I compliment the author on his sedulously composed essay. However, it all seem to hinge on Sir John Stracheys singular observations in his book India: Its Administration and Progress. There is no evidence that Englishmen, especially those in power, agreed to his observation readily and institutionalized Stracheys ideas. Rather evidences show that British continued to politically integrate India to the extent possible under one Viceroy. However, I got a soft copy of the book the author refers to and tried to read for myself. I realize that Stratchey actually got this idea from Indians he met in England. This is what he actually said- I have been told by intelligent natives of India who have visited Europe that they could see little difference between the European countries through they had travelled, the languages being equally unintelligible offered to them no marks of distinction; the cites, the costumes, the habits of life, the manners and customs of the people, so far as a passing oriental traveller could judge, seemed much in the same in England, in France, and in Italy. The differences between the countries of India- between, for instance, Bengal and Punjab, or between Madras and Rajputana- seemed to them, on the other hand, immense, and beyond comparison greater than those existing between the countries of Europe.....The differences between the countries of Europe are undoubtedly smaller than those between the countries of India (P.2). So actually Strachey was echoing the views of some Indians he met. This might appear insignificant in age where English and Hindi has percolated across India (though not fully) as link language, when he have adopted comoon western type of shirt/T-shrit/Pant/Jeans as dressing, when he have one currency etc. But way back in the 19th century diversity looked greater to a common observer. The political unification brought about by the British cannot be compared with the political unification brought about the Mughals or Mauryas. Mughals imposed a hegemony on most parts of India. But the rule did not inspire Indians from different parts of the land to come together on common platform. It did not produce any literature, political or otherwise, reflective of that unity. But under the British rule, the Indians from Bengal, Maharashtra, Madras, Punjab, United Provinces came together on common platform to chalk out an unified strategy. Dadabhai Naoroji says its clearly in his Presidential Speech at 2nd annual session of Congress at Calcutta.
Posted on: Mon, 06 Oct 2014 06:01:41 +0000