A Post-Colonial Revision of History
History is continuously being rewritten. Updating scholarship with new data available is what academicians are busy with. Corrections are required when an author's biases become evident. Embellishments need to be trimmed, exaggerations toned down, one-sided interpretations corrected, partisan self-glorifications rectified, nationalistic or ideological emphasis touched up, and scientific objectivity and precision ensured. These are the traits of modern historical writing. Writers who refused to do so find no acceptance beyond their immediate admirers or ardent supporters of their ideology or perspective.
A post-colonial version of a nation's history will certainly differ from the colonial version, just as a medieval account would differ from an ancient narration. We appreciate the effort of our nationalistic historians who seek to bring corrections to earlier colonial accounts. They should not, however, generalise things and accuse all scholars of colonial times of having been prejudiced or one-sided in the same manner, as though they sat down and plotted together. As individuals and representatives of diverse schools of thought, they differed among themselves in dozens, if not hundreds, of ways, according to the interests of each person and the competence of each team.
Our Debt to Genuine Scholars in Colonial Times
In colonial times, every scholar ran the risk of being challenged by a colleague nearby or a fellow researcher in another country. They consulted each other, learnt from each other, and felt compelled to correct themselves when later scholarship produced counter-evidence. If a politically interested writer hushed up colonial injustices or underestimated the achievements of indigenous people, there would be scores of others in his own country or elsewhere who would expose his fallacies and biased approach. Universities generally sought to be very objective.
Pioneers such as William Carey and William Jones made significant contributions. Max Müller exalted the advanced thinking of ancient Aryans, jealously collecting every piece of wisdom he could lay his hands on and recording for future generations an immense store of literature, of which Indians themselves were the greatest beneficiaries. Rhys Davids' study on Buddha was equally inspiring.
Sincere Missionaries also Helped
Early missionary criticism of what appeared superstitious or obscurantist in Hinduism stirred Indian intellectuals to explain the deeper meaning of those images, symbolisms or traditions. It drew them to self-criticism and the adoption of corrective measures. People like Ram Mohan Roy or Vivekananda were prompt in doing so.
Other missionaries, on the contrary, glorified the spiritual traditions of India and were very vocal in their criticism of the colonial administration, its lack of a sense of justice, and insensitivity to indigenous cultures. Mahatma Gandhi and other freedom fighters felt supported by them, drew inspiration from them, and continued their struggle for independence under their encouragement. Many missionaries studied downtrodden communities, their languages and cultures, and assisted forgotten and marginalised groups. People like Ambedkar greatly benefited from the early assistance they received.
Oriental studies in general stimulated Western thought, offering a corrective to its one-sided, pragmatic interests and encouraging intellectual and religious exploration of the East. Those who were emphatically secular-minded found Ashoka's edicts or the writings of Confucius extremely interesting and were amazed that such perspectives had arisen in the East centuries before they did so in the West.
An Invitation to Current Rewriters of Indian History
Let me begin with a quotation from Arthur Schopenhauer: "Truth lives long, so tell the truth." Let scientific objectivity, truth and precision be your goal. Flattering the nationalist ego by claiming that plastic surgery was well advanced in ancient India, referring to the example of Ganesha's figure, may go well with blind believers, but not with the scientifically informed present-day world. Modi's devotion to cows indeed prompted him to take a few high-breed cows to Uganda, but fortunately, he did not take his head transplant boast to Putin, Xi, Trump, or Macron. However, his proud claim to possess head-transplant skills is frequently quoted by his less-informed disciples.

At this stage, let me point out one fact that may shed considerable light on the entire matter. British administrators and scholars heavily relied on the Brahmin interpretation of Indian history, religious beliefs, and social and cultural traditions. They sought to win intellectual acceptance among the Indian elite and retain a political hold on the larger society, utilising the moral and religious influence of the Brahmins. British rulers cleverly granted the Brahmins the prominence in society that they eagerly sought. In this, they merely imitated their Muslim predecessors.

The Ascent of the Indian Upper Castes
The fact, therefore, is that the Brahmins belonged to the early groups that pursued English studies, took up administrative jobs and remained perfectly loyal to the British, closely aping their manners. Their highest ambition was to find employment under their imperial rule. They had served Muslim regimes faithfully and were now quick to see new opportunities in English education.

Other upper castes came up closely behind, emerging as lawyers, teachers, engineers, doctors, and bureaucrats. They became the new elite, closing their ranks with determination. They did not want the lower castes to catch up with them. That is the social order that the Hindutva sovereigns want to re-establish, except for a few honorary symbolic posts to a few Dalits and tribals.

The Consequence of Brahminic Domination
Therefore, it was not the Hindu community that gave disproportionate prominence to the Brahmins, but the Muslim and British rulers who exploited their influence. Kshatriya rulers had previously been strict in keeping Brahmins in their own place. Surprisingly, it is the upper caste that betrayed their countrymen to outside rulers, though they are most eloquent today in criticising their one-time patrons.
In the field of history, the Brahmin perspective was extremely one-sided. They ignored great heroes of ancient India, such as the Buddha and Ashoka. We needed a foreigner like James Princep to introduce Ashoka to the Indians and Sir John Marshall to lay the foundation of Indian history in the Indus Valley (Mohenjo-Daro-Harappa), rather than in the jungles of the Doab.

Harappa-Pataliputra Contribution Completely Forgotten
It was during the Maurya period, not the Gupta period, that India emerged as Vishwaguru, from Southeast Asia to West Asia, Egypt to Greece, gradually reaching China and the Far East. So, Indian history begins with the tribal ethics of indigenous cultures in Harappa, integrated with Jain-Buddhist wisdom around Pataliputra, which was later appropriated by the "guardians" of the Vedic heritage, whose main contribution was the rigid caste-system. This great truth is almost completely forgotten, so much so that British recording of Indian history recognises only the Hindu-Muslim-British periods.

What about the Buddhist period, spanning approximately 700 years, when Buddhism had the largest number of adherents in India and around the world? How did the Brahmins get British scholars to marginalise Buddha and forget Ashoka? They know the art; they marginalise Akbar and the Mughals even today.
Peter Navarro on Indian Arrogance
Recently, Peter Navarro, Trump's trade adviser, stirred a storm among the Americans of Indian origin when he spoke of the "arrogance" of the Indian ruling class in offering economic support to Russia's Ukraine war through a large-scale purchase of Russian oil. He ignored the fact that India needed oil, that China and the EU were having similar trade exchanges with Russia, that the Americans themselves were finding Trump's 'arrogance' beyond endurance.

In any case, the Trump phenomenon has proven Nehru's perception right: that America is an unreliable and unpredictable ally, suffers from a superiority complex, and wants not partners but vassals, subordinates, and dependents. Pakistan was ready to oblige. In this respect, Russia has demonstrated greater consistency in its relationship with India, despite ideological differences.
Navarro went on to ridicule Modi in saffron clothes and a prayer posture. He accused the money-making Indian 'Brahmins' of taking advantage of their fellow citizens! The American NRIs were up in arms against Peter Navarro. He is evidently making a mess of things.
But the Americans should remember: never humiliate an entire society; never humiliate India. They do not forget so easily, as Shashi Tharoor has repeatedly said. They have not put behind Mao's 1962 unexpected invasion of India, even after 63 years.
Brahmin-Bania Ruling Class
But, for all his poor understanding of Indian society, in one thing Navarro did not err: that under a Brahmin-Bania leadership, the Ruling Party in India is determined to take advantage of the weaker communities and marginal groups. The BJP-RSS elite's religious pretensions have no convincing power: they do not go beyond Kumbha Melas, temple-building, poojas and mantras ... no genuine concern for fellow beings.
Savarkar had already warned, "If Hindutva is to sustain itself on a cow's legs, it'll come crashing down at the slightest hint of a crisis." That is what is happening. As uniformity is being imposed, regional consciousness is growing stronger in Maharashtra, South India, Punjab and the Northeast. Northeast has its own reasons for pride. The literacy rate in Mizoram is 91.3%. What is the literacy rate in UP? The crime rate in Meghalaya is the lowest in the country. What about MP, Haryana, or Rajasthan? BIMARU states still remain in BIMARU conditions.
Shallow Religiosity Is Suicidal
Enlightened Hindus are the first to argue that today's Hindutva ideology, strategies and policies are distorting true Hindu identity. Political leaders are doing harm to their own people under a religious mask. RSS leaders' words and deeds don't match.

It was not religiously fervent people that captured power in 2014, but those who wanted to 'instrumentalise' religion for political and economic domination. They sought to win the support of the religion-driven, mindless masses of India. They joined hands with the RSS, who too were hungering for religious domination of unperceptive millions.

With this begins the 'political use of religion,' promoting exaggerated forms of faith expressions that have come under the name 'Fundamentalism' today. They have alienated minorities within the country and the neighbourhood. Is India emerging as Vishwa Guru or Vishwa Bully (quoting a phrase from Ramachandra Guha) with ballistic missiles?

Embarrassing Boasts
None less than Shivraj Singh Chouhan lectured to science students in Bhopal, India, had Pushpak Vimana centuries before the Wright brothers invented the aeroplane. Poor, ignorant youth swallow such empty boasts as articles of faith. Atmanirbharata (self-reliance) of ideas should inspire us to adopt war strategies from the Mahabharata! Anurag Thakur warned students not to be misled by British deceivers; Lord Hanuman was the first to travel in space, not Neil Armstrong!

Earlier, the Chief Minister of Gujarat, Vijay Rupani, had claimed that Narad Muni had better information storage than Google. The Chief Minister of Tripura insisted that the war events in the Mahabharata were reported to King Dhritarashtra by Sanjay through a medium similar to the internet. Union Science Minister Harsh Vardhan vowed that scientist Stephen Hawking had referred to the Vedas as holding superior scientific information to Einstein. Ramesh Pokhriyal, BJP MP, asserted that science was a dwarf before astrology. Pankaj Jha, a professor at Sri Ram College, has ridiculed such mythology-based claims.

The Upper Castes Continue the Oppressive Ways of Ancient Days
It is said that history belongs to the victors, literature to the defeated. Vyasa's Mahabharata tells of a merciless war that wiped out entire races. Valmiki's Ramayana shows how the indigenous peoples of India were heartlessly crushed by the advancing Aryans. Indigenous communities were treated as Vanaras, Rakshasas, Dasas, Dasyus, Kiratas and Mlecchas. History boasts of victories, literature exposes cruelties.
It has been proposed that a new Ramayana be written from Ravana's point of view or Sita's point of view; that Indian history be rewritten from a Buddhist, Dalit, or tribal perspective. Everyone has a right to be heard. Devdutt Pattanaik or Shashi Tharoor would say that Hinduism was harsher towards Buddhism than Islam was towards Hinduism. Hinduism has survived, but Buddhism has nearly been wiped out in its original home.
History-rewriting Should be Inclusive
Thus, we notice that insensitivity has been in many directions. Telling tales again and again of Muslim or British cruelty is unfair. If Modiji complains of a thousand years of Indian subjugation, Dalits can complain of 3500 years of enslavement by the Hindu elite, and tribals of marginalisation. Everyone's grievance must be heard. Today, the chance for the weaker sections to be heard is growing feebler. Romila Thapar was pushed out of the JNU chair because she insisted on writing an inclusive history of India: North-South-East West, Aryan-Dravidian-Mongolian-Marginal, Hindu-Muslim-Buddhist-Christian-Sikh-Tribal.
NCERT texts should be fair to all. The Mughals opened India's doors to the dynamic economy of Central and West Asia, making its economy the world's first, and representing 25% of global GDP. The British opened the doors to modernity, introducing concepts of freedom, equality, and parliamentary accountability, as well as railways, universities, English education, and the study of tribal societies. Usha Patnaik says the British took away about 45 trillion dollars. But they united India and laid the foundations for its present stature. Study every aspect of reality, put it all in proportion in the NCERT history.

Satyameva Jayate!