Ask a Teacher

Search



Although British showed much cruelty to Indians but then they abolished 'SATI'.Why?
Lord William Bentinck again played a part in abolishing ‘sati’.

A widow accompanying her husband’s corpse to the pyre, thus completing a life of uninterrupted conjugal devotion – this was what ‘sati’ meant to Indians. But to the British, it was an ‘illogical, heinous and barbarous act in the name of religion’. Although some reformers and thinkers like Dwarkanath Tagore and Raja Ram Mohan Roy opposed the practice, and contended that it had no place in the code of Manu (Manusmriti). Still, being foreigners and opposing a practice rooted deeply in the minds of millions of Indians was a very big risk.

The proposal of abolishing ‘sati’ was met with huge uproar and led to several debates. Finally, after a full debate in the Governor-General’s council, a regulation known as No. XVII, dated 4th December 1829, was enacted, “declaring the practice of ‘sati’ illegal and punishable by the criminal courts.”


comments powered by Disqus