The relevance of history for students pursuing law degrees has acquired urgency in the contemporary period across the world from the United States, where the murder of George Floyd sparked an international crisis, to India, where contentious debates on citizenship law and farm laws have entered civil society. The idea of “art for art’s sake” no longer holds, and questions of authorial intent and audience interaction have brought about fundamental shifts. In law, this paradigm shift is exemplified by the concept of intersectionality proposed by the African American law professor Kimberlé Crenshaw. In fact, Crenshaw’s framework has informed activism on both sides of the Atlantic, signaling its importance in the human sciences.

Simply put, intersectionality argues that our identities are shaped by overlapping experiences of race, gender, class, ethnicity, and more. These identities intersect at various moments in our lives, creating complex forms of discrimination. For instance, legal systems often divide individuals into binary gender categories of male and female, whereas transgender persons and people of colour experience multiple marginalizations. The purpose of introducing this concept is to highlight that such issues are central to both legal studies and history.
Thus, concepts such as gender and language in the human sciences have influenced all disciplines, and it is here that history provides a longue durée perspective for law students. One example is the contemporary debate on the need for a caste census. Without historical understanding, caste is often seen as an immutable category that has remained unchanged for thousands of years. Such oversimplifications, along with portrayals of Indian society as rigidly divided into four castes, have shaped orientalist narratives. Social media is also filled with such representations, and cybercrime cells often encounter disputes arising from them. There are even demands to include caste as a category of discrimination in countries like the USA and the UK.
The historian Nicholas Dirks's work, Castes of Mind, challenges these assumptions. Dirks argues that colonial institutions, especially the census, played a key role in shaping caste into a fixed category. According to him, caste was not always rigid; rather, colonial rule helped formalize and solidify it. The example of the Jats of northern India supports this view. Historically found across religions such as Hinduism, Sikhism, and Islam from Delhi to Peshawar, they have occupied varied social positions. About a century and a half ago, Jat kingdoms existed in parts of North India, suggesting their association with the Kshatriya category.
However, earlier references describe them as outside the varna system. During the medieval period, they were largely peasants, though some rose to positions of nobility. Significant change occurred during the colonial period with the advent of canal irrigation and the rise of a prosperous Jat peasantry. These upwardly mobile groups sought recognition as dominant castes in colonial records. Although officially placed within the varna hierarchy, local narratives often elevated their status above others. In recent decades, declining agricultural income and reduced job opportunities have led to demands for OBC status. This illustrates how caste has transformed from a social category into a political one.
A similar transformation can be observed in religion. The decline of the Mughal Empire and the expansion of the East India Company, culminating in the Indian Rebellion of 1857, mark important shifts. While communal disturbances were relatively rare earlier, their frequency increased under colonial rule. This shift can be attributed to the colonial state’s role in institutionalizing and politicizing religious identities. Consequently, religion moved from being a largely private and spiritual matter to a public and political one. Such distortions, often reinforced by selective narratives and rhetorical strategies influenced by postmodern and post-structural approaches, can lead to serious misunderstandings when broader contexts are ignored.
Therefore, the study of history serves multiple purposes for law students. It exposes them to biases, prejudices, distortions, and the realities of human suffering, while also highlighting the pursuit of justice. History develops analytical skills and linguistic precision, both essential for legal drafting, and provides a broader comparative understanding of global contexts. It also helps students understand the foundations and evolution of modern institutions.
In conclusion, history enables law students to move beyond simplistic binaries, engage with complex realities, and interpret legal texts with greater context and empathy. It plays a crucial role not only in studying cases but also in delivering informed and just judgments.