{"id":3801,"date":"2019-05-09T06:43:27","date_gmt":"2019-05-09T06:43:27","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/0318da2.netsolhost.com\/pwarchive\/?p=3801"},"modified":"2019-05-09T12:17:12","modified_gmt":"2019-05-09T12:17:12","slug":"a-report-on-shared-histories-2019-chandigarh","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/0318da2.netsolhost.com\/pwarchive\/?p=3801","title":{"rendered":"A report on Shared Histories 2019, Chandigarh"},"content":{"rendered":"

We landed in Chandigarh on May Day, on the eve of the two-day history teaching conference we had organized, to be hosted by Saint Kabir Public School, under the rubric of \u2018Shared Histories\u2019.<\/p>\n

cccc<\/span>With a promising turnout of nearly ninety participants, we began the conference at 9:15 a.m on May 2nd with a pertinent opening address by the Principal of St. Kabir\u2019s explaining why the school chose to host this conference in its own socio-political global location.<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/a>

Prof. Thapar on ‘Region and Religion’<\/p><\/div>\n

cccc<\/span>Romila Thapar began the proceedings of the conference with a historical overview of the Panjab region and the religions that flourished therein, upto the birth of Sikhism in the 15th<\/sup> century. Upsetting the widely established notion[1]<\/a> that Hinduism, Islam and Sikhism were the three predominant religions practised in the region until 1849, Prof. Thapar cast light on Sufism as distinct from Islam, a category it is often conflated with, and the borrowing of ideas between the Sufis and Nathpanthis, the latter of which cannot accurately be contained within \u2018Hinduism\u2019. The origins of varna<\/em>, the impacts of caste and religion on each other and evolving ideas of \u2018alien\u2019 and \u2018local\u2019 were explored. This was followed by Indian art historian and critic, Prof. B.N. Goswamy on \u2018A Mughal Ramayana and a Jaina Shahnama\u2019\u2014an illustrated talk around exquisite images that challenge\u00a0monolithic ideas of religion through art form. Comparing pahari depictions of scenes from the Ramayana (where multiple timespans coexist within the same frame) to the same scenes in a Mughal Ramayana (containing text in floating panels), Prof. Goswamy went on to share images from a copy of Firdausi\u2019s Shahnama with illustrations in the Jaina style and the Mughal Ramayana commissioned by Hamida Banu Begum (Akbar\u2019s mother), who is said to have asked for her copy on her deathbed, among many other such results of cross-cultural engagements.<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/a>

Prof B.N.Goswamy<\/p><\/div>\n

This window into a largely unfamiliar history enthralled the audience.\u00a0 A sumptuous lunch was followed by Prof. Krishna Kumar on\u00a0the subject of teaching the Partition. Drawing from his book <\/span>Prejudice and Pride: School histories of the freedom struggle in India and Pakistan, <\/em>Prof. Kumar shared his analyses of both nations\u2019 ways of remembering their shared history\/ies of Partition and of bequeathing this memory to the young through textbooks, in their respective projects of nation-building and assertion.<\/span><\/p>\n

\"\"<\/a>

Prof. Krishna Kumar on teaching the Partition<\/p><\/div>\n

ccc<\/span><\/em>After these three very different avenues into shared histories, the \u2018world caf\u00e9\u2019 session was conducted with the audience re-organized into groups, each moderated by a facilitator (primarily speakers at the conference). Five broad questions on the place of shared histories in the classroom, in the context of the sessions held until then, were explored. Facilitators shifted tables midway through the two-hour session to ensure each circle received a multiplicity of perspectives. A few tables continued to be engaged in discussion as the two hours concluded and it was time for representatives of each table to share key issues discussed with the larger group.<\/span><\/p>\n

cccc<\/span>Day 2 opened with a fascinating insight into an instance of the nascent Indian state\u2019s response to the Partition\u2014the silai<\/em> centres begun by the new Government to address the problem of the \u2018widows of the Partition\u2019. Begun as a measure towards integration into the production process and society, these silai <\/em>centres employed said widows in the production of uniforms for class IV government service, under the supervision of \u2018masterjis\u2019 who would cut the cloth. Through the histories of the women who worked there, Urvashi Butalia traced the history of these silai<\/em> centres, highlighting the patriarchal notions of \u2018chaste\u2019 and \u2018corrupt\u2019 that coloured the state\u2019s approach in negotiations with these women who were officially termed a state \u2018liability\u2019. After much struggle, they went on to receive low pensions.<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/a>

Urvashi Butalia on the history of silai centres and its links to the Partition.<\/p><\/div>\n

ccc<\/span>This bottom-up lens was taken further and diversified by Anusha Yadav, founder of The Indian Memory Project. She shared with us pictorial stories from her narrative-based visual archive\u2014intimate stories set in and against institutional histories, both affected by the Partition. From Azoori, possibly pre-partition British India\u2019s first \u2018item dancer\u2019 who moved to Pakistan in \u201947, to stories of the displacement the Partition brought to anglo-Indians who knew no other home\u2014the audience listened, entranced. The conference then moved into a segment on 1947 and the princely states, focused on the cases of Kapurthala and Kashmir. Cynthia M. Frederick, a conservation architect and co-author of <\/span>Prince, Patron and Patriarch – Maharaja Jagatjit Singh of Kapurthala<\/em>, spoke about the cosmopolitanism of Maharaja Jagatjit Singh, as manifest in the architecture and society of Kapurthala, and the Partition\u2019s consequences on this ecosystem. Idrees Kanth next addressed the audience on the complexities of engaging with the history of Kashmir beyond the commonly used parameters (even in progressive liberal academia) of \u2018conflict\/resistance\u2019. Structurally critiquing the approach of most existing academic work on Kashmir, Kanth problematized the act (and politics) of teaching Kashmir history in the classroom. Both parts of this segment saw diverse, active responses from the audience.<\/span><\/p>\n\n\t\t