Popular Translations of Nationalism

In one way, therefore, this book is a welcome addition to the specific body of literature existing on the NCM, more so, because in the mainstream historiography with some justification, the NCM is being regarded as the first mass-based anti-colonial national movement. Singh does seem to endorse this view as she claims that ‘Besides, a study of this phase also becomes significant [other than the phase of 1935-46 as covered by Vinita Damodaran in her book] for revisiting the historiography on nationalism as non-cooperation marked the period when national movement moved from the confines of educated section and assumed a mass character.’ (Preface, x). As Singh observes a little later, the ‘Swadeshi Movement and the Home Rule Movement did not have much impact in Bihar’ (p. 11), one can see a logical conclusion drawn here that the NCM was indeed the first mass-based national movement in Bihar. The first chapter attempts to explain this novelty by looking at the different ‘locale of the NCM’ in the political set-up of Bihar.

Three important clusters have been recognised by Singh in explaining the exact nature of the NCM in Bihar. One, agrarian protests against European planters and their Indian employees, and also against Indian zamindars; second, political change in which the Rowlatt agitation ‘marked the beginning of [a] different political era’ (p. 15); and third, the religio-political issue of the Khilafat which had a strong base in Bihar before the NCM. I am using the word ‘agrarian’ as shorthand; Singh does describe both peasant and tribal protests in a great detail in Chapter four of the book. Also, the geographical distribution of these protests have been clearly outlined: in north Bihar, the protests were largely against the indigo planters while in the south, which had substantial tribal population, the movement or rather movements were directed against landlords and traders. Elsewhere, in districts such as Saran, Muzaffarpur and Darbhanga (where large zamindari families existed) the issue at stake was of rent. (p. 234).

One clear outcome of Singh’s discussion of the Rowlatt Satyagrah movement of 1919, which provided a significant background to the NCM, is that the peasant struggles in Bihar were already on the rise from the early twentieth-century. This is also a theme widely covered in numerous works on Bihar peasantry and nationalism but it is important to understand Singh’s treatment of this phase of peasant struggle as this social group also played a major role in the subsequent NCM. In fact, as Singh says: ‘It is this strong tradition of peasant agitation that sharpened with its convergence with the Non-Cooperation Movement in Bihar.’ (p. 9). Various tenancy legislations and then the First World War had worsened the situation of the peasants (pp. 3-6). The big zamindaris such as the Darbhanga estate obviously remained aloof but Singh also claims that small zamindars also did not do much to ameliorate the conditions of the peasants. With the changing nature of the social base of the Congress in the post-Rowlatt period, Singh claims that rich peasants, small landlords, merchants and businessmen started associating with the Congress (p. 15). What we then notice through this account is that there are two strands flowing rather parallel to each other: one, of popular protests which was ‘shaped by organizational structures that were independent of nationalist organization’ (p. 233) and second, the widening base of the Congress to which both peasants and small landlords were driven into. This historiographical explication in itself is no novelty as existing works have already outlined this. What remains challenging from the historian’s viewpoint is to explain how did this convergence happen? What were the modalities and mechanisms through which various classes, seemingly sparring at each other (peasants and landlords, for instance) were brought into the same fold of ‘nationalism’. As it appears to the present reviewer, chapter two of this book, which attempts to explain this convergence, constitutes the core of the book.

One interesting aspect that comes out from the discussion in Chapter two is that the peasants and their representatives such as Swami Vidyanand were in the forefront of pushing the Congress to adopt the NCM. The swell in agrarian protests was one of the main reasons which the Congress followed and not initiated. In other words, the local popular protests led the way for pan-Indian movement rather the other way round.  One can make a similar argument based on Singh’s insightful account of the anti-liquor movement, which was not a part of the original agenda (p. 43 and pp. 125-38). There, however, remain some confusing leads in the account given. If peasants and their representatives were in the lead then it is not adequately explained why the support for the election boycott campaign (which was on the agenda of the NCM) was the weakest in the rural areas (pp. 30-1). Perhaps and this again needed to be conceptually delineated, the framework of ‘convergence’ itself is inadequate as Vidyanand and other peasant leaders went against the NCM agenda and contested the election. They did so not in opposition to the goals of the NCM; they claimed to remain the ardent supporters of Gandhi. Ban on liquor consumption and its illicit distillation, as with other contradictory popular acts such as haat-looting, was both done in the name of Gandhi. While explaining this contradiction, Singh unconvincingly falls back on the usual baddie – the British colonial excise policy; hence, both prohibition and consumption become two sides of the same coin (pp. 134-36). The author could have found better explanations through her own framework of ‘popular translations’ in which sometimes translations could have just failed.

The mix of political loyalties, class struggles, varied forms of mobilisation, expanding social base of the Congress, and not least, the shifts that were taking place in these three to five years are of complex nature. Singh does manage to lay bare the basic contours of this mix; nevertheless, the analytical precision and clarity at times remains muddled in the otherwise descriptive account, which of course is interesting for a historian (like the present reviewer) working on the same region. More importantly, the study fails short of offering any new conceptual tools to grapple with the vexed question of the Congress’ widening base and different forms of class struggles that prevailed in Bihar.

Amongst other mechanisms, emergence of Gandhi, the press and the role of rumour has been taken up for discussion to explain the way the Congress tried to broaden its presence in rural areas. One is struck by the absence of reference to Shahid Amin’s influential essay Gandhi as Mahatma (unless the author felt that this work is now seminally so acceptable that it does not need to be referenced and engaged with or the author simply found no merit in this work). Once again, the description of how Gandhi’s charismatic stories were time and again repeated in the print, how the printed materials such as Gandhi chalisa helped carve an image of him that made him a ‘phenomenon’, and so on, are highly interesting. Still lacking is the analytical depth in the themes such as the relationship between rumours and print, between informal exchange and gossip in the bazaar and organisational/institutional structure of a printing press or the Congress office, and not least, between the authorship and readership of these oral as well as printed texts. For instance, Singh rightly argues that readership of these printed low-priced chapbooks and other materials were diverse, but so can one argue was the authorship. If that be the case, the blanket term of ‘non-cooperators’ or even ‘nationalists’ become a deceptive descriptive category (please see, esp. pp. 39-42). Were all the people participating in the production of texts and circulation of rumours be classed as ‘non-cooperators’ and/or nationalist? A brief discussion on volunteers is indeed helpful (p. 50); a much penetrative reflection on the use of different terms (non-cooperators, nationalists, Congress workers, volunteers and so on) would have provided readers with indicative signposts about the ways in which nationalism itself threw up varied (and overlapping) categories for its participants.

Singh has proficiently used a range of sources; in particular, the use of Hindi language sources is highly commendable. It was here, perhaps, she could have made use of novels such as Karmabhoomi (by Premchand) to go deeper into asking the question: what did it mean to be a volunteer or a non-cooperator? Also, in terms of source range, the use of popular tracts and proscribed pamphlets is a unique feature of this book, but unfortunately also constitutes the weakness because Singh does not contextualise this prolific literary production and circulation of texts that took place at a very critical juncture of mass-scale cheap printing, rise of varied mofussil-level authorship and readership, and new ethics and language of nationalism.

The first phase of the movement started fading by May 1921 to be followed by the second intensified phase from September of the same year which had some new features. Singh’s account is perceptive here: the renewed intensity, as she argues, was because of the organisational character, which now was based on disciplining the volunteers. As Chapter four demonstrates, new programmes such as the boycott of foreign cloth, colonial educational institutions and government jobs brought newer elements such as students, pleaders and lawyers into the fold. Singh, however, is quick to remind that increased importance on discipline did not check violence. Police stations, planters’ godowns and other places became regular targets. One can glean through Singh’s rich local description that the sites of protest in this phase had moved to streets, cuthcherries, jails, schools, colleges and so on. While she convincingly argues that intensification led to anxiety amongst officials about the erosion of their authority, she misses to explain if these were the new ‘sites’ of political resistance compared to the rural sites where peasant protests had remained strong (excluding planters’ establishments, which were also prominent targets in the second phase). This becomes a pertinent point to clarify because fear of the peasants, who until now were the mainstay of the movement, going radically against the zamindars was one of the reasons to not go for the civil disobedience (p. 51). Something must have also been said about the connection between urban, mofussil and village ‘sites’ of mobilisation and protest, particularly when the author adeptly presents a range of description from places that would fit in all these categories.

It appears that as institutions and their physical buildings increasingly became targets of ire, the police thannahs became one of the most despised sites. In fact, the NCM was finally called off when policemen were charred in U.P. but the history of violence against the colonial subordinate constabulary is not part of the mainstream accounts. In this regard, the strongest chapter of the book is the last one which explores the two dimensions of how ‘nationalism’ related to this subordinate group of state officials. One, through direct and indirect appeal to give up their jobs (by reminding them of their moral duty towards the nation and fellow countrymen). The constabulary’s own protest against the state fed and fed upon this moral appeal. Second, and equally important, was through violence and killings directed against them.

Conceptually, this book on the first mass-based national movement attempts to bridge the gap between the popular and elite domains of nationalism, a theoretical approach which became influential about three decades ago, and since then been heavily modified even by some of its proponents. It is interesting to notice that Singh still finds it relevant to make this the prime entry point of her theoretical and conceptual engagement. Between ‘mobocracy’ and ‘subaltern militancy’ as the two poles defining popular protests, Singh has got it right to question the binary between the popular and the mainstream. However, whether the expression of ‘translation’ provides any better conceptual framework remains an unanswered question in this book.

Nitin Sinha, Department of History, Vanburgh College, University of York (nitin.sinha@york.ac.uk)