University of Sydney Library. Barr Smith Library. Dixson Library.
Islam in India
University of Western Australia Library. UNSW Library.
- Oral histories.
- Muslims British India by Hardy.
- Project Management (The Briefcase Book Series).
- Global Boundaries: World Boundaries Volume 1!
- Explorations in Ancient and Modern Philosophy, Volume 2.
- History of underrepresentation.
- Religion, Science, and Empire: Classifying Hinduism and Islam in British India.
Liverpool Campus Library. H3 Book; Illustrated English Show 0 more libraries Open to the public Book; Illustrated English Show 0 more libraries None of your libraries hold this item. Found at these bookshops Searching - please wait We were unable to find this edition in any bookshop we are able to search.
These online bookshops told us they have this item:.
- Design Thinking for Strategic Innovation: What They Cant Teach You at Business or Design School?
- When the Wild Comes Leaping Up: Personal Encounters with Nature.
- The Muslims of British India by Peter Hardy.
- Anita and Me?
- Colonial repression.
- New Pearl of Great Price;
Other suppliers National Library of Australia - Copies Direct The National Library may be able to supply you with a photocopy or electronic copy of all or part of this item, for a fee, depending on copyright restrictions. Tags What are tags? Add a tag.
Public Private login e. Add a tag Cancel History of Pakistan. Lists What are lists? Login to add to list. Be the first to add this to a list. Comments and reviews What are comments? Add a comment. Australian National Islamic Library. Australian National University.
Site Search Navigation
Catholic Theological College. Charles Sturt University. Curtin University. Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade. Edith Cowan University. Flinders University. Libraries ACT. Macquarie University. Monash University.
What Is Article 370, and Why Does It Matter in Kashmir?
Murdoch University. National Library of Australia. Northern Territory Library. Randwick City Library. State Library of NSW. State Library of Queensland.
State Library of South Australia. State Library Victoria. The University of Melbourne. The University of Queensland.
How Orientalism Pitted Hindus against Muslims in India?
The University of Sydney. University of Adelaide. In the nineteenth century, the newly established British education system in India deliberately portrayed Muslim rulers of India as marauders, rapists and looters in order to malign them. By contrast, the British rule in India was portrayed in a positive light: that the British Empire built roads and railways and established schools, colleges and hospitals in India.
If we were to compare the British and Muslim rules in India, the Muslim rulers at least resided in India and shared their wealth and fortune with their subjects. The British rule, on the other hand, was a foreign rule; the affairs of the state were run by viceroys and governors on the behalf of the monarchs of England who resided thousands of miles away in London.
A small number of European colonizers in India treated their subjects as untouchables; they traded raw materials for pennies and sent finished goods back to the Indian market with huge profits, thus enriching themselves and the British Empire. Up until , the Hindus and Muslims of India were united enough to rise up in arms together against the British colonizers under the nominal command of the last Mughal emperor, Bahadur Shah Zafar.
But after that, the British education system introduced by Lord Macaulay in India entrenched communal divisions and made it virtually impossible for Hindus and Muslims to understand each other, even though both religious communities were the victims of exploitation of foreign rule. Regarding the notion peddled by the Orientalist historians that Muslims or Islam were somehow foreign to India, we need to settle on the definition of nativity first.
If an Indian settles in the US, for instance, how would you define such a first generation immigrant? Since he was brought up in India and subsequently migrated to a Western country, therefore such a first generation Indian-American would have more in common with Indians than Americans, as such. But how would you identify the children of an immigrant who have been brought up and educated in the West? The second generation Indian-Americans, for all practical purposes, would be more American than Indian in their outlooks.
Similarly, although I concede that the invading armies of Muslim rulers from Central Asia, Afghanistan and Iran were foreign to India; but once they settled in India, made Delhi their seat of governance, intermarried and gave birth to Indian children, then how come the descendants of such benevolent rulers be labeled as foreign invaders? Excluding a few odd adventurers, like Mahmud of Ghazni, who had his seat of government in Afghanistan but plundered the wealth of India by conducting raids on Somnath, the Muslim rulers of India, particularly the Sultanate of Delhi and the Mughal Empire, were as much native to India as the Hindu and Sikh rajas and maharajas.
Notwithstanding, the only true sociological definition of nation is ethno-linguistic group. The concept of modern nation state, particularly in multiethnic federations like India and Pakistan, is an artificial construct which is predicated on nothing substantive but on myths, fables and symbols. Rather than monolithic communities, the Hindus and Muslims of India were more parochial and tribal in character. The primary concern of impoverished Indian masses was to earn bread and butter for their families.
The metanarratives of Hindu and Muslim nationalism were taught by the British rulers, Hindu elites and Muslim ashrafiya to their subjects in order to distract and exploit them. Here, let me clarify that I am not giving a free pass to the Muslim rulers of India. Their rule must have been as tyrannical as any other undemocratic, elitist rule throughout the history has been.
The Muslims of British India, by P. Hardy | Canadian Journal of History
I am only contending that the Muslim rulers were deliberately singled out and vilified in order to sow the seeds of dissension between the two communities. By the British divide-and-rule policy in the Indian context, it is generally assumed by Indian historians that the British rulers used the Muslim minority against the Hindu majority by giving the former preferential treatment, separate electorates etc.
Moreover, the partition of Bengal on religious lines in was another classic instance of the British divide-and-rule policy through demographic change.
Related The Muslims of British India
Copyright 2019 - All Right Reserved