HISTORY

UNIT–1

What is History/ how do we define History?

1. History is an attempt to recapture the past events. The past, however, is an imperfect past as it is in a
sense lost to us forever.
2. Traditionally, History has been a study of past events in a chronological order.
In archaeology we use carbon dating for arriving at a particular time of an object.
Father of History – Herodotus
Chronology:
Chronos – dates, years
Logus – attainment of an objective
3. History in today‘s context has been narrativised (told in a form of a story). In the past, History was about
collection of facts, that is, military achievements of a ruler. Every fact has a meaning and it has to be
interpreted and retold in a form of a narrative.
4. History has been the result of constant interplay between human beings and their environment. Human
beings from the very beginning have the capacity for organization which started with the providing of
the basic needs, i.e. food, clothing, shelter which was followed by social and political organization,
transmission of knowledge through intellect, self expression and even religious and philosophical
beliefs. In other words, this is a shared heritage of the human kind. Human beings have moved from
simple tribal societies to republics and to monarchies which are complex system. In other words, History
is a biography of civilizations. Civilizations are universal cultural patterns in which human beings share
uniform institutions and ways of life. The civilizations do not remain static or isolated but they change
over a period of time and interact with other culture that is why they are complex societies.
5. When a group of people in a particular period develop a highly complex cultural pattern resting upon
intricate social and political organizations and they exert a wide control over the forces of nature. The
human society can be said to have achieved civilization. Civilization in all its different aspects and
dimensions constitute the subject-matter of History.
6. History is the living past of the human beings over centuries to the past. The past historians have left
behind chronicles, historical accounts and other written documents which have given the present
historians an idea about the past. Most of these historical accounts of the past are written for posterity or
future generations. Many of them by nature are didactic, i.e. they provide moral instructions or lesson by
describing the successes and failures of the kings. There is an underline belief in historians that we must
learn from the mistake of the past. Simultaneously, modern historians partially agree that History needs
to be understood as there is a lesson in History but at the same time historians should refrain from
passing moral judgements. In other words, today‘s history writing is not prescriptive or didactic.
7. Conventional history writings have primarily focused on life cycles and events associated with the kings
and the great people. The focus of History has been on the military achievements of the kings, the policy
decisions, the administrative structures of the rulers and the dynasties. There has hardly been any
mention of ordinary lives.
8. According to some historians, all History is contemporary history. A modern historian E. H. Carr
described History as a continuous dialogue or a process of interaction between the historian of the
present and the facts of the past. Past does not speak by itself, it is the historian who ask certain
questions from the records of the past.
9. All histories are biased histories. Each historian has a specific question or a set of question to ask from
the past, for instance, a historian of today may wish to focus only on the activities of the women of the
past.
10. History attempts to understand the patterns of development in a particular period, for instance, in a
specific dynasty to understand the unique features of the polity and the society. In other words, History
is a study of unique developments in an age or any culture.
11. In traditional history writing, the historians have looked at History in teleology and unilinear perspective.
For these historians, especially from the historical school, History is a story of progress from primitive to
advanced civilization.
12. History has been defined or has been understood as a story of change over a period of time. Both time
and change are associated with History. Today‘s historians questioned the statement that History is
unchanging and is static. No two events in History are same or identical as the historical figures change
with time.
13. The subject-matter of History is diversified and varied in nature in modern times. Previously the focus of
History was on the kings but today the focus is shifting and History is becoming more interdisciplinary.
The subject-matter of History is no longer about battles but it is about oppression, marginalization, about
the hidden power structures in the society and about the lesser known regions and areas.
14. In History there has been a biased towards writing and written records. Conventionally, History has been
divided into three— pre-history, proto-history and History. For today‘s historian, History is a record
based on multiple historical sources in which the written is one source. In conclusion, when we attempt
to answer the question what is History consciously or unconsciously the historians reflect these biases in
the contemporary times and the society they live in. In other words, History is a continuous process of
dialogue between the present and the past.

 Debates in History
There are two important debates in History:
1. Relevance of facts in History
2. Interpretations in History

→ Relevance of facts in History

1. The nineteenth century was a great age of science thought and enlightenment in Europe. Everything was
being tested against reasoning and rationality. If any discipline did not succeed in the test of rationality,
it was dismissed as irrational and unscientific.
2. Two thinkers, Ranke and Niebuhr wanted to assert the position of History as a science. They came to be
associated with positivist school of law in Europe which was anxious to stake out the claim for History
as a science. Ranke argued that it is possible in History to reconstruct the past in modern sense as a
scholarly discipline. He focused on the methods stating that historians need to stick to certain definite
rule of establishing the fact which should be scientific in nature. He concluded that the task of a historian
was to collect the facts in a scientific manner which itself is precise and accurate.
3. The positivist also asserted that the only purpose of history writing is to be precise and it can only be
derived from the collection of facts. Further, once the facts have been collected there is nothing left to
infer.
4. In Great Britain, the positivist viewed resonated with the empiricist school of thought which was by the
British philosophers John Locke and Bert and Russell. They argued that facts are sacred as they are
scientific and opinions free.
5. This common sense view of History further argues that there are certain basic facts which are same for
all historians and they form the backbone of History, for instance, the year 1526— the first battle of
Panipat. These are the basic facts which belong to the category that is the raw material of History.
6. The positivist argued that the dead hand of the past generation of historians, scribes and chronicles have
left behind a large reservoir of written documents with all its biases, prejudices and opinions. Today‘s
generation of some historians except the views of the past historians unquestioningly.
7. The nineteenth century fetish for facts was completed and justified by a fetish for written documents.
According to the positivist believe in the precision of the documents which were considered to be the
primary source. In conclusion, the positivist believes that the facts speak for themselves as they are
based on authenticated documents.

→ Interpretations in History
1. Nineteenth century was a comfortable age for Europe in which Europe is dominating the world. By the
end of nineteenth century, the European powers have supremacy over the entire world. Europe was full
of confidence and optimism in the nineteenth century and they did not feel the need to question the
existence. Facts on the whole seem satisfactory and the inclination to ask questions was very weak for
the positivist in the nineteenth century. The meaning was self evident in the fact itself.
2. In the twentieth century, Europe was rocked (or convulsed) by conflicts which affected the large civilian
population and massive destruction and Europe had to confront certain disturbing questions about their
existence and the past.
3. In the 1920s, an Italian scholar Benedetto Croce wrote a book titled ―History as a story of liberty‖. In
this book he argued that all History is contemporary history. In other words, History consists of
essentially seeing the past through the eyes of the present and also in the light of its present problems. He
concluded that the main job of a historian is not to record but to evaluate.
4. Another historian who argued strongly for the importance of interpretation or the idea in the History was
a British historian R. G. Collingwood, i.e. the idea of History in 1944–45. R. G. Collingwood
emphasized on the philosophy in History. Before him, Voltaire has also stressed upon the philosophy of
History in the eighteenth century.
5. Collingwood emphasized on the following points:
(a) The philosophy of History is neither concerned with the past by itself nor with the historians thought
about the past by itself. Instead it is concerned with both the things in their mutual relationship. The
enquiry is conducted by the historian into the series of past events about which he or she enquires.
(b) The past which a historian study is not a dead past but it is a past which in some sense is still living in
the present.
(c) A past act is dead that is meaningless to a historian. It gets a meaning when a
historian understands the thought that lay behind the act. In other words, Delhi
Sultanate
Collingwood asserts all History is the history of thought.
(d) The facts of History are not ‗pure‘ since they do not exist in a pure form. They are Slave/Ilbari
always refracted through the mind of the historian and the reader. ↓
Khilji
(e) The first concern in History should not be the facts but the person writing the facts. ↓
In Indian History, Ziauddin Barani writes History of Delhi Sultanate in his book Tughlaqs
‗Tarikh-i-Firuzshahi‘. ↓
(f) G. M. Trevelyan writes History of Great Britain from the liberal tradition point of Sayyids
view. In the liberal tradition, nationalism and wars undertaken on the cause of ↓
Lodis
nationalism were celebrated but they condemned wars on the basis of religion. The
 nineteenth century liberal thought was dominated by the idea that it is good to kill for the nation but
denounced killing for the religion.
(g) Ziauddin Barani was the historian of Delhi Sultanate. He belongs to the class of Ulemas, i.e. the Muslim
religious community. He looked at History and the actions of the Sultans from the religious point of
view and hence his work has to be seen in the context of his social background and identify the bias
inherent in his history writing.
(h) Historians need to have an imaginative understanding of the minds of the people with whom he or she is
dealing.
(i) A historian must not be sympathetic with the past as sympathy implies an agreement. History cannot be
written unless a historian receives some kind of a contact or a connection or empathy with the minds of
those about whom a historian is writing. The function of a historian is not to love the past or to
emancipate himself or herself from the past but to master and understand the past as the key to
understating the present.

 Historical Methods
Historical method is the methodology used by historians in a scientific manner to reconstruct the past. It
is a technique to arrive at an understanding of the past developments. Historical method in a way is a
practice of History. It has three important constituents:
1. Records or the sources
2. Critical method or historical analysis
3. A historical sense

1. Records or sources
The principle materials available to a historian for reconstructing the past are the records or remains of
the past. It is sometimes called as historical debris. The records serve as evidence for the facts and the
analysis of the historians. The records are rich in variety of ways. There are written documents, official
correspondences, inscriptions, coins, medals, private letters, journals, diaries, photographs, maps,
paintings, presscores, sculpture, artifacts, etc. It is through the study of such history as records that a
historian understands that history of events and people. History deals with evidence just like law; hence
the famous saying ―no records no history‖.

2. Critical method or historical analysis

As History deals with evidence, the material remains that are left behind from the past must be examined
carefully. It cannot be presumed or assumed that all materials of the past are genuine as records. A
historian should not completely trust the source but should presume that all materials of the past are
doubtful unless otherwise proved. There is a very well instance of a spurious document in History which
is called ―The Donation of Constantine‖. The historian must aim at presenting an authentic picture of the
past based on multiple sources. The method is largely analytical which includes internal and external
criticism. The external criticism is also called critical scholarship which examines the authorship of the
historical record, for instance, the place and the time of the documents— such information is crucial in
determining the historical value of the document. The internal criticism examines a record, for example,
a written document in terms of its content to ascertain whether the document is true or false. Both
external and internal criticism together pronounces a verdict or the veracity or authenticity of a record
which becomes a fact of History. Historical method as it emerged in the nineteenth century is a scientific
approach focusing on the accuracy of the historical record as far as possible. The historical fact emerges
out of exploration of multiple historical data which corroborates the other records.
3. Historical sense
A keen awareness of the past is called historical sense. A historical sense includes the study of History
along with the uniform patterns of development and of the change in the past. The characteristic feature
which distinguishes History from other disciplines is a specific concern with the elements of change
through time. Historians is concerned with the transition for instance from ancient to medieval or
medieval to modern. A question that a historian investigates is when did the change occur or happen.
The sociologists look for the common factors or the regular patterns discernible that can be seen in the
regular activities of a human being in a society. The historian looks at the way societies differ from each
other at different points of time. In other words, how over a period of time societies changes and
develop. It is this basic concern with change through time which makes it necessary for a historian to
know exactly when an event took place. To conclude, a historian must know the sequence of occurrence
of events in order to identify when change occur in society as it constitutes a historical sense.

 Sense of History in ancient India

Historiography is the writing of History by the past generations of historians‘ chroniclers and other
record keepers. Historiography literally means the art of writing history or it is the history of history or
the history of historical writings. Historiography informs about the evolution of history writing in
particular period or the area of research.

 Ancient India history writing

1. In ancient India there is an availability of a waste amount of information in the form of literature and
historical material. These records range from written documents to architecture and other kinds of object
and artifacts.
2. In the second half of the eighteenth century, the Mughal province of Bengal, Bihar and Odisha directly
came under the control English East India Company in order to rule the territory the company started
gathering information about the laws and the histories of the place. This task of gathering information
becomes a colonial enterprise called as an 'orientalist' point of view. Under orientalist enterprise, there
was a large scale translation of Asian Sanskrit records. They translate Sanskrit records which is interest
to then specially Manusmriti, Vedas, Bhagavad Gita some of the plays of Kalidas. While carrying on
this task the colonial offices well that the ancient India literature were ahistorical as the Western
understanding of history based on chronological time which was found missing in the records available
to them. Hence they concluded that the ancient India lacked a sense of history.
3. Ancient India
(a) Despite the abundance of literature in ancient India, history is miserably represented as chronology is not
there.
(b) Brahmins who were the class in India society were not interested in recording for future generation for
achieving the human achievement and activities their interest were elsewhere.
(c) The Brahmins were interested in region philosophy especially power karma and rebirth and the working
of the all powerful niyati (faith). This idea goes against history.
(d) The ancient society believed in the idea of regression. In other words, i.e. the preceding yuga (eon) was
progressively better than the present yuga which means Satyuga was the best this
idea is clearly unhistorical. Multiple time
(e) The colonial officers observed that there is a tendency of the Indian mind of frames:

ancient India to prefer general over particular or in other words, the collective Cyclic
over the individual action or activity. For instance, a text might be quoted but
Linear
not the author. Similarly in art, literature and painting there is anonymity. There
Spiral/Spherical
 is a lack of care for accurate knowledge and exact detail. There is a worship of tradition and authority in
the ancient Indian society.
(f) According to western scholars, the ancient Indian philosophical thought considers human life as
deception or Maya (illusion) and hence human activities and achievements were largely ignored. Actual
life experiences were neglected for the spiritual after life consideration.
4. The ancient Indians looked for answer for natural occurrence of the events in terms of either divine or
demonic forces. The super human magical powers gave explanation capable of affecting the course of
nature.
5. In the ancient Indian records, one finds the records of missing chronology. Many a time the knowledge
of events is unaccompanied by the time of the occurrence of event which is unhistorical in the modern
discipline of the History. There are two kinds of chronological problems in the ancient Indian records:
(i) The absence of dates and sequence of events.
(ii) The lack of a basic date of universal applicability in ancient India
There is an existence of Vikram Samvat, Saka Samvat, Gupta Samvat and Saka-Gupta Samvat. There is
a constant problem of unclear chronology in the ancient Indian records. Ashoka stated that he attacked
Kaling in the eight year of his reign in a statement, but we still do not know the date of Ashoka‘s
coronation and the date of Kaling war.
6. The ancient conception of time did not describe events of the past in chronology but in terms of
everyday domestic and religious rights and in terms of yug.

 Interpretations of historical records of ancient past

1. The contemporary history makes attempt to reconstruct the ancient Indian past from the primary records
available. There is rich historical information available in the records through the objective may not be
to write history for future generations.
2. According to historians, history writing in ancient India shows the logical development of themes and
not historical development it is more like literature writing that is divided into number of stages.
3. We take up the example of Bāṇabhaṭṭa‘s Harshacharita. The work is divided into five stages:
(i) Prarambh (or the beginning)
(ii) Prayatna (or the effort)
(iii) Praptyasa (or the hope of success)
(iv) Niyatapta (or the certainly of achievement)
(v) Phala-gama (or achievement)
The story is about the early years of Harshavardhana and it is considered to be the first work to be
regarded as historical. Harshacharita tells the story of a hero Harsh, his family, brothers and sisters. The
story begins with the marriage of Harshavardhana‘s sister Rajyashri with the king of mukhari dynasty—
Grihavarman, the ruler of Kannauj. It is followed by the death of his father— Prabhakarvardhana, and
his mother committing sati. Grihavarman is murdered and Rajyashri is imprisoned by the king of Malva.
Harshavardhana‘s elder brother— Rajyavardhana goes on a military campaign on Malva to rescue his
sister but on the way he is killed by treachery by king Shashanka of Gauda dynasty. There ends the story
of his brother. Meanwhile Rajyashri escapes from the prison and hides in Vindhyas mountains and she is
rescued by his brother Harshavardhana. The brother-sister reunites and they return to the capital.

→ Evaluation of Harshacharita
1. It is not a historical work
2. It is based on eye-witness accounts, Bāṇabhaṭṭa‘s personal knowledge and evaluation.
3. The objective of Bāṇabhaṭṭa is not to record the events as they happened but to praise the hero
Harshavardhana and his achievement that is redeeming the family honour by rescuing his sister, the
royal is restored.
4. It is a work of Sanskrit prose and it has many religious and mythological illusions.
5. Its historical significance lies in the fact that he mentions the political treacheries (betrayals) of the past
under Shishunagas, Mauryas, Sungas and Sakas.
6. The significance of Bāṇabhaṭṭa work for a historian lies in the social history of the ancient past that it
provides. Bāṇabhaṭṭa describes men and women of all kinds and classes. He mentions about agricultural
process such as ploughing. Bāṇabhaṭṭa also refers to the crops like sugarcane enclosures interesting
Harshacharita for the first time mentions the use of Persian wheel— arghatta, for the purpose of
irrigation. He also describes heaps of corns ready for threshing.
7. Most importantly, Bāṇabhaṭṭa mentions singing herdsmen.
8. Bāṇabhaṭṭa also describes self immolation (sati) by Prabhakarvardhana‘s widow.

 Kalhana’s Rajatarangini
1. It is the conditions or uninterrupted flow of History of Kashmir.
2. It is a long Sanskrit poem of 8,000 metrical verses. It has 8 contos or tarang, i.e. the wave.
3. Kalhana begins the History of Kashmir from 1184 BCE (mythical time) up to 1148–49 CE.
4. Kalhana is the son of Champak, who was the minister of king Harsh of Kashmir dynasty, who ruled
from 1089–1101.
5. Kashmir has certain distinctive advantages which led to ascertain flourishing of history writing.
(a) The geographical location of Kashmir which is at the intersection of many land routes between
Central Asia, India and China.
(b) It made Kashmir open to cultural influences from the western Greco-Roman traditions, Eastern
Mongolian tradition and Northern Scythians (or early Turkish). All of them have a definite
historical tradition.
(c) Kashmir was to a large extent is geographically isolated from the rest of the Indian sub-continent.
This allowed for a distinct culture to develop in Kashmir.
(d) Kashmir was a centre of Buddhism for a long time which also has a strong tradition of writing
history.

 Rajatarangini
1. His work depicts how contemporary men and women appears, the clothes that they wore and their
beliefs.
2. He mentions the building of the towns such as temples, shrines, monasteries and also their
destruction and looting by the non-believers and iconoclasts (non-believer in ideal worship).
3. Kalhana also mentions individual kings and their achievements and also the discrimination in society
was not along the lines of caste. In political administration, for instance, king Avantivarman‘s
minister Suyya who was an expert in engineering and irrigation works was of Chandala origin. He
mentions king Meghavarman, who wanted to spread non-violence through conquest.
4. Kalhana mentions femines, floods and great fires that decimated large population.
5. He mentions warrior king like Lalitaditya and also benevolent king like Chandrapida.
6. He also mentions political and administrative aspects of the royal court of Kashmir including
conflicts between the royalty and the powerful groups such as Ekangas and Tantrins and Damaras
(feudal lords). The priest resorted to hunger strike as a powerful political weapon to get their
demands met.
7. Kalhana also mentions the economic aspects, though he is not interested in looking at the political
part. He describes the famines and their rise of food prices, taxation and currencies. He also mentions
class division between the rich and poor when he describes that the royalty and the nobility enjoyed
eating fried meat and drinking light wine which was delightfully and perfumed. The food of the
common people was boiled rice.
8. Kalhana describes the society in Kashmir. From his records it seems that caste was not a barrier to
holding any military or administrative posts. A lower caste Domba and the Brahmins work together
as soldiers in the army. Wealth was an indication of price and status. Inter-caste marriages are
mentioned, for instance, king Sankarvarman‘s mother was a daughter of low caste spirit distiller.
9. King Chakravarman (923–933) married to a Domba woman— Hamsi and she was his chief queen.
As the chief queen she performed the religious ceremonies in the famous temple of Vishnu temple in
Ramaswamins in Srinagar.
10. There was no Purdah system or seclusion of women. Polygamy was known and practised.
11. Women own immovable property and she managed the estates themselves.
12. Some of the women were military commanders.
13. Anugamana was known and practised but it was not indigenous to Kashmir.
14. There were two influential people mentioned— Sugandha, in the ninth century and Didda, in the
eleventh and twelfth century.
15. He condemned oppression and exploitation due to his belief in dharma. For instance, he condemned
king Sankaravarman for attacking and plundering the temples for wealth, taking back grants to the
Brahmins, and practice of forced labour (vishti). He denounced the slave trade which was run by the
Mlecchas.
16. He was sympathetic to the poor and down-trodden. In this context he mentioned many popular
uprises. People revolted against bad news.
17. Kalhana used a wide variety of sources available in the twelfth century Kashmir.
18. These sources are Nila-meta, Purana-nila, and the patron of saint of Kashmir. Then he mentions the
composition of Chavillakra and Padma-mihira.
19. The writing of Mlecchas and eleven previous works on the History of Kashmir. He crossed checked
many of these records from the original works such as official documents, ordinances, edicts, official
grants, laudatory, coins, buildings, and monuments, etc. There are precise details about every fact
that he is taking assertions of.
20. He tried to rise above the superstitions and miraculous interpretations of his times, though he could
not completely succeed. He took trouble to defect and remove discrepancies.
21. He also makes an attempt to understand the historical events in their context. It means that the
explanations did not rest on concepts like dharma or karma, but they were based on natural causes
and human actions.
22. Kalhana also takes care of chronology which he himself state was based on Kali-Laukika. It is
secular periodization and he also uses saka era.
23. Like today‘s historian, Kalhana mentions at the very outset his ideal of a historian. This distinguishes
Kalhana from his contemporaries of other authors as he has an honest independent and impartial
outlook. He states, ―That man of merit alone deserves praise whose language, like that of a judge, in
recounting the events of the past has discarded bias as well as prejudices.‖ His adherence to
Shaivism did not prejudice him against Buddhism. He presented both sides of a ruler, i.e., the good
and the bad points. In other words, Kalhana‘s works is a critical account of the kings of Kashmir and
not the panegyric of the kings.
24. Kalhana‘s work is didactic in nature, i.e., moral lectures for the future generations.
25. At times Kalhana reflected on the philosophical concepts like dharma, adharma, punya, paap, niyati
(or faith), punar-janam, and his belief in divine retribution.