Abstract
The debate on critical history has taken on a new dimension in recent years, challenging the very status of history’ as a privileged, objective discourse. Historians, and practitioners of other disciplines, have used the ‘voice from the edge’, and the ‘fragmentary statement’ to disturb the totalizing and normalizing character of historical writing. Other historians have condemned this disturbing of the ‘centre’, of the inherited form of historical narrative and of well‐established objects of investigation, for its nihilism and its ‘absolute’ relativism. The following article returns to this debate with some reflections based on materials drawn mainly from India.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
