BABURNAMAH / TUZUK E BABURI

 Baburnamah / Tuzuk-e-Baburi / Waqiat-e-Baburi / Baburiat by Babur or Emperor Zahiruddin Muhammad 

Autobiographical memoirs of the Emperor from his accession in June 1494 to September 1529. Babur, the founder of the Mughal Empire in India was descendent of Timur and born in 1483. The greater part of his life was spent in war. He took Kabul in 1504, Qandahar in 1506, several times invaded Hindustan and in 1526 finally defeated Ibrahim Lodi he became substantially the master of Hindustan he was a good writer and left a valuable autobiography and a Divan in Chaghtai Turkish  

Translations:  

In Persian by Shaykh Zainuddin Kwafi, Mirza Payanda Hassan Ghaznavi, Abdur Rahim Khan E Kanan completed in 1950. 

In French: Pavet de Courteille, Paris, 1870. 

In English: A. Beveridge, London 1921, 2 Vols 

Baburnama gives graphic description of the early years of Babur in Farghana and Samarqand, his quarrels with cousins. It describes in detail the flora and fauna of India and his personal impressions of the nature and climate of India and also th works of art and industries. 

Barber was also a poet and the author of divine in ducky which was edited by doctor E Denison Ross in 1910. What ads a special interest to the contents of this volume is the fact that it has preserved a poetical work by Barber which has hitherto considered to be irretrievably lost. As a man of parts, the estimate of Mirza Haydar is valuable in the composition of perky poetry he was second only to Amir Ali Sher. The divine written by him is most lucid Turkey. He invented a style called Mubarak and was the author of most useful treaties on jurisprudence. He also wrote an essay on Turki parody...’ 

SOCIAL REFORM MOVEMENTS IN THE 19TH AND 20TH CENTURIES

The impact of modern education, rational, humanitarian and scientific approach to life – which ushered in – both in action and reaction – were largely responsible for social reform movements in the 19^th and 20^th century. Rammohan Roy, a pioneer in modern religious reform movements in India, was also the Morning Star of modern social reform movement in the country. Social reform became an integral part of religious reform in India and this was equally true of Bramho Samaj, Prathana Samaj, Arya Samaj, Ramakrishna Mission, Theosophical Society in Hinduism as also among the Muslims, the Parsis and the Sikhs.

C. H. Heimsath in an excellent analysis of the Hindu social reform movements has indicated three distinct phases in the History of social reform in India viz. first phase of individual revolt and reform together with strong religious links from Rammohan to the early 1880s; the second phase was marked by the elevation of social reform movement to a national plane as exemplified by the efforts of Behramji Malabari and the Indian National Social Conference; the third stage began when social reform was identified with a regeneration of the traditional spirit of the nation and is popularly associated with the activities of ‘extremist’ leaders of the early twentieth century. To it may be added the fourth phase under the leadership of Mahatma Gandhi when social reform became a main plank in the all-round regeneration of Indian society.

The social reform movements in India have aimed at uprooting social evils, and inculcating in men and women the spirit of sacrifice for the general good of the society. The first and foremost social problem that attracted enlightened opinion was the need for a better deal for women in society, in the abolition of the cruel rites of sati and infanticide, in the condemnation of child marriage and polygamy and popularization of widow remarriage, in the abolition of purdah, in provision of educational facilities for women and economic openings to make them self-supporting and finally an equal share for women in the political life of the country by enfranchisement.

Another social evil that was a major concern of the English educated and Hindu intelligentsia was the caste restrictions in Hindu society and the degrading position of the lower castes especially the untouchables. Of these two great evils, those connected with the position of women received greater attention in the 19^th century, while the problem of the untouchables (harijans) came in sharp focus in the 20^th century because of political overtones.

Sati: The term Sati literally means a ‘pure and virtuous woman’. It was applied in the case of a devoted wife who contemplated perpetual and uninterrupted conjugal union with her husband life after life and as proof thereof burnt herself with the dead body of her husband. Enlightened Indian rulers like Akbar, the Peshwas, had imposed restrictions on its performance. Though the East India company broadly adhered to its declared policy of noninterference with the social customs of the people, yet early Governors- General like Cornwallis, Minto and Lord Hastings had taken some steps to restrict the practice of Sati by discouraging compulsion, forbidding admission of intoxicating drugs to the sorrow stricken widows, putting a ban on the Sati of pregnant women or widows below the age of 16 years and above all making compulsory the presence of police officials at the time of sacrifice who were to see that no compulsion was used. However, these restrictions proved inadequate and achieved limited success.

Enlightened Indian reformers led by Rammohan Roy launched a frontal attack on the evil of sati. With an eye to the coming Charter debates in the British Parliament and anxious to get a renewal of its charter for another 20 years by presenting a creditable image of its activities in India, the Court of Directors encouraged William Bentinck to enact legislation to suppress Sati. Regulation XVII of Dec 1829 declared the practice of Sati or burning or burying alive of widows illegal and punishable by criminal courts and culpable homicide. The regulation of 1829 was applicable in the first instance to Bengal Presidency alone but was extended in slightly modified forms to Madras and Bombay Presidencies in 1830. Thus, the evil practice of Sati on any scale was wiped out though stray cases might have occurred here and there.

Infanticide: Another horrible and cruel rite particularly common among the Rajput and Bengalis was killing of their infant daughters at birth, taking female children to be a great economic liability. Further, if the parents could not arrange marriage for their daughters, it was considered a social disgrace and a violation of religious injunctions. Some socially backward tribes followed the practice of killing their infant daughters at their birth; this was done by the mother by deliberately neglecting the feeding of a female child to administering poisonous drugs to the child through the nipples of the mother’s breast. Maharaja Dalip Singh, son of Ranjit Singh, mentions that ‘he had actually seen when he was a child at Lahore, his sisters put into a sack and thrown into the river’.  

Enlightened British and Indian opinion was unanimous in condemning infanticide. When persuasion alone could not help, the Bengal Regulation XXI of 1795 and III of 1804 declared infanticide illegal and equivalent to committing a murder. Pressure was exerted through political residents and agents in Indian states to eradicate this evil rite. As a precautionary measure, the Government of India passed an Act in 1870 making it compulsory for parents to register the birth of all babies and providing for verification of female children for some years after birth, particularly in areas where the custom was resorted to in utmost privacy.

Widow remarriage and prohibition of child marriage: The lot of women in society could not be improved merely by the negative steps of suppression of sati and infanticide but by positive action in popularizing widow remarriage and raising the age limit for marriage of girls. The Bramho Samaj debated the question of widow remarriage and popularized it among the Bramhos. The efforts of Pt. Ishwar Chandra Vidyasagar (1820-91) Principal of Sanskrit College, Calcutta, deserve special mention. He dug up old Sanskrit references and proved that Vedic texts sanctioned widow remarriage. He sent a petition signed by 987 persons to the Government of India urging it for legislative action. His efforts were rewarded when the Hindu Widow Remarriage Act (Act XV of 1856) legalized marriage of widows and declared issues form such marriages as legitimate. However, in Bengal the widow remarriage reform achieved very limited success.

In Western India, Prof. D. K. Karve took up the cause of widow remarriage and in Madras Veeresalingam Pantulu made Herculean efforts in the same direction. Prof. Karve started his career as a teacher in a Girl’s School at Bombay and seven years later in 1891 became a Professor at Fergusson College. In the meantime, he became a widower. He refused to marry a teenager and married a Brahmin widow in 1893. Karve devoted his life to the upliftment of Hindu widows and became the Secretary of the Widow Remarriage Association. In 1899, he opened a widow’s home in Pune with the object of giving high-caste widows an interest in life by providing them openings in the profession of teachers, doctors and nurses and making them, at the same time, self-supporting. He crowned his work by setting up an Indian Women’s University at Bombay in 1916.  

Legislative action in prohibiting child marriage came in 1872 when by the Native Marriage Act (popularly known as Civil Marriage Act) marriage of girls below the age of 14 and boys below 18 years were forbidden. However, this act was not applicable to Hindus, Muslims and other recognized faiths, and as such had very limited impact on Indian society. B. M. Malabari, a Parsi reformer of the 19^th century started a crusade against child marriage and his efforts were crowned by the enactment of the Age of Consent Act (1891) which forbade the marriages of girls below the age of 12. The Sharda Act (1930) further pushed up marriage age and provided for penal action in marriages of boys under 18 and girls under 14 years of age. A further improvement was made by the Child Marriage Restraint (Amendment) Act 1978 which raised the age of marriage for girls from 15 to 18 years and for boys from 18 to 21.

Education of Women: Hindu society in the 19^th century suffered from false religious illusions that Hindu scriptures did not sanction female education, that education of girls wrought wrath of gods leading to their widowhood.

The Christian Missionaries whatever their motives, were the first to set up the Calcutta Female Juvenile Society in 1818. However, the celebrated name of J.E.D. Bethune, President of the Council of Education, will always be remembered with respect. In 1849, he founded a Girl’s School in Calcutta. Pt. Ishwar Chandra Vidyasagar also did a lot in popularizing the cause of female education and was associated with no less that 35 girls schools in Bengal. In Bombay the students of Elphinstone Institute became the spearhead of the movement for women’s education and founded the Students Literary and Scientific Society. Charles Woods’ dispatch on Education (1854) laid great stress on the need for female education. In the broad perspective, women’s education became a part of the general campaign for amelioration of the plight of women in society.

Abolition of Slavery: Slavery of the Greek or Roman on American negro type did not exist in India. Slavery in India was more akin to what may be termed as bonded – servant, bonded-labor type and slaves in India were treated in a humane manner unknown to Western countries. In this context the observation of the Committee of Circuit deserves to be quoted. It reads, ‘The ideas of slavery, borrowed from our American colonies, will make every modification of it appear in the eyes of our countrymen in England a horrible evil. But it is far otherwise in this county; here slaves are treated as the children of the families to which they belong and often acquire a much happier state by their slavery than that could have hoped for by the enjoyment of liberty’. If in northern India slaves generally served as domestic servants, in South India slaves were mostly employed in cultivation. Of course, European slave-owners in India, treated their slaves in the same inhuman manner characteristic of Western slave owners.

Slavery was abolished in the British Empire in 1833 and a clause was inserted in the Charter Act of 1833 requiring the Governor – General in Council to abolish slavery in India as soon as it could be safely and conveniently carried out. Act V of 1843 declared slavery illegal in India and all existing slaves were emancipated without any compensation to slave owners. The Penal Code of 1860 also declared trade in slavery illegal. Bonded labor in one form or the other however lingers on in India even now.

Social reform in the 20^th century: The history and course of social reform movement in the twentieth century is marked by the coming into existence of a number of social organizations both at the all India and provincial levels. The Indian National Social Conference founded in 1887 by M. G. Ranade had limited objectives and achieved limited success. In 1903 the Bombay Social Reform Association was founded and in Madras Mrs. Annie Besant set up the Hindu Association. In September 1932 the All India Anti Untouchability League was founded, later renamed as Harijan Sevak Sangh. Further, the social reform movement lost its exclusive male and upper caste basis and orientation; women themselves crusaded for an equal status in society and organized the first All India Women’s Conference in 1926 while the lower castes founded All India Depressed Classes Association (March 1918) and All India Depressed Classes Federation.

Though many social evils like drinking, beggary, etc. received the attention of social reformers in the twentieth century, the twin problems of improvement of the lot of women and depressed classes received greater attention partly because of the dynamic leadership of Gandhiji and partly due to political overtones of the problem of depressed classes.

Attacking the purdah system among women Gandhiji said, ‘the sight of the screen made me sad. It pained and humiliated me deeply… let us not live with one limb completely or partially paralyzed… Let us tear down the purdah with one mighty effort’. The All India Women’s Conference also denounced purdah. Gandhiji appealed to women to come out of the purdah and participate in the nationalist struggle by picketing and spinning. In the Civil Disobedience Movement launched by Gandhiji in 1930 women participated and courted arrest in large numbers to evoke a comment form a foreign observer that if the Civil Disobedience Movement accomplished nothing else but the emancipation of women in India, it would have fully justified itself.

When the Muslim League obtained separate electorates and taunted the Hindus that the depressed classes were not part of the Hindu Community but constituted a separate community deserving representation in its own rights, the political ambition of the Depressed Classes was touched and they realized their bargaining potential in the fast changing political scene. The Indian National Congress and Hindu social organizations saw the political-cum-social aspect fo the problem of lower castes and made some determined efforts to keep them within the fold of Hinduism. In 1928, the Indian National Social Conference adopted a resolution that ‘the present caste system is a great obstacle to the unification of the Hindu society, and therefore resolves that its abolition should be expediated by a) encouraging true interdining, b) promoting intercaste marriages and c) removing untouchability and all disabilities arising therefrom wherever they exist’.  Gandhiji organized the Harijan Sevak Sangh with headquarters at Delhi which has done some useful work. Dr. B. R. Ambedkar, a politically conscious leader of the Depressed classes, was not satisfied with these half hearted moves and blamed the Harijan Sevak Sangh as a wing of the Congress with the ‘real aim of ensuring the Untouchables and to make them the camp-followers of the Hindus and the Congress’. In 1945, Dr. Ambedkar criticized Gandhiji in his famous book ‘What Congress and Gandhi have done to the Untouchables and advised his fellow untouchables to embrace Buddhism.

The Constitution of the Indian Republic has abolished ‘untouchability’ and forbidden its practice in any form, while reservation of seats for scheduled castes and Scheduled tribes in the Lok Sabha and State Vidhan Sabhas, apart from reservation of seats for them in the services are steps in the right direction. Caste disabilities are fast crumbling under the new democratic set up and economic pressures and the scheduled castes are increasingly playing their due role in the national life.

SIGNIFICANCE OF THE PARTITION OF BENGAL

The Partition of Bengal 1905

A masterpiece of Curzon’s internal policy was the partition of Bengal into two provinces of Bengal proper and eastern Bengal and Assam in 1905.

The provinces of Bengal at the time comprised Bengal, Bihar and Orissa. Curzon described the partition as ‘a mere readjustment of administrative boundaries’. It was explained that the Eastern districts of Mymen Sings and Backergange divisions were notorious for lawlessness and crime and the police arrangement was unable to cope with the situation. The lieutenant Governor who was in charge of the extensive areas could not properly look after these extensive areas. Besides there had been historical precedents of the creation of separate administrative units, as the setting up of Northwest Provinces in 2865 and separation of Assam under a high commissioner in 1874.

The new province of Eastern Bengal and Assam was to include Assam and the divisions of Dacca, Rajshahi and Chittagong.

The opposition to the partition of Bengal was great and vocal. The Bengal intelligentsia took it to be a subtle attack upon the growing solidarity of Bengali nationalism, an attempt to undermine the traditions, history and language of the Bengalis. The nationalists pointed out that the scheme was devised to divide the people on the basis of religion and to put the Muslims against the Hindus. Lord Curzon explained that one object of the partition proposal was to create a Mohammedan province where Islam could be predominant and its followers in ascendency.

Far more offensive was the manner in which the proposal of partition was carried out in the teeth of public opposition. The viceroy described the popular agitation as ‘partly unscrupulous and partly misinformed’, while Sir Andrew Fraser, the lieutenant Governor, attributed the agitation to vested interests of two provincial classes, the Calcutta Bar who feared a setback to other work due to the creation of a separate court at Dacca and the Calcutta journalists who feared the possibility of new newspapers being published from Dacca. Lord Morley, the new Secretary of State, declared in 1905 that the partition was a ‘settled fact’.

It was suggested to the government that united Bengal could be placed under a governor with a separate executive council as in Madras and Bombay. The viceroy turned down the proposal as unsatisfactory. Probably the best solution could be, what was done six years later, the separation of non-Bengali speaking parts of Bihar and Orissa from Bengal proper.

Sentiments on both sides clouded the real issue and poisoned the political atmosphere.  The partition was forced at a psychological moment, the year of Japan’s victory over Russia. The Indian opinion was utterly disregarded.

Curzon made it a prestige issue and decided not to yield to pressure. Bengali youth accepted it as a challenge to their nationalism and pledged to undo it.

Recent researches have proved that Curzon’s main motives were political and Machiavellian, to undermine the solidarity of politically advanced Bengalis and at lessening the political influence of Calcutta in Indian affairs. In a private confidential letter to the Secretary of State on 17 February 1904, Curzon wrote ‘If we are weak enough to yield to their clamor now, we shall not be able to dismember or reduce Bengal again and you will be cementing and solidifying, on the Eastern flanks of India, a force already formidable and certain to be a source of increasing trouble in future’.

The partition of Bengal, whatever its justification from the administrative viewpoint, was a cardinal blunder of Curzon. It embittered Indo British relations. It created a breach between Muslims and Hindus for the Muslims thought that they had been deprived by the Hindus of the opportunities possible from a Muslim majority province. However, the partition and the resultant agitation gave a great fillip to the nationalist movement. The annulment of the partition in 1911 gave India a ‘sense of power’, besides inculcating love for swadeshi.

DISCUSS THE IMPACT OF CHRISTIAN MISSIONARIES ON INDIAN SOCIETY AND CULTURE

Activities of the Christian Missionaries during British Rule: Christianity is reported to have entered India in the first century A.D. when St. Thomas landed on the Malabar Coast. By the 3^rd century A.D. the Syrian Christians had emerged as a body in the state of Kerala. During Akbar’s reign, in 1580, a Baptist Christian mission was set up at Fatehpur Sikri and its missionaries participated in the religious discussions at the ‘Ibadat Khana’. The Jesuit Missionaries are reported to have opened a Jesuit College at Agra in the times of Emperor Shah Jahan.

A new phase in East-West relations began when Vasco da Gama landed at Calicut in 1498. Vasco had explained the motive behind his visit thus: ‘We have come to seek Christians and spices’. The Portuguese Roman Catholic missionaries like Francis Xavier and Robert-de-Nobili, did some notable work in the field of opening some elementary schools and some orphanages.

In the 17^th and 18^th centuries, the Directors of the English East India Company and the English authorities in India adopted contradictory postures, sometimes encouraging missionary activities and at other times limiting missionary activities in India. In the 18^th century in particular the English East India merchants and officials, looked upon the Salvation Army (Christian missionaries) as a threat to their profits (they had in view the Mughal antipathy to the Portuguese Jesuits as a cautionary precedent) and put all sorts of restrictions on the entrance of missionaries in the Presidency towns.

The Seramur Missionaries – The Baptist missionaries from England – the trio, Joshua Marshman, William Carey and William Ward – wanted to start their activities from Calcutta. Lord Wellesley, the Governor General (1798-1805) considered them so ‘subversive’, ‘a menace to tranquility’, that they were banned from entering Calcutta, these missionaries were compelled to settle in the nearby Danish Settlement at Serampur. The Serampur trio did some useful work int eh field of education, setting up a printing press, translating the Ramayana and Mahabharata into English, besides attempting social reform.

The Evangelical movement in England added to the missionary influence and their popularity in London; it did influence the thinking of the Company’s Directors and the members of Parliament. As a result, the Charter Act of 1813 lifted the Company’s blanket ban on missionary activities in India, and missionaries from the UK could enter, reside, and openly preach. The Charter Act of 1833 went a step further and threw open India to missionaries of the whole world, who are free to preach and even settle in India. Consequently, many Germans and much funded American Protestant missionaries came to India. The Roman Catholic Missions also became more vigorous and their missionaries from all parts of the world poured into India.

Missionary comments on Hindu Socio-Religious Practices – The primary motive of the Christian missionaries was to convert the Indians to Christianity. In particular, they decried Hindu religion and their religious practices like idolatry and image-worship. To hammer their point, the Christian missionaries praised the tenets and practices of their religion. This evoked a sharp reaction in orthodox Hindu circles, though the missionaries did succeed in having some converts from the lower classes and in backward tribal and hill areas. All the same, the social and educational activities attracted the notice and praise of the newly western educated class.

The missionaries crusaded against the discrimination against women in Hindu society; social evils like infanticide, child marriage, polygamy, sati, forced widowhood, came under sharp condemnation. Practices like purdah, dowry system, the Devadasi practice (Bengal) and denial of proper education to women, also received their attention.

The rigidity of the caste system and untouchability were the other targets of the missionary attack. Though conversion amongst the lower castes were moderate, the inequality based on the caste system received the careful attention of the leaders of the various socio religious reformers.

The missionaries also turned over their attention to the neglected and primitive tribes like Santhals in Southern Bihar, the Marria-gonds in Madhya Pradesh and the numerous tribals in Garo hills and other areas in Northeastern state. The missionary efforts did attain some success in conversions.

In the field of social service, the missionaries were very active, though their humanitarian approach was an adjunct to their primary aim of conversions to Christianity. The missionaries opened many medical dispensaries, some hospitals and some medical institutions to win the hears of the weaker sections of Indian society. Similarly, they opened some orphanages for the physically handicapped and blind. Service centers were also opened during epidemics, famines, droughts, floods, etc. The missionaries won notable success in the field of education, production of vernacular literature, setting up printing presses and publications. In this field, the missionaries worked as pioneers, when they opened modern elementary schools, made provisions for teaching English language, set up teachers training institutions, set up special schools for girls, which provided vocational education also. The missionaries did valuable work in the field of adult education and carried on novel experiments in rural education in their schools at Moga, Salem, Madak, Ankaleshwar, Dernakal and at several other places. During 1936-37, there were 14,341 missionary institutions, with a total student strength of 1,118,200 on their rolls. The total expenditure involved was over Rs, 38 million.

In the political field, the missionary activity, particularly in the fields of political awakening and development of Nationalist outlook was only marginal.

An overview: Many Western scholars and apologists of missionary activities in introducing the modern printing press in India, opening of Westernized type of schools, commenting on the rich cultural heritage of the Indian classics, focusing attention of socio-religious evils in the Indian set up and popularizing humanitarian values in society. The missionary’s condemnation of deficiencies in Indian religious practices evoked reactions among Indian leaders, who earnestly turned their attention to socio-religious reforms in Indian society. Taken in this light – both in action and reaction – the missionaries become heralds of modernization in India.

DISCUSS WILLIAM BENTICK’S EFFORTS TO BAN SATI SYSTEM IN INDIA

No previous Governor General of India had ever tackled social problems with greater courage than Bentinck did. He tried to reform Hindu society by abolition of the cruel rite of Sati and suppression of infanticide. He crushed the gangs of assassins called ‘thugs’ and made peaceful living possible.

The term ‘Sati’ literally means ‘a pure and virtuous woman’. It is used in the case of a devoted wife who contemplates perpetual and uninterrupted conjugal union with her husband life after life and as a proof thereof burns herself with the dead body of her husband. The belief that the dead need company and victuals in their journey to far off Paradise was prevalent among many primitive peoples, and it was customary to bury, with the body of a chief, his drinking bowls, horses, dogs, and even his favorite wives and concubines. Probably this practice was brought to India by the Indo-Scythian invaders. In India its popularity was due to a false sense of conjugal duty sanctioned by society and religion, though the motivating urges were economic and moral.

Some enlightened Indian princes had taken steps to abolish this cruel practice in their dominions. Emperor Akbar had attempted to restrict it. The Marathas had forbidden it in their dominions. The Portuguese at Goa and the French at Chandernagore had also taken some steps towards its abolition. The East India Company had however adhered to its declared policy of non-interference into the social and religious customs of the people of India. Early British Governors-General like Cornwallis, Minto and Lord Hastings had taken some steps to restrict the practice of Sati by discouraging compulsion, forbidding administration of intoxicating drugs to the sorrow stricken widows, putting a ban on burning of pregnant women or widows below 16 years of age, and above all, making compulsory the presence of police officials at the time of sacrifice, who were to see that no compulsion was used. These restrictions, however, proved inadequate and unsuccessful.

Enlightened Indian reformers led by Raja Ram Mohan Roy urged William Bentinck to take necessary steps and declare the practice of Sati illegal. The loss of his sister-in-law by sati had stirred Rammohan Roy to action and he had published a number of pamphlets condemning the practice. His arguments were supported by many of the progressive Indian newspapers and the conscience of the nation had been awakened. William Bentinck provided the necessary legislative corrective. He collected relevant facts and figures about Sati cases, obtained the views of army officers, of the Judges of Nizamat Adalat, of the Superintendents of Police of the lower and upper provinces and came to the conclusion that there was no danger of mutiny or civil commotion. Regulation No XVII of December 1829 declared the practice of sati or burning or burying alive of widows illegal and punishable by the criminal courts as culpable homicide. The Regulation of 1829 was applicable in the first place to Bengal Presidency alone, but in 1830 was extended in different forms to Madras and Bombay Presidency.

No public disorders followed the enactment. A few orthodox Bengalis vainly made an appeal to the Privy Council against Government’s interference in their religious customs. Counter petitions were sent to the King by Rammohan Roy and Devendranath Tagore and William Bentinck was thanked for what he had done.

PERMANENT SETTEMENT IN BENGAL 1793

At the time of his appointment Cornwallis was specially directed to devise a satisfactory solution to the land revenue system in Bengal which should ensure the Company’s interest as well of the cultivators. The fist essential for a satisfactory approach to the problem was a thorough inquiry into the wages, tenures and rents prevalent in Bengal. Prolonged discussion followed in which the leading part was taken by Sir John Shore, the President of the Board of Revenue, Mr. James Grant, the Record Keeper and the Governor General himself. The discussion centered round three vital questions. With whom was the settlement to be made – the zamindars or the actual tillers of the soil? What would be the state’s share in the produce of the land? Should the settlement be for a term of years of permanent?

What was the position of the zamindar? Was he to be considered merely as a hereditary tax gatherer with no priority rights or was he the owner and proprietor of land? On this point John Shore and James Grant held opposite views. John Shore maintained that the zamindar was the owner of the land subject to the payment of annual land revenue to the state. As such the zamindar could bequeath the entire land to his children, sell it or mortgage it. This was the position in the later Mughal times, maintained Shore. James Grant, on the other hand maintained that the state was the owner of all land in the country, the zamindar was just the rent collecting agent and as such could be discarded at the will of the state. Cornwallis, who himself was an English landlord, accepted the viewpoint of Shore. Cornwallis’ viewpoint was very much affected by what was practicable. The company’s servants did not possess sufficient administrative experience to make a direct settlement with the ryot. The system of farming estates to the highest bidder had been tried for long with undesirable consequences. Thus, Cornwallis decided to make a settlement with the zamindars.

What was to be the basis for the revenue settlement?

James Grant maintained that the settlement should be made on the basis of the highest Mughal settlement, namely, that in force in 1765. Shore argued that in the Mughal times there was great discrepancy between the assessed amount and the revenue actually collected and that arrears were very often written off. Ultimately it was decided that the settlement was to be made on the basis of the actual collections of the year 1790-91.

For what period was the settlement to be made?

About this Shore and Cornwallis held different views. Shore held the view that considering the absence of proper survey or demarcation of estate boundaries and limited means of assessment, the settlement should be made for an initial period of 10 years. Cornwallis wanted to declare the settlement permanent and perpetual. He held the view that a 10-year period was too limited to induce any zamindar to clear away the jungles or introduce other permanent improvements in the land. The Court of Directors gave sanction to the view of Cornwallis.

The Settlement – The Zamindars were recognized owners of land and a 10years settlement was made with them in 1790. In 1793 the decennial settlement was declared permanent and the zamindars and their legitimate successors were allowed to hold their estates at that very assessed rate forever. The state demand was fixed at 89% of the rental, leaving 11% with the zamindars as their share for their trouble and responsibility.

Observations on the Settlement – Contemporary opinion claimed a number of advantages for the permanent settlement.

Financially, the permanent settlement secured a fixed and stable income for the state and the state could depend upon that income, monsoons or no monsoons. Further, it saved the government the expenses that had to be spent in making periodical assessments and settlements.

Economically, it was claimed that the Permanent Settlement would encourage agricultural enterprise and prosperity; waste land would be reclaimed and the soil under cultivation would be improved; the zamindars would introduce new methods of cultivation like rotation of crops, use of manure, etc. Thus, the settlement would create conditions for the development of the fullest power of the soil. This in turn would create a contented and resourceful peasantry.

Politically, Cornwallis expected that the Permanent Settlement should create a class of loyal zamindars who would be prepared to defend the company at all costs because their rights were guaranteed by the company. Thus, the permanent settlement secured for the government the political support of an influential class in the same way as the Bank of England had for William III after 1694. The zamindars of Bengal stood loyal during the great rebellion of 1857. Seton Karr commented that the ‘political benefits of the settlement balance its economic defects’.

Socially, the hope was expressed that the zamindars would act as the natural leaders of the ryot and show their public spirit in helping the spread of education and other charitable activities.

Lastly, the permanent settlement of Bengal set free the ablest servants of the Company for judicial services. Further, it avoided the evils normally associated with the temporary settlements, the harassment of the cultivator, the tendency on the part of the cultivator to leave the land to deteriorate towards the end of the term to get a low assessment, etc.

Disadvantages: Whatever little economic or political purposes the Settlement might have served during its first few years, it soon turned into an engine of exploitation and oppression. It created ‘feudalism at the top and serfdom at the bottom’. Many of the advantages claimed proved to be illusory.

Financially, the state has proved to be a great loser in the long run. The advantages of a fixed and stable income were secured at the great sacrifice of any prospective share int eh increase of revenue from land.

Even when new areas of land were brought under cultivation and the rents of the land already under cultivation had been increased manifold, the state could not claim its legitimate share int eh increase. The state demand fixed in 1793 remained almost the same even in 1954.

The Permanent Settlement retarded the economic progress of Bengal. Most of the landlords did not take any interest in the improvement of the land but were merely interested in extracting the maximum possible rent from the ryot. The cultivator, being under the constant fear of ejectment, had no incentive to improve the land. The zamindars did not live on the estates, but away in the cities where they wasted their time and money in luxury. Thus, the zamindars became a sort of ‘distant suction pumps’ sucking the wealth of the rural areas and wasting it in the cities. Besides, a host of intermediaries grew up between the state and the actual cultivator. This process of sub-infeudation sometimes reached ridiculous proportions, there being as many as 50 intermediaries. All the intermediaries looked to their profits and the ryot was reduced to the position of a pauper. In this context it may be worthwhile to quote the view of Carver who wrote: ‘Next to war, famine and pestilence, the worst thing that can happen to a rural community is absentee-landlordism’.

Politically, the permanent settlement did fit in the game of the Company and the Zamindars along with other vested interests became the favorite children of imperialism. However, the British administration gained the loyalty of the few at the cost of the alienation of the masses. Besides, the system divided rural society into two hostile classes, namely, the zamindars and the tenants.

Socially, the Permanent Settlement stands condemned. By recognizing the absolute right of ownership of the zamindars, the company sacrificed the interests of the peasants whether of property or occupancy. In a way the peasants suffered from a double injustice, first by surrendering their property rights and secondly by being entirely left at the mercy of the zamindars who rack-rented them. True, the government attempted rectification and passed tenancy legislation to protect the interests of the ryot, but the zamindars evaded the protective legislation. The growth of population resulting in an excessive pressure on land played into the hands of the zamindars and they not infrequently ejected the ryot. In fact, the peasant was reduced to the position of a serf.

In the beginning the zamindars themselves were in great difficulty. The state demand was pitched very high. Added to this over assessment was the harshness in the method of collection of revenue. The zamindars were required to deposit the revenue in the government treasury by the sunset of the last day fixed for the purpose failing which the lands were confiscated and auctioned. This ‘sunset’ law created great hardships and deprived many zamindars of their land for temporary difficulties. During 1797-98 estates worth 17% of the total revenue of Bengal were sold for non payment of the state demand in time. The ‘sunset’ law created so great insecurity that at one time no bidders were coming forth. The frequent changes in the ownership of land affected adversely the condition of the cultivators.

We might say in conclusion that a temporary settlement for 40 or 50 years, renewable again and again would have secured all the objectives Cornwallis had in view. It was hardly a wise policy measure to bind posterity for all times. If some Indian nationalists like Romesh Dutt gave their unquantified support to the policy of permanent settlement it was partly due to the fact that they themselves came from a class which was the beneficiary from the settlement of Bengal and partly due to the fear that the control of the bureaucracy would be worse than that of the zamindars. In the twentieth century, the economic insufficiency and social injustice of the settlement became very glaring. Besides it was found against the tenets of political or social justice. The Government of Free India has tried to set right the wrong done by Cornwallis. The West Bengal Acquisition of Estates Act, 1955, has abolished zamindari by paying compensation to the zamindars at a huge expense to the public exchequer.

WAS THE PARTITION OF INDIA INEVITABLE AND UNAVOIDABLE?

 The answer to this question differs widely with the nationality of the writer- Indian, Pakistani or British.

In India the partition of the country is considered a tragedy. It is projected as the logical culmination of the long-standing British policy of Divide and Rule and the Muslim League’s ideology of communalism and separateness. The two worked together and forced the Indian National Congress to agree to the partition of India. Indian writers largely place the blame at the door of the Congress leaders and agree that if they had shown adequate understanding, tact and boldness, the partition of the Motherland could be avoided.

In Pakistan however, the partition is considered as quite logical and inevitable, and the growth of Muslim nationalism is traced in the depth of Indian History.

Among the British scholars there is no unanimity of opinion about the rationale of the partition of India and there is difference of opinion among historians and those writers who served the ‘raj’ in India.

Whatever the verdict of history, credit must be given to Mr. M. A. Jinnah for his adroit handling of the situation. He was a very shrewd politician and often dodged his political rivals by clever somersaults. He rose form strength to strength and earned the epithet of Qaid-i-Azam (Great Organizer).

Jawaharlal Nehru attributes the growth of Muslim communalism to the delay in the growth of a strong Muslim middle calss; this enabled the League to work up the psychology of fear among the emotionally excitable Muslim masses. The cry of ‘Islam in danger’ brought the Muslim masses under the banner of the League and Mr. Jinnah stood forth as the political messiah. All said, the acts of omission and commission on the part of the Hindu Mahasabha further fanned the fanaticism of the Muslim League.

Mr. V. D. Savarkar, the President of Mahasabha, advocated ‘a uncompromising doctrine of Hindu ascendency’ and openly announced that ‘the only way to deal with the Hindu-Muslim schism was to insist that all India was Hindustan and that the Muslims must reconcile themselves to the status of a minority community in a democratic state which orders life by majority rule.