'If there is anything safe in India, it is democracy': ICHR chairman Tanwar

Q / The notion of India being the ‘mother of democracy’ gained currency after Prime Minister Narendra Modi began speaking about it. Is there sufficient historical and archaeological evidence to back it?

A / The term ‘mother of democracy’ is in fact a technical term that has been around for a long time. What the prime minister has drawn attention to is the approach to decolonise the process of historical narrative that prevailed in this country.

To give you an example, the British were in India for just about 200 years. Now, for a country like India, with history of thousands of years, 200 years should have been inconsequential. But it was not so. The British delinked us from our legacies: our spiritual and cultural legacies. Basically, the idea is to have a decolonised approach to understanding issues.

Q / As you said, this is not a recent construct. Historians referred to it at the turn of 20th century. But it seems we lost it along the way. 

A / This is one of the big ironies of Indian history writing. I have been teaching history since 1977, and I remember that the books I read in 1975 or 1976 to take it up as a profession were [written by] R.C. Majumdar, Jadunath Sarkar, Radhu Kumud Mukherjee. There were 11 volumes of Majumdar’s History and Culture of Indian People, a profoundly important narrative based on solid sources. Gradually, these volumes disappeared and you had a new set of writings.

Now, when you look at the history of the freedom movement in the 20th century, you have two streams: one stream has been wiped out and the other stream propagated. So, the concept that the freedom movement was more a political movement was a false narrative. The freedom movement was greatly inspired by cultural and spiritual legacies. Look at Vande Mataram. When Bankim Chandra Chatterjee developed the concept of nation as mother, it inspired Lala Lajpat Rai, Bal Gangadhar Tilak and V.D. Savarkar. And Aurobindo picked it up, talking about the nation as a unique civilisation in evolutionary terms. That is when ‘mother of democracy’ attains a broader sense.

Q / The modern sense of democracy as a concept came from the Greeks and the Romans. Was our systems as developed as theirs? 

A / The issue has to be understood in a larger perspective. In Vedic literature, you have sabha and samiti. Panini talks about parishads. These [references] predate the Greeks and the Romans by at least 1,000 years.

In The Legal and Constitutional History of India, Justice Rama Jois explains the concept of dharma as discussed in the Rig Veda. He says the concepts of dharma and kingship are interdependent, like two sides of the same coin. The essence of democracy is good for all. So when you talk of the good for all, we are talking about 1,000 years before the Greeks and Romans spoke about it.

Q / The Indian Council of Historical Research came out with a book―India: The Mother of Democracy―that covers a lot of ground. 

A / A key emphasis we are trying to make here is that there is a part of history writing that has not received its due place.

We are an evolutionary civilisation. So when the ‘mother of democracy’ idea emerged, we were talking of cultural and spiritual rejuvenation, to let the world know that [the concept of democracy] was more cultural than political, and more spiritual and civilisational. The idea was not to tell the world that we were an evolved democracy per se. We had our problems, particularly poverty. Here we are talking about democracy in a broad sense.

Q/ Are historians across the world willing to accept our findings on the Indian idea of 'mother of democracy' ?

A/ You have raised an important point. It is too early to comment on that. Much has been written about how the concept of democracy evolved and developed. The way we look at Indian democracy is slightly different.  Most of the civilisations that are as old as ours now belong in museums. If you look into 40 major civilisations, which are 10,000 years old, only Hinduism alone is surviving today. Here by the term 'Hinduism', I am referring to the broader 'Akhand Bharat'. So there must be something to  this civilisation.

Q/ Are changes being made in the history text books now?

A/ I do not know about the text books, but we have definitely been able to initiate a discourse. The CBSE has published two volumes of a book for classes 11 and 12, not on mother of democracy, but the Indian knowledge system. We are interested in bringing this point to mainstream discourse and urge others to understand India and stop passing judgements on India and its democracy. We have had democracy for thousands of years.

Q / How do you react to the charge that there is an attempt to rewrite history books?

A / As chairman of the ICHR, I can assure you categorically that there is no concept, process or project to rewrite anything. We fully accept what has been written. All we are trying to do is fill the gaps.

Q / In the ICHR book, you have included examples from the northeast and south India, and of Sikh gurus and even khaps in Haryana, to showcase democratic traditions. How did you decide on them?

A / India is a hugely diverse country, a diversity integrated over thousands of years. We may be speaking different languages, wearing different clothes, but never felt out of place in different parts of the country. There is an innate bonding in the country.

Imagine Shankaracharya walking from Kerala 1,200 years ago and reaching Kashmir. We are a country governed by sages and saints. Consensus building has been an integral part of our culture. The diversity in choosing essays in the book came from the idea that all our cultures―be it in south India or the northeast―had some concept of democracy.

Q / There has been much debate on the inclusion of khaps as democratic institutions when even courts have spoken out against them. 

A / Khaps are very complex bodies. When you look at khaps today, I am not in a position to react. But we are talking of the period when they played an important role. Villages in Haryana, like my village, have survived more than 1,000 years.

The khaps had a quasi-judicial system to settle disputes. There are villages where the police have never entered; people used to take pride in it. It is important to understand their role in the context of regular invasions. Conversions were taking place, and here was a body of people, an organisational setup, which protected its people, its women and social fabric.

Q / There are fears that democracy in India is in decline.

A / If there is anything that is safe in this country, it is democracy. A common man in a village cannot even imagine being denied the right to vote. We have our problems, but [the decline of] democracy is certainly not one of them.

Q/ What are the future projects being undertaken by the ICHR?

A/ The ICHR is handling two projects. Firstly, we are translating into Hindi the 11 volumes of R.C. Majumdar’s book on history and culture of Indian people.  This is a foundational book. The second project is an exhibition on Jammu and Kashmir, and Ladakh through the ages. We are going to tell the world the true narrative of Kashmir. Most people understand Kashmir in terms of post 1947 or the most-medieval period. They do not know of the pre-Kalhana or pre-Mauryan periods.
The narrative of Kashmir has been built by a school of history writers— some in the US and the UK and, of course, some of our own friends here—who have narrated the story of Kashmir, as if it was distinct and isolated from the very beginning and was not part of the broader historical frame. In this exhibition, we are going to tell the world how Kashmir has been the home of Sanskrit, Prakrit, Pali, Sharada, and of its temple architecture and trade routes.

The exhibition will be launched latest by December. It will be a major narrative changing project.