1 How to Write a Patriotic History of the Rebellion of 1857? Rajanikanta Gupta’s ‘Sipahi Juddher Itihas’ and Multiple Faces of Loyalty, Anxiety and Dissatisfaction Ramendrasundar Trivedi (1864 – 1919), one of the great essayists and literary figures in the early decades of the 20 th century Bengal, once mused over his reading experiences in early school days. At the age of eight or nine, as a student of middle Anglo-vernacular school, he came across, in a magazine called ‘Bandhab ’, an article, which stated that quite a few history text books happened to be full of lies and misinformations. A number of books on the histories of Bengal and India, mostly written by eminent English scholars, belonged to this category. He clearly remembered his reaction even after thirty years. “I considered it totally unbelievable that there may be mistakes in the history writings of any English scholar. I was unaware of this side of the human character that great scholars would have written baseless stories, due to their partisanship . Moreover, it appeared to me absolutely ridiculous that the history books which I had to cram in order to avoid the slaps of my teacher contained mistakes” 1. That very article had announced that Rajanikanta Gupta 2 (1849-1900), then an unknown person, had taken up a project to write a comprehensive history of the Sepoy War in India; it would be written in vernacular and it would rectify many misconceptions currently nurtured and propagated by the English historians. Ramendrasundar, being an avid reader since his school days, was eagerly waiting for the forthcoming book for days and finally managed to devour the 1 Ramendrasundar Trivedi’s obituary on Rajanikanta Gupta in Sahitya, 11yr, Jaishtha, 1307 B.S. /1900, published as introduction to Sipahi Juddher Itihas (History of the Sepoy War), 4 th ed. (Calcutta: the Sanskrit Press Depository, 1910). I have used this edition, unless otherwise mentioned, abbreviated as SI. These are actually two volume editions, containing five parts. With the initiative of Rajanikanta’s son Mohinikanta, Manindrachandra Nandi of Kasimbazar had borne out the cost of the publication of this two volume standard edition. Ramendrasundar’s speech delivered in a memorial meeting at Sahitya Parishad and published in its magazine (1307B.S.) has also been republished in the volume. 2 Henceforth RK 2 multiple volumes, coming out of the press over the years, one by one, running up to 1540 pages. Eventually he was entrusted to write an introduction to a royal edition, published posthumously. Similar excitement and astonishment of a young reader that he experienced as a young reader pervaded the whole introduction written by him—the secretary of the Bangiya Sahitya Parishad—the premier literary society of Bengal. This wonder arose from certain literary practices and historical perceptions entertained by RK as well as from the life history of the historian himself. A. The Man and his milieu Ramendrasundar has underlined a particular social position of RK; he was a professional writer and did nothing else for his livelihood - even rejecting the family profession of a traditional medicine practitioner. He was a member of a poor family and due to congenital deafness, he could not even acquire a degree. His knowledge over English was also initially poor. Nevertheless, he had unusual confidence in himself for taking up the career of a professional writer. Ramendrasundar has specifically mentioned this personal choice as unique and called him ‘Daridra Bangali Granthajibi Grihastha ’ (a poor Bengali familyman who lives by writing books’) 3. His life, as if, was wholly dedicated to the service of vernacular literature like ‘a devoted son’ of ‘a poor Bengali mother’. That was his only vow (brata ). A life dedicated to the service of vernacular literature did not mean that RK was either unpractical or insensitive to the business environment of the then literary world of 3 Introduction, SI, Vol.1, 14. The details about the life and works of RK are available in Brajendranath Bandyopadhyay ed. 6/17 Sahitya Sadhak Charitmala, (Calcutta: Bangiya Sahitya Parishad, 1388 B.S.), and Kiranshankar Roy and Jyotsna Singha ed. Rajanikanta Gupta: Vyaktitya O Manisha , (Calcutta: Lekhak Samabay Samiti, 1976). 3 Bengal. Being an occasional writer in the ‘Education Gazette’, one of the premier Bengali magazine edited by eminent educationist Bhudeb Mukhopadhyay (1827-1894), he also became a regular contributor to the leading popular newsmagazine ‘Bangabasi’ edited and owned by Jogendra Chandra Basu (1854-1905). This magazine ran like a regular business concern and had been identified with the politics of neo-Hinduism. RK’s serialised articles on ancient ‘Hindu’ civilisation had been published as ‘Arya-Kirtti ’ (1883-1885) by this organisation and run into several editions. He had been generally considered by the historians as a member of this neo-Hinduite group and a close associate of the ‘Bangabasi’. That was his brand identity correct or incorrectly, in the discussion on literary history of Bengal 4. Yet, RK, as a professional writer, cut across the warring groups in late 19 th century world of Bengali literature. He had used the term ‘Aryans’ more as a cultural category, including all the inhabitants of India. His non-Aryans (Anarjyas ) or tribals had played sometimes more glorious roles in defending the homelands; in fact, they fought back the ‘Aryan’ invaders with great courage. They as the Bhils or the Mawalis were principal followers of Pratap Singha and Shivaji. In a long discourse on the history of successive invasions of India, he had shown interplay between words ‘Aryans’ and the ‘non- Aryans’, the Mughals and the Muslims, the Bengalis and the Rajputs as cultural communities, illustrating that everybody belonged to a territory defined by a common 4 Haradhan Dutta, ‘Rajanikanta and Bangabasi’, in Kiranshankar Roy, ibid, 56 – 66. For a discussion on the historian as a group member as well as his attitude to social reform, see, For a standard account of the Bangabasi Group, Amiya etc. For a discussion on the historian as a group member as well as his attitude to social reform, see, Shyamali Sur etc., Calcutta: Progressive Publishers, 2002, 82-102. Amiya P. Sen, Hindu Revivalism in Bengal, (New Delhi, Oxford University Press), 236-254. 4 culture, even if, the sense of a common political territory called ‘Bharatbarsha’ 5 is of a comparatively later phenomenon. He has repeatedly argued that the Mughal period and the Nawabi period under Siraj-ud-daullah had witnessed the domination of the Hindus everywhere; pre-British raj was, in fact, a ‘Bengali raj’, and Sanskrit language and literature in Bengal had flourished under the Mughal patronage to a great extent. In fact, he devoted a section on the development of Sanskrit studies in medieval Bengal under the Sultanate and the Mughals in one of his textbooks, a unique subject-item in those days. In the same text he has specifically mentioned kind and chivalrous treatment of Ghyasuddin Tughlaq to Debal Rani, the unfortunate Rajput woman. Even in his Arya-Kirtti , hitherto considered as his most popular text written in the support of the ideals of neo-Hinduism for his scathing comments on the seventeenth century Indian ruler as Muslims and Yavans , he was eloquent on the architecture of the Mughals as great memorials to the past glory of the bygone days of his country. The slippages and overlappings of these racial, cultural and linguistic terms in terminological specific historical context had always created an instability of a definition in his prose. The publication details would also show that RK adroitly maintained an adjustable position and never identified himself completely with any particular group, either so called conservative ‘Hindus’ or so called progressive ‘Brahmas’. One of his earlier collections of articles in the memory of Mary Carpentar had been sponsored by the well- known reformist lawyer Manomohan Ghosh (1844 – 1896) who had nothing to do with 5 For his account of successive invasions in India, see, his Bharat Prasanga, (Calcutta: Bengal Medical Library, 1887), 48 – 49. For the glorious role of non-Aryans as a race in the stories of defence of homeland, see ‘Bharater Anarjya Jati’ in Prabandha Manjari, Calcutta, 1894. For an account of development of Sanskrit Studies in medieval India Bharater Itihas, (Calcutta: Sanskrit Depository Press, 1899), 82 – 83. ‘Rajbhaktir Eksesh’ (Amar Singha) Arya Kirtti (1924), 156-157. For a recent account of the ambiguous use of term by Rajanikanta, see Swarupa Gupta, 1857 and Ideas about Nationhood in Bengal , Economic and Political Weekly, May 12, 2007, 1760 – 1767. 5 ‘Bangabasi’ group. RK was also commissioned to write a short biography of Mary Carpentar by the Brahma Samaj. In last decade of the 19 th century, his close association with Bangiya Sahitya Parishad, as the first editor of its institutional journal, had underlined the acceptance of his status as a writer within a wider circle of Bengali literary elites whose members were Benoykrishna Deb (1866 – 1912) and Rabindranath Thakur (1861- 1941). His numerous books, numbering up to twenty, had run into several editions as late as 1920s and had been prescribed as text and rapid readers for schools all over Bengal, probably for his contacts with Bhudeb Mukhopadhyay and Rajendralal Mitra (1822-1891). These had been published and distributed by well-known publishers such as Bengal Medical Library of Gurudas Chattopadhyay (1837-1918) and Sanskrit Depository Press established and formerly owned by Ishwarchandra Vidyasagar (1820-1891) himself. In his later days he was quite well off and built up a library of his own for his magnum opus ‘Sipahi Juddher Itihas’. His association with Surendranath Bandyopadhyay (1848 – 1925), the nationalist leader, was also quite well known. Hence, a poor and physically handicapped vaidya boy, hailing from a rural area, RK ultimately got recognition in the literary world of urban Calcutta and was moderately successful in his career in financial terms.