Question

Read the following passage and answer the questions.
The writings of Indian historians who were trained in the
British educational system show an inclination to restore the
pride in the ancient glory of India and the self-esteem of the
Indian readers. Their writings are known as 'Nationalistic
Historiography'. Nationalistic writings in Maharashtra were
inspired by Vishnushastri Chiplunkar. He criticised the
prejudiced history of ancient India written by British officers.
The nationalistic historians tried to seek the golden era of
Indian history. They are at times blamed for ignoring the
critical analysis of the historical truth.
1) What was the tendency of nationalist historians?
2) Find the odd man out giving reasons:
Vishnushastri Chiplunkar, Vinayak D. Savarkar, V.K. Rajwade,
Dr Babasaheb Ambedkar.
3) How is nationalistic historiography different from colonial
historiography ?​​

Answer 1

$\:\:\:\huge\color{}\boxed{\colorbox{}{Complete\ answers.}}$

1) What was the tendency of nationalist historians?

✦ The tendency of Nationalist historians was that their writings are known as 'Nationalists Historiography'.

2) Find the odd man out giving reasons:  Vishnushastri Chiplunkar, Vinayak D. Savarkar, V.K. Rajwade,  Dr Babasaheb Ambedkar.

✦ The nationalist writings in Maharashtra were  inspired by VisnuShastri Chiplunkar.

3) How is nationalistic historiography different from colonial  historiography?

✦ It differs in that nationalist historiography is the segmentation of the object of historical science to restrict itself to the nation. History has a local bias that tests its universalist vocation. And colonial history is an expression of the rupture of a vision of the world and its relationship with the search for political-theological justifications for the conquest.

➥ I hope I have been a great help, greetings!

$\red{\large{ \pmb{ \underline{ \underline{\bf{Atte:\ AlejandraAranibar}}}}}}$