History Department of Shri Shikshayatan College

History Department of Shri Shikshayatan College Contact information, map and directions, contact form, opening hours, services, ratings, photos, videos and announcements from History Department of Shri Shikshayatan College, College & University, 11 Lord Sinha Road, Shri Shikshayatan College, KOLKATA.

This is the Social Media page run by the Department of History, Shri Shikshayatan College, Kolkata, in a bid to make history more accessible and vibrant across spaces, cultures, and generations.

Where Empires Learned to Paint Their Souls : In the heart of Madrid stands the Museo del Prado — not merely as a museum,...
17/05/2026

Where Empires Learned to Paint Their Souls :

In the heart of Madrid stands the Museo del Prado — not merely as a museum, but as a living archive of monarchy, religion, conquest, fear, and artistic immortality. Founded in 1819 under King Ferdinand VII of Spain, largely through the efforts of Queen María Isabel de Braganza, the museum emerged at a moment when European empires sought to preserve their cultural authority through art and intellectual patronage. What began as the Royal Museum of Paintings and Sculptures would eventually transform into one of the most powerful artistic institutions in the world.
To enter the Prado is to enter centuries of European consciousness preserved in pigment and shadow. Its galleries are filled not only with paintings, but with political anxieties, theological imagination, imperial ambition, and human vulnerability. Unlike museums that merely celebrate beauty, the Prado confronts the viewer with civilization itself — glorious, fragile, violent, and deeply human.
Among its most celebrated masterpieces is Diego Velázquez’s Las Meninas, a painting that revolutionized the language of visual representation. At first glance, it appears to be a portrait of the Spanish royal court; yet beneath its surface lies a philosophical puzzle involving perspective, authority, and spectatorship. Velázquez places himself within the composition, while the viewer becomes implicated in the scene itself, blurring the boundary between observer and observed. Even centuries later, Las Meninas continues to be studied as one of the most intellectually complex works in Western art history.
The museum also houses Francisco Goya’s haunting Black Paintings, created during the final years of the artist’s life. Painted directly onto the walls of his home after Spain had been devastated by war and political instability, these works abandon the elegance of royal portraiture and descend into psychological darkness. In Saturn Devouring His Son, perhaps the most disturbing image within the collection, mythology becomes horror as Saturn consumes his own child in a terrifying meditation on power, madness, and destruction.

13/05/2026

“Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere.” — Martin Luther King Jr.

On 1st April, the Department of History hosted the 8th edition of its Inra- Departmental Debate Series on the motion:
*“This House Believes That Black Lives Matter Represents the Second Civil Rights Movement.”*
Speaking for the motion, Devarnava Mukherjee argued that Black Lives Matter represents a modern continuation of the Civil Rights Movement, drawing parallels between the leadership of Martin Luther King Jr. and the activism of Alicia Garza, Patrisse Cullors, and Opal Tometi. The speech highlighted how BLM confronts systemic racism embedded within institutions such as policing, education, housing, and governance, while also emphasising the movement’s global influence and relevance in contemporary society.
Speaking against the motion, Soumili Ghosh questioned whether BLM can truly be considered the “Second Civil Rights Movement,” pointing to significant differences in leadership structure, organisational unity, legislative focus, and political methods. The argument further examined the contrast between the coordinated framework of organisations like the NAACP, SCLC, SNCC, and CORE and the decentralised nature of BLM.

What ensued was not merely a debate, but a day of intellectual vigour, eloquent dissent, and spirited historical inquiry.
Where do you stand on the motion? 👀


Caption and Video editing by: Fozia Rahman and Deepanjali Singh
Pictures and Videos captured by: Palak Agarwal and Rituja Dey

12/04/2026

The Department of History successfully conducted the Sixth Debate in its Intra-departmental debate series on 30.03.2026, encouraging students to critically engage with the themes of decolonisation and the Cold War, and to reflect on the complexities of neo-imperialism in the Post-colonial World.

Speaking for the Motion (Soumili Bera):
Speaking in favour of the motion, Soumili Bera argued that decolonisation, although presented as a process of granting independence, often resulted in the emergence of neo-imperialism. She highlighted that former colonial powers continued to exert control over newly independent nations through economic dominance, political influence, and cultural dependency. According to her, institutions such as global financial systems and multinational corporations became new instruments of control, replacing direct political rule. She emphasized that many post-colonial states remained dependent on former colonial powers, which limited their true sovereignty and development.

Speaking Against the Motion (Deepanjali Singh):
Speaking against the motion, Deepanjali Singh contended that decolonisation was a significant and necessary step toward freedom, self-determination, and nation-building. She argued that while challenges persisted after independence, it would be incorrect to equate decolonisation with neo-imperialism. Instead, she highlighted the agency of newly independent nations in shaping their own political, economic, and social systems. She further stated that global cooperation and interdependence should not be mistaken for imperial control, and that many countries have successfully progressed after decolonisation.

12/04/2026

The Department of History successfully conducted the fifth debate in its intra-departmental debate series on 24.03.2026, that encouraged students to critically reflect on one of the most significant geopolitical transformations of the 20th century.

Motion: This House Believes that the Dissolution of the USSR Was the Greatest Geopolitical Catastrophe in the 20th Century.

Speaking for the motion, Srijayee Sarma argued that the Dissolution of the Soviet Union marked a profound geopolitical catastrophe with far-reaching consequences. She emphasized how the sudden dissolution of a major superpower led to political instability, economic crises, and the emergence of multiple independent states struggling with transition. She highlighted on the conflicts in regions such as Eastern Europe and Central Asia, and argued that the end of the Soviet Union disrupted global balance and intensified uncertainties in international relations.

Speaking against the motion, Aheli Dey argued that the Dissolution of the Soviet Union cannot be considered the greatest geopolitical catastrophe of the twentieth century. She emphasized that its collapse brought an end to many costly indirect conflicts associated with the Cold War, reducing prolonged global tensions. It also weakened the arms race that had been draining resources worldwide for decades. She further noted that the Soviet Union had long suppressed the general public and national aspirations, and its disintegration allowed several nations to assert their independence. She further argued that other 20th century events, such as World War II, were far more catastrophic in terms of human and material loss.

The debate highlighted different perspectives on the significance of the Soviet Union’s collapse in global history. It showed how the same event can be seen as both a crisis and an opportunity. The discussion encouraged critical thinking and deeper historical understanding.


Caption and Video editing by: Adrija Adhikari and Rituja Dey
Pictures and Videos captured by: Palak Agarwal and Rituja Dey

01/04/2026

The Department of History successfully conducted the fourth debate in its intra-departmental debate series on 24.03.2026, that invited students to critically examine one of the most debated issues in modern global history.

Motion: “This House Believes that the 1947 United Nations Partition Plan Was the Root Cause of the Arab-Israeli Conflict.”

Speaking for the motion, Ruposhree Raksh*t argued that the United Nations Partition Plan for Palestine laid the foundational basis for the Arab-Israeli conflict. She highlighted how the division of Palestine into separate Jewish and Arab states, without adequate consensus among local populations, intensified communal tensions and set the stage for prolonged hostilities. She further highlighted the present developments, noting how ongoing tensions in the region continue to escalate into broader conflicts such as the recent Israeli strikes on Iran’s military and nuclear infrastructure and the resulting regional retaliation, demonstrating contemporary geopolitical crises and instability across the Middle East.

Speaking against the motion, Tannu Prasad contended that the origins of the conflict predate 1947 and cannot be attributed to a single event. She pointed to factors such as the Balfour Declaration, British colonial policies, and growing nationalist movements among both Arabs and Jews. She argued that while the partition plan acted as a catalyst, it was part of a longer path of political, social, and territorial disputes. The continued relevance of the conflict, she noted, lies in its deep-rooted historical complexities rather than any singular cause.

The debate highlighted the complexity of the Arab-Israeli conflict and the difficulty of identifying a single cause. Both sides presented strong arguments, drawing from historical events and present-day realities. It showed how history is shaped by multiple factors and interpretations.The discussion encouraged critical thinking and deeper engagement with global issues.

The Department of History participated in the Women’s Day celebration organized on 16th of March,2026 by the Women’s Day...
19/03/2026

The Department of History participated in the Women’s Day celebration organized on 16th of March,2026 by the Women’s Day Cell of our college, marking the occasion with creativity, enthusiasm, and thoughtful expression. The event was further enriched by the presence of the esteemed Chief Speaker, Smt. Swati Gautam, whose insightful words and inspiring reflections beautifully captured the spirit and significance of the day.

Our department is delighted to celebrate the achievements of its students. Samadrita Ghosh(Sem VI) secured the First Position in English Creative Writing, while Sampurna Gupta(Sem VI) earned the Second Runner Up in the same category. In Poster Making, Shree Chakraborty(Sem VI) achieved the First Runner up, expressing the theme of the occasion through artistic brilliance.

The spirit of participation in both events was equally inspiring. Srijayee Sarma, Adrija Adhikari, Aheli Dey, Palak Agarwal, and Ruposhree Raksh*t of Semester VI and Anchita Roy and Maisha Alam of Semester I from our department actively took part and received certificates of participation, contributing to the lively and meaningful spirit of the event.

We extend our sincere gratitude to the Women’s Day Cell and the dedicated teachers who are part of it, whose hard work, guidance, and commitment made this celebration truly memorable.

content courtesy : Aheli Dey and Adrija Adhikari (Semester VI)



15/03/2026

History in Debate: Exploring the Global Past and Present

Intra-Departmental Debate | 13.03.2026
The Department of History successfully conducted the third debate in its intra-departmental debate series, offering students a stimulating platform to critically engage with and articulate their perspectives on key developments shaping the twentieth and twenty-first centuries.
Motion:
“This House Believes that the Digital Sphere Has Replaced the Street as the Primary Site of Protest.”
Speaking for the motion, Devyani Das argued that the digital sphere has become deeply embedded in everyday life and increasingly shapes the character of contemporary protest movements. Drawing on examples such as the R.G. Kar protests and the Black Lives Matter movement, she highlighted how digital platforms facilitate rapid mobilisation, wider outreach, and social integration, enabling protest to gain visibility and momentum across networks.
Speaking against the motion, Rituja Dey contended that street protests continue to remain the core site of political activism despite the rise of digital platforms. She referred to major historical movements—from the U.S. Civil Rights Movement to anti-colonial struggles—which relied on people physically assembling in public spaces to exert political pressure. Even today, demonstrations across the world show that collective presence in the streets carries a force that digital spaces alone cannot replicate. While social media may help organise and amplify movements, it remains vulnerable to censorship and control.
The debate reflected considerable intellectual engagement and historical insight, embodying the spirit of academic exchange that the series seeks to cultivate.
For students of history, discussions such as these remind us that while the forms of protest may evolve, the questions they raise about power, participation, and public action continue to resonate across time, linking the past with the political realities of the present.

13/03/2026

Sports as Popular Culture: Exploring the History of Football and Cricket in India with Shri Mayukh Lahiri

On 30 January 2026, the Department of History had the privilege of hosting a Special Lecture by Shri Mayukh Lahiri, Assistant Professor, Department of Journalism & Mass Communication, on the theme “Cricket & Football as Popular Culture in India.” Students from Semester I and Semester III attended this enriching academic session.

The lecture traced the historical evolution of sports, beginning with hunting as one of the earliest collective human activities and progressing to the Ancient Greek Olympics, the first organised sporting event in history. Shri Lahiri also offered insights into key moments such as the 1936 Berlin (N**i) Olympics, the birth of professional sports, and the ways in which games gradually became divided along class lines. Cricket emerged as an elite, equipment-intensive sport dominated by the upper classes, while football evolved as a people’s game, accessible to the working masses and grounded in collective effort.

The lecture examined the introduction of cricket and football in India and how both sports eventually acquired a patriotic and nationalistic dimension, becoming instruments of resistance during the freedom struggle.
He emphasized Bengal, being known as the "Capital of Sports." He highlighted the importance of influential figures such as Sarada Ranjan Roy, who played a significant role in popularising cricket among Bengalis, and Nagendra Prasad Sarbadhicary, regarded as the father of Indian football in detail.During this period, sports emerged as a powerful medium to express nationalist sentiment and anti-colonial resistance.

The lecture also connected historical developments with contemporary sports politics and future possibilities, including global tournaments and the return of cricket to the Olympic Games.

We are sincerely grateful to Shri Mayukh Lahiri for delivering such an insightful lecture, which will undoubtedly benefit the students of Semester I and Semester III in their academic journey ahead

10/03/2026

The Department of History successfully hosted the second debate in its intra-departmental debate series, creating an engaging forum for students to critically analyse and articulate perspectives on significant developments shaping the twentieth and twenty-first centuries. The deliberations reflected intellectual rigour, historical awareness, and a spirit of scholarly dialogue among the participants.

Intra Departmental Debate:09.03.26
The Department of History hosted it's Second Debate in this series on the motion :

“This House Believes the Non-Aligned Movement Has Become Obsolete in the 21st Century.”

Shree Chakraborty – For the Motion:
Shree Chakraborty argued that the Non-Aligned Movement, established in 1961 amid the ideological polarization of the Cold War, served as a crucial platform for newly independent nations seeking to safeguard their political sovereignty. Conceived by leaders such as Jawaharlal Nehru, Josip Broz Tito, and Gamal Abdel Nasser, NAM enabled states to remain outside the competing spheres of the United States and the Soviet Union, thus fulfilling a significant historical purpose in that era.

Adrija Adhikari – Against the Motion:
Adrija Adhikari contended that the relevance of the Non-Aligned Movement persists in the twenty-first century, as its foundational principles:sovereignty, peaceful coexistence, and non-interference remain integral to international relations. Echoing Jawaharlal Nehru’s vision, she emphasized that non-alignment represents the pursuit of independent foreign policy and the evaluation of global issues on their merits rather than alignment with power blocs.
The debate highlighted two contrasting perspectives on the relevance of the Non-Aligned Movement,one viewing it as a product of the Cold War era, and the other emphasizing the enduring importance of its principles in contemporary global politics. The discussion reflected thoughtful analysis, historical awareness, and the spirit of intellectual engagement among the participants.

Address

11 Lord Sinha Road, Shri Shikshayatan College
Kolkata
700071

Website

Alerts

Be the first to know and let us send you an email when History Department of Shri Shikshayatan College posts news and promotions. Your email address will not be used for any other purpose, and you can unsubscribe at any time.

Shortcuts

Share

Category