To control the past is to master the present, to legitimize dominion and justify legal claims. It is the dominant powers-states, churches, political parties, private interests- which own or finance the media or means of production, whether it be school books or strip cartoon, films, or television programmes. (1)

In the past history was used by rulers and aristocrats to glorify their achievements and project them as saviours and benefactors. In the modern period it is used by the new political leadership to assert their authority and domination and legitimize their status as rulers; especially after the emergence of newly independent countries, history is reconstructed to adjust their claims in the changing political situation. During the colonial period, the claim and right to rule over the peoples by old and traditional rulers were wiped out and they were either disappeared in the mist of history or relegated to unknown position. After, decolonosation.new generation of political leadership, which struggled for freedom and hence assumed status of freedom fighters, claimed to rule the newly independent countries. As rulers they were in need to legitimize their claim. That is why the concept of 'freedom struggle' and 'war of liberation' emerged with great luster and romance. Sacrifices of these leaders became dominant themes in recent history writings. In case of India and Pakistan, the role of these freedom fighters is highly eulogized in order to give them right to lead and rule the new nations. Interestingly, the British historians call this process as 'transfer of power'. It means to deny or ignore the struggle that was waged against their rule. 'Transfer of power' according to their point of view was a change that has taken place peacefully and not as a result of struggle. These two interpretations reflect two antithetical approaches to history. The British refused that they left India under any pressure; it was voluntary surrender of power. On the other hand, the Indians and Pakistanis claim that they achieved their independence as a result of struggle and resistance against the British rule and not as a gift from their colonial masters.

Like most of the newly independent countries, Pakistan also had a problem as to how to reconstruct its history in order to legitimize its creation. In case of Pakistan, there were two problems: how to treat the colonial period, and how to justify the partition? On the question of colonial period, most of the colonised countries are very sensitive to deal with it because it was the period of their humiliation, surrender, and defeat. To be ruled by foreigners wounded their pride. Therefore, to deal with the period means to accept national and societal weaknesses and to recognize the humiliation rendered by colonial powers. Pakistan found an easy solution, the whole period of colonisation is treated as the Indian past as there was no Pakistan at that time and left it to the Indian historians to deal with it. However, Pakistani historians faced a number of complicated and complex issues and themes that were handled by them keeping the interest of the ruling classes in the background of the partition

Historiography in Pakistan has developed under the framework of the 'Pakistan ideology' which is based on the separation of Muslim nationhood. It justified the partition of India. The Pakistani historians are asked from the very beginning to construct the history within this framework. It is well understood that whenever history is written under the influence of an ideology, it sacrifices its objectivity. Facts are manipulated in order to justify political acts of leadership. In the words of Eric Hobsbawm, "nationalist historians have- often been-to be servants of ideologists". (2)
He also observed that "History as inspiration and ideology has a built-in tendency to become self-justifying myth. Nothing is more dangerous blindfold than this, as the history of modern nations and nationalism demonstrates." (3)
In power politics, ideologically based historiography not only provided legitimacy to political leadership but also evolved special type of arguments. Michael. W.Apple poses a question that: "What ideology does for the people who have it"? Answering this question he writes that it "distorts one's picture of social reality and serves the interest of the dominant classes in the society". (4)

In writing history, the Pakistani historians face a problem of how to deal with the ancient past. Islam came to the Indian subcontinent in the 8th century, therefore, on the basis of two-nation theory and on the concept of separation, the ancient Indian past does not belong to the new country. That is why one of the members of Jamat-I- Islami, Asadullah Bhutto, a teacher by profession, once gave a press statement that Moenjo Daro and such other archaeological remains should be bulldozed as they do not belong to Islam. By rejecting it, they turned their attention to the early Islamic past. The Islamic link is connected with the Arab conquest of Sindh which is known in history textbooks as "the door of Islam" (bab al-Islam). Its conquest made the Indian Muslim a part of the Arab Empire. Therefore, the glories of Damascus, Baghdad, Cairo, and Cordoba enchanted them more than the Indian counter parts of Delhi, Agra or Fathpursikri. Besides this, the Central Asian links are also traced and a reputed Pakistani archaeologist and historian A.H.Dani says that Pakistan has close and strong cultural links with Central Asia rather than India.

How to treat the medieval Indian History is also a problem. During this period, the Muslim dynasties ruled over India. But the centre of power was situated in India and not in the area which constitutes the new country of Pakistan. Though the period is reconstructed under the title of History of Pak-Hind, there are some fundamentalists who totally reject the whole rule Muslim dynasties as un-Islamic on the ground that the Muslim rulers instead of establishing an Islamic state, preferred to rule on the basis of secualrism. They inducted the Hindu in their administration that greatly weakened the Islamic character of the state. They also strongly condemn all attempts, which developed a composite culture.I.H. Qureshi, a leading historian of Pakistan criticised the policy of cooperation with the Hindus which was enunciated by the Mughal rulers, especially Akbar who included the Hindus as a partner and treated them on basis of equality. He argues:
"And in the final analysis, if the Muslims were to forget their uniqueness and come to absorb as Akbar did, contradictory tendencies and beliefs from other religions, could the Muslim nation continue to exist as a separate nation? Akbar's policies created danger not only for the Muslim Empire but also for the continued existence of the Muslim nation in sub-continent." (5)
Akbar is much maligned in the Pakistani historiography. Regarding him a threat to the ideology, he is completely omitted from school textbooks. (7)
Recently a Jamat-Islami' s intellectual wrote an article" At last the Fall became our destiny". It shows how the fundamentalists, under the Pakistani ideology, constructing the medieval period. He writes:
After Muhammad b.Qasim, all conquerors invaded India for plunder and not for propagation of Islam. They had no desire and passion for holy war. Some of them conquered territories after shedding the Muslim blood and assumed the royalty that was similar to the Romans and the Persian rulers.. (7)
He condemns them by emulating the practices of the non-Muslim kings:
They built palaces and castles for their luxurious living and personal protection, kept slave girls for their sexual satisfaction, and recruited eunuchs to watch the conduct of their women. Following the traditions of the Pharaohs, they even built tombs for their queens. (8)
He argues that the reason for the downfall of the Muslim rule in India was the attempt to create a composite culture. When Akbar and the other Mughal rulers adopted the policy of marrying the Hindu women, the process of polluting the Muslim culture began which ultimately disintegrated the Mughal Empire. He writes: "When the Mughal rulers married the Hindu women and allowed them to keep their religion and worship according to their religion; it was disaster. As a result of these marriages the Mughal rulers were born by the Hindu mothers."(9) The medieval Indian history is not regarded a part of the Pakistani historiography because it was shared by the Hindus and the Muslim both. Therefore, the culture that was produced by both is denial of the Muslim Separateness.

Dealing with the recent history of freedom struggle, the emphasis is shifted from freedom struggle to the 'struggle for Pakistan'. In this case the Congress, dominated by the majority of the Hindus appears to be main adversary and opponent not recognising the separateness of the Muslim community and opposing the partition. This approach makes the Hindus more hostile than the British. Therefore, the creation of Pakistan is regarded as victory against the Hindus and not against the British.

Reconstruction of the regional histories poses another problem. How to adjust them in the framework of the ideology. In case of the Punjab, its Sikh's period is rejected and downgraded as the 'Sikha Shahi' synonymous to anarchy and disorder. The wars of the Sikhs, which they fought against the British, are not the matter of pride and have no place in history textbooks. On the other hand, the British conquest is hailed as blessing for the people of the Punjab because it delivered them from the Sikh rule. In case of Sindh, the Talpur Mirs, the rulers of Sindh, were ignominiously defeated by the British in 1943.To lessen the humiliation of the defeat, attempt is made to glorify some of the individuals who fought bravely against the British. Further, the province is given credit that it was the first among other provinces which voted in its legislative assembly for Pakistan.North West Frontier province is remembered by its resistance to the colonial rule, but during the freedom of struggle, allegiance of its political leadership to the Congress is condemned. Political leadership and not people are blamed for it. In case of Baluchistan, the resistance of the Kalat State not to accede Pakistan is not mentioned in the schoolbooks.
The main concern of the Pakistani historiography is to homogenize culture, traditions, social and religious life of the people Homogenization suits the centralization, therefore, any attempt to assert the historical identity of region is discouraged and condemned. This process also affected the non-Muslim religious minorities who are also excluded from the main stream of historical process. It is argued that as these religious minorities did not contribute to the creation of Pakistan, therefore, they do not have any justification to demand equal rights.

In the recent history Pakistan passed through a number of political crises. It experienced military dictatorship, corruption of feudal democracy, separation of East Pakistan, rise of fundamentalism, and ups and downs in relations with India. As a result of change of political situation, history textbooks suffered a lot. As history as a subject discontinued in 1961,textbooks of social science contain the portion of history. Textbook writers are allowed to select only those portions of history, which suit the ruling party in power. Michael W. Apple rightly observes that:
Selectivity is the point; the way in which from a whole possible area of past and present, certain meanings and practices are chosen for emphasis, certain other meanings and practices are neglected and excluded. Even more crucially, some of these meanings are reinterpreted, diluted, or put into forms which support or at least do not contradict other elements within the effective dominant culture. (10)

In the textbooks, the version of history changes with the change of government. When there is democracy, the army rule is blamed for all existing problems. When army rule comes, it accuses politicians and democracy for creation disorder and corruption. Even in case of democratic change, the past government is condemned for political and economic crises. What George Orwell writes correctly applies to Pakistan: "All history is a palimpsest scraped clean and reinscribed, exactly as often as is necessary. The past is written in the light of the present requirements of the authoritarian government." (11) The disjointed and selected version of history fails to create any historical consciousness among students as well as in general public. When full facts of historical process are not recorded; it reduces the power of analysis and the society is condemned to repeat its history again and again. ****

References

1.Ferro,Marc: the use and Abuse of History, Routledge & Kegan Pul, London, 1984,p.vii
2. Hobsbawm, Eric: On History Abacus, London 1999,p.35.
3. Ibid., p. 47.
4.Apple, Michael, W.: Ideology and Curriculum, Rutledge & Kegan Paul, London. 1980, pp. 20,21. 5.Qureshi, I.H.: The Muslim Community of the Indian sub-continent. Hague 1962,p.167.
6.Ali, Mubarak: History on Trial. Lahore 1999, pp.76-82.
7.Wasti, Zahid Ali: And the Fall became a Destiny( Urdu article). In: Awaz,No. 9, October-December 1999, pp.247, 248.
8. Ibid., p.248.
9.Ibid., p.250-257.
10. Apple, p. 6.
11.Orwell, George: Selected Writings, Heinmann Educational Books, London 1976, p.165.