.

He said there is also no evidence to show that Gautamiputra Satakarni had annexed Magadha as shown in the film or he ruled the entire India.

( Source : Deccan Chronicle. )
Next Story