HALF-TRUTHS CALLED HISTORY
by Vincent Van Ross
History should always be taken with a pinch of salt because it often rides on half-truths and lies. A battle or war is fought between two rivals or opponents. The opponents could be races, tribes or even countries. In most duels, one of them tends to win the campaign. The other one is likely to lose. All said and done, it is the story of the victor and the vanquished, unless it ends up in a stalemate or a ceasefire.
However, when we read the history of two countries which engaged in a battle or a war, things tend to change over a period of time. A hundred years later, the history of the two countries is not quite the same as it used to be when the war was fought. With the passage of time, both the countries glorify themselves on the battlefront. Obviously, this is not possible because one of them must have lost the battle or yielded to the other. Yet, when you read the history of the two countries you are led to believe that both of them won the war. That is not possible. But, that is the way it is. War is seldom a win-win situation for both countries.
Perhaps, thats why it is called history. Or, should I say: HIS-STORY? By that, I mean the point of view of the historian. History is written by historians who are engaged to do the job by powerful authorities. Or, they do it on their own volition. Either way, there is room for bias or prejudice.
Most of the time, it is the victor that is the architect of history of his times. In other words, history is the story of the victor. Therefore, even glorious feats of the vanquished tend to get neglected or ignored. However, the loser may glorify these feats to their own countrymen and make it appear that it is they who won the war.
Every invasion used to be designed to conquer and subdue the native population and perpetuate the rule of the invader. In doing so, the victor used to focus on demolishing the entire lineage of the vanquished. Most invaders adopted a common four-pronged approach:
(i) They killed all men above 12 years of age. By doing this, they ensured that there would be no resistance or uprising against the aggressor because children cannot counter a fighting army. This also helped them to ensure that no one who knew the history of the tribe or race survived to tell the stories of their past.
(ii) They raped the native women. With this, they managed to put a stop to the existing lineage at age 12, and introduce their own in its place.
(iii) They ravaged and plundered the property of the inhabitants, because people without resources can never stand up against an invading force. Submission became their only option.
(iv) They destroyed the archives and other records, including literature of the native race or tribe. By destroying the archives, they wiped out the past of the people they invaded.
Believe it or not, the strategies worked well for them. And, it left no trace of the tribes that inhabited the conquered territory. This is the story of our lost tribes and kingdoms. This may not be possible today. But, those were the days of barbarism. And, they did not have sophisticated information storage and retrieval systems.
Today, if you and I are here, it is because we belong to a race or tribe which was aggressive or a tribe that was able to withstand the depredations of the invaders.
So, if we have a history, it is the history of the victor. Or, we are part of the history of the vanquished that bided for its time to rewrite its history, because the vanquished never get the opportunity to write their own story in their own time.
Irrespective of whether our ancestors were victors or vanquished, we now have a glorious past to boast about. Because, history often rides on half-truths and lies!
The writer is a political and cultural commentator, based in New Delhi.
