Burma: Census of India 1901 Vol. I - Khamkoo
Burma: Census of India 1901 Vol. I - Khamkoo
Burma: Census of India 1901 Vol. I - Khamkoo
Create successful ePaper yourself
Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.
— —<br />
02 REPORT ON THE CENSUS OF BURMA.<br />
Table No. VIII. In 1891 the periods selected for exhibition in the education<br />
table for that <strong>Census</strong> (Imperial Table No. IX) were three in number, namely, 0—15,<br />
15— 25, and 25 and over. The age periods now adopted are four, so selected as<br />
to divide the younger members <strong>of</strong> the literate population up into groups corresponding<br />
approximately to primary, secondary and higher education. They are<br />
o— 10, 10—15, 1<br />
5— 2° and 2 ° and over -<br />
The two first oi the I9° X age P enods<br />
combined cover the same ground as the first <strong>of</strong> the 1891 age periods, but after<br />
the age <strong>of</strong> fifteen has been passed a contrast by age periods <strong>of</strong> the figures for<br />
the recent and for the previous <strong>Census</strong> is impracticable.<br />
87. There is one more point <strong>of</strong> special importance in connection with the definition<br />
<strong>of</strong> literacy, which should be kept in view when<br />
Treatment <strong>of</strong> those only able to<br />
a comTast <strong>of</strong> the returns <strong>of</strong> the last census with those<br />
sign then- names.<br />
oi previous enumerations is undertaken. In 1891 the<br />
instructions for filling up column 12 <strong>of</strong> the Schedule for the enumeration <strong>of</strong> that<br />
year concluded with the following passage :<br />
"Enter as Illiterate those who are not under instruction and who do not know how<br />
to both read and write, or who can read but not write, or can sign their name<br />
but not read."<br />
The last eight words are those to which I would draw special attention. They<br />
exclude from the rank <strong>of</strong> literates all persons whose accomplishments with the pen<br />
and pencil extend no further than to the scrawling <strong>of</strong> their name at the foot <strong>of</strong> a<br />
petition or a receipt. This class was similarly denied admission into the literate<br />
category in 1881. The principle underlying this distinction is indicated in one <strong>of</strong><br />
the earlier paragraphs <strong>of</strong> Chapter VI <strong>of</strong> the <strong>Census</strong> Commissioner's General<br />
Report for <strong>India</strong> 1891 in the following words :<br />
"Then, again, in the present day so many messengers, porters and other menials<br />
find it to their advantage to be able to sign their names that they acquire<br />
this amount <strong>of</strong> literature without ever advancing beyond it ; and it was held<br />
advisable to specially exclude this class from the category <strong>of</strong> literate."<br />
In the 1 90 1 instructions for filling up column 14 <strong>of</strong> the Schedule (" Literate or<br />
Illiterate") no reference was made to the treatment <strong>of</strong> these illiterate signers and<br />
the questions therefore arise ;<br />
were they as a rule included among the literates at<br />
to have affected the<br />
the recent enumeration and, if they were, are their totals likely<br />
aggregate <strong>of</strong> literacy to an appreciable extent ? I should on the whole be disposed<br />
to answer both questions in the affirmative. If it were a question <strong>of</strong> omitting or<br />
not omitting from the roll <strong>of</strong> literates a handful <strong>of</strong> bill collectors in the few mercantile<br />
centres <strong>of</strong> the country, it would matter but little whether persons who could sign<br />
their names and nothing more were treated as literate or not. In <strong>Burma</strong>, however,<br />
it is more than a question <strong>of</strong> a few commercial menials, for a very substantial section<br />
<strong>of</strong> the male indigenous community hovers on the border line between literacy<br />
and illiteracy and it needs <strong>of</strong>ten but a trifle to turn the scale one way or the other.<br />
High as is the proportion <strong>of</strong> the educated to the total population <strong>of</strong> the province,<br />
it would be vain to suppose that the lettered <strong>Burma</strong>n was removed by many degrees<br />
from his unlettered countryman. The monastic curriculum is not severe and at best<br />
the literacy <strong>of</strong> the bulk <strong>of</strong> the folk is a plant <strong>of</strong> shallow growth. A few years neglect<br />
will <strong>of</strong>ten suffice to wither it, and it not infrequently happens that the only<br />
remnant <strong>of</strong> his early teaching left to a man who would resent <strong>of</strong>f-hand the imputation<br />
<strong>of</strong> illiteracy, is found, when the matter is looked into, to be his power <strong>of</strong> appending<br />
his own signature to a document. With a keen and conscientious enumerator<br />
such an one would have been treated as an illiterate at the 1881 and 1891 <strong>Census</strong>es,<br />
while there is nothing to show that, provided he could laboriously inscribe the<br />
letters <strong>of</strong> his name, he would not at the recent enumeration have been assumed to<br />
be capable <strong>of</strong> spelling the result and, on the strength <strong>of</strong> this performance, have<br />
been assigned a place in the dignified ranks <strong>of</strong> the literate. It is far from likely<br />
that the number added to the literate population <strong>of</strong> the province by the omission<br />
from the instructions <strong>of</strong> the eight words aforesaid is anything very great, but the<br />
facts that that omission existed and that it probably had an influence <strong>of</strong> its own<br />
upon the figures cannot reasonably be ignored.