In India’s popular imagination, where the stakes of pre-colonial history have grown extremely high, the term ‘medieval’ continues to denote the conventional colonial meaning of an era between the ‘glorious’ ancient times and the coming of the British. In this framing, temporal boundaries range from anywhere between c. 600 CE until the 1700s, and the generic notion that these were centuries dominated by ‘Muslim’ rule have a lasting grip on the public imagination. At the same time, in academic circles, the early modern—1450-1750 CE—has emerged as the popular category for historical studies on pre-colonial South Asia. This at once denotes a shift away from the conventional periodization and links the subcontinent’s history to global historical processes and current debates. In the light of these developments, how do professional historians of South Asia working on the pre-colonial world prior to the early modern centuries, conceive of the once widely used term medieval? This roundtable brings together scholars at various career stages to rethink the ‘medieval’ in South Asian history and discuss the questions and methodologies that shape research on this historical period today.

Eric Gurevitch will discuss the implications of returning to the history of science in medieval India. In 1837, William Whewell described the Middle Ages as the “stationary period” of science, a period when the developments of Greek sciences waited around for modern science to come along. Twenty years earlier, James Mill had famously described the same period of time – “the long interval from the visit of the Greeks to that of the English” – as marked by a “stationary condition” of Indian institutions, manners, and character. Gurevitch will talk about aspects of these two historiographies that continue with the turn to early modernity. Luther Obrock's research concentrates upon Sanskrit-language histories of Kashmir from the twelfth through the sixteenth centuries. These texts cross the boundaries of received historical periodization, whether based on religious community (Hindu/Muslim), ideological order (Sanskritic Kingship/Islamicate Sultanate), or political formation (independent local polity/imperial assimilation). Obrock will discuss how they make for good examples for both the utility and limitations of the concept of the "medieval" in South Asia. Ayesha Sheth will examine the recent declaration of Amrit kaal, a forthcoming glorious period for the Indian nation and how it has redrawn the boundaries of periodization within Indian history. Hinged on the familiar rhetoric of political fragmentation, economic degradation, religious strife, and cultural stagnation, the notion of the Amrit Kaal summons the erstwhile 18th century boundary of the medieval into the 21st century. Framed by the current political moment, Sheth will reflect on the notion of the medieval as ‘fragmented’, one that has continued to persist in historiography despite its recasting as “early modern”. Cynthia Talbot will consider how the notion of a Persianate age has replaced the older idea of a medieval period, and what the implications are for our study of Indian history overall. She will examine what gets left out of our purview and its implications for different regions in the subcontinent.