In SEARCH ofHISTORY

Dr. Mubarak Ali

Dost PublicationsIslamabad - Lahore - Karachi

Dost PublicationsPlot 110, Street 15, 1-9/2, Islamabad, Pakistan

Tel: 051-4102784-85 E-mail: dostpub@comsats.net.pk

In Search of HistoryDr. Mubarak Ali

First Published 2009

No part of this publication may be reproduced, translated,stored in a retrieval system or transmitted in any formwithout written consent of the publisher or the author.

Printed in Pakistan byWordMate Islamabad

Rs: 250.00

ISBN: 978-969-496-351-8

CONTENTS

Preface

War and peace in historical perspective

Cultural intervention and social change

The role of great men

Scholarship should move on

In the name of Pakistan study

Conspiring against TajMahal

Robbing Iraq of its history

Owning and disowning our past

Why do we call Alexander 'Great'?

Language of power

It's time to liberate history

Will Baghdad rise again?

Yes, he did massacre and plunder Indians

How cow became politicizedReligious debates

Akbar's Ibadat Khana

Tolerance

Begging in history

v

1

13

30

34

38

44

48

52

56

60

64

68

71

7679

82

86

89

Charity and society 92

The concept of 'Hell' 96

History of 'Paradise" 99

Silk and culture 103

The role of emotions 106

The culture of flowers 110

From Pappa to potato 113

Tobacco and the Mughal court 117

Inscriptions on tombstones 120

Imperialism devours its own children 123

Changing face of imperialism 127

Violence in a historical perspective 131

Demolition of temples 136

Index 141

iv

PREFACE

It is the task of social sciences to point out political, social andcultural problems and find out their solution. Althoughnatural science and technology are getting more and moreimportance in developing societies, however, social sciencescannot be ignored and set aside as irrelevant to modern time.

It is wrong approach to draw boundaries between naturaland social sciences.On the contrary, both help each other increating understanding about nature and human society­both integrate philosophically on higher level.

History as one of the important branches of social sciencesplays an integral role in creating social and politicalawareness among people. With the passage of time, it hasbroadened its scope and now deals nearly every aspect ofhuman life.Therefore, study of history becomes important tounderstand changing scenario of the world.

These essays which are published in different newspapersmake attempt to clarify some historical confusion which isprevailing in our society. I hope it would create some interestin the discipline of history which is deckling in our SOCiety.

Mubarak AliSeptember, 2009

Lahore

v

WAR AND PEACE INHISTORICAL PERSPECTIVE

Introduction: War and TraditionIn victory and defeat war is a drama which most historians,poets, and writers like to narrate with passion and vigour. Itis such a powerful and moving topic that when they describescenes of battlefields, killing and bloodshed, dialoguesbetween victors and vanquished, they make epics out of suchdescriptions which sensationalize and thrill the cominggenerations when they read them. In case of victory or defeat,both sides eulogize their warriors and transform them intoheroes, who sacrifice their lives defending honour anddignity of their country. In Greek history the 'Fallen Heroes ofThermopulae' who fought against the Iranians in defending thepass and were finally killed one by one, are immortalized inthe history of Greece. Thucydides devoted his entirehistorical narrative to the Peloponnesian war fought betweenAthenians and Spartans. The drama of war becomes moremoving and absorbing in the form of poetry as it embodiesemotions and sentiments. For example, in the Mahabharata,when Arjuna asks Krishna how he could fight against hisown kith and kin who were in front of him: "How Krishna,shall I fight Bhimsa and Orona with arrow on the battlefield?They are both objects of reverence, 0 destroyer of foes. It isbetter to live on alms in this world without slaying thesenoble elders, because even after killing them we shall enjoyonly blood stained clothes in the form of wealth and sense ofenjoyment." Krishna encourages him by arguing that: "Thesoul is never born nor dies; it exists on coming into being. For

1

it is unborn, eternal, everlasting and primeval; even thoughbody is slain, the soul is not." It convinced Arjuna and hefought and won the battle that resulted in the creation of thegreat epic of the Mahnbharta.

There are thinkers and historians who regard war as anessential force to keep a nation active and alive. Theirargument is that war is natural. It is in the psyche of humanbeing and therefore it cannot be avoided. In the words ofHeraclitus: "war is the father of all things" Another writer,Lasaulx, believes that war is divine in character and we findits presence in nature. That is why, he believes, the Indiansworship Shiva, the god of destruction. He further writes thata warrior is filled with the joy of destruction: "wars clear theair like a thunderstorm, steel the nerves and restore the heroicvirtues upon which states were originally founded, in placeof indolence, double-dealing and cowardice". According toBurckhardt, a Swiss historian, long duration of peace "leadsto enervation; it permits the rise of mass of precarious, fear­ridden, distressful lives that would not have survivedwithout it and that nevertheless claim for "rights" ... anddegrade the nation. War restores real ability to honor. As forthese wretched lives, war may at least reduce them tosilence."

When in any society war is respected and regarded as holyand sacred, in such a society warriors and soldiers arehonoured and rewarded for their deeds and achievements.Poets compose elegies to pay tributes to their courage andbravery; artists paint them in glowing colours and sculptorscarve their statues in order to immortalize their heroic acts. Insuch an environment those who oppose war are dubbed ascowards and traitors. To die fighting in battlefield becomesan act of honour and pride. Those who flee to save their lifeare ridiculed and lose their social status.

History is replete with such incidents. In India, the Rajputshave a tradition which is highly praised by historians. In theevent of their defeat, the soldiers performed the ritual of [oharby killing their womenfolk and children and, after donning

2

saffron dress, they fought till the last warrior. During thesiege of Chittor (1567) when Akbar witnessed this, he wasvery much impressed by the bravery of the Rajputs. When aRajput Raja, Jaswant Singh fled from a battle againstAurangzeb to Mewar (1658), the queen closed the gates of herfort and did not allow him to enter. There is another exampleof Abul Fazl, Akbar's closest friend. When he was comingback from the Deccan, he was informed that under the orderof [ahangir the Raja of Bundhela was waiting to kill him. Hewas advised to change the route. He refused because heregarded it as an act of cowardice. He followed the sameroute, fought against his enemy and died in the battlefield. Itis evident that when a society develops such traditions inwhich warriors and conquerors assume high status, peace­loving people find title space to live a honourable life.Bravery becomes a virtue while peace cowardice and sin. Insuch a society, scholars and people of knowledge lose allrespect and became subservient to warrior classes.

Conquerors are heroes nearly in every society. In the wordsof a writer, if a person kills a man, he is a murderer, if he killsthousands, he is a conqueror. Based on this criterion,Alexander and Cyrus and other murderers became 1/ theGreat". There is another story wherein a pirate toldAlexander that they were both bandits; the only differencewas of the size of killing and looting. Therefore, a conquerorhaving more power has capacity to loot and plunder more.According to Burckhardt when conquerors, after devastatingcities and massacring people, return to their homeland alongwith war booty, they are cheered and welcomed by theirpeople and honoured as the chosen people ofGod.Machiavelli, the man of the Renaissance, believed that warwas essential for rulers. He advised them that they keep theirpeople in war hysteria as it was the only way to divert theirattention from their problems and prevent them from joiningagainst them. He argued that a nation always needs anenemy. Its presence keeps people united and loyal to theirrulers. What Machiavelli said in the 15th century is true even

3

today as far as Pakistan is concerned. We are in a warsituation after the creation of our country. We are demandedall the time to sacrifice our fundamental rights, our resources,our honour and dignity to defend our country. There is aquestion: can a poor, sick, and illiterate nation defend itscountry? Or a time is coming when nothing would be left todefend.

How Wars are justified?Thucydides, a Greek historian, writing on wars of his time,pointed out that the main motive of war was to loot andplunder and not occupation of other's territory. In the laterperiod, when nations developed agriculture and trade andaccumulated wealth and resources, victors not only occupiedterritories but forcibly acquired wealth of vanquished nationthat was called 'war booty'. Greed and thirst of more powerled to the foundation of great empires such as the Roman, theArab, the Carolingian, the Mughuls and the Ottoman. From15th to 18th centuries, the European countries such as Spain,Portugal, Britain, and France assumed the role of greatimperial powers by conquering and occupying Asian,Africancountries and the newly discovered world.

Whenever wars were fought, imperial powers always foundout some moral justification to legitimize them. People wereneeded for some higher cause to sacrifice their lives,therefore, thinkers and religious scholars did this job byproviding moral justification to kill and devastate to fulfil thedivine mission. Whereupon, religion became the best tool tomobilize people to wage holy war for it. When a nation got tobelieve that its religion was true and all other were false, andthey were followers of a faith which would prevail all overthe world, it motivated them to kill unbelievers in order toaccomplish God's mission. In the medieval period, theconcept of 'Just War' evolved to justify killing in the name ofreligion. This is the reason that most of these wars ofmedieval period were fought in the name of religion thoughthe ulterior motives were economic and political gains. Suchas in the wars of Crusades, religion inspired people to fight

4

but behind the garb were the economic interests of theEuropean merchants and traders who invested huge sums insupport of these wars.

However, situation changed in Europe when the institutionof nation state emerged and secular ideas and thoughtsundermined religious faith. Therefore, instead of religion,nation and nation state acquired top most place in society.Now, wars were waged in the name of nationalism. It wassaid that 'my country right or wrong was my country'. Itmeant that moral and ethical values had no place as far asinterest of a country was concerned. Social Darwinism wasthe second inspiring theory that gave a sense of racialsuperiority to the Europeans over other nations. As a superiorand chosen nation it was their natural right to subdue andenslave weaker nations. The arrogance of racial superiorityled the British and the French to believe that they were themost civilized and cultured and as such it was theirresponsibility to civilize others. It was known as the 'whiteman's burden' or 'mission of civilization' in the imperialjargon.

The concept to civilize the barbarians and backward nationsafter conquering and enslaving them is very old. Forexample, Pericles, the Greek ruler, wanted to conquer othernations in the name of civilization. Itwas his belief that thesesavage nations could become civilized only after living underthe Greek rule. The same argument was given by Abul Fazl,justifying the imperialist policy of the Mughals, that to beruled by the Mughals meant a blessing to the lesser powers.Some historians, on this basis, give example of the Rajputs,who played a very important role in history by contributingto the extension of the Mughal Empire; otherwise, they mighthave wasted their energies fighting against each other. Underthe Mughals they became Empire builders and acquired adignified place in history.

To justify devastation of war and killing of people, theEuropeans, by adopting racial superiority and notion ofcivilization, dehumanized the conquered nations. They were

5

presented as savages, barbarians, and sub-humans. In thiscase to kill and enslave such people was justified. Thesuperior nations felt no sense of guilt when they massacredthe inhabitants of America, Australia, and New Zealand.After occupying their territories, they exploited their naturalresources and used them for their own benefit. Hitler,following the same concept and believing in the superiori tyof the Aryan race, argued that the Slav people were inferiorand as they were not capable of using their natural resources,it was the right of the German nation to occupy their land andcontrol their wealth for the advancement of civilization.

The Americans, after donning the mantle of imperialism, andfollowing the concept of "Manifest Destiny" began the policyof occupation and extending their influence beyond theirborders. American President, Theodore Roosevelt, once saidthat he welcomed war because America needed it. When theAmericans occupied the Philippines and it was said that whatwas the use to occupy it as it was far from America, it wasargued that the American navy would bring it closer to itsborder.

The Americans, when engaged in wars, justify their acts ofaggression on the medieval as well as on modern concepts ofmorality. On one hand, they regard their armed conflicts asjust was believing that God is on their side. On the otherhand, they call their wars a defence of civilization. Theybelieve that the Asian, African and Latin American countriescould be civilized only under their control and by followingtheir model. Therefore, American occupation and influence isa blessing for them.

They also repeat the argument that non-European nations arenot capable of using their natural resources for thedevelopment of humankind, whereupon, it is the right of theAmericans as advanced and technological developed countryto use these resources. This is why they are trying to controloil from the Arab countries.

The Americans also believe that this century is 'the American

6

century' and it is their responsibility to maintain sustainablepeace in the world. Following the precedent of "Pax Romana"in which the Romans, after crushing all rebellions, establisheda permanent peace, the Americans assert that by wagingrelentless wars against all those countries who are possessingweapon of mass destruction, they could establish peace. PaxAmericana is the dream of the American ruling class whichthey determine to achieve.

The Voice for PeaceThroughout the history of humankind, although the time­span of period of war has been relatively short, the havoc anddestruction it has wrought on human societies makes it themost devastating phenomenon in history. It is an event thatdisturbs normal routine of life and suspends all social andcultural activities.The irony is that instead of condemning it,it is generally glorified in history. Pacifists are regarded ascowardly and inactive people while warriors are admired,praised and symbolised determination and courage. Thoughsentiments are mobilized in favour ofwar, majority of peoplehave yearned for peace and wish to live a happy, prosperousand strife free life. Therefore,whenever war brought disasterto societies in the past, philosophers, thinkers, and writerspowerfully expressed anti-war sentiments. For example, thewar between Sparta and Athens produced anti-warsentiments in both societies.The two great dramatists of thisperiod Aristophanes and Euripides revealed and representedanti-war feelings of people in their dramas. Aristophenes inhis Acharnian has an Athenian farmer who makes privatepeace and eats imported food while his fellow citizens lookon longingly. In his Lysistrasa he incites women to withholdtheir favour until men make peace. Europides in his TrojanWomen expresses his disgust at the cruelties ofwar.

However, these voices for peace proved futile and could notprevent war. Moreover, as humankind developed knowledgeand experimented in science and technology, more lethalweapons were invented and used for destruction. In Europeand Asia and Africa war became the only solution to solve

7

political disputes and economic problems. However, as warbecame more destructive, the longing for peace also becamestronger and stronger. Thinkers, philosophers and writersproposed a number of schemes to save the world from warand its atrocities and maintain permanent peace. ImmanuelKant (d.1804) was one of those thinkers who made attempt tooutline a scheme to make this world safer. He fully realizedthat whenever political and economic interests clashed,countries were involved in warfare. He argued that whenthere was no war between two countries, itwas the best timeto have diplomatic relations with each other. Diplomacy, inhis words, should not be secret but open, so people on bothsides know the nature of relationship and share their opinionwith ruling classes. He urged that during peace, standingarmies should be dismissed because the institution of armyneeded war for its existence. To have good and friendlyrelations between two countries, he believed that thereshould be trade and commerce and cultural links. Theseactivities would bring people closer and promoteunderstanding.

Oswald Spangler (d.1936) in his book Decline of the Westsurveys the history of different civilizations and finds onecommon feature in every culture and human society: that warhas always been a favourite sport of men while womenvehemently opposed it, because it took away their offspringand made them sacrifice for the cause of religion ornationalism. Whatever women created after a long strugglewas destroyed by war. Therefore, women appeared in historybeing anti-war and against militarism.

First World War brought such a disaster that when it wasover, people were shocked when itwas known that 9 milliondied on both sides. It was the war in which new weaponssuch as tanks, shells and machineguns were used. Thousandsof soldiers experienced life trenches during the war. That iswhy there was a strong reaction against war that wasexpressed in fiction, short stories, plays, poetry and memoirs.Henri Babusse, the author of Le fell describes life in trenches:

8

"What a life. Mud, earth, rain. We are saturated, dyed,kneaded. One finds dirt everywhere, in pockets, inhandkerchiefs, in clothes, in food." His call to French soldierswas to reject both 'Deutschland ueber alles' and 'Francebefore all'. He says: "Love France as you love your mother ...but don't place her before justice and morality."

Karl Kraus in his novel The last days of mankind depicts thecondition of soldiers who were sent to front for fighting: "Isaw you on the day when you marched out. The rain andmud of this fatherland and its infamous music were thefarewell, as they herded you into the cattle cart! I see yourpale face in the orgy of filth and lies in this frightful farewellat freight station from which the human material isdispatched."

There was a time when people remained unaware of the realcause of war. Now with the spread of political consciousnessand publication of vast literature against war, more peopleare aware of the real reason behind it. The best example is thetwo Gulf wars. Although the USA and the U.K claimed thattheir purpose was to liberate Iraqi people from the tyranny ofSaddam Hussain. It is clear to everybody that the realpurpose is to control oil wells of the Middle East.

Any hope of preventing war depends on the attitude of thepeople. If they react against war and strongly demonstratetheir sentiments, governments have to cease hostilities andfind peaceful solutions. Ifman wants to live a normal life andenjoy the fruits of his labour, he has to choose peace. AsRussell writes: "How to live in freedom and joy. At peacewith himself and therefore with all mankind. This willhappen if man will choose joy rather than sorrow. If not,eternal death will bury man in deserved oblivion."

The Peace MovementsAs voices for peace were generally low and could not beheard everywhere, peace activists decided to launch wellorganised movements against war to mobilize people infavour of peace. There were two approaches to these

9

movements: one attempt was made to convince people toabandon arms; in the second approach it was argued that themain causes of war should be analysed and removed, and away out should be sought in which conflicts and disputesshould be resolved by diplomatic means. Itwas also decidedthat movements should be well organized to createawareness against the horrors of war. Napoleanic wars inEurope and American war with Cuba, Puerto Rico, and thePhilippines urged political activists as well as intellectuals tolaunch movements for peace and raise their voice againstwar. It resulted in the emergence of New York Peace Societyin 1815,British Peace Society in 1816, and American PeaceSociety in 1828.From 1848to 1851 these organizations heldpeace conferences regularly and discussed how world peacecould be established. Their proposals were that formaintaining peace negotiation and mutual talks wereessential elements. Those nations who had conflictswith eachother, they should resolve their problems with the help ofdiplomacy rather to go to war for solution. Importantly,armament race was the cause for tension, therefore,production of armament should be curtailed and finally,attempts should be made to eliminate them.

The peace movements were further spread to other countriesand in 1867 a League of Peace was founded in France. In1891, Germany and Austria organized groups for peace.Bertha von Sttutner published her book Die Waffen Nieder(Laydown your Arms) in 1889that soon became the Bibleforpeace lovers. In 1905National Council for Peace was formedwhich represented various groups. This clearly indicates howpeople were concerned about peace.

In the United States in 1866 Universal Peace Union wasfollowed by World Peace Foundation, Church Peace Unionand in 1899 Anti-Imperialist League. Mark Twain was itsactive member and extensively propagated against war in hiswritings. In one of his essays, he wrote that war divided anation into two groups: patriots and traitors. In anotherarticle he asserted that nations should decide their problems

10

and disputes by themselves without any externalinterference. He openly declared that he was anti-imperialistand opposed any invasion and occupation of other country.

The peace movements opposed the theory that man wasinherently prone to jealousy, hatred and terrorism andargued that man always wanted to live in peace andharmony. Therefore, to prevent conflicts, the best methodwas to promote sentiments of love and brotherhood. Manwas exhausted as a result of centuries long wars and wantedto maintain a sustainable peace in the world to enjoy worldlypleasure. To them, education was the best medium topromote these ideas. They also believed that awarenessshould be created among people that wars were fought forpolitical and economic interest of ruling classes and not fortheir welfare. So, they should not be trapped by the slogans ofnationalism, patriotism, and racism.

In the 19th century, Europe, as a result of colonization andexploitation of colonial resources, was advancing rapidly andit was generally believed that their progress would remainun-hindered. Interestingly, in the peace movements, thequestion of colonial wars was not raised; neither occupationof colonies was condemned. These peace movementsconcentrated on Europe and America and wanted to preventand if possible to eliminate all conflicts peacefully. However,in spite of their efforts and the emergence of democraticinstitutions, they failed to stop the First World War whichbroke out in 1914. The outcome of the war was horrendousand shattered the dream of progress and the conception ofutopia. Immediately after the war, the League of Nations wasfounded to resolve all disputes among nations withdiplomacy. In 1930s, peace conferences were held in theHague and Geneva. Einstein, the scientist, also attended oneof such conferences and was shocked to observe that thedelegates of different countries were discussing as to whatweapons should be used and what not. They were in favourof war and only wanted that it should be fought on someprinciples. Disgusted by their discussion, Einstein called a

11

separate press conference and said that there was no suchthing as humanized war. War was always inhuman, and,therefore, should be abolished altogether.

However, the peace movements could not prevent the SecondWorld War that was more catastrophic than the first becauseatom bombs were dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasakiwhich destroyed the cities and its population. The Americansprohibited the Japanese not to disclose the horror of droppingof bombs.The peace movements, after the war, were subdued andcould not raise their voice loudly. Only during Algerian warof independence, the French public demonstrated againsttheir government and forced to recognize Algerianindependence. The movement again emerged forcefullyagainst Vietnam War. During the first and the second Gulfwars, there were demonstrations, especially in the recent war,huge demonstration exposed the ulterior motives of the USAand Britain and pressurized their government not to invadeIraq. In democratic societies, there is space for people todemonstrate and express their views, but it is argued thatdecisions are made in parliaments and not in the streets. Inspite of people's opposition, Iraq was invaded and occupiedwhich raises the question that: can people's voice be heardonly at the time of election and be ignored in deciding suchserious issues as war and occupation. It is depressing thatprotest and voices of the people are drowned in the noises oftanks, bombardments, and machineguns. Wareen E. Keuhl,writing on 'International Peace' observes that: "Man,therefore, stands at the same threshold he approachedcenturies ago, despite improved means of communication,and ominous threat to his survival, an increased awareness ofhis danger and the experiences and machinery of his past toaid him, peace still remains a dream. The idea of peace,however, has survived innumerable wars and still motivatesmen to hope and work for the millennium."

12

CULTURAL INTERVENTIONAND SOCIAL CHANGE

Studying social change, generally historians either minimizeor ignore the impact of culture and give more emphasis topolitical events and economic development. This approach,subsequently, reduces the dynamics of society and one failsto comprehend complexities of the process of social change.Looking in depth, we find that the system of socialaction hasthree dimensions: social system, the cultural system and thepersonality system. Out of these three, culture plays verysignificant role in shaping, formulating and changing valuesand traditions of a society.

When we talk about culture, it includes literature, paintings,music, dance, sculpture, folklores, festivals, and celebrations.It creates such traditions, institutions, values, norms andcustoms, which become marks of identification andcharacteristic of a society and its members. As culture iscreated, developed and used according to the needs of acommunity, it, on one hand, makes attempts to sustain,conserve, and preserve the old traditions and values in theinterest of privileged groups who derive their power andinfluence from them. On the other hand, it challenges out­dated customs and traditions and introduces new socialvalues to adjust according to the requirements and change oftime. Therefore, society remains in conflictbetween forces ofcontinuity and change. History progresses because of thisconflict. It gives society a new life, a new energy, and a newvitality to resist and to change. If there is an end to conflict,itmeans stagnation, deterioration and decline.

13

According to anthropologists and sociologists, there are fourcategories of culture: elitist which claims to have superiorvalues and, therefore, affordable only to few privileged andrich classes; the holistic which covers whole way of life; thehegemonic which is imposed by the ruling classes onmajority; and pluralistic which integrates different sections ofsociety into one unit. In another categorization, the Chinesedivide it as mental and manual, town and countryside, andindustrial and agrarian. In another broad definition there aretwo cultures: high and popular. High culture represents theruling classes while popular of the masses. However, EdwardTyler comprehensively defines it as: "Culture is everythingwhich is socially learned and shared by members of asociety."Shared culture is used in case of political crisis when a nationas a whole face danger either of internal disintegration orforeign invasion or domination. In this case ruling classes,who exclude masses from their high cultural domain, includethem in a nationalist culture and inspire them to take side ofthe establishment in the name of nationalism and patriotism.This phenomenon we have seen during the colonizationperiod when struggle for independence was launched by theelite classes. During the process historical past wasresurrected and a shared culture was constituted to mobilizemasses to take part in the struggle against colonialism. Theruling classes also talk about shared culture when they faceeither political crises or economic downfall. At this stage allsections of society are appealed to protect the cultural valuesin the large interest of the nation. Shared culture gives a senseof common identity and helps to strengthen socialmovements, which are initiated to change the structure of asociety. Democratic and secular societies with egalitarianvalues bring radical social changes in which various groupsand institutions help each other and contribute to a changethat covers the interest of all.

Culture plays also an important role in the life of minoritieswho are generally discriminated in such societieswhere there

14

is no political and religious freedom. Under thesecircumstances, their cultural values and symbols help them toretain their identity.

In this paper an attempts is made to focus the role of culturein changing the patterns of Western society and that howdifferent political-cultural movements tried to bring socialchanges and political consciousness in the subcontinent.

The Renaissance CultureMedieval Europe culturally was completely under the grip ofreligion. The music, paintings, sculpture, architecture,festivals, rituals, and processions were all coloured heavilywith religion. It is said that from cradle to grave religioncontrolled life and death of an individual. However, socialand economic forces slowly changed the pattern of life. Thegeographical discoveries, encounter with people of otherreligions and cultures, and the expansion of trade andcommercial activities brought a new approach whichchanged the outlook about worldly life.Effortswere made tointerplay of earthly interest. Laws and social and politicalinstitutions were reconstituted to accommodate according tothe variety of human conditions. In the 14th century,following this approach, Renaissancechallenged the religioushold and brought cultural changes first in Italy and then inthe rest of Europe. As a result of it, new learning andliterature, the new paintings and architecture and new moralvalues emerged to fulfil the needs of society.GeorgeVoigt inhis book Revival of ClassicalAntiquities (1859)writes that: 1/Atthis moment there developed in Italy the seed of a newcivilization,which was to bear its fruits first in the literatureand artistic field and later to gather under the standard ofliterature and scholarship not merely in Italy but the wholecivilizedworld."

To encounter divine authority and religious hold, thesignificant contribution of the Renaissance culture was theadoption of 'huminitas'. It was the movement of a newevolution ofman, of his place in universe, and in history. The

15

concept of humanism promoted the idea that humans wereresponsible for their own destiny. It was argued that theycould change the world without divine intervention.According to N.F.Cantor, humanism "emphasized theprimacy of human values and individual creativity overfeudal and ecclesiastical traditions and institutions...Humanism advocated an educational system in whichclassical studies were the curriculum for moral as well asintellectual training". As traders and merchants wereexploring the world and adventurers voyaging around theglobe, it was needed to get rid of spiritual, superstitious,social and political clutches of the medieval age. Onlyliberated people could construct the world. The discovery ofman brought tremendous changes in the sphere of culture;humans became topic and theme of paintings, sculpture,literature, music, and dancing. Human body was glorifiedand adored by artists and sculptors. Art and literature oncefreed from religious taboos and censorship flourished andemerged as powerful tools to create social and politicalconsciousnessin the society.

The concept of humanism greatly influenced education whichsubsequently led to change in the manners and behaviour ofthe people. "The curriculum and pedagogy that therenaissance humanist" writes Cantor, "had established allover Western Europe by 1500 was the foundation of theFrench lycee, the German gymnasium and English public(non-clerical)school of modern times. In these schools wascrystallized the cultural heritage of the classicaland medievalworld that achieved a universal discourse, a commonlanguage (usually Latin and French), and a standardizedsymbolicculture."

Another contribution of the Renaissance culture was in therealm of social behaviour, manners and attitudes. The wholeprocess is exhaustively discussesby Norbert Elias in his bookThe Civilizing Process (1978).Themedievalman was not awareof hygiene and cleanliness that was indicated in his wearingof dress, eating habits, and conversing with each other. To

16

change the behaviour and manners, a number of books werewritten during the Renaissance period." Noble, courteousbehaviour is constantly contrasted to 'coarse manners',"writes Norbert Elias on the contents of these books.

For example, one book pointed out the manners of eating:"Some people bite a slice and then dunk it in thedish in a coarse way; refined people reject such badmanners.""A number of people gnaw a bone and then put itback in the dish; this is a seriousoffence.""Do not scrape your throat with your bare handwhile eating;but if you have to, do it politelywithyour coat.""It is not decent to poke your fingersinto your earsor eyes, as some people do, or to pick your nosewhile eating.Thesethreehabits are bad.""I hear that some eat unwashed; (if it is true, it is abad sign).May their fingersbe palsied."

There is a book written by the Italian writer known asCastiglione with the title of Book of the Courtier. He tells us thecharacteristics of a noble and civilized man. According tohim, a gentleman should be physically attractive andaccomplished in all things. He should be a man of art andletters and refrain from boasting and bragging. Moreover, hemust be careful inhis speech and conduct.

The culture of the Renaissance first changed the elite classesand then influenced the other sections of society to follow thismodel. It liberated Europe from religious extremism andinaugurated an era of liberalism and enlightenment.

The Reformation that followed the Renaissance ended thehegemony of church and promoted the notion of nation stateand national culture. Adoption of national languageunleashed the creativity of European nations to enrich theirculture and identify them with it.

The French Revolution and its CultureFrench Revolution of 1789, as a result of political change,created a new culture that slowly transformed the European

17

society from old regime of despotism to democracy. Theslogan of the Revolution was liberty, equality, and fraternitythat ended the hegemony of aristocracy and its culture. Thesocial hierarchy came to an end. New ones replaced the oldtraditions and institutions. The impact of Revolution was feltin every sphere of life. All privileged symbols of monarchyand nobility were discredited. People started to address eachother as 'citizen' by abandoning all titles such as 'HisHighness' or 'His Exalted'. Separation of the church from thestate laid down the foundation of secularism whichsubsequently led to religious toleration, A strong sense ofnationalism was created when France was attacked by therival European power and a people's army was recruited todefend the country. Another significant aspect of the newrevolutionary culture was the involvement of women in thesocial, political and cultural activities. There was an activeparticipation of women. In the word of Mria Mies: "Theyhoped to make their own revolution within the GreatRevolution by joining in the struggle on the streets of Paris, aswell as in the many discussion groups and republican clubsthat had sprung up all over the country. Large masses ofwomen from the impoverished sections of Paris participatedactively in the battle against feudalism." The culture that wasproduced by the revolution spread to the whole of Europeand changed its political and social structures.

The Industrial CultureThe term of the Industrial Revolution was first used by A.Toyanbee and located it in the middle of the 18th century. Itfirst occurred in England and then slowly spread to the otherEuropean countries. Unlike the French Revolution ittransformed the European society slowly and gradually. Itencountered the feudal culture and agrarian society andintroduced its own values and traditions that reshaped thestructure of society.Agrarian culture that was dominated byfestivals, celebrations and processions were discontinued inthe cities.Workers who came from villages were soon cut offfrom their roots from their traditional life and became

18

unknown in the city life. The working conditions in the earlystage were so strenuous that they did not find leisure time toinvolve in such cultural activities. Factory owners and thestate authorities also discouraged them to assemble andparticipate in any celebration because it was regarded as athreat to law and order.

In the early phase of the Industrial Revolution the life of theworkers was miserable. They lived in slums where there wasno sewerage system or availability of clean drinking waterand no medical facility in case of sickness. There was nosecurity of job and no pension in the old age. However,slowly realization came that educated, healthy, and skilledworkers were more productive than an uneducated andunskilled labourer. This led to setting up schools, hospitals,and training centres to ensure utilization of human energy formore production.

The artists and writers reacted against the gloomyatmosphere and as Peter N. Sterner observes: "Culturechanged as well. Many artists and writers turned against theugliness of the industrial setting. Romantic painters early inthe nineteenth century concentrated on idyllic scenes ofnature in part to contrast with the blight of factory cities. Abit later, many artists professed withdrawal from their largersociety, urging that art for art's sake; this was a radicalalternative to industrial materialism. On a more popularlevel, the Industrial Revolution stimulated interest in secularrather than religious sculpture."

The Industrial Revolution radicalized the communicationsystem by building roads, lying railway tracks and usingcanals for transportation by steamers. The size of townsexpanded and new labour force that migrated from thevillages became a part of city life. Factory system introduceda new culture in which all workers worked together underone roof that subsequently created in them a sense ofsolidarity. However, factory system demanded punctuality oftime and discipline. While working, they were watched byforemen and supervisors. "New pace and discipline", writes

19

Sterns, "a life time of supervision by a separate managementgroup, and a limited sense of achievement, there were thehallmarks of factory work experience ... "

The industrial revolution changed the family structure of themiddle class. As male became the lone breadwinner andsupporter of a family, power and privileges of masculinityemerged with full force. The status of women lowered downto manage family affairs and looked after children. Girls wererequired to get basic education and training in music anddancing to get appropriate husband. The daily routine wasthat the day was spent in work and the evening time wasspared in hearing some books that were read loudly. The girlsplayed the piano to show their expertise in music and toentertain the family. Middle class, to distinguish it from theworking class, adopted a life style that identified it to thelower classes. Wallpapers decorated houses; stylish furnitureand carpets were used to display their taste and wealth. Incase of the working class, though women and childrenworked to meet the growing expenses but the status of man,as a patriarch was recognized superior. Working class womensuffered greatly as they had to work part time and took careof domestic duties and fulfil household requirements withtight budget.

The industrial culture divided society not on the basis of classbut also on the basis of professionalism. Of course, there wererich and poor classes creating a contrast of opulence andimpoverishment. Then there were skilled and unskilledworkers whose social status differed greatly. The growth andexpansion of industry created new professional classes ofengineers, accountants, managers, and technicians. They werevery much conscious of their professions and had a pride oftheir performance. The life style of society further changed asa result of mass productions when markets were flooded withcommodities. Shops displayed their goods with style toattract customers. Sales girls are employed to deal with thebuyers. It changed the whole culture of selling and buying.

Competition was the code word of success in the industrial

20

cultural environment. There were the stories of rag to richsuccess. Itwas said that if poverty existed it was the result ofpoor work habits than a system.

It is argued that the industrial culture on one hand liberatedworkers from the clutchesof feudalism,but on the other handit chained them with exploitative system of capitalism.However, with the growth of industrialization, social,political and economic structures were changed. Democraticvalues became strong, secularization of mind took place, andindividualism was recognized as an important ideology of asociety. It led to freedom of speech, expression,worship, andsurety of basic human rights. The industrial society becameso elastic that it becameeasy for it to absorb different culturalvalues. The theory of melting pot and bowl of salad both suitedto it. An industrial cultural society was ready to absorb anynew element in a melting pot. It was also ready to keep theseparate identity of each group with tolerance like a bowl ofsalad.

Indian Subcontinent and the Bhakti MovementFor a long time it was argued by some historians that theIndian society that was multi-religious, multi-cultured andcaste-ridden, was stagnant and there was no mobility or theprocess of change in its structure. The modern Indianhistorians, however, challenge this interpretation with strongevidence that the socialand cultural changes had been takingplace throughout history. One of its examples is the BhaktiMovement.

In the 13th and 14th centuries India went through social,cultural, religious, and political changes. The Turkish ruleended the small states and laid down foundation of akingdom that politically united North India under a Sultan.Ulama, who came from different parts of the Muslim world,tried to create religious differences between Muslims andKafirs and pressurized the rulers to implement the Shariat.Sufis and different orders (Silsila) challenged the religiousorthodoxy and preached religious tolerance. With the

21

establishment of the Turkish rule, the Brahmans lost thepatron rulers and retired to the background. When Persianbecame court language, it reduced the status of Sanskrit andwith it the status of the Brahman priest further lowereddown.

Moreover, the Indian society greatly changed as a result oftechnology that was introduced by the Turks. These newtechnological inventions improved agricultural products andpromoted new crafts that subsequently raised the socialstatus of artisans' classes. The mobility of lower castes tohigher social ladder was not liked by the upper castes. That iswhy the historian of the Saltanate period, Ziauddin Baranihad great contempt for them and advised the rulers not toappoint them on higher posts.

Bhakti Movement of 13th and 14th centuries was the productof this milieu. Was it a voice of the voiceless people and lowercastes that challenged all those customs and practices thatwere prejudiced to them or it had some other motives?Historians interpreted it differently. To some it was amovement to check conversion to Islam and reform theHindu society from the below that it could face the challengesof a new religion. On the other hand, it is said that it was anattempt to bring the Muslims to the fold of Hindusim.KN.Panikar, a famous historian, looks at the movement asbalm on the wounds which occurred as a result of the Muslimconquests on the body of India. The Russian historiansinterpret it as revolt of people against feudalism. To some,however, it was a movement to bring Hindus and Muslimtogether abandoning all those beliefs and rituals that createda gulf between them.

The main characteristicsof the BhaktiMovement are: first, allits exponents belonged to the lower castes and were proud ofit. It shows that there was mobility in the society and rigidityof caste system was crumbling. Secondly, they challengedreligious orthodoxy, formalism, religious rituals, andauthority of Mullas and Pandits. Their emphasis was directrelation with God without any mediation. Direct access to

22

God required no religious affiliation. Love of God eliminatesall prejudices and differences and brings people togetherirrespective of their caste, creed, and class. Thirdly, theleaders of the movement adopted different genre of poetry tomobilize people. Itwas most effectiveand appealing methodsin a society that was illiterate. They roamed from village tovillage and recited poems that preach devotion and love toGod. Fourthly, they concentrated their efforts to the ruralareas. Cities to them were den of corruption and greed.Therefore, they addressed the common people and created inthem spirit of endurance to face miseries and retain hope forsalvation.

Bhakti Movement was divided into two schools of thought:Saguna and Nirguna. Saguna believed that divine powershould be worshipped in some form. Therefore, idol worshipwas adopted by its followers that led them to places ofworship (temples) and recitation of divine books. Their mainexponents were Sur Das, Tulsi Das, Mira Bai, Chaitinya, andVidhiyapi. In the end it was absorbed by the mainstreamHindu religion. Nirguna, on the other hand, did not believein the worship of God in any form, or to go to the places ofworship, or observe religious rituals. According to theirteaching, God is in every person and, therefore, there was noneed of any temple or mosque. As artisans, workers, andsmall traders were its followers, they ridiculed bookishknowledge. Kabir, Rai Das, Akhu Bhagat, Charan Das, andDadu Diyal were its leaders.

By challenging religious orthodoxy and hypocrisy of priests,Hindus and Muslims alike, the movement created tolerancein the Indian society and maintained harmony ofcontradictions of different religions. Though it rejected thereligious authority but emphasized for its disciples to followthe Guru. However, the criticism is that it concentrated on thesalvation of individual but no attempt was made to changethe society as a whole. Moreover, there was heavy reliance onGod for salvation and belief that exploiters and oppressorswould be punished by Him.

23

However, in Maharashtra, Bhakti Moment that waspopularized by Ram Das, created 'Maharashra Dharam' andsupported Shivaji in his attempt to struggle against theMughals and found his own Empire. In the Punjab, GuruNanak followed the Nirguna school of Bhakti Movement butgradually his successors abandoned it and militarized theSikh community against the Mughals.

Though Bhakti Movement has become a part of history, stillresonance of its songs thrill people and take them away frombitterness and violence that they face in their daily lives topeace and harmony.

Among the Bhagats of the movements, the most prominentand popular was Kabir who challenged religious orthodoxy,caste system, written knowledge, and preached for equalityand tolerance. He had contempt for yogis, sadhus andmoulvis who became but for his sarcasm. His message is:

The jogi cries: Gorakh, Gorakh!The Hindu invokes the name of Ram,The Mussalman cries: Khuda is one!But lord of Kabir pervades all.

Kabir's view is that man can purify himself by rejecting allreligions as they create hatred and prejudice:

The Brahman is the Guru of the world, but he is not thedevotees,Guru:

He got entangled in his four VedasAnd there he died.If the Shaykh be devoid of patience,Of what use is that Kaaba pilgrimage?How can he whose soul is not firmCan hope to reach God.

Kabir expresses the sentiments of simple folks who wereoppressed not only politically but also religiously by rulersand priests. His scathing attack exposed them to the people oftheir real nature. His verses reduce them as clowns andbuffoons.

o Miyan your order is not just: We are poorservants of God- and you just seek glory!

24

Allah is the Master of Religion;He did not order tooppress the poor:YourMurshid and your Pir tellme,wheredid theycomefrom?You observe the Ramzan and you keep spellingprayers-But the Kalimawon't earn you your heaven:He,whoknowsHimthroughtheExperience,HissoulpossessesseventyKaabas.

By challenging religious orthodoxy and hypocrisy of priests,Hindus and Muslims alike, the movement created tolerancein the Indian society and maintained harmony ofcontradictions of different religions. Though it rejected thereligious authority but emphasized for its disciples to followthe Guru. However, the criticism is that it concentrated on thesalvation of individual but no attempt was made to changesociety as a whole. Moreover, there was heavy reliance onGod for salvation and belief that He would punish exploitersand oppressors.

The cultural traditions of the Bhakti Movement continuedand reached to maturity during the reign of Akbar whopropounded his concept of sulh-i-kul or peace with all. Acomposite culture developed in the elite class where socialand cultural ties were more stronger than religion. City lifewas also changed. The Mughal cities expanded in size andbecame centers of trade and commerce. Artisan, artists, poetsand men of letters found rich patron there to promote theirwork. All these groups were tied culturally with each otherand tolerated their different religious way of life.Vidyapati, apoet, commenting on the city life of Jaunpur said: "HereMuslims say bismillah and slaughter cattle; there Hindus offersacrifices to God; here they kneel in namaz, there they offerpuja; here live Oijahs, there live Khawajas."

The Dalit MovementThe echoes of the Bhakti Movement are heard in the modernperiod when the untouchables launched their movement thatthey called 'Dalit', meaning oppressed, exploited or

25

downtrodden. The political movement of the untouchableknown as the 'Dalit Panther' defines it as:

"Who is dalit?Membersof the scheduledcastesandtribes, neo-Buddhists, the working people, thelandless and poor peasants,women and thosewhoare being exploitedeconomically,politicallyand inthe name of religion."

In another definition, Gangadhar Pantawane, an editor ofmagazine explains that:

"Tome, Dalit is not a caste.He is a man exploitedby social and economic traditions of this country.He does not believe in God, Rebirth, Soul, Holybooks teaching separatism, Fate and Heavenbecause they made him a slave. He does notbelieve in humanism. Dalit is a symbol of changeand revolution."

The Dalits belonging to the lower castes suffered humiliation,insult, and indignity for centuries. They were not allowed toget any education and kept backward economically by socialtraditions. During the colonial period, some of them gotchance to get education and raise their status economically,but not socially. After the independence, a small section fromthe dalit emerged equipped with education and formed aclass that was conscious of their exploitation. These people inthe 1960s and 1970s created a 'dalit culture' that brought anew consciousness among the downtrodden people. Mostly,the feelings were expressed in poetry, short stories, and plays.A powerful literary movement represented deep-rootedanger against all those traditions, values, and customs thatthey regarded as their enemies. A Dalit poet V.L Kalekarpassionately rejected the Hindu culture that kept his peopleenslaved:

No!No!No!A triple rejectionTo your economic, social, political, mental,religious,moral and cultural pollution.Youever-living,ever-luminoussuns!Yourvery touchbrings a contagiousdisease.ButIam a new sun

26

Independent, self-IuminatingPossessed of a new spiritI reject your culture.I reject your Parmeshwar-centered tradition.I reject your religion-based literature.I have taken into account the unceasing battles.I may bend but I won't break.

In this new culture which is formulated on the basis ofliterature. There is cultural clash. The Dalit by negating andeliminating the Hindu culture, laid down the foundations of acounter culture that could liberate them from centuries oldinhuman and cruel traditions.

Arjun Dangle, in one of his poems titles as 'Revolution'expressed the whole history of the untouchables:

We used to be their friendsWhen, clay pots hung our necks,Brooms tied to our rumps,We made our rounds through the Upper LaneCalling out johar Mayabap.We fought with crows,Never even given them the snot from our nosesAs we dragged out the Upper Lane's cattle,Skinned it neatlyAnd shared the meat among ourselves.They used to love us then.We warred with jackals-dogs-vultures-kitesBecause we ate their share.Today we see a root-to-top change.Crows-jackals-dogs-vultures-kitesAre our close friends.The Upper Lane doors are closed to us.Shout victory to the revolutionShow victoryBurn, burn those who strike a blow at tradition.

One of the important aspects of the new Dalit culture is thatDalit women are also raising their voice against theirvictimization. Dalit women are being dishonoured andmolested because of their caste. Mrs. Bansode, a Dalit poetessexpressing her ordeal writes:

27

This complaint of mineIs against the orthodox cultureWhich has imprisoned us in a sealed room,Which has given us charity of life completelyboycotted.Where the wind treats us as strangers,Where monsoons give us only faminesWhere the water plays with usThe most inhuman game of mirage.We are rejecting thisUnclean and poisonous life.And to escape from these cruel cursesWill you give meA bright and auspicious moon?My countrymen, to your courtI have brought a complaint.Will you give me justice?

Dalit playwrights also played an important role in spreadingthe counter culture that challenged the establishment and theHindu culture. In the words of B.R.Joshi: "Through themedium of theatre and street plays these writers aredepicting effectively the inner and external conflicts in Dalitlife and Dalit society."

It appears that to get a dignified place in the society, theDalits are fighting a cultural battle by eliminating the higherHindu culture to get recognition of their popular culture. Thepresent Indian political scene is the best example to showhow the upper castes are struggling hard to maintain theirhegemony by holding political power and following theideology of 'Hindutva'. However, the democratic processprovides some space to the Dalits to raise their voice and gettheir basic rights. The Dalit struggle is going on. It is a longway to go and achieve the ends.

Counter CultureBhakti and Dalit movements, though they occurred indifferent time and space, both indicate the power and vitalityof the counter culture that challenged the hegemonic cultureand its traditions. There are interesting methodologies that

28

were developed by the common people in popular culture toexpose brutality, exploitation and injustices of the rulingclasses. For example, one of the popular forms was the storytelling in the community gatherings. Themain heroes of thesestories were not kings or generals or high office holders butthose who opposed the establishment and rebelled againsttheir rule. There were heroes of common people who foughtagainst oppressors on behalf of the people to get justice.There were comedians, jokers, and swindlers who amusedpeople by their tricks and provided temporary relief fromhardships of life. Dacoits and bandits who defied the powerof government instantly transformed as heroes. They becamethe symbols of people's power and their ambitions. Theirencounters with political authority were not only narrated instories but songs were also composed and sung far and widewith zeal and fervour. In North India Sultana Dako becamesuch an icon for common people. In the Punjab Nizam Loharis still celebrated in folk literature as a hero. In Sindh, whenPro Chandio, a dacoit, was killed, people attended his funeralin great number and paid him tribute because he defied thestrong centre and state institutions that were regarded asoppressive by the people of Sindh. We can find sameexamples in nearly every area and region of the Indiansubcontinent.

In another example, people reduced the ruling classes toshame by creating a culture of gossips against them - a verypowerful medium that was used in the past and is alsoaffectively used today. The image of rulers, generals, andofficeholders, which was propagated by the officialmedia aspious, generous, and virtuous, was over-turned in publicgossips. They were transformed as tyrant, lecherous,immoral, and wicket. The Italian traveler Marmuci, whovisited India during Shahjahan's period, collected suchgossips in his book Sioria do Magar. He writes the gossips ofbazar people in which Shahjahan appears as womanizer andimmoral person. The royal harem is a den of corruption. Thispeople's perception of the royalty brought it down to thelowest level of morality. The gossips turned the image ofroyalty upside down.

29

break-up of the country.

Since the subject was introduced by People's Party ofPakistan, it was vehemently opposed by the religious partiesin the Parliament. They presumed that the PPP governmentmight use the initiative to propagate socialism or secularismby teaching Pakistan studies. However, when Ziaul Haqcame to power in 1977 after overthrowing Z.A.Bhutto'sgovernment, he made its study mandatory in 1981 in alleducational institutions including professional colleges. Iteventually became compulsory also for 0- and A- levelstudents at the request of the Pakistan government. Thisprovided an opportunity for publishers to print a whole lot ofnew textbooks. Most of the authors were not historians butteachers or writers not historians but teachers or writers ofcheap textbooks. They obediently followed the government'sinstructions in writing in English as well as in Urdu.

Before we proceed further, it would be good to firstunderstand the definition and implication of an ideology.S.A.Alatas in his book, The Myth of the Lazy Native, definesideology based on Karl Manheim's thoughts as: "(a) it seeksto justify a particular political, social, and economic order; (b)in this attempt, it distorts that part of the social reality andcontradicts its main presuppositions; (c) it exists primarily ina form of manifest thought content which is different from itslatent content; (d) it is authoritative in nature; (e) it expressesthe interest of a distinctive group; (f) when it is dominant itcreates a false consciousness among the group it represents aswell as the group it dominates; (g) it can draw its ideas fromany source, science,religion, culture, economics,history, etc."

Following the creation of Pakistan, the term 'ISlamicideology'~ was used to define the country as an Ideological state. Gul~ Shahzad Sarwar in Pakistan Studies, explains the term:

~~ "Islamic ideology constitutes, no doubt, a basis common to all'f ;>\ manifestations of Pakistani society. The ideology is~~iP promoting a sense of self-identity. The ideology looks at man

.)T as forming a unity whose spiritual needs cannot be divorced~ from his material needs." This ideology was used to mobilizerJl~ 39

~~~

religious nationalism as a binding force of the five provincesof Pakistan and to discourage and condemn the provincialnationalism as being anti-Pakistan.

However, religious nationalism was first challenged by thesmall provinces in 1955-56when One Unit was implemented.It was finally shattered when East Pakistan began to agitatefor independence. To counter this, in 1969-1970,General SherAli, a minister in the cabinet of YehyaKhan, popularized theterm 'Pakistan Ideology'. It was an important shift. WhileIslamic ideology was based on religious nationalism, Pakistanideology emphasized territorial unity in an attempt to checkthe separation of East Pakistan. However, once Bangladeshwas independent, the real purpose of the creation andpopularization of Pakistan ideology came to an end and areturn was made to 'Islamic ideology'.

Textbook writers explain this as the basis of Muslimnationhood, the Islamic state, one's Islamic identity, andrelate it to the Muslim Ummah. M. Akram Rabbani andMunwwar Ali Sayyid in An Introduction of Pakistan Studieswrite: "Pakistan ideology is based on the ideals of Islam." Theresult is that in the end, Islamic and Pakistan ideologies aremerged and synthesized as one with the result that those whoread it would think that those who founded Pakistan have allalong struggled for the establishment of an Islamic state andnot one where the rights ofMuslims would be protected. Thesecond important element is the so-called 'two nation' theory.Some zealous textbook writers trace the difference betweenHindus and Muslims in the writings of Al Beruni. Quotinghim, Gul Shahzad Sarwar writes: "The Hindus entirely differfrom the Muslims in every aspect", forgetting the fact that atthe time of Al Beruni there were few Muslims in the Indiansubcontinent. Writing on two nations, nearly all writers keepin mind the modern concept of nationhood and analyze theseparation between the Hindus and the Muslims along theselines. The fact is that in the medieval period the Muslimcommunity was divided into a number of ethnic units andeach unit had its own identity such as Mughals, Afghans,

40

Turks, Iranians, Arabs and so on. The Hindu community wasalso divided into a number of castes and sub-castes.

Actually, the British colonialists were the first whoformulated the concept of communities on the basis ofreligion. According to their categorization, the Hinducommunity was vegetarian, peace loving and effeminate incharacter; while the Muslim community was meat-eating,violent, unmanageable, and disloyal.

Differences between the two communities were furthercreated as a result of the census and the system of electionwhich gave the idea to the Muslims that as a minority theywould not be able to acquire political power. Therefore, if welook to the process of the formation of Muslim nationhood,we find that historically it began as a community then sawitself as a minority, and finally, in 1940, as a nation. Thedemand of a separate homeland was justified on the basisthat Hindus and Muslims were two separate and differentnations, therefore, they could not live together. The problemhere was that while there was no harm in pointing outcultural, social or religious differences, it was dangerous andharmful to assert one group's superiority over the other onthese bases. The result, as we witnessed, was an increase infanaticism and mutual hatred and the sowing of the seeds ofprolonged hostility and animosity.

Muhammad Islam Siddiq in his book Ruh-i-Pakisian (the Soulof Pakistan) gives a chart pointing out the differencesbetween the two nations. According to him, the two havedifferent religious beliefs, places of worship, sacred shrines,modes of worship, holy books, prophets, and while "theHindus regard the water of Ganges as sacred the Muslimconsider zam zam as holy; the Muslims venerate date-trees,olives and ingir (fig)while the Hindus revere the trees of pepaZand bargad". He then goes on to enumerate cultural and socialdifferences in dress, residential buildings, eating habits, andsocial and religious rituals and customs. In the end, thegullible reader ends up convinced that there was nothing incommonbetween these two nations.

41

When Pakistan came into existence as a Muslim (or Islamic)nation state, its history was also made to wrap around anational framework. In writing the emphasis was given to thepersonalities and economic forces that had been instrumentalin the creation of the new country. Consequently. instead ofinitiating new ideas in order to meet present-day challenges,the ruling elite and the so-called intellectuals relied heavilyon the vision of those leaders who have become a part ofhistory and whose concepts or thought are no longer relevantto the challenges of modern times. Further, some politicaldynasties are exploiting their much trumpeted "sacrifices" forthe creation of Pakistan with an end to monopolizing theresources of the country.

Another important aspect of Pakistan Studies is projecting thewretchedness of the Muslims during the colonial period.According to these writings they were expressly keptbackward through a British-Hindu "conspiracy". Thisconcept had emanated from The Hunter Commission Reportthat highlighted the poverty and backwardness of BengaliMuslims but not those in the United Provinces where theywere in privileged positions. However, the British-Hinduconspiracy legitimized the demand for a separate homelandwhere Muslims would be able to "enjoy freedom andeconomicwell-being".

One of the characteristics of these textbooks is the languagewhich is used to narrate and describe the events. The Britishand the Hindus are portrayed as arch-enemies who were forever busy intriguing and conspiring against the Muslims. TheHindus were narrow-minded, prejudiced, full of hatred,fanatics, frauds and poisonous. According to this description,there was a common Hindu mentality whose representativeis Kautalya, the author of the Artha Shastra.

Muslims, on the other hand, were tolerant, peaceful, friendly,and generous. They had these qualities because they were thechildren of the conquerors who had defeated the Hindurulers of ancient India. On the basis of this description, thereis a Hindu and a Muslim mentality beyond all class and

42

castes distinctions residing monolithic communities.

Keeping in view the course outline of Pakistan Studies, it isclear that the subject is taught descriptively and notanalytically. This also makes it dull and uninteresting. Asideological compulsions tend to repudiate facts that goagainst this ideology, there is the need to distort history andto create a false consciousness among the learners. The finalresult being that though compulsory, the subject fails tosatisfy an eager student's thirst for knowledge. This obviousconsequence is the indifference and the pathos that wewitness today among the new generation.

43

CONSPIRING AGAINST TAJ MAHAL

Themedieval Indian history or 'the Muslim Rule' in India hasbecome controversial and is being interpreted in differentways by different groups of historians. The nationalisthistorians regard it a part of the Indian history but thecommunalist historians, rejecting it, call it a foreign rulewhich, they claim, had "polluted" their history and cultureand disrupted the continuity of their history. This perceptionis also applied to the historical monuments built during thisperiod including TajMahal.

The communalists adopt two kinds of approaches to dealwith this problem: to demolish them and vindicate the pasthumiliation, or to Hinduise them by distorting their history.TajMahal is one such monument which has become a victimof racial prejudice and ideologicalfanaticism.

The Europeans were the first to give credit of its beautifuldesign to the European architects. Sebastein Manrique whovisited India during 1640-41,writes that "the architect ofthese works was a Venetian, by name Geronimo Veroneo,who had come to this part in a Portuguese ship and died inthe city of Lahore before he reached it. Fame... had spreadthe story that the Emperor summoned him and informed himthat he desired to erect a great and sumptuous tomb for hisdead wife, and he required to erect a great design for this, forthe Emperor's inspection. The architect Veroneo carried outhis order and within a few days proved the great skill he hadin his way of procuring several models of the most beautifularchitecture."

44

It is interesting to note that during the 17th century when theMughal Empire was at its zenith, the Europeans werereluctant to admit that the Indians were capable of buildingsuch a marvellous structure by having their own design.

When the British gained political domination of India itbecame very difficult for them to acknowledge the fact thatIndia's past governance was better than their own rule.Attempts were made to distort history and achievements ofthe past rulers. They were portrayed as tyrants and despots.In their interpretation of Indian history, Taj Mahal, amonument of beauty and symbol of the artistic creativity,became controversial. Major Sleeman, a famous Britishadministrator while visiting Agra in 1844remarked that "themagnificent building [TajMahal] and all the palaces of Agraand Delhi were, I believe, designed by Austin de Bordeaux, aFrenchman of great talent and merit, in whose ability andintegrity the Europeans placed much reliance."

In the wake of the rise of communalism in India andHindutva's gaining political power in recent period, attemptsare being made to disprove that Shahjahan was its builder.Numerous books and articles are being written to claim thatTajMahal was never built by Shahjahan but that the buildingpre-dates Shahjahan era by several centuries and wasoriginally built as a Hindu or Vedic temple. Shahjahan hadonly acquired it from its imagined owner called [ai Singh.P.N. Oak, a historian of dubious repute, wrote a bookTaj Mahal_ The True Story in which he gives 109evidences toprove that the Taj was a pre-existing Hindu temple. It isargued that RajaParamardi Dev built the building as a Vedictemple at least 500years earlier or in 1155.

The attitude of the British and the communalists towardsTaj Mahal is indicative of their mindset. The British, afterdefeating the Indians, became the new rulers and showedmuch arrogance. They were convinced that the Indians werenot capable of designing and building such a structure. Theysimply wanted to give the whole credit of its design to someEuropean to feed to their racial superiority.

45

This interpretation implies that the Indians as subordinatessimply carried out the construction of Taj Mahal inaccordance with the design drawn up by a European architectand that they had no contribution of their own in its glory.The communalists' objective is to deprive the Mughals of anycredit for being its original builder and instead present themas occupiers and usurpers. Their argument is that the Mughaltook possession of the Hindu buildings and became theirowners the same way as they occupied the country andbecame its rulers.

Taj Mahal witnessed many ups and downs in its life. TheMughals maintained it as long as they had resources andpolitical power, but during the period of their decline itsuffered not only from neglect and the forces of nature thatruined its gardens and watercourses but also at the hands ofplunderers and looters who took away precious stones andvaluable material which gave glamour to the building.During the early British rule, the Englishmen also joined thelooters. Lord Curzon, the viceroy of India observed: "It wasnot an uncommon thing for the travellers to arm themsevleswith hammer and chisel, with which they wiled away theafternoon by chipping out fragments of agate and carnelianfrom the cenotaphs of the Emperor and his lamented Queen."

After suffering the loot and robbery, TajMahal faced anothercrisis during the governorship of WilliamBentinck (1828-33)when it was decided to demolish all the Mughal monumentsof Agra and Delhi and ship their marble to England for sale.Someof the pavilions of the Red Fort were stripped and theirmarble was shipped off to England. It was planned todemolish TajMahal and take away its marble. To accomplishthis evil design, the machinery reached the garden of theTaj and preparations were made to start the work.Fortunately at the nick of time news came from London thatthe first auction of marble had failed and all further orderswere cancelled.TajMahal, thus, survived just by sheer goodluck.Taj Mahal also found a lover and a patron in Curzon. He

46

restored its past glory by repairing its buildings, replacing thestones that had been plucked by people as souvenir andrenovating its gardens. It emerged from dirt and dilapidationas a newborn baby.

However, the question who built Taj Mahal no longerremains a mystery. Surely it was not built by Shahjahan butby architects, calligraphers, masons, stonecutters, and metalworkers and ordinary labourers who built it and made it asymbol of creative mind of the Indian society.

47

ROBBING IRAQ OF ITS HISTORY

This is a common phenomenon of history that imperialpowers, after defeating their adversaries militarily, makesystematic efforts to root out their historicalheritage and thusreduce them to a state of intellectual and culturalpowerlessness. By rendering the vanquished identity less, thevictors curb and stifle their spirit of resistance. This process,moreover, facilities the assimilation of the defeated nationinto the imperial culture. Thus, they can be made subservientto the victorious forces.

This happened in South America where the Inca, Maya, andAztec civilizations and their historical monuments andartifacts were looted and destroyed. After the indigenouspeople were delinked from their past, they were assimilatedinto the imperial Spanish system. The same model wasfollowed in North America and Australia where the localpeople were forced to forget, abandon, and shun theircultural roots before they were absorbed in the melting pot ofthe dominant European culture.In the second model, the occupying forces plunder thearchaeological and historical antiquities, manuscripts anddocuments of the country attacked and deposit them in theirmuseums and libraries in order to control history and makethe occupied nations dependent on the scholarship ofimperial powers. Having resources and sources, they distort,mould, interpret and construct the history of colonialcountries as it suits their interest.

The colonial powers of the 18th and 19th centuries adopted

48

this model in Asia and Africa to deprive their people of theirhistorical heritage. When Napoleon invaded Egypt in 1799,he sent ships loaded with the Egyptian antiquities to Francethat are now on display in the Louvre Museum. The BritishMuseum is another example that is the repository of lootedarchaeological and historical artifacts of the British colonies.

In the third model, which is followed by the Americans, thepeople are encouraged to steal and sell precious antiquitiesand manuscripts to their museums and libraries. It hasbecome a booming business for private collectorsto smuggleand get anything historically worth to purchase for highprice. One example is Afghanistan. TheAfghan Museum wasplundered by criminal gangs and its antiquities are now soldin the world markets.

Following different models, the Americans are trying to usedifferent tactics to make the Iraqi people powerless,historyless, and bereft of any sense of their cultural past. Inworld history, Iraq is known as 'the cradle of civilization'. Itproduced the Sumerian, Assyrian, Akkadian, and Babyloniancivilizations with such great cities as Ur, Nineveh, andBabylon. It was the first civilization that introduced thecuneiform script, the decimal system in arithmetic and alunar calendar. The Iraqis are proud of their past. Theyregard themselves as the inheritors of the oldest civilizationand benefactors to humankind.

The Americans are now trying to snatch their pride andhistorical consciousness and reduce them to non-entity? Theimperial forces have defeated them military but notculturally.

The problem with America is that as a nation it has achievedscientificand technologicalsupremacy over the world. It hasmilitary and economicpower. But it does not have a past andno glorious historical heritage. When it compares itself withthe ancient nations of Asia and Africa it appears before thema pygmy and an insignificant nation that has no pasttraditions and institutions. To rectify this weakness, the

49

Americans are trying to collect and deposit ininstitutions important archaeological andantiquities and manuscripts by hook or by crook.

But this only makes them the collector but not the inheritor ofpast civilization. In Iraq, their aim seems to be not so much toget hold of their antiquities and destroy them, though thatwas the initial impression one got from the reports of thelooting and plundering of the museums and libraries by themobs. But in reality the gangs of looters are organized byvested interests to take away precious artifacts and sell themto private collectors. According to a group of Britisharchaeologists they are "persuading the Pentagon to relaxlegislation that protects Iraq's heritage by preventing salesabroad".

their ownhistorical

In another report the American Council for Cultural Policy, acoalition of 60 collectors and dealers (like the coalition ofoccupying forces) met the Bush administration and arguedthat the post-Saddam Iraq should relax the antiquities laws.Now, there are confirmed reports that behind gangs of lootersthere is an organized mafia which is taking advantage of theanarchy to take away historical treasures from Iraq. All theseactivities have the blessing of the imperial and occupyingforces.

The recent burning of the library in Baghdad whichcompletely destroyed all precious manuscripts anddocuments is testimony to the policy of the occupying forcesto deprive the Iraqi people of their history and their past.After giving details of the burning documents, manuscriptsand rare books, Robert Fisk asked the question: "Why?" Theanswer is in the American psyche. In the first Gulf war of1991, Goerge Bush Sr. condemned Iraq's invasion of Kuwaitsaying "the entire civilized world is against Iraq". His sonBush Jr. has repeatedly declared after 9/11 his aim to saveand protect civilization. He has termed the present conflict asone between the civilized world that is America and theterrorists who are the people of the Middle East. The logicalconclusion is that to preserve and protect its civilization, the

50

West would like to eliminate and wipe out other cultures andcivilizations. Make other nations, especially those who areresisting American imperialism, historyless, pastless, andafter silencing them, push them back to the stage ofbarbarism.

The American occupying forces are attempting to create anew model in Iraq by depriving the people of their culturalheritage and thus reduce them to a conglomerate of Shias,Sunnis and Kurds, who are at logger-heads and need abalancing power to maintain peace. Experience shows thatonce people lose their history, culture, and identity, they canbe moulded according to the design of the occupying forces.Therefore, once, the Iraqi people are deprived of theirhistorical sources, it would become impossible for them toreconstruct and reshape their history. It has been said thatthose who control the past also control the future. This iswhat the Americans are trying to do in Iraq.

51

OWNING AND DISOWNING OUR PAST

Medieval Indian history created a divide between Hindusand Muslims and polluted historiography with communalfeeling, largely because both the communities had widelydivergent perceptions of the period. JamesMill called it theMuslim period in his History of British India, on the basis thatthe Muslim dynasties had ruled the subcontinent during thisperiod.

Despite the tension it created between Hindu and Muslimobserves of history, the term suits us. That is why we haveadopted it readily in our historical narratives. Moreover, itbecame a matter of pride that we, Muslims, ruled over Indiafor nearly one thousand years and kept the Hindus under oursubjugation.

The historiography of the medieval Indian period first cameto light during the struggle for freedom against the Britishwhen the nationalist historians, in order to prove the conceptof one nation, projected it as a sign of the existence of acomposite culture and common heritage. AllahabadUniversity's history department played a significant role inthese efforts and its historians contributed much to researchon this period. However, their focus was on political ratherthan socialor cultural history.

That the nationalists wanted to, in a sense' 'own' this periodcreated some problems among the emerging Muslim middleclass which was in search of a separate identity. As themedieval period became common to the Hindus and the

52

Muslims, they (the Muslim middle class) was reluctant toassociate with this shared past. Jawaharlal Nehru analyzedthis in his book The Discovery of India: "They searched theirnational roots elsewhere. To some extent, they found them inthe Afghan and Mughal periods of India, but this was notquite enough to fill the vacuum. Thoseperiods were commonfor Hindus and Muslims alike, and the sense of foreignintrusion had disappeared from Hindu minds. The Mughalrulers were looked upon as Indian national rulers ... It issignificant that Akbar, whom the Hindus especially admired,has not been approved of in recent years by some Muslims.When the 400th anniversary of his birth was celebrated inIndia all classes of people, including many Muslims, joined,but the Muslim League kept aloof because Akbar was asymbol of India's unity." (Akbar's 450th birthday wascelebrated in 1992 at Delhi and Aligarh where nearly 60historians specializing in the medieval Indian historypresented their papers on different aspects ofAkbar's reign.)

Nationalist historiography suffered in the 1920sas a result ofcommunalism. It greatly damaged the shared values of bothcommunities. History was politicized so much that it becamean instrument of hate that polluted the relationship of theHindus and Muslims. During this period, the Muslim eliteclasses selectivelyrecognized the medieval period that suitedtheir political interests. It was from this period that theyresurrected the Arabs and the Turkish conquerors as theirheroes to inspire the community, and to present them as rolemodels in their confrontation with the Hindus. Interestingly,the most admired heroes were invaders such as Muhammadbin Qasim, Mahmud of Ghazni, and Shahbuddin Ghauri.After partition, we inherited this communal approach and itstill dominates our historicalperspective.

In India, the Aligarh schoolof history radicalized the study ofmedieval history. The historians of this school interpreted theperiod in its social, cultural, and economic contexts andargued that India progressed as a result of new technological

53

and scientific innovations brought to the subcontinent by theTurks. It was proved that with the exception of one or tworulers, all ruling dynasties followed secular policies withreligion in a sub-ordinate role.

However, recently, the emergence of the BJPand its extremistHindutva ideology has rejected the Indianization of themedieval period. This period is regarded as foreign rulewhich was a disaster and catastrophic for India. This hatredagainst the rule ofMuslim dynasties was a primary reason forthe demolition of the Babri mosque in Ayodhya. Theretrogressive steps employed by the BJPcombine can also beseen in recent changes made to history textbooks, ostensiblyto 'purify' Indian history of foreign elements.

The study and understanding of the medieval period alsosuffered on this side of the border. The existing territories ofthe centre of power and, therefore, mostly exploited by theruling elite that created political unrest from time to time inthese areas. There were rebellions against Mughal rule in theNWFP. Anti-Mughal sentiments are fully evident in thepoetry of Khushal KhanKhattak. Sindhwas also not happy atthe way it was occupied by Akbar and later on ruled by hissuccessors. The exploitation carried out by the Mughalgovernor during Shahjahan's rule is narrated in MazharShahjahani by YusufMirak.

Moreover, once we chose to withdraw from the Indiansubcontinent (in terms of identifying ourselves),we have lostall interest in the medieval period which has become alein tous. There is also a state policy to cut off all links to the Indiansubcontinent and trace our historical and cultural roots toCentral Asia. The rise of religious extremism has furthermade this period less attractive as fundamentalists regard itas polluted with Hindu cultural influences. They tum theirattention to the Islamichistory and get inspiration from it.

There is no hope of any substantial contribution to anunderstanding or study of medieval Indian history from

54

Pakistani historians. This is because our educationalinstitutions hardly undertake any kind of worthwhileresearch. Since 1947, only about four or five theses aresubmitted every year for a Ph.D. degree and most of them areunfit for publication. However, there is some hope in Indiawhere the tradition of historiography has become very strongand the medieval period, in spite of its controversy, is an erain which several historians have shown considerable interest.

55

WHY DO WE CALL ALEXANDER 'GREAT'?

Some authors have rightly observed that those who despiseknowledge are ultimately destroyed by knowledge. It is afact,which can hardly be disputed, that those societieswhichremain in a state of ignorance decline socially,politically andeconomically and disappear in the oblivion of historyunceremoniously.

As Foucault says that "Knowledge is power, and power isknowledge". It means that those who keep away from it,become vulnerable and could be dominated by those whohave it. This is evident from history. It happened in the pastand will continue to happen in future.

However, important thing is not only to acquire knowledgebut also to create it. To acquire knowledge means to buy aready-made commodity for consumption. In this process theconsumer does not take any part in creating, producting ormanufacturing knowledge. Therefore, a nation enjoysprestige and dignity only when it contributes to knowledgesystem that could benefit humanity as a whole. In case ofconsumption, it is mere imitation, as most of our earlyMuslim intellectuals did when they translated the Greekbooks and made an attempt to apply their philosophy toIslamic theology.

As consumers of knowledge they failed to produce anyradical or revolutionary movement in the Islamicsociety.TheMu'tazila sect, influenced by the Greek thoughts, remainedeffectiveas long as the rulers patronized it. Once the policy ofthe succeeding ruler changed, the whole sect and its

56

intellectual process that initiated debates, discussions, andpolemics and stimulates society to think and to argue. Thisprocess subsequently leads society to intellectual maturity.

Here, I would like to give an example of the presenthistoriography that has evolved and developed in the West. Itis organized as a discipline with laws and regulations as tohow to edit manuscripts; how to compare contradictoryevidence and determine their validity; how to read text andinterpret its meaning; and how to detect falsehood in themanuscripts and correct it? And by keeping and adhering allthese rules write and interpret history objectively as far aspossible.

The problem with the Asian and African historians whostudy in the Western universities and learn researchmethodology of writing history, tend to apply it to their ownhistorical narratives. They construct history on the model oftheWest. That is why one European historian says: "How cansomebody create a new history as all history is the history ofEurope which is masculine and white in character."

Take the example of Marxist periodisation of history thatdivides it into slavery, feudalism, and capitalism. When anattempt was made to divide the Indian history on this line, itproved disastrous and misleading because in India slaveryand feudalism existed in quite different shapes. Later,Kosambi and other modern Marxist historians corrected theperiodisation and chronology of the Indian history.D.D.Kosambiprovides a pattern for writing Indian history.He says: "History is defined as the presentation, inchronologicalorder, of successivedevelopments in the meansand relations of production."

When the Western historians write our history, they applythe same terminology that are common in theirhistoriography. To understand the historical characters, theycompare them with their Western counterparts. For example,Vincent Smith writing on the Indian history compares themilitary adventures of Samandara Gupta with Napoleon.

57

This comparison goes on and Kalidas is equated toShakespeare.

It is quite misleading to understand our historical characters.In case of comparison, they lose their own identity and arelinked with those characters that belong to some other ageand other countries. For instance, Alexander, who invadedIndia and brought havoc to the subcontinent, is regarded asGreat. Such is the impact of these historicalwritings that mostof our historians just follow this pattern and liberally usethese terms to explain history.The European historical model is so deeply ingrained in ourmind that we always try to understand the process of historywith Eurocentric perspective. For example, four importantperiods that brought radical change in the European historyare Renaissance, Reformation, Enlightenment, andIndustrialisation. While studying history within theframework of these periods, we come to believe that this isthe only process of development and progress which shouldbe followedby the Asian and Africancountries.

So, first of all there should be a Renaissancein our society. Itis so fascinating a concept that the Muslim intellectuals haveseveral times claimed that there was Renaissance in theIslamicworld that could bring radical changes in structure ofMuslim society.Similarly, the intellectuals always regard Reformation aspanacea for religious backwardness and lament that sincethere has been no reformation in Islam, there is suchextremism and orthodoxy in religion. However, they fail tounderstand that the phenomena of Renaissance andReformation were both product of different environmentsand could not be applied to Islam. In Renaissance,humanismrejected the divine authority and made man responsible forhis destiny. This cannot be applied to Islam.Reformationwaspossible in Christianity as there was an institution of churchthat could be challenged. There is no such institution, so theprocess to reform is not possible.The term of Renaissance is also misused in other cases, such

58

as in Bengal the intellectual awakening of the 19th century isdescribed as Renaissance. The historian Koff raises thequestion that as it was revival of language, history andcustoms, so should it be called Renaissance or nationalism?

It is also believed that in case of industrialization societywould get rid of old and obsolete traditions and institutions.Democracy would follow the suit. However, we forget thatmere adoption of technology and setting up factories cannotchange mindset of society. Therefore, the question is how tochange it? History is a powerful subject and if historicalnarratives are rewritten not on the model of Westernhistoriography but based on original pattern that suits ourprocess of history, we could retrieve the past that we havelost during the colonialperiod.

We have to reject the nationalist version of history that is theproduct of reaction against colonial domination and as suchjustifies each and everything as great and admirable andeulogises rulers and generals as heroes. It also concealscorruption and mismanagement of post-independentgoverning classesin order to glorifynation.

In India, historians are trying to rewrite their history with aliberal and progressive point of view. At the same time, theyare also fighting against the retrogressive version of historypropagated by the BJP. In this way history is playing animportant role in creating political and social consciousnessin Indian society.

In Pakistan, we are not producing any knowledge and notrewriting history to fill the gaps which were left unattendedduring the colonial period. We are relying on a history that iswritten by foreign historians and repeating their version inour books, journals, and media. As we do not createknowledge, we import it and want to use it like othercommodities; this reliancemakes us intellectuallybarren andbankrupt. The dictum that "knowledge destroys them, whodespise knowledge" aptly applies on us. Are we ready fordestruction?

59

LANGUAGE OF POWER

Then American President GeorgeW. Bush speaks and uses alanguage that contains threat, contempt and aggressiveness;it is not a new phenomenon. Creation of a new vocabularysuch as Axis of Evil, War against Terrorism, preemptiveattack, war combatants and change of regime indicates thehidden motives of America to establish its hegemony anddomination.

Bush's continuous reference to the American people of theirgreatness and American values are meant to create anenthusiasm and get popular support. Nations are charmed byglory and greatness, and the Americans are no different thanother nations of the past who sacrificedeverything to achievegrandeur and majesty to become superpowers. In thisrespect, Bush is following in the footsteps of past conquerorsand aggressors who unleashed the forces of war anddestruction, and laid down the bases of their Great Empireson ashes. Power, in the words of Lord Acton, not onlycorrupts absolutely, but also blinds absolutely and preventsto look around and understand' others'.

History is replete with examples of those individuals andnations who, after acquiringmilitary power, assumed the roleof conquerors and arrogantly referred to weak rulers asimbecile, coward, corrupt and cruel. They challenged them,knowing fully well that they could not respond. To humiliatethem was enjoyment for powerful and mighty persons.Intoxicated by power, they asked others to correct their

60

behaviour and act obediently as their subordinates.

Power does not believe either in equality with weaker powersor settle disputes after negotiation. War is the ultimate goal todefeat the enemy and get the desired results. Therefore, theopponents are challenged to fight and face the consequences.We find the same process in nearly all the great empires thatin their heyday invaded countries, occupied them andreturned with war booty to boost the morale of their people.As a result of conquest and colonization, a new languageemerged that glorified victors and humiliated thevanquished.

There is one interesting example of Caliph Harun al-Rashid.On his succession to the throne, the Byzantinian emperor,Nicephorus 1 (802-811), after repudiating the treaty that wassigned by his predecessor, asked Harun to return the tributealready paid to him. The Caliph became so angry that heordered to bring ink and pen immediately and wrote this onthe back of the letter: "From Harun, the commander of thebelievers, to Nicephorus, the dog of a Roman. Verily, I haveread the letter, 0' son of an infidel mother. As for the answer,it shall be for thine eye to see, not for thine ear to hear.Salam."

Interestingly, such language created a pride among the nationthat possessed military power and even today, after readingit, we are enthralled to know that how the mighty Abbassidempire humiliated the great Byzantinian king. Anotherexample is the letters that were exchanged between Timurand the Ottoman Sultan, Yildrim.Both,regarding themselvespowerful and conquerors of the world, addressed each otherwith contempt and hatred, ready to match their militarypower with each other.

In the modern period, Napoleon set an example of a powerfulman who usurped power and rose from a humble person tothe status of an emperor. Once all power was concerted in hisperson, the French military became powerful enough to

61

defeat all European rulers. As secretly the rulers of Europehated him, he left no chance to humiliate them. He used tosay: "I found the crown of France lying on the ground and Ipicked it up with my sword." The message was that a crownwithout power was a simple piece of ornament. Itwas powerthat made the crown meaningful. Realizing the sacrifices ofhis soldiers, he eulogized their services.

After getting victory at Austerlitz in 1805,he addressed hissoldiers thus: "Soldiers!I am satisfied with you. In the battleof Austerlitz you have justified all my expectations of yourintrepidity. You have adorned your eagles with importantglory." As a conqueror of Europe, he changed the map of thecontinent according to his liking. In 1806,he created four newkings, two of them his brothers. He had his own concept ofpower. Some of his sayings show how he looked at solutionsof problems: "The strong are good; the weak are wicked";"Men must be led by an iron hand in a velvet glove"; "Thereis only one thing to do in this world, and that is to keepacquiring more and more money and power"; "My mistressis power, but it is as an artist that I love power. I love it as amusician loves his violin"; and "Conquest has made me whatI am and conquest alone can maintain me."

In modern European history, Napoleon became a model ofconquerors and dictators such as Hitler and Mussolini, whofollowed him and behaved like him in their treatment ofconquered people. There is an interesting speech of Hitlerthat can be applied to all imperialists who want to conquerthe world: "As a whole, and at all times, the efficiencyof thetruly national leader consists primarily in preventing thedivision of the attention of people, and always inconcentrating on a Singleenemy... It is part of the genius of agreat leader to make adversaries of different fields appears asalways belonging to one category only, because to weak andunstable characters the knowledge that there are variousenemies will lead only too easily to incipient doubts to theirown cause....

62

Also, with this comes the first paralysis of their own strength.Therefore, a number of essentially different enemies mustalways be regarded as one in such a way that in the opinionof the masses of one's own adherents the war is being wagedagainst one enemy alone. This strengthens the belief in one'sown cause and increases one's bitterness against theattacker."

63

IT'S TIME TO LIBERATE HISTORY

Reasons for why we need to go back into our past vary fromsociety to society.An industrial and technologicallyadvancedsociety, which is moving ahead, looks to future rather thanpast to realize its achievements. On the other hand, a society,which remains stagnant and fails to create or invent anythingto contribute to humankind, looks of its past to seek refuge inits constructed glory.

So, there are differing views on the role of history in differentsocieties. In the first abovementioned case, it cuts its roots inthe past and lets a society to advance its interests ruthlesslywithout drawing any lesson from the past; in the second case,a decadent society finds solace in its past and survives onfalse notion of its lost glory.

J.H.Plumb in his book The Death of the Past, writes that anindustrial society IIdoes not need the past and requires nosanction in the past and no roots in it." Why is it so?G. Woodward writing in The Future of the Past observes that:"The more positive motives behind manipulations of the pastinclude desires to enhance lineage, pedigree, national pride,or status by means of ennobling the past."

Therefore,when a society does not require sanction from thepast of lineage, privileges and status and relies on anindividual's talent, equality and fundamental rights, historyceases to play its role as protector of elite classes. Or when anation is more advanced and acquires greater prestige in thepresent than what it had in the past, again, history becomesless significant and less attractive.

64

That is why historians have debated on the significance andtruthfulness of the past. Is it constructed for the interests ofsome classes or for whole society? How far its construction isreliable? "Past is not discovered and found. It is created andrepresented by the historians as a text," writes AlanMunslow. According to another historian, "The past isunknowable; all we can know about it is from historians'writings; so history disappears and we are left withhistoriography as a species of literary endeavour." If this isthe case, how can history play any positive role? That is whythe result has been that it lost its credibility and its mission tocreate consciousness.

Popularity of history, in the words of R.J.Evans,has furtherreduced when "in the search for scientific accuracy andmethodological sophistication, historians began to cutthemselves off from the wider reading public... Andincreasing number of university based historians found that,with more or less the same amount of history to go around asbefore, to conduct original research means focusing onsmaller and smaller subjects."

Therefore, history has reached a stage where it had to findnew routes to go ahead or to disappear in oblivion. In 1966,Edward Thompson wrote an article titled History from Belowwhich gave a new life to history, opened vast avenues tohistorians for conducting research. Thomson commenting onit writes: "I am seeking to rescue the poor stockinger, theluddite, cropper, the 'obsolete' hand-loom weaver, the'utopian' artisan,... from the enormous condescension ofposterity."

The new concept proved to be a break through and provideda vast arrary of new topics to historians that renewed theinterest in history. To make history popular, some historianscame out of their higher educational institutions and wrotepopular history books in simple language and with fewerreferences. Later, the media provided them ampleopportunities to directly reach the people. A.J.Tylor'slectureson television created an interest about historical subjects

65

among the viewers. Mobilizing interest among the largersections of society, history continued to broaden itsboundaries and included in its agenda subjects such ashuman emotions and sentiments.

History has now made such advances that some historiansclaim that nothing is beyond their grip. Recently, history ofwomen and history of environment were introduced whichhas again opened new areas of interest to historians. Bothtopics are not only enriching history but also creating newconsciousness among the readers. Both history from belowand women's history include those sections of society inhistory that were earlier excluded. History no longer remainsa monopoly of the elite and male-dominated discipline; it hasbecome popular and attracts wider sections of readers.

In the case of Pakistan, there is doubtless an urgent need tolook back into our past, not for mere taking pride in some ofits glorious aspects but to analyze the causes of our downfalland decline. Why has our society become so stagnant and lostall its vitality and vigour? The roots of this decline lie in ourpast which had been full of intrigues, corruption andexploitation by our ruling classes. Lust for power,monopolization of all resources by a few, deprivation anddenigration of common-folks were some of the prominentfeatures of our past. Another aspect of great interest is howthe ruling classes failed to defend and protect their people inthe event of invasions but did not protect their status andprivileges by accepting humiliating surrenders. If thisshameful chapter of our history is made known to our peopleby writing books, it would deter the current ruling classesfrom performing a similar role to earn legitimacy of theirpower.

Therefore, the answer is in the affirmation that we needhistory, but first of all, it should be liberated from thestranglehold of state ideology. To write history from belowwe need independent research institutes that can allowscholars to pursue their research without any stateintervention. Moreover, there is also a need for changing the

66

whole pattern of history writing as most of our historianswrite traditional history: they are not fully aware of the recentdevelopments of ideas and trends in the discipline. That iswhy the state and politicians use such history to get sanctionfrom the past for their power and privileges. Therefore, tocontest it and correct it, there is need for writing acomprehensive history of Pakistani society that shouldinclude the role of common people in shaping history. Onlythen, history will fulfil the needs of our society.

67

WILL BAGHDAD RISE AGAIN?

It is a phenomenon of history that citiespass through politicaland social upheavals, internal as well as external and,consequently, some of them perish but others survive alongwith their past heritage.

Baghdad is one such city which had, over the centuries,withstood the internal anarchy and foreign invasions and hassurvived and retained its identity. It was founded in 762bythe Abassid Caliph Al-Mansur (754-775)as his new capitaland named it as dar al-salam or the city of peace.

It was built in round shape with four gates indicating the ruleover four corners of the world. The caliph's palace, known asDar al Zahab (golden palace), and the [ama' mosque wereimpressive building showing temporal and spiritual power ofthe Caliphate. There was a green dome (Qubbat al-khidra) as apart of the palace along with a statue of a horseman holding alance showing the readiness to defend the city.

Al-Mansur visualised it a city for defence as well as forcommercial activities and remarked: "It is excellent as amilitary camp. Besides, here is the Tigris to put us in touchwith lands as far as China and bring us all that the seas yieldas well as the food products of Mesopotamia, Armenia andtheir environs. Then there is the Euphrates to carry for us allthat Syria, al-Raqqahand the adjacent lands have to offer."

The city flourished under the Abbasid caliphs and soonbecame a cosmopolitan city where people from Iran, CentralAsia, China, and India came for trade and commerce. Its

68

cultural and cosmopolitan culture is beautifully depicted inThousand and One night as "Whose charm is not faded in spiteof its age".

The city faced its first jolt during the civilwar between Amin(800-813)and Ma'mun (813-817)when it was besieged byTahir, the commander of Ma'mun. The city suffered14-month-siege and when it refused to surrender, it waspartly destroyed by Tahir. And, when Ma'mun entered as avictor, the city was deserted. He repaired the damagedbuildings and brought back the city to life again.

During the later period of the Abbasid rule, the city sufferedat the hands of Turkish slaves who became powerful andunruly. That was the period when all types of crooks andayyar (thugs) became famous for their notoriety. The periodalsowitnessed sectarian conflictsthat made the life of the cityintolerable. Taking advantage of the weaknesses of thecaliphs, the city was captured first by Buids and then the5aljuqs. Baghdad survived during all these unfavourablecircumstances.

In the 12th and 13th centuries, the Muslimworld faced greatchallenge from the Mongols who wrought havoc on CentralAsia and Iran and uprooted the Muslim dynasties anddestroyed all cultural centres of the Muslims. In 1253,HulaguKhan, the grandson of GengisKhan, invaded first Almut, thecentre of the Ismailis, and asked the Caliph Musta'sim tocome for his help. He did not get any response.

So,after finishing his campaign against the Ismailis,he askedthe caliph to demolish the outer walls of Baghdad andsurrender to him. Receiving no reply, he marched into thecapital city in 1258. The vazir of the caliph, ibn al-Qama,appeared before him and asked for the conditions ofsurrender. Hulagu Khan refused to see him. He also ignoredthe warning that if there was any violation of the city of peaceand mistreatment of the caliph the "whole universe would bedisorganized". He was told that "the sun hides its face, rainceases and plants grow no more." Without paying any heed

69

to such warnings he attacked, captured the caliph, wrappedhim in a carpet and strangulated to death.

All his 300 officials were murdered. The invaders engaged inplunder and loot. The inhabitants of the city, including men,women and children were killed. Houses, bazaars andlibraries were set on fire. Itwas estimated that nearly 100,000people were massacred mercilessly.Itwas for the first time inthe history of the Muslims that there existed no caliph whosename could be recited in the khutba (Friday sermon).

To calm the wrath of the invaders, the ulema of Baghdadissued a fatwa that a just unbeliever ruler was better than anjust Muslim ruler. Sa'di Shirazi, the Persian poet, was somuch shocked by the incident that he composed a movingpoem on the destruction of Baghdad that turned out to be amasterpiece of the Persian literature.

Since then, Baghdad could not regain its old glory. Itremained for some time under Il-Khani rulers of the Mongolorigin.

In 1508,the Safavid ruler Shah Ismail captured it and made apart of his kingdom. Then it came under the Ottomans whomade it a vilayat of their Empire. After the FirstWorld War, itbecame capital of the Hashmite dynasty under Faisal.Later, itwitnessed a number of political coups by the military andintolerably suffered under several dictators. In 1991,Baghdadwas partly destroyed during the US-ledinvasion.

Baghdad is once again facinga new 'invasion'. But this time itis more ominous as the new invaders are equipped withmodern technology and lethal weapons of mass destruction.The question is: "Will Baghdad survive it and rise again as itdid in the past?"

70

YES, HE DID MASSACRE ANDPLUNDER INDIANS

It is difficult to understand why a controversy on AhmadShah Abdali's role during his Indian campaigns is beingraised these days and the Afghan king being presented as ahero by some and an invader and a marauder by others.Whatever the reasons, the fact remains that those who judgehim from an ethnocentric point of view, for them he was thefounder of modern Afghanistan and a great Afghan(popularly he is called baba) who defeated the Indians andconquered their territories.

And those who see his achievements in religious perspective,for them he was a great conqueror who defeated theMarathas at the Battle of Panipat in 1761and liberated theMuslims from their political domination. But those whoassess his career purely from a historical point of view, theywill find him an aggressor who invaded India only for thesake of plunder and loot and inflicted great political, socialand economiclosseson the people of the Indian subcontinent.

We need to understand that foreign invasions always bringhavoc, chaos, and disruption to occupied territories. It weabsolve our (Muslim) invaders from crimes and instead starteulogizing them, it creates false historical consciousnessleaving no space for us to learn anything from history. Incaseof invaders and aggressors there should be no distinctionbetween 'ours' and 'theirs'. They should be treated purelywithin historical parameters and their crimes should beexposed and condemned.

Ahmad Shah Abdali (1722-1773)was with Nadir Shah when

71

the latter invaded India in 1739 and participated in all hisIndian campaigns and subsequent lootings. Therefore, hismain motive to invade India, when he assumed power afterthe assassination of Nadir Shah, was purely to plunder whathis patron had left behind and nothing else.

Leaving aside the accounts of his Punjab, Sindh andBlochistan campaigns, I would like to concentrate on hisinvasion of North India and occupation of Delhi in 1757 andin 1761. That was the period when the Mughal Empire hadlost its military power and failed to protect its imperial capitalfrom the Afghan army. After the invasion, Abdali's firstvictim was the population of Mathura, the holy city of theHindus. The contemporary chronicles describe that theoccupation army demolished the houses, broke the idols,massacred male population and raped helpless women.

Next was the Gokul city and then Agra where his general[ahan Khan not only slaughtered the inhabitants but alsolevied heavy fines on those who were fortunate enough tosurvive. Leaving a trail of devastation and destruction behindhim, Abdali entered the imperial capital and launched asystematic campaign to plunder the city. The author ofTarikh-i-Alamgiri gives details of looting.

According to him, a centrewas set up to collectfines from thecitizens near Katra Soshan-al-Daula.Letters were sent to therich people to come to the office and pay the imposed fine.On every street and market a kulahposh was posted whocounted the houses and shops and demanded moneyaccording to their financial status. Torture and beating was acommon practice to extort money. As a result, many peoplecommitted suicide; many died because of torture. To findhidden treasure, the soldiers demolished the houses and dugthe floors and no onewas spared.

It is estimated that a total amount of money which Abdalitook from India was between 3 and 12 cores of rupees. Thebooty not only included jewels, ornaments, diamonds, andother precious things but also the Mughal princesses. He

72

wanted to marry Hazrat Mahal, the daughter of MuhammadShah.

According to J.Sarkar in his The Fall of the Mughal Empire."This tender lamb was to be pounced upon by a fierceAfghan of grandfatherly age whose two ears docked andnose was rotting from a leprous carbuncle." There wasresistance in the harem. The royal family threatened to killher. He was told that she was not beautiful and was alreadyengaged to a prince. However, all efforts to save her from theclutches of the Afghan failed.He married her forcibly.

Two widows of Muhammad Shah and the daughter ofAhmad Shah accompanied her to Afghanistan. Besides them,there were other Mughal princesses who were forced toaccompany the Afghan army. They included Affatun Nisa,who was married to Nadir Shah's son in 1739 and whomAhmad Shah married after the death of Nadir. Sarkar quotesfrom a Marathi letter which says: "The Pathan has takenaway the handsome wives of the Amirs". There was such alarge-scale loot of the capital that it took 28,000 camels,elephants, mules, and carts to carry Abdali's booty.

Shah Waliuallh (d.1762),who later invited Abdali to invadeIndia, was in Delhi and wrote letters to his friends seekinghelp for his safety. In one of his letters he writes: "When theShah (Durrani) marches against India, you should write tosome of your sincere friends in the Durrani's army that soand so (Shah Waliullah) is in Delhi. Should the Durrani'sarmy suddenly enter Delhi, some of his guards should beposted for his (Shah Waliullah's) protection. By way ofprotection it would be better to depute a student to theDurrani's army, in order that he might warn the army in timeto protect the sincere friend (ShahWaliullah)." In spite of hisacts of plunder and atrocities, which was personallywitnessed by Shah Waliullah, he wrote a letter to Abdali toinvade India against the Marathas.

Most of the Pakistani textbookhistorians eulogizeAbdali as agreat mujahid who defeated the kafir Marathas in the third

73

battle of Panipat (1761). However, historians of South Asiapoint out that the benefit of the Marathas' defeat went to theEast India Company and not the Mughals. After the battle ofPanipat, Abdali carne to Delhi as a conqueror and resided atthe Red Fort along with his wives and held court in theDituan-i-Khass of Shahjahan. He and his army did not sparethe city from pillage and rapine.

Mir Taqi Mir narrates the tribulations of the inhabitants ofDelhi in his autobirography Zikr-i-Mir, in thesewords: "In theevening Raja Nagar Mal (Mir's patron) left the city, and indue course reached the fort of Suraj Mal (the [at ruler). Istayed behind to look after my family. After evening, aproclamation was made that Shah Abdali had grantedsecurity to all, and that none of citizens should be in any fear.But as night had scarely fallenwhen the outrages began. Fireswere started in the city and houses were burnt down andlooted.

"The following morning there was all uproar and confusion.The Afghans and Rohillas (Najib's soldiers) started the workof slaughter and plunder, breaking down doors, tying upthose they found inside, and in many cases burning themalive or cutting off their heads. Everywhere was bloodshedand destruction, and for three days and three nights thissavagery continued. The Afghans would leave no article offood or clothinguntouched."

"They broke down walls and roofs of the houses, ill-treatedand tormented the inhabitants. The city was swarming withthem. Men who were pillars of the state were brought tonothing; men of noble rank left destitute; familymen bereft ofall their loved ones. Most of them moved the streets amidinsult and humiliation. Men's wives and children were madecaptive, and the killing and looting went on unchecked. TheAfghans humiliated and abused their victims and practisedall kinds of atrocities upon them. Nothing that could belooted was spared, and some would strip their victims evenof their underclothing. The new city (Shahjahanabad) wasransacked."

74

Mir Taqi Mir further writes how the old city of Delhi wasplundered by the occupation army of Abdali. "For seven oreight days the tumult raged. Nobody was left with cloth towear or with enough food even for a single meal. Many diedof the wounds that they had received, while others sufferedgreatly from the cold. The looter would carry of men's storesof grain and then sell it at an extortionate price to those whoneeded it."

"The cry of the oppressed rose to heaven but the king(Abdali),who considered himself a pillar of true religion,wasquite unmoved. A large number of people left and many ofthem died. Others were carried off by force to the invader'scamp. I, who was already poor, became poorer ... my house,which stood on the main road was razed to ground."

This was the legacy of Ahmad Shah Abadali, the greatwarrior and conqueror that he left behind in India. If still heis to be regraded as a hero or saint, then we shall have tochange the meaning of both words. (Thosewho wish to knowmore about Abdali may refere to Ganda Singh's excellentbook Ahmad Shah Abdali).

75

HOW COW BECAME POLITICIZED

D.N.Jha, Professor of History, at Delhi University wrote abook on the attitude of the people towards beef-eating inearly period of Indian history and proved on the basis ofreligious and historical evidence that the Indians slaughteredcow on religious occasionsand consumed beef. Sacredness ofcow evolved with the passage of time as a result of its utilityin an agricultural society whereupon people started tovenerate it and attached a religious sanctity to it. The bookcreated such an uproar against the author that thegovernment provided a guard to protect him.

This issue of cow-slaughter appeared as a religious issueduring the Saltanat period when the Muslims, who werebeef-eaters, slaughtered cow for their consumption in theirdaily life as well as of festival occasions. As political powerwas in their hand, there was little protest against this practice.However, during the rule of Muhammad Tughluq (1325-1351), Ibn Battuta, the North African traveller, who visitedIndia reports about a communal clash on cow-slaughter inwhich the enraged Hindu mob attacked those who wereinvolved in the slaughter and burnt them alive.

When Babur (1526-1530)conquered India and, in spite of hisshort rule, realized the importance and sacredness of cowamong the Hindus in the Indian society,he instructed his sonHumayun in his testament that: "It is incumbent thatreligious bigotries should be wiped off the table of heart, andjustice meted out to each religion according to its own tenets.Specially, abstain from sacrificeof cow as this would tend to

76

Christianity, arrived. Regarding Islamic societies, he believedthat they were on the decline and, after losing their energies,were on the brink of collapse. Avrill Powell, in her book,Muslims and Missionaries in Pre-Mutiny India, writes: "Thevulnerability of the Muslim world, and the concomitantpolitical and economic strength of Europe, he diagnosed insocio-political terms as of their contrasting dominantreligious values." Therefore, his belief was that the Muslimaristocracy, Ulema and common people were in a sate ofdecline and doubting their religion would be converted toChristianity easily.

This time the challenge of the Christian missionaries wasmore powerful as they had the patronization of politicianpower. The Uelma also surprised that they had to defendtheir religion on the basis of reason, and not on emotions.Therefore, they took full advantage of those translations ofthe Bible that the missionaries did for their preaching. Theman who emerged as a prominent figure in these monazirawas not a religious scholar but a medicine doctor, WazirKhan, who, to respond to the challenges of missionaries,studied all those books which were published in Europe andcritical to the tenets of Christianity. Fully equipped withmodern knowledge, he defeated Pfander in a number ofdebates that finally forcedhim to leave India.

In this respect, the 19th century was important because as aresult of religious debates, some Ulema reinterpreted Islam toadjust its teaching according to modern values. Specially,SirSyed and Maulvi Chiragh Ali made attempts not only todefend Islam from missionaries, but interpreted it with aprogressive point-of-view. However, their views failed toattract the majority of Muslims and soon the Ulema ofDeoband, with their orthodox ideas, influenced the IndianMuslim community. Consequently, our Ulema reached thesame stage where the Ulema in Akbar's court were. Theirview of the world became limited, which prevented themfrom understanding the ongoingmodern trends.

81

AKBAR'S IBADAT KHANA

In the medieval period, religious intolerancewas regarded asa virtue and tolerance as a vice. Bossuet, one of the famoustheologians of the period, proudly claimed that Catholicismwas the least tolerant of all religions. Intolerance, it wasbelieved, was the best method to protect faith and keep thefollowers away from any heresy.

This situation changed only when the' Age of Reason' beganand new ideas and thoughts had challenged faith andpromoted rationality to judge all aspects of life.Enlightenment, Renaissance, industrialization and growth ofsecular ideas became a threat to religiousbeliefs.

A more serious threat emerged from the Communistideology, that alarmed clerics of all religions into finding outways and means to defend their faith. Subsequently, to saveand preserve religious beliefs and to counter the challenges ofatheistic trends, they initiated 'inter-religious dialogues' tocreate a close relationship among the followers of differentreligions. The outcome of this policy is to find commonalitiesin different religions and accommodate them in a broaderframework of tolerance and mutual understanding.

When Europe was following a policy of religious intolerance,Akbar, in India, introduced the policy of Sulh-i-kul (peacewith all) and established an institution known as Ibadat khanaor the house of worship in 1575 at his newly built capital,Fathpursikri, to hold debates on different aspects of Islam.

On every Thursday, he invited Sayyeds, Shaikhs and nobles

82

to come and take part in religious discussions. He madeelaborate plan for sitting arrangement as Badayuni inMuniakhab-al- Tawarikh writes: "The Amirs should sit on theeast side, the Sayyeds on the west, the Ulema on the south,and the Shaikh on the north. His majestywould go from timeto time to these various parties, converse with them andascertain their thought." In case of a need for references,books were available from the royal library.

The discussion on the history of Islam, jurisprudence (Fiqh),and Ahadith, the traditions of the Holy Prophet (PBUH),madethe Ibadatkhana a battleground for the Ulema who startedaccusing and declaring each other nonbeliever. Two leadingUlema, Mulla Abdullah Sultanpuri and Abdunnabi Sadr,who once had a great influence on Akbar, failed to respond tothe challenges of Abul Fazl,who arrived at the court in 1575and became a powerful debater at the Ibadatkhana. He madehis adversaries speechlessand contemptuously remarked that"bigoted Ulema and the routine lawyerswere shamed."

Later on, the entry of Shia scholars, such as Hakim Abul FathGilani and Mir Sharif Amuli, introduced a differentinterpretation of Islam. He was also disgusted at thewrangling and quarrelling of the Ulema on minor issues.

However, these discussions created so much interest in himthat according to Badayuni: "He used to spend much time inthe Ibadatkhana in the company of learned men and Shaikhs.And specially on Friday nights, he would sit up there thewhole night continually occupied in discussing questions ofreligion, whether fundamental or collateral." It was quitenatural that on hearing different interpretations he wasconfused and remarked: "I wished I had not heard suchdifference of option from teachers of traditional subjects, norconfounded by different interpretation of the Quranic versesand the Ahadith."

Therefore,not satisfiedwith the discussionswhich took placeamong the Ulema and to know more about other religionsand their teachings, he invited prominent theologians of

83

different faiths to come to the Ibadatkhana and take part indiscussions.There came learned Brahmans, Pushottam and Debi, whoexplained the tenets of Brahmanism. They were followed byJain Clerics,under whose influencehe prohibited slaughter ofanimals for certain days. Zoroastrian scholar Dastur MaharjiRana unfolded the intricaciesof his religion and so, accordingto Badayuni, Akbar was so much impressed byZoroastrianism that he "ordered Abul Fazl to makearrangements that sacred fire should be kept burning at thecourt at all hours of the day according to their customs."

His curiosity led him to invite Christian fathers from Goa tocome to his court and teach him about their religion. The firstChristian mission, under the leadership of Father Aquaviva,reached Fathpursikri in 1780.Father Monserrate, a member ofthe mission, wrote an excellent commentary of his journey tothe Mughal court and about the activities of his mission. Thefathers took part in various discussions at the Ibadatkhana.About these debates, Father Monserrate write: "The fathersand the religious leaders of the Musalmans held frequentdebates concerning an infinite variety of points_ the Trinity,God, the Son, his death... the Day of judgment, death,resurrection, and various philosophical and political subjects.However, be it recorded without pride or boasting that, bythe help of God, the fathers so effectually silenced theiropponents that they frequently demanded miraculousportends as the proof of truth of Christianity." Though thefathers used very abusive language during the discussion,Akbar and his courtiers tolerated it and allowed them tospeak freely.The experiment of lbadatkhana was unique in the medievalhistory. On one hand it brought to light the fanaticism of thetheologians who rejected other religions and insisted ontruthfulness of their's. On the other hand, these discussionscreated an atmosphere in which religious scholars broughttheir points of view freely without any hindrance. Theseinter-religious dialogues created tolerance which helped

84

Akbar construct his policy of Sulh-i-kul to rule onver India.

There is a general misunderstanding that Akbar invented anew religion. The term Din-i-llahi was coined by Mohsin Faniin his book Dabistan-I-Mazahib, written during Jahagir'speriod. Abul Fazl calls it Ain-l-Rahnamuni (regulation forguidance). His policy of religious tolerance suited India, asfollowers of different religions lived there. Akbar assumedthe role of a king of all the people, irrespective of their colourand creed.

85

TOLERANCE

Akbar is the most misunderstood monarch as far as Pakistanis concerned. The textbooks and the writings of the religiouscircles paint him in dark colours: a ruler who had renderedgreat harm to Islam in India, and a man who was illiterateand, thus, unable to understand the true spirit of religion.These are all attempts to belittle Akbar as a person and as aruler. The recent researches on him are ignored and the oldprejudices prevail.

The first misunderstanding is that Akbar introduced a newreligion. This is incorrect. The name Din-i-Illahi was for thefirst time used by Mohsin Fani, a 17th century scholar in hisbook Dabistan-i-Mazahib which was later on popularized bylatter historians and writers. Abul Fazl and othercontemporary historians did not use this term. Instead, AbulFazl calls it in Ain-i-Akbari as Ain-i-Rahnamuni: rules andregulations for guidance.

The modern historians on the basis of the contemporarysources have proved that Akbar did not promulgate any newreligion nor did he proclaim himself a prophet nor was thereany scripture for the so-callednew religion. Itwas just a cultof which Akbar was the guru and his followers were hischelae. Itwas just like any Sufi Silsila (order).

The important aspect of the cult was that the chelas were notasked to abandon their ancestral religion. On the other handthey were asked not to imitate any faith but accept it on thebasis of rationality.

86

There were a number of his disciples who continued to followtheir faith and were not asked to abjure it in order to becomehis chelas. He never coerced anybody to become a member ofhis cult nor was any attempt made to propagate it.

The author of Dabistan-i-Mazahib, writing on the new cult,points out that the followers had to take the oath never to behostile to other religions, never to convert people by force totheir faith, and never to harm any living creature. Therefore,it was a cult which formulated regulations to control thebehaviour of people in order to make them civilized andcultured.Vanina, writing in Ideals and Society in India (1996) rightlyobserved, "it was a social gathering simultaneously typicaland new for mediaeval India's mystical order, a literary cluband a social circle of enlightened philosophers all rolled intoone; it was a part of a wider socio-cultural process and assuch it continued to develop into different schools ofthought."Akbar never intended to make it a state religion. Toynbee iswrong in saying that Akbar made an attempt to introduce anew religion to strengthen the universal Mughal state. On thecontrary, he announced his new cult when he had alreadycrushed all rebellions and silenced all types of opposition. Hewas fully secured and there was no danger either to histhrone or to his person.Akbar's policy of sulh-i-kul or peace with all its different fromhis Ain-i-Rahnamuni (which he promulgated in 1582). Hispolicy to treat people of all religions on the basis of equalitywas adopted in the early years of his reign when he married aRajput princess and abolished religious taxes on the Hindus.

He continued this policy throughout his reign and neverrelented in spite of opposition from the Ulema and theirfatwas. Therefore, his Ain-i-Rahnamuni and Sulh-i-kul weretwo different phenomena. One was the product of hisintellectual skepticism and the other of his political and socialneed to integrate Indian societyon the basis of equality.

87

The contention that "rarely are the citizens of a countrydiscriminated on the basis of religion and creed" is not true.The world has witnessed the massacre of the Muslims inBosnia and Kosovo. Daily we read in the newspapers how theZionist of Israel discriminates against Muslims andChristians.

And how can we ignore the treatment of our religiousminorities in Pakistan? All our three Constitutions containdiscriminatory provisions against them. Every literate personknows how the Ahmadis were declared non-Muslims andhow the state and society is treating them. Who can ignorethe implications of the blasphemy law and its effects on thenon-Muslims? How can we ignore the principle of separateelections for the minorities? There is no need to remind thatno non-Muslim can become head of state of Pakistan, nor cana Hindu or a Christian aspire for the post of C-in-C. Once anygroup is deprived of its rights constitutionally, it cannot haveany other way to redress its grievances except throughviolence or migration. We have to admit that we treat ourreligious minorities as second rate citizens.

As for the question why religious parties have so far failed towin an election, the answer is simple: All major politicalparties, whether Muslim League or PPP, implement theiragenda, sometimes more vigorously than the religiousparties.

What Akbar did in the mediaeval India provides us lessons tolearn; to create a new political and social structure whichmakes all citizens of Pakistan equal and respectable not onlyconstitutionally, but also in practice.

88

BEGGING IN HISTORY

Everyday, we come across countless beggars who harass usand use all sorts of methods to get alms. However, thephenomenon of begging is not new. We find it throughouthistory and in all those societies where the distribution ofwealth was uneven and the gap between the rich and thepoor and needy demanded their share from the surplus inpossession of the rich. So, in actuality, it was not begging butsharing. The demand emerged when there was famine,drought, unemployment and such social and political crisesthat deprived people from earning their livelihood. Findingno other alternative, they resorted to begging or asking fortheir share from those who had more.

Generally, historians do not regard the subject interestingenough to record the activities of beggars in different periods,and how it reflected the attitude of society towards theproblem of poverty. However, finding some information, anattempt is made to construct the changing attitude of beggaryin history. During the mediaeval period in the West as well asthe East, beggars were regarded as holy men and respected bysociety. To feed or to provide financial subsistence to themwas an act of piety that was highly appreciated. The conceptwas that the alms-giver would get rewards in the Hereafter inhis munificence.Beggars,knowing the religious sensibilitiesofthe people, invoked religion to get alms and charity. Theirpractice was to go door to door and beg. Housewives, whoprovided them with food, requested them to pray for the well­being of their families. On festivals and ceremonies, peoplewere generous in giving them alms in the spirit of sharing.

89

In India, giving alms to beggars is a centuries-old tradition.Nobles and rich traders, to earn a good name and reputation,helped the poor and arranged langar (free food) on variousoccasions. Kings and emperors also made it a point to givealms. About the Mughal emperor Akbar, Abul Fazl writes inA'in-i-Akbari: "There is a treasure always waiting at the court;and every beggar, when His Majestysees him, is sure to findrelief."

As beggars had no pr~perty and belongings, and no worldlyambitions, they acquired respect as men who were close toGod; and it was believed that their prayers as well as curseswere granted. Beggars were respectfully called fakir (whopossessed one day's sufficiency for self and family), baba(father or respectable old man) and saeen (mister or sir). Asthey were free from all worldly problems and enjoyed life,many envied them. On this aspect, RichardBrome,an Englishpoet, writes:

"The only freemen of a common-wealth;

Free about scot-free; that observe no law, Obey nogovernor; use no religion,

But what they draw from their old custom Orconstitutes themselves.Yet are no rebel."

Besides this, beggars adopted different methods to appeal tothe sentiments of the people. Someof them played music andsang songs; and some attracted people by disfiguring theirbodies. There is an interesting poem written by RobertCrowley, in 1550, that can be applied even today in oursurroundings.

I heard two beggars that under an hedge sate, Whodid with long talk their matters debate.

They had both sore legs most loathsome to see, Allraw from the foot well most to the knee, 'My leg',quoth the one, 'I thank God is fair'.

'So is mine', quoth the other, 'in a cold air', Forthen it looked raw and as red as any blood, Iwould not have it healed for any world' good.

90

No man would pity me but my sore leg, Whereforeif I were whole I might in vain beg.

Besidesordinary beggars there were some religious sectswhoadopted begging as their livelihood, such as Franciscans andDominicans in Christianity. In order to be independent fromstate and church, they relied on society for sustenance andresorted to begging. In the Budhist traditions, the Bhikshusgo door to door and beg. Even the king of Thailand, once ayear, dons a Bhikshu dress and begs. There are two reasonsfor this: one, to shun off any sense of arrogance and inculcatehumility. Secondly,having no property and lust for life, theydevote their time in praying and meditation, that earns therespect of society.Hence, they become spiritual guides to thepeople. It also gives them freedom from state institutions thatcannot exploit them for their political interests.

In Europe, the attitude of society towards begging changed inthe 17th century as a result of growing influence ofsecularism and weakening of religion that shattered beliefson salvation and life after death. This changed the wholeimage of beggars. If somebody was found begging, his headwas shaved and sometimes he was also beaten up aspunishment. Some of the European cities expelled them fromtheir boundaries. Some passed acts against begging; andsome issued licenses to the deserving for begging. In theIndustrial age, when work became compulsory for everyable-bodied person, beggars became a burden on society.They were either imprisoned or confined to workhouses. Thewhole concept of charity had undergone a change and to givealms to a beggar meant to corrupt him. The concept was thatinstead of helping the poor, it was better to provide him witha job. Charity became secular and no longer remainedreligious.

In our society, religion continues to dominate begging. Abeggar invokes religion to get alms and uses all such phrasesthat appeal to the religious sentiments of the people. Thus,the exploitation of religion continues in the region_ beggarsfor charity and the rulers for power.

91

CHARITY AND SOCIETY

Charity is regarded as one of the best solutions to minimizethe effects of poverty and to give relief to needy people.Individuals as well as institutions undertake the task todistribute it among thosewho need it badly. It is considered areligious obligation and a social responsibility to lessen theburden of impoverishment.

During the Sultanat period, Firuz Tughluq (1351-1388)institutionalised the charity and established a separatedepartment that provided dowry to poor girls and financialassistance to destitute people. It was an old tradition toestablish almshouses (Langar Khanay), where poor peoplecould get free food. Mughal emperors founded such housesthroughout the empire at the state expense.

Such houses increased in the time of famine or drought.Akbar (1556-1605)built such houses at Fatahpur for poorMuslims and Hindus. They were known as Khairpura andDharampura. A large number of Jogis began to come to thecapital when they smelled free food. Then a separate housewas built for them known as Jogipura.

Jahangir (1605-1627)during his reign built such houses atAhmadabad, Allahabad, Lahore, Delhi and Agra. Thesehouses were known as Bulgharkahan (a place for thedistribution of cooked food among the poor).

Besides these institutions of charity, there were some socialand religious practices to give alms to the poor. For example,at the time of festivals or celebrations a tray full of silver and

92

gold coins was moved around the head of a nobleman oremperor, and then the money was distributed among thepoor. The ceremony was called Nisar. It was thought to avertall evils on all occasions.It was also a practice that when anemperor or nobleman went out in procession for the Eidprayers or to visit tombs of saints and his ancestors,he threwmoney on the crowd of people who assembled to see theprocession. This tradition of throwing money in India wasregarded as an act of generosity.

Once Akbar thought a new way to distribute money amongthe poor. He filled a tank called AnaptaZao at Fatahpur withcoins that were distributed among poor.

Abul Fazl writes: "There was a reservoir in the courtyard ofthe palace at Fatahpur, twenty-yards long by twenty broadand three yards deep. This he caused to be filled with red,white, and black money (i.e.,gold, silver and copper coins)."But on the first day, there was such a crowd that a number ofpeople were stamped on. On seeing it Akbar decided toabandon this practice.

On the other hand the way to handle the problem of povertywas different in England. During the Tudor period (1485-1603),there emerged a new kind of beggars called the 'sturdybeggars' as a result of unemployment, dismissal of soldiersfrom the Frenchwars and theWar of the Roses,deforestation,and system of enclosures that deprived poor peasants tocultivate wasteland. They became a menace to the Englishsociety as they wandered in the countryside in groups andknocked doors for alms.

To solve this problem, the government passed a number ofpoor bills to provide relief to the needy people. The cost ofreliefwas to be met by voluntary subscribers and Parish wasto administer it. Next, the government decided to set upworkhouses to discourage the poor to beg and to rely onrelief. In"1723, a Workhouse Test Act was passed whichrequired poor to enrol themselves in workhouses and work

93

there. In another act of 1834, the outdoor relief waswithdrawn and they were forced to live in the workhouses.

Life in those workhouses was harsh and environment wasunpleasant. There was no respect for family as husbands,wives and children were separated from each other and strictdisciplines were observed. Meals had to be easten in silence.Diet was sparse. The inmates there were also provided jobssuch as of stone-breaking, bone-grinding and of picking oldropes to pieces. Charles Dickens in his novels graphicallydepicts the condition of those workhouses.

A historian writes: "There was a famous scandal in Andoverworkhouse when the inmates, working on bones-crushingwere so hungry that they were found to be eating rottenmarrow and fats from the bones. No wonder, the workhousesbecame known among the workers as Bastilles (after thenotorious fortress-prison in Paris)."

Condition of the workhouses improved as a result of publicpressure during 1850s. However, their image persistedamong the poor who regarded those houses unpleasant tolive. By the passage of time, the Poor Laws were replacedwith a series of new institutions, which provided relief topoor people either through state institutions or charityfoundations.

There is a basic difference between the individual andinstitutional charities. In case of an individual, it lasts onlyduring his lifetime while an institution functions forgenerations, if it is maintained properly.

Moreover, when an individual helps the poor, the receiverpersonally feels obliged to his benefactor while the alms-giverassumes arrogance and makes an attempt to use it for hissocial and political motives or for his personal glory. But incase of the institution there is no such thing. Contributors tosuch institutions mostly remain anonymous. So theinstitutional help keeps dignity of a receiver.

94

In the democratic system, it is a right of citizens to demandfrom state and its institutions to take care of them. Therefore,the government should take such measures that no onewould ask for help from his fellow citizens for hismaintenance.

95

THE CONCEPT OF 'HELL'

With the development of human society, there emergedconcepts of sin and virtue, evil and good. Itwas observed thatsome evildoers were punished for their deeds but some ofthem were not, specially those who wielded power andenjoyed privileges. As there was no strong authority topunish them, they remained free to commit all sorts ofcrimes.

This helplessness resulted in the belief that if such peoplecould not be punished in this world, they would becondemned in the next. It satisfiedweaker sectionsof society,that these tyrants and criminals would be damned by theDivine power forever.

How the concept of Hell is formulated and on what stagesdoes it pass through is traced by Alan E.Bernsteinin his bookThe Formation of Hell: Death and Retribution in the Ancient andEarly Christian Worlds. According to him, in theMesopotamian civilization, it was believed that after deaththere would be no account for sins and all the dead, good orbad, would be treated equally. Neither would they bepunished or rewarded for their deeds. Itwas a general beliefthat there was a separate world for the dead. Therefore, inancient mythology,we find that many attempts were made todiscover the world of the dead.

In the Epic of Gilgamesh it is narrated: IfA great expanse ofland and sea divides the living from the land of the dead." Inthe Babyloniancivilization,the dead lived beneath this worldwhere they were ruled by a king. They built forts and walls

96

around them to defend themselves against the living, and didnot allow anybody from the outside world to come in.

In the Egyptian civilization, the concept of punishment forevildoers and reward for virtuous people developed. Afterdeath, every individual had to pass through a process inwhich he was judged on the basis of his deeds. Those whowere found guilty, their bodies were cut into pieces. Theywere told: "The fire is against you, the flames are against you,the blazing heat is against you and stabs at you, and hacksyou in pieces, and cuts you up in such a way that ye shallnever again see those who are living upon earth."

The Greeks and the Romans also believed that there was aseparate world of the dead underneath the earth. The Greekscalled it Hades, where spirits of the dead were put indifferent categories, according to their acts. Those foundinvolved in crimes and sins were condemned forever.

The Jews elaborated the concept of punishment and rewardafter death, and formulated Gehenna or Hell for sinners. Inthe Old Testament, there is a full description of it and detailsof how evildoers would be punished. "The Lord will swallowthem up in his wrath; and fire will consume them." There iswarning to malcontents: "For behold, the day comes,burninglike an oven, when all the arrogant and evildoers will bestubble; the day that comesshall burn them up."

In one of the Psalms it is said: "The Lord rests the righteousand wicked, And his soul hates him that loves violence. Onthe wicked he would rain coal fire and brimstone; Ascorchingwind shall be the portion of their cup. For the Lordis righteous, he loves righteous deeds; The upright shallbehold his face."In Christianity, the referencesof Hell are few and they are notelaborated, but later on, some of the Christian Fathersdeveloped the idea of Hell with gruesome detail. Fater PietroPinamonti warned: "Every damned person will be like aheated oven, blazing hot on the outside and inside his chest;the filthy blood will boil in his veins, as will the brain in his

97

skull, heart in his chest, and the guts in his wretched body."

In Islam, the same model of Hell is adopted and Gehenna ofthe Hebrews became [ahannum of Arabic. It is believed thatthere would be a Day of Judgment, when all the dead wouldrise from their graves and, after accounting their good andevil deeds, would be either punished or rewarded.

In every period of history there were thinkers andintellectuals who challenged the concept of Hell. Forexample, in the Roman period, Plutark, a historian, raised thequestion that why sinners and the wicked are not punished inthis world; and why the delay in punishment? He argued thatthey should be punished in this world so that everybody cansee it.

John Goudsblom in Fire and Civilization writes: "The image ofhell-fire, as developed by successive generations oftheologians, poets and painters, ... were puzzled by thequestion of what constituted the social and psychological soilon which these images could thrive. In order to understandthe civilizing campaigns, they need also to be seen in thewider context of a military-agrarian society with a steadilygrowing urban population. The people who feared fire inHell also had some knowledge in war and fire in cities."

98

HISTORY OF 'PARADISE'

In the Pahlavi language, paradise means a garden which issurrounded by four walls and full of fruit trees, flowers,foundations, birds and where men and women live togetherhappily.

In Arabic,jannat alsomeans a garden set with trees or a grovewith palm trees. Among the Greeks, the Jews, and theChristians there are three concepts of paradise. In one ofthem, it is said that perhaps once upon a time there was agolden age on this earth when there was no conflict, norivalry and no hatred against each other and all men andwomen lived peacefully and happily. It further explains thatthere was plenty to eat and beautiful natural surroundings toenjoy.Thememories of the golden age have become a part ofcollectivememory of humankind that is why he is yearningfor such timewhere he could live peacefullyand leisurely.

In the second concept it was believed that there were suchislands where man could live a carefree life. Third conceptwas of Elysian Field where there were no worldly problemsand peace reigned eternally.

About the golden age, Hesiod, a Roman poet writes that inthe golden age,men "lived like gods without sorrow of heart,remote and free from toil and grief: miserable age rested noton earth, but with legs and arms never failing; they mademerry with feastingbeyond the reach of all evils."

Plato in The Stateman portrays golden age in the reign of

99

Choronos where "they had fruits in plenty from the trees andother plants, and they lived for the most part in the open air,without clothing or bedding."

Later on, Christian religious scholars emphasized on theexistence of earthly paradise that was in some far off andunknown place and inaccessible to people, only someindividuals, after special permission, could visit it. In anotherpoint of view, God had lifted it to heavens and one could gothere only after his death.

In the mediaeval period, Christian scholars believed thatearthly paradise was the Garden of Eden which was existedsomewhere in the world. In 1165, it was a popular belief thatthis paradise was situated in Asia in the kingdom of PrestorJohn. Or it was in some unknown island which subsequentlycreated curiosity and the adventurers started voyages insearch of it.

When America was discovered, some of them found it inBrazil and some in Cape Hermoso. Amerigo Vespucci wrotein one his letters that: "the friendly land, covered withcountless very tall trees that do not loose their leaves and thatemit sweet and fragrant odours and are loaded with tastyfruits that promote the body's health; the field of thick grassthat are filled with flowers which have a wonderful delightfulperfume; the great throng of birds of various species, whosefeathers, colours and songs defy description. For myself, Ithought I was near the earthly paradise."

The geographical maps that were prepared during themediaeval period, pointed out the probable location of theearthly paradise. Some of them indicated it in Ethiopia, orArmenia, Iraq, Palestine, and South America.

Christian scholars also discussed that when and at what timeGod created paradise and at what stage expelled Adam andEve from it. They also discussed how tall were Adam and Eveand what was their age at the time of their creation. Were

100

there no diseases in paradise? Did they work and spent theirtime leisurely?

Martin Luther's argument was that if Adam and Eve had notcommitted sin, mankind would have not endured worldlytorture and misery. In this case neither they needed anypaper, nor books. On the contrary they would haveeverlasting wisdom.

Then there was question: what was the language of paradise?Some argued that as Hebrew is the oldest language, therefore,God had conversed with Adam in it. However, this did not,satisfy the nationalists of different countries and they provedthat languages of paradise were Swedish, Danish, andFlemish.

Another question was: were man and woman equal inparadise? The reply was that if Eve would not have temptedAdam to commit sin, both of them could enjoy equal status.The role of Evedowngraded women. However, it was furtherargued: nature demanded that Eve should have obeyedAdam.

As in feudal Europe private property had become sacred, thequestion was asked about it: Was there private property inparadise? On this question Saint Ambros said that there wasno question of private property in paradise. However, in the17th century amendments were made and it was said that ifanybody would have collected fruits from trees, in this casehe would have right to possess them and any attempt tosnatch fromhim would have been a sin.

These views indicate that how the institution of privateproperty was becoming strong in society and religionsupported it.

In the 17th century when European scholars criticized theBible and its concept of creation, the belief on earthlyparadise subsequently weakened. Instead of searching thelost paradise, people decided to create their own paradise on

101

earth. Therefore, such gardens were set up which could revileparadise. In Europe, botanical gardens were founded in 1533in Venice, in 1545 in Padaua, in 1546 in Pisa and in 1575 inParis.

In the Indian subcontinent, Mughals set up a number ofgardens on the model of paradise with trees, fountains,flowerbeds, and waterways and proudly claimed that if thereis a paradise on earth, here it is, here it is.

102

SILK AND CULTURE

Things of daily use play an important role in influencing andchanging the habits and behaviour of people. Those who arerich and resourceful, use luxury things to distinguishthemselves from the commoners. Such things becomesymbols of their high status and social class. To make theseinaccessibleto the commoners, different methods are adoptedby the elite classes: either to make these things so expensivethat the ordinary people cannot afford them or to make theiruse unlawful for the lower classes.

In these times, such a law would be termed a violation ofhuman rights, therefore other methods are used. One such isto manufacture them in less quantity and sell them at highcost so that only the wealthy are able to buy them. This trendis evident in the changing fashions of dress, ornaments,jewellery, furniture, and architecture. These luxuries arelinked to sophistication and refinement. Only the super richcan afford their possession.

The study of an objects' history reveals its role and impact onthe social, cultural, and religious life of a society.Xinru Liu, aChinese professor of history, wrote an interesting book on'Silk and religion' surveying historical use of silk and itsimpact on Asian and Western societies from 600A.D. to 1200A.D.

He rejected the myth that China was the first country toproduce silk and that it kept its preparation secret till someNestorian priest smuggled silk worms and introduced themanufacturing of silk to other countries. He argued that silk

103

was produced in China, India, Byzantinian and the Romanworld simultaneously.

However, the quality of Chinese silk was superior to theothers. As it was very expensive, only the aristocracy used it.Besides dresses, silk was also used for other purposes such asa currency. Artisans, who prepared it, paid duties to thegovernment in the form of silk. It was also used as a shroudat a noble's death.In 7th century China, there were rules and regulations for theuse of silk. In 681, the king Kao-tsung issued an edictrevealing how the nobility and ruler were particular aboutthe usage of silk.

"It is said that some officials and commoners donot follow the rules (of clothing) in public, butwear tight jackets of crimson, purple, black, andgreen under their robes. They even dare to showthese clothes when they are in lanes or in thecountry. This kind of behaviour blurs thedistinction between the nobles and masses, anderodes moral standards. From now on, everyoneshould wear clothes designated for the lower ones,but those of lower rank are not allowed to wear theclothes of those above their status. The official incharge should enforce this rule and never allowsuch aggressions to occur."

Silk as a costly cloth was gradually used in different religionto preserve holy relics. First, the Buddhist kept the relic of theBuddha wrapped in silk and used silken banners on theirmonasteries. Later, in the Christian churches the use of silkbecame silken and silken curtains were hung on the walls ofchurches to beautify them. The figure of Christ and saintswere at times embroidered on them. The holy relicswere alsopreserved in silken folders. The graves of saints were alsocovered by beautiful silken cloth.

In Islamic societies on the other hand, there was no suchprohibition on the use of silk for commoners as it was inChina and in the Roman world. However, there areTraditions of the Holy Prophet (PBUH)in which the wearing

104

of silken clothes for men is prohibited. As a wealthy classemerged in the Muslim world, it started to wear silkenclothes to distinguish itself. These were used as statussymbols. Muslim rulers established factories for thepreparation of silken dresses.

The Abbasid Caliphs, to compete with the Byzantinianemperors, used silk as a means to show off their wealth andgrandeur. It is said that the Abbasid Caliph Muqdadirbillah(908-932)had 28 thousand silk curtains at his court whichwere hung at festivals and other occasions of celebration tocreate awe among onlookers.

Other Muslim rulers also established royal factories for thepreparation of silken robes of honour for gifts to nobles andfor the dresses of the royal family, following the tradition.The Fatimids of Egypt possessed rich silk curtains for theadornment of their palaces. Later on, it became popularpractice to give robes of honour to notables and nobles ondifferent occasions in appreciation of their services to theempire.

History shows that in the medieval times, the use of silk wasnot only for religious purposes but silk dresses were a symbolof a high class.When devotees came from China to India theybrought with them silk that was offered to Buddhist shrinesand monasteries as gifts and in case of need was used ascurrency tomeet their expenses.

105

THE ROLE OF EMOTIONS

So far ,it was the domain of psychologists to study andinvestigate the impact of emotions of human life. Now,historians extending the borders of history, are makingattempts to analyze the role of emotions in the formation ofhistory and its progress. However, emotions are studied intheir historical perspective to see how they change theirmeaning and perception in different historicalperiods.

Anger is one such emotion. Individuals express their anger toshow despair, helplessness, and some time authority overothers. Whenever individuals become angry, it is indicatednot only from the movement of their body and the expressionof their facebut the language that they speak.

Anger is also used as a tool to control the weaker classes ofsociety. On the one hand it is advised that the elite classesshould show their anger to their servants in order to instilawe and fear in them. On the other hand, the lower classesare expected to control their anger in spite of the injusticeandexploitationby their superiors.Historians of the Annals school are exploring new territoriesin historical studies. One such historian will write the historyof emotions. Barbara RosenWein has published a book TheAnger's past: tHe Social uses of emotion in tRe £adle Ages It is acollection of articles written Dy eminent historians on thevarious aspects of anger in the past. These articles deal withas to ow anger is related fo the various classes and howthese classes showed their anger in their particularcircumstances. For examp'le, the anger of fie priestly class

106

was associated with reli 'on, wl1ile rulers, nobles, ana feudallords possessing power and authority behaved autocraticallyusing anger as a tool to control their subjects. Peasan sandpoor peop] sup]2ressed their anger against the authorities,kept silence and endured all hardships.

Anger had many features in the medieval period. One ofthem was to a use and curse in a state of anger. The nature ofthe curse indicatea the social and religious status of theindividual. In the case of a religious man he sought the helpof God to destroy or eliminate the adversary or enemy: forexample, his curses contained these sentences: "May the Lordtoss their bodies as bait to the birds of sky and the beasts ofthe land. May they be damned with the devil and angles inhell and may they burn in eternal fire." Whenever God's helpwas sought to destroy or to harm a person, it indicated twothings: one that the person cursing was very weak and hadno power to take revenge against his enemy, therefore, heneeded divine help to fulfil his wish. Secondly, he did notwant to take the responsibility of someone's calamity andwished to make God responsible for the catastrophe on hisenemy.

Contrary to religious curses, secular ones were different. Inthis case, the opponents were abused in such terms that wereregarded socially challenging. For examRle, to call anybody aBastard was to cnallenge his ancestry and to humiliate hissocial status. In other cases, those who had the authorityaccused their subordinates of being lazy, stupid, illiterate,and uncultured rogues. Rulers in normal circumstancesremained composed but showed their anger towards rebels,criminals, and recalcitrant nobles. It was tradition thatwhenever a royal edict was issued it would mention that incase of disobedience, royal wrath would not spare anyone.Both in the East as well as in the Westmanuals known as themirrors of princes were written for the rulers instructing themon how to behave in different circumstances.It is advised thatrulers should maintain a balance in their kindness and anger.In case of imbalance there would be chaos and anarchy.

107

For example, in Indian history Jalaluddin Khilji is criticizedby contemporary historians for being too kind to rebels andcriminals resulting on weakness of his rule. On the otherhand, Balban and Alauddin were too strict and renderedsevere punishment to rebels and criminals. The result wasthat after their death, their successors allowed unlimitedfreedom that ultimately led to the collapse of their dynasties.Both extremes proved disastrous for rulers.

In the medieval period peasants were regarded as unculturedand savages, therefore, their anger was judged in the light oftheir social status. It was not a positive or just anger but ananger that created riot, disorder, and lawlessness.Contemporary historians condemned their revolts as a resultof irrational anger. In 1233 Rope Gregory ix proclaimed acrusaae against the re6ellion of peasants in Bremen callingthem wild beasts. The rebellions of peasants were judged by­ruling classes not as a result of exploitation but fromdisobedience of autnority.Paul Freedman, writing on Peasants' Anger in the Middle Agesobserves that: "Peasants' anger was not portrayed as aresponse to injustice, much less as a purposeful socialmovement. Rage was potentially inherent in the essentially:low nature of the peasantry that could erupt if the rusticswere not held firmly in check. Cold, calculated anger, eit erfor revenge or in defense of honour, was considered generallyimp'ossible for peasants." In a hierarchical society, therebellion of peasants was looked upon because the right tofight a battle was the privilege to knights while the duty ofpeasants was to labour and work. Their anger andsubsequent rebellions were stated as violation of traditionand, therefore, should be crushed without mercy.

Marc Bloch, a French historian traces the causes of theemotional states of the medieval people and argues that thereason of their anger was that they did not get nutritiousfood. Secondly, they did not have any sense of cleanliness.These two elements made them emotional in their daily life.Besides these, there was fear of authority, epidemics, famines,

108

incidents of violence and torture that contributed to a sense ofinsecurity in them.

The change in Europe occurred as a result of the Renaissancewhich initiated, in the words of Norbert Elias, 1/a process ofcivilization". In the changed environment, it became a virtueto control anger and behave like a gentleman. In the modernage, the nature of anger has further changed as a result of thedemocratization of SOciety.Now, not people but rulers areafraid of people's anger.

109

THE CULTURE OF FLOWERS

The culture of flowers seems to have recently becomewidespread and popular, evident from the mushroomingflower shops and kiosks around. It has now become practiceto present a bouquet or put garlands around a friend's neckas a gesture of love and respect.However, flowers have been used since time immemorial as asymbol of love in nearly all ancient civilizations, except forthe three great Semitic religions: Judaism, Christianity, andIslam. Poets, artists and intellectuals are so enthralled by theirdelicacy,colours, and beauty that they use them as vehicles toexpress their inner emotions and sentiments.

Whenwe trace the history of the culture of flowerswe find itsexistence in the civilisation of ancient Egyptians whichregarded the lotus flowers as sacred and on occasions ofreligious festivals displayed it and other flowers as a mark ofrespect and devotion. It was their belief that their god 'Ra'was born out of the lotus flower. However, in Greece andRome, the use of flowers was secular rather than religious.Their favourite flower was the rose which they displayed onevery occasion. Such was its widespread use that mostphrases of daily use referred to it. (Suchas "a bed of roses").As the demand for roses increased, merchants and tradersplanted a number of gardens to meet consumer's demands.Soon, flower shops emerged in every nook and corner of thecities and vendors started to sell them in the markets andstreets. Another important change that took place during thisperiod was that instead of human sacrifice,now flowerswere

110

offered to deities, a reflection of how man's bloody naturehad changed.

With the decline of the Roman Empire, the culture of flowersalso declined. When Christianity replaced the Roman power,it adopted a hostile attitude towards flower culture. TheChristian Fathers opposed this practice on the grounds thattheir apostles never used crowns of flowers, neither did theydecorate alters with them nor displayed them on anyreligious festivals. In early Christianity, the religiousauthorities not only forbade the use of flowers but alsocondemned the use of perfume as well because it was thepractice of infidels.

However, gradually, the prejudice against flowers andperfumes diminished and in the 9th century, flowers wereused for decoration in churches and monasteries. Differentflowers became symbols for different ideas and concepts suchas an olive for peace and a rose as a symbol of the blood of amartyr evolved. During the Renaissance, the culture offlowers flourished extensively. It became the favourite topicof writers and painters. Such was the enthusiasm thatcompetitive flower exhibitionswere organized and nurseriesestablished to produce the best flowers.As the production offlowers increased, it no longer remained confined to thenobility but became accessibleto the common people. Now,one could see flowering plants in front of shops and in thebalconiesof house of the commonpeople.

In 1554,the Austrian ambassador saw the tulip flower at thecourt of the Ottomans. He was so impressed by its beautythat he took it to Vienna. In 1560,is was planted in Holland,Belgium, and Germany. In 1778,it was so widely cultivatedin Holland that it became its national symbol.

The culture of flowers suffered in England when theParliament under Cromwell came to power. The Puritansprohibited the use of flowers and perfume in churches. In1660 an act was passed by the Parliament that warnedwomen not to use flowers and perfumes. The culture

III

reflourished after the restoration of monarchy and as a resultof the separation of politics and religion. Secular ideasencouraged the use of flowers while religious extremistsmade attempts to suppress their use. Later on,industrialization further promoted the culture and made it animportant part ofmodern society's daily life.

Jack Goody writes in his book The Culture of Flowers how inthe Indian civilization: "An attractive women's apparel washardly complete without 'buds, flowers, wreaths, blossomsand tendrils'. Picking flowers was one of Sita's pleasures; herfondness of lotuses, which she places in her hair. Men toowore flowers, especially as garlands which were a favouritebed-time adornment. They were used not only to decorateindividuals but also chariots, roads, houses, palaces and evencities. The gift of garlands was connected with courtship andmarriage." The Lotus flower, like it was in Egypt, is regardedsacred in Hindu society. It is the favourite flower of Vishnu,Krishna, and Lakshami. (Now it is a party symbol of the BJP).

The Muslims of India were influenced by the Hindu cultureof flowers. The Mughals were very fond of flowers and asJahangir mentions in his Tzuk, Nurjahan's mother inventedrose perfume (Atr-e-gulab). In the 19th century, the compositeculture introduced a flower festival at the Mughal court(Pholon walon ki ser) which was celebrated every year underthe patronage of the Mughal king (Mirza Farhatullah Begwrote an excellentessay on it).

However, at the same time, religious extremists, like the earlyChristian Fathers, condemned the use of flowers for religiousas well as for secular purposes. Saiyyed Ismail Shaheed in hisTaqwaiyatul [man and Sirat-e-Mustaqeem forbade the use ofgarlands (Sehra) by the bridegroom in the wedding ceremony.

Interestingly, flowers were widely used in shrines wheredevotees offered flowers to the graves of Sufi saints. Theculture of flowers suffered whenever religious extremistscame to power, but flourished in secular environments. Thisobservation is correct even today.

112

FROM PAPPA TO POTATO

Technological inventions bring changes in societies andaccelerate their economic and social development. Similarly,new varieties of food contribute to changing humanbehaviour and social attitudes. The process of history showsthat humans gradually discovered different kinds ofvegetables, herbs, fruits and grains and after experimentsused them for their food.

To make it tastier, spices were added in the process ofcooking. As civilization progressed, the preparation andpresentation of food became an art which created a social gulfbetween the rich and the poor. With the growth of thepopulation, there was a need to discover more items foreating.

In the 15th century, a miracle happened: the old world cameto know about the new world, which introduced a number ofnew food items including potatoes. Their introduction andadoption greatly influenced the social,political and economiclife of Europe whose growing population was desperately inneed ofmore food.

Potatoes were Originallycultivated in Peru and Bolivia,areaswhere the Inca civilization was at its peak at the time of theEuropean's invasion. It was such an important crop thatbefore its cultivation, human sacrifice was made to make itfertile. Later on the llama, a South American animal, replacedhuman sacrifice. The sacrifice reflects how far the people ofthis area depended on potatoes for their livelihood.

113

Columbus first brought potatoes, in 1493, from Haiti to Spainwhere experiments were made to cultivate it. It appears fromhistorical evidence that the eating of potato was popular assacks of potatoes were used for food during long voyages,loaded on to Americanbound ships.

In the South American countries, potatoes were known by adifferent name: in Peru, they were known as 'pappa' and inChili as 'pogni'. From pappa it became batata and finallypotato in English. In Goa, it acquired the name of 'batatasurata' because it came to Goa from the port of Surat. It wasalso called 'earth apple'. The Iranians translated it intoPersian as Saib-i-zamini. They also referred to it as Alu-i­Malcolm on the name of an officerof the East India Companywho first introduced it to Iran. The Italians named it as'tortoufle' and the Germans called it as 'kartoffel'.

Although the Spaniards brought potatoes in the 15thcenturyto Europe, there were doubts about its use. People werereluctant to eat them instead of bread. Some refused becausethey were not mentioned in the Bible.Many thought them tocause leprosy. To counter doubts, the government of Francein 1771asked the Department of medicine of the Universityof Paris to give its opinion on whether they were useful ordetrimental to health. The response of the university waspositive. In the Prussian State, people were also not ready toeat the potato. In 1774, when Fredrick sent potatoes toKolberg where a famine-like situation prevailed, peopleresisted their use. "The things have neither smell nor taste.Not even the dogs will eat them, so what use are they to us"said the people of Kolberg.Fredrick became so angry that hesent an army and forced the peasants to cultivate them.

In their early history, the eating of potatoes related to socialstatus. The Spaniards, as conquerors, were reluctant to eatpotatoes, as they were the food of the local people. Similarly,the Englishwere also hesitant to use them, as it was the staplefood of the Irish regarded as an inferior race. Social statuswas also determined on what kind of potatoes people ate. In

114

the 18th and early 19th century, poor people could onlyafford to eat lumbers, a cheap variety, while aristocrats ategregorscup, a better quality of potatoes.

The ruling classes of Europe soon became interested inpopularizing the use of the potato, as it was a cheap food andcould prevent starvation. In Ireland, the potato greatlyinfluenced social, cultural, political, and economic history. Asthe climate was suitable for its cultivation it became animportant crop. However, Ireland suffered immensely fromEngland's political hegemony. The English landlords took allits grain away. No encouragement was made to promote itsindustry; subsequently, economic backwardness, constantrebellions against England, assassination of their leaders, civilwars, immigration, deforestation, famines, and droughtswere the causes that created shortages of food. Potatoes filledthis vacuum. According to one historian: "Irish farmers in theseventeen century were the first to realize that a quarter acreof land would yield twenty hundred weights of potatoes."

However, dependence on potatoes had negative effects in the1840's when there were severe famines, which resulted in thecatastrophic devastation of Ireland. Thousands of people diedof starvation and those who could afford it, immigrated toAmerica. The estimate is that three and half million peopleleft for America between 1851 and 1946. The social impactwas that the Irish male was forced to marry late and some ofthem preferred to remain unmarried. The government failedto alleviate the suffering resulting in political unrest that ledto a number of movements against England.

In Ireland, potatoes kept the level of poverty low for nearly 30years. The English factory owners took advantage of thembecause they provided them with cheap labour. In thisrespect potatoes as a cheap food helped the powerful classesto exploit the poor and needy and use them for their interest.Thus, on the one hand, it was used as cheap food, and on theother, it strengthened the class system in Europe. Van Gogh,who visited along with Zola, the settlements of miners,

115

painted the masterpiece 'Potato eaters' showing the grimmisery of the potato eaters. Zola wrote his famous novelGerminal on their living conditions.

The potato is still playing its historical role by providingpeople throughout the world with cheap and tasty food in theform of French fries and cutlets.

116

TOBACCO AND THE MUG HAL COURT

Medically, it is now established that smoking is hazardous forhealth and, therefore, to discourage habitual and addictedsmokers, there are laws and social restrictions which are inforce to keep public places clean from smoking.

But there was a time when its introduction thrilled the peopleof Europe and they readily became addicted to the new drugthat was brought first by the Spaniards, and then thePortuguese from the New World. When some of the fellowsof Columbus saw the inhabitants of Cuba smoking tobacco,their observation was recorded as such: "They light it at oneend and at the other, they suck, chew, or draw in with theirbreath that smoke with which their flesh is benumbed and soto speak, it intoxicates them, and in this way, they say they donot know fatigue."

Soon, it became popular throughout Europe. The Portuguesebrought it to southern India and from there it reached thecourt of Akbar in 1604-5by a Mughal noble whose name wasAsad Beg.He was sent by Akbar as an ambassador toBijapur.There, he saw tobacco and knowing that Akbar was fond ofrare and new things, he decided to bring it as a present tohim. According to him, when Akbar noticed something in thetray "he expressed great surprise and examined the tobacco,which was made up in pipeful; he inquired what it was, andwhere I had got it. Nawab Khan-i-Azam replied: "This istobacco, which is well known in Makkah and Madina, andthis doctor has brought it as a medicine for your majesty."

Akbar became curious and wanted to smoke it. Asad Beg

117

brought a handsome pipe for Akbar. It "was three cubits inlength, beautifully dried and coloured, both ends beingadorned with jewels and enamel." The court physician triedto forbid the emperor not to smoke a new drug which mightbe dangerous to his health, but Akbar insisted and to pleaseAsad Beg, smoked a little. He then asked the druggist whowas brought to the court about tobacco and its qualities. Hisreply was that there was nothing about it in his books. Thenfollowed an interesting discussion which indicates theintellectual atmosphere at the court of Akbar. A physiciansaid: "It is an untried medicine, about which the doctors havewritten nothing. How can we describe to Your Majesty thequalities of such unknown things? It is not fitting that YourMajestyshould try it."

To that, Asad Beg replied to the physician: "The Europeansare not foolishas not to know all about it. There are wise menamong them who seldom err or commit mistakes. How canyou, before you have tried it a thing and found out all itsqualities, pass a judgement on it that can be depended on byphysicians, kings, great men and nobles? Things must bejudged according to their good or bad qualities, and thedecisionmust be according to the factsof the case."

The physician responded: "We do not follow the Europeansin adopting a custom which is not sanctioned by our ownwise men without trial."

Asad Beg replied: "It is a strange thing, for every custom inthe world has been new at one time or other; from the days ofAdam till now, they have gradually been invented. When anew thing is introduced among a people, and becomes wellknown in the world, everyone adopts it. Wise men andphysicians should determine the good or bad qualities of athing; the good qualitiesmay not appear at once.

Akbar enjoyed the discussion and commented that: "truly,we must not reject a thing that has been adopted by the wisemen of other nations merely becausewe cannot find it in ourbooks; or how shall we progress?"

118

Asad Beg brought large quantities of tobacco and a number ofpipes that he generously gifted to nobles and his friends.Akbar himself never smoked it again. The author of Ma'asir-i­Rahimi also testifies that tobacco first came during Akbar'sreign and soon became popular among the Mughal nobility.However, it is assumed that there was also strong oppositionto smoking it. [ahangir, in 1617,mentions in Tuzuk that: "Asthe smoking of tobaccohad taken a bad effectupon the healthand mind of many persons, I ordered no one should practicethe habit. My brother, ShahAbbas, also being aware of its evileffects,had issued a command against the use of tobacco."

It appears that in the 17th century, there was widespreadopposition to tobacco smoking. That is why the ruler ofEngland, James I, forbade its use. It was also banned by theOttoman Sultan Murad (1623-1640).There was a deathpenalty for those who violated the ban.

Thomas Roe, the English ambassador who visited theMughalcourt during 1615-1618,found it difficult to procure tobaccoin India because of its ban and wrote to his friend, Popwell, inEngland, to send him four or five pounds for his personaluse. When a German traveller, Mandeslo, visited Indiaduring Shah Jahan's period, he observed that smoking wascommon among the nobility as well as among the commonpeople.We find that the later Mughal rulers had a separatedepartment for smoking known as Bhandar Khana. Kings andnobles made elaborate arrangements for smoking the hukkah.When the British came to India, in the early period they alsoadopted the habit. It no longer remained a habit of thenobility but common people adopted it with enthusiasm aswell. The hukkah became a symbol of communal fraternity.

119

INSCRIPTIONS ON TOMBSTONES

To bury the dead is an ancient practice. Believing that thedead may one day rise again and come to life, relatives andcommunity people buried personal belongings that could beused in the next life. These included pottery, food, jewels,ornaments, and weapon. Later on, when archaeologistsexcavated these ancient sites, the discovered antiquitiesbecame a great source of information, enabling historians totrace the history and culture of past societies.However, thepractice to bury things ceased when the concept of privateproperty and inheritance established in many societies, andthe custom to distribute the dead person's property amongheirs becameprevalent.

The tradition of erecting tombstones was started todistinguish the dead. Theywere not merely signs, but peoplealso inscribed on it the detail of the dead person's life, hisachievements, qualities and a prayer to get a dignified placein paradise. Sometimes, there were verses of famous poetsrelating to the mortal world and lamentation of worldlypleasures. A reminder to the living that this was their lastdestination. When historians study these inscriptionsbelonging to different ages, they make attempts to constructthe history of the socialand cultural values and traditions of aparticular period.

For example, if a society believed in the hereafter, theinscriptions showed their beliefs in punishment and rewardin the next world. If a society did not believe in any religion,their inscriptions did not deal with gods and their anger or

120

punishment. Historically, fear of the afterlife emerged whenthe 'great religions' appeared and formulated the concept ofheaven and hell, reward and punishment for good and baddeeds on the Day of Judgement. In pagan societies, there wasno fear of death; it was regarded as a natural phenomenonthat was accepted without any concern.

In this respect, the inscriptions on Roman tombstones andtheir readings are very interesting. Archaeologists andhistorians studied nearly 100,000epitaphs of Roman tombsthat show that they did not believemuch in the hereafter, andeven after death their interest in worldly affairswas not over.It was a Roman custom that nobles and resourceful personsused to build their tombs outside the city, on both sides of theroads, with the purpose that travellers and passersby shouldvisit their graves and read the inscriptions on theirtombstones. The writings are purely related to their privateaffairs. There are advice and instructions to relatives andfriends, and curses to rivals and enemies. Good wishes topassersby. In one of the epitaphs, travellers are addressed:"Read, passing friend, what role I played in this world. Andnow that you have read, have a pleasant journey." Atraveller, in response inscribed on the tomb: "You take care,too."

Somepeople left their message generally to the public, tellingthem to learn lessons from their life. In one of the inscriptionit is said: "I lived meanly so long as it was given me to live,and I advise you to enjoy yourself more than I did. That's life:You get this far and too farther. I never heeded the advice ofmy philosopher. Bewareof the doctors: they are the ones whokilled me."

Some, even after their death, never forget their opponentsand castigated them from their graves. A noble whose freedman betrayed him, dubbed him as a highway robber. A fatherannounced that he disinherited his disobedient daughter. Amother accused another woman, believing that she hadpoisoned her son. One of the epitaphs expresses the hope thathis wicked friend would feel the wrath of the gods of heaven

121

and hell.

Death of a child or young person was mourned and sorrowswere expressed on epitaph. Inone of such case, it is inscribed:"He was kidnapped by Bacchus to become his intimate andcompanion." Commenting on this Roman custom, PaulVeynewrites in A History of Private Life: "We know for a factthat when a Roman felt like reading a little, he took a walkoutside the city. Epitaphs were easier to read than the cursivescript of books. None spoke of suffering of the bereaved; allmentioned the social role of the deceased and his faithfuldischarge of duties towards family and friends. To makedinner conversation about one host's tombstone was not asocial gaffe, likely to bring morbid thought to his mind. Hewould have been reassured, rather, that his dignity andvirtues could remain in the public eye after he was gone."

It shows that how the concept of death has changed fromtime to time. However, one thing is certain_ man's deepdesire is to be remembered after his death. Some of them areremembered for a short period and some of them, who arelucky, remembered as saviours and heroes for a longer time.One cannot deny the role of epitaphs and inscriptions ontombstones that keep the memory of dead persons alive.

122

IMPERIALISM DEVOURS ITS OWN CHILDREN

Imperial powers, driven by misdirected nationalism and selfimposed righteousness had frequently attacked, based, andoccupied the weaker countries and subsequently plunderedtheir resources. In the wake of the victory, the rulers andgenerals are glorified for their exploits and treated as 'heroes'for their feats.

In the excitement and euphoria that follow the conquest,people forget the price that they had to pay for it. Soldiersand civilians die on both sides. In the case of continuedoccupation, administrators and occupying forces isolatedfrom their own cultural environment and milieu have tospend their prime time of life in a foreigncountry.

For example, it was the custom of the British in India to sendtheir officers back home after 55 years so that the Indianscould not see an old British officer. While youth was thesymbol of power, old age betrayed weakness that an imperialpower did not like to exhibit. Hence, one generation afteranother of the English people were made to pay this price forthe glory of their nation.

The question arises that when the British, as an imperialpower, took various countries of Asia and Africa into itscolonial fold and exploited their resources, who actuallybenefited from it: common people or the ruling elites? The19thcentury was the zenith of British imperialism, and it wasduring this period that great monuments were constructed toglorify the power and might of it, industries flourished byconsuming raw materials of colonized countries and traders

123

and merchants profited beyond their expectations. But thecommon people of the country suffered and faced miseriesand hardships of life and did not get any share in the spoils ofthe conquests.

C.M. Trevelyan writes in English Social History that in the 19thcentury "the term paupers as used in England and moreparticularly in agriculture districts embraces that numerousclasses of societywho depend for subsistence solely upon thelabour of their hands." When field labourers did not find anyjob and agitated for their demands in 1830, they weredeclared rioters and tried on criminal charges. Three of themwere hanged and 420 were transported as convicts toAustralia where the imperial administration needed workersto cultivate plantations on cheap wages. Later, it became ageneral practice to declare people convicts even for minorcrimes so as to send them to Australia for work. It isdocumented that the conditions of workers in the imperialand industrial age was miserable. They lived in slums wherethere existed no sanitation, no education, and noentertainment. They lived in perpetual fear ofunemployment. Men, women, and children worked for 16 to17hours without any offday.

Frederick Engeles, commenting on the conditions of workingclass in England, writes: "The consequence of all theseinfluences among the workers is a general weakening of thebody. There are few strong, well-built and healthy peopleamong them - at least among the industrial workers whogenerally work in closed rooms and with whom we are hereconcerned. They are almost all weakly, gaunt and pale. Theirbone structure is angular but not powerful. Their muscles areflabby from fever... their weakened bodies are unable towithstand illness and therefore seized by it on every occasion.That iswhy they age early and die young."

On the one side, the looted wealth concentrated in a fewhands with aristocracy becoming richer and richer. On theother side, the condition of the industrial towns was patheticand gloomy. In November 1836,Charles Dickens first visited

124

Manchester and gave a moving account of the city: "Throughmiles of cinder-paths' and blazing furnaces and roaring steamengines, and such a mass of dirt, gloom and misery as I neverbefore witnessed."

Cook Tylor, another visitor, also substantiated Dickens'impressions. He writes: "This is particularly the case in thetownship of Manchester: its narrow streets, its courts andcellars have been abandoned to the poorest grade of all. Therethey live higher from the view of the higher ranks by piles ofstores, mills, ware houses, and manufacturing establishments,less known to their wealthy neighbours who reside chiefly inthe open spaces on Cheetham, Broughton, and Chorlton."

Workers had no right to form trade unions and in case ofstrikes, were treated with utmost brutality. In July 1844, as aresult of strike, the workers of Manchester faced state wrathas described by Engeles in these words: "Strikers receivednotices to quit their cottages, and within a week all fortythousand of them had been put out into the street. Thismeasure was carried out with revolting savagery. The sick,the infirm, the aged, the infants, and even pregnant womenwere mercilessly kicked out of their beds into street."

It is evident that beneficiary of imperialism was thearistocracy which built palatial buildings for their residence,cultivated sophisticated customs and social rituals, adoptedfrock-coats,and top-hats as distinguished marks of their highstatus. John Buchannan, a visitor to London in 1899,observedthat: "Conversation was not the casual thing it has nowbecome, but was something of an art, in which competenceconferred prestige."

That was how the great imperial power of Britain treated itsown people in the hey-day of its power and, in the words ofKipling, carried white man's burden to their colonies tocivilize and modernize their barbarian and savageinhabitants.

Brutality is inherent in the ethos of imperialism. Once it isapplied to colonizers it, consequently, dehumanizes the

125

c

r'erial society. As a result, it subjugates not only otherlations but also humiliates and insults its own citizens.Recent events show that on the one side the Americanimperialists are claiming to liberate "conquered" people buton the other hand, they are violating their own constitutionand suppressing democratic rights and traditions and puttingtheir own people under surveillance. Imperialism has nohuman face. It is a monster that not only destroys andannihilates others but also devours its own people.

126

CHANGING FACE OF IMPERIALISM

The world has never remained free from imperialism. It hasemerged from time to time in different forms and shapes.Sometimes, its slogan was 'mission for civilization' andsometimes its justification was to establish an enlightenedrule and liberate people from tyranny and oppression.

With this moral force, it defended itself against the criticismand chargesmade against it. Suchwas the impact of the noblemission of imperialism that even up to the beginning of the20th century, the liberals and socialistsof Europe regarded itan essential tool to civilizeand modernize Asian and Africancountries. The situation turned after the First and SecondWorld Warwhen, in most of the colonized countries, freedommovements began, based on indigenous nationalism. Theleaders of these movements exposed the abuses ofimperialism, such as political domination, robbing of naturalresources, distortion of cultural values and economical andsocialbackwardness.

The resistance put imperial powers in defence. Imperialhistorians and politicians came forward with the argumentthat in actuality, occupation and extension of territories wasnot the motive of their rule. On the contrary, the real missionwas to improve the material condition of the colonizedcountries. In some cases, their argument was that thecolonized countries invited them to come and liberate themeither from their enemies or tyrant ruler. However, whennationalist movements became strong, the imperialintellectuals attacked them and denigrated them. Their main

127

target was 'Asian and African nationalism' which was usedby these movements as an affective instrument to fightimperialism.

The argument was that as nationalism was the product of theprogressive and advanced European society, the colonizedcountries, as backward and tribalized, could not producepure and progressive nationalism. Therefore, they called it afrustrated, polluted, distorted and tribal form that had nomatch with European nationalism. The main purpose of thiscriticism was that as nationalism was a product ofenlightened societies, it could not be successful in backwardcountries.

Frank Fueredi in his book The New Ideology of Imperialism:renewing the Moral Imperative traces different phases ofEuropean imperialism and that how European intellectualsridiculed the anticolonial movements. For example, W.J.Crocker, in his book Self-Government for the Colonie, camparesIndian nationalism with the Nazis. "In Mahatma Gandhi'sLand of Ahimsa and Satyagraha, I found myself back in pre­war Nazi Germany. Therewere the same massed processions,the same screaming press from which objectivityand decencyalike been abolished, the same murder-inciting speeches, themobs, the flags, the quasi-military parades, the specialsalutes, the uniforms, the oaths and the Heils (Jai Hind)."

Some argued that anti-colonial sentiments were a product oftheir psychological condition. The conflict betweenmodernity and traditions distorted the personality of a nativeand after depriving him of his spiritual values, reduced himas a 'marginal man'. This disintegration of his personalityturned him anti-colonial. Through political involvement, hewanted to retrieve his lost personality. Arguing it, their mainmotive was to prove that anti-colonial movements were notagainst occupation and exploitation, but an expression of thesickness ofmind.

After independence, when the Asian and African countriestook advantage of the rivalry of the West and the USSR,the

128

old colonial masters did not like this. Harold Macmillan, theBritish Prime Minister, once remarked: "It puts tremendousblackmailing weapon into the hands of quite unimportantcountries in the Afro-Asian camp who, if it were not thetremendous rivalry between Russia and the Free World,would not be able to sell their favours so dear."

After the fall of the USSR,the Third World countries againbecame vulnerable and open to Western and Americanintervention. To control their resources and rule over them, itis once again argued that the newly independent countrieshave failed to solve their problems by themselves. They areeither ruled by military dictators or corrupt politicians whohave no capacity to improve the conditions of the commonpeople. Keeping in view their performance, G.R. Elton, aBritish historian, remarked that the dissolution of the BritishEmpire was a colossal error. Another British historian, JohnCharmley, writes: "Look at Uganda under the British andlook at it now."

Armed with these arguments, the new imperial powers havemoral justification to reoccupy and rule over Third Worldcountries. On the other hand, the Third World countries aredefencelessas there is no rival power to support and protectthem. This has made new imperialism energetic and forceful.Now, it has new slogans for its expansion, such as terroriststates, weapon states, rogue states and fundamentalists andcriminals in those states which are not liked by the West.There is a moral justification for intervention, occupation andto rule over them till they are civilized and democratized.One of the columnists of the Daily Telegraph suggested: "Anugly, evil spirit is abroad in the Third World and it cannot becondoned; only crushed as Carthage was crushed by theRomans."

However, the role of imperialism in the past as well as in thepresent raises a number of questions. Are the nations of theThird World immature and need to be ruled by somewesternpower for progress and modernization? Why have the newlyindependent countries failed to solve their social, political

129

and economic problems, and always look to the advancedand developed countries for help and assistance? If thenations of the Third World countries are not capable, isn't thesolution to surrender their sovereignty and recognizepatronage ofWestern imperialism?

These are the questions that are required to be investigatedby Third-World intellectuals!

130

VIOLENCE IN A HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVE

When Amrozi, the suspect in Bali bombing case, wascaptured, the event was welcomed throughout the worldwith the hope that his trial would now lead to furtherdisclosures about the terrorist network behind the ghastlyincident and that all the perpetrators of the heinous crimewould ultimately be awarded the punishment that theydeserved. If this is a standard method to root out terrorism,then, as a corollary, why not those terrorists who bombedcivilians in Afghanistan and Iraq be pursued as well andpunished likewise?

Belgiumhad a law in its statute book to try anybody who isinvolved in crimes against humanity, but, strangely enough,only recently its Prime Minister, under the pressure ofWashington, announced to scrap it. So, the truth remains thatthose who are powerful are free to commit crimes againsthumanity without any fear.Not theweak ones.

Throughout history, violence has either been used as apolitical tool by powerful groups to crush those who wereopposed to their authority or by the weaker sections ofsociety to avenge injustice, exploitation, and to change thestructure of state in their favour. A study of history ofviolenceshows that it has passed through different stages. Inthe first stage, violencewas used against individuals. Itwerethe times when kings and monarchswielded absolute power,therefore, it was believed that removal of unpopular andcruel ruler was the only alternative to get rid of him. Suchincidents of violence gave a message to the new ruler: either

131

abandon the policy of his predecessor and reform statestructure or be ready to face the same fate.

In the second category, if religious sects or social/politicalgroups were subjected to oppression by the administration,the victimized parties reacted by attacking those individualswho were responsible for their bad fate. In Muslim history,we find that the policy of violence was effectivelyapplied bythe followers of Hassan bin Sabah, who were known asFidayeen. When harassed by the rulers, state administratorsand Ulema, the Fidayeen resorted to acts of violence to silencetheir opponents.

The prominent persons who were killed by them includedNazam ul Mulk Tusi (d.1092),Abbasid caliph al-Mustarshid(d.1135),his son al-Rashid (d.1135),the Saljuq Sultan Daud(d.1143),and Abul Mohsin (d.ll08), the jurist of Qizvin, whopreached against the Ismailis. The argument behind thekilling of rulers, religious scholars and administrators wasthat by eliminating them the propaganda against them wouldcease and that it was, in a sense, the best method to avoidbloody civil wars or internal riots. In modern parlance it canbe described as target killing. Generally people were notinvolved in the acts of violence.

The same policy was adopted in the modern times by thesecret societies that were formed in Italy, Germany, Austriaand Russia. They called themselves patriots and wanted tochange the political system in favour of the interests ofcommon folks. In Russia, where Czars were very powerfuland refused to reform the political system, the radical groupsmade attempts to eliminate them in the hope that thesuccessorsmight learn a lesson and change state policies.

In Iran where Muhammad Raza ruled with iron hand,revolutionary elements tried several times to assassinate himwith the motive to end his dictatorial regime. It is clear that ina monarchical and dictatorial structure where there are nodemocratic methods to change, violence becomes the onlyoption. It is evident from Nazi Germany where many

132

attempts were made on the life of Hitler, as there was noconstitutional way to check his unlimited authority. One canfind plenty of examples of such cases in history.

The third category of violence emerged against colonial ruleand occupied powers. The colonial powers not only militarilycrushed opposition but also introduced policies that werecontrary to the interests of colonized people. In India, forexample, the opposition groups used limited democraticmethods to put forward their demands but when they failedto attract government's attention towards their problems,they resorted to violence to pressure the colonialadministration.

It happened in the case of the partition of Bengal (1905)whenterrorist groups assassinated British officials, disruptedrailway system and made many attempts on the life of theviceroy. The terrorist activities extended beyond Bengal. Inone such incident that occurred at viceregal party atAhmadabad a boy suddenly appeared there and afterthrowing a bomb just disappeared. In another incident, on thewedding day of Lord Minto's daughter, a bomb was placedin a flowerpot. The viceroy and his family escaped death butthere were others who died as a result of the explosion.

After the First World War, Bhagat Sindh and his friendsunleashed terrorism against the colonial government. BhagatSingh was hanged in 1931on the charges of assassinating apolice officer in Lahore. Franz Fanon, in appreciation ofterrorism against colonial powers, argues that it givescourage to ordinary people to fight against the foreign rule.

In the present scenario,we see how radical and revolutionarygroups whose countries are occupied by foreign powers useviolence against them not only in occupied territories but alsoin their homelands. A prominent case is that of thePalestinians. They are fighting and resisting Israelis not onlyin Palestine but also in Israel. Chechnya's is also a similarcase. The Chechens are commiting acts of terrorism in Russiaas a response to its repressive policy.

133

Why these groups target civilians as well and create terroramong the population? Their argument is that they are in astate of war and targeting the enemy whether they becivilians or military personnel in their struggle for freedom.When the civilians support their government's policies anddo not protest against the violation of human rights, they areconstrued to be involved in war crimes against their people,and should be punished.

However, such an approach has its dark side too. As a resultof the acts of terrorism which the rebel groups consistentlycarry out, they lose sympathy and goodwill which theyinitially enjoyed of the common people for whom they aresupposed to be fighting. Instead, the occupying powers beginreceiving public support for their brutal actions to crushthem. This creates a situation in which violence begetsviolence. It is evident from cases of Palestine and Chechnyawhere violenceon both sides continues unabated.

The worst type of violence is 'state terrorism'. It happenswhen the state itself confers legitimacy to its acts of violenceto crush its opponents in the name of 'state interest'. It nolonger remains confined within limits of the state's territorybut goesbeyond its borders. TheCIAof the United States andMosad, the Israeli secret service, are well known forpractising state terrorism and one can cite several instances toshow how they assassinated the opponents of theirgovernment's policies in other countries.

Sometimes,states also send terrorist groups to other states todestabilize them by acts of terrorism. It happened in the caseof Contras who were supported by the CIA to destabilizeNicaragua's leftist government. The Jihadi groups of Pakistanare another example which are secretly sent to the occupiedKashmir to destabilise security conditions there.

In another category of violence, sectarian or political groupsin an attempt to weaken a government, they are opposed to,commit acts of violence inpublic places and create a sense ofinsecurity among general population. In these cases, they

134

disturb normal life and terrorize the people in general bybombing bus stations, railways, and market places. When thegovernment takes action against these groups, they, in a bidto take revenge, attack people to create an impression that theincumbent administration is too weak to protect its people.

By resorting to such offensive actions, it also warns theauthorities against taking any punitive action against themand also that it was high time that it changed its policies.Sometimes, secret agencies of the government organizeterrorist groups to use them in their own interest such as thegroup of Bhinderwala in East Punjab which had the supportof the government. However, in most of the cases, suchgroups blackmail their patrons and become a liability forthem.

The question is: Is violence a solution to all the problems? Ifnot, then what policy should be adopted by the state to solveproblems? In this regard, one should remember that thepolicy of violence, whether adopted by groups or state, isessentially an expression of weakness, not power. It createsanarchy, choas and uncertainty and fails to produce anypositive results.

History tells us that only those resistance movements wereable to meet victory which had strong intellectual and moralbase. A case in point is AfricanNational Congress. It adoptedarmed struggle as a policy of resistance but simultaneouslyalso launched an intellectual and moral movement whichsubsequently enabled it to gain wider international supportagainst apartheid practised by South Africa's white racistregime. This should become a moral for resistancemovements in Chechnya,Palestine,and Iraq.

135

DEMOLITION OF TEMPLES

It is the phenomenon of history that conquerors, afterdefeating their counterparts and occupying their territories,had demolished their places of worship in order to humiliatethem and assert their political domination. Sometime, theyconverted these places to their worship centres. In themedieval Indian history, the Muslim rulers followed thispolicy and demolished a number of temples or convertedsome of them to mosques as a symbol of their power. Theirdeeds of desecration of temples and breaking of idols arereported in details in the Persian text with an admiration toraise their status as devoted and virtuous Muslims.Mahmudof Ghazna (989-1030)is on the top who razed a number oftemples including Somanatha and earned the title of 'idolbreaker' Hindusha Qasim Firishta in Tarlkh-i-Firishta quotes aresponse of Mahmud which he sent to the Raja of Thanesarthat: "WeMuslimsbelieve that in case of preaching Islam anddestroying the worshipping places of the infidels we wouldbe rewarded profusely in the next world." It became thetradition of the court historians to eulogize their patron andattribute to him the acts of demolition of temples inhyperbolic language.

During the colonial period, on the evidence of these Persiantexts, the Britishhistorians and administrators propagated thetheme of demolition of temples to create a divide between theHindus and the Muslims. Elliot & Dowson in the History ofIndia as told by its own historians selected those excerptsfrom the Persian texts, which show the tyranny and bigotry

136

of the Muslim rule.

The issue of demolition of temples by the Muslim rulers waspoliticized during the communal period in the 1920s. Againbased on the Persian texts, the communalist Hindu historianspresented exaggerated figures of the temples that weredestroyed during the Muslim rule. The Muslim historiansdefending these acts argued that the temples were razed tothe ground because of their role in political intrigues orbecause of moral corruption. Itwas also pointed out that thenumber was highly exaggerated and in reality only few andnot so many, as mentioned by the other side, weredemolished.

The issue again surfaced recently as a result of 'Hindutva'ideology when the extremist Hindus leaders accuse theMuslim rulers as foreigners who demolished the Hindutemples as a result of sheer religious fanaticism.This justifiedthem to destroy the Babri mosque which they claimed wasbuilt on the site of Rama's janambhomi (birthplace).

Recently,RichardM. Eaton in his essay Temple Desecration andIndo-Muslim States looks at the issue of demolition of templesfrom a different angle. According to him, in case of MahmudofGhazna, the attack on the temples was just to plunder theirwealth which he required for building of his Empire.However, later on the temples were demolished not forplunder but to assert political domination. As some of thetemples were closely connected to the person of a ruler whowas regarded sometime as incarnation of the deity andsometimes its deputy representative. In such cases thedefeated and rebel ruler's temple and his diety weredesecrecated as a punishment. Such as Viththala atPandharpur in Maharashtra or Jagannath at Puri in Orissa.Eaton proves that the Muslim rulers did not demolish thosetemples that had no connection politicallywith the ruler suchas Khajerao temples, which were left untouched. He quotesthat from 1192to 1729only 8 temples were demolished.

137

However, it was the practice that once a territory came undertheir control, they not only protected temples but alsorepaired them. For example in 1326 Muhammad Tughluq,after the conquest of the Deccan, ordered to repair a Sivatemple in his territory. Sultan Shahabuddin (1353-73) ofKashmir refused to melt the silver and golden idols. Inanother case, the Ulama asked Sikander Lodi (1489-1517)notto demolish temples as itwas against the tenets of Islam.

In case of the Mughal rulers, they protected the temples andprovided them financial assistance. The Rajput mansabdarsof the Mughal court not only repaired the old temples butalso constructed the new ones. However, in case of rebellionsand disloyalty of the Hindu rulers, the Mughal emperors tooksevere action and destroyed the temples in the territory of therecalcitrant raja or ruler such as in 1613,[ahangir (1605-1627)ordered to desecrecate an idol which was in the templebelonging to an uncle of Rana Amar of Mewar who wasfighting against the Mughals. Shahjahan (1628-1658)andAurangzeb (1658-1707),thus, demolished the temples orbroke the idols only in those caseswhen therewere rebellionsagainst them.

Eaton and Romila Thapar both give a number of instanceswhen the practice of demolition of enemy's temples anddesecrecation of images as revenge was prevalent before thearrival of the Muslim rulers in India. Romila Thapar statesthat the Pallavia king took away the image of Ganesh fromthe temple of Vatapi. There were instances when the Hindukings violated religious sanctity of the Jain temples.Aurangzeb, who is accused of destroying temples, appearsalso as a patron of the Hindu houses ofworship. On the basisof Eaton's argument he took action against those temples thatwere located in rebellions terrotries. Now, there are newevidence that he patronized Jangambari at Kashi,Someshwarnath at Allahabad, and Umnanda at Guwahati.He bestowed jagirs to a number of Jain temples whose framinare still preserved by their priests. He also allotted a piece of

138

land to Mahaka at Ujjain for the expenses to keep lightingthroughout the year.

Ifwe analyse the whole issue of demolition of temple with abroader perspective, we can see that it was a question ofassertion of political power rather than to violate religioussensibilities of the enemy. However, when history is used forpolitical motives, it is distorted, and misinterpreted. In case ofdemolition of temple both the Muslim and the Hinduhistorians are responsible to misrepresent the issue and usefor their political ends.

139

INDEX

AAbdali, Ahmad Shah: 71,72,73,74,75Abul Fazl: 3,5, 83, 84, 85, 86, 90, 93Akbar (Mughal Emperor): 3, 25, 53, 54, 77, 79, 80, 81, 82, 83,

84,85,86,87,88,90,92,93,117, 118, 119,Alexander (Mecedonian King): 3, 56, 58Aristo-phane: 7Arjuna: 1,2Asad Beg: 117, 118, 119Aurangzeb (Mughal Emperor): 3, 136, 138

BBabur (Mughal Emperor): 76, 77Babusse, Henri: 8Battuta, Ibn: 76Berlin, Issiah: 30Bhutto, Z. A.: 39Bismarck (German Chancellor): 31Bordeaux, A.: 45Burckhard t: 2, 3Burke, Peter: 37Bush, George: 50, 60

141

CCaroe, Olaf: 34Carr, E.H.: 35Curzon (Viceroy): 46Cyrus: 3

DDangle, Arjun: 27

EEinstein, A.: 11Elias, Norbert: 16, 17, 109Euripides: 7

FFiruz Tughlaq (Sultan): 92

HHalague Khan: 69Harun al Rashid (Abbasi Caliph): 68,69, IDS, 132Hegel: 30Heraclitus: 2Hussain, Saddam: 9,50

JJai Singh: 45Jaswant Singh: 3[ahangir (Mughal Emperor): 3, 77, 80, 92,112,119,138Joshi, B.R.: 28

KKabir, Bhagat: 23, 24Kant, 1.: 8Khattak, Khashhal Khan: 54

142

Kraus, Karl: 9

LLasaulx: 2Latif, S.M.: 34

MMahmud of Ghazna: 53, 136, 137Manrique,S.: 44Manucci:Machiavelli: 3Mamum (Abbasid Caliph): 69, 70, 106, 133Mill, James: 52, 119Mirak, Yusuf: 54Mir, Taqi: 74,75

NNapolean: 10Nehru: 53

pPanikar, K. N.: 22Pantawame, Gangadhar: 26Pericles: 5Pfander, Carl: 80

QQasim, Muhammad bin: 53

RRoosvelt, Theodore: 6Russell, B.:9

SShahjahan (Mughal Emperor): 29,45,47,54,74,138

143

Shivaji: 24, 77

Sleeman, Major: 45

Spengler, 0.:

Stutner Von Bertha: 10

TThucydides: I, 4Toyan-bee, A.: 18

VVeronen, C.:Vidyapati: 25

WWaliullah, Shah: 73

ZZafar, Bahadur Shah (Mughal Emperor): 77Zia ul Haq: 39

144