ABSTRACT
Set against the dominant western canon, Indians artists, as much as non-western artists around the globe, are labeled as derivative and suffering from a time lag. In response, Indian modernist and contemporary artists repudiate history and the prevailing chronology. In questioning this pessimism, this chapter traces the roots of the problem in the historical imagination of colonial India, which is riddled with incommensurate temporalities, the contradictions between a dominant chronology imposed by the British and the plethora of competing regional temporalities. The discipline of art history in India was created by colonial scholars, especially archaeologists, who adapted European notions of history, linear time and periodization, creating the tripartite system of Buddhist/Hindu (ancient), Islamic (medieval) and colonial (modern) periods. Interestingly, the colonial historical framework was utilized by the British rulers and the nationalists alike. The East India Company introduced a uniform chronology, consisting of the Gregorian calendar and the Christian era that replaced a plethora of regional reckonings, with a view to rationalizing the timeframe. The colonial calendar was introduced into all public activities, while regional calendars continued to flourish for seasonal festivals and social activities, this creating a schizophrenic national culture. Colonial historiography came under attack following sea changes in post-war historical thinking. A wide range of post-colonial Indian historians challenged the reliability of colonial historical thinking based on the notion of Indian backwardness and the absence of history in India, which has led the way for revising Indian history.
