William Dalrymple definitely deserves Bharat Ratna and his books must be included in our school syllabus. He spent majority of his professional life on researching about Indian history, guy is genius.
Speechless, visceral South Asian indignation here. This remarkably well researched, well documented presentation is phenomenal enlightenment for the vital process of psychological decolonization, not just for every Bangladeshi, every Indian, every Pakistani but, most significantly, for every british individual. Liberation and Equality are all encompassing, they are vital inheritances both for the colonized/oppressed as they are for the colonizer/oppressor. Thank you, William Dalrymple and Shashi Tharoor
because you are a dumbo..just earlier you fell victim to the narrative pitched at school, now you are falling victim to the narrative presented by these two con artists
Shashi in the excitement cited Marthanda Verma of Travancore as the first King to defeat a European army, tend to ignore the fact that even earlier than that in the 16th century it was Rani Abbakka who fought a long war encompassing 4 decades with the Portuguese resulting in them loosing very badly and finally to rely on treachery to kill her.
This is the travesty. We have long ignored those kinds of facts and abbreviate that part of history to Battle of Plassey, Buxar and 1857. The result is a full on ignorance and sainthood for Gandhi
@@krishnajonnakadla-cm4ouWhat she’s talking about is a couple of centuries prior to the period you’re talking about. Also, Gandhi’s sainthood could be questioned but his greatness isn’t really a point of debate.
As an ex banker I have realised rather late (much after my long bank career unfortunately) that whether I it’s the napoleonic wars or the American civil war or even the ancient Roman wars, the banker cast the winning dice. Heroic martial accounts are completely blind to this fact. Willioam’s point at 59:00 is for me the high point of this discussion. Rest of the details of EIC history are merely the story plot. Audience queries were so impressive and sadly got such little time.
Great talk btw by William who was totally factual, truthful and objective during this talk. British people should not glorify their colonial rule of other nations as is done today in school texts, other places. As William says in this talk, the Diwani being handed over to EIC by Shah Alam to manage the finances of 3 of the richest provinces of India viz Bengal, Bihar and Orissa are today the poorest. We know where the loot went, don't we?
Very few know this but the Sikhs, Gurkhas and the Pashtoon soldiers were die hard loyal to the British officers in the Indian Army. They are also today among the best fighters.
Inspite of the Mughal and the British India Company, India is still here, Hinduism is still here and both are taking their rightful place in the worldIndia haf a culturak empire in China and the East without using force..
India became a geopolitical reality due to the British rule. You may not like to believe it but that is how it evolved. In the past the concept of India was more in a spiritual and emotional sense. Bharata was divided into various "Janapadhas" with Kings fighting one another for supremacy. British rule gave India a geopolitical reality along with Parliament, Army, Railways etc. Shashi Tharoor may be right that India could still have had all these without being colonized but that is how it happened and there you have it!
@@sridharkaushik9290 you were making a valid point up untill you said "....along with parliament, army and railways". The British rule did not "give" these things to us. These are legacies of the colonial rule, that we inherited. By saying the British gave those to us, it implies that we wouldn't have any of these without them. And that is a ridiculous thing to say considering the British built the railways with Indian money just so they could transport raw materials and loot to the ports in Calcutta and Bombay and ultimately back to Britain.
@@winter_silhouetteSure, but what we inherited from the British was an advanced form of government, a modern judiciary along with common law and institutions on which a modern democracy can function, none of which had their precedents in India
It’s funny that at a time when the emphasis should be on progress of citizens, we are still stuck along with other primitive forces around the world on the revival of a certain religion, when evidence over history suggests that the prominence of religion results disproportionately in the clergy gaining greater political and material influence at the cost of the rest.
Ironic to see, around 24:00, WD discussing a past Bikaner merchant operating in Kolkata under the logo of a current company founded in Bikaner that ran its manufacturing in Kolkata.
One 'small' company? Might have been the very start, but it for most it's time it was an arm of the state, having Royal ascent, and many shareholders that were Lordsand others in government..
Wow, just wow - so much explosive info emerging only now!!! I didn't think I was going to watch the whole video but I got totally hooked and have even saved the transcript.
The idea of loot by the East India Company is absolutely fascinating! It's a captivating glimpse into history that reveals the complexities of trade, power, and ambition.
he is son of Hew Darymple Governor of Gibraltar, a man who was once boss of Wellington...a lot of what he says is true but to take the responsibility away from UK and just put it on EIC seems quite edited...the original charters these companies got to trade was backed by the Church and Royalty of UK. similar happened in SPAIN, without the backing of church and royalties this e companies had no power of any sorts...
The one thing I don’t understand in this narrative (and also Mr. Tharoor’s) is why the per capita GDP of India remains uniformly low, in fact close to subsistence level), from the glory days of the Moghuls (1700s), through the British loot, until about 1950. Only subsequently, it starts creeping up, gathering some moderate momentum after the the economic liberalization. This suggests that it made little difference to the average Indian whether Moghul wealth was parked in Delhi or had been shipped to London.
Not sure if your statement is true, but if it is, it may be due to the fact that life of common folk improved in the west only post industrialisation, and sadly, India is still not fully industrialised. We are still a largely agricultural economy.
@HowIDoitGamingXbox it is in various research reports. Google “Indian per capita income versus rest of world in 15th and 16th century”. Then do the same, replacing “per capita income” with “GDP”. The two pictures will be starkly different,
@@krishnajonnakadla-cm4ou GDP measures the net wealth of the country, not the per capita income. The average income in India is currently around Rs 20,000 per month.
The GDP per capita can remain the same over a long time even when a few get very rich at the expense of the larger masses, who are forced into destitution
Absolutely brilliant. it's not just the story but the way these gents narrative it. Hats off! And very rarely are audience questions so analytical and meaningful - well done audience
It is a lie to call it colonialism by a company- if you remember Mangal Panday, you would recall that the shipment of soldiers arrived. Which company will hand over a prized possession just like that even if it is to the monarch.
I read somewhere - “From the dawn of history, India has always been invaded. The invader never won. But, India always lost”! The list of Jagat Seths, Mudaliars and Chettiars of Tamil Nadu, Mir Jaffers, Mir Sadiqs is endless. India was betrayed by its own people every time. I feel the main reason is the caste system, where every caste looked out for itself. Which is true today too. Remember, the majority of “lower” castes were not allowed to bear arms. That said, nobody really thought about India as a country. That concept wasn’t even there.
Where do you think, Mir Jaffer, Mir Sadiq, Mir Kashem etc. fitted in the Caste system? These has nothing to do with caste system, it's to do with the greed of power, personal hatred to the ruler and greed of wealth and money. Greed always wins over literally anything including caste and all.
The misdeeds of the Brits in India are legendary. So, too, is Mr Tharoor’s rebundling of the same story. His starting point always is how rich India was. At 27:05 he quotes an Oxford professor (of course, it has to be Oxford) to say “India was such a rich country ……. Its economy was 27% of the global GDP.” That raises a question. The US economy is now 24% of the worlds. That means that India then was richer than the US is now, in comparative terms. Then he says that in 1700 the revenue collected by Aurangzeb was more than every single European monarch combined (sic). Mr. Dalrymple, in this book “The Anarchy”, quotes historian Shireen Moosavi’s research which found that “the Mughal state appropriated 56.7 per cent of the total produce”. So, my question is: If India was so rich, and if the Moghul’s treasury collected so much tax, where did it all that money go? Yes, we know, it went into tombs, mosques, gardens, durbars, poets, musicians, and such like. What else? What public goods did those revenues produce? And, particularly, where was education? How many schools? Was there even a single printing press in their whole empire? The avarice of the Brits, their loot and plunder are all well-known, recorded in meticulous detail by the Brits themselves. The villains are well known. Repeatedly churning out stories of their villainy only allows us to continue to wallow in the comfort of victimhood, leaving the most important questions unanswered: Why did we fall like ninepins to the Brits in spite of our greater wealth, much larger population, much greater natural resources? Mir Jafars and Jsagat Seths are but fall guys. About time we started looking for causes, not villains.
We know the villains; they are very well known. It took some one hundred years at least for the EIC to occupy India. It did not happen within a few months.
There is another explanation. The total GDP of the world grew faster than the GDP of India. India's GDP increased under the British but not as much as in the West. "The statistic that India produced 25 per cent of world output in 1800 and 2 to 4 per cent of it in 1900 does not prove that India was once rich and became poor. It only tells us that industrial productivity in the West increased four to six times during this period...National income statistics do not show that during British rule the Indian economy became steadily poorer". Source: Tirthankar Roy, Professor of Economic History, born and educated in India.
What if the only reason in the first place the Indian subcontinent had an estimated 25% of global GDP was because it had over 20% of the world's population. That's how it was first calculated. India's GDP before the C19th can only be estimated. For these early years 'population size is the far more important multiplier in the equation' as it's assumed incomes were little more than twice subsistence levels in a premodern, preindustrial agrarian society like In the Indian subcontinent. So the total GDP calculated is based on this low estimate of income multiplied by the historical population size. Search for List of regions by past GDP (PPP)
U seemed to have studied history from the British curriculum books. You need to come to india, or read about Nalanda university, for example, if u wanna know about our schools and univeraities. There were gurukuls. U need to read about them. The fact that it was 27% of gdp is not made up, this has been written by british historians themselves. Come and see our ancient temples and palaces.. there were carved cannons made of gold, the cotton fabric, the finest ones were exported from india, indigo dye was first produced in india. Do you know the first dockyard in the world called Lothal dockyard was in india? What did they have this dockyard? Not for weekend cannoeing ofcourse. It was for ships that were used for trade. Why did Vasco degama or Columbus set sail to find India? What was about it that attracted Europeans so much? Of course the cloth, the spices. And the craftsmanship. Read about these terms that I told you, to begin with. Then we will talk about your next questions.
The British East India Company was formed on December 31, 1600, when it received a Royal Charter from Queen Elizabeth I, granting it the exclusive right to trade with the East Indies, which included India and Southeast Asia124. At that time, India's share of the world GDP is estimated to have been around 24%. What was China's share of world GDP in the year 1600? China's share of world GDP in the year 1600 was approximately 29%. Clearly, India was not the greatest nation (at least in economic term) when British East India Company was formed. IT was probably the second best nation in the world.
It’s important to remember history without resentment and anger. 2 of the harshest critics of British Colonialism. But it’s necessary to remember history as it truly was.
I am surprised that Bernardo Bertolucci or someone like him has not yet offered to take on this series for a Movie. No songs please. Just a serious historical movie.
Is this meant to be an exercise in frustration tolerance? WHERE ARE THE SLIDES?!! Surely this couldn’t have been by design; you must have intended to have your visuals compliment and enhance your verbal presentation. IS THERE ANY WAY TO SALVAGE THIS UNFORTUNATE ERROR? There must be a recording of the slides that could be presented alongside the conversation. This was uploaded onto TH-cam a mere 7 months ago today (March 8/‘23). If there is someone monitoring these comments, please take heed and REPLY. Thank you
My sincere apologies! Allow me please to eat crow, while I type this exposé of my petulant impatience. Had I just allowed myself to watch the video a few moments longer, the slides would have appeared. My rant, my lesson, my apology.
One thought. Is one's historiographical reputation based on having early on found a niche to be expanded on/exploited, or has maturation allowed a nuancing of your initial thesis?
William (and Anita, his host on the Empire podcast--a must hear for every Indian) should write Indian school history textbooks so we are better educated!! Thank you. Shashi starts this talk by calling the EIC "rapacious"--which is true, but they did everything in partnership with Indian kings and merchants, using Indians as soldiers. So whom should we blame? Britain? Or Indians? And what have we learnt from that experience? Nothing.
Long & short of it that none of the Kings, Sultans and whatever figure heads they were on coins etc. - an abiding shame that none of them could shed their ego, unite and drive the Brits out of the country. It's only after the country had been reduced to shambles, abject poverty and dubbed a third world country did the Brits leave for the politicians in India to do whatever they wanted to. Yet an another disgrace, this story has come in to the open after over 75 years after independence. Most likely, it has not been taught in schools. After all this, unregulated population, poor quality of life of past 75 years - and complete lack of awareness of how wealth of the country was stolen by the Brits - make it a pathetic & sad tale. Had it been the Americans, they would have been breathing fire and going to the end of the Earth & made incredible noise about it all. And likely recovered most of the loot.
You underestimate the benefits from British trade and investment and from industrialisation of India's economy. Under the British an increase in Indian population also occurred with an increase of GDP per capita. "The share of factories in industrial employment of British India increased from almost zero in 1850 to 11% in 1938, and in industrial income from 15% in 1900 to 45% in 1947...The growth is impressive by any standard". Source: Tirthankar Roy. India was a dominantly agricultural society, it was a developing country. But "India led the developing world in two leading industries of the industrial revolution, cotton textiles and iron and steel. For example, in 1928, 48% of the cotton spindles outside Europe, North America and Japan were in India. (Dunn and Hardy 1931, 25.) In 1935, 50% of the steel produced outside Europe, North America and Japan came from India. (BKS 1950.) Like these factory industries, even the handicraft industries did well in the early 20th century" The world’s fourth-largest cotton textile mill industry emerged in Bombay and Ahmedabad in direct competition with Manchester. 'Between 1900 and 1930, the volume of handloom cloth production about doubled...The second source was the factory industry. Productivity per worker in factories was about four times that of a worker in the handicraft industries in 1900". Britain created an Indian coal industry from nothing, a valuable natural resource for India. Without coal India could not have a modern steel industry. Tata Steel was founded by Indians in 1907 and is now one of the largest steel companies in the world. "By the time of independence in 1947, the port cities of India and Pakistan were home to some of the best schools, colleges, hospitals, universities, banks, insurance companies, and learned societies available outside the western world". Quotations from Tirthankar Roy, Professor of Economic History, born and educated in India.
A small English company could takeover, master and rule over a powerful and rich nation, only because the nation was mostly never united but rather divided in regions, religions, caste, creed and sinful self interest. History teaches us so that we correct over our mistakes, can we?
Well, Shashi Tharoor speaks in his impeccable English because the Brits colonized India. ON a different note, if British looted India, it was because India was weak and not united then. There is a lesson in this for all Indians!
We Bengali were the richest of all in India. Bengal was the world's richest economy and highly developed functioning society. That's why the Great Shaheed Shurawardy said, that Bengal thinks today the rest of India will think tomorrow.
@@ajithkumarj59Bengal’s status as one of the richest provinces in the world was very much under Muslim rule. The more pertinent question is why India fell to invading Muslims in the first place and the answer lies in the fact that Hinduism created a caste-fractured society with citizens that were loyal to their caste and not to their culture, and that caste birth-based profession resulted in weak and inefficient military and academia
Sashi tharoor syndrone Keep talking till you start admiring your own voice and words And don’t stop Now your not talking to audience eventually they figure out your a fake and tune you out You basically are preaching or talking to yourself and fall in love with your own voice Sashi tharoor syndrome Should be new word on Google wiki
@@TD-nn4fu no they're not. Andhbhakths are bhakhts of a political party and one man. Like mindless drones. Their loyalties lie not to the nation. The rest of us are patriots. You sir, are an andhbhakth.
Why should modern Indians feel embarrassed about misdeeds of their predecessors? Your sadism does come thru though. If you are Indian, perhaps you'll realize your folly b4 you die
Why should modern Indians feel down for bad actions of older ones. Your comment def passes as one that the betrayers would write. If you don't love your motherland unconditionally, what are you? Enlightened soul?
@@krishnajonnakadla-cm4ou Exactly. Anyone who does anything "unconditionally" automatically qualifies as an andhbhakth - that's literally the definition of the word (blind devotee) 😅. As for your "betrayer" label, you would have to actually prove what I did that counts as a betrayal. Unless and until having a mind of my own = betrayal in your books. You're not going to be able to process my comment or what I was getting at , it's beyond your spectrum, believe-you-me.
So english guy saying soilders or generals wanted expansion but east India company wanted only wealth not wars which costs very much😔😂 CAN A WAR BE FOUGHT WITHOUT TOP HIERARCHY SUPPORT. EVEN RUSSIA-UKRAIN IS WAR FROM TOP TO BOTTOM APPROACH. STOP ILLOGICAL HYPOTHESIS WHICH IS FAILURE STEP.
It was mentioned in the video that Clive fought the battle of Plassey without permission from his superiors. In the days before electrical communication, it was rarely possible to wait for top hierarchy support before starting a war.
East India Company was helped by an Indian Banker J Seth...and this started the whole British rule....for 190 yrs.. Similar story with Prithivaraj Chauhan....and Ghori..started the Muslim/Mughal invasion.. Nothing changed now with Congress/ Rich Indian families doing the same trying to sell this country out... Will we ever learn...maybe few all revealing history text book for the next generation in India...summing all of our own betrayals..
Why are we so fixed with the East India Company?? There was a hundred years of the British Rule after the rule of East India Company ended. Please concentrate more on the good that The Crown did to us. The schools, colleges, universities, roads, railways, telegraph, full cities like Mumbai, Delhi, Calcutta, Chennai, Cochin, Dacca, Peshawar, Lahore, Jhansi, the airstrips, the ports, the army. Do you know how much these costs in todays price?? Why is this British man not highlighting the good that the British have done to India?? Or is it that badmouthing the British helps him sell more of his books??
William Dalrymple definitely deserves Bharat Ratna and his books must be included in our school syllabus. He spent majority of his professional life on researching about Indian history, guy is genius.
Speechless, visceral South Asian indignation here.
This remarkably well researched, well documented presentation is phenomenal enlightenment for the vital process of psychological decolonization, not just for every Bangladeshi, every Indian, every Pakistani but, most significantly, for every british individual. Liberation and Equality are all encompassing, they are vital inheritances both for the colonized/oppressed as they are for the colonizer/oppressor. Thank you, William Dalrymple and Shashi Tharoor
Learnt more here than school…. William and Shashi, thank you
because you are a dumbo..just earlier you fell victim to the narrative pitched at school, now you are falling victim to the narrative presented by these two con artists
What an amazing presentation. These historians are a delight to hear real facts of the past.
Brilliantly told!
Listening to the other talks too!!
Thanks for putting them on TH-cam.
Shashi in the excitement cited Marthanda Verma of Travancore as the first King to defeat a European army, tend to ignore the fact that even earlier than that in the 16th century it was Rani Abbakka who fought a long war encompassing 4 decades with the Portuguese resulting in them loosing very badly and finally to rely on treachery to kill her.
This is the travesty. We have long ignored those kinds of facts and abbreviate that part of history to Battle of Plassey, Buxar and 1857. The result is a full on ignorance and sainthood for Gandhi
@@krishnajonnakadla-cm4ouWhat she’s talking about is a couple of centuries prior to the period you’re talking about. Also, Gandhi’s sainthood could be questioned but his greatness isn’t really a point of debate.
As an ex banker I have realised rather late (much after my long bank career unfortunately) that whether I it’s the napoleonic wars or the American civil war or even the ancient Roman wars, the banker cast the winning dice. Heroic martial accounts are completely blind to this fact. Willioam’s point at 59:00 is for me the high point of this discussion. Rest of the details of EIC history are merely the story plot. Audience queries were so impressive and sadly got such little time.
Great talk btw by William who was totally factual, truthful and objective during this talk. British people should not glorify their colonial rule of other nations as is done today in school texts, other places.
As William says in this talk, the Diwani being handed over to EIC by Shah Alam to manage the finances of 3 of the richest provinces of India viz Bengal, Bihar and Orissa are today the poorest.
We know where the loot went, don't we?
These two gentlemen are pleasure to listen on their own and here they are together, wonderful
I have just ordered the quartet. Cannot wait until they arrive.
Suggest reading Shashi Tharoor'r book too .. 'Inglorious Empire'
Finally, a conversation between two articulate, literate and intelligent individuals in India. A rare sight indeed.
Very few know this but the Sikhs, Gurkhas and the Pashtoon soldiers were die hard loyal to the British officers in the Indian Army. They are also today among the best fighters.
It's not just about what England did but what what it did with the COMPLICITY of INDIAN influential figures
there was no we vs them...their strength gave us the grander identity..i hope you you get what i am trying to say here..
@@deoman99No. I don't get it. What strength are you referring to?
The royalty, the clergy and the merchants
Inspite of the Mughal and the British India Company, India is still here, Hinduism is still here and both are taking their rightful place in the worldIndia haf a culturak empire in China and the East without using force..
India became a geopolitical reality due to the British rule. You may not like to believe it but that is how it evolved.
In the past the concept of India was more in a spiritual and emotional sense. Bharata was divided into various "Janapadhas" with Kings fighting one another for supremacy. British rule gave India a geopolitical reality along with Parliament, Army, Railways etc.
Shashi Tharoor may be right that India could still have had all these without being colonized but that is how it happened and there you have it!
@@sridharkaushik9290 you were making a valid point up untill you said "....along with parliament, army and railways". The British rule did not "give" these things to us. These are legacies of the colonial rule, that we inherited. By saying the British gave those to us, it implies that we wouldn't have any of these without them. And that is a ridiculous thing to say considering the British built the railways with Indian money just so they could transport raw materials and loot to the ports in Calcutta and Bombay and ultimately back to Britain.
@@winter_silhouetteSure, but what we inherited from the British was an advanced form of government, a modern judiciary along with common law and institutions on which a modern democracy can function, none of which had their precedents in India
It’s funny that at a time when the emphasis should be on progress of citizens, we are still stuck along with other primitive forces around the world on the revival of a certain religion, when evidence over history suggests that the prominence of religion results disproportionately in the clergy gaining greater political and material influence at the cost of the rest.
First time learning history in quite different way, yet so profound impact is being created on our minds.
Ironic to see, around 24:00, WD discussing a past Bikaner merchant operating in Kolkata under the logo of a current company founded in Bikaner that ran its manufacturing in Kolkata.
One 'small' company? Might have been the very start, but it for most it's time it was an arm of the state, having Royal ascent, and many shareholders that were Lordsand others in government..
Very interesting and informative
William and Shashi, two phenomenal men.
Wow, just wow - so much explosive info emerging only now!!! I didn't think I was going to watch the whole video but I got totally hooked and have even saved the transcript.
Superb exchange. Statecraft is key word.
The idea of loot by the East India Company is absolutely fascinating! It's a captivating glimpse into history that reveals the complexities of trade, power, and ambition.
he is son of Hew Darymple Governor of Gibraltar, a man who was once boss of Wellington...a lot of what he says is true but to take the responsibility away from UK and just put it on EIC seems quite edited...the original charters these companies got to trade was backed by the Church and Royalty of UK. similar happened in SPAIN, without the backing of church and royalties this e companies had no power of any sorts...
That's true. Almost the entire world was conquered this way.
Very depressing and difficult to watch. Indians stabbed each other in the back and the British just climbed over the corpses to collect the loot.
This was excellent. Shashi plugged in necessary bits and William put everything into a sensible piece.
Seem's hate has finally consumed you fully. Hahaha. Good to see.
@@IndoPakCanvas Yeah coz I finally understood Quran.
Abhorrent username
Very nicely presented.
The one thing I don’t understand in this narrative (and also Mr. Tharoor’s) is why the per capita GDP of India remains uniformly low, in fact close to subsistence level), from the glory days of the Moghuls (1700s), through the British loot, until about 1950. Only subsequently, it starts creeping up, gathering some moderate momentum after the the economic liberalization. This suggests that it made little difference to the average Indian whether Moghul wealth was parked in Delhi or had been shipped to London.
Not sure if your statement is true, but if it is, it may be due to the fact that life of common folk improved in the west only post industrialisation, and sadly, India is still not fully industrialised. We are still a largely agricultural economy.
@HowIDoitGamingXbox it is in various research reports. Google “Indian per capita income versus rest of world in 15th and 16th century”. Then do the same, replacing “per capita income” with “GDP”. The two pictures will be starkly different,
Then either the GDP is wrong or we weren't wealthy. It can't be both.
@@krishnajonnakadla-cm4ou GDP measures the net wealth of the country, not the per capita income. The average income in India is currently around Rs 20,000 per month.
The GDP per capita can remain the same over a long time even when a few get very rich at the expense of the larger masses, who are forced into destitution
.
Thank you 😊
Meeting of two genius persons - experts on the Indian history and culture .
Fantastic! Loved it.
Absolutely brilliant. it's not just the story but the way these gents narrative it. Hats off!
And very rarely are audience questions so analytical and meaningful - well done audience
Hmm a corporation raising money from Indian banks to pay Indians to eventually become incredibly rich whilst bankrupting Indians... sounds so current.
Ashish Saxena.
The Adani Corporation.
Your lack of understanding about economics is bit rich, uncle. Good luck.
your lack about the use of language and comedy is a bit like your account balance@@ajaxjaiswal3442
@@josephandrews5467go back to sleep
@@ajaxjaiswal3442Chad sir explain saar
It is a lie to call it colonialism by a company- if you remember Mangal Panday, you would recall that the shipment of soldiers arrived. Which company will hand over a prized possession just like that even if it is to the monarch.
What I’m most surprised about is that non-South-Asians audience are absent.
I read somewhere - “From the dawn of history, India has always been invaded. The invader never won. But, India always lost”!
The list of Jagat Seths, Mudaliars and Chettiars of Tamil Nadu, Mir Jaffers, Mir Sadiqs is endless. India was betrayed by its own people every time.
I feel the main reason is the caste system, where every caste looked out for itself. Which is true today too. Remember, the majority of “lower” castes were not allowed to bear arms.
That said, nobody really thought about India as a country. That concept wasn’t even there.
Where do you think, Mir Jaffer, Mir Sadiq, Mir Kashem etc. fitted in the Caste system?
These has nothing to do with caste system, it's to do with the greed of power, personal hatred to the ruler and greed of wealth and money. Greed always wins over literally anything including caste and all.
The misdeeds of the Brits in India are legendary. So, too, is Mr Tharoor’s rebundling of the same story.
His starting point always is how rich India was. At 27:05 he quotes an Oxford professor (of course, it has to be Oxford) to say “India was such a rich country ……. Its economy was 27% of the global GDP.” That raises a question.
The US economy is now 24% of the worlds. That means that India then was richer than the US is now, in comparative terms. Then he says that in 1700 the revenue collected by Aurangzeb was more than every single European monarch combined (sic). Mr. Dalrymple, in this book “The Anarchy”, quotes historian Shireen Moosavi’s research which found that “the Mughal state appropriated 56.7 per cent of the total produce”. So, my question is: If India was so rich, and if the Moghul’s treasury collected so much tax, where did it all that money go? Yes, we know, it went into tombs, mosques, gardens, durbars, poets, musicians, and such like. What else? What public goods did those revenues produce? And, particularly, where was education? How many schools? Was there even a single printing press in their whole empire?
The avarice of the Brits, their loot and plunder are all well-known, recorded in meticulous detail by the Brits themselves. The villains are well known. Repeatedly churning out stories of their villainy only allows us to continue to wallow in the comfort of victimhood, leaving the most important questions unanswered: Why did we fall like ninepins to the Brits in spite of our greater wealth, much larger population, much greater natural resources? Mir Jafars and Jsagat Seths are but fall guys.
About time we started looking for causes, not villains.
We know the villains; they are very well known. It took some one hundred years at least for the EIC to occupy India. It did not happen within a few months.
There is another explanation. The total GDP of the world grew faster than the GDP of India. India's GDP increased under the British but not as much as in the West. "The statistic that India produced 25 per cent of world output in 1800 and 2 to 4 per cent of it in 1900 does not prove that India was once rich and became poor. It only tells us that industrial productivity in the West increased four to six times during this period...National income statistics do not show that during British rule the Indian economy became steadily poorer". Source: Tirthankar Roy, Professor of Economic History, born and educated in India.
What if the only reason in the first place the Indian subcontinent had an estimated 25% of global GDP was because it had over 20% of the world's population. That's how it was first calculated. India's GDP before the C19th can only be estimated. For these early years 'population size is the far more important multiplier in the equation' as it's assumed incomes were little more than twice subsistence levels in a premodern, preindustrial agrarian society like In the Indian subcontinent. So the total GDP calculated is based on this low estimate of income multiplied by the historical population size.
Search for List of regions by past GDP (PPP)
Well, Hindoostan was the richest territory in the world during the Mughal times. Bhakts may not like to acknowledge that!
U seemed to have studied history from the British curriculum books. You need to come to india, or read about Nalanda university, for example, if u wanna know about our schools and univeraities. There were gurukuls. U need to read about them.
The fact that it was 27% of gdp is not made up, this has been written by british historians themselves. Come and see our ancient temples and palaces.. there were carved cannons made of gold, the cotton fabric, the finest ones were exported from india, indigo dye was first produced in india. Do you know the first dockyard in the world called Lothal dockyard was in india? What did they have this dockyard? Not for weekend cannoeing ofcourse. It was for ships that were used for trade.
Why did Vasco degama or Columbus set sail to find India? What was about it that attracted Europeans so much? Of course the cloth, the spices. And the craftsmanship. Read about these terms that I told you, to begin with. Then we will talk about your next questions.
Please create post time stamps of subject introductions🎉
Respect to the Diamond geezers real jewels - thank you
Just spectacular
The British East India Company was formed on December 31, 1600, when it received a Royal Charter from Queen Elizabeth I, granting it the exclusive right to trade with the East Indies, which included India and Southeast Asia124.
At that time, India's share of the world GDP is estimated to have been around 24%.
What was China's share of world GDP in the year 1600?
China's share of world GDP in the year 1600 was approximately 29%.
Clearly, India was not the greatest nation (at least in economic term) when British East India Company was formed. IT was probably the second best nation in the world.
So ?
They were happy with 24%
boy at 52 mins ....very correct
{7 16:56
It’s important to remember history without resentment and anger. 2 of the harshest critics of British Colonialism. But it’s necessary to remember history as it truly was.
William is a national treasure
I am ashamed to say, that despite some very open History Teachers at school, that I knew so very little of this part of British History.
I am surprised that Bernardo Bertolucci or someone like him has not yet offered to take on this series for a Movie. No songs please. Just a serious historical movie.
Current relevance 48:00
Is this meant to be an exercise in frustration tolerance? WHERE ARE THE SLIDES?!! Surely this couldn’t have been by design; you must have intended to have your visuals compliment and enhance your verbal presentation. IS THERE ANY WAY TO SALVAGE THIS UNFORTUNATE ERROR? There must be a recording of the slides that could be presented alongside the conversation. This was uploaded onto TH-cam a mere 7 months ago today (March 8/‘23). If there is someone monitoring these comments, please take heed and REPLY. Thank you
My sincere apologies! Allow me please to eat crow, while I type this exposé of my petulant impatience. Had I just allowed myself to watch the video a few moments longer, the slides would have appeared. My rant, my lesson, my apology.
Uncomfortable truth for many Brits with a conscience.
One thought. Is one's historiographical reputation based on having early on found a niche to be expanded on/exploited, or has maturation allowed a nuancing of your initial thesis?
Well the sinhalese defeated porugese, dutch and english in head to head battles...
Anyone can defeat any army if u have the will....
William (and Anita, his host on the Empire podcast--a must hear for every Indian) should write Indian school history textbooks so we are better educated!! Thank you.
Shashi starts this talk by calling the EIC "rapacious"--which is true, but they did everything in partnership with Indian kings and merchants, using Indians as soldiers. So whom should we blame? Britain? Or Indians? And what have we learnt from that experience? Nothing.
Long & short of it that none of the Kings, Sultans and whatever figure heads they were on coins etc. - an abiding shame that none of them could shed their ego, unite and drive the Brits out of the country. It's only after the country had been reduced to shambles, abject poverty and dubbed a third world country did the Brits leave for the politicians in India to do whatever they wanted to. Yet an another disgrace, this story has come in to the open after over 75 years after independence. Most likely, it has not been taught in schools. After all this, unregulated population, poor quality of life of past 75 years - and complete lack of awareness of how wealth of the country was stolen by the Brits - make it a pathetic & sad tale. Had it been the Americans, they would have been breathing fire and going to the end of the Earth & made incredible noise about it all. And likely recovered most of the loot.
You underestimate the benefits from British trade and investment and from industrialisation of India's economy. Under the British an increase in Indian population also occurred with an increase of GDP per capita. "The share of factories in industrial employment of British India increased from almost zero in 1850 to 11% in 1938, and in industrial income from 15% in 1900 to 45% in 1947...The growth is impressive by any standard". Source: Tirthankar Roy.
India was a dominantly agricultural society, it was a developing country. But "India led the developing world in two leading industries of the industrial revolution, cotton textiles and iron and steel. For example, in 1928, 48% of the cotton spindles outside Europe, North America and Japan were in India. (Dunn and Hardy 1931, 25.) In 1935, 50% of the steel produced outside Europe, North America and Japan came from India. (BKS 1950.) Like these factory industries, even the handicraft industries did well in the early 20th century"
The world’s fourth-largest cotton textile mill industry emerged in Bombay and Ahmedabad in direct competition with Manchester. 'Between 1900 and 1930, the volume of handloom cloth production about doubled...The second source was the factory industry. Productivity per worker in factories was about four times that of a worker in the handicraft industries in 1900".
Britain created an Indian coal industry from nothing, a valuable natural resource for India. Without coal India could not have a modern steel industry. Tata Steel was founded by Indians in 1907 and is now one of the largest steel companies in the world.
"By the time of independence in 1947, the port cities of India and Pakistan were home to some of the best schools, colleges, hospitals, universities, banks, insurance companies, and learned societies available outside the western world". Quotations from Tirthankar Roy, Professor of Economic History, born and educated in India.
East India the bigest employer in england but Britain facing abject poverty like running workhorse pay for slieep running the jack the ripper events.
A small English company could takeover, master and rule over a powerful and rich nation, only because the nation was mostly never united but rather divided in regions, religions, caste, creed and sinful self interest. History teaches us so that we correct over our mistakes, can we?
Well, Shashi Tharoor speaks in his impeccable English because the Brits colonized India.
ON a different note, if British looted India, it was because India was weak and not united then. There is a lesson in this for all Indians!
We Bengali were the richest of all in India. Bengal was the world's richest economy and highly developed functioning society. That's why the Great Shaheed Shurawardy said, that Bengal thinks today the rest of India will think tomorrow.
Bengal was first destroyed by Islam, then British and finally the Communists.
Chad@@ajithkumarj59
Great Shaheed suhrawardy indeed! Glorifying a jihadi butcher and pimp! Quite brazen
First of all that quote was of Gopal Krishna Gokhle, political Guru of Gandhi. And Shuruwabardy was anything but 'great'.
@@ajithkumarj59Bengal’s status as one of the richest provinces in the world was very much under Muslim rule. The more pertinent question is why India fell to invading Muslims in the first place and the answer lies in the fact that Hinduism created a caste-fractured society with citizens that were loyal to their caste and not to their culture, and that caste birth-based profession resulted in weak and inefficient military and academia
Sashi tharoor syndrone
Keep talking till you start admiring your own voice and words
And don’t stop
Now your not talking to audience eventually they figure out your a fake and tune you out
You basically are preaching or talking to yourself and fall in love with your own voice
Sashi tharoor syndrome
Should be new word on Google wiki
Well technically speaking,The first asian power to defeat a European power were the Persians(parthians) defeating the romans If I'm not mistaken.
so ... it should be called
THE 1857 REVOLUTION
Sashi benefits from research done by Darymple
100,000 killed in Delhi in one day, according to Tharoor. Does any one know where this can be corroborated?
🤣🙂 That guy who challenged is unexpected one. Nice. Poor white Elephant aka william said a lot used "BUT" 😆 I say BS . CROWN/KINGS/QUEEN IS $HIT .
Bro decided to wake up and make Andh Bhakts question their very existence and entire life story lol 😅
I am sure people like you, sold India in the first place. Atleast , andhbhakts are bhakts of their country!!!
@@TD-nn4fu no they're not. Andhbhakths are bhakhts of a political party and one man. Like mindless drones. Their loyalties lie not to the nation. The rest of us are patriots. You sir, are an andhbhakth.
Why should modern Indians feel embarrassed about misdeeds of their predecessors? Your sadism does come thru though. If you are Indian, perhaps you'll realize your folly b4 you die
Why should modern Indians feel down for bad actions of older ones. Your comment def passes as one that the betrayers would write. If you don't love your motherland unconditionally, what are you? Enlightened soul?
@@krishnajonnakadla-cm4ou Exactly. Anyone who does anything "unconditionally" automatically qualifies as an andhbhakth - that's literally the definition of the word (blind devotee) 😅. As for your "betrayer" label, you would have to actually prove what I did that counts as a betrayal. Unless and until having a mind of my own = betrayal in your books. You're not going to be able to process my comment or what I was getting at , it's beyond your spectrum, believe-you-me.
So english guy saying soilders or generals wanted expansion but east India company wanted only wealth not wars which costs very much😔😂 CAN A WAR BE FOUGHT WITHOUT TOP HIERARCHY SUPPORT. EVEN RUSSIA-UKRAIN IS WAR FROM TOP TO BOTTOM APPROACH. STOP ILLOGICAL HYPOTHESIS WHICH IS FAILURE STEP.
It was mentioned in the video that Clive fought the battle of Plassey without permission from his superiors. In the days before electrical communication, it was rarely possible to wait for top hierarchy support before starting a war.
@@PastPresenteddo read up on what happened after.
@@krishnajonnakadla-cm4ou Any particular bit of what happened after? It was quite a busy time.
East India Company was helped by an Indian Banker J Seth...and this started the whole British rule....for 190 yrs..
Similar story with Prithivaraj Chauhan....and Ghori..started the Muslim/Mughal invasion..
Nothing changed now with Congress/ Rich Indian families doing the same trying to sell this country out...
Will we ever learn...maybe few all revealing history text book for the next generation in India...summing all of our own betrayals..
You’ve misspelled the Modi-Adani nexus
Why are we so fixed with the East India Company?? There was a hundred years of the British Rule after the rule of East India Company ended. Please concentrate more on the good that The Crown did to us. The schools, colleges, universities, roads, railways, telegraph, full cities like Mumbai, Delhi, Calcutta, Chennai, Cochin, Dacca, Peshawar, Lahore, Jhansi, the airstrips, the ports, the army. Do you know how much these costs in todays price?? Why is this British man not highlighting the good that the British have done to India?? Or is it that badmouthing the British helps him sell more of his books??
British implemented Final Solution on India, just like Hitler implemented Final Solution on Jews.
Those distort our History, promote anti Hindu agenda Cong leaders love to invite them and give importance.
Are you a descendant of Jagat Seth? 😂