1947 Partition of India & Pakistan

On August 15, 1947, as the clock struck midnight, the cries of millions of people urgently making their way through the corpse-littered terrain of developing India and Pakistan drowned out joyful celebrations of freedom from British authority. The Indian subcontinent eventually attained Independence after more than a century of British East India Company domination and another 90 years under the British Raj. After years of anti-colonial struggle, a moment of climactic victory should have occurred, but instead was irreparably tainted by unspeakable bloodshed and brutality.

Up to two million people perished in the most dreadful ways. The gloomy surroundings silently witnessed wanton rape, pillaging, headless bodies, trains loaded with the dead, and limbs strewn along the sides of roads. Nothing could have adequately prepared the 14 million or more refugees for this tragedy. One of the largest mass migrations in human history and violence on a scale never previously witnessed were brought on by the 1947 Partition of the Indian Subcontinent into the sovereign states of Hindu-majority India and Muslim-majority Pakistan. Seven million Muslims, seven million Sikhs, and roughly seven million Hindus ended up in the wrong country as the provinces of the Punjab and Bengal were split in half.. Many families packed up their essential goods and set off for India or West or East Pakistan (now Bangladesh), believing they would return "home," leaving their valuables behind. Many were unsuccessful.

How might nearby communities that had lived in relative peace for millennia suddenly turn viciously against one another? One could point the finger at the British government's decision on July 15, 1947, to give over control just one month later on August 15, 1947, ten months earlier than expected. A British lawyer named Sir Cyril Radcliffe, who lacked even a basic understanding of India and had only five weeks to redraft all of South Asia's borders, could be held responsible for the hastily constructed borders. One could criticise the escalating language of hostility that went along with the growth of Hindu and Muslim nationalism or the British strategy of divide and rule.

While the widely accepted Partition narrative emphasises each of these elements and characterises the violence as bands of armed young men in the grip of a communal frenzy seeking out their next victims, these interviews offer alternative viewpoints. They challenge common perceptions of Partition while also shedding light on a moment that has been challenging to understand. It is my hope that new histories will be created that balance the political workings of Partition with the lived human realities as more academics, students, and laypeople work with these interviews.

These Partition memories, as they are portrayed in this collection of interviews, highlight the frailty of our humanity and the extremes to which we can sink or soar. It is intended that these individual accounts would help bridge the stories from all sides of the border and serve as a reminder that our similarities outweigh our differences, in addition to offering a deeper understanding of the lived realities of Partition.