The Historian’s Craft and the Role of the State: Perils and Prospects

Abstract

India, deemed a country since long past, naturally deserves to have historical narratives of its own. In modern times, the court chronicles of the past have been succeeded by histories embracing both rulers and the ruled. There is always a political twist to the writing of history because the writer himself inevitably proceeds with ideas that are axioms in his mind (which may not be in the minds of his readers or of people forming the subject of his study). His own axioms or beliefs may be influenced by those prevailing in his midst (whether in the country he/she studies or in the atmosphere around the author he/she writes about). Side by side, with such a limitation set for the historian, there is the ever-widening perception of the scope of history and the ever-firmer insistence on objectivity overriding all boundaries, national, social or religious. This article examines how far Indian historians have responded to both the bonds they must maintain and the ever-enlarging grounds that history opens up for them to survey.