A distorted past?

What all India had before the arrival of the Muslim invaders', read a message I received from a friend. She genuinely believes that the Muslim invaders and their progeny marred the greatness India once had. Do I write her a rebuttal? Based on what my career in History has taught me so far? Do I simply ignore the hate that she's pouring on my WhatsApp? As has become the norm.

Toppling history

A month ago, the University Grants Commission (UGC) proposed a new history syllabus for the undergraduate courses. The syllabus drastically reduces Mughal history, expands the rise of local powers like the Marathas and doesn't even mention Akbar — an emperor who devised Sulh-e-Kul, the policy of religious tolerance. Has that policy fallen out of favour because the course of the present politics makes it so?

The syllabus announces terms like 'History of the Bharatvarsha', 'Sarasvati Civilization', 'Indian valour' and traces scientific innovations to the Vedic age. The draft policy uses adjectives like 'Greatness of Indian Literature', can something that has been outrightly stated as great be studied critically? The syllabus fails to mention society, class distinctions, identity, and women's history. It fails to recognize the idea of India as a nation developed through the course of history, and not in the Vedic age!

'Sarasvati Civilization' is named after a mythological river which, as per the prominent historian DN Jha, exists only in the imagination of the credulous! If the delegitimization of Muslim rulers for the masses through Bollywood movies were not enough, now even educational bodies are ensuring that the truth gets overshadowed.

Wrong idea of the past

Seeking present religious identities in the politics of the past shall only destroy the idea of a shared Indian past and threaten communal harmony. Maratha vs Mughal discourse of the power struggle cannot be seen in the frame of the present Hindu-Muslim binary as neither the Mughals were fighting for Muslim domination nor the Marathas for a 'Hindu Rashtra'.

India's past should be seen in the image of India itself: an amalgamation of various religious identities enriching it. If passed, this syllabus has the potential of destroying a major portion of history and instilling in students the idea of India that wasn't there. It relegates the Sultanate and the Mughal rulers as merely breaks in a monolithic, uniform great Indian past. It shall play a role in furthering the otherisation of the Muslim identity prevalent in the country right now.

A religious binary?

I am wondering what the future of history would be. I came across another news article stating that the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) has removed plaques that stated that the Rajput forces had to retreat in the battle with Akbar. Mughals claimed a decisive victory over Mewar in the Battle of Haldighati (1576). Why does that have to be erased today? History cannot be remodeled on fanciful imaginations and aspirations of past glories.

The fight shall go on

Getting back to the WhatsApp hatred I received, it is the price you pay for your religious identity and constantly voicing anti-communal concerns. Just like the famous historian Audrey Truschke, who is trolled by 'Hindutva nationalists' for pursuing unbiased history. We cannot let the Hindu-Muslim religious binary and bigotry seep into our textbooks. Leading historians have raised their voices against the proposed syllabus but the UGC has not responded so far.

The question remains: Can the UGC's actions facilitate hateful trolls? Yes, they may, by inserting the wrong idea of the past in the history curriculum. As it has been emphasized time and again that there can only be 'a secular India' or 'no India'.

The writer is a student of Medieval History at AMU. Views expressed are strictly personal