Colonialism in the subcontinent thread

VidaRed said:
Indus valley and vedic empire are two different things. Im more inclined towards the migration theory than the invasion theory. Who according to you arrived first in the subcontinent after migrating out of africa ? I think i read somewhere that australian aboriginals and adivasis share genetic markers which would somewhat prove that adivasis infact were the first few to settle in the subcontinent and thus should be referred to as natives.
Click to expand...

Yup, they are different but parts of it, culturally at least, overlap from what I know. For details, it will require a deep study and I want to study it in detail sometime.
The Australian aboriginals bit is way way too far before, right? Something like 10's of 1000s of years ago. There aren't any records of any significant civilization of that time.
Let's assume that adivasis came first, but they weren't killed, or made to run away to setup any civilization or rule and this is key. Nor did adivasis occupy length and breadth of subcontinent and had a significant civilization of their own. That way, even adivasis were part of that culture when civilization developed through time. Valmiki, who is said to have written Ramayana as per mythical stories, was an adivasi kind. So the overall original culture which later on developed into Hindu religion was combination of everything and came into prominence when civilization advanced. Hindu religion has no creator like other religions, but it is basically this development which I have mentioned in last 3-4 posts and which happened over centuries around 3000 years ago.(might be more dated, I don't think anyone definitely knows when). As such, that becomes the original culture of this subcontinent. I have no idea how you can seriously compare it to Mughal invasion or British empire much later which is very recent history of just 500-600 years, a period when civilization throughout the world had moved forward. It is not as if Aryans came one fine day, declared they were Hindus and wanted to occupy this region. That culture developed over centuries. Even hindu name was given quite later if I am not wrong.
 
Slight sidetrack but what is an excellent book that details colonial rule in India. Any suggestions?
 
ArmchairCritic said:
Slight sidetrack but what is an excellent book that details colonial rule in India. Any suggestions?
Click to expand...

Apart from the Metcalfs' Concise History which I mentioned above, these two cover a lot:

Bernard Cohn's Colonialism and its Forms of Knowledge is a classic, very theoretical work that argues that the British obsession with classifying and codifying the various ethnic groups, castes, languages, etc. they came across in India played a major role in solidifying and politicizing caste and religious identity once these were made defining criteria in the 'democratic' process, something that Tharoor hints at in that speech above. Cohn has a load of other publications on colonial India.

Christopher Bayly, who died recently, wrote a lot of stuff on British rule in India, I'd recommend Empire and Information which details how the British worked with native informants in order to rule the empire.

I can recommend a few more on more specific colonial era episodes such as the 1857 uprisings or the Khilafat Movement if you're interested.
 
2cents said:
Apart from the Metcalfs' Concise History which I mentioned above, these two cover a lot:

Bernard Cohn's Colonialism and its Forms of Knowledge is a classic, very theoretical work that argues that the British obsession with classifying and codifying the various ethnic groups, castes, languages, etc. they came across in India played a major role in solidifying and politicizing caste and religious identity once these were made defining criteria in the 'democratic' process, something that Tharoor hints at in that speech above. Cohn has a load of other publications on colonial India.

Christopher Bayly, who died recently, wrote a lot of stuff on British rule in India, I'd recommend Empire and Information which details how the British worked with native informants in order to rule the empire.

I can recommend a few more on more specific colonial era episodes such as the 1857 uprisings or the Khilafat Movement if you're interested.
Click to expand...

Ta, I'll try and get an overview first and then flesh it out with more specific episode as I go along I suppose, much appreciated.
 
The Man Himself said:
My basic knowledge of different eras is more based on what was taught during school and some occasional reading later. Discovery of India by Nehru should cover the important eras of earlier periods and give basic idea. If you are looking to go in detail, if someone from India here has major in history or has read about it in detail otherwise, should be more aware of recommended books. I also think that given the history is so vast and with so many different rulers, one would probably have to read different books on each era. For basic though, Nehru's should be OK.
My favourite modern era is Maratha empire and specifically Shivaji's era, and B.M. Purandare's book on him was something I read over & over again as kid.
Click to expand...



Its a whole series.
 
Ahh It's Bharat ek Khoj. @VidaRed , ya saw this on DD during childhood. Not all but some, was v.v. young. Don't remember episodes wise now but remember the starting/title music and song. It was very famous then.
 
berbatrick said:
:lol:
That's all I'll say.
Click to expand...

While TMH is obviously coming from a right wing Hindu place on this, there is something to be said about the dominance of a certain agenda when it comes to Indian history. Even historians like Guha have come out and said in recent years that scholars associated with a certain school of thought have been able to quell any challenge to their version of history by partisanship and nepotism.

RSS and the saffron brigade obviously want to color the Indian history for its own agenda. But several other international historians have over the years commented on the Mughal invasion of India and the rule of Mughal emperors. Stuff that historians like Thapar have either intentionally or ignorantly left out. Let's just say that whatever is taught as part of our curriculum or is part of popular discourse is extremely tame compared to the real version. Even if it may be politically correct and desirable to not dwell to much into that part of history, does not mean the prevailing narrative should not be critiqued.
 
crappycraperson said:
While TMH is obviously coming from a right wing Hindu place on this, there is something to be said about the dominance of a certain agenda when it comes to Indian history. Even historians like Guha have come out and said in recent years that scholars associated with a certain school of thought have been able to quell any challenge to their version of history by partisanship and nepotism.

RSS and the saffron brigade obviously want to color the Indian history for its own agenda. But several other international historians have over the years commented on the Mughal invasion of India and the rule of Mughal emperors. Stuff that historians like Thapar have either intentionally or ignorantly left out. Let's just say that whatever is taught as part of our curriculum or is part of popular discourse is extremely tame compared to the real version. Even if it may be politically correct and desirable to not dwell to much into that part of history, does not mean the prevailing narrative should not be critiqued.
Click to expand...

That's all fair enough but Romila Thapar also the leading historian of ancient India and some of the ridiculous charges against her from the right (Tavleen Singh and Swapan Dasgupta) are so wrong...you literally have to read the first page of her book on Somnath to know she never denies Ghazni raided Somnath.

About the Marxist thing in particular, I'm reading a book by her, on the 8th page she's just said that Marx's view on Indian history "has no evidence to support it."
 
crappycraperson said:
While TMH is obviously coming from a right wing Hindu place on this, there is something to be said about the dominance of a certain agenda when it comes to Indian history. Even historians like Guha have come out and said in recent years that scholars associated with a certain school of thought have been able to quell any challenge to their version of history by partisanship and nepotism.

RSS and the saffron brigade obviously want to color the Indian history for its own agenda. But several other international historians have over the years commented on the Mughal invasion of India and the rule of Mughal emperors. Stuff that historians like Thapar have either intentionally or ignorantly left out. Let's just say that whatever is taught as part of our curriculum or is part of popular discourse is extremely tame compared to the real version. Even if it may be politically correct and desirable to not dwell to much into that part of history, does not mean the prevailing narrative should not be critiqued.
Click to expand...

I am not coming from anywhere with any agenda. Thapar has an acclaimed position as historian but it is also true that her views on history are painted with her ideology. When this happens, the person can't be relied on as a historian fully. A historian needs to present facts as they are first and foremost. Thapar has switched her stand on Aryan theory when first claiming it as invasion and then conveniently calling it as migration. This is just one example.
Does that mean I am refuting each word she has written? No. I won't mind reading her books, but as I said, I will be careful. I will be similarly careful if Ashok Singhal writes a book tomorrow on some part of history!!

I am always pointing out the double standards which are taken up in our country. No one can deny that most of the intelligentsia and academy positions over the years have been filled with Congress and leftist people. Anyone even remotely related with RSS or BJP was kept out. Do they now want people to believe that what they put in books in these 60 years should be treated as sacred and true? When old historical books and archeological facts and proofs tell otherwise?

Fwiw, if tomorrow someone from right side, like Batra tells that Sex education should be kept out of books because it is against Hindu religion or something, I will oppose that. If one has to be liberal, be actually liberal, not hypocrite, pointing out wrongs with one religion but keeping quiet on others. Then again, this is the country where media refers to Nawaz Sharif as 'Sharif saab' but will call Atal Bihari Vajpayee as merely 'Atal.' Sure, give respect to others too, but respect our prime minister too when addressing him :) Otherwise you just hopelessly display double standards and hints of agenda.
 
The Man Himself said:
Lots of nonsense here, TH. Yes there are problems with how women are treated and there is a need of change in mindset and yes western world is more advanced and liberal in their thinking in general when it comes to gender equality but it is absolute bullshit to put it the way you have done, generalizing as if those things happen with women every now and then. Just look up the rape data globally and see which countries have highest % of rapes. Even if we say that many cases in India might not get reported, similar can be case in other countries and even without that the gap is huge.

@My Indian friends here, this is what I was pointing out about the BBC documentary, its actual effects and how it is not actually off topic now. This is what it does to mindset of people in other countries and their outlook towards India. Do we have problem, yes,a serious one. Is western world a place where rapes don't happen? No. If I look at the data on rape, do western countries create so many documentaries on it and telecast worldwide? Do they break rules and bribe the rapist to give interview like they did here?

There are still people in Western world who think we ride elephants daily and snake charmers can be found anywhere, even in big cities, never mind it has been banned for some time now.

About the foreign aid, it will hardly matter to India if UK stops it.
Click to expand...

:lol: In fairness, I don't think everyone in India is an elephant riding snake charmer. Though I would be incredibly jealous if elephants were the main mode of transport, as they are my favourite animal.

@redindian1987 Of course spending on a space programme matters. From an outsider perspective it's seen as a frivolous expenditure when hundreds of millions of people are in poverty, it's money that could be spent on getting families and children out of slums and sweat shops and into education. Education is the root of all these anti-social behaviours, if people are taught from a young age that everyone is equal then the culture of society will change over generations.

@amolbhatia50k I can appreciate you are proud of India's achievements and I fully understand that, and perhaps what I said was a bit crass. I also applaud the ambition of being a nation which furthers scientific endeavour, however when people are starving in the streets and forced to beg for money, I don't think a space programme is particularly appropriate. I would be extremely angry if the UK government decided to take up such a policy, while millions of people live below the poverty line.

In all I think the idea of requesting the UK pay reparations is political manoeuvring. They are requesting that a country which is currently imposing strict austerity measures, where public services are facing a 1% pay rise freeze and cuts to other public services, pays reparations to a former colony. While the moral reasons are fully justified, it will get you nowhere and just aggravate people. I personally have mixed feelings of this, I appreciate the history and heritage my country has but also deplore it; the British Empire, in my opinion, has caused more harm than good in the majority of places it has touched. The troubles in Africa and the Middle East are great examples of this. What is realistic is an apology, which in all likelihood, with enough pressure you are likely to get. Being paid millions for the damages done? Highly unlikely, which is why I referenced the closing statements of Tharoor's speech.
 
That'sHernandez said:
when people are starving in the streets and forced to beg for money, I don't think a space programme is particularly appropriate. I would be extremely angry if the UK government decided to take up such a policy, while millions of people live below the poverty line.
Click to expand...

Same thing is often said with regards to India's nuclear program. Thing is though, India lives in a very different neighbourhood to the UK - it's competing with Pakistan (four wars since 1947 and a host of other issues) and more importantly China (one war, various territorial disputes, etc.). India just cannot afford to be left behind in any criteria.
 
Quick question, is it only Western nations who are to be expected to apologise for their imperial past? Or can affected countries demand reparations and apologies from, for example, Mongolia?
 
Our space program is actually excellent for our economy, given that it's almost (?) entirely indigenous. It generates jobs, brings in forex, satellites help the communication, agriculture and other industries.

Our defense spending (incredible amount of money spent on defense imports) would actually be a better point to argue with, rather than the space tech program.

SteveJ said:
'Right of conquest'. Translation: theft.
Click to expand...
You set the scousers on us? You truly have to pay for this...
 
That'sHernandez said:
:lol: In fairness, I don't think everyone in India is an elephant riding snake charmer. Though I would be incredibly jealous if elephants were the main mode of transport, as they are my favourite animal.
Click to expand...

Well, elephants are nice normally. The size does scare though still :D Just had an elephant ride few months back after long long time and it was fun.
 
2cents said:
Quick question, is it only Western nations who are to be expected to apologise for their imperial past? Or can affected countries demand reparations and apologies from, for example, Mongolia?
Click to expand...
In the case of the central Asian invaders, they either looted and fecked off, or they stayed and settled. There was no colonization for centuries, purely and entirely for the benefit of the 'mother' countries in their case. They were also personal entities and weren't exactly carrying a 'national flag' so to speak.
 
MDFC Manager said:
In the case of the central Asian invaders, they either looted and fecked off, or they stayed and settled. There was no colonization for centuries, purely and entirely for the benefit of the 'mother' countries in their case. They were also personal entities and weren't exactly carrying a 'national flag' so to speak.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure why your first point matters. The second point I get, though it still doesn't seem to be applied consistently, e.g. many believe the modern state of Turkey owes an apology/reparations to the Armenians for what happened under the Ottoman Empire, a pre-nation state entity. In any case I'm still not 100% convinced - none of the people responsible for what happened are around today, that strikes me as more important than the fact that they live under the same flag.

Note I'm not suggesting that the British don't owe these things to India (as an Irishman I'd be naturally intrigued if it happened), I'm just trying to anticipate a potential can of worms it might open.
 
The point about the space program is absolute bollocks because it provides employment, helps us avoid natural calamities..remember the odisa cyclone last year ? it used to cause thousands of deaths every year but last year the deaths were in single digits, insures national security, allows scientific knowledge to increase and actually makes a profit. Money from welfare schemes isnt being diverted to it and money set aside for such welfare is much more than isro gets.

http://www.thehindu.com/sci-tech/sc...hing-45-foreign-satellites/article7452376.ece
 
2cents said:
I'm not sure why your first point matters. The second point I get, though it still doesn't seem to be applied consistently, e.g. many believe the modern state of Turkey owes an apology/reparations to the Armenians for what happened under the Ottoman Empire, a pre-nation state entity. In any case I'm still not 100% convinced - none of the people responsible for what happened are around today, that strikes me as more important than the fact that they live under the same flag.

Note I'm not suggesting that the British don't owe these things to India (as an Irishman I'd be naturally intrigued if it happened), I'm just trying to anticipate a potential can of worms it might open.
Click to expand...
I think the first point matters because the entity that colonized the Indian subcontinent, still exists (may not be the in the same exact form), and directly and substantially benefited from said colonization. This isn't the case with the central Asian invaders, though.
I'm not even saying it's just the western imperialists that have to reparate. Japan has recent history of being imperialistic too, doesn't it? They'd fit a lot better than the central Asian raiders.

Anyways, my personal opinion is that financial reparations are just worthy of debates. I wouldn't actually go about demanding it.
 
MDFC Manager said:
Anyways, my personal opinion is that financial reparations are just worthy of debates. I wouldn't actually go about demanding it.
Click to expand...

Ya I took that speech by Tharoor more as a debate where he explaining his stance quite well. It becomes more important if others in that debate argued that more good came out of colonization. Actual financial reparations aren't possibly going to happen in reality.
 
The Man Himself said:
Ya I took that speech by Tharoor more as a debate where he explaining his stance quite well. It becomes more important if others in that debate argued that more good came out of colonization. Actual financial reparations aren't possibly going to happen in reality.
Click to expand...

In the debate itself he expressly said he's not asking for reparations but an acceptance that nothing positive was achieved for the colonized, basically he saying accept it was wrong and we can move on whilst the other side was claiming that colonialism was beneficial for the colonies.
 
VidaRed said:
In the debate itself he expressly said he's not asking for reparations but an acceptance that nothing positive was achieved for the colonized, basically he saying accept it was wrong and we can move on whilst the other side was claiming that colonialism was beneficial for the colonies.
Click to expand...

Yup. He did mention it.
 
berbatrick said:
That's all fair enough but Romila Thapar also the leading historian of ancient India and some of the ridiculous charges against her from the right (Tavleen Singh and Swapan Dasgupta) are so wrong...you literally have to read the first page of her book on Somnath to know she never denies Ghazni raided Somnath.

About the Marxist thing in particular, I'm reading a book by her, on the 8th page she's just said that Marx's view on Indian history "has no evidence to support it."
Click to expand...
As I said those on the right wing have their own agenda to cater to, they will always shout down those opposed to it. Romila Thapar is definitely a renown historian of acient India, that is why any selection omission/distortion by her with respect to any era or event should be questioned even more vociferously. I consider myself part a liberal but I find many on Indian left to be as intellectually dishonest as those on the right.
 
2cents said:
Same thing is often said with regards to India's nuclear program. Thing is though, India lives in a very different neighbourhood to the UK - it's competing with Pakistan (four wars since 1947 and a host of other issues) and more importantly China (one war, various territorial disputes, etc.). India just cannot afford to be left behind in any criteria.
Click to expand...
Yup, very true. India's nuclear program is as necessary as solving poverty and other issues. Illiteracy-poverty are equally big issues but are taken care of separately.
 
MDFC Manager said:
I think the first point matters because the entity that colonized the Indian subcontinent, still exists (may not be the in the same exact form), and directly and substantially benefited from said colonization.
Click to expand...

Just to play devil's advocate (as I think we're on the same page), it could be argued that the 'entities' which suffered under the British no longer exist. Instead we have the post-colonial states of South Asia. Are the modern day areas which once constituted the Princely States really due as much as, say, what was Bengal?
 
2cents said:
Just to play devil's advocate (as I think we're on the same page), it could be argued that the 'entities' which suffered under the British no longer exist. Instead we have the post-colonial states of South Asia. Are the modern day areas which once constituted the Princely States really due as much as, say, what was Bengal?
Click to expand...

This is getting a bit abstract but the peoples of these states chose (barring that 1 huge exception that we shall not discuss) to unite with the India that had been British India. Plus those princes very clearly existed due to and cooperated extensively with the Raj, and though there was some interesting analysis about those areas being economically stronger than British India today, I've not read about substantial differences in conditions.

Anyway, abstract debate.
 
That'sHernandez said:
In all I think the idea of requesting the UK pay reparations is political manoeuvring. They are requesting that a country which is currently imposing strict austerity measures, where public services are facing a 1% pay rise freeze and cuts to other public services, pays reparations to a former colony. While the moral reasons are fully justified, it will get you nowhere and just aggravate people. I personally have mixed feelings of this, I appreciate the history and heritage my country has but also deplore it; the British Empire, in my opinion, has caused more harm than good in the majority of places it has touched. The troubles in Africa and the Middle East are great examples of this. What is realistic is an apology, which in all likelihood, with enough pressure you are likely to get. Being paid millions for the damages done? Highly unlikely, which is why I referenced the closing statements of Tharoor's speech.
Click to expand...

To be honest that guy with the speech was asking more for an "admission of guilt" rather than actual money. If you listen to it till the end, he suggests £1 for the next 200 years. Do you really think Britain cant cope with paying £1 each year as an admission of the fact that we mugged them off.
 
That'sHernandez said:
@redindian1987 Of course spending on a space programme matters. From an outsider perspective it's seen as a frivolous expenditure when hundreds of millions of people are in poverty, it's money that could be spent on getting families and children out of slums and sweat shops and into education. Education is the root of all these anti-social behaviours, if people are taught from a young age that everyone is equal then the culture of society will change over generations.
Click to expand...

But it isn't, an outsider having a wrong view of something doesn't mean we should go around making decisions based on that wrong view. It is a simplistic argument which isn't based on facts.

India has achieved universal primary education. The problem isn't getting people into school, the problem isn't even keeping them in school, the problem is getting them a quality education. We don't have proper teachers; children aren't getting an education when they can't do simple arithmetic. You won't see anybody disputing any of that. Now, if your argument is that we aren't spending enough on health and education, I would wholeheartedly agree. I have many problems with how the present government is cutting welfare expenditure,with the entire trickle down logic. But the space programme has nothing to do with it.

I'm not convinced education alone will not suffice when most children see sexism all around them. As long as domestic violence exists, as long as the may little things (which show the hypocrisy of this "Indian culture is the greatest) exist, it will go on. However, I'm hopeful. Britain or the rest of the west didn't suddenly wake up with an enlightened view on these things, it took time like it will take time with India.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.