History Compass. 2017;15:e12403. https://doi.org/10.1111/hic3.12403 wileyo Abstract This essay examines histories of colonial British India and the annexation of Sindh in 1843 from two perspectives. The first is the colonial historiographic project that frames the history of Islam in India, creates an archive for its study and produces the political and military dominance of Sindh. Fundamentally, it argues that Muslims in India cannot produce their own histories for they lack the language and archives for scientific objectivity. In response, a set of Indian intellectuals take on the project of writing histories of Sindh from 1890 to 1950s. These histories are written in direct dialogue with the colonial archive and insist on their engagement with social scientific methodologies and tools. In rethinking this past, the essay argues that that Urdu historiography was itself deemed unscientific by modern South Asian historians and abandoned as not “proper history.” This essay thus asks that we incorporate such histories in our genealogies of anticolonial past.

中文翻译：

---

隔离的历史：信德省和印度殖民地的史学问题-第一部分

历史罗盘。2017; 15：e12403。https://doi.org/10.1111/hic3.12403 wileyo摘要本文从两个角度考察了英属殖民地的历史和1843年信德人的吞并。第一个是殖民史学项目，它构筑了印度伊斯兰教的历史，为其研究创建了档案，并在信德省取得了政治和军事上的统治地位。从根本上说，它认为印度的穆斯林无法产生自己的历史，因为他们缺乏科学客观性的语言和档案。作为回应，一组印度知识分子接手了1890至1950年代信德省的写作历史项目。这些历史是在与殖民地档案馆直接对话后写成的，并坚持将它们与社会科学方法论和工具结合在一起。在反思过去 这篇文章认为，乌尔都语历史学本身被现代南亚历史学家认为是不科学的，被视为不正确的历史。因此，本文要求我们将这些历史纳入我们反殖民历史的家谱中。