Who is Shonalika Kaul?

Historian Shonalika Kaul is Professor of History at Jawaharlal Nehru University, Delhi. He has contributed a lot in the field of historiography. In his recently published book Bharata Before the British and other essays – Towards A New Indology, Kaul surveys the literature on Indian history since the 19th century. Moreover, this topic has become highly controversial in modern Indian politics as well. She argues in her book that colonial approaches have been widely used in looking at the history of India. In fact, Indian literary sources have been viewed in the same light. Westerners viewed societies other than theirs from a different-ignorant perspective.

It is imperative to rethink the history writing about India

In her new research, Shonalika Kaul challenges prevailing academic stereotypes about India and perceptions of Indian history around the world. They try to analyze Indian history from a new perspective and question the existing educational ideology. Kaul argues that colonial writers counted India among countries that had no idea what history was. While doing this he compared the Indian society with the western society. Western society has a fair sense of history. There is an understanding of the reality and chronology of history. She says that even after independence, many ancient Indian literary works were treated as myths because this perception persisted. As a result, they were not considered to be of much importance to historians or as a tool used to spread the views of the social elites of society.

Read more: Snake Species Named After Leonardo DiCaprio: Indian snake named after the hero of Titanic; What is the relationship between the two?

Shonalika Kaul challenges this view and argues that mythology is a communal mechanism used by a society to understand itself and its world. Because of this, those myths are very important for creating meaning and identity for any society. Kaul says that classical historiography ignored myths while searching for truth. And this method became the strength of the colonial empire. It came to impress that Western societies have history, while non-Western societies have only myths. Shonalika Kaul also questions the analysis of epics like the Ramayana. He objects to the concept of Arya-Aryatra in the analysis of Ramayana. Kaul argues that because myths are regionalized, it is wrong to claim that they are not historical.

All India Community

Theories of nationalism by scholars such as Benedict Anderson, Eric Hobsbawm, Ernest Gellner consider nationalism and nation-states as modern phenomena. According to Anderson, nationalism in India is an ideology borrowed from the West. The British state and the colonial modernity that came with it are considered to have unified the country administratively. According to this scholarly tradition, India is a modern phenomenon. The nature of which changed after the colonial period.

Gyanendra Pandey has said that there was no sense of pan-Indian community among Indians in the pre-modern period. Shonalika Kaul challenges this view and argues that the concept of an “all-Indian community” existed in India for thousands of years. They distinguish it from the concept of the modern nation-state. Because the modern nation-state is a relatively recent form of political concept around the world. However, she asserts that the idea of ​​India as a community bounded by the Himalayas to the north and the seas to the south appears repeatedly in many historical sources. These include the writings of Mahabharata, Puranas, Tamil Sangam literature, testimonies of foreign travellers, such as Al-Biruni, Amir Khusrau and Abul Fazal. Historians are keenly aware of the changes in societies brought about by modern technology, management and public relations. However, says Shonalika Kaul, this does not mean that India has not had communities expressing such sentiments for thousands of years.

Sanskrit is not historically elite

Shonalika Kaul disrupts yet another prevailing belief in professional historiography. Sanskrit was the language of the upper classes and outcasts, while Prakrit was the dialect of the common people. Kaul says that, in contrast, Sanskrit was used in public dramas to spread ideas widely and often contained themes that challenged tradition. Shonalika Kaul asserts that there is nothing inherently sectarian or hegemonic about Sanskrit. She adds, reading Kalidasa or Shudraka reveals that Sanskrit literature was pursuing truth, while Bilhana and Kalhana show their disdain for all-powerful kings.

Read more: Owl Trafficking: Lakshmi’s vehicle is an owl but Diwali is inauspicious for owls; What exactly is happening?

Kaul also points out that many Sanskrit texts have ridiculed and severely criticized social hypocrisy. Due to this D. D. He challenges Kosambi’s view that ‘Sanskrit writers were the nest of the elite’. They also point out that ‘Natyasastra’, the earliest Sanskrit treatise on dramatic art in India, clearly states that Sanskrit plays were performed during festivals and other occasions in public places, such as temples and town squares. Kaul points out that drama is called the fifth Veda for all classes of society in this book. Kaul points out that ‘Natyasastra’ says that the use of complicated or obscure words should be avoided in Sanskrit drama. She notes that Sanskrit and Prakrit were often used together in a play.

Cultural Relations of Kashmir with India

Shonalika Kaul, who specializes in the history of ancient Kashmir, has devoted a few chapters to Kashmir’s historical and cultural ties with India. They question the assumption that Kashmir’s history was unique and separate from other regions. Kaul presents evidence from the Archaic to the Medieval period, which proves that Kashmir has always been seen as a part of the ‘sentimental Indian community’. They show that B.C. Pottery found in Kashmir around the 6th century AD is similar to that of the Ganges basin; Sanskrit was the earliest historical language used in Kashmir; The Kashmiri language belonged to the Indo-Aryan group of languages; And the Sharda script in Kashmir evolved from Brahmi. Shonalika Kaul laments that many researchers have neglected Kashmir’s deep cultural ties with India due to the modern political climate. She presents a comprehensive analysis of the evidence regarding ancient and medieval Kashmir, which reinforces her point that the history of Kashmir was closely linked to the cultural tradition of India.

Real hard work is not properly valued

Towards the end of her book, Shonalika Kaul has written a few chapters on historiography. In which she questions not only the Western approach used to study India, but also the apparent divide between left and right ideologies among historians of India. She criticizes the influence of government officials on the Indian education sector and resents the API (Academic Performance Indicator) system. According to him, this system emphasizes only publishing papers in journals that increase the API score rather than writing books with original reasoning. which does not properly evaluate the actual hard work.