
“A decade later, I
realised that this was actually irrelevant. Even in ancient times in India,
records were kept and reference made to some past events, which were believed
to have happened,” she explained.
In her talk on the
historical traditions of early northern India on day two of The Hindu Lit for
Life fest on Sunday, Professor Thapar said that though there may not have been
a conventional form of historical writing, there are nevertheless many texts
that reflect the historical consciousness of the past.
She said colonial
scholars described the Indian past as ‘oriental despotism’, arguing that it was
a static society that registered no historical change, and therefore it had no
use for recording the past and used only cyclic time. Mentioning various texts,
she said that early Indian history was far from static, and in fact it followed
both cyclic and linear systems of time.
On the historical
traditions of early India, Professor Thapar said there were three distinct
historiographies (ways of explaining the past): the Bardic tradition, the
tradition of the Puranas and Shramanic traditions, which were parallel but
quite different from each other.
The historiography of
the bards or sutas, as they were called, lay in their narrating events of
heroes in the form of ballads and epic fragments. It is treated as a kind of
substratum source of history. She said that in both the Puranic and Shramanic
traditions, there was a gradual change in form, information and comment, moving
towards creating a historic tradition.
Professor Thapar
concluded by stressing on the need to have the perceptions of the early
authors, which, she said, could help understand the past. “We have to search
for how the past saw its past as a parallel study to see how we see the past,”
she said to a packed auditorium.
These are some of the
ideas that the historian has discussed in her latest book,The Past Before
Us: Historical Traditions of Early North India(2013: Permanent Black and
Harvard University Press, 2013).
No comments:
Post a Comment