Why I write Economic History
The editors of Himal have asked me to write a brief note on why I write economic history. Having engaged in research and writing on the economic history of Nepal for over one-third of a century now, I could not honestly say no. Besides, I felt that the exercise would provide a good opportunity to review the reasons I have given at different times, and to clarify my thoughts and ideas as to why I have chosen economic history as my field of research.
The question why I write economic history may be countered with the question: Why not? Why climb Sagarmatha? There are people with an inquisitive or adventurous mind who try to do something that no one else has done. I suppose I belong to the inquisitive category. Before my studies on Nepal's economic history, the subject was virtually unexplored. In 1971, in the preface to A Study in Nepali Economic History, I wrote, "There has been a spurt in historical writing in Nepal in recent years. The patience and perseverance of a number of individuals in discovering and bringing to light documents, inscriptions and other source materials belonging to different historical periods have been commendable. Their diligence in the etymological interpretation of these source materials, and the meticulous care with which they pinpoint errors and inaccuracies in dates, names, places and personal relationships, are an essential process in our understanding of Nepal's past. One wonders, however, to what extent these efforts have made the problems and challenges faced by our ancestors comprehensible and meaningful to the present generation. From the viewpoint of substance too, the persistent disregard for economic aspects of Nepal's historical problems is inexplicable and indeed inexcusable. The choice of dynastic political relationships or the esoteric aspects of human life as subjects for historical research may be explained by the personal predilections of the researcher or his incapacity to assimilate available historical data, but the contributions made by such efforts to the better understanding of the life and problems of the Nepali people in the past is of dubious value."
My interest in economic history is also due to the realisation that it is a key aspect of the nation's life. This is why, in my 1971 book, I sought to describe "… how the people of Nepal earned their living and what factors affected their economic life during the period from the mid-18th century to the mid-19th. It deals with the economic aspects of the people's life in the belief that this is the aspect that concerns their very survival, and, as such, governs the nature of their life in other aspects too. It is concerned with such general phenomena as affect the life of the people from the economic viewpoint and not with particular incidents or personalities as subjects of intrinsic interest. Rather, it concentrates on the facts of economic life with the objective of determining the stage, nature and pace of economic development, and of identifying specific factors inducing or retarding economic progress."
Another aim was to explore the roots of the Nepali state and society by describing "… the economic policies and programs followed by the Gorkhali rulers to mobilize human and material resources for territorial expansion." I sought insights into the basic features and objectives of Gorkhali rule without which the political history of this period could not be studied meaningfully. My study sought to shed light on the impact of those policies and programs on the life of the people. And it was in that respect that it left the "narrow and traditional confines of previous historical studies on Nepal" and sought to cover the entire country on a broad, regional basis, analysing the influences at work among the people. In not confining my attention to wars, dynastic chronologies and political intrigues in Kathmandu as the subject-matter of historical study, I believe that I had set a precedent in Nepali historiography.
As I look back today, I also detect a utilitarian streak in my writings. For instance, I wrote my Land-ownership in Nepal (1976) in the belief that "if the men of the future are ever to break the chains of the present, they will have to understand the forces that forged them." Economic development policies can only be formulated and implemented effectively if there is an adequate understanding of existing institutions, particularly agrarian institutions in countries such as Nepal. As I wrote in the 1978 reprint of Land Tenure and Taxation in Nepal: "Economic development in societies which seek to follow the path of evolutionary reconstruction necessitates an adequate understanding of existing social and economic institutions. This is so particularly in the fields of land and agriculture, where powerful vested interests often stand in the way of policies and programs aimed at improving the peasant's lot."
A similar motivation marked my volume Thatched Huts and Stucco Palaces: Peasants and Landlords in 19th Century Nepal (1978), which I undertook in the belief that "… history consists essentially in seeing the past through the eyes of the present and in the light of its problems, and that the main work of the historian is not to record, but to evaluate." I believed that my work marked "a departure from the general tradition of Nepali historiography, in which greater emphasis is laid on the auxiliary sciences of history — archaeology, epigraphy, numismatics — than on the history itself as a dialogue between living present and past which the historian makes live again by establishing its continuity with the present." Inasmuch as economic development has become the leading national slogan in present-day Nepal, I sought to explore some of the historical and institutional constraints facing such development. In other words, Thatched Huts and Stucco Palaces sought to answer the question: "Why is Nepal poor?"
Having said this, I do not feel that there is any need for me to make an attempt to justify my research and writings on the economic history of Nepal in terms of their relevance to the mundane issues of economic development and political evolution. For me, far more inspiring and ennobling has been the feeling of participation, at whatsoever elementary level it may be, in the eternal quest for knowledge. In the course of exploring and recording a previously unknown and uncharted aspect of the history of the Nepali people and, therefore, of mankind as a whole, I have the feeling of having left my footprints on the sands of time. It is this spiritual satisfaction from my work, rather than its material rewards, that has sustained me during the long years of silent and lonely study, research, contemplation, and writing.