By Prof. Santishree Dhulipudi Pandit
The recent debate on changes in the National Council of Educational Research and Training (NCERT) history textbooks reminded me of a comment by Russian novelist Leo Tolstoy: “The factors which determine the life of mankind are various, historians select from them only some single aspect, say the political and economic, and represent it as primary, as the efficient cause of social change”.
As a social scientist and an administrator, I am dismayed to read in some sections of the media allegations that corrections and improvements made in the NCERT history textbooks are deliberate distortions or rewriting of our history, that today’s historians are less competent, and that they are erasing parts of our history under the influence of a particular ideology.
Such a charge is laughable and betrays a sense of entitlement that only one set of historians of a specific era had the sovereign and absolute knowledge to determine what should be taught in our schools about India’s civilisational past.
While the importance of the autonomy of academic and intellectual activities in writing school textbooks, especially for central organisations, such as NCERT, can never be over emphasised, the recent kerfuffle on how institutional autonomy has been undermined by the current government and how academic freedom is under stress is a pointless and one-sided exercise.
In the last nine years, nobody has told me what to teach or how to frame my questions on a topic. Turning to the history textbooks prepared by NCERT, there is a growing demand to improve and correct their content. I strongly believe school textbooks should be revised or rewritten every 10 years to incorporate discoveries and new knowledge. This will benefit learners, broaden their horizons, empower them to think independently about our past, political and social systems and understand plans for the future.
The current NCERT social sciences textbooks were prepared in 2006, and as media reports suggest, NCERT has rationalised Class 12 history books, corrected mistakes and errors, not rewritten them. However, there is an urgent need for a thorough revision of NCERT textbooks, not only in history but in all subjects; therefore, NCERT considered it prudent to use the existing textbooks until the new National Curriculum Framework (NCF) comes up with a detailed plan and advice for a comprehensive revision of the books and the syllabus of our school education.
In any event, rationalisation, filling up gaps, moving away from Delhi-centrism and updating textbook content is a continuous process; there have been several changes in history text- books since the first edition of these books was published in 1966.
Is it fair to say that only one set of people has the right to rewrite textbooks? Textbooks written by an earlier group of historians underwent many changes and, in 2006, were replaced by books written by a new set of authors. One does not remember any controversy on these changes. Further, if rewriting textbooks was such an undesirable activity, we would still be teaching books written by colonial historians in our schools.
Institutions such as NCERT should be concerned about reducing syllabi stress on students in our schools. India’s history, as Ram Manohar Lohia said, is more than 10,000 years old; the writers, therefore, would naturally agonise over what topics to choose for a textbook. Thus, much care would be required to keep two things in mind: One, what is relevant for a 16-year-old and how many facts she can absorb from her textbooks in one year, and how evenly and rationally facts of our history are presented before her.
NCERT has clarified that the section removed from the Class 12 history textbook on the Mughals was unnecessary as these details are available in the textbooks of previous classes; also, these sections contained the political history of the Mughals, which may not be required for school students. This logic is reasonable because certain aspects of history or political science can be deeply investigated at the university level.
If the writers of the current history textbook felt the necessity of teaching school children the generosity and tolerance of the Mughals, then it would be equally appropriate to expect stories of their religious fundamentalism. Facts are sacred, though interpretations may vary. This criticism of the changes is like saying what was said in 2006 is the final word, and no changes can be made.
This is an exclusivist argument for a civilisation that celebrates diversity and assimilation. The present NCERT social sciences textbooks must update their content, improve the language to make them lucid for students to understand and enjoy, and reflect a meaningful pedagogy. What is not required is a sermon from those who may think they know it all.
Instead, facts must be presented lucidly, so students can glean the knowledge they wish to acquire. Most importantly, academics and politicians must keep away from politicising school textbooks. The textbooks should tell the students the stories of our past but not weave in half-truths and gaps by erasing vast chunks of history.
The Cholas, Cheras, Pandyas, Pallavas, the dynasties that ruled the Vijayanagara kingdom, Ahoms and the mighty Marathas, their bravery and contribution, are marginalised or absent from our school textbooks.
History cannot be written on shaky and fabricated foundations. What was constructed was a mythical and artificial unity on a falsified history. NCF is attempting — I endorse its efforts — to bring a plurality of voices and an independent scheme of more inclusive representations of the versions of marginalised and previously excluded history.
We need to be more honest with our past and facts. History represents the memory of civilisations, the acts of people, and the past; historians must present this memory carefully and faithfully for future generations. Textbooks must change as the curriculum needs to be continuously revised to address gaps and make them more relevant and inclusive for the changing times, and this is what NCF is doing.
This is in keeping with our civilisation’s ethos, in the words of Thiruvalluvar, who held that adherence to truth is an essential quality in writing any text.
Originally published in The Hindustan Times, 12 April, 2023
Posted in SIS Blog with the authorisation of Dean, School of International Studies, Jawaharlal Nehru University, New Delhi
Prof. Santishree Dhulipudi Pandit is Vice Chancellor, Jawaharlal Nehru University, New Delhi