India Conquered

Title: India Conquered – Britain’s Raj and the Chaos of Empire

Author: Jon Wilson

Publisher: Simon & Schuster, 2016 (First)

ISBN: 9781471101250

Pages: 564

Now that there are numerous books on the British occupation of India that witnessed two centuries of colonial rule, any new author on the subject is burdened with having to provide a guarantee to the reader of providing at least one previously unknown fact or story in the book. On this aspect, this book is a treasure chest of new knowledge on the colonial rule. Most Indian books on the subject sing the eulogy of Jawaharlal Nehru and his Congress party in ‘snatching freedom away from the British’. They typically follow a political narrative of the era. Wilson follows a refreshingly novel approach – that of the economic and social analyses. Gandhi and Nehru appear in several pages, but not more than that, which is the most deserving representation that is warranted by circumstances. This book describes the economic factors that shaped politics and the feeling of insecurity which was firmly rooted in the minds of British administrators. Wilson argues that they had no further agenda than displaying British power and obtain submission of Indian people before the Empire’s might. The British also introduced constitutional reforms that changed the way Indians governed themselves. These were slow at first, initially coming at a time when the Catholics didn't even have the vote in Britain. This book presents a continuous story of how the British conquered India and how it was forced to forego the jewel in its crown, spanning four centuries. Jon Wilson is a professor of history at King's College, London having educated at Oxford and New York. He is an expert in Indian history and has authored another book on the subject.

The English East India Company was a merchant establishment who assisted the crown in establishing a lucrative colony in India. Most historians would stop at this description but this author informs us how it was much more than a mere trading company. From the start, the company was a political body with a single stock of money to hire ships, pay soldiers and build warehouses (called factories). It was empowered to sign its own treaties with local rulers. The crown gave it monopoly on trade with all parts of Asia not in the possession of a Christian prince. At least on this point, they were not much different from the Portuguese who came to India in search of ‘Christians and spices’. When it acted, it did so with the command of the English state. The company tried to squeeze themselves into the already crowded Indian trade, with a bid to claim tax-free status. This was resented by Mughal governors. The first attempts to challenge the Mughal state ended in catastrophic disasters in 1689 in Bombay and Bengal.

Aurangzeb’s death marked the beginning of the end of the Mughal dynasty. Wilson identifies the invasion of Nadir Shah that catalysed the downfall. Nadir Shah's symbolic sovereignty over Delhi lasted only 57 days in 1739, but its aftershocks transformed Indian politics. It massively shrank the sources of Mughal power, leading to lawlessness in the provinces. Mounted warriors ransacked the countryside seeking wealth. Plunder and not negotiation became the effective tool for creating centres of wealth. Credit networks temporally disappeared, making it harder to send money. Trade collapsed and it took public finances along with it. This turned out to be a most opportune moment for the East India Company. Victories against Arcot and Mysore in the peninsula and against Siraj ud-Daula at Plassey had transformed the British from armed merchants to tax collectors. This came about by a clever change in company policy. In return for lending soldiers and money to Indian rulers, the company was entrusted with land from which the money owed to them could be recovered from the taxes accruable. Nizam of Hyderabad had to cede 30,000 square miles of territory in Andhra which was later known as the Ceded Districts.

For better or for worse, the company introduced many novel reforms that disrupted the political fabric at first, but continue to remain with us to the present day. The practice of decision making in writing inaugurated an era of hefty paperwork, but it moved decision-making away from public view in contrast to the open display of authority under the Mughals. Another crucial factor enhanced the military potential of the company. Its victories in battle were not the results of technological or tactical superiority. They were simply better at raising enough money for the campaigns through deficit financing. The company's unrivalled ability to borrow cash from global money markets ensured a reliable source in times of dire need. This was augmented with revenue collection and part of bullion borrowed from London for trade with China, but used for military purposes. It also borrowed from Indian merchants and bankers at 5 to 7 per cent of interest. Compared to this, when the Marathas ran out of cash, their soldiers ravaged the countryside to extract payment from the villagers which caused much acrimony and resentment.

British conquest of India was confirmed with the defeat of the 1857 Mutiny. Wilson follows an attitude sympathetic to Indian interests. The most brutal massacres executed by both sides were at Kanpur where 200 white women and children were killed by the mutineers and many times that many Indians were killed by the British in retaliation. Wilson ameliorates the sepoys by claiming that the killing ‘probably took place because the sepoys had become increasingly frightened about being attacked themselves‘(p.243). Justifications of this kind are way off the top. Similarly, the last Mughal emperor’s picture also gets a sympathetic brush. Wilson claims that Bahadur Shah Zafar shaped the rebel government making sure sepoy leaders were not displaced by nobles, provided moral sanction for the new regime and then tried to use his authority to direct it away from excessive violence. This is in contrast to the image drawn by other historians. Just compare it to William Dalrymple's ‘The Last Mughal’ where instances when the sepoys were disrespectful even to the physical presence of the emperor are narrated. This book examines the finer nuances of the concept of ‘Rule of Law’ implemented by the British regime. The penal code’s priority was the smooth and safe functioning of the imperial administration. Punishment for crimes against individuals was only a sidekick. Ten sections of the code dealt with ‘offences against the state’ and nineteen covered actions ‘contemptuous of public servants’, while only three sections dealt with murder and four covered other forms of culpable homicide. The strange fact is that modern India still retains them.

Wilson rewrites the official narrative of Indian Independence struggle which is monopolized by the supposed larger-than-life antecedents of the Congress party. India's political movements were planted and nurtured by local industry leaders. Growth of the textile industry in Ahmedabad in the 1870s made a rich business class. The inferior political position of India's leaders hampered their trade. The profitability of business and prosperity of the country needed a new kind of political leadership able to put Indian interests first. Similarly, the freedom struggle is often portrayed as a 24x7 fight of Congress leaders against the ‘inhuman British polity’. This is also very far from the truth. The constitutional reforms of 1919 introduced a very limited form of self-rule, but it demoralized the imperial bureaucracy. The clash between British officers and Indian political leaders within and outside the local institutions caused the capacity of imperial administration to collapse in the early 1920s. In many towns, villages and districts, public offices flew Congress’ flag and ensured that government-funded schools taught anti-British curricula. Judiciary and higher education became almost fully Indianised.

The book can be condensed into a single paragraph given on p.481 which runs as follows. “Rather than a coherent political vision, British rule in India was based on a peculiar form of power. Fearful and prickly from the start, the British saw themselves as virtuous but embattled conquerors whose capacity to act was continually under attack. From the seventeenth to the twentieth centuries, they found it difficult to trust anyone outside the areas they controlled. Their response to challenge was to retreat or attack rather than to negotiate. The result was an anxious, paranoid regime. The British state was desperate to control the spaces where Europeans lived. Elsewhere it insisted on formal submission to the image of British authority. But it did not create alliances with its subjects, nor build institutions that secured good living standards. The British were concerned to maintain the fiction of absolute sovereignty rather than to exercise any real power”.

As earlier mentioned, the book describes many previously unheard of hard facts and provide an economic perspective to Indian history and freedom struggle. Though it examines the effect on Britain of ruling over India for two centuries and then suddenly letting it go in 1947, a similar survey of the effects of British rule on India is missing. This may probably be as a result of the author’s careful intention to be on the right side of Indian readers and appear to be politically correct to them. The book includes some lacklustre photographs which don't do much justice to the subject. What is astonishing is the huge size of the bibliography, much of which can be freely downloaded from archive.org for serious readers wanting to pursue a specific topic.

The book is highly recommended.

Rating: 5 Star

Asoka

Title: Asoka

Author: D R Bhandarkar

Publisher: LG Publishers, 2019 (First published 1925)

ISBN: 9789383723461

Pages: 366

Contemplating about a king who lived 2200 years ago, who renounced war as an instrument of state policy and turned to the material and spiritual welfare of his people, is a task more in the realm of  fairy tale than actual history. Remorseful at the violence and large scale loss of life in the conquest of Kalinga, Ashoka turned away from violence and got attracted to Dhamma, following in the footsteps of the great Buddha. Not content with his own change of mind – it cannot be called a conversion or change of faith, as religion as we know them today had still not come into existence – the king spread his message far and wide in his kingdom as well as neighbouring principalities. A series of fourteen rock edicts and seven pillar edicts have been discovered in the expanse of land between Peshawar and Bihar in the east-west direction and Himachal Pradesh and Karnataka in the north-south direction. The edicts of Ashoka are concerned with his Dhamma, and the means he adopted to disseminate it. It provides a glimpse into his personal life too. In a sense, these edicts may be thought of as Ashoka‘s tweets, had he lived in the modern world. Devadatta Ramakrishna Bhandarkar, who is the author of the book, was an archaeologist and epigraphist who worked with the Archaeological Survey of India. This book was first published in 1925 and is one of the pioneering works that guided the deciphering process of the Mauryan inscriptions.

Reconstruction of the life and times of Ashoka from the rock edicts is an intriguing tale in itself, which is told only fleetingly in the book. The edicts spoke of King Priyadarshi Devanampriya (the king who is good to look at and the beloved of the gods). The name Ashoka was adduced to this king after correlating references in Ceylonese chronicles. The author has done a commendable task in re-creating the bureaucratic and social structure of the Mauryan society with liberal inputs from Kautilya’s Arthashastra as props.

Through the edicts, Ashoka exhorted his people to keep Dhamma to reap the benefits in this world as well as the next. For him, Dhamma constitutes of goodness, freedom from depravity, mercy, liberality, truthfulness, purity and gentleness. His proclamations also specified the actions through which Dhamma can be translated to the physical world. It included non-slaughter of animate beings, non-injury to creatures, hearkening to parents, hearkening to elders, reverence to teachers, liberality, seemly behaviour to friends, acquaintances, relatives and towards Brahmana and Shramana ascetics and seemly behaviour to slaves and servants. Even though Ashoka leaned towards Buddhism, the reverence shown to Brahman ascetics is noteworthy. This runs counter to neo-Buddhist commentary emanating mainly from Dalit intellectuals. Ashoka didn't miss the wood for the trees. He rightly projected Dhamma as the core of all religious sects though individually they differ markedly by outward rituals. He was stern when situations so demanded. Schisms had started appearing in the body politic of the Buddhist Sangha at that time and Ashoka ordered strict punishment for mendicants, or commoners who encouraged schism in the religious order. Edicts at Sanchi and Bhabru contain these threats.

Enlightened indeed was Ashoka's rule after his conversion to Dhamma, but the ways in which he sought to control intimate aspects of the daily lives of his subjects smacks of authoritarianism of a serious kind. Prohibition of animal sacrifices is thought to be a way to control Vedic Hinduism. Vegetarianism and respect to elders were elevated from the level of ideals to mandatory duty. But, here we should also bear in mind the likelihood that the king's commands remained only on paper, I mean, in stone and people might have continued to live as they pleased. Ashoka respected and extended his liberality to Brahmanic sects also. Ban on sacrifices does not necessarily imply any antagonism to Brahminism as some of the Upanishads declared against such degenerate practices in no uncertain terms. Again, he did not ask the people to turn vegetarian overnight. Prevention of cruelty to animals included ban on killing of any living being that is neither eaten nor required for any decoration or medicinal purpose. It was definitely not that of the Jain variety. For animals which served as food, he forbade killing, castration or injury on certain auspicious days. Treatment arrangements for sick men and animals were instituted and watering sheds for animate beings were provided along roads.

Ashoka is credited with the use of stone for architectural purposes, replacing wood. Bhandarkar offers a calculated comparison of the Mauryan king to Constantine and Marcus Aurelius Antoninus, but ends up elevating his native ruler above others. Here he neglects to take into account one very important principle. Whatever judgement posterity reserved for Ashoka is on the basis of his claims and commands depicted on rocks and pillars. What we have is only a statement of policy rather than a record sheet of achievements compiled by impartial commentators. Keeping aside the hyperbole, the real level of actual accomplishments can only be surmised now. We also see the spirit of geographical integration in his edicts and inscriptions and the use of a common language, Pali, throughout the wide empire. This dialect spoken in Magadha was carried by the state to become the lingua franca of ancient India. On the negative side, the author asserts that progress of political science was suddenly arrested by the moral and spiritual nature of the royal edicts. Religion and philosophy began more and more to absorb the Hindu mind. It is no wonder then that hardly a quarter of a century after his demise, the Bactrian Greeks crossed the Hindu Kush to conquer a large part of India.

A noteworthy feature of Bhandarkar, though an eminent archaeologist, is that he does not provide allowance for considerable embellishments in royal promulgations. One edict states that 100,000 were killed in the Kalinga War, 150,000 taken as slaves and many times as many died in burning and sacking of the city. The author takes this at face value and suggests that this ‘indicate the horrors of a war even in that period when the weapons of destruction were not so diabolical and deadly as now’ (p.21). Again, the mention about the slaughter of hundreds of thousands of animals daily for the royal kitchen is sanctified with a baseless claim that the palace distributed meat to the people! The book includes the full text of the edicts in translated form along with detailed explanatory notes as appendix. The author is not so composed on the face of criticism by fellow scholars. He opposes most of them strongly with comments such as ‘no unbiased person can reasonably doubt’, ‘a conclusion which no sane person will admit’ and ‘more than we can understand’. He confuses the Assyrians with the mythical Asuras found in Sanskrit epics based only on the similarity in names.

The book is highly recommended.

Rating: 4 Star

Mappila Muslims

Title: Mappila Muslims – A Study on Society and Anti-colonial Struggles

Author: Hussain Randathani

Publisher: Other Books, 2007 (First)

ISBN: 9788190388788

Pages: 182

Muslims constitute a quarter of Kerala’s population which is very powerful in the north, in the region known as Malabar. They are called Mappilas there, which is a generic term for non-Hindus in Kerala, as seen in the central and southern parts where Christians are more numerous this appellation is applied to them. This book explores the formation of the Mappila society and its struggles against colonialism. This is part of the doctoral research of the author. Dr. Hussain Randathani is a historian and had taught in colleges in Kerala.

This book examines the origins of the Muslim society. Kerala had a long tradition of trade with Arabia from prehistoric times even before Islam originated there. Arabs acted as the conduit of Kerala’s spices to Europe and the Mediterranean world. They enjoyed a monopoly of the sea trade as local Hindus stayed away from the sea on religious grounds. Kerala’s kings always held them in good humour as the sole income of the state was custom duty on spices. Locals who were affiliated to the Arabs were naturally co-opted to Islam when their masters embraced the new faith in the seventh century. Muslim warriors helped the Zamorins of Calicut in his military expeditions against the neighbours.

The bulk of the people among the Mappila community are converted Hindus and the early kings are reported to have encouraged conversions. But Randathani mistakes the slave trade as voluntary change of faith as can be seen from Barbosa’s comment reproduced in the book. The European traveller states that “if the Hindu king finds any youths or young men, who are vagrant and no employ and have no close relations, he sells them as slaves to Muslims who are willing to pay three to five cruzados each”. Women were also traded (p.15). This was how the Zamorin ‘encouraged’ conversions! Communal riots were a common feature of Malabar prior to 1921 in which the Hindus were massacred or converted while Muslim deaths were mainly caused by the action of law enforcement agencies. These riots usually began as an outbreak against the British government, which would then be cleverly diverted against the Hindus. The author hails the forced religious conversions in these uprisings as ‘an appropriate means of dealing with people who were assisting the government forces to render them harmless”. During the 1831-51 outbreaks, the Muslim population shot up by a whopping 42.8% (p.17). The role of Sufis was an important factor in the spread of Islam in Malabar. They also contributed to local literature. Ballads on the life and miracles of Sufis were known as malas (necklaces), the oldest of them being Mohiuddin Mala of 1607.

The growth of Islam in Kerala is a testimonial to the tolerant spirit of its society. They were given every avenue to practice and propagate their faith. If the author is to be believed, local Hindu kings even encouraged people to convert to Islam. But what they gave in return is a point that must be discussed and debated in detail. There is a clear unbalance in the way scholars analyse both the communities in which a greater than deserved allowance is given to the easily provoked religious sentiments of the Muslim community. Mistaking the spirit of plurality as a sign of weakness or religious inferiority, a deeply fanatical and belligerent ethos was generated among the Mappilas. Theological variations inside Islam itself were brutally suppressed. Kondotti Valiya Tangal was a respected Islamic scholar who followed the Shia sect which was abhorrent to the Sunni majority among Mappilas. He and his disciples were brought to heel by social boycott and they submitted to the majority Sunnis in nineteenth century.

The central theme of Randathani’s work is the anti-colonial struggle of Kerala's Mappilas. This is nothing but a figment of imagination. Mappilas fought the Portuguese and the British with tooth and nail but not because they were imperialists. What the Mappilas had fought for was jihad - pure and simple - like what we saw on 9/11 and continues to see in Iraq and Syria now. The author himself admits that Mappila resistance against the British was a religious crusade led by religious leaders (p.89). The book tries to hoodwink readers into believing that Muslim violence was a response to agrarian oppression unleashed by Hindu landlords. This weak edifice falls to the ground in the light of figures provided by the author himself. Between 1842 and 1852, 232 suits were filed by Hindu landlords against Muslim tenants, of which 81 evictions were ordered. In the same period, 155 suits were filed by Muslim landlords against Muslim tenants, in which 43 evictions were decreed. Moreover, the rebel religious leaders were themselves very rich and big landlords. The author counters this paradox with an assertion that Hinduism made the persons suffer in silence while Islam recommended fight against the oppressor. Antagonism towards an oppressor was “naturally directed against his religion also” (p.91). That's why the rebels often attacked the temples of the landlords. Just witness the callousness with which a twenty-first century intellectual whitewashes jihad! A real merit of Randathani is that he concedes the fallacy of his arguments on some unguarded occasions. He admits that the reason behind the popular struggles of nineteenth century cannot be viewed as agrarian discontent alone (p.100). Real or perceived slights against religion or its leaders, forcible conversions, construction of mosques on Hindu property, re-conversions back to Hinduism were all causes for violence. Sayyid Fazl Tangal of Mambaram was a leader of jihadist propaganda. He was banished to Arabia in 1855, and Collector H V Conolly, who ordered the transportation, was assassinated at his residence. Another Collector, C A Innes, was attacked in 1915 for recovering a Hindu boy who was forcefully converted to Islam.

Apologists of jihad among Muslim intellectuals usually follow the ‘injustice line’. If-justice-is-denied-to-a-group-of-Muslims,-they-will-turn-towards-terrorism is the standard refrain. These intellectuals really align with terrorists in their hearts, but are reluctant to openly do so only because the chances of success of a pure jihadist organisation is rather limited in today’s world. Randathani does the same thing when he claims that “when justice was denied completely from all sides, the Mappilas became desperate and resorted to suicidal attacks and individual terrorism” (p.120). The supposedly anti-colonialist Sayyid Fazl Tangal was a supporter of the Turkish Sultan! Isn't that an oxymoron, because the Ottoman Empire ruled over subject peoples stationed far and wide? He supported the Sultan in European wars. This book also includes a review of Tangal’s book Uddat al Umara wal Hukkaum li Ihanat al Kafarat wa Abdat al Asnam (preparation to judges and leaders to undermine the idolaters and unbelievers). The title itself expresses the extreme contempt the Sufi had harboured against the inhabitants of Kerala. This is a compilation of opinions and fatwas. Sayyid Fazl reminded the obligation of Muslims to obey the Sultan of Turkey and assured the jihadis that they would become ‘the flying birds of heaven’ if they fell dead in battle.

The author has included some dubious reference books like Keralolpathi in weaving his arguments. This eats away at the credibility of the narrative. There are no practically original ideas in this book. Proofing errors mock at the user on every page. Absence of mentions of the 1921 Mappila riots in Malabar is surprising, especially because its suppression was so brutal and effective that not a single outbreak originated in Malabar after that.

The book is not recommended as it puts jihad in a good light, as if it is a weapon to fight injustice. Whatever may be the original meaning of the term, jihad means an unacceptable bout of indiscriminate violence in practice.

Rating: 2 Star