Book review: Saurav Kumar Rai,Ayurveda,Nation and Society: United Provinces,c. 1890–1950

Spread across six chapters, this book delineates the long history of ‘medical nationalism’, which emerged in India in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. Focused on nationalisation or Indianisation of India’s medical profession and healing system, this theme is studied by Rai through the Ayurveda revivalist movement in the United Provinces (UP). His research extends the scope of such studies by analysing the changes and continuities which became discernible in the attitudes towards ‘indigenous’ medicine in post-1947 India. Apart from interviews with practising Ayurvedic healers and shopkeepers, Rai uses diverse sources, including little-studied Ayurvedic pamphlets and journals as well as literary correspondences and interventions to build his arguments. Through a close study of these sources, the book sheds light on the increasing commercialisation of healing practices and health discourses in India. Besides medical nationalism, the book therefore also discusses at length the advertising of Ayurvedic drugs. Further, Rai argues that despite imbibing different aspects of Western medicine, the practitioners of Ayurveda failed to incorporate one of its key elements, the spirit of rigorous enquiry and experiment.

The short, crisply written introduction discusses the historiography of Ayurveda, highlighting important historical interventions. While deliberating upfront on the nomenclature of ‘indigenous’ and ‘foreign’, Rai urges readers and especially historians to exercise caution while using these terms as far as the study of medical history is concerned (pp. xxv–xxvi). He notes that many of the supposedly ingenious characteristics of Indian society and culture, including medicine ‘were actually bestowed by the people who were not the original inhabitants of India’ (p. xxv). A similar argument is made for ‘Western’ medicine, which like indigenous medicine is also not homogenous in terms of its origin and practice and ‘significantly changed in due course of history, exhibiting regional variations as well’ (p. xxv).

Rai also discusses some myths and realities on the origins of Ayurveda, including speculation about its divine origins. Such theories are a theme common to two ancient Ayurvedic texts, namely Charaka Samhita and Sushruta Samhita (pp. 7–8). Closely analysing these texts, Rai discusses the history of their authors, even bringing together some little-known facets of their backgrounds and interests. In the same section, Rai tackles questions regarding the relationship of Ayurveda with the Vedas (p. 10). He notes that rather than being influenced by any single school of thought, Ayurveda ‘is a system of healing carrying within its fold multiple influences’ (p. 14). Given that each of these multiple authorities has had a significant influence on the development of Ayurveda, Rai argues that it is often challenging to locate ‘the core of Ayurveda’ or its ‘origin point’ (p. 14). Rai then shows how, in order to counter the Western charge of ‘Ayurveda being nothing less than a quackery’ (p. 9), Ayurvedic practitioners went out of their way to redeem a scientific status for Ayurveda. For instance, its practitioners began to incorporate elements of Western medicine such as scientificity, professionalisation, institutionalisation and standardisation into Ayurveda practice (p. 9).

Chapter 1 (pp. 29–58) discusses the historical circumstances of the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries when the issue of ‘indigenous’ medicine gained prominence. The chapter explores the complex responses that the emergence of ‘indigenous’ medicine invoked (pp. 32–44). Pessimistic tendencies among the proponents of ‘indigenous’ medicine created rifts, not just between the Ayurvedic (vaids) and Unani doctors (hakims) but also within their own respective groups. Rai also highlights how Ayurveda was not merely another form of indigenous medicine but played an increasingly prominent role in the sociopolitical landscape. In the late colonial period, attempts to revive traditional medicine resulted in efforts to nationalise Ayurveda (p. 44). However, as Rai notes, this movement for revival was also far from homogenous and quite diverse in nature.

Chapter 2 examines the official response of the Indian National Congress (INC) to indigenous medicine. This chapter primarily focusses on the responses of three political figures, namely Mahatma Gandhi, Hakim Ajmal Khan and Govind Ballabh Pant. While Khan was an activist and a practitioner of indigenous medicine, Gandhi and Pant were important nationalist leaders. Since these individuals held tremendous influence at regional and national levels, they were in a position to shape public opinion regarding the use of indigenous medicines like Ayurveda. As Rai had noted earlier, the INC-led UP government that came to power in 1937 had implemented policies that ‘favoured the practitioners and pharmacies related to “indigenous” medicine over Western system of healing’ (p. 15). Many such policies now created challenges that caused further differences among the practitioners of indigenous medicines.

Chapters 3 and 4 provide a close scrutiny of Ayurvedic journals and tracts emanating from the UP as well as organisations established there during the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. This coverage offers important insights into the socio-historical circumstances that led to Ayurveda being co-opted into the discourse of the nationalist movement. An important part of this discussion deals with the twin issues of male chastity [brahmacharya] and the occupation of midwifery. Exploring these themes, Rai pays special attention to aspects of caste, gender, class and community as related to the health discourse of Ayurveda.

In Chapter 5, Rai explores the role of the market in shaping the Ayurvedic movement in the late colonial period, paying special attention to the drug and print market. Focusing on advertising of Ayurvedic drugs, Rai shows how ‘visual culture and print media were tapped by the Ayurvedic practitioners and pharmaceutical companies’ (pp. 16–17).

The concluding chapter maps Ayurveda on the sociopolitical canvas of India in the years immediately after independence. In this section, Rai explores the legislative decisions from the UP that promoted the use of indigenous medicine. He also discusses three important documents, the Report of the Health and Survey and Development Committee of 1946, the Report of the Committee on the Indigenous Systems of Medicine of 1948 and the Report and Recommendations of the United Provinces Ayurvedic and Unani Systems Reorganisation Committee of 1949.

Written in a lucid style, Rai’s book is an important academic intervention in the field of history of medicine. It provides a fresh perspective to study not just the history of medicine in India, but also critically re-examines concepts like ‘indigenous’ and ‘foreign’. At a time when the tinkering with historical and scientific facts for political gains is blatantly being carried forth, a well-researched book such as the present one helps in countering misinformation and provides a nuanced perspective. It is evidently an important read not only for students of history but also for those from other disciplines.