Latest "The Last Mughal" is arriving in October 2006

There is a report on Sify.com by Vishal Arora from Delhi. It is titled "New Twist to 1857 mutiny debate". It is surprising to read that for Arora the Uprising of 1857 was an event which has to be either identified as a Mutiny or a First War of Independence. Anyhow, the report is about a forthcoming book of William Dalrymple.

According to this report William Dalrymple has come out with a research work spread over four years and the result will be in form of a book titled "The Last Mughal". It is just a coincidence that my last post was about the Last Mughal Emperor Bahadur Shah Zafar whose song "Na Kisi ki Ankh Ka Noor Hoon, Na Kisi kay Dil Ka Karar hoon" made famous in the silken voice rendered to his poetry by late Mohammad Rafi. He is definitely becoming a "Dil Ka Karar" with great Shidad after 142 years.

Well, the book is not in my hands. It will be released, as reported in the above mentioned report, in the month of October 2006. However, there are some details about this book which are given in the above mentioned report.

The first feature of this book mentioned in the report is that Darlymple had reached conclusion that the 1857 event was a "war a religion due to concerns over British intentions to impose Christianity".

Darlymple has, it is emphasized, reported in an interview on BBC that he had consulted nearly 20000 documents of the rebels now preserved in National Archives of India. The documents are in Persian and Urdu. He was assisted by Mahmoud Farooqi in gleaning and evaluating the documents. The documents were recovered from the Sepoy Camp and the Palace in Delhi.

A question was asked from the historian that whether the missionaries were a separate identity and opposed by East India Company. The historian had explained the position of missionary in British East India Company in the year 1857 and reported to 1833 Charter. Though the historian has not specifically mentioned the Charter and the report only records that the historian had told that the missionaries were legally allowed in East India territory in 1830s. He seems to have categorically stated that after that "missionaries and Church building were both patronized by the company. This was a major cause of the uprising of 1857."

In report a very important statement has been attributed to the celebrated historian which is the major contention against the Indian historians till this day. It is said that "up to now most of the data used by historians exploring 1857 has come from British source." The historians clarified that the papers in National Archives has never been properly explored before. There may be a truth in that observation.

It is further written that the historians told in the interview that the war of religion was linked to the foreign domination. He had substantiated by referring the war cry of the rebel sepoys which consisted the word Din and Dharma in danger. He also emphasised that other concerns like self-government and economic freedom had found little mention in their documents and the main concern had remained about the imposition of Christianity by the British edifice.


A very peculiar observation is made in the report. The historian is reported to have said that the main rebels were the upper class Hindus because of the composition of the infantry at that time and they were later joined by freelance Jehadis. Further, in a categorical statement, he has reported to have told that "There are clear and specific references among the Mutiny Papers to a regiment of jihadis arriving in Delhi from Gwalior who are described as suicide ghazis who had vowed never to eat again and to fight until they met death at the hands of the kafirs". Then he has further reported that the sepoys indulged in prosecution of Christian converts during the course of uprising. He has pinpointed a specific case of Chaman Lal, a Christian convert living in Delhi. It will be of interest to note that how he has referred to such an observation in his book.

However, the report ends on a very fascinating note. The BBC has sought answers to questions about present affairs of India on socio-religious level. The historian has given his opinion also. Anyhow, this report has attracted my attention and I found it worth recording on my blog.

There is need to direct the attention of the readers to an article by Prof. R. K. Khanna at Uprising in 1857.

In addition to that the BBC interview with William Darlymple can be accessed here. It is worth reading it. As far I am concerned, I am not amused with the contents given in there.

Being a student of history, I must say that history should not be used as a propaganda material by using dialectics. Is there any conspiracy against India? The Ghost of J. S. Mill is still alive. The Shradas has started in India from today that is September 7, 2006. The United Kingdom must do some thing about this Ghost.

Using Historiography to emphasis an Ideological Stand

V. N. Dutta, Professor Emeritus, is a regular columnist in Spectrum, a Sunday section in The Tribune published from Chandigarh. He writes the column "Off the Shelf". Earlier he was quite regular. His reviews of different books were surfeited with scholarly comments. Last year, his reviews were full of literary references even of the book of literature wherein he was seen departing from discussing the history books and taking up the books from literature. However, this year his column is not appearing regularly. As one can assume that he has advanced in age and may be he is not keeping up with the editorial demands of the publication. Even the last review, one before the last Saturday, did not carry the stamp of V. N. Dutta genre.

Last Saturday, that is September 3, 2006, he wrote a review on "The Last Emperor" by S. Mahdi Husain, republished from Delhi. The first edition was published in 1956. While recollecting the event of the publication of the book in 1956, Prof. Datta referred to an incidence which prompted Husain to publish the biography of the Last Emperor. I reproduce the whole paragraph verbatim below:


"The impulse to the writing of the biography of Bahadur Shah originated from the controversy that had aroused between the author and the doyen of historians, Dr R. C. Majumdar. The author wrote an article, Emperor Bahadur Shah II and his Role in the War of 1857, in Amrit Bazar Patrika, November 18, 1956. In this article, Husain had emphasised that Emperor Bahadur Shah was a staunch patriot. Fired by a passionate zeal, he fought for the freedom of his country from the fetters of foreign rule. Husain also maintained that the War of 1857 was the war of independence and not a mere sepoy revolt, as is commonly known. Ten days later, on November 28, 1956, Majumdar, contesting Husain’s views rebutted that only one epitaph fitted suitably to Bahadur Shah, and that was treachery. In other words, Bahadur Shah was a traitor who betrayed the sepoys. Husain took Majumdar’s criticism as a challenge and brought out this comprehensive work on Bahadur Shah."

After making a point above, Prof. Datta carried out the dissection of the book from the point of historicism and methodology. However, I am here with comments of different genre.

It is rather a continuity of my earlier argument which I have presented in my earlier post titled "Need of Rewriting Gandhian Era". The question here is the actual interpretation of Indian history rising above the ideological affiliation and the biases which were quite strong in the middle of twentieth century India. There is need of rewriting the history of India from Indian perspective. I remember, as a young student of history at undergraduate level I was amused to read the controversy debated between A. L. Srivastva and S. R. Sharma over the episode of marriage between Jahangir and Nurjahan. I read their books to prepare my notes for my examination. But when I reached the chapter of Jahangir, I was put into difficulty to choose this episode for my notes. They had discussed this issue over three to four pages. I was not able to decide whether I should write any notes on them or would there be any question on it. When I discussed it will by Professor, I did not give any straight forward answer. He rather discouraged me. He told me not to consult A. L. Srivastva as he was branded as Hindu minded biased historian. I did not have the understanding and knowledge to understand what he was telling me. I still remember that I did not obtain good marks in Mughal History paper. The boys, who had consulted the question answers books (The Refreshers or Kunjees as it is called in India), obtained better marks than I did. I had virtually licked each and every line of S. R. Sharma and A. L. Srivastva. One of my friends who knew that how far I had mastered this subject mocked at me for my method of study. Well that is other story. The issue is that the historians debate among themselves over such issues in such a manner which can not be included under the subject of history. In history, a historian should remain confined to the source material and say only that much which had been written in the original sources. If he has to pass any judgement, then the historian should also write there the counter view. However, it is found that historians indulge in an activity of settling scores with their fellow historians and write history accordingly. This damages the interest of history as well of the interest of those people or nation about which it is written.

It is not one single episode. There is another episode in the Indian historiography. There was similar fight and debate between R. C. Majumdar and Tara Chand. Tara Chand was deputed to write the history of India, especially the Freedom Struggle of India. Earlier this job was to be given to R. C. Majumdar who had already accomplished a big task in 1951 under the patronage of G. D. Birla for Bhartiya Itihasa Samiti with funding from Shri Krishnmarpan Charity Trust headed by G. D. Birla, an industrialist known to be close to Gandhiji. Later, the ruling party Congress entrusted this job to Tara Chand. They had accused Majumdar for being near to Jan Sangh group and a non-secular historian.

Similarly, a few years back, Irfan Habib was ousted from the ICHR on the grounds that he was a Marxist historian. In response, Irfan Habib came out with his book of essays wherein he countered many concepts and views being promoted by the historians in his absences.

Similarly, Sumit Sarkar has come out with his own book titled Writing Social History. I have not yet completed the reading of this book. Therein, I am developing this impression that the essays are intentionally collected to counter a particular form of historiography. Though in such type of books, sometimes you are not able to understand the direction of debate. May be one is not all that well informed as well as well read as these established authors are.

Another examples which comes to mind is the book, the Last Mughals and the profile of Bahadur Shah I. One is just amused to read that how S. R. Sharma tried to counter the impression about Bahadur Shah I as created in the Last Mughals.

On the whole, such types of exercise by the historians to project an event in history with counter views and then indulge in obscurantism by obfuscating a historic personality or an event does a great a disservice to the subject. I am really excited when I find some original sources online which is made available by this new technology of Internet. My faith in my own view of Internet as a good source of discussing history through collecting of sources available online was further reinstated when I read of an invitation to Miland Brown by the Encyclopaedia Britannica. It helps you to see for yourself the real content of the source and derive the exact picture of an event or a personality.

I here again take another example. Since our school days we were taught that Aurangzeb was a religious bigot and fundamentalist. It was taught that he used to take his supper only after collecting a maund of sacred threads of Hindus. Later, in the book of J. L. Mehta, a letter by Aurangzeb was reproduced. The contents of that letter project Aurangzeb in a different colour. Similarly, an attempt was made for sometime to project Aurangzeb as a milder person than what he was earlier projected in the history books. Now, at present stage, when I read more and more about Indian history, I always thing over that how a particular aspect of history would be taught in Pakistan. Will they project the same version? It is then, I feel that there is need to rewrite the history.

Dr. S. Radhakrishnan

Sarvepalli Radhakrishnan was born in Tirutani on September 5, 1888 into a poor brahmin family. The name of his father was Sarvepalli Veeraswami. His mother's name was Sitamma.

Sarvapalli Radhakrishnan started his teaching career in year 1909 at the age of 21 years from the post of Assistant Lecturer in Madras Presidency College, Tirupati.

In year 1918, he was selected to the post of the Professor of Philosophy in the University of Mysore. It was there he published his first book titled "The Philosophy of Rabindarnath Tagore". Before that his thesis at post graduate level was published. The title of his thesis was "The Ethics of the Vedanta". After that he had published numerous articles in the various world renowned journals of Philosophy. His second book was "The Reign of Religion in Contemporary Philosophy" published in 1920. In 1921, the Vice Chancellor of Calcutta University nominated him George V Professor of Philosophy. In 1923, he published his book "Indian Philosophy". It was rated as the masterpiece in the field of literature and philosophy. This book fully established him as the leading intellectual of world. He was later called to England to deliver lectures at Oxford University. He was appointed there as Professor of Religion and Ethics. It was during his stint that he had spoken for the cause of freedom of India. He spoke, "India is not a subject to be administered but a nation seeking its soul." In 1931, he was elected to the post of Vice Chancellor of the Andhara University. He restructured the university and made well recognized institution in the field of social and general sciences and technology. In 1939, he took over as the Vice Chancellor of Benaras Hindu University founded by Pandit Madan Mohan Malvia. The Benaras Hindu University survived and flourished only because of Sarvapalli Radhakrishanan efforts.

In 1948, he was asked to chair the University Education Commission. It was under his guidance that the Indian Education system of independent India was re-framed.

In 1949, he was deputed as an ambassador to Soviet Union which was under Stalin at that time. From 1948, he represented on numerous cultural bodies of United Nations Organization (UN).

In 1954, Bharat Ratan was conferred upon Dr. Radhakrishanan. He became the President of India in 1962. It was during his tenure that India fought her two major wars namely with China in 1962 and then with Pakistan in 1965. It was during his tenure that Nehru passed away. Two famous Indian prime ministers Pandit Nehru and Lal Bahadur Shastri ruled under his presidentship.

He expired on May 17, 1975 at Madras.

Some of the Major episode of the life of Dr. S. Radhakrishanan.

Sarvapalli Radhakrishnan was born in an orthodox Brahmin family. However, he completed all this education in Christian missionary schools and colleges through scholarship. He completed his high school from Lutheran Mission School in Tirupati. He completed his graduation and post graduation from Madras Christian College Vellore.


While at Madras Christain Missrionary College, young Radhakrishanan was undecdied about the choice of subject for his honours course. He was expected to choose from Mathematics, Physics, Biology, History and Philosophy. It was a mere incidence that one of his cousin who had completed his graduation course with honours in philosophy, passed on to him three well known books on Philosophy. Radhakrishanan read those books mere out of curiosity and finally decided to opt for Philosophy as an honours course at graduation level.


In 1914, the world renowned Mathematics genius from India Srinivas Ramanuja visited Sarvapalli Radhakrishanan to seek his blessing for leaving for his studies in Cambridge. He approached him with the message that Goddesses Durga had directed him in his dream to seek his blessings before leaving India.

Ashutosh Mookerjee, the Vice Chancellor of Calcutta University was highly impressed by the articles and books of Sarvapalli Radhakrishanan. He nominated him to the post of King George V Professor of Philosophy at Calcutta University in 1921. It was a highly prestigious assignment.

Prof. J. H. Murihead requested Sarvapalli Radhakrishanan to write a readable account on Indian Philosophy which could be included in the Library of Philosophy. Radhakrishanan completed a mammoth task of writing on Indian religion within two years and published the book "Indian Philosophy" in two volumes in year 1923. The book is still rated as "philosophical classic and a literary master piece".

Sarvapalli Radhakrishanan was invited to Oxford University to deliver "Upton Lecture" on ‘The Hindu View of Life’. Later a special chair was established for him and he was appointed as Spalding Professor of East Religion and Ethics at Oxford.

In 1929, Sarvapalli Radhakrishana succeeded Principal J. Estin Carpenter in Manchester College, Oxford.

He was knighted in 1931 and bestowed upon the title of ‘Sir’. He was then called Sir S. Radhakrishanan. He was called by that title till 1947. After that he was addressed as Dr. S. Radhakrishanan.

In 1931, he was invited to head the Andhara University as Vice Chancellor. He resurrected the university by restructuring the departments of language, Humanities, Science and Technology. When he left the university in 1936, Andhara University had earned the position of the leading universities.


In 1939, he took over as the Vice Chancellor of Benaras Hindu University established by Madan Mohan Malaviya. In 1942, the Governor Sir Maurice Hallet tried to convert the campus of University into a war hospital during the Quit India Movement. Radhakrishanan approached the Viceroy and stayed the conversion of campus for other purposes. However, Sir Maurice Hallet responded by holding back the grant to the University. Sir Sarvapalli Radhakrishanan launcehd a ‘Begging Pilgrimage’ and collected funds for the university. The university continued to work in that manner. After that Madan Mohan Malaviya retired from the university. The university requested Sir Sarvapalli Radhakrishanan to continue in his post for infinite time.


Savapalli Radhakrishanan was appointed as an ambassador to USSR in 1949. He was invited by Joseph Stalin to meet him in Kremlin. It was an unexpected invitation because such a meeting was never part of the protocol. It is on record that referring to his infamous bloody purges, Radhakrishanan suggested a role model of Asoka to Stalin. Stalin listened him and responded back with a smile. He was able to establish direct rapport with Stalin who was being hated by rest of the world at that time. When Radhakrishanan was called back to India in 1952, he met Stalin before leaving and had very intimate conversation with Stalin. It touched Stalin deeply and even wished him a long life. The political analysts believe that the role played by Radhakrishanan in Moscow had laid the grounds for better relation with USSR.

During his two terms as Vice President of India, whereby he acted as the Chairman of Rajya Sabha, his period is remembered for tactful handling of sensitive debates in Rajya Sabha. His role as the Chairman of Rajya Sabha is remembered for the Sanskrit Shalokas and quotations from Bible which he readily used while defusing the tension generated during the debates in the house.


More than 100 honorary degrees and nearly 10 D Litt had been conferred upon him.

President Dr. S. Radhakrishanan spent his last days at his house ‘Girija’ Mylapore, Chennai.

Comments and Quotations by and about Dr. S. Radhakrishanan.

Dr. Sarvapalli Radhakrishanan was a monist in philosophy, monotheist in religion, eudaemonist or perfectionist in Ethics and socialist in politics.

Another profound scholar and leading politician Dr. Shanker Dayal Sharma, when took over as the President of India, it was popular in intellectual circle that a person that could revive the glory of President of India as raised to a height by Dr. S. Radhakrishanan, had come become president.


Professor A. G. Hogg of Madras Missionary College while commending the post graduate thesis of Sarvapalli Radhakrishanan titled "The Ethics of Vedanta and Its Metaphysical Presupposition" wrote, "The thesis which he prepared in the second year of his study for this degree shows a remarkable understanding of the main aspects of the philosophical problems, a capacity for handling easily a complex argument besides more than the average mastery of good English".

Aldous Huxley had remarked about Radhakrishanan that he "is the master of words and no words". It refers to his ability to express the most abstruse thoughts of philosophy in such a fine language that it becomes comprehensible to all.

Prof. H.N. Muirhead said, "Dr. Radhakrishnan has the rare qualification of being equally versed in the great European and the not less great Asiatic tradition which may be said to hold in solution between them the spiritual wisdom of the world, and of thus speaking as a philosophical bilinguist upon it."


George P. Conger said, "Among the philosophers of our time, no one has achieved so much in so many fields as has Sarvepalli Radhakrishnan of India … ."

Further, "With his unique appointment at Banaras and Oxford, like a weaver's shuttle, he has gone to and fro between the East and West, carrying a thread of understanding, weaving it into the fabric of civilization."

---

Sources: Former Presidents of India A Government of India Web Site. The readers will get details of all the awards conferred upon and works done by Dr. S. Radhakrishanan.

---

---

peep into interpretation

A Site of Rajesh Chopra

wikipedia.org

University of Memphis Web Site This link displays a handwritten letter by Dr. S. Radhakrishanan. It is part of the web site of University of Memphis at http://www.cs.memphis.edu/ .

Bangali Net of Bangali Net.

Hinduism Today

---

---

---

Edit Log:

Date: September 5, 2007.

Added the new link to official Presidents of India Official site. It was done because the original site has undergone reframing after the election of the new President Honourable Smt. Pratibha Devsingh Patil. Those who are visiting this post (for one last week, there is a tremedous rush), are requested to check the original site at http://presidentofindia.nic.in/ and then seek the link on left hand sidebar of the website if they are not able to access the site directly from this blog.

Validity of Newspapers as Primary Source Material

On Sunday, August 27, 2006, in the Spectrum issue of the Tribune, published from Chandigarh, India, a review by Gobind Thukral on the book titled Myth and Reality of the Sikh Militancy in Punjab by Dr. Joginder Singh has appeared.

I have not read the book under review but the review by Gobind Thukral contains some such observations on the use of the newspaper as the source for writing history of a particular period, which invite attention. The statements are relevant for understanding the role of the newspapers as the source material and on that as primary source.

I am taking out those statements out of context and place them in the following order.


"newspapers mirror society and play their role according to their respective ideological positions. This role could be constructive or destructive and here perceptions of scholars and readers would vary. If one could question the objectivity and motive of newspapers, one could always question the assessment of the scholars."


While using the newspapers as the primary source, in case of the book under review, where the author has used only the newspapers and even confined only to two specific newspaper being published from one place which is also a place of another newspapers like Punjab Kesari, Hind Samachar, Vir Partap etc, the caution given by Gobind Thukral is very important.


The next two statements selected are also very important. They are as follows:
"The interpretation and projection by the media then (the period for which the author of book had used two specific newspapers) by and large suffered from myopia, lack of information and self-interest. While complete objectivity may not be possible, only a section of the media tried to achieve that."

The second statement is :
It is also normal that a large section of the media—newspapers, magazines, radio, television and now the Internet—try to project the part as a whole. Worst, the mass media is no longer purveyor of the complete reality and public sphere journalism in most cases has been replaced by crass commercialism. Objectivity and free press are now more of myths."


And finally, Thukral concludes:
"Were these newspapers busy cooking stories and leading some campaigns or were these simply caught in a pincer between the militants and the state (both acting as tools of terror), which denied them the breathing space to report fairly and accurately? What happened to the other newspapers, big and small, during that period, when militants would come calling and dictated everything at gunpoint, can be ignored at the loss of arriving at fair and credible assessment. The media mediates between the reality and us, as the mediation more and more replaces reality for us. What happens when the media fabricates even a small part of the reality?"

I have not read the book. I can not comment on the central theme of the review. I had talked to a senior professor about the nature of the review. His views were diametrically opposite to the impression which I had developed after reading the review. Hence, I am now confining to that aspect of the review only which is related to the methodology of research in history. No doubt, I have omitted some of the comments of the reviewer on the author’s preference for particular selection as well his arguments to justify his selection as well as the omission of some aspects which could have been considered while using the selective newspapers.

It is not that Professor Joginder Singh is the first person to adopt this methodology for describing a particular period in history for a particular community, a separatist movement and a particular place. The topic, which he has chosen, was taken up by other scholars also and from different countries. They had used other sources also. One of the book which comes to mind is one written by H. Deol for the same period with the similar topic.

There had been many instances which could be mentioned when the scholars went to archives or Raddeewalas (scrap dealers), collected old copies of a particular type of publication, employed compilers and then developed their thesis on the basis of such sources.

One book which also comes to mind is "Social history of India" by K. K. Dutta. In that book, in order to describe the social character of people, the effect of changing times on the society, K. K. Dutta has extensively used the letters to the editors and the editorials of the newspapers in order to describe the change. The book is about the social history of India in nineteenth century.

Similarly some incidences also come to mind wherein the newspaper had played major role to define and decide a particular direction of the events. One event which had come to my mind while reading the review for the first time was the Emm Telegram which was manipulated by Bismarck. It is also an important study to describe that how far the newsprint media was instrumental in becoming the cause of the Franco-Prussian War of 1870. Similarly, the American Spanish War 1899 is also studied wherein the role of newspapers is taken in determining the start of war. Similarly, there are numerous conspiracy theories which are product of news media. One of the best examples is Watergate Scandal of America.


Anyhow, Thukral’s comments on using newspapers as the primary source for putting up some thesis is definitely of great importance for those who use newspapers and also other available sources in form of Video and Audio records with T. V. Channels as well as the digital forms on internet. It will not be out of place to mention that it will be worthwhile to see that how the reporting on Iraq on internet can be used to describe the event say after fifty years or after five years when America would have closed its operation in Middle East.


It is not any kind of disrespect or negative remark. I desire to mention one thing here. It may be taken with open mind.

There are four professors in Punjab with the same name. They are Joginder Singh Garewal, Joginder Singh Dhanki, Joginder Singh Dhillon and Joginder Singh. All of them have been talking of Modern India and especially about Punjab. All of them have contributed to the subject in a substantial manner. However, if you read them without knowing them, you may develop an impression that they have common ideology of promoting a particular view of Sikh history. They may vary on one or two aspects of interpretation but soon you start feeling that somewhere their objectivity comes under strain while evaluating the sources or picking up the sources to use or taking up of the topic for verification and research.

Winner’s Delight

An issue always crops up again and again that why should one blog. The motives, aims and purpose of blogging as well as providing information and sharing it on internet, developing understanding of a topic on community basis open to all wherein rest of the observers keep a discerning eye on what and to what extend you can explain and provide a solution are all such issues which are made redundant by a sleight of hand and declaring that such a pursuit is useless and those who indulge in blogging or making web sites in their field of knowledge are merely wasting the time.

One of a senior teacher in a university in Sweden, David Richardson who writes on Education Forum and use web sites and community blogging as a tool in pursuit of knowledge once even remarked that we are just playing with these tools (the electronic gadgets like computer, audio visual blogs etc.) like a small child. It was not a criticism or some disenchantment. It was said in particular reference but if his statement is taken separately, it gives a different meaning and substantiate the argument of those who are not able to visualize that one aspect of ICT and that is blogging, can be really useful and satisfying experience.

Long back, Miland Brown showed his exuberance when he found a leading history scholar placed his lecture on the web. He had in his comment lamented that such an activity was not taken on a wider scale and the real potential of sharing information and knowledge through the technological advancement in form of Internet remained untapped. He had also commented that the activity of sharing information and knowledge on regular basis had its own reward.

Now if some of bloggers can really rejoice in the happiness of other people when such people achieved a success through sharing of a knowledge with others then they should check the Helping Hand on the site of Kevin M Levin and exhilaration and exuberance of the writer on finding that his work is really making rounds because he is able to reach people through blogging.
Without his permission I am here reproducing some of his comment which are oozing out the happiness the person has received when his research work has earned him that happiness for which no one rewards you but that is reward in itself.

Levin writes "Over the past few months I've had three graduate students contact me to talk about archival sources and my work on William Mahone, the Crater, and postwar Virginia politics and memory."

Then he further exclaims "My position on sharing my ideas and files is very simple: What's Mine Is Yours."

Further, he continues, "I should say that I am both surprised and pleased that my work is beginning to make the rounds. The ego gets a bit of stroking which is fine as long as it remains in check."
These lines are just an expression of happiness which he has felt on happening of sharing.

Then the historian in him comes out with a finest gem in form of explanation on the methodology of research in history. One can write such lines after reading good books. They can be written only after putting into practice the methods learned to undertake the research in history. But such lines do not come out easily. They sprout and then poured out only during an excitement and great emotional wave. The rest of the world receive in its hands a good definition and explanation. He writes, "More importantly, however, the contacts serve as a reminder that doing serious history is a joint venture. In my view all interpretation is incomplete. This does not mean that all interpretation is subjective; I have little patience with post-modernist theory that reduces everything down to the text or some type of pragmatic epistemology. It simply means that what the historian brings to the interpretive table is based on a relatively narrow reading of both primary and secondary sources. Because of this we share rough drafts as a way to bounce ideas off one another and we inquire into the location or availability of various sources. Behind it all - at least in my own case - is the hope that someone will share an interpretation that I've overlooked. … I guess it's some kind of rite of passage. In short, we learn as a community by disagreeing and challenging one another."

Similarly, Bill Turkel has expressed a sense of satisfaction and shared what he has been able to achieve recently with his students. He writes, "The summer is over and the first five digital history interns at Western have completed the projects … ." Bill has given fabulous definition on history in Department activity link which I am going to use in my class an notes.

The above extracts are surfeited with happiness gained through activity on Internet. It shows that how this medium is a revolution in itself and going to change the coming times. People are apprehensive about news changes impending in nano technology field – the new in thing. But herein, they are totally oblivious of a happening that is going to change the coming days. The bloggers are rejoicing in the rewards which they have received through their action. No institution is going to give them any commemoration, recognition and certificate for it. Their work has turned out be a reward in itself. It just shows that what is going to come in future.

Conspiracy History in India: Case of Netaji

Well I am not writing about any new finding.

It is a post consisting of some links about Netaji and my views.

In India, it seems that everything is settled about her history. There is never a debate over any issue on the contents that are presented as the history of India. Therefore, there is no controversy about the history of India. If some groups raise the question that the Aryans did not come to India from outside, then the group is branded as taking political mileage out of a non-existing issue or an issue which is already settled. Even the group which raises the question, does not come out with any scientific validation of the claim and ultimately leave the issue as if it is already settled. There are no conspiracy theories in India. In America, JFK assassination case is still being debated as if it has just happened last year. The people are coming out with arguments and evidences in favour of their stand and questioning the government on various aspects which the government can not escape without answering. But in India, there is nothing like that. I am sure, the Americans would be ardently remembering 9/11 even in 2101.

However, many of the issues of Indian History have remained unsettled. One among them is the case of Netaji. The contribution of Netaji was not less than any other freedom fighter. He was the finest and brightest son of the country. However, the countrymen have not treated rightly with his memory. They took decades to confer Bharat Ratan upon him whereas he should have been recognized as the Pride of Nation. In the history books, he is shown as one who opposed Gandhiji and won the election to the post of President of INC. When he found that on opposing Gandhiji, he was not getting the support of the elder Congressmen, he demitted his post and formed a Forward Bloc. Then, later, he left India and headed Indian National Army or Azad Hind Fauj as it should be rightly called. When the country was passing through a period of great expectations and uncertainty in 1946, the whole nation of undivided India came together for Shahnawaj, Shegal and Dhillon of INA. Only this much is told but rest no body knows.


Zaffar Anjum, a student of AMU, JNU and IIMS Delhi, attended a seminar titled "The Forgotten Army in a World at War: Subhas Chandra Bose’s INA and its Effect on Asia’s Independence" on August 13, 2006 in Singapore. The seminar was organised by Institute of South East Asian Studies. The resource persons were Professor Sugata Bose, Professor A. Mani, P Ramasamy and Mr Prasenjit K Basu. It was also attended by INA veterans Ms. Rasammah Bhupalan, Ms. Janaki Nahappan, and Mr Ajit Kumar Guhatakurta. Zaffar Anjum had presented the life history of Subash Chandra Bose in chronological order like a historian. He might have prepared notes during the seminar or consulted some book but the information provided in his post "Remembering Netaji" is quite exhaustive even if it is brief. He had touched the major events of the life of Netaji. Apart from that he has given a link to a supplement of the Hindustan Times titled The Enigma of Subash Chander Bose. The supplement of the newspaper, The Hindustan Times is quite exhaustive and detailed. There are numerous links which requires exploration. It is a good link for the record.


Acknowledgement:
I reached link through DesiPundit.
Another good link is:
The Enigma of Subash Chander Bose : The Hindustan Times. A Typical Conspiracy Theory discussed in Indian Print Media.

Looking at Indian History through Vellore Revolt

For sometime by now, I have been emphasizing that there is a need to redefine some of the historic concepts as found in the Indian history and more specifically the Colonial India. I have been pleading that there is need to rewrite some of the aspects of the Indian history or in other words some chapters of Indian history. I have given my views in my posts like Need of Rewriting Gandhian Era, then in Quasi Mutiny of 1824 by 47 Native Infantry at Barrackpore and also in Bindee Tiwari. Earlier also, I have given similar views in another post in Colonial Interpretation Requires Revision.

Recently I have come across some posts suggesting the same thing. I have come across a post at Varnam in the post An Independence Day Story. In the post, the author had described the incidence of the Mutiny of the Vellore in year 1806. He had described in detail the incidence and finally gave his conclusions also. He wrote, "In fact this was not the first revolt. On the eve of Buxar (1763), the company’s Indian Sepoys refused order and were horribly executed by Hector Munro. Also during the during the Burmese (1824), Sindh, and Punjab war (1840-49), sepoys staged mutinies when denied compensation for the loss of caste while serving overseas." This had been borrowed from "The First Mutiny, India: a history by John Keary" by the aforesaid blogger.

On the other hand, R. C. Majumdar, in British Paramountcy and Indian Renaissance_Part I, Bhartiya Vidya Bhavan Bombay, Third Edition, 1988, had written that Vellore Mutiny was one of the most serious mutiny having similarity to the Mutiny of 1857. In the same book he had finally concluded that the 1857 was not the first war of independence. In his arguments he had referred to the all such cases which he had traced since 1740 while tracing the genesis of "Discontent and Disaffection" among the civilian and military people of India in the chapter 13 of above mentioned book.

The blogger at Varnam had also concluded that it was a result of Vellore Mutiny that the British administration had started recruiting from Bihar, Bengal and United Provinces. He had also pointed out that the flogging as a punishment was also stopped. But these conclusions are not correct. In his book, Forty One Years in India by Frederick Sleigh Roberts, it is mentioned that the flogging was still practiced during the second Afghan War as a punishment. The book by Robert is available on Guttbenberg site at the link Frederick Sleigh Roberts. Similarly, the issue of avoiding interference in customs and traditions of sepoys was adopted as a policy by Board of Directors of the East India Company. It was the Secretary of State of Board of Control which was influencing the working of the governor generals in India. It have tried to bring out this aspect in two of my posts written in Hindi on this blog itself.

Varnam blogger who had written the post on Vellore Mutiny had borrowed the links from Instant Kaapi at the First Mutiny. Therein another issue had been touched upon. Karunanidhi of DMK had taken the issue of giving the right place to Vellore Mutiny in history text books. But such issues when taken up by politicians always acquire a different hue. Similarly BJP had also tried to touch this issue. They had even brought into the Text Book by NCERT that 1857 was even spread to South India also. But the Communist historians strongly contended and gave it a political touch to this issue.

I here speak as a student of history. I am not affiliated to any political party as such. The issue is not that which party want to project which aspect of Indian history in what form. The issue is that there is need of rewriting of Indian history in post 1947 period. There is need to visit the original sources once again and seek afresh the data and details about India as it had emerged during the Modern Period.


Acknowledgement:
The link on Varnam has been traced through DesiPundit.

Opinion Makers of British Colonial India

On the site of the Center of the South Asian Studies of University of Cambridge, which also forms the part of the British Library, a log of the microfilms of Newspapers of Colonial India is given.

I have made an extract of the data given there on the Newspaper of the Colonial India. It is reproduced below with some modification.

If one tries to just survey the data, numerous fascinating things emerge. It also raises many questions for further research.

I make some observation on the basis of the following data.

1. The Tribune, which is presently published from Chandigarh, was earlier published from Lahore. In the list of the Cambridge University, it is shown as Tribune, but the one which is published from Chandigarh is called The Tribune. I hope that it is the same paper.

2. Milap, another important newspaper of colonial India, in Urdu, was earlier published from Delhi. It was later published from Jalandhar.

3. Lahore and Delhi were the major publishing centres before partition. But later, Jalandhar emerged as the Publishing centre.

4. Three papers, Kesari, Khalsa Advocate and Khalsa Samachar were published from Amritsar. These were the papers which were in the forefront of the rise of Akali Movement and also the formation of Akali Dal, a regional party of Punjab.

5. In case of Kesari Newspaper, the place of publication has been shown as Kesari, which it seems, is the wrong entry. I do not think that there is any place called Kesari in Maharshatra. If it is so, then I have to check it.

6. There are more numbers of English newspapers. It raises the question that whether all of them were viable publication or not. Some of them like Hindu, Times of India and Hindustan Times have continued up to present day.

7. The library has a copy of the one of the oldest paper namely Calcutta Gazette dated back to 1792.

8. There are nearly 24 titles from nineteenth century. It is other thing, that the library does not have any copy of nineteenth century Amrit Bazar Patrika. Why is so?

9. There are copies of Poona Sarvajanik Sabha also which was in forefront of social reform movement in Bombay Presidency. I do not know whether the organization published any newspaper. It may be probably the souvenirs of Poona Sarvajanik Sabha.

10. Yogaksheman in Hindi was published from Trichur, a non-Hindi area.

11. Nizam Vijay, a Marathi publication was issued from Hyderabad.

12. Indian Nation, in English was published from Patna. Whereas, most of the publication of Bengal Presidency were published from Kolkatta.

13. Indian Hindustan was published from San Francisco, the only paper in the list which was published from outside British India.

14. The publications in Urdu being published from Delhi and Kolkatta were more in number than what was published from Lahore.

15. As mentioned in point 6, another issue rises. It will be of interest to investigate that what was the actual number of readership of English paper. In most of the cases, the time period of publication belongs to same time band. There are nearly 129 publications. It suggests that there was a huge readership. Some of the papers like Hindu and Amrit Bazar Patrika were quite radical in their editorials. It suggests that these paper can be studied for ascertaining the public opinion of that time band.

Any how, the list has attracted me. I have kept it in record for a long time. I have not been able to make any further breakthrough about the outline editions or articles on such papers. I have reproduced the list below. I hope that those engaged in South Asian Studies and Colonial Period studies, will definitely find it interesting data.

Titles of South Asian Newspapers

Serial No.	Title	Place of publication	Language	Details of holdings
1	Advance	Calcutta	English	1930-31
2	Advocate	Lucknow	English	1917
3	Aj	Banares	Hindi	1920-51
4	Akashvani	Lahore	Hindi	1922-23
5	Al Balagh	Calcutta	Urdu	1915-16
6	Al Hilal	Calcutta	Urdu	1912-17
7	Aligarh Institute Gazette	Aligarh	Urdu and English	1886-97, 1901-36
8	Aljamiat	Delhi	Urdu	1926-39, 1948-53
9	Amrita Bazar Patrika	Calcutta	English	1905-42
10	Andhra Patrika	Madras	Telugu	1914-30, 1932-40
11	Arya	Lahore	Hindi	1926, 1933-37, 1945, 1948-49, 1952-54, 1957-59
12	Arya Musafir	Lahore	Urdu	1898-1915, 1934
13	Bangladesh Observer	Dhaka	English	1987, 1992-93
14	Benares Recorder	Benares	English	1846-47
15	Bharat Dharma	Kashi	Hindi	1924
16	Bharat Jiwan	Banaras	Hindi	1884-1911
17	Bharat Weekly	Allahabad	Hindi	1928-30
18	Bombay Chronicle	Bombay	English	1913-59
19	Bombay Sentinel	Bombay	English	1934-59
20	Bulwuntnamah			1875
21	Calcutta Gazette	Calcutta	English	1792-93
22	Calcutta Samachar	Calcutta	Hindi	1914-25
23	Commonweal	Adyar	English	1914-20
24	Comrade	Delhi	English	1911-14, 1925
25	Congress Socialist	Bombay	English	1934-38
26	Dawn	Delhi/Karachi	English	1941-47, 1959, 1961, 1963, 1966-86
27	Deccan Times	Madras	English	1945-49
28	Democrat	Allahabad	English	1922
29	Devnagar	Calcutta	Hindi	1907-09
30	Din Bandhu			1893-1912
31	Din Mitra			1910-18, 1925-32
32	Dnyan Prakash	Pune	Marathi	1914-50
33	Dnyanodaya	Pune	Marathi	1845-60, 1862-69, 1871-74, 1876-1906
34	Eastern Times	Lahore	English	1942-48
35	Economic Weekly	Bombay	English	1949-50
36	Enquiry		English	Nos1-2
37	Forward (New Forward/Liberty)	Calcutta	English	1923-29, 1933-35
38	Frontier	Calcutta	English	1968-78
39	Gujarat Mitra & Gujarat Darpan	Surat	Gujarati	1894-1949
40	Hamdard	Delhi	Urdu	1913-15, 1924-28
41	Hans	Kashi		1933-43
42	Harijan	Ahmedabad	English	1933-56
43	Hindi Pradipa	Allahabad	English	1877-1908
44	Hindu	Madras	English	1883-1937, 1968-72
45	Hindu Outlook	New Delhi	English	1938-61
46	Hindu Sansar	Delhi	Hindi	1925-30
47	Hindustan Times	New Delhi	English	1924-51, 1978, 1991
48	Hitavada	Nagpur	English	1913-31
49	Hunkar	Patna	Hindi	1944-49
50	Independent	Allahabad	English	Feb. 1919 - Dec. 1921
51	Independent Hindustan	San Francisco	English	1920-21
52	Independent India	Bombay	English	1937-49
53	Indian Election - Manifesto Collection		English	1967
54	Indian Mirror	Calcutta	English	Jan. 1880, May 1880, Oct. 1880, July 1881, Jan 1882, Sept, 1882, Jan. 1883, March 1883, May 1883, Jan. 1884
55	Indian Nation	Patna	English	1931-35
56	Indian National Herald and Sunday Edition	Bombay	English	1926-29
57	Indian Opinion		English	1903-1914
58	Indian People	Allahabad	English	1903-09
59	Indian Social Reformer	Bombay	English	1908-49
60	Indian Spectator	Bombay	English	1883-1901
61	Indu Prakash	Bombay	Marathi-English	1883-95
62	Jagriti			1917-24
63	Janata			1932-38
64	Janata Weekly		New Delhi	1946-80
65	Janmnabhumi	Masulipatam		1919-26
66	Justice	Madras	English	1928-29, 1944-47
67	Jyoti	Delhi		1923-30
68	Kaivari			1929-30
69	Karmayogin	Calcutta	English	1909-10
70	Kesari	Marathi	1881-1920
71	Khalsa Advocate	Amritsar	English	1903-30
72	Khalsa Samachar	Amritsar	Punjabi	1899-1930
73	Kirti	Amritsar		1926-30, 1933-36
74	Krishna Patrika	Machilipatnam	Telugu	1902-44
75	Lahore Chronicle	Lahore	English	1858-59
76	Leader	Allahabad	English	1909-29, 1939, 1950-51
77	Madras Mail, The Mail and Weekly Mail	Madras	English	1889, 1931-49, 1972-75
78	Maharashtra	Nagpur	Marathi	1914-35
79	Maharatta	Pune	English	1881-1950
80	Marwari Agarwal	Calcutta	Hindi	1921-25
81	Marx Panthi	Calcutta	Bengali	1934
82	Marxist Miscellany	Bombay	English	1945-46
83	Mathrubhumi	Calicut	Malayalam	1923-40
84	Milap	Delhi	Urdu	1923-48
85	Mithavadi	Calicut	Malayalam	1913-20
86	Morning News, Dacca	Dacca	English	1968-71
87	Muslim			1937-44
88	National Front	Bombay	English	1938-40
89	National Herald	Lucknow	English	1938-50
90	Native Opinion	Bombay	Marathi-English	1867-89
91	Navakal	Bombay		1928-33
92	New Age	Delhi	English	1936-39, 1953-60
93	New India	Madras	English	1914-28
94	Nizam Vijay	Hyderabad	Marathi	1921-39
95	Pakistan Times	Lahore	English	1950-51
96	Pakistani Newspapers Selected Issues		English	1970-71
97	Panjabee	Lahore	English	3 Oct. 1904 - 28 Dec 1907; 1 July 1909 - 30 Dec. 1909
98	The People	Lahore	English	1925-29, 1931-34
99	People's Age	Bombay	English	1945-48
100	People's War	Bombay	English	1944-45
101	Poona Sarvajnik Sabha	Poona	English	1878-95
102	Rangoon Gazette	Rangoon	English	1901, 1911, 1939, 1941
103	Rashtravir			1921-35
104	Sainik	Agra	Hindi	1936-37
105	Sangharsh	Lucknow	Hindi	1937-52
106	Sapru Correspondence
107	Searchlight	Patna	English	1918-48
108	Seminar		English
109	Servant of India	Pune	English	1918-23
110	Servant of India Society (Reports)	Pune	English	1905-79
111	Servants of the People Society		English
112	Sholapur Samachar	Sholapur		1929-39
113	Statesman	Calcutta	English	1936-51
114	Statesman Weekly	Calcutta	English	1979
115	Subodh Patrika	Bombay	Marathi-English	1899-1940
116	Swadeshamitran	Madras	Tamil	1905-22
117	Tej			1931
118	Times of India	Bombay	English	1878-79, 1889-1914
119	Tribune	Lahore	English	1881-1977
120	Varad Samachar	Akola	Marathi	1868-1898, 1901-18
121	Vartman	Kanpur	Hindi	1925-48
122	Vijay Maratha	Poona		1921-31
123	Workers Weekly	Bombay	English	1930
124	Working People's Daily	Rangoon	English	1969
125	Yogaksheman	Trichur	Hindi	1920-30
126	Yogaksheman (Weekly)	Trichur	Hindi	1935-37
127	Young India	Ahmedabad	English	1919-31
128	Zamana	Kanpur	Urdu	1906-08, 1910-44
129	Zulqarnain	Badaun	Urdu	1903-56

The original list can be accessed here.


Later Edited Inclusion dated August 18, 2006:
There are nearly nine publications from Madras or Madras Presidency Area. There are only two publications in Telugu in the list. I have another post on the publication in Telugu which may be of interest to research scholars. It is about V. Ramaswamy Sastrulu which had been taken from a site of Telugu enthusiast. However it has changed its format since my last visit. Fortunately, the blogger administrator has retained the original article under the title "He Left His Imprint on Telugu Printing".

Need of Rewriting the Gandhian Era

I

Prof. Khanna has tired to tackle some of the major questions concerning Indian history in his article Mohammad Ali Jinnah which remain unanswered to this day. He has adopted a contextual theme to present his view on the basis of secondary sources. However, I am here, trying to emphasis a different dimension which also has relevance for Indian History and its teaching in India. Prof. Khanna has raised the following questions and tried to answer them in a befitting manner.

The questoins which he had tried to answer are as follows:
What were the factors that within three years of the elections he openly announced the two nation theory, and made the formation of a separate State as the goal of the Muslim League.
a. Did the failure in the elections forced him to think otherwise?
b. Did the British rulers influence over him for this goal?
c. Was the short-sightedness of the Congress leadership responsible for Jinnah turning his path from a nationalist leader to a communal and separatist leader?
d. Had he become a puppet in the hands of the communal Muslim leadership?

One of the major theses he has given is that the electoral politics had laid the ground for a game plan for Jinnah and Muslim League. He has tried to bring out this thesis on the basis of figures on the election results. The election result of 1937 has always remained a major research point for the Indian historians and those who tried to study the history of India. On this issue, Prof. Khanna had touched the right chord but did not elaborate much on it. However, he has reached a conclusion. He writes, " Thus the League, after its failure in the 1937 elections had decided to wear the communal garb and it clicked." I modify it. I say that Jinnah wore the garb of communal politics after the failure in the 1937 elections and it clicked.

The second question is more pertinent and sensitive. It asks about the responsibility of Congress itself in inducing repulsion among the Muslim electorates against the policies of Congress and finally gave credence to Muslim League’s ‘Two Nation Theory’. Now, the Congress critics may grimace and Congressmen would yearn to twist the neck of Prof. Khanna. But there is truth in the elucidation given by the author. In Tara Chand version of history, the working of Congress government had been eulogised. But it never satisfies a researcher who tries to seek exact reports of the policies adopted and works done by Congress. Jwahar Lal Nehru might have given glowing account in his ‘Discovery of India’ of the exuberance of the common man visiting the offices of ministers held by Indians, but the question remains that whether it had also turned away another section from those offices wherein the ministers with Gandhi caps and Khadi were holding their darbars. The second point which the author has taken is the alliances of parties which was planned for United Province. Congress had betrayed Muslim League at that point when they did not go for allied rule at that time. It just reminds us about the recent alliance with NCP in Maharashtra wherein encouraged by election result it has forced the NCP to give away CM seat to Congress and also the failure of BJP when it became overconfident of itself before 2004 elections and broke away with Chauthala INLD party in Harayana and Karunnidhi DMK in Tamil Nadu. No doubt, Prof. Khanna has made a pointed remark that "it had a disastrous impact on the future course of history."

The apologist for Congress decisions may give numerous arguments in favour of 1937 decisions. Somewhere, by loosing Jinnah, the Congress lost the case of united India. If they try to stretch their argument too far then only one conclusion can be reached. They had lost the united India by saving India for the Hindus. This theory has never come up in case of Congress but it had definitely came up for the Muslim League. Muslim League thus obtained the slogan that they were saving Pakistan for the Muslims.

The third issue of the role of British rulers in using the rift between League and Congress for the benefit of the war efforts of allies is also very important. They issued August Declaration that "no constitution should be enacted by His Majesty’s Government and the Parliament without the consent and approval of Muslim India." It gave courage to Muslim league to follow up their Yaum-i-Nijat with Pakistan declaration. Somewhere, a feeling emerges that Congress did the wrong thing by demitting the office at that juncture. It gave grounds for manipulation for the British administration. They tried to play with both Gandhi and Jinnah and they succeeded in their game. All the talks of Cripps Mission, his returning back, Quit India movement, Wavell, Rajgopalacharia formula etc do not appeal to reasoning. They all emerge as justification for the Congress activities and nothing else. The fact was that Britain got the chance to play ‘Divide and Rule’ policy with vengeance and their main task at that time was to checkmate fascist forces in the interest of their own nation and Allies. It is a mere issue of debate whether there was any stuff in demand for Pakistan. Was the Muslim League really serious about it? The fact remains that Congress lost Jinnah and the ground realities and contemporary situation helped the British government to play Jinnah and Gandhi against each other for their own safeguards. The events which took place after 1945, just adopted a natural course of happenings. The die was cast well in 1937. The transformation of Jinnah from nationalist to separatist can be an issue and debate for the Indians but as for Pakistan, he became the saviour. One may discuss it in either of the way. One may debate that Jinnah was against communal politics but later became a separatist. One may say that he was always in favour of Muslim dominated rule and forced Congress to bend to his whims which the latter refused to oblige. But the fact remains somewhere, in 1930s, it was a loss to India when the Congress lost Jinnah. Now, when Congress lost Jinnha, it can say that Jinnah was not a secularist but the history tells something else.

However, Prof. Khanna has left one question incomplete. The question is Had he become a puppet in the hands of the communal Muslim leadership? He has tried to answer it to some extent but it would have been better had he studied it separately.

II

Now the article of Prof. Khanna has another dimension also. He is a teacher of history for the last 22 years. I am teaching history at undergraduate and postgraduate level for the last 16 years. As per the course of Punjab University Chandigarh, we get the opportunity to teach history of Modern India. Therein, we teach the period from 1919 to 1947 in detail. This portion of Indian history is also an inseparable part of All India Civil Services examination. It forms an important part of General Studies Paper I in Mains. It is quite crucial for the aspirants of Civil Services.

However, we never teach the Jinnah story in our classes. In Indian history, we term 1919 period onwards as Gandhi Era. Some of the major headings for elaboration are Philosophy of Satyagraha, Gandhi’s Earlier Satyagraha’s in India, Rowlatt Act, Jallianwala Bagh tragedy, Khilafat movement wherein we never point out that it did not have the support of Jinnah, Non-Cooperation Movement, Nagpur Session and Working Committee of Congress, Chaurichaura Incidence and Gandhi’s Declaration from Bardoli, Constructive Programmes of Gandhiji, Activities of Swarajist Party and Gandhi view on participation in electoral politics at that stage, Simon Commission, Nehru Report and for the first time we bring Jinnah through his Fourteen Demands, Lahore Session and Puran Swaraj Resolution, Second Civil Disobedience Movement and Dandi March, Gandhi-Irwin Pact and Round Table Conference wherein we do not refer that Jinnah participated only in the first Round Table Conference, Communal Award, Poona Pact, rise of Socialists in Congress, rise of Dalit movement, Freedom Struggle in Princely States and view of Gandhiji, in between we also discuss Armed revolt or revolutionary movements different from Congress political activities and thus we reach 1937, that crucial year when the course of the history of India changed.


From there onwards, we try to trace activities upto Quit India Movement. For this, we discuss Government of India Act 1935, Provincial Elections and formation of Congress ministry wherein we avoid discussing the process of forming ministries in United Province and Bengal Province, Faizpur Session and peasants demand, then the Second World War and the reason of Congress Demitting the office wherein in we make special mention of separatist activity of Muslim League when they declared their Pakistan resolution, then the Cripps Mission and finally the Quit India movement.


After Quit India Movement, the debate always remains confined to Gandhi politics and Jinnah’s adamant stances on demands from the British rule vis-i-vis Muslims. With the discussion of Cabinet Mission plan, the discussion includes the role of Muslim League, their arm twisting techniques for constitutional assembly and interim government, their direct action day and finally the Mountbatten Plan. At this stage, there remains a full stress on the Congress activity and as teachers we fear that some student may not ask some uncomfortable question concerning the actual reason of accepting the partition of India.

Now in light of the article by Prof. Khanna, it may be apparent to some knowledgeable people that there is need to cover the story of Jinnah along with the freedom struggle under the Congress. It will not bring down the significance of the role of Congress but on the other hand, emphasis its contribution. Similarly, the role of Revolutionaries as well communist should also be made part of the general history of Modern India. They are completely missing.

Nowhere, it is being desired and suggested here that there Congress committed a fault. History does not pass judgement like that. It tries to study the things as it happened. The problems arises when under some wrong notion, some facts are hidden. It never helps. Rather, it damages one or the other groups. In the present geo-political situation, there is a need to reframe the contours as being taught in Modern Indian history.

III

Finally, I direct the attention to the bibliography which Prof. Khanna has given. His has pointed out the citation from various secondary sources. I consider it an important feature. During my course of developing of this blog, I have been concentrating on the dependable write ups as available on the net. There is need that whosoever writes on history, he must follow the rule of history. The Blogger must mention or cite the source from where he is deriving his argument. With the digitization of sources, it has become easy now. It is acquiring a practical shape. Some teachers, like William J. Turkel, who are equally comfortable with Information and Communication technology, are developing good models which will be mainstay of such academic activities on internet. The people who have some objection against activities like Wikipedia should try to evaluate the activity of Prof. R. K. Khanna. They should look at the manner, as the academic article should be presented.

I also hope, that those, who have this objection and they are right in raising that objection, that there are no good articles and source materials on net for Indian history, will find it useful.