History as self-representation: the recasting of a political tradition in late eighteenth-century eastern India

Modern Asian Studies

Volumn 32, Issue 4, 1998, Pages 913-948

  Chatterjee, Kumkum ^a  

^a NONE

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

COLONIALISM; EIGHTEENTH CENTURY; POLITICAL HISTORY;

INDIA, (EAST);

EID: 0031786451     PISSN: 0026749X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1017/S0026749X98003096     Document Type: Article

References (142)

1. Michel Foucault, Power/Knowledge; Selected Interviews and Other Writings 1972-77, ed. Colin Gordon, trans. Colin Gordon et al. (New York, 1980).
2. Ghulam Hussain Khan Tabatabai, Seir Mutaqherin, trans. Nota Manus, 3 vols (this edition: New Delhi, 1990). This reference is to vol. 3, p. 27.
3. William Bolts, Consideration on Indian Affairs (London, MDCCLXXII), preface, p. vi.
4. For general discussions on the establishment of the East India Company's rule over Eastern India, see e.g. N. K. Sinha (ed.), The History of Bengal 1757-1905 (Calcutta, 1969). For a more recent treatment of the same subject, see P. J. Marshall, Bengal: The British Bridgehead. Eastern India 1740-1828 (The New Cambridge History of India, Cambridge, 1987).
5. For general discussions on the establishment of the East India Company's rule over Eastern India, see e.g. N. K. Sinha (ed.), The History of Bengal 1757-1905 (Calcutta, 1969). For a more recent treatment of the same subject, see P. J. Marshall, Bengal: The British Bridgehead. Eastern India 1740-1828 (The New Cambridge History of India, Cambridge, 1987).
6. Ranajit Guha, An Indian Historiography of India: A Nineteenth Century Agenda and its Implications (S. G. Deuskar Lectures on Indian History, 1987, Calcutta, 1988) and Partha Chatterjee, 'The Nation and its Pasts', pp. 76-94 and 'Histories and Nations', pp. 95-115, in his The Nation and its Fragments. Colonial and Postcolonial Histories (Princeton, 1993).
7. Ranajit Guha, An Indian Historiography of India: A Nineteenth Century Agenda and its Implications (S. G. Deuskar Lectures on Indian History, 1987, Calcutta, 1988) and Partha Chatterjee, 'The Nation and its Pasts', pp. 76-94 and 'Histories and Nations', pp. 95-115, in his The Nation and its Fragments. Colonial and Postcolonial Histories (Princeton, 1993).
8. Ranajit Guha, An Indian Historiography of India: A Nineteenth Century Agenda and its Implications (S. G. Deuskar Lectures on Indian History, 1987, Calcutta, 1988) and Partha Chatterjee, 'The Nation and its Pasts', pp. 76-94 and 'Histories and Nations', pp. 95-115, in his The Nation and its Fragments. Colonial and Postcolonial Histories (Princeton, 1993).
9. Ibid.
10. For social background and intellectual orientation of the colonial middle class/literati in Eastern India, see J. H. Broomfield, Elite Conflict in a Plural Society. Twentieth Century Bengal (Berkeley, 1968); Anil Seal, The Emergence of Indian Nationalism (Cambridge, 1971); Sumit Sarkar, The Swadeshi Movement in Bengal (New Delhi, 1973); Rajat K. Ray, Social Conflict and Political Unrest in Bengal, 1875-1914 (Delhi, 1984); Partha Chatterjee, Nationalist Thought and the Colonial World (Delhi, 1986), and several essays in the The Nation and its Fragments; Tapan Raychaudhuri, Europe Reconsidered. Perceptions of the West in Nineteenth Century Bengal (Delhi, 1988). The social background and intellectual orientation of that segment of the pre-colonial literati who are relevant to this paper have been discussed below.
11. For social background and intellectual orientation of the colonial middle class/literati in Eastern India, see J. H. Broomfield, Elite Conflict in a Plural Society. Twentieth Century Bengal (Berkeley, 1968); Anil Seal, The Emergence of Indian Nationalism (Cambridge, 1971); Sumit Sarkar, The Swadeshi Movement in Bengal (New Delhi, 1973); Rajat K. Ray, Social Conflict and Political Unrest in Bengal, 1875-1914 (Delhi, 1984); Partha Chatterjee, Nationalist Thought and the Colonial World (Delhi, 1986), and several essays in the The Nation and its Fragments; Tapan Raychaudhuri, Europe Reconsidered. Perceptions of the West in Nineteenth Century Bengal (Delhi, 1988). The social background and intellectual orientation of that segment of the pre-colonial literati who are relevant to this paper have been discussed below.
12. For social background and intellectual orientation of the colonial middle class/literati in Eastern India, see J. H. Broomfield, Elite Conflict in a Plural Society. Twentieth Century Bengal (Berkeley, 1968); Anil Seal, The Emergence of Indian Nationalism (Cambridge, 1971); Sumit Sarkar, The Swadeshi Movement in Bengal (New Delhi, 1973); Rajat K. Ray, Social Conflict and Political Unrest in Bengal, 1875-1914 (Delhi, 1984); Partha Chatterjee, Nationalist Thought and the Colonial World (Delhi, 1986), and several essays in the The Nation and its Fragments; Tapan Raychaudhuri, Europe Reconsidered. Perceptions of the West in Nineteenth Century Bengal (Delhi, 1988). The social background and intellectual orientation of that segment of the pre-colonial literati who are relevant to this paper have been discussed below.
13. For social background and intellectual orientation of the colonial middle class/literati in Eastern India, see J. H. Broomfield, Elite Conflict in a Plural Society. Twentieth Century Bengal (Berkeley, 1968); Anil Seal, The Emergence of Indian Nationalism (Cambridge, 1971); Sumit Sarkar, The Swadeshi Movement in Bengal (New Delhi, 1973); Rajat K. Ray, Social Conflict and Political Unrest in Bengal, 1875-1914 (Delhi, 1984); Partha Chatterjee, Nationalist Thought and the Colonial World (Delhi, 1986), and several essays in the The Nation and its Fragments; Tapan Raychaudhuri, Europe Reconsidered. Perceptions of the West in Nineteenth Century Bengal (Delhi, 1988). The social background and intellectual orientation of that segment of the pre-colonial literati who are relevant to this paper have been discussed below.
14. For social background and intellectual orientation of the colonial middle class/literati in Eastern India, see J. H. Broomfield, Elite Conflict in a Plural Society. Twentieth Century Bengal (Berkeley, 1968); Anil Seal, The Emergence of Indian Nationalism (Cambridge, 1971); Sumit Sarkar, The Swadeshi Movement in Bengal (New Delhi, 1973); Rajat K. Ray, Social Conflict and Political Unrest in Bengal, 1875-1914 (Delhi, 1984); Partha Chatterjee, Nationalist Thought and the Colonial World (Delhi, 1986), and several essays in the The Nation and its Fragments; Tapan Raychaudhuri, Europe Reconsidered. Perceptions of the West in Nineteenth Century Bengal (Delhi, 1988). The social background and intellectual orientation of that segment of the pre-colonial literati who are relevant to this paper have been discussed below.
15. For social background and intellectual orientation of the colonial middle class/literati in Eastern India, see J. H. Broomfield, Elite Conflict in a Plural Society. Twentieth Century Bengal (Berkeley, 1968); Anil Seal, The Emergence of Indian Nationalism (Cambridge, 1971); Sumit Sarkar, The Swadeshi Movement in Bengal (New Delhi, 1973); Rajat K. Ray, Social Conflict and Political Unrest in Bengal, 1875-1914 (Delhi, 1984); Partha Chatterjee, Nationalist Thought and the Colonial World (Delhi, 1986), and several essays in the The Nation and its Fragments; Tapan Raychaudhuri, Europe Reconsidered. Perceptions of the West in Nineteenth Century Bengal (Delhi, 1988). The social background and intellectual orientation of that segment of the pre-colonial literati who are relevant to this paper have been discussed below.
16. For social background and intellectual orientation of the colonial middle class/literati in Eastern India, see J. H. Broomfield, Elite Conflict in a Plural Society. Twentieth Century Bengal (Berkeley, 1968); Anil Seal, The Emergence of Indian Nationalism (Cambridge, 1971); Sumit Sarkar, The Swadeshi Movement in Bengal (New Delhi, 1973); Rajat K. Ray, Social Conflict and Political Unrest in Bengal, 1875-1914 (Delhi, 1984); Partha Chatterjee, Nationalist Thought and the Colonial World (Delhi, 1986), and several essays in the The Nation and its Fragments; Tapan Raychaudhuri, Europe Reconsidered. Perceptions of the West in Nineteenth Century Bengal (Delhi, 1988). The social background and intellectual orientation of that segment of the pre-colonial literati who are relevant to this paper have been discussed below.
17. The specific histories that have been used in this paper are as follows: Ghulam Hussain Khan Tabatabai, Seir Mutaqherin, trans. Nota Manus, 3 vols (this edition: New Delhi, 1990); Ghulam Hussain Salim Zaidpuri, Riyazu-s-Salatin, trans. Maulavi Abdus Salam (Calcutta, 1904); Francis Gladwin, A Narrative of the Transactions in Bengal (a translation of Salimullah Munshi's 'Tarikh-i-Bangala') (Calcutta, 1788); Karam Ali, 'Muzaffarnama', the Khudabaksh Library MSS (I am also grateful to Shaista Khan for permitting me to consult her unpublished English translation of this work. Direct quotes from the 'Muzaffarnama' in this paper are based on her translation); Yusuf Ali Khan, Tarikh-i-Bangala-i-Mahabat Jangi, trans. Abdus Subhan (Calcutta, 1982); Maharaja Kalyan Singh 'Ashiq', Khulasatu-t-Tawarikh, trans. Sarfaraz Hussain Khan, Journal of the Bihar and Orissa Research Society, vol. 5, 1919, vol. 6, 1920 and vol. 9, 1923; Muhammad Ali Khan Ansari, 'Tarikh-i-Muzaffar Jang', the Oriental and India Office Records (henceforth O&IOL). wish to thank Rasul Hajizadeh, the Penn State University, for help in translating portions of the 'Tarikh-i- Muzaffar Jang'. In addition I have used excerpts from histories as given in H. M. Elliot and J. Dowson, The History of India as Told by its Own Historians (henceforth: E&D), vol. 8 (this edition: Allahabad, 1964). Specific references to these histories have been made at appropriate places in the paper. This paper analyses the rearticulation of Indian/late Mughal political traditions in eighteenth-century Persian works and administrative treatises. It does not attempt to address the question of whether these Persian works can be regarded as 'history' in the modern sense of the term or whether they are examples of a pre- modern historical consciousness. This issue is an important and a complex one which deserves separate treatment and cannot be satisfactorily discussed in this paper. The articles by Guha and Chatterjee referred to in footnote 2 are primarily about the creation of an Indian historiography of India in the nineteenth century and except for very general observations, they are not directly concerned with the issue of whether Mughal or late Mughal historical works can also be considered to be histories in the modern sense.
18. The specific histories that have been used in this paper are as follows: Ghulam Hussain Khan Tabatabai, Seir Mutaqherin, trans. Nota Manus, 3 vols (this edition: New Delhi, 1990); Ghulam Hussain Salim Zaidpuri, Riyazu-s-Salatin, trans. Maulavi Abdus Salam (Calcutta, 1904); Francis Gladwin, A Narrative of the Transactions in Bengal (a translation of Salimullah Munshi's 'Tarikh-i-Bangala') (Calcutta, 1788); Karam Ali, 'Muzaffarnama', the Khudabaksh Library MSS (I am also grateful to Shaista Khan for permitting me to consult her unpublished English translation of this work. Direct quotes from the 'Muzaffarnama' in this paper are based on her translation); Yusuf Ali Khan, Tarikh-i-Bangala-i-Mahabat Jangi, trans. Abdus Subhan (Calcutta, 1982); Maharaja Kalyan Singh 'Ashiq', Khulasatu-t-Tawarikh, trans. Sarfaraz Hussain Khan, Journal of the Bihar and Orissa Research Society, vol. 5, 1919, vol. 6, 1920 and vol. 9, 1923; Muhammad Ali Khan Ansari, 'Tarikh-i-Muzaffar Jang', the Oriental and India Office Records (henceforth O&IOL). wish to thank Rasul Hajizadeh, the Penn State University, for help in translating portions of the 'Tarikh-i- Muzaffar Jang'. In addition I have used excerpts from histories as given in H. M. Elliot and J. Dowson, The History of India as Told by its Own Historians (henceforth: E&D), vol. 8 (this edition: Allahabad, 1964). Specific references to these histories have been made at appropriate places in the paper. This paper analyses the rearticulation of Indian/late Mughal political traditions in eighteenth-century Persian works and administrative treatises. It does not attempt to address the question of whether these Persian works can be regarded as 'history' in the modern sense of the term or whether they are examples of a pre- modern historical consciousness. This issue is an important and a complex one which deserves separate treatment and cannot be satisfactorily discussed in this paper. The articles by Guha and Chatterjee referred to in footnote 2 are primarily about the creation of an Indian historiography of India in the nineteenth century and except for very general observations, they are not directly concerned with the issue of whether Mughal or late Mughal historical works can also be considered to be histories in the modern sense.
19. The specific histories that have been used in this paper are as follows: Ghulam Hussain Khan Tabatabai, Seir Mutaqherin, trans. Nota Manus, 3 vols (this edition: New Delhi, 1990); Ghulam Hussain Salim Zaidpuri, Riyazu-s-Salatin, trans. Maulavi Abdus Salam (Calcutta, 1904); Francis Gladwin, A Narrative of the Transactions in Bengal (a translation of Salimullah Munshi's 'Tarikh-i-Bangala') (Calcutta, 1788); Karam Ali, 'Muzaffarnama', the Khudabaksh Library MSS (I am also grateful to Shaista Khan for permitting me to consult her unpublished English translation of this work. Direct quotes from the 'Muzaffarnama' in this paper are based on her translation); Yusuf Ali Khan, Tarikh-i-Bangala-i-Mahabat Jangi, trans. Abdus Subhan (Calcutta, 1982); Maharaja Kalyan Singh 'Ashiq', Khulasatu-t-Tawarikh, trans. Sarfaraz Hussain Khan, Journal of the Bihar and Orissa Research Society, vol. 5, 1919, vol. 6, 1920 and vol. 9, 1923; Muhammad Ali Khan Ansari, 'Tarikh-i-Muzaffar Jang', the Oriental and India Office Records (henceforth O&IOL). wish to thank Rasul Hajizadeh, the Penn State University, for help in translating portions of the 'Tarikh-i- Muzaffar Jang'. In addition I have used excerpts from histories as given in H. M. Elliot and J. Dowson, The History of India as Told by its Own Historians (henceforth: E&D), vol. 8 (this edition: Allahabad, 1964). Specific references to these histories have been made at appropriate places in the paper. This paper analyses the rearticulation of Indian/late Mughal political traditions in eighteenth-century Persian works and administrative treatises. It does not attempt to address the question of whether these Persian works can be regarded as 'history' in the modern sense of the term or whether they are examples of a pre- modern historical consciousness. This issue is an important and a complex one which deserves separate treatment and cannot be satisfactorily discussed in this paper. The articles by Guha and Chatterjee referred to in footnote 2 are primarily about the creation of an Indian historiography of India in the nineteenth century and except for very general observations, they are not directly concerned with the issue of whether Mughal or late Mughal historical works can also be considered to be histories in the modern sense.
20. The specific histories that have been used in this paper are as follows: Ghulam Hussain Khan Tabatabai, Seir Mutaqherin, trans. Nota Manus, 3 vols (this edition: New Delhi, 1990); Ghulam Hussain Salim Zaidpuri, Riyazu-s-Salatin, trans. Maulavi Abdus Salam (Calcutta, 1904); Francis Gladwin, A Narrative of the Transactions in Bengal (a translation of Salimullah Munshi's 'Tarikh-i-Bangala') (Calcutta, 1788); Karam Ali, 'Muzaffarnama', the Khudabaksh Library MSS (I am also grateful to Shaista Khan for permitting me to consult her unpublished English translation of this work. Direct quotes from the 'Muzaffarnama' in this paper are based on her translation); Yusuf Ali Khan, Tarikh-i-Bangala-i-Mahabat Jangi, trans. Abdus Subhan (Calcutta, 1982); Maharaja Kalyan Singh 'Ashiq', Khulasatu-t-Tawarikh, trans. Sarfaraz Hussain Khan, Journal of the Bihar and Orissa Research Society, vol. 5, 1919, vol. 6, 1920 and vol. 9, 1923; Muhammad Ali Khan Ansari, 'Tarikh-i-Muzaffar Jang', the Oriental and India Office Records (henceforth O&IOL). wish to thank Rasul Hajizadeh, the Penn State University, for help in translating portions of the 'Tarikh-i- Muzaffar Jang'. In addition I have used excerpts from histories as given in H. M. Elliot and J. Dowson, The History of India as Told by its Own Historians (henceforth: E&D), vol. 8 (this edition: Allahabad, 1964). Specific references to these histories have been made at appropriate places in the paper. This paper analyses the rearticulation of Indian/late Mughal political traditions in eighteenth-century Persian works and administrative treatises. It does not attempt to address the question of whether these Persian works can be regarded as 'history' in the modern sense of the term or whether they are examples of a pre- modern historical consciousness. This issue is an important and a complex one which deserves separate treatment and cannot be satisfactorily discussed in this paper. The articles by Guha and Chatterjee referred to in footnote 2 are primarily about the creation of an Indian historiography of India in the nineteenth century and except for very general observations, they are not directly concerned with the issue of whether Mughal or late Mughal historical works can also be considered to be histories in the modern sense.
21. The specific histories that have been used in this paper are as follows: Ghulam Hussain Khan Tabatabai, Seir Mutaqherin, trans. Nota Manus, 3 vols (this edition: New Delhi, 1990); Ghulam Hussain Salim Zaidpuri, Riyazu-s-Salatin, trans. Maulavi Abdus Salam (Calcutta, 1904); Francis Gladwin, A Narrative of the Transactions in Bengal (a translation of Salimullah Munshi's 'Tarikh-i-Bangala') (Calcutta, 1788); Karam Ali, 'Muzaffarnama', the Khudabaksh Library MSS (I am also grateful to Shaista Khan for permitting me to consult her unpublished English translation of this work. Direct quotes from the 'Muzaffarnama' in this paper are based on her translation); Yusuf Ali Khan, Tarikh-i-Bangala-i-Mahabat Jangi, trans. Abdus Subhan (Calcutta, 1982); Maharaja Kalyan Singh 'Ashiq', Khulasatu-t-Tawarikh, trans. Sarfaraz Hussain Khan, Journal of the Bihar and Orissa Research Society, vol. 5, 1919, vol. 6, 1920 and vol. 9, 1923; Muhammad Ali Khan Ansari, 'Tarikh-i-Muzaffar Jang', the Oriental and India Office Records (henceforth O&IOL). wish to thank Rasul Hajizadeh, the Penn State University, for help in translating portions of the 'Tarikh-i- Muzaffar Jang'. In addition I have used excerpts from histories as given in H. M. Elliot and J. Dowson, The History of India as Told by its Own Historians (henceforth: E&D), vol. 8 (this edition: Allahabad, 1964). Specific references to these histories have been made at appropriate places in the paper. This paper analyses the rearticulation of Indian/late Mughal political traditions in eighteenth-century Persian works and administrative treatises. It does not attempt to address the question of whether these Persian works can be regarded as 'history' in the modern sense of the term or whether they are examples of a pre- modern historical consciousness. This issue is an important and a complex one which deserves separate treatment and cannot be satisfactorily discussed in this paper. The articles by Guha and Chatterjee referred to in footnote 2 are primarily about the creation of an Indian historiography of India in the nineteenth century and except for very general observations, they are not directly concerned with the issue of whether Mughal or late Mughal historical works can also be considered to be histories in the modern sense.
22. The specific histories that have been used in this paper are as follows: Ghulam Hussain Khan Tabatabai, Seir Mutaqherin, trans. Nota Manus, 3 vols (this edition: New Delhi, 1990); Ghulam Hussain Salim Zaidpuri, Riyazu-s-Salatin, trans. Maulavi Abdus Salam (Calcutta, 1904); Francis Gladwin, A Narrative of the Transactions in Bengal (a translation of Salimullah Munshi's 'Tarikh-i-Bangala') (Calcutta, 1788); Karam Ali, 'Muzaffarnama', the Khudabaksh Library MSS (I am also grateful to Shaista Khan for permitting me to consult her unpublished English translation of this work. Direct quotes from the 'Muzaffarnama' in this paper are based on her translation); Yusuf Ali Khan, Tarikh-i-Bangala-i-Mahabat Jangi, trans. Abdus Subhan (Calcutta, 1982); Maharaja Kalyan Singh 'Ashiq', Khulasatu-t-Tawarikh, trans. Sarfaraz Hussain Khan, Journal of the Bihar and Orissa Research Society, vol. 5, 1919, vol. 6, 1920 and vol. 9, 1923; Muhammad Ali Khan Ansari, 'Tarikh-i-Muzaffar Jang', the Oriental and India Office Records (henceforth O&IOL). wish to thank Rasul Hajizadeh, the Penn State University, for help in translating portions of the 'Tarikh-i- Muzaffar Jang'. In addition I have used excerpts from histories as given in H. M. Elliot and J. Dowson, The History of India as Told by its Own Historians (henceforth: E&D), vol. 8 (this edition: Allahabad, 1964). Specific references to these histories have been made at appropriate places in the paper. This paper analyses the rearticulation of Indian/late Mughal political traditions in eighteenth-century Persian works and administrative treatises. It does not attempt to address the question of whether these Persian works can be regarded as 'history' in the modern sense of the term or whether they are examples of a pre- modern historical consciousness. This issue is an important and a complex one which deserves separate treatment and cannot be satisfactorily discussed in this paper. The articles by Guha and Chatterjee referred to in footnote 2 are primarily about the creation of an Indian historiography of India in the nineteenth century and except for very general observations, they are not directly concerned with the issue of whether Mughal or late Mughal historical works can also be considered to be histories in the modern sense.
23. The specific histories that have been used in this paper are as follows: Ghulam Hussain Khan Tabatabai, Seir Mutaqherin, trans. Nota Manus, 3 vols (this edition: New Delhi, 1990); Ghulam Hussain Salim Zaidpuri, Riyazu-s-Salatin, trans. Maulavi Abdus Salam (Calcutta, 1904); Francis Gladwin, A Narrative of the Transactions in Bengal (a translation of Salimullah Munshi's 'Tarikh-i-Bangala') (Calcutta, 1788); Karam Ali, 'Muzaffarnama', the Khudabaksh Library MSS (I am also grateful to Shaista Khan for permitting me to consult her unpublished English translation of this work. Direct quotes from the 'Muzaffarnama' in this paper are based on her translation); Yusuf Ali Khan, Tarikh-i-Bangala-i-Mahabat Jangi, trans. Abdus Subhan (Calcutta, 1982); Maharaja Kalyan Singh 'Ashiq', Khulasatu-t-Tawarikh, trans. Sarfaraz Hussain Khan, Journal of the Bihar and Orissa Research Society, vol. 5, 1919, vol. 6, 1920 and vol. 9, 1923; Muhammad Ali Khan Ansari, 'Tarikh-i-Muzaffar Jang', the Oriental and India Office Records (henceforth O&IOL). wish to thank Rasul Hajizadeh, the Penn State University, for help in translating portions of the 'Tarikh-i- Muzaffar Jang'. In addition I have used excerpts from histories as given in H. M. Elliot and J. Dowson, The History of India as Told by its Own Historians (henceforth: E&D), vol. 8 (this edition: Allahabad, 1964). Specific references to these histories have been made at appropriate places in the paper. This paper analyses the rearticulation of Indian/late Mughal political traditions in eighteenth-century Persian works and administrative treatises. It does not attempt to address the question of whether these Persian works can be regarded as 'history' in the modern sense of the term or whether they are examples of a pre- modern historical consciousness. This issue is an important and a complex one which deserves separate treatment and cannot be satisfactorily discussed in this paper. The articles by Guha and Chatterjee referred to in footnote 2 are primarily about the creation of an Indian historiography of India in the nineteenth century and except for very general observations, they are not directly concerned with the issue of whether Mughal or late Mughal historical works can also be considered to be histories in the modern sense.
24. The specific histories that have been used in this paper are as follows: Ghulam Hussain Khan Tabatabai, Seir Mutaqherin, trans. Nota Manus, 3 vols (this edition: New Delhi, 1990); Ghulam Hussain Salim Zaidpuri, Riyazu-s-Salatin, trans. Maulavi Abdus Salam (Calcutta, 1904); Francis Gladwin, A Narrative of the Transactions in Bengal (a translation of Salimullah Munshi's 'Tarikh-i-Bangala') (Calcutta, 1788); Karam Ali, 'Muzaffarnama', the Khudabaksh Library MSS (I am also grateful to Shaista Khan for permitting me to consult her unpublished English translation of this work. Direct quotes from the 'Muzaffarnama' in this paper are based on her translation); Yusuf Ali Khan, Tarikh-i-Bangala-i-Mahabat Jangi, trans. Abdus Subhan (Calcutta, 1982); Maharaja Kalyan Singh 'Ashiq', Khulasatu-t-Tawarikh, trans. Sarfaraz Hussain Khan, Journal of the Bihar and Orissa Research Society, vol. 5, 1919, vol. 6, 1920 and vol. 9, 1923; Muhammad Ali Khan Ansari, 'Tarikh-i-Muzaffar Jang', the Oriental and India Office Records (henceforth O&IOL). wish to thank Rasul Hajizadeh, the Penn State University, for help in translating portions of the 'Tarikh-i- Muzaffar Jang'. In addition I have used excerpts from histories as given in H. M. Elliot and J. Dowson, The History of India as Told by its Own Historians (henceforth: E&D), vol. 8 (this edition: Allahabad, 1964). Specific references to these histories have been made at appropriate places in the paper. This paper analyses the rearticulation of Indian/late Mughal political traditions in eighteenth-century Persian works and administrative treatises. It does not attempt to address the question of whether these Persian works can be regarded as 'history' in the modern sense of the term or whether they are examples of a pre- modern historical consciousness. This issue is an important and a complex one which deserves separate treatment and cannot be satisfactorily discussed in this paper. The articles by Guha and Chatterjee referred to in footnote 2 are primarily about the creation of an Indian historiography of India in the nineteenth century and except for very general observations, they are not directly concerned with the issue of whether Mughal or late Mughal historical works can also be considered to be histories in the modern sense.
25. The specific histories that have been used in this paper are as follows: Ghulam Hussain Khan Tabatabai, Seir Mutaqherin, trans. Nota Manus, 3 vols (this edition: New Delhi, 1990); Ghulam Hussain Salim Zaidpuri, Riyazu-s-Salatin, trans. Maulavi Abdus Salam (Calcutta, 1904); Francis Gladwin, A Narrative of the Transactions in Bengal (a translation of Salimullah Munshi's 'Tarikh-i-Bangala') (Calcutta, 1788); Karam Ali, 'Muzaffarnama', the Khudabaksh Library MSS (I am also grateful to Shaista Khan for permitting me to consult her unpublished English translation of this work. Direct quotes from the 'Muzaffarnama' in this paper are based on her translation); Yusuf Ali Khan, Tarikh-i-Bangala-i-Mahabat Jangi, trans. Abdus Subhan (Calcutta, 1982); Maharaja Kalyan Singh 'Ashiq', Khulasatu-t-Tawarikh, trans. Sarfaraz Hussain Khan, Journal of the Bihar and Orissa Research Society, vol. 5, 1919, vol. 6, 1920 and vol. 9, 1923; Muhammad Ali Khan Ansari, 'Tarikh-i-Muzaffar Jang', the Oriental and India Office Records (henceforth O&IOL). wish to thank Rasul Hajizadeh, the Penn State University, for help in translating portions of the 'Tarikh-i- Muzaffar Jang'. In addition I have used excerpts from histories as given in H. M. Elliot and J. Dowson, The History of India as Told by its Own Historians (henceforth: E&D), vol. 8 (this edition: Allahabad, 1964). Specific references to these histories have been made at appropriate places in the paper. This paper analyses the rearticulation of Indian/late Mughal political traditions in eighteenth-century Persian works and administrative treatises. It does not attempt to address the question of whether these Persian works can be regarded as 'history' in the modern sense of the term or whether they are examples of a pre- modern historical consciousness. This issue is an important and a complex one which deserves separate treatment and cannot be satisfactorily discussed in this paper. The articles by Guha and Chatterjee referred to in footnote 2 are primarily about the creation of an Indian historiography of India in the nineteenth century and except for very general observations, they are not directly concerned with the issue of whether Mughal or late Mughal historical works can also be considered to be histories in the modern sense.
26. The specific histories that have been used in this paper are as follows: Ghulam Hussain Khan Tabatabai, Seir Mutaqherin, trans. Nota Manus, 3 vols (this edition: New Delhi, 1990); Ghulam Hussain Salim Zaidpuri, Riyazu-s-Salatin, trans. Maulavi Abdus Salam (Calcutta, 1904); Francis Gladwin, A Narrative of the Transactions in Bengal (a translation of Salimullah Munshi's 'Tarikh-i-Bangala') (Calcutta, 1788); Karam Ali, 'Muzaffarnama', the Khudabaksh Library MSS (I am also grateful to Shaista Khan for permitting me to consult her unpublished English translation of this work. Direct quotes from the 'Muzaffarnama' in this paper are based on her translation); Yusuf Ali Khan, Tarikh-i-Bangala-i-Mahabat Jangi, trans. Abdus Subhan (Calcutta, 1982); Maharaja Kalyan Singh 'Ashiq', Khulasatu-t-Tawarikh, trans. Sarfaraz Hussain Khan, Journal of the Bihar and Orissa Research Society, vol. 5, 1919, vol. 6, 1920 and vol. 9, 1923; Muhammad Ali Khan Ansari, 'Tarikh-i-Muzaffar Jang', the Oriental and India Office Records (henceforth O&IOL). wish to thank Rasul Hajizadeh, the Penn State University, for help in translating portions of the 'Tarikh-i- Muzaffar Jang'. In addition I have used excerpts from histories as given in H. M. Elliot and J. Dowson, The History of India as Told by its Own Historians (henceforth: E&D), vol. 8 (this edition: Allahabad, 1964). Specific references to these histories have been made at appropriate places in the paper. This paper analyses the rearticulation of Indian/late Mughal political traditions in eighteenth-century Persian works and administrative treatises. It does not attempt to address the question of whether these Persian works can be regarded as 'history' in the modern sense of the term or whether they are examples of a pre- modern historical consciousness. This issue is an important and a complex one which deserves separate treatment and cannot be satisfactorily discussed in this paper. The articles by Guha and Chatterjee referred to in footnote 2 are primarily about the creation of an Indian historiography of India in the nineteenth century and except for very general observations, they are not directly concerned with the issue of whether Mughal or late Mughal historical works can also be considered to be histories in the modern sense.
27. The specific histories that have been used in this paper are as follows: Ghulam Hussain Khan Tabatabai, Seir Mutaqherin, trans. Nota Manus, 3 vols (this edition: New Delhi, 1990); Ghulam Hussain Salim Zaidpuri, Riyazu-s-Salatin, trans. Maulavi Abdus Salam (Calcutta, 1904); Francis Gladwin, A Narrative of the Transactions in Bengal (a translation of Salimullah Munshi's 'Tarikh-i-Bangala') (Calcutta, 1788); Karam Ali, 'Muzaffarnama', the Khudabaksh Library MSS (I am also grateful to Shaista Khan for permitting me to consult her unpublished English translation of this work. Direct quotes from the 'Muzaffarnama' in this paper are based on her translation); Yusuf Ali Khan, Tarikh-i-Bangala-i-Mahabat Jangi, trans. Abdus Subhan (Calcutta, 1982); Maharaja Kalyan Singh 'Ashiq', Khulasatu-t-Tawarikh, trans. Sarfaraz Hussain Khan, Journal of the Bihar and Orissa Research Society, vol. 5, 1919, vol. 6, 1920 and vol. 9, 1923; Muhammad Ali Khan Ansari, 'Tarikh-i-Muzaffar Jang', the Oriental and India Office Records (henceforth O&IOL). wish to thank Rasul Hajizadeh, the Penn State University, for help in translating portions of the 'Tarikh-i-Muzaffar Jang'. In addition I have used excerpts from histories as given in H. M. Elliot and J. Dowson, The History of India as Told by its Own Historians (henceforth: E&D), vol. 8 (this edition: Allahabad, 1964). Specific references to these histories have been made at appropriate places in the paper. This paper analyses the rearticulation of Indian/late Mughal political traditions in eighteenth-century Persian works and administrative treatises. It does not attempt to address the question of whether these Persian works can be regarded as 'history' in the modern sense of the term or whether they are examples of a pre-modern historical consciousness. This issue is an important and a complex one which deserves separate treatment and cannot be satisfactorily discussed in this paper. The articles by Guha and Chatterjee referred to in footnote 2 are primarily about the creation of an Indian historiography of India in the nineteenth century and except for very general observations, they are not directly concerned with the issue of whether Mughal or late Mughal historical works can also be considered to be histories in the modern sense.
28. The records of the East India Co. such as the Proceedings volumes of the various Provincial Councils of Revenue and The Committee of Revenue (located in the West Bengal State Archives, Calcutta) contain countless such administrative reports.
29. Oriental and India Office Records (O&IOR): Home Miscellaneous, vol. 68, 'Substance of a Persian Treatise on the Revenues of Bengal', undated and by an anonymous author in 'Mr. Murray's Papers on the Revenues of Bengal', also undated (hereafter referred to as Persian treatise) and Home Miscellaneous, vol. 387: 'Abstract of Accounts Relative to the Soubeh of Bihar Prepared & Delivered by the Canongoes of Several Parganas, Fasli, 1180 A.D.' (hereafter referred to as 'Atmaram's Account'). Both these commentaries may have been authored by the same person.
30. Oriental and India Office Records (O&IOR): Home Miscellaneous, vol. 68, 'Substance of a Persian Treatise on the Revenues of Bengal', undated and by an anonymous author in 'Mr. Murray's Papers on the Revenues of Bengal', also undated (hereafter referred to as Persian treatise) and Home Miscellaneous, vol. 387: 'Abstract of Accounts Relative to the Soubeh of Bihar Prepared & Delivered by the Canongoes of Several Parganas, Fasli, 1180 A.D.' (hereafter referred to as 'Atmaram's Account'). Both these commentaries may have been authored by the same person.
31. Oriental and India Office Records (O&IOR): Home Miscellaneous, vol. 68, 'Substance of a Persian Treatise on the Revenues of Bengal', undated and by an anonymous author in 'Mr. Murray's Papers on the Revenues of Bengal', also undated (hereafter referred to as Persian treatise) and Home Miscellaneous, vol. 387: 'Abstract of Accounts Relative to the Soubeh of Bihar Prepared & Delivered by the Canongoes of Several Parganas, Fasli, 1180 A.D.' (hereafter referred to as 'Atmaram's Account'). Both these commentaries may have been authored by the same person.
32. R. Guha, An Indian Historiography, p. 6.
33. See footnote 4 for references to works dealing with the establishment of the East India Co.'s political power over Eastern India.
34. For general observations on Indo-Islamic historiography and on the authors who composed them, see Peter Hardy, Historians of Medieval India; K. A. Nizami (ed.), History and Historians of Medieval India; Mohibbul Hasan (ed.), Historians of Medieval India; Harbans Mukhia, Historians and Historiography During the Reign of Akbar.
35. For general observations on Indo-Islamic historiography and on the authors who composed them, see Peter Hardy, Historians of Medieval India; K. A. Nizami (ed.), History and Historians of Medieval India; Mohibbul Hasan (ed.), Historians of Medieval India; Harbans Mukhia, Historians and Historiography During the Reign of Akbar.
36. For general observations on Indo-Islamic historiography and on the authors who composed them, see Peter Hardy, Historians of Medieval India; K. A. Nizami (ed.), History and Historians of Medieval India; Mohibbul Hasan (ed.), Historians of Medieval India; Harbans Mukhia, Historians and Historiography During the Reign of Akbar.
37. For general observations on Indo-Islamic historiography and on the authors who composed them, see Peter Hardy, Historians of Medieval India; K. A. Nizami (ed.), History and Historians of Medieval India; Mohibbul Hasan (ed.), Historians of Medieval India; Harbans Mukhia, Historians and Historiography During the Reign of Akbar.
38. For general accounts relating to the establishment of Mughal rule over Eastern India and the development of a semi-autonomous kingdom in this region, see Sir J. N. Sarkar, History of Bengal, Muslim Period 1200-1757 (this edition, Patna, 1973) and Marshall, Bengal: The British Bridgehead.
39. For general accounts relating to the establishment of Mughal rule over Eastern India and the development of a semi-autonomous kingdom in this region, see Sir J. N. Sarkar, History of Bengal, Muslim Period 1200-1757 (this edition, Patna, 1973) and Marshall, Bengal: The British Bridgehead.
40. Philip Calkins, 'Mughal Decline in the East: The Mansabdari System Rebuilt', unpublished paper, and 'Formation of a Regionally Oriented Ruling Group in Bengal, 1700-1740', Journal of Asian Studies, vol. 29, 4, 1970.
41. Philip Calkins, 'Mughal Decline in the East: The Mansabdari System Rebuilt', unpublished paper, and 'Formation of a Regionally Oriented Ruling Group in Bengal, 1700-1740', Journal of Asian Studies, vol. 29, 4, 1970.
42. John F. Richards, 'Norms of Comportment Among Imperial Mughal Officers', in Barbara Metcalf (ed.), Moral Conduct and Authority: The Place of Adab in South Asian Islam (Berkeley, 1984).
43. Philip Calkins, 'The Formation of a Regionally Oriented Ruling Group', identifies mansabdars, mercantile interests and landed magnates (i.e. zamindars) as constituting the support base of this kingdom. Bengali language local/regional histories contain detailed information about local service gentry families and their involvement with government service. Such work enabled some of them to secure mansabdari positions and/or special revenue collecting rights (i.e. zamindari rights) from the rulers/nawabs of Murshidabad. Representative examples of such local histories are: Nabinkrishna Bandyopadhyaya, Bhadrapurer Itibritta (Murshidabad, 1910-11); Rasiklal Gupta, Maharaj Rajballabh Sen (Calcutta, no date); Kumudnath Mullick, Nadia Kahini (Calcutta, B.S. 1317); S. Dhar, Nabab Harekrishna (Calcutta, 1910).
44. Philip Calkins, 'The Formation of a Regionally Oriented Ruling Group', identifies mansabdars, mercantile interests and landed magnates (i.e. zamindars) as constituting the support base of this kingdom. Bengali language local/regional histories contain detailed information about local service gentry families and their involvement with government service. Such work enabled some of them to secure mansabdari positions and/or special revenue collecting rights (i.e. zamindari rights) from the rulers/nawabs of Murshidabad. Representative examples of such local histories are: Nabinkrishna Bandyopadhyaya, Bhadrapurer Itibritta (Murshidabad, 1910-11); Rasiklal Gupta, Maharaj Rajballabh Sen (Calcutta, no date); Kumudnath Mullick, Nadia Kahini (Calcutta, B.S. 1317); S. Dhar, Nabab Harekrishna (Calcutta, 1910).
45. Philip Calkins, 'The Formation of a Regionally Oriented Ruling Group', identifies mansabdars, mercantile interests and landed magnates (i.e. zamindars) as constituting the support base of this kingdom. Bengali language local/regional histories contain detailed information about local service gentry families and their involvement with government service. Such work enabled some of them to secure mansabdari positions and/or special revenue collecting rights (i.e. zamindari rights) from the rulers/nawabs of Murshidabad. Representative examples of such local histories are: Nabinkrishna Bandyopadhyaya, Bhadrapurer Itibritta (Murshidabad, 1910-11); Rasiklal Gupta, Maharaj Rajballabh Sen (Calcutta, no date); Kumudnath Mullick, Nadia Kahini (Calcutta, B.S. 1317); S. Dhar, Nabab Harekrishna (Calcutta, 1910).
46. Philip Calkins, 'The Formation of a Regionally Oriented Ruling Group', identifies mansabdars, mercantile interests and landed magnates (i.e. zamindars) as constituting the support base of this kingdom. Bengali language local/regional histories contain detailed information about local service gentry families and their involvement with government service. Such work enabled some of them to secure mansabdari positions and/or special revenue collecting rights (i.e. zamindari rights) from the rulers/nawabs of Murshidabad. Representative examples of such local histories are: Nabinkrishna Bandyopadhyaya, Bhadrapurer Itibritta (Murshidabad, 1910-11); Rasiklal Gupta, Maharaj Rajballabh Sen (Calcutta, no date); Kumudnath Mullick, Nadia Kahini (Calcutta, B.S. 1317); S. Dhar, Nabab Harekrishna (Calcutta, 1910).
47. Philip Calkins, 'The Formation of a Regionally Oriented Ruling Group', identifies mansabdars, mercantile interests and landed magnates (i.e. zamindars) as constituting the support base of this kingdom. Bengali language local/regional histories contain detailed information about local service gentry families and their involvement with government service. Such work enabled some of them to secure mansabdari positions and/or special revenue collecting rights (i.e. zamindari rights) from the rulers/nawabs of Murshidabad. Representative examples of such local histories are: Nabinkrishna Bandyopadhyaya, Bhadrapurer Itibritta (Murshidabad, 1910-11); Rasiklal Gupta, Maharaj Rajballabh Sen (Calcutta, no date); Kumudnath Mullick, Nadia Kahini (Calcutta, B.S. 1317); S. Dhar, Nabab Harekrishna (Calcutta, 1910).
48. Kumkum Chatterjee, 'Poetry, History and the Late Eighteenth Century Inquilab', unpublished paper presented to the conference on 'Cultural Production and Cultural Change in the Ottoman, Safavid and the Mughal Empires, 1500-1800', The University of Pennsyvania, May 1993.
49. Maulavi M. Hidayat Hussain, 'The Mirza Namah (The Book of the Perfect Gentleman) of Mirza Kamran with an English Translation', Journal of the Asiatic Society of Bengal, vol. 9, 1913.
50. Richards, 'Norms of Comportment, pp. 262-76.
51. V. G. Khobrekar (ed.), Sir Jadunath Sarkar Centenary Commemoration Volume. English Translation of Tarikh-i-Dilkasha. Memoirs of Bhimsen Relating to Aurangzeb's Deccan Campaigns (Bombay, 1972); also Sir J. N. Sarkar, 'A Great Hindu Memoir Writer', in Studies in Mughal India (New York, 1920), pp. 231-41.
52. V. G. Khobrekar (ed.), Sir Jadunath Sarkar Centenary Commemoration Volume. English Translation of Tarikh-i-Dilkasha. Memoirs of Bhimsen Relating to Aurangzeb's Deccan Campaigns (Bombay, 1972); also Sir J. N. Sarkar, 'A Great Hindu Memoir Writer', in Studies in Mughal India (New York, 1920), pp. 231-41.
53. Richards, 'Norms of Comportment', pp. 262-76.
54. 'Atmaram's Account'.
55. There is a dearth of historical literature on formal education and intellectual life in pre-modern India. Some direct and indirect references are found in the eighteenth and early nineteenth century.
56. See e.g. Rasiklal Gupta, Raja Rajballabh Sen and other local histories in Bengali referred to in footnote 17.
57. E&D, vol. 8, pp. 5-20 contains references to this feature: Subhan Rai Khatri's 'Khulasatu-t-Tawarikh' was allegedly based on the 'Mukhtasirut Tawarikh', an earlier work, while Ghulam Hussain Tabatabai's Seir was supposed to have been based on Subhan Rai's work. Also, see Hardy, Historians of Medieval India, p. 1.
58. E&D, vol. 8, pp. 5-20 contains references to this feature: Subhan Rai Khatri's 'Khulasatu-t-Tawarikh' was allegedly based on the 'Mukhtasirut Tawarikh', an earlier work, while Ghulam Hussain Tabatabai's Seir was supposed to have been based on Subhan Rai's work. Also, see Hardy, Historians of Medieval India, p. 1.
59. Ibid.
60. For this feature of historiography since the time of Emperor Akbar, see Zahiruddin Malik, 'Persian Historiography in India During the 18th Century', p. 143, in Mohibbul Hasan (ed.), Historians of Medieval India.
61. For earlier Islamic polities, see e.g. R. Mottahedeh, Loyalties and Leadership in an Early Islamic Society (Princeton, 1980) and C. F. Petry, The Civilian Elite of Cairo in the Later Middle Ages (Princeton, 1981). For the Ottoman and Ching bureaucracies, representative examples would be, Cornell Fleischer, Bureaucrat and Intellectual in the Ottoman Empire (Princeton, 1986), Thomas A. Metzger, The Internal Organization of the Ching Bureaucracy (Cambridge, Mass., 1973) and Escape from Predicament. Neo- Confucianism and China's Evolving Political Culture (New York, 1977).
62. For earlier Islamic polities, see e.g. R. Mottahedeh, Loyalties and Leadership in an Early Islamic Society (Princeton, 1980) and C. F. Petry, The Civilian Elite of Cairo in the Later Middle Ages (Princeton, 1981). For the Ottoman and Ching bureaucracies, representative examples would be, Cornell Fleischer, Bureaucrat and Intellectual in the Ottoman Empire (Princeton, 1986), Thomas A. Metzger, The Internal Organization of the Ching Bureaucracy (Cambridge, Mass., 1973) and Escape from Predicament. Neo- Confucianism and China's Evolving Political Culture (New York, 1977).
63. For earlier Islamic polities, see e.g. R. Mottahedeh, Loyalties and Leadership in an Early Islamic Society (Princeton, 1980) and C. F. Petry, The Civilian Elite of Cairo in the Later Middle Ages (Princeton, 1981). For the Ottoman and Ching bureaucracies, representative examples would be, Cornell Fleischer, Bureaucrat and Intellectual in the Ottoman Empire (Princeton, 1986), Thomas A. Metzger, The Internal Organization of the Ching Bureaucracy (Cambridge, Mass., 1973) and Escape from Predicament. Neo- Confucianism and China's Evolving Political Culture (New York, 1977).
64. For earlier Islamic polities, see e.g. R. Mottahedeh, Loyalties and Leadership in an Early Islamic Society (Princeton, 1980) and C. F. Petry, The Civilian Elite of Cairo in the Later Middle Ages (Princeton, 1981). For the Ottoman and Ching bureaucracies, representative examples would be, Cornell Fleischer, Bureaucrat and Intellectual in the Ottoman Empire (Princeton, 1986), Thomas A. Metzger, The Internal Organization of the Ching Bureaucracy (Cambridge, Mass., 1973) and Escape from Predicament. Neo- Confucianism and China's Evolving Political Culture (New York, 1977).
65. For earlier Islamic polities, see e.g. R. Mottahedeh, Loyalties and Leadership in an Early Islamic Society (Princeton, 1980) and C. F. Petry, The Civilian Elite of Cairo in the Later Middle Ages (Princeton, 1981). For the Ottoman and Ching bureaucracies, representative examples would be, Cornell Fleischer, Bureaucrat and Intellectual in the Ottoman Empire (Princeton, 1986), Thomas A. Metzger, The Internal Organization of the Ching Bureaucracy (Cambridge, Mass., 1973) and Escape from Predicament. Neo-Confucianism and China's Evolving Political Culture (New York, 1977).
66. O&IOR: Home Miscellaneous, vol. 68: 'Mr. Murray's Papers on the Revenues of Bengal', undated; Coast & Bay Abstracts (O&IOR): Fort William General Letter, dated Jan. 29, 1726. The term 'revolution' occurs very frequently in almost all the eighteenth- and early nineteenth-century works used in this paper.
67. F. Lehmann, 'The Eighteenth Century Transition in India: Responses of Some Bihar Intellectuals', unpub. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Wisconsin, 1967.
68. Seir: 3, pp. 159-60; Home Misc., vol. 387: 'Atmaram's Account'.
69. Seir: 3, pp. 159-60; Home Misc., vol. 387: 'Atmaram's Account'.
70. Bolts, Considerations on Indian Affairs, p. 150.
71. For this tendency in late Mughal historiography in general, i.e. in works not relating to Eastern India, see e.g. Ali Mohammed Khan, Mirat-i-Ahmadi, trans. M. F. Lokhandwala (Baroda, 1965). See also, Zahiruddin Malik, 'Persian Historiography in India During the 18th Century', pp. 147-9, in Mohibbul Hasan (ed.), Historians of Medieval India. References to causes/symptoms of decline in works of Eastern India-based writers occur in Seir, 3 vols, 'Muzaffarnama', 'Atmaram's Account', etc.
72. For this tendency in late Mughal historiography in general, i.e. in works not relating to Eastern India, see e.g. Ali Mohammed Khan, Mirat-i-Ahmadi, trans. M. F. Lokhandwala (Baroda, 1965). See also, Zahiruddin Malik, 'Persian Historiography in India During the 18th Century', pp. 147-9, in Mohibbul Hasan (ed.), Historians of Medieval India. References to causes/symptoms of decline in works of Eastern India-based writers occur in Seir, 3 vols, 'Muzaffarnama', 'Atmaram's Account', etc.
73. For this tendency in late Mughal historiography in general, i.e. in works not relating to Eastern India, see e.g. Ali Mohammed Khan, Mirat-i-Ahmadi, trans. M. F. Lokhandwala (Baroda, 1965). See also, Zahiruddin Malik, 'Persian Historiography in India During the 18th Century', pp. 147-9, in Mohibbul Hasan (ed.), Historians of Medieval India. References to causes/symptoms of decline in works of Eastern India-based writers occur in Seir, 3 vols, 'Muzaffarnama', 'Atmaram's Account', etc.
74. Seir: 2, p. 413.
75. The Seir and the Riyaz contain generous praises of the Murshidabad nawabs Murshid Quli, Shujauddin and Ali Vardi.
76. Seir: 1, pp. 153, 156, 246-7, 257, etc.
77. Seir: 1, pp. 67, 81-90, 110-11; Riyaz, pp. 337-8.
78. Seir: 2, p. 113.
79. For example, Gladwin, Narrative of Transactions, p. 109.
80. Seir: 3, pp. 189-90.
81. The repeated praises of the personal qualities of Nawabs Murshid Quli (Gladwin, Narrative of Transactions, p. 109); Shujauddin (Seir: 1, p. 279); Rustum Ali's 'Tarikh-i-Hindi' (E&D, vol. 8, p. 67) and Ali Vardi (Seir: 1, p. 341), for example, indicate this, as do open criticisms of the later Mughal emperors (e.g. Seir: 1, p. 20).
82. The repeated praises of the personal qualities of Nawabs Murshid Quli (Gladwin, Narrative of Transactions, p. 109); Shujauddin (Seir: 1, p. 279); Rustum Ali's 'Tarikh-i-Hindi' (E&D, vol. 8, p. 67) and Ali Vardi (Seir: 1, p. 341), for example, indicate this, as do open criticisms of the later Mughal emperors (e.g. Seir: 1, p. 20).
83. The repeated praises of the personal qualities of Nawabs Murshid Quli (Gladwin, Narrative of Transactions, p. 109); Shujauddin (Seir: 1, p. 279); Rustum Ali's 'Tarikh-i-Hindi' (E&D, vol. 8, p. 67) and Ali Vardi (Seir: 1, p. 341), for example, indicate this, as do open criticisms of the later Mughal emperors (e.g. Seir: 1, p. 20).
84. The repeated praises of the personal qualities of Nawabs Murshid Quli (Gladwin, Narrative of Transactions, p. 109); Shujauddin (Seir: 1, p. 279); Rustum Ali's 'Tarikh-i-Hindi' (E&D, vol. 8, p. 67) and Ali Vardi (Seir: 1, p. 341), for example, indicate this, as do open criticisms of the later Mughal emperors (e.g. Seir: 1, p. 20).
85. The repeated praises of the personal qualities of Nawabs Murshid Quli (Gladwin, Narrative of Transactions, p. 109); Shujauddin (Seir: 1, p. 279); Rustum Ali's 'Tarikh-i-Hindi' (E&D, vol. 8, p. 67) and Ali Vardi (Seir: 1, p. 341), for example, indicate this, as do open criticisms of the later Mughal emperors (e.g. Seir: 1, p. 20).
86. J. F. Richards, 'The Formulation of Imperial Authority under Akbar and Jahangir', in J. F. Richards (ed.), Kingship and Authority in South Asia (Madison, 1978).
87. Stephen P. Blake, Shahjahanabad. The Sovereign City in Mughal India 1639-1739 (Cambridge, 1991).
88. 'Atmaram's Account'.
89. Ibid.
90. Fleischer, Bureaucrat and Intellectual, ch. 8.
91. V. G. Khobrekar (ed.), Bhimsen's Tarikh-i-Dilkasha, p. 1.
92. Seir: 1, pp. 58-60.
93. Ibid., pp. 36-7.
94. Ibid., pp. 114-15.
95. Ibid., pp. 36-7.
96. Ibid.
97. Ibid., p. 40.
98. The Seir, Riyaz, Gladwin, Narrative of Transactions, Yusuf Ali, Tarikh-i-Bangala-i- Mahabat Jangi, all contain scattered comments which reveal positive opinions held by the historians.
99. The Seir, Riyaz, Gladwin, Narrative of Transactions, Yusuf Ali, Tarikh-i-Bangala-i-Mahabat Jangi, all contain scattered comments which reveal positive opinions held by the historians.
100. Seir: 1, p. 342.
101. Ibid., pp. 341-2.
102. 'Muzaffarnama', Riyaz, pp. 363-4, Seir. 2, pp. 186-7, 193.
103. 'Muzaffarnama', Riyaz, pp. 363-4, Seir. 2, pp. 186-7, 193.
104. Seir: 3.
105. 'Muzaffarnama'.
106. 'Atamaram's Account'.
107. Ibid. and 'Persian Treatise'.
108. 'Atmaram's Account'.
109. Ibid. and 'Persian Treatise'.
110. 'Atmaram's Account'.
111. The Seir e.g. contains many instances when Ghulam Hussain praised the English and yet this history also contained one of the strongest critiques of East India Company rule to be voiced in the later eighteenth century. Sometimes, the struggle of Ghulam Hussain and other late eighteenth and early nineteenth-century writers to tone down their criticism for fear that it would ruin their chances of securing the company's patronage led to the composition of strained and contradictory statements such as in the following passage from Hari Charan Das's 'Chahar Gulzar Shujai' (E&D, p. 229): 'It is said that the English are so just and honest that they do not interfere with the wealth of any rich men. . . . But from those who are powerful, they manage to obtain money by their wisdom and adroitness and even by force if necessary; but they are not oppressive and never trouble poor people'.
112. A discussion of contemporary Indian views on British society and political system, though complementary to Indian critiques of the East India Company's government of Eastern India, is somewhat beyond the scope of this paper. For an analysis of the former, see Juan R. I. Cole, 'Invisible Occidentalism: Eighteenth Century Indo-Persian Constructions of the West', Iranian Studies, 25, 3-4, pp. 3-16.
113. 'Muzaffarnama' and Seir: 3, pp. 158-213.
114. 'Muzaffarnama'.
115. Seir: 3, pp. 158-213.
116. Ibid.
117. Ibid.
118. 'Muzaffarnama', E&D, p. 228: The Chahar Gulzar Shujai.
119. Seir: 3, pp. 158-213.
120. Ibid.
121. Lehmann, 'The Eighteenth Century Transition in India'; also Kumkum Banerjee, 'Indigenous Trade, Finance and Politics: Patna and its Hinterland, 1757- 1812', unpub. Ph.D. thesis, Calcutta University, 1989.
122. Lehmann, 'The Eighteenth Century Transition in India'; also Kumkum Banerjee, 'Indigenous Trade, Finance and Politics: Patna and its Hinterland, 1757-1812', unpub. Ph.D. thesis, Calcutta University, 1989.
123. The reference here is to works like Alexander Dow's History of Hindostan (3 vols, London, 1812-16); Charles Grant's 'An Historical and Comparative Analysis of the Finances of Bengal', in W. K. Firminger (ed.), The Fifth Report from the Select Committee of the House of Commons on the Affairs of the East India Company, 1812 (3 vols, Calcutta, 1917) and to countless administrative reports prepared by East India Company officials which are for the most part still 'buried in the archives' (Guha, An Indian Historiography, p. 9). Examples of such reports are scattered throughout the East India Co.'s administrative records which date in particular to the 1770s-1790s, i.e. the proceedings of the various Provincial Councils of Revenue, the Committee of Revenue, etc. (the West Bengal State Archives, Calcutta). Guha, An Indian Historiography, also contains references to such reports.
124. The reference here is to works like Alexander Dow's History of Hindostan (3 vols, London, 1812-16); Charles Grant's 'An Historical and Comparative Analysis of the Finances of Bengal', in W. K. Firminger (ed.), The Fifth Report from the Select Committee of the House of Commons on the Affairs of the East India Company, 1812 (3 vols, Calcutta, 1917) and to countless administrative reports prepared by East India Company officials which are for the most part still 'buried in the archives' (Guha, An Indian Historiography, p. 9). Examples of such reports are scattered throughout the East India Co.'s administrative records which date in particular to the 1770s-1790s, i.e. the proceedings of the various Provincial Councils of Revenue, the Committee of Revenue, etc. (the West Bengal State Archives, Calcutta). Guha, An Indian Historiography, also contains references to such reports.
125. The reference here is to works like Alexander Dow's History of Hindostan (3 vols, London, 1812-16); Charles Grant's 'An Historical and Comparative Analysis of the Finances of Bengal', in W. K. Firminger (ed.), The Fifth Report from the Select Committee of the House of Commons on the Affairs of the East India Company, 1812 (3 vols, Calcutta, 1917) and to countless administrative reports prepared by East India Company officials which are for the most part still 'buried in the archives' (Guha, An Indian Historiography, p. 9). Examples of such reports are scattered throughout the East India Co.'s administrative records which date in particular to the 1770s-1790s, i.e. the proceedings of the various Provincial Councils of Revenue, the Committee of Revenue, etc. (the West Bengal State Archives, Calcutta). Guha, An Indian Historiography, also contains references to such reports.
126. The reference here is to works like Alexander Dow's History of Hindostan (3 vols, London, 1812-16); Charles Grant's 'An Historical and Comparative Analysis of the Finances of Bengal', in W. K. Firminger (ed.), The Fifth Report from the Select Committee of the House of Commons on the Affairs of the East India Company, 1812 (3 vols, Calcutta, 1917) and to countless administrative reports prepared by East India Company officials which are for the most part still 'buried in the archives' (Guha, An Indian Historiography, p. 9). Examples
127. The reference here is to works like Alexander Dow's History of Hindostan (3 vols, London, 1812-16); Charles Grant's 'An Historical and Comparative Analysis of the Finances of Bengal', in W. K. Firminger (ed.), The Fifth Report from the Select Committee of the House of Commons on the Affairs of the East India Company, 1812 (3 vols, Calcutta, 1917) and to countless administrative reports prepared by East India Company officials which are for the most part still 'buried in the archives' (Guha, An Indian Historiography, p. 9). Examples of such reports are scattered throughout the East India Co.'s administrative records which date in particular to the 1770s-1790s, i.e. the proceedings of the various Provincial Councils of Revenue, the Committee of Revenue, etc. (the West Bengal State Archives, Calcutta). Guha, An Indian Historiography, also contains references to such reports.
128. See J. S. Grewal, Muslim Rule in India. The Assessments of British Historians (Calcutta, 1970).
129. For example, see Dow, History of Hindostan, vol. 3, xxviii. For an analysis of Dow's views on the Mughal empire, see Grewal, Muslim Rule in India, pp. 18-1 9. For example, Mountstuart Elphinstone, The History of British India (London, 1841), vol. 2, pp. 143, 260, 317-18, etc.; for an analysis of Elphinstone's views on Mughal rule, see Grewal, Muslim Rule in India, pp. 143- 6.
130. For example, see Dow, History of Hindostan, vol. 3, xxviii. For an analysis of Dow's views on the Mughal empire, see Grewal, Muslim Rule in India, pp. 18-1 9. For example, Mountstuart Elphinstone, The History of British India (London, 1841), vol. 2, pp. 143, 260, 317-18, etc.; for an analysis of Elphinstone's views on Mughal rule, see Grewal, Muslim Rule in India, pp. 143- 6.
131. For example, see Dow, History of Hindostan, vol. 3, xxviii. For an analysis of Dow's views on the Mughal empire, see Grewal, Muslim Rule in India, pp. 18-1 9. For example, Mountstuart Elphinstone, The History of British India (London, 1841), vol. 2, pp. 143, 260, 317-18, etc.; for an analysis of Elphinstone's views on Mughal rule, see Grewal, Muslim Rule in India, pp. 143- 6.
132. For example, see Dow, History of Hindostan, vol. 3, xxviii. For an analysis of Dow's views on the Mughal empire, see Grewal, Muslim Rule in India, pp. 18-1 9. For example, Mountstuart Elphinstone, The History of British India (London, 1841), vol. 2, pp. 143, 260, 317-18, etc.; for an analysis of Elphinstone's views on Mughal rule, see Grewal, Muslim Rule in India, pp. 143- 6.
133. I am indebted to the referee of this paper for pointing out that the composition and dissemination of many of the colonialist histories of India occurred in the context of Anglo-Indian debates about the East India Company.
134. Dow, History of Hindostan, vol. 1, cxv, cl, cxl-cxli.
135. For this concept, see Thomas R. Metcalf, Ideologies of the Raj (The New Cambridge History of India, vol. III.4) (Indian edition, New Delhi, 1995), pp. 6-9.
136. Ibid., p. 6.
137. Ibid., p. 9. Even British 'orientalist' scholars who are known for their admiration of Indian culture and traditions confined their interest to ancient India and specifically to the achievements of the Aryans. It was believed that Indian culture subsequently suffered a decline which by implication was due to the establishment of 'Muslim rule' over India. For British 'orientalist' views on India, see David Kopf, British Orientalism and the Bengal Renaissance (Berkeley, 1969), and Thomas R. Trautmann, Aryans and British India (Berkeley, 1997).
138. Ibid., p. 9. Even British 'orientalist' scholars who are known for their admiration of Indian culture and traditions confined their interest to ancient India and specifically to the achievements of the Aryans. It was believed that Indian culture subsequently suffered a decline which by implication was due to the establishment of 'Muslim rule' over India. For British 'orientalist' views on India, see David Kopf, British Orientalism and the Bengal Renaissance (Berkeley, 1969), and Thomas R. Trautmann, Aryans and British India (Berkeley, 1997).
139. The classic formulation of this view is in Edward Said, Orientalism (New York, 1978).
140. Partha Chatterjee, 'Histories and Nations', pp. 95-115, in The Nation and its Fragments.
141. Rajat Kanta Ray, 'Colonial Penetration and the Initial Resistance: The Mughal Ruling Class, the English Company and the Struggle for Bengal 1756-1800', Indian Historical Review, vol. 12, nos 1-2, 1985-86. Of related interest is Gautam Bhadra, 'Prak-Rammohan Juge Companir Shasaner Prati Kaekjan Bangali Buddhijibir Manobhab', Academy (Bengali journal), no. 6, 1989.
142. Rajat Kanta Ray, 'Colonial Penetration and the Initial Resistance: The Mughal Ruling Class, the English Company and the Struggle for Bengal 1756-1800', Indian Historical Review, vol. 12, nos 1-2, 1985-86. Of related interest is Gautam Bhadra, 'Prak-Rammohan Juge Companir Shasaner Prati Kaekjan Bangali Buddhijibir Manobhab', Academy (Bengali journal), no. 6, 1989.