COLONIAL HISTORIOGRAPHY
The systematic history writing in the Indian subcontinent started with the coming of the Europeans, who, for their administrative compulsions were required to know the land and its inhabitants whom they were going to rule. But the history produced by them was always imbued with the notions of oriental despotism and self-sufficient village economy, the main characteristic of which was the changelessness from the earliest times to the coming of colonial rule. Hence, all the developments and changes in the past were assigned to external forces. The painstaking words of Indologists brought various texts from the ancient period into light and generated great interest about the forgotten past among both the Europeans and the …show more content…
A theory often associated with the Utilitarian view of Asian civilizations was that of Oriental Despotism. James Mill, a European scholar, who wrote about India, was critical of Indian culture. In his book, “History of British India”, Mill divided India into three periods-Hindu, Muslim and British. He argued that Hindu Civilization was ‘irrational, backward and unchanging’ and that Muslim civilization must be marginally better. British administration was seen as the only solution. Mill's insistence on these negative features reflected his use of this description as part of his campaign to legislate change in Britain. Many of the debates assessing the condition of India can be better explained through a familiarity with the current debates on political economy in Britain at that …show more content…
The analyses of Karl Marx, in what he called the Asiatic Mode of Production, envisaged despotism and stagnancy as key characteristics which nullified movements towards change parallel to that of Europe. In the absence of private property there were no intermediary groups between king and peasant, nor classes or class conflict of a kind that would lead to dialectical change. This was further nullified by the absence of commercial centres. Such societies featured the existence of isolated, egalitarian village communities whose surplus produce was creamed off by the despotic ruler and his court, governing through an autocratic
The systematic history writing in the Indian subcontinent started with the coming of the Europeans, who, for their administrative compulsions were required to know the land and its inhabitants whom they were going to rule. But the history produced by them was always imbued with the notions of oriental despotism and self-sufficient village economy, the main characteristic of which was the changelessness from the earliest times to the coming of colonial rule. Hence, all the developments and changes in the past were assigned to external forces. The painstaking words of Indologists brought various texts from the ancient period into light and generated great interest about the forgotten past among both the Europeans and the …show more content…
A theory often associated with the Utilitarian view of Asian civilizations was that of Oriental Despotism. James Mill, a European scholar, who wrote about India, was critical of Indian culture. In his book, “History of British India”, Mill divided India into three periods-Hindu, Muslim and British. He argued that Hindu Civilization was ‘irrational, backward and unchanging’ and that Muslim civilization must be marginally better. British administration was seen as the only solution. Mill's insistence on these negative features reflected his use of this description as part of his campaign to legislate change in Britain. Many of the debates assessing the condition of India can be better explained through a familiarity with the current debates on political economy in Britain at that …show more content…
The analyses of Karl Marx, in what he called the Asiatic Mode of Production, envisaged despotism and stagnancy as key characteristics which nullified movements towards change parallel to that of Europe. In the absence of private property there were no intermediary groups between king and peasant, nor classes or class conflict of a kind that would lead to dialectical change. This was further nullified by the absence of commercial centres. Such societies featured the existence of isolated, egalitarian village communities whose surplus produce was creamed off by the despotic ruler and his court, governing through an autocratic