History is not like science which always remains the same, given no change in conditions. With new inventions, the old one becomes obsolete in science, this is not the case with history. History is evolving and subjective thing. History is the battle of narratives. Every time reading the same source one can decipher the new meaning and keep on adding to the subject. Historians while writing history puts their judgement, and biases into the content. This gives the scope for research and rewrites the subject. I would not call it rewriting rather it would be addition, clarity and truth about the historical facts.

Rewriting of Indian history comes into discussion because the vice president of India recently had said about changing the Macaulay education system and bringing India based history into the curriculum. In October 2019, The home minister also referred to the rewriting of history at a seminar organised at Banaras Hindu University to celebrate the Gupta period king. The demand for rewriting history and including the excluded things are louder in the right-wing thinker and supporters. 

What rewriting?

By referring to the rewriting they want that the syllabus of the education system should change and become more inclusive by giving importance to all aspects of history. It is not changing the complete content and says that everything that is being taught today is wrong. According to the history is biased and has the influence of ruling power and Marxist historians of that time. The syllabus did not give due importance to the history of another side.

Game of truth

If one looks at the history bias is clearly visible in writing. It is said that Indian History is not given that importance due to the biased attitude of writers of their respective time periods. Indian history is highly British centric, Mughal and Delhi centric, ignorance of the indigenous history, glorification of invaders and Indians are always painted to be on the losing side. It conveys that India has no history, no culture, no civilisation. Everything we get in history is either because of the colonial power or from the Mughal power.

History is always in the yoke of the master. World history revolves around European history, For them the world is Europe. 

The same is in the case of Indian history. Ancient history is not glorified as it demands, it circles around the problems in Rig Vedic period and later Vedic period. Indus valley civilisation, I call it first urbanisation due to its modern and people-centric architecture, way of living, advancement in the use of the product and prosperous society. But IVC today revolves more around the Aryan invasion theory. Medival history is all about invasions, Mughal rule and glorification of their rule. Indians are shown as an inferior community who just faced loss at the hand of the Mughals. Everything today is being provided by them or because of them. The whole medieval history revolves around Delhi, ignoring the native rulers and hiding the dark side of Mughal rule in India. Modern History is about colonial rule and divided India. Our British Masters at that time portray that they give birth to India. According to them, India had nothing and what is today only because of the rule and changes that they bring to the country. The writings of the different times are influenced by the maters. Complete truth should be taught in the curriculum.

Diverse, inclusive and Indic history

It is not a rewriting of history, it would be transparent history. If every aspect of the facts is included in the textbooks, it would make children more aware and have complete knowledge. To reference how British archives distort Indian history Kalidas was called “Shakespeare of India”. Kalidas was the renounced author and was among the nine jewels in the court of Gupta ruler Chandragupta 2. Kalidas lived in the 4th-5th century. How can he be named after a person who lived much later in the period of 1567-1616. For me, Shakespeare is the Kalidas of Britain. The same is the case with Samundragupta who is regarded as the “Napolean of India” If one looks at the time period of both Samundragupta ruled in the 4th century and Napolean in the 17th-18th century. 

Things need correction not only in the books but also in other places, wherever required. Nalanda university is among the best education centre from ancient times, a Persian invader Bhaktiyar Khilji invaded India many times and in one of his raids around 1200CE, He burnt the manuscript of Nalanda university. It is said that the smoke from the burning of the manuscript continued for six months. The fun part is that the nearest railway station to Nalanda University is named Bhaktiyarpur. The present Chief Minister of Bihar belongs to the city called Bhaktiyarpur. won’t it be changed?

Everyone knows the sequence of the Mugal rulers their time period and their magnificent valour, tolerance, development, and diplomacy because this is what is taught in school. Yes they have a good history they ruled for a long time but it doesn’t mean they are everything. There is no mention of local rulers. decan rulers like The Vijaynagar empire, Ahoms Rajput rulers and many more. Students in school were taught only about the battles that local rulers lost to the Mughals. Rajasthan Government make a correction back in 2017 that Mahranapratap of Mewar was the victor in the Battle of Haldhighati in the 16 Century, not Akbar. Akbar did many reforms but while showing the intolerance in the rule of Akbar many facts were buried about the condition of minorities and forced conversion to Islam.

It was not mentioned anywhere about the mammoth of plunder done by invaders at the Hindu temple, Thousands and thousands of temples were destroyed and killed by the invaders. The amount of wealth they took from us, If we were not a prosperous state ( as per them) How can we have that much wealth that they came and took more wealth back every time.

In modern history, if we look through the lens of the British historian, India was a disturbed land without law and order. They came with the good intention of trade and when they found the condition of society pathetic, started governing and through their good government transformed India into a new modern country. Yes, there is a good impact of British rule in India they brought many things but only for their benefit. As a colony ruler, they suppressed every dissenting voice from the native people by using force. They also glorify their rule and say history in that way. As per British writing, The Revolt of 1857 was just a sepoy mutiny. Later by an Indian writer, it was called the First War of Independence. This war against the British though not successful guided the people in the late fighting with the Britishers. The case of the Freedom struggle is in the same line, only a handful of leaders were given more space and importance while many big and small leaders and the public at large together fought for the freedom of India. 

Then How?

It is very clear that history in the textbooks is included according to the masters. One should also make clear that we can not teach everything about history in the syllabus of school and higher education. Try to make it more diverse and bring every aspect of history not only the subject that suits your ideology. Some regard it as “saffronising of education”, They are right in their thought. As the right-wing and all the supporters of rewriting history say ruling party picked history that suited their ideology and politics. Now by selective writing, you also going to do the same. Politics should remain away from education. If one really wants to change or modify the syllabus it should be impartial, away from all political gains, including the rich Indian culture, Mesmerising Indian arts, applauding diplomacy of the past, bringing the India centric history to bring a sense of pride in Indian history.

History is the past, not the present. People should deyphanate from the past. Don’t look at it as yourself and feel proud or insulted due to the history. History is for learning, History is for understanding, and history is for civilisation. Everyone knows America was also the colony of the British but when they got independence they make sure that they would not include anything that has British linkage, from the political system, and a written constitution to a sense of American culture and civilisation. Japan had also a very strong sense of nationalism. At the time when Americans ruled japan, The commander of Japan arouse the feeling of being Japanese and nationalism. After learning best practices from all over the world people of Japan returned and make Japan one of the highest industrialised countries at that time in a very short span of time. 

India was regarded as “sone ki chidiya” in past. Bring the history that everyone should be proud of, arouse the feeling of nationalism, not jingoism.

Note: All views expressed are personal

         Ready for any correction in any fact. 

Divyanshu Singh