Quotes from Romila Thapar

For peasants and merchants, war was a nightmare that disrupted the routine of earning a livelihood Laying waste vast tracts of inhabited and cultivated land, merely because it was part of the enemy's territory, was a proud boast attributed to Prithviraja Chauhan on defeating the Chandella ruler.

In contemporary times we not only reconstruct the past but we also use it to give legitimacy to the way in which we order our own society.

History is not just a directory of information; it also involves analyzing and interpreting this information.

The history of India was constructed in accordance with nineteenth century European views on what history should be and what was thought to be Indian history.

A society has many pasts from which it chooses those that go into the creation of its history. The choice is made by those in authority—the authority being of various kinds—although occasionally the voice of others may be heard.

The flesh of the ox was medically prescribed to enhance vigour.

Historically the interesting question is when and why did the prohibition on eating beef become the requirement of a good Hindu.

A later age looks back with nostalgia at an earlier one and depicts it in terms of ideals and activities now receding.

The second assertion was that the pre-colonial political economy conformed to the model of what was called Oriental Despotism.

The third aspect was that Hindu society has always been divided into four main castes—the varnas.

The Mahabharata can be viewed as a civilizational text not because it reflects the propagation of a particular view of these dharmas but because, among other things, it speaks to the debate on social ethics, especially between the brahmanical perspective and those that question it—a debate that has continued over many centuries.

Dravidian became the counter-point to the Aryan.

Colonial historians drew on texts encapsulating the upper-caste perspectives of Indian society and extended it to the whole of society.

We know from many examples all over the world and from many periods of history that it was perfectly feasible for people of different racial origins, brought together through migration, trade, conquest or persecution, to find themselves ultimately using the same language.

I have over the years of my research been struck by the frequency with which the present makes use of the past either in a detrimental manner where it becomes a part of various political ploys, or alternatively in a positive manner to claim an enviable legitimacy and inheritance.

The noticeable decline in liberal values is disturbing, especially as fewer and fewer persons appear concerned about this decline.

The political ideologues of the Hindu Right endorse a history rooted in colonial interpretations and are anxious to make that period of history a Hindu utopia.

The alienation implicit in modernization is sought to be assuaged by the creation of a past and of ideologies that legitimize the present.

Religion as an ideology needs to be analyzed in all its dimensions, for, unless its political, social and economic dimensions are openly discussed, even if it is claimed that such discussion hurts sensibilities, there can be no real move away from dogma to humanism.

To stop at moral judgement on whether caste was good or evil is insufficient, as the assessment has to go much further and examine why this form of discrimination/organization was chosen.

On a universal scale the civilized were the colonizers and the uncivilized were the colonized.

If the past is to be called upon to legitimize the present, as it so frequently is, then the veracity of such a past has to be continuously vetted.

Identity by religion, cutting across caste, region and language, has become something of a fantasy for pre-modern times.