|
|
|
Sort Order |
|
|
|
Items / Page
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Srl | Item |
| 1 |
ID:
135832
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
This article analyses Bengali- and Hindi-language travelogues written by Indian railway travellers in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. While the authors of these texts were influenced by the literary and interpretative sensibilities of European guidebooks of the period, especially English-language railway guides to India, they did not uncritically adopt their colonial discourses. Rather, Indian authors created a distinct narrative, rejecting or appropriating European ideas with discretion, primarily to suit their specific vision of India. I argue that in their writings, Indian authors, like their European counterparts, participated in a process of creating ‘others’, which had fundamental implications for the imagining of colonial Indian society.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 2 |
ID:
135797
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
Conventional views of regions and regionalism begin with geography, history, language or other categories of organization. In this article, I offer a new(?) concept: the colonial region and its concomitant sentiment of colonial regionalism. The colonial region is one formed under colonial rule to suit administrative needs. It may directly encompass some form of pre-existing region, or it may cobble together a variety of smaller areas—some perhaps regions of their own, others not—into one greater region. A colonial region is thus an artificial one, not necessarily taking into account local realities. Many of the presidencies, provinces, and princely states might thus be considered as forms of colonial regions. Such regions often have long lives, and over time, inhabitants within a colonial region come to take on a sense of identity and pride in that region. This article examines colonial regionalism in the Madras Presidency along the axes of pride in physical and human assets.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 3 |
ID:
135717
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
The Asiatic cultural continuum, with India at the centre of the gravity, is a fact yet to be discovered and discoursed fully. There has been multi-directional diffusion of the cultural traits and the belief systems. Some religious and socio-cultural traits, such as ancestor worships, belief in life after death, rebirth, re-incarnation, Karmic theory and
liberation from the life-cycle (nirvāna and moksa), used to be widespread covering entire Asia. The commonality extended in many other aspects linked to the traditional religions, what we call Sanatan Dharma, presently called Hinduism. The discovery of the commonality helps self-discovery and self-appraisal; it becomes an act of selfportraiture. Of course, in India, information on such topics is never given to the students, it is taboo practiced by our academics and intellectuals to have discourse on such subjects. This leads to ‘Culture/ tradition illiteracy’, a dominant trait of English educated modern Indians. As a result, our elite have inherited lot of myths, lies and
confusion from their colonial masters. Anything beyond political India, even if non-political and otherwise deeply linked, is alien for them. The denial syndrome is pervasive; it envelopes cultural, linguistic, historical and all other spheres. There is an increasing trend of replacing India for ‘South Asia’ during the academic discourses today; the use of the term ‘Bharata’ is becoming rarer in scholarly writings,
which is part of the same malady.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 4 |
ID:
135461
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
The legitimation of colonial state’s authority was accompanied by the delegitimation of pre-colonial authority at all levels ranging from the pre-colonial claimants to sovereignty to lower levels such as the ‘native princes’, chiefs and the like.”1 If we look into this part of the world, the North-East India, colonial state intervention was able to “delegitimise” not only the Ahoms of Assam but also other neighbouring hill polities including that of Burma (Myanmar). However, the colonial administrators and writers have presented the colonial intervention in this area, as the saviour of society and the action towards liberation of slaves as the greatest service to the humanity. The earlier generation of historians, which relied greatly upon the colonial sources, subscribed to colonial views in their writings. Consequently, the issue of resistance to the British rule in North-East India did not get the deserved space in the historiography of the region. This paper aims to bridge this gap. The first part of the paper studies the historiographical progress in this regard and the second part discusses the case of resistance of the Singpho and Khampti tribes of Arunachal Pradesh.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 5 |
ID:
135833
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
This article compares colonial and post-colonial transformations to the upper stretches of the River Ganga in north India. Exploring mixed sensitivities to the Ganga's developmental and religious significance, the discussion draws on the historical record to compare the implementation and impacts of canal irrigation technologies under the British with contemporary policies to build hydroelectric dams on the sacred river. The article evaluates similarities between the two, while investigating the veracity of activist claims that the British were more sensitive than the independent Government of India to the demands of river devotees that the Ganga continue to flow unfettered past sites of cultural and religious significance.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|