i) Educational Essays of A.G.

Gardiner

Gardiner expected smooth, light and playful behaviour instead of

quarrels and disputes. He raised the question of morality in everyday life.

In all cases, it is the human interest that appealed him. He described not

only the effect upon, but also the illustration in human character. He has

aptly pointed out the irrelativity in the behaviour of the society he lived in

and suggested correlative measures to overcome the problems which

could harm the entire society.

The essays On Choosing a Name, On Letter Writing, On Seeing

Visions, On Talking to One’s Self, On Seeing Ourselves, On Guinea

Stamp, On Dislike of Lawyers, On Pockets and Things, On a

Vanished Garden, On Fear, On Being Called Thompson, On

Thinking For One’s Self, On Sawing Wood, On Early Rising, A

Dithyramb On a Dog, On Word-magic, On Superstitions, Young

America, On Waking Up, On Re-reading, On Good Resolutions, On

Plagiarism, On Big Words, Do We Buy Books?, On Anticlimax and

In Defence of Skipping express Gardiner’s educational thoughts. In

almost all these essays he stresses the need of informal education.

In order to correct the misbehaviour of English people, he mainly

defined the inevitability of books. He argued that when one is thrown

entirely upon one’s own sources, one discovers how dependent one is

77
 Deleted: ‘

upon men and books for inspiration. Do We Buy Books ? He questions Deleted: ’

his readers and forces them to think about the necessity of having books.

Gardiner himself felt ashamed of his library, though in his life he had

accumulated 2000 books. He criticized the people who spent many

hundreds and even thousands of pounds in the course of years in making

their house beautiful and never gave a serious thought to books. For

people, it is not the contents of the books that matter, but the size. It is not

that one cannot afford to buy books. One spends two hundred million

sterlings a year on beer, and one doubts whether one spends two hundred

million pence on literature. As furniture, books are a cheaper and better

decoration than blue china or Chippendale chairs. A row of books will

give a house character and meaning.

A house without books is a mindless and characterless house. It is

not the question of money. He repeated that books are the cheapest as

well as the best part of the equipment of a house. You can begin your

library of a couple of shillings. Books are the priceless investment for

your children. It is a library that creates a reading man. He believed that

an intelligent child who stumbles upon any masterpiece, will be caught by

the reading habit for life. And that habit is there to compare with it? What

delight is there like the revelation of books, the sudden impact of a master

spirit, the sense of windows flung wide open to the universe? It is these

78
adventures of the mind, the joy of which does not pass away, that give the

adventure of life itself beauty and fragrance, and make it

“ … rich as the oozy bottom of the deep

In sunken wreck and sumless treasuries ”
( Gardiner : 1920 : 209 ).

Gardiner disclosed the utility of reading books as they are rich and

fathomless treasure. He expected people to buy books which are

priceless. Reading books is a very valuable habit which provides

knowledge and wisdom to human beings. He glorified the knowledge

possessed by the books as rich as the oozy bottom of the deep. He further

argued that people do not say that they have read books but they say that

they live in communion with these spirits. Books explore the needs and

the tastes of the writers. One does not know the reading tastes and needs
Deleted: can’t

of others. One can not get the idea of what kind of knowledge one wants

actually. Everybody’s reading choice would be different from each other.

One may like to read novels while other may not like to read the same

and like history. One should read books on one’s history and religion,

according to Gardiner.

In On Big Words he advised one to gather books with thought

because for them it was not the contents of the books that mattered but

the size. He criticized people for making a show of the books in their

shelves. Books really represent something of the exceptional attitude of

the average man. People according to him spend money on beer but

79
hardly spend on literature. Many people can afford to buy motor-cars at

anything from two hundred pounds but are aghast at the idea of spending

half a guinea occasionally on a book. He stressed to have an excellent

vocabulary to load one’s common speech or everyday letters with long

words. One gains wisdom from the simplicity of his speech.

While stating the importance of books Gardiner further argued that

a man cannot choose even a name without taking the help of the books.

Even a great journalist or a writer finds thousand words for his article but

hardly gets a title or name for it. Finding a title leads the writer to despair.

Even the men of genius suffer from this impoverishment. The great

writers like Goldsmith, Shakespeare, Johnson suffered from this sterility

of choosing a name for their books according to Gardiner.

Gardiner has no objection in having a good vocabulary. But one

ought not to lard one’s common speech or everyday letters with long

words. Quite ordinary words employed with a certain novelty and

freshness can wear a distinction that gives them not only significance but

a strange and haunting beauty. S.T. Coleridge flashed on the mind all the

beauty and wonder of the tropic night. While John Milton and William

Wordsworth could use the grand words like William Shakespeare when

the purpose was rhetorical or decorative. Shakespeare did not go to the

words for expression of the great things of life. In this regard the views of

80
Gardiner are similar to the great American scholar Emerson who always

said that books bring knowledge and wisdom.

In On Choosing a Name, he discloses that like great writers he

also faced the difficulty of choosing titles for his essays or collection of

essays. He confessed that finding a name to a newly born child or to a

book is difficult in any circumstances. As he puts it “ it is hard even to

find a name. Not that finding a name is easy in any circumstances. Every

one who lives by his pen knows the difficulty of the task ” ( 1916 : 8 ).
Formatted: Indent: First line: 0 pt,
Tabs: 81 pt, Left
This difficulty of Gardiner is solved by his friends by suggesting a

suitable title to his writings. He himself has never found a title for one

that he has written that has always come to him from his friends. This

quotation throws enough light on his sharp wit and indifferent way of

expressing himself.

Referring to the limitations of his own knowledge, Gardiner

admits that he knows very little about his own body, and finds it

something mysterious. For example, he does not know anything more

about various objects or parts of his body than an ordinary student or

teacher. He remarks that even a medical student does not know

everything about the human body. He does not know about the stars like

the constellations Orion or other astronomical bodies. Even the most

learned astronomer has only a little knowledge of the vast universe and

81
does not know all its secrets. He confesses ignorance of how flowers are

born with all their beauty, out of the secretions of the Earth and Air. He

cannot tell much about them. He gives an example of his ignorance

regarding trees and plants, by telling how he kept digging at some roots

without realizing that he was pulling out the roots of an ivy tree growing

at some distance, and thus causing damage. He realized his folly when an

expert in horticulture examined it. He does not hide his foolishness in

various matters.

According to Gardiner, all human beings have limited mental

powers and possess only a tiny piece of land in the vast field of

knowledge. Talking in general terms, he remarks that even the most

learned men have limited knowledge in comparison with the immense

stretch of the field of knowledge. Some people know even less than

ordinary people ; In fact, no one possesses all the knowledge about all

things. A man’s capacity for knowledge is very limited indeed. Even an

ordinary man may know more on a particular subject than the wisest men

like Caesar and Plato. Sir Thomas Browne and Abraham Lincoln knew

less about the planet we inhabit, even less than an ordinary

undergraduate ; but they were among the wisest and most active men.

Gardiner implies that lack of complete and diverse knowledge is not a

handicap to real wisdom or greatness nor is the ignorance about so many

things. He does not oppose to the eagerness or efforts to learn, but

82
believes that all such efforts help one in acquiring only limited

knowledge. One should learn all he can about the planet on which he

lives but more important than learning and knowledge is a ‘healthy

feeling’. He supports Savonarola’s views that an old woman having faith

may know more than Plato or Aristotle.

He criticized people for pretending to dislike life, even though

they do not really want to die. In youth, he is full of enthusiasm and looks

forward to gaining new experiences. In the middle age, when he reaches

Deleted: ‘the top of the pass’,

the zenith he begins loosing his former zeal and vigour to enjoy life. In

the old age, he is content to cast a backward glance at what he has

achieved and is reluctant to resume his adventurous career. He is already

tired of journeying on the long way of life, and does not like to undertake

another journey in this world.

In the essay, Gardiner describes a cheerful outlook on life. He

finds life worth living and does not agree with the gloomy view of the

pessimists who wish they had never been born at all.

He describes a small group of men from different professions

assembled in a London club. Here he deals with the feelings of a man

during different stages of life. Having had their dinner, they sat talking in

the smoking-room of the club. These men were remarkably successful in

life. The group comprised an eminent lawyer, a famous politician, a well

known clergyman and a journalist. They talked about various matters and

83
then began to discuss the question whether they would like to live this life

again if it were in their power to do so. The answer given by everybody

except one man was ‘No’. The clergyman had also rejected the idea of

living once again in this world because he thought that one visit to the

theatre of life was enough and did not want to pay a second visit to it.

Thus, almost all the men present there were reluctant to have another life

to live on this earth.

On Living Again is an essay written on a serious subject, but

employs a playful manner in dealing with it. It shows the same blend of

sobriety and lightness as is found in several other of his essays. It deals

with the question whether we would like to live in this world again if we

could get a chance to do so. Like the group of men assembled in the

smoking-room of the club in London, most would reply in the negative.

Gardiner’s views in that it is enough to have lived and enjoyed life once,

and the idea of having another life to live, is not palatable. People do

believe that their present life has been worth living and all the

experiences and adventures in it worth living. But thinking in terms of

undergoing these adventures and experiences again, during the course of

another life, is not possible or pleasant.

He expressed a cheerful outlook on life. He found life worth living

Deleted: didn’t

and did not agree with the gloomy view of the pessimists who wish they

had never been born at all. The sense of uncertainty, adventure and

84
curiosity makes life attractive and colourful. Gardiner advises one to take

away the uncertainty of life if he wanted to take away all its magic. Due

to uncertainty, human life is so attractive and interesting. One does not

know his future. This reality makes life curious which leads it to go on

living and experiencing it.

People go to the game of cricket in a mood of uncertainty and

adventure, because they do not know how many runs they would be able

to make, or whether they would be able to make any runs at all. Similarly,

life is interesting only so long as one is not sure as to what the future

holds in store for him. It is the novelty of each experience that adds to the

zest for life. It is because every dawn breaks as full of wonder as the first

day of creation that life preserves the enchantment of a tale that is never

told. Gardiner looks worried about the personal as well as social problems
Deleted: ¶

of common man of his time. In the essay On Superstitions, he severely

criticizes people for being superstitious. Being superstitious means

becoming childish which is a folly. Most of us believe in number game

while choosing a house. It is a weakness of mankind. People

unnecessarily keep faith in the things which are useless. “ Superstition

was disinherited when science revealed the laws of the universe and put

man in his place. It was no discredit to be superstitious when all the

functions of nature were unexplored, and man seemed the plaything of

85
beneficent or sinister forces that he could neither control nor understand,

but which held him in the hollow of their hand ” ( Ibid : 54 ).

Sometimes the omens were right and sometimes they were wrong,

but whether right or wrong they were equally meaningless. Here,

Gardiner clears the doubts of being superstitious in nature.

In his most celebrated essay On Letter Writing, he felt sorry for

the killing of the great art of letter writing due to penny post and modern

hurry and the lack of expression. He blames telegraph, the telephone, and

the postcard for the destruction of the art of letter writing. He proves his

point by giving an example of soldiers like Bill and Sam. He advises to

write a good letter one must approach the job in the lightest and most

casual way. One must be personal, not abstract. People with titles should

act like ordinary decent human beings. It is an insult to them, and it ought

to be an insult to the intelligence of the reader.

The American class-rooms and libraries are memorable. There is a

lot of enthusiasm about the football matches in college campuses.

Students may be of Oxford or Cambridge, almost everybody is mad after

local football matches. There is sportly atmosphere than educational.

He lashes out at the society for giving titles to wrong men because

they misuse the titles. He argues that greatness of man does not lie in

titles. In the essay On Thinking For One’s Self Gardiner argues that

most of us are secondhand thinkers and second-hand thinkers are not

86
thinkers at all. Men are always dying for other people’s opinions,

prejudices they have inherited from somebody else, ideas they have

borrowed second-hand. Many of them go through life without ever

having had a genuine thought of their own on any subject of the mind. It

is that one is afraid to think. Even some of them who try to escape this

hypnotism of the flock do not succeed in thinking independently. One

only succeeded in getting into other flocks. One is too timid to think

alone, too humble to trust his own feeling or his own judgment. One

wants some authority to lean up against. One is free to think as he pleases

and most people cease to think at all and follow the fashions of thought as

seriously as one follows the fashions in hats. Because one standardizes

his children for making them like himself instead of teaching them to be

themselves and new incarnations of the human spirit, new prophets and

teachers, new adventures in the wilderness of the world. One is more

concerned about putting one’s thoughts into their heads than in drawing

their thoughts out and succeed in making them rich in knowledge but

poor in wealth.

He talks of sexual equality. He argues that women are just as

capable as men of forming an opinion about facts, they have at least as

much time to spare, and their point of view is as essential to justice. He

Deleted: ¶

advises to fight against fear and win this mental disease.He accused

French people for misusing titles in The Guinea Stamp. He spoke of

87
human health, and treatment given by doctors. He taught one to have

some feelings for his country because it is his duty towards the nation. He

attacks the British as well as their titles. In his opinion, greatness of a man

does not lie in titles but in one’s deeds. He felt sorry because in Britain

and France, inferior and wrong people were awarded with prestigious

titles which led to the misuse of those titles. He considered it a criminal

offence for a Colonial to accept a title.

Gardiner dislikes lawyers. He opined that lawyers are more selfish

than other people like brewers, or soap boilers, or bankers. He doubted

Deleted: Though a

the loyality of judges as well as the lawyers to the law. Lawyer’s weapon

is law, his object is not justice. He condemned them for their misconduct

of doing injustice to the just. He bitterly states,

“ Law has about the same relation to justice that grammar has to
Shakespeare. If Shakespeare were put in the dock and tried by the
grammarians he would be condemned as a rogue and vagabond, and,
similarly, justice is not infrequently hanged by the lawyers. We must
have law just as we must have grammar, but we have no love for either of
them. They are dry, bloodless sciences, and we look askance at those who
practice them ” ( Ibid : 120 ).

On Boilers and Butterflies express a man without a hobby is like

a ship without a rudder. Life is such a tumultuous and confused affair that

most of us get lost in the tangle and brushwood and get to the end of the

journey without ever having found a path and a sense of direction. But a

hobby hits the path at once. It may be ever so trivial a thing, but it

88
supplies what the mind needs, a disinterested enthusiasm outside the mere

routine of work and play.

Mr. Chesterton treats books as the expert wine-taster treats wines,

not drinking them in great coarse gulps, but moistening his lips and

catching the bouquet on his palate.

Gardiner showed the path of success to youths. He believed that the

man who wins is the man who keeps cool, whose effort is always

proportioned to his power, who gives the impression that there is more in

him than ever comes out. Youth should be encouraged to fashion its own

taste and discriminate for itself between the good and the best. When that

is done one can ‘skip’ as one likes, with an easy mind and a good

conscience. One has learned his path through the wilderness. One knows

where the hyacinths grow and where one can catch the smell of the wild

thyme, and the nightingale sings to the moon. And if with this liberty of

knowledge he ‘skips’ some of the high brows, and is found more often in

the company of Borrow than of Bacon-well, one has done one’s task-

work and is out to enjoy the sun and the wind on the heath.

An idea may be good or bad, but no idea is good enough to claim

one’s whole waking thoughts. One likes people who have many facades

to their minds, who hold strong opinions on a variety of subjects and

know to keep them under control, airing them when they are in season

and putting them in cold storage when they are not of season. One likes

89
them to think in many quantities, to let their thought range over the whole

landscape of things, to have plenty of windows to their mind and to open

them in turn to all the winds that blow. One ought not to be the slave of

one idea, but the master of legions which one should exercise and

discipline and from which one should extract a working philosophy of

life.

People who pretend to read the riddle of one’s affairs in the

pageant of the stars are deceiving themselves or are trying to deceive

others. The great American scholar Emerson said that if one only saw it

once in a hundred years one should spend years in preparing for the

vision. It is hung out for one every night, and one hardly gives it a glance.

And yet it is well worth glancing at. It is the best corrective for this

agitated little mad-house in which one dwells and quarrels, fights and

dies. It gives one a new scale of measurement and a new order of ideas.

Gardiner thinks that talking to one’s self is conclusive evidence for

the man who talks to himself habitually never hears himself. His words

are only the echo of his thoughts, and they correspond so perfectly that,

like a chord in music, there is no dissonance. That was thus with the art

student Gardiner saw copying a picture at the Tate Gallery.

Whether the habit is a mental weakness or only a physical defect is

a matter of discussion. It would be a world in which lies would have no

value and deception would be a waste of time – a world in which truth

90
would no longer be at the bottom of the well, but on the tip of every

man’s tongue. One should have all the rascals in prison and all the

dishonest traders in the bankruptcy court. Secret diplomacy would no

longer play with the lives of men, for there would be no longer secrets.

Those little perverse concealments that wreck so many lives would

vanish.

In Gardiner’s opinion the world would go very well if people had

tongues that told their true thoughts in spite of theirs. Like the great

Nature poet William Wordsworth, every great man has blindness about

his own work. One needs to take a journey from his self-absorbed center

and see himself with a fresh eye and make an unprejudiced judgment.

Running an empire is quite a different job from running a grocery

establishment, and it is folly to suppose that because a man has been

successful in buying and selling bacon and butter for his own profit.

Gardiner asks would you like to hand over the Premiership to

distinguished grocers of to-day ? The great statesman has to prove

himself a great statesman just as the great grocer has to prove himself a

great grocer. He has to prove it by the qualities of statesmanship

exercised in the full glare of publicity.

On Waking Up is one of the subjective essays which deals with

the joy of waking up in the morning. It also conveys his views on the

value of sleep in a man’s life. From the personal experience of waking

91
up, Gardiner passes on to the discussion of the problem related to eternity

and immortality which is viewed differently by different persons like

Pascal, Blunt and Austin. The essay reveals his close observation of

Nature and his powers to give a realistic description of the natural

phenomena. He finely describes the natural scene in the early morning.

Waking up has always given a clear conscience, a good digestion, and a

healthy faculty of sleep and a joyous experience to the Americans. It has

the pleasing excitement with which the turning up of the fiddles of the

orchestra affect all. It is like starting out for a new adventure, or coming

into an unexpected inheritance, or falling in love, or stumbling suddenly

upon some author whom one has unaccountably missed and who goes to

your heart like a brother. In short, it is like anything that is sudden and

beautiful and full of promise. But waking up can never have been quite so

intoxicating a joy as it is now that peace has come back to the earth. It is

in the first burst of consciousness that one feels the full measure of the

great thing that has happened in the world. It is like waking from an

agonizing nightmare and realizing with a glorious surge of happiness that

it was not true. The fact that the nightmare from which one has awakened

now was true does not diminish one’s happiness. It deepens it, extends it,

projects it into the future. There is no pleasure like eating which comes

three times a day and lasts an hour each time. But sleep lasts eight hours.

It fills up a good third of the time one spends. Joy of waking up is

92
delightful in throwing off the enchantment of sleep and seeing the sunlit

streaming in at the window and hearing the happy jangle of the birds, or

looking out on the snow-covered landscape in winter, or the cherry

blossom in spring, or the golden fields of harvest time or upon the

smouldering fires of the autumn woodlands ? Perhaps the day will be as

thorny and full of disappointment and disillusions as any that have gone

before, but no matter. In this wonder of waking there is eternal renewal of

the spirit, the inexhaustible promise of the best that is still to come, the

joy of the new birth that experience cannot stale nor familiarity make

tame.

In On Thoughts at Fifty, Gardiner gives the example of Stevenson

to show how, on growing old, a man loses interest in his birthdays and

becomes indifferent to them. Birthdays cease to provide a man with joy

and excitement as they did in the childhood or youth. Gardiner himself

has a feeling of indifference towards his birthdays after ceasing to be

young, and does not take any interest in the occasion. However, on

reaching the age of fifty, his feelings about birthday are different. The

usual span of life is said in the Bible to be seventy years. That means, the

writer has to live another twenty years. These twenty years constitute a

period of physical decay, but they are also a period of indulgence in the

beauty and joy of Nature. At the age of 50, twenty years seem to be only

93
a short span but in childhood or youth, the age of 50 seemed to be very

distant and meant, for him, becoming an old man or an antiquity.

Gardiner hated painting faces or dying hair as they are the acts of

hiding one’s original personality. So he lashes out at old women for

impressing the gents by painting and powdering their faces. He says,

“ But that any one, not compelled to do it for a

living, should paint the face or dye the hair is to
me unintelligible. It is like attempting to pass off
a counterfeit coin. It is either a confession that one
is so ashamed of one’s face that one dare not let it
be seen in public, or it is an attempt to deceive the
world into accepting you as something other than
you are. It has the same effect on the observer that
those sham oak beams and uprights that are so
popular on the front of suburban houses have. They
are not real beams or uprights. They do not support
anything, or fill any useful function. They are only a
thin veneer of oak stuck on to pretend that they are
the real thing. They are a detestable pretence, and
I would rather live in a hovel than in a house tricked
out with such vulgar deceits that do not deceive ” ( Ibid : 172 ).

All About A Dog is an essay containing a commentary on an

important social subject, and deals with the issue related to the

observance of rules in daily life. It points out that rules are necessary for

smooth functioning of society, but not all rules are to be observed strictly.

Some of them, like the rule of the road, may demand strict observance,

because they involve the question of the physical safety of people. But

there are some rules like concerning the dog , that need not be necessarily

followed literally even though causing discomfort and inconvenience to

94
all. They may be ignored if they tend to stand in the way of the smooth

flow of life and social activity. They should be tempered with goodwill

and good humour. He had a deep thinking of educational system. Hence,

points out its shortfalls by stating –

“ The evil, I suppose, lies in our education. We standardize our

children. We aim at making them like ourselves – new incarnations of the
human spirit, new prophets and teachers, new adventures in the
wilderness of the world. We are more concerned about putting our
thoughts into their heads than in drawing their thoughts out, and we
succeed in making them rich in knowledge but poor in wisdom ”
( Gardiner : 1919 : 115 ).
Formatted: Indent: First line: 0 pt,
Tabs: 27 pt, Left + 45 pt, Left +
All About A Dog is a story-essay, i.e. an essay written in the form of Not at 57 pt

a story followed by a moral or message by the writer. Gardiner narrates

the events on the bus in a skilled manner, and uses crisp and racy

conversation between the conductor and the passengers to provide an

added interest to the narrative. The essay contains an interesting portrayal

of the character of the bus-conductor and the young woman carrying the

dog. Thus, several elements of the short-story are found in this essay, that

make its reading delightful and absorbing. The events in the essay are

rather dramatically presented. The essay also abounds in apt descriptions

such as that of the dog blinking at the dim lights, of the driver ‘beating his

arms across his chest’, and of the three policemen standing ‘like a group

of statuary up the street watching the drama’. The psychological state of

the conductor ‘with a general sense of grievance against everything and a

particular grievance against passengers who came and sat in his bus while

95
he shivered at the door’, his sense of triumph over the passengers because

he has got his rules, and his desire to justify his conduct to the writer, are

finely presented. And then there is the moral related to the observance of

rules, tagged at the end of the narrative.

The writer expresses his views through his exhortation of the

conductor, about the observance of rules. According to him, certain rules

are meant for the guidance of people concerned, and are not to be strictly

adhered to at the cost of the comfort and convenience of passengers. ‘A

little goodwill and good temper’ is desirable in the enforcement of such

rules, which is lacking in the behaviour of the conductor. There is thus an

element of moralizing in the essay, but the writer does not moralise with

an air of superiority or preaching. He conveys his moral like a man

talking to a fellow being informally, and trying to convince him of what

he says. He finds the interesting drama enacted in the bus to be an

occasion for conveying his views to the central figure of that drama, i.e.

the bus conductor. Without this moral, it would have been a plain

short-story and not an essay on an important social subject.

Formatted: Indent: First line: 0 pt,
Tabs: 57 pt, Left + Not at 9 pt
On Habits is an amusing and interesting personal essay in

which Gardiner informally writes about his experience in matters of

habits. In this essay, he takes the reader into his confidence and conveys

his personal experience in matters of habits, and also makes some general

observations in connection with them. He has pointed out the merits and

96
demerits of habits in a humorous manner, illustrating his remarks by

citing examples of various persons who are governed by their habits.

Gardiner illustrates tyranny of habits through a story told by Sir

Walter Scott to Rogers about his school days. He also gives his own

example on maintaining habits. He used to hang up his coat and hat in the

cloakroom of his club, at whatever place he could find vacant. But then

he forgot where he had put them and had to waste much time in searching

them. So he decided to hang his coat and hat on a certain peg or hook and

then it became his habit to do so, and he felt it quite easy to find out these

things. Thus, his habit proved very useful to him.

Gardiner is of the view that habits are good so far as they are

employed as a tool to help us. But they become a nuisance if one

becomes totally dependent on them or a slave to them. He gives the

example of Mr. Balfour who was habituated of holding the lapel of his

coat while speaking in public. Once, on a particular occasion, when he

was proposing a toast, he wore a coat that had no lapels. Balfour was

much perturbed while speaking, even though he was too skilled a speaker

not to be able to speak at all.

Realizing such an effect of habits, and his own difficulties due to

the habit of writing with a pencil, Gardiner put aside the pen and took out

a pencil with which he could write an article fluently by sticking to his

habit.

97
 He gives some examples of how habits can cause discomfiture to
Deleted:

mankind.He also tells about how he managed to find out his hat and coat

in the club by forming a habit of always hanging them on a certain peg.

In Defence of Ignorance is a delightful and instructive essay. It

deals with the subject of ignorance of the writer in particular and of all

human beings in general. Gardiner believes knowledge to be infinite and

widespread and points out the limitations of the knowledge of all

individuals. Even the most learned people according to him, possess only

a fraction of the knowledge even of their own subject, and even of the

most unlearned man knows more about a particular subject than others.

Knowledge is not necessarily conductive to the efforts to acquire wisdom.

A man may be very wise even without being learned.

A remarkable quality of the essay consists in the frankness of the

writer’s confessions of his ignorance. He talks about his ignorance of

several subjects and shows all humility in pointing out the littleness of his

own knowledge. The essay is chiefly subjective and personal in that it

reveals the writer’s own views about the state of his learning as well as

that of others. Talking in general terms, he exposes the falsity of the pride

of learning and the limitations of knowledge possessed individually by all

human beings.

Gardiner supplies various examples to prove his own ignorance

and that of all men. There is a touch of light humour in his description of

98
the various occasions on which he has found his ignorance exposed and

his pride of knowing things debunked even by the most ordinary persons

like the old chaise driver or the woman feeding bees. He shows his

humanity in the remark that he is too ignorant about so many things to be

able to offer advice to others. He indulges in self ridicule by laying bare

his own ignorance in various matters. However, he expresses some

serious views on knowledge and ignorance.

A simple moral lesson is conveyed by Gardiner in this essay. It is

that even the most ordinary and unlearned man may know more about

certain things than wise man, and may add to our knowledge by

imparting valuable information on some subjects or the other. He advises

the young men to acquire knowledge, but to remember that healthy

feeling and faith are more important for a happy life than knowledge and

learning. Thus, he reveals his didactic purpose in this essay, and seeks to

teach the reader the importance of wisdom and healthy feeling.

Formatted: Indent: First line: 0 pt

In On Saying Please he points out the value of good manner in

social life and emphasizes the importance of courtesy and politeness in

daily behaviour. In a simple, natural and anecdotal manner, he shows

how polite speech and manner sweeten the atmosphere around, and how

discourtesy and ill-manners spoil or pollute it. Gardiner emphasises the

value of gentleness of speech and manners and concludes that politeness

is a more effective tool of taking revenge on a discourteous person, as is

99
seen in the case of Chesterfield, than a violent attack as was restored to

by the liftman. However, instead of indulging in abstract moralising or

preaching, Gardiner gives concrete examples of polite behaviour like that

of the polite bus-conductor and the consequences of ill-manners like

those of the rude passenger in the lift.

On Being Idle is a personal essay in which he revealed his own

character and personality. The essay had a moral to convey and served a

didactic purpose. The writer sought to learn the lesson of labour,

incessant work and devotion of duty from the bee. He condemned the

imposters both in the world of the bees and the human world who made

much noise but did little work even though pretending to be doing much.

He wanted to be like the honest-bee who was always busy in doing

something or the other. The principle of the ‘survival of the fittest’ which

is especially applicable in the animal world, is illustrated by the killing of

the old queen bee by the new.

In On Smiles, he appeared as a delightful and informative essayist

who writes on even the most trivial subject in a serious and perceptive

manner. He presented in it a discerning analysis of the nature, importance

and types of smiles. Especially appealing and instructive was the

distinction he drew between, and the peculiar characteristics he pointed

out of the smiles of various persons. The smile of his friend was

described as ‘pleasant weather’ and that of Rufus Isaacs as ‘debonair’.

100
Gardiner described Llyod George’s smile as ‘the twinkling smile, so

merry and mischievious, so engagingly secret and calculating’ and Mr.

Asquith’s as private and intellectual ; Roosevelt’s as one which seemed

‘to stretch across the Continent from the Atlantic to the Pacific.’

Woodrow Wilson’s smile as ‘spacious’, ‘thoughtful and reflective’, and

so on. He also distinguished between frank and subdued smile and

habitual and unexpected smiles. Thus, he showed his power of

discrimination even in a trivial matter like smiles.

While describing the smiles of various persons, Gardiner also

brought out distinctive traits of the character and personality of these

persons. For example, Swift was described as ‘terrible’, and Philip II as a

gloomy fanatic. Lord Morley’s ascetic features and Frederic Lamond’s

gravity and spiritual remoteness were aptly hinted at. He seemed to

condemn the habitually smiling persons like the vicar mocked by

Archbishop Temple and Mrs. Barbauld. His remarks about these persons

revealed his insight into the characters of various types of people.

In On Plagiarism, Gardiner discusses plagiarism of different

writers in order to create awareness. He defends the charge of plagiarism

brought against Pope by Professor Karl Pearson. In his opinion, Pope was

very perfectly keen, amazingly neat and tidy in his opinion. Great writers

like Shakespeare, William Wordsworth, John Milton also abunduntly

borrowed thoughts and ideas from their predecessors to enrich their

101
writings. He argues that the charge of plagiarism is only valid where the

borrowing is deliberate and employed without creating new thoughts and

new effects. Honest stealing may be defended but to steal and to degrade

is past forgiveness.

On Catching the Train contains beautiful touches of the portrayal

of natural landscape, which reveal Gardiner’s love and observation of

Nature. It is a fine essay which reveals Gardiner’s ability to deal with a

trivial subject in a serious manner with slight touches of humour. The

drama of human life is shown in it to be taking place against the

background of Nature. He describes his feelings while the train is on the

move. He presents an introspective analysis of his feelings of anxiety and

fear and about missing the train. He also deals with the psychological

condition of the man writing under a pen-name and the carefree manner

of people in the matters of catching the train. He is of the opinion that it is

not the expected troubles that occur in life but quite unexpected and

unimagined one. He condemns the habits of apprehensiveness among

people.

In On the Rule of the Road, Gardiner makes practical suggestions

to sweeten social intercourse and smoothen the flow of social life. He

expresses his views in favour of the curtailment of individual liberty and

adjustment of personal interests and tastes for a proper enjoyment of

liberty by all. His preference for a compromise between individual liberty

102
and social liberty, between anarchy and socialism and between the rights

of one man and those of another is based on his proper wisdom.

According to Gardiner, liberty does not mean unlimited freedom to do

what one likes. One’s liberty and rights are conditioned and restrained by

those of others. While enjoying one’s personal liberty and rights, one

should be conscious of those of others and try not to overstep the bounds

of his liberty. Individual liberty should not stand in the way of social

liberty. The rule of the road is, according to Gardiner, an example of how

a slight curtailment in the liberty of an individual may be greatly helpful

in preserving the liberty of all others, and how private liberty can best be

enjoyed only in conjunction with social liberty.

On Great Men presents pen portraits of six greatest Englishmen –

Shakespeare, Milton, Cromwell, Alfred Roger, Bacon and John Wesley.

He chose them by setting up criteria of greatness and by the process of

elimination. He excludes homicidal geniuses and people possessing mere

power devoid of any purpose or philosophy of life and also professional

soldiers and politicians. After giving a careful thought of great men in

various fields such as literature, philosophy, science, politics, and so on.

Gardiner selects six greatest English men. There are in it two poets, two

men of action, one scientist and one preacher. No artist has been included

because Gardiner believes that English men have no such claim to

greatness in the field of arts as they have in that of literature.

103
 All these great figures are English in the strict sense that none of

them is a Scotsman, an Irishman or a Welshman. There is no soldier or

politician in the list.

ii) Educational Essays of Lokhitwadi

At the beginning of the year 1700, King Aurangazeb’s army was

plundering in South India. Powerful Maratha kings were busy in

strengthening their independent kingdoms. Both had recruited many

Indians as soldiers in their armies. Indian villages were divided into two

groups one farmers and other soldiers. Whenever there were battles,

these soldiers were fighting it under the leadership of their Sardars. East

India Company exploited Indians on large scale. For nothing, Company

dismissed the ancestral right of many states and forcefully took them

under English control under the pretence of Doctrine of Lapses. East

India Company dismissed Aangare State near Mumbai by denying the

right of heirship to Jaisingh Aangre, Satara after King Shahaji’s death in

1848, Holkar’s, Newalkar’s Jhanshi, Nizam’s Hyderabad and so on

were also treated likewise. Divided Hindu rulers were fighting among

themselves for pretty reasons. For the sake of revenge and vengence,

they killed each other. Mighty English availed themselves of this

opportunity and provoked one Hindu king against the other. Internal

104
conflicts prevented them to unite each other. So they became

vulenerable. British sought this opportunity and dismissed their states in

order to strengthen their power in India.

Vedas divided Hindus on the basis of caste, sub-caste, religion,

language, region and ancestry. Apart from this, physiognomy again

divided them into four races which were Arya, Vaish, Kshtriya and

Shudra. These divisions never allowed them to come together.

The late 19th century in Maharashtra is the period of colonial

modernity. Like the corresponding periods in other Indian languages, this

was the period dominated by the English educated intellectuals. It was the

age of prose and reason. It was the period of reformist didacticism and

great intellectual ferment. In 1818, British had overthrown Bajirao

Peshwa II and took over the political power of Marathas which totally

crumbled the independence of Marathi people. No power in India was

leftover to challenge British Rule. Absolute English power was

established throughout the country. Irresponsible, absorbent, immature

and incapable Indian rulers were dismissed by the mighty English Rule.

This proved to be the turning point in the history as well as the social life

of a big nation like India. The advent of British Rule was the beginning of

a great revolution in the social life of Indians. Inspite of being previously

ruled for hundreds of years by Muslims, Dutchs and Portugese, the social

life in the country was unaffected. But the English culture challenged the

105
social construction in Maharashtra. A dawn of English administration and

education brought transition in the Marathi culture, social system, faiths,

beliefs, lifestyles in the region. Ideological hurricane brought forth the

instant transformation in the life and style of the people.

In his essays, Lokhitwadi has sought to convey his views on

subjects of social interests and not only tried to convince the

contemporary people of what he says, but forced them to behave

according to his will and wishes. His strong reflections, tastes,

preferences and moods are mirrored in his essays. His essays project his

personality and his viewpoints.

In this connection, G.B. Sardar remarks, “ Western influence

forced Indian thinkers to resort to modern ideas like ‘Freedom’,

‘Democracy’ etc. Western knowledge gave birth to a series of social

reformers and thinkers which transformed social, political and

educational foundation of Maharashtra. Establishment of ideological

movements created awareness and awakening among community ”

( quoted in Phadkule and Nasirabadkar : 1990 : 28 ).

Indian society was totally orthodox and had absolute faith in their

scriptures. Indians were blindly and thoughtlessly following the teachings

of scriptures which were considered as laws. Lokhitwadi was the first

Indian writer who boldly pointed out the futility of these laws and forced

them to review Indian social structure, old customs, traditions, behaviour,

106
lifestyle, education, politics, economy etc. He forced them to be united as

an individual, family, society, race, religion, complexion, group. He

taught them not to blindly follow the teachings of religious scriptures

without judging them on their conscience. He tried to remove the

misconceptions that day to day practice is directly connected with

scriptures and distinguished religion from practical knowledge.

Lokhitwadi’s Nibandhsangrah, published in 1866, explicated

religious, historical, political and economic issues of the time.

Dr. Radhakrishnan in his Religion and Society supported Lokhitwadi’s

movement of social reform by saying,

“ In a savage community there is hardly any progress from one generation

to another. Change is looked upon with suspicion and all human energies
are concerned on maintaining the statusquo. In a civilized community
progress and change are the life-blood of its activity. Nothing is so
subversive to society as blind adherence to outworn forms and obsolete
habits which survive by mere inertia ” ( quoted in Phadkule : 1973 : 74 ).

Lokhitwadi pointed out the social evils like ignorance, casteism,

racism, sex descrimination in Hindus which according to him were the

obstacles enroute to their comprehensive development. These evils

divided them on the basis of language, caste, sub-caste, ethnic groups,

regions etc. Due to which they lost the spirit of equality and national

integrity. The entire community was fumbling in the darkness of

ignorance for ages together. Outdated customs and traditions never

107
allowed them to change their caste systems. Orthodox faiths and beliefs

pervaded the indigenous Hindu Community from changing age old

customs. Rulers were rashly busy in fighting among themselves and

enjoying glories of their kingdoms. Dukes were recklessly collecting

healthy revenues from peasants without looking at their problems.

Lokhitwadi spent his entire life stressing the need for revival and

rejuvenation of Hindu religion. He started ideological revolution in

Maharashtra which laid the path to progress. He appealed Hindu scholars

to get rid of the outdated traditions, beliefs and superstitions. His courage

lies in revolting against his own caste and religion.

English rule, culture and literature awoke the learned and aspirant

Indians. As a result, they started introspecting themselves. They reviewed

their social systems, rituals, behaviour, thinking, lifestyle and likewise.

They abondoned the old ideas and customs which embarrassed them

since long. English education made them capable of facing challenges of

modernization. This made them revivalist that led to renaissance which

gave birth to a new era in Marathi literature. Justice Ranade, was the

pioneer of modern Maharashtra, who led the first phase of

revolutionaries. In the second phase, Lokhitwadi stepped into the shoes of

Justice M. Ranade. Therefore he is regarded as the leader of social

reformers.

108
 Lokhitwadi tried to improve ethics and morals of the people

through education. He was in favour of introducing the branches of

European knowledge as it may help the Indians to shun their orthodox

attitude and develop scientific temperament. He was of the opinion that

English were educating the natives though not with great enthusiasm.

He admired English Government for establishing a Sanskrit School

under the guidance of Hindu Pandits to impart knowledge as it already

existed in India. In Lokhitwadi’s view the purpose of this school was to

equip the youth with grammatical niceties and metaphysical distinctions

of little or no practicable use to society and to acquire that was known

two thousand years ago, with the addition of vain and empty subtitles

since produced by speculative men, that was commonly taught already in

all parts of India. He further expected that the object of British

Government in India ought to be the promotion of European literature

and science among the natives of India and that all the funds appropriated

for the purpose of education would be best employed on English

education alone. But the British aimed at the improvement of native

population to promote a more liberal and enlightened system of

instruction, embracing mathematics, natural philosophy, chemistry and

anatomy, with other useful sciences which may be accomplished with the

sum proposed by employing a few gentlemen of talents and learning,

109
educated in Europe, and providing a college furnished with the necessary

books, instruments and other apparatus.

In the very title of Patra Number 128, Lokhitwadi asks

Hindustancha Prachin Itihaas Kaa Naahi ? ( Why India does not have its

ancient history ? ) He felt sorry for the lack of writing the history of a vast

country like India, though there were thousands of scriptures already

written on innumerable subjects. He found the reason behind it was lack

of knowledge. Scriptures containing stories of Rama, Krishna, Buddha

were thought to be the history at that time. Before the advent of Muslim

Rule in India, no information of the kings and their administration in

Bengal, Karnataka, South India and other parts of the country was

available. Ignorant Hindus did not write the history of their kings. Due to

division, Hindus had not felt the need to write their history. Writers also

thought that it was a mere wastage of time. Well known poets like

Tukaram, Moropant, Acchutrao Modak wrote books on religion

throughout their life but did not write history of Maharashtra. Peshwas,

though ruled for more than hundred years, had not written the history of

even Sardar Shinde, Holkar, Patwardhan, Vinchurkar and Rajebahadur.

Writers like Rangnath, Ramdas, Jairam also had not felt to write the

history of King Shivaji. But Muslims wrote their history. Muslim

historians Farista, Abu Fazal wrote about Moghal regime. After Muslims,

British invaded India who wrote the genuine history of India. Both

110
Muslim and English historians confessed that they could win and rule

Indians because the people of this country were divided into castes, sub-

castes, religions, status, languages, and territories and so on. Moropant

wrote 108 Ramayanas despite writing poems on Peshwas. Only Brahmins

possessed the art of writing. But being royal patronages, they did not dare

to write the history of India. Apart from this, decline of Sanskrit language

and continuous disputes, riots and battles among Hindu rulers disturbed

the peace of the country.

Lokhitwadi underlined the limitations of Sanskrit language. He

pointed out that Sanskrit scholars did not become popular in practice,

politics and wars. Nana Fadnavis, Sakharam Bapu, Naro Shankar, Vitthal

Shivdeo became scholars without mastering Sanskrit. Sanskrit scholars

never administered or showed heroism. Sanskrit was never the language

of any government. Lokhitwadi thought, for acquiring wisdom, only

Sanskrit learning was not enough.

Books can overcome the ignorance of mankind, was the belief of

Lokhitwadi. In order to awake the idle and ignorant people of Pune, he

pursued the Governor, Sir George Clark and the then Collector of Pune to

start a library in Pune. He established it on 4th February 1848 with 300

books and 4 newspapers in Budhwarwada by collecting a fund of rupees

one thousand five hundred. Unfortunately majority of the people did not

like the idea.

111
As it is said : “ Books can overcome ignorance but unfortunately, people

do not realize the importance of reading ” ( Priyolkar : 1996 : 6 ).

People believed that it was child’s play to acquire knowledge. He

openly condemned evil traditions and challenged the followers of these

traditions. He strongly opposed casteism, gender discrimination, blind

faith, child marriage, English illiteracy, selfishness, etc. He suggested

intercaste marriages to overcome the problem of casteism. In this

connection following remark is noteworthy : “ He brought about a

renaissance and social-awakening in Maharashtra ”

( www.answer.com/topic/marathi ).

These social evils were overthrown by English rulers who

promoted education among illiterate Indians.

Like Rajaram Mohan Roy, Lokhitwadi also advocated gender

equality. He openly opposed women being dominated by men. According

to Lokhitwadi, women easily fell victim to the tyrrany of men. They were

exploited at large by various means. They were deliberately kept away

from acquiring knowledge. They were deprived of the right to education

and remarriage. He proposed five hundred years English Rule to facilitate

the Indians to educate them. He argued that women should be made

literate in order to eradicate patriarchial dominance. There should be

equal rights to men and women. Unless and until people will not accept

112
the equality of men and women, India cannot become a progressive

country.

He rightly said that education shapes the future of a man. Not only

formal but also informal type of education was necessary to be wise.

According to Lokhitwadi, ‘Knowledge is power’.( Priyolkar : 1996 : 7 )

Everyone who had been to school was not wise but wise were widely

honoured and paid by the society. He warned the parents not to marry

their children at a tender age. He forced the parents to educate their

children properly to get theoretical as well as practical knowledge of the

contemporary world.

Brahmins, the superiors and the strongest people in the past kept

other people away from acquiring education. They thought themselves to

be the only pedantic and denied the right to education to others. The caste

system stratified the society into Brahmin, Kshtriya, Vaishay and Shudra.

In 1832, first English school was started in Pune. Unfortunately

people opposed it. English education was not welcomed, though it

imparted knowledge. People misunderstood that it was against their

religion.

Ancient Aryan scriptures depicted reality and possessed so many

good things to be brought into practice. They also tell numerous invain

things which are to be thrown out of practice. These books were on

religion, fables, geography, history etc.

113
 Ignorant Hindus were the blind followers of Arya. Arya were

against the art as well as fabulous fields of knowledge like singing,

dancing and playing music. They thought them to be contemptible. There

were other curricular activities which meant for the pleasure of listening,

watching and playing.

Lokhitwadi was also of the view that reciting Gita,

Vishnusahastranaam, Saptshati, Vedas was not sufficient to get

knowledge. Scholarship of man was reflected in books. Wisdom should

be acquired through reading ancient scriptures, studying many languages,

gathering information. English is the global language. Universal

knowledge can be acquired through reading books in English only.

Sanskrit learning is not enough to acquire immense knowledge as it is a

language of a particular religion. Forecasting, chanting incantations are

the essentials in Sanskrit while there are views and counterviews in

English over a subject. On almost every field of knowledge, there is a

treasure of English books like Law of Family, Law of Evidence, Law of

Presumption, Law of Contracts, Law of Infants, Law of Bankruptcy, Law

of Nuisance, Law of Merchants, Law of Property, Law of Partnership,

Law of Trusts, Law of Burials, Law of Procedures, Law of Divorce, Law

of Games, Law of Marines, Law of Civil Law, Criminal Law, Law of

Hereditary, Law of Surety, Law of Damages, Law of Pleadings, Statute

Law, Common Law etc. These books widened the horizons of

114
knowledge. In Lokhitwadi’s opinion, Indians can be made knowledgeable

through English learning.

Rituals were not laws. Ancient scriptures were written by ascetics

in jungles. These innumerable books are about Ayurvedic medicines,

Geography, Astrology, Grammar, Cookery etc. People recognized their

teachings as authoritative and considered the ascetics as incarnations of

God. Orthodox people were against the enhancement of knowledge.

Marathi scriptures and newspapers provide a lot of information about

India as well as other countries and their development. Unfortunately

nobody reads them. This ill-thinking led them to the darkness of

ignorance. On the contrary, they thought it a meaningless business as well

as wastage of papers. There were numerous fields of knowledge

beneficial to mankind. But Indians did not know how to travel by water,

usefulness of Chemistry, and the science of running machinaries because

their scriptures were the oldest books on Earth. Therefore, English books

could be the only source to fulfill this thirst for current universal

knowledge. The scholars of the European countries like England and

Germany invented new doctrines, theories, laws and principles. English

books contained immense knowledge and information which proved to

much advanced than Ancient Indian scriptures.

Lokhitwadi attacked the social stratification and division of the

society on caste basis. Brahmins were thought to be upper caste people.

115
Everybody’s profession was fixed according his caste. Dr. Babasaheb

Ambedkar called this system as a multistory building without a staircase.

Brahmins studied Vedas and scriptures. Naavi’s, (a barber) job was to cut

hair, Kumbhar (a potter) made earthan pots, Bhangi, a scavenger looked

after sanitation, Sonar, a goldsmith made ornaments.

Infant and child marriages were rampant. Dowry system was

prevalent. This child marriage system made many of them bankrupt.

Instead of making the boy self reliant and capable of shouldering

domestic responsibilities people got them married with a girl at the tender

age for the sake of huge dowry.

On the early death of husband, the girls who became widows had

to live a solitary life. Widow remarriages were not permitted. In

Lokhitwadi’s view, re-marriages are must for the welfare of the society

though they were thought to be against the scriptures. This social reform

could protect a girl by living a miserable and helpless life. Thus,

Lokhitwadi stood for the upliftment of the downtrodden and deprived

sections of the society.

Lokhitwadi instantly thought over the social, religious, economic

and political problems of India. He specially studied Indian History with

reference to its social principles, contemporary fields of knowledge, arts,

polity, and people.

116
 Realizing the need of history, Lokhitwadi not only contemplated but

wrote Indian history in the essays like Patra Number 112 Nizamachay

Vanshavishayee, Patra Number 113 Satarchay Chhatrpati Yaanchay

Pratinidhi, Patra Number 114 Satarchay Chhatrpatincha Vansh,

Patra Number 115 Poorvichi Mahiti, Patra Number 119

Hindusthanchay Rajya, Patra Number 126 Manushachi

Poorvapithika, Patra Number 127 Hindusthanatil Desh, Patra

Number 134 Musalmanaanvishai Maahiti, Patra Number 135 Parsi

Lok, Taanchaa Chaliriti, Dharma Va Puratan Granth Yaanvishai

Maahiti, Patra Number 136 Shikh Lokanvishai Maahiti, Patra

Number 145 Char Yuge, Patra Number 148 Rajakiya Vichar Yurop

Aani Asia etc. In this respect a well known Marathi critic Nirmalkumar

Phadkule calls Lokhitwadi “ the first topmost Marathi history writer ”

( 1973 : 162 ).

Lokhitwadi’s revolutionary thoughts expressed in the last century

are rrelevant even today. He accelerated the social movement and

revolted against the existentialists and intellectuals and tried to co-relate

religion with social life. He advocated liberalization, education and

gender equality. His nationalism and vitality of the thought culminated

into a new mode of thought that would be useful even today to solve the

problems and clear the doubts in the minds of the present generation.

Encyclopaedia of Marathi Literature describes his goal as, “ the spiritual

117
and moral development of the society by eradicating orthodoxy and blind

faith ” ( Vol. XII : 1985 : 1264 ).

Lokmanya Tilak, a great reformist opined in one of the editorials of

his daily Kesari that,

“ Gopalrao studied all the Western fields of knowledge. As

compared to others he had vast historical knowledge as well as
experience. Till his last, he was reading different types of books,
collecting and keeping old documents safely. He not only inspired but
also financially helped every revolution which took place in Pune during
his lifetime. He pioneered Dyanprakash and wrote by the pseudo name
‘Lokhitwadi’ for forty years ” ( quoted in Phadkule : 1973 : 22 ).

Enhancement of knowledge is the prime duty of the Government.

Unfortunately, Peshwa regime of Deccan did not perform this duty.

Shastri, Pandit, Vaidic bards were appointed by the Hindu and Muslim

kings as their courtiers. Their courts were full of such scholarly men.

These highly learned persons got royal patronage in order to educate the

people. They were granted immense privileges by their kings. They were

highly paid and given the right to collect yearly revenues from a few

villages, though they were very selfish and lazy. At home, they were

adoring their gods and goddesses instead of spreading knowledge among

the common people. Lokhitwadi, was against appointing ‘Shastris’ and

‘Upadhayas’ as courtiers. So he advised the kings to strictly order these

courtiers to educate and provide medicines to poor people.

Foreigners like English, Portugese and Muslims ruled India

because of the lack of foresightedness and laziness of Hindus. In ancient

118
times Hindus were very brave and adventurous. In course of time, due to

blind faith, they lost their legacies which brought in misery. They were

able to read and write which made them overconfident. They never

crossed the Black Waters to acquire various streams of knowledge as it

was thought to be a taboo. This kept them away from becoming

Professors, Barristers, Doctors and Engineers. They considered

themselves to be the so called leading intellects.

Hindu rulers like Peshwas, Holkars and Shindes were continuously

busy in fighting among themselves. They provided opportunities to the

foreign rulers to enter who easily took possession of the country under the

pretext of trade and then ruled India. They took advantage of the

cowardice, impoverished and foolish nature of Hindus. Muslim rulers

made them slaves for five hundred years and English for one hundred and

fifty years. At first, Muslims came to India from Iran, Arabia and Turkey

and settled to rule the natives. While English from England, spread their

trade through East India Company and again ruled over India. The

defenceless Hindus lost their freedom and became slaves in their own

land. Many outsiders ruled India for hundreds of years. They left their

footprints here in the form of their language, culture, lifestyle, etc.

Lokhitwadi suggested people to start printing press because printed

thoughts last long than colloquial interaction. He also advised people to

write letters like British people in order to open up their hearts as well as

119
develop the art of writing and printing. But there was no freedom of

speech in the reign of old kings. People were not allowed to discuss polity

and religion. Tongue and hands were cut off on its violation. For example

– once a woman spoke angrily against the tyranny of a ‘Mamledar’

during the Peshwa’s reign. The ‘Subhedar’ tied a woolf to that woman’s

body and burnt her alive for such a trifling offence. In another case, a

clerk was thrown from a castle for disclosing official matters in Bajirao

Peshwa’s reign.

In Patra Number 8 Junya Samjuti, Lokhitwadi published a list

of 30 insane traditions. He appealed the wise men to judge and denounce

these absurd traditions. These traditions were laid down by the Brahmins

against the education of other caste people. Propagation of knowledge

was prohibited. Establishment of factories, post office, printing press, and

use of typewriter was abhorred. Government’s decision was

unquestionable. The society was divided into haves and have nots. Poor

could learn to earn their living. They had to follow old traditions without

questioning them. No other language except Sanskrit could be

studied.Women were deprived of education. Giving birth to a son was

welcomed while girls were hated. A widow was not allowed to remarry.

Such was the social and cultural environment of the time.

Lokhitwadi did not deny the futility of religious theology. He

suggested someone to study it partially with English acts to master the

120
knowledge of law. Theology tells how to behave in this world. Practically

this theology is not complete as it possesses blind faith and

misconceptions. Many authors created confusion among the people by

excessive writing over the society. In fact, both things are quite different

from each other. They are to be expressed separately. Most religious

theories are outdated in the present context. They are to be replaced by

British Laws. It is the duty of the scholars to amend the religious theories

in order to make them more applicable and useful to the people.

He opposed manufacturing and drinking of alcohol as well as

eating meat. He advises drug addicts to overcome addiction to alcohol

and eating meat because these two habits kill the conscience of mankind.

Lokhitwadi reprimanded people for flattering rich and men in

power instead of praising scholars. They were unable to judge between

right and wrong. Apart from this they were fatalistic than attemptive.

They did not try to become literate and indulged in pleasure, becoming

slaves of rich to earn their bread and butter. They were insincere,

hypocritical, phony, foolish and behaved like animals. Hence ignorance

kept them away from the realization of Truth. Man being the crown of

creation has been rewarded with power of speech and knowledge. It is his

duty to develop and update various fields of knowledge around him. But

he indulged in witchcrafts and evil practices. His worship is a pretence.

His action is devilish. Hence, the English rightly called the Hindus

121
‘Semi-Barbarous’ because they were ignorant, gullible, eccentric and

praising foolish people. Traditionally, among Hindus, Brahmins were

thought to be the intellectuals. They studied ‘Vedas’ as it was the only

source of knowledge. Brahmins were in pursuit of religious knowledge.

They deprived the right to education to the people of other castes.

Brahmins sent their children to ‘Gurus’ (religious teachers) on

performing their ‘Munj’ (a religious ceremony). In their academies, these

children were blindly reciting letters of four ‘Vedas’. The ‘Pantojis’

(religious teachers) taught them to read and write unethical chronicles

like ‘Vetal Panchvishi’ and ‘Shukrabahaddari’. This type of education

seemed defective. Lokhitwadi was of the view that there should be a

single religious book which should be in people’s language. Instead of

chronicles, children should be asked to read different books and

newspapers to get information and general knowledge.

In one of the most important essays, Patra Number 64 –

Dharmasudharna, Lokhitwadi emphasized the amendment of scriptures

from time to time as per the social needs. He suggested the Hindus to

follow fifteen point programme in order to bring out religious reforms.

They are as follows –

1) All should recite devotional songs by heart

2) All are to be treated equally

122
3) Except Munj, Marriage, Funeral, (these three) all remaining rites

should be cancelled, compulsion of Sanskrit language should be

abolished, freedom of using one’s own language should be granted

4) Freedom of speech and conduct should be granted

5) Men and Women should have equal rights to remarry

6) Morality instead of conduct should be made accountable

7) Baseless argument shouldn’t be heard

8) Every human being should be treated mercifully irrespective of his

caste

9) Everybody should love his country and think of its welfare

10) Everybody should have the right to choose his employment

11) Everybody should gain respect on the strength of his qualities and not

on the basis of caste or race

12) People should be granted more rights in order to force the

government to make laws for their welfare

13) Laws made by the rulers should be accepted

14) Everyone should strive for the enhancement of knowledge, poor

should be helped, medicines should be provided free of charge and

monetary help should be given to the poor

15) Everyone should tread the path of truth, nobody should contempt

anyone, one should enjoy the freedom to get knowledge, research should

be promoted and its findings should be published.

123
 In ancient times, the art of Reading and Writing was not developed.

Recitation was the only way to acquire knowledge. For the convenience

of the learners, Maharshi Ved Vyas divided Vedas into four parts :

Rugved, Yajurved, Atharvaved and Samved and published them in an

anthology. Vedic religion taught to perform ‘Yadnya’ (a religious

sacrificial ceremony ) in order to contain the five universal elements -

earth, air, fire, water, ether. Six aspects of Vedas were broadly brought

forth, like education, an era or a reliable source, a hobby, grammar,

astrology and definitions. Lokhitwadi, though a Brahmin, fearlessly and

impartially attacked his own community for its orthodoxy. In this regard

the following statement is noteworthy :

“ Gopal Hari Deshmukh (1823-1892) who, through his shatpatre (a

bunch of letters numbering 100) attacked orthodox Brahmans opposing
social and religious reforms ” ( Moon : 1990 : 195 ).

In the essay Sanskrit Vidya, he targeted the Sanskrit scholars

Nana Fadnavis, Sakharam Bapu, Naro Shankar, Vitthal Shivdev for their

undiplomatic nature. These scholars were performing various Hindu

rituals like ‘Munj’, ‘Vivah’, ‘Jaaval’, ‘Shrradh’ to earn their livelihood,

which was the only utility of Sanskrit language. These scholars never got

perfection in handling court, polity, war etc. Their knowledge was very

limited. Sanskrit scholars did not spread its knowledge abroad, therefore,

foreign rulers used their language instead of Sanskrit.

124
 Maharashtrians were scattered in South and North Indian regions

like Gondwan, Varad, Khandesh, Pune, Wai, Miraj, Kokan, Balaghat

regions. The people of these states spoke Kannada, Telugu, Hindi,

Gujarati, Marathi languages. Inspite of colloquial differences, Marathi

was wiedly spoken in all these regions. Aryans were Brahmins, Kshtriya

and Vaishya. Their language was Sanskrit. Brahmins were known to be

the masters of this language. They were widely praised and blindly

followed by other communities. Sanskrit was the language of pedantic

scholars while Marathi was used for day to day communication which

resulted in code mixing. Apart from this, many words were added to

Marathi by Muslims, English and Jains, in course of time. Persian and

Arabic languages too affected Marathi which was to be the court

language. Great Marathi poets Dyneshwar and Mukundraj wrote their

poems in Prakrut. But the major impact on Marathi was that of Sanskrit.

Marathi grammar was written later on.

During the English regime, many books were written, newspapers

and periodicals were published in Marathi with the help of Sanskrit and

English literature. Previously scriptures were written on the basis of great

Hindu epics like ‘Maha Bharat’, ‘Bhagwatgita’ and ‘Ramayana’. Later

on, books were written on the basis of English because English books

were coherent, full of poetics, figures of speechs, grammar and at the

same provided lot of information. On the contrary, Indian books were

125
lacking in authentic knowledge of religions, castes, races, traditions,

medicines, chemistry, botany, games and sports, new and old laws,

geography, history, astrology, phonetics, scriptures, science, languages,

travel, animals, recipes, diseases and so on.

Old scholars were unable to read English newspapers. They had no

idea about the different countries in the world. Even the words like

America, England, Russia, Lieutenant, Governor, Legislative Council

were unknown to the Sanskrit scholars. They were acquainted only with

the characters of Hindu epics the Ramayana and the Mahabharata. They

forgot that real knowledge means information of various subjects,

possession of practical knowledge as well as the skill to speak and write.

As food feeds the body, knowledge feeds the mind. Knowledge makes

the mind creative and imaginative. Lokhitwadi advised the contemporary

scholars to read newspapers as it was the only source and the easiest way

to acquire knowledge.

Lokhitwadi influnced the writers like Baba Padmanji, Vishnubua

Brahmachari and Jyotirao Phule. Shatpatre deeply influnced Baba

Padmanji which resulted in the loss of his faith in Hindu religion. In

1854, he converted to Christianity which he defends in his

autobiography Arunodya.

126
 Unfortunately people were reluctant to accept the views of

Lokhitwadi. His revolutionary thinking was condemned. The traditional

people targeted him. Prominent among them was Vishnushastri

Chiplunkar. He attacked Lokhitwadi for a year through his

Nibandhmala. Chiplunkar was a nationalist rather than a reformist

journalist. He did not recognize Lokhitwadi’s reforms. Through the

essays numbering 64 to 76 of Nibandhmala he castigated and

condemned Lokhitwadi. Vishnushastri Chiplunkar bitterly called

Lokhitwadi’s writings-outdated, lacking in novelty, against Indian culture

and uninspiring. Dr. P.G. Sahastrabuddhe and Dr. A. N. Deshpande

attacked Shatpatre for its ordinary language. L. R. Pangarkar, G. T.

Madkholkar also recorded their objections over Lokhitwadi’s writings.

Critics P.G. B. Sardar, Prof. S.K. Khirsagar rightly appraised Lokhitwadi

( Phadkule and Nasirabadkar : 1990 : 26 - 27 ).

On reviewing the educational essays of A.G. Gardiner and

Lokhitwadi, it is observed that both essayists’ aim was to build human

character and eradicate ignorance from the contemporary society. They

emphasised the need of formal as well as informal type of education for

acquiring knowledge and wisdom. They wanted to correct the

misbehaviour of the English and Indian people respectively. To achieve

their goals, they focused on the inevitability and utility of books for

inspiration and new ideas. In their opinion, it is the valuable habit of

127
reading which provides knowledge and wisdom to human beings. They

advocated the development of scientific temperament and eradication of

superstition, which seemed to be an obstacle in the path to progress.

Gardiner raises the question of morality in everyday life while

Lokhitwadi is worried about the behaviourial pattern of the Indians.

Gardiner expects smooth, light and playful behaviour in the society while

Lokhitwadi wants to correct the social order of his time.

128