In a recent statement on April 11, 2025, BJP MP Udayanraje Bhosale made a bold claim regarding the origins of women’s education in India. According to Bhosale, it was the Satara ruler Pratapsinh Bhosale who established the first school for women in the country, with Mahatma Phule following in his footsteps. The opposition Congress, however, swiftly criticized Bhosale’s assertion as a distortion of history. The discussion took place at Phule Wada on Mahatma Phule’s birth anniversary, where Bhosale, a descendant of Maratha empire founder Chhatrapati Shivaji Maharaj, emphasized the influence of both Pratapsinh Bhosale and Mahatma Phule on women’s education.
The Legacy of Satara Ruler Pratapsinh Bhosale and Mahatma Phule
According to BJP MP Udayanraje Bhosale, the roots of women’s education in India can be traced back to Satara ruler Pratapsinh Bhosale. He claimed that it was Pratapsinh Bhosale who established the first school for women within his palace in Satara. This pioneering initiative set the stage for the advancement of women’s education in the country. Bhosale went on to highlight the parallels between Pratapsinh Bhosale’s efforts and the subsequent work of social reformer Mahatma Phule.
Bhosale pointed out that Mahatma Phule, along with his wife Savitribai, are widely recognized as pioneers of women’s education in India. Mahatma Phule’s significant contribution to the cause of women’s education includes the founding of the country’s first school for girls in Pune in 1848. By acknowledging the historical significance of Pratapsinh Bhosale’s early efforts in promoting women’s education, Bhosale sought to underscore the interconnectedness of these influential figures in shaping educational reforms in India.
Opposition Response and Historical Perspective
While Udayanraje Bhosale’s remarks shed light on the lesser-known contributions of Satara ruler Pratapsinh Bhosale to women’s education, they were met with criticism from the opposition, particularly Maharashtra Congress president Harshvardhan Sapkal. Sapkal denounced Bhosale’s claims as a misrepresentation of history and emphasized the enduring legacy of Mahatma Phule and his wife Savitribai in championing women’s education in India.
The controversy surrounding Bhosale’s comments underscores the complex tapestry of historical narratives that shape our understanding of social reform movements and educational initiatives. By engaging in a dialogue about the intertwined legacies of figures like Pratapsinh Bhosale, Mahatma Phule, and Dr. Babasaheb Ambedkar, we gain a deeper appreciation for the multifaceted influences that have shaped the landscape of women’s education in India.
In conclusion, the discussion sparked by Udayanraje Bhosale’s assertions serves as a reminder of the ongoing importance of critically examining historical accounts and recognizing the diverse contributions of individuals to societal progress. As we reflect on the historical milestones of women’s education in India, we are reminded of the interconnectedness of past and present efforts to promote gender equality and educational access for all.
