The renaming of New Delhi’s Aurangzeb Road to Dr APJ Abdul Kalam Road points to the advancement of a nation from the vestiges of medieval barbarism to secular, democratic and modern ideas
One would have thought that the renaming of Aurangzeb Road, an arterial avenue in the heart of New Delhi, as Dr APJ Abdul Kalam Road, after the most loved and respected national icon in recent times would have been universally hailed. But, sadly, that is not to be. Sections of the political class, including those who often swear by the core values in our Constitution have taken umbrage at this decision and have sprung to the defence of one of the biggest despots in the country’s history. While doing so, they have hurt the sentiments of millions of Indians who loved the simple, secular Kalam, who ignited the minds of the nation’s youth.
Those who oppose the renaming of Aurangzeb Road, argue that history should not be tampered with and that this is an attempt to obliterate history. This is a specious argument on two counts. First, no such argument was ever advanced when dozens of roads and landmarks in Delhi were renamed over the last 50 years. Second, how can history be erased if a road is renamedIJ
Indians have been obsessed with renaming roads all across the country since independence. In fact, it was considered de rigueur to make such changes and as a result, most arterial roads in New Delhi have been renamed since 1947, and most of them have been named after icons of one political party — The Congress. Here is a small sample:
Kingsway is now Rajpath and Queen’s Way is Janpath. York Road has become Motilal Nehru Marg and poor Sir Arthur, the Duke of Connaught, after whom Delhi’s centerpiece — the upmarket circular shopping mall — was named, was officially knocked out in the 1990s. Now Connaught Circus and Connaught Place stand renamed as Indira Chowk and Rajiv Chowk. It is another matter that Delhiites have rejected the change. No commuter or autowallah ever refers to Connaught Circus as Indira Chowk.
Apart from Motilal Nehru, Indira Gandhi and Rajiv Gandhi, many more leaders of the Congress have dislodged icons of the British Empire on Delhi’s streets. For example, Queen Victoria Road became Rajendra Prasad Road and King Edward Road was renamed Maulana Azad Road; Curzon Road is now Kasturba Gandhi Marg; Hardinge Avenue is now Tilak Marg. Old Mill Road stands renamed as Rafi Marg, after Rafi Ahmed Kidwai; Hastings Road was renamed Krishna Menon Marg; Dupleix Road became K Kamraj Marg; Canning Road is now Shrimant Madhavrao Scindia Marg; Wellesley Road became Dr Zakir Hussain Marg and Willingdon Crescent, Mother Teresa Crescent.
The bleeding hearts for Aurangzeb had no tears to shed for the noble Duke of Connaught, when he was given the short shrift two decades ago. After all, it was the Duke of Connaught who inaugurated the Central legislative Assembly, the precursor to today’s lok Sabha in 1921.
The Assembly, which was the lower House in the bicameral Parliament, was constituted following the Government of India Act, 1919. Is it fair to obliterate the name of the man who inaugurated the apex legislative body in IndiaIJ What sin had he committed to warrant such ill-treatmentIJ And what about Cornwallis, Dupleix or CanningIJ What crimes did they commitIJ
Another argument that is repeated ad nauseam is that this is an attempt to obliterate history. Nothing can be farther from the truth. How can one wipe out the cruelty and violence unleashed by Aurangzeb on his Hindu subjects merely by removing his name from an arterial road in DelhiIJ
For example, who will forget that Aurangzeb issued an order to his Governors on April 9, 1669, to demolish the schools and temples of the Hindus leading to the destruction of hundreds of temples including the Kashi Vishwanath temple at Benaras, the Krishna temple at Mathura and the Somnath temple. Following the destruction of the temple at Mathura, he built a lofty mosque at that site. The idols were brought to Agra and buried under the steps of the mosque of Begum Sahib “in order to be continually trodden upon”.
Ten years later, on April 2, 1679, he imposed jizya — a tax that the Hindus had to pay in order to continue to practice their faith. The list is endless, but here are a few more nuggets from the life of this man who is a darling of Marxist historians: He offered Government jobs and commutation of prison terms for those who converted to Islam; in April, 1665, he fixed different rates of customs duty for imported goods for Muslim (2.5 per cent) and Hindu merchants (five per cent); in 1668, he prohibited all Hindu fairs; in 1671, he dismissed all Hindu head-clerks and accountants and hired Muslims in their place.
Aurangzeb was most vengeful when he dealt with the Sikhs. He ordered the destruction of Sikh places of worship, imprisoned Guru Tegh Bahadur and beheaded him after torturing him for many days because he refused to convert to Islam. He continued the assault on Sikhism during the tenure of Guru Gobind Singh and killed four of his sons.
This is just a glimpse of the life and crimes of Aurangzeb culled out from the monumental work of some of India’s greatest historians like Jadunath Sarkar and RC Majumdar, who had an unblinkered approach to history.
Will this history of the abominable Aurangzeb be expunged by altering the name of a road in New DelhiIJ Far from destroying history, this will serve a very noble cause. The names of British monarchs and viceroys were removed from our roads to wipe out obvious daily reminders of our colonial past and to reinforce the idea of independence. Similarly, now, roads bearing the names of persons like Aurangzeb must be renamed to reinforce the ideas of secularism and democracy.
The question, therefore, is not why Aurangzeb Road is now named after Kalam. We must ask: Why the Indian state glorify Aurangzeb all these yearsIJ Who was behind this horrendous idea and why was this atrocity, committed on the nation’s secular, democratic fabric, allowed to continue for six decades after the adoption of a Constitution with the most cherished secular and democratic valuesIJ
Actually, the name change represents the advance of a nation from the vestiges of medieval barbarism to the most secular, democratic and modern ideas that someone like Kalam stood for. But, those who steered the Indian state all these years and permitted the glorification of one of the most dreadful characters in India’s history, seem to be still voting for Aurangzeb!
They have a lot of answering to do!