Title Changing notions of History.docx ✅

Indian historians initially tended to follow the pattern established by the European historians and wrote largely on dynastic history. But with the growing presence of a nationalist ideology, the nationalist interpretation of Indian history gained importance. History as a major component in the construction of national identity and culture became a subject of contestation between the anti-colonial nationalists and those supporting the colonial view. Some colonial views like that of the orientalists found sympathetic echo in nationalist writings. Indian nationalist history challenged the negative aspects of the colonial historiography and thereby helped to release historical writing from the imprint of the more negative colonial theories about the Indian past. Both Muslim and Hindu nationalists drew from anti-colonial, nationalist ideologies for legitimacy, but converted their interests into a nationalism that confined itself to the articulation of a single concern-interpreting history in terms of monolithic religious identities. The nationalist historians meticulously weaved together data from texts, inscriptions, coins and other material remains to amplify the contours of the ancient Indian past. South India was also brought into the narrative and study of the regional polities progressed. The nationalist tinge in the writings of these scholars can be seen in their insistence on the indigenous roots of all the major cultural developments. The 1950’s saw the emergence of the Marxist historiography. Marxist historians shifted the focus from an event- centered history dominated by political narrative to the delineation of social and economic structures and process especially those related to class
stratification and agrarian relations. It also contributed towards unearthing the history of the non-elite groups, some of which had suffered centuries of subordination and marginalization. But the problem with Marxist historiography was that texts were sometimes read uncritically, with insufficient attention paid to the problematic chronology and peculiarities of genre. Archaeological data was included, but the basic framework of the historical narrative remained text centric. Initially the focus on class meant less attention to other structures and processes especially those related to class stratification and agrarian relations. Religion and culture were often sidelined or mechanically presented as reflections of socio-economic structures. Over the last 50 years new theoretical perspectives, scientific techniques and a continuing growth in the volume of archaeological data have been transforming our understanding of the early Indian past, especially with regard to subsistence practices, technology and human interaction with the environment. The research of small group of historians mainly women, working on gender relations have altered the frontiers of early Indian social history. A significant feature of recent historiography of the early medieval period is the detailed study of the changing profiles and configurations and of regions and sub regions. Special attention has been given on agrarian relations and political, economic and social structures and legitimization of political power. Despite their differences, the major historiographical school also shared some similarities, for instance, in their emphasis on Brahmanical Sanskrit texts and their tendency to marginalize archaeological evidence. Certain tenets if all these schools continue to thrive in the present. Some of the fundamental premises and