This research paper seeks to critically examine the underlying factors that contributed to the non-linear nature of ancient Indian Hindu historiographical traditions. The historiographical traditions of ancient India are deeply complex, shaped by multiple factors that distinguish them from the Western models of historical writing. Traditionally, India has been characterized as an “ahistorical” civilization, a claim rooted in the lack of continuous, linear historical records similar to those found in the Greco-Roman or medieval European traditions. It traces the roots of this non-linearity by examining the influence of India’s decentralized political landscape, diverse regional scripts, and varying calendrical systems, which collectively hindered the creation of a unified historical narrative. The paper also illustrates how history in ancient India was ritualized, with ceremonies serving as vital repositories of collective memory. By drawing on Michel Foucault, the study critiques Eurocentric historical methodologies that impose linearity and totalization on the understanding of history. It demonstrates that India's fragmented historiographical traditions are not indicative of a lack of historical consciousness but rather a reflection of its unique epistemological stance, which values diverse narratives and the intermingling of the sacred and secular. Ultimately, the paper argues for a re-examination of how ancient Indian historiography can enrich contemporary historical discourse by emphasizing its complexity and depth.