“What we call historical truth and veracity-Intelligent, thoughtful comprehension of events and fidelity in representing them-nothing of this sort can be looked for among hindoos.”
During the modernist era people looked at historical documentation as a bank of facts; things needed to be put in chronological order and only the absolute truth was to be written. This could come in any written from all the way from a document to the diary of a traveler. As long as life was documented the way it was.
Indian culture took to documenting their past from a very different angle as a result of which it could be as if they looked at documenting history as something of little importance.
There have been many attempts to explain this phenomenon ranging from General lack of interest to Maya and cyclical time(because of which “there is no room in this scheme for the modern idea that man is the subject and agent of history”) But within these explanations Roy W. Perrett mentions that “Indian philosophy did not recognize either history or memory as independent sources of knowledge.” This is interesting because I personally feel that this statement doesn’t necessarily need to be a negative one.
Oral tradition in India has been around for centuries. The gurukul system where a student is to live with his teacher and imbibe his teachings through simply memorizing what the teacher says is a practice that still exists in niche areas of Indian culture today. Take Hindusthani music for example; despite having books on the subject students still learn simply by listening and memorizing the teachers tune.
What I am tryng to point out is that it is in this way that quite a lot of our history has been recorded. Rajasthan for instance has an entire class of people known as bhat, the genealogists. The role of these people is to keep track of your family line, specifically the male line. There are two types of bhats - mukhavancha bhat and pothibancha bhat. The mukhavancha bhat maintain genealogy records orally, not in writing. The pothibancha bhat keep a bahi or record in which they write down names.
Each family has to pay the pothibancha bhat for the writing of their names, without which their names will not be entered into his bahi or into the bhat's memory. The practice in Rajasthan is that the bhats visit families every three years and record in the bahi the names of children born, if any, in the families in the interim years. These people are walking encyclopedias of family lineage and their history. Most people have the misconception that these people only record the histories of royalty but it was for almost anyone who wished to keep their family history alive. This information has been passed down through generations of bhats and is still alive today.
Narrative, in Indian tradition is one of the most important ways of documenting this culture. Records of past deeds, experiences and people are all kept through stories, music or theatre. Wandering performers sing of a great sadhu or king of which someone who is inspired might make a song and so on and so forth. The process is constantly growing and evolving through a multitude of techniques.
When one looks at documenting history one must broaden ones perspective a little. All history in India is documented in some way,
Oral tradition being only the tip of the iceberg; It’s just that sometimes ones ways of interpreting could get a little more creative!
No comments:
Post a Comment