Abstract
In Republican Citizenship in French Colonial Pondicherry, 1870–1914, Anne Raffin explores the history of Pondicherry, a former French colony that is now a union territory of India. Pondicherry was officially renamed Puducherry in 2006, returning to its original name and reverting to its original pronunciation (Pondicherry was its colonial mispronunciation). The main territory of Pondicherry shares its boundaries with the state of Tamil Nadu. The two territories share much in common, given that they speak the same language, Tamil. An important difference between the two is their colonial background, with Tamil Nadu being a former British colony.
There are two popular beliefs about Pondicherry in Tamil Nadu. People of Tamil Nadu assume that the natives of Pondicherry are French citizens, and many of them have taken advantage of the benefits, such as visa-free travel to France, that come with it. Those who decline such provisions are seen as missing out. There’s a belief that rickshaw drivers in Pondicherry speak French, so speaking French when visiting is recommended. Upon visiting Pondicherry, one can observe that these popular beliefs are not fully true. The author provides historical data to elaborate on these assumptions, explaining their origins and the political conditions that influenced them. The book offers a comprehensive history that supports the validity of these rumours.
All of this began with the well-intentioned efforts of the Third Republic (the system of government adopted during 1870–1914) to assimilate the natives of French Pondicherry into the French nation. However, there were numerous practical issues at the grassroots level. These included electoral malfunctions, educational disparities based on caste and other challenges. The author examines the concept of citizenship and explores why the colonisers desired the colonised population to become citizens of France and under what political circumstances. The book primarily seeks to answer questions about the fate of this ambitious project and whether it succeeded or not. The author adopts a comparative approach, combining history and sociology, and focuses on the period of the Third Republic (1870–1914). While the book is intended for academics, it also appeals to those interested in the history of Pondicherry, particularly its residents, as it sheds light on their past.
The book is divided into six chapters. The first two chapters delve into the history of Pondicherry within the French empire and its context within the Indian subcontinent. It explores the granting of electoral rights to adult males as a means to attain citizenship, as well as French education and participation in the army as pathways to full citizenship. The book looks into the ground reality and investigates why this ambitious project did not succeed as intended.
During the process of educating the natives, the attitude of the French empire towards language is noteworthy. The French language was considered superior to the native Tamil language which was primarily confined to the domain of the home and family, while French was seen as the language of politics. The author highlights that the assimilation process regarded the colonisers’ language as superior and the colonised language as inferior, reflecting the worldview of the colonisers in the 18th century. However, whether we have overcome such a mindset in the 21st century remains a significant question to be asked. Nevertheless, there were also voices advocating for the native language, as one French councilman argued against this process and suggested that the native language should be taught in schools.
In the third chapter, the author raises questions about the citizenship project among the various social groups in Pondicherry during the Third Republic. Would this project make them full citizens of France or only second-class citizens? The author further explores how the natives responded to this project and why some supported it while others opposed it. The chapter also addresses whether everyone from the various social groups obtained citizenship and, if not, what transpired. The author states that the project ultimately failed due to incomplete implementation by the colonisers and resistance from the natives. Certain segments of the population that supported the project, such as the renouncers who embraced the political motto of ‘Liberty, Equality, Fraternity’, were not supported by French politicians. Various cultural and legal practices among the local population hindered the realisation of the universal republican ideal.
The fourth chapter provides a detailed description of how French education and joining the French army could institutionalise Republican ideals in French India. It is believed that to fight for a country, one should be a citizen of that country, and education plays a role in moulding individuals to be loyal citizens. However, when the French first arrived in Pondicherry in 1674, their primary objective was to promote commerce, and education was only made available to all in 1843, just three decades before the Third Republic. The Third Republic viewed education as a means to instil notions of enlightenment and progress, replacing the traditional beliefs of the natives and integrating them into a democratic state.
By 1906, after six decades of attempts to educate the natives, education was no longer a priority for the colonial state, nor was it a prominent agenda for the general and local councils. French was considered a superior language intended for boys and not girls, as boys were seen as citizens of France with voting rights, while girls were expected to become ‘devoted mothers and skilled housewives’, for whom the feminine Tamil language was deemed sufficient, confined to the private sphere of home and family. However, the attempt to teach French to native males was largely unsuccessful, with only a few individuals being able to speak French. Colonial officials even noted that it was impossible to recruit police officers who could speak French.
The major cultural practice, as stated above, which hindered the progress of the Third Republic, was the caste hierarchy among the local population. The higher castes already holding better positions in social and political grounds could get the benefits offered by the Third Republic. The lower castes had to compete with the already established caste groups; this triggered tensions and legal measures to get things resolved. The colonial authorities encouraged petitioning as a legitimate way to address grievances. The fifth chapter discusses the necessity and outcomes of petitioning. The majority of the petitions aimed to address malpractices and violence during elections. Both French and Indian elites, who already held authority in the social sphere, sought to win elections in order to attain political power. They employed various means, including violence to intimidate voters, stealing voting urns, disappearing voting rooms and bribing voters, among others. Despite efforts by the authorities to maintain peace, malpractices persisted due to the insufficient presence of Indian soldiers to secure polling booths.
The practice of offering betel leaves and liquor to bribe voters was already prevalent during that time, and it continues to be observed in contemporary politics as well, not in betel leaves but in various other forms. The fraud and malpractices in the election process led to the perception that it was a ‘travesty of democracy’. In this context, citizens relied on petitions as a means of seeking redress. However, the process of petitioning faced challenges for various reasons. Illiteracy among petitioners led them to depend on scribes. Even if a petition was written properly, an improper signature could invalidate it, or sometimes the petition itself was not written correctly, resulting in rejection by the state. Elite castes, as usual, took advantage of this opportunity for their own convenience, while lower castes were deprived of raising their grievances.
Electoral citizenship in Pondicherry primarily benefitted the elites since knowledge of the French language was a prerequisite for contesting elections. While the elites petitioned against electoral misconduct, individuals from lower strata petitioned for the improvement of their lives rather than engaging in political processes. The non-intervention policy adopted by the state further facilitated the elites. This allowed them to both maintain their caste privileges and benefit from colonial policies implemented in Pondicherry. Economic development in Pondicherry occurred through the establishment of textile mills, but the jobs offered by the mills were considered undesirable by the upper castes. As a result, around 10,000 mill workers from the lower strata were employed. Another option for lower strata individuals was to enlist in the colonial army and gain access to education, which they believed would improve their job prospects within the colonial administration. Discrimination based on caste and race was prevalent at that time, and even some French individuals regarded ‘citizenship’ as an issue, fearing they would lose their privileges and resources provided by the state to the natives.
Chapter six is the conclusion, which describes the events that occurred towards the end of the Third Republic’s term. Leaders from Tamil Nadu visited Pondicherry, popularising the freedom movement. This influenced the locals to understand colonialism and sparked agitation against the regime. As a result, most of the population declined the offer of citizenship. Only 2.21 per cent of the natives ultimately opted for French citizenship. However, the Third Republic granted citizenship to those who had adopted and assimilated into French culture.
Overall, Republican Citizenship in French Colonial Pondicherry, 1870–1914 provides a comprehensive and insightful examination of Pondicherry’s history during the specified period. Anne Raffin successfully elucidates the complexities surrounding citizenship and its implications in the context of French colonial rule.
In the next edition, typological errors should be taken care of. Additionally, it is important for the author to be careful about the caste names of the leaders. For instance, E. V. Ramasamy is Naicker by caste, not Iyengar.