Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at http://www.jstor.org/page/
info/about/policies/terms.jsp
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content
in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship.
For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.
Indiana University Press is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Victorian Studies.
http://www.jstor.org
This content downloaded from 130.113.111.210 on Fri, 22 Jan 2016 01:00:13 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
164
VICTORIAN STUDIES
This content downloaded from 130.113.111.210 on Fri, 22 Jan 2016 01:00:13 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
165
Although the trial ended with Hastings's acquittal, Dirks argues that it was
not, as is sometimes contended, a failure. As several scholars have already pointed out,
Burke's concern was less with protecting Indians than it was with shielding the ancient
constitution at home from the perversions of Company "nabobs."The trial became the
ordeal-by-fire from which the British imperial enterprise emerged purified of all ignominy. From then on, scandal was reserved for the "natives" themselves, and the
"imputed barbarism" of their traditions- evidenced in practices such as Sati, Thuggee,
or hook-swinging- was used to "justify, and even ennoble, imperial ambition" (5, 297,
301, 305).
But the eighteenth century in India to which Dirks takes us is already distinguished by a vigorous historiographical debate, "janus-faced,"that looks, on one hand,
to explain the decentralization of the Mughal Empire and, on the other, to understand
the transition to colonialism. In terms of the second concern, Dirks valuably questions
a strand of recent popular historical writing that evokes an era characterized by "unexpected and unplanned minglings" of Europeans and Indians and of their "cultures and
ideas" to forge relationships that are, moreover, characterized as "symbiotic" (William
Dalrymple, WhiteMughals:Love and Betrayalin EighteenthCenturyIndia [2002] xiv). This
world is "hybrid"and these relations "symbiotic"only if one suspends the framework of
power within which they operated. Without denying all racial and cultural border
crossings at the time, Dirks reminds us that the eighteenth century was also unmistakably an era of conquests, economic extraction, and even ruinous famines precipitated
by Company policies.
If accounts such as Dalrymple's push the colonial context too far into the
background, however, Dirks's pulls it too much forward. While an emerging British
Empire must certainly be acknowledged as part of the setting for a number of actors in
eighteenth-century India, surely it did not form the only setting. Dirks highlights the
disingenuous stances of various Company officials who deferred to the Mughal emperor's supremacy when convenient but violated it when it suited them since his "sovereign
authority was widely seen as a sham" by Britons in both England and India (179). He
fails to note, however, that a similar attitude characterized a wide variety of Indian
political actors of the time. Sanjay Subrahmanyam's account of Nadir Shah's raid into
northern India in early 1739, when he also ordered a general massacre in Delhi,
reminds us that the Mughal emperor Muhammad Shah's sovereignty had been "temporarily suspended" for about two months after which he was "officially restored to the
throne" by the Persian vanquisher's permission {Explorationsin ConnectedHistory[2005]
194). Even before Nadir's devastating blow to Mughal authority, a number of powerful
noblemen of the empire had decidedly struck their own independent political paths.
And the number of those who did so afterwards, along with formerly subordinate
chiefs, warriors, and martial peasant groups, increased noticeably. An array of robust
successor states emerged to prominence through the dual exercise of both respecting
the emperor's authority and usurping his powers, the former being requisite to legitimate the latter. A discussion of these can be ignored only at the cost of reproducing an
Anglo-centered narrative- surely a far cry from Dirks's intent.
The eighteenth century, therefore, was not just a moment of British colonial
intrusion but, from the perspective of the Mughal capital in Delhi and its older elite,
AUTUMN2007
This content downloaded from 130.113.111.210 on Fri, 22 Jan 2016 01:00:13 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
166
VICTORIANSTUDIES
This content downloaded from 130.113.111.210 on Fri, 22 Jan 2016 01:00:13 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions