Advertisement

Interpreting World History Lec 05 -- 25 January 2019

Interpreting World History Lec 05 -- 25 January 2019 India is a case study of colonialism, and I start today's lecture by looking at India from the period of 1757-1858. I consider what were the pillars of British rule: that is, how did the British rule, how did they persuade Indians about the legitimacy of their rule, what were the rhetorical and argumentative strategies they deployed, and so on. They claimed that they offered India the 'rule of law', and that the Indians could expect them to adhere to the idea of 'fair play'; they also did not interfere, at least until the early 19th century, in the religious affairs of the Indian. The argument about 'divide and rule' also holds to a certain degree; they forged alliances with some native rulers and set them against other native rulers. The British were also engaged in the conquest of knowledge; then in 1835 the decision was taken that state funds on education would henceforth be spent on education in English. Macaulay's Minute on Education of 2 February 1835 emerges as a key text. It is in this context that the Anglicist-Orientalist controversy emerges. However, the conventional terms in which colonialism is viewed -- military expansion, economic colonization, racism, and so on -- are not unimportant. India was the world's largest exporter of textiles before the conquest; it becomes a big importer some decades after British rule commences. In 1857-58, much of north India erupted in rebellion, formerly known as the Sepoy Rebellion; the British put it down after some closely fought battles. I consider briefly the causes of the rebellion, including resentment agains white racism. The implications of the rebellion are then discussed briefly -- the East India Company becomes a relic of history, India becomes a Crown Colony, and there are administrative changes. The British proclaimed their recapturing of Delhi by eating pork and drinking wine at the Red Fort, the seat of the Mughal Empire. They fundamentally transformed Lucknow. We also look at two articles by Marx on what the British were doing in India: one form of barbarism heaped on another form of barbarism. Marx argued that the British were actuated by vile interests, but the British were unwittingly the great agent of social change and political reform in what was fundamentally an unchanging and stagnant society. The British had woken up India from a coma.

India 1757-1858,idea of fair play,conquest of knowledge,Anglicist-Orientalist controvery,divide and rule,indirect rule,Minute on Indian Education,Cotton and colonization,Sepoy Mutiny,Doctrine of Lapse,Annexation of Awadh,Red Fort,making of colonial Lucknow,Marx on India,unchanging India,stagnant India,Oriental Despotism,Marx's theory of history,historical materialism,

Post a Comment

0 Comments