"Rational vs. National," screams the headline of the
new pall-bearer of secularism, the magazine Outlook.
"Fresh evidence available with Outlook," the story
announces, "reveals that not only has the ICHR [the Indian
Council of Historical Research] been packed with
'sympathizers' but a new statement of objectives or
resolution [sic.] has been added, changing certain key
words from the original Memorandum of Association of
1972, legitimised by an Act of Parliament. While the
original Memorandum of Association states that ICHR's
aims would be to give 'rational' direction to historical
research and foster 'an objective and scientific writing of
history', the new resolution, which will be included in the
Gazette of India, states that ICHR now seeks to give a
'national' direction to an 'objective and national
presentation of history'. So, 'rational' has been changed to
'national', and 'scientific' too has been changed to
'national'...."
"Tampering with history," proclaims the old pall-
bearer, The Hindu. "Apprehensions of this kind [that the
fabled 'Sangh parivar' is out to rewrite history] have been
substantiated by a related decision. The resolution by the
Ministry of Human Resource Development -- nodal
Ministry under which the ICHR comes -- that details the
new nominations carries with it an amendment to the
Memorandum of Association by which the ICHR was set
up; while the institution was set up 'to foster objective and
scientific writing of history such as will inculcate an
informed appreciation of the country's national and cultural
heritage,' the new Government's mandate is that the ICHR
will give a 'national direction' to an objective and national
presentation and interpretation of history'. This amendment
is certainly not just a matter of semantics. Instead, one can
clearly see in this an intention on the part of the BJP-led
Government to rewrite history...."
The next issue of the CPI(M) mouthpiece, Peoples
Democracy, reproduces this editorial ! And carries with it
an article by one of the ring-leaders, K. N. Panicker.
"Saffronization of historical research," proclaims the
heading. Panicker repeats the charge of the word "rational"
having been replaced by "national". He adds another : the
Memorandum of Association of the ICHR mentions five
objectives, he says, but the Resolution put out by the
Saffron-brigade mentions only two.
Thus, the charge rests on three bits of "evidence" :
that the Memorandum of Association of the ICHR has been
changed; second, that a word -- "rational" -- in the
Resolution announcing the new members of the ICHR has
been surreptitiously replaced by another word -- "national";
third, that while the original Memorandum of Association
specifies five objectives for the ICHR, the new Resolution
cuts out three of these.
Having been educated by The Hindu that the "nodal
ministry" for the matter is the Ministry of Human Resource
Development, I ring up the Secretary of that Ministry. Has
the Memorandum of Association of the ICHR been
changed?, I ask. No, he says. It has not been changed, he
says.
And then about the Resolution announcing the new
members. The allegation, you will recall, is that the aim
which in the Memorandum of Association is, "to give a
national direction to an objective and RATIONAL
presentation and interpretation of history....," has been
altered in the Resolution to read, "to give a national
direction to an objective and NATIONAL presentation and
interpretation of history...."
I have before me the statement of the Ministry of
Human Resources Development [No. F 30-28/86-U3] dated
6th October, 1987, that is of eleven years ago. It gives the
text of the Resolution of the Government of India
announcing the new members -- announcing, among other
things, that Irfan Habib is being appointed as Chairman
with retrospective effect from 9 September, 1986. The
corresponding expression in it is, "to give a national
direction to an objective and NATIONAL presentation and
interpretation of history...."
I have before me the statement of the Ministry of
Human Resources Development [No. F. 30-13/89-U3] dated
15th May, 1991. It gives the text of the Resolution of the
Government of India announcing the new members --
announcing, among other things, that Irfan Habib is being
re-appointed as Chairman with retrospective effect from 12
March, 1990. The corresponding expression in it is, "to
give a national direction to an objective and NATIONAL
presentation and interpretation of history...."
To test my hypothesis yet again, I look for and obtain
the immediately preceding statement of the Ministry. It
bears the number F. 30-3/94-U.3, and is dated 8th
September, 1994. Like the others, it furnishes the text of
the Resolution of the Government of India announcing the
new members -- announcing, among other things, that
Ravinder Kumar, another "historian" of the same hue, is
being appointed as Chairman with retrospective effect from
8 September, 1990. The corresponding expression in it is,
"to give a national direction to an objective and
NATIONAL presentation and interpretation of history...."
That is how far I am able to get on my own. I request
the Secretary of the Ministry : can he please request
someone to look up the Resolutions of the earlier years, and
see whether they contain anything different ? Can he help
me trace when this "alteration" got made ?
Till the time of my dispatching this article, the
Secretary has been able to trace Resolutions going back up
to 1978 -- that is, twenty years. Each of them carries the
very same words !
The research of the Secretary and his colleagues
establishes that -- to reproduce the word the Secretary uses
-- the whole mystery has arisen from a "typographical
error" : some typist banging away on his typewriter some
twenty-odd years ago typed "rational" as "national". As
each typist, when asked to type out the subsequent
Resolution, copied the preceding one, that word continued
to be typed as "national" year after year. The leftists
inferred no conspiracy. But, lo and behold, now that a BJP
Government is in power, inferring conspiracies -- to use
their favourite phrase -- is a historical necessity. It is
objective history ! It is progressive methodology ! Perhaps
they will put on their Sherlock Holmes caps again, and
establish that the Governments of Mrs. Indira Gandhi, of
Rajiv Gandhi, of V. P. Singh, of Narasimha Rao have all
been in league with the RSS, and therefore parties to this
grave conspiracy !
I then ring up Mr. Vinod Mehta, the editor of
Outlook. "But the reporter says she has the text and
everything," he says. I narrate what I have found. He
promises to check and get back to me. When we talk again
he says he has sent me the text of the Resolution. But that is
the current one. My point was that the "change" which
Outlook had built its story on has existed in all Resolutions
for at least twenty years. He says he will get back to me.
That is where matters stand.
The exact same thing holds for that fabrication of K.
N. Panicker : about five objectives having become two. In
every single one of the Resolutions -- including the 1994
Resolution under which this man was himself nominated to
the ICHR, a Resolution he can find printed at page 342 of
The Gazette of India, October 22, 1994 -- the exact same
sentences are used : only those objectives are mentioned as
are mentioned in the Resolution issued this year ! And
another thing : if an RSS publication publishes even an
interview with me, that is further proof of my being
communal; but so tough are the hymen of these
progressives that, even when they contribute signed articles
to publications of the Communist Party, their virginity
remains in tact !