——_____ Whose Imagined Community? Partha Chatterjee Se Naooam has once more appeared on the agenda of wot ffi Amos every day sat aera pola anaes in Wester sonra declare that ithe cllape of comma (ts the ern hope at they mean prenmably te cllapse of Sve sotalan), the Cipal danger to world peace is ow posed by the feaurgence of nadovalm in dierent par ofthe wort, Sneath dey tnd age a Bhenomenon ass tobe recognsed ay aprblem before ke li the ate peoples bases nt dese wh sho con for i wo be Iiberated from the arcane practices of area specials and made once more a sbject of general debate However, his very mode of return othe agenda of worl pia bas ice 0 me, hopeleuly preuied ibe dicts onthe mie Ine 1930 and 19605 natonatan asl eganed ae fete of he trios ancolonal srogges in Ain and Alten, Bat sna at the ne inasional paces ef economy and pln the pontoon ‘ate were diiplined and normalized uaer the concepaed sabes of “development and modernization’ nal valent blag rele sete domain he arr histori of thi aca tmpite. And in thou peice histories defined by te unprepowea ing contents of colonial archives, the emancipatory aspects of nationalan were undermined by couile Feeliont 0 cee dele Imanipulaons, and the cial pursuit of privat interes yeh 1070 national id become s matter fete pole tne eon yp plein the Third World kiled each esher sometimes in wars beweeh fegular armies, sometines, more dares im crac ad afeh po: tracted civil wars, and increasingly, it seemed, by technologically 24 PARTHA CHATTERJEE m9 sophisticated and virtually unstoppable acts of terrorism, The leaders of the African struggles against colonialism and racism had spoiled their records by becoming heads of corrupt, fractious, and often brutal Fegimes; Gandhi had been appropriated by such marginal cult as paci- fam and vegetarianism; and even fo Chi Minh in his moment of glory was eauyghe in the unvielding polavties of the Cold War. Nothing, it wwould seer, was left in the legacy of nationalism to make people in the Western world feel good about it This recent genealogy of the idea explains why nationalism is now viewed as a dark, elemental, unpredictable force of primordial nature threatening the orderly calm of civilized life. What had once been suc- cessfully relegated to the outer peripheries of the earth is now seen picking is way back foward Europe, through the long-forgotten provinces Of the Habsburg, the tearist, and the Ottoman empires Like drugs, te rorism, and illegal immigration, i¢ is one more product of the Third ‘World that the West dislikes but is powerless to prohibit. In light of the current discussions on the subject it the media itis sur prising to recall that not many years ago nationalism was generally Considered one of Europe's most magnificent gifts to the rest of the World. Itis also not often remembered today that the two greatest wars of the eventieth century, engulfing as they did virtually every part of the lobe, were brought about by Europe's fale to manage its own ethnic nationalisms. Whether ofthe ‘good! variety or the ‘bad, nationalism was tentirely a product of the political history of Europe. Notwithstanding the celebration of the various unifying tendencies in Europe today and of the political consensus in the West as a whole, there may be in the recent amnesia on the origins of nationalism moze than a hint of anxiety about ‘whether ithas quite been tamed in the land ofits birth. ‘In all this time, the “arca specialist’, the historians of the colonial world, working their way cheerlessy through musty ies of administrative reports and official correspondence in. colonial archives in London or Paris oF Amsterdam, had of course never forgotten how nationalism arrived in the colonies. Everyone agreed that it was a European import, the debates in the 1960s and 1970s in the historiographies of Africa or India o Indonesia were about what had become of the idea and who was responsible for it, These debates between a new generation of national- ist historians and those whom they dubbed ‘colonialist’ were vigorous and often acrimonious, but they were largely confined to the specialized. territories of area studies’; no one else took much notice of them, “Ten years ago, it was one such area specialist who managed to raise ‘once more the question of the origin and spread of nationalism in the framework of a universal history. Benedict Anderson demonstrated withPING THE NATION 216 MA sch ube and oii hat atone were ot he dterniae oduct of gen socilogal condtons sich as langage Face Popgion: they hed Deen, Fuope and everywhere es nthe worl Tmagined into exitence! He also described some of the major ins ln forms throu which this magined community came to aequte Concrete shape especialy the insta of what eso ingenious called ‘printeapitalsm’ He then argued that the historical experience of terials in Wester Earope nthe Avereas, nd it Riad p> piled forall subsequent nationalize se of mols orm from whieh Rana ites ata tnd Arica ha osc tones they ike Andersons book has been Ishin, the most nena a the fas Mt of courve i sneedless oad, s confined sinostexchinvel to aca demic witngs, Contary tothe largely uninformed exotiezation of tiaonaiam i the popular medi in the Wea the theoretical tendency represented by Anderson certainly tempts reat the penomenon 3 partof the unveral history ofthe moder word I have one central objection to Anderson's argument. If nationalis the rest f the world have to choose their imagined community from cer- tain ‘modular’ forms already made available to them by Europe and the ‘Americas, what do they have left to imagine? History it would seem, has decreed that we in the postcolonial world shall only be perpetual con- suumers of modernity. Europe and the Amerieas, the only rue subjects of | history, have thought out on our behalf not only the seript of colonial enlightenment and exploitation, but also that of our anticolonial resis tance and postcolonial misery. Even our imaginations must remai forever colonized. T object to this argument not for any sentimental reason, 1 object because I cannot reconcile itwith the evidence on anti-colonial national: ism. The most powerful as well as the most creative results of the nationalist imagination in Asia andl Africa are posited not on an identity Datrather on a differmcewith the ‘modular’ forms of the national society propagated by the modern West. How cap we ignore this without redu- ‘ing the experience of anticolonial nationalism to a caricature of itself? ‘To be fair to Anderson, it must be said that he is not alone to blame. ‘The difficulty, I am now convinced, arses because we have all taken the claims of nationalism to be a politcal movement much too literally and such too seriously In India, for instance, any standard nationalist history will tll us chat nationalism proper began in 1885 with the formation of the Indian ‘National Congress. Ie might also tellus thatthe decade preceding this was a period of preparation, when several provincial pol eal associations PARTHA CHATTERJEE 27 were formed. Prior to that rom the 1820s to the 1870s, vas the period of ‘social reform’, when colonial enlightenment was beginning to ‘mod fernize’ the customs and institutions of a traditional society and the politcal spirit was stil ery much that of collaboration with the colonial Fegime: nationalism had still not emenged. ‘This history, when submited to a sophisticated sociological analysis, ‘cannot but converge with Anderson's formolations, In fact, since it seeks 1 replicate in its own history the history of the modern state in Europe, nationalism's selErepresentation will inevitably corroborate Anderson's evoding of die nadonaist myth. 1uhink, however, that, a history ations alism’s autobfography is fundamentally fawed. By my reading, anticolonial nationalism creates its own domain of sovereignty within colonial society well hefore it begins its political bale ‘with the imperial power. I does this by dividing the world of social inst- tutions and practices into two domains ~ the material and the spiritual ‘The material is the domain ofthe ‘outside’, of the economy and of state- ‘rat, of science and technology, a domain where the West had proved its superiority and the East had succumbed. In this domain, chen, Western saperiority had to be acknowledged and its accomplishments carefully studied and replicated. The spiritual, on the other hand, is an ‘inner’ ‘domain bearing the ‘esential’ marks of cultural identity, The greater ‘one’s success in imitating Western skills in the material domain, there fore, the greater the need to preserve the distinctness of one's spiritual cnloure, This formula is,1 think, a fundamental feanure of anticolonial nationalisms in Asia and Aftica? ‘There are several implications. First, nationalism declares the domain of the spiritual its sovereign territory and refuses to allow the colonial power to intervene in that domain. I may revurn to the Indian example, the period of ‘social refcrm’ was actually made up of two distin phases, In the earlier phase, Indian reformers looked to the colonial authorities to bring about by state zetion the reform of traditional institutions and. ‘customs. In the latter phase, aldiouggh the need for change was not dis- puted, there was a strong resistance to allowing the colonial state to mervene in matters ffe-ting ‘national culture’. The second phase, it my argument, was already the period of nationalism. The colonial state, in other words, is kept ous ofthe ‘inner’ domain of | national culture; but itis not as though this so-alled spiritual domain is left unchanged. In fact, here nationalism launches its most powerful, creative, and historically significant project: to fashion a ‘modern’ ational culture that is nevertheless not Western. Ifthe nation isn ima gincd community, then this is where itis brought into being. fn this, its ‘tue and essential domaty, the nation is already sovereign, even when the state isin the hands of the colonial power. The dynamics of this historical38 MAPPING THE NATION project is completely missed in conventional histories in which the story ‘of nationalism begins withthe contest for political power [wish to highlight here several areas within the so-alled spiritual domain that nationalism transforms in the courte of ts journey. [will confine my itlustations ro Bengal, with whose history Tam most familia, The first such area is that of language. Anderson is entirely correct in hs suggestion that itis ‘printeapitalism’ which provides the new inst tional space for dhe development of the modern “national language. Tlowever, the speuficides of the colonial situation do not allow a simple ransposition of European patterns of development. In Bengal, for instance, itis at the initiative of the Fast India Company and the European missionaries that the first printed books are produced in [Bengali atthe end of the eighteenth century and the first narrative prose compositions commissioned at the beginning of the nineteenth. At the same time, the first half ofthe nineteenth century is when English eon pletely displaces Persian asthe language of bureaucracy and emerges as the most powerful vehicle of intellectual influence on a new Bengali lite. The crucial moment in the development of the modern Bengali language comes, however, in mideentury, when this bilingwal elite makes ita cultural project to provide its mother tongue with the necessary lin {uistic equipment to enable it to become an adequate language for ‘modern’ culture. An entire institutional network of printing presses, publishing houses, newspapers, magazines, and literary societies is cre ated around this time, outside the purview of the state and the European missionaries, through which the new language, modern and standard: ized, is given shape. The bilingual intelligentsia came to think of ts own language as belonging to that inner domain of cultural identiy, from which the colonial intruder had to be kept out; language therefore ‘became a zone over which the nation first had to declare its soversignty and then had to wansform in order to make it adequate for the modern world, Here the modular influences of modern European languages and lit. eranures did not necessarily produce similar consequences, In the case of the new literary genres and aesthetic conventions, for instance, whereas European influences undoubtedly shaped explicit critical discourse, it ‘was also widely believed that European conventions were inappropriate and misteading in judging literary productions in modern Bengal, To this day chere isa clear hiatus in this area berween the terms of academic criticism and those of literary practice. To give an example, let me brictly discuss Bengali drama, Drama is the modern literary genre that is the least commenced on aesthetic grounds by critics of Bengali literature, Yee it is the form it PARTHA CHATTERJEE 219 which che bilingual elite has found its largest audience. When itappeared jn its modern form in the middle of the nineteenth century, the new Bengal drama had two models availabe tot: one, the moxlera European drama as it had developed since Shakespeare and Moligre, and two, the virtually forgotten corpus of Sanskrit drama, now restored to a reputation of classical excellence because ofthe praises showered on i by Orientalist scholars from Europe. The literary criteria that woud presumably direet the new drama into the privileged domain of a modern national cultare were therefore clearly set by modular forms provided by Europe. But ‘he performative practices of the new institution of the public theatre mace it impossible for those criteria to be applied to plays written for the theatre. The conventions that would enable a play to succeed on the Calcutta stage were very different from the conventions approved by eri Jes schooled in the traditions of European drama. The tensions have not bbeen resolved to this day. What thrives as mainstream public theatre in ‘West Bengal or Bangladesh today is modern urban theatre, national and clearly distinguishable from ‘folk theatre’, It is produced and largely patronized by the literate urban middle clases. Yet cei aesthetic eon ventions fail ( meet the standards set by the modular iterary forms adopted from Europe, ven in the case of the novel, that celebrated artifce of the national {st imagination in which the community is made to live and love in “homogeneous time’, the modular forms do not necessarily have an easy passage. The novel was a principal form through which the bilingual elite in Bengal fashioned a new narrative prose, In the devising of this prose, the influence of the co available models - modern English and classical Sanskrit ~ was obvious. And yet, as the practice of the form stined greater popularity, it was remarkable how frequently in the course of their narrative Bengali novelists shifted from the disciplined forms of authorial prose to the direct recording of living speech. Looking at the pages of some of the most popular novels in Bengali itis often difficult ‘o tll whether one is reading novel ora play. Having created a modern prose language in the fashion of the approved medular forms, the Titerati, in their search for artistic truthfulness, apparently found it nec cesary to escape as often as possible the rigidities of that prose, The desire to construct an aesthetic form that was modern and national, and yet recognizably different from the Western, was shown it perhaps its most exaggerated shape in the efforts in the early twentieth entury ofthe so-alled Bengal school of art. It was though these efforts {hat on the one hand, an institutional space was created for the modern professional artist in India, as distinct from the trdlitonal craftsman, for the dissemination through exhibition and print of the products of art and for the creation ofa public schooled in the new aesthetic norms, Yet270 MAPPING THE NATION this agenda for the construction of a modernized artistic space was accom panied, on the other hand, bya fervent ideological programme for an art ‘that was distinctly ‘Indian’, chats, eferene from the "Western" Although the specitic ste developed by the Bengal school for a new Indian art failed to hold its ground for very long, the fundamental agenda posed by its efforts continues to be pursued to this clay, namely, to develop an art that would be modern and at the same time recognizably Indian, Alongside the institutions of printcapitalism was created a new net work of secondary schools. Once again, nationalism sought to bring this area under its jurisdiction long before the domain of the state had become a matter of contention. In Bengal, from the second half of the nineteenth century, itwas the nev elite that took the lead in mobilizing 8 ‘national’ effort to start schools in every part ofthe province and then to produce a suitable educational literature. Coupled with print. capitalism, the institutions of secondary education provided the space where the new language and literature were both generalized and nor. ‘malized ~ outside the domain of the state It as only when this space was opened up, outside the influence of both the colonial state and the Buropean missionaries, that it became legitimate for women, for instance, to be sent to school. It was also in this period, from around the turn of the century, thatthe University of Caleta was tarned from an institution of colonial edueation to a distinedy national institution, in its cursiculm, its faculty, and its sources of fanding ® Another area in that inner domain of national culture was the Facil ‘The assertion here of autonomy and difference was pethaps the most dra matic, The European criticism of Indian ‘tradition’ as barbaric had focused to a large extent on religious beliefs and practices, especially those relating to the treatment of women. The early phase of ‘social reform’ through the agency ofthe colonial power had also concentrated ‘on the same isues, In that early phase, therefore, this area had been iden tified as essential to ‘Indian tradition’. The nationalist move began by disputing the choice of ageney. Unlike the early reformers, nationalists \ere not prepared to allow the colonial state to legislate the reform of ‘raditional’ society. They asserted that only the nation itself could have the right to intervene in such an essential aspect of its cultural identity. Asi happened, the domain of the family and the position of women, underwent considerable change in the world of the nationalist middle class. [twas undoubtedly a new patriarchy that was brought into exis ence, diferent from the ‘traditional’ order but also explicitly claiming to be different from the ‘Western’ family. The ‘new woma’ was to be mod ‘ern, but she would also have to display the signs of national radition and therefore would be essentially different from the ‘Wester’ wornan, PARTHA CHATTERJEE 221 The history of mationalisin asa political movement tends to focus pri marily on its contest with the colonial power in the domain of the outside, that i, the material domain of the stte. This is a different history fro the one T have outlined. Ic is also a history in which nationalism has no ‘option but to choose its forms from the gallery of ‘models’ offered by European and American nation-states: ‘difference’ is not a viable crite ron in the domain of the material In this outer domain, nationalism begins its journey (after, let us remember, it has already proclaimed its sovereignty in the inner domain) by inserting itself into a new public sphere constituted by the processes and forms of the modern (in this ease, colonial) state. Inthe beginning, nationalisn’s task is to overcome the subordination of the colonized middle class, tha is, co challenge the ‘rule of colonial difference’ in the domain of the state. The colonial sate, we must remember, was not just the agency that brought the modular forms of the modern state to the colonies it was also an agency that was destined never to fulfil the nor smalizing mission of the modern state because the premise of its power was a rule of colonial difference, namely, the preservation of the aienness of the ruling group, As the institutions of the modern state were elaborated in the colony, especially in the second half of the nineteenth century, the ruling, European groups found it necessary o lay down ~ in law-making, in the bureaucracy, inthe administration of justice, and in the recognition by the state ofa legitimate domain of public opinion ~ the precise difference between the rulers and the ruled. I Indians had to be admitted into the judiciary, could they be allowed to try Europeans? Was it right that Indians should enter the civil service by taking the same examinations as [Bitish graduates? If European newspapers in India were given the right of free speech, could the same apply to native newspapers? Ironically, it ‘became the historical task of nationalism, which insisted on its own of cultural difference with the West, to demand that there be no clfference in the domain of the sate. In time, with the growing strength of nationalist politics, this domain became more extensive and internally differentiated and finally took on the form of the national, that is, postcolonial, state, The dominant ele- ments of is selEdefinition, at least in postcotonial India, were drawn from the ideology of the modern liberal emocratic state, In accordance with liberal ideology, the public was now distinguished from the domain of the private. The state was required to protect the inv Olability of the private self in relation to other private selves. The legitimacy of the state in carrying out this function was to be guaranteed by its indifference to concrete differences between private selves ~ dif ferences, thats, ofrace, language, religion, class easte, and so forth,22 MAPPING THE NATION The trouble was that the morabintellectual leadership of the mation- alist elite operated in a field constituted by a very different set of distinctions ~ those between the spiritual and the material, the inner and the outer the eseental and the inessential, That contested field over ‘which nationalism had proclaimed its sovereignty and where it had ima- gined its true community was nether coextensive with nor coincidental to the field constituted by the public/private distinction, In the former field, the hegemonic project of rationalism could hardly make the dis- sinetions of language, religion, caste or class a matter of indifference to itself: The project was that of culsral ‘normalization’, like, a8 Anderson suggests, bourgeois hegemonic projects everywhere, but with the alle important difference that it had to choose its site of autonomy from a position of subordination to a colonial regime that had on its side the ‘most universalist jusiicatory resources produced by post Enlightenment social though ‘The results that autonomous forms of imagination of the community were, and continue to be, overwhelmed and swamped by the history of {he postcolonial state. Here lies the root of our postcolonial misery: not in our inability to think out new forms of the modern commumity but in ‘our surrender to the old forms of the modern state. Ifthe mation is an imagined community and if nations must also take the form of states, then our theoretical language mus allow us to tak about community and sate at the same time. I do not chink our present theoretical language allows us to do this. ‘Whiting just before his death, Bipinchandra Pal (1858-1952), the fiery leader of the Swadeshi movement in Bengal and a principal figure in the preGandhian Congress, described the boarding houses in which students lived in the Caleutta of his youth: Stem’ meses ales my college is is ea ago wee he swallrepublapd were managed on ey democtae ies Brerhing wee Acide y the voice ofthe majo nc nembers ofthe a, elie fremont a marageras ciety ihewhok House soy hs hanged with the callecon ofthe des the members, ad the general ‘ges mas reueny bogged o cep scletn whe ie mare ele od iy members wh had oes py nso the own pocket fr fs se management ed to oi this hota seater ne men od ater ee seedy Goof the wtote House and wes nigh aie ng Tremere xc thee cues and eer asthe decom ths out queauned or daobeyed ty any member Nor were the meres of tie mes al helps nthe as ‘er of duly enforcing ther verdict upon an offending colleague. For they PARTHA CHATTERJEE es could ates treaton the recktrant member ether wih explon Gpethas erie retuned ogo, mht ene spor of the et being ‘eo en im And such mw te force of pul opinion inthe eal ioc at have knows ofcass of hs purse on efending mem Tefu ich so worked upon tem shat fer week of her expaon fom neh ood athe had js come ot of ste prlonge or sei Spelt aeknem Jn compost of our mes calle for some sort ofa comproniebeoecen apeamealel orthodox and the Resto and other heterodox members of Shr tepublc. Soa rae was pasted bythe nnanious vote ofthe whole Tio that no meme ould bring any food to the Howse =i rege the feckngy of Hind erthedny. Tt na however les understood {hacihe member the mes as bay ad ne al wo ot ne {erenth what anyone took ote the hose Soe wer feo 39 ad hae Sitar offrben ow etnerat the Crem Eastern Hos which cme of cnmenced fo occasional patton ron, or awher ee “The interesting point inthis description is not so much the exaggerated and obviously romanticized portrayal in miniature ofthe imagined poli ical form ofthe selEgoverning nation, but rather the repeated use ofthe institutional terms of modern European civic and politcal life (republic, democracy, majority, unanimity, election, House, Court, and so on) describe a st of activities that had to he performed on material utterly incongruous with that civil society. The question of a ‘compromise’ on the food habits of members is really setled not on a principle of demar- ‘ating the ‘private’ from the ‘public’ but of separating the domains of the “inside” and the ‘outside’, the inside being a space where “unanimity” had to prevail, while the outside was a realm of individual freedom. Notwithstanding the "unanimous vote of the whole House’, the force that determined the unanimity in the inner domain was not the voting procedure decided upon by individual members coming together in a body biat rather the consensus of a community ~ institutionally novel (because, alter all, the Calcutta boarding:house was unprecedented in tradition’), internally differentiated, but nevertheless a community ‘whose claims preceded those of its individual members, ‘But Bipinchandra’s use of the terms of parliamentary procedure to describe the ‘communitarian’ activities of a boarding house standing in place of the nation must not be dismissed as a mere anomaly. His lan- ‘guage is indicative of the very real imbrication of two discourses, and ‘correspondingly of wo doroains, of politics. The attempt hasbeen made in recent Indian historiography to talk ofthese as the domains of ‘elite’ and ‘subaltern’ polities But one of the important results of ths histor = ‘ographical approach has been precisely the demonstration that each, ‘domain fas not only acted in opposition to and asa limit upon the other24 MAPPING THE NATION Dua, throagh this process of struggle, has also shaped the emergent form. fof the other. Thus, the presence of populist or communitarian elements in the liberal constitutional order of the postcolonial stare ought not 0 bbe read asa sign of the inauthenticity or disingenuonsness of elite palit. jes: itis rather a recognition in the elite domain ofthe very real presence ofan arena of subaltern polities over which it must dominate and yet which alsy had to be negotiated on its own terms for the puzposes of pro- ducing consent. On the other hand, the domain of subaltern polities has increasingly become familiar with, and even adapted itsel to, the institutional forms charaeteriatic of the elite domain. The point, there fore, is no longer one of simply demarcating and identifying the ovo «domainsin their separateness, which js what was required in order first to break down the totalizing claims ofa nationalist historiography. Now the task is to trace in their mutually conditioned historicities the specific forms that have appeared, on the one hand, in the domain defined by the hegemonic project of nationalist modernity, andl on the other, inthe ‘numerous fragmented resistances to that normalizing project. This is the exercise I wish to carry out. Since the problem will be directly posed of the limits to the supposed universality of the modern regime of power and with it of the postEalightenment disciplines of -knowledge, itmight appear as though the exercise is meant to emphasize ‘once more an “Indian’ (or an ‘Oriental’) exceptionalism. In fact, how lever, the objective of my exercise is rather more complicated, and considerably more ambitious. Itinclides not only an identification of the discursive conditions that make such theories of Indian exceptionalism possible, but also a demonstration that the alleged exceptions actually inhere as forcibly suppressed elements even in the supposedly universal forms of the modern regime of power The laner demonstration enables us to make the argument that the uni: versalist claims of modern Western social philosophy are themselves limited by the contingencies of global power, In other words, ‘Western uni versalism’ no fess than ‘Oriental exceptionalism’ can be shown to be only particular form ofa richer, more diverse, and differentiated concept alization of a new universal idea. This might allow us the possibilty not only to think of new forms of the modern community, which, as T argue, the nationalist experience in Asia and Aftica has done from its birth, bn, much more decisively, to think of new forms of the modern state ‘The project then isto claim for us, the once colonized, our freedom of Slaims, we know only too well, can be made only as coutes- imagination, tations ina field of power. Seudies wll necessarily bear, for each specific disciplinary field, the imprint of an unsesolved contest. Ta make a claim ‘on behalfof the fragment isalso, not surprisingly, to produce a discourse that is itself fragmentary Its redundant to make apologies for this. PARTHA CHATTERJEE 225 Notes 1, Benedict Anderton, Umagined Commit: Ratton: onthe Origin and Spread Naito Lavo 1988 real Brie conta arguent oy ook National Tag and te Coil Wr: 4 eas Dass Lead 186, der, aged Communit, pp 17-42 bie pp aa 5. The Elncy of hs aie mnement bs been rset nate in detail by Tapas ‘Guballa, The Mating of Now Tnon "Ar Arta Aha on Nation Bee, eben Camwnage 16 %. Sce"Anilchandra Banerjee, “Yeas of Consolidation: 1888-1004 Tripura {Ghakrnrt, The Unert andthe Government 1004-24 and Pramatanndh Batre "Reform and Reorgteao 1004-2 n Niranjan raul Cup ‘det Yors of te Unicon of Caleta Cae St p17 YMA IST We Bipincnandes al one of iy Le and Tome Caleta 192, reprinted 1973, poise. Repent bythe various cays in Rana Gu. ey Sablon Sui, vole 1 peli Ii-a0. The prowrmmate rtement of tie apn tn Rana Cala, “On ie Anpesr ofthe Hit of Colei aint Gb ey Sut Suro ath 88: pp. 8