Revised NCERT book says Babur was ‘Ruthless,’ Aurangzeb a ‘temple-destroyer’; Shivaji is described as a ‘master strategist and a true visionary’ who respected other religions and rebuilt temples
NEW DELHI – The revised National Council of Educational Research and Training (NCERT) history textbook’s portrayal of Mughal emperors — describing Babur as “ruthless” and Aurangzeb as a “temple-destroyer” — raises serious concerns about academic objectivity, historical nuance, and the growing politicisation of education.
First and foremost, history is not a tool for vilification or glorification; it demands context, complexity, and critical engagement. Labelling Babur simply as “ruthless” strips away the multidimensionality of his rule, which included significant contributions to art, architecture, and administration. Similarly, calling Aurangzeb a “temple-destroyer” without equal emphasis on his policies of temple patronage and the broader political-religious dynamics of his era reflects a selective and reductionist approach.
The NCERT’s revised Class 8 Social Science textbook portrays Mughal rulers in a negative light. It has sparked controversy over the Narendra Modi government’s strategy to shape historical narratives.
The textbook, Exploring Society: India and Beyond (Part 1), describes Babur as a “brutal and ruthless conqueror” who “slaughtered entire populations” and “erected towers of skulls”. Akbar’s rule is characterised as a “blend of brutality and tolerance,” referencing the massacre of civilians in Chittorgarh.
The often reviled ruler Aurangzeb is depicted as a temple destroyer who ordered the demolition of schools and temples, including those at Banaras, Mathura, and Somnath. The book also makes a passing reference to his political motives and some temple grants.
Since the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) started ruling the country in 2014, Aurangzeb has been a target of Hindutva groups for his alleged suppression of Hindu society during his rule.
The new textbook focuses more on religious violence and destruction, differing from earlier Class 7 textbooks that emphasised administration, expansion, and culture.
A special section in the book, Note on Some Darker Periods in History, explains the reasoning behind these depictions. It emphasises that no one should be blamed today for the actions of individuals in the past.
“Understanding the historical origin of cruel violence, abusive misrule, or misplaced ambitions of power is the best way to heal the past and build a future where, hopefully, they will have no place,” the note says.
In contrast, Shivaji is described as a “master strategist and a true visionary” who respected other religions and rebuilt temples.
NCERT officials argue that the historical account is “balanced and entirely evidence-based”.
The revised textbook is part of the National Education Policy (NEP) 2020 and National Curriculum Framework for School Education 2023, with new books introduced for Classes 1 to 4, 6, 7, and 8.
Critics argue that the portrayal of Mughal emperors deepens communal divisions and distorts young minds, fuelling religious prejudice.
This revision appears to align more with ideological narratives than with rigorous historiography. Historians across the spectrum have long warned against reading medieval actions through modern moral or communal lenses. Emperors of all backgrounds — Hindu, Muslim, or otherwise — used religion as a political tool, and acts of destruction or patronage often had strategic motives rather than religious hatred at their core.
Moreover, the timing and tone of these changes suggest a worrying trend of rewriting history to serve present-day majoritarian politics. It risks deepening communal divides, especially among young students, by embedding prejudice into pedagogy rather than fostering critical thinking or mutual understanding.
Petitions have been circulated demanding a review of NCERT’s historical content for objectivity and academic integrity. NCERT officials, however, maintain that the textbook provides a nuanced view of history, highlighting both the achievements and limitations of historical figures.
