Course Manual

History 1 - Modern South Asia: Historiography and Sources

Module no. Module topic Lecture weeks

1. On History 1
2. The Mughal Era 2, 3
3. The Long 18th Century 4
4. The Rebellion of 1857 5
5. Colonial Knowledge-Formation 6
6. Indian Enlightenment? 7
7. Indian Nationalism 8-9
8. Gandhi 10-11
9. Partition of India 12
10. Divergent Paths 13

Part IV

Modules and Readings1:

Module 1 - History: Facts, Contexts, Interpretations

History is often viewed as a mere reproduction of facts and dates describing the distant
past. And yet, we see in the world around us today, that there is often great disagreement
over facts, events, personages, historical processes. What is history? What is
historiography? How do historians write history?

1) Peter Stearns, “Why Study History?” (1998)

https://www.historians.org/about-aha-and-membership/aha-history-and-
archives/historical-archives/why-study-history-(1998)

2) Robert Darnton, “Workers Revolt: The Great Cat Massacre of the Rue Saint-
Severin”, in his The Great Cat Massacre and Other Episodes in French Cultural History,
pp75-79, 92-101

Module 2: Early Modernity – the Mughal Era

The Mughal era is often viewed as a time of possibilities. As one of the three great
Muslim empires of Asia in a time before modern colonialism overran most of that
continent, the Mughal empire was exceptional in that the monarch presided over largely
non-Muslim subjects. Babur established his kingdom on the ruins of the centuries old
Delhi Sultanate. But is the subsequent Mughal era justly seen as a continuation of north

1
The course instructors reserve the right to change readings, and add or subtract
selections. Students will be given adequate notice if any changes are made to the reading
list.
India’s medieval era or was there something about it that was modern? And if so, how do
we describe that modernity? Why is it historically important for us to rethink this era?

Katherine Butler Brown, “Did Aurangzeb ban music?: Questions for the historiography
of his reign”, Modern Asian Studies, 41:1, January 2007, pp77-87, 91-95, 103-106, 112-116.

Richard Eaton, “Temple desecration and Indo-Muslim states”, Frontline, 5 January 2001,
pp 70-77, (available online)

Ruby Lal, “Introduction”, Domesticity and Power in the Early Mughal World, pp 1-14

Module 3: The Long Eighteenth Century and the Establishment of Company Raj:
Decline or Decentralization? Continuity or Change? Collaboration or Resistance?
The eighteenth century was a dramatic time in the history of the Indian subcontinent. As
the Mughal empire headed toward certain decline, a number of new regional powers
took over the reins of administration in different parts of the country. The Persian and
Afghan invasions toward the middle of the century put an end to pretensions of Mughal
power but the decisive military victories of the English East India Company seemed to
define the destiny of the subcontinent for the next two hundred years. Yet the
historiographical question remains, was the eighteenth century a ‘dark’ century or a time
of political, commercial and cultural ebullience? Was Company rule a continuation of
earlier traditions of sovereignty on the subcontinent or did it mark a break? Did natives
“collaborate” with the Company in furthering colonialism on the subcontinent or did
they “resist” at every turn?

Sugata Bose and Ayesha Jalal, Modern South Asia, Chapters 5 and 6 (page numbers differ
according to the edition)

Indrajit Ray, “The myth and reality of deindustrialization” in A New Economic History of
Colonial India, pp 52-63.

Priya Satia, “Guns and the British empire” found at: https://aeon.co/essays/is-the-gun-
the-basis-of-modern-anglo-civilisation

Module 4: The Rebellion of 1857: “First War of Independence” or “Sepoy Mutiny”?

Of all the moments of resistance to British rule in India, the rebellion of 1857 was the
most dramatic. How do we think of it in a longer history of resistance to colonial rule in
the period of Company Raj? How do we think of it in the subsequent history of
nationalist resistance to colonial rule?

Gautam Bhadra, “Four rebels of 1857”, Spivak and Guha (eds) Selected Subaltern Studies,
pp 128-145, 156-75.

M. J. Akbar, HLO Garrett, The Trial of Bahadur Shah Zafar, pp 373-379

Module 5: Knowledge-Formation about India: From Indomania to Indophobia?

The conquest of India by the British was a process that began in 1757 with the British
take-over of Bengal and within a century, the British had been transformed from mere
traders to the masters of India. These new colonizers in India were however soon
overtaken by an anxiety as they failed to understand the “natives,” their customs,
religions, state structures and other various facets of life. This led them to produce and
catalog a knowledge about the “natives.” Colonial knowledge-gathering was a state
sponsored project, which was necessary not only to know India, but also to justify their
colonial domination over the subject population. How did the British try to understand
and legitimize their dominance over India? Toward that end, was colonialism a totalizing,
hegemonic power that dramatically altered the lives of its colonial subjects? Or was it a
benign power built on principles of good governance and civil society that ushered in
benevolence towards the millions it governed?

Edward Said, Orientalism, “Introduction”, pp 1-9

N.B. Dirks, Castes of Mind: Colonialism and the Making of Modern India, pp 56-57, 61-68, 74-
76

Module 6: An Indian ‘Enlightenment’ or a Borrowed Modernity?

Starting with Rammohun Roy and Ishwar Chandra Vidyasagar, the nineteenth century
seems to have been a time when Indians began to converse (talk back?) with the British
and with other Indians. By the end of that century, many more Indians joined in the
conversation and immersed themselves in debates that animated the emerging public
sphere in the Presidency towns. What did they discuss? What was the nature of the
distinction between private and public spheres, between the traditional and the modern?
Was there a ‘Bengal Renaissance’/Indian ‘Enlightenment’?

Partha Chatterjee, “The Nationalist resolution of the women’s question”, in Sudesh Vaid
and Kumkum Sangari (eds), Recasting Women: Essays in Colonial History, pp233-237, 242-53.

Rosalind O’Hanlon, Caste, Conflict and Ideology: Mahatma Jotirao Phule and Lower Caste Protest
in Nineteenth Century India , pp 193-219.

Module 7: Indian Nationalism: Many Hues

The standard history of Indian nationalism places the Indian National Congress at the
very heart of conceptions of the nation. And indeed, as one of the greatest political
parties of the modern world, the INC is credited with not only winning freedom for
India but also for launching a trenchant critique of colonialism as a moral and material
exercise, one which several successful anti-colonial movements around the world drew
from. Yet the ‘nation’ was conceived rather differently by various nationalists from both
within and outside the Congress fold. How do their writings reveal the many hues of
Indian nationalism and complicate the standard narrative?

Bipan Chandra et al (ed), India’s Struggle for Independence, chapter 4 and 5 “The Foundations
of the Congress: The Myth” and “The Foundations of the Congress: The Reality”, pp34-
56

R. C. Dutt, Economic History of India, Volume 2, pp v-xix. Available at:

http://socserv2.socsci.mcmaster.ca/econ/ugcm/3ll3/dutt/EcHisIndia2.pdf

M. S. Golwalkar in Ramachandra Guha, Makers of Modern India, pp 373-377

“AIML Presidential address, 1930” by Muhammad Iqbal, sections 1, 2, 3, 4, 8, 10, found
at http://www.columbia.edu/itc/mealac/pritchett/00islamlinks/txt_iqbal_1930.html

E. V. Ramaswamy Naicker in Ramachandra Guha, Makers of Modern India, pp 242-254

Module 8: Gandhi: “Father of the Nation” or a “Naked Fakir”?

Gandhi is certainly among the most debated and vexed figures in modern South Asian
history. He is lauded as the ‘Father of the Nation’ by some and denounced as a
calculating politician by others. How do we understand his life and his thinking on
subjects like the relationship between religion and politics, his philosophy of non-
violence, programme of ethical action and his attitude toward nationalism and toward
caste? Who were his interlocutors and how did they engage with his ideas? How did his
message reach the ‘masses’?

M.K. Gandhi, Hind Swaraj, Navajiwan Trust edition, “What is true civilization?” and
“How can India become free?”, pp 37-42

Sabyasachi Bhattacharya, The Mahatma and the Poet: Letters and Debates between Gandhi and
Tagore 1915-1941, pp 54-59, 65-68.

BR Ambedkar, Annihilation of Caste – The Annotated Critical Edition, pp 321-328, 333-356

Shahid Amin, “Gandhi as Mahatma” in Guha and Spivak (eds) Selected Subaltern Studies,
pp 288-296, 338-342.

Module 9: The Partition of India: A Disaster, a Birth, Entwined Fates?

The partition of India in 1947 is considered to be one of the most dramatic episodes in
world history in the long twentieth century. In Indian nationalist historiography, it is
viewed as a disaster but for Pakistani nationalists, it was seen as the moment a nation
came into its own. Is the story of Partition a tale of contingent elite politics or one of
subaltern violence?

Asim Roy, “The high politics of India’s partition”, Modern Asian Studies, 24:2, May 1990,
pp385-408.

G. Kudaisya and Tai Yong Tan (ed.) The Aftermath of Partition in South Asia, pp 52-77

Saadat Hasan Manto, Toba Tek Singh (short story)

Module 10: India and Pakistan: Divergent Paths?

Many assumed that Indian independence from colonial rule in 1947 following a long and
world-famous national movement would result in a distinctive break from the colonial
past and usher in a new era in Indian history. And yet there were as many continuities
over 1947 as there was change – some would argue that there was more of the former
than the latter. So then in 1947, what really changed for millions of residents of the
Indian subcontinent?

Jalal and Bose, Modern South Asia, Chapter 18.

Intezar Hussain, The Death of Sheherzad (short story)