India as Seen
by Early Muslim Chroniclers
The above is the title of an
intensely researched work of history by Osman Sher
that has just been published by Regency Publications,
New Delhi. Osman Sher may not be an unfamiliar name
to many readers of Pakistan Link as he used to contribute
thought-provoking articles to this weekly quite
often in the past. He then dedicated his time to
research and composition of analytical works of
abiding value on the history of the Indo-Pak subcontinent.
His earlier works include The India of Ancient Times
(1999) and The Culture of Tolerance: A study of
Indian History (2001).
Interestingly enough, his discipline is not history
but economics and he has held senior assignments
at home in Islamabad and abroad in Ankara, Mozambique,
Maldives and elsewhere as an economic advisor. But,
history is his passion and his interpretation of
the facts of history tickles the imagination of
the readers too.
While going through his earlier work on the Indian
culture of tolerance, I couldn’t help admiring
his perspective despite my own feeling that the
Hindu caste system had given rise to a society that
was discriminative by birth. That system, which
worked as a drag on the forward march of the society
and the upward movement of an individual in the
social hierarchy by dint of hard work and inherent
talents, was the major impediment in the development
of a composite Hindu-Muslim culture and value system
in the subcontinent. It was also a major factor
in triggering the partition of country.
Sher maintains that the system had little negative
effect on the spirit of tolerance of the Hindu community
towards foreign invaders and immigrants. They were
welcomed and absorbed into the multicultural Indian
society.
Muslim historians of the subcontinent do not generally
share this point of view. Nevertheless, Sher has
made out a forceful case. In these columns I had
offered my review of that book soon after it was
published in 2001.
The book under review records the impressions of
Indian society conveyed to us by Muslim emperors,
courtiers, court chroniclers, and travelers. They
have given, according to Sher’s findings,
vivid accounts of the land, its flora and fauna,
the people, their customs and proclivities, their
beliefs and any thing else they found worth recording
in their accounts.
Muslims have always excelled as chroniclers. And
they have made every effort to find the truth and
record it without any subjective coloring or twist.
The tradition of meticulous search for truth that
the early Muslims developed in recording Ahadis,
that is the sayings and practices of their prophet,
has continued to condition their approach to recording
secular developments too.
No other community of the Middle Ages has manifested
the same zeal as the Muslims in meticulous pursuit
of truth. Facts and fictions have rarely been allowed
to mix to enhance human interest.
The multidimensional and colorful Hindu society,
on the other hand, laid emphasis on adorning even
historical events with hyperbolic presentation of
their heroes as giants, ten times bigger than life,
while demonizing the villains and adversaries by
turning them into monkeys, snakes or rats.
Sher has quoted Pargiter, a scholar of standing,
as saying:
“Ancient Indian history has been fashioned
out of compositions, which are purely religious
and priestly, which notoriously do not deal with
history, and which totally lack the historical sense.”
Al Biruni too has made a mention of this in his
famous book “Kitabul Hind” in the following
words: “Unfortunately, the Hindus do not pay
much attention to the historical order of things,
they are very careless in relating the chronological
succession of their kings, and when they are pressed
for information and are at a loss, not knowing what
to say, they invariably take to tale-telling’.
Muslims have ruled over India continuously for seven
centuries. The rulers and their armies were mainly
of Central Asian Turkish stock. They were ruthless,
even barbarous, in the battlefield, but in times
of peace they were just, considerate and accommodating.
Their zeal for the construction of monumental structures,
many of which stand even today paying tributes to
their genius, was matched by their devotion to leaving
behind objective accounts of major events of their
period.
Several emperors elected to write themselves the
historical accounts of their reigns. One finds this
happening in the US now. Almost all Presidents of
this era have come out with accounts of their lives
and works. The Moguls who couldn’t write themselves
like Humayun for being entangled in battle after
battle, or Akbar being physically incapable of writing,
gave the assignment to some trustworthy relation
or an eminent scholar. But they invariably kept
an eye on the contents to ensure their veracity.
Sher’s finding in this respect is worth reproducing
here. The chroniclers, he says, “could have
written about the people and their beliefs in what
ever manner they liked, misrepresenting the conquered
people by the suppression of truth or by an extra
emphasis on the shadier aspects of their social
life; but they did not look at the local people
with contempt.” They showed a passion for
the land and its inhabitants.
Sher has allotted the first three chapters of his
book to a description of the land and its people,
the arrival of Muslims in the subcontinent, and
the paucity of written history in ancient India.
These chapters provide the requisite background
for a fuller appreciation of the works of Muslim
emperors, their courtiers, men of letters and others.
Students of history today can marvel with a sense
of gratitude at the legacy of these writers who
were under no compulsion to exercise their pens,
avoid temptation at self-projection, and sift facts
from fancy and be always objective. To them writing
history was a sacrosanct function.
Alberuni, for instance, considered the writing of
history and a study of the Prophet’s traditions
as equally sacrosanct.
The founder of the Mogul empire, Babar, says in
his book Tuzuk-i-Babri : “I have simply written
the truth. I do not intend by what I have written
to compliment myself; I have simply set down exactly
what happened” no matter whether it hurts
the feelings of some near or dear one.
Sher has done a splendid job in collecting all the
works of Muslim chroniclers and presenting to the
readers a candid picture of the shape of things
that emerge from these books. He has added the accounts
of Western travelers of 17th century as appendices
to the book. These include Sir Thomas Roe, Travernier,
Francois Bernier, and Niccolao Manucci.
This book is a must read for all students of Indian
history covering the period from 11th to mid- 19th
centuries. If you want to get a copy, please find
out the source from the author at (905)608-0650.
- Arifhussaini@hotmail.com
April 8, 2005
