Ajmal V for BeyondHeadlines
History is fuel for any society to go forward. It evolves through several processes before take a definite shape. Those processes include, power of memory, interpretation, generalising, framing, priming, stereotyping, neglecting and so on. Therefore, what our history is the by products of all those process. It is a good weapon to instill positive or negative exhortation in minds of human. This piquant side of history fascinate every ideology to read and propagate their history or making their own version.
India as a museum of races, would have history of each races to study. But our collective history has a well-defined form by consciously forgetting numerous histories or silencing other side accentuating one side only. This happens whenever or whoever attempt to draw a historical background to nation-states in modern times. India’s national history is also is not different. But an eminent threat is waiting on the way.
I think to focus on the new appointments in Indian History Council for Research before that looking the background is imperative to understand the consequence of new development.
Who wrote our history?
In discipline, history writing or science of history is a special area of study – Historiography. This field of study analysis variant history writings existed or exist till now. A student of history is being acquainted to all the aspects and choose a field as his/her ideal model of history writing. Since history is the study of written past, the writers, their ideology, their yardsticks to write and objectivity should be scrutinized before accepting the arguments on particular subject. There would have two type of issue, first, the personal credibility i.e., biases and preconception and second is intentionally or unintentionally confinement to limitations of individual ideology. This both are harm to history and society.
Indian history also has indeed these issues in various historical discourses. The first Indian historians were court historians of dynasties and foreign travellers. The first group portrayed the dynastic rule and advantages of rulers. The genealogy of dynasties gets from those accounts. The latter group focus on the political and social conditions of India. They gave details of political stability and the social condition.
The modern history writing start by British colonialist with the sole intention to justify their exploitative rule in India. The British historians were followed by later on. The nationalist wing mainly strived to defend the accusation of British historians by glorifying Indian past. The new school of historian emerged out of Marxist inspiration. Their main feature is looking history beyond communal level and see the social structure according to mode of production of different times in the past. This group could easily dominate in the academics, thus their views got predominance in the academics and society.
Prospering fascist history
Nevertheless, a communal manufacturing of history was going on as parallel to other development in history writing. This school of history was greatly influenced by glorification of past done by nationalists around the world and India. Their main objectivity is to build a nation on the philosophy of Hindutva. V.D. Savarkar was first theorist of this ideology. He was inspired from making of European nation-states such as Germany and Italy and the propagation of Zionist movement for a National Home for Jews. After few years later, the fascist movements in Europe was extremely inspired by the Hindutva ideologue. All of them meaningfully manipulated or manufactured history to help their movements. On that way, Savarkar try to find a glorified Hindu political and social system in ancient India and produced a common enemy who was accused for the collapse of the holy culture – Muslims.
This two elements were driving force for the propagation of Hindutva ideology since then. Hindutva was a racist concept of Hinuism. This define Hindu as the race of Indian born and descendent of original inhabitants i.e., Aryan. So that their commitment towards the nation is genuine. Thus, they developed the concept of mother earth. Hindutva considers all migrated people – especially Muslims – as foreigners and not belong to this mother earth. That’s the main accusation of Muslim. They projected some Hindu warriors as heroes of India such as Pritvi Raj Chauhan and Shivaji who fought against Muslim invaders. Thus, they promulgate Muslim as traitors, suspicious and enemy to the nation. This spread extreme prejudices among society against Muslim inhabitance in the country, which caused several communal atrocities.
Even several prominent Congress nationalists were attracted Hindutva ideology. Although a slow momentum was there in the society for Hindutva version of history, the mainstream somehow could achieve to sideline their extreme arguments in influencing national policies and programmes. But time to time they could infiltrate into the mainstream and attempted to showcase their ideology as prominent. As their social influence had increased majority mentality eventually diverted to such concept, which ensured evolution of pro-Hindutva stand in non-Hindutva groups too. Those groups consider that was like as usual point of view. The reality was that they could not stay away from leaning to Hindutva since it has become pervasive in the society.
Political gain and academic intervention
The hitherto apprehensive Hindutva politics start to get recognition after 40 years of independence of the country. It was the result of their rigorous engagement in society. The power house in India seemed some weakness by then. So the political face of Hindutva could ascend to the political rule by the end of 20th century. The power embolden them to play their invisible game in lime light. They installed people who has little allegiance to Hindutva in the key post.
In the post of Chairman of Indian Council for Historical Research itself pro-Hindutva scholars were appointed during first BJP rule. Prof. B.R. Grover recalled two volumes of ‘Towards Freedom’ series written by Prof. Sumit Sarkar and Prof. K.N. Panikkar, during the process of publishing, due to accuse from Hindutva wings on criticism to RSS in partition and assassination of Gandhi. That proved the dangerous impact of Hindutva in academics.
There has been several attempts are being held in last two decades giving Hindutva version of history in school textbooks in various states around the country. The Central Board of Secondary School itself attempted to include Hindutva school of thought.
Modi magic
Modi’s amazing victory in Lok Sabha election after 10 years gap further embolden the frustrated Hindutva ideologues to frankly express and act in the field of education. It is important for BJP to stable its rule in the centre. Therefore, the government quicken to appoint a ‘mysterious’ professor as chairman of ICHR. The appointment aimed to end the domination of Marxist scholars in history. But actually the appointed person’s credibility as a history professor is on suspicion, as there was not much academic works of him. His several arguments in his blog is dangerous to the discipline, by using superstitious beliefs without any historical evidence. Do we need a RSS pracharak as the chairman of India’s premier historical research body? The appointments of council members have also raised questions.
The Hitler has constituted The Reich Institute for the History to rewrite German history in Nazi racial ideological perspective. This Institution was headed by Walter Frank. Ideology dominated over objectivity and historical methodology, distortion of past was main output of the rewriting history.[1] Interestingly, Indian fascists also attempt the same way turning the existing institutions as the body of rewriting history, and moreover manufacturing new history, emphasising superstitious beliefs over the historical facts and exaggerating ancient Hindu society to sideline Medieval period of Muslim dynasties. Modi rule may mark a change in the course of history. Who knows??!
[1] Joseph W. Bendersky, A History of Nazi Germany: 1919-1945 (1956), Illinois, p. 140.
