What do you think?
Rate this book
The Past As Present: Forging Contemporary Identities Through History
Understanding our past is of critical importance to our present.
Many popularly held views about the past need to be critically inquired into before they can be taken as historical. For instance, what was the aftermath of the raid on the Somanatha temple? Which of us is Aryan or Dravidian? Why is it important for Indian society to be secular? When did communalism as an ideology gain a foothold in the country? How and when did our patriarchal mindset begin to support a culture of violence against women? Why are the fundamentalists so keen to rewrite history textbooks?
The answers to these and similar questions have been disputed and argued about ever since they were first posed. Distinguished historian Romila Thapar has investigated, analyzed and interpreted the history that underlies such questions throughout her career; now, in this book, through a series of incisive essays she argues that it is of critical importance for the past to be carefully and rigorously explained, if the legitimacy of our present, wherever it derives from the past, is to be portrayed as accurately as possible. This is especially pertinent given the attempts by unscrupulous politicians, religious fundamentalists and their ilk to try and misrepresent and wilfully manipulate the past in order to serve their present-day agendas. An essential and necessary book at a time when sectarianism, bogus ‘nationalism’ and the muddying of historical facts are increasingly becoming a feature of our public, private and intellectual lives.
Interesting facts
A new collection of essays from renowned historian Romila Thapar, one of the most important Indian academics writing today.
Well-researched and thoroughly accessible, this volume is sure to become essential reading for those interested in Indian history and religion.
Includes her experience of writing history textbooks for school, analysis of ancient history and interpretations of the epics, and the role history plays in contemporary politics.
Understanding our past is of critical importance to our present.
Many popularly held views about the past need to be critically inquired into before they can be taken as historical. For instance, what was the aftermath of the raid on the Somanatha temple? Which of us is Aryan or Dravidian? Why is it important for Indian society to be secular? When did communalism as an ideology gain a foothold in the country? How and when did our patriarchal mindset begin to support a culture of violence against women? Why are the fundamentalists so keen to rewrite history textbooks?
The answers to these and similar questions have been disputed and argued about ever since they were first posed. Distinguished historian Romila Thapar has investigated, analyzed and interpreted the history that underlies such questions throughout her career; now, in this book, through a series of incisive essays she argues that it is of critical importance for the past to be carefully and rigorously explained, if the legitimacy of our present, wherever it derives from the past, is to be portrayed as accurately as possible. This is especially pertinent given the attempts by unscrupulous politicians, religious fundamentalists and their ilk to try and misrepresent and willfully manipulate the past in order to serve their present-day agendas. An essential and necessary book at a time when sectarianism, bogus ‘nationalism’ and the muddying of historical facts are increasingly becoming a feature of our public, private and intellectual lives.
Interesting facts
A new collection of essays from renowned historian Romila Thapar, one of the most important Indian academics writing today.
Well-researched and thoroughly accessible, this volume is sure to become essential reading for those interested in Indian history and religion.
Includes her experience of writing history textbooks for school, analysis of ancient history and interpretations of the epics, and the role history plays in contemporary politics.
Many popularly held views about the past need to be critically inquired into before they can be taken as historical. For instance, what was the aftermath of the raid on the Somanatha temple? Which of us is Aryan or Dravidian? Why is it important for Indian society to be secular? When did communalism as an ideology gain a foothold in the country? How and when did our patriarchal mindset begin to support a culture of violence against women? Why are the fundamentalists so keen to rewrite history textbooks?
The answers to these and similar questions have been disputed and argued about ever since they were first posed. Distinguished historian Romila Thapar has investigated, analyzed and interpreted the history that underlies such questions throughout her career; now, in this book, through a series of incisive essays she argues that it is of critical importance for the past to be carefully and rigorously explained, if the legitimacy of our present, wherever it derives from the past, is to be portrayed as accurately as possible. This is especially pertinent given the attempts by unscrupulous politicians, religious fundamentalists and their ilk to try and misrepresent and wilfully manipulate the past in order to serve their present-day agendas. An essential and necessary book at a time when sectarianism, bogus ‘nationalism’ and the muddying of historical facts are increasingly becoming a feature of our public, private and intellectual lives.
Interesting facts
A new collection of essays from renowned historian Romila Thapar, one of the most important Indian academics writing today.
Well-researched and thoroughly accessible, this volume is sure to become essential reading for those interested in Indian history and religion.
Includes her experience of writing history textbooks for school, analysis of ancient history and interpretations of the epics, and the role history plays in contemporary politics.
Understanding our past is of critical importance to our present.
Many popularly held views about the past need to be critically inquired into before they can be taken as historical. For instance, what was the aftermath of the raid on the Somanatha temple? Which of us is Aryan or Dravidian? Why is it important for Indian society to be secular? When did communalism as an ideology gain a foothold in the country? How and when did our patriarchal mindset begin to support a culture of violence against women? Why are the fundamentalists so keen to rewrite history textbooks?
The answers to these and similar questions have been disputed and argued about ever since they were first posed. Distinguished historian Romila Thapar has investigated, analyzed and interpreted the history that underlies such questions throughout her career; now, in this book, through a series of incisive essays she argues that it is of critical importance for the past to be carefully and rigorously explained, if the legitimacy of our present, wherever it derives from the past, is to be portrayed as accurately as possible. This is especially pertinent given the attempts by unscrupulous politicians, religious fundamentalists and their ilk to try and misrepresent and willfully manipulate the past in order to serve their present-day agendas. An essential and necessary book at a time when sectarianism, bogus ‘nationalism’ and the muddying of historical facts are increasingly becoming a feature of our public, private and intellectual lives.
Interesting facts
A new collection of essays from renowned historian Romila Thapar, one of the most important Indian academics writing today.
Well-researched and thoroughly accessible, this volume is sure to become essential reading for those interested in Indian history and religion.
Includes her experience of writing history textbooks for school, analysis of ancient history and interpretations of the epics, and the role history plays in contemporary politics.
344 pages, Hardcover
First published April 1, 2014
228 people are currently reading
932 people want to read
About the author
Romila Thapar
93 books360 followersRomila Thapar is an Indian historian and Professor Emeritus at the Jawaharlal Nehru University, New Delhi.
A graduate from Panjab University, Dr. Thapar completed her PhD in the School of Oriental and African Studies at the University of London.
Her historical work portrays the origins of Hinduism as an evolving interplay between social forces. Her recent work on Somnath examines the evolution of the historiographies about the legendary Gujarat temple.
Thapar has been a visiting professor at Cornell University, the University of Pennsylvania, and the College de France in Paris. She was elected General President of the Indian History Congress in 1983 and a Corresponding Fellow of the British Academy in 1999.
A graduate from Panjab University, Dr. Thapar completed her PhD in the School of Oriental and African Studies at the University of London.
Her historical work portrays the origins of Hinduism as an evolving interplay between social forces. Her recent work on Somnath examines the evolution of the historiographies about the legendary Gujarat temple.
Thapar has been a visiting professor at Cornell University, the University of Pennsylvania, and the College de France in Paris. She was elected General President of the Indian History Congress in 1983 and a Corresponding Fellow of the British Academy in 1999.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 29 of 34 reviews
March 20, 2019
If the past is to be called upon to legitimize the present, as it so frequently is, then the veracity of such a past has to be continuously vetted.
Romila Thapar needs no introduction to erudite Indians. She is the historian par excellence on Early Indian history, and the go-to reference for anything historical for many people including me. She is also the academic whom the Hindu Right in India love to hate, for her avowedly leftist and supposedly "biased" views on India's past.
In this book, Thapar has collected together a number of her essays on those aspects of the Indian past that inform the present, such as Hinduism, the caste system, the relationship between Hindus and Muslims, the position of women in society etc. Currently, there is a trend by those who want to imagine an ideal "Hindu" past for India to posit a perfect society without any blemishes (sone ki chidiya - golden bird - is a term I have heard used). Any intelligent person knows that this is poppycock of the first order, as any culture is liable to be made up of the good, the bad and the indifferent. However, projecting a golden past for India is not a historical endeavour - it is political. And that is what the author is trying to expose and demolish in this book.
Most of the objections to Thapar and others like her come from non-historians. It is the belief of the right-wing that anyone can write history.
I am always surprised at the popular assumption that historical writing requires no training. The world and his wife can write history, and can take umbrage if criticized by historians for writing junk. It is ironic that the historian today can be confronted by non-historians insisting on their version of the past being correct and accusing the historian of prejudice!
What these people actually do is to present a conclusion which they want to establish, and then twist and invent "historical" facts to support their view, conveniently ignoring those that go against their theory. The ordinary reader, fooled by the rhetoric (and the need to believe) falls for it. That is why we need serious historians to present balanced and informed views - like Thapar has done in this book.
***
The book is divided into four parts. The first part, “History and the Public” deals with how Indian history has been written since colonial times, and how it has been misrepresented and oversimplified. Colonial history assumes three stages of Indian history, largely static: two thousand years of a “Hindu” civilisation, six hundred years of Muslim rule, followed by colonial rule. What this ignores is the fact that there was no monolithic and overarching “Hinduism” and the rule by the Mughal kings and other Islamic rulers was not unidimensionally Islamic. But even after jettisoning the colonial theories, however, independent India continued with many of the fictions, like that of despotic kings, the developed “Aryan” society and the division of India into the four varnas uniformly. And even when the Aryan “invasion” theory was rejected, the forces of the right kept up the fiction of an ancient advanced indigenous society which was Aryan in spirit (a fiction created by the European Enlightenment – read Aryans, Jews and Brahmins by Dorothy Figuero), conveniently ignoring linguistic and archaeological evidences for migration into the Indian subcontinent.
Thus is the fiction of a “Hindu” identity, and an undivided India in the mystic past, built up. Its requirement is political rather than historical.
The intention of Hindutva history is to support the vision of its founding fathers—Savarkar and Golwalkar—and to attribute the beginnings of Indian history to what they called the indigenous Aryans. This contradicts the existing archaeological and linguistic evidence of the Indo-Aryan speakers. This theory ignores all the other societies, some of which were speaking Dravidian and Munda, of which languages there are traces in Vedic Sanskrit. It refrains from defining what is an Aryan because obviously any definition would lead to many complications given the range of exceptions that would arise. It ignores the argument, now generally agreed to, that the concept of Aryan is not an exclusive, racial identity, but refers primarily to the language, Indo-Aryan and to the culture of a group recognizable by linguistic and ritual features, reflecting a merging of varied groups including migrants from the Indo-Iranian borderlands and the Oxus plain; and that the meaning and evolution of the term changed with its historical usage.
(Romila Thapar was writing this in 2014. In the last four years, the “nationalistic” fervour has reached such a pitch that anyone doubting the theory of an ancient Hindu India is immediately sent to Pakistan!)
The author describes her struggle, even in less jingoistic times, to get a textbook which contains views contrary to the traditional one published. The roots of virulent nationalism was even then present in our polity, which prevented the powers that be from looking at history impartially.
Contrary to what critics say of Thapar, she is definitely not pushing an agenda here; she wants all differing viewpoints to be debated openly in classrooms and elsewhere. What she is against is the peddling of one official version of history.
The past is not static. We believe that because we have created it we can also give it shape. The shape we give it is generally in response to our current requirements one of which is the need for legitimacy from the past. And it then becomes contested.
***
In the second part (“Concerning Religion and History”), Romila Thapar traces the religious identity of Indians. As expected, she takes apart – with evidence – the concept of a monotheistic Hinduism, first posited by the British and later on gleefully adopted by the Hindu Right. Indian society was a mix of Brahmanas (the followers of the Vedic religion) and Shramanas (mendicants, belonging to Buddhist and Jain sects), as recorded by the Emperor Ashoka. Apart from these, there were others outside the pale of the Vedic religion who followed their own rites, and the tribals in the forest. Ironically, the religion which claims to be tolerant was extremely intolerant towards these outcasts!
Hinduism, instead of being the Sanatana Dharma that it claims to be, is a religion which slowly evolved from Vedic Brahminism to Puranic Hinduism (of the Bhakti tradition) to the form it is available in today – which is to say, too diverse to define. However, this is exactly what the Hindutva apologists are trying to do: kill the diversity and standardise it, in an effort to yoke religion to politics. Thapar calls this “Syndicated Hinduism”.
Syndicated Hinduism draws largely on Brahmanical texts, the Vedas, the epics, the Gita and accepts some aspects of the Dharmashastras, and attempts to present a religion appropriate for modern living, although claiming at the same time that it encapsulates ancient tradition. This contradiction ends up inevitably as a garbled form of what is said to be Brahmanism with motley ‘values’ drawn from other sources, such as bringing in elements of individual moksha, liberation, from the Bhakti tradition, and of course Puranic mythology and rituals. Its contradictions are many. The call to unite under Hinduism as a political identity can be anachronistic.
In this aspect, they are following the lead of the British colonialists whom they blame of distorting history, according to the author.
Hindutva claims to represent indigenous Indian thought opposed to western interpretations of Indian religion, traditions and culture. The claim is that colonial scholarship used its understanding of Indian culture for political purposes to justify colonialism. Yet Hindutva is doing precisely the same by reformulating Hinduism along the lines suggested by colonial interpretations in order to facilitate its use in political mobilization. It uses colonial constructions of the Indian past such as the theories of James Mill and Max Mueller to further its programme of political control. The exploitation of history becomes a significant dimension of its attempt to appropriate the understanding of the past.
This is an intensely political chapter: it has to be, as Thapar is arguing as a secular historian against the communalisation of Indian history.
***
The third part, “Debates”, deals with some of the high profile and acrimonious historical debates of the recent past. The debates are (1) the Aryan invasion (2) the authenticity and variability of the Hindu epics (3) the alleged destruction of the Somanatha Temple of Gujarat by Mahmud Ghazni and the resulting (alleged) enmity between Hindus and Muslims.
The Aryan “invasion” as a historical theory has now been discarded, as everyone knows – same as the identity of the Aryan as a race. However, that does not negate the fact that there have been migrations into India and the Sanskrit speaking people came from outside, while the Dravidian speakers were indigenous. These were basically language groups, and instead of invasion and occupation, there were centuries of migration and mixing. But the right-wing, in their need to prove that the Aryans were indigenous to the subcontinent, has come up with all kind of crackpot theories which have no takers outside their political circles.
Any rational person knows that epics – be they Indian, Greek, or Persian – are literature and not history. However, in India, it is once again the need of the religious right to claim historicity for the stories of Rama and Krishna. This leads to the suppression of variants also, especially of the Ramayana which is known to have 300 versions. Even the TV version of the epic was exclusively modelled on Valmiki’s Ramayana and Tulsi Das’s Ram Charit Manas, rejecting the other versions as non-authentic.
The chapter on the destruction of the alleged destruction of the Somanatha Temple is easily the most entertaining one in the section. It is a clear example of how multiple historical narratives were ignored by the Britishers to promote their agenda of Hindu-Muslim enmity, which was later used by indigenous historians without critical analysis.
Romila Thapar welcomes debates. What she rues is how one official version of any issue is promoted as authentic and the others are suppressed, often using threats and violence.
When secular historians attempt an analysis of a religious text with a dispassionate inquiry as is required of historians, they are abused, and accused of hurting the sentiments of those that believe the text to be sacred. It should be understood that the world of the historian working on religious texts and that of the believer for whom the texts are sacred, are two distinctly different worlds and should not be confused. The latter cannot deny space to the former. All texts have to undergo such inquiries in the course of their being used as historical evidence. On the one hand the historicity of the religion is reiterated and on the other the historical analyses of the foundational texts are objected to. This has brought into focus the entire plethora of hurt sentiments by a variety of political groups claiming to be defenders of the various religions.
Yes indeed.
***
The final section, “Our Women – Then and Now”, looks at the argument that women held an exalted position in ancient India and debunks it for what it is – a myth. For one Gargi the traditionalists love to hold up as an example, there are a thousand dasis who never had a voice. In ancient India, a woman basically had only three choices of career – wife, courtesan/ prostitute or nun (in the ascetic orders).
This part looks at the ritual of Sati and debunks the myth that it originated as a method for women to escape from invading Muslim rulers. It also identifies India’s current rape culture as a result of the contradictions arising as part of changing tradition.
Dalits and women by claiming their rights as citizens are seen as those who are over turning the old order in which they were subordinate beings, therefore they become the targets of contemporary violence. This becomes a way of asserting power among those for whom social violence is a way of expressing frustration.
***
Romila Thapar, being a person of firm political convictions, has written an intensely political book. Also, being the accomplished historian she is, it is backed up every inch by historical evidence. It is a fascinating read. You may not agree with her fully – but you will definitely enjoy her calm voice and erudite analysis.
I have touched on two kinds of pasts. One is the past that has passed into the historical landscape and which has been drawn upon in highly selective ways, to validate the present. The other is the recent past, the almost-present, which has done the selecting from the earlier past and positioned it in the present. Both processes have been attempts at forging new identities associated with contemporary times.
A clear, unbiased view of the past is necessary for understanding the present. So it is incumbent on each one of us to read up on as many viewpoints as possible, and make our own judgements.
February 7, 2019
This book is a collection of essays. Book is full of rhetorical arguments. So many points were keep on repeating. Book could have shortened by 100 pages. No facts were mentioned. It doesn't have clarity and failed to engage readers. Author tries to claim that she is neutral but she isn't. She keep on demeaning Hinduism and our cultures.
Book is biased.
Don't read this book if you are looking to gain any insights on Indian history.
Highly disappointed.
Book is biased.
Don't read this book if you are looking to gain any insights on Indian history.
Highly disappointed.
July 7, 2014
The Past As Present: Forging Contemporary Identities Through HistoryThe Past As Present: Forging Contemporary Identities Through History by Romila Thapar
My rating: 4 of 5 stars
India had no history or historians. So the English said and went about creating their little history book on India which was only about three centuries since they shipped themselves into India that is..There was no science, empirical techniques, proveable records, archaeology developed enough amongst other things, to claim, otherwise, the British complained. Sadly. a large part of books and history on India parroted this colonial thesis. India became independent and a brand of nationalist historians were born the Mukherjees, Raychauchaudris,Majumdars, Vincent Smith et all..And the contrarian viewpoint was from a brand of 'subalterns',Ranajit Guha, Irfan Habib, Sarkar, Partha Chatterjee, RS Sharma,Bipin Chandra Ms Thapar included. The latter, a motley group supported a materialistic historical interpretation and hence this kind of research bore a certain stamp and style.Ms Thapar, notably, is against a 'communal interpretation' of history, for they are invariably 'partisan'or 'selective' and do not go by modern tools or methodologies of seeking and investigating 'multiple, prioritised causes'.Arun Shourie a prominent critic and practicing politician, though would have us believe the central issues of understanding history and its interpretation are caught up in the cross-hairs of nationalist historians vs Marxist hagiography.
Like all victors the so-called left-leaning historians seemed to receive a certain patronage from the Congress Party for a long while and their history writing style was encouraged officially. Politics being dynamic was undergoing a change gradually in Independent India and this or such a viewpoint started to getting challenged.There were numerous views and opinions and all felt had justification enough to be heard.The season of alternative histories had been spawned from the fertile eggs of a new found democracy. The Right or BJP and its kind which also sees the sense of history as a cultural and political desideratum wants to a be part of this process, too. It is into this competitive dialectics, quite legitimately,thus, that the contestations are underlined in.
One does read increasingly,regrettably though, of a new kind of intolerance. Very physical and coercive it is. Very violent. The banning of Ramanujam’s articles on Ramayana, the forcible exile of arguably the best known artist M F Hussain,non-publishing of Donigkers books on Hinduism and the rise of a Batra Brigade bringing into the fore a kind of thought control which is non-scientific,non-emiprical, a-historical and mythology based history of Hindu revivalism are an argument of force and power. Exactly the kind the British masters of yore had bemoaned, perhaps.Notwithstanding, whether Left or Right it has to be seen though that the linkages of political power and historical research do they in the end, (if there is one) help in nation building and the continuity of its core values(whatever they are as it is in the debate) in the future. It can never be denied that the success of the arguments made in the reviewed book is also interestingly linked to the fear that a new age of non-ideology and digital overdrive, thoroughly technology driven would quite wipe out a nuanced and rigorous understanding of our past, history and politics. The alternative rewriting of history,the dressing up of right wing icons like Shyma Prasd Mukherjee, talk of return to'linguistic nationalism', "civilisational consciousness"(read homogenised Hindu -dominated history of India) as proposed for in the BJP Manifesto or as is one already witness to is bad augury and appears to be a suspicious onslaught on the memory and recall of generations now and in years to come.For secularism is deemed to be intellectual snobbery and considers religion as superstition,“a hypocrisy … a staged unfairness which treated minority violations as superior to majoritarian prejudices”,and as Modi ruefully admits.It is here that we begin to read wily and mischievous new interpretations of the process of nation building . How then secularism gets back to its true meaning of 'religion' being separate from the 'state', is a moot question for all in terms of contemporary identities:Hindu, including all castes and Dalits,Muslims i.e. Shias, Sunnis and other minorities
A word about Ms Romila Thapar and her impeccable integrity would be in order, here.In January 2005, she declined the Padma Bhushan awarded by the Indian Government. In a letter to President A P J Abdul Kalam, she said she was "astonished to see her name in the list of awardees because three months ago when I was contacted by the HRD ministry and asked if I would accept an award, I made my position very clear and explained my reason for declining it". Thapar had declined the Padma Bhushan on an earlier occasion, in 1992. To the President, she explained the reason for turning down the award thus: "I only accept awards from academic institutions or those associated with my professional work, and not state awards"That Ms Thapar has been a pioneer of sorts in pursuing a certain scientific and anti-essentialist interpretation of history is beyond doubt.It focuses more about what happens below and among the masses rather than the elites. As to how much of it survives or spurs others in continuing and furthering in part or whole,as not a mere academic debate but a living, objective history of the people will in the ultimate analysis be the judge and jury.It would be particularly gainful to remember that Ms Romila Thapar has always agreed to the right of the Hindus for a 'culturally sensitive and fair' representationas against an "unscientific and religious based material that distorts the truth and pushes a political agenda'.
For the moment we are sanguine ,however,only victors do not write histories. Heroes do not determine the consequence of wars and we learn from history to correct our mistakes. Early India is no longer about the Hindus; neither is the middle period of the Mughals and Muslims. Nor the last three hundred years about the English.
Hear this accomplished and much respected activist-historian speak:
http://youtu.be/J8HhLJzpx3
My rating: 4 of 5 stars
India had no history or historians. So the English said and went about creating their little history book on India which was only about three centuries since they shipped themselves into India that is..There was no science, empirical techniques, proveable records, archaeology developed enough amongst other things, to claim, otherwise, the British complained. Sadly. a large part of books and history on India parroted this colonial thesis. India became independent and a brand of nationalist historians were born the Mukherjees, Raychauchaudris,Majumdars, Vincent Smith et all..And the contrarian viewpoint was from a brand of 'subalterns',Ranajit Guha, Irfan Habib, Sarkar, Partha Chatterjee, RS Sharma,Bipin Chandra Ms Thapar included. The latter, a motley group supported a materialistic historical interpretation and hence this kind of research bore a certain stamp and style.Ms Thapar, notably, is against a 'communal interpretation' of history, for they are invariably 'partisan'or 'selective' and do not go by modern tools or methodologies of seeking and investigating 'multiple, prioritised causes'.Arun Shourie a prominent critic and practicing politician, though would have us believe the central issues of understanding history and its interpretation are caught up in the cross-hairs of nationalist historians vs Marxist hagiography.
Like all victors the so-called left-leaning historians seemed to receive a certain patronage from the Congress Party for a long while and their history writing style was encouraged officially. Politics being dynamic was undergoing a change gradually in Independent India and this or such a viewpoint started to getting challenged.There were numerous views and opinions and all felt had justification enough to be heard.The season of alternative histories had been spawned from the fertile eggs of a new found democracy. The Right or BJP and its kind which also sees the sense of history as a cultural and political desideratum wants to a be part of this process, too. It is into this competitive dialectics, quite legitimately,thus, that the contestations are underlined in.
One does read increasingly,regrettably though, of a new kind of intolerance. Very physical and coercive it is. Very violent. The banning of Ramanujam’s articles on Ramayana, the forcible exile of arguably the best known artist M F Hussain,non-publishing of Donigkers books on Hinduism and the rise of a Batra Brigade bringing into the fore a kind of thought control which is non-scientific,non-emiprical, a-historical and mythology based history of Hindu revivalism are an argument of force and power. Exactly the kind the British masters of yore had bemoaned, perhaps.Notwithstanding, whether Left or Right it has to be seen though that the linkages of political power and historical research do they in the end, (if there is one) help in nation building and the continuity of its core values(whatever they are as it is in the debate) in the future. It can never be denied that the success of the arguments made in the reviewed book is also interestingly linked to the fear that a new age of non-ideology and digital overdrive, thoroughly technology driven would quite wipe out a nuanced and rigorous understanding of our past, history and politics. The alternative rewriting of history,the dressing up of right wing icons like Shyma Prasd Mukherjee, talk of return to'linguistic nationalism', "civilisational consciousness"(read homogenised Hindu -dominated history of India) as proposed for in the BJP Manifesto or as is one already witness to is bad augury and appears to be a suspicious onslaught on the memory and recall of generations now and in years to come.For secularism is deemed to be intellectual snobbery and considers religion as superstition,“a hypocrisy … a staged unfairness which treated minority violations as superior to majoritarian prejudices”,and as Modi ruefully admits.It is here that we begin to read wily and mischievous new interpretations of the process of nation building . How then secularism gets back to its true meaning of 'religion' being separate from the 'state', is a moot question for all in terms of contemporary identities:Hindu, including all castes and Dalits,Muslims i.e. Shias, Sunnis and other minorities
A word about Ms Romila Thapar and her impeccable integrity would be in order, here.In January 2005, she declined the Padma Bhushan awarded by the Indian Government. In a letter to President A P J Abdul Kalam, she said she was "astonished to see her name in the list of awardees because three months ago when I was contacted by the HRD ministry and asked if I would accept an award, I made my position very clear and explained my reason for declining it". Thapar had declined the Padma Bhushan on an earlier occasion, in 1992. To the President, she explained the reason for turning down the award thus: "I only accept awards from academic institutions or those associated with my professional work, and not state awards"That Ms Thapar has been a pioneer of sorts in pursuing a certain scientific and anti-essentialist interpretation of history is beyond doubt.It focuses more about what happens below and among the masses rather than the elites. As to how much of it survives or spurs others in continuing and furthering in part or whole,as not a mere academic debate but a living, objective history of the people will in the ultimate analysis be the judge and jury.It would be particularly gainful to remember that Ms Romila Thapar has always agreed to the right of the Hindus for a 'culturally sensitive and fair' representationas against an "unscientific and religious based material that distorts the truth and pushes a political agenda'.
For the moment we are sanguine ,however,only victors do not write histories. Heroes do not determine the consequence of wars and we learn from history to correct our mistakes. Early India is no longer about the Hindus; neither is the middle period of the Mughals and Muslims. Nor the last three hundred years about the English.
Hear this accomplished and much respected activist-historian speak:
http://youtu.be/J8HhLJzpx3
October 3, 2020
To everyone who is blessed with the greatest of all fortunes i.e. to be able to read, write, understand and, most importantly, think independently -
All great books are essential, but some are more essential than others.
"Those who control the present, control the past and those who control the past control the future." - George Orwell, 1984
Orwell proved that one doesn't need tomes of pages to show the reality that we live in. Some things can be put precisely because they're really straightforward. You may choose to call it dystopia, as long as you believe that you're not living in it. So when Orwell says something, one needs to pay extra attention.
But Orwell missed writing something explicitly. Perhaps, he believed that after thousands of years of existence, it would be quite clear to us. Nevertheless, what he must have deliberately missed would be the fact that exercising control in any era has inadvertently meant exercising control on the women, irrespective of the geography. Any slightest tilt in the balance of the universe has invariably fallen upon the women of the time in the form of subjugation, torment and abuse - owing to the second rate citizenship that every society assigns to them. Therefore, History, I believe, is a genre that deserves greatest attention of the female readers.
When I bought this book earlier this year, I was questioned by a well-intentioned person that if I believed in Ms. Thapar's "distorted sense of history". As this was my first tryst with a Romila Thapar work, at that moment, I really had no assumption that could cloud my reasoning. So, I started reading the book a few days ago. It didn't take me long to understand why so many people hate her. There are only two reasons:
1. She uses an utterly dispassionate logic as a historian; a profession to which her integrity supercedes that of an average person. But such dispassionate logic is often hurtful to the faith and beliefs around which most people build their entire identities. A world that doesn't think twice before waging wars on others complains about her texts "hurting sentiments".
2. Most of the people haven't read her and believe what their aforementioned friends - or the Whatsapp University or the Twitter Collegiate - tell them to believe. Because, let us be honest, nobody told them that the right to freedom of expression comes with an unsaid duty to educate oneself from reliable sources. Why even bother?!
It's appalling to see our colleagues and peers - coming from a similar or better educational background - believe that the wrongs of the past can be corrected by the wrongs of the present. It's disturbing to see that, across the world, fundamentalism is seen as the way to avenge another fundamentalism. This spectacle should be an alarm to those who can still think for themselves, for History has a nasty habit of repeating itself.
About Ms. Thapar, I have only this much to say - she's absolutely brilliant; especially at making a reader question their foundational ideas of identity, race, caste, heirarchy and nationalism. Reading her feels like sitting in the company of an educated, mature and sensible person; something that has become a rare occurrence these days. The amount of effort she puts in clarifying all doubts of ambiguity or her allegiance to any political ideology, would put a rational reader to shame. How low have we stooped intellectually, that a trained and acclaimed historian has to give us the basics of critical analysis of any historical or scientific evidence! She says nothing that should offend anyone but then taking offence is the new Antakshari.
Meanwhile, let's boast the large number of graduates, engineers, doctors, MBAs and civil servants that has led our country to this golden age of ignorance. Mr. Orwell is probably looking at us like the Big Brother in his novella and smiling with utter lament and pity.
All great books are essential, but some are more essential than others.
"Those who control the present, control the past and those who control the past control the future." - George Orwell, 1984
Orwell proved that one doesn't need tomes of pages to show the reality that we live in. Some things can be put precisely because they're really straightforward. You may choose to call it dystopia, as long as you believe that you're not living in it. So when Orwell says something, one needs to pay extra attention.
But Orwell missed writing something explicitly. Perhaps, he believed that after thousands of years of existence, it would be quite clear to us. Nevertheless, what he must have deliberately missed would be the fact that exercising control in any era has inadvertently meant exercising control on the women, irrespective of the geography. Any slightest tilt in the balance of the universe has invariably fallen upon the women of the time in the form of subjugation, torment and abuse - owing to the second rate citizenship that every society assigns to them. Therefore, History, I believe, is a genre that deserves greatest attention of the female readers.
When I bought this book earlier this year, I was questioned by a well-intentioned person that if I believed in Ms. Thapar's "distorted sense of history". As this was my first tryst with a Romila Thapar work, at that moment, I really had no assumption that could cloud my reasoning. So, I started reading the book a few days ago. It didn't take me long to understand why so many people hate her. There are only two reasons:
1. She uses an utterly dispassionate logic as a historian; a profession to which her integrity supercedes that of an average person. But such dispassionate logic is often hurtful to the faith and beliefs around which most people build their entire identities. A world that doesn't think twice before waging wars on others complains about her texts "hurting sentiments".
2. Most of the people haven't read her and believe what their aforementioned friends - or the Whatsapp University or the Twitter Collegiate - tell them to believe. Because, let us be honest, nobody told them that the right to freedom of expression comes with an unsaid duty to educate oneself from reliable sources. Why even bother?!
It's appalling to see our colleagues and peers - coming from a similar or better educational background - believe that the wrongs of the past can be corrected by the wrongs of the present. It's disturbing to see that, across the world, fundamentalism is seen as the way to avenge another fundamentalism. This spectacle should be an alarm to those who can still think for themselves, for History has a nasty habit of repeating itself.
About Ms. Thapar, I have only this much to say - she's absolutely brilliant; especially at making a reader question their foundational ideas of identity, race, caste, heirarchy and nationalism. Reading her feels like sitting in the company of an educated, mature and sensible person; something that has become a rare occurrence these days. The amount of effort she puts in clarifying all doubts of ambiguity or her allegiance to any political ideology, would put a rational reader to shame. How low have we stooped intellectually, that a trained and acclaimed historian has to give us the basics of critical analysis of any historical or scientific evidence! She says nothing that should offend anyone but then taking offence is the new Antakshari.
Meanwhile, let's boast the large number of graduates, engineers, doctors, MBAs and civil servants that has led our country to this golden age of ignorance. Mr. Orwell is probably looking at us like the Big Brother in his novella and smiling with utter lament and pity.
September 20, 2020
Romilla Thapar discusses, in this book, how the past (many times imaginary) is invoked to give a force to a current political movement. She claims that history, especially ancient history, is not static, it changes as and when we develop a more in-depth understanding of archaeological evidence and their multidimensional understanding from the intersection of multiple disciples. As we move towards the paradigm shift to employing scientific methods to understand our past, not just in terms of the life of rulers and elites but also the socio-economic strands of the society, we start to gain a coherent understanding of our past supported by undeniable evidence.
Interest in Indian history arose in the 19th century when Britishers engaged in the project of understanding their subject and, in the way, started looking for reasons to justify their subjugation. They broadly divided it into 3 eras: Hindu, Muslim and British. This was done to give the expression that Indian society has always been monolithic and there was always a sense of enormity between Hindu and Muslim. They tried to express that Indian culture has always been static and looked over by the Oriental Despotism system. Nationalists when they arrived in the scene did change these eras to Ancient, Medieval, and Modern but broad contours remained the same. They adapted the way the elites class view of looking into society, which was the major source passed down to us. History is not just a directory of knowledge, it also involves analysis and interpreting this information.
Religion in India was of a different kind as compared to Europe. But the colonial establishment considered and presented it as a Semitic religion to make sense of the history albeit truth was far from it. Hinduism, for example, is not a monolithic religion; it is the mosaic of multiple sects brought together under a single umbrella. There were some themes, like caste (or jati) division, that crossed religious boundaries, even religion claiming to be egalitarian practiced it. As the fight for independence intensified, religious organizations such as Hindu Mahasabha and Muslim league took the historical perspective of the colonial historians to justify their position of demanding the nation defined by religion. Their primary motive is not the welfare, that they claim Ram Rajya would bring, rather the ascent to power by political mobilization.
India has always been a stratified society, where multiple sects exist in the environment of confrontation and contestation. Ashok divided them roughly into two categories - Brahmanas (Vedic religion followers) and Shramanas (Buddha and Jain sects). The onset of something called Puranic Hinduism, in its current incarnation, came only after in the second AD demarcated by bhakti tradition. The shift from communal rituals to individual bhakti does signify the emergence of individual liberty and freedom. Now the relationship between a follower and God becomes a personal one, not requiring the justification of Pandits. But the communalism around the religion wishes to destroy this diversity and use it for political mobilization to fulfill their agendas.
When we talk about epics and their place in history, we have to be careful as these are not events that supposedly took place in a particular point of time rather they carry with them their genealogy. Therefore, any archaeological correlation would be complicated as it would require the sorting out of stratification of the text. Reflections that surface in the epic change with each new skin that it acquires with time. For example, Ramayana does not belong to any one moment of history for it has its own history which lies embedded in its multiple variants at different times and places. To present its one version on TV and deny the legitimacy of others is to rob it of its nuances. If the state as the main patron of culture withdraws from innovations in creativity on the grounds that it will hurt the sentiments of “religious peoples”, the culture will tend to be reduced to the lowest common denominator. We as a human, and nation are the product of our pasts; we have to do our utmost to understand the past as well and as fully as we can and at the same time be sensitive to its nuances and complexities. It is this that distinguishes the maker of myths from historians.
Women at all levels of society - whether their status is high or low - were kept at the margin of history. In the society where identity is determined by birth, it is essential to know the parentage as to maintain the rules of caste. Since ultimately only a woman knows the biological father of her child, caste and patriarchy are therefore inseparable. Sati, which has been described as originating as a method for women to escape Muslim invaders, has been part of “tradition” even before their arrival. Describing it as Hindu tradition is to transfer a ritual associated with a small segment of upper caste society to the entire society with the claim that it is the rite of the Hindu community. These kinds of rituals should not be forgotten as it reflects on the making of what we sometimes describe as our “tradition”. Before claiming that we know our tradition and must follow it, we should ask the question as to whose tradition we are observing - which caste, which class, which sect, and which region. We might try to universalize past observance but there were also well-defined and accepted variants. Ignoring them is akin to inventing a new and emaciated tradition and insisting on its antiquity. Often enough what we describe as our heritage and tradition is actually of recent vintage.
Romilla Thapar, often being vocal about her political viewpoints, has written a well-researched and thoroughly accessible book while putting her academic historian cap, backed up by historical evidences. It is a very fascinating read that one is poised to enjoy.
Interest in Indian history arose in the 19th century when Britishers engaged in the project of understanding their subject and, in the way, started looking for reasons to justify their subjugation. They broadly divided it into 3 eras: Hindu, Muslim and British. This was done to give the expression that Indian society has always been monolithic and there was always a sense of enormity between Hindu and Muslim. They tried to express that Indian culture has always been static and looked over by the Oriental Despotism system. Nationalists when they arrived in the scene did change these eras to Ancient, Medieval, and Modern but broad contours remained the same. They adapted the way the elites class view of looking into society, which was the major source passed down to us. History is not just a directory of knowledge, it also involves analysis and interpreting this information.
Religion in India was of a different kind as compared to Europe. But the colonial establishment considered and presented it as a Semitic religion to make sense of the history albeit truth was far from it. Hinduism, for example, is not a monolithic religion; it is the mosaic of multiple sects brought together under a single umbrella. There were some themes, like caste (or jati) division, that crossed religious boundaries, even religion claiming to be egalitarian practiced it. As the fight for independence intensified, religious organizations such as Hindu Mahasabha and Muslim league took the historical perspective of the colonial historians to justify their position of demanding the nation defined by religion. Their primary motive is not the welfare, that they claim Ram Rajya would bring, rather the ascent to power by political mobilization.
India has always been a stratified society, where multiple sects exist in the environment of confrontation and contestation. Ashok divided them roughly into two categories - Brahmanas (Vedic religion followers) and Shramanas (Buddha and Jain sects). The onset of something called Puranic Hinduism, in its current incarnation, came only after in the second AD demarcated by bhakti tradition. The shift from communal rituals to individual bhakti does signify the emergence of individual liberty and freedom. Now the relationship between a follower and God becomes a personal one, not requiring the justification of Pandits. But the communalism around the religion wishes to destroy this diversity and use it for political mobilization to fulfill their agendas.
When we talk about epics and their place in history, we have to be careful as these are not events that supposedly took place in a particular point of time rather they carry with them their genealogy. Therefore, any archaeological correlation would be complicated as it would require the sorting out of stratification of the text. Reflections that surface in the epic change with each new skin that it acquires with time. For example, Ramayana does not belong to any one moment of history for it has its own history which lies embedded in its multiple variants at different times and places. To present its one version on TV and deny the legitimacy of others is to rob it of its nuances. If the state as the main patron of culture withdraws from innovations in creativity on the grounds that it will hurt the sentiments of “religious peoples”, the culture will tend to be reduced to the lowest common denominator. We as a human, and nation are the product of our pasts; we have to do our utmost to understand the past as well and as fully as we can and at the same time be sensitive to its nuances and complexities. It is this that distinguishes the maker of myths from historians.
Women at all levels of society - whether their status is high or low - were kept at the margin of history. In the society where identity is determined by birth, it is essential to know the parentage as to maintain the rules of caste. Since ultimately only a woman knows the biological father of her child, caste and patriarchy are therefore inseparable. Sati, which has been described as originating as a method for women to escape Muslim invaders, has been part of “tradition” even before their arrival. Describing it as Hindu tradition is to transfer a ritual associated with a small segment of upper caste society to the entire society with the claim that it is the rite of the Hindu community. These kinds of rituals should not be forgotten as it reflects on the making of what we sometimes describe as our “tradition”. Before claiming that we know our tradition and must follow it, we should ask the question as to whose tradition we are observing - which caste, which class, which sect, and which region. We might try to universalize past observance but there were also well-defined and accepted variants. Ignoring them is akin to inventing a new and emaciated tradition and insisting on its antiquity. Often enough what we describe as our heritage and tradition is actually of recent vintage.
Romilla Thapar, often being vocal about her political viewpoints, has written a well-researched and thoroughly accessible book while putting her academic historian cap, backed up by historical evidences. It is a very fascinating read that one is poised to enjoy.
May 17, 2025
The audiobook narrator captured Romila Mam's contempt and disgust with hindutva goons too perfectly lmao
December 15, 2018
The book is about how history has shaped some ideas of present. And as the author rightly says, history is not just the study of past. It is a dialogue between the past and the present. We try to connect the dots between two eras while reading history. The author claims to narrate historic interpretations from a very neutral and objective perspective. So far so good. But the narration is anything but neutral. At one point it feels like the sole purpose of the book is to demean our culture and make all of us feel ignorant. Last few chapters were like the conspiracy theories we read over internet (Taj Mahal was Tejo Mahal etc.). I got the book to read more from the person who wrote my high school history textbooks. But was appalled to see the non stop rant on how Hinduism is not so good and how destruction of our institutions from invaders is not so bad. Not cool.
August 16, 2020
This book is very necessary to understand the vast nature of our cultural past. When reading history one never thinks that he is also a thing which will eventually be turned into a past, but this line of thinking enables a person to understand that the upheaval of our day to day absurdity, would have a line or two dedicated to it and just that, it won't matter. Therefore, taking identity from past is what we do, but we also have to be critical about our understanding of past. One action is depended on a lot of different motives until and unless we identify them and accept them, we won't be able to evolve.
With this book, A lot of questions are raised regarding identity in a community and its repercussions in the society.
With this book, A lot of questions are raised regarding identity in a community and its repercussions in the society.
October 4, 2014
Not a well researched and engaging read. no new points she has made. A summary of her previously released books. An inane, failed and poor attempt to defend her views on many controversial early Indian and feminist topics with some repetitive and equivocal writing.
August 7, 2017
The book is so repetitive and boring that's it's bound to take its toll on the reader ! All the author wanted to say could have been condensed in 100 pages rather than the 350 odd pages .
October 12, 2025
I loved this collection of linked essays for two reasons: First, (and maybe this is confirmation bias at work) but it shored up for me my suspicion that the foundations of the Hindutva movement and aggressive nationalism undeniably sweeping India at the moment are flimsy, manufactured, and of recent vintage.
Second, it blew away so many preconceived notions I had not realized I held - whether it was around "Hinduism", the identity politics of using religion as a primary marker as deployed by the Brits, the Ramayan, Mahabharat, the Purans and their evolution, as well as this self-evident thought: all religious beliefs interact, borrow, and mutates in response to each other rather than existing in an orthodox, inert canon as the self-appointed guardians of the faith would have you believe. In fact, going into my TBR urgently are the alternate versions of the Ramayan, because I realized my gran hoodwinked me into thinking the Valmiki/ Kalidas versions were canonical. Damnit, Mai Aaji :)
There were some essays I found more instructive than others, but none were a waste of my time. The strident essay on the practice of Sati and on the topic of rape in Indian culture genuinely gave me chills.
Romila Thapar's voice is one we sorely need in this age of authoritarianism, majoritarianism, and crony capitalism. Her idea and understanding of India is far more nuanced, and therefore more real, precious, and worth preserving as compared to the current circus of jingoism.
What was terrible here - because I listened to the Audible version - was the atrocious narration. Clearly the lady narrating had not read the book ahead of time and absolutely butchers ever tenth sentence with random pauses, poor pronunciation (she says Pyooranik instead of Pooranic! roll of the eyes). I would deduct three stars from the narration, but the text is great. Read this one rather than listening to it!
Second, it blew away so many preconceived notions I had not realized I held - whether it was around "Hinduism", the identity politics of using religion as a primary marker as deployed by the Brits, the Ramayan, Mahabharat, the Purans and their evolution, as well as this self-evident thought: all religious beliefs interact, borrow, and mutates in response to each other rather than existing in an orthodox, inert canon as the self-appointed guardians of the faith would have you believe. In fact, going into my TBR urgently are the alternate versions of the Ramayan, because I realized my gran hoodwinked me into thinking the Valmiki/ Kalidas versions were canonical. Damnit, Mai Aaji :)
There were some essays I found more instructive than others, but none were a waste of my time. The strident essay on the practice of Sati and on the topic of rape in Indian culture genuinely gave me chills.
Romila Thapar's voice is one we sorely need in this age of authoritarianism, majoritarianism, and crony capitalism. Her idea and understanding of India is far more nuanced, and therefore more real, precious, and worth preserving as compared to the current circus of jingoism.
What was terrible here - because I listened to the Audible version - was the atrocious narration. Clearly the lady narrating had not read the book ahead of time and absolutely butchers ever tenth sentence with random pauses, poor pronunciation (she says Pyooranik instead of Pooranic! roll of the eyes). I would deduct three stars from the narration, but the text is great. Read this one rather than listening to it!
August 1, 2025
This is an eye-opening and deeply progressive historical lens on Indian society.
Thapar incisively analyzes enduring power structures such as caste, patriarchy, colonialism and how they intersect and mutate across time. She shows how religion and nationalism have been strategically used through a colonial-Brahmanical alliance to construct a version of history that centers upper-caste narratives, often erasing or distorting the lives and experiences of the marginalized. This historical construction actively works against the values of a secular and egalitarian society.
As a tribal reader, the book struck a deep chord. It helped me see how the upper caste version of history whitewashes the systematic dispossession of our lands and the reduction of our communities ,once autonomous and rooted to a permanent, exploited labor force.It helped me make sense of how history has been weaponized to sustain caste-based hierarchies and cultural exclusion.
Some readers have called this book anti-Hindu or false. But that critique fails to understand a core distinction: faith and history serve different purposes. Faith may offer comfort, but history is not meant to affirm beliefs. It demands critical inquiry, evidence, and nuance. Historical writing isn’t about reverence; it’s about understanding.
By highlighting the many versions of the Ramayana, secular ethics from Buddhism, or rebellious figures like Draupadi, Thapar offers a powerful argument for embracing historical variance. To fight for that variance is to resist erasure and to reclaim a fuller, more honest view of the past.
This is not just a set of essays. It’s a sharp, necessary tool for reshaping how we think about history, identity, and justice.
Thapar incisively analyzes enduring power structures such as caste, patriarchy, colonialism and how they intersect and mutate across time. She shows how religion and nationalism have been strategically used through a colonial-Brahmanical alliance to construct a version of history that centers upper-caste narratives, often erasing or distorting the lives and experiences of the marginalized. This historical construction actively works against the values of a secular and egalitarian society.
As a tribal reader, the book struck a deep chord. It helped me see how the upper caste version of history whitewashes the systematic dispossession of our lands and the reduction of our communities ,once autonomous and rooted to a permanent, exploited labor force.It helped me make sense of how history has been weaponized to sustain caste-based hierarchies and cultural exclusion.
Some readers have called this book anti-Hindu or false. But that critique fails to understand a core distinction: faith and history serve different purposes. Faith may offer comfort, but history is not meant to affirm beliefs. It demands critical inquiry, evidence, and nuance. Historical writing isn’t about reverence; it’s about understanding.
By highlighting the many versions of the Ramayana, secular ethics from Buddhism, or rebellious figures like Draupadi, Thapar offers a powerful argument for embracing historical variance. To fight for that variance is to resist erasure and to reclaim a fuller, more honest view of the past.
This is not just a set of essays. It’s a sharp, necessary tool for reshaping how we think about history, identity, and justice.
April 19, 2022
Romila Thappar is Veteran Historian whose experience in field is best in India. In this book she discuss regarding past and present history and her days as NCERT text book panel writter. She discuss on how history should be written and should be from facts by observation and leaving the false history identified. Now a days Whatsapp historians are prominent and they edit and circulate history in form of hatred and false information. Also Politicians who didn't even know facts of history are rewriting history which suits their political agenda
This book provide an insight on past and present history and is a must read.
ഇന്ത്യയുടെ മുതിർന്ന ചരിത്രകാരൻമരിൽ ഒരാൾ അണ് റോമില തപ്പാർ. വലത് പക്ഷ രാഷ്ട്രീയക്കാരുടെ ഏറ്റവും വലിയ ശത്രു. വാട്ട്സ്ആപ്പ് യൂണിവേഴ്സിറ്റി ഡിഗ്രീ എടുത്ത ഇത്തരം രാഷ്ട്രീയക്കാർ അധികവും വ്യാജ ചരിത്രകാരി എന്നാണു അവരെ വിശേഷിപ്പിക്കുന്നത്. WhatsApp ഡിഗ്രീ കരസ്ഥമകിയാ ഇത്തരക്കാരെ ഈ പുസ്തകത്തിലൂടെ തുറന്നു കാണിക്കുക അണ് തപാർ.
ഇന്ത്യ എന്ന രാജ്യത്തിൻ്റെ പ്രാചീനവും ആധുനികവും അയ ചരിത്രം അണ് ഇതിൽ വിവരിക്കുന്നത്. Ncert ടെക്സ്റ്റ് ബുക്ക് കമ്മിറ്റിയിൽ ഉണ്ടായിരുന്ന തപ്പർ അവരുടെ അനുഭവങ്ങൾ ഈ പുസ്തകത്തിലൂടെ വിവരിക്കുന്നുണ്ട്. രാഷ്ട്രീയക്കരുടെ ഇഷ്ടത്തിന് അനുസരിച്ച് അണ് ഇന്ന് വിദ്യാഭാസ വകുപ്പ് ടെക്സ്റ്റ് ബുക്കുകൾ പ്രസിദ്ധീകരിക്കുന്നത് പോലും.
പ്രാചീന ഭാരത ചരിത്രവും ആധുനിക ഭാരത ചരിത്രവും എങ്ങനെ ക്രോഡികരികണം എന്നും ഈ പുസ്തകത്തിലൂടെ താപ്പർ വിവരിക്കുന്നു .
This book provide an insight on past and present history and is a must read.
ഇന്ത്യയുടെ മുതിർന്ന ചരിത്രകാരൻമരിൽ ഒരാൾ അണ് റോമില തപ്പാർ. വലത് പക്ഷ രാഷ്ട്രീയക്കാരുടെ ഏറ്റവും വലിയ ശത്രു. വാട്ട്സ്ആപ്പ് യൂണിവേഴ്സിറ്റി ഡിഗ്രീ എടുത്ത ഇത്തരം രാഷ്ട്രീയക്കാർ അധികവും വ്യാജ ചരിത്രകാരി എന്നാണു അവരെ വിശേഷിപ്പിക്കുന്നത്. WhatsApp ഡിഗ്രീ കരസ്ഥമകിയാ ഇത്തരക്കാരെ ഈ പുസ്തകത്തിലൂടെ തുറന്നു കാണിക്കുക അണ് തപാർ.
ഇന്ത്യ എന്ന രാജ്യത്തിൻ്റെ പ്രാചീനവും ആധുനികവും അയ ചരിത്രം അണ് ഇതിൽ വിവരിക്കുന്നത്. Ncert ടെക്സ്റ്റ് ബുക്ക് കമ്മിറ്റിയിൽ ഉണ്ടായിരുന്ന തപ്പർ അവരുടെ അനുഭവങ്ങൾ ഈ പുസ്തകത്തിലൂടെ വിവരിക്കുന്നുണ്ട്. രാഷ്ട്രീയക്കരുടെ ഇഷ്ടത്തിന് അനുസരിച്ച് അണ് ഇന്ന് വിദ്യാഭാസ വകുപ്പ് ടെക്സ്റ്റ് ബുക്കുകൾ പ്രസിദ്ധീകരിക്കുന്നത് പോലും.
പ്രാചീന ഭാരത ചരിത്രവും ആധുനിക ഭാരത ചരിത്രവും എങ്ങനെ ക്രോഡികരികണം എന്നും ഈ പുസ്തകത്തിലൂടെ താപ്പർ വിവരിക്കുന്നു .
May 25, 2018
This is a great con-temporarily relevant book containing a series of essays and lectures given by the eminent historian Romila Thapar. Some of the impact points that come out of this book is the wrong perception of the periodized history of India into the Hindu period, Muslim period and the last Christian period. Her apparent leftist leanings come out quite clearly in her lectures and essays but she is very articulate and convincing in her arguments. Her take on the Somnath Temple raid by Mahmud Ghazni is quite thought provoking. A must read for history enthusiast which will change the traditional perception of ancient history of our country.
May 19, 2017
Romila Thapar shows how India's multi-faceted history is selectively used to cement a partiarchic society, deepen religious communalism, narrow thinking and exclude discussion. Sad and irritating. Despite all that the society has produced someone like the author. That gives hope.
May 2, 2025
Romila Thapar is one public intellectual with many followers and an equal number of detractors. Her work on Early Indian history earned her many enemies. Undeterred, she continues to be in public life, publishing her side of the story with great conviction. In these essays, she analyses the interplay of past and present where the present interprets the past to legitimise the present actions and how the present-day requirements tend to determine the past. She contends that the past and the present should be understood in their contexts, and backward extension of the present to the past events would lead to a situation where the present is answerable to an unrelated and unconnected past. Her focus is on the question of contemporary identities, political use of these identities, and the way they are linked to the past. Her basic problem with the right-wing definition of Indian history is that they attempt to assert that the Indian history and culture are founded in the Vedas, which, she says, will annul the reality of the Indian society that constitutes multiple cultures and ignores the variant relations that existed between various groups through the Indian history.
English historians (especially James Mill) have periodised Indian history into Hindu, Muslim, and British rule and depicted the two major religions to be constantly at loggerheads. He also gave currency to the idea that Asian societies were ruled by despots and portrayed them as static societies. He identified the basic attribute of Hindu society as its caste hierarchy. Thus, he projected Indian society as fragmented with internal chaos, justifying the sobering and civilising rule of the British. However, Ms Thapar claims that there is a major shift from this colonial interpretation of history to themes that had to do with economic resources, the forms of social organization, the articulation of religion and art as aspects of social perceptions, and above all to tracking the major points of historical change in a history of three millennia leading to diverse outcomes. This shift is not to the liking of those who argue for a mono-causal, religion-derived cultural uniformity.
She discusses a range of issues, including early Indian history, religious identities, politics of history textbooks for school children, communalism, and religion & secularism. She also presents her take on various contemporary debates, which include Aryan migration theory, dating of Epics, issues involved with Mahabharata and Ramayana, Somanath temple desecration, and treatment of women in Indian society in the past and in the present.
In this book, Ms Thapar’s analysis is cold, unsentimental, and unsparing. In her way, she pursues the historicity of an event, not bothering about the reactions it may invoke. Epics are dissected to appreciate the social norms, ethics, caste realities, and the power equations of the times. She is interested in the historicity of the epic and its evolution, including the interpolations made into it in response to the changing times and norms. She may appreciate the literary quality of an epic in passing, but is not really concerned.
Ms Thapar gives the impression that there is no such thing as Muslim tyranny, as tyranny is not specific to any religion, and it is the norm prevalent during medieval periods. She seems to contend that there were as many Hindu tyrants as there are Muslim tyrants, and historical memory is only a construct to suit a political agenda. While one can agree to the presence of Hindu tyrants, it doesn’t make Muslim tyranny any less painful. Trying to show that a demolition of viharas or temples by a Hindu king to counter demolition by a Muslim ruler is not the way forward. This logic, even if correct, will not appeal to a pilgrim to Mathura, where a mosque can be seen right on the temple. Instead, it is better to acknowledge the atrocities, if committed, and move forward with a realisation that history cannot be relived and that it is not a manifesto to settle scores. We have more pressing problems than remodeling all the mosques into temples.
Finally, the objective of the study of history is to satisfy our curiosity to understand how we evolved to be what we are and to enjoy the fascinating story of the ascent of man. While it can give us valuable lessons for shaping the future, every lesson has to be tempered with the present context and applied with a sense of proportion. One should not be foolish to insist on reliving the perceived past glory or plan to settle the scores of past grievances. We can be worthy of the past glory, if any, when we live in the present, shaping a brighter future relevant to the times we live in. Ms. Thapar’s essays will make one reflect on these lines even if one doesn’t agree with all her opinions.
English historians (especially James Mill) have periodised Indian history into Hindu, Muslim, and British rule and depicted the two major religions to be constantly at loggerheads. He also gave currency to the idea that Asian societies were ruled by despots and portrayed them as static societies. He identified the basic attribute of Hindu society as its caste hierarchy. Thus, he projected Indian society as fragmented with internal chaos, justifying the sobering and civilising rule of the British. However, Ms Thapar claims that there is a major shift from this colonial interpretation of history to themes that had to do with economic resources, the forms of social organization, the articulation of religion and art as aspects of social perceptions, and above all to tracking the major points of historical change in a history of three millennia leading to diverse outcomes. This shift is not to the liking of those who argue for a mono-causal, religion-derived cultural uniformity.
She discusses a range of issues, including early Indian history, religious identities, politics of history textbooks for school children, communalism, and religion & secularism. She also presents her take on various contemporary debates, which include Aryan migration theory, dating of Epics, issues involved with Mahabharata and Ramayana, Somanath temple desecration, and treatment of women in Indian society in the past and in the present.
In this book, Ms Thapar’s analysis is cold, unsentimental, and unsparing. In her way, she pursues the historicity of an event, not bothering about the reactions it may invoke. Epics are dissected to appreciate the social norms, ethics, caste realities, and the power equations of the times. She is interested in the historicity of the epic and its evolution, including the interpolations made into it in response to the changing times and norms. She may appreciate the literary quality of an epic in passing, but is not really concerned.
Ms Thapar gives the impression that there is no such thing as Muslim tyranny, as tyranny is not specific to any religion, and it is the norm prevalent during medieval periods. She seems to contend that there were as many Hindu tyrants as there are Muslim tyrants, and historical memory is only a construct to suit a political agenda. While one can agree to the presence of Hindu tyrants, it doesn’t make Muslim tyranny any less painful. Trying to show that a demolition of viharas or temples by a Hindu king to counter demolition by a Muslim ruler is not the way forward. This logic, even if correct, will not appeal to a pilgrim to Mathura, where a mosque can be seen right on the temple. Instead, it is better to acknowledge the atrocities, if committed, and move forward with a realisation that history cannot be relived and that it is not a manifesto to settle scores. We have more pressing problems than remodeling all the mosques into temples.
Finally, the objective of the study of history is to satisfy our curiosity to understand how we evolved to be what we are and to enjoy the fascinating story of the ascent of man. While it can give us valuable lessons for shaping the future, every lesson has to be tempered with the present context and applied with a sense of proportion. One should not be foolish to insist on reliving the perceived past glory or plan to settle the scores of past grievances. We can be worthy of the past glory, if any, when we live in the present, shaping a brighter future relevant to the times we live in. Ms. Thapar’s essays will make one reflect on these lines even if one doesn’t agree with all her opinions.
January 21, 2023
Loved the details. Highly informative even if some of her ideas have been contested often times. Romila Thapar is without doubt one of the best Historians alive in India today. Her characteristic narrative style with adequate focus on analyzing an issue from all corners, makes one think strongly about the believes they have had since as long as they can remember. How can one say if the tradition that they have been following since decades and centuries isn't something that originally begun with those ideas mind and isn't were simple tactics to gain wealth and suppress the enemies; when the sources themselves that tell us the history of these practices can be found to not withhold under scutiny. The history of India, it seems, is as multi-faceted and ever changing as are the people and it's languages in the contemporary world, a fact that's often overlooked when the subject is taught in the schools.
The author talks on all these and much more in this phenomenal book. I specifically found the chapters on the emancipation of the Women in ancient and mediaeval India, highly illuminating. As Yuval Nova Harari said in his masterful essays, "Women have been the single most underprivileged and ill-treated section of the society throughtout the history all the major cultures of the world." In her book, Thapar emphasizes how some accounts usually cited as an example of possibly equal status of women, like that of the scholar Gargi in the upnishads, are but some lone elite cases that don't represent the majority classes. She goes on to say that instead stories about what went around with the suppressed Dasis are not at all present in the ancient literatures. Practises such as Sati, that were prevalent in much of India until very recently in historical terms, in fact show that the Women were often treated rather as a commodity and were moved out of the way when their targeted purpose is finished or when they appear to pose a threat to the Men's share of wealth.
"The Past as Present" is a thought provoking book, full of insightful essays. Highly recommended as an illuminating take on some of the most controvertial topics in current Indian Geopolitical History. To what extend you agree with the ideas dealt with herein is totally upto you, but I would rather be taken back if the book doesn't make to atleast think a little deeper about what you know as your culture and your past.
The author talks on all these and much more in this phenomenal book. I specifically found the chapters on the emancipation of the Women in ancient and mediaeval India, highly illuminating. As Yuval Nova Harari said in his masterful essays, "Women have been the single most underprivileged and ill-treated section of the society throughtout the history all the major cultures of the world." In her book, Thapar emphasizes how some accounts usually cited as an example of possibly equal status of women, like that of the scholar Gargi in the upnishads, are but some lone elite cases that don't represent the majority classes. She goes on to say that instead stories about what went around with the suppressed Dasis are not at all present in the ancient literatures. Practises such as Sati, that were prevalent in much of India until very recently in historical terms, in fact show that the Women were often treated rather as a commodity and were moved out of the way when their targeted purpose is finished or when they appear to pose a threat to the Men's share of wealth.
"The Past as Present" is a thought provoking book, full of insightful essays. Highly recommended as an illuminating take on some of the most controvertial topics in current Indian Geopolitical History. To what extend you agree with the ideas dealt with herein is totally upto you, but I would rather be taken back if the book doesn't make to atleast think a little deeper about what you know as your culture and your past.
January 20, 2020
In an ideal world, writings about history will be based on facts regardless of one's opinions and political inclinations. But unfortunately, we have been witness to the weaponizing of history to suit the narratives of the present. So I've always made it a point to check out essays of historians to gauge whether they come from a point of objectivity, before diving into their writings on their core subjects. I started doing this with Ramchandra Guha and now, I've done the same with Romila Thapar.
This collection of essays deals particularly with the way the past has been used to colour the present and is a critique of such practices. As one of the eminent historians of ancient India, Thapar presents multiple instances where the current nationalist government sticks to the flawed colonial narrative to create a divide among various people groups of the subcontinent. This is very pertinent in this age where there has been an active effort by those in power to saffronize this once diverse, multicultural nation.
Dealing with subjects like the reading of myths as history, the presentation of past eras as either monolithic Hindu or Muslim periods, the attitude of women today stemming from patriarchal views of the past, the ubiquitous Aryan invasion theory etc., Thapar's urge for objectivity is a call that urgently needs to be heeded.
This collection of essays deals particularly with the way the past has been used to colour the present and is a critique of such practices. As one of the eminent historians of ancient India, Thapar presents multiple instances where the current nationalist government sticks to the flawed colonial narrative to create a divide among various people groups of the subcontinent. This is very pertinent in this age where there has been an active effort by those in power to saffronize this once diverse, multicultural nation.
Dealing with subjects like the reading of myths as history, the presentation of past eras as either monolithic Hindu or Muslim periods, the attitude of women today stemming from patriarchal views of the past, the ubiquitous Aryan invasion theory etc., Thapar's urge for objectivity is a call that urgently needs to be heeded.
December 13, 2020
"A society has many pasts from which it chooses those that go into creation of its history"
Identity of a nation is based on myths surrounding the past as the past can be interpreted in many ways. All nationalisms require and search for utopia from the past and the more remote periods of history are chosen, partly because there is less detailed evidence on such periods and therefore it is possible to fantasize more freely about them. History needs to be defended in such a precarious situation else it would be hijacked by vested interest groups to forward their own agenda. Their is a sense of despair in authors words where she highlights how multiple facets of history have been molded to the extent that any variations are now considered "hurtful to sentiments".
For eg, let's take Hinduism as a religion. Hinduism had sufficient variety among itself until Shramanic sects (Buddhism, Jainism etc) sought to differentiate themselves from Brahmanic practices. Brahmanic practices differed in their Gods, rituals, animism, phallus-worship etc, that what we call Hinduism today was never a unified and rigid religion as Judeo-Christian monotheism. Ancient India, like China was relatively isolated from the world and both developed a unique civilization of their own. India developed a mosaic of religious sects, unique system of caste hierarchy and worship practices. For the peoples living then, it didn't need a name as an identifier as it didn't need to be differentiated from anything else. Hinduism as a term for religion was never used before 14th Century. There are multiple versions of Ramayana which are drastically different from each other, but existence of one doesn't threaten the reality of other. Yet, today we see a process of semitic-isation and Hinduism books, processes and Gods are sought be standardised. Instances like Somnath temple raid are projected in terms of Hindu-Muslim clash, while the contemporaries never viewed them as such, as even Hindu kings used to raid the temples to get money (so was done also by Emperor Constantine of Rome to get the Church Gold when attacked by Sultan Mehmet II of Turkey)
The book thus makes you take a step back to question assumptions we take for granted (for eg the assumption that Hinduism had a non-violent past). It reflects back on the direction our country has taken since independence. Author tells her own experience as a writer of NCERT history books in an autobiographical chapter which is one of the best in the book. In a very radical environment we are living in, such authors maybe criticised for being anti-national, some like Dabholkar may even be shot, but these are few sane and fearless voices that need to be heard, whether you agree with them or not, if for nothing else than for the value of tolerance which is attributed to our country.
Identity of a nation is based on myths surrounding the past as the past can be interpreted in many ways. All nationalisms require and search for utopia from the past and the more remote periods of history are chosen, partly because there is less detailed evidence on such periods and therefore it is possible to fantasize more freely about them. History needs to be defended in such a precarious situation else it would be hijacked by vested interest groups to forward their own agenda. Their is a sense of despair in authors words where she highlights how multiple facets of history have been molded to the extent that any variations are now considered "hurtful to sentiments".
For eg, let's take Hinduism as a religion. Hinduism had sufficient variety among itself until Shramanic sects (Buddhism, Jainism etc) sought to differentiate themselves from Brahmanic practices. Brahmanic practices differed in their Gods, rituals, animism, phallus-worship etc, that what we call Hinduism today was never a unified and rigid religion as Judeo-Christian monotheism. Ancient India, like China was relatively isolated from the world and both developed a unique civilization of their own. India developed a mosaic of religious sects, unique system of caste hierarchy and worship practices. For the peoples living then, it didn't need a name as an identifier as it didn't need to be differentiated from anything else. Hinduism as a term for religion was never used before 14th Century. There are multiple versions of Ramayana which are drastically different from each other, but existence of one doesn't threaten the reality of other. Yet, today we see a process of semitic-isation and Hinduism books, processes and Gods are sought be standardised. Instances like Somnath temple raid are projected in terms of Hindu-Muslim clash, while the contemporaries never viewed them as such, as even Hindu kings used to raid the temples to get money (so was done also by Emperor Constantine of Rome to get the Church Gold when attacked by Sultan Mehmet II of Turkey)
The book thus makes you take a step back to question assumptions we take for granted (for eg the assumption that Hinduism had a non-violent past). It reflects back on the direction our country has taken since independence. Author tells her own experience as a writer of NCERT history books in an autobiographical chapter which is one of the best in the book. In a very radical environment we are living in, such authors maybe criticised for being anti-national, some like Dabholkar may even be shot, but these are few sane and fearless voices that need to be heard, whether you agree with them or not, if for nothing else than for the value of tolerance which is attributed to our country.
August 11, 2020
It's an interesting book. But before you approach this book, make sure that you know what it is not.
This book is not a narrative about India's ancient past. It's about how that past can/should/must be engaged with to seek answers for contemporary issues. This is a chance to sit down at the coffee table with one of the most acclaimed (and also hated) Indian Historians ever -- Romila Thapar.
Anyone who holds dogmatic and unquestionable views about history and historical events will come back pissed off by the author. For those who are looking for a light but intellectually stimulating conversation with Romila Thapar come back delighted.
She picks up a wide range of issues -- the politics of history textbooks in India, the development of History as a study in India, the Hindutva nationalists in India, Ancient History, Hindu epics, women in Ancient India etc.
Would recommend to those looking for a light but engaging reading on contemporary Indian politics with respect to History.
This book is not a narrative about India's ancient past. It's about how that past can/should/must be engaged with to seek answers for contemporary issues. This is a chance to sit down at the coffee table with one of the most acclaimed (and also hated) Indian Historians ever -- Romila Thapar.
Anyone who holds dogmatic and unquestionable views about history and historical events will come back pissed off by the author. For those who are looking for a light but intellectually stimulating conversation with Romila Thapar come back delighted.
She picks up a wide range of issues -- the politics of history textbooks in India, the development of History as a study in India, the Hindutva nationalists in India, Ancient History, Hindu epics, women in Ancient India etc.
Would recommend to those looking for a light but engaging reading on contemporary Indian politics with respect to History.
April 25, 2021
This book is a collection of essays by renowned Indian historial Romila Thapar.
The author has divided the book into four parts. In the first part, History and the Public, the mis-representation of Indian history in an oversimplified manner. The second part, Concerning Religion and History, the author has provided a tracing of religious identities of Indians. The third part, Debates, deals with various debates which we see frequently such as myth of Aryan Invasion, Authenticity of various Hindu epics, and Destruction of Somnath temple. The fourth and final section, Our Women – Then and Now, mentions the role of women in Indian society historically and compares them with modern times.
While this book seems well researched, but it failed to bind the reader and I have found it quite dry and non-engaging.
The author has divided the book into four parts. In the first part, History and the Public, the mis-representation of Indian history in an oversimplified manner. The second part, Concerning Religion and History, the author has provided a tracing of religious identities of Indians. The third part, Debates, deals with various debates which we see frequently such as myth of Aryan Invasion, Authenticity of various Hindu epics, and Destruction of Somnath temple. The fourth and final section, Our Women – Then and Now, mentions the role of women in Indian society historically and compares them with modern times.
While this book seems well researched, but it failed to bind the reader and I have found it quite dry and non-engaging.
April 21, 2021
Insightful. Most of the book is about taking nationalistic stances on history like Ram Setu, Somnath temple looting, Sati practice and showing how nationalistic perspectives are always built on half information specifically selected to drive specific narratives. It leaves one wanting for more history. If xyz is wrong, you want a more nuanced historical perspective on these issues. Of course that is not the subject of this book. This book just deals with how the past is constructed to give impetus to present concerns and majoritarian identity. So it leaves you wanting for more - in a constructive way.
January 17, 2022
The Past As Present എന്ന ഇംഗ്ലീഷ് പുസ്തകത്തിന്റെ മലയാള പരിഭാഷയാണ് ചരിത്രാവര്ത്തനം. മതം, വർഗീയത, സ്വത്വബോധം, മതഗ്രന്ഥങ്ങൾ, സ്ത്രീ സമത്വവാദം, അക്കാദമികരംഗത്തെ വർഗീയവത്കരണം, ചരിത്രപഠനം എന്നിവയെക്കുറിച്ച് റൊമില ഥാപ്പർ നടത്തിയ പഠനങ്ങളാണ് ഇതിൽ കാണാൻ കഴിയുക. സമകാലിക ഇന്ത്യൻ സമൂഹം ഉന്നയിക്കേണ്ട ��ോദ്യങ്ങൾ മുന്നോട്ടു വയ്ക്കുന്ന ഈ പുസ്തകം ഭൂതകാലത്തെക്കുറിച്ച് ചരിത്രപ്രചാരത്തിലുണ്ടായിരുന്ന കാഴ്ചപ്പാടുകളെ വിലയിരുത്തിക്കൊണ്ട് യഥാർത്ഥ വസ്തുതകൾ അവതരിപ്പിക്കുന്നു. ഇന്ത്യൻ ഇതിഹാസ കാവ്യങ്ങളുടെ വാമൊഴിയിലുള്ള വകഭേദങ്ങളെ കുറിച്ചും വിശദമായി അവതരിപ്പിക്കുന്നു
July 28, 2023
An interesting journey into how our past defines us, the author gives us details how there can't be only one version of an event especially from India's ancient era as very few reference material exists from that era.
This lack of accurate information is used by many political parties in modern they India to showcase an idea of India that can be sold in order to gain votes. The author clearly shows how India always was a land of variety when it came to religious beliefs and there was never any uniformity of religion at any point of time unlike the religions of the West.
This lack of accurate information is used by many political parties in modern they India to showcase an idea of India that can be sold in order to gain votes. The author clearly shows how India always was a land of variety when it came to religious beliefs and there was never any uniformity of religion at any point of time unlike the religions of the West.
May 19, 2021
This is a brilliant book and one that is perfectly suited for the current situation in our nation. Appropriation of past in the name of traditions and then using it for selfish political motives, has become all too common now. Here, the author has encapsulated all that is needed to understand the situation and has explained all the scenarios perfectly. This book must be read by anyone who wants to have a deeper understanding of India's ancient history.
August 15, 2021
Perhaps the most important aspect of this book is the explanation, exploration and rationalization of the study of history. That the past is a reflection built on contemporary ideologies sounds novel at first but these essays go a long way in making that very point. Many of the essays are written as reaction to contemporary events and they work on that level too, to capture a moment in contemporary past of India struggling somehow still to build a communal and non existent identity. Aside from a historian's obligation, the book discusses at length about the colonial history of India and ideas peopogated through it. An important read for all of us carrying the cultural burden of our past in everyday life.
Lastly I want to add I am most satisfied with the section on Indian history and it's women. I was looking for a section like this in A history of India volume 1 by Ms Romila Thapar.
Lastly I want to add I am most satisfied with the section on Indian history and it's women. I was looking for a section like this in A history of India volume 1 by Ms Romila Thapar.
October 8, 2023
An intriguing and thought provoking rationale of Indian history. It acknowledges the contemporary issues in reading and analysing historical accounts, often moulded and twisted as per convenience.
On the contrary, history as unbiased is significant and required.
A must read for all history buffs.
On the contrary, history as unbiased is significant and required.
A must read for all history buffs.
October 12, 2018
Heavy reading.
March 17, 2020
A very objective book and os relevant book for the people of India. It is quite prophetic in its forethoughts. I love the insights Romila Thapar has while dealing with a very subjective matter.
Displaying 1 - 29 of 34 reviews