A Book Summary: EMINENT HISTORIANS Their technology, their line, their fraud by ARUN SHOURIE Part 3

 Please buy this book: 

Flipkart: https://www.flipkart.com/eminent-historians/p/itmeytznrckbgxrh

Good reads: https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/651154.Eminent_Historians

Amazon: https://www.amazon.in/Eminent-Historians-Their-Technology-Fraud/dp/9351365913

The Historians

1. A characteristic concoction

2. Eminent entrepreneurs!

3. How to do it!

4. A fitting tribute

5. When cornered, cry ‘Petty’,

‘Personal’, ‘Uncivilized’

6. ‘…after selling himself in the flesh market’

3. How to do it!: 

..................Why, the most eminent of them all, ‘Responsibility for compiling the Arabic, Persian and Urdu inscriptions was accepted by Professor Irfan Habib on the request of the ICHR,’ the records state. How kind! Everyone was to work in an ‘honorary capacity’ – but in the special sense in which these worthies use the term ‘honorary’! Each of the two ‘Main Editors’, the ‘Editorial Committee’ of the project decided in its meeting on 20 September 1990, would be paid ‘an honorarium’ of Rs 5,000/- for every four months. The ‘General Editor’ too would be paid an honorarium of Rs 3,000/- for every four months. A very important rule that – never take money, take honoraria! The committee also decided, ‘Professor Shrimali may be allowed to purchase relevant books in connection with the work of the project if the books are not supplied to him by the ICHR within a reasonable time’ – a bit of honorariness which every scholar would lust after!.....................

........................Ramesh now deployed the next weapon: ask for more! Fools will always throw in good money after bad. He wrote back saying that for him to do the work, the Council should appoint three more scholars to assist him [so helpful was he that he specified the names of the three also!], that the Council should provide him with a computer assistant, and also with rented accommodation! The chairman wrote pointing out that already Rs 45,000 had been paid to Ramesh, that seven years had passed, and asked how much more time was required. Another year ‘may be required’ if the terms he had proposed were met, Ramesh answered! In despair, Settar turned to Irfan Habib and Sharma again and ‘appealed’ to them to help out – another tactic: subalterns block the pass; the only way the fellow can hope to proceed is by beseeching, and thereby getting in the debt of the principals! Sharma recalled that he had already dissociated himself from the project – vide the ‘beneficiaries’ spat. In any event, the  two met Settar, and agreed to submit – by now you would have guessed – a revised project each!...............And, never forget, if the ICHR takes any step to bring them to account, if it takes any step to hand over the project to anyone else, it is doing so because these eminent historians are secular, and the Council is now set upon saffronizing history!

4. A fitting tribute:

In his question V.N. Gadgil had asked the minister to state ‘whether several hundred manuscripts are either missing from the Council’s custody or are totally damaged; if so, what action the government has taken in the matter.’ In its written reply to the Rajya Sabha the ministry stated, ‘The ICHR has informed that a few manuscripts are reportedly either missing or have not been sent to the Press for certain reasons. The Council have intimated that it has initiated action to ascertain whether any manuscript has been lost or appropriated otherwise.’

Another rat: see how the case of manuscripts which were ‘missing’ had been clubbed with that of manuscripts which ‘have not been sent to the Press for certain reasons.’ And how the case of manuscripts which have been lost had been clubbed with that of manuscripts which have been ‘appropriated otherwise’.

..........The ICHR at last took a step closer to the truth. It wrote, Yes, the Annual Reports confirm that the manuscript prepared by Dr Saran was indeed received in the Council. By now I had learnt a vital fact. Dr Saran had died. His son-in-law had written to the Council in 1995. He had pointed out that the Annual Reports of the Council had themselves stated that the manuscript had been received by the ICHR, and had added, ‘As we understand, this project of my father-in-law was to be later published by the ICHR. We are not aware if this has indeed been done by the ICHR although nearly 20 years have elapsed since the translation was completed, but we have been extremely disturbed to hear stories to the effect that not only has someone else published the translation as his own work, but that this has been done by a member of the staff of the ICHR…’

.......The Publications Section had said the manuscript had never been forwarded to it. That left the section which was in a sense responsible for overseeing the project – the Medieval Unit. The deputy director in charge of this unit said that the manuscript was not traceable in his unit. Not satisfied with the reply, the then director had once again urged the deputy director, Medieval Unit, ‘to do his best efforts [sic] to trace out the manuscript’. But the friends, all entangled in those ‘interlocking webs of mutual complicity’, intervened. And the inquiry was killed. Guess who obtained a PhD from Rajasthan University in 1992 by submitting ‘an annotated English translation of Arif Qandhari’s Tarikh-i- Akbari’. Guess who has published the book in his name. The very same deputy director in charge of the ICHR’s Medieval Unit – Tasneem Ahmad!...............

..................Not just the needs of history, therefore, those of secularism, of unity based on a composite culture too fulfilled! The dignitary writing the Foreword? Irfan Habib himself – who, among other things, has been chairman of the ICHR twice, and a member five times! And don’t miss the description of India – just the composite culture and unity which it has taken a long process to create! The unity of course being nothing but a manifestation of, and totally dependent on, that composite culture! So, composite culture it is. The compliments duly returned: ‘The first and foremost [sic],’ writes Tasneem Ahmad, ‘I express my profound sense of gratitude, very personal regards and respects to Professor Irfan Habib, who encouraged and guided me at every stage of the work. In spite of his very pressing engagements and pre-occupation, he ungrudgingly spared his valuable time to examine with care every intricate problem, arising out [sic] during the course of work.’ The debt to another of these eminences not forgotten either: ‘My debt to my revered teacher,’ writes Tasneem Ahmad, ‘Professor Satish Chandra is incalculable. He took great pains in reading and correcting the work and his considered suggestions have paid me rich dividend.’ ‘Examining with care every problem arising out during the course of work’? Taking ‘great pains in reading and correcting the work’? Advancing ‘considered suggestions’ which ‘pay rich dividend’? – when the entire manuscript has been lifted word for word from the work of Dr Parmatma Saran!