Cookies Policy

This site uses cookies. By continuing to browse the site you are agreeing to our use of cookies.

I accept this policy

Find out more here

Hindutva, Mythistory, and Pseudoarchaeology

No metrics data to plot.
The attempt to load metrics for this article has failed.
The attempt to plot a graph for these metrics has failed.
Brill’s MyBook program is exclusively available on BrillOnline Books and Journals. Students and scholars affiliated with an institution that has purchased a Brill E-Book on the Brill platform automatically have access to the MyBook option for the title(s) acquired by the Library. MyBook is a cheap paperback edition of the original book and will be sold at uniform, low price.

Access this article

+ Tax (if applicable)
Add to Favorites

image of Numen

Abstract This essay elucidates ideologically-inspired interpretations of the South Asian archeological record, particularly by those called Hindutvādins, and those who write about (and against) them. I first survey briefly the chief points in the history of archaeology in examining the Indus Valley Civilization. Next, I describe some of the major controversies that reflect claims of Hindutva pseudoarchaeology in the South Asian context. Throughout, I illustrate the increasingly virulent interactions between Hindutva proponents, indigenist theorists, and academic interpreters, and what these debates foretell of the future of Indus Valley studies.

1. Arnold Bettina "“The Past as Propaganda: Totalitarian Archaeology in Nazi Germany”" Antiquity 1990 Vol 64 244 464 478
2. Arnold Bettina "“The Contested Past”" Anthropology Today 1999 Vol 15 4 1 4
3. Bayly Susan "“History and the Fundamentalists: India after the Ayodhya Crisis”" Bulletin of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences 1993 Vol 46 7 7 26
4. Bhan Suraj "“Recent Trends in Indian Archaeology”" Social Scientist 1997 Vol 25 1/2 3 15
5. Boivin Nicole "“Orientalism, Ideology and Identity: Examining Caste in South Asian Archaeology”" Journal of Social Archaeology 2005 Vol 5 225 252
6. Bryant Edwin The Quest for the Origins of Vedic Culture 2001 Oxford University Press
7. Chadha Ashish "“Visions of Discipline: Sir Mortimer Wheeler and the Archaeological Method in India (1944‒1948)”" Journal of Social Archaeology 2002 Vol 2 3 378 401
8. Fagan Garrett G. , Feder Kenneth L. "“Crusading against Straw Men: An Alternative View of Alternative Archaeologies: Response to Holtorf (2005)”" World Archaeology 2006 Vol 38 4 718 729
9. Friedland Roger , Hecht Richard "“The Bodies of Nations: A Comparative Study of Religious Violence in Jerusalem and Ayodhya”" History of Religions 1998 Vol 38 2 101 149
10. Frykenberg R.E. Sontheimer Gunther D. , Kulke Hermann "“The Emergence of Modem ‘Hinduism’ as a Concept and as an Institution: A Reappraisal with Special Reference to South India”" Hinduism Reconsidered 1989 New Delhi Manohar 29 49
11. Golwalkar Madhava Sadashiva We, or the Nationhood Redefined 1939 Nagpur Bharat Publications
12. Habib Irfan "“Unreason and Archaeology: The ‘Painted Grey-Ware’ and Beyond”" Social Scientist 1997 Vol 25 1/2 16 24
13. Hansen Thomas Blom The Saffron Wave: Democracy and Hindu Nationalism in Modern India 1999 Princeton, New Jersey Princeton University Press
14. Heehs Peter "“Shades of Orientalism: Paradoxes and Problems in Indian Historiography”" History and Theory 2003 Vol 42 2 169 195
15. Holtorf C. "“Beyond Crusades: How (Not) to Engage with Alternative Archaeologies”" World Archaeology 2005 Vol 37 4 544 551
16. Humes Cynthia Ann McDermott Rachel Fell , Kripal Jeffrey John "“Wrestling with Kali: South Asian and British Constructions of the Dark Goddess”" Encountering Kālī: In the Margins, at the Center, in the West 2003 Berkeley University of California Press 145 168
17. King Richard "“Orientalism and the Modern Myth of ‘Hinduism’ ”" Numen 1999 Vol 46 2 146 185
18. Lefkowitz Mary Fagan G.G. "“Archaeology and the Politics of Origins: The Search for Pyramids in Greece”" Archaeological Fantasies: How Pseudoarchaeology Misrepresents the Past and Misleads the Public 2006 London Routledge 180 202
19. Lele Jayant K. Hindutva: The Emergence of the Right 1995 Madras Earthworm Books
20. Masson Charles Narrative of Various Journeys in Balochistan, Afghanistan, the Panjab, & Kalat, During a Residence in those Countries 1842 London Richard Bentley
21. Panikkar K.N. "“Religious Symbols and Political Mobilization: The Agitation for a Mandir at Ayodhya”" Social Scientist 1993 Vol 21 7/8 63 78
22. Pollock Sheldon Breckenridge Carol A. , van der Veer Peter "“Deep Orientalism? Notes on Sanskrit and Power Beyond the Raj”" Orientalism and the Postcolonial Predicament 1993 Philadelphia University of Pennsylvania Press 76 133
23. Pollock Sheldon "“Ramayana and Political Imagination in India”" The Journal of Asian Studies 1993b Vol 52 2 261 297
24. Rajagopal Arvind "“Ram Janmabhoomi, Consumer Identity and Image-Based Politics”" Economic and Political Weekly 1994 Vol 29 27 1659 1668
25. Ratnagar Shereen "“Archaeology at the Heart of a Political Confrontation: The Case of Ayodhya”" Current Anthropology 2004 Vol 45 2 239 259
26. Sarkar Sumit Ludden David "“Indian Nationalism and the Politics of Hindutva”" Contesting the Nation: Religion, Community and the Politics of Democracy in India 1996 Philadelphia University of Pennsylvania Press 270 293
27. Savarkar V.D. Hindutva: Who is a Hindu? 1969 [1923] Bombay Savarkar Sadan
28. Sharma Arvind "“On Hindu, Hindustān, Hinduism and Hindutva”" Numen 2002 Vol 49 1 1 36
29. Sharma Arvind "“Did the Hindus Lack a Sense of History?”" Numen 2003 Vol 50 2 190 227
30. Smith Brian K. "“Re-envisioning Hinduism and Evaluating the Hindutva Movement”" Religion 1996 Vol 26 119 128
31. Srivastava Sushil "“The Abuse of History: A Study of the White Papers on Ayodhya”" Social Scientist 1994 Vol 22 5/6 39 51
32. Taneja Nalini "“National Convention against Communalisation of Education: A Report”" Social Scientist 2001 Vol 29 9/10 77 91
33. Thapar Romila "“Hindutva and History: Why do Hindutva Ideologues Keep Flogging a Dead Horse?”" Frontline 2000 October 15 16
34. Trautmann Thomas R. Aryans and British India 1997 Berkeley and Los Angeles University of California Press
35. Trautmann Thomas R. , Sinopoli Carla M. "“In the Beginning Was the Word: Excavating the Relations between History and Archaeology in South Asia”" Journal of the Economic and Social History of the Orient 2002 Vol 45 4 492 523
36. Tull Herman W. "“F. Max Müller and A.B. Keith: ‘Twaddle’, the ‘Stupid’ Myth, and the Disease of Indology”" Numen 1991 Vol 38 1 27 58
37. Visweswaran Kamala , Witzel Michael , Manjrekar Nandini , Bhog Dipta , Chakravarti Uma "“The Hindutva View of History: Rewriting Textbooks in India and the United States”" Georgetown Journal of International Affairs 2009 Vol 10 1 101 112
38. Witzel Michael Fagan G.G. "“Rama’s Realm: Indocentric Rewritings of Early South Asian Archaeology and History”" Archaeological Fantasies: How Pseudoarchaeology Misrepresents the Past and Misleads the Public 2006 London Routledge 203 232
39. FN1 1)The subjects introduced in this essay — the Indus Valley Civilization, the nature of the “Aryan,” the Aryan “Invasion” and/or “Migration” Theory, the destruction of the Babri Masjid in Ayodhya — are among the most controversial one encounters in South Asian studies today. I have consulted well over one hundred articles, books, and archaeological reports (not to mention many web sites), that all address questions regarding the so-called Indo-Aryan or Vedic people in what is today India, Pakistan, and parts of Afghanistan. My work here is meant to provide background into the issues and to document major accusations of pseudoarchaeology and pseudoscience, not to assert the “truth” about the archaeological finds and their history themselves.
40. FN2 2)I find useful Richard King’s succinct explanatory definition: “Simplistically speaking, we can speak of two forms of Orientalist discourse, the first, generally antagonistic and confident in European Superiority, the second, generally affirmative, enthusiastic and suggestive of Indian superiority in certain key areas. Both forms of Orientalism, however, make essentialist judgements which foster an overly simplistic and homogenous conception of Indian culture” (King 1999:184). For an accessible and relatively short article elucidating greater complexities in the use of the term Orientalism in the specific context of Indology and South Asian historiography, see Peter Heehs (2003). And to complicate things further, Sheldon Pollock has criticized the neglect of studying ‘Pre-Orientalist “Orientalism,”’ arguing that it is not possible “to survey the constructions of colonial domination without a detailed topography of precolonial domination” (Pollock 1993:104).
41. FN3 3)The term “prehistory” was “introduced into English in 1851 to denote that longer past into which texts do not reach, and within which the study of material culture comes into its own for the first time” (Trautmann and Sinopoli 2002:497, citing Glyn Daniel’s 1962 book, The Idea of Prehistory).
42. FN4 4)Max Müller thought he understood the Veda “better and more correctly” through the science of language because he held to the view that “although the European shared a cultural heritage with the Vedic people, this ancient tradition had actually been lost to the Indians in the post-Ṛgvedic period” (Tull 1991:40).
43. FN5 5)And perhaps this development was none too soon. One of the greatest archaeological losses for humanity occurred in 1856, when British engineers John and William Brunton were laying the East Indian Railway Company line that would connect Karachi and Lahore. John Brunton needed to find ballast for the line of the railway, and after having been told of an ancient ruined city near the lines, called Brahminabad, he found it full of hard well-burnt bricks. What we now know was an IVC site was reduced to ballast. His brother William Brunton used bricks from yet another ruined city further north (which had already been used as a quarry by villagers in the nearby village of Harappa at the same site). Together, the Brunton brothers were responsible for using millennia-old IVC bricks as ballast for nearly one hundred miles of the railroad track running from Karachi to Lahore.
44. FN6 6)Hiuen-Tsiang had spent sixteen years in India during the mid-seventh century, c.e., and his visits to various locations, even to this day, are treated in large part as an important historical resource.
45. FN7 7)Diffusion posits that innovations in the archaeological record must be evidence for the movements of a particular people. For an unflinching postcolonial analysis of Sir Mortimer Wheeler’s legacy, see Chadha 2002.
46. FN8 8)Sharma is here referring to Frykenberg 1989:31.
47. FN9 9)B.K. Smith (1996:21) suggests that the “ ‘Hinduism’ (or ‘Hindu-ness,’ hindutva) conceived by the leaders of the RSS and the Hindu Mahasabha [w]as inextricably linked to the developing concept of Indian national identity. All this was made easy (not to say possible) by the body of Western scholarship that insisted upon India’s ‘spiritual’ essence and Hinduism’s infinitely protean form. The modern reincarnation of Hindu nationalism (what I would suggest may be the ‘second wave’ of the movement) in the guise of the so-called ‘Sangh Parivār’ activists has also embraced both the non-definition of Hinduism quareligion, as well as the conjunction of ‘Hindu-ness’ and Indian national identity.”
48. FN10 10)RSS leader M.S. Golwalkar wrote, “Hypothesis is not truth. Out of the heap of hypotheses we reject all and positively maintain that we Hindus came into this land from nowhere, but are indigenous children of the soil always, from times immemorial and are natural masters of the country” (1939:8–9).
49. FN11 11)“V.D. Savarkar and Mahatma Gandhi may be regarded as the patron saints of the two distinct forms of Hinduism [viz., a world religion and all things Indian] the ambiguity of the word Hindu gave rise to. Paradoxical as it might appear, both these trends arose out of the same problematic — that of defining Hinduism” (Sharma 2002:21).
50. FN12 12)Entire books have been written on this subject (e.g., Lele 1995, Hansen 1999). For a briefer but still useful synopsis, see Sharma 2002:23ff.
51. FN13 13)“The dispute over the Masjid, constructed in 1528 by Mir Baqui, a noble of Babur’s court, had simmered for long, at least since 1885 when litigation had begun for the right to property in the area. What brought about a qualitative change in the dispute was the surreptitious installation of an idol of Ramlalla inside the mosque in 1949. Ayodhya thus became a potential site of religious confrontation between the Hindus and the Muslims. The BJP effectively exploited this potential in its quest for political power” (Panikkar 1997:63).

Article metrics loading...


Affiliations: 1: Department of Religious Studies, Claremont McKenna College 500 East Ninth Street, Claremont, CA 91711 USA


Can't access your account?
  • Tools

  • Add to Favorites
  • Printable version
  • Email this page
  • Subscribe to ToC alert
  • Get permissions
  • Recommend to your library

    You must fill out fields marked with: *

    Librarian details
    Your details
    Why are you recommending this title?
    Select reason:
    Numen — Recommend this title to your library

    Thank you

    Your recommendation has been sent to your librarian.

  • Export citations
  • Key

  • Full access
  • Open Access
  • Partial/No accessInformation