Opinion by
Written by Samyak Ghosh
A social media debate in India has, at the centre of it, the behemoth called WhatsApp history. Author William Dalrymple in an interview and more recently YouTuber and historian Ruchika Sharma in an article in this newspaper (‘The Indian historian is an embattled one’, IE, January 5) accused Indian professional historians and their ivory towers for the rise of WhatsApp history in the country. However, neither of them has clearly defined WhatsApp history. Before we test the veracity of their claims, it is imperative to know what WhatsApp history is.
In short, WhatsApp history refers to the circulation of historical knowledge about the past and conversations around it — often distorted — on social media. This includes YouTube videos, Instagram reels, threads on X (previously Twitter), and similar forms of content circulating via WhatsApp masquerading as historical knowledge. I suggest that the problem at hand concerns recognition — of history as historical knowledge and of the historian as an actor who speaks to the public beyond the spaces of classrooms, peer-reviewed journals, and academic conferences.
What has been termed WhatsApp history, however, is not unique to India. Something similar called TikTok history exists in the United States of America. In both cases, we notice a deliberate distortion of history, citing sources that do not adhere to the professional ethics of the historian. Be it popular or academic, historical knowledge informs the general public about their past. The professional historian offers an interpretation adhering to the ethics of verifiability, evidence-based reconstruction, and context-sensitive reading of the past — of events, agents, or processes.
It is claimed that language and circulation are a hindrance to reaching the general public. However, specifically, the Indian professional historian has for generations written textbooks for schools, and competitive examinations, and has played a crucial role in the framing of history curricula across the nation. They have also written for newspapers (with regional and national circulations), appeared in courtrooms, and influenced policy decisions. The Indian historian has continuously stepped out of his so-called ivory-tower isolation to wear the hat of a public intellectual to write popular history books, apart from training generations of students to think, read, and write historically. All of that work appears to have been dismissed when we only look at the ivory tower — more of a myth than a reality.
The rise of WhatsApp history has nothing to do with the work of the professional historian. WhatsApp history thrives on creating alternative narratives and their allure in the present. Its reach is directly related to the social context in which the recognition of truth is challenged. If there is a reason behind the rise of WhatsApp history then it is the conditions that make it possible — the gradual erosion of a culture of learning (across the world) and the destruction of universities as spaces of learning (as opposed to gathering skill-sets). It is indeed stunning to see that history as business thrives when history as learning struggles due to low enrollment and lack of research funding almost everywhere in the world. The Indian historian is not facing a unique crisis but is part of a problem that goes far beyond simple solutions like myth-busting, fact-checking, and reel-making. This is where we need to understand that history communication need not always be a replacement for history education.
The Indian historian is not fighting a lonely battle in the work of history education. As the historian Manan Ahmed points out, the challenge that a previously colonised subject (across the world) faces while writing history is two-fold — colonial epistemology as foundational to disciplinary knowledge and originary myths that tell histories without the feel of myth as such. If we need to dismantle colonial epistemology, then we have to engage with it. And, if we want to move beyond originary myths, we need to disrupt their nature as “histories” that feel natural or as Ahmed says “lived in”. The current generation of Indian professional historians writing in English and Indian languages continue to do this work, often writing for a general audience. I can think of Ruby Lal’s biography of the 16th-century Mughal princess Gulbadan Begum, published by Yale University Press and Juggernaut. In a world where myths masquerade as facts, the Indian professional historian cannot only make history content for social media. Historical knowledge thrives on time-consuming and meticulous research that more often informs popular history books. It is for the benefit of popular history that professional historians should continue their painstaking work, often derided as an ivory-tower enterprise.
The writer is an assistant professor of history at the National Law School of India University, Bengaluru
Stay informed with access to our award-winning journalism.
Avoid misinformation with trusted, accurate reporting.
Make smarter decisions with insights that matter.
This No Is Already Registered.
Thanks For Registered Mobile No.

source