Integrity Score 240
No Records Found
No Records Found
Introduction
The Concept of an Indian Identity and Mindset continues..
Taking this for granted, I venture to say that there is no country that can rival the Indian Peninsula with respect to unity. It has not only geographic unity, but it has over and above all a deeper and much more fundamental unity – the indubitable cultural unity that covers the land from end to end [Published in Indian Antiquary, Vol. XLI, May 1917, p. 94].
After achieving independence, under the leadership of Jawaharlal Nehru and the implementing authority of the ICS, de-falsification of our history was never done, in fact the very idea was condemned as “obscuranist” and Hindu chauvinist. For a brief period, when Murli Manohar Joshi was in charge of the Education portfolio at the Centre (1998-2004) an attempt was made to de-falsify history. But again it was done not by challenging scholarly debate, but by changing textbooks on government diktat, i.e., putting the ‘cart before the horse’. The effort became tainted as ‘saffronisation’. Joshi had got it right conceptually, but he got poor support from his colleagues in government for implementing it. It was not given priority.
What is the gist of this British imperialist-tailored Indian history? In this history, India is portrayed as the land conquered first by the Dravidians, then by the Aryans, later by Muslims, and finally by the British. Our history books today portray this obsession with foreign rule. For example, even though the Mughal rule from Akbar to Aurangzeb is about 150 years, much shorter than the 350 year rule of the Vijayanagaram empire, the history books of today hardly take notice of the latter. In fact the territory under Krishna Devaraya’s rule was much larger than Akbar’s, and yet it is the latter who is called “the Great”. Such a version suited the British
rulers who had sought thereby to create a legitimacy for their presence in India.
to be continued....