Jump to content

Rukhmabai

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Onlyaccuratesources (talk | contribs) at 23:53, 3 February 2021 (→In popular culture). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Rukhmabai
Born(1864-11-22)22 November 1864
Died25 September 1955(1955-09-25) (aged 90)
Occupation(s)Doctor, women's emancipation

Rukhmabai (22 November 1864 – 25 September 1955) was an Indian physician and feminist. She is best known for being one of the first practicing women doctors in colonial India as well as being involved in a landmark legal case involving her marriage as a child bride between 1884 and 1888. The case raised significant public debate across several topics, which most prominently included law vs tradition, social reform vs conservatism and feminism in both British-ruled India and England. This ultimately contributed to the Age of Consent Act in 1891.

Early life

Rukhmabai was born to Janardhan Pandurang and Jayantibai in a Marathi family. Her father passed away when she was aged two and her mother seventeen. Six years after her husband's demise, Jayantibai married the widower Dr Sakharam Arjun who was an eminent physician and social activist in Bombay. Remarriage of widows was permitted among the Suthar (carpenter) community - the caste to which the couple belonged.[1]

Two and a half years later, 11-year-old Rukhmabai was married to the 19 year old Dadaji Bhikaji, a cousin of her step-father. It was agreed that deviating from the contemporary social norms, Dadaji would stay with Rukhmabai's family as a gharjawai and be fully provided for by them. The expectation was for him to acquire education in due course and "become a good man". Six months into the marriage, Rukhmabai having reached puberty, the traditional event of Garbhadhan was held signalling the time for ritual consummation of marriage. But Dr Sakharam Arjun, being an eminent physician of reformist tendencies, did not permit early consummation.[1]

This displeased Bhikaji, now aged 20, who also resented the attempts of Rukhmabai's family to make him "a good man". In addition to his aversion for education, the compulsion to go to sixth standard of school at an age when he should have been at the university was particularly distressing. In the meanwhile, Bhikaji lost his mother and against the advise of Sakharam Arjun, took to living with his maternal uncle Narayan Dhurmaji. The environment of Dhurmaji's home pushed Bhikaji further into a life of indolence and waywardness. He eventually accumulated debts which he hoped to clear using the property that accompanied Rukhmabai into the house. Rukhmabai refused to move in to the household of Dhurmaji to live with Bhikaji, a decision supported by her step-father.[1]

In contrast, in the same years Rukhmabai studied at home using books from a Free Church Mission library. Because of her father's association with religious and social reformers she also came into contact with prominent names like Vishnu Shastri Pandit, a strong proponent of women's causes in Western India at the time, along with European men and women exposing her to liberal reformism. With her mother, she also regularly attended the weekly meetings of the Prarthanä Samäj and Arya Mahilä Samäj.[2][1][3]

"Restitution of conjugal rights" case by Bhikaji

In March 1884, Bhikaji sent a legal notice to Sakharam Arjun via his lawyers Chalk and Walker, asking him to desist preventing Rukhmabai from joining him. Eventually Sakharam Arjun sought legal help and via lawyers Payne-Gilbert, and Sayani provided grounds for Rukhmabai's refusal to join Bhikaji.[4]

In 1885, the case of Bhikaji seeking "restitution of conjugal rights" titled "Bhikaji vs. Rukhmabai, 1885" came up for hearing and the judgement was passed by Justice Robert Hill Pinhey. Pinhey stated that English precedents on restitution did not apply to the case as the English law applied to consenting adults. He also found fault with the English law cases and found no precedent in Hindu law. He declared that Rukhmabai had been wed in her "helpless infancy" and that he could not compel a young lady. Justice Pinhey retired soon after.[citation needed]

In 1886, the case was brought up for retrial. Rukhmabai's counsels included J.D. Inverarity Jr. and Kashinath Trimbak Telang. The case drew criticisms from various sections of the society, in some cases claims that the law did not respect the sanctity of Hindu customs.[5] Specifically, criticism of Justice Pinhey's decision came from the Native Opinion, an Anglo-Marathi weekly run by Vishwanath Narayan Mandlik (1833–89) who supported Bhikaji. A Pune weekly run by Balgangadhar Tilak, the Mahratta, wrote that Justice Pinhey did not understand the spirit of Hindu laws and that he sought reforms by "violent means". In the meantime, a series of articles appearing before and during the trial, in the Times of India penned under the pseudonym a Hindu Lady also caused public reactions. Later on it was revealed that the author was none other than Rukhmabai. The public debate revolved around multiple points of contention - Hindu versus English Law, reform from the inside versus outside and whether ancient customs deserved respect or not. The first appeal against the case was made on 18 March 1886 and was upheld by Chief Justice Sir Charles Sargent and Justice L.H. Bayley.[citation needed]

On 4 March 1887, Justice Farran, using interpretations of Hindu laws, ordered Rukhmabai to "go live with her husband or face six months of imprisonment". Rukhmabai responded that she would rather face imprisonment than obey the verdict. This resulted in further upheaval and social debate.[6] Balgangadhar Tilak wrote in the Kesari that Rukhmabai's defiance was the result of an English education and declared that Hinduism was in danger.[2] On the other hand, Max Müller responded writing that the legal route was not the solution to the problem of Rukhmabai's case and that it was Rukhmabai's education that had made her the best judge of her own choices.[7]

Dissolution of Marriage

After the series of court cases which resulted in the affirmation of the marriage, she appealed to Queen Victoria.

Everywhere it is considered one of the greatest blessings of God that we are under the protection of our beloved Queen Victoria's Government, which has its world wide fame for best administration. If such a Government cannot help unyoke us Hindu woman, what Government on earth has the power to relieve the daughters of Ind from their present miseries? This 50th year of our Queen's accession to the most renowned throne is the jubilee year in which every town and every village in her dominions is to show their loyalty in the best way it can, and wish the mother Queen a long happy life, to rule over us for many years with peace and prosperity. At such an unusual occasion will the mother listen to an earnest appeal from her millions of Indian daughters and grant them a few simple words of change into the book on Hindu law- that 'marriages performed before the respective ages of 20 in boys and 15 in girls shall not be considered legal in the eyes of the law if brought before the Court.' This mere sentence will be sufficient for the present to have enough check on child marriages, without creating a great vexation among the ignorant masses. This jubilee year must leave some expression on us Hindu women, and nothing will be more gratefully received than the introduction of this mere sentence into our law books. It is the work of a day if God wished it, but without His aid every effort seems to be in vain. So far, dear lady, I have dwelt on your patience, for which an apology is necessary. With best compliments -I remain yours very sincerely, Rukhmabai.

Rukhmabai's Testimony to the Government of India. Daily Telegraph, 15 July 1887. page 2.

It has been claimed that Queen Victoria overruled the court and dissolved the marriage.[8] However no primary documentary evidence has been provided to support Queen Victoria's direct intervention in the case.

In July 1888, a settlement was reached with Bhikaji and he relinquished his claim on Rukhmabai for a payment of two thousand rupees. Bhikaji remarried in 1889 [9] and Rukhmabai went on to become a widely revered feminist and medical practitioner.

Main article: Age of Consent Act, 1891

The case generated a great deal of debate both within India and England. It drew written commentaries from reformers like Behramji Malabari (1853-1912), Balgangadhar Tilak, journalistic opinion pieces from prominent names like Rudyard Kipling[10][11] and broader feminist discussions in British women's magazines.[12][13][8][2][14][15]

Ultimately, the publicity and debate generated by this case helped influence the enactment of the "Age of Consent Act" in 1891, which changed the age of consent from 10 to 12 years across British India.[8]

Career

Rukhmabai received support from the likes of Dr. Edith Pechey (then working at the Cama Hospital) who not only encouraged her but helped raise funds for her further education.[16] Other supporters included Shivajirao Holkar who donated 500 Rupees for "demonstrating courage to intervene against traditions",[17] suffrage activists like Eva McLaren and Walter McLaren, the Countess of Dufferin's Fund for Supplying Medical Aid to the Women of India, Adelaide Manning and others who helped establish "The Rukhmabai Defence Committee" to help gather fund towards supporting her cause of continuing education. In 1889, Rukhmabai set sail to study medicine in England.[18]

In 1894, she received her Doctor of Medicine from the London School of Medicine for Women having also studied at the Royal Free Hospital. Doctors Kadambini Ganguly and Anandi Gopal Joshi were the first Indian women to have received medical degrees in 1886.[19] But only Dr. Ganguly went on to practice medicine, making Rukhmabai the second woman to both receive a medical degree and practice medicine.[20]

In 1895, she returned to India and worked as the Chief Medical Officer at the Women's Hospital in Surat. In 1918, she turned down the offer of a role in the Woman's Medical Service, opting instead to work at the Zenana (Woman's) State Hospital in Rajkot until her retirement in 1929. She established the Red Cross Society at Rajkot. Rukhmabai chose to settle in Bombay after her retirement.[16][21][14]

Later life

In 1904 after the death of Bhikaji, Rukhmabai chose to start dressing in a white sari as per Hindu traditions of widowhood.[22][circular reference]

In 1929 after her retirement, she publishing a pamphlet titled "Purdah - the need for its abolition" arguing that young widows were being denied the chance to actively contribute to Indian society.[21][23]

Death

Rukhmabai died, aged 90, from lung cancer on 25 September 1955.

  • In 2008, the specifics of the legal case between Rukhmabai and her husband were published as a book titled "Enslaved Daughters: Colonialism, Law and Women's Rights" (ISBN 9780195695731) by author Sudhir Chandra.[1]
  • In 2016, the story of Rukhmabai was adapted into a Marathi film titled Doctor Rakhmabai starring Tannishtha Chatterjee directed by Anant Mahadevan and produced by Dr Swapna Patker.[24]

Recognition

  • 19?? - A hospital in Surat was named after her[25][8]
  • On 22 November 2017, Google commemorated Rukhmabai's 153rd Birthday with a Google Doodle on their Indian front page. Although this gave her name as "Rukhmabai Raut"[26] there is no evidence that she ever used the surname of her father, step-father or of Dadaji. She signed herself as "Rukhmabai" in her medical writings[27] and her registration with the Registrar of the General Medical Council also only uses "Rukhmabai".[28]

See also

References

  1. ^ a b c d e Chandra, Sudhir (2008). Enslaved Daughters: Colonialism, Law and Women's Rights. Oxford University Press. doi:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195695731.001.0001. ISBN 978-0-19-569573-1.
  2. ^ Burton, Antoinette (30 March 1998). At the Heart of the Empire: Indians and the Colonial Encounter in Late-Victorian Britain. University of California Press. ISBN 978-0-520-91945-7.
  3. ^ Chandra, Sudhir (2008). "Rukhmabai and Her Case". In Chandra, Sudhir (ed.). Enslaved Daughters. Oxford University Press. pp. 15–41. doi:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195695731.003.0001. ISBN 9780195695731.
  4. ^ Lahiri, Shompa (18 October 2013). Indians in Britain: Anglo-Indian Encounters, Race and Identity, 1880-1930. Routledge. pp. 13–. ISBN 9781135264468. Retrieved 4 March 2014.
  5. ^ Chandra, Sudhir (1996). "Rukhmabai: Debate over Woman's Right to Her Person". Economic and Political Weekly. 31 (44): 2937–2947. JSTOR 4404742.
  6. ^ Robb, George; Erber, Nancy (1999). Disorder in the Court: Trials and Sexual Conflict at the Turn of the Century. Springer. pp. 42–44.
  7. ^ a b c d Rappaport, Helen (2003). Queen Victoria: A Biographical Companion. ABC-CLIO. p. 429. ISBN 9781851093557.
  8. ^ Vallée, Gérard, ed. (2007). Florence Nightingale on Social Change in India: Collected Works of Florence Nightingale, Volume 10. Wilfrid Laurier University Press. pp. 775–776.
  9. ^ Malabari, Behramji M. (1888). ""A Hindu Lady"- and her woes". In Giduma, Dayaram (ed.). The Life and Life-work of Behramji M. Malabari. Bombay: Education Society. pp. 113–117.
  10. ^ Malabari, Behramji M. (1888). "Rukhmabai and Damayanti". In Giduma, Dayaram (ed.). The Life and Life-work of Behramji M. Malabari. Bombay: Education Society. pp. 132–134, 222–248.
  11. ^ Burton, Antoinette (2011). Empire in Question: Reading, Writing, and Teaching British Imperialism. Duke University Press. pp. 199–201.
  12. ^ Burton, Antoinette (1999). "Conjugality on Trial: The Rukhmabai Case and the Debate on Indian Child-Marriage in Late-Victorian Britain". Disorder in the Court. Palgrave Macmillan, London. pp. 33–56. doi:10.1057/9781403934314_3. ISBN 9781349405732.
  13. ^ a b "Rukhmabai | Making Britain". www.open.ac.uk. Retrieved 22 November 2017.
  14. ^ Antoinette, Burton (1 October 1998). "From Child Bride to "Hindoo Lady": Rukhmabai and the Debate on Sexual Respectability in Imperial Britain". The American Historical Review. 103 (4). doi:10.1086/ahr/103.4.1119. ISSN 0002-8762.
  15. ^ a b Jayawardena, Kamari (2014). White Women's Other Burden: Western Women and South Asia during British Rule. Routledge.
  16. ^ "Latest Telegrams". The Express and Telegraph. 21 January 1888. p. 2.
  17. ^ Chandra, Sudhir (1992). "Whose laws?: Notes on a legitimising myth of the colonial Indian state". Studies in History. 8 (2): 187–211. doi:10.1177/025764309200800203. S2CID 159894938.
  18. ^ "Google doodle for Rukhmabai Raut, but India's first woman doctor Kadambini Ganguly remains forgotten". 23 November 2017. Retrieved 24 November 2017.
  19. ^ Jovita Aranha (31 August 2017). "The Phenomenal Story of Kadambini: One of India's First Women Graduates & Doctors". Retrieved 22 November 2017.
  20. ^ a b Rappaport, Helen (2001). Encyclopedia of Women Social Reformers. ABC-CLIO. p. 599. ISBN 9781576071014.
  21. ^ Vandana.Srivastawa (22 November 2017). "Dr Rukhmabai Bhimrao Raut Honoured With a Google Doodle on her 153rd Birthday, Know All About the Woman Who Brought Age of Consent Act Into Force". India.com. Retrieved 22 November 2017.
  22. ^ Sorabji, Richard. Opening Doors: The Untold Story of Cornelia Sorabji, Reformer, Lawyer and Champion of Women's Rights in India.
  23. ^ Royal Maratha Entertainment (3 March 2017), Doctor Rakhmabai | Official Teaser | Tannishtha Chatterjee, retrieved 23 November 2017
  24. ^ Opening Doors. Penguin Books India. 15 June 2010. p. 32. ISBN 9781848853751. Retrieved 25 November 2015.
  25. ^ Rukhmabai Raut’s 153rd Birthday - Google - 22 November 2017
  26. ^ Rukhmabai; Bennett, B. H. (May 1909). "A Case of Myxoma". The Indian Medical Gazette. 44 (5): 180. ISSN 0019-5863. PMC 5167930. PMID 29005240.
  27. ^ "Medical Register: Untraceable Practitioners". The Lancet. 198 (5118): 732–734. 1921. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(01)22801-3.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Rukhmabai&oldid=1004709689"