NATIONAL LAW UNIVERSITY, JODHPUR

WINTER SEMESTER

(JULY-NOVEMBER 2017)

HISTORY- I
C.A. II- BOOK REVIEW
“AN ERA OF DARKNESS: THE BRITISH EMPIRE IN INDIA”
-SHASHI THAROOR
(Word count- 4843 words)

SUBMITTED BY: SUBMITTED TO:

YASHWANTH.J DR. OM PRAKASH
B.A- LL.B, I Semester Faculty of Policy Science
Roll number- 1605

YASH YADAV
B.A-LL.B, I Semester
Roll number- 1603
2|Page
 TABLE OF CONTENTS

I. INTRODUCTION…………………………………………………………………………4

II. ABOUT THE AUTHOR………………………………………………………………….5

III. THEME…………………………………………………………………………………..6

IV. CHAPTER WISE CRITCS

Chapter 1: THE LOOTING OF INDIA……………………………………………...7

Chapter 2: DID THE BRITISH GIVE INDIA POLITICAL UNITY……………….9

Chapter 3: DEMOCRACY, THE PRESS, THE PARLIAMENTARY SYSTEM AND

THE RULE OF LAW…………………………………………………...11

Chapter 4: DIVIDE ET IMPERA…………………………………………………...14

Chapter 5: THE MYTH OF ENIGHTENED DESPOTISM………………………...17

Chapter 6: THE REMAINING CASE FOR EMPIRE………………………………18

Chapter 7: THE (IM)BALANCE SHEET: A CODA……………………………….19

Chapter 8: The MESSY AFTERLIFE OF COLONIALISM………………………..20

V. OPINIONS AND ANALYSIS…………………………………………………………...21

V1. THE VERDICT………………………………………………………………………….23

3|Page
 INTRODUTION

In mid-2015 Shashi Tharoor was invited by Oxford University to take part in a debate where he

had to propose on the motion 'Britain Owes Reparations to Her Former Colonies'. After sometime

this Debate was posted online and received an astonishing positive review. When Tharoor was

questioned regarding the great review that he was receiving to this he answered that all he had

done was established the basic facts which most of Indians were unaware of.

Most Indians today are not well versed with reality of the British raj and what kind of treatment

India had received under the raj. This fact prompted David Davidar to insist Shashi Tharoor about

writing a book on the British era in India.

This book doesn’t give a chronological narrative account of the rise and the fall of the British

Empire. It rather studies and presents arguments against the claims alleged benefits India had under

the British raj.

Many britishers were blaming Tharoor and his party for misruling India for six decades. Mr.

Tharoor has beautifully answered these questions in his book by counter questioning them that

does the incompetence of governments after independence justified the famines before it.

At the end this book is not wholly about British colonialism but about India's experience under it.

4|Page
 About the Author
Shashi Tharoor (born 9 March 1956) is an Indian politician and a former diplomat who is

currently serving as Member of Parliament, Lok Sabha from Thiruvananthapuram, Kerala since

2009. He also currently serves as Chairman of the Parliamentary Standing Committee on External

Affairs.

Tharoor began writing at the age of 6, and his first published story appeared in the Sunday edition

of The Free Press Journal, in Mumbai at age 10.His World War II adventure novel Operation

Bellows, inspired by the Biggles books, was serialized in the Junior Statesman starting a week

before his 11th birthday. Each of his books has been a bestseller in India. The Great Indian Novel

is in its 42nd edition, and a Silver Jubilee special edition was issued on the book's 25th anniversary,

September 2014, from Viking Pengun India. The Elephant, the Tiger and the Cellphone has

undergone seven hardback re-printings there. President Bill Clinton cited Shashi Tharoor's book

India From Midnight to the Millennium in his speech to the Indian parliament in 2000.

Shashi Tharoor's non-fiction work "An Era Of Darkness", published in the UK as "Inglorious

Empire" What the British Did to India", arising out of a speech he delivered at the Oxford Union,

was published in November 2016. It sold over 50,000 copies in eight hardback reprints within six

months of publication. The UK edition rose to Number 1 in the London Evening Standard

bestseller lists.

Victor Mallet in Financial Times said Tharoor "wants us to understand the origins of the difficulties

that confronted India after 1947", attributing most of that to colonialism.

5|Page
 THEME

“Robust nationalist polemic”

Amidst this heightened nationalist fever, spiking on social media after Modi’s win in 2014 came

Shashi Tharoor’s energetic debate speech last year at the Oxford Union. Tharoor was speaking for

the motion, “Britain Owes Reparations To Her Former Colonies,” and launched into a brilliantly

argued, no-holds barred nationalist roar against former colonial masters.

A speech that echoed the views of the nationalist school of history writing begun as far back as the

late 19th century had found a new millennial constituency.

Tharoor has now converted that ‘viral’ Oxford union speech into a new book, `An Era of Darkness’

(Aleph) in which he expands his theme of the evil, heartless, greedy and racist British mercilessly

exploiting India, impoverishing its people, stealing its riches, destroying its social fabric and

leaving it with a ruined economy, dysfunctional democracy and confused modernity, with even

the so-called gains of colonialism like the English language and the railway network being only

very mixed blessings.

The setting of the book is basically during the starting of the modern era.

6|Page
 Chapter 1

THE LOOTING OF INDIA

In this chapter tharoor focuses on how britishers took advantage of the collapse of the Mughal

empire and on the rising number of warring principalities contending for authority and how they

subjugated a vast land through the power of their artillery and their amorality. the britishers

displaced nawabs and maharajas, emptied their treasuries as it pleased them, took over their states

through various methods like 'doctrine of lapse' where whenever a ruler died without an heir, the

British would take over it and stripped farmers of the ownership of their land that they have been

tilling for generations.

In 1757, British had fought and won the battle of Plassey, this laid the foundation of British Empire

in india.it was won under the command of Robert Clive through the combination of superior

artillery and even more superior subterfuge.

The British had destroyed the textile competition from India and led to first great

deindustrialization of the modern world. For centuries the handloom weavers of Bengal had

produced some of the world's most desirable fabrics that were coveted by European dressmakers.

The demand of britishers is estimated to have increased the Bengal’s textile production by as much

as 33 per cent. But once britishers took over the power everything changed. They squeezed out

other foreign buyers and instituted their monopoly and since the British manufacturers couldn't

compete with Indians, the britishers smashed the looms of Bengali weavers. They did everything

7|Page
they could do to destroy it, even imposed tariffs o 70-80 per cent on whatever Indian textiles

survived

But the ill effects of British did not stop here. Theft that they had labelled as taxation became their

favorite form of exaction. French ambassador Comte de Chatelet explains it very well, he writes,

'There are a few kings in Europe ricer than the directors of the English East India Company.' There

are many accounts of British chicanery and perfidy with which they extracted wealth from native

princes, and went on to overthrow them and take over their territories. Warren Hasting accepted

substantial bribes and then went on to wage war against the bribe-giver. One wonders whether

criticize his greed or admire him for the fact that despite being 'paid for', he refused to be 'bought'.

There were policies like 'permanent settlement' which proved repressive for the Indian economy

and all but also destroyed Indian agriculture.the conditions were so unpleasant that many people

fled from their traditional homes for refuge in domains beyond the company's remit. Since the

empire was a creation of merchants and at heart it was a commercial enterprise which operated

according to the ups and downs of the market, therefore to them emotions of people suffering from

their rule wasn't any cause of concern.

The reason for high taxation was that half of the collected revenue used to go out of India for wide

variety of colonial expeditions in furtherance of the glory of the British Empire, from Burma to

Mesopotamia.

8|Page
 Chapter 2

DID THE BRITISH GIVE INDIA POLITICAL UNITY

It cannot be denied that throughout the history of this subcontinent there has existed a feeling of

unity among the people living in it. Some examples are the Mauryan era (322 bce-185bce), the

Gupta era (at its peak, 320-1565ce) and the Mughal era (1526-1857). The British like to point out

that they are responsible for the political unity of India and about the idea of India being as one

entity. To this Mr. Shashi Tharoor has very nicely pointed out that all British had done is that they

had taken advantage of India’s disorder with superior weaponry and they were not the first to do

that. According to him it is entirely possible that Indian ruler would have done this and established

his rule over most of the sub-continent.

If britishers had not invaded and Mughals would have continued to rule over India it would have

led to an inevitable change (just like it happened on England in 17th century) from absolute

monarchy to constitutional monarchy. It would have happened in India just as it did in several

other countries in the non-colonized world, across Europe and in the handful of Asian countries

that were not colonized, notably China, Japan and Thailand. The process would not have been

painless; there may well have been revolutions and military struggles; there would have been

disruption and conflict; but India’s resources would have stayed in India and its future would have

been resolved by its own people.

The onset of British colonialism interrupted this natural evolution and did not allow it to flower.

But to suggest that Indian political unity would not have been possible without British is absurd

and unsupported by the evidence.

9|Page
In India people of all religions caste lived intertwined lives, and even religious practices were

rarely exclusionary: one could easily see a muslim playing hindu devotional songs and see a hindu

worshipping a muslim saint. it was only after the britishers stared to rule theories for a different

state came up.

10 | P a g e
 Chapter 3

DEMOCRACY, THE PRESS, THE PARLIAMENTARY SYSTEM AND THE RULE

OF LAW

The political unity and democracy that was created in India by the British according to the

Britishers, a good part of it lies in the three building blocks of democracy during the colonial era:

a free press, an incipient parliamentary system and the rule of law.

Press

It is certainly true that Indian nationalism and the independence movement could not have spread

across the country without the active involvement of the free press. The first British printing press,

established in Bombay in 1664. It took more than a century for the first newspaper to be printed in

India when, in 1780, James Augustus Hicky published his Bengal Gazette, or Calcutta General

Advertiser. It must, therefore, be acknowledged that it was the British who first established

newspapers in India, which had been unknown before colonial rule, and it is to their credit that

they allowed Indians to emulate them in doing so both in English, catering to the tiny English-

educated elite (and its aspirational imitators) and in Indian vernacular languages.

It catered to the literate minority—less than 10 per cent of the population at that time—but their

influence extended well beyond this segment, since the news and views they published were

repeated and spread by word of mouth.

The press beyond any doubt contributed significantly to the development and growth of nationalist

feelings in India, inculcated the idea of a broader public consciousness, exposed many of the

11 | P a g e
failings of the colonial administration and played an influential part in fomenting opposition to

many aspects of British rule.

The British authorities began to be alarmed: Lord Lytton brought in a Vernacular Press Act in

1878 to regulate the Indian-language papers, and his government kept a jaundiced eye on the

English-language ones. (It was the introduction of this Act that prompted the Amrita Bazar Patrika

to convert itself into an English-language newspaper overnight, to avoid coming under the new

law’s purview.) Indeed, the Indian vernacular press was allowed to get away even with crude

invective.

Parliamentary system

It was remarkable that when the Indian nationalists, victorious in their freedom struggle, sat down

to write a Constitution for independent India, they created a political system based entirely on

British parliamentary democracy. The parliamentary democracy involves the British perversity of

electing a legislature to form an executive: this has created a unique breed of legislator, largely

unqualified to legislate, who has sought election only in order to wield (or influence) executive

power.

It has produced governments obliged to focus more on politics than on policy or performance. It

has distorted the voting preferences of an electorate that knows which individuals it wants but not

necessarily which policies. It has spawned parties that are shifting alliances of individual interests

rather than the vehicles of coherent sets of ideas. It has forced governments to concentrate less on

governing than on staying in office, and obliged them to cater to the lowest common denominator

of their coalitions. It is time for a change.

12 | P a g e
But six decades of Independence have wrought significant change, as exposure to British practices

has faded and India’s natural boisterousness has reasserted itself. Some of the state assemblies in

our federal system have already witnessed scenes of furniture overthrown, microphones ripped out

and slippers flung by unruly legislators, not to mention fisticuffs and garments torn in scuffles

among politicians. Pepper spray has been unleashed by a protesting Member of Parliament in the

well of the national legislature. We can scarcely blame the British for that either.

Rule of law

Bringing British law to the natives was arguably one of the most important constituent elements

of this mission. It was, of course, through ‘the law’ that British authority was exercised. But where

a system of laws pre-existed the British legal system, as was the case in India, British law had to

be imposed upon an older and more complex civilization with its own legal culture. In India the

British were forced to use coercion and cruelty to get their way; often they had to resort to the

dissolution of prior practices and traditional systems, as well as, in the process, to reshape civil

society.

There is no doubt that traditional systems like the khap panchayats of the north had severe

limitations of their own and were often used to uphold an iniquitous social order, but as Rwanda

has shown with its gacaca courts, traditional systems can be adapted to meet modern norms of

justice without the excessive procedural delays, formalism and expense of the Western system.

The colonial legacy has meant a system of interminable trials and long-pending cases, leaving

India with an unenviable world record for judicial backlog that exceeds by far every other country

in the world.

13 | P a g e
 Chapter 4

DIVIDE ET IMPERA

The tendency to separate was apparent in British attitudes from the start. Indeed, it had been

evidenced in the only already-white country the British colonized, Ireland; instead of assimilating

the Irish into the British race, they were subjugated by their new overlords, intermarriage was

forbidden (as was even learning the Irish language or adopting Irish modes of dress) and most Irish

people were segregated ‘beyond the Pale’. If the British could do that to a people who looked like

them, they were inclined to do much worse to the darker-skinned peoples they conquered in India.

The 1901 census helped colonizers in making boundaries clear and precise unlike the community

boundaries that were there in the precolonial era. The Britishers couldn't find anyone who could

tell them boundary lines of communities but after this census commissioners discovered the

boundary lines that existed among Hindus, Sikhs and Jains barely existed. But this went against

the British assumption that communities are mutually exclusive and a person had to belong either

to one or another community. The British then simply superimposed their assumptions on Indians

by classifying them by religion, caste or tribe and thereby, initiating their divide and rule culture.

They took a step further by introducing Montagu-Chelmsford reforms. Under this policy seats

were reserved for hindus, muslims, sikhs and so on. This resulted in the aggravation of communal

identities, since what little politics was permitted could quickly devolve into a communal

competition for limited resources. Public sentiments could be aroused to exaggerate differences

amongst Indians, which redounded to the benefit of the British.

14 | P a g e
Stumbling towards Armageddon

During the world war India was suffering under the British rule but still Nehru still assured the

British of their support with them, on the condition that it should be provided choice was made by

Indians and not imposed upon them. Under his direction, Congress leaders made it clear to the

viceroy that all they needed was a declaration that India would be given the chance to determine

its own future after the war. The Congress position was greeted with understanding and even some

approval in left-wing circles in Britain.

Two years in the political wilderness after the electoral setbacks of 1937 had already transformed

the League. Congress rule in many provinces had unwittingly increased Muslim concern, even

alarm, about the implications of democratic majoritarian rule in a country so overwhelmingly

Hindu. Many Muslims began to see themselves as a political and economic minority, and the

League spoke to their insecurities. Jinnah had begun to come to the conclusion that the only

effective answer to the Congress’s political strength would be separation—the partition of the

country.

In October 1939, Jinnah persuaded Lord Linlithgow, the viceroy, to enlist the League as the sole

representative of India’s Muslims, a position to which its electoral results did not yet entitle it.

Wavell convened a conference in Simla from late June 1945, where the viceroy allowed Jinnah to

wreck. In this atmosphere of frustration and despair to congress’s surprise the British called

elections in India at the end of 1945, for seats in the central and provincial assemblies..

15 | P a g e
Tragically, divide et imperia had worked too well.

The interim government was formed to decide about the future India but here also the League was

trying its best to wreck it from within and amid the shambles of policy making the British

announced that they would withdraw from India no later than June 1948, and that to execute the

transfer of power, Wavell would be replaced.

Nehru was convinced that Jinnah was capable of setting the country ablaze and destroying all that

the nationalist movement had worked for: a division of India was preferable to its destruction. ‘It

is with no joy in my heart that I commend these proposals,’ Nehru told his party, ‘though I have

no doubt in my mind that it is the right course.’ The distinction between heart and head was

poignant.

On 3 June, Nehru, Jinnah, and the Sikh leader Baldev Singh broadcast news of their acceptance of

partition to the country.

And then after long years of struggle, at the stroke of midnight of 14 august 1947, our first Prime

Minister Jawaharlal Nehru announced our freedom.

16 | P a g e
 Chapter 5

THE MYTH OF ENLIGHTENED DESPOTISM

Tharoor is at his eloquent best when deconstructing the malice and connivance of the empire.

Particularly harrowing is his account of the many famines that happened under the British and how

they saw these avoidable tragedies as a Malthusian necessity. He cuts down any olive branch one

may extend towards the British with statistics and reasoning that explain the underlying motives

in each of their policies. He maintains an unwavering sneer at the audacity of the empire to have

undertaken such skullduggery and then attempted to give it a positive spin. Tharoor’s extensive

knowledge of the subject, peppered with historical accounts and contemporary examples, makes

for an engaging read because he considers every possible counterpoint to his arguments and

addresses them deftly in a manner that is hard to refute.

Tharoor mourns the annihilation of a gentle social order across the country which he believed was

sustained through dialogue and held together by consensus. Tharoor is particularly derisive of

parliamentary democracy, asserting that what was fine for a small number of people of a much

smaller country, is wholly unsuited for a large and raucous one like our own.

He calls it “Brutish Raj” in a sardonic tone and throws light on the events which were never to be

forgotten from the hearts of the true blood Indians. He comments upon Jalianwala bagh massacre

as “no act of insane frenzy but a conscious, deliberate imposition of colonial will”.

17 | P a g e
 Chapter 6

THE REMAINING CASE FOR EMPIRE

The author ignores the greatest accomplishments of the Raj—the decimation of the old order of

inherited privileges and rights; kindling of the spirit of democracy and incubation of the great

Indian middle class via government jobs in the railways, the army and in civil governance.

The few unarguable benefits—the English language, tea, and cricket—were never actually

intended for the benefit of the colonized but introduced to serve the interests of the colonizers.

Besides going into the financing of Indian Railways and how gold plating was done by many an

English investor assured of guaranteed returns and how Railways during construction and later

were used to drain the Indian economy and increase the national debt, Tharoor makes an important

point that in the operational finances of Railways it was the third class passengers traveling in sub

human conditions that subsidized freight and the first class.

Tharoor’s criticism of the pre-Independence Congress, evocations of an idyllic Indian past such as

village communities, references to the glories of Nalanda University and guru shiksha parampara

would delight the present Narendra Modi-led ruling dispensation. But history is greater than

politics. Yes exploitation and racism were integral to British rule but should the history of those

200 years be interpreted only through a political prism?

Famine, forced migration and brutality were 3 of the major propagandas that were lighted upon

this chapter. Tharoor is at his eloquent best when deconstructing the malice and connivance of

the empire. Particularly harrowing is his account of the many famines that happened under the

British and how they saw these avoidable tragedies as a Malthusian necessity.

18 | P a g e
 Chapter 7

THE (IM)BALANCE SHEET: A CODA

In this chapter, Tharoor focusses on the positives and negatives of the colonial era of The British

Era. He at first cites how not all Britons were arrogant such as Clive, Churchill, Dyer etc. He

continues to elaborate the officials, viceroys who befriended Indians and devoted their lives to

services in India.

The colonial consequences discussed in the chapter are very convincing. The facts being India

and China together accounting for almost 75% of the world’s total industrial output in 1750 and

turning to one of the poorest and diseased societies in the world. It is noted that Ferguson admits

that ‘between 1757 and 1900 British per capita income gross domestic product increased in real

terms by 347 per cent while for India it was a mere 14 per cent’.

The British ended their ignominious half-century in which India’s per capita income showed no

growth at all. “Now, in fifty years Japan has revolutionized her history with the aid of modern

arts of progress, and India with 150 years of English rule, is still condemned to tutelage”.

The Moral Barriers enlightens the readers how Indians were easily exploited by the Britishers.

Opium production and sale was one of the monopolies carried out by the british. While the

Chinese had opium wars for the move by the british, Indians fell for it. He quotes “British

remained foreigners, unlike Muslim rulers”.

Tharoor’s passion for the subject comes through every page, his sardonic tone and twist of the

English phrase even while cursing the power that imposed English language with “Tommy

jackboots” hits the readers with a genuine force.

19 | P a g e
 Chapter 8

THE MESSY AFTERLIFE OF COLONIALISM

While some think that the British should be thanked for introducing the railways, press and

parliamentary system into India, Tharoor argues that these were only introduced in order to

accelerate the purloin of the country’s riches and to maintain control over the land. He also points

out how India is still suffering under a system that was framed with Victorian values. Our

bureaucracy, corruption and unfortunate laws pertaining to homosexuality and sedition can all be

attributed to the archaic system set up by the British. Even the divide-and-rule policy initially used

by the British to keep Indians quarrelling amongst themselves, created a gulf between communities

that continues till today.

Shashi Tharoor briefs about the imperial amnesia. It is best to see his work as a reflection of the

spasm of imperial hubris that briefly jerked into life at the beginning of the twenty-first century,

rather than as a definitive statement of the nature and implications of the experience of Empire for

hundreds of millions of people around the globe.

The author chastises the British for taking the fame ‘Kohinoor Diamond’ from the soils of India.

The chapter seems to be a one sided debate, there was one to blame- “The white man”.

Tharoor accepts that the British Raj was more efficient than the domestic institutions it replaced.

He is right that the rapacity of the Raj was exaggerated, precisely because its extractive capacity

was greater than the loosely regulated Princely States. Consider the establishment of land records

and the uniform and regular assessment and collection of revenue.

20 | P a g e
 OPINIONS & ANALYSIS

Tharoor’s book, which took shape after his speech on the subject went viral last year, is an

extensive examination of the economic and cultural damage wreaked upon India over the 200 years

it was under British rule. In order to establish their dominion, the British dismantled the organic

structure of the subcontinent which was always, as the historian Jon Wilson noted, “A society of

little societies”.

When a child learns history in school, often it is a highly biased as well as highly abridged version.

Yes, we all read about British Raj and the Indian freedom struggle. But history was not taught with

a spirit of enquiry. We were never asked to argue both sides of a question. Or to think objectively

about the effects of policies and actions, such as war and colonization, upon the populations of the

world.

Tharoor systematically goes over the history of British rule in India and the adverse effects of

colonialism on Indian industry and economy. He addresses each of the pro-colonial arguments –

for example, that British rule brought about law and order to a nation that was ruled by debauched

and/or brutal native rulers, that the Britishers actually ushered India into the modern age by

building a superb rail and road network, that they put an end to heinous practices such as Sati, and

other sundry arguments that claim that British rule did quite a lot of good on the way to doing

harm. He debunks each of these arguments.

An Era of Darkness serves as a brief guide to the entire history of British rule in India. At the same

time, it gives precise information as to how the British Raj crippled India economically. Does this

21 | P a g e
still affect India’s current standing as an independent nation, and if so, how? And is reparation

possible? These are some questions that the reader can ponder upon as s/he reads the book.

There is a "moral urgency", Tharoor declares, to educate people, especially in Britain, about

colonial exploitation. For his part, he announces that "my outrage is personal", and that he finds

it "far easier to forgive than to forget". He underplays that in India, while there was ambivalence

while the British were still around, none of us now says they should have been here. Within

India, the British Empire has evoked a posthumous consensus. The message of the book-and the

outrage which animates its author-have been prescribed, through their textbooks, to Indian

schoolchildren since Independence.

But the drawback of a debate is that its terms are set by others. Imaginative history proposes its

own questions. Quibbling about British badness deflects attention from the deeper problems of

the entire framework of Nationalist Truth.

Tharoor’s book bridges the gap and deserves to be read by both British and Indian audiences; the

British can perhaps use it to acknowledge the disgrace of empire while Indians can use it as a

reminder of how we shouldn’t be divided and taken advantage of again. After all, as Tharoor states

in the book, “history belongs in the past, but understanding it is the duty of the present”.

Lastly, at a time when debate has been reduced to a cacophony of slogans and insults by bhakts,

Tharoor's writing, with its expansive case studies and citations and sustained argument, all

augmented by his felicity of language, may just come as an eye-opener to us all.

22 | P a g e
 THE VERDICT

I would strongly urge you to buy An Era of Darkness and read it from cover to cover. It serves as

a reminder of the travails our nation has been through. It is also an eye-opener to those of us who

have neither personally experienced nor personally known anyone who has had to suffer life under

foreign rule.

RATINGS

A must read book for lovers of Indian History

4.5/5

23 | P a g e