Yes, that is the right name. I was literally appalled after checking out the syllabus. I thought that well, we've studied the crappy history throughout school and college but this is CSS and at least here I would find real history. I was happy that I would study more about the ancient and glorious Indus Valley Civilization, achievements of the ancient Indian philosophers during the Vedic period and after that, the Muslim period.

But the moment I saw the syllabus, the name of Muhammad bin Qasim was glowing and history, as usual, began from 712 AD. Before that, Indian continent probably did not exist. And of course, that was more like a military history. It mainly dealt with Muslims conquerors and Kings, instead of focusing on the intellectual achievement of the medieval Indians, both Muslims and non-Muslims. You don't need anything new, just extent your 8th class Muasharti Aloom. To hell with history.

Apparently we are so insecure that we cannot allow history to extent beyond which there was no existence of our particular ideology. And we continue to do this is entire education curriculum, creating only prejudiced and paranoid individuals.

So pleased to hear a word of wisdom.I can't agree with you more.We Pakistanis despise and disown the achievements of our ancient forefathers and exalt and glorify our distant Turk and Arab neighbours only because we share the same religion.Our history is inextricably linked with Indus Valley Civilisation.Try as we might,we cannot sever this eternal bond.

Sad but true. Some of the most powerful empires the world has ever seen, The Mauryans, The Guptas, The Kushans; none is discussed in FPSC's syllabus. The Indus civilization, arrival of Aryans which altered the history of the region, The Vedic age, birth of world's 3rd largest religion, none finds a place in our version of the history.

__________________
"And how can man die better than facing fearful odds, for the ashes of his fathers, and the temples of his Gods?"

Thank you for agreeing. I deliberately did not go into the details of the glorious Vedic period; I was not sure how it would be taken here.

So my question is, if there are any members who have already attempted the CSS or have any experience of it, can someone write objective history in CSS? I mean what if a person chooses to write the actual history instead of what we are hammered into our heads during our formal education? Is it taken on its merit, or is the official version inevitably supported?

Agreed! but I believe we can't call it Muslim History either. For a simple fact, I being a pathan have different idols/role models than the ones shared by the Punjabis for instance. For example: Khushal Khan Khattak is revered in the Pashtun folklore because he fought the Mughals (and all) but I have to write glorious things about Aurangzeb when it comes to questions asked in the Exams

__________________
Umar Abbas Babar
I Know I am Bad But When Bad is the Best, Bad is the Only Choice

Notwithstanding the obscurantism of narrow syllabus, it must be said that the objective treatment of history increasingly finds greater appreciation in CSS. Hence, you don't have to invent any ideological bases and religious motives behind the many Muslim conquests of India. In fact, a holistic, and almost a sociological, understanding of historical events is prerequisite to fetch good marks, a paradigm shift from the old simplistic generalizations and binary reductions.

__________________
Why not !?

Thanks for clarification Out of Place. I did hear there is much scope for independent thinking and critical analysis in CSS and that certainly is a breath of fresh air.

@umarabbas: I do agree with you. Reducing the various cultures and traditions of sub-continent into a single ideology and discouraging any kind of multi-culturalism is what our state authorities have been doing since its inception, and which accelerated during the horrible dictatorship of Zia, the fruits of which we are reaping today. Let's hope the evolution of democracy would relieve us of this nightmare, or at least our future generations.

@gypsified: well I would not blame the state either. Take religion out of the picture, and the country will collapse like a house of cards (at least it won't have any ideological basis to remain in tact).

In my opinion religion can never act as a gluing/cementing agent!

__________________
Umar Abbas Babar
I Know I am Bad But When Bad is the Best, Bad is the Only Choice

Very well elaborated by Umar Abbass.I am convinced that a broadminded Dara Shikoh was more needed by India than the puritan Aurangzeb.Khushal Khan Khattak is a beacon of light for all freedom loving people.There is no mention of Dulla Bhatti,Rani of Jhansi,Bhagat Singh in our history.It has never been told to us that Hindus and Muslims,notwithstanding cultural differences and caste barriers,lived in harmony and peace.Neither does this history mention that Ranjeet Singh was a secular minded person who treated muslims fairly and appointed them to a elevated posts and that British were the culprits who fanned the flames of communal hatred.And worst of all,we never know that Jinnah did his utmost to keep India united yet contemptuous treatment of Cabinet Mission Plan by Nehru and Patel lead to partition.
So many things are shrouded in mystery and we are so ignorant of these bitter but true facts.

@Umar Abbas: That's quite right, but as they say, "cuius regio enis religio" (whoever runs the country decides which church you go to). So the people who actually run the country (we know politicians have a little say in this matter and the actual reins of power have remained elsewhere) have interests deeply rooted in religious bigotry, and thus a totalitarian society.

I, however, do believe that even if we keep religion out of the equation, to some extent at least, we can still live together in harmony. There are a lot of examples of secular states that bind people together with different ethnic identities and religious backgrounds, even races. Problem is, this can be done if we actually have a sense of common history and culture that goes way beyond the Arab invaders, all the way to Indus Valley Civilization that stretched from Northern areas of Pakistan all the way to ancient Sindh - something that is not taught in any public or even private schools and higher educational institutes.

Even if contemporary regional cultures are different, that is something to be cherished and can exist in perfect harmony. But for that, people who run the state should be willing, which they aren't. Alternatively, the civil society (which is next to non-existent in Pakistan) has to play its role in a democracy. For that, however, democracy needs to flourish and we haven't seen that yet in Pakistan, unfortunately. What a complicated situation! (and there are people who have a simple solution: just impose "shariah" and everything would be hunky-dory).

It's a delight to have an intelligent conversation. Thanks a lot, mechrose37 and Umar Abbas.