Hindu Vivek Kendra
A RESOURCE CENTER FOR THE PROMOTION OF HINDUTVA
   

OBJECTIVE WHITEWASH FOR OBJECTIVE HISTORY (PART I of II) ! - India Connect website

by Arun Shourie ()
Tue, 4 Aug 1998 05:52:13 -0700

Title: OBJECTIVE WHITEWASH FOR OBJECTIVE HISTORY (PART I of II) !
Author: by Arun Shourie

Column II.263

"This is an old charge which keeps surfacing now and
then," wrote one of those "eminent historians", K. N.
Panikkar, in an vituperative response to an article of mine -
- the charge that close to two crores had been spent on the
"Towards Freedom" project of the Indian Council of
Historical Project, and little had been achieved. "About a
year back Times of India carried a front page story on this.
The historians had then clarified through a public
statement published in several newspapers, that they have
not drawn any money from the ICHR and that they worked
for five years purely in an honorary capacity. When he [that
is, me] gets the information from the ministry, if he does,
that the editors have not taken any money, I would
normally expect Shourie to tender a public apology. But
given the intellectual honesty and cultural level reflected in
his article, I do not think it would be forthcoming. The
alternative of suing for defamation the likes of Shourie is
below one's dignity. But I do expect at least the ministry to
make a public statement on the factual position."

Strong stuff, and definitive, one would think. It turns
out that on 17 July, 1998, in answer to a question tabled in
the Rajya Sabha, the Ministry stated that only one part of
the project has been completed and published since the
original volume of Dr. P. N. Chopra. This is the volume --
in three parts -- by Dr. Partha Sarthi Gupta covering 1943-
44. In answer to another question, the Ministry has
reported that "After publication of the Volume he was paid
an honorarium of Rs. 25,000/- in September, 1997."

Dr. Partha Sarthi Gupta, in other words, is the one
editor who has completed the work which he had
undertaken. For that he has been paid Rs. 25,000. The
others have not completed the work they had undertaken,
they have therefore not been paid the Rs. 25,000 which are
to be paid to them only when their volumes are completed
and published. That is how they go about proclaiming
themselves to be social workers -- we have been working in
an honorary capacity, we have not taken a penny !

And as bits and pieces about the ICHR at last start
trickling out, we learn that the "Towards Freedom" project
isn't the only one on which large amounts have been spent
and which has not been completed. There is an "Economic
History of India Project." Rs. NINETEEN LAKHS AND
FIFTY FIVE THOUSAND have been spent on it. Nothing
has been published as a result. Though, the Ministry told
the Rajya Sabha that "according to the information
furnished by the ICHR," two volumes of the project -- on
Railways and Agriculture -- are "ready for the press".

The Ministry also told the Rajya Sabha that "Professor
Bipin Chandra was sanctioned a sum of Rs. 75,000/- during
1987-88 for the assignment entitled 'A History of the Indian
National Congress'. A sum of Rs. 57,500/- [FIFTY SEVEN
THOUSAND FIVE HUNDRED] has been released to him
till 23.6.1989. The remaining balance of Rs. 17,500/- is
yet to be released because a formal manuscript in this
regard is yet to be received." In a word, spare readers this
social-worker stance -- "doing all this in a strictly honorary
capacity". It is as if Bipin Chandra were to go about saying,
"See, I have not even taken the Rs. 17,500/- which the
ICHR still owes me." And do not miss that effort from the
ICHR to help to the extent possible -- "The remaining
balance of Rs. 17,500/- is yet to be released because a
formal manuscript in this regard is yet to be received."
Does that mean that some "informal" manuscript has been
received, or that no manuscript has been received ?

As newspapers and magazines such as Outlook had
done, Panikkar had concocted his conspiracy theory on the
charge that the BJP Government had changed the word
"Rational" into "National", and that it had suppressed three
of the five objectives of the ICHR by changing the
Memorandum of Association of the ICHR. I had
reproduced relevant paragraphs from the Resolutions to
show that the same wording had continued for at least
twenty years. I had given the numbers and dates of the
Resolutions. I had also reported that I had requested the
Secretary of the Ministry to help ascertain the year since
which the same wording had continued. And what was the
response of this "eminent" historian who, as he said, writes
signed articles in publications of the Communist Party
"because I believe in the ideals it stands for" ? "Even if
Shourie's contention is true (unlike Shourie who is a BJP
MP, a resident of Delhi elected from UP, I have no means
to ascertain from the Ministry)...."

That is a much favoured stance : when caught
peddling a lie, insinuate that the other fellow is privileged !
And that as you are from the working masses, you cannot
ascertain whether the facts he has stated are true.
Therefore, what you stated must stand as fact -- Q.E.D. !

Exactly the same dodge was used a day or so later by
another of these progressives. Manoj Raghuvanshi had
invited K. M. Shrimali and me to discuss on Zee
Television's Aap ki Adalat the charge that history was
being rewritten in communal colours. Raghuvanshi read
out what Outlook had reported -- that the West Bengal
Board of Secondary Education had issued instructions in
1989 that "Muslim rule should never attract any criticism.
Destruction of temples by Muslim rulers and invaders
should not be mentioned."

Raghuvanshi asked Shrimali, whether this did not
amount to distortion ? True, that was a painful period of
our history, Raghuvanshi said, but should it be erased from
our history books ? Would that be objective, rational
history? Shrimali's response was the well-practised script :
firstly, he did not know that such an instruction was ever
issued; if it was issued, he said, he was against it; but one
must see what the context was in which the instruction had
been issued....

Concerned teachers in West Bengal have been so kind
as to send me the circular relating to textbooks for class IX.
Dated 28 April, 1989, it is issued by the West Bengal
Secondary Board. It is in Bengali, and carries the number
"Syl/89/1".

"All the West Bengal Government recognised
secondary school Headmasters are being informed," it
begins, "that in History textbooks recommended by this
Board for Class IX the following amendments to the
chapter on the medieval period have been decided after due
discussions and review by experts." "

"The authors and publishers of Class IX History
textbooks," it continues, "are being requested to
incorporate the amendments if books published by them
have these aushuddho [impurities, errors] in all subsequent
editions, and paste a corrigendum in books which have
already been published. A copy of the book with the
corrigendum should be deposited with the Syllabus Office
(74, Rafi Ahmed Kidwai Road, Calcutta -- 16)." Signed,

"....Chattopadhyaya, Secretary."

The accompanying pages contain two columns :
aushuddho -- impurity, or error -- and shuddho. One has
just to glance through the changes to see the objective the
progressives are trying to achieve through their "objective",
"rational" approach to the writing of history. Here are some
of the changes.

Book : Bharat Katha, prepared by the Burdwan
Education Society, Teachers Enterprise, published by
Sukhomoy Das....

Page 140 : Aushuddho -- "In Sindhudesh the Arabs
did not describe Hindus as Kafir. They had banned cow-
slaughter." Shuddho -- "Delete, 'They had banned cow-
slaughter'."

Page 141 : Aushuddho -- "Fourthly, using force to
destroy Hindu temples was also an expression of
aggression. Fifthly, forcibly marrying Hindu women and
converting them to Islam before marriage was another way
to propagate the fundamentalism of the ulema." Shuddho :
though the column reproduces the sentences only from
"Fourthly....", the Board directs that the entire matter from
"Secondly.... to ulema" be deleted.