What is history from below? Discuss it with reference to the history-writing in India.

Grass hoods history, history seen from below or the history of the common people, people’s history, and even ‘history of everyday life. The conventional history about the great deeds of the ruling classes received further boost from the great tradition of political and administrative historiography developed by Ranke and his followers. The history from below was an attempt to write the history of the common people. It is history concerned with the activities and thoughts of those people and regions that were neglected by the earlier historians. Peasants and working classes, women and minority groups, unknown faces in the crowd, and the people lost in the past became the central concern of this historiographical tradition.

 According to Raphael Samuel, the term “people’s history” has had a long career, and covers and ensemble of different writing. The beginning of the history from below may be traced to the late 18^th century. In the classical western tradition, history-writing involved the narration of the deeds of great men. The common people were considered to be beyond the boundaries of history and it was beneath the dignity of the historian to write about them. Peter burke points out, ‘until the middle of the eighteenth century, the word “society” in its modern sense did not exist in any European language, and without the word it is very difficult to have any conception of that network of relationships we call “society” or “the social structure”.

     In India, most of members of the subordinate classes, including the industrial classes, are not literate, therefore, direct sources coming from them are extremely rare, if not completely absent. Given this scenario, the historian trying to write history from below have to rely on indirect sources. As sabyasachi bhattacharjee points out, given the low level of literacy we have to depend on interferences from behavior pattern. Report on opinions and sentiments, on oral testimonies etc. oral traditions also have their problems. They cannot be stretched back too far and one has to work within living memory. These problems are outlined by one of the great practitioner of history from below, Ranjit Guha,the founder of the subaltern studies . Above all “history from below” has to face problem of the ultimate relative failure of mass initiative in colonial India,

     Most talk about elitist origins of the evidences which the historians use for understanding the mentalities behind the peasant rebellions. This has come down to us in the form of official records of one kind or another –police reports, army dispatches, administrative accounts, minutes and resolutions of governmental departments, and so on. Non-official sources of our information on the subject, such as newspapers or the private correspondence between persons of authority, too speak in the same elitist voice, even if it is that of the indigenous elite or of non-Indians outside officialdom.

    History from the below,  As the perspective of the common people in the process of history- writing. It is in against that concept of historiography, which believes I Disraeli’s dictum that history is the biography of great men. Instead the history from below endeavors to take into accounts the lives and activities of masses who are otherwise ignored by the conventional historians. Moreover it attempts to take their point of view into accounts as far possible. It is venture; the historians face a lot of problems because the sources are biased in favor of the rulers, administrators and the dominant classes in general.