08-31-2005, 09:39 PM
The Brit had a "reformative" and interventionist attitude prior to 1857. Ancient Indian practices, traditions, faiths etc which were once tolerated and appreciated by the first batch of the Orientalists was now trodden over, questioned and curtailed by the Utilitarians. The Anglicist influence in the British admin also had a very destabilising effect.... Now the British wanted to establish their superior civilization on the sorry, wretched Indian people.
Some good things happened..... modern education, english education, abolition of Sati, extermination of the Thugee cult, education of women etc. But as we all know, it was purley a way to reinforce imperialist hold. But they did a good job on convincing us that all this was for OUR good.... citing high faluting theories like Oriental Despotism, Asiatic mode of production, too metaphisical Hindu traits etc made it a HISTORICAL NECESSITY that the Indians should benefit from the loving hand of the British. Bizzare it may seem now, but many Indians swallowed this hook, line and sinker.
So far so good, but once they began to prod the sensitive and explosive religious issues, the sith hit the ceiling. Not just the greased cartridge, the Brits has faced big problems with the the Wahabis, the Khaskars, the Akalis etc on these issues. But the 1857 rising was too close ..... the British henceforth followed a non-interference policy. Selectively forgive but not forget. Let the heathen natives wallow in their degradation, say what?.... We just want the money!
Hindus were pretty much satisfied by the state of things (for the moment). At least the missionaries do not operate in the urban and village areas anymore.... the Brits were bright enough to send them amongst the tribals...far from public view. Most importantly, the Hindu faith will be left alone it seemed.
But the realisation that 1857 was a Muslim conspiracy to a great degree made the Brits trample down the "Syeds" pretty hard. It continued till the terrified Ulema released dozens of fawas citing Britsh as just rulers, India no more a Dar-ul-Harb reversing the Shah Aziz fatwah of 1804, and the efforts of Syed Ahmed Khan, Amir Ali, Abdul Latif etc. Brit policy changed after Hunter's seminal work in 1870 and when they started sensing the genesis of a true national movement. They then set out on Divide and Rule.
The transfer of power to the Crown, Queen Victoria's declaration and the dissolution of the Easi India Coy who had so far followed a bloodsucking policy of Merchantilism and looting convinced many Indians that things will be better. The new Brit economic system of Financial Capitalism seemed better... Moreover, many Indian intellectuals (who totally stayed out the 1857 rising) had faith in Britisher's word, their "cricket" spirit... After all, them and their children were educated by these same Brits. All the modern ideals like Democracy, Humanism, Nationalism etc were being taught by the British themselves. The British not engaging in any large scale vicious witch-hunt or extermination program after 1857 also helped a bit.
This changed after the Drain of Wealth theory by Dadabhai Naoroji.... even he was astonished by his own findings. Of course, this was so unlike the British it seemed... He even called it "UnBritish Rule". More findings by Sen, Ranade etc awakened the Indians to the fact that the Brits were there ONLY to loot. This realisation (aroung late 1870s) is IMHO the rude awakening, the Shatterpoint (to quote Jedi Master Mace Windu). The Indians (the intellignetsia and the Patricians who mattered) were so fooled by the "Angrez Mai-Baap" deception so far..... and once this came to light, things changed. In fact, Viceroy Dufferin was so pissed at Dadabhai Naoroji that he made the most "unparliamentary" accusations against the revered Grand old man of India. Dufferin was very prescient it seems.... his diaries and lettes are full of references to "the conceited fool Hume", and the INC "which will one day be a major threat to the Empire" etc.
****************
Throughout the Indian National Movement (incl the Rising), there had been 5 major mass movements... 1857 Rising, 1905 Swaraj, 1922 Non Co-operation, 1930 Civil Disobedience and 1942 Quit India Movement.
Each of these powerful nationalistc surge was followed by a long period of calm or reconstruction or outright defeat/passivity, until something came along that shattered the status quo. The Drain of wealth and the growth and closing ranks of proto-nationalsist organisations was what set off the INM, after a long time of almost zero activity after 1857. The INC wasn't yet a mass movement, but it was evolving since its very inception. Now that their knew the true face of the Brits, their attitude to them started changing radically too.
A point I like to reiterate is,
The nation was silent, but seething after 1857....... however, the modern political forces that had a viable & concrete vision on what the hell to do after we throw out the Brits, what on earth is India, how do we govern it (and the other "Bah, Humbug!" questions brushed aside by the angry mob or the archaic constructs of 1857 era India) was born only much later.
At least, we realised we aren't strong enough to throw out the Brits in a military campaign.
Some good things happened..... modern education, english education, abolition of Sati, extermination of the Thugee cult, education of women etc. But as we all know, it was purley a way to reinforce imperialist hold. But they did a good job on convincing us that all this was for OUR good.... citing high faluting theories like Oriental Despotism, Asiatic mode of production, too metaphisical Hindu traits etc made it a HISTORICAL NECESSITY that the Indians should benefit from the loving hand of the British. Bizzare it may seem now, but many Indians swallowed this hook, line and sinker.
So far so good, but once they began to prod the sensitive and explosive religious issues, the sith hit the ceiling. Not just the greased cartridge, the Brits has faced big problems with the the Wahabis, the Khaskars, the Akalis etc on these issues. But the 1857 rising was too close ..... the British henceforth followed a non-interference policy. Selectively forgive but not forget. Let the heathen natives wallow in their degradation, say what?.... We just want the money!
Hindus were pretty much satisfied by the state of things (for the moment). At least the missionaries do not operate in the urban and village areas anymore.... the Brits were bright enough to send them amongst the tribals...far from public view. Most importantly, the Hindu faith will be left alone it seemed.
But the realisation that 1857 was a Muslim conspiracy to a great degree made the Brits trample down the "Syeds" pretty hard. It continued till the terrified Ulema released dozens of fawas citing Britsh as just rulers, India no more a Dar-ul-Harb reversing the Shah Aziz fatwah of 1804, and the efforts of Syed Ahmed Khan, Amir Ali, Abdul Latif etc. Brit policy changed after Hunter's seminal work in 1870 and when they started sensing the genesis of a true national movement. They then set out on Divide and Rule.
The transfer of power to the Crown, Queen Victoria's declaration and the dissolution of the Easi India Coy who had so far followed a bloodsucking policy of Merchantilism and looting convinced many Indians that things will be better. The new Brit economic system of Financial Capitalism seemed better... Moreover, many Indian intellectuals (who totally stayed out the 1857 rising) had faith in Britisher's word, their "cricket" spirit... After all, them and their children were educated by these same Brits. All the modern ideals like Democracy, Humanism, Nationalism etc were being taught by the British themselves. The British not engaging in any large scale vicious witch-hunt or extermination program after 1857 also helped a bit.
This changed after the Drain of Wealth theory by Dadabhai Naoroji.... even he was astonished by his own findings. Of course, this was so unlike the British it seemed... He even called it "UnBritish Rule". More findings by Sen, Ranade etc awakened the Indians to the fact that the Brits were there ONLY to loot. This realisation (aroung late 1870s) is IMHO the rude awakening, the Shatterpoint (to quote Jedi Master Mace Windu). The Indians (the intellignetsia and the Patricians who mattered) were so fooled by the "Angrez Mai-Baap" deception so far..... and once this came to light, things changed. In fact, Viceroy Dufferin was so pissed at Dadabhai Naoroji that he made the most "unparliamentary" accusations against the revered Grand old man of India. Dufferin was very prescient it seems.... his diaries and lettes are full of references to "the conceited fool Hume", and the INC "which will one day be a major threat to the Empire" etc.
****************
Throughout the Indian National Movement (incl the Rising), there had been 5 major mass movements... 1857 Rising, 1905 Swaraj, 1922 Non Co-operation, 1930 Civil Disobedience and 1942 Quit India Movement.
Each of these powerful nationalistc surge was followed by a long period of calm or reconstruction or outright defeat/passivity, until something came along that shattered the status quo. The Drain of wealth and the growth and closing ranks of proto-nationalsist organisations was what set off the INM, after a long time of almost zero activity after 1857. The INC wasn't yet a mass movement, but it was evolving since its very inception. Now that their knew the true face of the Brits, their attitude to them started changing radically too.
A point I like to reiterate is,
The nation was silent, but seething after 1857....... however, the modern political forces that had a viable & concrete vision on what the hell to do after we throw out the Brits, what on earth is India, how do we govern it (and the other "Bah, Humbug!" questions brushed aside by the angry mob or the archaic constructs of 1857 era India) was born only much later.
At least, we realised we aren't strong enough to throw out the Brits in a military campaign.