Nationalist Historiography flourished mainly in dealing with the ancient and mediaval periods. It hardly existed in the modern period and came into being mainly after, 1947, no school of nationalist historians of modern India having existed before 1947. This was in part because, in the era of nationalism, to be a nationalist was also to be anti-imperialist, which meant confrontation with the ruling, colonial authorities. And that was not possible for academies because of colonial control over the educational system. It became safe to be anti-imperialist only after 1947. Consequently, a history of the national movement or of colonial economy did not exist. This is , of course, not a complete explanation of the absence of nationalist historiography before 1947.
A detailed and scientific critique of colonialism was developed in the last quarter of the 19th century by non-academic, nationalist economists such as Dadabhai Naoroji, Justice Ranadi, G.V. Joshi, R.C Dutt, K.T Telang, G.K Gokhale and D.E Wacha. Several academic economists followed in their footsteps in the first half of the 20th century. Their critique did not find any reflection in history books of the periods. This critique, however formed the core of nationalist agitation in the era of mass movement after 1920. A few historians who referred in passing to the national movement and nationalist historians after 1947 did not see it as an anti- imperialist movement. Similarly, the only history of the national movement that was written was by nationalist leaders such as R.G Pradhan, A.C Mazumdar, Jawaharlal Nehru and Pattabhi Sitaramayya. Post 1947 historians accepted the legitimacy of nationalism and the Indian national movement but dealt with its foundation in the economic critique of the colonialism. They also tended to underplay, when not ignoring completely, other streams of the nationalists struggle.
Modern historians have also been divided between those, such as Tara Chand, who held that Indian has been a nation in the making since the 19the century and those who argue that Indian has been a nation since the ancient times, to their credit, all of them accept Indian's diversity, i.e., its multi - lingual, multi - cultural character.
Nationalist historians also have ignored or severely underplayed inner contradictions of Indian society based on class and caste or the oppression of and discrimination of against women and tribes. They have also ignored the movements against class and caste oppressions. They have seldom made an in - depth analysis of the national movement and often indulged in its blind glorification while adopting a secular position and condemning communalism, they do not make a serious analysis of its character or elements, causation and development. Quite often, it is seen merely as an outcome of the British policy of 'divided and rule'. They give due space to the social reform movements but do not take a critical look at them, and often ignore the movements of the tribal people and the lower castes for their emancipation. As a whole, historians neglected economic, social and cultural history and at the most attached a chapter or two an these without integrating them into the main narrative.
Nationalist historian did, however, set up high tradition of scholarship. They based their writings on hard research and commitment to truth as they saw it. They carefully and meticulously footnoted all their statements. Consequently their writing was very often empirically sound. Their research advanced our understanding and interpretation of the past. They also contributed to the cultural defence against colonisation on our culture. Simultaneously, most of them contributed to the positive aspects of the modernisation of our society. Many of them also uncovered new sources and developed new frameworks for the interpretation of existing source. They raised many new questions, produced controversies and initiated active debates. They also inculcated the nation that historical research and writing should have relevance for the present. Even when not going far in their own research, they accepted and promoted the nation that the role that the common people play in history should be a major component of history writing.
Above all, nationalist historical writing contributed to the self - confidence, self - assertion and a certain national pride which enabled Indian people to struggle against colonialism especially in the face of denigration of India's past and the consequent interiority complex promoted by colonial writers. In this respect as in many others, nationalist historical writing in India became a major unifying factor so far as the literate Indians were concerned.
Reference:
MHI-03 'Historiography'
IGNOU
Translation:
Nationalist Historiography hi hman lai hun khan a thang duang hle a, tunlai hunah hi chuan a awm mang lo a a ni. Kum 1947 hnu lamah chiah a rawn lang leh tan a, hemi hma hi chuan hetiang lampang zirna hi awm ngai lo a ni. Hemi hi a chhan pakhat chu ram hmangaihtu ten an ram hmangaihna kha lantir a rem lo a, an ti lang a nih chuan an ram awptu lal an hmachhawn a ngai zel ani. Lehkhathiam tan pawh tih theih vak an nei lo a, a chhan chu an lehkha zir dan zawng zawng pawh British ho in an thuhnuaiah an dah vek vang a ni. Hun a lo kal zel a, 1947 hnu lamah chuan a lo ziawm ve ta deuh a. Ram awp na that lohzia te mi thiam ten an lo auchhuah pui ta a. Chung mite chu Dadabhai Naoroji, Justice Ranade, GV Joshi, RC Dutt leh mi dang te an ni. Hei hi kum zabi 19na lai vel kha a ni. Kum zabi 20na a lo thlen chuan an hnung zuiin mithiam tan takin hetiang lampang hawi zawng thu an lo nei ve leh zel a. A tir chuan ngaihven hlawh em em lo mahse, Kum 1920 a lo thlen chuan mipui zingah a thawk na tawh hle a ne. Mahse hei hi mi tan chuan ram in awpbehna lantirna tak tak ah an ngai lo a, inhnialna tam tak a awm phah a ni.
National movement lampang ziaktu awm chhun te chu RG Pradhan, AC Mazumdar, Jawaharlal Nehru leh Pratibha Sitaramayya. 1947 hnu lamah chuan ram hmangaih hawi lampang chu historians te chuan an lo pawm ve ta ani. Historians ngaihdan te pawh a ni ang lo ta nual a. Tara Chand chuan kum zabi 19 atang vel in India chu hnam pum khat ang in a siam tan niin a sawi a, thenkhat erawh chuan hmanlai hun atang daih tawh a hnam pum khat ni tawh in an sawi thung ani. Chutihrual chuan India chu mi chi hrang hrang, tawng hrang hrang, rinna hrang hrang awmkhawm an nih tih chu an pawm vek a ni. Mahse Indian society chu chi inthliarna te, hmechhia hmuhsitna leh hnam hnuaihnung te hnuaichhiahna a nih thu te chu an sawi lang leh bawk si lo a, a thatna lampang ringawt an sawi uar a ni. Hnam hnuaihnung zawk hmalakna te chu an ngaihthah fo thin a ni.
Amaherawhchu, nationalist historian te hian thil tha tam tak an ti ve tho a, an thil tih reng reng ngun takin an ngaihtuah hmasa a, tha takin an chhinchiah bawk a ni. Kan khawtlang inrelbawl dan tihhmasawnna kawngah pawh min pui nasa ani. Hmanlai thil tun laia chhawr tangkai theih tur chi tam tak an rawn hmu chhuak a, mipui inpumkhatna pawh nasa takin a la awm lehzual a ni. Heng an thil sawi ziah te hian mipui rilru a hneh a, kan lo inhmuh hniamna thin te a paih bo a, tin ram inpumkhatna a siam bawk a ni.
No comments:
Post a Comment