The history sheet

The sense of deja vu is inescapable. Four years ago, at the height of NDA rule, an NCERT director introduced history books that were accused of a ‘‘rightist bias’’, factual inaccuracies and being ‘‘unscientific’’. The books the BJP-led government replaced have now been reintroduced.

If the plethora of history textbooks is confusing, consider what it must do to the hapless schoolchild!

It all began — as even a contest of contested histories must begin — one evening in 1999 when J.S. Rajput, a physicist by training who had been appointed NCERT director by the BJP government, was handed a file to sign.

‘‘It was approval to fight a case in the Punjab and Haryana High Court,’’ recalls Rajput, ‘‘against Sikh groups that had filed a petition against a textbook. It said ‘the Mughal administration ordered the execution of Guru Tegh Bahadur’ … As if he were a criminal.’’ It also speculated ‘‘family intrigue’’ was the cause of his death.

‘‘I called for the book,’’ says Rajput, ‘‘and consulted Khushwant Singh. He told me the author had quoted only some of the contemporary sources.’’

Subsequently, Rajput’s NCERT framed a new curriculum, on the basis of which new syllabi were devised and new books commissioned. The old history textbooks were junked. Some of them had been around for three decades, having been written by the people like Bipan Chandra, Romila Thapar, Satish Chandra, eminent “progressive” historians.

THE new curriculum was taken to court. In September 2002, the Supreme Court upheld it and the new textbooks, written by BJP-friendly historians, were introduced. To quote Satish Chandra — his Medieval india was replaced but is now back — ‘‘The history books that were being taught till recently were infused with a political party’s own agenda. School textbooks should never be based on legends and myths.’’

The books introduced in 2002 were of uneven character. ‘‘There were honourable exceptions such as Meenakshi Jain,’’ says a former HRD Ministry official, ‘‘but some read badly.’’ Devendra Swarup, doyen of ‘‘right’’ history says, ‘‘Yes, improvements could have been made. But at that point it was important to remove books with a leftist prejudice. And please consider some of the (left) authors of those books are not great scholars. One of them is an MA third class, known only as a textbook writer.’’

THE battle is getting complicated. Within the ‘‘secular’’ historian camp there are divisions between those who have a stake in the textbook market and those who don’t.

Authors like Satish Chandra, Bipin Chandra and R.S. Sharma are octogenarians. Says a ‘‘liberal’’ historian, ‘‘They have to give way to younger historians, from their side.’’ Some historians have advocated doing away with the chronological approach altogether and focusing on themes — gender, caste.

The divisions are apparent. Two years ago, Delhi’s Congress government asked its state body to write history textbooks, rejecting the ‘‘communal’’ NCERT ones. The project was overseen by educationist Krishna Kumar.

Recently, the Delhi government’s textbooks were torn apart by a leftist historian. Among other things, he objected to baby Pervez Musharraf’s migration to Pakistan being listed as a noteworthy event in Delhi, 1947-48.

Kumar is now the UPA-appointed NCERT director. His job is to frame a new curriculum, devise new syllabi and commission new textbooks.

So by 2006-07 expect new textbooks, albeit a case of New Left replacing Old Left.

Says Bipan Chndra, ‘‘I am in favour of new textbooks provided they are of historical insight and integrity and not based on myth … I am in favour of the syllabus being reviewed very frequently and the books accordingly updated.’’

Interestingly, Bipan Chandra’s Modern India was first written in 1990. Fifteen years on, the newest reprint will be taught to class XII pupils. As in 1990, ‘Modern India’ still ends in 1947.