Macaulay: Disbelief on Coming up of British Empire in India

---

---

The post is build and developed around a quotation given here which has been taken out of an essay written by Macaulay published in 1840. Macaulay can not be overlooked. However, the contents of the essay from where the following lines consisting of more than 1500 words has been plucked out, can not be called a historic document even if it was authored by Macaulay. However, a person in 2016 who seeks to know about the happenings in 1700 may adopt a device and the methodology of learning from the documents produced in 1840s. This is the core of history.
This post is long. Those who are interested merely in the actual contents but not interested in what this blogger writes, may check the following extract. He/she will find a quotation by T. B. Macaulay. The reference to the source is given at the end. However, it is made the part of the essay which the author has written. The reader, interested in the quotation may have to read through the writing of the author and the does not apologize for that.

The Extract: It is a part of an essay written by Thomas Babington Macaulay.

Macaulay wrote thus:
The empire which Baber and his Moguls reared in the sixteenth century was long one of the most extensive and splendid in the world. In no European kingdom was so large a population subject to a single prince, or so large a revenue poured into the treasury. The beauty and magnificence of the buildings erected by the sovereigns of Hindostan, amazed even travellers who had seen St. Peter's. The innumerable retinues and gorgeous decorations which surrounded the throne of Delhi dazzled even eyes which were accustomed to the pomp of Versailles. Some of the great viceroys who held their posts by virtue of commissions from the Mogul ruled as many subjects as the king of France or the Emperor of Germany. Even the deputies of these deputies might well rank, as to extent of territory and amount of revenue, with the Grand Duke of Tuscany, or the Elector of Saxony.
There can be little doubt that this great empire, powerful and prosperous as it appears on a superficial view, was yet, even in its best days, far worse governed than the worst governed parts of Europe now are. The administration was tainted with all the vices of Oriental despotism and will all the vices inseparable from the domination of race over race. The conflicting pretensions of the princes of the royal house produced a long series crimes and public disasters. Ambitious lieutenants of the sovereign sometimes aspired to independence. Fierce tribes of Hindoos, impatient of a foreign yoke, frequently withheld tribute, repelled the armies of the government from the mountain fastnesses, and poured down in arms on the cultivated plains. In spite, however, of much constant maladministration, in spite of occasional convulsions which shook the whole frame of society, this great monarchy, on the whole, retained, during some generations, an outward appearance of unity, majesty and energy. But throughout the long rein of Aurungzeb, the states, notwithstanding all that the vigour and policy of the prince could effect, was hastening to dissolution. After his death, which took place in the year 1707, the ruin was fearfully rapid. Violent shocks from without co-operated with an incurable decay which was fast proceeding within; and in a few years the empire had undergone utter decomposition.
The history of the successors of Theodosius bears no small analogy to that of the successors of Aurungzeb. But perhaps the fall of the Carlovingians furnishes the nearest parallel to the fall of the Moguls. Charlemagne was scarcely interred when the imbecility and the disputes of his descendants began to bring contempt on themselves and destruction on their subjects. The wide dominion of the Franks was severed into a thousand pieces. Nothing more than a nominal dignity was left to the abject heirs of an illustrious name, Charles the Bald, and Charles the Fat, and the Charles the Simple. Fierce invaders, differing from each other in race, language, and religion, flocked, as if by concert, from the farthest corners of the earth, to plunder provinces which the government could no longer defend. The pirates of the Northern Sea extended their ravages from the Elbe to the Pyrenees, and at length fixed their sear in the rich valley of the Seine. The Hungarian in whom the trembling monks fancied that they recognised the Go or Magog of prophecy, carried back the plunder of the cities of Lombardy to the depth of the Pannonian forests. The Saracen ruled in Sicily, desolated the fertile plains of Campania, and spread terror even to the Rome. In the midst of these sufferings, a great internal change passed upon the empire. The corruption of death began to ferment into new forms of life. While the great body, as a whole, was torpid and passive, every separate member began to feel with a sense, and to move with an energy all its own. Just here, in the most barren and dreary tract of European history, all feudal privileges, all modern nobility, take their source. It is to this point that we trace the power of those princes, who, nominally vassals, but really independent, long governed, with the titles of dukes, marquesses and counts, almost every part of the dominions which had obeyed Charlemagne.
Such or nearly such was the change which passed on Mogul empire during the forty years which followed the death of Aurungzebe. A succession of nominal sovereigns, sunk in indolence and debauchery, sauntered away life in secluded palaces, chewing bang, fondling concubines, and listening to buffons. A succession of ferocious invaders descended through the western passes, to prey on the defenseless wealth of Hindostan. A Persian conqueror crossed the Indus, marched through the gates of Delhi, and bore away in triumph those treasures of which the magnificence had astounded Roe and Bernier, the Peacock Throne, on which the richest jewels of Golconda had been disposed by the most skillful hands of Europe, and the inestimable Mountain of Light, which, after many strange vicissitudes, lately shone in the bracelet of Runjeet sing, and is now destined to adorn the hideous idol of Orissa. The Afghan soon followed to complete the work of devastation which the Persian had begun. The warlike tribes of the Rajpootana threw off the Musulman yoke. A band of the mercenary soldiers occupied Rohilcund. The Seiks ruled on the Indus. The Jauts spread dismay along the Jumna. The highlands which border on the western sea-coast of India pured forth a yet more formidable race, a race which was long the terror of every native power, an which, after many desperate and doubtful struggles, yielded only to the fortune and genius of England. It was under the reign of Aurungzebe that this wild clan of plunderers first descended from the mountains; and soon after his death, every corner of his wide empire learned to tremble at the mighty name of the Mahrattas. Many fertile viceroyalties were entirely subdued by them. Their dominions stretched across the peninsula from sea to sea. Mahratta captains reigned at Poonah, at Gualior, in Guzerat, in Berar, and in Tanjore. Nor did they, though they had become great sovereings, therefore cease to be freebooters. They still retained the predatory habits of their forefathers. Every region which was not subjec ot their rule was wasted by their incursions. Wherever their kettle-drums were heard, the peasant threw his bag of rice on his shoulder, hid his small savings in his girdle, and fled with his wife and children to the mountains or the jungles, to the milder neighbourhood of the hyaena and the tiger. Many provinces redeemed their harvests by the payment of an annual ransom. Even the wretched phantom who still bore the imperial title stooped to pay this ignominious black-mail. The camp-fires of one rapacious leader were seen from the weall of the palace of Delhi. Another, at the head of his innumerable cavalry, descended year after year on the rice-fields of Bengal. Even the European factors trembled for their magazined. Less than a hundred years ago, it was thought necessary to fortify Calcutta against the horsemen of Berar; and the name of the Mahratta ditch still preserves the memory of the danger.
Wherever the viceroys of the Mogul retained authority they became sovereigns. They might still acknowledge in words the superiority of the house of the Tamerlane; as a Count of Flanders or a Duke of Burgundy might have acknowledged the superiority of the most helpless driveler among the later Carlovingians. They might occasionally send to their titular sovereign a complimentary present, or solicit from him a title of honour. In truth, however, they were no longer lieutenants removable at pleasure, but independent hereditary princes. In this way originated those great Musulaman houses which formerly ruled Bengla and the Carnatic, and those which still, though in a state of vassalage, exercise some of the powers of royalty at Lucknow and Hyderabad.
In what was this confusion to end? Was the strife to continue during centuries? Was it to terminate in the rise of another great monarchy? Was the Mussulman or the Mahratta to be the Lord of India? Was another Baber to descend from the mountains, and to lead the hardy tribes of Cabul and Chorasan against a wealthier and less warlike race? None of these events seems improbable. But scarcely any man, however, sagacious, would have thought it possible that a trading company, separated from India by fifteen thousand miles of sea, and possessing in India only a few acres for purposes of commerce, would, in less that a hundred years, spread its empire from Cape Comorin to the eternal snow of the Himalayas; would compel Mahratta and Mahommedan to forget their mutual feuds in common subjection; would tame down even those wild races which had resisted the most powerful of the Moguls; and, having united under its laws a hundred millions of the subjects, would carry its victorious arms far to the east of the Burrampooter, and far to the west of the Hydaspes (present day Jhelum), dictate terms of peace at the gates of Ava, and deat its vassal on the throne of Candahar.

The Source:
The above mentioned work, which is part of an essay written by Macaulay, has been taken from “The London Series of English Classics” edited by J. W. Hales and C. S. Jerram. The essay has been included in that series. The title of the essay included in the compilation is 'Lord Clive' by Thomas Babington Macaulay. The essay had been edited and annonated by Herbert Courthope Bowen. The compilation which included the essay by Macaulay, was published as a separate volume in 1877. The essay of Macaulay, which the series picked, had been taken from Edinburgh Review, which was published in 1840. Macaulay had written a similar essay on Warren Hastings. The essay on Hastings by Macaulay was published same review in 1841.
The essay first appeared in 1840. What was the aim of writings this essay at that time? Then it was republished in 1877. The motive of reprint of the essay in 1877 is well explained in the introduction to the compilation by the editors. (continued)

---

---

Facts and Truths in History

---

---

I am going to use Hindi and English both the languages in writing the posts from now. दोनों भाषओं का प्रयोग होगा.

यहाँ पर fact की हिंदी तथ्य लिया गया है । Truth की हिंदी सत्य लिया गया है ।

---

---

Hardship of A Historian

---

---

---

On November 21, 1764, Orme wrote the following lines to Robert Clive when Clive was deputed to India for the second time.

Orme wrote, “I have had permission to poke into the records of the India House, and have discovered excellent materials for the exordium of my second volume; but the difficulty of getting them away is immense, for every scrap of an extract that I desire is submitted to the consideration of the Court of Directors; so that in three months, and after making twenty-five journeys to the House, I have not got half what I want. All because they won't lend me old books, of which not a soul in England suspected the existence until my rummages discovered them. I am afraid, my Lord, that these gentlemen suspect that I shall make a fortune by my book; and therefore think all the trouble and impediments I meet with to be what I have no reason to complain of, as it is in the way of trade.

You, my Lord, have treated me differently; and pray continue to do so. Make me a vast map of Bengal, in which not only the outlines of the province, but also the different subdivision of Burdwan, Beerboom, &c. may be justly marked. Get me a clear idea of the different officer and duties of Duan (probably he meant Diwan), Bukhshee (probably he meant Buxshee), Cadgee (probably he meant a Qazi), Cutwall (probably he meant a Kotwal), and all other great posts in the government. Take astronomical observations of longitude, if you have any body capable of doing it. I send you a skeleton of Bengal map I intend for my second volume, and I will hereafter send you the first sheets of the book itself; which will contain matter entirely new, even to us East Indians; but that cruel India House, and my paper constitution, keep me back most terribly.”

The above lines have been picked from “The Life of Robert, Lord Clive: Collected from the family paper”, by Sir John Malcolm, completed by Charles Malcom in three volumes. The lines are from the second volume, pages 260-61.

Some Observations:

1. The lines are reported to have been written in 1762. This was the year when the Americans colonies were celebrating the accession of George III.

2. The efforts of a historian are depicted in the lines. The craft of collections is well demonstrated. It had been when “Wealth of Nation” by Adam Smith and Marx's Das Capita had not been published or even conceived. The idea is that there was no stress on economic determinism formula as emphasized by Marxian historians. Even then the book which Orme had authored had emphasized on different financial angles of the company. The Parliament of England had yet to debate the cost of running the colonies in America.

3. The historian had sought the help of the chief administrator for acquiring some valid information and facts about India. It shows that the administration in India was not well defined at that time. It can be proved from other references. The Nationalist Historians attributes imperialistic designs of the British Company. But in light of the above fact, it seems, that there inferences and interpretations are not true.

4. James Mills six volumes came in 1817. He had referred to work of Orme in order to criticize many of the observations of the officers of the company who were called Nabobs or East Indians in Britain. His claim in the preface of the first volume of his work is also stands to scrutiny. It is proved wrong that there was no good work on India. He was biased against a group of the Company officials. It seems that the work of Mills was a part of a wider game of the British parliamentarians and members of the company who were divided on the issue spending the wealth of the Empire on raising colonies outside their own territory.

No doubt, the above lines are quite important for the scholars who are in the field of research, working of research methodology and history.

---

---

Mechanism of Changing Sovereigns in Indian History

---

---

One can read a quotation reproduced below, taken from the Memoirs of Lord Clive by John Malcolm, chapter IV, Volume 1. The content reproduced here tries to answer a question which is generally asked from the historians of Indian history. The question is, “Why did India remain under subjugation for one thousand years?”

Now, there are historians who object to this very question. They are Medievalist. They claim that it was the British empire which brought India under her rule. Before that, the Mahommedan rule was a natural thing and they may not be called the invaders. It was the British who were invaders. So it can not be said that India was under foreign yoke for one thousand years. However that is another issue.

The quotation follows:

"The power established by the Mahommedans in India has never varied in its character from their first invasion of that country to the present time (i.e. CE 1800 c.). The different qualities of the individuals by whom it has been exercised, have introduced a variety of shades both in the mode and substance of their rule, but the general features have remained the same. The Mahommedan emperors of Delhi, the Subadars of divisions of the empire, and the Nabobs and chiefs of kingdoms and principalities, supplanted and expelled, or extirpated, sovereigns and princes of the Hindu military tribe: - but while they succeed to the power which these potentates had held, the management of the finance and revenue, and all those minuter arrangements of internal policy, on which the good order of the machine of government miust ever depend, remained very nearly in the same hands in which the Mahammedans had found them. The unwar-like but well-educated Hindus of the Brahmin or the mercantile castes continued, as under the martial princes of their own tribe, to manage almost all the concerns of the state. A Hindu, under the denomination of minister, or as Naib (or deputy), continued at the head of the exchequer; and in this office he was connected with the richest bankers and monied Hindus of the country. Princes had private hoards, - but there was no public treasury. Advances were made to individuals and bodies of the men by bankers (denominated Seits (Seths) or Soucars (Sarkars)), who were repaid by orders on the revenue, and obtained a double profit on the disbursement and the receipt of money. The proud and thoughtless Mahommedan prince, anxious only for the means necessary for his purposes of pleasure or ambition, was not over-scrupulous as to the terms he granted to the financial agents: and the advantages they gained combined with tier simple and frugal habits, enabled them to amass immense wealth. This they well knew how to employ, for purposes both of accumulation, and of establishing political influence; commanding, as they did, the money resources of the country, the prince, his officers, and army, were all in a great degree dependent upon them; and to treat them with extreme severity was certain to incur obloquy, and often defeated its aim, since, by their natural character, they were as patient of suffering as they were tenacious of their gains.

Besides, the wealth of Hindu ministers and managers was usually deposited with bankers; and the injury done to credit by acts of injustice or oppression towards any of the latter class, affected such numbers, as to prove ruinous to the reputation, and often to the interests, of the despot by whom it was attempted.

The Hindu ministers, or revenue officers, had not the same number of retainers as the Mahommedan. They were, therefore, seldom in the same degree objects of jealousy of dread: but though they were from the this cause less exposed to extreme violence, they were more frequently objects of extortion; and for this they were better prepared, both from the great profits they made, and from their parsimonious habits.

A very quick and intelligent Mahommedan prince, on being asked why he gave so decided a preference to Hindu managers and renters over those of his own religion, replied, “that a Mahommedan was alike a sieve, - much of what was poured in went through; while a Hindu was like a sponge, which retained all, but on pressure gave back, as required, what it had absorbed!”

But there were other reason which prompted Mahommedan princes to employ and encourage Hindus, both at their court and in their armies. They formed a counterbalance to the ambition and turbulence of their relatives, and of the chiefs and followers of their own race. This feeling operated from the emperors on the throne of Delhi, when in the very plenitude of their power, down to the lowest chief : and it is from its action combined with that influence which the wealth and qualities of the Hindus obtained, that we are, in a great measure, to account for the easy establishment and long continuance of the Mahommedan power in India. The new dominion was attended with little of change, except to the Hindu sovereign and his favourites. The lesser Rajas (or princes) gave their allegiance and paid tribute to a Mahommedan instead of a Hindu superior, while their condition and local power continued nearly the same.

Hindu ministers and officers served probably to greater profit the idle and dissipated Moghul, than they could have done a master of their own tribe; and as there was complete religious toleration, and their ancient and revered usages were seldom or never outraged, they were too divided a people upon other subjects to unite in any effort to expel conquerors, who, under the influence of various motives, left to them almost all, except the name, of power.

From the composition and character of such governments, it is obvious that neither individuals nor the community can recognize, much less feel an attachment to what we call the state, as separated from the person who, for the time being, preside over the different branches of its administration. The sovereign has his servants and adherents; his tributaries, chiefs, commanders, and officers have theirs; but the latter owe no fidelity or allegiance, except to their immediate superiors. Each individual of this body has personal privileges, and enjoys protection in certain rights, from established usages, which, affecting all of the class to which he belongs, cannot be violated with impunity : but as there is no regular constitution of government supported by fixed succession the throne, men derive no benefit from the state, and owe it therefore no duty. From these facts it is evident that nothing can be so erroneous as to judge the conduct of the natives of India, amid the changes and revolutions to which the governments of that country are continually exposed, by those rulers which apply nations which enjoy civil liberty and equal laws. Treachery and ingratitude to their chief or patron are with them the basest of crimes : and obedience and attachment to those who support them, the highest of virtues. According as they fail in, or fulfill, the obligations which the relations of the society in which they live impose, men are deemed infamous or praise-worthy : and to the reciprocal ties by which such bands are held together, the prince and chief are as often indebted for their safety, as their followers for the just reward of their devoted service. The monarch is secure upon his throne no longer than while he can preserve a body of personal adherents. The chief that is threatened by his sovereign looks to his followers for support or revenge; while the latter, in the lesser vicissitudes to which they are subject, expect with equal confidence the protection of him to whom they give their allegiance.

In the countries where men are influenced b y such motives, the dethronement of a prince is regarded as no more than the fall of a successful leader of chief of a party ; and the frequency of such an occurrence has perhaps tended, more than all other causes, to temper the exercise of despotic power, and to compel sovereigns who owned no other check to seek its continuance, by reconciling to their rule those of whom it was so liable to be subverted.

---

---

Bipin Chandra, the historian is no more.

Bipin Chandra, the renowned Marxist historian is no more. I have learned it through the facebook page of Prof Rajiv Lochan of Punjab University. He was born in 1927 in Himanchal and died in 2014.

Bipin Chandra is known among the students of history as the author of 'India's Struggle for Independence'. In 2008 came his Indian after Independence(first published in 2000). His other book which I read was Communalism in India. In 2009 came his re published compilation of Nationalism and Colonialism in Modern India with a Prologue by Aditya Mukherjee, his coauthor as well Professor of Jwahar Lal Nehru University New Delhi. In 2008 he received life time achievement award from Indian History Congress. He became National Research Professor in 2006.

My understanding of Modern History was framed by reading of text book of V. D. Mahajan, the father of Mridula Mukherjee, one of the co author of Bipin Chandra. Then I graduated to Modern India by Sumit Sarkar. I was not fully qualified to understand that book. I struggled. Then I came across Bipin Chandra's books. It introduced me to paradigms like STS or PCP. Such interpretations definitely nurtured my faculties of learning history. I happened to meet Aditya Mukherjee and even interact. I developed a wish to meet Bipin Chandra. But now that would not be fulfilled.

---

---

---

An Essay on Historiopgraphy as a new trend by V. Sharma

---

Check the link HERE.
The link is to an article by vibha Sharma (I do not know the author but the essay has many references to Dr. Rajivlochan)which has appeared in The Tribune India in Spectrum section. It has been identified by Rajivlocah himself and it is an acknowledgement here for the source of information.
The idea to tag is here to collect articles on historiography which is the motive of this blog. The writer has taken up an issue of new trends in history writing and brought about an essay on historiography. It is confined to Medieval period of India.
While reading the essay (I did it hurriedly), I was wondering what would E. H. Carr had said about the sources of the Medievalist and it treatment in present by the historians.
Secondly, I believe that Dr. Rajivlochan is an expert on modern period and contemporary India (refer to website of Punjab University Chandigarh at puchd.ac.in) but he has been quoted for works on Medievalist India. However, that is not a big issue as the author has touched upon the philosophy of history and the references sounds quite relevant.
Thirdly, I do not know how the author will reflect, but there are references to the responses of readers unrelated to history, which are available on net and those had appeared when The Lash Mughal was published. There is use of internet in the article.
I beg to differ with the author when it is said that now historians have started giving importance to story feature in history. This thing was already debated when Godwani wrote 'The Sword of Tipu Sultan'.

---

---

Spinning Clio: Introduction to Historical Methods

Oh Boy, what should I say?
Before I say anything further, those who are interested in Historical Methods, especially those who are pursuing MA History, Semester system from Punjab University Chandigarh in the fourth semester, they first check HERE.

I am blogging since 2004. It was in 2005, I located this essay. The essay is written by an engineer who is interested in History and had acquired a degree in History. The visitors who will explore the link, will learn about the actual contents of the essay and the source of the contents of the essay.

Now when I am preparing my lecture for my class, I felt the need of visiting this essay. Presently, I can not write much but, it was an experience to relocate this essay through the links maintained on my blogs. I was not able to locate the link from this blog. I wonder that if this is going to be re-posting of this link. But I would say one thing, the Internet is definitely one way of learning and sharing. The education system must undertake some serious studies to make it more effective. They are doing it since long under the title of ICT but I do not see it around. I am trying to do it since 2004 but I do not feel encouraged. But, today, my faith in my paradigm is reinstated.

---

---

Neuroscience and History: What???

---

---

HNN is displaying two essays espousing the interdisciplinary study wherein neuroscience and history can collaborate.
History is based on available data. It was fascinating to read that the neuroscience can help to gather more data through molecular genetics which could help to study the neuropathology. How? The postage stamps glued to letters have saliva of some historic personalities which could be retrieved. Fascinating. It will be a new set of data from past which historians can subject to their narration and interpretation format of history.
The HNN itself has pointed that they are displaying the articles on the topic to generate debate. It still requires some theoretical basis to develop a world of knowledge build upon the data provided by neuroscience.

---

---

Note; Subject to change as it is the first response on reading the article and it is instantaneous.

---

---

Mediterranean Stupor

---

---

Socrates, Plato and Aristotle were their epic men. Crete, Mycenaean and Minoans were their seeds. Egypt and Babylon were recognized but underrated. Russel declared with pride accompanied with surprise the sudden rise of civilization in Greece. Sir Arthur Evan, the archaeologist, is the force, authority, testimony and validity behind that claim. The inheritance, like the origin of Virgin Mary, writing and mathematics are recognized but imperiousness of a claimant who does not suggest but emphatically tell that it is he who is right. Even Collingwood depicts similar attitude. I quote, “By what steps and stages did modern European idea of history come into existence? Since I (Collingwood here) do not think that any of these stages occurred outside Mediterranean region ... I am precluded from saying anything about about historical thought in China or in any other part of the world except the region I have mentioned.” Russel is surprised. Collingwood is precluded. The forces outside them decide that they adopt the premises that the counting begins and the action germinates from Mediterranean region. The English intellectuals of later nineteenth century are mainly the soldiers who fought positivism which had emerged by eighteenth century. Nature became a subject of invasion when they raised the army of positivism fighting the positivism. After all, how could they see the defeat of Christian theology? However, Nature yielded them the thoughts but there were thoughts before that also. The conflict was resolved by criticizing positivism outwardly but at inner side, they remained the soldiers of positivism. That positivism made them fight two wars. The two wars defeated positivism. They again went back to eighteenth century. The next stage has yet to come. Will they now seek surprises outside the Mediterranean Region.

---

---