A Counterpoint of PreconceptionsCommunalism and the Writing of Indian History by Romila Thapar; Harbans Mukhia; BipanChandraReview by: Sudhir ChandraEconomic and Political Weekly, Vol. 4, No. 52 (December 27, 1969), pp. 1981-1983Published by: Economic and Political WeeklyStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/40738244 .Accessed: 03/10/2012 01:36

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range ofcontent in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new formsof scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

.

Economic and Political Weekly is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access toEconomic and Political Weekly.

http://www.jstor.org

REVIEWS

A Counterpoint of Preconceptions Sudhir Chandra

Communalism and the Writing of Indian History by Romila Thapar, Harbans Mukhia and Bipan Chandra ; People's Publishing House ; pp 57; Rs 2. THE dirty connotation acquired by the term communal seems to exercise an obsessive hold on the Indian mind. It shows how the reputation of a word, the result of a changing social or poli- tical reality, can limit, even vitiate, men's understanding of the reality itself. Two of the three articles in this collection give the impression that, to deny the existence of communalism is the best way to ensure secularism. This brings to mind Ernst Fischer's perspicacious observation that Marxists have erred fundamentally in ignoring religion as a motivating factor.

The first article on communalism and the writing of ancient Indian history by Romila Thapar begins on a sound note when she points out that modern com- munalism seeks its intellectual justifi- cation in the historical past. The Hindu communalist sees in the ancient period an ideal Hindu society which fell on evil days with the coming of the Mus- lims; and the Muslim communalist traces the roots of separatism to the first Muslim conquest in India.

To Thapar the root of the problem of communalism in Indian history lies in the perpetuation of James Mill's periodisation of Indian history into phases dominated by the Hindu civilisa- tion, the Muslim civilisation, and the British (not Christian, emphasises Tha- par) civilisation. For, among other things, it meant that the glorification of the more ancient past - so natural for a subject people - would be the glori- fication of the Hindu period. Once the psychological need for glorification is accepted, the question remains, why it was satisfied as it was. The Hindus chose a particular period of their his- tory for glorification not because it was ancient - which Mill had charac- terised as the Hindu period - but because it was non-Muslim. In the ab- sence of a sense of belonging - among the overwhelming majority of Hindus to the Muslim rule (Harbans Mukhia's protest against the lumping together of the Turks, the Afghans and the Mughals notwithstanding) and vice versa - Hindus and Muslims could not but

look to different pasts for inspiration. And their selection of the period was independent of Mills periodisation.

Thapars contention that the descrip- tion "Hindu" is historically invalid does not hold insofar as it fails to take into account the psychology of the people. Historically warranted or not, to these people the Hindu past existed. It could be a myth; but it is real. To say this, is not to lament the fact. Communalism stands on firmer grounds than an imaginary past. No amount of intellectual dissection to expose its heterogeneous character can remove the ideological propellant of communalism. The Hindu past exists in the Hindu mind. No historian can write off this legacy. All that can be done is to make sure that it is not exploited to whip up communalism. Which is to say that, the removal of communalism does not demand that a Hindu should cease to be a Hindu, and a Muslim to be a Mus- lim, and so on. Nothing could be better than if this were the result of a natural growth of scepticism or agnosticism; but not otherwise.

Thapar's paper seems to betray a cer- tain looseness of conception. With- out making a distinction betwen mo- tive and effect and cause and effect, she hits at everything that appears to her to have the remotest connection with communalism. Large targets make shooting easy, especially when you do not have to hit the bull's eye. Thus Thapar attacks the prevailing myths about the Aryan culture, the spiritual superiority of the Indian culture, the Golden Age, and the unique tradition of non-violence in India. Regardless of the circumstances that produced these notions, she is concerned with these only as factors responsible for communalism. Bipan Chandra also talks of these, but with a sense of propor- tion and in the correct historical con- text.

Though in the Preface Thapar dis- claims the idea of advancing an alter- native to the Communal interpretation of history, the anxiety to demolish the latter results in an attempt to offer

rational explanations for events that have been seen, in the context of reli- gion by many others. She shows, for example, that idol-breaking was not done by Muslims alone. She refers to the Rafaamngini which records in- stances of iconoclasm by a Hindu ruler of Kashmir, Harsha, who kept a special officer for the purpose. Her explana- tion is that the immense riches stored in the temples were responsible for this plunder and destruction. But this is being believed by the average student of Indian history today. To say this she need not have referred to Harsha. Her point, however, is more than this. She wishes to establish that temples were plundered by Hindus and Muslim alike. Being an acknowledged historian, and sensitive to the tools of her dis- cipline, Thapar should have at least paused before generalising on the basis of such scanty evidence. Were she not anxious to demolish a certain approach, she would certainly have inquired whe- ther the Hindu rulers were as ready to resort to this source of replenishing their treasury as the Muslim rulers were.

Thapar says that the communal ap- proach produces poor-quality history. The fact to a reader of her article appears that, what she has really cri- ticised is not so much communal his- torical writing but poor-quality history. The real criticism of those who wrote about ancient India in the nineteenth century and also of those who wrote it in the first decades of the twentieth is that they were poor historians or nationalists, or that they worked at a time when history as a discipline had not made the advances it has since made. It is not their fault that what they wrote became grist to the com- munal historian.

Bipan Chandra alone among the three contributors makes a distinction between the communal approach to history and the perfectly understandable glorifica- tion of the past which later served to strengthen communalism. Without im- plying communal motivation, he is able to show that the myths enumerated above "encouraged a backward-looking mental outlook and discouraged that faith in progress, that faith in the future, which lies at the heart of healthy na- tionalism". He also makes the major point that, what now appears as com- munalism among a section of the Indian people - especially among the historians - spread mainly because it could serve as 'vicarious' or 'backdoor' nationalism.

1981

December 27, 1969 ECONOMIC AND POLITICAL WEEKLY

"Communalism enabled them to feel nationalistic without opposing imperial- ism, the foreign power that was then ruling and oppressing the Indian peo- ple. It enabled them to combine per- sonal safety with nationalist senti- ments." Chandra follows this with a very sensible plea in favour of the historians who adopted an approach that seems to us communal. They are not to be anathematised, he says. "Many of them were not fully aware of the weaknesses of their approach. It is only when history has fully worked itself out that the full implications of events and approaches become clear. But, we, who have lived through the partition of 1947 and who are daily feeling the necessity of national inte- gration, have to realise that the com- munal approach has hardly anything to offer and has not only caused im- mense damage but can cause even more of it in the future."

Harbans Mukhia goes farther than Romila Thapar when he claims that religion, considered by many to have been the determining factor in the mediaeval period, was really auite unim- portant. The fact perhaps would be that it was neither the determining fac- tor nor quite unimportant, but some- thing in between.

Mukhia also says that our approach towards history can be genuinely and logically secular when we change our whole view of history itself, studying the history of society rather than of an individual ruler or the ruling class. Which further suggests that what Tha- par and Mukhia criticise is not the communal approach, but what modern historians feel was a defective way of writing history. If the idea of secular state is new, and Mukhia does not like this being made the basis for attacking or extolling somebody in the mediaeval period, he should desist from criticis- ing historians of an earlier period for not having anticipated the rigorous tests of their descendants.

If Thapar uses stray evidence to ex- plain away the part played by religion in history, Mukhia employs logic for the same purpose. But logic is a dan- gerous tool and requires careful hand- ing, particularly when it is used in writing history. A modest example of this is his contention that conversion to Islam, which was voluntary at the lower levels, was coercive in certain cases only at the top level. He argues that in the circumstances of mediaeval India there could be no greater proof of the loyalty of a man than the accept-

ance of the religion of the ruler. But this would also suggest that a man who could, for fear of life, forsake what was at the time regarded as the highest value of human life would not scruple to betray the man who had forced this ignominy on him.

Mukhia further argues that jazia was not intended to compel conversion to Islam, and proceeds to equate it with zakat. While there could hardly be scope for a difference of opinion about the effect of jazia on the number of converts, the equation of the two taxes overlooks the simple fact that jazia created what was often a galling distinc- tion between the faithful and the heathen. Nor would it be correct to say that the two meant the same thing in terms of pressure on the two commu- nities. But Mukhia begs the whole question by importing an extraneous logical argument that religion, ai ter all, was not such a cheap commodity as could be exchanged for the advantage of escaping the payment of a paltry sum. Agreed that jazia was a financial and not a religious measure; but the money was levied on a basis that was discriminatory. Mukhia nowhere cares to discuss how contemporary Hindus reacted to the impost. Perhaps the ques- tion does not occur to him because, in his view, the measure being financial no rancour should have arisen on this account. But historians ought to be chary of using their intelligence to im- agine without empathy the psychology of an earlier generation, or of demand- ing that it should have thought as they are doing today.

Trusting his logical faculty further, Mukhia finds it "obvious that the demo- lition of temples could not have been meant for winning over the Hindus to Islam". "For", he innocently asks, "how can one imagine that the way of winning over the heart of a people is to go and demolish its temples"? One wishes that instead of crediting the entire Muslim rulership of mediaeval India with exactly the amount of intel- ligence and rationalism that he himself possesses, Mukhia had attempted an ana- tomy of fanaticism, besides analysing the effects of such demolition on those whose Gods and Goddesses were housed in these temples. It should not surprise Mukhia if an atheistic historian con- tends that the demolition of temples would have made no impression on the popular mind.

Logically there should be no diffi- culty in understanding Mukhia's point that just as Ashoka is praised for his

proselytisation, we should be able to appreciate the Muslim attempt at con- version where it really existed. Psycholo- gically, however, it should be nearly' impossible for the majority of Hindus to equate Islam or Christianity and Buddhism which is to them an out- growth of their own religion. Gautam Buddha, not Christ or Mohammed, is an incarnation of God to most of them.

It is poor-quality criticism of the communal approach that Thapar and Mukhia offer. Bipan Chandra raises the level of discussion by focusing the problem in its correct perspective. He condemns the uncritical acceptance of the past, especially of the nineteenth century reform movements and the twentieth century political movements "We live in cliches", he says, "so far as Raja Ram Mohan Ry, Swami Dayanand, Vivekanand, Aurobindo Ghose, Lokamanya Tilak, Lajpat Rai, Gandhiji and others are concerned. It has become a tradition with our mass media, school text-books, All India Radio, etc, to uncritically praise them. Consequently, the communalists, and ethers can exploit their negative fea- tures". He emphasises that it should not be difficult to realise that they made a great contribution to the growth of Indian nationalism, and erred in certain fundamental sense in their understand- ing, "of the relation between religion and politics, of the role of caste sys- tem, or of the problems of history, or of the making of Indian society, or of the religious minorities".

Bipan Chandra attacks the propaga- tion of hero-myths. Linking this with his theory of vicarious nationalism, he says that at one stroke, "and in a sort of immanent fashion, these hero-myths proved the case for the two-nation theory or the basic communal ap- proach".

It seems difficult, however, to accept Chandra's contention that nationalism derived its validity from the fact that is was a correct representation of an objective reality: the developing identi- ty of common interests of the Indian people, in particular against the com- mon enemy, foreign imperialism. He further says that communalism deve- loped as a result of the lack of deeper penetration of nationalist outlook and ideology. One could seriously suggest that communalism also was the cor- rect representation of objective reality; that the objective reality of which na- tionalism appears as the correct repre- sentation to Bipan Chandra was not sufficiently pervasive; that the common

1982

ECONOMIC. AND POLITICAL WEEKLY December 27, 1969

interests that he talks of were not so common as to produce an identity which all Indians could recognise as their own. The term "correct" implies a value judgment. Chandra may pon- tificate as to what was correct and what was not; he should at least explain his criteria for passing the judgment. To take a concrete example, there was an objective reality that the nineteenth century India presented. It was the one in which both Syed Ahmad Khan and Badruddin Tyabji lived. But the two responded to it in different ways. The one eschewed politics, or at least said that he did so, and opposed the Indian National Congress, which, according to Chandra's analysis, should be viewed as the correct representation of the objective reality. The other pre- sided over the third session of the Indian National Congress. Whose res-

ponse to reality would Chandra regard as correct? The question is relevant because Syed has often been deni- grated as an arch communalist who be- came the intellectual progenitor of Pakistan, which again was the con- summation of Muslim communalism, not the culmination of a different na- tionalism. It should be revealing to many if it could be shown conclusively that what is called Muslim communal- ism - though it could more fairly be described as separatism - was not in response to the needs of the com- munity. Chandra seems to interpret narrowly the concept of interests as a factor in the growth of nationalism in India when he says that communal- ism was, and is, the false consciousness of the historical process of the last hundred years.

Hybrid Bajra in the Laud of 'mul' S K Ray

The New Strategy of Agricultural Development in Operation: A Case Study of the Kaira District in Gujarat by B M Desai and M D Desai; Thacker and Co, Bombay, 1969; pp 148; Rs 25.00. THIS micro-level study of 1967 kLarif season examines the high-yielding varie- ties programme - its organisation, achievements and prospects. The authors have attempted to assess (i) the role of the State and non- official agencies in providing necessary support includ- ing services; (ii) co-ordination among these agencies; (iii) procedure for tar- get fixation; (iv) farmers' response in- cluding factors contributing to such response, and (v) relative profitability visia-vis local varieties and substitut- able crops, particularly tobacco.

Bajra is one of the major crops grown in Kaira district, and the authors have rightly chosen this ^rop for their study. Kaira district farmers have earned quite a reputation for some years now for their commendable per- formance in agriculture. The authors purposefully selected this district to examine the operation of. the high-yield- ing varieties programme 'under most favourable conditions'.

Through a stratified random samp- ling method 100 fanners were selected from four villages of which 60 were par- ticipants in the high-yielding varieties programme. Of the participating far- mers 60 per cent had land-holdings of five acres and less. Again 45 of them were growing hybrid bajra for the first

time, and thus, their experience has limitations. Even so it is significant these 45 .did venture into hybrid bajra against the traditional competitor, to- bacco.

The study reveals an institutional pat- tern similar to that found elsewhere. The working pattern also proved the same. The target coverage under hy- brid bajra was 'fixed' by the "powers that be" and handed down to the dis- trict and block officials for imple- mentation. The criteria followed for State and district targeting was 'avail- ability of seed'. Availability of seed is no doubt an important factor. The study however illustrates the risk in taking everything else for granted.

The importance of adequate dissemi- nation of information about new prac- tices is clearly indicated in the survey. What is dished out is either not in- telligible or not oriented to the needs of the farmers. The study repeats the common malady, that is, the official framework covering the villages does not encourage the two-way flow of in- formation between officials /technicians and villagers. As a result, farmers' problems often fail to reach agricul- tural specialists, and the specialists themselves know much less about field problems. Thus an atmosphere of

mutual respect and confidence so vital in achieving set objectives is last. De- velopment activities thus also fail to tap reservoirs of local initiative, support, judgment and skill.

This study has re-emphasised the need for linkage between credit and marketing and the need for improv- ing marketing facilities, particularly for tobacco in the surveyed area. Lack of such facilities may be driving tobac- co growers to hybrid bajra. Over a period of time this may not be a good thing because such . lack of faci- lities might dull enthusiasm for hybrid bajra too.

Risks involved in experimentation with recommended practices are propor- tionately higher on smaller than on lar- ger holdings. Farmers with larger holdings command more credit and other facilities. But farmers who work on very small margin have to exercise great caution in adopting new methods. Compared to local varieties the hybrid bajra entails a twofold increase in cash expenditure alone, Rs 199.00 against Rs 95.00 per acre for local varie- ties. It is even more when total expendi- ture including that on fertilisers and other inputs are taken into account. If, in spite of this, a sizeable portion of small farmers have switched over to hybrid bajra it only shows the poten- tial available if adequate means are provided,

The authors have taken pains to establish marginally higher profitability of hybrid bajra vis-a-vis tobacco by in- cluding the marketing costs also for both. For any substantial switch over from the traditional tobacco crop in this area to hybrid bajra it is necessary that the difference be more substantial than is now the case. Moreover, the marketing cost of tobacco can be signi- ficantly reduced, as the authors admit, through co-operative marketing facili- ties. This will further eliminate what- ever marginal difference there is in pro- fitability between the two crops.

In summary, availability of services and production supplies are the key factors to success of high-yielding varieties programme. Under the present set up these are not adequate to meet the needs of the farmers. The survey points out that any introduction of new technology must always be back- ed up with timely supplies of inputs necessary and continuous evaluation made. The present study sets a pat- tern for other regional studies in order to have a better knowledge of the working of the new agricultural stra- tegy.

1983

Article Contentsp. 1981p. 1982p. 1983

Issue Table of ContentsEconomic and Political Weekly, Vol. 4, No. 52 (December 27, 1969), pp. 1969-2000, A190-A228Front MatterCherchez la Femme [pp. 1969-1969]Cement Comes in from the Cold [pp. 1970-1970]Public Relations for Public Sector [pp. 1970-1971]Over to Al Fatah [pp. 1971-1971]Squeeze on Guarantee Scheme [pp. 1971-1972]BUSINESSMuch Yarn, Little Pulp [pp. 1972-1972]Not Too Little to Mop Up [pp. 1972-1973]Regal Fare [pp. 1973-1973]More Cashew for Moscow [pp. 1973-1973]

LETTER TO EDITORLIC as Santa Claus [pp. 1973-1975]

FROM OUR CORRESPONDENTSAlignments in Andhra [pp. 1975-1976]Sessionmanship above All [pp. 1976-1977]Shifting Loyalties [pp. 1977-1978]Resuming the Key Role? [pp. 1978-1979]

THE FOURTH ESTATECinderella's Sparkle [pp. 1979-1980]

REVIEWSA Counterpoint of Preconceptions [pp. 1981-1983]Hybrid Bajra in the Laud of 'Amul' [pp. 1983-1983]

SPECIAL ARTICLESProblem of Tribal Integration to Urban Industrial Society: A Theoretical Approach [pp. 1985, 1987, 1989, 1991-1994]Why Does Organised Industry Assail Futures Market? [pp. 1995-2000]

COMPANIES: Justification in Growth [pp. 2000-2000]Correction: COMPANIES: Being Nursed into Growth [pp. 2000-2000]REVIEW OF AGRICULTURE: December 1969Varietal, Not TechnologicalRegional Dispersion of Agricultural Income: Implications of the New Technology [pp. A190-A191, A193-A196]Profitability of High-Yielding Wheat and Rice [pp. A197-A200]Peaceful Use of Nuclear Energy [pp. A200-A200]Productivity and Allocation of Resources between Rice and Jute in West Bengal [pp. A201, A203, A205-A206]Agricultural Development in Maharashtra: Some Aspects [pp. A207, A209-A210]Capitalist Farming in India [pp. A211-A212]Associated Industries [pp. A212-A212]Big Farmers of Punjab: Second Instalment of Results [pp. A213-A219]Labour and the Green Revolution: The Experience in Punjab [pp. A221-A224]Application of Science to Development [pp. A224-A224]India's 'Surplus' Cattle: Some Empirical Results [pp. A225-A227]Urban Transport in Asia [pp. A227-A227]

Back Matter