Jump to content

What if partition happened a hundred years earlier in 1847?


SecondSlip

Recommended Posts

The modern shape and contours of SC were given by Brits, otherwise historically when have Nagaland, Kashmir, UP, Andaman and South been part of same administration?

 

There was no escaping colonization in that era, we were simply outgunned by the Europeans in all departments, Godzilla meets Bambi. If not Brits the French or Dutch or Portuguese would have crushed us and then ruled without inhibition...and honestly Brits were more merciful and humane.

 

Be happy that we got independence in '47, without the world wars the wait would have been much longer. Anyway the question/premise raised by OP is so confusing that I can't formulate a coherent response. 

Edited by Gollum
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Gollum said:

The modern shape and contours of SC were given by Brits, otherwise historically when have Nagaland, Kashmir, UP, Andaman and South been part of same administration?

 

There was no escaping colonization in that era, we were simply outgunned by the Europeans in all departments, Godzilla meets Bambi. If not Brits the French or Dutch or Portuguese would have crushed us and then ruled without inhibition...and honestly Brits were more merciful and humane.

 

Be happy that we got independence in '47, without the world wars the wait would have been much longer. Anyway the question/premise raised by OP is so confusing that I can't formulate a coherent response. 

Today in year 2020, right wing Hindus are complaining that Muslims are changing the demographics of Kerala, Assam and West Bengal. Similarly back in 1947, they could have been trying to change the demographics in East Punjab. 
 

So what I am asking is if we got independence 100 years earlier in 1847 with the Muslim population severely lower, could India have ended up with more land mass since the Muslims wouldn’t have been given opportunities to change the demographics? 
 

Like would our Punjab be bigger today? Would Lahore have been part of India? Would parts of East Bengal like Khulna been part of India? The Muslim population in these areas in 1847 might have been lower than the non Muslim, and would have been given to India according to partition plan!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In 1847, Brits didn’t have control of all of Indian SC to give us freedom. There were Muslim majority kingdoms in Junagadh, Deccan, Kashmir and East Bengal. Even in British Raj, Bombay, Madras and Calcutta presidencies had pockets of Formerly annexed Muslim kingdoms, so any Hindu consolidation is hypothetical. May be in 1900 before the partition of Bengal is a better time frame for the OP to consider, when in 1905, the partition of Bengal was done on communal lines. This made the dream of Sir Syed and Allama Iqbal give a real  platform for Pakistan to be demanded. Ambedkar in his book, partition of India, lists the number of communal riots in India from 1918 to 1942, It seems like a consolidated Unified freedom struggle is almost a myth and it was always about who will rule whom. Muslims distrusted Congress so much that they considered any Congress rule  akin to a Hindu rule. Congress was against partition, till 1947 feb. so, even in 1947 we had an idea of akhand Bharat and we had about 100% of land. IMO, more than just land, we need more people to believe in the notion  of India.

Edited by coffee_rules
Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, SecondSlip said:

@Gollum @coffee_rules 

 

Do you guys know what the demographics of the subcontinent were in 1847?
 

Was Sindh still Muslim majority back then? How about parts of West Punjab that are close to the Indian border? Places like Lahore and Bahawalpur? Or how about places in East Bengal that are near India like Chittagong? 

Haven't checked them out. But I am guessing Sindh was Muslim majority, even parts of Indian Punjab.

 

Chittagong Hill Tracts was Hindu/Buddhist majority in 1847, probably 99%. Bengal as a whole became Muslim majority only in early 20th century. East Bengal however was a Muslim majority before that, many converts being from Buddhism. But not Chittagong Hill Tracts, Muslims were very much a minority even in 1947. I can't recollect an article I read which went into details about demography in various regions of United  Bengal. Malda, Murshidabad, Dinajpur could have gone to Pak while Khulna, CHT could have joined India but there were other problems, read the article below.

 

Two Bengals in two nations: How West Bengal got its current shape

Edited by Gollum
Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, Gollum said:

Haven't checked them out. But I am guessing Sindh was Muslim majority, even parts of Indian Punjab.

 

Chittagong Hill Tracts was Hindu/Buddhist majority in 1847, probably 99%. Bengal as a whole became Muslim majority only in early 20th century. East Bengal however was a Muslim majority before that, many converts being from Buddhism. But not Chittagong Hill Tracts, Muslims were very much a minority even in 1947. I can't recollect an article I read which went into details about demography in various regions of United  Bengal. Malda, Murshidabad, Dinajpur could have gone to Pak while Khulna, CHT could have joined India but there were other problems, read the article below.

 

Two Bengals in two nations: How West Bengal got its current shape

So basically, even if partition happened a hundred years earlier in 1847, the maps would look very similar to what we have today?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, SecondSlip said:

So basically, even if partition happened a hundred years earlier in 1847, the maps would look very similar to what we have today?

Can't say for sure about other parts but Bengal yeah more or less. We could have got a lil bit more area (5%?) but also depends on who draws the boundaries.

 

Moreover even if we had got Khulna, CHT how could we let go of M-majority Malda, Murshidabad thereby dividing southern and northern districts. Inland shipping routes, trade/commerce, control of river (Farakka) etc. are important, not just about religion.

 

Anyway this is a totally hypothetical thread. Brits ruled over us and we must count ourselves lucky to have escaped the shackles in 1947, could easily have been a colony even today but stars aligned. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...