MODERN HISTORIANS OF ANCIENT INDIA

Colonialist Views and their Contribution

Although educated Indians retained their traditional history in the form of handwritten epics, Puranas, and semi-biographical works, modern research in the history of ancient India began only in the second half of the eighteenth century to serve the needs of the British colonial administration. When Bengal and Bihar fell under the rule of the East India Company in 1765, they found it difficult to administer the Hindu law of inheritance. Therefore, in 1776, the Manu Smriti, (the law-book of Manu), which was considered authoritative, was translated into English as ‘A Code of Gentoo Laws’. Pandits were associated with British judges to administer Hindu civil law and maulvis to administer that of Muslims. The initial efforts to understand ancient laws and customs, which continued largely until the eighteenth century, culminated in the establishment in Calcutta in 1784 of the Asiatic Society of Bengal. It was set up by a civil servant of the East India Company, Sir William Jones (1746-94). He was the first to suggest that Sanskrit, Latin, and Greek belonged to the same family of languages. He also translated the play known as the Abhijnanashakuntalam into English in 1789; the Bhagvadgita, the most popular Hindu religious text was translated into English by Wilkins in 1785. The Bombay Asiatic Society was set up in 1804, and the Asiatic Society of Great Britain was set up in London in 1823. William Jones emphasized that originally the European languages were very similar to Sanskrit and the Iranian language. This enthused European countries such as Germany, France, and Russia, to foster Indological studies. During the first half of the nineteenth century, chairs in Sanskrit were established in the UK and several other European countries.

Modern Historians of Ancient India

The greatest impetus to Indological studies was given by the German-born scholar F. Max Mueller (1823-1902), who was largely based in England. The Revolt of 1857 caused Britain to realize that it badly needed a deeper knowledge of the manners and social systems of an alien people over whom it ruled. Similarly, the Christian missionaries sought to uncover the vulnerabilities in the Hindu religion to win converts and strengthen the British empire. To meet these needs, ancient scriptures were translated on a massive scale under the editorship of Max Mueller. Altogether fifty volumes, some in several parts, were published under the Sacred Books of the East series. Although a few Chinese and Iranian texts were included, ancient Indian texts were predominant.

In the introductions to these volumes and the books based on them, Max Mueller and other Western scholars made certain generalizations about the nature of ancient Indian history and society. They stated that the ancient Indians lacked a sense of history, especially of the element of time and chronology. They added that Indians were accustomed to despotic rule, and also natives were so engrossed in the problems of spiritualism or of the next world that they felt no concern about the problems of this world. The Western scholars stressed that Indians had experienced neither a sense of nationhood nor any form of self-government.

Many of these generalizations were made in the Early History of 'India by Vincent Arthur Smith (1843-1920), who wrote in 1904 the first systematic history of ancient India. His book, which -was based on an in-depth study of the available sources gave primacy to political history. It served as a textbook for nearly fifty years and is still used by scholars. Smith's approach to history was pro-imperialist. As a loyal member of the Indian Civil Service, he emphasized the role of foreigners in ancient India. Alexander's invasion accounted for almost one-third of his book. India was presented as a land of despotism which had not experienced political unity until the establishment of British rule. He observes: 'Autocracy is substantially the only form of government with which the historian of India is concerned'.