advertisement
(This excerpt has been taken with permission from ‘Ambedkar in London’, edited by William Gould, Santosh Dass, and Christophe Jaffrelot, published by Hurst Publishers.)
BR Ambedkar arrived in England in the autumn of 1916, and his first admission to LSE took place in October 1916 under the supervision of Edwin Cannan. Sidney Webb, meanwhile, helped Ambedkar to get access to the India Office library. On 11 November of the same year he was admitted to Gray’s Inn. In this year, Ambedkar took courses in political ideas, social evolution, geography and social theory.
However, he interrupted his study from August 1917 due to the expiration of his scholarship, and LSE granted him permission to return within a space of four years.
As well as providing evidence to the Southborough Committee from late 1918 to January 1919, he established his first periodical, Mooknayak, in January 1920 and the ‘Depressed Classes’ organisation the Bahishkrit Hitkarini Sabha in February 1920.
Ambedkar was a leading figure in two largescale Dalit conferences before his early 1920s stay in London. These took place at Mangaon (Kolhapur), which involved a dinner with the Maharaja, and at Nagpur—the First All-India Depressed Classes Conference—in which Ambedkar was the principal speaker.
The latter helped to finance Ambedkar’s studies and career through his second phase in London (which started in 1920). He considered Ambedkar to be a representative of the non-Brahman cause in England and urged him to speak in that capacity.
The Maharaja, who probably first met Ambedkar in 1919, was himself a keen advocate of the anti-Brahman cause, following the refusal of local Brahmans to grant Marathas kshatriya status. As such, he viewed Ambedkar as a kind of ambassador, suggesting to his friend Sir Alfred Pease that he might educate British opinion on the Brahmanical bias within the freedom movement in India.
Studying in England was to be treading a similar path to many other nationalists and publicists of his and a younger generation: M K Gandhi, Mohammad Ali Jinnah, Jawaharlal Nehru and a host of other figures in Indian politics made their way through London or Oxford and Cambridge.
However, Ambedkar was both challenging the notion that such international educational sojourns were the preserve of the privileged and conducting a trip that was more focused and deliberate.
The writings and publications that emerged from these early years, although less developed, are nevertheless consistent with (and, as I will argue later, shaped) his later formulations of ‘Depressed Classes’ politics and civil rights, although as Christophe Jaffrelot in Chapter 5 shows, they had not at this point reached their full maturity.
As such, they form a crucial background to his later intellectual moves. These intellectual and academic formulations also took place via a particular range of international experiences, which rooted his thinking—at least from his own perception—in certain notions of its universal applicability.
This direct, constitutional approach to ‘Depressed Classes’ rights also shaped the focus of Ambedkar’s studies. Like previous students, Ambedkar followed the path of the law. But he also deliberately developed his study of specific social science fields—principally, economics and sociology or social anthropology. In this sense, as we will see below, his choice of LSE was also significant.
It seems inconceivable that Ambedkar would have enjoyed much time to pursue other interests outside of his studies, political networking and correspondence with contacts in India. Yet it is also quite likely that the events of this formative period in his thinking and writing would have made an impact on what he went on to publish and in how his later career developed.
New constitutional arrangements had reorganised India’s provincial and financial governance (discussed more below), and there were new radical challenges to British colonial power both in India and elsewhere: the Khilafat movement protested against Britain’s post-war control of the Muslim holy places following the disintegration of the Ottoman Empire and was being connected to an India-based protest led by M K Gandhi; protests were developing against the post-war repressive Rowlatt Bill that extended the wartime security measures of the Raj; and uprisings against Britain were also taking place (or had recently occurred) against British imperial interests in Egypt, Iraq and Ireland.
Ambedkar’s thinking about Indian governance took place, then, in an era of rapid political transformation and rebellion. Britain was also dramatically changed by the war, and Ambedkar would have been reading and hearing about these effects in papers and lecture theatres: the post-war economic crisis, industrial unrest, the effects of Spanish influenza, and the changing patterns of employment as more young women took up vacancies created by the massive number of casualties of the war.
Ambedkar was keenly interested in political representation and the rights of the under-represented.
Certainly, as we will see below, Ambedkar would have experienced first-hand women’s new admission into higher education, the law and professions, and their more direct engagement in the political life of the country.
But how did this context affect Ambedkar’s everyday experiences in London? The archival record for Ambedkar’s time in the city, especially around his accommodation and personal life, is thin.
We do know for certain that he stayed at two other addresses before arriving at 10KHR (10 King Henry’s Road in North London), and that in at least one case (if not both) his experience was an unhappy one.
At the time of Ambedkar’s visit it was subject to a report on conditions for Indian students, set up by an official Committee for Indian Students. Most damning was the suspicion in the minds of residents that the landlady of the house, a Miss Beck, was a spy employed by the British government to monitor Indian students’ political activities. The Committee of Indian Students strenuously denied the allegations.
He wrote to Prabhakar Padhye that the food was wholly inadequate, with supper often only consisting of a ‘cup of Bovril, biscuits and butter’. According to Ambedkar, ‘The landlady was a terrible woman. I am always praying for her soul; but I am sure she will go to perdition’.
The experiences of Indian students finding accommodation on their first arrival in the UK was not just hindered by financial considerations.
This situation reflected a wider problem of student segregation and racism in interwar Britain that pervaded both universities and wider social interactions among young people.
(William Gould is a Professor of Indian History at the University of Leeds, where he teaches and publishes on the history and politics of South Asia. The views expressed are the author’s own. The Quint neither endorses nor is responsible for them.)
(At The Quint, we question everything. Play an active role in shaping our journalism by becoming a member today.)