AHC: Ethnic-nationalism in the British Raj, not pan-Indianism
- Thread starter lerk
- Start date
Not very likely. The British tried hard to divide and rule, and to an extent it worked in greatly inflaming religious divisions which resulted in the India-Pakistan split today, but ethnic nationalism was often a non-starter for any independence minded Indian. It was rightly seen as something which would weaken and delay the independence movement as a whole, and which would harm the economic prospects of any independent state, not to mention the easily forceable political consequences of war between these ethnic statelets.
Last edited:
twovultures
Donor
Maybe the British Raj allows Indians to obtain more authority in the colonial government (cooling a desire for independence among the educated Indian elites who created a pan-Indian nationalism) but makes sure to send all such 'native officials' to positions of power outside their immediate homeland (so Bengali officials to the Punjab, Punjab officials to the south, southern officials to Bengal). This results in the face of colonialism being Indians from different regions for many people, leading to a desire to separate from the other groups that they've learned to associate with oppression as nationalist feelings mount in response to colonialism. Perhaps the 'native officials' are especially hard and brutal on the neighbors they've been sent to rule, both because they are trying to prove themselves as loyal to the white British officials, and because they bring religious/caste/ethnic prejudices to their work that would make Kipling look PC.
Probably would have helped to have the orientalists win the day back when they were deciding whether the Raj should use English as its primary language or continue use of Persian/Sanskrit and other native administrative languages- that way not only are there separate inteligencias for each region, it also maintains pre colonial knowledge systems/ ways of thinking about social organisation, which avoids the influence of the British idea that the Hindu Muslim divide was the only way to interpret India. Instead divisions like north/ south, caste affirming/caste denying, language, historical alliances etc all become much more important.
It still wouldn’t be exactly ethnic, because that’s impossible, but you’d easily get separate developments in different regions.
It still wouldn’t be exactly ethnic, because that’s impossible, but you’d easily get separate developments in different regions.
I could see @twovultures suggestion coming about from an infatuation with the Roman Empire, and deciding to copy the princple they had with non-citizen subjects who joined the army - deploy them as far as possible from their native culture and language.
But I think @Madhukar_Shah has a more likely approach. Based on how British authorities ran colonies across the world, the whole reason they wanted local administrators was to translate into and from the local language - having them handle all the paperwork is more of a bonus outcome than the initial driver. So I really can't see them sending Indian clerks and admin staff into regions where the language and customs are different, for that reason.
But if they decide to align administrative divisions more closely with dominant local languages, such that it's feasible to have more of the record-keeping and administration done in that language because the district no longer overlaps linguistic boundaries... That might be feasible. Once you get above a certain level the Raj would want records in English so that information can be reported upwards to English-speakers, but certainly local records can remain in the local language. That then gives you a clerical staff, a bureaucratic middle class as it were, who can regard themselves as well-educated white-collar people and build up some pride in their own group.
I think a lot of the problem you need to overcome is that of prestige dialect, or language in this case. While the Raj rules geographical India, then the people at the top of society, those with all the power, speak English. That creates a strong driver fpr any local who wants to climb the ladder, and obtain as much power as the British wil let them have, to learn English to gain access to the circles of power. So then the local elite are also seen speaking English, which creates further pressure for people below them to also learn it, so as to ingratiate themselves with them, or to be seen as more powerful, influential and prestigeous by everyone else around them. Then you end up with the children of powerful locals going to British private schools and universities and a pan-Indian mindset developing between them while they're all adrift in a sea of Brits and feeling homesick. (Having done a language degree and also found myself as one of very few Brits at a German uni, I know how fast and how hard that can hit.)
I think that to end up with an independent Bengal, Maharashtra, Tamil Nadu etc., you really need each language and culture to retain at least some prestige during the Raj. You really need both. Then as independence movements grow, you'd have a local seed crystal in each region to grow e.g. a Bengali movement rather than a pan-Indian movement. You'd also have administrative borders that aligned with the aims of a more regional movement, I feel like that might also help.
But I think @Madhukar_Shah has a more likely approach. Based on how British authorities ran colonies across the world, the whole reason they wanted local administrators was to translate into and from the local language - having them handle all the paperwork is more of a bonus outcome than the initial driver. So I really can't see them sending Indian clerks and admin staff into regions where the language and customs are different, for that reason.
But if they decide to align administrative divisions more closely with dominant local languages, such that it's feasible to have more of the record-keeping and administration done in that language because the district no longer overlaps linguistic boundaries... That might be feasible. Once you get above a certain level the Raj would want records in English so that information can be reported upwards to English-speakers, but certainly local records can remain in the local language. That then gives you a clerical staff, a bureaucratic middle class as it were, who can regard themselves as well-educated white-collar people and build up some pride in their own group.
I think a lot of the problem you need to overcome is that of prestige dialect, or language in this case. While the Raj rules geographical India, then the people at the top of society, those with all the power, speak English. That creates a strong driver fpr any local who wants to climb the ladder, and obtain as much power as the British wil let them have, to learn English to gain access to the circles of power. So then the local elite are also seen speaking English, which creates further pressure for people below them to also learn it, so as to ingratiate themselves with them, or to be seen as more powerful, influential and prestigeous by everyone else around them. Then you end up with the children of powerful locals going to British private schools and universities and a pan-Indian mindset developing between them while they're all adrift in a sea of Brits and feeling homesick. (Having done a language degree and also found myself as one of very few Brits at a German uni, I know how fast and how hard that can hit.)
I think that to end up with an independent Bengal, Maharashtra, Tamil Nadu etc., you really need each language and culture to retain at least some prestige during the Raj. You really need both. Then as independence movements grow, you'd have a local seed crystal in each region to grow e.g. a Bengali movement rather than a pan-Indian movement. You'd also have administrative borders that aligned with the aims of a more regional movement, I feel like that might also help.
This is not necessarily true- if the orientalists win then that’s strengthening the initial attitude of the British in india that any company official must have at least a good grasp of Persian, Braj and Urdu. The white Mughal phenomenon where British Indians acculturate to Mughal society becomes more prominent and the British in india have no need to conduct any level of official business in English, because they all know Persian and that’s just how it’s always been.
You could very well have the British seeking to stop English education from spreading to maintain their ethnic identity in india when they’re more acculturated in terms of clothing and lifestyle.
The issue with this is that these concepts are rather loose - especially at the time. Sure, the Dravidians are a bit more clear-cut, so you can easily cleave them, but then you get to the Hindis who all come in a spectrum where whichever way you cut it, something passes, with the additional smattering of non-Hindi minorities (like the Gonds, Brahwis, etc). How would that work?
I get what you mean. I do suspect, though, that that would lead to a Neo-Mughal Empire instead, as in you still get an All India trajectory, but it speaks Persian (to begin with) and later Urdu as a national language, and calls itself Hindustan.
Given the caste system as well as how Muslims were often the invading forces who they’d took control (depending on the area) I would say that it might be difficult to get people to see everyone of their own region as being one group. Maybe if you get more concerted Mutinies where every caste might have anger with the British, or you have areas were things are not stratified by the British directly into Five Castes and where enough of the population does not count as Dalits/Untouchables. Not sure what percentage of the population tended to count as that. There is an idea, though. Are their any methods any Indian groups thought of for making Dalits be classified as ‘Cleansed’? I would suggest sending them overseas and mixing until their backgrounds are not entirely remembered, but that was be difficult and not work with the amount of numbers involved. Plus someone needs to clean the sewers and act as butchers, so they would need to find them somewhere. And more importantly, their tongues might turn into a creole or they use Hindi as a lingua Franca amongst each other if sent oversees.
Hmmm, the English (and then British) used Muslim and Hindu religious laws to set up civil laws. Maybe they can be made different in each region? While I out it is possible, if you could make it different enough so it is like two rail lines using different gauges of tracks, it could make unity less desirable.
Hmmm, the English (and then British) used Muslim and Hindu religious laws to set up civil laws. Maybe they can be made different in each region? While I out it is possible, if you could make it different enough so it is like two rail lines using different gauges of tracks, it could make unity less desirable.
That’s possible too- but I think it’d avoid the creation of a bureaucratic class that sees itself as Indian. i think it’d depend on the political trajectory (whether the mutiny is avoided, whether the Mughal emperor is deposed etc) which would determine what level of devolution is permitted in princely states/British ruled territories. Do they feel the need to create a centralised legal system on European models or do they allow for the more pluricentric sources of law that existed in different parts of india at different points.