“Very unlike our own historians today, the British recognised the unique identities that existed over the subcontinent and had no qualms in separating the different people of such a vast region into what were clear national distinctions. Through this historical endeavour, the British have left us with high nosed and often racist accounts of the peoples living in the sub-continent.”
“The thirteen pieces from different journals are masterful. However it is the battle accounts of H T Lambrick, which read like thrillers written in typical British fashion, which enthrall, shock enthuse and delight the reader simultaneously. Accounts of Sir Charles Napier, infamous for uttering the latin ‘peccavi’ on capturing the province are awe inspiring even for the most ardent of post-colonial scholar.”
“Then there are the more culturally driven discussions such as the observations of Baloch poetry on the Sindh border done by Lambrick. In short, the brilliant selection gives the reader the opportunity to observe with absolute clarity a cross section of Sindh’s cultural and political history.”
Caption for picture: Rani Kot Fort in Sindh, said to be the largest fort in the world and often compared to the Great Wall of China.
Much has been said and written on the history of Pakistan. The quality of the product has rarely been uniform. Simplistic recollections of major events have been expounded upon in royally boring detail in textbooks. Great treatise of nuanced discussions on the intricacies of the Pakistani national identity and its global and local implications have caused great debate and discussion.
The discussion on Pakistan continues, and with much fervour and participation. And even though this has fostered a general recognition and acceptance of the unique cultural evolutions and identities of the different provinces of the country, there has been no real attempt at researching or even compiling the histories of the provinces.
Most of the currently available collected research has been done exclusively during the colonial era by British historians and anthropologists. Much research was done by the British on the different peoples of the sub-continent, even if, in the dark early days of Western imperialism, it is often convoluted and racially motivated.
Despite this, however, very unlike our own historians today, the British recognised the unique identities that existed over the subcontinent and had no qualms in separating the different people of such a vast region into what were clear national distinctions.
Through this historical endeavour, the British have left us with high nosed and often racist accounts of the peoples living in the sub-continent, such as those in the Punjab in such seminal works as the ‘Chiefs of Punjab.’ Much time has also been devoted to the Pashtuns and the Rajputs and the Sikhs, all races labeled by the British as martial – an image that continues to persist because of the serious case of colonial hangover suffered particularly in this region.
However, one of the provinces and people that have received seemingly less attention by the British, and thus none at all by future historians, are Sindh and the Sindhis. Serious international, anthropological interest should have been developed in an area which not only houses the world’s largest fort, but is also home to one of the most intricate power structures in the societies of the East. Yet Sindh did not seen much in the way of historical preservation for a log time even into its modern era.
What many do not realise, however, that Sindh too had a dedicated group of British historians looking into its rich cultural and historical value. It is this group of historians that have been brought back to life by Oxford’s new title “Discovering Sindh’s Past.” The book, which is a selection from the journal of the Sind Historical Society, does not contain any new research, information or analysis. Yet this compilation of selections from the Journal of the Sind Historical Society, published between 1934-1948, is a rare look into Sindh that has been missing.
The reader would be wise to remember that it was only after Sindh fell to the British in the 19th century that the modern historiography of Sindh was introduced by the conquerors, who founded the Historical Society of Sindh with the purpose of reconstructing the history of Sindh.
A vibrant and proactive society of historians, it held regular meetings where its members pitched ideas, shared research and observations, and prepared for the publication of their journals. These journals are now rare to find even though they contain some jems from that era. Edited by Michel Boivin, Matthew A Cook and Julien Levesque, “Discovering Sindh’s Past” goes a long way to give the reader a glimpse of not just wonderfully written and conducted research, but also a lesson on how history is professionally curated.
The thirteen pieces from different journals are masterful. The book begins with a number if essays by A B Advani regarding the historical transfer of power from clans such as the Kalhora to the Talpurs. However it is the battle accounts of H T Lambrick, which read like thrillers written in typical British fashion, which enthrall, shock enthuse and delight the reader simultaneously. Accounts of Sir Charles Napier, infamous for uttering the latin ‘peccavi’ on capturing the province are awe inspiring even for the most ardent of post-colonial scholar.
Then there are the more culturally driven discussions such as the observations of Baloch poetry on the Sindh border done by Lambrick. In short, the brilliant selection gives the reader the opportunity to observe with absolute clarity a cross section of Sindh’s cultural and political history.
The fact that most of the work is written by foreign writers makes no difference. To the non-Sindhi reader, it will be almost completely unchartered territory, which only goes to establish further how unique the Sindhi identity is. While Sindhis themselves may find significant issue with some of the colonial language and aspersions, something the editors have worked seemingly hard to minimise, the book is simply an engrossing tale of a different world for the non-Sindhi reader.
That the Sindh Historical Society, from whose journals the work has been compiled, ceased to exist has some serious implications for the historians of the country. In fact, the British formed historical society did not last beyond partition and published the last of its works in 1948.
Historical societies, such as the one in Sindh, are meant to preserve, collect and research the heritage of certain areas. While the British may have only done this service after the great disservice of colonising the area, one does question why the history of Sindh has not been preserved since, especially as part of Pakistan. This is all the more pertinent considering that complaints of injustice against Sindhi language and culture have been rife since partition. In this way, the book does not just help the reader discover Sindh’s past, but also makes them think about its future.