New Delhi: After finding its way to parliament, the sengol, with its contested history, now features in the newly released NCERT Class 9 social science textbook. The sceptre, which dates back to the Chola Dynasty, is referred to as a “a cultural marker of rulership and good governance” in the textbook.With even the NCERT showcasing it now, the idea of the sengol achieves some sort of permanence. But are the textbook’s references to the sceptre a reflection of reality or part of a manufactured history? This question assumes significance as the NCERT has already removed the Mughals and the Delhi Sultanate from class 7 textbooks, claiming to focus on the “Indian ethos and its civilisational accomplishments”.Such revisions have led to questions over whether the NCERT is misleading the crores of students who rely on its textbooks and feeding them a version of history that has been built by politics – something its sengol addition is also liable to do.When it comes to the sengol, the textbook notes that it was placed inside the then-newly inaugurated parliament building by Prime Minister Narendra Modi in 2023. It says that in 1947, at the dawn of independence, adheenam saints handed Jawaharlal Nehru a sengol as mark of independence.“To mark the occasion of India’s Independence, at the stroke of midnight on 15 August 1947, the first Prime Minister, Jawaharlal Nehru, received the Sengol from the Adheenam Saints (an old Shaivite tradition) of Tamil Nadu,” it reads according to media reports.Since the sengol debate was resurrected in 2023, when it was announced that one would be placed in parliament, historians have been sceptical of its relevance – particularly because it is, historically, a symbol of a dynasty and religion and not democracy.Moreover, it appears that the sengol was a gift, and not this exalted symbol of change. At the time, a carefully constructed narrative was being distributed as gospel truth, which flattened the complex legacy and the politics behind the handing of the sceptre. Instead, it was turned into a mere tokenistic symbol, devoid of deeper meaning.The Modi government’s narrative – which has not gone unchallenged (see below) – involves Lord Mountbatten and C. Rajagopalachari, and presents the sengol as the ultimate symbol of power. Home minister Amit Shah told a press conference the following while announcing the government’s plan to place the sceptre inside parliament:“When the time for transfer of power came, Lord Mountbatten – who was the Viceroy – asked former PM Nehru about what should be the symbol of transfer of power to the country as per the Indian traditions. Nehru discussed the issue with freedom fighter and avid historic scholar C. Rajagopalachari. After doing an intensive historic research, Rajagopalachari said that as per the Indian traditions ‘Sengol’ has been marked as the symbol of historic transfer.”A website to explain the history and cultural relevance of the sengol was created by the Indira Gandhi National Centre for the Arts, but appears to no longer be operational.At that time, a number of documents were also shared with journalists in an attempt to clarify why the sengol was being placed in parliament. Among them was a blog-post – “Whatsapp history” – by Tamil writer Jeyamohan, which said that the sengol was one of many gifts given to Nehru.Was it appropriate to hand over a religious symbol on a secular occasion? Question was raised in 1947 itselfMuch has been written about the sengol and what it says about power. One important addition is a 1947 essay by C.N. Annadurai, a former chief minister of Tamil Nadu.“Annadurai talks about how a potent symbol of religious authority was given to a secular prime minister, and elaborates on how he reads the sengol. He talks about what importance a religious authority has in a constitutional context, in his own characteristic critical way,” said Indian feminist activist and researcher V. Geetha, the translator of the essay. The essay complicates the issue of the sengol, providing an insight into how the ruling BJP has flattened the history and the context under which the sceptre came into being.“This is not a sceptre brought forth by the devotee seeking God’s grace by his ardent singing … no, the Aadheenam’s gift has been wrought by people’s labour. The gold that has gone into its making is paid for by those who do not care for the poor who go hungry day and night,” wrote a scathing Annadurai, highlighting the inequality built into the sengol.He seemed to interpret the sengol as an assertion of power, a bid to hold on to wealth.“This sengol sent to Pandit Nehru is no gift offering. Or a symbol of love. Or for that matter, an expression of patriotism. It is a request to the future rulers of India that they spare the Aadheenams and not take away their wealth and glory … by offering this to our rulers, the Aadheenam is seeking their friendship … so that their fame and domination do not wither away,” wrote Annadurai, who went on to become the founder of the Dravida Munnetra Kazagham.‘Sengol’s resurgence part of BJP’s attempts to make inroads in Tamil Nadu’Public historian Anirudh Kanisetti, author of Lords of Earth and Sea: A History of the Chola Empire, explained the resurgence of the sengol and its narrative relevance as part of a thinly veiled attempt by the BJP to enter the public and political imagination of Tamil Nadu.“One of the ways in which they tried to expand into Tamil Nadu, one of the ideas which they struck upon, was appropriating the Cholas into Hindutva,” he said. “There were a lot of Hindutva influencers. Amish Tripathi wrote a book about the Cholas doing a surgical strike in Ghazni. Essentially, the Cholas were being folded into this north Indian discourse of grievances and revenge – the underpinnings of Hindutva.”Another dimension of this outreach programme was powerful mutts, key to Tamil Nadu’s religious life, and the proprietors of powerful temples and large swathes of property. Mutts have historically held relationships with political figures, said Kanisetti.There is ample documentation that suggests that a sengol was handed to Nehru, which currently sits in a museum in Ahmedabad. It is important to note, however, that there is no evidence to substantiate the saga that involves Mountbatten and Rajagopalachari.“The seer of the Thiruvaduthurai mutt, Ambalavana Deshikar, gave a sengol with a Rishabha Vaghana – a symbol of Saivite culture – to his second-in-command seer, Kumaraswamy Thambiran, the mutt odhuvar (singer) Manickam and the Nadaswaram vidwan (scholar/expert) T.N. Rajarathinam Pillai to go to Delhi and hand over the ‘sengol’ to Nehru after reciting a hymn from Kolaru Padhigam – Thirumurai. Thus he displayed his patriotism,” wrote epigrapher S. Krishnaswamy in the Thiruvavaduthurai Aadheena Varalaaru (‘History of the Thiruvavaduthurai Aadheena), as also mentioned by the South First.The Hindu had also written in 2023 that while there is all this documentation of a sengol being presented to Nehru in 1947, there is little evidence that the leaders of that time treated this as symbolic of the transfer of power from the British Raj to an independent India.Kanisetti pointed out that since independence, India has had a “strangely romanticised relationship” with royal power. Nehru was no different; fascinated by Ashoka and “particular figures” who could be used as “unifiers”. Geetha also referred to the present government’s habit of picking up symbols to lure Tamil voters, though they are symbols that often find minimal resonance.“Hindutva is trying to appropriate regional hero-kings into this elevated discourse of ‘resistance’, which is very much the tone of the latest set of additions to the NCERT textbook. From that context, it’s possible to see the sengol symbolising the transfer of power as a logical, if absurd, conclusion of our strange democratic romanticising of royal autocracy,” Kanisetti said.Thus the NCERT’s mention of the sengol’s handover to Nehru in its new textbook, comes against the background of the Modi government deploying a contested narrative around its role during independence, of questions over the use of a regal and religious symbol in a secular context, and of the BJP’s attempts to make inroads in Tamil Nadu.