NCERT, the Mughals, and the Making of a New National Memory

The changes reveal a deliberate shift from historical inquiry to ideological storytelling.

The textbook’s portrayal of the Mughal period introduces distortions that oversimplify complex legacies and suggest ideological bias.

(Photo: The Quint)

The rewriting of history often begins subtly: whispers in the media, viral WhatsApp messages, and loaded questions in public discourse. These seeds of doubt then lead to vilification, with entire eras branded as “dark ages” and rulers demonised as invaders.

Next come omissions, followed by a sweeping substitution of historical fact with mithya—a crafted narrative serving ideological ends rather than public enlightenment.

This is actually reminiscent of the colonial period history writing, where a conscious effort was made to vilify the medieval eras in India and impose what the European history had witnessed: division of entire history into three ‘periods,’ ancient, medieval and modern, with ancient being glorious, medieval dark, and modern, being a progressive, scientific period.

History & Ideology: A Tale as Old as Time

This trajectory, evident in India’s education system since the National Education Policy (NEP) 2020 enabled large-scale curricular revisions, has reached a critical juncture with the NCERT Class VIII Social Science textbook, Exploring Society: India and Beyond (2025–26).

The textbook’s treatment of the Delhi Sultanate and Mughal periods (including 1526–1605) reveals a deliberate shift from historical inquiry to ideological storytelling, marked by selective additions, omissions, and distortions that undermine the study of India’s pluralistic past.

The revised textbook, especially its history section titled “Tapestry of the Past,” moves away from the multi-perspective approach present in earlier NCERT editions. It presents a civilisational narrative that categorises India’s past into native and foreign, dharma, and adharma, and identifies certain figures as heroes or villains.

This method reflects the bardic tradition, where storytellers highlighted their patrons and streamlined historical events to reflect prevailing power relationships. In contemporary times, similar approaches have appeared in state-approved textbooks, resulting in a version of history influenced by ideological perspectives rather than exclusively academic analysis.

What’s New About NCERT Now?

The textbook introduces updated content that emphasises the perceived brutality of the Delhi Sultanate and Mughal periods, shifting their coverage from Class VII to Class VIII. Key additions include:

• Highlighting Mughal “Brutality”: Mughal rulers are portrayed with a focus on violence and religious intolerance. Babur, the founder of the Mughal Empire (1526), is described as a “cruel conqueror” who built “towers of skulls” (India TV, July 16, 2025). Akbar is presented as a “mixture of tolerance and cruelty,” with the Chittorgarh massacre highlighted, while Aurangzeb is depicted as a temple-destroying zealot (Education21, July 18, 2025). These characterisations prioritise conflict over governance or cultural contributions.

• Disclaimer on Historical Accountability: A note stating, “No one should be blamed today for the actions of the past,” aims to prevent communal misuse of history (Jagran Josh, July 16, 2025). However, its placement after chapters emphasizing Mughal violence undermines its intent.

• Alignment with NEP 2020: The textbook integrates history, geography, civics, and economics into a single volume, reflecting NEP 2020’s holistic approach and the National Curriculum Framework for School Education (NCF-SE) 2023 (Jagran Josh, July 16, 2025).

These additions create a narrative that casts the Mughal period (1526–1605) as an era of destruction, overshadowing the empire’s contributions to governance, art, and cultural syncretism. The disclaimer, while well-intentioned, fails to counterbalance the textbook’s focus on conflict, potentially reinforcing communal biases for students studying this period.

Subtractions: Erasing Complexity and Diversity

Significant omissions in the textbook limit the understanding of the Mughal period, particularly for a course covering 1526–1605. Key subtractions include:

• Exclusion of Women Rulers: Figures like Raziyya Sultan (Delhi Sultanate) and Nur Jahan (Mughal Empire), previously covered in Class VII, are omitted, erasing the contributions of women to medieval Indian politics (Education21, July 18, 2025).

• Minimization of Mughal Contributions: The textbook reduces or removes content on Mughal administrative reforms (eg, Akbar’s mansabdari and dahsala systems), cultural syncretism (e.g., translation of Hindu texts, Indo-Islamic architecture like Fatehpur Sikri), and economic advancements (e.g., trade networks, coinage reforms). These were critical to the Mughal Empire’s legacy during 1526–1605 (Education21, July 18, 2025).

• Lack of Comparative Context: The textbook omits references to violent acts by pre-Islamic rulers, such as Harsha of Kashmir or Chola emperors, who also engaged in temple destruction or conquests, creating a skewed narrative that targets Islamic rulers (Education21, July 18, 2025).

These omissions hinder a comprehensive study of the Mughal period, particularly for understanding Babur’s establishment of the empire, Humayun’s challenges, and Akbar’s policies of sulh-i-kul (universal tolerance). The absence of women rulers and comparative historical context diminishes the representation of gender dynamics and cultural pluralism, critical themes for 1526–1605.

Distortions: Ideological Framing of History

The textbook’s portrayal of the Mughal period introduces distortions that oversimplify complex legacies and suggest ideological bias. Key distortions include:

• Selective Portrayal of Mughal Rulers: Babur is reduced to a “brutal warlord,” with his literary contributions (Baburnama) and role as empire founder sidelined. Akbar’s Chittorgarh massacre is emphasized over his abolition of jizya (1563–64) and religious dialogues, inaccurately framing the latter as a late reform. Aurangzeb is depicted solely as a temple destroyer, ignoring his patronage of scholars and administrative reforms (India TV, July 16, 2025; Education21, July 18, 2025).

• Misrepresentation of Jizya: The textbook describes jizya as a tool for “public humiliation” and conversion, contradicting historical records that define it as a protection tax for non-Muslims. Akbar’s early abolition is misrepresented, distorting his legacy of tolerance (Education21, July 18, 2025).

• Civilizational Binary: The textbook contrasts Muslim rulers, depicted as destructive invaders, with Hindu rulers like Krishnadeva Raya, whose conquests are framed as “expansion” rather than aggression. The destruction of Vijayanagara by Deccan Sultanates is narrated with emotive grief, while similar acts by Hindu rulers are omitted, reinforcing a Hindu-Muslim binary (Education21, July 18, 2025).

• Maratha Glorification: The chapter on the Marathas portrays Shivaji as a restorer of Hindu dignity, with their raids on Bengal described as “rare indiscipline,” while Mughal violence receives extensive condemnation, revealing a double standard (Education21, July 18, 2025).

An Empire Reduced to a Footnote

The updated textbook moves coverage of the Delhi Sultanate and Mughal periods from Class VII to Class VIII, emphasising violence and religious intolerance by Mughal rulers. Babur, Akbar, and Aurangzeb are depicted primarily through acts of brutality, with less focus on governance or cultural achievements.

While a disclaimer urges readers not to judge the present by the past, its impact is reduced by its context among descriptions of Mughal violence. The book aligns with NEP 2020 by integrating subjects, but its portrayal of the Mughal era centres on conflict rather than complexity.

Notable omissions include contributions of women rulers like Raziyya Sultan and Nur Jahan, details on Mughal administrative reforms, cultural syncretism, economic advancements, and comparative references to violence by pre-Islamic rulers. These gaps limit students’ understanding of the period’s diversity, gender dynamics, and broader historical context.

Additionally, selective emphasis distorts the narrative. Positive aspects of Babur and Akbar are largely excluded, and the jizya tax is misrepresented. Violence by Muslim rulers is highlighted, while similar actions by Hindu rulers are omitted, reinforcing a civilisational binary. Maratha leaders are portrayed favourably despite their own violent campaigns, indicating an ideological bias in the textbook’s framing.

Portraying the Mughal era (1526–1605) solely as a “dark age” of foreign rule distorts its administrative, cultural, and economic contributions. Historians like Romila Thapar and Irfan Habib, amongst others, argue this framing perpetuates colonial narratives and supports nationalist agendas.

An Empire Reduced to a Footnote

The changes in the Class VIII textbook have profound implications for studying the Mughal period and broader historical education. Firstly, the focus on Mughal “brutality” and omission of their contributions limit students’ ability to analyse primary sources like the Baburnama and Akbarnama, hindering critical engagement with the period 1526–1605.

The absence of women rulers and syncretic elements distorts the understanding of social and cultural dynamics. Further, the selective narrative risks fostering communal divisions by portraying Muslim rulers as inherently destructive, despite the disclaimer.

Critics, including opposition leaders, have labeled the revisions a “cheap BJP-RSS attempt to rewrite history,” while supporters like BJP leader RP Singh defend them as “de-greenwashing” (Education21, July 18, 2025).

Lastly, it erodes critical thinking on the part of students who depend on this textbook. By replacing historical inquiry with a civilizational allegory, the textbook discourages students from grappling with complexity, undermining NEP 2020’s goal of fostering critical thinking.

The NCERT Class VIII Social Science textbook for 2025–26 reflects a noticeable shift in its approach to historical content. The revised material places increased emphasis on the Mughal period’s conflicts while omitting references to women rulers and cultural achievements.

These changes may affect the representation of the Mughal Empire’s political, administrative, and cultural influence in India between 1526 and 1605. It is important that history education maintains balance, accurately presents diverse perspectives, and is grounded in evidence-based scholarship. Ensuring this will help uphold the integrity and academic quality of the curriculum.

It would not be wrong to say that the new textbooks, including the one just released, try to obliterate whatever was gained in the field of history in the last seven decades.

From late 1950’s the trend of undue emphasis on rulers and dates had been replaced by processes. Individuals had replaced class and attempts were on to understands the why’s and how’s in history. We are being taken back to square one, and one community is being pitted against another. We are being pushed into real ‘dark age’ of discriminations and privileges.

(The writer is a Professor of History at Aligarh Muslim University and an expert of Medieval Indian History. He is also the Secretary of the Indian History Congress. He has a number of publications to his credit. This is an opinion piece and the views expressed above are the author’s own. The Quint neither endorses nor is responsible for the same.)