The event of the division of the Indian subcontinent into two independent nations, Pakistan and India, is recorded as a period of great confusion and uncertainty. After the British Raj in India that prevailed for almost a century, British India was divided into Hindu-majority India and Muslim-majority Pakistan. It is during this bewildered period that a man from the city of Ambala in present-day India decided to emigrate to present-day Pakistan with his family. This man, the chairman of the Muslim League (the political party that led the movement for a separate Muslim nation in British India) in Ambala at the time, was called Khawaja Abdur Rehman. The migration process was extremely challenging and dangerous during that period, but it was successful for this family. Traveling inside a train, this particular group of nine to ten individuals was afraid of being attacked, which was “expected” during the hot days of this exodus, and hid the youngest under a train seat in case of disturbances. . This fifteen-year-old girl would later be my grandmother.

We are interested in understanding the importance of two types of stories, political or historian’s history and oral or popular history, and developing a connection between them. The history of the historian focuses predominantly on the political or national aspect of history. As a result, try to understand and record in detail the causes and effects of a particular event. Oral history, on the other hand, “is a field of study and a method for collecting, preserving, and interpreting the voices and memories of individuals, communities, and participants in past events” (Oral History Association). The first is at the state level and is usually objective, while the second is at the personal level and can be deeply subjective. During the process of studying partition, I caught glimpses of both approaches to history, but what intrigued me most was how Gyanendra Pandey, a historian specializing in colonial and post-colonial history and the author of “Remembering Partition,” has approached the subject of the score. . Focusing on the history of ordinary people, she has tried to understand the partition from different angles. In her style, I have witnessed a fine blending of both recorded history and people’s history, though most of the material leans toward the latter. The same approach allows the reader to understand different aspects of the same event.

Gyanendra Pandey has underlined the relationship between history and memory. More specifically, he has tried to establish a link between the history of the historian and oral history, and also to highlight the difference between them. The town’s history regarding the 1947 partition is considered to contain violence based on cultural, religious, and racial differences; it reveals the atmosphere of violence, rape, murder and uncertainty that prevailed at the time. In academic history, the brutality during partition is treated as parallel to massive political and democratic change. Dr. Ishtiaq Ahmed, a Swedish political scientist and author, in his book “The Punjab Bloodied, Partitioned and Cleansed” indicates the distinguishing factor of oral history and the person who shares it: “He/she is not treated simply as a source or object of information, but as a subject that is intrinsic to the story it tells. Each of these stories is a living story to be read on its own merits” (Ahmed 139).

Gyanendra Pandey, after collecting and studying numerous oral histories, has distinguished two narratives that local people used to make sense of the partition violence; the certainty that the violence was justified at the time and the belief that it occurred “out there”, that is, outside their town or community. These narratives describe how personal interpretation of events can affect memory history. One can question the veracity and currency of memory history, but I believe that the purpose of oral history is to go beyond estimating the accuracy of the event and to understand the people themselves, who constitute “current” history. Oral histories give insight into individuals and families, which are the building blocks of any community or nation. Therefore, it becomes imperative to account for oral histories (what people remember) alongside recorded history by studying the 1947 sheet music.

Gyanendra Pandey has distinguished three partitions, each dealing with an aspect of the 1947 partition seen from a different perspective. The first partition refers to the claim of Pakistan by the Muslim League from 1940 onwards. By studying this concept, one learns the South Asian Muslim side of history. In the second partition, which refers to the division of the Punjab and Bengal provinces, one learns the Sikh and Hindu side of history. The third partition, however, is more humane in orientation, dealing with the massive upheaval and violence that took place on “both sides” during the partition.

It’s the third partition that surprises me, as it raises serious questions about the whole idea of ​​partitioning; who was right and who was wrong. Perhaps partitioning cannot be understood in binary terms at all; we cannot separate the heroes and the villains. The political perception of partition can vary from person to person, and each argument can be somewhat contentious. I believe that by studying the anthropological dimension of partition – or the history of the people – one can change or refine one’s political perception. Hence, the importance of oral histories is not just limited to understanding individuals and families at the time of the partition, but extends to shaping the entire perception of the 1947 partition in general. In the introduction to his book, Remembering Partition, Gyan Pandey writes: “Part of my purpose is to underscore how different the Partition story looks from different perspectives” (Pandey 5).

Going back to the story we started at the beginning of the article, a Sikh lived in Rawalpindi, located in present-day Pakistan, during the partition of 1947. The Sikh decided to emigrate to the opposite side of the border (present-day India) with his family, but before In doing so, he handed over his properties – a total of five to six houses – to the person who had recently immigrated to Pakistan from India with his family; Jawaja Abdur Rehman. It is difficult to explore the connection between these two individuals from two different nations and cultures, but this simple interaction helped the lives of many other families who had migrated to Pakistan from India, as Khawaja Abdur Rehman decided to give these properties to refugees in need. . Even during the period of great confusion and bloody unrest, some practical examples based on humanistic values ​​and interreligious compassion could be detected.

Works Cited

Ahmed, Ishtiaq. The Punjab bloodied, divided and cleansed. New Delhi: Rupa Publications India Pvt. Ltd., 2011. E-book.

Oral History Association. Oral History: Defined. second website. November 12, 2019.

Pandey, Gyanendra. Remembering Sheet Music. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2004. Electronic book.