6.Changing Approach to Study Ancient Indian History

The following are different approaches to history writing:

Indologist Approaches/ Orientalist Approaches
Colonial Approaches
Nationalist Approaches-Reaction Glorifying Ancient India
Marxist Approaches

With the arrival of European settlers in India, history writing began in ancient times. Indians had historical writings such as the Rajatarangini and Puranas, but modern history writing as we know it now started with the Europeans.
Early History of India, written by Vincent Smith in 1904, served as the introduction to the first comprehensive history of ancient India. His primary source-based book placed a strong emphasis on political history. He took an arrogant and fundamentally imperialist stance.

He highlighted the significance of foreign invasions, and half of his book was devoted to Alexander’s invasion. It was claimed that India was a despotic country without political unity prior to the arrival of British colonial rule.

Orientalist Approaches

The second half of the 18th century saw the beginning of modern research into the history of ancient India. Due to requirements of the colonial government, a few East India Company employees were interested in learning about India. This resulted in the founding of the Asiatic Society of Bengal (1784) and the Indological Study. Scholars like William Jones and Max Mueller were significant during this time. Large-scale translations of widely read Sanskrit texts began. The history of ancient India starts at these points.

Colonial Approaches

Colonial historians: James Mill, V.A.Smith Their agenda was to present India as a land of despotism. They stressed the view that Indians were not capable of governing themselves.
They emphasized the role of foreigners. They wanted to justify their rule.

Nationalist Approaches

It was an opposition to the colonial strategy. They were responding to the colonial revisionism of our history. B.G. Bhandarkar, V.K. Rajwade, Rajendra Lal Mitra, R.C. Majumdar, and Nilkanth Shastri are nationalist historians. In order to emphasize the features of ancient India, nationalist historians painstakingly pieced together information from texts, inscriptions, coins, and other material remains.

The nationalist undertone in these academics’ writings is evident in their emphasis on the indigenous origins of every significant cultural advancement.
It is also evident in their quest for the golden periods, which resulted in their exaltation of the Vedic and Gupta eras.
South India was included in the story.

Limitations

It exalted the accomplishment while having certain limitations.
The Brahmanical viewpoint was being accorded greater weight.
They were emphasizing interpretation grounded in Sanskrit more.
The average person was disregarded.
The Royal viewpoint was their main concern. more drawn to political history, especially that of kings and their courts.

Marxist Approach

Political history gave way to non-political history after independence. The Marxist approach was instrumental in this change.

Marxist historians follows below approach:

❖ Economic determination -> Historical Materialism.
❖ Common Man
❖ More importance to archeological Sources
❖ Focus on society and the role of women.

Limitations of Marxist Approach

❖ Neglect of texts
❖ No focus on culture
❖ Neglect Political development
❖ Marxist historians -> D.D.Kaushambhi, R.S.Sharma, and Romila Thapar are
considered

D.D. Kosambi’s Introduction to the Study of Indian History (1956) marked a turning point in the Marxist interpretation of ancient Indian history.

According to Upinder Singh

❖ Marxist historians’ most significant contribution was to reorient historical narrative away from events and toward the identification of social and economic structures and processes, particularly those connected to agrarian relations and class stratification.

❖ Marxist historiography also helped to illuminate the past of marginalized and non-elite groups, some of whom had endured centuries of oppression and marginalization.