THE LEARNING OF PERSIAN IN SOUTH ASIA

South Asia came into contact with Persian in the late ninth century (Ghani 1941: 74-75; Alam 2004: 115). However, it was established as a prestigious literary language in the eleventh century as a consequence of Ghaznavide rule over the Punjab. Indeed, by the thirteenth century, it was established in the centres of Muslim power in other parts of India. The literature of these centres of Persian in pre-Mughal times has been discussed most recently and synoptically by Muzaffar Alam (2003: 131-159). It has also been discussed in detail along with Persian writing during the Mughal period, by Ghani (1929: 30) in English as well as in the three volumes of Tarikh-e-Adabiyat (1971 and 72) in Urdu.

There is also some work on special aspects of Persian in India: the debate over Indian Persian (summed up by Alam 2003: 177-186); the contribution of Hindus to Persian literature (Abbullah 1942); letter writing (Momin 1971); bureaucratic norms and conventions, especially those of the Mughals (Khan 1994). While the poets mentioned by ‘Aufi (d. c.1252) in his anthology of poets, Lubab al-Albab may have needed little formal instruction in Persian—though presumably they too may have got lessons in prosody from the contemporary masters of the art—children born and brought up in India, surrounded by languages other than Persian, needed formal schooling in this powerful language. The curricula in Persian have been recorded by G.M.D. Sufi in Al-Minhaj (1941) from Muhammad Tughlaq’s time (r.1325-51). There are many scattered references to the teaching of Persian in several sources. The present author too has studied the learning of Persian among the Muslims of north India and present-day Pakistan and connected it to world view and power (Rahman 2002: 121-160).

The present article focuses on the curricula of Persian and the ways (privately or in institutions of learning) in which the language was learned in South Asia. It also provides some information about the teaching of Persian to females.

PEDAGOGICAL MATERIAL

Most pedagogical material meant to teach children how to read Persian dates from a period when children seem to have known an Indian language better than the spoken language. One of the most well known of these primers, or lexicons, is the Khaliq Bari which is widely attributed to Amir Khusrau (Mirza 1934: 232). However, Hafiz Shirani, a painstaking researcher, attributes it Ziauddin Khusro (written around 1621-22) (Shirani n.d: 7). A number of such primers came on the scene during the fifteenth century and were certainly used teach Persian through Hindvi (the predecessor of Hindi and Urdu) while others, like Abu Nasr Farahi’s Nisab ul Sabiyan (1661) taught Arabic through the medium of Persian (Shirani n.d: 7). The Khulasatu’l Makatib (written in 1688) tells us that students were taught the alphabet, then the primers, then they graduated to middle level books (Gulistan and Bustan of Sheikh Musleh al-Din Sa’adi (d. 1292) and then the more advanced books. The other books were about prose and composition, poetry, history and ethics (For details see Annexure 1). A boy was supposed to be four years, four months and four days of age when he began his studies. The ceremony, called bismillah (in the name of God), was, however, often postponed till the child was seven years old. The child was taught the Persian alphabet, the primers, the middle level books and then, if he undertook further studies, the more advanced books (Reid 1852: para 153, p. 52). Sir Syed Ahmad Khan (1817- 98), the great reformer of education in India, was also educated in the same way by a private teacher (Hali 1901: 35).

The primers were not only meant for teaching the alphabet and the rudiments of the Persian language. They also disseminated the world view on which the civilization using that language was dependent. The moral values endorsed in the Pand Nama and the Karima are patriarchal and hierarchical. Hospitality and silence are approved of; miserliness and talkativeness condemned. Women are considered inferior and untrustworthy. The advice given to the young student, presumably male and often addressed as pisar (son, boy), is to shun women and not get emotionally involved with them. The Nam-e-Haq is a guidebook on ritual worship and cleanliness.

The most important part of letter writing was the knowledge of the form of address, tiles and honorifics (alqab and adab). These were elaborate and calibrated according to the respective power differential (be it because of disparity in age, rank, wealth, religion, gender or whatever) of the addresser and the addressee. Then the language of the letter had to show deference or authority, coupled always with courtesy, according to circumstances. A copious vocabulary, knowledge of literature and stylistic graces were highly appreciated. In short, a successful letter writer upheld the values of hierarchy, conservatism (by adhering to conventions) and intellectual brilliance without heterodox analysis (by spending one’s mental energy and learning on memorization and stylistic gymnastics). What to say of the Muslims who benefited from Mughal rule, the Hindus too upheld the same power structure. The Mughal king Akbar (r. 1556-1605) won their loyalty through marriage alliances and employment and they became Muslimized in culture (Abdullah 1930). Madrassas, which were institutions for education rather than only Islamic education, took in and trained Hindus through Persian which was the instrument of this cultural Muslimization. The graduating Hindus became the munshis of the empire. Among the best known among them are people like Chandra Bhan Brahman (d. 1045 Hijri), Harkaran Das Kambuh (c. 1031 Hijri) and Madhu Ram (c. 1120). Chandra Bhan’s letter to his son has a passage which gives useful insights into the educational values of that period.

Beginning by emphasizing the value of good calligraphy, he says:

Although the science of Persian is vast, and almost beyond human grasp, in order to open the gates of language one should read the Gulistan, Bustan, and the letters of Mulla Jami, to start with.

This is followed by a long list of books on history and ethics. Then comes an even longer list of poets—forty four among the ‘earlier’ ones and twenty four among the ‘modern’ ones—which is cut short only because of the brevity of the communication (Abdullah 1942: 240-242. Avalable in English in Alam 2004: 130-132). What is more important for us is that throughout Chardra Bahn Brahman advises his son to be loyal to the social order. The author is impressed by Persian and the elite culture it represents. This makes him a fitting symbol and tool for spreading Mughal cultural hegemony (as defined by Gramsci 1929-1935: 12) over the ruled which, I argue elsewhere, is one of the effects of Persian education during Muslim rule over India (Rahman 2002: 495-502).

BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF PERSIAN LITERATURE TAUGHT IN INDIA

Persian literature was not theological. It was mostly poetic and the world view of this poetry was not Islamic as interpreted by the ulema. Its best works were in the Sufi tradition where love stood for divine love; the beloved, often symbolized as a beautiful boy, stood for an immanent deity and wine was a metaphor of mystic distraction. At another level, this literature celebrated romantic love, dwelt upon boyish and female beauty, mentioned drinking as a matter of course and with a certain iconoclastic, heterodox pride and had several erotic passages.

One of the most popular textbooks of Persian, Bahar-e-Danish written by Shaikh Inayatullah Kumboh (1608-1671) sometime in 1650-51?, was used in all the Persian schools in Mughal India. During British rule too, according to the education reports, it was taught in nearly all the schools and its ‘style and idiom’ were ‘regarded as the best models of composition’ (Reid 1852: 54).

The stories in it belong to the magical, medieval world view to which the Alf Laila and other medieval tales belong. The moral values are unashamedly in the male chauvinist tradition. Women are cunning, lustful, unfaithful, unchaste and inconstant. This is especially driven home by the tale of four women who vow to deceive their husbands by fornicating with a handsome youth in the very presence of their husbands in such a way that the husbands are completely fooled.

Another textbook, written in the Punjab and mentioned as part of the curricula of Persian schools in that province (Leitner 1882: 63), was Maulana Muhammad Ghanimat’s (b. 1688) Masnawi Nairang-e-Ishq (called Masnavi Ghanimat). The story is about Shahid, a poor boy whose beauty captivates men and women alike. The ruler’s son, infatuated with Shahid, starts living with him. Later, Shahid falls in love with a girl. The theme of boy-love (amrad parasti) is a recurrent on in Persian poetry and one which is found even in the basic course books of students such as the Gulistan and Bustan.

Rhymed tales, or dastans, were also part of the traditional course of Persian studies. Yusuf Zulaikha, Sheereen Khusrau and Laila Majnun were taught by famous teachers, sometimes but not always, attached to educational institutions. Bairam Khan, for instance, was taught a version of the Yusuf Zulaikha legend by Abdul Ghafur Lari (Badaoni 1995a: 588). The tales are always formulaic. The hero and the heroine are beautiful beyond description. They fall in love but there are circumstances which prevent legal cohabitation. In the end they generally die. The passion they depict is so intense that it makes the lovers oblivious of social hierarchies, norms of society, societal taboos, material well-being, and even pain and death. Interpreted in a mystic way the love passion served as a metaphor for the mystic’s (Sufi’s) quest for an immanent deity.

The value system this literature supports was hierarchical, male dominating and supportive of Muslim ascendancy politically and their hegemony intellectually and culturally. Likewise it strengthened the common belief in the arbitrariness of life and in fate which all led to political quietism and acceptance of the prevalent gender roles and power structure.

THE LEARNINGOF PERSIAN BY FOREIGNERS

When Muslim kings of India were powerful, foreigners who visited their realm—especially those connected with the court itself—learned Persian. Ibn Batuta (1303-1368 or 9), the Moroccan traveler who came to India in 1333, learned it so well that he conducted all his business in it., One of the earliest European travellers, John Mildenhall (visited during 1599-1606), wrote an application (he calls it ‘Ars’ which is a corrupted form of Arzi) to the king asking him for trade concessions for the British. He learned the language in six months with the help of a ‘schoolmaster’. (Foster 9121: 57).

Another traveler, Nicholas Withington (1612-1616) reports that Jesuits preached ‘first in the Persian tongue, that the Armenians and Moores may understand’ (Foster 1921: 223). Thomas Coryat (1612:1617) learned Persian and it helped him immensely in his travels across the Great Mughal’s empire (Ibid, 284). The Jesuits, whose purpose was conversion, translated the Bible in Persian. Father Jerome Xavier, who did one translation, wrote in 1604 that an earlier translation, ‘more than 300 years old’, had been for from Rome (Maclagen 1932: 214). They presented a translated copy to Jahangir (r. 1605-27) in 1606 (Guerreiro 1930: 30-31) as well a Persian version of the lives of the Apostles (Ibid, 43-44).

The early British officers of the East India Company corresponded with Indian princes and notables in Persian. Although Persian was abolished as the court language in 1834, the Persian Interpreter—an official who interpreted Persian correspondence to high functionaries of the company and wrote letters in that language to outsiders—was attached to the personal staff of high-ranking officials. Thus the C-in-C (Sir Henry Fane between 1835-38) had an interpreter on his staff during this period as his daughter, Miss Isabella Fane, testifies (Pemble 1985: 55).

Although political power was with the British, the cultural hegemony of the Muslim elite was still intact in the early period of British rule. Thus we find British officers becoming ‘White Mughals’ speaking Urdu, writing in Persian, wearing oriental clothes in private and, of course, marrying Indian women or keeping concubines (Darlymple 2002). Some of them actually wrote Persian poetry as Ram Babu Saksena’s book European and Indo-European Posts of Urdu and Persian (1943) shows. Notable among them are: Edward Henry Palmer (1840-87); John Thomas (served with Begum Sumru in 1782); Lt. Col Shadwell Plough (1858-1903); and Lt. Col James Skinner (1778-1841). It was only slowly that the British asserted their cultural and intellectual hegemony and English, rather than Persian, became the language which carried it throughout India.

The British learned Persian in formal institutions of learning and informally from private tutors. Among the formal institutions were the Fort William College in Calcutta which started functioning in 1801 (Fort William Vol-1), and Haileybury College established at Hertford in 1806. At both places they taught the well known classics—Tuti Nama, Iyar-e-Danish, Bahar-e-Danish, Qissa Hatim Tai and Gulistan—changing one or two books here and there (Fort William Vol-1 and Haileybury 1925). In India the young officers (writers) hired Munshis as did H. T. Prinsep (1792-1878) when he came to India in 1809 and as did even John Beames who came in 1857 when Persian had officially been replaced by English (Prinsep 1904: 59 and Beames 1961: 80-81). Even in 1909, a report attributes the significance of Persian for British rule in India because of the ‘political position’ of Iran and because of the cultural prestige of the language among Indian and Afghan Muslims (Treasury 1909: 117).

Although Indians had been visiting England from the 1600s onwards, a certain Munshi Isma’il seems to have been recorded as a teacher of Persian in 1772. Others were Abdul Azim Isfahani (1775-6 and d. 1790); Munshi Muhammad Sami (c. 1785) and others (Fisher 2004: 104). I’tisam al Din visited England between 1767 and 1769 and taught students. He also helped William Jones with his Persian studies (Khan 1998: 76). Mahomet Saeed of Bengal advertised in the London newspapers for British pupils to whom he could teach Persian (Fisher 2004: 105). Abu Talib, who visited in 1799, tried to set up an institution to teach Persian but did not succeed. He reports, however, that an offer was mode to him but by then he had resolved to return to India (Talib Vol-1: 1810: 164). Indian instructors of Persian did not regard Britain with a sense of inferiority in the eighteenth and even up to the middle of the nineteenth century. They claimed they ‘offered accurate and authentic language and cultural training’ (Fisher 2004: 107). They were very few, of course, but taught both the civil servants (Haileybury) and the military officers (Addiscombe) who would rule India. However, Addiscombe’s cadets were even less interested in Persian, taught to them by Hassan Ali who joined the faculty in 1810, than Hailebury’s civil servants (Fisher 2004: 126). By 1826 attitudes had changed as the British developed contempt for Indians and Indian faculty was phased out (Ibid, 132-133). Soon Persian too was phased out.

British officials kept up private correspondence with eminent Indians in Persian. Asadullah Khan Ghalib, the famous Urdu poet, tells his friend in a letter of 1858 that John Jacob discouraged people from writing in Urdu while encouraging them to write in Persian (Ghalib 1858). The poet himself wrote to the British Chief Secretary in Persian even in 1863 (Ghalib 1863) though he wrote to his Indian friends (except Tipu Sultan’s maternal grandson) in Urdu (Ghalib 1866).

Even in 1872 British officials were encouraged to learn Persian. Indeed, while the reward for passing an examination in Persian was Rs. 1200, it was only Rs. 750 for Urdu (Home 1872: 575). This importance decreased but Persian, as one of the classical languages of (Muslim) India, remained a subject in the prestigious civil service examination.

PERSIAN IN THE EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTIONS

Records of madrassas, meant for training functionaries of the state and the religious establishment, exist from the tenth century. Mansoora (Sindh), for instance, had the madrassa of Qazi Abu Muhammad Mansoori (c.10 c); Lahore; Ajmer, Delhi, Uchh, Multan, Deecan, Jaunpur, Badayun and Bengal all had madrassas Minhaj Uddin Siraj, the author of the history book Tabaqat-e-Nasiri (c. 1260) was the administrator of Madrassa-e-Ferozi in 1227 at the orders of Nasir Uddin Qabacha (r.1205-28) at Uchh (Mehr 1975: 13). They existed when Ibn Batuta, the traveler from Morocco, visited India in the fourteenth century (Batuta c. 14C: 230). In these madrassas the medium of instruction was Persian and books on Arabic grammar, such as the Meezan us sarf, probably by Siraj Uddin al-Awadhi (d. 1372), had explanations in Persian (Baloch 1971; 69). Later, during the Mughal period, the number of madrassas increased.

There is much historical evidence about royalty learning Persian. They were generally given instruction by private tuition engaged for this purpose. Sher Khan (d. 1545), who began life as a landlord’s son and not a prince, however, studied at a Madrassa in Narnaul (between Hisar and Jaipur) which had been built in 1520. Here, among other things, he studied Nizami’s Sikandar Nama and, of course, the inevitable Gulistan and Bustan. (Sarwani c. 1586: 9; Sufi 1941: 52). The legend of Heer Ranjha, as narrated by Waris Shah ( ), mentions the Nam-i-Haq, Khaliq Bari as primers and the usual canonical works of literature prose and ethics numbering thirteen as part of the curriculum in the Punjab(Sufi 1941: 109. Also see Shah ). This curriculum did not change much since the British found it much the same when they arrived (Leitner 1882: 55-57). Indeed, the madrassas of the Bengal and Behar (Adam 1836: 199-215) as well as present-day U. P also taught the same with some minor variations (Reid 1852: para 153, p. 52).

Reports during the British period, such as Fisher’s Report (1826), Leitner’s Report (18 ) etc provide lists of schools functioning from pre-British times. Those called maktabs taught rudimentary Persian while madrassas went on to teach more Persian books. The British themselves established government educational institutions where Persian was an important subject in the beginning of their rule.

The British divided schools into several categories. The two relevant for our purposes are the Arabic and the Persian schools. In a sample of sixteen tours are cities out of a total of thirty one in the North Western Provinces (part of U. P today), there were 903 Persian schools and 150 Arabic ones in 1850 (Edn NWP 1850: 25). Also see Rahman 2002: 81). In the Punjab there were 458 Persian schools in the early 1880s. they taught 4,015 students and, according to W.R.M Holroyd, only 95 contained more than twelve while 247 has six or less students (Edn. P 1883: para 26, p.10).

The British also promoted Persian studies in the Culcutta Madrassah established in 1781 ( Fisher 1832: 2). They also established the Agra (1822) and Delhi (1826) colleges where Persian was taught (Fisher 1832: 24-25). Private entrepreneurs, such as a philanthropist named Fraser, opened a school in Delhi to teach Persian to 80 Indian boys in 1814 (Fisher 1832: 25). Later, when the universities were established from 1858 onwards, Persian was a subject of study.

As Persian was not used in the domains of power, the demand for it decreased. In 1877 some members of the Punjab University senate complained the study of Persian only creates paper munshis and hence English should be taught in its place (Nobin et.al 1871: 89; Khan R 1872: 283-4). Even the Anjuman-e-Punjab agreed with this idea. Holroyd, the Director of Public Instruction, suspected that such demands had been inspired by rich people who could afford to teach their sons at home. (Holroyd 1871: 117-118). However, other British officers agreed that Persian be phased out of the school curricula: The Governor General omitted it from the Persian courses in the Bengal (Report Madrasah 1941). It was also omitted in the Punjab (Edn p 1914: 12) and in Sindh (Letter of AD. Younghusband, Commissioner of Sind to the Governor of Bombay, 27 July 1908, SA).

Another change introduced by the British was the gradual substitution of modern texts instead of the classical texts. One reason why this was done was because they, as well as the Indian reformers, began to find the classics embarrassingly erotic (Rahman 2002: 506). Thus, Maulana Muhammad Hussain Azad wrote Farsi Ki Paehli Kitab in 1870 in Lahore. Shibli Nomani wrote Nisab-e-Farsi (1894) and so on. There were books for matriculation, intermediate, B. A and so on. This happened in the high tide of Victorian prudery, but even as early as 1830 the Calcutta Book Society reported new books: Roebuck’s Persian Primer and a grammar (Fisher 1832: 90). The shift from things Indian to British, modern products of the intellect had begun in the early part of the nineteenth century.

On the whole, Persian lost its importance and is taught in the educational institutions of Pakistan and India as an optional subject. Students take it because it is taught through the memorization and translation of selected passages from simple textbooks which are so easy that they get high marks with little effort. They also take it, at least in Pakistan, in the competitive examinations for state services because of the same reason. Some madrassas in South Asia also teach Persian more as a symbol of continuity than for giving actual competence in the language. Some Shia madrassas teach it, however, to show their affiliation with Iran, the only Shia state in the world. Both madrassa students and students from secular institutions lack knowledge of modern, spoken Persian and are unable to function in real life situations either in Afghanistan or Iran. Some modern language-teaching institutions are trying to remedy this shortcoming in order to create interpreters for state and business purposes (Rahman 2002: 152-157).

FEMALE EDUCATION IN PERSIAN

Although some Muslim women always had some education, mostly the Qur’an which was read without understanding (nazra), reading and writing was not always considered appropriate for women. The Qabus Nama, a manual of appropriate behaviour dating from the eleventh century advises that a daughter need not be taught how to read and write though she may be instructed in the rudiments of religion (Iskander c. 11C: 125). The Akhlaq-e-Nasiri, a widely read book of adab in Mughal India, is equally mistrustful of womens’ education (Naim 1987: 112-113).As education at that time was in Persian it appears that men, while enjoying the aesthetic, amorous and erotic appeal of this literature, were uncomfortable about their women getting exposed to it. This became very clear during Victorian India when the Indian reformers of education spoke out strongly against it.

Nazir Ahmad, the didactic novelist (1833?-1912), recommends the study of Urdu and simple arithmetic besides the Qur’an and religious books, in his novels. However, his character Nusuh in Taubat un Nusuh (1874) teaches the Gulistan to his wife but censors one fourth of it by blackening its lines. These, he explains to her, were obscene (Ahmad 1874: 410-411). In Fasana-e-Muttila the protagonist Muttila learns Persian in school and the eroticism of this literature makes him conscious of his beauty and wayward in behaviour thus ruining his life (Ahmad 1885 in Akhtar: 630). However, Persian could be safely studied under good supervision. Thus in Majalis un-Nissa (1874) Kwhaja Altaf Husain Hali (1837-1914), another reformer, shows his character Zubaidu Khatun being taught at home, first by an ustani (female teacher) and then by her father. Besides the inevitable Gulistan and Bustan, she also reads the ‘Iyar-i-Danish (Minault 1998: 36).

However, despite this bias women were educated in Persian. Ibn Batuta found in a town in Malabar (Hinawr) ‘thirteen schools for girls and twenty-three for boys’. This was unusual because he remarks that it ‘a thing which I have never seen elsewhere’. (Battuta c. 14C: 230). The women of this town knew the Qur’an by heart and, Persian being the language used by Muslim educated people, this language was certainly taught in these schools.

Women from the most powerful families, not having to conform to public opinion, did get educated. The names of such women are found in many historical sources and are as follows: Gulbadan Begum, (born 1523) author of the Humayun Nama; Salima Sultana, niece of Humayun; Nur Jahan; Mumtaz Mahal; Razia Sultana; Chand Bibi and several Mughal princesses (Sufi 1941: 81-82; Rafiq 1982: 196-211. For Mughal princesses also see Badakhshani 1971: 95-98. Although details of their education are seldom provided, it appears that princesses and women from eminent families were instructed at home by women teachers. For instance, Inayatullah Khan’s mother Hafiza Maryam, had been commissioned to teach Aurangazeb’s accomplished daughter, Zebunnissa Begum (1639-1689)¹ Khan,S: c. 1750s: 821). The princess Jahan Ara, daughter of Shah Jahan, wrote a letter and couplets in Persian to a Sufi called Mulla Shah (Ahmed 1974: 132-133). Minor royalty of the latter period , such as the Begums of Bhopal, seem to have regarded education as an accomplishment in women of their stature. Sultan Jahan Begum, the third woman ruler of the state, learnt Persian as well as English (Minault 1998: 25). Her granddaughter, Abida Sultaan, also studied Persian for less than an hour daily (Sultaan 2004: 23).

Women from the ashraf classes were educated if their fathers taught them or kept teachers to do so. For instance, Azizunnissa Begum (1780?–1857), Sir Syed’s mother, read elementary Persian and the Qur’an (Panipati V. 16: 682. quoted from Minault: 14; Alam 2004: 50). There is evidence that some of the women of the Hindu Kaesth class, which had taken to Persian, also knew the language (Durga Prashad in Tazkiratun Nissa as quoted by Abdullah 1942: 233).But, ironically enough, the society also gave enough autonomy to courtesans who lived in surrogate families run by women (gharanas), to enable them to control their education. And some of the best of them were taught Persian. According to Leitner, who must have conversed with ashraf men of the Punjab, the ‘superior class of Hetairai are known to have received an education in Persian poetry and in calligraphy’ and this is the reason, he claims, that Persian poetry, ‘which has an almost intoxicating effect on the native mind, is sternly prohibited to be heard or read by most respectable females’ (Leitner 1882: 98). Umrao Jan Ada, the protagonist of Mirza Hadi Ruswa’s novel of the same name, says she was taught the Karima, Amad Nama, Gulistan and other books of Persian (Ruswa 1899: 54-55). While the courtesans needed the language to entertain gentlemanly customers, this was precisely the reason the middle class mistrusted it.

It appears, however, that in the primary schools (maktabs) boys and girls Hindus as well as Muslims, studied together (Abdul Latif 1971: 34 and Leitner 1882 : 105). This has been reported as the normal practice in Pakistan’s rural areas by people in their seventies (Malik 2005). There were also female indigenous schools which admitted small boys in various districts of the Punjab (Leitner 1882: 98). Though these schools taught the Qur’an (nazra), some of them taught the primers of Persian also. According to Leitner, ‘some of the ladies are good Persian scholars, and in a distinguished Muhammadan family that I know, I have been given to understand that several of the ladies are excellent poets’ (Leitner 1882: 104). This was the condition of the Punjab in the 1880s when Leitner collected his data. However, even today, curiously enough, some women, otherwise illiterate, know the Karima by heart and narrate it in women’s gatherings even now in the Pakistani Punjab. It is possible that, like the Qur’an, they also memorize the primer (personal communication).

Modernity brought ideas of women’s emancipation, especially through education,

which were expressed by Mumtaz Ali (1860-1935, a reformer, in Huquq un Niswan. He launched the paper ‘Tahzib un-Niswan’ in Urdu from Lahore in 1898. He commends books of good Urdu style as well as the Gulistan and Bustan (Minault 1998: 83). His wife Muhammadi Begum (1878?-1908) learned Urdu on her own (Minault 1998: 111-112). Mumtaz Ali taught her Persian ( Ibid, 112). The Anjuman-i-Himayat-i-Islam made five primary schools for girls in 1885 and increased them to fifteen by 1894. The curriculum included Persian (Minault 1998: 176). At this time, indigenous schools did sometimes teach Persian to girls. According to the testimony of Badruddin Tyabji before the Hunter Commission of 1882: ‘There are some Koris [Qaris] or Mullas in the chief centres of Muhammadan population who teach the Koran and perhaps a little Hindustani and Persian to the girls’. Although Persian was being phased out of the domains of power, it had such prestige that it was considered too much of an accomplishment to be denied altogether to young ladies. Thus, when Syed Karamat Husain (1854-1917) founded the Lucknow Girls’ School, Persian was taught along with Arabic, Urdu and English (Minault 1998:223). Another educationist, Rokeya Sakhavat Husain (1880-1932), who was a Bengali also established a school in Calcutta where Persian was taught in the beginning (Hossain 1988: 41-42). It was phased out, like it was in the boys’ schools, but because it could not empower the learner and not because of gender discrimination

Conclusion

Persian was learned by the Muslim elite as well as its subordinate allies among the Hindus (such as kaesths) because it was used in the domains of power. The purpose of the learners was to empower themselves individually and collectively. However, by doing so, they helped in maintaining the cultural and intellectual hegemony of the Indian Persianized Muslim elite. This hegemony made Muslim (Mughal) political supremacy acceptable to Indians.

The studying of Muslims and Hindus in the same schools and the courses of study—primers, composition and epistolography, literature and ethics—created a consensus of values among the educated elite which, in the last analysis, supported Muslim values and perceptions of reality. Hierarchy—the superiority of males over females, the elite over the masses, Muslims over Hindus etc—was one of these values. Arbitrariness was another. It promoted belief in fate and, therefore, political quietism. The magical universe of Persian literature, disconnecting cause and effect and creating a world in which things happened arbitrarily, helped one reconcile oneself to the arbitrariness of political authorities and blame their excesses on one’s fate (kismet or karma). Yet another attitude, again connected with Persian literature, was the idea that literature was an aesthetic device completely alienated from real life. Thus stories of love, disregard of the norms of society, revolt against one’s socio-economic class (by falling in love with persons from another class), disregard of gender (boy-love) lost their heterodox force because they were consumed as aesthetic products and put on a pedestal which separated them from life. Thus, the unconventional was conventionalized and the subversive potential of Persian texts neutralized and, indeed, recruited into supporting the power structure. But because this subversive potential existed, women were generally kept away from it. Women powerful in their own right or autonomous, being on the fringes of society (courtesans), did, however, study Persian. Middle class women too were taught the language under strict supervision and generally at home but sometimes in schools. The demand for learning Persian decreased when Persian was no longer useful for obtaining jobs in the state or the private sector. It in now studied either for the few jobs where it is still used, by scholars or by students who find it easy to get high marks in it.

NOTES

1. A collection of poems called Diwan-i-Makhfi collected in 1724, is credited to Zeb un Nissa. However, some ascribe it to another Makhfi. For the English translation of the first fifty ghazals see Magan Lal and Jasce Duncan Westbrook, the Diwan of Zeb-un_Nissa London: John Murray, 1913.

Annexure-1

BOOKS of PERSIAN TAUGHT in the EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTIONS of SOUTH ASIA

(The books in bold print are taught even now in Pakistani madrassas).

Primers

Attar, Fariduddin[d.1220] c. 12-13C. Pand Nama. Multan: Maktaba Shirkat-e-Ilmia, 1959 [Urdu meanings in margins by Sajjad Hussain].

Bukhari, Sharfuddin. c. 14C Nam-e-Haq. Karachi: H. M. Saeed Company.

Sa’adi, Muslehuddin. c. 13C. Karima. Multan: Bairoon Bohar Gate [Urdu words in margins by Qazi Sajjad Hussain].

Prose and Composition

1. Bad’ai ‘ul-Insha (or Insha-i-Yusufi).

2. Prose works of Mulla Jami and Mulla Munir.

3. Letters of Abu’l Fadl (d. 1602).

4. Handbook of Shaikh ‘Inayatullah, Secretary to Shah Jahan.

5. Bahar-i-Sukhan by Shaikh Muhammad Salih.

6. Letters of Mulla Munir.

7. Epistles of Shaida and Mulla Tughra.

8. Story of Lal Chand.

9. Lilavati translated by Shaikh Faizi. (d. 1595).

Literature

1. Gulistan and Bustan (beginners) by Sa’adi

2. Yusuf Zulaikha ‘Abd ur Rahman Jami (d. 1492)

3. Tuhfat-ul-Ahrar ”

4. Nuzhat-ul-Abrar ”

5. Sikandar Namah Nizami Ganjwi (d. 1209)

6. Makhzan-ul-Asrar ”

7. Haft Paikar ”

8. Shirin Khusrau ”

9. Laila Majnun ”

10. Qiranu’s-Sa’dain Amir Khusrau (d.1325)

11. Matla’u’l-Anwar ”

12. I’jaz-e-Khusravi ”

13. Works of other poets including Sa’adi (d. 1292), Hafiz Shirazi (d. 1389/90), and Sa’ib Tabrizi (d. 1677). Also the Qasaid of Badr-i-Chach, Anwari, Khaqani, ‘Urfi (d. 1592), and Faizi (d. 1595).

14. Fiction: Tuti Nama by Masud Ziauddin Nakshabi (d. 1350); Anwar-e-Suhaili by Husain Waiz Kashifi (d.1350); Iyar-e-Danish (1587) by Shaikh Abu’l Fazl (d. 1602) and Bahar-e-Danish.

NB: Books of ethics and history have been left out. Out of more than fifty poets whose names appear in different courses of study only a few very well known ones are given here (for details see Sufi 1941: 77-8).

REFERENCES

The following abbreviations have been used below:

NDC Sources located at the National Documentation Centre, Cabinet Division, Government of Pakistan, Islamabad

OIOC Oriental and India Office Collections, British Library, London.

Abdul Latif, Muhammad. 1971. ‘Chapter 1’ In Tareekh-e-Adabiat Vol-4.

Abdullah, S.M. 1967. Adabiyat-i Farsi Mein Hinduon Ka Hissa [The contribution of the Hindus to Persian Literature] Lahore: Majlis-i Taraqqi-ye Adab.

_____. 1930. ‘Farsi Ta ‘alim ka asar Hinduon par’ [The effect of Persian education on the Hindus], Khialistan (April), pp. 33-38.

Adam, William. 1836. ‘Report on the State of Education in Rajshahi Submitted in 1836’. In Long 1868: 85-142.

Ahmad, Nazeer. 1874. ‘Taubat un Nusuh’ in Majmua Deputy Nazeer Ahmad ed. Saleem Akhtar (Lahore: Sang-e-Meel, 1994).

Ahmed, Zahur Uddin. 1974. Pakistan Main Farsi Adab ki Tareekh: Ahed-e-Jahanger S e Aurangzeb tak. Lahore: Majlis Taraqqi Adab.

Alam, Muzaffar. 2003. ‘The Culture and Politics of Persian in Precolonial Hinustan’. In Pollock, Sheldon (ed). 2003. Literary Cultures in History: Reconstructions from South Asia Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press. pp 131-198.

_____. 2004. The Languages of Political Islam: India 1200-1800 Chicago: The University Chicago Press.

Badakhshani, Mirza Maqbool Baig. 1971. ‘Adabi Manzar, Chapter 2’. In Tarikh-e-Adabiyat Vol.3, pp. 42-122.

Badaoni, Abdul Qadir. C. 1995a. Muntakhab-ul-Tawarikh Vol. 1. Trans from Persian by George S. A. Ranking. Calcutta, 1884. Edition used. Patna: Academica Asiatica, 1973.

Baloch, Nabi Baksh. 1971. ‘Mazhab’ In Tarikh-e-Adabiyat Vol. 3 , pp. 60-8.

Battuta, Ibn. c. 14C. Ibn Battuta: Travels in Asia and Africa 1325-54. Translated from Arabic by Gibb, H.A.R. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul Ltd, 1929.

Beames, John. 1961. Memoirs of a Bengal Civilian. London: Chatto and Windus.

Darlymple, William. 2002. White Mughals: Love and Betrayal in Eighteenth-Century India. London: HarperCollins.

Edn. NWP. 1850. Memoir on the Statistics of Indigenous Education Within the North Western Provinces of the Bengal Presidency. (Comp.) R. Thornton. Calcutta: Printed by J. Thomas, Baptist Mission Press.

Edn. P. 1883. Report on the State of Education in the Punjab and its Dependencies for the Year 1882-83 by Lt. Col. W.R.M. Holroyd, Director Public Instruction Punjab. Lahore: Printed at the Central Jail Press.

Edn. P. 1914. Report on Progress of Education in the Punjab for the Year 1913-14. Lahore: Superintendent, Government Printing.

Fisher. 1832. ‘Memoir compiled from the records of the India Governments at the East India House, in pursuance of a Minute of the Committee of Correspondence of the 7^th February 1826, “showing the extent to which aid has been afforded by the local Governments in India, towards the establishment of Native schools in that country”. In Basu, N.A. (ed.). 1952. Indian Education in Parliamentary Papers: Part-I (1832). Bombay: Asia Publishing House: 1-143.

Fisher, Michael H. 2004. Counterflows to Colonialism: Indian Travelers and Settlers in Britain 1600-1857 (New Delhi: Permanent Black, 2004)

Foster, William 1921. Early Travels in India 1583-1619 London: Oxford University Press.

Ghalib, Asadullah Khan. 1858. Letter of 5 March to Hatim Ali Beg. In Mehr 1982: 180.

_____. 1863. Letter of 12 May to Meerza Abbas Beg. In Mehr 1982: 543.

_____. 1866. Letter of 6 October to Noman Ahmad. In Mehr 1982: 519.

Ghani, Muhammad Abdul. 1929-30 A History of Persian Language and Literature at the Mughal Court (Babur to Akbar), in three parts, allahabad: Indian Press.

_____. 1941. Pre-Mughal Persian in Hindustan. Allahabad: The Allahabad Law Journal Press.

Gramsci, Antonio.1929-1935. Selections from Prison Notebooks Hoare, Quintin and Smith, Geoffrey Nowell (eds and trans.).1971. London: Lawrence and Wishart.

Guerreiro, Father Fernao. 1930. Jahangir and the Jesuits: From the Relations of FFG, S.J. Trans. from the Portuguese by C.H. Payne. Originally Published, 1930. New Delhi: Munshiram Manoharlal, 1977.

Haileybury .1825. Yearly Report 1824-25. IOR Haileybury Records (1749-1923). (OIOC).

Hali, Altaf Hussain. 1901. Hayat-e-Javed Translated from Urdu into English by Daud J. Mathews; New Delhi: Rupa and Co, 1994.

Holroyd. 1871. Letter from Captain W.R.M. Holroyd, DPI, to the Officiating Secretary, Punjab No. 85, Lahore, 13 May 1871. In Extracts from Punjab Records (Education): Home Department June 1871. ACC No. 799 (NDC).

Home. 1872. Rewards to Educational Officers for Passing in Vernacular Languages: Home Dept. 8 July 1872, ACC No. 1686 (NDC).

Hossain, Rokeya Sakhawat. 1988. Sultana’s Dream and Selections From the Secluded Ones Tr. From Urdu and ed. Roushan Jahan. NY: Feminist Press.

Iskandar, Kaikaus ibn.c.11c. A Mirror for Princes : the Qabus Nama .Tr. from the Persian. Levy, Reuben. New York: E. P. Dutton, 1951.

Khan, Rahim, 1872. ‘Memorandum on Muhammadan Education in India’, 17 April 1872. In Senate 1872.

Khan, A. D. 1994. Diplomatic of the Soyurghal Farman of the Great Mughals (1556-1707) Allahabad: Quemer Publications.

Khan, Samsamud Daulah Shahnawaz c. 1750s. Ma ‘asir ul Umara Lahore: Markazi Urdu Board, 1969. [The author lived between 1700-1758].

Kumboh, Mohammad Saleh. 1660. Shahjahan Nama 3 vols. Trans from Persian into Urdu by Nazir Husain Zaidi. Lahore: Markazi Urdu Board, 1974

Leitner, G. W. 1882. History of Indigenous Education in the Punjab since Annexation and in 1882. Repr. Lahore: Republican Books, 1991.

Maclagen, Edward. 1932. The Jesuits and the Great Mogul. London: Burns Oats and Washbourne Ltd.

Malik, Fateh Muhammad. 2005. Personal information, 12 September, Islamabad.

Mehr, Ghulam Rasul (Translator). 1975. ‘Introduction’ to the Urdu translation of Taboqat-e-Nasiri (c. 1260) (from Persian) Lahore: Markazi Urdu Board.

Mehr, Ghulam Rasool (Comp.). 1982. Khutut-e-Ghalib [Urdu: The Letters of Ghalib]. Lahore: Sheikh Ghulam Ali.

Minault, Gail. 1998. Sceluded Scholons: Women’s Education and Muslim Social Reform in Colonial India Delhi: Oxford University Press.

Mirza, Mohammad Wahid .1934. The Life and Works of Amir Khusrau Lahore: Punjab University Press, 1962.

Momin, Muhiuddin. 1971. The Chancellery and Persian Epistolography under the Mughals: From Babur to Shah Jahan (1526-1658), Calcutta: Iran Society.

Naim, C.M. 1987. ‘How Bibi Ashraf Learned to Read and Write’, Annual of Urdu Studies No. 6: pp. 99-115.

Naqvi, Syed Ali Raza. 1972. ‘Shu’ara ke Tazkare’. In Tarikh-e-Adabiyat Vol.5, pp.165-262.

Nobin, Chandra Rai; Raja Harbans; Rai Mul Sing etc. 1871. ‘Opinion with reference to the Resolution of the Government of India. No. 300, 7 August 1871’. In Senate 1873.

Pemble, John (ed) .1985. Miss Fane in India Gloucester: Alan Sutton.

Prinsep. 1904. ‘Three Generations in India 1770-1904’ by Sir Henry Thoby Prinsep. MSS. Eur. C. 97/2. (OIOC).

Rafiq, Saeed Ahmad. 1982. Musalmanon Ka Nizam-e-Taleem Karachi: Academy of Educational Research.

Rahman, Tariq . 1996. Language and Politics in Pakistan Karachi, Oxford University Press.

_____. 2002. Language, Ideology and Power, Language Learning Among the Muslims of Pakistan and North India Karachi: Oxford University Press.

Reid, H. S. 1852. Report on the Indigenous Education and Vernacular Schools in Agra, Aligarh, Bareli, etawah, Farrukhabad, Mainpuri, Mathura, Shahjahanpur for the Year 1850-1851. Agra: Printed at the Secundra Orphan Press.

Ruswa, Mirza Muhammad Hadi. 1899. Umrao Jan Ada Islamabad: Alhamra Publishing, 2000.

Saiyid, Dushka. 1998. Muslim Women of the British Punjab: From Seclusion to Politics London: Macmillan’s Press.

Senate. 1872. Proceedings of the Senate of the Punjab University College. April 1872, ACC No. 799 (NDC).

_____. 1873. Proceedings of the Senate of the Punjab University College. February 1873, ACC. No. 799 (NDC).

Shah, M Akram. 1971. ‘Dastanen’ [Urdu: Tales]. In Tareekh-e-Adabiat Vol. 4; Chapter 17.

Sufi, G.M.D. 1941. Al-Minhaj Being The Evolution of Curriculum in the Muslim Educational Institutions of India. Delhi: Idarah-i-Adabiyat-i Dilli. Edition used 1977 reprint.

Sultaan, Abida. 2004. Memoirs of a Rebel Princess. Karachi: Oxford University Press.

Talib, Abu. 1810. The Travels of Mirza abu Talib Khan in Asia, Africa, and Europe During the years 1799, 1800, 1801, 1802 and 1803 Written by Himself, in the Persian Language. Trans. Charles Stewart Vols. 1 & 2. London: Longman, Hurst, Rees & Orme.

Tarikh-e-Adabiyat.1971-72. Tarikh-e-Adabiyat-e-Musalmanan-e-Pakistan-o-Hind [Urdu: the History of the Literatures of the Muslims of Pakistan and India] Vols 3, 4 and 5: Persian. General Editor. Mahmud, Fayyaz Lahore: University of the Punjab.

Tayabji, Badruddin.1882. ‘Evidence before the Hunter Commission’. In Report of the Bombay Provincial Committee: Appendix of the education Commission Report Calcutta: Superintendent of government Printing, 1884, p. 501.

Treasury. 1909. Report of the Committee Appointed by Lords Commissioners of His Majesty’s Treasury Organization of Oriental Studies in London. London: His Majesty’s Stationery Office.