Inevitable ideological biases in writing history

IN the furore over the dropping of a section on the Mughal period from the history syllabus of Classes XI and XII (CBSE and UP board), there has been the proverbial heat more than the light. It would be better on all sides if it is conceded that history and other social sciences are a minefield of biases, personal as well as ideological, and that every side carries its bagful of presumptions. The contest then is between this presumption and that one, and it is rarely about what is true and what is false. But each side believes that it is objective and true, and the other side is false. What could and should be a useful and fruitful debate between two opposing parties turns into a mere vitriolic exchange.

The views on India’s history have always been controversial, at least in the modern period. We had the British colonial reconstruction of Indian history followed by that of the nationalist school, and then by the much-maligned Marxist interpreters of the Indian past. In many ways, each school of interpretation was but a natural one, and so was the reaction to it. The nationalists were right in objecting to the colonial historians, and the Marxist — this term has to be used in a very loose sense because it includes various strands of Leftist views, including the liberal ones — reaction to the nationalists was again natural. The fault of the Marxists and their ilk is their false belief that a final conclusion has been reached and that Indian history, as interpreted by them, should form the basis of school textbooks. But there have been changes and controversies over what goes into the textbooks in the post-Marxist phase. Yes, though it is not recognised, Indian history textbooks have gone through a post-Marxist phase. So, when right-wing historians from the RSS-BJP stable talk excitedly about demolishing Marxist misinterpretations, they do not seem to realise that Marxism in the writing of history is dead, and they are literally tilting at windmills.

What has gone unnoticed in the last few decades — and yes, it predates 2014 when Prime Minister Narendra Modi led the BJP to power, and even 1998, when Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee’s BJP-led coalition government came to power — is that there has been a shift in historical biases, and what can be called Hindu right-wing assumptions have become prominent in research work, in archaeology and in other historical fields.

The work of archaeologists BB Lal and SP Gupta reflected the reaction to the preceding Marxist school of historians, especially on issues like the so-called Saraswati civilisation and its tenuous connection with the Indus Valley civilisation. Given the intense ideological rivalry, historians of the then establishment refused to accept the professionalism of those who opposed their views.

What has kept the discipline of history in a stable framework as it passed through the colonial, nationalist, Marxist and post-Marxist phases is the assumption about a rigorous research methodology, whatever may be the conclusions you reach. The colonial historians, though they were not professional historians, did absorb the tenets of modern historiography as it developed in Europe in the 19th century, and the nationalist, Marxist and post-Marxist historians followed the rules of the game as it were even as they differed with each other.

The major doubt that arises about the BJP-RSS school of Indian history is whether it has the required scholarship, even if one disagrees with its emphases and conclusions. It is here that the present right-wing dispensation is not able to stand up and declare its credentials.

In the ongoing controversy, there are two issues which need to be addressed. The first is about whether dropping sections on the Mughals is a distortion of history. The argument we are hearing from the government side is that there is a need to lessen the burden on the students, and to do so, it is no great sin to drop some of the topics. This is, indeed debatable, and it is being pointed out that some of the topics, such as the Mughals, which have been dealt with in the lower classes have been done away with in the higher ones. And that this does not mean that Mughal history has been deleted from the knowledge of students at the school level. And that Mughals will remain a topic of study in college and university. This is, of course, an insidious argument, and it is a strategy to shift the emphasis away from the Mughals as such. But it can pass muster to an extent.

There is indeed a bias towards the Mughals for the simple reason that the historical record of the time is much more abundant than that of the earlier times. And it is also the case that the British perceived themselves to be the heirs of the Mughals in India, and in their own little way, tried to imitate the opulence and splendour of the 17th-century Delhi Mughal court. It can be argued that in the context of a 5,000-year history, the 1526-1857 period is being given undue emphasis.

But what becomes intellectual dishonesty and intellectual crime is to alter the facts of the assassination of Mahatma Gandhi. It would be an unacceptable lie to deny that Nathuram Godse was a Hindu fanatic and he killed Gandhi because of Gandhi’s emphasis on Hindu-Muslim unity. This might be an unpalatable fact for the BJP-RSS, but they cannot tamper with this historical fact. And there should be a nationwide protest against this lie. And the protest needs to go beyond professional historians and academics. The people, in general, should be raising a hue and cry against lies to be taught to their children in schools. And it is a shame that there has been no protest so far from the people at large. And it is on this issue that PM Modi, who has been professing to be a great admirer of Mahatma Gandhi, should be forced to take a stand.

At one time, Marxists misinterpreted Indian history, and the BJP-RSS can say that they too have a right to misinterpret in the same measure. But what the BJP-RSS cannot get away is with lies in school history textbooks, and to omit the fact that Mahatma Gandhi was killed by a Hindu fanatic, Godse.