Did Ancient Indians possess a sense of History?

History is defined as the presentation, in chronological order, of successive developments in the means and relations of production’.
This question of Indians possessing a sense of history or not, arose when the colonial historians mostly comprising of British scholars like William Jones, James Mill and Vincent Smith said that Indians totally lacked a sense of history especially time and chronology because most Indian sources did not display that sort of history writing which was prevalent in Britain and other European countries. So basically what Indians did not posses was that sense of history which the Europeans possessed. Dismissing Indian sources as writings lacking in a sense of history completely would be a very incorrect statement to make.
Although ancient Indians knew how to write from times as early as 2500 BC (Harappan civilisation) we do not come across any written historical record till about fourth century AD which were found in Central Asia. Now the gradual shift to a very crude form of historical records is definitely a sign of progress in the sense of history and record-keeping among the ancient Indians.
Literary sources
There are a variety of literary sources which are available for ancient period of Indian history. Most of them were not meant to be read. They were orally transmitted from one generation to another in the form of something that was recited, heard or performed. Thus ancient Indians had a different way of keeping their traditions alive and within the records for future references. Most early texts were not authored by one. Mostly the authors remain anonymous, but these texts reflect a certain background, certain perspectives and biases such as those of class, religion and gender. And all these pieces of information are vital to reconstruct the history of the social set up of the background location. The majority ancient books were written based on religious themes. Most of these texts were not written with the intention of maintaining an account of historical records. But in an unconscious effort all these texts have come out to be versatile. The remembered texts in the ancient Indian context were the Puranas, epics, Dharmashastras and the Nitishastra whereas the Vedas were a part of ‘shruti’ meaning that which is heard.
The Vedas: The Vedas hold a very important position in the history of ancient India. They sort of form the base to all the other religious and cultural texts. They are a reflection of eternal, self-existent truths realized by the rishis in a state of meditation or revealed to them by the gods. The Rigveda-the earliest surviving text of all times, contains the world oldest philosophical poetry. It is a collection of 1028 hymns arranged in 10 books called ‘mandalas’. The Samaveda contains 1018 verses written in musical notations. The Yajurveda deals with details of performance of rituals. And the last of the Vedas the Atharvaveda contains some of the Rigvedic hymns and spells and charms which talk about the practices that subsisted during the Atharvavedic times. So the idea of recording or conserving the traditions and cultures in the Vedic times is quite apparent. A numerous other parts of the Vedas explain every aspect of the texts in great details which amplifies the argument of ancient Indians possessing a sense of elaboration of historical references. Such as the Aranyakas deduce sacrificial rituals in an emblematic manner. Vedic texts were essentially religious in nature; therefore expecting references to dynasties and other historical events in them could be sort of faulty. But then there are instances of some mentions of battles for example, book 7 of Rigveda cites the instance of a battle of 10 kings in which Sudas defeated a number of adversaries who had confederated against him. But since it is very difficult to date such old texts, the argument of those for the proposition, stating that Indians did possess a sense of history, falls weaker because of the apparent absence of sense of time. But these reflect the religious beliefs and practices prevalent among the Brahmana males and about North and North-western part of the subcontinent during 2nd and 1st millennium BCE.
The Epics: The two Sanskrit epics Mahabharata and Ramayana fall within the category smriti as well as itihaasa. These epics are magnificent texts with powerful stories that have captured the imagination of millions of people over the centuries. The writing of Mahabharata spans many years. Its period of composition is placed somewhere between 400 BCE to 400 CE. And the Ramayana’s spans between 5th or 4th century BCE too the 3rd century CE. These epics have several chronological layers which are needed to be identified in order to use these as historical sources. The Mahabharata consists of 18 Parvas(books) and 2 main recensions-northern and southern. The conflict between 2 sets of royal cousins forms the core of the entire story including gospels of the Great War fought at Kurukshetra. Apart from the core the epic contains a lot more irrelevant material-other stories, sermons, didactic portions containing teachings, in it which has been added over centuries thus giving it an encyclopaedic nature. It is clearly not just Vyasa who authored this. The Ramayana exists in seven Kandas(books) of which Bal Kanda(1st) and Uttara Kanda(last) were later inter-polations.It has two recensions-northern and southern. The basic story is about Rama the prince of Kosala: his banishment to the forests due to the intrigues of his wicked stepmother; the abduction of his wife Sita by Ravana, the King of Lanka; Sita’s rescue and Rama’s return to the capital and he becoming king. The compact vocabulary of entire text suggests that it was the work of a single individual, traditionally identified as Valmiki. Unlike Mahabharata Ramayana offers some sort of archaeological evidence from Ayodhya: settlement of the Northern Black Polished Ware phase which dates back to around 700 BCE. The Ramayana has several versions coming from varying locations. These epics not only have a historicity which makes it important. They are cradles of several cultural layers. Even if they were true(or not) these epics do convey a great deal of clues about the social classes and class conflicts and political set up that might have existed sometime near the composition of the entire text.
Puranas (4th-5th century CE): It is not so that the sense of time and space which is essential to determine the historical identity and significance of a particular text was totally absent in the ancient Indian sources. For example the Puranas, the text divides time into four ages or Yugas: krita, treta, dwapara and kali, each age considered to be worse than the one preceding it. In the Indian context sense of time is not linear as it is in the European context. In Indian context the cyclic form of time is what the Puranas depict. The cycle of time is connected with the cyclical decline and revival of dharma. So that precisely is a glaring example of the kind of sense the ancient Indian authors of the Puranas had about historical time, and they also had an idea of categorisation which is sort of imperative for any historical text to be interpretable. The Puranas are eighteen in number. They provide a huge account of royal political history as they mention historical dynasties from Chandravamshi and Suryavamshi to Haryankas, Shaishunagas, Nandas, Mauryas, Shungas, Kanvas, and Satavahanas right upto the Guptas. They also have sections that deal with genealogies although most genealogies were mythical as far as the kali age was concerned. They also talk about places and events which were considered significant and hence discuss these events in great detail. It is an important source of geographical history and history of emergence of religious cults. They also reflect the interaction between Brahmanical and Non-Brahmanical traditions. So the idea of significance in the context of record was present. “The authors of Puranas were not unaware of the idea of change, which is the essence of history.” This fact is evident as the descriptions of these events were written in the future tense, even though these events had occurred long before they were written about. So it is evident that ancient Indians possessed a sense of history. They now survive as religious fables and cant. Most of the historical content, with a large percentage of myths and diluted with semi-religious legends, the true nature of the works got wiped out during successive redactions copied by innumerable, careless scribes.
Dharmashastras: “Dharma refers to the proper, ideal conduct of a person living in a society, a course of action which leads to the fulfilment of goals of human life.” A special group of Sanskrit texts dealing with dharma are the Dhaarmashastras. Apart from norms of social behaviour Dharmashastras also deals with a number of other issues including personal, civil, and criminal law. Although the laws were not obligatory they were rather recommendations. They talk about how things should be rather than acting as penal codes. Although the Dharmashastras do not reflect the society of those times directly, inferences can be made about the practices and social and religious norms. They also reveal the tension between theory and practice within the Brahmanical tradition. One important aspect that the Dharmashastras disclose are the varnas, which later goes on to be the intriguing factor of the Indian society. They offer many examples of contradicting the so thought Vedic codes which actually talks of the flexibility of the society then and also of the unawareness of some parts of our texts which lead to greater complication.
Biographies: An immensely impressive sense of history can be witnessed in the biographies or ‘charitas’ written in the ancient Indian times. These biographies not only were a direct reflection on the subject who was usually a king, but also on his rule, his administration and societal status. Thus with the help of one biography the historical reconstruction of an entire kingdom or society can be formulated. The idea of glorifying a subject itself suggests that the ancient Indians had written the text because they wanted the subject to be remembered-a very justified sense of record keeping, though all in a sort of unconscious manner. The 7th century work “Harshacharita” by Banabhatta is one of the best examples one can offer as far descriptive biographies are concerned. The biography deals with the early career of Harsha. “Although highly exaggerated, its gives an excellent idea of the court life under Harsha and the social and religious life in his age.” Other such biographies include ‘Ramacharita’(12th century) written by Sandhyakara Nandi which talks about the Pala prince Rampala and his victory in the clash against the Kaivarta peasants. Bilhana’s ‘Vikramankadevacharita’ unfolds the glorious stories of Vikramaditya VI (1076-1127), the Chalukya king of Kalyan. From the south Mushika Vamsha is another clear example narrating an account of the Mushika dynasty who ruled northern Kerala. In the thirteenth and the twelfth centuries the biographies of some merchants were written, maybe not with the idea of projecting the commercial set up of those times but the texts were ample enough to recreate the mercantile framework which would have existed in those times.
The earliest chronicle, in the true sense of the term, which we know of in India, is Rajatarangini, written in 1148 AD by Kalhana. The book is essentially an account of the kings of Kashmir from the earliest times up till the rulers of the 12th century AD. The book has been written in quite a vivid manner where political events have also been described in a dramatic fashion and beautiful character sketches were woven. In fact the whole piece of writing was given a poetic touch, maybe because “Kalhana considered himself primarily a gifted and skilful poet.”
Others: Comparing Indian historical writers with contemporary writers in the world context like Herodotus, Thucydides, Polybius, Livy and Tacitus is not just. That is because even with similar contemporary rulers to kings like Harsha, who was also associated with great wars and administrative policies, no narrative like that of Caesar’s Commentaries or Xenophon’s Anabasis was ever written in India. Instead the trend was that of graceful court drama, hymns, epigrams and sort of a bit dramatic poetry.
“In case of poetry or drama, the analysis requires sensitivity to the literary conventions of the time and the writer’s style and imagination.” This is why Indian history sources do not seem to project the proper sense of history that Europeans look for. The art of glorifying every bit of history is an ancient tradition that has been carried on.
Language literature: Even when the grammatical texts were written like Panini’s “Ashthadhyayi”, Patanjali’s “Mahabhashya” and Vararuchi’s “Prakritaprakasha”, it was with a certain intention of laying down certain codes that these texts were written. And these codes were written only to be referred to in the future and remembered at appropriate instances, thus exhibiting quite a justified sense of history. And these very texts are highly significant in the interpretation of languages which was crucial in understanding other epigraphic and literary sources, thus providing a vital insight into the literary world of ancient India.

Archaeological Sources
Archaeology is basically the study of human history with reference to historical material remains. The term ‘culture’ is very frequently used by archaeologists, anthropologists, and historians. It encompasses every aspect of patterns of human learnt behaviour, their way of thinking and all those features which identify them as a part of a certain social group. The different components of archaeological sources as in material remains are vestiges of grand palaces and temples, small discarded products of everyday human activity which speaks a lot about ancient societies and also things like structures, artefacts, bones, seeds, pollens, seals, coins, sculptures, and inscriptions. All of these components each play a very significant role in reconstructing the past.
The idea of constructing a monument itself speaks volumes about the sense of history they possessed as it reveals an aesthetic sense as well as the idea of building something grand so as to establish and sort of record the greatness that was involved in the concerned times so as to praise the subject of the monument. Inscriptions-even if not written in a very historically emphatic way, is nevertheless a means to record events so as to capture the importance of the moment and carry it forward to generations. So every aspect has a role to play and everything that connects us to the past is, deliberate or not, definitely an indication of the sense of history possessed by the ancient Indians.
Conclusion: A historian’s perspective and other kinds of sources
“India had some episodes, but no history.” D.D. Kosambi argues that ‘it is the episodes-lists of dynasties and kings, tales of war and battle spiced with anecdote, which fill school texts-that are missing from Indian records.’ It is only in the case of Indian history that history has to be reconstructed without episodes, not as it is in the case of European histories.
For other kinds of sources like archaeological sources or ritualistic sources which also convey a lot of information about the lifestyle and religious convictions that prevailed during those times, D.D. Kosambi comments saying that “The existence of any classical literature implies the class-division of society: literacy in the oldest times meant the pre-existence of a temple, priesthood, urban life, division of society into producing groups and others who expropriated the relatively low surplus produced. Only the latter wrote the epigraphs with which the historian must work, the producers had not the leisure for literacy.” So this in itself gives us a lot of idea about what existed and what did not. Even though in an unconscious effort, the whole idea of producing any literature itself involves the presence of a sense of record-keeping among ancient Indians.
Another aspect of unusual kind of sources is rites and practices that have descended from ancient times up till today. Some rites have been dated back to the Stone Age though the votaries are not aware of such long continuity. ”Such rites may not have found foundation in the Brahmin scriptures but other portions of Sanskrit ritual works show equally primitive sacraments adopted at almost all periods, down to the last century.” Most of the rites that are practiced now though are not justified by Vedic references.
There is a lot more to Ancient Indian sources and their nature and interpretive character, which are yet to be unfolded.