With CM Nitish Kumar helming the state, the pan-Bihari
identity is getting shriller by the day. The demand for the creation of
a separate state, carved out from Bengal Presidency, started for the
first time in 1868. With education making a slow start, the angst at
being discriminated against by the British in blatant favour of Bengalis gave way to open discontent.
The call 'Bihar for Biharis' started only with the publication of an Urdu newspaper, 'Murge Sulema', which in its edition dated February 7, 1874, wrote openly that capable Biharis should be appointed in the government, which should have a two-pronged strategy, that of strengthening the education department here and giving required fillip to dialects and languages native to Bihar.
The 'Bihar Bandhu' journal, in its April 5, 1876, edition strongly mentioned that if Bihar continued to stay within Bengal for very long, it would be damaging for its interests as there was no meeting point between the two in terms of food, culture, attitude, matrimonial alliances, so much so that Bengalis looked down upon their Bihari brethren and treated them as inferiors. In Bihar part of Bengal Presidency, all jobs in the railways and later in technical education were filled up by Bengalis, pushing Bihar further into the morass of backwardness. 'Kashid', in its January 22, 1877, edition went a step further in writing that the Bengal-Bihar federation was as artificial as an improbable alliance between England and France.
Archival sources show that with the growth in national awakening due to cultural renaissance and the Vernacular Press Act of 1978, a panicky British government, adopting a dual policy, decided to give piecemeal benefits to Bihar region, both as a device to admonish Bengal to mend its ways in a veiled manner and to pacify Biharis. Bihar, nevertheless, stepped up its demand despite the absence of an organized form and leadership.
'Bihar Times', in its editions of 1893 and 1894, stated that the demand for Bihar gained momentum with the entry of Sachchidanand Sinha and Mahesh Narayan. In column after column, the two stalwarts wrote extensively on the educational and socio-economic conditions of the region, arguing vociferously that only segregation from Bengal would do it good. The newspaper also strongly advocated that instead of separating Chittagong from Bengal and merging it with Assam, Bihar should be segregated from Bengal if it had to progress. A memorandum to this effect was also submitted to Bengal Governor Sir Alexander McKenzie who was visiting Bihar then. Prior to partition of Bengal in 1905, the voice for creation of Bihar reached a high pitch. In their book 'Separation of Bihar or The Partition of Bengal', Sinha and Narayan advocated this cause.
Bihar saw the first signs of colonial grace post-1905. The Frazer Memorial Trust granted assistance for education in the region, leading to the Bihar Landholders Association mentioning the governor of Bengal as the Governor of both Bengal and Bihar in its 1907 citation. Sinha's writings during this period reflected Bihar's constant monetary drain to Bengal resulting in lack of medicare, increasing poverty and illiteracy. This drew Biharis closer and the demand shriller.
Between 1907-1912, the reins of this movement was in the hands of Brahmadeo Narayan, Ali Imam, Hasan Imam and others. Ali Imam presided over the first session of Bihar Prantiya Sammelan in 1908 and Fakhruddin mooted the proposal that Bihar should finally be segregated from Bengal. A delegation of Bengal Landholders Association, Bihar Prantiya Sangh and Bihar Muslim League submitted a memorandum to the governor on August 14, 1908 mentioning that Bihar was a model state with all religions, castes and communities living in harmony and should, therefore, be carved out into a separate identity. Conceding its demand, the government, in its letter to the secretary of state on August 25, 1911, recommended that Bihar be made a separate state. On December 12, 1911, the government declared during the Delhi Durbar that Bihar, Orissa and Chhotanagpur be separated from Bengal, which was notified on March 22, 1912.
The call 'Bihar for Biharis' started only with the publication of an Urdu newspaper, 'Murge Sulema', which in its edition dated February 7, 1874, wrote openly that capable Biharis should be appointed in the government, which should have a two-pronged strategy, that of strengthening the education department here and giving required fillip to dialects and languages native to Bihar.
The 'Bihar Bandhu' journal, in its April 5, 1876, edition strongly mentioned that if Bihar continued to stay within Bengal for very long, it would be damaging for its interests as there was no meeting point between the two in terms of food, culture, attitude, matrimonial alliances, so much so that Bengalis looked down upon their Bihari brethren and treated them as inferiors. In Bihar part of Bengal Presidency, all jobs in the railways and later in technical education were filled up by Bengalis, pushing Bihar further into the morass of backwardness. 'Kashid', in its January 22, 1877, edition went a step further in writing that the Bengal-Bihar federation was as artificial as an improbable alliance between England and France.
Archival sources show that with the growth in national awakening due to cultural renaissance and the Vernacular Press Act of 1978, a panicky British government, adopting a dual policy, decided to give piecemeal benefits to Bihar region, both as a device to admonish Bengal to mend its ways in a veiled manner and to pacify Biharis. Bihar, nevertheless, stepped up its demand despite the absence of an organized form and leadership.
'Bihar Times', in its editions of 1893 and 1894, stated that the demand for Bihar gained momentum with the entry of Sachchidanand Sinha and Mahesh Narayan. In column after column, the two stalwarts wrote extensively on the educational and socio-economic conditions of the region, arguing vociferously that only segregation from Bengal would do it good. The newspaper also strongly advocated that instead of separating Chittagong from Bengal and merging it with Assam, Bihar should be segregated from Bengal if it had to progress. A memorandum to this effect was also submitted to Bengal Governor Sir Alexander McKenzie who was visiting Bihar then. Prior to partition of Bengal in 1905, the voice for creation of Bihar reached a high pitch. In their book 'Separation of Bihar or The Partition of Bengal', Sinha and Narayan advocated this cause.
Bihar saw the first signs of colonial grace post-1905. The Frazer Memorial Trust granted assistance for education in the region, leading to the Bihar Landholders Association mentioning the governor of Bengal as the Governor of both Bengal and Bihar in its 1907 citation. Sinha's writings during this period reflected Bihar's constant monetary drain to Bengal resulting in lack of medicare, increasing poverty and illiteracy. This drew Biharis closer and the demand shriller.
Between 1907-1912, the reins of this movement was in the hands of Brahmadeo Narayan, Ali Imam, Hasan Imam and others. Ali Imam presided over the first session of Bihar Prantiya Sammelan in 1908 and Fakhruddin mooted the proposal that Bihar should finally be segregated from Bengal. A delegation of Bengal Landholders Association, Bihar Prantiya Sangh and Bihar Muslim League submitted a memorandum to the governor on August 14, 1908 mentioning that Bihar was a model state with all religions, castes and communities living in harmony and should, therefore, be carved out into a separate identity. Conceding its demand, the government, in its letter to the secretary of state on August 25, 1911, recommended that Bihar be made a separate state. On December 12, 1911, the government declared during the Delhi Durbar that Bihar, Orissa and Chhotanagpur be separated from Bengal, which was notified on March 22, 1912.
source:TNN
No comments:
Post a Comment