Were we History illiterate !!!!!!!!!!!

In my last post,I discussed about social,financial and environmental relevance and benefits of Ramsetu.Few days ago Archaeological Survey of India said that Ram is a myth not a historical fact.So I want to search that whether a distinct line can be drawn in between myth and history in ancient Indian literature.

I would love to start this post with the quotation of renowned historian A L Basham that is “If you read the Ramayana and Mahabharat as history, you will find lots of mythology. If you read them as mythology, you will find lots of history”. I actually want to talk that is it truth that Indian writers lack sense of history and Indians has not been interested or aware with their history writing?? Is it truth that the ancient Indians, who made great inroads into different subject and aspect of life, never seriously took to documenting their history ???
There are three primary resources to gather the knowledge about Indian history - Literature, Archeology, and Foreigner's Accounts. Thousands of years old Rudiments of ancient Indian history have been scattered in different texts.Although they are written for very different purposes but you can squeeze out the information of historical value very easily. For example biographies like Harsha-Charita,Vikramankeva-Charita,Prithviraja-Charita, Kumarapala-Charita have glorifying language but you can easily extract the fact from myth. Panini's masterpiece Ashtadhyayi tells us how Sanskrit replace the Prakrit and Chanakya’s Arthashastra gives a detailed account of political system of administration during the Mauryan Empire.
But beside this it’s also a truth that to differentiate history from mythology and traditions from imaginations is very difficult task. Actually the obsession with historical accuracy is a Western, rather than an Indian construct. The whole construct is a British anthropological revenge on us. The British and their cohorts taught that all that was mythology, a myth, and only the Western Christian world's methods are 'scientific'. Hence we adopted their standards, their calendar, their ways to greet the guests, their worldview became ours. We had a different tradition of recording events and writing history. Historians have cited the traditional Indian habit of creating myths and fables rather than 'accurate' historical documents to lament that India has no sense of history. For instance, More than 50 kings from King Barhi to the Pandava King have been recorded in the Mahabharat, Additional information about the King, his wife, his scions; his relations, etc. have been accounted in great detail. I think a poetic fiction with such a comprehensive account of the events on the battle-field and lineages will only serve the purpose of boring the reader to death rather than entertain anyone! Usually, the story of any "Maha-Kaavya" dance around one or two main characters. Can you let me know that who would then be considered the "hero" of Mahabharata?
You can find so many other examples in this slide show who told the exact and unique way of history of ancient Indians.

.Therefore, rather than getting defensive about this 'criticism', we should be proud of our historical view of civilization. Because our forefathers intuitively knew that mythology provides a far more authentic understanding of a civilization than history does. Indeed, as Indians, we believe in creating myths, and obliterating history. History, after all, is often simply a victor's viewpoint of how things were, whereas mythology tells us how people truly longed for them to be.
So I think that these mixture of myth and truth have modulated and synthesized our life. These were practiced from the dome of civilizations in form of Songs, dramas,stories and festivals through generations after generations .Therefore undisputedly,These are history that contains not only dead facts but a sense of livingness also............... means these are living history.