Flight of Deities and Rebirth of Temples: Episodes in Indian History
Meenakshi Jain
New Delhi Aryan Books International, 2019
One of the most tragic and neglected aspects of medieval historiography of India is the fate of Hindu, Buddhist and Jaina Temples. Sita Ram Goel several years back addressed this issue and indicted the medieval rulers for following a political strategy of destroying Hindu places of worship and the systematic destruction od Hindu, Buddhist and Jaina centres of worship and pilgrimage, he argues was party of the political and imperial ideology stemming from Islamic ideas of conquest and conversion of Darul Harb into Dar ul Islam, from Land of War to Land of Islam. Hence the destruction of Indian religious institutions cannot be view in isolation of the ideological underpinning of the Turkish, Afghan and Mughal rule over India. This interpretation was, of course, attacked by a whole host of historians from Alighr Muslim University, Delhi University and of course, Jawaharlal Nehru University. Is this interpretation a "communal" one or, even if not politically correct have the weight of historical evidence behind it.
The deliberate underplaying of Moslem vandalism in parts of India which were conquered may have been a political necessity in the years after Partition when Hindu Moslem tension were high and it was prudent to avoid contentious and identity laden issues. However, 70 years after Independence if the same platitudes are trotted out, it becomes necessary to re investigate the issue and assess the question on the basis of evidence. In short, the time for political correctness is past and it is time to seize the historical moment even as it disintegrates before our very eyes. Meenakshi Jain has produced a scholarly and eminently well researched work on this question. She starts where Sita Ram Goel left and her work is a fitting riposte to all those historians who live in a state of denial about the tragedy the befell India. After reading the work under review it will not be possible for anyone either to deny the political underpinning of the reign of vandalism unleashed against Hindu and other Indian religious structures or belittle the cultural and civilizational chaos it engendered.
One argument that white scholars like Richard Davis and Richard Eaton are quick to advance is that the Turks, Afghans and Mughals did not indulge in any sort of vandalism and destruction which Indian rulers had not done in the past. This line of argument is absolutely incorrect as there is not a single instance in which a ruler of India be he Jain, Buddhist as Harsha or Hindu/Shiva like Rajendra subjected the images captured for religious sites and appropriated for relocation in their own imperial repertoire ever showed an attitude of anything less than reverence. Thus when Krishnadevaraya captured Udayagiri and acquired the green granite Balarama image, he had a Krishna temple constructed in his capital, Vijayanagara, and had the image installed with reverence. Similarly, when Rajendra Chola brought back the image of Durga from the territories of the Western Chalukyas he had it enshrined in his new capital, Gangaikonda cholapuram. Such example can be multiplied. However after the Islamic conquest, temples were detroyed and the sanctity of the temple violated by the shedding of blood and was usually accompanied, as was the case with the Vaishnava Temple of Srirangam, a whole sale massacre of the temple priests. To deny the cold facts of history, recorded in the medieval Chronicles is to deny the very validity of History as a field of study.
Meenakshi Jain has produced a fine piece of historical research. It is true that the academic climate for a free investigation of India's tangled and tortured past has opened up only recently and I fervently hope that historians of India cease to function as servitors of political parties, start researching the past without fear or favour.
Meenakshi Jain
New Delhi Aryan Books International, 2019
One of the most tragic and neglected aspects of medieval historiography of India is the fate of Hindu, Buddhist and Jaina Temples. Sita Ram Goel several years back addressed this issue and indicted the medieval rulers for following a political strategy of destroying Hindu places of worship and the systematic destruction od Hindu, Buddhist and Jaina centres of worship and pilgrimage, he argues was party of the political and imperial ideology stemming from Islamic ideas of conquest and conversion of Darul Harb into Dar ul Islam, from Land of War to Land of Islam. Hence the destruction of Indian religious institutions cannot be view in isolation of the ideological underpinning of the Turkish, Afghan and Mughal rule over India. This interpretation was, of course, attacked by a whole host of historians from Alighr Muslim University, Delhi University and of course, Jawaharlal Nehru University. Is this interpretation a "communal" one or, even if not politically correct have the weight of historical evidence behind it.
The deliberate underplaying of Moslem vandalism in parts of India which were conquered may have been a political necessity in the years after Partition when Hindu Moslem tension were high and it was prudent to avoid contentious and identity laden issues. However, 70 years after Independence if the same platitudes are trotted out, it becomes necessary to re investigate the issue and assess the question on the basis of evidence. In short, the time for political correctness is past and it is time to seize the historical moment even as it disintegrates before our very eyes. Meenakshi Jain has produced a scholarly and eminently well researched work on this question. She starts where Sita Ram Goel left and her work is a fitting riposte to all those historians who live in a state of denial about the tragedy the befell India. After reading the work under review it will not be possible for anyone either to deny the political underpinning of the reign of vandalism unleashed against Hindu and other Indian religious structures or belittle the cultural and civilizational chaos it engendered.
One argument that white scholars like Richard Davis and Richard Eaton are quick to advance is that the Turks, Afghans and Mughals did not indulge in any sort of vandalism and destruction which Indian rulers had not done in the past. This line of argument is absolutely incorrect as there is not a single instance in which a ruler of India be he Jain, Buddhist as Harsha or Hindu/Shiva like Rajendra subjected the images captured for religious sites and appropriated for relocation in their own imperial repertoire ever showed an attitude of anything less than reverence. Thus when Krishnadevaraya captured Udayagiri and acquired the green granite Balarama image, he had a Krishna temple constructed in his capital, Vijayanagara, and had the image installed with reverence. Similarly, when Rajendra Chola brought back the image of Durga from the territories of the Western Chalukyas he had it enshrined in his new capital, Gangaikonda cholapuram. Such example can be multiplied. However after the Islamic conquest, temples were detroyed and the sanctity of the temple violated by the shedding of blood and was usually accompanied, as was the case with the Vaishnava Temple of Srirangam, a whole sale massacre of the temple priests. To deny the cold facts of history, recorded in the medieval Chronicles is to deny the very validity of History as a field of study.
Meenakshi Jain has produced a fine piece of historical research. It is true that the academic climate for a free investigation of India's tangled and tortured past has opened up only recently and I fervently hope that historians of India cease to function as servitors of political parties, start researching the past without fear or favour.
