Throughout the India history it has been a matter of debate among historians that Who/What actually Unified India .
On the one hand Colonial historians often claim that the very idea of ‘India’ as one entity , is the unchallengeable contribution of British rule and had the British not ruled India , it would have been divided in many separate identities . On the other hand recent contrast views of various Modern Historians and Thinkers like Shashi Tharoor claim that the ‘ Idea of India was inherent from a time much earlier than the British came.
British gave three pronged arguments to further their claim of Why they deserve credit for the political unity of India .
- The British like to point out, in moments of self-justifying exculpation , that the India would have been disintegrated into various regional powers if they had not unified it .
- The Pan India British Rule (nearly 2/3rd part of India ) resulted into the Unification of the country . This argument stands on two pillars. First, that the British created the idea of a political union called India. Second, that they provided Indians the institutions needed to hold the union together and run it.
- Railways : The construction of the Indian Railways is often pointed as one of the ways in which British colonialism benefited the subcontinent and unified different corners of India and tightened the connectivity which in itself is a contributing factor towards Unity .
Counter Arguments : ‘ Idea of India was inherent from a time much earlier than the British came.
1. Repeated Cycle in History : This was not the first time India got United . Throughout the Indian history there are many instances were Unification of India was witnessed .
The Mauryas (322 BCE — 185 BCE) integrated India and ruled over it , later it was again disintegrated into various regional powers . After years of process India was reunited under Guptas (at its peak, 320–550 CE) and later during the Mughals(1526–1707 CE)
2. Tharoor’s Theory of Impulsive force or The Magnet effect :
“Throughout the history of subcontinent, there has existed an impulsion for unity. Every period of disorder throughout Indian history has been followed by a centralising 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 British did, and consolidated his rule over most of the subcontinent.” For example when you drop a magnet then the broken part of the magnets tend to get together and bound themselves together similarly the regional powers would have united to form India
3. Railways : Governor General Lord Hardinge argued in 1843 that the railways would be beneficial “to the commerce, government and military control of the country” . So railways were not introduced to help Indians unite the country , It was only after the independence that the Railways realised their true potential and helped in the development of country and before independence the only work that the railways did was to ensure colonial interests
Some More facts defying the Colonial Idea :
1. Mythological perspective : The ancient epics the Mahabharata and the Ramayana also reflect ‘idea of India’
2. India has enjoyed cultural and geographical unity throughout the ages.
Arabs, for instance, regarded the entire continent as ‘al-Hind’ and all Indians as ‘Hindi’, whether they hailed from Punjab, Bengal or Kerala. The great nationalist Maulana Azad once remarked upon how, at the Haj, all Indians were considered to be from one land, and regarded themselves as such.
** Did British really Unite us ? Then Why Partition ?
Britain’s policy was not to unite but to Divide and Rule : The Partition of Bengal (1905)and the Morley Minto Reforms(1909) and the Growth of Communalism and later Partition .
Book by Anuj Garg — https://www.amazon.in/dp/B08KZQ6HWJ/ref=cm_sw_r_wa_api_i_TfxGFbFKANJ9V
