A.S. Altekar in The Position of Women in Hindu Civilization writes, “One of the best ways to understand the spirit of a civilization and to appreciate its excellence and realise its limitations is to study the history of the position and status of women in it… The marriage laws and customs enable us to realise whether men regarded women as market commodities or war prizes or whether they realised that the wife is the husband’s valued partner whose cooperation was indispensable for happiness and success in family life.”

Further, Altekar contradicts his own statement implying degrading woman and her potential power by saying, “Women have low fighting value. By giving birth to sons, they contribute indirectly to the fighting strength and efficiency of their community.”

By and large women have been invisible in Indian historical writings. The Indian woman has been perceived and seen from a male point of view. It was in 1881, for the first time that Tara Bai Shinde in her autobiography, A Comparison Between Women and Men, challenged male chauvinism and wrote that laws were enacted by males and were made for the benefit for their ilk. Thus, the prudence, bravery and intelligence of women were not tolerated and were suppressed by men.

Indian history writing has constantly relegated women to the background. Although many books do have a chapter on women — often at the end, entitled, Position of Women in Vedic, later Vedic, Medieval or Modern Indian Society — they do not do justice to the role of women in India’s past.

For countless centuries, women in India had been subordinated to men and socially oppressed. The various religions practiced, traditions and personal laws based on them, consigned women to a status inferior to that of men. The traditional view often praised the role of women as wives and mothers but as individuals they were assigned a very lowly social position. They were supposed to have no personality of their own apart from their ties to their husbands. They were seen as just adjuncts to men. Even Manu has said, “It is ingrained in her nature to seduce men and lead them astray. To her when created, have been allotted impure desires, wrath, dishonesty and bad conduct. All her good qualities can come from her husband. The woman’s intrinsically defective nature justifies her absolute subordination to man: “Day and night women must be kept in dependence by the males of their families.”

Kautilya also echoes the same views while saying, “When keeping a child as a hostage, however, as between giving a son and a daughter, he who gives a daughter, over-reaches. For, a daughter is not an heir, and is of use to others only and cannot be harassed. A son is the reverse of this.”

Isami in his Futuh us Salatin (written in the fourteenth century) has written, “That woman alone is good who constantly works on Charkha (spinning wheel), as higher post keeps her away from her aim; Panba (cotton) is the companion of a woman Sorrow (?) her cup of wine; and sound of Duk gives accompaniment to her songs”.

Amir Khusrau who is known for his enlightened views of Indian socio-cultural phenomenon, does not remain behind in placing woman in a subordinate position. He was devastated over the birth of his daughter and laments, “I wish you were not born, and if you were, it would have been better if you had been a boy.”

In the sixteenth century, Tulsidas holds:



(Drum, rustic, menial, animal and women all these deserve to be ridiculed).

Even Abdul Qadir Badaoni, a sixteenth century historian, is known to have ridiculed the female child by saying that, “the best son-in-law is grave.”

Pand nama-i Jahangiri, attributed to Jahangir, contains, “Do not grieve over the death of daughters. Do not follow the advice of women. Never be complacent and neglectful of their deception and artifice.”

Despite this image in the eyes of the contemporary writers, we do come across the juxtaposing views of empowerment of women. There are references of women in history who wielded power on their own strength. Razia Sultan is the name to reckon with. She won over public support by her diplomatic gestures. Before assuming sovereign power, Razia did influence the crowd and succeeded in instigating the people against Shah Turkan, wife of the deceased Sultan Iltutmish, who wanted her son Ruknuddin Firuz Shah to succeed Iltutmish. Minhaj Siraj, a contemporary historian, informs us how Razia’s wisdom prevailed over Shah Turkan. She put on red garments, which were worn in those days by aggrieved persons demanding justice, and made a direct appeal in the name of her father to the people of Delhi who had assembled to offer Friday namaz. The army and the people of Delhi supported Razia and she was declared Sultan.

For Razia, the masculine adjective ‘Sultan’ instead of feminine adjective ‘Sultana’ has been used, which shows the mentality. She faced every kind of political upheaval and opposition of nobles and ruled like any other Sultan. Minhaj Siraj praises Razia but also deplores and sympathises with her. He says, “She was endowed with all the admirable attributes and qualifications necessary for kings, but her sex was her greatest disqualification.” Further, it is interesting to see how her opponents used the weapon of character assassination against her and defamed her by linking Jamaludding Yaqut’s name with her. But she proved her ability and competence and ruled for almost four years. Shaikh Abdul Haq Muhaddis Dehlvi, an Islamic Jurisprudent in the 17th century, expressed astonishment at how the ulema did not raise an objection against Razia’s succession. In fact, Islamic laws do not permit woman of holding sovereign power.

Many other women showed their competence in state matters, like Malika-i Jahan, the wife of Jalaluddin Khalji, was an ambitious lady. After Jalaluddin Khalji’s death in 1296 A.D., she made efforts to put her son on the throne, captured political power in her own hands and started issuing royal orders, but Alauddin Khalji ousted her. Similarly, Muhammad Tughlaq’s mother exercised influence in matters of state.

Babur’s grandmother Ehsan Daulat Begum assisted Babur and “her prudent advice was responsible for much of his success in 1494 A.D.” However, Babur was not different to any other male counterpart. In his memoirs Baburnama, he mentions a private party and writes, “I gave 100 shahrukhis to Tardi Beg and told him to get wine and other things ready as I had a fancy for a private and unrestrained party. I invited Muhammad-i Qasim Barlas and Shah-Zada to the party. Said Tardi Beg, “Hul-hul Aniga wishes to drink wine with you,” said I, “For my part, I never saw a woman drink wine; invite her.” There was drinking for quite long time.…The party was quite free and unpretending. I lay down, the others went to another house and drank there till beat of drum (midnight). Hul-hul Aniga came in and made me much disturbance; I got rid of her at last by flinging myself down as if drunk.”

Gulbadan Begum, the daughter of Babur, was well versed in Persian and Turkish languages and often composed verses. She wrote Humayun Nama on the request of Akbar, giving an account of social and political activities of the time. It is a valuable source for historical information. She was lover of books and used to collect books for her personal library.

Nur Jahan also wielded considerable power. After her marriage with Jahangir in 1611 A.D., she actively participated in the court politics. Her relations and the nobles of Irani origin were given preference over the Turani, Rajput and Indian Muslim nobles. Her powerful personality intimidated many. She even formed a Junta (Clique). But male resentment can be seen in the form of Mahabat Khan’s revolt. Nur Jahan, by her prudent political skill got Jahangir released. Thus the women were not less brave and wise than men.

In the absence of Raja Man Singh of Amber – Jaipur, Rani Gaur used to manage the affairs of the Kachawaha state. During Man Singh’s stay in Deccan, when there was famine, Rani Gaur despatched foodgrains to the Raja.

Similarly, after the death of Maharaja Jaswant Singh of Jodhpur in 1677, his Rani corresponded with Aurangzeb. She resisted the annexation of Jodhpur State in the imperial territory.

Rani Durgavati’s heroic battle with the imperial forces of Akbar has been praised in unequivocal terms by Abul Fazl. He writes, “The sovereignty of that country (Gadha – Katanga) had come to a woman named Durgavati, who was generally known as the Rani. She was distinguished for courage, counsel and munificence, and by virtue of these elect qualities she had brought the whole of that country under her sway. I have heard from experienced men who had been there that 23,000 cultivated villages were in her possession, and that in 12,000 of these she had resident governors. The remainder were subordinate to her, and their headmen were under her control.” Abul Fazl continues, “She was a good shot with gun and arrow, and continually went a hunting, and shot animals of the chase with her gun. It was her custom that whenever she heard that a tiger had made his appearance she did not drink water till she had shot him.”

She was never afraid of battle and fought bravely with the powerful Akbari forces. Owing to her prudent strategical management, she succeeded in defeating the Mughal forces. It was followed by the powerful despatch of the Mughal forces. Rani, instead of escaping to the ravines, preferred to fight. Abul Fazl has recorded, “She continued to wage hot war alongside of her own gallant followers. An arrow from the bow of fate struck her right temple, and she courageously drew it out and flung it from her. The point remained in the wound, and would not come out. Just then another arrow struck her neck. That, too, she drew out with the hand of courage, but the excessive pain made her swoon”. After gaining her senses, she called her loyal servant and asked him to kill her. When he refused, the Rani killed herself with her own dagger.

Even in the early medieval period, we have reference of Rajyashri, the sister of Harsha, who after the death of her husband occupied a seat of honour by the side of her brothers and also participated in state deliberations.

Many more women like Mumtaz Mahal, Jahan Ara, Zinatunnisa Begum, Sahibji, Lal Kunwar, etc. enjoyed considerable power in Mughal India.

Similarly, in the early eighteenth century, Begum Samroo also known as Zebrun - Nissar, a dancing girl married to the European mercenary Samroo, after the death of her husband, controlled his forces efficiently and managed the state affairs. She was extremely competent. She also built a magnificent church at Sardhana near Meerut, which is still the centre of attraction for religious devotees and tourists alike. But there are references of reaction of the male dominated society against these powerful women time and again.

The common man’s perception of woman was no different to the elite perception of medieval India. Rajasthani folklore sheds light on such women who proved to be different from the contemporary norms and showed their gallant in guise of male costume. One folk tale is an example to understand this — a Bloch girl posing herself as a male, joined a Bhati chief of Jaisalmer in plundering the horses of a trader who had encamped in the region of Sind. They plundered the horses and got 17 horses. After coming to Jaisalmer, they decided to take their share. Since the number of horses was uneven, so the Bloch girl, like any other brave man cut the horse into two pieces with her sword and shared it. After this, they parted their ways. In the precincts of the city, there was a pond, so the Bloch girl decided to take bath. While she was bathing, a soldier of Bhati chief happened to pass from that route. He was amazed to see the undressed girl who was till then posing herself as a man. He rushed to the chief and revealed her identity. The Bhati chief proposed her. After some pretensions, she agreed to marry him. The story ends with the Bloch woman giving birth to two sons and looking after them and household.

This story reflects the male mentality. Till the identity was not revealed, the Bloch girl was treated as a brave man. But after the revelation of the identity, she was relegated to the subordinate position. Her talent and prowess is suppressed to the status of looking after household and children.

The following evidence evinces how woman power is suppressed. As per popular saying, in the 1857 revolt against British power, an old Muslim woman clad in green costume, used to appear in the mohallas and encouraged people to follow her in fighting against the Britishers. She was a very good fighter and an expert in using sword and banduqs. One day while fighting bravely, she was wounded and fell down from the horse. The British Sepoys arrested her. Subsequently, the military general decided to release her being a woman, but Lt.W.S.R. Hudson intervened and advised her confinement, otherwise she would be perceived as a deity, wielding invisible power and this would invite increased problems to the Britishers. On this, instead of releasing, she was sent to Ambala Cantonement as prisoner.

Even the perception of the Europeans is dominated by the Indian elite perception. De Leat, a sixteenth century European traveller, writes that “only the poor or immodest Muslim women are seen in public.” Another European William Hodges comments in the 18th century that Hindu women were walking with downcast eyes and never used to look towards any side. These perceptions strongly advocate that women were not tolerated if they were behaving against the norms prescribed for them by the society.

However, there are ample examples where the women of artisan classes and other so-called lowly occupations supplemented the family income by participating in different professions of their families. They were helping their menfolk in agricultural activities. A Mughal miniature of C. 1610 depicts a woman sowing seeds, walking behind the man driving the plough. In Anwar-i Suhaili, paintings depict women carrying food for their menfolk working in the fields. Women were also grinding corn, fetching water, looking after cattle, milking cows, etc. They were serving as midwives and nurses to babies.

In general, women’s position was so pathetic that from time to time, the socially conscientious persons tried to intervene in the heinous traditions and customs. Sultan Muhammad bin Tughlaq (1325-1350 A.D.) tried to check the evil practice of Sati (widow burning). Emperor Akbar (1556-1605 A.D.), with some senior Rajput nobles, is known to have persuaded widow Rajput girls for not assigning themselves to fire. An ordinance was issued to all qazis of the empire to dissuade women from committing sati. Child marriages were discouraged while widow remarriages were encouraged. Such reforms continued in body and spirit, and particularly in the 19th century, we do come across individuals and societies like, Raja Ram Mohan Roy and his Brahmo Samaj, Ishwar Chandra Vidyasagar, Jotiba Phule and his Satya Shodh Samaj, Vishnu Shastri Pundit and his Widow Remarriage Association, Dadabhai Noroji and his Parsi Law Association, which made valiant efforts to bring out the suppressed women to the forefront of respectable status.

However, the menfolk had only that much of sympathy with the women till the latter did not hurt their male ego. We do come across how the royal women of harem and zanani deodhis were kept under strict surveillance of “toothless women”, “matrons” and “eunuchs” to check them from immoral deeds. Italian traveller Nicolao Manucci in his Storia do Mogors writes that the surveillance was three tiers. Spies were employed to have secret watch over the royal women.

Even in the present time of democracy there is only lip service and loud voice for giving power to women. In reality, Women’s Reservation Bill has not been passed in the Parliament to reserve seats for women in the lower house, i.e. Lok Sabha. It is not surprising considering the fact that women in most advanced countries like England had to resort to action to get the right to vote. To attract the attention of the monarchy towards this issue, the women activists in England threw themselves in front of the royal horse in 1912 while he was going to the Derby race. Indian woman has still a long way to go if she wishes to empower herself.

(The author is professor in the Department of History and Culture, Jamia Millia Islamia, New Delhi)