Changing notions of History

The modern writing of Indian history began with the colonial perceptions of
the Indian past. European scholars searched for histories of India which
conformed to the European standards, but could find none, other than the
‘Rajatarangini’ by Kalhana in the 12th century, which was a history of Kashmir.
They saw the history of India as that coming out of a Sanskritic tradition and
hence kept away the numerous works in Persian by court poets and the
chronicles of the Turkish, Afghan and Mughal rulers. These works were
regarded as alien to the Indian civilization. The various Buddhist and Jaina
works were also not given appropriate significance.

There was also hostility towards Islam which was taken as totally alien in
India; this was also aggravated by historical reasons beginning from the
Crusades. If the role of Islam in shaping Indian history was conceded at all, it
was said to be negative and such judgments were based on little or no
evidence.

It was also argued that Indian civilization is a-historical. Not only were there
no history of India, but the absence of history was also explained by the
cyclical concept of time in India. However there is evidence of linear and
cyclical time being followed in early India and the most insightful way of
appreciating this would be to see the intersections of the two, an idea which
was alien to these scholars.

Initially there were two strands in the European interpretation of Indian

civilization, which came to be known as the Orientalist (also called
Indologists) and the Utilitarians. These developed from the studies by the
officials of the British East India Company, many whom were in India and
some in Britain. Many even went to the extent of studying languages like
Sanskrit, Persian, Bengali, Tamil and various other Indian languages to study
the Indian past. Administrative requirements emphasized the separateness of
Hindus and Muslims at all levels.

In 1784 the Asiatic Society of Bengal was formed, which provided an

institutional focus for scholars working in a number of related fields such as
textual study, epigraphy, numismatics and history. Major contributions of the
Indologists lay in their efforts to collect, edit, and translate ancient Indian
texts. In this they relied heavily on the information provided by the native
informants.

Apart from the study of ancient texts, the 19 th century also witnessed
important developments in the field of epigraphy, numismatics, archaeology
and the study of art and architecture. The decipherment of the Ashokan
Brahmi and Kharoshti scripts were considered major breakthrough. The
analysis of coins led to the construction of framework for the political history
of India. The discovery of stones tools laid the foundation for the study of
Indian prehistory and the Archaeological Survey of India was established in
1871. However all of these breakthroughs were rooted in the colonial context.

Social and religious institutions and traditions were critiqued from the
western view point. Indian society was presented as static and its political
systems were termed as ‘despotic’ over the centuries. Race, religion and
ethnicity were often confused with each other and there was a tendency to
exaggerate the impact of foreign influence on ancient India.

Indian historians initially tended to follow the pattern established by the

European historians and wrote largely on dynastic history. But with the
growing presence of a nationalist ideology, the nationalist interpretation of
Indian history gained importance. History as a major component in the
construction of national identity and culture became a subject of contestation
between the anti-colonial nationalists and those supporting the colonial view.
Some colonial views like that of the orientalists found sympathetic echo in
nationalist writings.

Indian nationalist history challenged the negative aspects of the colonial

historiography and thereby helped to release historical writing from the
imprint of the more negative colonial theories about the Indian past. Both
Muslim and Hindu nationalists drew from anti-colonial, nationalist ideologies
for legitimacy, but converted their interests into a nationalism that confined
itself to the articulation of a single concern-interpreting history in terms of
monolithic religious identities.
The nationalist historians meticulously weaved together data from texts,
inscriptions, coins and other material remains to amplify the contours of the
ancient Indian past. South India was also brought into the narrative and study
of the regional polities progressed. The nationalist tinge in the writings of
these scholars can be seen in their insistence on the indigenous roots of all the
major cultural developments.

The 1950’s saw the emergence of the emergence of the Marxist

historiography. Marxist historians shifted the focus from an event- centered
history dominated by political narrative to the delineation of social and
economic structures and process especially those related to class stratification
and agrarian relations. It also contributed towards unearthing the history of
the non-elite groups, some of which had suffered centuries of subordination
and marginalization. But the problem with Marxist historiography was that
texts were sometimes read uncritically, with insufficient attention paid to the
problematic chronology and peculiarities of genre. Archaeological data was
included, but the basic framework of the historical narrative remained text
centric. Initially the focus on class meant less attention to other structures and
processes especially those related to class stratification and agrarian
relations. Religion and culture were often sidelined or mechanically presented
as reflections of socio-economic structures.

Over the last 50 years new theoretical perspectives, scientific techniques and
a continuing growth in the volume of archaeological data have been
transforming our understanding of the early Indian past, especially with
regard to subsistence practices, technology and human interaction with the
environment. The research of small group of historians mainly women,
working on gender relations have altered the frontiers of early Indian social
history. A significant feature of recent historiography of the early medieval
period is the detailed study of the changing profiles and configurations and of
regions and sub regions. Special attention has been given on agrarian
relations and political, economic and social structures and legitimization of
political power.
Despite their differences, the major historiographical school also shared some
similarities. For instance in their emphasis on Brahmanical Sanskrit texts and
their tendency to marginalize archaeological evidence. Certain tenets if all
these schools continue to thrive in the present. Some of the fundamental
premises and methods of Orientalist historiography continue to hold their
ground and the histories of Third World countries such as India remain
Eurocentric in many ways. Appeals to the ancient and early medieval past are
still often dedicated by nationalist or communalist agendas. Marxist
historiography still continues to be an influential force in Early Indian
historiography.