【Move to another page】
Quote
https://ift.tt/2OqDgqX
Historiography of India
Sacuquire:
The historiography of India refers to the studies, sources, critical methods and interpretations used by scholars to develop a history of India. Historians and their ideas are the focus here; specific lands and historical dates and episodes are covered in the article on [[history of India]]. Scholars have long studied India.
== Marxist works ==
In India, [[Damodar Dharmananda Kosambi|D. D. Kosambi]] is considered the founding father of Marxist historiography. The senior-most scholars of Marxist historiography are [[Ram Sharan Sharma|R. S. Sharma]], [[Irfan Habib]], [[D. N. Jha]] and [[K. N. Panikkar]].<ref>Bottomore, T. B. 1983. A Dictionary of Marxist thought. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press.</ref>
One debate in Indian history that relates to a [[historical materialist]] schema is on the nature of [[feudalism]] in India. [[Damodar Dharmananda Kosambi|D. D. Kosambi]] in the 1960s outlined the idea of "feudalism from below" and "feudalism from above", with which R. S. Sharma largely agrees.<ref>R S Sharma, ''[[Indian Feudalism (book)]], 2005''</ref><ref>R S Sharma, ''Early Medieval Indian Society: A Study in Feudalisation'', Orient Longman, Kolkata, 2001, pp. 177-85</ref> Such Marxist historians argue that the economic origins of [[Communalism (South Asia)|Communalism]] are feudal remnants and the economic insecurities caused by slow development under a "world capitalist system."<ref></ref>
[[B. R. Ambedkar]] criticized Marxists, as he deemed them to be unaware or ignorant of the specifics of [[caste]] issues.<ref>Liquid error: wrong number of arguments (1 for 2)</ref> A number of historians have also debated Marxist historians and critically examined their analysis of [[history of India]].Liquid error: wrong number of arguments (1 for 2)<ref></ref><ref></ref><ref></ref> One critique is [[Arun Shourie]]'s ''[[Eminent Historians]]'' (1998), which does not identify any scholarly shortcomings but only minor inefficiencies and bureaucratic corruption.<ref></ref><ref>Bryant, E. E. (2014). Quest for the Origins of Vedic Culture: The Indo-Aryan Migration Debate. Cary, USA: Oxford University Press, USA.</ref>
Since the late 1990s, [[Hindu nationalism|Hindu nationalist]] scholars especially have polemicized against the Marxist tradition in India for neglecting what they believe to be the country's 'illustrious past.' Marxists are held responsible by the [[right-wing]] for aiding or defending [[Islam in India|Muslims]], who are considered as 'enemies within'<ref></ref> or 'internal threats'<ref></ref> by [[Hindutva]] ideologues.<ref></ref>
== Marxist works ==
In India, [[Damodar Dharmananda Kosambi|D. D. Kosambi]] is considered the founding father of Marxist historiography. The senior-most scholars of Marxist historiography are [[Ram Sharan Sharma|R. S. Sharma]], [[Irfan Habib]], [[D. N. Jha]] and [[K. N. Panikkar]].<ref>Bottomore, T. B. 1983. A Dictionary of Marxist thought. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press.</ref>
One debate in Indian history that relates to a [[historical materialist]] schema is on the nature of [[feudalism]] in India. [[Damodar Dharmananda Kosambi|D. D. Kosambi]] in the 1960s outlined the idea of "feudalism from below" and "feudalism from above", with which R. S. Sharma largely agrees.<ref>R S Sharma, ''[[Indian Feudalism (book)]], 2005''</ref><ref>R S Sharma, ''Early Medieval Indian Society: A Study in Feudalisation'', Orient Longman, Kolkata, 2001, pp. 177-85</ref> Such Marxist historians argue that the economic origins of [[Communalism (South Asia)|Communalism]] are feudal remnants and the economic insecurities caused by slow development under a "world capitalist system."<ref></ref>
[[B. R. Ambedkar]] criticized Marxists, as he deemed them to be unaware or ignorant of the specifics of [[caste]] issues.<ref>Liquid error: wrong number of arguments (1 for 2)</ref> A number of historians have also debated Marxist historians and critically examined their analysis of [[history of India]].Liquid error: wrong number of arguments (1 for 2)<ref></ref><ref></ref><ref></ref> One critique is [[Arun Shourie]]'s ''[[Eminent Historians]]'' (1998), which does not identify any scholarly shortcomings but only minor inefficiencies and bureaucratic corruption.<ref></ref><ref>Bryant, E. E. (2014). Quest for the Origins of Vedic Culture: The Indo-Aryan Migration Debate. Cary, USA: Oxford University Press, USA.</ref>
Since the late 1990s, [[Hindu nationalism|Hindu nationalist]] scholars especially have polemicized against the Marxist tradition in India for neglecting what they believe to be the country's 'illustrious past.' Marxists are held responsible by the [[right-wing]] for aiding or defending [[Islam in India|Muslims]], who are considered as 'enemies within'<ref></ref> or 'internal threats'<ref></ref> by [[Hindutva]] ideologues.<ref></ref>
September 16, 2018 at 09:47AM
