Was Madhya Pradesh Designed to Dilute Muslim Concentration?

A Post-Partition Theory of State Formation in the Hindi Belt

India’s state formations have often been explained as products of linguistic reorganization (1956), administrative convenience, or colonial inheritance—but what if there was an unspoken demographic dimension shaping the boundaries of certain states?

Madhya Pradesh, the so-called *heart of India*, presents an interesting case: it was deliberately constructed to dilute the political and demographic influence of its historically significant Muslim populations, particularly in Bhopal, Malwa, and Nimar. If this theory holds for MP, could the same logic apply to the entire Hindi belt?

As a side note, this idea originally stemmed from a Brown Pundit commentator many moons ago, who suggested that Uttar Pradesh was structured to dilute Muslim concentrations around Delhi and Rohilkhand.

Reimagining Madhya Pradesh: A Natural and Historical Perspective

Madhya Pradesh is often treated as a monolithic entity, but **if we analyze its formation through geography, ethnolinguistics, and historical legacy rather than arbitrary borders, a more natural division emerges.** What would the true provinces of Madhya Pradesh look like if we mapped them according to rivers, plateaus, mountain ranges, and historical cultures?

#### **Total Population and Religious Demographics**
– **Total Population (2011 Census):** ~72.6 million
– **Religious Breakdown:**
– Hindus: **~90%**
– Muslims: **~7%**
– Jains, Sikhs, Christians, Others: **~3%**
– **Highest Muslim Concentrations:** *Bhopal, Indore (Malwa), and Nimar (Burhanpur, Khandwa).*

Among subdivisions, **Malwa Province (Indore, Ujjain) has the highest Muslim population** due to its history as a Mughal-Maratha administrative and trade hub.

—
### **The Curious Case of Madhya Pradesh: A Muslim Dilution Project?**

At the time of **Partition (1947),** some regions of present-day MP had significant Muslim populations, particularly:

– **Bhopal State** (*22% Muslim, ruled by a Muslim Nawab*)
– **Malwa Region** (*Indore, Ujjain, Ratlam—historically influenced by Muslim traders and administrators*)
– **Nimar Region** (*Burhanpur, Khandwa—Mughal trading hubs*)
– **Jabalpur & Gwalior** (*historically strong Muslim administrative and commercial influence*)

**However, instead of carving out a Muslim-influenced princely state (like Hyderabad), Bhopal was absorbed into an artificially large, Hindu-majority Madhya Pradesh.**

The new MP had:
– **No clear linguistic unity** (Bundelkhandi, Malwi, Nimadi, Bagheli, and Chhattisgarhi all subsumed under “Hindi”).
– **No cohesive geography** (combining plateaus, plains, forests, and river valleys).
– **No singular historical identity** (merging princely states, British provinces, and culturally distinct regions).

In effect, **Bhopal’s Muslim demographic and political influence was diluted across a massive Hindu-majority state, preventing it from becoming a Muslim-majority mini-state.** The same happened to **Muslim-heavy Malwa and Nimar, ensuring their votes would never tip the balance.**

—
### **The Hindi Belt’s Political Strategy: A Broader Pattern?**

If Madhya Pradesh was created partly to **dilute Muslim concentration,** could the same logic apply to the broader **Hindi belt**?

#### **1. Why Was the Hindi Belt Never Split Along Historical-Cultural Lines?**
– Unlike the **Dravidian South** (which was divided into Tamil Nadu, Karnataka, Andhra Pradesh, and Kerala for linguistic and cultural autonomy), the **Hindi Belt remained largely intact.**
– If states like **Awadh, Bhojpur, or Bundelkhand** had been carved out, **they could have empowered local Muslim populations**, particularly in **Lucknow, Allahabad, and Bihar**.
– Instead, **large states like UP and Bihar kept Muslim populations fragmented and politically weaker.**

#### **2. Why Were Certain States Not Created?**
– **Bundelkhand (Western MP & Southern UP)** could have been a separate state with a distinct identity, but **it would have been too small to neutralize Bhopal’s Muslim presence.**
– **Chhattisgarh was separated in 2000**, but only **after Partition fears had subsided**.
– **Bhojpuri-speaking Bihar was never split**, ensuring that Muslims in **Patna, Gaya, and Bhagalpur** remained a **minority within a larger, Hindu-dominated state.**

#### **3. Princely States with Muslim Rulers Were Merged into Larger Hindu States**
– **Bhopal was absorbed into MP.**
– **Rampur was absorbed into Uttar Pradesh.**
– **Hyderabad was broken into Maharashtra, Telangana, and Karnataka.**
– **Kashmir remains contested due to its Muslim-majority status.**

Each time a **Muslim-ruled region was integrated, it was done in a way that ensured Muslims became a smaller minority rather than a dominant regional force.**

—
### **What If MP Had Been Broken Up?**

If MP had been split along **historical, geographical, and cultural lines**, the resulting states could have looked like this:

If **Bhopal, Nimar, and Malwa had been separate states, they would have had a stronger Muslim political presence.** Instead, they were **merged into an overwhelmingly Hindu-majority MP, ensuring that Muslim political power was permanently diluted.**

—
### **The Broader Implication: The Hindi Belt Was Engineered for Hindu Political Hegemony**

– The **South was divided into small, linguistic states** (Tamil Nadu, Karnataka, etc.), allowing cultural autonomy.
– The **Hindi belt was consolidated into giant states (UP, Bihar, MP, Rajasthan) to ensure Hindu majorities.**
– **Muslim-majority pockets (Bhopal, Rampur, Hyderabad) were broken up or absorbed into larger Hindu states.**

This **ensured that no region outside Kashmir could be politically dominated by Muslims post-Partition**—creating the electoral and demographic reality we see today.

—
### **Final Thoughts: Madhya Pradesh as a Template for Hindi Belt Politics**

– If MP’s **size and structure helped dilute Bhopal and Malwa’s Muslim concentration,** it suggests a **broader pattern in the Hindi belt.**
– The **logic of absorption and dilution** can be seen in **UP, Bihar, Rajasthan, and even Hyderabad.**
– If India had followed a **purely historical or linguistic model**, the Hindi belt **would look very different today—and Muslim political power could have been much stronger.**

Would a different state structure have changed **India’s political and cultural trajectory?** Possibly. But what’s clear is that **MP’s formation was not just an accident—it was a political strategy that ensured permanent Hindu majorities in the heart of India.**