Between facts and politics: The new NCERT history controversy

Rethinking history or reinventing it

Textbooks are more than just repositories of facts, they shape how generations view their country, their neighbours and themselves. The latest revision of NCERT’s Class VIII Social Science textbook has sparked widespread debate, with its new portrayal of the Mughal period drawing both praise and criticism.

The latest revision of NCERT’s Class VIII Social Science textbook has ignited intense debate across academic and political circles. Released in 2025 under the framework of the New Education Policy (NEP) and the National Curriculum Framework for School Education (NCF-SE), the new edition takes a decidedly more critical stance on the Mughal period.

It has brought forward depictions of violence, conquests and religious intolerance, particularly in the narratives surrounding rulers such as Babur, Akbar and Aurangzeb. While some applaud the textbook for what they view as a more honest retelling of history, others see the changes as a thinly veiled attempt at religious politicisation.

A shift in narrative

One of the most noticeable aspects of the new textbook is the tone. Babur, traditionally introduced as the founder of the Mughal Empire, is described in the current edition as a brutal invader who decimated cities, enslaved civilians and built towers of skulls to instill fear.

Akbar, long celebrated for his syncretic policies and attempts at religious unity, is presented in a more complicated light. While the book acknowledges some of his efforts at inclusion, it also highlights violent campaigns like the siege of Chittorgarh, where, according to the textbook, approximately 30,000 non-combatants were massacred. Aurangzeb is depicted as a ruler driven by religious orthodoxy, responsible for temple demolitions, the reimposition of the jizya tax on non-Muslims, and the persecution of Sikhs and Jains.

These representations are a sharp contrast to earlier NCERT textbooks, which focussed more on the administrative, architectural and cultural achievements of the Mughals, often softening or glossing over episodes of violence and conflict.

“The revised portrayal of the Mughals seems biased presentation. It overlooks their contributions to art, architecture and administration. It is focussing mostly on conflicts. History should present a balanced narrative that includes both positive and negative aspects to help develop understanding and critical thinking among students,” Depali Sharma, a social science teacher based in Delhi, tells Media India Group.

Another significant shift in the revised syllabus is the emphasis on resistance to Mughal rule. Figures such as Rani Durgavati, Ahilyabai Holkar, Maharana Pratap, Shivaji and various tribal leaders are given new prominence. The book positions them not merely as regional actors but as central figures in the broader story of Indian resilience against imperial domination. This realignment brings a more decentralised view of Indian history, moving away from the traditional Mughal-centric lens.

According to reports, by highlighting the stories of these lesser-known leaders and communities, the curriculum attempts to broaden historical understanding. However, it still raises questions about whether these inclusions are motivated by scholarly rigor or political agendas.

Controversial footnotes

Perhaps in an effort to mitigate potential backlash, the textbook includes a footnote titled A Note on Some Darker Periods in History. This section emphasises that the past must be understood in its own context and cautions students against holding present-day communities responsible for historical actions.

While well-intentioned, critics argue that this disclaimer does little to counteract the negative portrayal of Muslim rulers in the main text.

“History education should focus more on facts, evidence and critical analysis. While shaping national identity is important, it should emerge  in a way to promote understanding of diverse historical experiences. A fact-based approach helps students develop informed opinions, appreciate unity in diversity, and build a national identity rooted in truth,” says Sharma.

Historical accuracy or ideological bias?

The question of historical accuracy lies at the heart of the controversy. Supporters of the revision argue that earlier NCERT textbooks overly romanticised the Mughals and ignored documented atrocities. They point to primary sources like the Baburnama and Akbarnama, which they say, contain accounts of violent conquests, forced conversions and temple demolitions. For these voices, the updated syllabus is a long-overdue correction that presents a fuller, more honest picture of medieval India.

However, historians critical of the changes argue that the portrayal is lopsided. They note that violence, conquest and religious intolerance were not unique to the Mughal era. Ancient and medieval India saw temple destruction, iconoclasm and warfare committed by rulers of all backgrounds.

“These changes hinder students’ understanding by promoting a narrow, one-sided view of history. Omitting key contexts and contributions limits their ability to grasp India’s rich and diverse past. A balanced historical account helps students appreciate cultural synthesis and encourages analytical skills. This can help to develop open minded opinion,” adds Sharma.

By singling out Muslim rulers for criticism without offering similar scrutiny of other dynasties, the syllabus risks distorting history rather than clarifying it. Moreover, factual discrepancies have been pointed out, such as the misdating of Akbar’s policies or oversimplification of complex political motivations, raising concerns about academic integrity.

While NCERT maintains that the revised syllabus encourages critical thinking and a more nuanced understanding of India’s past, the overall framing has led many to question whether the line between forcing certain beliefs, and helping students think for themselves is being blurred. The timing of these changes, set against a broader political climate of rising religious nationalism is also of concern.