DID THE BRITISH GAVE INDIA POLITICAL UNITY

The British like to point out , in moments of self-justifying exculpation , that they deserve credit for the political
unity of India – that the very idea of India as one entity ( now three but one during the British Raj) instead of
multiple warring principalities and statelets , is the unchallengeable contribution of British imperial rule.

It is difficult to refute that proposition except with a provable hypothesis : that throughout the history of the
continent , there has existed an impulsion for unity. This was manifest in the several kingdoms throughout Indian
history that sought to extend their reach across all the subcontinent : the Maurya( 322 BCE-185 BCCE) , GUPTA ,
and Mughal (1526-1857) empires , and to a lesser extent , the Vijayanagara kingdom in Deccan . Every period of
disorder throughout Indian history has been followed by a centralizing impulse, and had the British not been the
first to take advantage of India’s disorder with superior weaponry , it is entirely possible that an Indian ruler would
have accomplished what the Brisih did , and consolidated his rule over most of the subcontinent.
The same impulse also manifest in Indians’ vision of their own nations , as in the ancient epics the Mahabharata
and the Ramayana , which reflect an “ idea of india” that twentieth century nationalists would have recognized.
The epics have acted as strong , yet sophisticated threads of Indian culture that subcontinent , that have woven
together tribes , languages and peoples across the subcontinent , uniting them in their celebration larger than life
heroes and heroines , whose stories were told in dozens of translations and variations , but always in the same
spirits and meaning.

Diana Eck’s writing on India’s ‘sacred geography’ extensively delineate ancient ideas of political unity mediated
through ideas of sacredness. As Eck explains : ‘ Considering its long history , india has had but a a few hours of
political and administrative unity . Its unity as a nation , however , has been firmly constituted by the sacred
geography it has held ion common and revered : its mountains , forests ,rivers , hilltop shrines .. Linked with the
track of pilgrimage.
If the British claims of creating viable political institutions in India , a democratic spirit , an efficient
bureaucracy and the rule of law all seem hollow after the analysis in the previous chapter , it is their
overarching assertion of having bequeathed India its political unity that underpins it.

But while the events outlined above were occurring , another anti-democratic British project was
coming to fruition that would discredit any credible view that the political unity of India was an
objective of British Colonialism.

“ The sight of Hindu and Muslim soldiers rebelling together in 1857 and fighting side by side , willing
to rally under the command of each other and pledge joint allegiance to enfeebled Mughal monarch
, had alarmed the British , who did not take long to conclude that dividing the two groups and
pitting them against one another was the most effective way to ensure unchallenged continuance of
Empire. As early as 1859 , the then british governer of Bombay , advised London that “Divide et
impera” was the old Roman maxim , and it should be ours.

“ The existence of hostile political creeds among that Indian people was essential for our political
positions in Inidia.
The British had a particular talent for creating and exaggerating particularistic identities
and drawing ethnically based administrative lines in all their colonies. Scholars have
theorized that this practice may have stemmed from the British horror of diluting their
own , idealized English identity, to which their colonial subjects were not allowed to aspire.

This tendency to separate was apparent in the British attitudes from the start.

Some critics point out that the British can scarcely be blamed for pre-existing divisions in
Indian Society , notably caste , which divided ( still divides) the majority hindu population
into mutually exclusive and often incompatible social stratifications. Fair enough , but it is
also true that the British , knowingly or unknowingly , helped solidify and perpetuate the
iniquities of the cast system. Since the British came from a hierarchical society with an
entrenched class system , the instinctively tended to look for a similar system in india.