Essay on How Was the Position of Women Altered in Colonial India

Introduction

In this essay I will analyse how the position of women was altered in colonial India. First, it is important to define the beginning of the colonial period in India. Stein argues that imperial rule began in India in 1858, with a legal shift from Company to Crown rule.[1] I agree with Bayly who believes that imperial rule began earlier, citing the 1784 India Act as a significant occurrence concerning India becoming a subordinate state of the British Empire.[2] Kulke also argues colonialism was earlier than 1858, and that the East India Company was just a “buffer”, which Britain used to shield itself from direct responsibility concerning controlling India.[3] I will be citing the beginning of colonial rule to be 1772 (ending in 1947), as this was the beginning of British legislation that was directed specifically for women in India.[4] This shows the British were powerful enough to legislate laws for the private sphere, and were having an impact upon females in India.

This thesis will generally be concerned with Hindu women in colonial India. Evidence suggests that the British did encounter issues making significant inroads into altering the position of some women, such as Muslims, partly due to issues such as Purdah.[5] Although there were some alterations to the roles of Muslim women, (as shown in their political involvement in 1918 political meetings),[6] I believe the change the colonial legislature had upon women in India, is better exemplified through investigating the alteration in Hindu women’s position.

The British made the inferior position of females within society fundamental to their criticism of Indian society and central to their civilizing mission. [7] Shinivas notes British rule produced lasting changes for women in Indian society;[8] he refers to this change as “Westernization”.[9] Conversely, Sangari argues that in many ways British intervention intensified female oppression.[10] Other evidence suggests that measures brought women to a new place in society which had a positive impact on their position.[11] I concur with Spear who notes that Western influence had both a negative and positive impact on women’s position in India, which I will demonstrate within the body of this essay.[12] As I will be exploring arguments concerning female oppression it is also important to define what I mean by oppression. Cambridge dictionary defines oppression as, “when people are governed in an unfair and cruel way and prevented from having opportunities and freedom”.[13] I will attempt to view the oppression from an Indian female perspective, rather than attempting to impose a normative Western value on what is a very different culture, containing different thoughts, values and ideals. [At the same time, it is important to note the concept of equality was prevalent at the time and although it did not extend to the fuller meaning in which sense we use it today, it did refer to more than simply the imposition of British values on a different culture.]

Various historians note, the ‘female question’ became immersed in the division which existed between the public and private sphere.[14] I will be dividing my research based upon the concept of the public and private positions outlined by Fruzetti in order to differentiate whether the alteration to the position of women had a positive or negative impact on the females. [15] The first section contains information on the private sphere and will focus upon the changing roles concerning Hindu widows, focusing on issues such as Sati. The public sphere segment will be exploring the changing roles of women in the new nationalist political movements of the Colonial era, like Vaid I believe the private sphere came into its own during such political discourse.[16] I also acknowledge that there are numerous categories which could be used to explore the altered positions of females.

Hindu widows and women’s involvement in the nationalist movement are just my personal choice of themes. I have chosen these themes as I believe they are sample issues which most clearly represent the difference of position concerning women in Indian society. These issues also demonstrate the different dynamics concerning the position of women during the colonial period in its entirety. For example the changes in the private sphere came from indigenous society, rather than the ‘Westernizing’ changes shown within the private sphere during social reform. Issues such as Sati (despite incidences still occurring in 1987)[17] became less prevalent within colonial India by the 20^th century.[18] During the 20^th century nationalist politics became a more rampant topic;[19] this allows me to view key issues which affected women in colonial India at different time periods during colonial India.

The history of women before the British presence in India is difficult to discern. As Liddle notes, women in India have a unique cultural heritage and their history is not easy to trace.[20] During the Mughal period, which preceded the British, there was said to be an overwhelming sense of invisibility surrounding women.[21] There was little trace of women in public life, which was dominated by men.[22] Within what was a patriarchal society,[23] women were secluded and confined to the house; chastity was seen as the supreme virtue for a female.[24] However this is not to say that this situation was viewed by female Indians as oppressive. Although they may appear contradictory, the views on Hindu women’s social statues came from scriptures, such as Manu Smriti, women were meant to be given the utmost respect (particularly within the private sphere) but were denied certain freedoms.[25] Women may not have seen their position as oppressed as it was derived from religious script.

There is evidence to suggest that the position of women had changed since Ancient India; there are some examples of queens ruling independently, such as in the Ninth Century, where as in the Mughal period they do not so significantly figure in the political sphere[26]. Concerning marriage, there was also a change during the Vedic period in marriage vows. Women now vowed to “obey” their husband, whilst in return, their husband promised to “cherish” them.[27] This could allude to the notion that women of a previous period had better opportunities than the women of colonial India. This could suggest that women were more subordinate during the Mughal period. Also, despite the discouragement of Akbar, the act of Sati had also increased during the Mughal era.[28] The British saw such acts as further evidence of female subordination, and subsequently made attempts through social reforms to change such customs, and therefore alter their position, to one of which they believed would be, less subordinate.[29]

Private sphere

The political debate concerning Sati by the colonial rulers is said to have began in 1798.[30] Historians suggest that the British viewed the act as “barbaric”, [31]and wished to reform the act to ‘improve the position of women in society’.[32] Despite the British official stance to not interfere in personal law,[33] tentative steps were taken to legislatively control the act. This is demonstrated in1813, when the practice was legalized if it was performed voluntarily. A widow could not be intoxicated prior to the act, or coerced into it.[34] The legalisation allowing voluntary Sati appears to be a reasonable notion, and could suggest women gained more freedom during the colonial period, as they were now able to decide themselves whether they wished to perform this act. Other historians also note there is a moral distinction between Sati’s which were acts of devotion, and those concerning women who were forced or did so to prevent themselves being ostracised from their caste and society.[35] Despite the 1813 legislation, the number of Sati incidence in Bengal doubled between 1815 and 1825 (which some historians argue was a direct response to the act).[36] A culmination of this and encouragement from Hindu reformers such as Raja Ram Mohan Roy’s, (which also shows there were pressures within Hindu society aiding the outlawing of Sati), and Christian missionaries led to Sati being fully outlawed in 1829[37]. Mani argues that the abolition of Sati was a significant moment in the history of Modern India.[38] I concur with historians who argue that the British interference concerning Sati appeared to be progressive but its influence was quite the opposite.[39] The banning of Sati involved abolishing a custom which was seen as being a part of religion, this lead many Hindus to search through religious scriptures in order to defend the custom.[40] Some believed they were successful, and used scriptures such as Nirnya Sindhu from Manu to justify it.[41]

The fact Sati could be justified through scripture, made it appear to some that the abolition of Sati was an attempt to subvert the Hindu religion[42]. Chatterjee argues that women now had to maintain their religious identity within the private sphere as men were more subject to colonial rule, as they were more involved in the public sphere.[43] This alludes to the notion Sati became further entrenched into female culture as a defence of religion against the imperial rule. Legislation opposing Sati highlighted the suggestion of British interference in religious matters. Roy Deb was one such leader to oppose foreign will imposed upon Indian culture; he believed changes should be made voluntarily by the Indians themselves, without the British creating legislation.[44] This notion was adopted by Tilak in later debates over reforms on the ‘women’s question’.[45] The way in which British forced their morality upon the Hindu culture through legislation, may have slowed the progress of reform for women. It possibly caused a conflict between those who opposed the custom but objected to a forced change by a foreign ruler.[46] Historians argue that even the most anti-imperialist must acknowledge that in theory, the ending of Sati was positive for women.[47] However the way Sati was banned through legislation imposed by the British, irritated nationalist sentiment. This may have slowed down the process of women gaining an improved position in society, as some Hindu men would not support seemingly progressive legislation on the position of women, because they were created by a foreign ruler. Therefore, I oppose Forbes view, that these reforms improved the position of women.[48] I believe reform issues highlighted and reinvigorated customs like Sati into Hindu culture.

This view can be demonstrated as follows. Before the British began to interfere with Sati through legislation, it was not a widespread act, with only a few incidences occurring between 1800 and 1817,[49] and mainly only involving higher caste women.[50] However, after legislation begun, historians argue that the number of Sati incidences increased as a form of anti-colonial disobedience[51]. The opposition to Sati is said to have appeared to be a threat to their culture, meaning Sati became seen as a more important custom and one which was performed with renewed vigour.[52] This theory is also supported by evidence that suggests even after its abolition in 1829, Sati was still practiced, particularly in Rayputana.[53] The last recorded case of Sati in colonial India was in 1861.[54] It is possible that if the British had not injected a renewed vigour into the practice through its abolition, then it arguably may have ended sooner through endogamous causes. Indian feminist historians argue that the act of Sati is deplorable to females and is a “crime against women”;[55] this would mean its increase was a negative alteration to the position of women.

As Joshi notes, banning Sati was taking away the rights of women.[56] Altekar states one of the reasons the abolition of Sati was so hard to administer, was that in many cases women were willing participants.[57] This view is supported by Magistrates documents that note, widows often threatened to curse relatives who attempted to stop them committing Sati.[58] It is speculated that 64% of women in 1818 who committed Sati were over 40, this could make the British reference to women who committed Sati as “tender children” seem erroneous.[59] As mentioned previously, people did find religious justification and some women genuinely wanted to perform this act. Yet colonial forces were now preventing them from undertaking this, which leads me to believe women became even more oppressed, as they now had there lives dictated, by a foreign ruler, more so than Mughal period, which failed to ban Sati

The Calcutta Gazette in 1827 also seemed to support the view that some women wanted to perform Sati, noting how a women had abandoned with “cheerfulness” and of their “own free will”.[60] This may at first appear unreliable evidence, as the Calcutta Gazette was an Indian publication, one would assume it would have stated this to uphold Indian custom against foreign ideals. However the Calcutta Gazette was also a publication which hailed the 1829 act as a great success, so this does make their view appear more impartial.[61] Walsh believes that devotion to ones husband was a choice for some,[62] and the ultimate act of devotion for many Hindu female women, would be Sati. By banning it they were not only denying Hindu women a possible religious right, they were also dictating their life choice. This supports the view that Indian women became further oppressed within the private sphere.

Stein notes, the option of Sati was no longer available to Hindu women after its abolition. However, the option of remarriage was unavailable to them as an alternative, particularly in the Brahmin caste, where forced widowhood was practiced.[63] Colonial influences prevented some women performing Sati; proven by cases where authorities would physically stop a widow mounting the pyre[64], yet no viable contingency was afforded to widows. There was an attempt to change this with the introduction of the 1856 Widow Remarriage Act, which prevented forced widowhood.[65]. Forbes suggests the act did not change the status of women, as many widows were still blamed for their husbands death, or were preyed upon by men who would force them into brothels, or to become mistresses.[66] The Calcutta High Court also noted an increase in dangua marriages.[67]

Not only did the act fail to achieve its aims, when applied, practical issues within the Act also negatively impacted upon the position of women in India. For example section 2 of the act was in accordance with Hindu law, whilst section 1 was not (“any interpretation of Hindu law to the contrary notwithstanding”).[68] Section 6 also outlined a ceremony which would be regarded as solemnising a valid window remarriage, but this practice was not authorised by religious or ancient custom.[69] As Metcalf argues, women had become a vessel for tradition,[70] attempting to introduce customs which were not authorised by scriptures caused problems, shown through the abolition of Sati. This may have made forced widowhood to be highly practiced as a show of defiance against colonial rulers. This could explain why 99% of females stated they were against remarrying during the colonial period.[71]

The Hindu Remarriage Act also contained the clause that upon remarriage women would lose the right to their former husband’s inheritance. This mainly deprived lower caste women as they could not afford to remarry.[72] I concur with Sangari, that many women were in a worse position as a widow than before the Widow Remarriage Act 1856.[73] The effect of the act had legal consequences for a number of widows, with various legal cases, such as Bewa vs Dasi 1923; in this example, relatives of the deceased sued a former wife for inheritance money as they considered the widow had promised to remarry.[74] Carroll argues that Brahmin values were still involved in the Hindu Remarriage Act, e.g., a penalty had to be given to a widow who remarried, (in this case an economic one).[75] As historians note, by definition social reform is meant to have positive social consequences.[76] A major consequence of the Widow Remarriage Act was to put lower caste women into a more vulnerable position. This leads me to believe that in terms of the private sphere, the position of women became even more oppressed, as the choice of remarriage depleted further despite legislation attempting to aid it.

Public Sphere

Dutt believes women’s involvement in politics had great significance to their positions, as they aided males in expelling the alien rulers.[77] Women who were once leading sheltered lives in there homes poured out onto the streets in defiance of the government; for example, during an incident in Lathi in 1931.[78] There is much debate about when women became immersed in nationalist politics. Forbes argues that there were political organisations from 1880, whilst others believe that women became involved from 1904.[79] There is evidence to suggest that early nationalist writers were women, for example Ananadamath in 1882.[80] But generally it appears most women involved in early nationalist politics did so from the private sphere, through actions such as keeping home for revolutionaries.[81] I argue it was after Ghandi began addressing women politically in the 1920s that women began to fully become involved in politics.[82] As mentioned previously, women were once invisible within the public sphere, so their involvement in politics demonstrates that by this time they had more opportunities.[83]

Historians such as Kishwar claim that Gandhi brought legitimacy to women’s freedom causes,[84] a notion with which I concur. Gandhi favoured the politicalization of women, even noting that men and women were equal and both had the right to attain occupation in the high office of government[85]. Although, within the private sphere Gandhi was still in favour of domesticity, he encouraged women within the public sphere, allowing them to share a platform with him[86]. Gandhi even argued that women were better qualified than men within his idealistic vision of political protest, as they knew better than men the art of peace.[87] He even told a group of men at a political meeting that he was hoping more women would attend.[88] Critics of Gandhi may note incidents such as the 1930 Salt March, where he asked women not to become involved, to argue that Gandhi was not beneficial to the position women in the public sphere.[89] However I retort with examples such as the picketing of liquor shops 1921-2, when Gandhi helped women to become involved, to show Gandhi did aid the women’s position within the public sector.[90]Approval and encouragement from Gandhi allowed women to be legitimately involved within the nationalist cause; this politicized position can be viewed as a positive alteration in role, as it allowed a freedom that women did not enjoy before British dominance.

Bagchi argues the 1920s and 1930s were a “remarkable” time for women as they became more involved in nationalist politics.[91] Forbes believes that the 1930-32 civil disobedience movement in particular won women and a place in politics,[92] some men were said to have displayed much pride in women’s participation during this period.[93] Historians also feel that during civil disobedience women took part in politics in separate or integrated organisations with males, they were no longer just the wives of politicians.[94] Other historians’ believe it was the 1920s when women were more ingratiated into the private sphere.[95] During this period women began to directly recruit into Gupta Samitis, which could be considered a direct recognition that women were a part of the nationalist movement.[96] The first overt manifestation of female militant groups also took place in Calcutta in 1928 when 128 members formed Women’s Volunteer Corps.[97] There are numerous examples of female involvement in political agitation against the colonial rulers. Prior to 1920 there was arguably no formal recruitment of women into political organisation, be they radical or legitimate.[98] As Sen argues, the British Raj, and the national movement against it gave women the opportunity to become involved in the public sphere.[99]

Other historians, however, offer compelling evidence which suggests that it was only a small segment of women, mainly the elites, who became involved in the public sphere via politics.[100] Female demonstrators were claiming to represent “all India”, but if it was just a few Hindu upper and middle class females representing the movement, then historians could disagree with this sentiment.[101] Many accounts from lower caste women show they spent most of their time either, working, cooking or attempting to gain some meagre amount of sleep,[102] many could not find the time to participate in politics. But there are examples of less respectable females becoming involved in politics, for example prostitutes collected funds for Congress between1922-24.[103] There were also issues concerning higher caste women who did not have permission from husbands or family members to protest.[104] This overlap of private sphere affecting the public sphere is also shown by historians such as Sarkar, who argue that the political actions of some women may have been due to pressures from members of their private sphere.[105] However, although I agree that the evidence appears compelling, I do not think that it proves women’s position within colonial India remained oppressed. Unfortunately rigid systems such as caste and the private sphere prevented many women becoming involved in politics, but there were women who did, and they made active attempts to represent the ones who could not. The option of becoming more involved within the public sphere was now a realistic one for females, (or at least have your gender represented within it). This would show that the position of women did improve, due to nationalists integrating the females they could into the fight for independence.

There are numerous accounts of nationalist women facing oppression and appalling treatment from authorities. For example Vaidya, (an older women employed by Gandhi), was beaten by authorities until blood poured from her head.[106] In 1931 Litiavati Asar was also taken to a police station and slapped until she passed out.[107] The fear that violence similar to this would occur at Bardoli Satyagarha 1928, led Gandhi to insist women should not take part.[108] These examples could imply women were still oppressed, but now by authorities, rather than by traditional structures, as authorities were preventing women involving themselves within the public sphere. However, I concur with Forbes, women gained respect from the nationalist movements,[109] and that included facing the adversity that came with it. The police brutality women faced also showed they were equals to men, as they were facing the same issues as their male counterparts. It also gave women the chance to prove they could handle such hardship, which in many cases they did. For example, when authorities came to burn down Galja Munda’s house, police accounts show there were females armed, ready to protect their property.[110]

I agree with historians that argue women’s political movements did not significantly impact on their private lives and system of patriarchy,[111] but it did allow women to enter a new sphere of society and prove they were equal to political tasks. Even being given a platform to prove their equality shows Indian women were becoming less subjugated. The fact they were able to rise to this task so competently was an added bonus, which led to further growth of females in the public sphere. As Pearson states, the participation of women within the political fight against the foreign ruler was added “fuel” for the fire which was the debate surrounding the argument that women should be fully equal within the political sphere.[112] Some male nationalists even encouraged women’s right bills within parliament and financially aided women’s organisation.[113] This is also proven by the gaining of the vote on equal terms with males in 1925 in some provincial areas[114], franchise was subsequently extended during the Government of India Act 1935.[115] Although there were issues with early women’s enfranchisement, such as the need to meet property qualifications, which was often a difficulty for women,[116] it showed they were becoming more influential and involved within the public sphere. The Bombay Chronicle also called for women to play a greater position in the legislature based upon their involvement in the nationalist cause.[117] It must be noted that the first women was elected President of the Indian National Congress in 1925, some 50 years before Britain elected Margaret Thatcher.[118] This suggests that women’s position became less oppressed within the public sector, where as the very nation attempting to ‘civilize them’, arguably still had more oppressive elements concerning women in politics.

Conclusion

To conclude, concerning the private sphere the colonial period seemed to further oppress the position of women. British rule, spearheaded by individuals such as Bentwick were attempting to civilise India and bring women out of a position of subjugation their role may have had a negative effect. [119] I concur with scholars who believe that issues surrounding women’s domesticity and oppression lie deeper than law.[120] Despite the disagreement of other historians,[121] I believe changing the laws only served to anger many Hindus as they felt their religious customs were being disregarded, and they were determined to not allow the jurisdiction of foreign rulers into the private sphere they controlled.[122] This made Hindu women protectors of the faith, meaning they had to uphold many of the old traditions based on domesticity, leaving them in an oppressed position. Hindus also searched through scriptures to find justification for acts like Sati and many felt they found evidence to support it; this caused it to become further immersed within Hindu culture. British involvement in issues concerning Hindu Remarriage also had a negative effect as women of lower caste, who were more likely to be able to remarry, were in a worse position financially. Legislation was also not able to change social stigma and many women still saw remarriage as sinful.

Concerning the public sphere there is evidence to show women’s position greatly improved. Under the guidance of men like Gandhi and the unifying ideology of nationalism, women involved themselves in the political struggle to free India from foreign rule alongside men. They were particularly prevalent in civil disobedience movements during the 1920s and 1930s. The political world was not one women had been traditionally involved in, so this new opportunity for women improved their position. Whilst I must acknowledge, generally it was only upper or middle class women who could be involved in the political field, this still shows progress is being made. The involvement of women in nationalist movements also aided them in more legitimate politics as they had proven their worth and they were as influential as men in the freedom fight. This is shown through women gaining suffrage on the same terms as men and women becoming elected to positions of power within the government. The political equality of women occurred earlier than Britain and leads me to conclude, that at least concerning the public sphere, women’s positions were improved during the colonial period.

Bibliography

Books

DR A.S Altekar, The position of women in Hindu civilisation from prehistoric times to the present day (Shri Jainendra Press 1983)

Wm Theodore de Barry, Sources of Indian tradition, volume 1 (Columbia University Press, 1958)

Jasodhara Bagchi, Indian women, myth and reality (Sangam Books Limited, 1995)

A.L Basham, a cultural history if India (Oxford University Press, 1975)

C.A Bayly, the New Cambridge history of the India, volume 2, India society and the making of the British Empire (Cambridge University Press, 1988)

Sugata Bose and Ayesha Jalal, Modern South Asia, history, culture, political economy, second edition (Routledge, 2007)

Dennis Dalton, Mahatma Gandhi, non violent power in action (Columbia University Press, 1993)

Geraldine Forbes, Women in Modern India (Cambridge University Press, 1996)

Linda M Fruzetti, The gift of a Virgin, women marriage and ritual in Bengali society (Oxford University Press, 1990)

Mahatma Gandhi, The essential Writings (Oxford University Press, 2008)

David Hardiman, Ghandi, in his time and ours, the global legacy of his ideas (Hurst and Company London, 2003

Leela Kasturi, Vina Mazumdar, Women and Indian Nationalism (Vikas Publishing House PVT Ltd 1994)

Gavind Kelkar and Dev Nathan, Genderand tribe, women land and forests (Kali for Women 1991)

Mandhu Kishwar and Ruth Vanita, in search of answers, Indian women’s voices from Manushi (Pitman Press Bath, 1985)

Jayasankar Krishnamurty, Women in Colonial India: essays on survival, work, and the state (Oxford University Press, 1989)

Hermann Kulke, Dietmar Rothermund, A history of India (Croom Helm, 1986)

Nita Kumar, Women as subjects, South Asian histories (University Press of Virginia, 1994)

Ruby Lat, domesticity and power in the early Mughal world (Cambridge University Press, 2005)

Joanna Liddle, Rama Joshi, Daughters of Independence, gender, caste and class in India (Zed Books Ltd, 1986)

Ania Loomba, Colonialism-post colonialism (Routledge, 1998)

Lati Mani, Contentious traditions: the debate on Sati in colonial India (University of California Press, 1998)

Barbara D Metcalf and Thomas R Metcalf, a concise history of Modern India (Cambridge University Press, 2006)

Thomas R Metcalf, Ideologies of the Raj (Cambridge University Press, 2007)

W.H Moreland C.SI, C.IE and Atul Chandra Chatterjee GCIE KCSI, a short History of Modern India, 4th edition (Longmans Green and CO Ltd, 1969)

Jawaharlal Nehru, the Discovery of Modern India (Penguin Books, 2004)

Indu Poakash Singh, Women, Law and social change in India (Sangam books, 1989)

Peter Robb, a history of India (Palgrave, 2002)

Kumkum Sangari, Sudesh Vaid, Recasting Women Essays in colonial history (Zubaan, 2006)

Sumit Sarkar, Modern India 1885-1947 (Macmillan India Ltd, 2008)

Anartya Sen, The Argumentative Indian, writings on India culture, history and identity (Penguin Books, 2005)

Indrani Sen, Women and empire, representations in the writings of British India 1858-1900 (Orient Longman Private Limited, 2002)

Arvind Sharma, Sati: historical and phenomenological essays (Motilal Banardidass, 1988)

MN Shinivas, Social change in Modern India (University of California Press, 1968)

Barbara Southard, The Women’s movement in colonial politics in Bengal 1921-1936 (Manohar, 1995)

Burton Stein, A history of India (Blackwell Publishing, 1998)

Percival Spear, The Oxford History of modern India, 1740-1947 part 3 (Oxford University Press, 1965)

Manju Verma, the Position of women in the freedom movement in Punjab (Abhijeet Publications, 2003)

Judith E Walsh, domesticity in Colonial India, what women learned when men gave them advice (Rownan and Littlefield Publishers, 2004)

Internet Resources

Legislative and Parliamentary Affairs Division, Ministry of Law, Justice and Parliamentary Affairs, the Hindu Widows Remarriage Act, 1856 <http://bdlaws.minlaw.gov.bd/sections_detail.php?id=9&sections_id=1072> (Viewed 24^th December 2010)

Sati Introduction, Women in World History <http://chnm.gmu.edu/wwh/modules/lesson5/lesson5.php?s=0> (Viewed 20^th December 2010)

Cambridge Dictionary, definition of oppression <http://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/british/oppression_1> (Viewed 29^th December 2010)

Vanessa Parilla, Sati: Virtuous women through self sacrifice <http://www.csuchico.edu/~cheinz/syllabi/asst001/spring99/parrilla/parr1.htm> (Viewed 3rd January 2010

Maja Daruwala, central Sati act, an analysis <http://www.pucl.org/from-archives/Gender/sati.htm> (Viewed January 1^st 2010)

Hinduism Today, Uproar over Rajput ‘Sati’ http://www.hinduismtoday.com/modules/smartsection/item.php?itemid=472<Viewed 15^th December 2010>

[1] Burton Stein, A History of India (Blackwell publishing, 2006) p.239

[2] C.A Bayly, the New Cambridge history of the India, volume 2, India society and the making of the British Empire (Cambridge University Press, 1988) p.195

[3] Hermann Kulke, Dietmar Rothermund, A history of India (Croom Helm, 1986) p. 241

[4] Joanna Liddle, Rama Joshi, Daughters of Independence, gender, caste and class in India (Zed Books Ltd, 1986) p.26

[5] Nita Kumar, Women as subjects, South Asian histories (University Press of Virginia, 1994) p.119

[6] Nita Kumar, Women, p.121

[7] Peter Robb, a history of India (Palgrave, 2002) p.238, [7] Barbara D Metcalf and Thomas R Metcalf, a concise history of Modern India (Cambridge University

[8] MN Shinivas, Social change in Modern India (University of California Press, 1968) p.46

[9] Shinivas, Social, p.1

[10] Kumkum Sangari, Sudesh Vaid, Recasting Women Essays in colonial history (Zubaan, 2006) p.8

[11] Percival Spear, The Oxford History of modern India, 1740-1947 part 3 (Oxford University Press, 1965) p.282

[12] Spear, The Oxford, p.281

[13] Cambridge Dictionary, definition of oppression <http://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/british/oppression_1> (Viewed 29^th December 2010)

[14] Vaid, Recasting, p.9, Robb, a history, pp.237-238

[15] Linda M Fruzetti, The gift of a Virgin, women marriage and ritual in Bengali society (Oxford University Press, 1990) pp.2-3

[16] Vaid, Recasting, p.10

[17] Hinduism Today, Uproar over Rajput ‘Sati’ http://www.hinduismtoday.com/modules/smartsection/item.php?itemid=472<Viewed 15^th December 2010>

[18] DR A.S Altekar, The position of women in Hindu civilisation from prehistoric times to the present day (Shri Jainendra Press 1983) p.141

[19] Vaid, Recasting, p.233

[20] Joshi, Daughters of Independence, p.51

[21] Ruby Lat, domesticity and power in the early Mughal world (Cambridge University Press, 2005) p.225

[22] Spear, The Oxford, p.281

[23] Lat, domesticity, p.22

[24] Jawaharlal Nehru, the Discovery of Modern India (Penguin Books, 2004) p.289

[25] Wm Theodore de Barry, Sources of Indian tradition, volume 1 (Columbia University Press, 1958) p.227

[26] Altekar, The position, p.185

[27] Altekar, The position, p.93

[28] Altekar, The position, pp.131-133

[29] W.H Moreland C.SI, C.IE and Atul Chandra Chatterjee GCIE KCSI, a short History of Modern India, 4 edition (Longmans Green and CO Ltd, 1969) p.446

[30] Lati Mani, Contentious traditions: the debate on Sati in colonial India (University of California Press, 1998) pp.15-17

[31] Kumar, Women, p.54

[32] Peter Robb, a history of India (Palgrave, 2002) p.238

[33] Joshi, Daughters, p.30

[34] Sati Introduction, Women in World History <http://chnm.gmu.edu/wwh/modules/lesson5/lesson5.php?s=0> (Viewed 20^th December 2010)

[35] Vaid, Recasting, p.105

[36] Maja Daruwala, central Sati act, an analysis <http://www.pucl.org/from-archives/Gender/sati.htm> (Viewed January 1^st 2010)

[37] Shinivas, Social, p.77

[38] Kumkum Sangari, Sudesh Vaid, Recasting Women Essays in colonial history (Zubaan, 2006) p.88

[39] Joshi, Daughters, p.26

[40] Shinivas, Social, p.77

[41] Vaid, Recasting, p.108

[42] Spear, The Oxford, p.221

[43] Judith E Walsh, domesticity in Colonial India, what women learned when men gave them advice (Rownan and Littlefield Publishers, 2004) p.45

[44] Barbara D Metcalf and Thomas R Metcalf, a concise history of Modern India (Cambridge University Press, 2006) p.88

[45] Burton Stein, A history of India (Blackwell Publishing, 1998) p.276

[46] Shinivas, Social, pp.77-78

[47] Vaid, Recasting, p.88

[48] Geraldine Forbes, Women in Modern India (Cambridge University Press, 1996) p.10

[49] Altekar, The position, p.138

[50] Joshi, Daughters, p.19

[51] Ania Loomba, Colonialism-post colonialism (Routledge, 1998) p.168

[52] Loomba, Colonialism, p.169

[53] Altekar, The position, p.141

[54] Altekar, The position, p.141

[55] Vanessa Parilla, Sati: Virtuous women through self sacrifice <http://www.csuchico.edu/~cheinz/syllabi/asst001/spring99/parrilla/parr1.htm> (Viewed 3rd January 2010

[56] Joshi, Daughters, p.36

[57] Altekar, The position, p.135

[58] Vaid, Recasting, p.97

[59] Vaid, Recasting, p.98

[60] Vaid, Recasting, p.94

[61]Arvind Sharma, Sati: historical and phenomenological essays (Motilal Banardidass, 1988) p.49

[62] Judith E Walsh, domesticity in Colonial India, what women learned when men gave them advice (Rownan and Littlefield Publishers, 2004) p.144

[63] Stein, A history, p.276

[64] Vaid, Recasting, p.105

[65] Sumit Sarkar, Modern India 1885-1947 (Macmillan India Ltd, 2008) p.71

[66] Forbes, Women, p.22

[67] Jayasankar Krishnamurty, Women in Colonial India: essays on survival, work, and the state (Oxford University Press, 1989) p.19

[68] Krishnamurty, Women, p.9, http://bdlaws.minlaw.gov.bd/pdf_part.php?id=9

[69] Krishnamurty, Women, p.5

[70] Thomas R Metcalf, Ideologies of the Raj (Cambridge University Press, 2007) p.100

[71] Altekar, The position, p.158

[72] Joshi, Daughters, p.22

[73] Vaid, Recasting, p.16

[74] Krishnamurty, Women, p.18

[75] Krishnamurty, Women, p.17

[76] Krishnamurty, Women, p.16

[77] Forbes, Women, p.121

[78] Nehru, the Discovery, p.31

[79] Joshi, Daughters, p.21

[80] Forbes, Women, p.122

[81] Forbes, Women, p.140

[82] David Hardiman, Ghandi, in his time and ours, the global legacy of his ideas (Hurst and Company London, 2003) p.109

[83] Metcalf, Ideologies, p.94

[84] Leela Kasturi, Vina Mazumdar, Women and Indian Nationalism (Vikas Publishing House PVT Ltd 1994) p.27

[85] Vaid, Recasting, p.231

[86] Hardiman, Ghandi, p.111

[87] Fruzetti, The gift, p.xxiii

[88] Hardiman, Ghandi, p.112

[89] Forbes, Women, p.132

[90] Hardiman, Ghandi, p.112

[91] Jasodhara Bagchi, Indian women, myth and reality (Sangam Books Limited, 1995) p.45

[92] Forbes, Women, p.130

[93] Mazumdar, Women, p.65

[94] Robb, a history, p.242

[95] A.L Basham, a cultural history if India (Oxford University Press, 1975) p.402

[96] Mazumdar, Women, p.61

[97] Mazumdar, Women, p.60

[98] Mazumdar, Women, p.54

[99] Anartya Sen, The Argumentative Indian, writings on India culture, history and identity (Penguin Books, 2005) p.37

[100] Sen, The Argumentative, p.201

[101] Forbes, Women, p.154

[102] Krishnamurty, Women, p.233

[103] Forbes, Women, p.128

[104] Forbes, Women, p.149

[105] Krishnamurty, Women, p.231

[106] Hardiman, Ghandi, p.115

[107] Hardiman, Ghandi, p.114

[108] Hardiman, Ghandi, p.112

[109] Forbes, Women, p.154

[110] Gavind Kelkar and Dev Nathan, Genderand tribe, women land and forests (Kali for Women 1991) p.152

[111] Hardiman, Ghandi, p.116

[112] Krishnamurty, Women, p.201

[113] Fruzetti, The gift, p.xxv

[114] Barbara Southard, The Women’s movement in colonial politics in Bengal 1921-1936 (Manohar, 1995) p.5

[115] Altekar, The position, p.192

[116] Spear, The Oxford, p.283

[117] Krishnamurty, Women, p.216

[118] Sen, The Argumentative, p.7

[119] Metcalf, Ideologies, p.94

[120] Gandhi, The essential, p.229

[121] Vaid, Recasting, p.239

[122] Vaid, Recasting, p.239