A Master Narrative for the History of Pakistan: Tracing the origins of an ideological agenda

Abstract

The demand for the creation of Pakistan was based on a historical narrative built around the centrality of the Muslim community in India and its distinctiveness in terms of religious beliefs, cultural traits, and historical traditions. A particular understanding of the past was, in other words, central to the idea of Pakistan. As a result, soon after independence in 1947, a group of eminent historians got together to set up the All Pakistan History Conference. It received official support and patronage as the new state was eager to shape a historical narrative that could strengthen the argument for a distinct Muslim identity. This article looks at the development of this historiography in Pakistan. Unlike existing studies on this topic, which simply point out the ‘flaws’ in the history textbooks used in Pakistan, I will argue that the dominant historical narrative to be found in these textbooks—or even in many scholarly works produced in Pakistan—is a form of master narrative that has a longer history that dates back to the colonial period. Drawing upon such sources as historical texts produced in Pakistan, recently declassified documents of the Cabinet Division, and proceedings of the All Pakistan History Conference, I will delineate the features of this master narrative, the intellectual history of ideas that shaped it from the colonial to the post-colonial period, and the political exegesis whereby it gained structural dominance in Pakistan that was replicated for intellectual, ideological, and statist projects.

Untitled

“…The ruling elite (civil and military) continued to exploit textbooks to achieve their hegemonic design on the ordinary people of Pakistan by presenting to them the 'official historical knowledge' which lacked 'historical knowledge.' The history writing and rewriting exercises were undertaken since the independence of Pakistan by the bureaucracy and by the bureaucracy backed individuals and organizations as was discussed and highlighted by Qasmi (2019). He called it an exercise initiated right after Pakistan became an independent state and continued till today to construct a master narrative of pre and post-independent Pakistan and of the Indian subcontinent's history.…”

“…The history textbook mirrored what was conceived in the education policy, Pakistan a nationstate and Islam gave it a unique character, an ideological country. The Pakistani historians backed by the bureaucracy conceived and presented Pakistan as a nation-state, a monolithic group of Muslims and where national integration project could only be materialized when Islam would be presented as a unifying force and India as an enemy country (Jaffrelot, 2002;Qasmi, 2019). The education and curriculum policies portrayed Pakistan as the only country in the world founded on the ideology that Muslims were different from other religious groups (read Hindus) and they should have a different country to practice their religion.…”

“…These forces shaped not only the history curriculum but other subjects, such as English, Urdu, Ethics, Islamic Education, Sciences, and Mathematics. The earlier studies highlighted that the ruling elite focused more on state-building and paid little attention to nation-building, and this continues to be the focus of history textbooks (Durrani, 2013;Durrani et al, 2017;GoP, 2009;Joshi, 2010;Qasmi, 2019). The defeat of the Pakistan Army in the Eastern wing of Pakistan (that resulted in the emergence of East Pakistan as a separate country, named Bangladesh), reignited the debate on state-building.…”

“…The differences between the Pakistani and Indian identity were of religion; the former was rooted in Islam while the latter was embedded in the Hindu religion. The textbook writers highlighted these differences, especially the religious difference, and these descriptions created 'us' and 'them' not only in the Indian subcontinent but elsewhere as well (Mohammad-Arif, 2007;Naseem, 2005;Naseem, Ghosh, McGill, & Mcdonald, 2010;Qasmi, 2019;Saigol, 2003Saigol, , 2005Zaidi, 2011), The differences between Muslims (us) and non-Muslims (them) were highlighted and presented to the pupils by eulogizing the former and presenting the latter as the opposite of the former.…”

“…The researchers explained the differences between Indian and the European understanding of history where the former was founded in "oral traditions, myths, and folktales" and the native historians "argued for a different and older relationship with the past" where "investigation of the Indian past was combined with a search for Indian frameworks of interpretation in postindependence historiography" (Mukherjee, 2011, p. 515); while the latter looked at history in the chronological pattern which "emerged from the Enlightenment, with an emphasis on sequential narrative and chronology, and a focus on political authority" (Thapar, 2011, p. 553). The Indian history project conceived and initiated after it becoming an independent country was viewed as "mostly hagiographic in kind, celebrating India's 'glorious past' and 'heroic struggles' with a good dose of reverence and sentimentality" (Mukherjee, 2011, p. 517) while the same was evident in Pakistan's history writing project as was noted by Qasmi (2019). Each country has its own pre and post-independence heroes and martyrs and wars between these two neighbors made the states choose and present their heroes and villains to pupils in textbooks.…”