Lord Macaulay's Speech on Indian Education: The Hoax & Some Truths
A friend has recently forwarded me a quote from Lord Macaulay's speech in the British Parliament on 2nd February 1835. I reproduce the quote below:
"I have traveled across the length and breadth of India and I have not seen one person who is a beggar, who is a thief. Such wealth I have seen in this country, such high moral values, people of such calibre, that I do not think we would ever conquer this country, unless we break the very backbone of this nation, which is her spiritual and cultural heritage, and, therefore, I propose that we replace her old and ancient education system, her culture, for if the Indians think that all that is foreign and English is good and greater than their own, they will lose their self-esteem, their native self-culture and they will become what we want them, a truly dominated nation."
The email requested me to forward me to every indian I know. I was tempted, but there were two oddities about this quote. First, the language, which appeared too modern. Second, this was far too obvious and too cynical for Macaulay, who was an apologist of the empire, and believed in its high moral purpose. The quote was obviously a fraud.
I was, however, tempted to check the source of this quote [I take this blog seriously!]. I found this useful article by the Belgian academic, Dr Koenraad Elst (read here), which shows that there is no authoritative source for this quote, except Hindu Nationalist magazines and sources, though this is widely circulated and believed. The author also claims that it is unlikely that such a speech was made, as Macaulay would have been in India on that date.
Then I found more information on Macaulay's speech on a book called Distinguished Anglo-Indians, which contained the text of Lord Macaulay's Minutes on Indian Education (See here), which told me that Macaulay addressed the parliament on about Indian education. [The date was 10th July 1833] This speech is usually referred together with his famous Minutes on Indian Education, which was indeed dated 2nd February 1835 where he was arguing in favour of using English as the medium of education in India, and made his oft-quoted comment that 'a single shelf of good european library was worth the whole native literature of India and Arabia'. However, what is overlooked, rather conveniently, is this comment contained the same document: Are we to keep the people of India ignorant in order that we may keep them submissive? Or do we think that we can give them knowledge without awakening ambition? Or do we mean to awaken ambition and to provide it with no legitimate vent? Who will answer any of these questions in the affirmative? Yet one of them must be answered in the affirmative, by every person who maintains that we ought permanently to exclude the natives from high office. I have no fears. The path of duty is plain before us: and it is also the path of wisdom, of national prosperity, of national honor.[See the full text here]
Clearly, Macaulay was saying something directly opposite to what has been quoted as his!
There is indeed a clear reason why this distorted quote was invented. This is indeed RSS and its followers, who put words on Macaulay. I now know RSS even referred to English speaking Indians as 'Children of Macaulay'! The quote above, passed on by my trusting friend, is a spoof, RSS trying to interpret what Macaulay might have meant. [I am sure those who did it knew that Macaulay also put Arabic on the same boat as Sanksrit]
Indeed, the same Minutes contain another classic Macaulay quote, which underlines his intentions, which would eventually become the bedrock of all British colonial strategy - "We must at present do our best to form a class who may be interpreters between us and the millions whom we govern; a class of persons, Indian in blood and colour, but English in taste, in opinions, in morals, and in intellect". This, more than anything else, explains why Macaulay became such a hate figure for the Hindu Nationalists as they came to adopt, dare I say this, the European ideas of nationalism on their own.
India is one of those countries with a great past and a promising future - and a present made up of unending conflicts between the two. No wonder Lord Macaulay has been invoked again, by email! And, no wonder it is a spoof, suiting some political Indian's view of the world. However, the colonialist that he was, India can thank Lord Macaulay for its modernity. Chandrabhan Prasad of University of Pennsylvania's Center For The Advanced Study of India has written another excellent article, outlining Macaulay's contribution in India (read this rather combative article here). He scripted the Indian Penal Code. He made no convenient adjustment to local religions. He wanted to build an education system secular and scientific, free of age-old prejudices and at par with the Western world. While his comment on Indian and Arabian literature was certainly ignorant, he played his part in building the modern India we are all so proud of.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Note: Since I wrote this post, Macaulay kept coming back to the conversations. I reckon it is only fair to highlight what I have written since, which provides an additional perspective, perhaps, to this discussion.
Macaulay and I
Should Britain Apologise?
Does Macaulay Matter?
Undoing Macaulay: The Case for Inglish
Later, to develop a background on how Lord Macaulay came to his minutes, I started the Road to Macaulay project. The links to the published posts are here, though I shall post newer ones as I publish them.
Road to Macaulay: A Personal Note
Road to Macaulay: The Development of Indian Education under British Rule
Road to Macaulay: Warren Hastings and Education of India
Road to Macaulay: Asiatic Society and Reinvention of India's Culture
Comments
I stumbled on your blog while searching for answers to the spoof on Macaulay, posted by a friend of mine on Face book. First of all, I congratulate you for having put up with so much stupidity and indecency for ages! You should have realized long back that you are dealing with incorrigible zealots and dogmatists, who masquerade as patriots.
Asathoma Sadga Maya, you just can't spend rest of your life pursuading those dwellers of the dungeons to come out and see the light, for your own sake , atleast.Aham Brahmasmi.Am I misquoting here?
Coming to the topic on hands, it is clearly a hoax, a spoof and a fraud. Macaulay was sent there to put a lid on this rotting cauldron of Medium of Instruction in 1834/35 and he did the right thing.
Indians were learning in Sanskrit and Parsi since time immemorial and the British were the first to pay them for their education which started in 1803 by some Minto , an outspoken orientalist and also a hardcore imperialist. The entire system was going nowhere after thirty years!Macaulay consulted the leading social reformers and elite of Indian society before he formed his opinion and presented it in the parliament. He might be ignorant about the true worth of Indian Heritage , as was almost everyone at that time of history, that is around 1850s – no knowledge of Harappa or Vedas and Upanishads or Ancient Indian History. Nobody knew much about India, period.
Why everybody in India was paying to learn English while the British government had to pay for the education of Sanskrit and Arabic students? Why did people welcome it, after all, if such measure was so detrimental to indian culture and ethos?
I read about this controversy over Macaulay umpteen times over a decade and I sincerely admire the guy for being more than a pretty politician that we encounter in politics everywhere nowadays. He was a visionary and a colonist, combined in one.
When I read the posts of some of those chest thumping megalomaniacs, who claim India was the centre of the universe, except that somebody or something stole its true importance in history , I feel sick. They just seem to sabotage the very foundations on which this great culture is built - diversity, tolerance,kindness and so on. Why don't they understand that we were not the best in every period of history. Nobody can beat our Upanishads as of now, nor can we beat their computers, medicine etc. (Please,don't even try to say these were all there in Vedas or in Puranas. If these were actually invented in the past by Indians, the British would be learning Sanskrit now. )
Supriyo,
I congratulate you again for your patience , a trait which is losing its ground here in India very fast.Everybody is furious and ignorant, chauvinism at its worst in modern times. The best are slowly but surely going out of the country or nudged out. What is left here is the hapless rubble at the bottom and the rowdy that runs the ramshackle system called mobocracy. And they would rather propagate falsehood than profess the truth. All we can say to these gullible folk who blame it all on Macaulay , is ‘Go, tell it to birds’.
All the best.
Narayana Koduri
Thanks for your kind comments. Since my loyalties regularly get questioned, kind words like yours light up my day. Thank you.
Perhaps there are two reasons I keep publishing and answering the unkind comments. First, because I hope that they would serve as a FAQ, so that I don't abused for the same thing twice. So far, that did not happen - people keep coming back to the same thing. Second, eventually, I started hoping that this fact, that people keep coming back to the same thing, basically saying 'we don't want to know the truth', will convince others that there is really something wrong with this attitude. I hope that is happening.
There is one final reason why I do it. I love India too, just like the others abusing me. However, I would love it the way it is - imperfect, poor, confusing, unjust. I see no problems in that. I just believe that if I love the country and accept its imperfections, I have some chance of being useful and help change things.
I agree with you that the quality of public discussions in India is abysmal. So is many other countries: We are succumbing to PR tactics and shouting techniques; style and social media muscle is beating truth and integrity hands down. This is indeed the context to engage more, not less, and hope that may be, may be, a few conversations will be started, a few things will change and few connections will form.
Supriyo
Wow! I'm Indian and I'm not offended that this quote isn't true. I don't need the validation of some British Official from the 19th century to be proud of my country. Nor do I needlessly need to uplift my country when it does have problems that most people in India just simply just to ignore or blame on this situation or that person or anyone but themselves for not taking action.
Many thanks for this - I have just got Catherine Hall's Macaulay and Sons, following your suggestion, and looking forward to read it.
My point in this post and elsewhere is not to try to justify imperial education policy, but just to enquire about historical truth and to encourage a public debate based on truth and understanding. Thanks for contributing to that conversation.
Supriyo
the systems, followed before India was colonized or while it was under British rule..they are of historical importance.. even if we get all our facts right we will need major restructuring to apply anything to present day India.
And guys, change begins with oneself.. first teach it to yourself.
(before shredding someone's reputation, just try to understand the intent and content of what is being said)
Please study Swami Vivekananda and other great people of India, You will realize what India was & is capable of.
Thanks for dropping by and leaving this comment.
I obviously do not agree to what you say. I refuse to believe that Indians are only capable of falsifying history to project a past that wasn't.
I would also disagree that I am product of Macaulay's system of education. That system of education was intended to create a class of Indians ready to help the British to rule the country, by accepting whatever is written in English, unquestioningly. As you would see, I am doing precisely the opposite: Questioning the authenticity of a quote written in English and circulated through World Wide Web.
I would believe we are looking at an irony here: I am, in clarifying Macaulay, defying his intentions. Others, in accepting the quote, is surrendering to the kind of thinking the British ruling class at the time wanted the Indians to do. If we must bring Swami Vivekananda in this discussion, I would believe he would belong more to the tradition I am following, questioning the facts, but loving India regardless whether it is rich or poor, than the other, trying to create a false history, encouraging us-and-them mentality and replacing reason with rhetoric.
I hope you will understand.
Supriyo
"...I have not seen one person who is a beggar, who is a thief..."
This is it pretty much. No literary criticism is required - as far as I am concerned - to ascertain the status of this quote.
I can't believe that someone who traveled "accross the length and breadth" of India 'missed' out all the thousands of beggars, poverty etc.
In addition to this, when a proper reference is totally missing, it should ring an alarm bell in one's mind.
Thanks for your excellent essay.
Did Macaulay made that statement? Is this Marxist to ask? Or the rant only indicate that it was indeed a lie, and everyone questioning the elaborate scheme to mislead would have to be painted as the 'other'? You are not the first one to invoke everything else other than the central question, and I am sure this is how political discussions in India will be conducted in the next few months: If one talks about something inconvenient, paint him as the other and avoid the question itself. My hope, however, is that this will not fool people who still want to know the truth.
Supriyo
This post has been on my reading list for years mainly because I am researching the effect of abolishing Sanskrit on the decline of knowledge of Ayurveda on the subcontinent. I use the quotation in my Ayurveda classes, when students ask me why Ayurveda is not better known to Indians.
The paltry knowledge of Indians toward 'our' native science of Ayurveda, especially in Calcutta, is something I want to change: it is my lifework, my dharma.
I have a Tamil/Malayali? version of the quotation you are exploring in this string, and I would like to share it, but cannot add images. If you can write to me at bhaswatimd@gmail.com, I can send it to you.
Om and Prem,
Bhaswati
Thanks for writing. Strange as it may sound in the context of this post, 'pre-modern' education in India is also one of my key interest areas, so it would be great to know about your work.
This post on Macaulay, and my subsequent stance on this, was less about any value judgement on Macaulay's effect on Indian Education, and more about the veracity of this quote. The more I studied Macaulay's life, I know that this quote is manufactured, because Macaulay's description of India is full of observations about wretched natives and their misdeeds.
Besides, I have now traced back the quote to a 1970s American magazine published by RSS sympathisers, and understand the motivation, however crude, behind this quote. The fact that this stance contradicts RSS' own version of decline of India under Islamic rule does not seem to matter.
Finally, I must clarify my approach to knowledge. Like you, I believe Sanskrit should be more widely studied. In fact, I believe that the Indian school students must have a better sense of the various regional cultures of India than they have now, too. However, such knowledge must not come with the rejection of any other knowledge. As Tagore would have said - if there is a lamp lit anywhere in the world, we must be able to see that light. This must not come at the cost of neglecting our own culture, but our own culture must not teach us to be blind, to be inward looking and to reject progress.
Supriyo
In addition a very good and necessary, though emotionally-disturbing, read is Madhusree Mukherjee's 23-page prologue in Churchill's Secret War, a deeply researched book on the cold-blooded of your civilized British. The prologue, called Our Title to India, covers the history of early occupancy of the British, who came for a cup of tea, and just did not want to Quit India, because of opium profits (The Sea of Poppies) and various other nefarious activities.
This book, more than many, has entrenched in me, a deep commitment to resurrect the teaching of Samskritam in India. If there is something that makes us Indian, it is the philosophy that must be understood just to understand the vocabulary that the language demands, vocabulary that many of us know deep inside. It is linked to the non-materialistic, non-Judao-Christianic-evangelizing, non-capitalistic, non-zero-sum, non-isolated, value-based, peaceful-warrior ideals we somehow know deep inside as Indians.
Warm wishes,
Bhaswati
Thanks for this comment.
In fact, India and China combined would have accounted for more than 50% of World's GDP even as late as 1850, a century after the date Mr Gurumurthy have pointed to. However, this didn't preclude the incidence of poverty, because, in absolute terms, this GDP was nothing compared to what we have now, and indeed, this was a feudal society with most people having nothing.
This is not a denial of the imperial exploitation. Indeed, you mention Madhushree Mukherjee's work, which I have read and written about
http://sundayposts.blogspot.co.uk/2010/11/churchills-genocide.html
The point is to ask how we got to be subjugated. There is no denying of India's heritage, but I believe being inward looking and divided are the reasons why Indian history went backwards. This is why, while I fully endorse what you say about Sanskrit education, I am uneasy about that being the only thing worth studying. And, besides, Indian heritage goes beyond just Sanskrit, and should include the aboriginal, Dravidian, Buddhist and Islamic traditions (to name a few) as well. Ignoring these and trying to impose a Sanskrit only culture will be another cultural genocide not unlike the one the English imperialists attempted.
Supriyo
But Macualay's hoax has served it;s purpose of injuring the frail Indian psyche ...of at least those who understand English.
more than 5 years ago.. before Facebook days... I received this so called Mcaulay letter on a Yahoo Group bulletin site. I had challenged it's authenticity immediately and had offered Rs 10,000/- to anyone who can prove it's existence ...as a real Macaulay document.
It is amazing how many of us Indians blame events that happened 200 ,500 ...years ago for their poor living conditions and personal failures of today.
There are so many things that we cannot blame on English .
Maths does not depend on any language . How many great mathematicians have we produced in last 500 years ...may be it is the English Language that screwed us .
Ayurveda ...oh what a great science...except that Ayurrveda medics flatly refuse any scientific enquiry into any of their Technics and potions and concoctions...is Sceintfic enquiry an English language property ? and we should not subject our dear technology to questioning by English speakers?
eg Ramdev baba's powder that cures blood cancer...all the best!
The way is clear for Macaulay haters ...stop speaking that foreign language ...dont teach it to your children and see where it takes you in a few years . Once other Indians see your shining path and glory they are bound to follow your example .
I mention Indian Maths and Ayurveda because it has been brought up by many in this blog ...it has nothing to do with Macualay ...I dont see the connection.
if india was poor and uneducated why the hell britisher came to india .
that's why u went to England now because you saw wealth
whatever britisher took from india
Supriyo
INDIA'S GIFT TO THE WORLD
(Brooklyn Standard Union, February 27, 1895)
Swami Vivekananda, the Hindoo monk, delivered a lecture Monday night under the auspices of the Brooklyn Ethical Association before a fairly large audience at the hall of the Long Island Historical Society, corner Pierrepont and Clinton streets. His subject was "India's Gift to the World".
He spoke of the wondrous beauties of his native land, "where stood the earliest cradle of ethics, arts, sciences, and literature, and the integrity of whose sons and the virtue of whose daughters have been sung by all travelers." Then the lecturer showed in rapid details, what India has given to the world.
"In religion," he said, "she has exerted a great influence on Christianity, as the very teachings of Christ would [could] be traced back to those of Buddha." He showed by quotations from the works of European and American scientists the many points of similarity between Buddha and Christ. The latter's birth, his seclusion from the world, the number of his apostles, and the very ethics of his teachings are the same as those of Buddha, living many hundred years before him.
"Is it mere chance," the lecturer asked, "or was Buddha's religion but the foreshadowing of that of Christ? The majority of your thinkers seem to be satisfied in the latter explanation, but there are some bold enough to say that Christianity is the direct offspring of Buddhism just as the earliest heresy in the Christian religion — the Monecian [Manichaean] heresy — is now universally regarded as the teaching of a sect of Buddhists. But there is more evidence that Christianity is founded in Buddhism. We find it in recently discovered inscriptions from the reign of Emperor Oshoka [Asoka] of India, about 300 B.C., who made treaties with all the Grecian kings, and whose missionaries discriminated [disseminated ?] in those very parts, where, centuries after, Christianity flourished, the principles of the Buddhistic religion. Thus it is explained, why you have our doctrine of trinity, of incarnation of God, and of our ethics, and why the service in our temples is so much alike to that in your present Catholic churches, from the mass to the chant and benediction. Buddhism had all these long before you. Now use your own judgment on these premise — we Hindoos stand ready to be convinced that yours is the earlier religion, although we had ours some three hundred years before yours was even thought of.
"In philosophy we are even now head and shoulders above any other nation, as Schopenhauer, the great German philosopher, has confessed. In music India gave to the world her system of notation, with the seven cardinal notes and the diatonic scale, all of which we enjoyed as early as 350 B.C., while it came to Europe only in the eleventh century. In philology, our Sanskrit language is now universally acknowledged to be the foundation of all European languages, which, in fact, are nothing but jargonized Sanskrit.
"In literature, our epics and poems and dramas rank as high as those of any language; our 'Shaguntala' [Shakuntala] was summarized by Germany's greatest poet, as 'heaven and earth united'. India has given to the world the fables of Aesop, which were copied by Aesop from an old Sanskrit book; it has given the Arabian Nights, yes, even the story of Cinderella and the Bean Stalks. In manufacture, India was the first to make cotton and purple [dye], it was proficient in all works of jewelry, and the very word 'sugar', as well as the article itself, is the product of India. Lastly she has invented the game of chess and the cards and the dice. So great, in fact, was the superiority of India in every respect, that it drew to her borders the hungry cohorts of Europe, and thereby indirectly brought about the discovery of America.
"And now, what has the world given to India in return for all that? Nothing but nullification [vilification] and curse and contempt. The world waded in her children's life-blood, it reduced India to poverty and her sons and daughters to slavery, and now it adds insult to injury by preaching to her a religion which can only thrive on the destruction of every other religion. But India is not afraid. It does not beg for mercy at the hands of any nation. Our only fault is that we cannot: fight to conquer; but we trust in the eternity of truth. India's message to the world is first of all, her blessing; she is returning good for the evil which is done her, and thus she puts into execution this noble idea, which had its origin in India. Lastly, India's message is, that calm goodness, patience and gentleness will ultimately triumph. For where are the Greeks, the onetime masters of the earth? They are gone. Where are the Romans, at the tramp of whose cohorts the world trembled? Passed away. Where are the Arabs, who in fifty years had carried their banners from the Atlantic to the Pacific? and where are the Spaniards, the cruel murderers of millions of men? Both races are nearly extinct; but thanks to the morality of her children, the kinder race will never perish, and she will yet see the hour of her triumph."
At the close of the lecture, which was warmly applauded, Swami Vivekananda answered a number of questions in regard to the customs of India. He denied positively the truth of the statement published in yesterday's [February 25] Standard Union, to the effect that widows are ill-treated in India. The law guarantees her not only her own property, before marriage, but also all she received from her husband, at whose death, if there be no direct heirs, the property goes to her. Widows seldom marry in India, because of the scarcity of men.
My this comment is not for just to be proud on Indian past but for understanding the power and need of 'real' knowledge for betterment of world and India.
May be this article provide little idea of ancient Indian Culture and its theme and purpose.
Must read article of 'Swami Vivekanand' in the end.
1. Thousands of years ago (>5000BC Although verses in Rigveda proves it to be of around 10000 BC) when European nations were either had no civilization or had little of it for satisfying their physical and material needs Indian sages used to have highest knowledge of 'Atman' (And the universe). They grew themselves to realize God (Bramhan/Universe). Their primary objective was not to discover science for creating objects for material enjoyments but to find the highest truth and as they came face to face with universe they discovered several laws of universe which now modern science proves correct.That is why we hardly find systematic scientific literature in old sanskrit scriptures. But at the same time you will see shlokas clearing mentioning of law of gravitation or law of energy etc. And this was thousands of years before Newton or other modern scientists. Even todays particle physics only proves that knowledge true.
2. So Indians of very old time had this knowledge which makes Man purer and help achieve them real purpose of human birth. Hence Highest respect was for those who had this spiritual knowledge (sages) and not for those who had wealth. This was the ideal of the society and hence after enjoying this world for 50 years man was suppose to start renunciating his attachments by entering into the 'Vanprasth asharam'. So that he can achieve peace and knowledge gradually. Of-course the background was prepared in his very education till first 25 years of his life.
3. As there was enough scientific knowledge (e.g. in mattalorgy, maths, medicins etc.) for society to function and it was lead by Great sages there was peace and harmony along with welth in society.
5. But as a rule 'Gyan' is eternal and 'karm kand' should change with time. 'Varn vyvastha' has taken bad shape. The infamous cast system took place of it. Most of the Brahmins remained only for name sake without any 'Gyan'. They only thought that by-hearting the Vedas is the 'knowlegde'.
6. 'Varn vyavastha' Proved to be a failed application of 'Vedanta'. Theory was fantastic but this application went drastically wrong. Many people who called themselves brahmins were actually even lower in mind than Shudras (they had word Chandal for such people). These fools have ill treated poor so called Shudras. Real brahmins (Rishis/sages) were less in numbers now.
7. Real knowledge remained with few. As sanskrit was language of pride. Anything written in it was itself and authority. That is why bad litrature was also written in sanskrit which still delued many.
8. Indias bad days started. There were drifts in the society. Too much of superstitions were there. As Swami vivekand said "There was a time when instead of doing any good to society, young Indian mind was busy in thinking whether to drink water from right hand or the left"
9. Day by day India became weak and weaker. This land was than attacked by many. Looting whatever possible. We have history in details(although tweeked at several places) from here.
11. But worsed thing happend was that Indian youth started beleving that This is the only knowledge. Indian heritage was all disgusting (which became very confusing because of millions on books in sanskrit and other languages having too much of karm kand). Education that can help in earning money, and help providing materialistic facilities was definitly looked superior. There were many 'Samaj Sudhar Andolan' running. Most of them were good. But they also rejected Indian 'Gyan' because of absence of real knowlwgible people.
12. I think further is self explanatory. We see that when now world recognise the high benifit of Yoga and Meditation we are teaching our kids in schools only PT. When researhes are going on Vedas and on Sanskrit language in the world, we have no place for it in our eduacation system.
After a long time India has started gaining its concousness. When people with true knowlwdge like swami Vivekanand went in westrn contries and west started admitting hesitantly the glory of indian knowledge. Youth of India got surprised. Because it had became standerd to validate things on criteria of western knowledge.
I would stop here. With a small request.
If you people want to test everything on logic and reasoning why don't you read Swami Vivekanad (Complete Works).
But we just wan't easy debating. Do we have the guts to renunciate even smallest of pleasures in our life?
Thanks for your comments.
However, we have covered this ground before: This is not about India's heritage, but whether the quote is true. As it transpires, it isn't.
I am sure Swami Vivekananda did not advise us to make up false quotes. So, it is completely irrelevant to invoke him in this debate.
We are in agreement that India had a great past (though I wouldn't necessarily accept the claim that Indians discovered everything there was to discover then). The question we differ on is why, with such great heritage, we eventually became subjugated. You will possibly say that this is because of a huge worldwide conspiracy to put Indians down, in which I, as an English speaking Indian, play a part. My theory will be that we lost our way because we turned inward, and distrusted the knowledge of others, and disengaged from the world. This is why successive agricultural revolutions and industrial revolution bypassed India, reducing the once glorious culture to dependence.
Now, if you and I decide to spend our precise time not indulging in history and rather to figure out how to chart our course from now on, I shall urge you not to externalise the problem and indulge in illusions about the past. I shall seek to find the truth of the past, and engage in the present with curiousity and confidence. Knowing the past is the best way to overcome it; to try to deny it will be to be bounded by it forever.
Supriyo
I am convinced that we should work together for better future of India (and world). But what is a better future? this is the question. If we say to become a developed country like some of the western contries... then we have to think twice. We must not forget that these same western countries can not provide a stable society for continuous 100 years. Directly (by introducing war in every 50 years)or indirectly (by introducing laws on poor countries). We have to be more vigilant and not be fooled by media. Same USA that talk about charity for South African children, behind the scene cutting amazon forest to recover there money of interest for the loan they have given to Africa. But can any body (or media) will stand?
I can not write everything, You have to understand the theme.
Problem is the long built perception that you and many have today. This is reflected by your comment:
"My theory will be that we lost our way because we turned inward, and distrusted the knowledge of others, and disengaged from the world"
Yes we lost our way.. but not by distrusting others. We trusted all kind of people and their knowledge. Same knowledge by which world is standing on the edge of nuclear war. Our entire education system is in had of western missionaries. And you say we distrusted them? We were the most tolerant race in history? If you disagree read history of ours and others. Romans, Parsians, Jude and so on..
Friend .. we lost our was because we distrusted our forefathers. That is why I said to you read swami Vivekanand.
Again I am (any many others) not here to win this 'debate'. And completely agree with you that spreading wrong info is bad.
But if this is the purpose of your life then I think it is better stand against those who are spreading so much of poison against India behind the scene.
Thanks for writing again.
I would usually keep to the subject of veracity of this quote, which you seem to agree is unfounded. However, it is perhaps in order to respond to the point raised by you that 'we lost our way' not because we closed ourselves off, but because we 'distrusted our forefathers'.
I would disagree.
This is because with the vantage point of being outside India, I see India as an 'Open Society with a Closed Mind' (as opposed to China, which is a 'Closed Society with an Open Mind'). This talk that Ancient Indians were great and achieved high science glosses over the fact that they excluded most of their compatriots from access to knowledge and participation, and instituted a caste system which ails us even today. From watching Indian Professionals, I know that the learning of Caste system, lack of respect for physical work and those who do physical work, is the greatest problem with India (which, I argue, result in poor skills and workmanship). You can debate whether we have shut ourselves out or not, but it clearly seems, at least in this debate, that we are intolerant to outside perspectives.
So, I shall stick to my point: I believe India produced great science and literature, but it degenerated because it excluded most of its citizens and failed to connect and learn from others. There are people among us who still want to continue this folly, and I am concerned that this will come at a great cost. We live in a connected world: Living in the reflected glory of the past may not be an option anymore.
Supriyo
On spiritual and moral values, I even today, see westeners are no match for India.
Thanks for this comment.
First the comment about Macaulay's intention. Building an education system based on science was his stated intention, his justification of taking money away from the Orientatists, his British colleagues who celebrated Indian culture and wanted to preserve and promote that. I used the word 'secular' to signify that this was not about religious education (though Macaulay thought Christianity would emancipate Indians). Finally, a big issue then, as now, was caste and untouchability, and the reforms Macaulay was arguing for, was to counter the effects of caste-based exclusion of the majority of Indian society.
This was the justification. This might also have been the intent. Whether it turned out that way is something we can debate. My own view is that this education system created a modern system of caste eventually. I wrote about this later (http://sundayposts.blogspot.co.uk/2008/12/macaulay-and-i.html).
One final comment about your observation about spiritualism. I don't usually get this my spiritualism is better than their spiritualism argument. Besides, I also feel that if half of my country's people don't have enough to eat, and I am happy to close my eyes and don't bother about them, my boasts about spiritualism will only be a pathetic excuse for self-centricity.
With regards,
Supriyo
Macauley was not in London in 1835. He was in India from 1834 to 1838 and he has presented his Minute on Indian education in Calcutta, not in London, to Lord Bentick, not to the House of Commons. Below I write the complete works of Macauley.
Search and you cannot find out that quatation " I have travelled the length and....", quoted by our fake scientist former president:
Critical and Historical Essays — Volume 1 (English) (as Author)
Critical and Historical Essays — Volume 2 (English) (as Author)
Critical and Historical Essays, Volume III (of 3) (English) (as Author)
Geschichte von England seit der Thronbesteigung Jakob's des Zweiten.
Dritter Band (German) (as Author)
Geschichte von England seit der Thronbesteigung Jakob's des Zweiten.
Erster Band enthaltend Kapitel 1 und 2 (German) (as Author)
Geschichte von England seit der Thronbesteigung Jakob's des Zweiten
Fünfter Band (der 11) (German) (as Author)
Geschichte von England seit der Thronbesteigung Jakob's des Zweiten.
Sechster Band: enthaltend Kapitel 11 und 12 (German) (as Author)
Geschichte von England seit der Thronbesteigung Jakob's des Zweiten.
Vierter Band (German) (as Author)
Geschichte von England seit der Thronbesteigung Jakob's des Zweiten.
Zweiter Band (German) (as Author)
The History of England, from the Accession of James II.
Complete Contents of the Five Volumes (English) (as Author)
The History of England, from the Accession of
James II, vol1, chapter 03 (English) (as Author)
The History of England, from the Accession of
James II, vol1, chapter 05 (English) (as Author)
History of England from the Accession of James II, vol2 chapter08 (English) (as Author)
History of England from the Accession of James II, vol2 chapter 6 (English) (as Author)
The History of England, from the Accession
of James II, Vol2 Chapter 6 (English) (as Author)
The History of England, from the Accession of James II — Volume 1 (English) (as Author)
The History of England, from the Accession of James II, Volume 1, Chapter 02 (English) (as Author)
The History of England, from the Accession of James II, Volume 1, Chapter 04 (English) (as Author)
The History of England, from the Accession of James II — Volume 2 (English) (as Author)
The History of England, from the Accession of James II — Volume 3 (English) (as Author)
The History of England, from the Accession of James II — Volume 4 (English) (as Author)
The History of England, from the Accession of James II — Volume 5 (English) (as Author)
The History of England, from the Accession
of James the II (Volume 1, Chapter 1) (English) (as Author)
Lays of Ancient Rome (English) (as Author)
Macaulay's Life of Samuel Johnson
With a Selection from his Essay on Johnson (English) (as Author)
The Miscellaneous Writings and Speeches of Lord Macaulay
Complete Table of Contents of the Four Volumes (English) (as Author)
Miscellaneous Writings and Speeches — Volume 1 (English) (as Author)
Miscellaneous Writings and Speeches — Volume 2 (English) (as Author)
Miscellaneous Writings and Speeches — Volume 3 (English) (as Author)
Miscellaneous Writings and Speeches — Volume 4 (English) (as Author)
Macauley was not in London in 1835. He was in India from 1834 to 1838 and he has presented his Minute on Indian education in Calcutta, not in London, to Lord Bentick, not to the House of Commons.
Below I write the list of the complete works of Macauley.
Search and you cannot find out that quatation " I have travelled the length and....", quoted by India's former president and other Hindutva people:
Critical and Historical Essays — Volume 1 (English) (as Author)
Critical and Historical Essays — Volume 2 (English) (as Author)
Critical and Historical Essays, Volume III (of 3) (English) (as Author)
Geschichte von England seit der Thronbesteigung Jakob's des Zweiten.
Dritter Band (German) (as Author)
Geschichte von England seit der Thronbesteigung Jakob's des Zweiten.
Erster Band enthaltend Kapitel 1 und 2 (German) (as Author)
Geschichte von England seit der Thronbesteigung Jakob's des Zweiten
Fünfter Band (der 11) (German) (as Author)
Geschichte von England seit der Thronbesteigung Jakob's des Zweiten.
Sechster Band: enthaltend Kapitel 11 und 12 (German) (as Author)
Geschichte von England seit der Thronbesteigung Jakob's des Zweiten.
Vierter Band (German) (as Author)
Geschichte von England seit der Thronbesteigung Jakob's des Zweiten.
Zweiter Band (German) (as Author)
The History of England, from the Accession of James II.
Complete Contents of the Five Volumes (English) (as Author)
The History of England, from the Accession of
James II, vol1, chapter 03 (English) (as Author)
The History of England, from the Accession of
James II, vol1, chapter 05 (English) (as Author)
History of England from the Accession of James II, vol2 chapter08 (English) (as Author)
History of England from the Accession of James II, vol2 chapter 6 (English) (as Author)
The History of England, from the Accession
of James II, Vol2 Chapter 6 (English) (as Author)
The History of England, from the Accession of James II — Volume 1 (English) (as Author)
The History of England, from the Accession of James II, Volume 1, Chapter 02 (English) (as Author)
The History of England, from the Accession of James II, Volume 1, Chapter 04 (English) (as Author)
The History of England, from the Accession of James II — Volume 2 (English) (as Author)
The History of England, from the Accession of James II — Volume 3 (English) (as Author)
The History of England, from the Accession of James II — Volume 4 (English) (as Author)
The History of England, from the Accession of James II — Volume 5 (English) (as Author)
The History of England, from the Accession
of James the II (Volume 1, Chapter 1) (English) (as Author)
Lays of Ancient Rome (English) (as Author)
Macaulay's Life of Samuel Johnson
With a Selection from his Essay on Johnson (English) (as Author)
The Miscellaneous Writings and Speeches of Lord Macaulay
Complete Table of Contents of the Four Volumes (English) (as Author)
Miscellaneous Writings and Speeches — Volume 1 (English) (as Author)
Miscellaneous Writings and Speeches — Volume 2 (English) (as Author)
Miscellaneous Writings and Speeches — Volume 3 (English) (as Author)
Miscellaneous Writings and Speeches — Volume 4 (English) (as Author)
You make an interesting point. Indeed, the trajectories of Japan and Russia were very different from each other, and China's recent rise is a phenomenon on its own, but none of those happened by rejecting external influences. In fact, if we take Japan (because the other two countries followed a socialist development path), the Meiji restoration of mid-Nineteenth century was all about modernising and embracing Western ideas, so much so that the traditionalists thought this would destroy Japan, just as many people in India today claim. That you speak about Japanese development is evidence that nothing of that sort happened.
I want to make another point about English. You see the concept of Modern India, as a nation state, is imagined on the basis of European nationalism. Take, for example, the RSS, the organization which believes in Hindu state and rejects modernity: The idea came from European Fascist ideals, that of a state above all individual interests and unified by a national culture, and essentially all the competing ideas of India stand on such formulation. Except one, the one you will read Mahatma Gandhi advocating just before he was shot by an RSS man, an India formed by self-governing near autonomous village republics, but that idea was rejected anyway (and would be a far cry from the shining India of cities we would like to see). So, the point is English has not just given us modernity, such modernity is actually the basis of the India we know (and even the one we may want as an alternative).
Supriyo
But what to do with politicians? can we remain isolated with them? absolutely not. Hence this rather useless tussle on language will remain a vehicle of spreading hatred for long long time.
-Arun
Thanks for this.
This issue is simple at one level: One needs an education which works best for work and career, which is the view you have taken.
However, at the same time, the issue has a complex turn: Is the way the work and careers are organised today, the best? What education may we need to optimise this? And, then, all these 'political' debates about language, content of education, and even character, starts.
So, this is a worthwhile debate to have. There is no one answer, and as long as we respectfully engage and seek the answer, we would all be better off in the end.
I believe I have learnt a lot from this conversation over the last six years. It is not about winning the debate. I believe everyone seems to accept now that the Macaulay quote was a spoof, which was the point of this post. The answers I get these days proves the point further. They are like, we can't prove that he had said this, but you have no proof that he hadn't. And, indeed, if one has any interest in rational discussion, he would call out the inherent pointlessness of these comments.
But, at another level, I know that we are simply having the wrong debate. I have now learnt what inflames passions when we talk about Macaulay. Starting from a simple viewpoint of globalisation and economic progress, I have come to appreciate the complexities, to differentiate what is optimum and what it is today. I think that is precisely the point of engaging in such debates.
Supriyo
I reached to your blog today for the same reason, "Whether Macaulay speech is true or fake."
So the fact is that speech is still in circulation, hahaha.
I broadly agree with your research that whether macaulay made that speech or whether any of his speech / action inferred the same".
You entire article is focused on subject line that is whether speech is true or not. But unfortunately many thought you are praising Western values and thereby ignoring power of Indian values.
For your good health and mental stability, I advise you to ignore all the stuff posted by other guys, with is not related to subject line.. :)
Good article.
http://www.columbia.edu/itc/mealac/pritchett/00generallinks/macaulay/txt_minute_education_1835.html
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W8c7XuDS4cs
I would have never imagined that a post on Macaulay would draw so much debate and emotions lasting over 6 years! At the same time, I am impressed by your patience and the effort you put in responding to all of the fair as well as unfair comments. Your blog posts and responses are proof enough that you are curious and passionate about India and its history and culture. It doesn't really matter whether you live in UK or Brazil.
Wanted to recommend a book - 'Empires of the Word:A Language History of the World' by Nicholas Ostler, that gives a global and historical perspective on languages and how and why English became the leading international language.
I believe Macaulay is relevant till date because the issue is tied to Indians' identity. In order for this debate to become even more meaningful (and extend for another 10 years :-) ), we need to look at a wider perspective. If this world was a movie, British and Indians won't be the only 2 characters...there were many other countries which were impacted by colonialism. How are they dealing with their colonizer's language? Dutch ruled Indonesia but why don't Indonesians speak Dutch while Filipinos speak Spanish? Do we ever compare our notes with Jordan, Sudan, Sierra Leone, Zimbabwe on what they went through? British empire was a global empire, and they were not just strategizing about India (though India became their crown jewel)...they had to fight America's independence leaders to whom they lost out in 1776, they had to sign treaties with Maoris in NZ, fight Opium wars with China, fight wars with France all over the world, Germany in World war...Since gaining Independence, India became an insulated society and it was right at the time to close doors to all things foreign and re-establish the lost pride. However, it's 2015 now and it's imperative that our young generation holds a global and informed perspective rather than a hollow nationalistic one without spending effort in reading and knowing facts. Blogs like yours are enlightening and generate a valuable debate!
I have recently started penning some of my thoughts as well - www.thecuriousdesi.com. Do check it out if you can.
cheers
I would have never imagined that a post on Macaulay would draw so much debate and emotions lasting over 6 years! At the same time, I am impressed by your patience and the effort you put in responding to all of the fair as well as unfair comments. Your blog posts and responses are proof enough that you are curious and passionate about India and its history and culture. It doesn't really matter whether you live in UK or Brazil.
Wanted to recommend a book - 'Empires of the Word:A Language History of the World' by Nicholas Ostler, that gives a global and historical perspective on languages and how and why English became the leading international language.
I believe Macaulay is relevant till date because the issue is tied to Indians' identity. In order for this debate to become even more meaningful (and extend for another 10 years :-) ), we need to look at a wider perspective. If world was a movie, British and Indians weren't the only 2 characters...there were many other countries which were impacted by colonialism. How are they dealing with their colonizer's language? Dutch ruled Indonesia but why don't Indonesians speak Dutch but Filipinos speak Spanish? Do we ever compare our notes with Jordan, Sudan, Sierra Leone, Zimbabwe on what they went through? British empire was a global empire, and they were not just strategizing about India only in London (though India became the crown jewel)...they had to fight America's independence leaders to whom they lost out in 1776, they had to sign treaties with Maoris in NZ, Opium wars in China, wars with France all over the world, Germany in World war...since gaining Independence, India became an insulated society and it was right at the time to close doors to all things foreign and re-establish the lost pride. However, it's 2015 now and it's imperative that our young generation holds a global and informed perspective rather than a hollow nationalistic one without spending effort in reading and knowing facts. Blogs like yours surely enlighten and bring about a valuable debate.
I have recently started a blog - www.thecuriousdesi.com. Do check it out if you can.
cheers
Many thanks for this comment and the book recommendation. It is one of those books I bought but never got to read, but your recommendation will now inspire me further to make the effort.
Yes, this comment first appeared in a magazine published by RSS Sympathesizers in the United States. This fake quote was a big thing and still in circulation. The irony, if anyone is noticing, is that the RSS and other revivalists who circulate this quote depend on two things. First, they take advantage of the Indian fetish with anything published in English. So, if an American magazine, regardless of whoever was publishing it, published the quote, it must be true. And, indeed, they use Internet to the greatest possible extent to spread it.
Indeed, the whole thing would be comic if its motive was not this devious. But I appreciate your blog and see that you are exploring history with curiousity and intent. India needs more sensible conversations about its history, and therefore, I wish you the best in your endeavour.
Supriyo
"I have not seen one person who is a beggar, who is a thief" And as you have mentioned, the old English writing was different than that of today.
People mislead with all this fabricated quotes in the internet. We came across many such examples through the recent years.
And Upasana, you rightly said And guys, "change begins with oneself.. first teach it to yourself."
Before shredding someone's reputation, just try to understand the intent and content of what is being said.
Thanks all.
Swagat
I am writing to you from Toronto,Canada. Though I have RSS background, I am not writing to you as one with blind following. I am a Canadian living here for last more than 12 years. I am well aware of British way of living. It's not India but also whole world is suffering due to British way of ruling, I am saying governing. In typical oath ceremony in democracy, oath of secrecy is very important as it saves a lot of problems for the leaders. Recently, we have election, and people enthusiastically rejected secrecy, hypocrisy and cover up efforts of earlier prime minister. The point is British are clever to mislead people. Examples if you read newspapers, BBC scandle that many women are exploited by this guy who is now dead. Also, Queen using hard working tax payers money to repair her palace are some of the recent news. Indians are straight forward, thanks to Krishna for sighting Jayadrath and sun, they don't know mean diplomacy of British.
Thanks for dropping by.
I must admit that we missed the point here. We are talking about Lord Macaulay never making a comment, which seemed to confirm an Indian golden age.
Despite this, I published the comment because you seem to try to confirm the intent why someone would invent such a comment. And, my response here is that as long as we continue to blame others - British, Congress, whoever - and do not take the responsibility of our own future, we would continue to languish at the backyards of the world.
So, in a way, Macaulay may not have said what we are claiming, but the misrepresentation itself shows our worst tendencies and explain why we are falling behind.
Supriyo
If you don't owe your responsibility and keep blaming history and others, you are not moving ahead. Wake up.
The source of this discussion, Lord Macaulay's quote as represented and circulating I social sites is completely fabricated and intentional. These bunch of people are trying to give a false impression of history and earlier society by misrepresentating facts and figures.
Warm Regards
Swagat
English me shayad tujhe samajh me nahi aya ki sare kya kahna chah rahe hai.
Main koshish karta hoon Hinglish me.
Tere ko kabhi samjah me nahi ayega ki Agrej yahan kyon aye the aur kyon apni sbhyata aur bhasha thopi kyonki ki tere me ek bahot bada infirority complex hai Hindu aur Bharitya hone ka jo ki galat hai.
Agar ho sake to thoda Veda aur Upanishad padho aur Vedic Math, Sanskrit, Astro, Metallurgy etc....jo ki Britishers ke ane ke pahle padhai jati thi Gurukul me. Aur usme Shudra, Brahman, Khstriya, Vaisya sare padhte the. Aur higher studies bhi hoti thi.
Ye bahot lamba subject hai samjhane ke liye.
Waise tohda Rajiv Dixit ji ko suno to shayad ache se samajh me aye. Lekin Unko pura sunana.
But it's my personal opinion; I have found that at times few Kale Angrej can't understand value of Vedic Bhartiya Science and Language. But you try.
Jai Hind.
In around 1828, after coming to India as Governor General of Bengal, Lord William Bentinck whose main role was to promote "East India company". He undertook a study across length & breadth of Indian villages. He was amazed to see the wealth, prosperity,the simple yet high moral standards of the natives. His aim was to understand how British can prolong the rule on India as colony without much bloodbath and applying force on natives. He employed few ppl for this task and did a study for some years. What he found that every Indian village was a SELF SUFFICIENT unit. Destroying one unit would not impact several such other units spread across the Indian geography. His main findings were as mentioned below:
Every village has the 3 following pillars. viz:
Pillar No 1----->>> Goushalas (Cow shed)
It would provide milk & milk products to villagers. Cow dung would act both as source of fuel and fertilizer for farming. Cow urine would act as fertilizer (it has 28 essential nutrients required by plants).
Pillar No 2 ----->>> Gurukools (Native Education schools)
Every village would have their own centre of education where SANSKRIT would b used to impart knowledge apart from local dialect. Hence Sanskrit was a unifying common language across India.
Pillar No 3 ----->>> Temple (Not just a place of worship but much more)
Every village would have a Temple which would be THE centre of all activities - worship, business dealings, marriage centre, dispute resolution, widow and poor support centre, arms training, information for jobs,finance, etc. It was a place for networking of all villagers. During flood, famine, war the temple would give shelter to all villagers.
So a village would rest on these 3 pillars & not be dependant on outside support, majorly, for any Import!
But this would not help British East Indian company and British kingdom to rule Villages (And India collectively). The villages must be made dependent on Import - This was the findings of the study report which Bentinck carried back to England in 1835 and presented to the then king of England William IV but he died in 1838 and queen Victoria came to throne. She ruled Britain for almost 63 years !
Queen Victoria took up the findings of the study and ordered Thomas Macaulay, a historian & politician, who was then in India (1834) to think how British rule can be expanded for long time in India so as to loot its wealth back to England.
Macaulay went thru the report and concluded that the 3 pillars of village have to be destroyed.
1. British need to destroy the Goushalas. This would destroy the food cycle of villagers, it would destroy their farming as villagers would start depending on foreign fertilizers & pesticides !
2. The British would need to destroy the Gurukool system and introduce English system of learning. This would destroy their root language Sanskrit thus the future generations of India will get cut off from their ancient rich culture & knowledge. British will have a hold over English and can manipulate it to teach Indians what they want quite easily.
Hence Macaulay implemented the English system of education in India, the work which was actually started by Bentinck in 1835 (English Education Act 1835)....!!!
3. The British would need to destroy the 3rd pillar - "Temple" which would cut off the nerve of villagers. Their support system would collapse and they will spend their life as individual unit. Networking of natives will b lost, the community power would slowly be lost. Unity will b lost.....
Goushalas gone....... !
Gurukool (Sanskrit) gone..... !!
Temple gone.....!!!
Result - In front of our eyes !!!!!!!
Jai Hind
In around 1828, after coming to India as Governor General of Bengal, Lord William Bentinck whose main role was to promote "East India company". He undertook a study across length & breadth of Indian villages. He was amazed to see the wealth, prosperity,the simple yet high moral standards of the natives. His aim was to understand how British can prolong the rule on India as colony without much bloodbath and applying force on natives. He employed few ppl for this task and did a study for some years. What he found that every Indian village was a SELF SUFFICIENT unit. Destroying one unit would not impact several such other units spread across the Indian geography. His main findings were as mentioned below:
Every village has the 3 following pillars. viz:
Pillar No 1----->>> Goushalas (Cow shed)
It would provide milk & milk products to villagers. Cow dung would act both as source of fuel and fertilizer for farming. Cow urine would act as fertilizer (it has 28 essential nutrients required by plants).
Pillar No 2 ----->>> Gurukools (Native Education schools)
Every village would have their own centre of education where SANSKRIT would b used to impart knowledge apart from local dialect. Hence Sanskrit was a unifying common language across India.
Pillar No 3 ----->>> Temple (Not just a place of worship but much more)
Every village would have a Temple which would be THE centre of all activities - worship, business dealings, marriage centre, dispute resolution, widow and poor support centre, arms training, information for jobs,finance, etc. It was a place for networking of all villagers. During flood, famine, war the temple would give shelter to all villagers.
So a village would rest on these 3 pillars & not be dependant on outside support, majorly, for any Import!
But this would not help British East Indian company and British kingdom to rule Villages (And India collectively). The villages must be made dependent on Import - This was the findings of the study report which Bentinck carried back to England in 1835 and presented to the then king of England William IV but he died in 1838 and queen Victoria came to throne. She ruled Britain for almost 63 years !
Queen Victoria took up the findings of the study and ordered Thomas Macaulay, a historian & politician, who was then in India (1834) to think how British rule can be expanded for long time in India so as to loot its wealth back to England.
Macaulay went thru the report and concluded that the 3 pillars of village have to be destroyed.
1. British need to destroy the Goushalas. This would destroy the food cycle of villagers, it would destroy their farming as villagers would start depending on foreign fertilizers & pesticides !
2. The British would need to destroy the Gurukool system and introduce English system of learning. This would destroy their root language Sanskrit thus the future generations of India will get cut off from their ancient rich culture & knowledge. British will have a hold over English and can manipulate it to teach Indians what they want quite easily.
Hence Macaulay implemented the English system of education in India, the work which was actually started by Bentinck in 1835 (English Education Act 1835)....!!!
3. The British would need to destroy the 3rd pillar - "Temple" which would cut off the nerve of villagers. Their support system would collapse and they will spend their life as individual unit. Networking of natives will b lost, the community power would slowly be lost. Unity will b lost.....
Goushalas gone....... !
Gurukool (Sanskrit) gone..... !!
Temple gone.....!!!
Result - In front of our eyes !!!!!!!
Jai Hind
Bhakts will take us back by 2000 years.
What appals me is their colossal arrogance and abysmal ignorance.
However, as was typical for a Western European in that age, and especially for an Englishman, Macaulay was ignorant and arrogant. His report (dated the 2nd of February 1835) sent from India is available online, e. g., at Prof. HC Verma’s website hosted by the IIK .
In this report, Macaulay made disparaging remarks about just about anybody other than the English. For example, he claimed that the Russia, “in the time of our grandfathers, was probably behind the Punjab” and that later “the languages of western Europe civilised Russia”, so much so that “Russia was expected to be pressing close on France and Britain in the career of improvement”.
Macaulay did not think much of Indian science and culture. Let us admit it, India was going through a Dark Age at that time, and much of our ancient learning was lost in rituals and superstition. By the way, he put Arabic in the same boat as ‘Sanscrit’.
On the 10th of July 1933, Macaulay was in Britain, and spoke at the House of Commons on the “India Bill”. Curiously, on this occasion Macaulay was virtually batting for the independence of a Western-educated India!
Nevertheless, to give the devil its due, Macaulay’s report did not contain the utter rubbish that has gone viral in India since 2008. Macaulay, it seems, genuinely wanted Indians to have the benefit of superior Western education.
The bhakt’s Guru worships Swami Vivekananda, who stressed English education.
The Imperial Legislative Council (not the British Parliament) did not accept Macaulay’s recommendation in toto. The English Education Act 1835 took a less negative attitude to traditional education and was soon succeeded by further measures based upon the provision of adequate funding for both approaches.
In any case, Macaulay’s views faced vehement criticism by prominent Englishmen like John Stuart Mill. Bhakts are advised to find out who this bloke was.
In some internet fora, I’ve seen bhakts championing a national identity and a national language. This is interesting. Did India/Bharat exist as a nation before the Raj?’ ‘India’/ ‘Hind’/‘Hindu’, of course, is an alien name (derived from ‘Sindhu’), but even ‘Bharat’ never existed outside the epic. Can bhakts show me one instance where ‘Bharat’ has been mentioned in the Vedas or the Upanishads? It is Western ethos that gave India a sense of national identity. Hindi has been imposed on non-Hindi speakers as a “national language”. Did someone say ‘Macaulay’?
Sadly, an official BJP site carries this fake news in a blog attributed to Mr. LK Advani
- The quote does not seem to have been made by Mr T.B. Macaulay
- Mr. T.B. Macaulay was extremely proud of his heritage and was fully convinced of the superiority of the English (including the English language). Look at his REAL quotes “ …..superiority of the Europeans becomes absolutely immeasurable.” ….all the books written in the Sanscrit language is less valuable than what may be found in the most paltry abridgments used at preparatory schools in England”. This clearly indicates Mr Macaulay’s, almost jihadist, mentality of demeaning everything that is not “English”.
- Mr. T.B. Macaulay based on perfunctory reading of some translated works of Sanskrit and Arabic literature concluded that “…a single shelf of a good European library was worth the whole native literature of India and Arabia.”. This is called jumping to the conclusion based on superficial understanding of the subject.
- So, a person who has reached his conclusions based on his sense of superiority (inherent bias) and superficial understanding of other’s views can be trusted to make a good decision about educating others?
- Some people may still argue that his decision was right but his logic or reasoning was wrong! To these people the obvious question to ask is: how come the Germans or the French or the Chinese have succeeded in becoming world-class economies without adopting T.B. Macaulay’s logic?
I'm suggesting Indian Government to restart Gurukul in villages to create employment for villagers, reducing stress on cities, moving back to villages, rich content in the values, Morales and sanskars which English education lacks. Though I'm in Canada, I don't want to see violence that I see here in North America continue as a result of modern education in India, which unfortunately already showing up.
For British, I don't see India is only victim ZX as many countries including neighbors Ireland, France, Germany and many others hate British. That's not case of India. All neighbors including Pakistan love India when it comes to friendliness of people. Even in Canada, people don't want to take oath for Queen and her descenders not only because they hate British for their deeds all over the world, especially violence, brainwash, manipulations, lies and many other traits even Donald Trump hates British news and media for but also what she did in Canada in residential schools for native Indians. All politicians in Canada including Prime Ministers and Premiers have apologize for it but Queen didn't as there's no economic advantage like for India Jaliyanwala Bagh massacre.
Your thoughts are brainwashed, even when live in misery. RSS don't have time to do whatever you are blaming them for, as rightly your brain works like British who did many such things.
For India, with Modi's leadership, India is coming back again but this time to take over the world who pissed her for centuries.
You can contact me at hemantpanchpor@hotmail.com.
BTW, I'm a Canadian though I love India not just by mouth but by heart!