COMPLETE NOTES ON HISTORY – 1

IN GENERAL, WHAT IS HISTORY?

History is a record of unique events in the life of mankind; it is the stir and vibration of life. It deals
with not only understanding and conserving our past, but also understanding the events going on in the
present. Thus, it can be regarded as the philosophy in motion. As Napoleon observed, “History is the
only true philosophy and the only true psychology.” It is a drama in which God played the game, while
man watched and learned.

DEFINE HISTORY.

Etymologically, the word ‘history’ is derived from the Greek word ‘Istoria’ meaning enquiry, research,
exploration or information. Dionysius of Halicarnassus gave the idea that history should be taught by
using examples. Given below are a few definitions of history by various historians:-

1) ARISTOTLE - History is an account of the unchanging past in the sense that human nature does not
change, and that all activities that originate with the same intentions and motives differ only in the
degree of details and not in their basic nature.
2) POLYBIUS AND THUCYDIDES – History is the story of things worthy of being remembered,
reminding us that all and sundry events do not constitute history and that only unique, significant and
remarkable happenings would figure in it. For e.g. this could include the scientific advancements that
bring us utility, knowledge and power to us, the artistic achievements that confer upon us truth, beauty
and pleasure and the intellectual growth which makes us rich in culture, philosophy and religion.
3) FRANCIS BACON – History is the discipline which makes men wise. However, wisdom is different
from mental sharpness; wisdom is the ability to distinguish between right and wrong, it is the capacity
to see all things purely as objects of understanding.
4) ROSSAEU – History is the art of choosing from among many lies that one which most resembles
the truth.
5) PROF. F.W.MAITLAND – History is what men have done and said, above all what men have
thought.
6) RENIER - History is the memories of societies.
7) A.L. ROWSE – History is essentially the record of the life of men in societies in their geographical
and physical environment. This can be seen when we consider:-
a. The severe winter in Russia and the non-availability of food defeated the most powerful invaders.
b. Climate conditions of Africa earned it the name “Dark Continent”.
c. England escaped many a times from foreign invasions due to its isolated position.
d. South India was saved from the foreign invasions than North India.
8) BURY – History is science; no less or no more.
9) E.H. CARR – History is an unending dialogue between the present and the past. History without a
problem to solve or a fresh idea to display is a bare chronicle, a sort of catalogue of events lacking in
soul and spirit.
 10) HERODOTUS (Father of history) – History is scientific, humanistic, rationalistic and self-
revelatory.
a. History is scientific in the sense that it is written in a systematic and organized way, based on
evidence and witnesses. It does not take everything at face value.
b. History is humanistic since it deals with significant actions done by human beings at determinate
place and time. It is distinct from myth which is basically concerned with non-human beings with a
dateless past. For e.g. Herodotus’ Istoria which deals with the Persian war (490-480/79 B.C.) amply
demonstrates this fact. His humanistic account perceived the war as a critical collective experience of
both the Persians and the Greeks.
c. History is rationalistic because historical enquiry is guided by reason, logic and sound common
sense. Human reason which is the critical faculty of man, is best used to unlock the riddles or the
hidden past.
d. History is self-revelatory because the study of past human actions seek to tell us,
i. First what it is to be a man;
ii. Second, what is it to be the kind of man you are;
iii. Third, what is it to be the man you are and nobody else is.

History according to Herodotus deals with human actions as well as thoughts on those actions. History,
understood in this way, seeks to establish to bring out what is hidden, to clarify what is obscure, to
make explicit the implicit, to assist us to act more rationally. He believes, history is a royal highway to
self-knowledge and not merely a jejune (boring) miscellany (grouping) of names and dates or dry-out
facts. His writings always appealed to the wider humanity.

11) FREUD – Historical records are a law of right or wrong.

NATURE OF HISTORY

In the past, history was a mere catalogue of events serialized in a descriptive manner. However, we
need to study history in a critical and scientific way; wherein historians think instead of merely
repeating the stories found in the books. This is needed because history has become the study of reality.

The function of the historian is neither to love, nor condemn nor be free from the past, but to master
the past in order to understand its bearing on the present.

Historical activity involves three different types of functions which should be performed
simultaneously,
a) First is to get at the truth, to know the entire human past as it actually happened and to be sure that
solid facts are at hand.
b) Secondly, one should interpret the facts, assess, evaluate and explain their significance.
c) Thirdly, the facts must be presented in a clear and attractive manner.

These make historian a scientist to gather facts, a philosopher to interpret them and a litterateur to
express them.

HISTORY REPEATS ITSELF

Some historians believe that history repeats itself from time to time, while other historians believe
otherwise.

Historians who believe this argue that human mind is alike all over the world and hence the forces that
influence the events are also alike. In this way, the events are co-related to one another and they always
react in a particular manner, because they have a basic unity. For e.g. the world wars repeated itself, the
aggressive policies of Napolean and Hitler did not last and were defeated, Kalinga war showed us that
might is never right; all these point out that history always repeats itself.

However, other historians point out that history is the means to record important events and human
deeds. Every event of history is unique and it has no uniformity. If we accept the theory of
repetition of history, it means that there is no advancement in society. Every individualistic deed is
unique in itself. In some countries, different cultures develop and each has its own custom. They
express that changes in society reflects the viewpoint.

VIEWPOINT OF DIFFERENT HISTORIANS ON NATURE AND SCOPE OF HISTORY

E.H. CARR held the idea that history is the unending dialogue between the present and the past and
value of a historian does not lie in cataloguing of events but in solving as many controversies relating to
the past and bringing it to the society. He says that history can never be known fully but only partially.
Thus, a historian needs to use his imaginative power. The past is never known fully and every historian
attempts to discover a portion of it and come closer to reality either by adding new information and/or
by offering new interpretation. This involves a very intimate dialogue between the historian who is in
present and the events which is in the past. To a historian, past is an unexplored region waiting to be
discovered and the only tool with which he could reconstruct the past is his reflective ability which
forms an image on his mind through closer discussion or dialogue on the subject.

The standard of values which the historian applies to his study of the past is determined by the
general, social, philosophical, religious and economic ideas of his age, either because he is in accord
with the predominant thoughts of his time or because he is in revolt against them.

To a Marxist historian the story of the growth of human thought and behavior is primarily the story
of influence and effect upon man of his economic conditions. Past events have to be revalued in light of
fresh developments and ideas. In addition, advances in other branches of knowledge bring to the
historian new means of discovering the facts of the past; suggest to him new methods of handling his
sources. Ex. Archaeology, statistics, graphology, photography, radiography, psychology an even pollen
analysis – brought to light new facts about the past.
HERODOTUS belonged to the epic age and hence the element of story-telling is strong in him.
BURRY belongs to the modern age of Science and Technology and hence he couldn’t resist calling
history a science no less and no more.
CROCE is a strong advocate of the view that the past and the present are linked in one chain of
common process.
Modern thinker R.G. COLLINGWOOD subscribes to the idea through his philosophy that history is
nothing but the reenactment of past experience and that the subject matter of history is reflective
thought. He says historical writing is a mental activity, in which the historian forms a mental image by
his study of the past records.
WHAT IS ANCIENT IS ALSO MODERN AND WHAT IS MODERN IS ALSO ANCIENT:
Agriculture, which was the main occupation of the Indians, was prevalent in the ancient times as well
as present now. The hold on religion is similar as in the past. Kautilya and Kalidasa are as much
relevant today as in past. The messages of Buddha or Jesus Christ or Muhammed or Gandhi are as
fresher today as in the past.
However thinkers like RANKE AND BURRY do not approve of this idea. They feel that the job of the
historian is merely to reconstruct the past, to represent the facts in its naked form and to serve the
historical dish undressed.
Nature of history varies according to the prevailing philosophy of the time and even historian to
historian. GREEKS emphasized rational interpretation while the ROMANS gave political twist to it,
the CHURCH HISTORIANS said God lives in history while the GERMANS made it more
philosophical. The MARXISTS made it more materialistic and more socialistic while the BRITISH
made it more imperialistic. The vies of the ARAB, CHINESE AND INDIAN are all different.

HISTORIOGRAPHY
Every modern historian should know how history has been written. Historiography is nothing but the
history of history. It is the history of the historical thought. It is an independent branch in its own right.
It is neither solely political, nor social nor cultural nor moral nor literary but a combination of all these.
The nature of historiography is not the examination of particular event but the study of the ideas which
prompted a historian. It is to understand the psychology of the historian; to form an estimate of his
work to know his technique of writing and to pass judgment on his performance. It has become a
special branch for itself and its nature and scope has special value to research.
There were hardly any attempts to record the history of historical writing before 19 th century; just as all
the other branches of social science, Greeks were the pioneers off historiography. The Greeks, Romans,
Arabs, Chinese had a strong sense of history whereas Indian thought was conscious of the controversial
nature. Excepting legends, myths and traditions in Puranas, we have hardly any great historical writing
comparable to the historical literature of either the West or the Middle East.
ANCIENT HISTORIOGRAPHY
Historiography was a product of the Greek mind; they made it a very powerful branch. It did not begin
until the 5th or 6th century before Christ. Earlier they used poetry; they were called the logographers;
those who combined words to make a speech. However, after Herodotus, writers took to simple prose
in order to sketch legends and traditions.
In the earlier times, the Greek historiographers wrote poetry in such a way that they contained a sketch
on the conditions of the contemporary society. For e.g. Homer belonged to this class of poets; his
poems contained a lot of historical material. Hesiod, another great poet also attempted to furnish
respectable ancestry to the Greek Gods.
Thus, ballads can be considered as the first instrument for the rise of historical literature. The
logographers marked a transition from myth to history. Whereas the Greeks witnessed the growth from
myth to ballad to history, Indians remained in ballad alone without pushing the ballad to the next
logical stage of history.
HERODOTUS
Herodotus is celebrated as the Father of history. He can be considered as the link between the
logographers on one hand and historians on the other. He hailed from Ionia- the place of great writers
and thinkers.
Herodotus chose Persian war as his subject of history. He wrote his narration in the form of story-
telling. He talks about Croesus who was the first prince of Asia to attack Greece. Herodotus gives his
genealogy, recounts his greatness and the fall and rise of the empire. There is a sort of continuity in his
narration. One central idea leads to another, until the conflict he narrates between the Greeks and
Persians becomes a comprehensive history of both Greeks and Persians. He traces the events after the
death of Cyrus to Cambysses who conquered Asia and Egypt.
A noteworthy feature of his writing was that he travelled from places to places like the Arab historians
in order to obtain the first hand information. The significance of his writing can be realized by
1) His consistency and continuity in writing;
2) The vigorous spirit he displays and the powerful style he adopts to make his narrative most
interesting.
However there were certain drawbacks which were unavoidable.
1) His ignorance of the language of the other people which is excusable because learning Persian or
Egyptian was difficult.
2) His inherent weakness to believe in what he hears; which is a serious mistake as a history writer.
3) His grace of style stood in his way of the accuracy of his data.
Despite all these, he possessed great virtue; a sincere purist of an object and clear understanding of the
problems; he could easily be considered not only the first but one of the greatest historians. Thucydides
too remarks in similar fashion that “No history has ever has a nobler exponent than Herodotus”.
Herodotus worked on nine books, each named after one of the Greek Goddesses or muses. There was
coordination, rhythm and easy flow in his writing that sustains the interest of the readers.
ANCIENT INDIAN HISTORIOGRAPHY
Indian civilization is one of the oldest civilization; older than Greek or Chinese. It is not an easy task to
study ancient Indian historiography. All records reveal that Indians touched every aspect of life in their
writings; however,

1) If Chronology is the eye of history – ancient Indian history will have always to be blind
2) If history is a scientific record of unique events – Indians were ignorant of it
3) If history is an inquiry into the past with the logical purpose of explaining its causes and
consequences – ancient Indians had no historical sense
4) If history is philosophy in motion – Indians could never be excelled
5) If history is the record of the growth of human mind – Indians do surely have a history –
shape pattern may not conform to the text book definition of history
6) If history is the reflection of what goes on in the realm of reality – we have to revise our
old notion (idea) that Indians were poles apart from historical consciousness
Undoubtedly, there is limitless stuff of history concealed in the form of legends, myths, epics, puranas,
and variety of literary records which, not history in themselves but historical material of which history
is composed.
It can be seen that they deliberately avoided doing research. Lack of contact with the outside world,
particularly in the realm of exchange of ideas could be a reason for the same.
KALHANA
He was from Kashmir; he was exposed to Chinese and Islamic historical traditions. His writing was a
chronicle of the king of Kashmir. Kashmir can be considered as the only region in India where the
tradition of historical writing was maintained. Kalhana was the son of Campaka; he wrote Rajatarangini
which consists of 8000 highly polished verses in eight books which was composed in 1148 AD.
He had historical sense. He said that history should make vivid before one’s eyes pictures of bygone
age. He had a critical mind which did not accept as true whatever was mentioned in the sources. He
utilized all types of datas including chronicles, inscriptions, prasastis of the earlier kings as well as
coins. He has dealt at length on the merits of benevolent despotism which comes closer to the ideas of
Plato. He touched on the drawbacks of feudalism which has led to rivalries, conflicts, instabilities;
indirectly suggesting reforms in the existing form of government. However it is to be noted that
Kalhana was primarily a poet and only secondarily a historian.
KAUTILYA’S ARTHASHASTRA was fully discovered only in the 20th century due to Shamasastri.
R.C. MAJUMDAR opined that after all we need not be so much disappointed by the absence of
historical literature; it is there in plenty only if we have the eyes to see it, though it may not be in the
way presented to us like Herodotus or Thucydides.
K.A. NEELAKANTA SASTRI opined that literature, in other countries, is the base of history; in India,
it if often a snare. He felt it really strange indeed.
Finally, if history is an X-ray machine that gives us the idea of the inner working of the human mind,
then the existing literature exactly serves that purpose.
RAMAYANA is a collection of heroic poems or legends. It highlights the ancient monarchical form of
government. It provides reference to the existence of caste system and the Brahmins enjoyed a high
place in the society. A patriarchal system existed and people were expected to live a pure, simple and
spiritual life. Polygamy existed in the royal families.
MAHABHARATHA is the longest epic in the world. It throws light that even during at that time,
monarchy was the form of government. It throws light on the later Vedic periods. One can observe that
polygamy still existed at the period. However, the position of women reduced. Education was provided
by the gurus. However it is a debate that polyandry reduced that morale of the people.
PURANAS provide immense material for the ancient Indian historiographers. They seem similar to
some kind of historical novel. They are 18 in number and gave important information about the ancient
dynasties. These were probably composed in the 8th century B.C. The Vishnu, Vayu, Bhagawat, Matsya
and the Brahma puranas were significant from the historical point of view. It also provided source
material for the Nandas, the Mauryas and the Kushanas. It also provided the history of the royal
families, evolution of the State and all the events from that of the Buddha to the end of the Guptas. It
also describes the powerful dynasties of the south; the Kanvas, Sungas and the Andhras. The Matsya
purana provides information on the main events about the Andhras. It provides the genealogical list of
the rulers, which is not provided in any other source.
BUDDHIST LITERATURE made valuable contribution to the Indian historiography. Although a
religious literature, it possessed rich material which shows the extent of historical writing. It includes
TRIPITAKAS which throws light on the important events of life of Buddhists. The
VINAYAPITAKAS describes the foundations of the Buddhists community. The proceedings were
apparently in the chronological order to record the subsequent events. SITTU PITIKA and
ABHIDHARMA PITIKA throws light on the socio-economic, political and religious condition of India
during the 6th century B.C. MAHAVISHASHYA by ASVA GOSHA also deals with the important
aspects of the Indian history. It also gives information about Chandra Gupta Maurya, Ashoka and
Kanishka.
JAIN HISTORIOGRAPHY: PARISISTHA PARVANA by HEM CHANDRA and
VIJAKSHYAPRIJNAPTI points out many historical events of great importance. PADMA CHARITA
by VIMALA and VASUDEVAHINDI by SANGHADASA throw light on Vikramaditya and the
conquest of Sakas and Synthias.
BANABHATTA contributed heavily to the development of the Indian history. He wrote HARSHA
CHARITA in the first quarter of the 7th century A.D. The book HARSHA CHARITA was a biography
of his patron PUSHYABHUTI HARSHA. It was not a mere work of history; it was a literary work.
BANA doesn’t try to provide a description of the complete life of Harsha; he made attempts to mix
historical and fictitious stories and tried to point out how HARSHA obtained the fortune.
BILHANA belonged to the Kashmiri Brahman family. He was patronized by the Chalukya king of
KALYANI SOMESWARA. He produced the play ‘Karnasundari’, which was about the marriage of
Karnadeva I of Anihlvad with Mayamalladeva. His most important work was
VIKRAMAGADEVA CHARITA. By the historical facts provided by Bilhana, we find that
VIKRAMADITYA VI was a generous person.
MEDIEVAL INDIAN HISTORIOGRAPHY
The medieval Indian historiography mainly consists of muslim historiography. The establishment of
Delhi Sultanate marked the beginning of a new era in the Indian historiography. They were far superior
to the English chronicles of the medieval period. Unlike the Christian chronicles which were written by
monks, Muslim historiography was penned by men of affairs.
From the mythological, theological and legendary phase of ancient India, there emerged more rational,
secular and authoritative phase under the Muslims. They regarded Persian historiography as their model
to follow in India. The aim of the Muslim historiography of this period was to present the past as a
succession of events, deeds and episodes, wars, battles, campaigns and court with inquiring into the
causes, conditions and processes.
Main history of the Sultanate period falls into four categories; a) General Histories, b) Prose eulogies,
c)didactic history, d) Artistic history.
The first great historian of this period is Ziaud-din-Barani. His famous work is Tarikh-e-Feroz Shahi
in 1358 AD. He had high conception of history, he considered it his essential duty to record honestly
the whole truth. He began his historical writing from Balban to Mohammed bin Tughlaq with six years
of Feroz Shah Tughlaq. Barani freely criticized the actions and character of kings and great men. He is
the only authority of the history of this period. His works are useful to decipher the agrarian, economic
and administrative history of this period.
Barani lists 7 benefits in the study of history;
1. It introduces us to the lives of great men, prophets, saints, thinks and Sultans
2. It opens us to the wisdom of the past
3. It excites in us reason and judgment by the study of the experience of the past
4. It comforts us in our misfortune and adversity
5. It encourages patience and resignation
6. It provokes in our heart respect for the righteous and contempt for the wicked
7. It is the strongest foundation of truth.
Thus, Barani was a didactic and fearless historian who wrote as if he had a mission in his life.
Shamsuddin Siraj Afif was another Muslim historiographer who was born in 1356. His work Tarikh-
e-Firoz Shahi . He opens his history in the manner of a biography of a mystic and uses all the
terminologies of mysticism by explaining the conduct of the rulers. This kind of history was known as
Manaquib or Fazail (blessed) history.
Numerous other chronicles which were full of information was very helpful for reconstructing political
history. For e.g. Ibn Battuta, a native of Tangiers, Egypt arrived to India in 1333 and was appointed
the Qazi of Delhi by Mohammed bin Tughlaq for nearly 8 years. Similarly, Alberuni, Firdausi and
Isami contributed to the reconstruction of medieval history.
A thorough transformation in outlook, treatment, technique and theme appeared to have taken place
during Mughal period. The literature was divided into 8 categories;
 Official Histories
 Government Records
 Biographies and Memoirs
 Non-Official Histories
 Local or Provincial Histories
 Collection of Letters
 Gazetteers and Official Manuals and
 Literary Works
Akbarnama of Abul Fazl is the most celebrated official history. He undertook the specific orders of
Akbar. He wrote four volumes on Akbar’s reign; the fifth volume was on administrative institutions.
He seemed to have revised his work 5 times in order to meet his expectations. His volume on
administration was completed on 1593 while his main work Akbarnama was completed in 1598. It is
the most complete and authentic history of Akbar’s reign. His works were critical and analytical. His
honesty and sincerity could be seen in his work. Abul Fazl was to Mughals like what was Thucydides
to Greece, Tacitus to Rome and Ibn Khaldun to Arabs.
Abul Fazl regarded history as a unique pearl of science which quiets perturbations; physical and
spiritual, gives light to darkness; external and internal. Abul Fazl believed in Akbar as do saints in God.
In many places, Akbar’s vices were minimized while his achievements were exaggerated.
His style was not easy, lucid and captivating. It was sophisticated and only serious scholars could
benefit out of it. He did not write for the commoners; he wrote only for the exalted and more so for the
enlightened monarch.
Nizamuddin Bakshi wrote Tabaqat-i-Akbari in 1592. He served under Abkar and though he enjoyed
the confidence of his master, he held his balance as a historian. It is a general history of India from
Ghazni to Akbar. His work was more objective and impartial than that of Abul Fazl.
Other works during the Mughal period include Tuzuk-i-Jahangiri, which includes the memoirs of
Jehangir and covers 20 years of his reign, Babarnama and Humayun Nama.
MODERN INDIAN HISTORIOGRAPHY
With the advent of Europeans in India, our historiography underwent a drastic change not merely in
approach, treatment and technique but also in the volume of works. This is evident in the fact that no
other period or country can boast of such a rich harvest of historical material as India from 1757-1947.
One reason that can be attributed to this phenomenon is that every policy was put in writing, every
opinion expressed and every business of the State transacted through dispatches, consultations,
proceedings and through secret letters and correspondents which resulted in enormous growth of
historical material.
There also occurred various socio-economic changes in the 19 th century, which resulted in new ways of
thinking and criticism; with the introduction of large scale trade and industry, promotion of science and
arts and reorganization of educational, political, administrative, legal and social institutions, new ideas
generated in the minds of the Indians. Indian historiography received new dimensions because British
was not the only European power that colonized India; Portugese, Dutch and the French too tried the
same, but were defeated by the superior diplomacy and military strength of the British.
From the time of Voltaire and Gibbon, European historiography underwent great changes and history
became an independent and distinctive discipline. Theological and metaphysical interpretations gave
place to more rational and scientific theories. They were very much influenced by the enlightenment
school of historiography.
When British historians were wresting with each other to win in their own points of view, Indian
historians who entered into this arena late, were quite left behind. However, the sharp mind of Indians
was quick to grasp the issues under debate and entered into the field with a challenging mood to
advance their own theories. For more than a century, Indians merely watched the game as passive
spectators; however their intellectual renaissance was inaugurated by Raja Ram Mohan Roy. They
competed with the western scholars and refuted many theories which were considered as unacceptable
to them. Indians formulated their own ideas on history, which stated that the real significance of history
lies in the transformation of the society through the exertion of its nationals. However, before this kind
of modern ideas was championed, Indians had to pass through, naturally, several stages of thinking
which were varied in nature;
1) There was an Extremist school of Rajanarian Bose, Chandranath Basu, Bankim Chandra Chatterjee,
B.G.Tilak, V.D. Savarkar, and several others who asserted the superiority of Hindus over that of the
Western Culture.
2) Secondly There was the rationalistic school of Rajendralal Mitra, R.C. Dutt, R.G. Bhandarkar,
Rayachaudari and others who were not intoxicated by the nationalistic sentiments and viewed the
events more objectively in order to rectify the errors committed by the Europeans in respect of
Indian history.
3) The third school was represented by Major D. Basu, A.C. Majumdar, C.Y. Cintamani and
Surendranath Banerjee who exposed the economic exploitation of India by the British in order to
inspire the nationalists in their struggle for freedom.
4) The fourth school consisted of historians such as Hiren Mukherjee, R. Palme Dutt, Kosambi and
others who were greatly impressed by the Marxian thought and attempted to explain the problems
of Indian history from this standpoint. This school extended its influence to include scholars of
order such as Prof. Md. Habib, Prof. Nurul Hasan, Prof. Romila Thapar, Dr. Bipin Chandra and
others.
5) India produced the fifth school of historians as well; they desired to be aloof from any kind of
ideological conflict and who struggled hard to present a Ranke type of history; they include
Jadunath Sarkar, S.N. Sen, Shafat Ahmed, S. Krishnaswamy Iyengar, Venkateshvarlu etc.
MODERN INDIAN NATIONALIST HISTORIANS
Nationalist historians played an important role in providing an ideological basis of the freedom struggle
and in analyzing the economic consequences of imperialism. The focus of nationalist attention was on
external; that is imperialist exploitation of India, not so much that of the internal; i.e. class exploitation
and consequent class conflict within Indian society. Greater concentration on the later aspect was given
by the Marxist historians.
The phrase ‘nationalist’ historians were first used by R.C. Majumdar, to denote those historians of
India whose writings had nationalist bias, especially during the period of colonial occupation. The
nationalist historiography helped in unearthing of wide range of sources and re-examination of all the
available sources. In the course of time, it received new impetus from the country wide agitation for
political freedom and it slowly became a part of the movement itself.
R.G. Bhandarkar, H.C. Raychaudary, J.N. Sarkar, G.S. Sardesai, Swami Ayyangar, Lala Lajpat Roy,
Girija Mukherjee were some of the important nationalist writers. The trained or academic historians
also followed this style of writing in the post independent era; they were B.R. Nanda, Tara Chand,
Amales Tripati, Bisweshwar Prasad etc. Most of this historians connected history as explanationist and
propagandist. They inspired the people of India and awakened the self-confidence and national pride
among the mass which strengthened the national movement.
 The nationalist historiography had certain defects too, that is some methodological defects, some
chauvinist approach on caste, cultural and social bias. Emotions and sentiments usurped the place of
reason and detachment, balance, perspective and objectivity. All became causality. They also failed and
ignored certain aspects and issues like tribes, women, down trodden people, marginalized societies etc.
Some sensational accounts brought a sort of communal identities. It glorified the Indian past and
culture and the events instead of making critical analysis.