Category india

The word ‘spolia’ hides too many humiliations – Reshmi Dasgupta

VOI

Ionic pillar capital embedded in wall of St.Peter's Church, Kalyvia Thorikou, Greece.

For medieval European builders who used temple rubble in their churches, the older Pagan faith was totally snuffed out in the former Roman Empire, so no one was left to protest against the deliberate insult to the ancient Gods. But in India there are many left to seethe about temple ‘spolia’ in mosques. – Reshmi Dasgupta

‘Spolia’ is an interesting word. Taken from Latin, it means “spoils” (of war) but archaeologists and academics use it to describe stones and architectural elements retrieved from older structures and re-used in new constructions, as masonry or decoration, either in the same place or elsewhere. Many of those who use the word prefer it because ‘spolia‘ sounds passive, because most people do not know the real meaning, with its vivid allusions to violence and destruction.

Debris and rubble are the better known words that imply destruction and hence are less used as they give rise to uncomfortable questions. More so when certain sections of them are reused intact, so that their original purpose juxtaposed with their new ‘repurposed’ existence remains clear to those looking at it. Hindu and Jain temple ‘spolia’—pillars—used in the cloisters of the 12th century Quwwat-ul-Islam Mosque in New Delhi’s Mehrauli is one such example in India.

Quwwat-ul-Islam Mosque
Western wall of Gyanvapi Mosque is that of earlier hindu temple.

Of course, an entire wall of an older structure retained intact in a subsequent construction—one example of which is currently in the news here—cannot be called ‘spolia’ in the classical sense as technically, it is not in bits and pieces. But its impact on those who see it is far sharper than, say, statues of Pagan or forbidden gods embedded in walls or on stairs, of which there are many examples in the areas of the erstwhile Roman, Byzantine and Ottoman empires.

In this connection, it may be remembered that remains of old statues and columns which were used in later constructions in the Acropolis in Athens have been widely interpreted as a deliberate device to forever remind Athenians about the destruction wrought by Persian emperor Xerxes I in 480 BCE after the battle of Thermopylae. Only certain spolia were used, so as to ensure Athenians resolve to never let it happen again. This is called ‘purposeful memorialisation’.

The ‘spoliate colonnades’ of Rome, however, are even more apt in the context of Mehrauli as intact pre-Christian Roman pillars were deliberately re-used in churches. In Spolia Churches of Rome: Recycling Antiquity in the Middle Ages, Maria Fabricius Hansen writes how from the 4th century CE to the 13th century CE, Christians “re-used” columns, pediments and other spolia of ancient (Pagan) Rome prominently in churches. It even became an architectural style.

The assertion of Christianity over the earlier faith prevalent there was implicit in this exercise since the new churches not only used old material but were also eventually built on the very sites of Roman temples. Fortunately for those medieval church builders, the older faith was totally snuffed out in the former Roman Empire, so no one was left to protest against the deliberate insult to their ancient gods. But in India there are many left to seethe about ‘spolia’.

The term ‘purposeful memorialisation’ can be used to describe the use of ‘spolia’ in India too, but the intention was rather different. Although contemporary left-leaning historians have tried hard to find a continuity in terms of violence and destruction in India before and after the advent of Islamic rulers, there is little proof of wilful debasing. There is no evidence of Buddhist ‘spolia’, for example, being deliberately used in Hindu temples to humiliate and disparage.

On the contrary, the great Buddhist university or mahavihara at Nalanda (then in Magadha and now Bihar) was built by the Hindu emperor Kumaragupta in the 5th century and flourished under successive Hindu rulers and non-royal Hindu donors. It was destroyed in the 12th century by ‘Turks’ (almost certainly Bakhtiyar Khilji’s army) corroborated by contemporary accounts of monks. The site of another mahavihara Odantapur that Khilji razed became Bihar Sharif.

Many reused ‘older’ building materials in India without any idea of what the original structures were, of course. Bricks and pillars of the 2nd century BCE Amaravati mahachaitya buried for more than a millennia were reused by a local zamindar Raja Vesireddy Nayudu to build his new capital in the late 18th century. Bricks from the then-undiscovered Harappa were also used by the British as track ballast for the Lahore-Multan railway in the late 19th century.

The Indus-Saraswati civilisation was still unknown when the railway was being built and Amaravati was just a grassy mound of bricks. They both could just as well have belonged to abandoned settlements of relatively recent provenance, that too not of known importance. So, whether knowing the origin of the bricks and ‘spolia’ would have really made a difference in these two cases remains moot. But all use of ‘spolia’ in India has not been that unwitting.

Which explains why there has been a concerted effort to project that destruction of places of worship and use of ‘spolia’ in India predated the Islamic period. One example cited is of the Pallava king Narasimhavarman I’s Brahmin general Paranjothi who took away a Ganesha idol from the Chalukyan capital Vatapi (now Badami in Karnataka) after the defeat of Pulakeshin II in 642 AD and installed it in his village Tiruchenkattankudi in Tiruvarur district of Tamil Nadu. But those who cite it omit the fact that the razing of Vatapi exempted temples.

Not only did Paranjothi install the Ganesha idol with great devotion and respect in his village but there is an inscription by Narasimhavarman I in the Mallikarjuna Temple at Vatapi, proving that destruction of Chalukyan temples—much less raising another structure on the site to rub it in—was not on the agenda. Carrying away idols did not indicate contempt as they were not melted down, unlike those taken from southern temples by Alauddin Khilji’s general Malik Kafur.

Another example given is of Rajadhiraja Chola who defeated the Chalukyas and plundered their capital Kalyani, taking away a large black stone dwarapala. But the inscription on that dwarapala, now installed at the Darasuram Temple in Kumbakonam, attributing its presence there to Rajadhiraja, proves it was not demeaned or destroyed but respectfully given place in another temple. If this could be called ‘spolia’ at all, it had been given a dignified new home.

The actions of warring southern Hindu rulers were a marked contrast to the attitude of the invading Islamic armies from the north, especially the expeditions of Alauddin Khilji’s favourite general Malik Kafur. The many stories of idols hidden to prevent destruction and mutilated stone carvings of figures in the great temples of south India bear witness to the fury and intentions of these invaders, going beyond just plundering their gold, gems, horses and elephants.

This is conveyed in almost fawning detail by the admired 14th century bard Amir Khusrau (who was witness to many of those pillaging wars) in Tarikh-i-Alai. One description goes: “The holy places of the Hindus, which the Malik Kafur dug up from its foundations with the greatest care. … The stone idols called ling, which had existed for a long time and until now, the kick of the horse of Islam hadn’t attempted to break … the Mussalmans destroyed all the idols”.

In most cases though, the ‘spolia’ used by idol-breaking armies are not as evident as, say, at the Quwwat-ul-Islam mosque and certainly Gyanvapi. But the question is when (if at all) will India’s historians and intelligentsia take a cue from their counterparts (who have noted the same phenomenon around the Mediterranean) face up to the truth? They need to not only call a spade a spade but also disseminate the real meaning and purpose of ‘spolia’ in history. – FirstPost, 14 August 2023

› Reshmi Dasgupta is an editor at the Times of India, New Delhi.

Temple pillars in Santhome Church museum, Mylapore.

The K.K. Muhammed Interview – TNIE

VOI

K.K. Muhammed

Archaeologist Dr. K.K. Muhammed, 71, was part of the Archaeological Survey of India team that excavated the Babri Masjid site in Ayodhya in 1976 where the Ram Temple now stands. While stating the demolition of Babri Masjid did shock him as an archaeologist, Dr. Muhammed is of the view Muslims must willingly hand over Gyanvapi and Mathura mosques to Hindus. He thinks that will heal many wounds. While stressing the Congress Party should have decided to participate in the inauguration of the Ram Temple on January 22, Dr. Muhammed terms the BJP rule under Narendra Modi a dark age for the ASI. Excerpts from his conversation with the New Indian Express Interrogation Team 

Q : You were part of the ASI team that excavated Babri Masjid/Ram Janmabhoomi in 1976. What were your findings?

A : It was a team led by Professor B.B. Lal that carried out the excavation and I was part of it. We came across pillars of a Hindu temple, with poornakalasa engraved on them. Forms of defaced gods and goddesses were also discovered. Terracotta statues traditionally associated with temples, too, were unearthed. We will never find statues of humans in mosques, as these are haram for Muslims. That’s how we concluded that a temple had stood there before the mosque was constructed.

Q : But some, like Professor Syed Ali Rizvi of AMU, allege you were not part of the excavation team? 

A : I was a postgraduate diploma student then at ASI’s School of Archaeology. Ten of us went as a team, including senior Congress leader Jairam Ramesh’s wife Jaisree Ramanathan. I was engaged in the excavation of Trench B.

Q : Have the findings of these studies been published in any academic journal?

A : Yes. It’s there in the Indian Archaeological Review. But ASI, especially Professor Lal, never wanted to make it an issue. It was more of an academic nature.

Q : ASI excavations found structures to prove that there was a temple. … But was there any proof of it being a Ram Temple?

A : Yes. They got an inscription—Vishnuharisila Phalakam—after the masjid was demolished in 1992. It clearly states that this temple is dedicated to the Mahavishnu who killed Bali.

Hari-Vishnu Inscription

Q : So the crucial evidence was discovered during demolition, not during excavation?  

A : Yes. They got this evidence after the Masjid demolition, not during excavation. The critics first said it was an 18th-century inscription. Later they backed out. In reality, it’s a 12th-century inscription. There was also an allegation that such evidence was planted there. So, we checked with the Lucknow Museum. They confirmed that the inscription they possess remains with them.

Q : The popular narrative is that Babar demolished a temple and constructed a masjid. But do we have evidence to prove that Babar had demolished the temple? 

A : Babar’s military commander Mir Baqi (Baqi Tashqandi) had led the demolition of the temple. There was an inscription in Persian which said Mir Baqi had demolished the temple. It could also have been a dilapidated structure.

Q : But there is a huge difference between demolishing a temple to build a masjid and constructing a masjid on the ruins of a dilapidated temple…. 

A : Many temples were demolished in medieval India. If you visit Delhi you can see Quwwat-ul-Islam Mosque near Qutub Minar (the mosque was built over the site of a temple). Some pages of Babar Nama have gone missing. Pages describing the activities of three months are missing. But there was an inscription that Mir Baqi had constructed the masjid. The demolition was part of a war and the Muslims of the current generation are in no way responsible for the act. But at the same time, Muslims should not defend the demolition of temples by some invaders. Christians do not justify what the Portuguese did in Goa.

Q : What were the findings of the 2003 excavations?

A : In 2003, a team led by B.R. Mani carried out an excavation using the Ground Penetrating Radar and found out there was a structure underneath. During the excavation, 12 pillars and more than 50 brick bases were discovered. The excavation team had experts from JNU/AMU  in addition to the Waqf committee’s lawyers, VHP people and members of the judiciary. It was fully recorded. About one-fourth of the workers were Muslims.

Q : Going by what you say, there was a 12th-century temple, and later a masjid was built on top of it in the 16th century. As an archaeologist do you agree with the demolition of a structure to unearth another one? 

A : No archaeologist would agree to the demolition of any historical structure. In this case, it had already been demolished. We now need to think about what’s the way forward.

Q : As an archaeologist, what did you feel when Babri Masjid was demolished in 1992? 

A : We were all shaken. Senior IAS officer I. Mahadevan had stated that we should not do wrong to correct a historical mistake that happened centuries ago. We were all against the demolition. It shouldn’t have happened.

Q : And as an Indian Muslim?

A : An archaeologist can never be a Muslim or a Hindu. We look at such matters objectively. I have faced stiff opposition from the Muslim community and Hindu groups on various occasions.

Q : Similar demands are now being made about Gyanvapi and Mathura? 

A : The Muslim community should be ready to willingly hand over its rights (to the structures at) Varanasi and Mathura, too, to the Hindus. Tension is bound to be there. But from a historic perspective, there cannot be a lasting solution to the whole issue without handing these two over. I always remind the Muslims that India, even after Partition, remains a secular country because of its Hindu majority.

Aurangzeb's firman against the Keshava Rai Temple in Mathura (13 October 1666).

Q : But won’t it lead to more tension? 

A : Ayodhya, Kashi and Mathura are three places as important to Hindus as Mecca and Medina are to Muslims. Hence, Muslims should be ready to willingly hand over these places.

Q : Is there sufficient evidence in Gyanvapi to support claims of a temple there? 

A : Yes. There may be Islamic inscriptions, but in totality, it is a Hindu structure. Also, there are many literatures which support this. This issue has created a major divide between the Hindus and the Muslims. So, handing it over to Hindus is the only lasting solution.

Aurangzeb's firman ording the demolition of the Vishwanath Temple at Kashi (August 1669).

Q : Gyanvapi is an 18th century structure. As an archaeologist, do you support demolishing such an old structure? 

A : The same issue had come up about Babri Masjid too. We can transplant these structures as such, without demolishing them. So far only four such transplants have been carried out in India. Of these, two were led by me—the Kurudi Mahadeva Temple and the Chaubis Avatar Temple in Madhya Pradesh.

Q : Whether Babri Masjid or Gyanvapi Mosque, these structures came into being as part of some historical moments. If we start correcting such historical errors, where would it lead us to?

A : That’s right. It’ll go on without any beginning or end. In Kerala itself, there are many such Buddhist temples and Jain temples that have later become Hindu temples. But if we take these three places as an exception—Ram Janmabhoomi, Krishna’s birthplace and Siva temple—that could prove to be the only and lasting solution to this issue. I think, if these two are handed over, all religious groups together can resolve this issue once and for all.

Q : Isn’t that just wishful thinking? The RSS-VHP reportedly has a list of close to 2,000 temples that were demolished to construct mosques….  

A : There won’t be any end if we go on like this. But unlike Semitic religions, the Hindu mind will not approve of such aggressiveness. You have to remember that many Hindus have stood with the Muslims in the fight against the Ram Mandir movement. Can you remember one instance where the Muslims stood for the cause of the Hindus?

Q : Isn’t Ayodhya more of a political issue than an archaeological or historical issue?

A : Yes, correct. It’s a political issue. It’s a fact that the BJP and the RSS try to use it with a motive to make political gains. At the same time, we need to understand the pain of lakhs of ordinary Hindu devotees. It would have been better if the Muslims could understand the pain of the Hindus.

Q : But aren’t these emotions created by politicians?

A : I accept there were attempts to whip up emotions. But even during my visit to Ayodhya in 1976-77, I could understand the heart-wrenching agony of the poor Hindus. Had it been Mecca or Medina, how many bombs would have exploded by now? Hindus allowed that structure to remain there for 500 years. We have to understand this magnanimity of Indian culture and Hinduism.

Q : A 16th century structure has been demolished and a huge structure built using modern technology. Do you think justice has been served?

A : The issue is not whether the act is justified or not. The structure has been demolished. If it was not demolished, ASI would not have allowed the construction of another structure within 300 metres from the structure. The disputed structure has gone and the new building has been constructed considering the requirements of the current time. It is an issue of faith and we have to make some compromises.

Q : Do you think the Ram Temple issue had been a pan-India issue at any point of time?

A : It was not a pan-India issue. But now it is growing to such levels. I accept that it is a political project.

Q : You say the Hindus were magnanimous. Where can we see such large-hearted Hindus now?

A : Compared to (followers of) other religions, Hindus are far better even now. They may react recklessly, playing with emotions, but they will think and correct themselves later. The Semitic religions will never be ready to compromise on their faith.

Q : Do you think there is an attempt to Semiticise the Hindu religion?

A : Yes. The Semitic religions have started influencing Hinduism. But it is a temporary phenomenon and will not be sustained. I am more concerned about the false scientific claims of Pushpaka Vimana, surgery, and stem cells mooted by even educated people who are inspired by the Hindu revival. The king of Saudi Arabia will not present the claims of Arab mythology in a science congress. But PM Modi had presented the claims of Indian sages who pioneered surgery. This has created concerns that Hinduism is losing its values.

Q : The lock of Babri Masjid was opened, allowing pooja, during the term of former Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi. How significant was that move?

A : Opening the lock of the Masjid, in 1986, was the first important decision. Later, in 1989, he allowed pooja at the disputed structure. There was an unwritten agreement between renowned Islamic scholar Abdul Hassan Ali Nadwi and Rajiv Gandhi to solve the issue. The agreement was that if the Muslims allowed the opening of Babri Masjid, the government would bring a bill to overcome the Shah Bano case verdict.

Q : What happened then?

A : The Waqf committee, including Syed Shahabuddin, had favoured the agreement. But once the Shah Bano bill was passed, all except Abdul Hassan Ali Nadwi changed their stance. After Rajiv Gandhi’s death, the agreement was forgotten.

Q : It is rumoured that historian Irfan Habib played a role in scuttling the agreement. Is it true?

A : I don’t know about his role. I will not be objective while speaking about Irfan Habib, because I have personal enmity with him. He is my teacher but I have no respect for him.

Q : Do you think the stand of Kerala CPM in the Babri Masjid issue is inspired by arguments of the Marxist historians?

A : Irfan Habib plays a prominent role in influencing the stand of the Communists. Besides, the CPM took it as a political stand to win the support of Muslims. I found the stand of the Muslim League more acceptable.

Q : How do you see Congress’ decision not to attend the consecration ceremony?

A : Congress should have come forward in these things because Rajiv Gandhi took the initiative to open the lock of Babri Masjid. Congress should have understood the feelings of Hindus, but those who control Congress do not think along those lines.

Q : Do you mean to say the Congress failed to understand the north Indian Hindu psyche?

A : That’s what I feel. And they are also scared of the consequences. If Congress becomes irrelevant, who else is remaining? BJP has become a group that can stoop to any level. We feel sad in seeing the misuse of the agencies like the ED.

Q : But many consider you a BJP person? 

A : That’s what people think. I didn’t attend their (BJP’s) meeting though they invited me. I can be considered a Congressman because I share their liberal ideology.

Q : Your book Njanenna Bharatheeyan has created a controversy because you stated that the ASI is in a dead state during the BJP rule? 

A : Yes. The ASI has become a dead organisation and 10 years of BJP rule is a dark age of the organisation. I had undertaken the renovation of 80 temples that were destroyed in the earthquake in the Chambal area. We expected they (BJP) would be in the forefront of the renovation efforts. But not a single temple has been renovated in the last nine years.

Bateshwar temple ruins in the Chambal Valley. MP.

Q : According to you, Modi has not shown any interest in renovating other temples, but was keen on Ayodhya temple. So, Modi’s interest in Ayodhya is not religious, but political?

A : They (BJP) themselves admit that it was a political project (laughs out). It is a mix of both (smiles).

Q : You are a person familiar with different archaeological structures. In your opinion, which are the most amazing structures in India?

A : Hampi and Halebidu in Karnataka. If they were renovated properly, they would be more beautiful than Rome.

Q : Have heard you saying that the collection of books that Hiuen Tsang took from India was the basis for China’s development?    

A : (Hiuen Tsang) carried 751 books on the back of 20 horses to China. I-tsing carried with him 400 manuscripts. They translated these works and used them for their future growth. But our knowledge collections were destroyed by invaders.

Q : But isn’t it a usual practice for kings and emperors to destroy temples or mosques as part of the conquests? Do you think there is a religious undertone to it? 

A : Damage is indeed a part of subjugation, but there is a religious undertone too in the case of Semitic religions. But in the case of Indian conquests of other countries, like Indonesia or Malaysia, you will not see this kind of destruction.

Q : But Marathas also ransacked  many temples during their raids. … Similarly, Pandya king is said to have torched the Kanthaloor Sala in Thiruvananthapuram….

A : Yes … they ransacked temples, but they did not destroy them like Semitic invaders. Semitic religions think only they are correct.

Q : Is there any archaeological proof for the happenings in Ramayana and Mahabharata?

A : Yes. Events in Mahabharata must have happened after iron ore was discovered. As per our estimate, it happened between 1200 BC and 1300 BC. Ramayana happened in 1500 BC. There are archaeological findings in the regions between Kurukshetra and Mathura where events in Mahabharata may have unfolded.

Q : So, Ramayana and Mahabharata are not mythology but history?

A : Communists will say these are mythologies while right-wingers say it happened two lakh years before. Archaeologists will not accept any of these. Truth is actually in between. Mahabharata war must have been a tribal warfare, and not a world war as it has been made out (smiles).

Q : What are the changes that you have observed in Indian society since the day you joined ASI in 1976?

A : People in general have become more religious. This change is more evident in the case of Hindus. I would say Hindus are in a way being forced to be more organised like the Semitic religions.

Q : Upanishads are your favourite books?

A : Yes. I am a follower of Vivekananda (smiles).

Q : Heard you received many threats after the Ayodhya verdict?

A : Yes, there were threats. I had police security for three years. Even now I don’t go out frequently.

Q : Have you received an invitation for the consecration of the Ram Temple?

A : Yes. I have received an invitation. But I may not go due to health reasons. – The New Indian Express, 14 January 2024

The New Indian Express Team

Vedic Saraswati Civilisation, not Harappan Civilisation – David Frawley

VOI

Archeological Survey of India has found 60 skeletons in excavations at Rakhigarhi.

The term ‘Harappa’ does not suggest any continuity in India’s history since the ancient period or give the Vedas any place in it. Those who proposed the name were proponents of the Aryan Invasion Theory like Mortimer Wheeler, and such a non-Vedic term was useful in perpetuating that theory. – Dr. David Frawley

It is time to remove the term ‘Harappan’ from designating the ancient civilisation of India, as it is inaccurate and ignores the nature and continuity of India’s civilisation as a whole. Harappan is an artificial and incidental term deriving from the archaeological site of Harappa in Pakistan along with Mohenjo-Daro, which were the major ancient urban sites in greater India discovered in the early twentieth century (1921-22) before the partition of the country. Western archaeologists arbitrarily chose it to designate an entire urban civilisation going back to 3500 BCE, which they viewed more as a lost civilisation than connected to the later history of India.

The term Harappa does not suggest any continuity in India’s history since the ancient period or give the Vedas any place in it. Those who proposed the name were proponents of the Aryan Invasion Theory like Mortimer Wheeler, and such a non-Vedic term was useful in perpetuating that theory. Wheeler also promoted the false theory of the massacre at Mohenjo-Daro by invading Aryans which has been archaeologically disproved.

Importance of Rakhigarhi

Today the site of Rakhigarhi in Haryana, located in the Saraswati River region of Kurukshetra, and traditionally regarded as the home of the Vedas, has been proven to be larger and older than Harappa and Mohenjo-Daro which were on the Indus. As Rakhigarhi is the largest Harappan site, it would be more accurate to associate this ancient Indian civilisation with Rakhigarhi rather than Harappa. It better reveals the geographical connections of these sites to later India and its prime historical regions.

The Harappan civilisation has also been called the Indus Valley Civilisation (IVC) as the Indus River (Sindhu in Indian languages) was the main location of the initial sites discovered. However, further excavations have revealed the majority of the so-called Harappan or Indus sites were located by the Saraswati River, famous in Vedic texts, which dried up around 4000 years ago, showing its antiquity.

An Ancient Maritime Civilisation

In addition, Harappan sites have been found in Gujarat by the ocean in what was then the delta region of the Saraswati River, indicating it was a maritime culture from the Saraswati to the sea. Vedic civilisation was also maritime, with 150 references to the ocean in the oldest Rig Veda alone, including noting the Saraswati River as flowing from the mountains to the sea.

Using nondescript terms like ‘Harappan’ fits in with the terminology of the Aryan Invasion Theory that separates the Vedas from the origins of India’s civilisation, which colonial scholars also maintained. Harappans are often called pre-Vedic or non-Vedic which the Rakhigarhi finds also disprove.

The rivers of Northwest India on which so-called Harappan sites have been found have ancient Vedic names including Sindhu, Saraswati, Vitasta, Parushni (Ravi), Vipas (Beas), Shutudri (Sutlej), Yamuna and Ganga. Vedic texts show a similar culture, artefacts and geography to what has been called Harappan, extending from fire altars to Shiva lingas. We see a continuity of civilisation in India from sites as old as 8000 years ago like Rakhigarhi or Bhirrana, another such ancient site in the Kurukshetra region in Haryana.

Saraswati-Sindhu Vedic Civilisation

In place of ‘Harappan’, the civilisation should be better called ‘Vedic Saraswati Civilisation’, or ‘Saraswati-Sindhu Civilisation’. Using the term ‘Harappan’ is misleading for the study of India’s history as it does not suggest the actual centre of the civilisation on the Saraswati River, along with its Vedic and Bharatiya connections.

Ramifications for India’s Textbook Accounts of History

Indian Marxist scholars like Romila Thapar and Irfan Habib who opposed the idea of the Saraswati civilisation were also, not surprisingly, the main academic opponents of the Ram Temple in Ayodhya. They denied that there ever was any Hindu temple at the Babri Masjid site, even after Prof. B.B Lal, Director General of the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI), showed the evidence. Lal also wrote extensively on the Harappan as a Saraswati and Vedic culture and was involved in the excavation of Harappan sites.

Unfortunately, these same Marxist scholars were given charge over India’s history textbooks by the Congress government, not only relative to the ancient period but medieval and modern periods as well, including India’s independence movement. The youth of India were given their distorted views of India’s history as authoritative, devised to get them to reject their own culture and dharmic civilisation, portraying India as a country of invaders and no such religion as Hinduism but only a series of local cults.

Congress did this trying to gain politically and made the Marxists their intellectual wing in a lack of any thinkers of their own. You can be certain that if the Congress ever came back to power, they would try to restore these academics and their views. Fortunately, Sri Ram has proved too strong for them and the Vedas can no longer be denied their core role in the history of Bharat. – Firstpost, 31 December 2023

› Dr. David Frawley (Pandit Vamadeva Shastri) is the director of the American Institute of Vedic Studies and the author of more than 30 books on yoga and Vedic traditions. 

Saraswati River Map

Warriors & Chariots: ASI finds proof Aryans were not invaders of India – Krishan Murari

VOI

Warrior burial site with chariots at Sinauli UP.

“Western scholars proposed that chariots and weapons came to India with the Aryan invasion. … The Sinauli excavation denies the entire agenda, as we have evidence of burials of warriors, weapons and chariots which is indigenous in nature.” – Dr. Sanjay Kumar Manjul

One of the knottiest and most hotly debated theories of ancient Indian history is that of the Aryan invasion around 2000-1500 BCE. The BJP and RSS have always claimed that India was the cradle of the Aryans—the tribe that introduced the chariot and horse to India and went on to compose the Vedas. Some biological evidence even points to this possibility.

Recent excavations from the nearly 4,000-year-old archaeological site in Sinauli, where a warrior tribe once lived around 1900 BCE, further bolsters this argument, at least according to the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI).

“Western scholars proposed that chariots and weapons came to India with the Aryan invasion, which changed society. The Sinauli excavation denies the entire agenda, as we have evidence of burials of warriors, weapons and chariots which is indigenous in nature,” said ASI’s joint director-general Sanjay Kumar Manjul at the National Museum in Delhi. The event was a lecture titled The Excavation of Sinauli: Revealing the Graves of Great Indian Warriors.

The excavations now form the earliest record of a warrior tribe in the subcontinent. It shows that these people were no ‘migrants’—but indigenous warriors with a culture distinct from that of the Harappan civilisation, though they existed around the same time as late Harappans. Their practices are echoed in ancient Hindu texts such as the Ramayana, Mahabharata and the Vedas.

Proving Mahabharata is no myth

Excavation of the Ganga-Yamuna doab in Sinauli, which is 70 km from Delhi, had begun in 2005 but was stalled for 13 years.

When the project was resumed in 2018, Manjul unearthed three chariots—and the possibility of re-examining widely accepted history. Now, carbon dating shows that the region was home to one of the earliest warrior tribes in the Indian subcontinent.  And archaeologists are still unpacking its secrets.

The chariots, along with the 10 other items Manjul’s team excavated, could be the missing link between ancient Indian history and Vedic culture, according to the ASI.

“The evidence at Sinauli is comparable with literature like the Mahabharata, Ramayana, and Vedas,” said Manjul. “There are references to great warriors like Ram, but there was no scientific proof for it.” For historians and archaeologists like Manjul, Sinauli is important for the cultural understanding of India’s literature.

“Sinauli opens a new chapter in the history of archaeology,” said director-general of National Museum B.R. Mani in his introduction to the lecture.

Chariots of war

In 2005, archaeologist D.V. Sharma was leading the project and discovered 116 burials; in 2018, Manjul and his team unearthed coffins, copper shields, and chariots dating back to the second millennium BCE—all pointing to the warrior nature of the Sinauli tribe. They found weapons with hilts and even a copper helmet. Slowly, they pieced together the culture of this tribe of the upper Ganga-Yamuna doab.

That this community was distinct from the Harappan civilisation can be proved due to the presence of ochre-coloured pottery (OCP), copper hoards, and burial sites in Sinauli, according to the ASI.

“The Yamuna belt has a different kind of culture, and 90 per cent of the things in Sinauli are indigenous,” said Manjul. Harappan imprint on Sinauli culture is only about a meagre 10 per cent.

The discovery of the three chariots changed everything for Manjul and his team—it was ‘myth’ getting materialised. The ‘vehicles’ were found buried with the dead warriors. “We only heard about chariots in our literature, but there was no physical evidence [for them],” said Manjul, who, through his 50-minute lecture, circled back many times to link the findings with Vedic literature while dismissing the Aryan invasion theory. He pointed out that the kind of wood used to make these chariots were similar to those described in the Vedas.

“The findings shocked the archaeological world and brought a new perspective about our history,” said Manjul.

All three chariots are two-wheeled and lightweight with a D-shaped chassis and copper decorations. They were built to be ridden by one person. While more research is needed, Manjul is inclined to believe that the chariot was invented in India.

The findings are in keeping with the RSS’s view. In an episode of the organisation’s Knowledge Series on YouTube titled The Myth of Aryan Invasions, RSS ideologue Krishna Gopal calls the invasion “a hypothesis of the British”.

“Arya means superior. The British questioned how the people of what they saw as a slave country could be superior. Hence, they gave a hypothesis that Aryans had come from outside,” he said.

The 2018 paper by 92 scientists that was published in the peer-reviewed journal Science concluded that the Aryans were Central Asian Steppe pastoralists who migrated to the Indian subcontinent roughly between 2000 BCE and 1500 BCE.

The rites of the dead

According to ASI, the antennae swords and their hilts attached with ornaments also played a ceremonial role. The Rig Veda mentions that warriors were buried in full attire with all their weapons. Many of the burials even have peculiar characteristics. “Some are wooden coffin burials, some are with copper sheathing and decorations with steatite inlays,” said Manjul, pointing to pictures on a slide show.

Manjul’s team also found the secret chamber where the priests performed the final rituals before the actual burial. The team postulates that the ritual could have been a day-long exercise.

The Sinauli findings are consistent with ancient Indian literature on another count—the ASI team discovered female remains at Sinauli. “In our literature [Mahabharata and Ramayana], we learned about the female warrior. Possibly the earlier clan [in Sinauli] had female warriors [too],” said Manjul.

A cat’s remains got everyone furrowing their eyebrows. “In previous excavations, archaeologists found burials of dogs. This is the first time a cat burial was found; possibly a domesticated cat,” said Manjul.

While most of the audience was hooked, some sat unconvinced that the Aryans were indigenous.

“They [ASI] just want to prove the Aryans are from this land, not the outsiders,” said Debadatta Ray, a retired engineer who was attending the event. – The Print, 17 November 2023

› Krishan Murari is an author and senior subeditor at ThePrint.

Chariot found at Sinauli archaeological site in UP.

Hindus in South India must unite for their collective past and shared future – David Frawley

VOI

Thiruvalluvar

Hindus in South India must recognise that their vote is crucial in this democratic political era, where political influence is necessary for any social respect. To not vote for those who support you is to condemn yourself to be ruled by those who are against you. – Dr. David Frawley

South India has long been the most Hindu and Vedic part of India in terms of its culture and way of life. By South India we mean the states of Tamil Nadu, Kerala, Karnataka, Andhra Pradesh and Telangana.

South India has the largest, oldest, most numerous and most attended Hindu temples, particularly in Tamil Nadu, not simply museum pieces but centres of an active and devoted community.

Vedic culture is most studied and practised in South India, including Yoga, Vedanta, Ayurveda, Vedic Astrology, Vastu, Classical Indian Music and Dance, with Sanskrit Stotras and Vedic chanting. The three main Vedantic lines and Acharyas followed throughout India, Advaita and Shankaracharya, Vishishtadvaita and Ramanumujacharya, Dvaita and Madhvacharya, originated in South India and are still centred there. The main Himalayan temples like the Char Dham are run by priestly families from South India.

South Indian popular culture has the most Hindu influence, easy to see in their movies with stories and references to Hindu deities, which are now getting acclaimed throughout India. More people in South India have Sanskrit names, including politicians like Karunanidhi or Jayalalitha, while Sanskrit loan words are common in the vocabularies of its languages including Tamil or Malayalam.

South Indian kingdoms, notably the Vijayanagar Empire, whose capital city was one of the largest and richest in the world, preserved Vedic culture from destruction by the Muslim Turks. South Indian dynasties through history, notably the Pallava, Kakatiya, Hoysala, and the famous Cholas upheld Hinduism/Sanatana Dharma and its monumental temple culture. The Cholas in particular spread it from to Southeast Asia as far as Indonesia. The temple art and sculpture of these South Indian dynasties is still the most appreciated of India today, notably the Chola Shiva Nataraj statues.

Many great gurus honoured worldwide for their teachings on Yoga and Vedanta came from South India, including Bhagavan Ramana Maharshi, Swami Sivananda, Swami Chinmayananda, Swami Dayananda of Arsha Vidya, BKS Iyengar, and Tirumalai Krishnamacharya. Sri Aurobindo though from Bengal set up his ashram in Pondicherry. To study Yoga, Vedanta and Ayurveda today students come mainly to South India.

Increasing political contradiction for Hindus in South India

Yet in spite of Vedic practices prevailing in South India there is a dangerous contradiction that threatens the Hindus in the region, a new attack on its great traditions that have so far endured for millennia.

South Indians at a political level rarely vote to defend their Hindu culture, whether in state or national elections. They seldom vote to protect their human and social rights as Hindus. South India has been dominated by regional political influences which lack a national vision, many of which are staunchly anti-Hindu, like the Communists of Kerala and the DMK in Tamil Nadu.

Today the Communist influence in India (which still has not renounced Stalin or Mao) is most prominent in South India. In addition, Conversion activities targeting Hindus are prominent in South India, both Christian and Islamic. Islamic terrorist groups like PFI are most active in the South.

Christian missionaries have tried to subvert South Indian Hindu culture by creating their own Christian Bhajans, Christian Bharatnatyam, even Christian Yoga. Some churches are made to look like Hindu temples and perform aratis. Christian priests may wear saffron robes or rudrakasha malas. Missionaries have attempted to infiltrate and promote conversion at Hindu sacred sites extending to the most sacred Hindu site of Tirupati.

Aggression of anti-Hindu ‘Stalinism’

This anti-Hindu influence in South India has reached such a fevered pitch that a DMK leader like Udhaynidhi Stalin, with the support of his father Tamil Nadu Chief Minister M.K. Stalin, can vocally preach for the elimination of Hinduism/Sanatana Dharma, condemning it like a dangerous disease, proclaiming it is necessary to eradicate Sanatana Dharma for the sake of human equality and social progress as if it had no merits at all. Sadly, such a brazen call to harm Hindus and disrupt their way of life is ignored or downplayed, while a call to do so against other religious communities in India would have resulted in national and international outrage.

This DMK, though calling itself a Dravidian party, has in fact tried to suppress and destroy Dravidian culture, which has been largely Hindu and Vedic since the dawn of its long history. Even the ancient Matsya Purana says that Manu as a flood figure came from Kerala.

DMK is in denial of the great Hindu kingdoms, dynasties and temple culture of South India, its extraordinary art, sophisticated philosophies, profound Vedic sciences and yogic spirituality. There is little traditionally Dravidian about the DMK, except perhaps their Sanskrit names which highlights their own Hindu family past they are trying to erase.

DMK Dravidian politics, we should note, is not Indian, Bharatiya or traditional but an extension of European nationalism, where the different linguistic zones of Europe like Germany or France, wanted separate countries, defined according to western politics of the right and the left. Though claiming to be atheists and rationalists, it is Hindu traditions that the DMK criticises and maligns, not the others. Their main enemies that they target are the Brahmins not colonial rulers and their prejudices which they seem to share.

DMK’s inspiration Periyar on India’s Independence called for a day of mourning for Tamils for not getting their own separate state apart from India. He also supported a separate state for Pakistan and encouraged the partition of India. Clearly DMK began as an anti-India party, anti-Bharat, and so naturally anti-Sanatana Dharma, and retains that divisive mentality today. For them dictator Stalin remains a role model to be named after, not any of the leaders of the Indian Independence Movement or the great gurus of Tamil Nadu.

Challenging the danger ahead

Not bringing a Hindu spiritual and cultural Dravidian influence into politics has ceded the political field in South India and its powers to Leftists, Christians and Muslims that are more politically active, better organised and funded. It has resulted in a situation in which Hindus in South India are becoming misrepresented, marginalised and oppressed, with a declining political voice and decreasing social rights. Hindu temples remain under state control and expropriation. Public education portrays Hinduism in a negative light as regressive, while looking at anti-Hindu groups in a positive light as progressive, continuing the anti-Hindu colonial agenda in India.

This Hinduphobia is obvious in Communist-ruled Kerala like the Sabarimala temple issue. Overall, Kerala Hindus are marginalised and can be attacked if they give themselves a political voice. They may prefer to avoid public exposure at a political level to protect themselves and their families. In Kerala Communist political rallies, we see pictures of Marx, Engels, Lenin, Stalin, Mao, even Che Guevara, figures who promoted violent revolution and genocide. DMK anti-Brahminism resembles European anti-Semitic movements that resulted in oppression and genocide of the Jews.

Even the Congress party in Tamil Nadu has become under the rule of the DMK as a junior part of its alliance and accepts or defends their anti-Hindu propaganda. In Andhra Pradesh, Jagan Mohan Reddy and his YSR Congress caters to Christian missionary influences extending to direct financial support.

Fortunately, to counter this danger, a new Hindu resistance is arising in South India, though still in its initial phase. Notably, we find young Hindu leaders like K. Annamalai in Tamil Nadu and Tejasvi Surya in Karnataka taking up new Bharatiya activism. At the national level, PM Narendra Modi has honoured the traditional culture of South India with the Statue of Equality dedicated to Ramanujacharya’s ideas on equality in Hyderabad, by honouring Adi Shankara’s birthplace in Kerala, and by visiting Udupi and honouring the Madhva line as well.

In conclusion, Hindus in South India must recognise that their vote is crucial in this democratic political era, where political influence is necessary for any social respect. To not vote for those who support you is to condemn yourself to be ruled by those who are against you. In addition, Hindus need to challenge the anti-Hindu media in South India.

This call for a new political awareness is not a call for Hindus to oppress anyone, as it will likely be maligned, but for Hindus to have their right portrayal in history, their human, legal and religious rights, and freedom to live a Hindu way of life just like their ancestors did. It is very strange to find Hindus threatened in India with its Hindu majority and Hindu/Bharatiya past. But it is a real problem that must be addressed not only for Hindu human rights but for maintaining the cultural traditions of South India in all of its diversity and splendour, which is one of the greatest and oldest cultural heritages in the world. – Firstpost, 8 Septemeber 2023

› Dr. David Frawley (Pandit Vamadeva Shastri) is the director of the American Institute of Vedic Studies and the author of more than 30 books on Yoga and Vedic traditions. 

E.V. Ramaswamy Naicker Quote

Nandi’s Witness: The moral question and obvious evidence at Gyanvapi Mosque – Venu Gopal Narayanan

VOI 1 Comment

It is a moral question: if, by custom, tradition, belief, and history, Nandi has always been posted to watch over Shiva, why have legalistic delays and an otiose intransigence prevented him from resuming his duties for so long? – Venu Gopal Narayanan

The issue of whether the Gyanvapi mosque in Varanasi was built on a Shiva temple, or not, is entering its denouement phase in various courts.

A number of questions are being asked: many are legal; more are legalistic; others are technical; and some, as always, are wretchedly political ones pregnant with instigative intent.

Original Kashi Vishwanath Temple with Gyanwapi Mosque standing atop it.

At one level, the entire legal ruckus seems slightly mindless and wholly needless, since the three domes of the mosque rest on the intricately sculpted remnant western wall of what is clearly a Hindu temple.

But then, defending the indefensible using word play has long been the preferred modus operandi for some schools of politics.

Alleged Shiva linga found in a well in the Gyanvapi Mosque.

As a result, the questions are flying thick and fast: Is that linga-shaped object in the mosque’s forecourt a linga or a pillar? Is it old or new? Is it made of concrete or stone?

Will an archaeological survey bring out the truth? Why should a survey be allowed? Is the petition for a survey legally tenable? Why do ‘they’ want a survey? Won’t ‘they’ ever let us live in peace? Ad infinitum.

Separately, the media domain is filled with questions about the questioners.

Heady legal verbiage is distilled with reductionist severity, by self-styled experts blessed with only a passing knowledge of the law, to such an extent, that it makes the concept of ‘dumbing down’ seem intelligent.

It is entirely beside the point that most such efforts either miss the point, get it wrong, or merely muddy the pool further.

Auranzeb's firman ordering the destruction of the Kashi Vishwanath Temple (Sept. 1669).

Is that judge kosher? Why didn’t this lawyer make that point? What about the imperial firmans ordering the destruction of a temple at that very site? Can’t they be adduced as irrefutable evidence? Or, is it all a sinister majoritarian ploy? Again, ad infinitum.

And then, there is a statue of a seated bull at the northern perimeter of the Vishwanath temple at Kashi, which has been quietly asking a different query ever since the ruckus began some centuries ago. He is Nandi, Shiva’s mount.

According to the legends which made this sacred land, Nandi is the keeper of Shiva’s abode, be it atop Mount Kailash, at Kashi, or any one of the innumerable grihas where a dreadlocked trident-bearer is the resident deity.

Nandi is endowed with great strength, and his job is to keep the peace while his Lord attends to various matters; so strong, in fact, that even Ravana, the invincible Lankan king, had to suffer a humiliating chastisement at Nandi’s hooves, when the royal visitor once threw a petulant fit after being forced to wait for an audience with Shiva at Kailash.

It is a task demanding eternal devotion and great fortitude, for which reason, Nandi is always found seated facing the abode of his master.

Photo by Britisher Samuel Bourne taken in the 1860s with the caption "Gyanvati is not a mosque, but a temple".

But this Nandi of Kashi has not seen peace, and oddly not his Lord, in a long age, for he sits facing away from the jyotirlinga of Vishwanath, gazing at a mosque through tall barricades erected by thoughts alien to this land. That is why his query is different from any other.

It is a moral question: if, by custom, tradition, belief, and history, he has always been posted to watch over Shiva, why have legalistic delays and an otiose intransigence prevented Nandi from resuming his duties for so long? It is a question for the ages.

Our modern questioners would rush to answer, excitedly and volubly, that the delay is on account of a small, but extremely influential section of the Muslim aristocracy, along with the secularist parties, who have turned the issue into a cause celebre for political control of a vote bank, and vital electoral profit.

Perhaps they are right, from a legal or a technical standpoint, but theirs is not a moral answer.

The reason is that an article of faith goes far beyond a judge, a court, a law, or an archaeological survey. It is an issue of morality: is it right to hinder Nandi thus? And the issue will be resolved peaceably, the day that point is answered honestly.

Consequently, it is not a matter of which court will answer Nandi’s query, or about how justly it will be answered, but when, because some questions cannot be avoided.

That is the way of dharma. In the end, the natural order of things is always restored by the truth.

Just as the Yaksha Prashna to Yudhishthira was the question of the Dvapara Yuga, Nandi’s query is the question for this Yuga, and the time for an answer has arrived. – Swarajya, 25 July 2023

› Venu Gopal Narayanan is an independent petroleum consultant who focuses on energy, geopolitics, current affairs and electoral arithmetic.

Vishwanath Temple Complex and Gyanvapi Mosque.

Rethinking the Indus Valley civilisation – Nanditha Krishna

VOI

Mohenjo-daro Dancing Girl (ca. 2300-1750 BCE).

Vasant Shinde, who has excavated several Harappan sites, was fortunate to isolate DNA from the skeleton of a Harappan lady at Rakhigarh. The result was a South Asian gene spread all over India, with no Steppe or Iranian ancestry. But Harappan genomes have been found in Iran and Turkmenistan, giving credence to the Out of India theory. – Nanditha Krishna

A seminar on ‘Art in the Indus Civilization’ was recently held in Chennai. Why art? Because the unverifiable readings of the Indus script are a major impediment, art becomes the most reliable source of information. This Bronze Age civilisation covered a vast area, from Balochistan in the west to Western UP in the east, from Afghanistan in the north to Gujarat in the south, the largest “empire” of the ancient world. Remains of agriculture from 6500 BCE are found in Mehrgarh, Balochistan.

Although Kalibangan (in India) was discovered first, Mohenjo Daro and Harappa were reported first but went to Pakistan during Partition. Subsequent excavations revealed that 75 per cent of the Indus civilisation is situated along the Ghaggar-Hakra, now identified with the river Saraswati. However, it is still known as the Indus Civilisation because the first sites were excavated there. Kalibangan, Dholavira, Lothal and Rakhigarhi are among the important sites subsequently excavated. In 1924, the Indus civilisation was declared a site of remote antiquity by the British, who had earlier maintained that Indian history began in 600 BCE!

The art of the Indus civilisation includes terracottas, ceramics, glyptics, sculpture, jewellery made of carnelian, steatite, gold, silver and, faience and beads. Art “expresses important ideas or feelings” of a people. Early terracottas are primitive, made of pressed clay and pinched, with huge holes for eyes. The mature period produced beautiful images of trees, animals, birds and deities engraved on seals and paintings on pottery. The art residues are distinctive spokespersons for this civilisation. The seals were made of steatite, faience and terracotta and used commercially and ritually. Dogs with collars and elephants with rugs over their back suggest that they had been domesticated. Images of horses, rhinos, monkeys, rams, other animals and birds appear either as toys or on seals. Ornaments, shells, turquoise and lapis lazuli were moved from 500 to 1500 km away.

Why is the naked bronze dancing girl presumed to be dancing? Why is the stone priest-king of Mohenjo Daro presumed to be a priest-king? There are no answers. Several images of yoga poses exist, while two naked male torsos of grey lime are outstanding. One twists a leg, a male dancing figure comparable to the Nataraja pose. The other is in samabhanga, perhaps a Tirthankara (Yajurveda mentions three). 

The earliest worship scene in India is a seal from the Indus Civilisation where a three-horned male figure stands inside a stylised pipal tree. There are several seals of male figures with three pipal leaves protruding from the head, recalling the Ashvatavriskshastotram. The second important seal type is a tree with prickly thorns and small leaves, the khejari or shami, with a female figure seated on a branch and a tiger below, reminiscent of the paalai or desert described by Tolkappiyar, whose goddess is Kotravai or Durga and plant, the prickly kotran. Durga’s vehicle is the tiger. In the Vedas, ashvata and shami were rubbed together to produce fire. Three-headed male figures meditate in yogic moolabandhaasana. All these are Harappan and Vedic iconography. Popular animal stories from the Panchatantra are painted on jars.

Vasant Shinde, who has excavated several Harappan sites, was fortunate to isolate DNA from the skeleton of a Harappan lady at Rakhigarh. The result was a South Asian gene spread all over India, with no Steppe or Iranian ancestry. But Harappan genomes have been found in Iran and Turkmenistan, giving credence to the Out of India theory. According to Dr Shinde, the dominant gene in most south Asians is 25 to 30 per cent Harappan. By craniofacial reconstruction, he found that Harappans resembled contemporary Haryanvis.

Radha and Krishna playing chess.

Some scholars believe that the second urbanisation of 1000 BCE was disconnected from Harappa, with a dark Vedic Age in between. This is false, says Prof Michel Danino, because the same technologies in pottery, water management, metallurgy and crafts are pursued throughout Indian culture. Fire altars and lingas, sindoor and Mother Goddess figurines, lost wax technique to cast bronze statues, and more have continued since Harappa. Tribal women wear Harappan-style bangles on their arms, and chessmen from Lothal and dice from Harappa are still popular games. Swastika and tree worship still prevailed, while the Harappan weight system continued throughout Indian culture. Check dams to avoid flooding, bathrooms with commodes and drainage lines with manholes for cleaning are Harappan legacies. So, did “untouchability” begin there? Unlike Egypt and Mesopotamia, the Indus people didn’t build pyramids and ziggurats, but made life comfortable for the common person in well-built cities.

When people travel with their musical instruments, they retain their names. The piano and violin retain their names everywhere. Shail Vyas researched Mesopotamian references to Meluha (as the Indus Valley was known there) and found the names of 30 Indian musical instruments and 60 items of trade, including animals, birds and timber species, from Meluha, all in Sanskrit, with similar Mesopotamian equivalents. These had gone with the sea-faring Meluhans of the Indus.

It is time to rethink the Harappan civilisation, a culture with much archaeology but little literature. Vedic culture is all literature, and no material remains—is it possible? The Vedas speak of copper, not iron, making it a Bronze Age civilisation like Harappa. The Vedic civilisation was riverine and agricultural, like the Harappan. The Early Harappan Period lasted from 3300 to 2900 BCE, the Mature period from 2900 to 1900 BCE and the Late Harappan from 1900 to 1500 BCE. By 1000 BCE, the Painted Grey-Ware of the Mahabharata period had appeared, so the Vedas would have to be much earlier. The Vedas do not speak of any homeland outside India. The two civilisations were contemporary, probably the same, for Meluhan Sanskrit in Mesopotamia is compelling evidence. It is time our history books reveal the truth. – The New Indian Express, 12 march 2023

> Nanditha Krishna is an author, historian, educationalist and environmentalist.

Sindhu-Saraswati (Indus Vally) Civilisation Map

Was Tipu Sultan really a patriot and great freedom fighter? – Jaithirth Rao

VOI

Tipu Sultan

The fact is Tipu was a brilliant military tactician and a weak military and political strategist. He allied with the French, who ended up on the losing side. He was bigoted and had megalomaniac pretensions of a Muslim conquest of India. – Jaithirth Rao

If only the Marxist editors of NCERT textbooks had admitted that Tipu Sultan was a flawed human being, perhaps some of us would not have many problems. The absence of such honesty makes us say: Ay, there’s the rub! In the Marxist version of the earlier sarkari sycophants, Tipu was a patriot, a tolerant, secular ruler, a great freedom fighter and so on. The question of “flaws” simply did not arise.

Tipu’s apologist, the Australian historian Kate Brittlebank, points out that he was virtually unique in being an Indian ruler who died fighting the British and did not take a pension from them. There is a considerable verisimilitude in that statement. But that does not automatically make Tipu a patriot. He allied with the French and if the fortunes of war had been different, India may have come under the rule of the French East India Company—not exactly a sanguine prospect for Indian patriots.

Misplaced patriotism of Tipu Sultan

The ruler of Mysore corresponded with the Sultan of Turkey and was not averse to that exalted person becoming the suzerain of India. At least for many of us, the British Raj was a better happenstance than an Ottoman Raj and that is our view as patriots. The Ottomans are unlikely to have built railways or set up universities, institutions that incidentally came up in the Ottoman Empire decades after they did in British India. Tipu wrote to Zaman Shah Durrani, the third king of the Durrani Empire in Afghanistan, to help throw out the British in India. Some of us see this as evidence of religious bigotry against Hindu Marathas, not secular patriotism.

In emphasising his anti-British credentials, which are taken as self-evident proof of his patriotism, the Delhi-JNU-Aligarh-Rutgers-Australia group of historians seem to forget that the British were not the only enemies of Tipu. In the last siege of Seringapatam (or Srirangapatna, if you so prefer) in 1799, there were more Hyderabad Nizam’s soldiers in the army attacking Tipu’s than those of the East India Company. And I assume that no one can accuse the Nizam of being a Hindu bigot. There were a lot of Maratha soldiers too. In fact, more soldiers loyal to Indian rulers, Hindus and Muslims, fought Tipu than the soldiers of the East India Company, which the Marxists love to hate.

My mother’s family is of “old Mysorean” vintage and many of these tales are stories I have heard from my grandfather Madhava Rao and my many granduncles. Our narrative is that while Tipu’s father and ruler of Mysore Hyder Ali was a usurper, he nevertheless maintained the fiction that he was a deputy of our beloved Wodeyar kings. It is Tipu who started calling himself “Sultan” and who marginalised our traditional rulers completely. The dowager Wodeyar Maharani Lakshmammanni was in correspondence with the British who she saw as legitimate “restorers” of order in our land and who looked upon Tipu as the disloyal, treacherous and, need I say, unpatriotic traitor. The Marxist historians will doubtless dismiss the venerable lady as a Hindu bigot or in current parlance as a supremacist.

Kodavas, Roman Catholics, Nairs, and the British

It is interesting to note how the Marxists of today are making light of the sufferings of Kodavas of Coorg (or Kodagu) and slyly portraying them as British agents. The fact is that most Kodavas hate Tipu who allegedly forcibly converted many of them. The descendants of this community of Kodava “converts” are still around.

Tipu was also brutal towards the Nair community of Travancore and Malabar. Again, forced conversions were the rule. And he followed it up with the destruction of temples. His worst depredations were against the Roman Catholic Christians of Mangalore. Forced marches, forced conversions, abductions of Mangalorean Christian women—all of these are documented and well-known. I wonder if the bishops of today’s crypto-Marxist Roman Church in India will even bother to talk about this. The Leftist historians of the world dismiss Tipu’s cruelty to British prisoners, including the forcible dressing of young drummer boys as girls and the violation of their civil rights as “imperialist propaganda.” It definitely was propaganda. But let us not forget the kernel of truth in these accounts.

The so-called secular historians talk endlessly about Tipu’s support of the Hindu temples of Srirangapatna and Nanjangud and of the Sringeri Mutt. Many of these are documented and cannot and should not be denied. But if the historians are neutral, they should have the integrity and courage to state that some of this support stemmed from Tipu’s faith in these temples possessing unique abilities in the realm of astrological predictions. Tipu was a believer in astrology. I give him credit for that. Will secular historians do the same?

A brilliant tactician but a weak strategist

The other point that the Marxist historians make is that Purnaiah, who was a Brahmin and a minister under Hyder Ali and Tipu, was pro-Tipu. This is true. But the same historians could have and should have added that many Mysoreans believed and still do that Purnaiah was a traitor a few times over!  I have a simple explanation. Purnaiah was perhaps a nobody until Hyder spotted him and his entire rise, including becoming the  Diwan of Mysore, was on account of Hyder and later Tipu. He was simply being loyal to his benefactors. Incidentally, in his later life, Purnaiah was equally loyal to the East India Company. Arthur Wellesley, who later became the Duke of Wellington, respected and admired Purnaiah. My grand-uncle Nagaraja Rao, a devout Brahmin himself, while talking about Purnaiah once told me that “Brahmins have a chameleon-like ability to adjust realistically to the powers that be.” That might sum up the Purnaiah story. Not loyalty or disloyalty, but realism.

Tipu called his government (which from our family’s point of view, was one of usurpers) the Sarkar-e-Khudadad, an Islamic Persian expression indicating that it was the government of God. Tipu deliberately introduced Persian into the land records of his dominion. Is it bigoted on our part to admire the British army officer Mark Cubbon who subsequently changed the rules and reintroduced Kannada and Marathi in the village maps? Who is the traitor? Who is the patriot? Who was benevolent? Who was malevolent? Important questions to ask. No wonder, even today, no political party wants to change the name of Cubbon Park in Bengaluru or remove his statue.

The fact is Tipu was a brilliant military tactician and a weak military and political strategist. He allied with the French, who ended up on the losing side. He was bigoted and had megalomaniac pretensions of a Muslim conquest of India. Hence his outreach to the Turks and the Afghans. He was a parvenu local Muslim and anathema to the Nizam who advertised his Persian ancestry. The Marathas saw him as a thorn in their side. The Nawab of Carnatic Muhammad Ali Khan Wallajah hated Tipu and was his unforgiving enemy. Many of Tipu’s subjects longed for the return of Wodeyar rule.

Hyder Ali was a military and political genius but his son Tipu, lacked his good sense. He allowed a large coalition—the Marathas, the Nizam, the British, the Kodavas, the Maharaja of Travancore and the Nawab of Carnatic to get together against him. He relied on the French who were irresolute and incompetent; he appealed to Turks and Afghans who were otherwise preoccupied and uninterested. He was clever. But unlike his father, he was not intelligent. He lost.

In any event, he was not a great, shining patriot. He was flawed, like most of us are. – The Print, 27 February 2023

› Jaithirth Rao is a retired businessperson who lives in Mumbai.

Masjid-i-Ala (Jama Masjid)

Mysore Archaeological Dept Report 1935

Why a nation and its people must know their true history – Makkhan Lal

VOI

India History Cartoon

No country can become a great nation, a world guru and a world leader on borrowed ideas, borrowed cultures and borrowed systems. The greatness and leadership is built upon the solid foundation and the pride of their own past. – Dr. Makkhan Lal

History, history writing and history teaching have, indeed, become newsworthy not only in India but also in most other parts of the world. The reasons may be varied—construction of a national history curriculum in India, England and Wales, the design of national history standards in the US, the content of history textbooks in Japan, China, Korea, Pakistan, Israel, and Germany, the approach to invasion of Latin American countries by the Europeans, the development of new curricula in the successor states of the former USSR, or even the rewriting of history textbooks in Russia after the collapse of the former USSR. Issues of identities, heritage, and citizenship, all rooted in the past, have become the hot stuff of politics.

Similarly, an issue can be raised about the conquest of peaceful people belonging to Inca, Aztec and Maya civilisations by the gun-trotting Europeans. Whether the victory should be viewed as the discovery of a new world and new economic resources for Europe, as is generally viewed by European and North American historians, or it should be seen as the destruction of the independently developed three native civilisations by technologically more advanced nations that have an unending lust for looting others’ treasures and making other people subservient.

A South American historian may well say: “It may be a subject of celebrations for Europeans but for us it is a subject of mourning because just in a few years the Europeans destroyed our civilisation developed over several thousands of years!”

Why study history

Questions have often been raised that when there are so many problems and differences of opinions among historians why should we study history at all.

History is all about the past. In almost every country, city, town and village throughout the world, a large number of existing buildings were built in the past to meet the needs and aspirations of people, now dead. This is most obvious in existing temples, churches, mosques, fireplaces, houses, public buildings, and so on. The systems of governments, political ideas, religious beliefs, art, architecture, cultural practices, educational systems, customs and behaviours are all products of the past, recent or remote.

The past is all-pervasive which, indeed, means that we cannot escape from it. The past signifies what actually happened—events that have taken place, societies that have risen and fallen, ideas and institutions, eating habits, dressing habits, etc. History is precisely the study of this human past. The past is our heritage; we are part of it and the past is part of us in all aspects: Be it culture, behaviour, religious faith and practices, be it rituals, be it the tradition of political, social and economic systems. It is reflected in our day-to-day living.

History is also about roots. It provides societies and individuals with a dimension of longitudinal meaning over time which outlives the human life span. It connects us with our past. History also allows us to peep into the future by providing precedents for contemporary actions and forewarning against the repetition of past mistakes. From its sense of continuity, history offers the apparent form and purpose to the past, the present and the future. In the words of E.H. Carr: “The past is intelligible to us only in the light of the present, and we can fully understand the present only in the light of the past.” He further says that history is needed “to enable man to understand the society of the past and to increase his mastery over the society of the present.” There is a need for history. It has a deeper social value and meaning.

The study of history is not a luxury. It is a necessity. This necessity has been best summed up by Arthur Marwick. He writes: “Individuals, communities, societies could scarcely exist if all knowledge of the past is wiped out. As memory is to the individual, so history is to the community or the society. Without memory, individuals find great difficulty in relating to others, in finding their bearings, in taking intelligent decisions—they lose their sense of identity. A society without history would be in a similar condition. … A society without knowledge of its past would be like an individual without memory. … It is only through a sense of history that communities establish their identity, orientate themselves, understand their relationship to the past and to other communities and societies. Without history (knowledge of the past), we, and our communities, would be utterly adrift on an endless and featureless sea of time.”

We all move ahead through the past of our own cultures, own civilisations, and values and it is this accumulation of ideas and experience, transmitted through education and sheer daily living that gives our thoughts meaning and the patterns and purpose of our actions. It is not that we live in the past but we are defined by it, and so the success of even the most forward-looking developments must inevitably rest on their relation to the ideas and practices of the society they are meant to serve. Science may forget its own history, but a society cannot.

History is neither a simple chronicle of the past nor a list of rulers and kings and the narratives of their rules. The past is not simply a collection of distinct ages or a hotchpotch of facts. History is an extremely complex discipline. Another point that needs to be emphasised is that a historian’s job is not that of a cook who prepares dishes as per the liking of his customers and adds spices accordingly. It is not the job of a historian to write politically correct history. His obligation is to write factually correct history.

It will be helpful if all historians remember what Sir Jadunath Sarkar wrote about the job of a historian: “I would not care whether the truth is pleasant or unpleasant, and in consonance with, or opposed to, current views. I would not mind in the least whether the truth is, or is not, a blow to the glory of my country. If necessary, I shall bear in patience the ridicule and slander of friends and society for the sake of preaching the truth. But still, I shall seek truth, understand truth, and accept the truth. This should be the firm resolve of a historian.”

This brief discussion on the nature of history as an academic discipline should make it abundantly clear that history is neither a static discipline nor can the writings on and of history be put into a set mould. Each generation views and writes about the past in the light of its own experience. Therefore, all interpretations and explanations are and must be as temporary and provisional as the descriptions. But in all these endeavours the sanctity of truth and facts should not be forgotten. Unanimity or one’s efforts to make others surrender is a recognisable characteristic of dictatorships, and not that of a free state. Open and continuing discussions and debates are the essence and strength of history and, for that matter, a great strength of an open society of an intellectually vibrant nation.

And now a word of caution! There is a tendency among historians to act as judges and give moral sermons. Historians must write and rewrite history. They are not supposed to be moral judges. Benedetto Crose has rightly said: “Those, who on the plea of narrating history, bustle about as judges, condemning here and giving absolution there, because they think that this is the office of history … are generally recognised as devoid of historical sense.”

Problems in history writing

Historians recognise that they are all culturally and socially influenced in their endeavour to write history but make all efforts to deny that their work is culturally, or socially, determined or constructed. As has been discussed briefly in the Introduction, EH Carr in chapter two of his book What is History provides a useful summary on this aspect of history writing. He quotes Donne Devotion that society and individuals are inseparable. “No man is an island, entire of itself, every man is a piece of the continent, a part of the main.” Like any other individual, a historian too is a social phenomenon, both the product and the conscious and unconscious spokesperson of the society to which he belongs. It is in this capacity that he approaches the facts of the historical past.

Therefore, we must not forget that we cannot fully understand or appreciate the work of a historian unless we have first grasped the standpoint from which he himself approaches it, and that standpoint is itself rooted in social and historical background. It is, therefore, essential that before we study history, we must study the historian and study his historical and social environment. When some historians claim that they are writing scientific history, or that only their version of history is correct, one must conclude immediately that the historians are not only being untruthful but are also hiding their political agenda under the garb of a “scientific” history. There exists nothing like scientific history. On similar lines, Benedetto Croce also spoke with his characteristic bluntness:

“The historian must have a point of view, … an intimate personal conviction regarding the conception of the facts which he has undertaken to relate. … It suffices to read any book of history to discover at once the point of view of the author if he is a historian worthy of the name and knows his own business. … Absolutely historical historians do not and cannot exist. Can it be said that Thucydidus and Polybius, Livy and Tacitus, Machiavelli and Guicciardini, Giannone and Voltaire were without morals and political views; and in our own time, Guizot or Thiers, Macaulay or Balbo, Renke or Mommson? … If the historian is to escape from this inevitable necessity of taking sides, he must become a political and scientific eunuch; and history is not the business of eunuchs. … Historians who profess to wish to interrogate the facts without adding anything of their own, are not to be believed.”

Karl Marx buried among the crosses of Highgate Cemetery, London.

The problem with Marxist historiography and its relationship with history is much more curious. For Marx and his followers, i.e. Marxist historians, the problem of history is not just understanding “what happened”, “how it happened” and “why it happened”. For them, the problem is “how to change the world” by the use of history. At the core of this view lie two fundamental beliefs. Firstly, the Marxists believe in five universal stages of history.

These five stages are:

  1. Primitive Communism
  2. Slavery
  3. Feudalism
  4. Capitalism
  5. Communism

Secondly, they believe that the society we inhabit is a bad bourgeois society and, fortunately, this society is in a state of crisis. The good society which lies just around the corner can be easily attained if only “we” work systematically to destroy the language, the value, the culture, the ideology of this “bourgeois” society. This necessitates a massive, radical left-wing political programme, and everything the historians write, every criticism they make, is determined by that overriding objective. In this, the post-modernists are exceptions. They are fully convinced of the utterly evil nature of the “bourgeois” society but have lost all hope of change and have fallen back into destructive nihilism. They assert that the only way to achieve Marxism is to destroy society if it cannot be changed.

Marxist historians have failed to understand and appreciate the fact that the society we live in has evolved through a complex historical process, very different from the Marxist formula of the rise of feudalism over slavery and bourgeoisie overthrowing the feudal aristocracy. It is highly complex with respect to the distribution of power, authority, and influence. Just as it was not formed by the simple overthrow of aristocracy by the bourgeoisie, so, in its contemporary form, it does not consist simply of a bourgeois ruling class and a proletariat. The idea that we are now in the final period of the late-capitalist crisis is simply absurd. Marxists have been looking forward to the final capitalistic collapse for over a century—in 1848, 1866, 1918, 1946, 1963 and 1968, to mention just a few dates, but as fate would have it, they are themselves doomed forever.

Statements like “The pursuit of history is, whether practitioners choose to acknowledge it or not, a political occupation,” indeed, is not only exceptional but also far-fetched. At the same time, we have to acknowledge that the experience of colonisation around the world has shown that domination by a more powerful culture—which defines its reality in quite different ways—either totally destroys, or at least drives, the less powerful ones into a subservient role. What was considered culturally “valid” can be rendered “invalid”, and the politically weaker ones are somehow required to modify their reality to fit within the constraints of the new codes.

We, as historians, must learn to recognise: “The past is perceived in different ways by different cultures. Methods of interpreting, recording, managing and protecting the past also differ between cultures. … The way people define their existence, their world view and their creation stories, and how they value, interpret, manage and transmit their past will continue to be handed on from generation to generation.”

Conclusions

Let us remember that no country can become a great nation, a world guru and a world leader on borrowed ideas, borrowed cultures and borrowed systems. The greatness and leaderships are built upon the solid foundations and the pride of the past; deeper the foundations, taller are the superstructures. Even globalisation is built upon this foundation. Many countries are part of globalisation on a much larger scale than India without abandoning their history, culture and heritage. It is on this basis they are able to assert their authority and influence the world order. – Firstpost, 6 January 2022

› Prof. Dr. Makkhan Lal is a historian and the founder director of the Delhi Institute of Heritage Research and Management.

How the Nehruvian Congress manipulated Gandhi’s assassination to emasculate Hindu nationalism – Koenraad Elst

VOI

Had Nathuram Godse foreseen the consequences of the act he contemplated, he might have thought twice about going through with it – Dr. Koenraad Elst

There are some historical events that are momentous in nature but have not received the kind of attention and examination they deserved. The topic of Mahatma Gandhi’s assassination at the hands of Nathuram Godse on 30 January 1948 is one such incident. Though it comes up regularly for discussion, it is wantonly distorted to embarrass the RSS and the party associated with it, the BJP, which was actually founded in 1980, that too as a reincarnation of the Jan Sangh, which had equally been founded after the murder, in 1951. This then is the best-known long-term effect: The unrelenting allegation that anything smelling of Hindu nationalism, and certainly the RSS, necessarily leads to such crimes. But are we missing something?

Chitpavan massacre

The first consequence of the murder was immediate: Nathuram Godse’s own community, the Chitpavan Brahmins, was targeted for mass murder. The comparison with the mass killing of Sikhs by Congress secularists after Indira Gandhi’s murder is fairly exact, except that the 1984 massacre is well-known (even eclipsing the memory of the larger number of Punjabi Hindus murdered by Sikh separatists in the preceding years), whereas this one has been hushed up. The New York Times first drew attention to it, reporting 15 killings for the first day and only for the city of Mumbai (then Bombay). In fact, the killing went on for a week and all over Maharashtra, with V.D. Savarkar’s younger brother as best-known victim.

Arti Agarwal, who leads the research in “Hindu genocide”, estimates the death toll at about 8,000. On mass murders, estimates are often over-dramatised, but here we must count with a countervailing factor: The government’s active suppression of these data, as they would throw a negative light on Gandhism. But research on this painful episode has now started in earnest, and those presently trying to get at the real figures include Savarkar biographer Vikram Sampath.

Crackdown

The second consequence came right after: The government’s crackdown on the Hindu Mahasabha and the RSS. Their offices were closed down, their office-bearers imprisoned for a year or so, their stocks of literature impounded. It clipped their wings for years to come. The Hindu Mahasabha lost its president Syama Prasad Mukherjee, who went on to found the Jana Sangh. The Hindu Mahasabha would never recover from this blow. Its last MP was Mahant Avaidyanath, best known as a leader of the Rama Janmabhoomi movement and the guru of present UP chief minister Yogi Adityanath, defected to the BJP in 1991.

By contrast, the RSS did survive quite well, and even generated a whole “family” of like-minded organisations, including a new political party. In a numerical sense, it was to thrive; but in two other senses, it paid a high price.

The third consequence was a drastic change in the political landscape. After Partition, the Hindutva movement had the wind in the sails. All Congress’ assurances that warnings against Islamic separatism were mere British-engineered paranoia, had been refuted by reality. Gandhi’s promise that Partition would only come over his dead body, had proven false. The new-fangled ideology of secularism stood discredited at its birth. And yet, overnight, the Hindutva current was marginalised and Nehruvian secularism started its triumphant march. By his murder, Godse had smashed the window of opportunity of his own political movement.

Amputated backbone

Finally, the fourth consequence would only materialise over the long term: The Hindu movement began to lose its defining convictions. Rather than continuing to see India as an essentially Hindu nation, it bought into the secularist notion of a mere “Hindu community” juxtaposed to “minority communities” that were endowed with equal rights and increasingly with privileges vis-à-vis the Hindus.

When Jawaharlal Nehru was widely criticised for having facilitated the Chinese invasion, the RSS halted the publication of a Nehru-critical article by Sita Ram Goel in Organiser: Rather than clamouring that its guest author’s judgement of Nehru stood vindicated, it feared that if anything were to happen to Nehru, the RSS would again get the blame. As the Gandhi murder had shown, it wasn’t necessary to be actually guilty to still incur the punishment, viz, by “having created the atmosphere” for the crime. The RSS bought into the secularist narrative that the Hindu ideology had caused the murder and started amputating its own ideological backbone.

If Godse had foreseen these consequences of the act he contemplated, he might have thought twice about going through with it. – Firstpost, 27 July 2022

› Dr. Koenraad Elst is a well-known Indologist from Belgium.

Gandhi's death reported in the NYT.