|
Who are We?
What do we do?
Latest News
Free Resources
Links
|
The Ghost of
Macaulay Haunts 171 Years Later
By Anita
Mukherjee
Life was easy back then. You were told that Bentinck was a good
governor general, that Macaulay was a
good education reformer, and you accepted it on the face value.
You were just a school student. But now, decades later, you read
the actual speech by Macaulay and you
wonder; you read the role of Bentinck in suppressing the
dissenting viewpoints of people like Prinsep and you wonder.
Perhaps, Bentinck is easier to explain; after all it is all
relative; compared to the string of appalling ones like Clive
and Hastings, he was less of a devil; but truthfully, neither
Bentinck nor Macaulay meant to do
anything good for India. They were only loyal patriots, loyal to
their own country; their job was to belittle and suppress India
and everything Indian, politically, culturally and in every
other way, and they did that well. They may have fooled
themselves in believing that they were carrying out a white
man’s burden, but what about a brown man (and woman)’s burden?
The browns (and blacks) were truly bearing the burden in 19th
century, literally and figuratively.
So, what was going on in Indian education system in 19th
century? In early 1830s, the Committee of Public Instruction,
which was entrusted with providing the direction for education
in India, was divided right in the middle, five members for
promoting Sanskrit, Persian, and Arabic, and five in favor of
elementary education in vernacular languages with English for
higher education (Thirumalai). The deadlock in the committee
resulted in a suspension of educational activities; at this
crucial juncture and in such high-charged atmosphere,
Macaulay stepped in.
Macaulay, an eminent parliamentarian and literary figure
lived in Calcutta between 1834 and 1838, and on February 2,
1835, he delivered a speech to the supreme council of India,
which sealed the fate of Indian languages and heralded English
as the prime language of official communication and education.
Most of his arguments (though not all) were countered by other
members of the Supreme council, particularly Prinsep, who was
the Secretary for issues related to education, but Prinsep’s
voice was muted, his memorandum suppressed. As Prinsep lamented,
Bentinck had already decided that whatever
Macaulay said was the truth and whatever he proposed was
right; his mind was already closed just as Macaulay’s was even
before he landed on Indian soil (Thirumalai). In his diary, on
February 15, 1835, thirteen days after Macaulay’s speech,
Prinsep wrote that the majority was against the introduction of
English, “I carried with me the vote of the majority of the
Council of Education. But when T.B. Macaulay
arrived to be the new legislative member of the Council of
India, his high literary reputation induced the Government to
appoint him President of the Council of Education, and the
English party, as it was called, entertained high hope that his
influence and authority would turn the scale against me and my
supporters. … Lord W. Bentinck would not even allow my
memorandum to be placed on record” (Thirumalai).
Endorsing Macaulay’s views, on March 7, 1835, Governor General
Bentinck paved the way for English with, "the great object of
the British Government ought to be the promotion of European
literature and science among the natives of India"
(Thirumalai).
As one reads Macaulay’s speech, one can see that his arguments
were based on both ignorance and arrogance, a deadly
combination. Contemptuous and disrespectful in the extreme, he
believed:
English is a far superior language compared to any other on the
planet.
British will be doing a favor to the ignorant, uneducated,
superstitious natives by giving them the gift of truth and
enlightenment in the form of English and Western science. After
all, what the white man didn’t understand was worthless and what
he couldn’t experience was superstition!
British were already doing so much, going beyond the call of
duty, by ruling the foolish natives. It is time that the smarter
natives at least step up and take some of the burden off by
learning English, helping in governance and acting as an
intermediary between the rulers and the ruled. He even
condescended that the brown man is actually good at learning and
speaking English.
And if you think I’m exaggerating, just look at some of the
actual quotes from the speech (Macaulay):
“a single shelf of a good European library was worth the whole
native literature of India and Arabia”.
“all the historical information which has been collected from
all the books written in the Sanscrit language is less valuable
than what may be found in the most paltry abridgments used at
preparatory schools in England”.
“It may safely be said, that the literature now extant in that
language (English) is of far greater value than all the
literature which three hundred years ago was extant in all the
languages of the world together”.
“The languages of Western Europe civilized Russia. I cannot
doubt that they will do for the Hindoo what they have done for
the Tartar”.
It is surprising that even he admitted that India was as good as
England (and that’s the skies, right?) in philosophy, “In every
branch of physical or moral philosophy, the relative position of
the two nations is nearly the same”.
Regarding teaching Hindu religion, he said, “We are to teach it
because it is fruitful of monstrous superstitions. We are to
teach false History, false Astronomy, false Medicine, because we
find them in company with a false religion”. Yet, one must admit
that he was against the missionaries, “We abstain, and I trust
shall always abstain, from giving any public encouragement to
those who are engaged in the work of converting natives to
Christianity”.
He ridiculed those who wanted to teach Sanskrit and Arabic
literature with, “when we can teach European science, we shall
teach systems which, by universal confession, whenever they
differ from those of Europe, differ for the worse; and whether,
when we can patronise sound Philosophy and true History, we
shall countenance, at the public expense, medical doctrines,
which would disgrace an English farrier,--Astronomy, which would
move laughter in girls at an English boarding school,--History,
abounding with kings thirty feet high, and reigns thirty
thousand years long,--and Geography, made up of seas of treacle
and seas of butter”.
He showed his generosity and magnanimity with, “at once stop the
printing of Arabic and Sanscrit books, I would abolish the
Madrassa and the Sanscrit college at Calcutta … If we retain the
Sanscrit college at Benares and the Mahometan college at Delhi,
we do enough, and much more than enough in my opinion, for the
Eastern languages”.
I’m trying hard to not judge him, to remain calm and detached
and let the reader decide what Macaulay
and the like were worth. But, there’s no doubt that what
missionaries did against Indian religions,
Macaulay and Bentinck did against Indian languages and
literature.
Prinsep countered Macaulay’s argument that students have paid to
study English whereas those studying Sanskrit or Arabic were
paid stipend by pointing out that “Gurukul” tradition of India
is based on providing free education, whereas English teachers
demand to be paid to teach, “Everybody knows that with Moolavees
and Pundits, … it is meritorious to give instruction gratis and
sinful to take hire or wages from the pupil who receives it… The
English Master on the other hand who is a Christian … acts on
quite different principles and not only deems it no sin to take
payment for the lessons he gives but makes a special demand of
it” (cited by Thirumalai).
Macaulay, in his speech, had quoted a
letter from Sanskrit scholars, who requested that the British
administration continue to provide financial support as they do
not have means of supporting themselves. Prinsep pointed out
that the stipends are nothing but, “in all respects similar to
the Scholarships of the Universities or to the foundation
Scholars of the Public Schools of England. They are given not as
inducements to study the language but as the rewards of
successful study”. Further, within Mudrusa, scholarships are
given “for proficients in English in order to encourage the
study of that language”. And only “If this be a conclusive
argument that the study of English is nauseated because it
requires to be paid for, then may it be applied to Arabic and
Sanscrit and to Mathematics and to all other studies”, he
retorts (cited by Thirumalai).
And that it was Indians, especially Hindus who supported and
allowed the British Raj to perpetuate for their selfish reasons
is evident from Prinsep’s, “It is the Hindoos of Calcutta, the
Sirkars and their connexions …those who have risen through their
connexion with the English and with public offices, men who hold
or who seek employments in which a knowledge of English is a
necessary qualification”. Prinsep shows his understanding of
ground realities when he emphasizes the dilemma that youth finds
themselves in, “In all times and amongst all people this is an
important question for youth but more especially to the youth of
India at present” to decide as to “by what course of education
to provide themselves the best chance of a comfortable
livelihood” (cited by Thirumalai).
So, how relevant is Macaulay today?
Well, there’s no denying that in those short 4 years, he changed
the destiny of hundreds of millions of Indians for centuries to
come.
Macaulay wanted to create “a class of
persons, Indian in blood and colour, but English in taste, in
opinions, in morals, and in intellect” (Macaulay)
and he certainly succeeded in that. Don’t Nehru, Jinnah and even
Gandhiji exactly personify the image of brown Englishmen? But
with Gandhiji, things eventually didn’t go as planned. How
Macaulay must’ve turned in his grave
when Gandhiji, after having tasted and lived British culture
decided to give it up and embrace what was truly Indian.
Choosing to live as the poorest of the poor, he led the boycott
of all British products, and emphasized simplicity and “seva”
--service to others, sacrificing self-interests and devoting
one’s life to the service of nation and fellow human beings –
something Macaulay and his kind could
never have understood.
India is a country that prides itself in its unity in diversity
– diverse food, clothing, languages, rituals and culture, yet
there is that basic Indian culture and value system that binds
us all together. And today, whether we like it or not, we have a
common language in the form of “Indian English”. Hindi comes as
a close second, what with generous help from Bollywood and
television but not quite! And just as Muslims came as outsiders
but integrated themselves in our Indian fabric, so has English
language. Most educated Indians are as fluent (and sometimes
more so) in English as they are in their mother tongue and it is
a pleasure to hear them as they switch languages in a
conversation, within a sentence naturally and gracefully.
In sixties, seventies and eighties, “brain drain” was a very
popular term in India, reserved for the best of Indian brains,
who migrated to US and other countries. There were serious
debates on why Indian government is subsidizing education in
premier institutes like IITs and IISc, when most of the
graduates choose to immigrate. In nineties, suddenly, the tide
turned; voices changed as the immigrants started giving back,
back to their institutes, villages and communities. The affluent
NRI (non resident Indian) was suddenly in a position to
contribute and he did; he cleared his debts with full interest,
the earlier investments seemed to pay off as India slowly became
the destination of choice for outsourcing. One cannot deny that
the command over English language is one major factor in Indian
success; one could only communicate with and influence West by
speaking their language, by being amongst them.
One can speculate on what would or could have been if Sanskrit,
Arabic and other spoken languages of India were favored over
English in 1830s. There’s no doubt that these languages would
have been much more enriched, as the educated Indians would have
contributed the way they now contribute in English. Perhaps, the
impact of Western culture on India would be much less too, and
Indian traditions, Indian mythology and culture would have
flourished. There’s no doubt that Devnagiri script in which
Sanskrit and Hindi are written is much more scientific compared
to Roman script and perhaps, it would have heralded a faster
scientific revolution. But, I’m not a person who enjoys science
fiction; speculating and imagining is not my cup of tea,
especially when I know that the past cannot be changed and the
wheels of time cannot be rolled back. We have been served with a
plate full of English, and we must make the most of what we
have…
Reference
Thirumalai et al. (2003). Lord Macaulay,
The Man Who Started It All, And His Minute. Language In India;
Strength for Today and Bright Hope for Tomorrow. Retrieved April
6, 2006, from
http://www.languageinindia.com/april2003/macaulay.html
(The author is active in a variety of different fora and is a
alumnus of Indian institute of Science, Bangalore
|
|
