Introductory - Global Sikh Studies

282
Appendix B
Sikh Tradition as a Source
of Historical Testimony
1. Paucity of Evidence
Some historians are disinclined to give much credit to tradition
as a source of historical testimony. In a country, where the recording
of history, according to its present-day discipline, was practically
unknown, where there was no sense of proportion in computing periods
of time which were counted in Yugas, where a great deal of research
is required to distinguish one Vikramajit King from the other of his
namesake, to reject outright evidence which can be extracted from
tradition virtually amounts to writing off a substantial part of its history.
Max Weber has expressed the view that ‘It is no accident that India
has produced no historiography to speak of. The interest in
historically unique forms of political and social relations was far
too weak for a man contemplating life and its passage. 1 Whatever
be the reason, the fact is that, leaving out the accounts provided
by the foreign Chinese, Greek and Muslim travellers and historians,
Indian history upto the medieval period, left entirely to its
indigenous sources of information, would have been reduced a
negligible part. If this is the position with regard to important
political dynasties and events, the paucity of information regarding
movements, which were not in harmony wit the orthodox ideology
and system, can be easily understood. A cursory reading of the
Bhakatmal, the one original account covering the medieval Bhakti
movements, shows that there is very little of authentic historical
significance that one can derive from it. Even the parentage of