The Qutub Minar was struck by lightning in the 14th century. The masons who repaired it left inscriptions all over it — some in Hindi, some in faulty Sanskrit. The architect Chahada Devapala and masons Lakshman, Nana, Solha among others, were all Hindus.
They invoked their deity Vishwakarma on the structure of the Minar. Centuries later, the same inscriptions have become the subject of controversy, riling up Hindu groups who believe it to be built on a temple. And that it’s actually ‘Vishnu Stambh.’
“Invoking their deity clarifies that it was not forced labour, nor that of converts,” said Romila Thapar, Professor Emerita at Jawaharlal Nehru University in a lecture delivered at Delhi’s India International Centre (IIC). The event was marred with threats, demanding its cancellation for allegedly propounding “false narratives”.
“This event is aimed at spreading hateful false narrative. People like Romila Thapar known for writing false history,” BJP spokesperson Kapil Mishra had tweeted. He also claimed that such an event would disturb “communal harmony in the city,” and tagged Union Home Minister Amit Shah and Delhi Police.
The organisers seemed to take note, as security at IIC was extraordinarily tight. Only members were allowed to be seated in the auditorium, while others watched via a webcast.
The lecture by Thapar, who specialises in Ancient Indian History, was titled: “Our history, their history, whose history,” focusing on the dissemination of history as it is today – rife with disproven stories.
Also read: New book tells ‘other’ side of Independence history. Amit Shah says everyone must accept it
Storytellers vs historians
Thapar spoke for 45 minutes to a rapt audience, questioning two fearsome camps of history – drawing a distinction between “the history written by the trained professional historian and other views of the past projected, by the nationalism of segregated groups, each vying for the primacy of its particular identity.”
To the latter group, history is just a story, she said. But, a story that is claimed as factual cannot be part of entertainment – it needs to be proved in order to have legitimacy – especially when they form the core of “the most influential of current storytellers” – the media.
Thapar did not just talk about the divergence between “professional scholars” and public opinion, but as she spoke about divisive issues in a divisive time, she did what she claimed the “storytellers” had been unable to do – give proof.
For the purpose of the discussion and because fault lines are being marked more rapidly than ever, Thapar narrowed in on Hindu-Muslim relations in the second millennium.
Thapar dismantled the European version of history that viewed India through its periodisation of rulers (the dominance of Hindus, then Muslims, and finally the British), saying it was reductive.
She called it “the kind of history that professional historians see as an attempt to whittle down every cause to a single one – religious difference – and ignore or minimise other causes.”
She said, according to historical sources, temples have always been looted – sometimes by Hindus themselves. In the 11th century, Kashmiri chronicler Kalhana writes that Hindu Kings looted the wealth of temples when there was a fiscal crisis in Kashmir.
“It was a travesty of the way serious history was being written and something of a joke when compared to the careful enquiries that historians were making into European history,” remarked Thapar.
In a voice that seldom faltered, she continued, making a singular plea – that history should be taught to our children and grandchildren based on reliable evidence given by professional historians – who account for the nuances in inter-community relations, “both the harmonious and the conflictual.”
On inter-religion marriage alliances, she said they were often done for upward social mobility and bonding. Rajput ruling families married into “mleccha families” were not necessarily treated with derision. Mleccha refers to communities that exist outside the caste system. “After all, there was no love-jihad in those days,” she said lightly, giving way to a few laughs among a mostly silent audience.
Also read: Chanakya’s existence, Ashoka’s politics—new book has stories and counter-stories on Mauryas
Right against history, historians
The auditorium was filled to the brim, with some spilling out the doors. Daksh Lohiya, a professor at Delhi University, addressed a letter to IIC demanding that the event be cancelled and the space not be used to “hurt the feelings” of a civilisation that “is already severely wounded and is struggling to recover.”
This process of recovery, as per Lohiya, consists of embracing “the true narrative” that has so far been denied, due to the falsifying of history by Romila Thapar and her ilk, whose views “have been designed to falsely undermine our culture and true history.”
Terms like “fake historian” and “hate monger” were hurled at Thapar on social media, as ostensibly right-wing Twitter users rallied to get the 91-year-old’s lecture cancelled.
One such user named Ajeet Bharti, who previously worked at the pro-Hindutva website OpIndia, exhorted people on Twitter to write to the director and president of IIC demanding cancellation.
Many obliged, sharing screenshots pillorying IIC for hosting “a known distortian.”
The lecture ended as it had begun, with a metaphor credited to historian Eric Hobsbawn. What history is to nationalism is what poppy is to a heroin addict.
But the conundrum remains. “Should this relationship be left as is? Or should we insist that the heroin addict question the visions seen by them?” Romila Thapar asked.
(Edited by Ratan Priya)