Romila Thapar Slams Textbook Rewrite: ‘Removing Mughals Is Nonsense’
Nidhi | Feb 13, 2026, 15:42 IST
NCERT map shows parts of Rajasthan under Maratha rule, former royal families and BJP leaders protest historical distortion
Image credit : IANS
Eminent historian Romila Thapar has criticized NCERT’s decision to remove Mughal chapters from school textbooks, calling the move “nonsense.” Here’s why the syllabus revision has sparked a national debate on history, education, and ideology in India.
The debate over India’s school history curriculum has intensified after eminent historian Romila Thapar sharply criticized the removal of the Mughal era and the Delhi Sultanate from sections of the school syllabus, calling the move “nonsense.” Her remarks, delivered at the Kerala Literature Festival 2026, have reignited nationwide discussions on how history should be taught and what such revisions mean for students’ understanding of India’s past.
The National Council of Educational Research and Training revised the Class 7 Social Science syllabus for the 2025–26 academic year. Chapters dealing with the Delhi Sultanate and the Mughal Empire were removed from certain textbooks. The revised syllabus places greater emphasis on ancient Indian dynasties, cultural traditions, and sacred geography, while reducing coverage of the medieval period.
Supporters of the change argue that curricula evolve and that space constraints require selective focus. Critics, however, contend that eliminating entire historical periods risks presenting students with an incomplete and potentially skewed narrative of India’s development.
Speaking at a session titled “Women Writing History: Three Generations,” Thapar emphasized that history is not a set of isolated compartments but a continuous process shaped by political, social, economic, and cultural transformations. According to her, removing an entire era disrupts this continuity and prevents students from understanding how different periods connect and influence each other.
Her central argument is not about glorifying any dynasty, but about preserving historical method and coherence. If one segment is cut out, the chain of cause and effect weakens. Administrative systems, revenue structures, art forms, architectural styles, language development, and social hierarchies all evolved across centuries. Without studying medieval India, students may struggle to understand how later institutions and cultural patterns emerged.
Historiography, the academic study of how history is written, stresses context. The Delhi Sultanate and the Mughal Empire played significant roles in shaping governance, land revenue systems, military organization, and urban growth. They also contributed to architectural landmarks, literary traditions, and cultural exchanges that influenced subsequent generations.
For example, revenue reforms introduced during the Mughal period influenced agrarian structures for centuries. Persian language traditions affected court culture and administrative documentation. Architectural forms blended Persian, Central Asian, and indigenous styles, shaping monuments that remain integral to India’s built heritage.
Removing these topics from early school exposure does not erase them from history, but it alters how students first encounter the story of India.
Thapar has long cautioned against what she calls “popular history” replacing research-based scholarship. In recent years, history debates in India have increasingly intersected with politics. Textbook revisions are often framed by supporters as corrections of earlier biases, while opponents see them as ideological restructuring.
The historian’s intervention highlights a broader concern: education should be rooted in evidence, multiple sources, and scholarly debate. When curriculum changes appear selective, critics worry that students may receive a narrative shaped more by present-day priorities than by historical inquiry.
Romila Thapar is one of India’s most respected historians, known for her extensive scholarship on ancient and early medieval India. Over decades, she has authored influential works and contributed to academic and public discourse on historiography. Her textbooks have been widely used in Indian schools and universities.
Her criticism of curriculum revisions stems from a long-standing commitment to academic rigor and methodological integrity rather than from partisan engagement. That background lends weight to her warning.
History education shapes how young citizens understand identity, diversity, and nationhood. A continuous narrative helps students grasp how cultures interacted, how institutions evolved, and how conflicts and cooperation shaped the subcontinent.
When historical coverage becomes fragmented, learners may lose perspective on long-term developments. They may struggle to connect early medieval transitions to later colonial structures or modern governance systems. Historical literacy depends not just on facts but on understanding processes.
The question is not whether one dynasty deserves celebration. It is whether removing major chapters compromises students’ ability to see the past as an interconnected flow rather than isolated episodes.
What Changed in the Curriculum?
Supporters of the change argue that curricula evolve and that space constraints require selective focus. Critics, however, contend that eliminating entire historical periods risks presenting students with an incomplete and potentially skewed narrative of India’s development.
Why Romila Thapar Called It “Nonsense”
Her central argument is not about glorifying any dynasty, but about preserving historical method and coherence. If one segment is cut out, the chain of cause and effect weakens. Administrative systems, revenue structures, art forms, architectural styles, language development, and social hierarchies all evolved across centuries. Without studying medieval India, students may struggle to understand how later institutions and cultural patterns emerged.
The Question of Continuity in History
For example, revenue reforms introduced during the Mughal period influenced agrarian structures for centuries. Persian language traditions affected court culture and administrative documentation. Architectural forms blended Persian, Central Asian, and indigenous styles, shaping monuments that remain integral to India’s built heritage.
Removing these topics from early school exposure does not erase them from history, but it alters how students first encounter the story of India.
Ideology Versus Academic Inquiry
The historian’s intervention highlights a broader concern: education should be rooted in evidence, multiple sources, and scholarly debate. When curriculum changes appear selective, critics worry that students may receive a narrative shaped more by present-day priorities than by historical inquiry.
Who Is Romila Thapar?
Her criticism of curriculum revisions stems from a long-standing commitment to academic rigor and methodological integrity rather than from partisan engagement. That background lends weight to her warning.
Why This Debate Matters for Students
When historical coverage becomes fragmented, learners may lose perspective on long-term developments. They may struggle to connect early medieval transitions to later colonial structures or modern governance systems. Historical literacy depends not just on facts but on understanding processes.
The question is not whether one dynasty deserves celebration. It is whether removing major chapters compromises students’ ability to see the past as an interconnected flow rather than isolated episodes.