Grading a Copied History Table: Legend, Document and Outright Swap
For the five-mark history question a candidate submits a table copied from a coaching handout: (1) Amir Khusrau, 13th century, invented the tabla and the sitar; (2) Tansen composed Raga Miyan ki Todi and Raga Darbari Kanada at Akbar's court; (3) Sadarang invented the tarana and the 16-matra Teentaal; (4) V. N. Bhatkhande wrote the Sangeet Ratnakar and created the ten-thaat system; (5) V. D. Paluskar founded the Gandharva Mahavidyalaya in 1901 and devised a notation scheme for Hindustani music; (6) Sharangadeva wrote the Ain-i-Akbari. The examiner's marking note says: 'full credit only where the date, the source and the nature of the evidence are right.' The candidate's teacher knows that items 1 and 2 are partly legendary, item 3 is confused, and items 4 and 6 have swapped authors. She has one 40-minute revision period before the board practical and must decide what to correct first and how the legendary items should be phrased so that they still earn marks.
1. Classify all six claims as documented, traditionally attributed, or wrong, and give the correction for each.
Read the worked answer
| # | Verdict | What is actually the case |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Traditionally attributed | Khusrau is a documented 13th-century poet-musician of the Delhi Sultanate, and qaul, qawwali and the tarana are traditionally traced to him. The tabla and sitar 'invention' stories are legend with no contemporary evidence; the sitar's origin is generally placed several centuries later. |
| 2 | Half documented, half attributed | Tansen's position as a court musician of Akbar is documented (he appears among the nine gems listed in Abul Fazl's Ain-i-Akbari). The specific ragas Miyan ki Todi, Darbari Kanada and Miyan ki Malhar are traditionally ascribed to him, not proven compositions. |
| 3 | Wrong | Sadarang is the pen name of Niyamat Khan, the 18th-century khayal composer who worked alongside Adarang (Firoz Khan); he is associated with khayal bandish, not with inventing the tarana or Teentaal. The tarana is traditionally linked to Khusrau's experiments; Teentaal's origin is not attributable to a named person. |
| 4 | Half wrong | The ten-thaat system is genuinely Bhatkhande's (Hindustani Sangeet Paddhati, early 20th century), but the Sangeet Ratnakar is by Sharangadeva, 13th century. |
| 5 | Documented | Paluskar founded the Gandharva Mahavidyalaya in 1901 and developed a notation scheme for Hindustani music. |
| 6 | Wrong, authors swapped | The Ain-i-Akbari is by Abul Fazl; Sharangadeva wrote the Sangeet Ratnakar. |
Only item 5 is safe as written. Items 3, 4 and 6 are factual errors that a trained examiner will spot immediately.
2. How should the legendary items (1 and 2) be worded so they still score under a marking note that demands the nature of the evidence?
Read the worked answer
The marking note is not asking the candidate to choose between 'true' and 'false'; it is asking for the status of the claim. Three elements earn the marks: the person, the date/century, and a phrase that signals the evidence type.
Model wording for item 1: 'Amir Khusrau (13th century), poet-musician of the Delhi Sultanate, is traditionally credited with the qaul and with early forms that later developed into the tarana; the popular stories crediting him with the tabla and sitar are not supported by contemporary sources.'
Model wording for item 2: 'Tansen was a court musician of Akbar, listed among the nine gems in Abul Fazl's Ain-i-Akbari. Ragas such as Miyan ki Todi and Darbari Kanada are traditionally ascribed to him.'
Useful sentence openers: 'traditionally credited with', 'is said to have', 'commonly ascribed to', 'documented in the Ain-i-Akbari'. Avoid 'invented' and 'created' unless a source can be named.
A candidate who writes 'Khusrau invented the tabla' loses the evidence mark; the same candidate writing 'traditionally credited with the tabla' keeps it. The correction is therefore cheap and should be drilled first as a phrase habit, not as a fact.
3. She has 40 minutes. What should she fix first, and how should she sequence the revision to maximise the five marks?
Read the worked answer
Sequence by marks recovered per minute, not by interest.
- Minutes 0–10: the three certain errors (items 3, 4, 6). These are unambiguous and each is worth a full mark if corrected. Fix by pairing rather than by reading: Sadarang = Niyamat Khan, khayal bandish, 18th century; Bhatkhande = Hindustani Sangeet Paddhati + ten thaats; Sharangadeva = Sangeet Ratnakar; Abul Fazl = Ain-i-Akbari. Test with a blank table, not by rereading.
- Minutes 10–25: the phrasing habit for items 1 and 2. Have the candidate rewrite both claims aloud three times using 'traditionally credited/ascribed' and add one document (Ain-i-Akbari) and one century (13th). This converts two risky claims into two safe ones.
- Minutes 25–35: a timed five-minute written rehearsal of all six lines, from memory. Mark it against the examiner's note: person, date/source, evidence phrase. Anything that loses a component gets rewritten once.
- Minutes 35–40: rehearsal of one sentence of oral defence - 'Khusrau's association with the tabla is traditional, and the sitar's origin is later' - because a board practical may ask the candidate to explain the table rather than read it.
Do not spend time memorising the full Ain-i-Akbari gem list or debate over raga authorship; the marks are in the evidence wording. Also check item 5 is written with the date 1901, since it is the one claim already correct and should not be damaged by careless rewriting.