Many Indians in the past and even in the
present justify the country’s subjugation by the British as a blessing
in disguise, stating that Colonialism was the best thing that could have
happened to India.
India is a living civilization. No other nation has a
continuance of philosophies, rituals, cultures and traditions in the
manner in which India has it. Even after thousands of years, of which
there were centuries of wars, invasions, enslavement, mass killings,
poverty, starvation and relentless attacks by foreign ideologies, what
we have achieved as a nation is remarkable.
But, any country which has gone through alien rule for centuries will
struggle to find a deserving place for itself among the community of
nations. Any foreign domination for so long would scar the minds of the
victims so deeply that it almost always translates into an “inferiority
complex” or a kind of “identity crisis” among the ruled; compelling them
to somehow live up to the rulers’ expectations and to mimic them.India has been no exception to this phenomenon. Our own people during
the British Raj (and even today) justified India’s subjugation by
foreigners as a blessing in disguise, by declaring with great
pompousness that Colonialism was the best thing that could have happened
to India. They argued that the British (just like their previous
counterparts) were liberators and not subjugators- liberators from
Brahminism, caste hierarchy, superstitions, backwardness and many more
evils.
This feeling has not lost its popularity even today and this is what
we know about our history in the popular culture. We as a nation have
developed a fondness in eulogizing our conquerors and ignoring or even
blatantly dis-respecting our own people and their achievements. This in
fact has translated into our actions in many fields and one such
important field is the writing of the Indian history.
For instance, it is vastly believed among our ‘intellectuals’ and
‘mainstream historians’ that the arrival of Islam into mainland India
was mainly due to the change of opinion among the masses, who favored
the ‘equality’ in Islam for the ‘oppression’ of the Hindu caste system.
They vehemently argue that India was invaded by a “few thousand” men,
who were able to succeed, because Hindus lacked unity among themselves,
and the lower-castes were unwilling to defend their country and their
upper-caste kings. But, a thorough examination of the primary sources
reveals that there is no truth in these assertions.
First, the invading armies were not comprised of only a “few thousand
men”. When Mamud of Ghazni attacked the Somnath temple in 1000 CE, for
example, he employed a fleet of 30,000 camels only to carry water
supplies, informs KS Lal, a reputed historian of the medeival period.
When Mahmod Ghori attacked North India in 1192 CE, he had 120,000 men in
cavalry alone! Later Islamic rulers had stronger armies: Alauddin
Khilji had 475,000 horsemen and Mohammad Tughlaq had 900,000 of them
under his command. [Koenraad Elst]. These Islamic invaders, however,
succeeded after facing a strong and successful resistance set up by the
Indian rulers over a vast period of 5 centuries.
Second, the social structure aspect of India was not that dim either.
Many Islamic writers of that time like Alberuni, Abul Fazl, Jahangir,
etc. have not once mentioned the supposed tyranny of the Hindu caste
system as a reason for gaining converts to Islam. Moreover, not a single
instance of the so called lower classes, making common cause with the
invaders can be noted. On the contrary, many examples of lower castes
fighting side by side with the upper caste kings are available. Many
examples of Shudra dynasties protecting the Brahmins from the invaders
can also be seen [ibid]. However, these aspects of unity and harmony
within Hindu society are almost always ignored and the main reason for
the Islamic invasions is always projected to be social factors, rather
than the religious and the military factors.
These types of “myths” are numerous in number and still vastly held
as ultimate truths. All these only confirm a need for us to view our
history through more neutral means than to follow what our conquerors
wanted us to believe. This article is a small attempt in that regard.
Now, considering India’s written history (“secular history”), we find
evidence of Indian lifestyle from the Greek records. Many Greek writers
have travelled to India and have recorded their experiences of this
land. One such Greek writer was Megasthenes (320 BC-290 BC), who was the
Greek ambassador to the Mauryan Empire, during the period of
Chandragupta Maurya. In his work “Indica/Indika”, Megasthenes explains
what he had seen first-hand in India during his stay in the country
[Though the original work is not available, a small portion of the book
is re-constructed on the basis of direct quotes of his work by other
ancient Greek writers].
Then, we have, Hiuen Tsang (602-664 CCE), who in his SI-YU-KI (The
history of the western world), explains in detail his experiences from
his long travels (almost 15 years) through many places in India. Later,
Fra Paolino Da Bartolomeo (1748-1806), an Austrian-born Carmelite
missionary and orientalist, who was in India from 1776-1789,narrates his
experiences of India in his “Voyages to East Indies” (published in
England in 1880). All these accounts are first-hand and can be
considered neutral. Though non-exhaustive, these accounts will surely
give us profound insights and a bird’s eye view into the ancient and
medieval Indian societies. Based on these accounts, the following points
can be considered.
People and society
In ancient India, when Megasthenes was writing his Indica, people
were generally healthy and fit and pursued various arts and skills. This
is often attributed to the abundance of the means of sustenance, pure
air and the availability of fresh and the finest drinking water. The
land was very fertile bearing various kinds of crops, plants and trees.
Various metals, including copper, iron, gold and silver, were
extensively mined to make ornaments, jewellery, weapons, shields and
other articles of use.
There were cities, well-built houses, different types of clothes and
fashion, etc. Famines and its disastrous effects were unheard of due to
proper preparations to face such situations and also because of the
immunity enjoyed by the farmers and their crops from harassments, even
during the times of bloody raging wars (This is in conformity with the
rules laid out in the Yuddha Sashtra about not hurting common men and
their property during the times of war).
The social structure of the time constituted seven castes, but
without any gradation or oppression (at least in the accounts of
Megasthenes). Further, the then Indian society had no slaves and the
freedom of individuals was respected. It was believed that all Indians,
though of different cultures and traditions, were indigenous to India,
and India was never invaded by any other people (This point also goes to
show how the idea of indigenousness of all Indians is not a new
construct of the nationalists, but had prevailed in ancient India too).
All these indicate to a well-established and well-functioning
society, which must have flourished over a long period of time to reach
this state, during Megasthenes’ times.
However, by the time of Hiuen Tsang, who wrote his account in the 7th
century, the social structure appears to have become slightly rigid,
with strict divisions between various castes in styles and behaviours.
But, despite this rigidness, no instance of oppression, harassment or
conflict among the different castes can be found.
There were well planned cities with proper compounds, watch towers
and roads. The houses were built of wood, which were covered with
coatings of lime and mortar (a sort of binding paste comparable to
modern day cement) and sometimes covered with tiles. They also had
balconies and belvederes and were decorated with cow-dung (for purity)
and with various patterns of flowers. A special type of multi-storeyed
buildings called the “sangharamas” (may be a kind of temple or a place
for monks) were built with extra-ordinary skills using intricate designs
and decorations like paints and suitable ornaments.
Various materials like cotton, silk, hemp, wool etc. were used in
clothing and fashion. People mostly wore fresh-white garments, whose
description resembles the style of Dhoti for men. Women, on the other
hand, covered their shoulders with a robe falling down to the ground.
Usually, people wore a crown /cap on their heads, flower wreaths and
other jewelled ornaments. Some people also wore sandals, decorated their
hairs in different styles and ornamented their noses. However, the
royalty and the ministers used various ornaments like necklace,
bracelets, head gears decorated with gems and various styles of
garments.
The above features strongly suggest the presence of a flourishing
textile and ornament industry. It also gives an impression that the
people were well dressed and well-mannered. Moreover, it can be seen
that the people were very particular in their personal hygiene. Various
practices were followed to maintain cleanliness like washing the hands
before partaking the food and cleaning the mouth and teeth after having
food, not eating the stale food, multiple bathing in a day, rubbing
& polishing utensils (made of gold, silver and iron) used for
cooking and eating purposes, proper cleaning after finishing calls of
nature, and using perfumes of sandalwood and turmeric.
These were indeed very progressive practices, when compared to
hygiene conditions in other areas of the world, especially the situation
in Europe of those times. In the early periods of the church, bodily
cleanliness was perceived as a symbol of luxury, materialism, and
paganism. It is often said that Europe during the middle ages, went a
thousand years without a bath, which obviously is an exaggeration, but
nevertheless depicts the prevalent disregard for hygiene.
Another important aspect of the society was the functioning of the
army. The art of warfare was usually taught to children (in their early
age itself) by their parents and only the strongest and bravest were
inducted into the military service. There were four divisions of the
army viz. infantry, cavalry, chariots and elephants. The weapons used
included among other things: sharp spurs (fixed to the tusks of
elephants), armours for war elephants and horses, long spears, big
shields, spears, bows and arrows, sabres, battle-axes, lances, halberds,
long javelins and various kinds of slings, etc. The extensive use of
various kinds of weapons not only points towards the presence of a
well-trained professional army, but also towards the presence of
thriving defence industry, which engaged in production of various
chariots, metal weapons, shields and armours.
Similarly, extensive accounts about the flora and fauna; various
drinks, dishes and refreshments used by the people; law and order
mechanism; judicial, financial, and administrative institutions; medical
practice; arts and crafts; trade and commerce; tax structure and wages
for labour, and record keeping, can be found, which goes to show how the
society was very large, diverse, and well-functioning, in the 7th
century.
However, by the time of Bartolomeo (who visited in the 18th century),
it appears that the peoples’ general welfare had vastly deteriorated
and very rigid caste distinctions had cropped up, largely due to being
exposed to repeated invasions and conquests by the Islamic rulers.
Confirming this that the Indian society had seen a great decline, since
the native kings were expelled by the foreign conquerors, Bartolomeo
writes:
“…Before that period, the different kingdoms were in a
flourishing condition; the laws were respected, and justice and civil
order prevailed: but, unfortunately, at present everything in many of
the provinces must give way to absolute authority and despotic sway.” [Bartolomeo]
Education
Though, no description of the education system can be found in the
available parts of Indica, both Tsang and Bartolomeo attest to the
presence of a well-established education system in pre-British India.
Moreover, Bartolomeo, while describing the way Indian kids learn reading
and writing (writing the alphabets by a finger or a stick, on sand or
paper, while simultaneously pronouncing its sound), comments that the
practice was used, since the times of Megasthenes (It should also be
noted that according to Lieutenant General Alexander Walker, the process
was borrowed from India by the Europeans). Tsang also informs us that
the children before age 7 were taught the book of twelve chapters
(siddhavastu). Later they were taught five vidyas viz.
Shabdavidya- Deals with language and grammar
Silpasthanavidya- Deals with arts, mechanics, calendars and also
explains the principles of various components of the nature such as
fire, water, darkness, coldness, etc.
Chikitsavidya- Deals with medical practice and treatment.
Hetuvidya- Deals with logic and causality.
Adhyatmavidya- Deals with theology and spirituality.
Tsang, additionally, states that the Brahmanas studied the Vedas and
Shastras and thus, indicating that the previously mentioned five vidyas
were perhaps taught to everybody, irrespective of their caste or social
standing. Otherwise, the author would have stated that the Brahmanas
were the only class allowed to learn anything and the need for a
distinct and specific mention was unnecessary.
Further, Bartolomeo tells us that the education system had suffered
(like other aspects of the society) much after foreign conquerors had
expelled the native kings. Despite this, Bartolomeo tells us that
reading, writing, grammar, accounts and oratory were taught.
Additionally, the following subjects were also taught to the children:
Poetry (Gavya); Fencing (Payatta); Botany and medicine (Vaydyassastra or
Bheszagiashastra), Navigation (Naushastra), use of the spear on foot
(Hastiludium), art of playing at ball (Pandacali), Chess (Ciudarangam),
Tennis (Coladi), Logic (Tarkashastra), Astrology (Giodisha), Law
(Svadhyaya), Silence (Mauna). [Interestingly, it is mentioned in the
notes given to the work of Bartolomeo by Johann Reinhold Forster
(1729-98), a Scottish historian and naturalist that Pythagoras must have
borrowed his philosophy in part from the Indian Philosophers in the
account of stark similarities between the Indian art of silence and
other rules like celibacy, which Pythagoras also asked his disciples to
follow.]
Moreover, the Indian education was very cheap and affordable compared
with the then system in Europe and also gave a fair opportunity to the
students in selecting what subject they wanted to pursue rather than
treating all of them as homogeneous entities destined to achieve a
single goal.
Furthermore, many British authorities had surveyed the situation of
the education sector in various parts of India during the early 19th
century. Accordingly:
In Madras Presidency, there were 12,498 schools for a population of
12.85 million, teaching 188,650 students. There was 1 school for every
1,000 people and taking into account homeschooling, which was also
widely prevalent, the ratio would have been much lower [Sir Thomas
Munro, as quoted by Dharampal].
In Bengal and Bihar, most village had a school before 1800 CE. During
the surveying period, 100,000 villages out of 150,748 had schools. Each
of the 18 districts of Bengal had 100 institutes of higher education
teaching almost 10,800 scholars [William Adam].
In Natoore Thana of Rajashahy district, there were 27 elementary
schools teaching 262 students and 38 higher education institutes
teaching 397 students. Out of 30,028 families, children of 1,588
families received home tutions. [ibid]
In 20 Thanas out of 37 surveyed in Murshidabad, there were 1,098
Bengali, 375 Hindi, 353 Sanskrit, 694 Persian, 31 Arabic, 8 English, 6
girls only and 1 infants only schools. [ibid]
Extensive research was also conducted in Punjab and Bombay presidency
and the situations there were similar. All subjects stated before were
taught and some institutes also taught arts and music. An important
point of consideration is that both teachers and students were drawn
from all castes. In some places (some of which were considered as places
of hardcore “Brahamanism”), the number of teachers and students coming
from the lower castes greatly outnumbered those from the upper castes.
Though, widespread illiteracy was recorded, and though, it partly
reflected ground reality, the major factor behind such a recording
appears to be the fact that a large number of young boys and most young
girls were tutored at home. What is important to note is that Indians
have a long tradition of imparting education to young children. In fact,
teaching children to read and write constitutes one of the 16 mandatory
religious ceremonies in a Hindu household.
A rather vivid depiction of India as found by the British when they
arrived here given by J T Sunderland nicely sums up the condition of
India before the British:
“…….This wealth was created by the Hindu’s vast and varied
industries. Nearly, every kind of manufacture or product known to the
civilized world-nearly every kind of creation of man’s brain and hand,
existing anywhere, and prized either for its utility or beauty-had long,
long been produced in India. India was a far greater industrial and
manufacturing nation than any in Europe or than any other in Asia. Her
textile goods-the fine products of her looms, in cotton, wool, linen and
silk-were famous over the civilized world; so were her exquisite
jewellery and her precious stones cut in every lovely form; so were her
pottery, porcelains, ceramics of every kind, quality, colour and
beautiful shape; so were her fine works in metal-iron, steel, silver and
gold. She had great architecture-equal in beauty to any in the world.
She had great engineering works. She had great merchants, great
businessmen, great bankers and financiers. Not only was she the greatest
ship building nation, but she had great commerce and trade by land and
sea which extended to all known civilized countries. Such was the India
which the British found when they came.” [as quoted in Will Durrant]
Bibliography
- Koenraad Elst, Decolonizing the Hindu Mind – Ideological Development of Hindu Revivalism. Delhi: Rupa and co, 2001
Philosopher and Economist, writing on Philosophy, History and current affairs.
