Editor's note: This is the first in an occasional series looking at different issues of California's textbooks.

They met Jan. 6 at an unusual closed-door session called by California's Board of Education to debate revisions to ancient Indian history in school textbooks.

On one side was Shiva Bajpai, a professor of Indian history at California State University, Northridge. Next to him sat Michael Witzel, a professor of Sanskrit and Indian Studies at Harvard University.

For six hours, the two men went back and forth, debating item-by-item revisions and deletions to California's sixth-grade social studies textbooks proposed by two Hindu groups, the Texas-based Vedic Foundation and the Hindu Education Foundation, whose members include many Indo-American parents from the Bay Area.

Though the two men agreed on many of the revisions, they bitterly disagreed on a handful of issues: polytheism, the caste system, the rights of men versus women and the Aryan migration theory.

And by the end of the meeting, the debate had all but collapsed, according to both sides.

"It was extraordinary. I've never experienced anything like it. The debate deteriorated to me telling him that he didn't know what he was talking about," said Bajpai. "I am concerned with scholars' interpretation of these issues, but I have more insight into the culture because I am a Hindu."

"I couldn't really argue with him," Witzel said. "All he kept saying was, 'That's your interpretation ... that's your interpretation.' He kept mixing his personal views with scholarship."

One week later, on Jan. 12, the state Board of Education announced it had formed a subcommittee to review the proposed changes. Those involved in the issue say a final decision on the changes is not expected untilFebruary or March.

Meanwhile, Hindu groups continue to weigh in on both sides of the issue, flooding the California Department of Education with letters, phone calls and public comments. One group, the Hindu American Foundation, led by Fremont physician Mihir Meghani, has hired a law firm to consider legal action should the state decide to modify the recommendations of the curriculum committee as a result of its closed-door meeting Jan. 6.

The controversy about the representation of ancient Indian history and Hinduism highlights how communities write — and sometimes rewrite — history to define themselves and others.

It also raises questions about lobbying efforts surrounding what is, and is not, included in history textbooks in California's educational system.

Anjali Patel, a Cupertino parent with two daughters and a founding member of Hindu Education Foundation, is among many Indo-Americans who contend that new proposed sixth-grade social studies textbooks misrepresent Hinduism and portray Indian history in a negative light.

When she reviewed the textbooks early last summer, Patel said she found problems with the depiction of women. She says she believed the books sought to overemphasize negative aspects of Hindu history, while downplaying the negative aspects in the history of other world religions, including Islam and Christianity.

In their original form, the proposed textbooks would not earn a passing grade, she said. One textbook illustrated an incorrect portrayal of a Brahman priest praying. One section in another textbook was titled, "Where's the beef?"

"The textbooks are horrible," said Bajpai. "They were full of inaccuracies and stereotypes."

Witzel agreed: "There were some real mistakes ... incorrect wording and a lack of sensitivity on some issues."

"These are the textbooks we're going to be giving our children," Patel said. "The textbooks should highlight the positive aspects and encourage tolerance."

By the end of the summer, as the state vetted the texts, the Hindu Education Foundation, along with Texas-based Vedic Foundation, submitted hundreds of edits.

After consulting with Bajpai, California's curriculum committee accepted most of their recommendations.

But then, on Nov. 8, Witzel became involved, rushing a letter to the California Board of Education after he was informed of the changes by a graduate student who had been approached to support them.

In his letter to the state, which was co-signed by 50 Hindu scholars, Witzel urged board members "to reject the demands by nationalist Hindu groups" to alter the textbooks "to conform to their politico-religious views" [....]