Abstract
Rise of ‘modern nationalism’ in India during the later half of the nineteenth century under colonial conditions is a widely contested/debated issue among scholars of Nationalists, Cambridge and Neo-Traditionalist leanings with added flavour of deconstructionist or post-nationalists. Undoubtedly, a nation as vast and ancient with diverse features, which even the European continent as a whole does not possess, needs micro scrutiny in select regions comprising of different social/ideological groups in context to the study of nationalism in India. This book explores the contest of nationalism and identity in the region of Punjab, which witnessed a partition within its own geographical boundaries in the making of national boundary in 1947 and later on divided into three separate language regions in post-independent India. So the subject of the author is delicate and has been handled with clear objectivity.
Issues pertaining to this particular region, both pre- and post-independence, are complex in nature. Earlier, a lot many scholars have shed light on the subject pre-independence history, around which the book is centred,, such as Shyamla Bhatia, Paul R. Brass, Achin Vinayak, Bidyut Chakraborty, Madan Gandhi, Kenneth. W. Jonnes, etc. However, on a delicate issue, the author has proceeded with a hypothesis of ‘variety and contest for accommodation’ rather than on the principle of ‘vertical hegemony’ or ‘hegemony without power’.
However, in the backdrop of the rise of much hyped ‘Hundutva ideology’, which is essentially different from Hinduism in its essence, the author has argued upon ‘re-arrangement with what Indian nationalism implied. Was it coherent monolith or was it internally contested?’ But the third assumption, ‘how far it was a colonial construction’ as per ideologies of the Raj, has been left with a space’. These assumptions are polemical in nature, in terms of contestation and creating an identity, keeping in view the sub-continental variety, as the post-independent history writing suggests. But the merit of the book lies in its narrative aspect and that it stays away from the specifics of Sikh and Muslim nationalist imaginations in Punjab, as the bulk of scholarly material rests upon, so as to say till Nisid Hajari’s work (Midnight’s Furies, Penguin, 2015), which rests upon the theory that partition was essentially a Punjab story. The author has concentrated on the varieties of contesting nationalism of ‘within’, setting aside the ‘exterior’ and ‘interior’. Interestingly, it has not been denied either. Thus, basically, the contesting classes of nationalism are Hindu nationalist, depressed classes and secularists as prime identities of groups resting upon the precise idea of secular and composite nationalism in Punjab, with its bearings at Pan-Indian space. So, by juxtapositioning of the two, book explores the juvenescence journey in Punjab and its effects on Pan-Indian canvass. Thus, the author guards the text from machinate characters.
Introductory note signifies the necessity of understanding Punjab in the context of emergence of contesting vision of identity-nation and nationalism, as the period under study offers immense cross-sectional discourse. Three main luminaries are put to microscopic survey, each in contrast—Lajpat Rai—seeking a Hindu nation, Bhagat Singh—a secularist of its own kind and Mango Ram—questioning the formulation of nation and its social identity from an ‘autonomous’ SC perspective. It is being suggested that these visions were not watertight but were in constant flux, primarily as most of ‘Adi Dharma’ constructionist were off schools of Arya Samaj, a dominant discourse in Punjab and elsewhere. Apart from this, secular issue of Bhagat Singh is interwoven with Lajpat Rai’s issue that ‘constant influx’ principle is being implied.
A large space has been dedicated to Lajpat Rai as a persona of Hindu/Composite nationalism. It is interesting to quote an observation of the author
On the Muslim question, however. Lajpat Rai was far less flexible than Gandhi. Though he saw the nation as a composite whole, he argues that Hindus should bargain hard for their rights in context of community negotiations through the Hindu Sabha platform and act as Congressmen when they dealt with colonial state as Indians.
However, it is further argued
though he seemed in some ways close to ideological domain of Hindu nationalism, he was still firmly a composite nationalist in the sense that he insisted that the nation as a whole must be composite and not “Hindu”. This was the fundamental disagreement that made him break with Bhai Parmanand of Hindu Mahasabha’.
Furthermore, the book provides a space on the question of—how colonial modernity establishes a juncture of departure for the formulation of traditional social structure of Hindus in general into the formation of ‘autonomous identity’ of a respective group, constantly in search of space, identification and hegemony of its own kind as an issue of contest resting upon the edifice of modern nationalism. To substantiate the argument, ample primary data have been used, as ‘Tribune’ is quoted extensively along with other contemporary reports.
Treatment of Bhagat Singh as an epitome of secular nation’s idea, in the period under review, is absorbing, essentially on linguistic ground, which undoubtedly proved as a communal catalyst in United Provinces and elsewhere in shaping the cultural–linguistic domain of social groups in India. Bhagat Singh’s secular and national leanings are worth quoting from the text ‘When he argues for Punjabi in Hindi (Devanagari) script as the as the regional language of Punjab to bring it closer to Hindi, which he regards as the natural choice of India’s national language’. Further, in spite of his own ideological leanings, the book provides enough space on the issue of nationalism of Bhagat Singh; how he reacts to Lajpat Rai’s death. Certainly, a nationalist beyond argument but not in a watertight compartment.
Finally, the ‘Adi Dharma’ and ‘Aryan’ polemics, which subsequently shape the issue of contesting nationalism in Punjab can be interpreted at loggers with Gandhi and Congress as a whole as well as a challenge to Arya Samajists, particularly in Punjab. On this very issue rests the third idea of contesting nationalisms in Punjab.
Over all, the book provides an analytical discourse through its narratives, supported by primary and secondary sources, an essential in the discourse of history. This well-researched work is a vital cog on the historical background and subsequent politics in India since independence, specifically related to Punjab and Pan-Indian context canvass too. The author has wisely used extensive primary sources and bibliography, which will enrich further research in history in particular and reader in general. Above all, the unbiased approach makes it worth a contribution.