Skip to main content

Rewrite Indian history by all means. But do commissioned historians have open minds?

By Mohan Guruswamy* 

There is one advantage that less educated people have over the highly educated. It is that they are more likely to have open minds. But there is always the danger that the open mind can actually be an empty mind. When the RSS' exercise of rewriting history began, Smriti Irani (then HRD minister) requested us not to judge her by her meager education but by her performance. But the RSS has on its agenda to rewrite Indian history and complete the project begun by the astrology believing physics professor from Allahabad University, Dr. Murli Manohar Joshi.
Historical revisionism is the process of rewriting history to correct the misinterpretations of the past or for an ideological purpose. Plato wrote that: “those who tell stories also hold the power.” The corollary to this is that those who hold power inevitably want to re-interpret old stories. British scholars, who seemed genuinely interested in how this country evolved, wrote most of modern India’s history. Indian rulers, foreign and Indian, were generally more concerned with their own periods, and often change of dynasties meant loss of continuity. Indians also did not leave historical records nor did they treasure them. Charles Allen in his book “Ashoka: The Search for India’s Lost Emperor” writes about how the story of India’s greatest emperor and his dramatic life had to be “prised out from the crevices of the past.” Amazing isn’t it to realize that till about two centuries ago Ashoka, now so central to our understanding of our perception of ourselves, was lost to our consciousness? It was people like the ICS officer, James Prinsep, who deciphered Brahmi and re-introduced Ashoka to us.
As a young student in a Catholic school, in recently independent India, the first history lessons imparted to me told that story, particularly the period of the last occupation by the British, somewhat differently. According to this, British rule was a most benign and beneficial period for Indians. This could even be true for social reforms like the abolition of sati and the building of great canal systems and railways happened during this period. The unification of India into one great political entity also happened in this period. Above all, southern India came under Delhi’s imperial rule for the first time.
In 1957 the centennial celebrations of the First Indian War of Independence happened and I suddenly discovered that what my history textbook was having me believe was wrong. This historical revisionism is legitimate as it set out to correct the narrative by looking at the same events with a different perspective. It is difficult to be entirely objective when writing history. But when history is rewritten without being subject to the rigors of academic and scientific discipline, it would be nothing short of charlatanism.
In recent years, The Sangh Parivar historians have been seeking to revise history to suit some of their ideological peculiarities. Their intellectuals are collectively at work to debunk the Aryan invasion theories (AIT), which have been amply evidenced by linguists, archeologists and of late by geneticists. Their theory is that Aryans migrated from India. In their view: “The long-puzzling remains of Harappa and Mohenjo-Daro, for example, discovered after the AIT was developed, suggested practices that are similar to those of contemporary Hinduism, undercutting the belief that Hinduism was a religion imposed from the outside into the subcontinent.”
A 2009 study carried out by David Reich, a professor of genetics at the Harvard Medical School and the CSIR-Centre for Cellular and Molecular Biology (CCMB) in Hyderabad, based on an analysis of 25 different Indian population groups, found that all populations in India showed evidence of a genetic mixing of two ancestral groups. The Ancestral North Indians (ANI), who are related to central Asians, middle easterners, Caucasians, and Europeans; and the Ancestral South Indians (ASI), who are primarily from the sub-continent. The researchers, by measuring the lengths of the segments of ANI and ASI ancestry in Indian genomes, were able to obtain precise estimates of when this population mixture occurred. They found that it started 4,200 years ago — the Indus Valley civilization was waning then, and huge migrations were occurring across north India, which might have caused the inter-marrying. Clearly there were people here, but they were not Aryans. But this runs counter to long cherished Sangh Parivar notions of who we are?
Whatever be the version of history that emerges, this one or that of Romilla Thapar, Irfan Habib and others, what will still remain is a history focused on the people of the Indo-Gangetic plain. And that is my real grouse. Take for instance the two volumes of The History of India by Percival Spear and Romilla Thapar. Of the twenty-four chapters twenty-one are about the peoples who, either lived in or kept conquering the Indo-Gangetic plain.
South Indian history that is fairly distinct and certainly more glorious than the tale of defeat after defeat in northern India gets only three chapters. And mind you the Deccan region now accounts for almost forty percent of India’s population. Little is told about regions like Orissa and Bengal while Assam hardly figures. Of course as can be expected there is not very much written about the original and autochthonous pre-Aryan and pre-Dravidian people. Even today our indigenous people account for about 12% of the population and are concentrated in specific regions.
If Spear and Thapar are reticent about acknowledging the role of other regions in shaping modern India, AL Basham and SAA Rizvi in their two volume effort “The Wonder That Was India” have even less time and space for other regions and their contribution to the composite culture and the multi-dimensional character of the Indian nation. Rizvi’s volume covering the period 1200 –1500AD is so single-minded that it is entirely devoted to the Muslim rule over parts of India. Quite clearly if Indian society has to be inclusive, all its various peoples must share a common perspective of the past. This is not so at present and hence, to my mind at least; the history textbooks need to be rewritten.
What then needs to be debated is what should this history be, for facts cannot be altered and much as the Sangh Parivar may like to do so, Babur cannot be wished away. But will common sense triumph over the RSS’s genetic memory? Unlikely, far from what one hears the made-to-order history that is being written has the Aryans and Dravidians, both, as indigenous people if not one and the same. This will then leave us wondering why Brahui, a language still spoken by certain tribes in Baluchistan, is considered by philologists to be a Dravidian language? What about the work of linguists world over who trace all modern Indo-European languages to one proto-language now called the Nostratic language with its origins in Central Asia? Can all this be wished away?
So by all means rewrite our history. That task is long overdue. But the question is whether the commissioned historians have open minds to get it right and keep the ideological clap-trap out of it? I doubt it.
---
*Well known policy expert. Source: FB timeline

Comments

TRENDING

हिंदी आलोचना जैसे पिछड़ चुके अनुशासन की जगह हिंदी वैचारिकी का विकास जरूरी

- प्रमोद रंजन*   भारतीय राजनीति में सांप्रदायिक व प्रतिक्रियावादी ताकतों को सत्ता तक पहुंचाने में हिंदी पट्टी का सबसे बड़ा योगदान है। इसका मुख्य कारण हिंदी-पट्टी में कार्यरत समाजवादी व जनपक्षधर हिरावल दस्ते का विचारहीन, अनैतिक और  प्रतिक्रियावादी होते जाना है। अगर हम उपरोक्त बातों को स्वीकार करते हैं, तो कुछ रोचक निष्कर्ष निकलते हैं। हिंदी-जनता और उसके हिरावल दस्ते को विचारहीन और प्रतिक्रियावादी बनने से रोकने की मुख्य ज़िम्मेदारी किसकी थी?

साहित्य बोध में परिवर्तन: सत्तर के दशक में विचारधारा का महत्व बहुत अधिक था

- अजय तिवारी   सत्तर के बाद वाले दशक में जब हम लोग साहित्य में प्रवेश कर रहे थे तब दाढ़ी रखने, बेतरतीबी से कपड़े पहनने और फक्कड़पन का जीवन जीने वाले लोग बेहतर लेखक हुआ करते थे या बेहतर समझे जाते थे। नयी सदी में चिकने-चुपड़े, बने-ठने और खर्चीला जीवन बिताने वाले सम्मान के हक़दार हो चले हैं। यह फ़र्क़ जनवादी उभार और भूमण्डलीय उदारीकरण के बीच का सांस्कृतिक अंतर उजागर करता है। 

How Mahakavi Sri Sri defined political and cultural metamorphosis of Telugu society

By Harsh Thakor  Srirangam Srinivasarao, popularly known as Sri Sri, or called Mahakavi (The Great Poet), held a reputation like no other Telugu poet. Today, on June 15th, we commemorate his 40th death anniversary. Sri Sri transcended heights in revolutionary creativity or exploration, unparalleled, in Telegu poetry, giving it a new dimension. His poems projected the theme or plight of the oppressed people at a scale, rarely penetrated by poets, giving revolutionary poetry it’s soul.

Laxmanpur Bathe massacre: Perfect example of proto-fascist Brahmanical social order

By Harsh Thakor  The massacre at Laxmanpur-Bathe of Jehanabad in Bihar on the night of 1 December in 1997 was a landmark event with distinguishing features .The genocide rightly shook the conscience of the nation in the 50th year of Indian independence. The scale of the carnage was unparalleled in any caste massacre. It was a perfect manifestation of how in essence the so called neo-liberal state was in essence most autocratic. 

एनडीए सरकार में हिन्दू राष्ट्रवाद की दिशा: मुसलमानों का हाशियाकरण जारी रहेगा

- राम पुनियानी*  लोकसभा आमचुनाव में भाजपा के 272 सीटें हासिल करने में विफल रहने के बाद एनडीए एक बार फिर नेपथ्य से मंच के केंद्र में आ गया है. सन 1998 में अटलबिहारी वाजपेई एनडीए सरकार के प्रधानमंत्री बने थे. उस सरकार के कार्यकलापों पर भी भाजपा की राजनीति का ठप्पा था. उस सरकार ने हिंदुत्व के एजेंडे के अनुरूप संविधान की समीक्षा के लिए वेंकटचलैया आयोग नियुक्त किया, पाठ्यपुस्तकों का भगवाकरण किया और ज्योतिषशास्त्र व पौरोहित्य को विषय के रूप में पाठ्यक्रम में जोड़ा. सन 2014 और 2019 में बनी मोदी सरकारें तकनीकी दृष्टि से भले ही एनडीए की सरकारें रही हों मगर चूँकि भाजपा को अपने दम पर बहुमत हासिल था इसलिए अन्य घटक दल साइलेंट मोड में बने रहे और भाजपा ने बिना रोकटोक अपना आक्रामक हिन्दू राष्ट्रवादी एजेंडा लागू किया. इसमें शामिल था राममंदिर का निर्माण और अनुच्छेद 370 का कश्मीर से हटाया जाना. इसके अलावा सरकार की मौन सहमति से गाय और बीफ के नाम पर मुसलमानों की लिंचिंग की गयी और लव जिहाद और न जाने कितने अन्य किस्मों के जिहादों की बातें की गईं.

सदन की सबसे उंची गद्दी पर बैठे यह शख्स मर्यादाओं को अनदेखा कर मुंह फेरता रहा

- मनीष सिंह*   ओम बिड़ला को जब याद किया जाएगा, तो लोगों के जेहन मे भावहीन सूरत उभरेगी। सदन के सबसे उंची गद्दी पर बैठा शख्स, जो संसदीय मर्यादाओं को तार तार होते सदन मे अनजान बनकर  मुंह फेरता रहा।  मावलंकर, आयंगर, सोमनाथ चटर्जी और रवि राय ने जिस कुर्सी की शोभा बढाई, उसे उंचा मयार दिया.. वहीं ओम बिड़ला इस सदन की गरिमा की रक्षा मे अक्षम स्पीकर के रूप मे याद किये जाऐंगे। 

नरेन्द्र मोदी देवत्व की ओर? 1923 में हिटलर ने अपनी तुलना भी ईसा मसीह से की थी

- राम पुनियानी*  समाज के संचालन की प्रजातान्त्रिक प्रणाली को मानव जाति ने एक लम्बे और कठिन संघर्ष के बाद हासिल किया. प्रजातंत्र के आगाज़ के पूर्व के समाजों में राजशाही थी. राजशाही में राजा-सामंतों और पुरोहित वर्ग का गठबंधन हुआ करता था. पुरोहित वर्ग, धर्म की ताकत का प्रतिनिधित्व करता था. राजा को ईश्वर का प्रतिरूप बताया जाता था और उसकी कथनी-करनी को पुरोहित वर्ग हमेशा उचित, न्यायपूर्ण और सही ठहराता था. पुरोहित वर्ग ने बड़ी चतुराई से स्वर्ग (हैवन, जन्नत) और नर्क (हैल, जहन्नुम) के मिथक रचे. राजा-पुरोहित कॉम्बो के आदेशों को सिर-आँखों पर रखने वाला पुण्य (सबाब) करता है और इससे उसे पॉजिटिव पॉइंट मिलते हैं. दूसरी ओर, जो इनके आदेशों का उल्लंघन करता है वह पाप (गुनाह) करता है और उसे नेगेटिव पॉइंट मिलते हैं. व्यक्ति की मृत्यु के बाद नेगेटिव और पॉजिटिव पॉइंटों को जोड़ कर यह तय किया जाता है कि वह नर्क में सड़ेगा या स्वर्ग में आनंद करेगा.