History Is Seldom Complete, Comprehensive And Totally Objective

By Sumit Paul, New Age Islam 23 September 2022 Dr Moin Qazi has rued the lack of objectivity among the historians of the sub-continent that led to permanent bad-blood and misgivings. History is His-story, story of man. Mind you, no history has ever been completely honest and impartial even if the historian tries to be objective. If old and contemporary Hindu historians (belonging to Hindu outfits) and Europeans like Francois Gautier besmirched the image of Muslim rulers, esp. of Mughals, Muslim historians and emperors also did the same. " History is a potent tool to hide or reveal palatable and unpalatable facts and truths at an opportune moment, " observed the British historian Sir Arnold Toynbee, one of the greatest historians of modern era. Roman historians Catallus and Pliny said the same thing millenniums ago. History is often facts agreed upon. It's invariably written from the victor's perspective. ' History is mud-slinging using pen and paper, ' Sir Jadunath Sarkar quoted Neil Empson in one of the volumes on Shivaji. So, saying that historians poisoned India or for that matter any country and race's pluralistic nature and fabric, is expecting too much of them. Historians in all ages have been paid chroniclers like the court chroniclers of Mughal India. It's our mistake to expect honesty and integrity from them. And when it comes to modern historians, we've made them Marxist, Capitalist or Left-wing historians, expecting analysis and interpretations from them. This is bizarre! Where's their core objectivity or supposed dispassionate duty of jotting down events that took place in the past? if history and past events become subjects of interpretations, the whole relevance of history is lost. So, you get historians like Audrey Truschke or Gautier whose historical accounts are trustworthy in bits and pieces. They've their journalistic and academic interpretative duties to discharge. Ergo, a Truschke will unnecessarily glorify Aurangzeb, a Gautier will find fault with all Mughals and one Goel will tarr all Muslims and Mughals with the same brush. Mughal court historian Khafif Khan would constantly vituperate against Shivaji, calling him a mountain rat ( poor Nehru was lambasted for using the same sobriquet for Shivaji in one of his books and later withdrew his comment !). This is conveniently covered up by Muslim intelligentsia. Abdul Qadir Badayuni described how Akbar the Great (!) converted 34 Rajput Hindu women and also usurped wives of many Muslim courtiers. He was perhaps the most lascivious of all Mughals. But these 'facts' were always suppressed for obvious reasons by the subsequent historians. That Shivaji was never uniformly considered a Maharaj ( king) as late as till 1995 despite his much-hyped coronation is a known fact. Some amateur historians eulogised and deified him. Today, he's 'god' of Maharashtra, thanks to politically motivated historians who extolled him to the level of god. Remember, history and politics have a nefarious nexus. Today's interpretative history is sullied by political aspirations, personal agenda and vested interests. We all know that historians are not to be trusted or even if they're to be trusted, their account of history must be taken with a pinch of salt. Therefore, don't shed tears on the falsification of history. It has always been a dubious business, a distortion of facts and a mutilation of truth. ----- A regular columnist for New Age Islam, Sumit Paul is a researcher in comparative religions, with special reference to Islam. He has contributed articles to world's premier publications in several languages including Persian. URL: https://newageislam.com/spiritual-meditations/history-comprehensive-objective/d/128012 New Age Islam, Islam Online, Islamic Website, African Muslim News, Arab World News, South Asia News, Indian Muslim News, World Muslim News, Women in Islam, Islamic Feminism, Arab Women, Women In Arab, Islamophobia in America, Muslim Women in West, Islam Women and Feminism