Degrading local heroes in the Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Text Book Board curriculum reveals severe contradictions in the state and regional historical narratives. Mentioning Kalu Khan, a Pakhtun legend during the time of Mughal emperor Akbar, as a notorious dacoit in the textbook of English Grade-IX is in sheer disregard of the people’s sensitivities. In fact, this step of the Khyber Pakhtunkhwa government clearly underpins its bias towards the regional history.

It regenerated the old debate of integrating the state narrative to the views upheld popularly in various regions of the country. Incongruity in both the viewpoints contains serious repercussion for the state and its institutions. It jeopardises relationship with the public and doubts the government’s claim of representative disposition.

Curriculum development is a sensitive issue and has a broad scope. It has widespread implications for schools, learners, teachers and society at large. It is also about the development of social perceptions in general. A curriculum is considered the "heart" of any learning institution which means that schools or universities cannot exist without a curriculum. With its importance in formal education, curriculum development has become a dynamic process due to the changes that occur in our society.

Curriculum refers to the total learning experiences of individuals not only in school, but in society as well. It should contribute in inculcating an approach in the minds of students that corresponds to the societies’ norms and traditions. It should respect and properly represent the popular sentiments of the next generation for making them better citizens. Marginalising them in the curriculum harm their general psyches which has severe implications both for the state and society.

The name of Kalu Khan and his role in resisting the Mughal intrusions has been mentioned in many historical manuscripts. He was a brave tribal commander, a diplomat and a military strategist. The political dynamics of the Pakhtun resistance in the second half of the sixteenth century are running in two divergent streams i.e. the Mughal-Yusufzai rivalry and the Roshnites’ opposition to the Mughal intrusion.

Strategically, the region that is now modern Khyber Pakhtunkhwa was much important for the defence of the Mughal Empire. To secure the line of communication through Khyber Pass, Akbar personally reached Attock in January 1586. He sent Zain Khan Koka to march towards Swat and Buner for controlling the Yusufzai Pakhtuns. Meanwhile Khalil and Mohmand tribes entered Khyber and blocked the pass for the Mughal caravans. Afridis and the followers of Jalalah, son of Bayazid Ansari, were stationed in Ali Masjid to confront the Mughals. In fact, in Swat the tribe of Yusufzai inflicted a crushing defeat on them. They were led by one of their great commanders Malak Kalu Khan. He was assisted by the Mohmand, Jadoon, Muhammadzai and many other tribes. Almost the whole Pakhtun tribes rose in rebellion.

Keeping in view the dynamics of rivalry between the Yusufzais and the Mughals it can safely be argued that tribal mobilisation was secular and religion was not a part of it. Moreover, they were under the strong influence of Pir Baba and Akhun Darwaiza -- both of them were regarded as spiritual pirs of the tribe. They preferred to be free from any sort of coercion imposed upon them by any political or religious dispensations.

Akbar sent a strong force under Zain Khan Koka and other capable commanders like Hakim Abul Fatah and Raja Birbal. At Chakdara, the three commanders held a meeting and it was decided to march on to Buner through Karakar pass, a decision which was a strategic blunder and proved disastrous for them. Birbal was given the command of vanguard while the two others followed him through.

After the Mughal army reached Malandaray, they sensed the approaching threat. Some of them spotted the Yusufzai fighters taking position on the top of hills. In the narrow gorges of Krhapa (Buner), the Yusufzais under Kalu Khan attacked and inflicted great losses on the Mughal forces. Eight thousands of Mughal soldiers died on the spot. Raja Birbal, Khwaja Arab Bakhshi, Mulla Shirin and a Battani commander Hasan Khan were among the dead. Zain Khan and Hakim Abul Fatah escaped to the fort of Attock. Akbar refused to meet the two escaping commanders for two days due to his anger on the death of Birbal.

The massacre of Mughal army in the defiles of Karakar in the Buner-Swat border area was an event of serious implications. This was one of the greatest defeats Akbar had ever received in his entire regime. It was prompted by Akbar’s strong desire to subdue the Yusufzais, to maintain his line of communication safe from tribal attacks and to block any possible reinforcement towards the Kashmir.

A long battle started between the Pakhtuns and the Mughals in which hill forts played a dominant role. The Mughals learnt the tactics of hill fighting from the Yusufzais and as long as they held the forts they managed to keep the passage open.

During the Mughal rule in India the areas of Swat, Buner and Bajaur never surrendered to the imperial sway. In this regard even Abul Fadl, Akbar’s court historian, acknowledges in his book Ain-i-Akbari and Akbar Nama the insubordination of the Yusufzais of Swat. Prince Murad and Zain Khan gained some successes in the samah (settled) areas. Between 1587 and 1592, the Mughals tried to enter Swat but without gaining any meaningful victory. The Mughal army, during the reign of Akbar, never succeeded in subduing the Yusufzais in Swat.

General masses in the frontier considered the victory of Kalu Khan as part of their resistance against the Mughal intrusion. Pakhtun elders narrate this victory to youngsters in recognition of the sacrifices made by their legends and heroes. It is an unrealistic step of the government that disregard was exhibited in the school textbooks towards those sages who are revered by society and people at large.

It is hoped that the authorities in the Ministry of Education and Text Book Board of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa would take serious note of this issue. In fact, the revision of the curriculum and the deletion of specific portion should be ordered to integrate it with popular sentiments of the province. Disrespect for the historical heroes by the government in the school curriculum would ultimately undermine credibility of the government among the public.