Colonial Governmentality and the Native Intellectual Response: Cultural Plurality,Imperial Education and the Foundations of Democratic Governance in Modern South Asia

Abstract

This article is premised on the argument that the idea of modern South Asia has been a product of the transformation of the region’s identity from being an exemplar of a cohesive macro-cultural topography in the ancient world to becoming an incohesive social formation today. Such a transformation was impelled by the epistemic rupture that it experienced, owing to the coming of the values of post-Enlightenment Modernity after the advent of the era of colonial transition. However, the emergence of the idea of South Asia, which is inherent with deep-seated sociocultural cleavages, cannot merely be explained by according a singular monovalent emphasis on the role of imported values of European Enlightenment. Rather, it is crucial to locate such a transformation in the context of the contribution of the native intellectual response to the arrival of the values of European Enlightenment. Situating ourselves in this epistemic framework, this article argues that the structuration processes which produced a fractured social cartography in modern South Asia have been a creation of the dialectical epistemic interaction between the forms of colonial knowledge and the native intellectual responses.

Keywords

Colonial knowledge colonial governmentality colonial historiography European enlightenment democratic governance modern South Asia

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Bayly

C. A.

(1996). Empire and information: Intelligence gathering and social communication in India 1780–1880. Cambridge University Press.

Chatterjee

P. S.

(1986). Nationalist thought and the colonial world: A derivative discourse? Zed Books.

Das Gupta

A. C.

(Ed.). (1959). The days of John Company: Selections from the Calcutta Gazette (1824–1832). West Bengal Government.

Dirks

N. B.

(2001). Castes of mind: Colonialism and the making of modern India. Princeton University Press.

Eagleton

, Said

, & Jameson

(1990). Nationalism, colonialism and literature. Minnesota University Press.

Elliot

H. M.

, & Dowson

(1867–1877). The history of India, as told by its own historians. Sushi Gupta.

Guha

(1997). Dominance without hegemony: History and power in colonial India. Harvard University Press.

Hansen

T. B.

(1999). The saffron wave. Princeton University Press.

Inden

(1986). Orientalist constructions of India. Modern Asian Studies, 20(3), 401–446.

10.

Inden

(1990). Imagining India. Basil Blackwell.

11.

Jha

D. N.

(2014). Rethinking Hindu identity. Routledge.

12.

Kaviraj

(2000). Modernity and politics in India. Daedalus, 129(1), 137–166.

13.

Kaviraj

(2005). The sudden death of Sanskrit knowledge. Journal of Indian Philosophy, 33(1), 119–142.

14.

Kolsky

(2005). Codification and the rule of colonial difference: Criminal procedures in British India. Law and History Review, 23(3), 631–683.

15.

Lele

(1993). Orientalism and the social sciences. In Breckenridge

& van der Veer

(Eds.), Orientalism and the postcolonial predicament: Perspectives on South Asia (pp. 45–75). Pennsylvania University Press.

16.

Ludden

(1993). Orientalist empiricism: Transformations of colonial knowledge. In Breckenridge

& van der Veer

(Eds.), Orientalism and the postcolonial predicament: Perspectives on South Asia (pp. 250–278). Pennsylvania University Press.

17.

Ludden

(2004). India and South Asia: A short history. One World Publishers.

18.

Ludden

(2008). An agrarian history of South Asia. Cambridge University Press.

19.

Macaulay

T. B.

(1835/1972). Minute on Indian education. In Clive

& Pinney

(Eds.), Thomas Babington Macaulay: Selected writings. Chicago University Press.

20.

Mathur

(2000). History and anthropology in South Asia: Rethinking the archive. Annual Review of Anthropology, 29(1), 89–106.

21.

McIntyre

(1988). Whose justice? Which rationality? University of Notre Dame Press.

22.

McLeod

(2008). India and Pakistan: Friends, rivals or enemies? Ashgate Publishing Company.

23.

Mehta

U. S.

(1999). Liberalism and empire: A study in the nineteenth-century British liberal thought. University of Chicago Press.

24.

Metcalf

(2008). Ideologies of the Raj. Cambridge University Press.

25.

Mill

(1810). Affairs of India. Edinburgh Review, 16 April, 127–157.

26.

Nandy

(1983). The intimate enemy: Loss and recovery of self under colonialism. Oxford University Press.

27.

Parekh

(1994). Superior people: The narrowness of liberalism from Mill to Rawls. Times Literary Supplement, 25 February, 11–13.

28.

Parker

(2005). The historiography of difference. Law and History Review, 23(3), 685–695.

29.

Pitts

(2005). A turn to empire: The rise of imperial liberalism in Britain and France. Princeton University Press.

30.

Prakash

(1990). Writing post-Oriental histories of the Third World: Perspectives from Indian historiography. Comparative Studies in Society and History, 32(2), 383–408.

31.

Ramusack

B. N.

(2008). The Indian princes and their states. Cambridge University Press.

32.

Said

E. W.

(1978). Orientalism. Vintage Books.

33.

Said

E. W.

(1983). The world, the text, the critique. Harvard University Press.

34.

Sarkar

(1997). Writing social history. Oxford University Press.

35.

Singh

J. G.

(1996). Colonial narratives/cultural dialogues: ‘Discoveries’ of India in the language of colonialism. Routledge.

36.

Stokes

(1989). The English utilitarians and India. Oxford University Press.

37.

Thapar

(2002). The Penguin history of early India. Penguin Books.

38.

Trevelyan

C. E.

(1838). On the education of the people of India. Orient Longman.