In 2016, as a response to the unrest on campus that triggered countrywide debate, the Jawaharlal Nehru University (JNU) Teachers’ Association organized a lecture series to explore the trajectory of nationalism. Thapar, emeritus professor of history at JNU and renowned historian, spoke of the connection between history and nationalism. In her talk titled ‘The Past as Seen in Ideologies Claiming to Be Nationalist’, she explains why the political requirements of today cannot be imposed on the history of the past.
I am delighted to be here on this occasion, having been invited to participate in the teach-in on nationalism. When I come to JNU these days, I feel a bit like a dinosaur – having been one among the founding generation of teachers.
Now, let me come to something that is much more topical – and that is the connection between history and nationalism. Nationalism emerges as a concept or an idea in modern times as a response to historical changes. It is difficult to locate it in pre-modern societies. So, we don’t look for nationalism in the centuries long past, we look for it when society changes to the point where it is required.
But let me turn to the Indian situation. The evolution of nationalist ideas in India was tied to colonialism. Therefore, the influence of the colonial interpretation of Indian history is present in all kinds of nationalism to a lesser or a greater degree. In pre-colonial times there were multiple identities of caste, language, religious sects and regions. Religious identities, I would like to argue, were not based on large monolithic religions but on a range of religious sects. In sum, we now recognize that diversity characterized Indian cultures. Up to a point, it can be said that modern anti-colonial nationalism drew the diversities together.
However, we cannot stop there, because if diversity is characteristic, the next question is: How did diverse groups negotiate their space and their relationships? This is a fundamental question where some explore these relationships whereas others project a single identity, argue that it is the identity of the majority and should therefore have priority. Let’s look at how this came about.
The colonial reading of Indian history denied the diversity of India.
There were no histories, of course, of India as a unified territory prior to colonial rule. Colonial history tried to tidy up the diversity, not by asking how these diversities related to each other, but by envisioning all religions in India as large monolithic religions and fitting the sects into one or the other, instead of seeing them as autonomous or only partially allied to another religion. Colonial scholars dramatized the confrontation of what they called the Hindu religion and the Muslim religion in order to support the two-nation theory, required by colonial policy. Relationships between religious groups are never so simple.
Also read: Why highly placed Muslims became ‘Krishna bhaktas’ in the Mughal period
The two-nation theory persisted, and was strengthened by the introduction of the concept of the majority community and minority communities after the British Indian census. It divided Indians and encouraged Indians into thinking about their identity as distinct, consolidated, monolithic religious identities. This suited colonial policy and therefore was encouraged.
In the mid-nineteenth century, European philology became interested in Vedic Sanskrit and its links with Indo-European languages. Many philologists and Sanskritists, such as Friedrich Max Müller and others, projected the idea that the Vedic corpus, authored by the Aryans, was the foundation of Indian civilization. The history of the origin of the Aryans and their innate superiority became an important aspect of colonial scholarship and of nationalist historians. It was popularized, initially by the theosophist Colonel Olcott. He maintained that not only were the Aryans indigenous to India, but that they also migrated westwards and eventually civilized the West. This was useful in projecting the idea that India has always had a singular history, of which the most important has been that of the ancient Hindus.
Various theories were put about on the origins of the Aryans. Max Müller said they came from Central Asia; Dayanand Saraswati preferred Tibet. Tilak, as we all know, was much more adventurous in suggesting the Arctic regions. When it became fashionable in the 1920s and ’30s to talk about the Aryans being indigenous to India, it was a little embarrassing to have Tilak placing them in the Arctic. So someone had the bright idea of saying that in those days the North Pole was actually located in Bihar. Various Indo-European languages, from Sanskrit to Celtic, were said to be of the same language family. It was assumed that those who spoke the same language were biologically related.
One may well ask why there was the need to project an indigenous descent for the Aryans. It was important to the theory that there was a direct link between the Aryans and the upper-caste Hindus that followed generation after generation up until present times. Max Müller in England and Keshab Chandra Sen in India argued that since both the British and the upper-caste Indians were Aryans, they were all eventually kin- related and, therefore, were like ‘parted cousins’ now coming together.
This theory met with an obstacle in the 1920s with the discovery of the Indus Valley civilization, or the Harappa culture as it is also called. This was prior to the Aryans and it was not Vedic. Therefore, this had now to be the foundation of Indian civilization. This, naturally, created a problem for those who believe that Vedic Aryanism is the foundation. That is one reason why today, some archaeologists and Sanskritists are trying to take the dates of the Vedas back to pre-Harappan times. Newspaper reports have stated that attempts are being made to take it back at least to 7500 bc. But the other problem is the unknown origin of the Harappans and that their language remains undeciphered. It’s much simpler now to maintain that the Harappans were also Aryans. There were many archaeological cultures in the subcontinent, so were they all Aryans?
How do these ideas and problems connect to the question of nationalism? By the late nineteenth century, there was an established middle class in India. The idea of nationalism began to emerge from this group. So, once again it is the particular historical situation in modern times that leads to the emergence of nationalist ideas. At first, the nationalists requested greater representation in governance and then gradually, as we all know, it grew into a mass movement, and the mass movement then finally ended up demanding an independent nation, which was a logical outcome. Anti-colonial nationalism endorsed the idea of a nation and defined it as a democracy with a secular, egalitarian society. This anti-colonial nationalism maintained that the primary identity of all citizens was being Indian, irrespective of whatever identities they may have claimed prior to this. Being Indian was an overarching and inclusive identity incorporating people of all religions, castes and languages on an equal basis with equal rights, and this is the central component for what was originally projected as secular, anti-colonial Indian nationalism. This was a new identity obviously, and was seen and projected as such.
But, given the history that was written by colonial scholarship and taught to the colonials by the colonizer – the fundamentals of which had not been fully challenged – there inevitably arose two kinds of what some people call ‘religious nationalisms’, and some people prefer to call (them)’ communalisms’ – the Hindu and the Muslim – and some may even refer to them as ‘pseudo-nationalisms’. Both endorsed the old, British two-nation theory. One aimed at establishing a separate Islamic state and managed to establish Pakistan; the other aimed at uniting the subcontinent under Hindu rule – what was to become the idea of the Hindu rashtra. Unlike anti-colonial secular nationalism that was inclusive of all as equals, for these communal ideologies, those of their own religion had priority, and to that extent these nationalisms were exclusive. They were not anti-colonial – some of them regarding the colonial power as their patron. Their hostility was towards each other.
Also read: In Modi’s opposition-mukt India, JNU must remain the Eternal Protester
These views were basic to the two organizations that propagated these ideas: the Muslim League and the Hindu Mahasabha. The latter was gradually superseded by the RSS, and later there emerged a conglomeration of organizations referred to as the Sangh Parivar.
As with all nationalisms of all kinds, Hindu religious nationalism also turned to history. But interestingly, it appropriated the two dominant colonial theories – the Aryan foundation of Indian civilization and the two-nation theory. These they now describe as the indigenous history of India. Ironically, it is claimed that these histories are cleansed of the cultural pollution of Indian historians influenced by Western ideas! That their own ideas are rooted in colonial theories is conveniently ignored.
The core of this ideology is the identity of the Hindu. The Hindu is the only one who can claim the territory of British India as the land of his ancestry – pitribhumi, and the land of his religion – punyabhumi. Muslims and Christians are described as foreigners since they came from outside the territory of British India and their religions originated in other lands. The ancestors of the Hindu and his religion having been indigenous to India, he, therefore, is the primary citizen. The true claimants to the ancient civilization can only be Hindus, descendants of the Aryans, and this is one reason why it has to be proved that the Aryans were indigenous to India, irrespective of whether they were or not. Being indigenous, they are the inheritors of the land. There are, however, glitches in this argument. Those of us who have pointed out the problems get our daily dose of abuse on the internet, and we are described as ignorant JNU professors and worse, even if in fact most are not from JNU.
….
The point that I am trying to make is that the reading and interpretation of the past requires a trained understanding of the sources and a sensitivity to understanding what has been written. The political requirements of today cannot be imposed on the history of the past. To maintain a generalized statement that the period of the last thousand years was one of the victimization and enslavement of the Hindus by the Muslims is historically unacceptable. This kind of generalization feeds communal nationalism. That is why I am cautioning against it. Unfounded generalizations have to be replaced by analytical history.
This excerpt from ‘Inquilab: A Decade Of Protests’, with a foreword by Swara Bhasker, has been published with permission from HarperCollins India.
Queen of falsehood.
She used to accept Ghaggar-Hakra river as River Saraswati.
In the late 90s when it was proved that the settlements beside Saraswati is heavy with archeological evidence of Vaidic culture dated way back 3000BC or older she refused to consider Ghaggar- Hakra as Saraswati and told Vaidic Saraswati is Helmand (With circustic arguments).
Her only intention is to prove Hindus are not Indigenous but outsider just like Islam.
Romila Thapar is horrible.
Of course Romila Thapar can write what she wants. She will even tell what is seen in Belur and Halebied is a lie. Ohh I forgot. Nalanda university was destroyed by Some flood. How come they blame the minority or should we call them the second majority?
Writer of the above has always tried to show against traditional indian culture so that can get international awards . Khilji looted devgiri.
Were Khilji, bahamani, gazani , Aurangzeb friends of native Indian peoples?
A university thesis is all about stating a viewpoint. The article only achieves it. Yet deep down, as trained, Promilla Thapar begins with an assertion between Nationalism and Colonialism. Is it related to the era of Muslim rule (if one dislikes the word dominate) that Nehruvian Historians trained and taught us at an impressionable age where Babar and Humayun finds very little mention. Sing praise for Akbar. Mention of Jahangir and Shah Jahan and his Taj Mahal and don’t tell about the regicide to win the throne. Aurangzeb was a tyrant. Bahadur Shah Zafar was a poet and scholar – who of course surrendered to the British. But never speak of the Gupta dynasty and its destruction at the hands of Asoka when he denounced war and embraced peace.
India is not split. It’s a group of people proclaiming to be educated and pontificating in earnest who are ill at ease. Why? They fear losing to rise of Indian masses. A rude awakening that begin in earnest over the treacherous act of 26/11 and followed it by Delhi Riots in February 2020. They do so for laurels and honouring mandates from those who hold them as puppets.
Can anything damning be said?
True
Wonderful portray Indian history, lack knowledge ,not done any resarch, taken the helpe of distraughted fact and figure, club with some hot spice made religious curries palatable to to her admirers item called Indian History. Really hundreds logical evidence of ancient India’s cultural , historical, existence is becoming painfull to them , very carefully avoided not make her history is to make woefully incorrect accuracey , she has made Indian History mokery before world . She should have very careful what is writing a National History of country or a rosy love story.
This article is cleverly trying to project history as seen by her. I reject it completely
Can she explain what are hindu idols doing in qutub minar. They have systematically brain washed 3-4 generations of Indians.
Roads and building are named after persona who have significantly contributed to our society. Why we have roads named after Aurangazeb, Babur etc and not after Dahirsen, Porus.
But I summarily reject this. I am not a Hindu zeolot but understand the clever subterfuge she is trying to creat
Romila Thapar is known to be sensationalist historian under the garb of leftists. Wishing her happy 88th birthday today, I never regret to reject her as anti-nationalist Indian history teacher. During our student days in Delhi, we used to hear about her personal history who used to sell articles in different names against India’s interest. What shall she gain out of it ? Time has changed. Nobody is going to accept her personal views in the greater interest of Indian nationalism : India as a nation is self sufficient to march forward as a Hindu Rashtra. Forget about such historians who is identified with anti nationals : the panelists as well as the person who has written the forward in the book. Below standard. Are you serious to buy a copy ???
The print is nothing but a mouth piece of leftists,naxals and anti nationals.
P.S: Romila Thapar is nothing but a budhiya who has gone insane due to heavy consumption of cheap weed!
There is a big tukde tukde gang in JNU since Indipendance.
Romila taper is a Nehruvian scholar. She is responsible for spoiling the real Indian history.
She is responsible for huge anti Hindu sentiments in text books.
Very pity romila that you will stoop to any level to satisfy your benefactors. But please don’t fail to keep in your mind provided it is in working condition on its own that you can’t fool all the people all the time.
A pure bullshit.
It’s quite shameful to consider Romila Thapar as a historian. She is the person who brought down Yudhishtir to Ashoka’ disciple❗
If we accept this half-baked truth and her analysis, then why was Zizija tax was imposed on Hindus during Muslim rules ? Does this pseudo secularist have any answer for this.
How would the taxation have been?
Leftist like historians taking birth again and again on their home ground JNU beautifully cemented by all communist and Marxist under the umbrella of NEHRUVIAN era.
They are bound to disrespect their own country any how.
Ms Thapar
With due respect, can you please swear if your views have nothing to do with Nehruvian thinking of modern India and your views are purely professional.
Based on what we studied in your articles and school text books I am confused if you are influenced by Nehruvian thoughts or those thoughts were based on your work.
Best
Historians are turning out to be more dangerous than the aggressors. What happened in J&K right in front of us proves their aggression in the past. Why does The Print give credence to such novelists?
Mohammed Ghori had attacked India in 11th Century…..1000 years ago….what was his aim?? Obviously, looting, killing and subjugation of Hindus…Most of these attacks failed till Moguls finally succeeded in ruling in Delhi….Historians like Romila Thapar want to REWRITE THE HISTORY TO SHOW FOREIGN INVADERS AS LIBERATORS!!!! SUCH IS THEIR ‘SECULARISM ‘…..OR WHAT IS NOW REFERRED TO AS SICKULARISM!!!
Your life existence is burden for earth, Romila.
Anti national Romila Thappad.
India before Islamic invaders, comprised of a lot of distinct kingdoms,fighting against each other. But it were the armies of the kings who were fighting then. With the advent of the Islamic rulers, came alongside the destruction of places of worship(temples), forced conversion of common people and massacre of those who did not convert. It was not limited to conflict of armies but was a religious crusade which believed in the supremacy of Allah. That, madam,is the genesis of the Hindu-Muslim divide. Nothing to do with Aryan, Vedic or Indus Valley civilization.
Bad teacher, mathematically 2020-750= 1270 & Romila is talking about 800 app years only.
Romana is not connected to reality beyond doubt. In 21 st century ifp oeple still kidnap and sell yezhudis, kurds, Christians as sex slaves, sell children from men to men. In Isis market just imagine wat wud have been in 7 th century. Terrible. All these things in other countries are done by criminals. These acts are done by poeple who claim themself to be holy. There are poeple in India also who say they are soldiersbof God, sikhs bit they protect dharma. Good values. They also fight but not like thesenpoeple Isis.
Title is misleading,muslim came in 12th century according muslim texts .16th century mughal came not all muslims .18th century east india company took bengal .Muslims never ruled even proper 500 years entire india. Under sultans Orissa ,Ahom and south indian Empire were in power. In Mugal times Vijayanagra was standing with Ahom in Assam. Under Britisher Punjab western ,Rajasthan ,southern and Jammu these kings were ruling with all their might. If muslims really ruled than why 80% Indians are Hindu.
Rajdeep Desai is scoundrel and fake as a journalist his predictions are dream and journalism a joke of ironic satire that a carrier of bull shit and mockery for Indian press. Someone end his journalism degree if he owns one.
Old lady still romancing with her own fantasies. Leftists and communists seem to behave like they are the self appointed custodians of Indian history. It was working well all these times before the information age.
The heights of their argument is when they call themselves intellectuals. Need to be wary of these idiots in pajama with Jolna bags/Cotton jhola bag. That’s the trademark of modern indian communist retards: pajama+jolna bag, also one can include white hair and big not to be missed red bindis if the retard happens to be a woman .
Enjoy your mental diarrhea old lady before you leave to your communist abode
Can you please explain the generalisation that has been force fed to all young Indian students that Mughals were great rulers that respected all religions.
Yet destroyed old systems as well as ancient knowledge of Non-Muslim cultures and boosting conversions amongst the weak while plundering our riches through barbaric violence.
The driving forces behind every Islamic invasion were greed, lust, hatred and a morbid love of violence. All these instincts were directed against kafir everywhere. From Arabia to Iran, the barbarians destroyed civilisations after civilisations. They drove the indigenous people faithful to their own values, out of their own land. Thus fire worshipping persees fled to India and found new home among hindus. They force-converted Jews in their homeland and muslim cruelty was such that Jews had to leave their place. And now as they reclaimed their homeland, the entire moslim ummah rose up in arms against Israel, albeit only to bite the dust. But hindus always were kind to this unfortunate tribe and sheltered them for over thousand of years. Islam erased last traces of Christianity in its place of origin. Islam is still committing such tyrannies – Boko Haram targeting Christian girls, barbarians posing as asylum seekers slaying teachers in France, Sultan Erdoğan arrogantly converting Hagia Sophia museum which was originally a church into mosque, people mouthing Kashmiriyat driving indigenous Kashmiri hindus and sikhs from valley, neighbours in India’s Muslim majority localities slowly forcing the hindu inhabitants to shift out and sell their properties at throwaway price to their tormentors- not to mention various jehadi outfits infesting Pakistan and Bangladesh daily making the lives of kafirs miserable. It is a fact that Islam cannot be friend of anybody, nor can it tolerate others’ existence. But historians like Thapar are blind to such facts. Or else how can she paint India’s moslim rulers as generally benevolent and conveniently overlook their zealous oppression of hindus? The simple fact that entire North India, barring parts of Rajputana or forest covered places like Khajuraho, has no ancient hindu structure left speaks volumes of moslim tyranny. The eastward march of Islam finally halted in India was due to intrinsic spiritual and cultural strength of Hinduism which Islam couldn’t vanquish. The conversation that they succeeded to enforce was mainly due to sword. Hindus were numerous and they loathed the ways of the invaders. The Muslims, despite great efforts by villains like Aurangzeb, couldn’t manage to convert such great disdainful majority. Besides, zeziya was very dear to those despots. After all, it was their holy Islamic greed. So, to rehash the rubbish again and again that the tyrants were actually nice to hindus, will only lower the already questionable credential of historians like Romila Thapar.
Some habits die hard – this woman proved it.
We are more in past syndrome than present issues, cultural syndrome than economic empowerment. Professionalism is fast growing which disown both pastence & culture hagemony. In fact, Romila like historians imposed their personal understanding over the lay people instead of educating them of practicable future. Now we are facing the consequences. Any how professionalism will thrive and dominate the past past and cultural hagemony as as has been happening in a dialectical way.
Hinduism, Islam or Christianity have long roots . Most are saying about peaceful living. Present world needs mutual respect, not hatered . Let people stay where they are in their Dharma , follow good of it and forget bad.
Similarly all Religions also must do the same thing.
Worst are historians more than invaders.
It is really pity that being an historian romila thappar doesn’t know ( or being a north indian doesn’t like to accept the truth ) about a culture living in southern india which is as old as any other civilization in the world…. and again and again emphasising the Aryans as indigenous to this land….. Note mrs. Thappar the pictorial symbols found in harrappan archeological sites are found identical to the tamizhi scripts found in adhichanallur and recent site at keezhadi which dates back to 3000BC….
Please read about southern india also.. because there also people live really wise people…
A handful of muslims came and made all locals into muslims .
What else proof do you need
Clearly a useless article written just to twist the facts. The fact is as below…
I visited Kutubminar some time back for the very first time. After marvelling at the structure, I wandered around the ground and was shocked to see that there were lying some remains of pillars, columns etc and on it, were carved some statues, sculptures. Upon neat observation, it was clear that it belonged to Jain religion. The guide with me was little bit bit uncomfortable but informed that Kutubminar was built after destroying the beautiful Jain Temple!
I think there r hundreds of facts lying in whole India just to prove how the above article is useless.
Ha ha ha ha.
hahahhaha … hohohoho
I can laugh on people who try to hit Ms. Thaper as neither they are anywhere nearby Ms. Thaper so for as her knowledge is concerned nor they know anything about history except which was fed by bjp. Temples were also broken by hindu rulers, hindu rulers were also equally cruel lekin ye schools ke nalayak bachhe jinse inka school me history ka syllabus pooch lo to dum daba ke bhag len, janta ko fake nationalizm sikha rahe hen.
hahahaha, explaining of anything, not only history, to suit a particular ideology is not knowledge at all, that is termed as propaganda.
U historians have damaged Mother India more than 1000 plus invaders, British brutality , also u historians still defend and want repeat of martyrdom of Sikh Gurus to happen now to all Hindus
Bharat Varsh. term is unknown to these leftist historians. For them cast , language differences are the diet to feed on. Inspite of these differences Indians stood firm against the atrocities committed by invading Muslim barbarian s. The Great Persian empire fell flat against invading Muslim and abandoned Zoroastrian religion. Whereas Indians stood firm and now are growing cultural ly politically, economically. Romila Thapar is sad because the project started by her in JNU is on the path of failure. She is giving undue importance to foreign sources and ignoring latest findings at Rakhi Garhi etc.
I wonder how much proof Romila Thapar provided for her historical fact presentations. How much field investigations she & her alike done to reveal true history in comparison to her western great counterparts ? She & most of her friend historians are basically “desktop historians”. This carries no authenticity. History is equivalent to science & not something abstract & without hard proof nothing carries any value.
Bharat Varsh. term is unknown to these leftist historians. For them cast , language differences are the diet to feed on. Inspite of these differences Indians stood firm against the atrocities committed by invading Muslim barbarian s. The Great Persian empire fell flat against invading Muslim and abandoned Zoroastrian religion. Whereas Indians stood firm and now are growing cultural ly politically, economically. Romila Thapar is sad because the project started by her in JNU is on the path of failure. She is giving undue importance to foreign sources and ignoring latest findings at Rakhi Garhi etc.
All the leftists, liberals becoming another Bhajapa… losing my faith in journalism and Indian politics.
A deep distortionist and Negationist..Her History telling is the worst MYTH of India..
It is seen that The wok of Romila Thapar is being read with personal perception . It is research work.After reading with references , opnion to be formed. It is not to be accompanied with personal feelings.otherwise researchers will be discouraged.
Suresh Dhole Advocate
Respected Madam, please open your eyes and mind how these people manipulate things against Hindus not only in India and outside our country. I am a victim and lost my job. Please come out of nut shell and let us together build better India mobile
Romila thapar stop being a pseudo hindu even in your name. What kind of rubbish u r (although u r aged but u don’t deserve respect as a academic) I’ve read in your book Ancient India. For u every problem lies in Sanatan Dharma and the evils like Islam and Christianity are pure. That tell us about ur rotten communist mindset, don’t know Paid by china or isi but sure u r an academic bait to insult ur country’s glorious Vedic and hindu past. Islam and Christianity are the biggest stains on our country, culture and religion
A crooked fake lady who wants and tried to destroy Sanatana Dharma.
I fail to understand why the historians opine. I as a reader should interpret history based on facts. Using words like eminent etc is like idolising them. This phenomenon worked till a mahatma or a pandit was used as a title to brain wash the public. Present generation is either not interested or are generally too ignorant of such phenomenon. Now logic – the need to bell the thought (cat) if to be given credence is to make believe india is inherently secular and we all together (hindu, muslim and Christians) have together created it. But the fact. Muslims suffering anywhere in the world mobilises Muslims to the extent of making other religion followers suffer. There is no nation first notion there. It is a universal religion which has political ramifications ingrained in its philosophy. They believe in a theocratic nation Muslims should be preferred as they are a majority and in a democracy minority should get preference. Where is the evolution of society. And what to say of conversions by church. We are all part of history in making. Leave the past, a sense of nationalism irrespective of religion is mandatory for every country, so should be for ours.
Kavita Krishnan, Romila Thapar, Kanhaiya Kumar, Mahua Maitra all are puppets of congress and anti national propaganda machines, though Indian know them very well.
If anybody search about the relation among the family of Thapar, Congress, anti Indian secularists and literates of pakistani origin.
The vicious pack of wolves always try to present their narratives in different formats, and by these they always try to use divide and rule policy between Hindu, Muslims and others
Presently they have started their campaign heavily through digital media like NDTV, Wire etc.
Beaware my brothers and sisters of India from these colour changing people and unity of India.
How to become famous? Today it is quite easy and it is just my blaming Hindus! (Sick people…)
If you talk against Hindus then you’re secular…talk supporting Hindus then you’re communal…
The author doesn’t have guts to talk about the Muslim rulers like Mughals, Khilji, Bahamani dynasties etc and the atrocities done during their rule…