Dear reader, online ads enable us to deliver the journalism you value. Please support us by taking a moment to
If Pakistan shuns the term ‘Ancient India’ in its history books, is it entirely to blame?
A few months ago, I visited a newly-opened museum in Lahore that, along with sections on Partition and the contemporary history of Pakistan, also included an exhibit on its ancient and pre-colonial history.
It was titled “Ancient Pakistan” and included references to the Indus Valley civilisation, the Mauryan Empire, the Kushan dynasty and even the Khalsa Empire of Ranjit Singh.
While there were certain conscious inclusions and exclusions in the exhibit, possibly to align with the current nationalist discourse in the country, the title of the section stood out as a little odd.
It felt like a modern category had been imposed on the ancient, a trend increasingly on the rise across South Asia. The generally used term “Ancient India” perhaps would have not evoked a similar reaction.
The overarching nationalistic tilt of the museum might explain why its curators were reluctant to use the term “Ancient India” for its exhibits.
In such a nationalistic framework, there is only one India — the Republic of India. In this narrative, the nuance of the term “Ancient India” — which, in addition to including parts of contemporary India, also includes areas of Pakistan, Nepal and Bangladesh — is lost.
Related: 'History in Pakistan has been badly treated'
In this simplistic framework, contemporary India becomes the modern-day incarnation of the ancient civilisation that is India.
However, this phenomenon is not unique to Pakistan and its nationalist discourse. The Republic of India, which emerged after the Partition of British India, embraced its ancient Indian heritage, becoming the visible successor of Ancient India.
What helped its cause was the continuity in the names — India. While on one hand, the contemporary Indian state drew historical continuity from its ancient past, on the other hand, its exclusive use of the name “India” also helped spread the perception globally that it was the only rightful inheritor of the legacy of Ancient India.
India vs Hindustan
A couple of weeks ago Shoaib Daniyal wrote an incisive piece on Scroll.in in which he pointed out that for a brief moment in the history of South Asia, Muhammad Ali Jinnah objected to the use of the name “India” by the new country, arguing that it should be referred to as Hindustan.
Nothing came of that conflict, but there are contesting theories as to why Jinnah raised the issue in the first place. Perhaps he saw both India and Pakistan as the successors of historical British India.
As opposed to being a universal name for the entire Indian subcontinent, the name “India” was picked by the British after the formation of their Empire. It has Greek roots. The Greeks referred to the land across the Indus as India.
Once the name took root, the history of the land began to be referred to as Indian history. In all academic discourse, the pre-Partition history of Pakistan and Bangladesh continue to be referred to as “Indian history”.
Now read: What is the most blatant lie taught through Pakistan textbooks?
Maybe Jinnah anticipated that the Republic of India’s use of the name “India” might gradually exclude Pakistan from this collective Indian heritage.
What also did not help was the subsequent attitude of the Pakistani state toward its Indian heritage. Slowly, as relations between the two neighbours began deteriorating, in Pakistan, the term “India” stopped being associated with a larger peninsular identity, but was solely identified with the modern state.
Pakistan began distancing itself from its own history, allowing its antagonistic relationship with India to shape its attitude and perception of its Indian heritage.
Pakistan’s history came to be defined in opposition to India’s history. A celebration of Muslim rulers ensued — divorced from the political realities that dictated their actions — while all other history and heritage of the Indian subcontinent began to be ignored.
Where’s Pakistan in the big picture?
A fairly complicated situation exists today. In global academia, the term “Indian history” encapsulates the history of the entire region.
But in the popular imagination, Ancient India ends up being reduced to relating to the past of Independent India. For example, the demand that the British return the Kohinoor diamond to modern-day India shows how historical India and contemporary India are seen as an extension of each other, with Pakistan and Bangladesh completely sidelined.
On the other hand, within Pakistan, there has increasingly been some acknowledgement of this past. The bone of contention, however, has been how to refer to it and package it.
Up next: Sassi's Bhanbhore or Muhammad Bin Qasim's Deybul?
While calling Pakistan part of the broader Ancient India is bound to have political repercussions, referring to it as “Ancient Pakistan” also has the potential to mislead.
However, even if Pakistan today decides to change its attitude towards its Indian heritage and chooses to accommodate it in its identity, it would find it difficult to shape the global narrative that it is indeed one of the successors of Ancient India, along with Bangladesh and India.
The situation is unlikely to change in the foreseeable future and it seems the term “Ancient India” will continue to be associated with contemporary India exclusively.
This piece originally appeared on Scroll.in and has been reproduced with permission.
Haroon Khalid has an academic background in anthropology from Lums. He has been travelling extensively around Pakistan, documenting historical and cultural heritage. He is the author of four books — Imagining Lahore, Walking with Nanak, In Search of Shiva and A White Trail.
The views expressed by this writer and commenters below do not necessarily reflect the views and policies of the Dawn Media Group.
Comments (60) Closed
A great author and a wonderful article. Keep up the good work.
Ancient India is indeed the history ONLY of the modern Indian Republic because its original inhabitants were the Hindus who inhabit the lands in India alone. The invading populace, the Muslims and Christians do not have any legitimate claim to this history nor to this land. The invading Muslims were given their own territory, Pakistan and many were forced out of the Hindu India. The Christians await a similar fate in the not too distant future. Only a 'pure' Dharmic India must remain as India and populated only by people adhering to the Dharmic faiths while the rest will be shown their way to their respective territories.
Truth prevails however hard you try to project your lies, because one cannot change the hard facts of truth by mere words of lies without truth in it.
Interesting and well articulated article. All major ancient civilizations along river sind were in the areas now in Pakistan but world associates them with modern day India due to this name confusion.This is a questions for Pakistani historians, anthropologists and other academia how can we first promote our own sense of ownership and then spread the message that a new political entity was created in 1947 but the civilization and people living here did not immigrated from Mars in that year. We have rich heritage. First we need to acknowledge it on our end. Thanks Haroon for writing on this topic.
It's a never ending debate but any nation that shuns it's past and pretends to be someone else is not telling truth to their children. Pakistan should feel proud of ancient history whether it is called ancient Pakistan or India doesn't matter. There is more pride in South Asian history than being Arabian. It is a region that has absorbed varieties of culture and grown as a true civilization unlike Arabs who monopolized just one culture and religion
Well written. Thanks for bringing up a topic that many Pakistanis choose to ignore. Let’s be proud of and acknowledge our collective history.
Nobody cares what we shun in our history books. Currently, real Pakistanis are being shunned by the Indians. In my heart, I don't blame them.
The Indus Valley Civilisation is a historical proof that the main cultural groups comprising Pakistan today lived as a single nation since the beginning of civilisation. The area of Pakistan was the centre of that society. The history of my land belongs to me, not to the Tamils, Bengalis or Maharashtrians.
Interesting and thought provoking write up.
Nice Article..... enjoyed reading it...…. time to reflect....
The Pathans, Baluchi, Sindhis, Kashmiris, Punjabis and smaller ethnic groups in the area comprising Pakistan lived as a united family since the beginning of human civilisation, a centre region of Indus Valley Civilisation. There cannot be a stronger claim to our identity then that. The adaption of Islam has reinforced that union.
As one can not change his/her parent, Pakistan can not change its history as a part of Ancient and modern India.India means the people of Indian subcontinent ie people of South East Asia. This region has common heritage, culture and history. This region is home to all religions of the world.
Well written article which shows that even after 71 years of independence, it suffers from an identity crisis. The country is unable to define its past in a way that is acceptable to all and makes sense. Even if the animosity towards its eastern neighbor wasn't there, it may still from an identity crisis because its religion is an import from the middle east and it fails to acknowledge its past religion/faith, and the national language (Urdu) / culture is an import from India. Fortunately for Bangladesh, this is a non-issue mostly because the entire country shares the same language and culture and acknowledges/celebrates the commonality with its western neighbor's state of West Bengal.
Erasing true historical fact will erase your roots.
The retention of the name India for the modern Republic was a smart move in hindsight. India as a vast cultural realm with ancient history came to be identified with the modern political construct. Pick up any book on world history and you would get an impression that there was always an India. It is littered with terms like Indian languages, Indian religions, Indian cuisine, Indian dances, Indian music, Indian numerals and then there is the Indian subcontinent and Indian ocean. Some idiots from Sangh parivar once petitioned the Supreme Court to abandon the name India and call it Bharat in English media as well. Did those wise guys expect foreigners to start calling Indian Ocean as Bharat Ocean or Indian subcontinent as Bharat subcontinent?
A very pragmatic piece by Mr Haroon. The museum management and other people in the country who confirm to their views must understand that Pakistan is as ancient as 1947 !
@Waseem the culture which the banks of the rivers followed is now inherited by present day India and not present day Pakistan. The belief and thinking had shifted to eastern side after 1947. The land border was drawn later in 1947 cannot take away the fact that it was a Hindu civilisation the very reason why it is shunned in Pakistan
A really well written article by the author. Balanced view is always a sign of maturity. Article does the same - showing the point and giving reasoning for and against. My say is a history should always be kept and shown as it is and politics and national fervour should be kept away from it and in such case should be tackled wit fully: eg. our ancient history would have been better...
Ancient India is a strange term as it mostley consist of modern state of Pakistan. What ever happened in Pakistan is Pakistani history both before and after independence. Indians often refer to Indus Vally Civilization in Pakistan to theirs (ISC remains has been found in Central Asia to border areas east of Pakistan) but Pakistan do not take ownership of Chola Empire since it had nothing to do with Pakistani lands. In this regard Ancient Pakistan seems like a great term which should be promoted by Pakistanis to describe their own ancient history.
@Waseem - will you be able to acknowledge your Indian and Hindu heritage?
Continuing identity crisis of Pakistani state.
Very good and thoughtful article. Author is broad minded and has looked at holistic aspect of the subcontinent and is fully open regarding the blunders Pakistan has made in the past. Hopefully India and Pakistan will keep the politics aside and present history unbiased.
Vidyasagar Dixit
Good article..We Indians consider Indus Valley as part of our heritage as much as Akbar or Humayun or Mauryas .....Lahore, Peshawar, Karachi etc ...Language Urdu is also part of Indian culture ...
Partition is man made tragedy of recent times coming out of political conflict
Why not refer to Ancient India as 'Ancient Indus'. Aferall, that is the root of the name India.
@Joe Smith wow nicely said
Dear author as you mentioned in your article that the museum displays all civilizations irrespective of caste creed and religion so after acknowleding these facts whats the point of raising objections on the title ancient Pakistan as the purpose is to show the history of piece of land which comprises Pakistan.
What uncomfortable contortions must Pakistanis go to in order to rewrite their history - forget it you'll never escape your past!
The name Hindustan was invented by Arab invaders.Prior to that it was Bharat and that shatters all arguments that India is land of Hindus. Moreover,Ancient Indian history is far older than invent of Islam.So if we still get some stupid satisfaction from trying to dis-own our ancestors.go ahead.And don't forget that by doing so you are only being played by politicians who only have their self interest at heart.
Excellent analysis!
@Waseem Disagree that "but world associates them (wrongfully) with modern day India due to this name confusion". World is highly intellectual and there is no confusion. The world rightfully calls it an Indian heritage, because the heritage owners are in India. Most of Pakistani population has converted to middle eastern heritage and cannot claim inheritance, just because they now all of a sudden find out that the world has raised its exchange value.
Great narrative of the impact of partition on the issue of ancient heritage for Pakistan. The article perfectly describes underline fact in "Pakistan began distancing itself from its own history, allowing its ANTAGONISTIC relationship with India to shape its attitude and perception of its Indian heritage." The antagonistic mindset in fact, was the strategical ideology meant to disown the Indian heritage. . For Pakistan to Claime the share of inheritance now, will require to make a U-turn by initiating a true friendship gestures and ideology of friendship towards India.
Even during the Mughal times the term used by the rulers was Hindustan, referring to the whole subcontinent. The Muslims were in command. for more than three centuries.
Stellar article!
Mr. Haroon Khalid,
If you look at ancient history, Pakistanis, Bhartis, Bangladeshis, Nepalis and Shri Lankan we are all Hindus and that is why Foreigners, Mainly Arabs and Persians gave name Hindustan to the subcontinent and Muslim rulers more or less united the Parts now Pakistan Bangladesh and Bharat. Britishers left, the muslim majority part chose name Pakistan and the idol worshipers majority part chose not India but Bharat. It is rightly Bharat which was area of Ganges Plains and which attacked Part Shri Lanka During Ramayan war and Ganges Plains then attacked Gandhara which formed area now Pakistan and Vrundavan which form area now Bangladesh. I have not made up this both war and the heros of these wars have birth places in Ganges Plains. Both wars did not achieve domination of Ganges Plains but resulted in Collapse of Indus Valley Civilization. Vedas were banned in Ganges Plains and Gita became main scripture of the idol worshipers. Pakistanis and Bangladeshis should be proud to claim themselves as Hindus as Hindu has been wrongly attached to the idol worshipers of Ganges Plains and they are given undue ownership of Indus Valley Civilization. Pakistan as a Muslim nation should be proud of Indus Valley Civilization. Wars by Ganges plains had plunged entire Hindustan into darkness of history and its sole purpose was destroy Budhism. It did not work Budhist Majority areas become Muslim and Bharat shrank and shrank and still shrinking.
Haroon, I appreciate your articles which attempt to link Pakistan to its Hindu & Sikh roots. I feel Pakistan has no one but itself to blame for abandoning its sub continental roots & trying to adopt a fake middle eastern identity. However its good to see that at least some people in Pakistan are trying to re-adopt its South Asian & Indian identity.
Excerpt from "Reminiscences of the Nehru Age" by MO Mathai. “In the Constituent Assembly... on 9 December 1946... a demand was spearheaded by Rajendra Prasad and some other obscurantists that the name of the country should be Bharat and not India in the Constitution. Nehru pointed out that in such a case, internationally India would lose all the benefits of a "succession state" such as original membership of the United Nations and various international bodies, and all the embassy buildings abroad and so forth. Pakistan was a new state seceding from India and had to negotiate for membership of international bodies... Nehru said, he also told them that their suggestion would please Pakistan the most. Rajendra Prasad and other hummed and hawed; but Nehru stood firm. Finally, he said he had no objection to mention somewhere in the Constitution "India that is Bharat.” Naming the new country as "Republic of India" was only related to politico-economic aspects than anything else.
Those who forget their history. history forgets them too..
India is india. The areas surrounding it were a part of its culture. If the successor atates cannot acknowledge it then they cannot be true to history.
Pakistan's situation is very similar to of Egypt, where they know that they belong to a great historical past but do not want to recognize it as it will change their present identity.
Pakistan has ancient history with Arabia only. The were surgically planted in this geographical location. Their DNA proves it. That is also the belief of majority elites in Pakistan who rules and guides policy.
Pakistan is a Civilisatioanl state and have a history of over 9000 years of settled existence. We are here since before Vedism, Hinduism, Judaism, Christianity and Islam. Whereas we Pakistanis have an identity which is based on our history and Islamic ethos, people of Republic of India are still grappling as to who they were and are. 14 Aug 1947 was rebirth of a Muslim nation that started building its villages towns and cities over 9000 years ago.
@sqb The descendants of the Indus valley civilisation are probably the present day Tamils.
The people of Republic of India identify themselves as Indians, which means "the people of Indus" which they are not and have never been. The majority also identify themselves as Hindus, which they are not and have never been, as the word Hindu emerged from the word Sindu (River Indus) which flows in the whole of Pakistan from north to south till it empties in the Arabian Sea and the original word Hindu was a geographical identification of the people of Sindh River Valley, irrespective of their ethnicity or religion. Hinduism was identified as a separate religion by the British in only 1800s, though Gandhi and Nehru amongst others, said that Hinduism is not even a religion. India therefore is the only country in the world which is named after a river that does not even flow in India.
What about Ancient Subcontinent.
Ancient Indian history starts from Mohinju Dero, Harapan civilization and the Gandhara civilizations. Mohinju Dero is in Pakistani territory. The people of Pakistan composed of Dravidian, Aryan, late Indian and some migrants from Persian, Arab, Turk, and central Asian stock. Disconnecting ourselves from ancient Indian civilization lead Pakistan to be non locals occupied Indian lands but actually it is not the case. I am Darad man from Gilgit and having, nature worship to Hindu religion to Budhist and then Islamic background. I am proud of Indian History and their contribution to the world. I love to be called as Indian, Hindustani or people of Indus origin. The only contribution to the world we can proud is our soft image of love, arts, music, norms, values, humanity and family system.
India is hinduism and hinduism is India, Ancient or otherwise. If anyone wants to be part of it they are welcome to use the term Ancient India and be perceived as hindus. Because Ancient Indians were Hindus and across the length and breadth of India people are bound together by their innate hindu self despite being totally different people. Anybody who is a resident of the Indian sub-continent can be an Ancient hindu because it is factually true,
Even after 70 years, seems like Pakistan is still fighting with its past. Pakistanis have to come to terms with its Hindu and Buddhist identity of the past. only then relation between India and Pakistan could normalize.
A very good write-up. I believe there is nothing wrong in calling it ancient Pakistan as Indus valley civilization did confine to present Pakistan. It is important that children should know the actual history/
It should be the history of Indus valley or ancient indus rather than India . We have so many sites of Indus valley civilization mainly Mohen jo daro and Harrapa.
@sqb the people of Indus Valley civilisation later moved to southern India.. check out the history
good read.
no doubt history elaborate past situation of countries nd various civilizations but we hv to do focus on contemporary positions of countries. like Bangladesh was a part of Pakistan now the situation is different it doesn't mean we count it same as previous
no doubt history elaborate past situation of countries as well as civilizations but we hv to focus on contemporary position .becoz we can't intermingle old and new this time
Pakistan should just use the word ‘ancient Pakistan area’. And to elaborate, the specific names of that area can be used,like Harappa and Mohonjodaro. Once we start to use it, in international forums, it will get picked up.
The ‘Indian ocean’ too should be newly termed the ‘Asiatic ocean’.
@Dr Salaria India has distorted history and made it up.
@Bhagwa Actually, no. The subcontinent didn't have just Hindus but also Buddhists, Jains etc. In fact, Buddhism was once very widespread. Most of present-day Pakistan was probably majority Buddhist rather than majority Hindu. Our historical sites also suggest that.
As for the invaders thing, 92% of Pakistanis are indigenous people of the land who have always resided here. The native population simply accepted Islam, but their genetics did not change. Of course, mixture happened. We all contain Greek, Arab etc. DNA because of intermarriages and all the mixing that happened, but most of our DNA has been shown to be indigenous.
Also, the people of the Indus Valley Civilization did not follow the "Hinduism" that developed much later on.
The correct words: Ancient Bharat.
@Zak So you are now a history expert as well ?
Unfair of Nehru to appropriate the name India which is the geographical term for subcontinent of Indus and beyond.