India Trilogy Part 2 - Real Indian History

An African proverb says "Until the lions have their historians, tales of the hunt shall always glorify the hunter,". This metaphor aptly describes how dominant groups inscribe power through historical narrative. And a story is never complete until we hear from all the sides. The one who does not have a voice or who does not have the means to publish his or her side of the story, is often treated as loser. Who wrote India's history? British or Indians? Let's find out.

Being a history buff, I make it a point to visit museum in any major city if I have the time. Have seen the London Museum to Te papa Museum in Wellington New Zealand.

But one of the most memorable ones was in 2004, when I went to Taipei Taiwan for the first time. I landed on a Sunday and had time to visit the National Palace Museum. Spent may be 5 to 6 hours there.

It's a brilliant museum which captured well 8000 years of Chinese civilisation. As luck would have it on that day, there was a complete section on India and how China traded with India for over 5000 years. They meticulously kept every small detail of Indians from the pottery they used to weapons, ladies dresses etc. Entire sections were devoted to Buddhism, Yoga, Ayurveda, Indian science etc.Even in India, though I have seen many museums nothing was show cased so well about Indian history and contribution.

I always admired the Chinese who are extremely proud about their race, language, culture, land and history. And wondered why Indians who have a culture and history perhaps even older than many other civilisations are not so proud. Why Indians from India which gave the world everything from Yoga to Zero to Ayurveda medicine to Astronomy to many major relegions including Hinduism and Buddhism are not as proud about being Indian.

Perhaps it's the way we kept (or did not keep records). CHINA is a written civilisation. They invented paper to calligraphy. Kept detailed records of everything in a written fashion . INDIA is a spoken civilisation. Vedas to science and astronomy was taught vocally from parent to child to students. We recited books rather than wrote books.

Or Perhaps it's the way we are taught history in India. Which might be a colonial hangover.

We have a few Biases in our history books.

1. History of Delhi or History of India?

More people will know Babur, Akbar, Humayun, to Mountbatten who ruled India from Delhi, rather than other dynasties.

Unless you are from that region, you will not know about Ahom Assam, Chalukyas Karnataka, Cholas Tamil nadu, Lalit Aditya Kashmir and their dynasties which ruled major parts of India for centuries

2. Indians are winners or losers?

The colonists always taught history in such a way Indians were portrayed as losers. Three battles of panipat, Buxar, plassey, ghazni, ghori all we lost to conquerors from distant lands. Basically losers from times of Alexander. And the Aryan Invasion theory (which has been proved as a myth by genetics now)

The reality is very different, and we are not taught to be proud about our culture and local kings who defended our lands valiantly.

Marathas ruled from Afghanistan to Tamilnadu. Cholas ruled from Bengal to Tamil Nadu, to Indonesia, Malaysia. AHOMS in Assam who beat the mughals and ruled for 600 years. King Suhaldev, who massacred Ghaznis troops. The brave Sikhs, Rajputs and Kashmiri kings who ruled parts of Nepal, Tibet, pakistan to Afghanistan.

AND king marthanda varma of Kerala, who in 1732 decimated the Dutch East India army, eventually making Dutch lose power to Indians. The first Asian power to beat European power was NOT Japan beating Russia in 1905. But Indians beating the Dutch in 1732 almost 200 years back. And later Tipu Sultan of mysore.

3. Independence. Armed or non violent resistance?

Modern Post independence Marxists historians portraying the independence movement as "non violent and unarmed struggle" as if the British left when we asked them to leave politely. The reality is, right from 1700. Indians fought the Portuguese and Dutch and later the British with weapons. To 1900, Indian patriots had armed struggle against the British. The armed leaders even had embassies in Germany and Japan, like ghaddar movement, Netaji bose INA who had the latest rifles and canons.

Tipu Sultan to Bhaghat Singh to Subash Chandra Bose we were armed to fight. It's not just Gandhi and Nehru who got us freedom.

4. Did women participate in resistance?

India had many women rulers, queen's, who fought the invaders valiantly. Jhansi Rani, Ahilya bhai Holker, Durgavati, Abakka to Velu Nachiyar in Tamil Nadu who fought the British in 1780.

Later the INA led by Bose had a separate women soliders wing. We had people from Annie Beasent to Sarojini Naidu who resulted the British.

5. Did India include Myanmar and Sri Lanka?

YES. the partition of India into 7 seven pieces, by the British (India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Burma, Ceylon, Nepal and Bhutan were all part of India once, as recently as 1900) and they partitioned it bit by bit. What we remember most is 1947.

It's time we recognise and honor in our history books all these valiant people and feel proud about being Indians.

Indian historians need to recognize these errors and correct them and present a complete picture. This is the minimum we owe, to our brave ancestors who made this country great in first place. This is the Real Indian History our text books must teach in our schools

Nash Narasimhan Tupil