Subject: Modern History

Yesterday, January 3^rd was birth anniversary of one of India’s first modern feminists and a social reformer Savitribai Phule. She is especially remembered for being India’s first female teacher who worked for the upliftment of women and untouchables in the field of education and literacy.

Who was Savitribai Phule?

• Phule was born in Naigaon, Maharashtra in 1831 and married activist and social-reformer Jyotirao Phule when she was nine years old.
• After marriage, with her husband’s support, Phule learned to read and write and both of them eventually went on to found India’s first school for girls called Bhide Wada in Pune in 1948.
• Before this, she started a school with Jyotirao’s cousin Saganbai in Maharwada in 1847.
• Since at that time the idea of teaching girls was considered to be a radical one, people would often throw dung and stones at her as she made her way to the school.
• Significantly, it was not easy for the Phule’s to advocate for the education of women and the untouchables since in Maharashtra a nationalist discourse was playing out between 1881-1920 led by Bal Gangadhar Tilak.
• These nationalists including Tilak opposed the setting up of schools for girls and non-Brahmins citing loss of nationality.

Her work

• Essentially, both Jyotirao and Savitribai recognised that education was one of the central planks through which women and the depressed classes could become empowered and hope to stand on an equal footing with the rest of the society.
• The Phules started the Literacy Mission in India between 1854-55.
• They started the Satyashodhak Samaj (Society for Truth-Seeking), through which they wanted to initiate the practice of Satyashodhak marriage, in which no dowry was taken.
• Because of the role played in the field of women’s education, she is also considered to be one of the “crusaders of gender justice”.
• Her books of poems “Kavya Phule” and “Bavan Kashi Subodh Ratnakar” were published in 1934 and 1982.

West Bengal Governor drew widespread condemnation over his tweet referring to a table, apparently used by Lord Curzon to sign papers pertaining to the Partition of Bengal in 1905, as “iconic”.

Who was Lord Curzon?

• Curzon, India’s Viceroy between 1899 and 1905, was one of the most controversial and consequential holders of that post.
• The partition of the undivided Bengal Presidency in 1905 was one of his most criticised moves, which triggered widespread opposition not only in Bengal but across India, and gave impetus to the freedom movement.
• Curzon was deeply racist, and convinced of Britain’s “civilizing mission” in India.
• In 1901, he described Indians as having “extraordinary inferiority in character, honesty and capacity”.
• He was deeply intolerant of Indian political aspirations.

The Partition of Bengal

• In July 1905, Curzon announced the partition of the undivided Bengal Presidency.
• The Presidency was the most populous province in India, with around 8 crore people, and comprised the present-day states of West Bengal, Bihar, parts of Chhattisgarh, Odisha, and Assam, as well as today’s Bangladesh.
• A new province of East Bengal and Assam was announced, with a population of 3.1 crore, and a Muslim-Hindu ratio of 3:2. Bengal, the western province, was overwhelmingly Hindu.
• While the move was ostensibly aimed at making the administration of the large region easier, Curzon’s real intentions were far less benign.

Aftermath of the partition

• The partition provoked great resentment and hostility in Bengal.
• It was clear to the Bengal Congress and patriotic Indians in both Bengal and elsewhere that Curzon’s motive was to crush the increasingly loud political voices of the literate class in the province, and to provoke religious strife and opposition against them.
• But the protests against the partition did not remain confined to this class alone.
• A campaign to boycott British goods, especially textiles, and promote swadeshi began.
• There were marches and demonstrations with the protesters singing Bande Mataram to underline their patriotism and challenge the colonialists.
• Samitis emerged throughout Bengal, with several thousand volunteers.
• Rabindranath Tagore led the marches at many places, and composed many patriotic songs, most famously ‘Amar Sonar Bangla’ (My Golden Bengal), which is now the national anthem of Bangladesh.
• The message of patriotism and Bengali nationalism was showcased in Jatras, or popular theatre.

Scrapping of the partition

• Curzon left for Britain in 1905, but the agitation continued for many years.
• Partition was finally reversed in 1911 by Lord Hardinge in the face of unrelenting opposition.

The Govt. in J&K has cancelled two existing public holidays and introduced a new one. This is seen by some as a move against their own assertion of their religious identity.

The three holidays

• The government order has cancelled public holidays on December 5 and July 13.
• December 5 is commemorated as the birth anniversary of Sheikh Mohd Abdullah, National Conference founder, former J&K Prime Minister, and former Chief Minister.
• July 13 is observed as Martyrs’ Day in Jammu and Kashmir. On that date in 1931, 22 Kashmiris were killed outside the Srinagar Central Jail, where they had assembled to protest against autocratic Dogra rulers.
• The new holiday is on October 26, the date in 1947 when the former state of Jammu and Kashmir acceded to the Dominion of India.
• A day later, Indian troops reached Srinagar to drive out tribal raiders. October 27 is observed as a Black Day in Kashmir, marked with a shutdown.

History & significance

• In 1846, under the Treaty of Amritsar, the British sold J&K state to the Dogra king Maharaja Gulab Singh.
• The Dogras hailed from Jammu and their rule lasted for over a century.
• In 1931, Muslims of Jammu and Kashmir rose against the autocracy of Dogra rule.
• The uprising, which led to the killing of 22 Muslims, is seen as the first assertion of Muslim identity in Jammu and Kashmir.

Implications of the move

• The move is seen as a departure from the politics of Jammu and Kashmir since 1939.
• Many people see this as an effort to erase the role of Sheikh Abdullah, and J&K’s Muslim assertion.
• They see it also as a refusal to recognise Kashmir’s popular Muslim leaders who sided with India in 1947, and leaders who continue to identify with India.
• It also raises a question mark over the revival of a political process in Jammu and Kashmir.
• The move comes when normalcy is yet to return even five months after the abrogation.