Page | 1
THE BENGAL
PRESIDENCY
HISTORY AND RISE OF NATIONAL
MOVEMENTS.
Aditya Pratap singh
3/31/2018
Faculty of law
Jamia Milia Islamia Semester-2 Self Finance
PREFACE.
I am very thankful to everyone who all supported me, for
completing my project effectively and moreover on time.
I am equally grateful to my history teacher [mahalingam
sir ]. He gave me moral support and guided me in
different matters regarding the topic. He had been very
kind and patient while suggesting me the outlines of this
project and correcting my doubts. I thank her for overall
supports.
Last but not the least, I would like to thank my parents
who helped me a lot in gathering different information
and guiding me from time to time in making this project
.despite of their busy schedules ,they gave me different
ideas in making this project unique.
Thanking you
2
INDEX:
THE HISTORY OF
BENGAL
Bengal in the holy writ
Cities of ancient Bengal.
Congress politics in Bengal
1919-1939.
Bengal on the eve of the
non-cooperation and
khilafat movement (1919-
20).
Partition of Bengal.
Bibliography.
3
THE HISTORY OF BENGAL.
The history of Bengal includes modern-day Bangladesh and West Bengal in the eastern part
of the Indian subcontinent, at the apex of the Bay of Bengal and dominated by
the fertile Ganges delta. The advancement of civilization in Bengal dates back four
millennia.[1] the region was known to the ancient Greeks and Romans as Gangaridai.
The Ganges and the Brahmaputra rivers act as a geographic marker of the region, but also
connect it to the broader Indian subcontinent.[2] Bengal, at times, has played an important role
in the history of the Indian subcontinent.
The area's early history featured a succession of Indian empires, internal squabbling, and a
tussle between Hinduism and Buddhism for dominance. Ancient Bengal was the site of
several major Janapads (kingdoms), while the earliest cities date back to the Vedic period.
A thalassocracy and an entrepôt of the historic Silk Road,[2] Ancient Bengal established
colonies on Indian Ocean islands and in Southeast Asia;[3] had strong trade links
with Persia, Arabia and the Mediterranean that focused on its lucrative cotton muslin
textiles.[4] The region was part of several ancient pan-Indian empires, including
the Mauryans and Guptas . It was also a bastion of regional kingdoms. The citadel
of Gauda served as capital of the Gauda Kingdom, the Buddhist Pala Empire (eighth to 11th
century) and Hindu Sena Empire (11th–12th century). This era saw the development
of Bengali language, script, literature, music, art andarchitecture.
From the 13th century onward, the region was controlled by the Bengal Sultanate,
Hindu Rajas (kings),[5] and Baro-Bhuyan landlords. During the Medieval and Early Modern
periods, Bengal was home to several medieval Hindu principalitis, including the Koch
Kingdom, Kingdom of Mallabhum, Kingdom of Bhurshut and Kingdom of Tripura; the realm
of powerful Hindu Rajas notably Pratapaditya and Raja Sitaram Ray. In the late 16th and
early 17th centuries, Isa Khan, a Muslim Rajput chief, who led the Baro Bhuiyans (twelve
landlords), dominated the Bengal delta.[6] afterwards, the region came under the suzerainty of
the Mughal Empire, as its wealthiest province. Under the Mughals, Bengal Subah generated
50% of the empire's GDP and 12% of the world's GDP,[7]globally dominant in industries such
as textile manufacturing and ship building,[8][9][10] with the capital Dhaka having a population
exceeding a million people.[7] The gradual decline of the Mughal Empire led to quasi-
independent states under the Nawabs of Bengal, subsequent Maratha expeditions in Bengal,
and finally the conquest by the British East India Company.
The British took control of the region from the late 18th century. The company consolidated
their hold on the region following the Battle of Plassey in 1757 and Battle of Buxar in 1764
and by 1793 took complete control of the region. The plunder of Bengal directly contributed
to the Industrial Revolution in Britain,[8][9][10][11] with the capital amassed from Bengal used to
invest in British industries such as textile manufacture during the Industrial Revolution and
4
greatly increase British wealth, while at the same time leading to
deindustrialization and famines in Bengal.[8][9][10] Kolkata (or Calcutta) served for many years
as the capital of British controlled territories in India. The early and prolonged exposure to
British administration resulted in the expansion of Western education, culminating in
development of science, institutional education, and social reforms in the region, including
what became known as the Bengali renaissance. A hotbed of the Indian independence
movement through the early 20th century, Bengal was divided during India's independence in
1947 along religious lines into two separate entities: West Bengal—a state of India—and East
Bengal—a part of the newly created Dominion of Pakistan that later became the independent
nation of Bangladesh in 1971.
Bengal in the holy writ
The historic lands included within the area now known as Bengal find no mention in the
Vedic hymns. The horizon of the earliest Aryan singers is apparently limited to the region
extending eastwards only as far as Bhagalpur. The theologists of the aitreya brahmana
however, refer to peoples who lived in large numbers beyond the frontiers of aryandom and
were classed as dasyus. Among such folks we find mention of the pundras . Pundranagara the
capital city of this aincient people, is proved by epigraphic evidence to have been situated in
the bogra district of northern Bengal. Some writers have traced the name of the vangas ,
another early Bengal tribe to the aitreya aranyaka.
The first unambiguous references to the vangas occur in the aincient epics and the
dharmasutras . The bodhayana dharmasutra1 divides the land known to it into thre ethnic or
cultural belts which were regarded with varying degrees of esteem. The holiest of the three
was aryanvarta , lying between the himalyas and the western vindhyas and watered by the
upper Ganges and the jamuna. The zone that stood next in point of sanctity embraced Malwa,
east and south Bihar south Kathiawar the Deccan and the lower Indus valley. The outermost
belt was formed by the aerates of the Punjab, the pundras of north Bengal, the suvras
occupying parts of southern Punjab and sind, the vangas central and eastern Bengal , and the
kalingas of Orissa and adjoining tracts. The regions inhabited by these peoples were regarded
as altogether outside the pale of vedic culture. Persons who lived amidst these folks even for
a temporary period were required to go through expiatory rites.
Cities of ancient Bengal.
As early as Panini we find mention of a city called Guadapura . but it cannot be identified. An
old brahmi inscription refers to the city of Pundranagara which answers to the modern
Mahasthangarh, an ancient shrine and fort seven miles north of bogra on the river Karatoya.
1
1. 25-31 L. Srinivasacharya’s ed., pp. 11-13.
5
Under the name of punavadhna it seem to be mentioned in a sanchi stupa inscription . the city
was still flourishing in the days of hiuen tsang (seventh centuary ad) and sandhyakara nandi
(12 centuary ad). It formed the headquarters of a bhukti till the muslim conquest.
The famous port of tamralipti may be older even than the capital city of pundras . it is
mentioned in the great epic. But the earliest dated reference to it is that contained in the
geography of Ptolemy.(about the middle of the second century ad). The Greek geographer
refers to the city s tamalites and places it on the ganges in a way which suggests connection
with the country of the mandalai. The town of tamluk, to which it is taken to correspond, is
on the right bank of the river rupnarayan about twelve miles from its junction with the
Hooghly. As pointed out above, the course of theserivers have shifted frequently , and it is
possible that in early times the port of tamralipti may have been situated on the Saraswati or
another branch of the ganges . in the days of the Chinese pilgrims , fa-hien, hiuen-tsang, and
of dandin, the author of the dasakumara-charita, it was the place for embarkation for Ceylon ,
java and china(in the east), and the land of the yavanas (in the west). The kathasaritasagara
preserves traditions about people embarking on ships at tamralipti and going to
kataha,possibly in the malay peninsula. The decline of the famous port commenced probably
after the dudhpani(hazaribagh) rock inscription of udayamana ( about the eight century a.d. ).
The abhidhana-chintamani mentions damalipta, tamalipta, tamalini,stamapura and
vishnugriha as synonyms of tmpalipti. The trikandasesha adds velakula and tamalika
(tamluk).
Along with tamalites, Ptolemy mentions the royal city of ganges which is already known to
the author of the periplus (first century A.D).
Congress politics in Bengal 1919-1939.
It is generally believed that ‘associations brought nineteenth centuary India across the
threshold of modern politics.2 The foundation of the Indian national congress in 1885 was a
landmark in the history of associations. Since then the complexities of modern politics have
shaped its creed, character and composition both at central and local level.
Until the First world war the nationalist Congress confronted imperialism using techniques
ranging from the policy of petitioning favoured by the Moderates to the passive resistance of
the Extremists. By the end of the war however, nationalist politics began to reach sections of
the populace who had earlier remained outside it. Their potential as active participants in
modern politics could not be ignored. A point had been reached where institutional politics
could not remain oblivious of the politics of the people. This set the trend for nationalist
politics in future years as the two streams interacted , each moulding the other.
2
Seal,Anil,1968, The emergence of nationalism,competition and collaboration in the late nineteenth century,
Cambridge.
6
This work attempts to identify the links between institutional politics and the politics of the
people, exploring its impact on both groups and also on the course of the nationalist
movement , especially during the period of Gandhi and Nationalism. Rather than concentrate
on the history of a locality at a specific time when the nationalist struggle was at its height ,
this study has tried to establish a link between micro and macro studies over a period of 20
years in order to broaden the perspective of nationalist politics. Departing from the
conventional historiography , which tends to emphasize either elite leadership or subalter
autonomy , this work seeks primarily to present a viable alternative model of interaction
between elite politics and popular politics in Bengal against the backdrop of major
developments in nationalist politics between 1919 and 1939.3
During its early years , the Indian national congress functioned mainly as an annual gathering
of the politically conscious elite, and it professed to be ‘the most visible outcome of that
revolution in the political life of the Indians , which was slowly transforming their thoughts
and intellects for the last 28 years and which had evoked the nationalists spirit’. Although its
supporters might, in moments of euphoria , have seen it as India’s national party , the early
congress functioned as a party without a permanent organisational structure.4
The early congress in Bengal had no separate organized identity. Leaders of the local
associations attended the sessions as congress delegates. In 1887, Bengali delegates to the
madras session of the congress expressed a strong opinion that a provincial conference should
be held every year for the discussion of provincial questions which could not be covered by
the national congress . This desire bore fruit when provincial delegates convened at the hall
of British Indian association during the dasserah vacations in 1888. It was the first of the
annual meetings o Bengali congress workers, the Bengal provincial conference. The first
president of the Bengal provincial conference was mahendra lal sarkar. Within a few years it
was felt that periodic conferences in different districts would be more conducive to the
dissemination of the political ideas current in Bengal . accordingly, rai baikunth nath sen
bahadur arranged the first peripatetic conference,which met in brahmpore in 1895. The
conference continued to be an autonomous institution until the congress was reorganized after
the inauguration of the non-cooperation movement. Its management was then handed over to
the provincial congress committee.5
3
Traditional nationalist historiography has tended to view the movement as an idealist venture in which the
indigenous elite led the people to freedom. The notion of a unified national movement characterized much of
the earlier historical writings. Contrary to this, the Cambridge school emphasized regional and local variations
within the nationalist movement. Bengal occupied a prime place in their writings. In the study of this particular
province and its relation with the nation in the field of nationalist politics , the Cambridge school has
concentrated mainly on factionalism and cliques among the elite and the consequent decline of the congress
in Bengal. It has been argued thet the congress in Bengal , which was based on the great city, was facing a
crisis within 20 years of first world war .
4
5
Liberty,april 1930.
7
The Bengal congress was constantly affected by ideological debates among its leaders . they
not only aligned themselves either with the Moderates or the Extremists , the two major
groups in the congress, but were organized into further complex groupings centering around
personalities. Major players among the moderates included Surendra nath banerjee, NN
Ghosh of the Indian mirror, Ashutosh Chaudhuri of the Bengali landlords association , and
rash bihari ghosh of the national council of education. In the extremists camp Bipin Chandra
PAL and aurobindo each had its own followers. In Barisal the swadeshi leader Ashwini
Kumar Dutta had his own group. The bone of contention among all the leaders was the
control of provincial congress. Inspite of their differences they had a sentimental attachement
to Bengal, the land of their birth. This shared sense of identity produced a strong alliance
between the Bengali leaders against the other dominant regions represented in the congress.
In the Calcutta session of the congress in 1906 ‘there came into existence an implicit
understanding between the moderates and the extremists of Calcutta to push the political
demands of Bengal against the conservative congress high command.’ Satyanand Bose had
informed gokhale that ‘…. Bengal is very keen about Swadeshi , boycott, partition and
national education . the feeling is not confined to the extremists but is shared by the
moderates also.’6
Efforts to reunite the congress were initiated by the Bengal leaders once again after the
outbreak of the first world war. At the momentous luck now session of the congress in 1916
the extremists returned to their old anchorage in politics. The Banerjee group coalesced with
the extremists and threathened a ‘raging and tearing scheme of agitation in connection with
our demand for self government’.7these years also saw the initiation into the politics of
younger men whose new ideas and vigour were to turn the tide of nationalist politics. In the
Bengal provincial conference of 1917 Banerjee himself proposed that Chitta Ranjan Das
should chair th session of the conference. In the process he paved the way for CR Dass to re-
enter politics and redefine extremism.
Bengal on the eve of the non-cooperation and khilafat
movement (1919-20).
In many ways the first world war was a harbinger of change in indian politics. Economic
dislocation, inflated prices, and government control over trade increased the hardships of the
people, making them increasingly conscious of the operessive nature of their imperial
government. In Bengal the intellectual element pondered over the cause-and-effect
relationship between the political situation and the economic condition.
6
Gokhale papers, Satyanand Bose to Gokhale 16 december 1906. Cited in ray, social conflict and political
unrest in Bengal,op.cit.
7
Ray social conflict and political unrest in Bengal, op.cit.
8
The vishwamitra thought that ‘subjugation was the real cause of famine because the
commercial policy of the government enabled the foreigners to exploit the land’.8
The demographic curve in Bengal was shifting. The Census report of 1921 showed that the
population in Bengal had risen by 28.6% since 1881. The annual rate of increase was 0.7%.
The rural population itself had increased by 27.6% and by 1921 it stood at 44.3 million.9
But interestingly this trend of population growth was not noticeable in West Bengal , where
the growth had been constrained due to malaria epidemics. In a span of 50 years until 1921 ,
the population of rural central and west Bengal had remained stagnant or even declined by 10
% as it had in Nadia and jessore districts.
The Partition of Bengal in 1905, was made on October 16, by then Viceroy of India, Lord
Curzon. Partition was promoted for administrative regions; Bengal was as large as France but
with a significantly larger population. The eastern region was thought to be neglected and
under-governed. By splitting the province, an improved administration could be established
in the east where, subsequently, the population would benefit from new schools and
employment opportunities. However, other motives lurked behind the partition plan. Bengali
Hindus were in the forefront of political agitation for greater participation in governance;
their position would be weakened, since Muslims would now dominate in the East. Hindus
tended to oppose partition, which was more popular among Muslims. What followed
partition, however, stimulated an almost national anti-British movement that involved non-
violent and violent protests, boycotts and even an assassination attempt against the Governor
of the new province of West Bengal.
Partition barely lasted half a decade, before it was annulled in 1911. Britain's policy of divide
et impera which lay behind partition, however, continued to impact on the re-united province.
In 1919, separate elections were established for Muslims and Hindus. Before this, many
members of both communities had advocated national solidarity of all Bengalis. Now,
distinctive communities developed, with their own political agendas. Muslims, too,
dominated the Legislature, due to their overall numerical strength of roughly twenty eight to
twenty two million. Nationally, Hindus and Muslims began to demand the creation of two
independent states, one to be formed in majority Hindu and one in majority Muslim areas
with most Bengali Hindus now supporting partitioning Bengal on this basis. The Muslims
wanted the whole province to join the Muslim state, Pakistan. In 1947, Bengal
8
‘report on the newspapers published in Bengal during the year 1920’, home poll conf file no. 145 , SI No. 1-4.
9
‘Census of India 1921’ vol V, Government of india, Bengalpt-2, tables, R H; CASSEN ‘India population Economy
and society’, quoted in basu,Sugata, ‘peasant labour and colonial Capital: rural Bengal Since 1770’, in The New
Cambridge History of india, Cambridg 1993.
9
was partitioned for the second time, this time specifically on religious grounds. It became
East Pakistan. However, in 1971, for cultural reasons, East Pakistan became the independent
state of Bangladesh. Partition may sometimes be necessary as a pragmatic strategy to avoid
bloodshed but more often than not this leads to new problems that divide even more people.
Almost always, partition produces discontent among minorities on both sides of the border.
Both partitions of Bengal saw bloodshed, ruined lives and made the world a less united place.
A partitioned world will not be able to make our planet a common home, so that it becomes a
shared, not a contested space. As a race, people need to find ways of building bridges instead
of barriers.
Reason for Partition
Lord Curzon, architect of the 1905 Partition of Bengal.
The plan also involved Bengal ceding five Hindi-speaking states to the Central Provinces. It
return, it would receive, on the western side, Sambalpur and five minor Oriya- speaking
states from the Central Provinces. Bengal would be left with an area of 141,580 sq. miles and
a population of 54 million, of which 42 million would be Hindus and 9 million Muslims.
However, Bengali speakers would be a minority in the West "in relation to Bihar is and
Oriyas."[2] Administration of the new province would consist of a Legislative Council, a
Board of Revenue of two members, and the jurisdiction of the Calcutta High Court would be
left undisturbed. The government pointed out that Eastern Bengal and Assam would have a
clearly demarcated western boundary and well defined geographical, ethnological, linguistic
and social characteristics. The government of India promulgated their final decision in a
10
resolution dated July 19, 1905, and the partition of Bengal was affected on October 16 of the
same year.
Reaction to the plan
As details of the plan became public knowledge, prominent Bengalis began a series of
demonstrations against partition and a boycott of British products. While protest was mainly
Hindu-led the Muslims nawab of Dhaka was also initially opposed to the plan, even though
Dhaka would serve as capital of the new province. Baxter suggests that the "divide and rule"
policy was the real reason for partition. Lord Curzon said, "Bengal united is a power; Bengali
divided will pull in several different ways."[3] Bengalis were the first to benefit from English
education in India and as an intellectual class were disproportionately represented in the Civil
Service, which was, of course, dominated by colonial officials. They were also in the
forefront of calls for greater participation in governance, if not for independence. By splitting
Bengal, their influence would be weakened. This would also, effectively, divide the
nationalist movement. Bengalis, who regarded themselves as a nation, did not want to be a
linguistic minority in their own province. Indeed, many of those Hindus who were considered
"unfriendly if not seditious in character" lived in the east and dominated "the whole tone of
Bengal administration." Since Muslims would form the majority in the east under the plan,
their power would be undermined. Baxter is thus, unlike Hardy, of the view that playing
Hindu and Muslims off against each other did lie behind the partition plan.[4] Calcutta, the
capital of the united province, was still at this point also the capital of British India, which
meant that Bengalis were at the very center of British power. At the same time, the Muslims
of Bengal were considered loyal to the British since they had not joined the anti-British
rebellion of 1857-8, so they would be rewarded.
Partition
Partition took place October 1905. It resulted in a huge political crisis. The Muslims in East
Bengal after initial opposition tended to be much more positive about the arrangement,
believing that a separate region would give them more opportunity for education,
employment, and so on. However, partition was especially unpopular by the people of what
had become West Bengal, where a huge amount of nationalist literature was created during
this period. Opposition by Indian National Congress was led by Sir Henry Cotton who had
been Chief Commissioner of Assam, but Curzon was not to be moved. His successor, Lord
Minto, also though it crucial to maintain partition, commenting that it "should and must be
maintained since the diminution of Bengali political agitation will assist to remove a serious
cause of anxiety… It is," he continued, "the growing power of a population with great
intellectual gifts and a talent for making itself heard which is not unlikely to influence public
11
opinion at home most mischievously."[5] Sir Andrew Fraser, formerly Lt. Governor of Bengal
stayed on as Governor of West Bengal and was especially targeted by anti-partition agitators,
who derailed his train in 1907. He retired in 1908. Support for the anti-partition cause came
from throughout India, where the partition of an historic province was regarded as an act
of colonial arrogance and blamed on the divide and rule policy. "Calcutta," says Metcalf,
"came alive with rallies, bonfires of foreign goods, petitions, newspapers and posters." Anti-
British and pro-self-rule sentiment increased.[6] In fact, the Swadeshi movement itself
emerged from opposition to Partition, which was regarded as "a sinister imperial design to
cripple the Bengali led nationalist movement."[5]
Later, Cotton, now Liberal MP for Nottingham East coordinated the successful campaign to
oust the first lieutenant-governor of East Bengal, Sir Bampfylde Fuller. In
1906, Rabindranath Tagore wrote Amar Shonar Bangla as a rallying cry for proponents of
annulment of Partition, which, much later, in 1972, became the national anthem
of Bangladesh. The song "Bande Mataram" which Tagore set to music became the "informal
anthem of the nationalist movement after 1905."[6] Secret terrorist organizations began to
operate, for whom Bengal as their mother-land was epitomized by the goddess Kali, "goddess
of power and destruction, to whom they dedicated their weapons."[6]
Bengal's Partition rescinded
Curzon Hall, University of Dhaka.
Due to these protests, the two parts of Bengal were reunited in 1911. A new partition which
divided the province on linguistic, rather than religious, grounds followed, with the Hindi,
Oriya and Assamese areas separated to form separate administrative units. The administrative
capital of British India was moved from Calcutta to New Delhi as well.
Dhaka, no longer a capital, was given a University as compensation, founded in 1922. Curzon
Hall was handed over to the new foundation as one of its first building. Built in 1904, in
preparation for partition, Curzon Hall, which blends Western and Moghul architectural
styles, was intended to be the Town Hall.
12
Legacy
East and West Pakistan before 1911, following Bengal's second partition in 1947.
Although protest had been largely Hindu-led, such eminent leaders of the Indian nationalist
movement at Nazrul Islam and Rabindranath Tagore stressed Hindu-Muslim unity. Although
some opponents to partition gave it a religious aspect by identifying closely with Kali, others
stressed the unity of the Bengali nation, not religion. Divine and rule, however, continued as
a British policy. In 1919, they created different electorates for Muslims, Hindus and for other
distinctive communities. A new award of seat allocation in 1932 increased Muslim
representation. This encouraged Muslims to develop as a "social-cultural group" so that even
in Bengal where, culturally, Muslims shared much in common with Hindus, they began to
regard themselves as a separate nation.[7] As Indian nationalism gained momentum, Muslims
and Hindus began to demand a new partition, more radical than that of 1905. This one would
divide Hindu-majority areas from Muslim majority areas to form the independent states of
India and Pakistan. Yet, as plans for Pakistan were set in motion, many people assumed that
the Muslims of Bengal would not want to join the proposed state, partly because of its
geographical distance from the other main centers of Muslim majority population over one
thousand miles to the West but also due to the strength of Bengali nationalism.
The proposed name for the new Muslim state, Pakistan, was formed from Punjab, Afghania
(North-West Frontier Province), Kashmir,Sindh, and Baluchistan, thus, Bengal was not
included. The United Bengal Movement did champion a separate, united state for all Bengalis
on the eve of the 1947 partition but failed to attract enough support. If the 1905 partition had
not happened, Bengali nationalism would probably have been strong enough to resist
partition when this was once more placed on the agenda. The consequences, however, of the
1905 partition and of subsequent British divide and rule inspired policies seriously
undermined Bengali solidarity cross-faith solidarity. This time, it was Hindus who supported
partition, largely because, after the Communal Award of 1932, Muslims had dominated the
13
Legislature in a coalition government with European support. Hindus now saw their future
within India, where Hindus would be a majority. For Hindus, a separate Bengali state was no
longer an attractive option, despite the appeal of Bengali solidarity. Bengali Muslims, for
their part, did not want to live in a United India. London mandated that the Legislature meet
in two sections, one comprising delegates from Hindu-majority districts and the other from
Muslim districts. A majority in favor of partition from either section would determine the
outcome. On June 20 1947, 166 to 35 in the East Bengal section actually voted against
partitioning Bengal and in favor of the whole province joining Pakistan. A vote in the
Western region favored partition by 58-21, with the West joining India and the East
Pakistan.[8]
Almost certainly due to the wedge that Britain's divide and rule policy had driven between
Hindus and Muslims in Bengal, partition followed more or less along the same demographic
lines as it had in 1905, except that only the Muslim Sylhet region of Assam voted to join (by
a majority of 55,578 votes) what was to become East Pakistan. Partition followed, although
only a minority of the whole province wanted this. Hundreds of thousands of casualties
resulted from riots and during mass population transfers. Having religion in common with
West Pakistan, however, over a thousand miles away, did not prove strong enough to glue the
two provinces of the new nation together. In 1971, after a bloody Bangladesh War of
Independence, the East became a separate sovereign state for reasons that had to do
with culture and language and Bengali nationalism. A nation was born that, although
majority-Muslim, declared all its citizens, regardless of religion, equal before the law with
"nationalism" as a principle of state.[9]
14
BIBLIOGRAPHY.
I. BOOKS
1. Topics in Indian history part III,NCERT, New Delhi,2006,
2. Chandra, Bipan, Communalism in present day India, penguin books New Delhi,1987
3. Chandra , Bipan, India's battle for freedom, penguin books, New Delhi,
4. Gibney , Matthew J., Randall Hansen, Immigration and refugee: from 1900 to the present,
Volume 1, oxford distributers, New Delhi, 1988
5. Pandey, Gyanendra. Recollecting Partition : Violence, Nationalism, and History in
India.Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2001.
6. Inder Singh, Anita. The Origins of the Partition of India, 1936-1947. Oxford University
Press, Delhi, 1987.
15
