Title:
India’s Ancient Past
Author:
R S Sharma
Publisher:
Oxford University Press 2008, (First published 2005)
ISBN:
9780195687859
Pages:
387
Ram
Sharan Sharma (R. S. Sharma) was a noted historian who was also the emeritus
professor of Patna University. India’s
Ancient Past was a text book of history for grade 11 students until it was
removed by the government around the year 2000. This book covers Indian history
from pre-historic times to the seventh century CE. A bird’s eye view of the
major events is portrayed in this book. Sharma uses scientific concepts to
propound history, but the problem arises when he becomes selectively rational.
He feels no compunction to lambast the ideas of the political party which is
opposed to his leftist ideals, without an iota of evidence to prove his point.
Such a book exhibiting partial paralysis of logic should not be taught in
schools.
The
British set it upon themselves the tough task of attempting to draw up a
history of India on modern lines, but based on flimsy references. Their logic
for embarking on this task was rather straightforward – if you want to rule
over a people, you are expected to be conversant with the past deeds of their
ancestors, so that you can be a better judge in their internecine strife. As
soon as the East India Company consolidated its hold over Bengal, steps in this
direction followed, like the establishment of Asiatic Society of Bengal. With James
Princep deciphering the script of Ashokan inscriptions, Indian historiography arrived
in the technical sense. The British were careful that their efforts of making
the history of ancient India do not in any way encourage the Indians to handle
the destiny of their country in their own hands. To drive the point home, they
made startling discoveries like Indians are fit only for being ruled and that
the rulers of the country came invading across the northwest frontier. Earlier
Indian historians also toed this line, but the real objective description comes
from Rajendra Lal Mitra. It is disturbing to note here that even now, most
Indian historians, including the author are not free from teachings of an alien
political creed that is no longer practiced anywhere in the world. R L Mitra’s
crowning achievement – in the words of Sharma – is that he found that people
ate beef in ancient India! See the ugly haste to link the idea to controversies
raging in the modern world. Sharma’s another finding on Marxian lines is the
outrageous suggestion that the caste system in India is not fundamentally
different from the class system in Europe. For leftist historians, Marx’s
utterance is gospel truth!
A nice discussion on the origins of
pastoralism and agriculture is presented as a backdrop of the human migration
to India. Organized settlements of the chalcolithic (copper – stone) period
existed in many places. An interesting point to note is that the Harappan
culture, with bronze as its prime mover, did not impart the technology to its
neighbours. The mature Harappan phase is attributed to the period 2500 – 1900
BCE, but we see chalcolithic sites continue to flourish and newly established
after this date. Sharma doesn’t venture into an unequivocal opinion on the
causes of the decline of that civilization, apart from expressing his opinion
of a general nature including flooding of the Indus, dip in rainfall in the
area, and the closure of trade routes to Mesopotamia with the establishment of
a strong kingdom at Elam in modern Iran lying on the trade route. War with the
Indo-Aryans is definitely not cited as a reason, which puts him in great
difficulty in explaining the passages in Rig Veda extolling god Indra for
destroying towns (purandara) and conquest of dasyus. The Vedic period stretches
from 1900 to 1500 BCE, in which Aryans achieved prominence with the help from
iron implements, horse-drawn chariots and the invigorating freshness of a new
world view that found expression on virgin soil. They were still mainly pastoral,
with a tinge of agriculture in cultivating barley. The Later Vedic period (1000
– 500 BCE) saw the establishment of sedentary janapadas (towns) in the Gangetic
basin, with agriculture expanding to include cereals such as rice and wheat.
The Varna system got rigid in this period, and many Vedic deities were replaced
with new or refurbished ones. The octopus-like grip of Brahmins in the society
was bitterly resented by Kshatriyas, the community of rulers and warriors.
Since works of a historical nature didn’t
originate in India till the advent of the Middle Ages, chronology of Indian
kings are rooted solidly on the invasion of Alexander in 326 BCE, which is
attested in Greek texts. Reckoning backwards from this event, the births of
Buddha and Mahavira are attributed to sixth century BCE. However, Sharma
expresses reservations about this date on the face of excavations carried out
at the historical sites of mid-Gangetic basin. Occupation of the sites is
proved beyond doubt only from the 5th century BCE onwards, causing
problems with the accepted chronology. Alexander’s arrival can’t be moved to a
later period. So, if the author’s objections hold water, the periods of the
early Mauryas are gravely in doubt. Rise of heterodox sects such as Buddhism
and Jainism occurred on the cusp of change brought about by foreign invasions.
Alexander’s attack was a fleeting moment of defeat, as the Mauryas were able to
wrest the provinces back soon. The death of Ashoka in 232 BCE was a pivotal
point in the history of the country. The pacified regime of Ashoka prepared the
country for foreign hegemony. The militant central Asian hordes found their
entry into China curtailed by the erection of the Great Wall around this time.
They turned to India instead to unleash their lust for glory and riches. Waves
of tribes rolled out of the Khyber pass such as Bactrian Greeks, Shakas,
Parthians, Kushans (Yuechi) and Sassanians. These invaders merged harmoniously
with India’s customs and social mores. We also witness the opening up of
India’s caste structure to accommodate the newcomers. After they were granted
entry as Kshatriyas, the gates banged shut, which still remains so.
By the third century CE, trade and commerce
declined in India, yet no credible reason is assigned for making this
assertion. Precious metals were rare in India and for coinage, the thrust was
on foreign trade. The downfall in trade dealt a crippling blow to money economy
and urban way of life. This indirectly led to resistance from peasants and
artisans. Sharma surmises that the working class might have withheld payment of
taxes and grain to the state. Mingled with this sorry state of affairs on the
economic front was the admission of many new tribes into the caste system. This
upheaval is said to be the historical event that led thinkers in ancient India
to remark this period as the beginning of Kali Yuga, where righteousness is
eclipsed and mixing of castes take place. But everything was not bleak. The
golden age of Hinduism was yet to be staged in the form of Gupta dynasty which
lasted 160 years from the 4th to 6th centuries. Literary
gems like Kalidasa and Bhasa adorned their courts. Sanskrit took its place as
the state language everywhere of consequence in the subcontinent. As the supply
of coins dwindled, numerous land grants took its place. Instead of payment in
coins, priests and royal officials were assigned land from which they were
permitted to extract revenue in the form of agricultural produce. The grandees
were also entrusted with administering justice in the area. Feudalism was about
to begin its long march to the Middle Ages. However, a violent storm was
brewing in the west, in the form of Islam which would destroy a large part of
the country’s wealth and shake its culture to its very core. However, the book
stops short of this.
As noted earlier, leftist historians
are hell bent on expounding Marxian ideas as age-old truth. They always try to
score a point in present-day political discourse by cherry-picking historical
facts which suit their cause. The author seems to be obsessed with proving that
ancient Indians ate meat. We see him celebrating with “people (of the chalcolithic age) certainly ate beef and pork, but they
did not eat pork on any considerable scale” (p.65). They may or may not have
eaten beef or pork, but why the point needs to be hammered home on the minds of
children, for whom this was a text book? See the reflexive recoil from
asserting that pork was widely eaten? This is another characteristic of the
leftist historian who pampers Muslim sensitivities. In another passage, Sharma
says “Swami Vivekananda speaks of both
orthodox and beef-eating brahmanas in Vedic times, and he recommends animal
food for the Hindus in the modern context” (p.127). Whatever he might have
been, Swami Vivekananda was definitely not a historian, isn’t it? Then again,
on p.216 he virtually dances with joy with the statement that “The Tamil brahmanas partook of meat and wine”.
Sharma is entitled to his opinion, but why such unproved theories should be
hoisted on young minds? He is quite sure that suppression of Buddhism by Hindu
rulers was due to fanaticism and bigotry, but the killer blow on Buddhism delivered
by the hands of Muslim invaders was the result of tempting the invaders with
riches collected in monasteries! The author says, “Shaivite Mihirakula killed hundreds of Buddhists, Brahmin ruler
Pushyamitra Sunga persecuted Buddhists, Shaivite Shashanka of Gauda felled the
Bodhi tree. For their riches the monasteries came to be coveted by the Turkish
invaders, becoming special targets of the invaders’ greed” (p.140). See the
reluctance to spell out the religion of the ‘Turkish’ invaders, while that of
Mihirakula, Pushyamitra Sunga and Shashanka are cried out from the roof top!
The book has a structured design with neat
little chapters and a mention of the chronology at the end of each chapter. A
few maps and monochrome plates are included to add interest. An excellent index
and extensive bibliography add value to the work.
The book is recommended.
Rating: 2 Star
No comments:
Post a Comment