CURZON’S ATTEMPT TO ESTABLISH BRITISH (RULE) HOLD OVER TIBET

As early as 1774-75 Warren Hastings had sent George Bogle as the Company’s envoy into Tibet to develop trade relations with that country. A second envoy was sent in 1783 for the same purpose. The priestly hierarchy of Tibet joined by the Chinese Resident there foiled all such attempts. In 1886, the consent of the Chinese, who claimed suzerainty over Tibet, was obtained for the dispatch of a mission, but the plan fell through. The Tibetan-Sikkim dispute over common boundaries brought matters to the point of hostilities. A Sino-British Convention of 1890 demarcated the boundaries; it also considered questions pertaining to trade between India and Tibet which took the shape of a definite agreement by 1893. However, no actual trade resulted from this agreement for the Tibetans refused to accept this convention and China which claimed suzerainty over Tibet could not enforce it.

At the time of Curzon’s arrival in India the relations with Tibet had reached the point of deadlock. The Chinese suzerainty over Tibet was ineffective. The Viceroys letters to the Dalai Lama were returned unopened. Above all, the Russian influence at Lhasa was increased and alarmed Curzon. A Russian national, Dorjieff had won the confidence of the Dalai Lama and brought to Tibet Russian arms and ammunitions.

Curzon who had tried to forestall Russian influence towards the Northwest in Afghanistan and Persia could not remain indifferent to the Russian advances in Tibet. Rumors were also afoot about a secret Sino-Russian agreement for establishment of a Russian protectorate over Tibet. The protests of the Russian ambassador in London against the contemplated dispatch of a special mission to Tibet by the Government of India lent further suspicion to Russia’s designs in that quarter.

In 1903, with the permission of Home authorities, Curzon sent Colonel Younghusband with a small Gorkha contingent on a special mission to Tibet to ‘oblige (the) Tibetans to come to an agreement’. The Tibetans refused to negotiate and offered nonviolent resistance. Younghusband pushed his way reaching Gyantse on April 11 and Lhasa on 3 August 1904. The Dalai Lama fled away from the capital leaving the charge of administration in the hands of senior officials. Younghusband dictated terms on 7 September 1904 which provided that Tibet would pay an indemnity of Rs. 75 lakhs at the rate of one lakh rupees per annum. As a security for the payment, the Indian government was to occupy the Chumbi Valley (territory between Bhutan and Sikkim) for 75 years. Provision was also made for opening trade marts at Yatung, Gyantse and Gartok. The Tibetans were also to respect the frontiers of Sikkim. Further clauses provided that Tibet would not grant any concessions for railways, roads, telegraphs, etc., to any foreign state, but give Great Britain some control over the foreign affairs of Tibet.

Mr. Brodick, the Secretary of State, charged the Government of India with disregard for his instructions in that the huge indemnity demanded was ‘in defiance of his express instructions’, or occupation of the Chumbi Valley for 75 years ‘as disobedience of orders’. Meantime, Lord Lansdowne gave assurances to Russia that no occupation or protectorate or even interference in the internal affairs of Tibet was intended. The Government of India defended the position of Younghusband but admitted ‘an error of judgment’ on its part. On the insistence of the Secretary of State and true to the pledge given to Russia the treaty was revised reducing the indemnity from Rs. 75 lakhs to Rs 25 lakhs and providing for the evacuation of the Chumbi Valley after three years. The valley was actually evacuated in Jan 1908.

Critics of Curzon’s policy hold that the Younghusband mission just gratified the imperialist tendencies of the Viceroy and that no permanent results followed. Only China gained out of the whole affair because the Anglo Russian Convention of 1907 provided that the two great powers would not negotiate with Tibet except through the intermediary of the Chinese Government. It must however be said that Curzon’s vigorous and determined approach counteracted all Russian schemes in Tibet – a great concern of the Viceroy.

EFFECTIVE COMMUNICATIONS I SYLLABUS | UNIVERSITY OF MUMBAI

 1. The concept of communication 

Communication, its concepts, process Importance of Communication in Media; Differences between Technical and General Communication; Barriers to Communication; Measures to Overcome the Barriers to Communication. 

2. Types of Communication 

Types of Communication; Verbal Communication-Importance of verbal communication- Advantages of verbal communication- Advantages of written communication; Significance of Non-verbal Communication. 

3. Oral communication and media 

Anchoring, voice modulation, interview, public speaking, skits/ plays, story telling, panel discussions, voice over, elocution, debates and group discussion  

4. Listening Skills 

Listening Process; Classification of Listening; Purpose of Listening; Common Barriers to the Listening Process; Measures to Improve Listening; Listening as an Important Skill in Workplace. 

 Reading -English, Hindi or Marathi 

1.Types of Reading -skimming and scanning Reading -examples Newspaper / Magazine article, TV, feature and documentary, radio features, commentary, bulletins, advertising copy, press release in English, Hindi OR Marathi. Recognizing aspects of language particularly in media. Importance of spelling. 

2.Various aspects of Language Recognizing various aspects of language particularly related to media , Vocabulary 100 media words 

3.Grammar & Usage Grammatical structure – spelling, structure of sentences, Active / Passive voice, tenses, Idioms , Phrases, proper usage of homophones,  homonyms etc. (Kindly provide practice session- Test , Quiz etc) 

Thinking and Presentation

1.Thinking Types of thinking (rational ,logical, critical, lateral etc) Errors in thinking ,Partialism, Time scale, Egocentricity Prejudices ,Adversary Thinking 

2 .Presentation - its importance , Steps in Making a Presentation; Delivering a Presentation 

Translation

1.Introduction To Translation 

Concept, importance, need for translation, challenges in translation, problems and importance of Information and Technology in translation. 

2.Interpretation 

Interpretation: Meaning, Difference between interpretation and translation  

3. Role of a translator Translator and his role in media, Qualities, Importance of Translator, Challenges faced by Translator

DID THE THIRD BATTLE OF PANIPAT DESTROY MARATHA POWER?

 Political significance of the Battle of Panipat – Historians have held divergent views about the effects of the battle on the fortunes of the Maratha power in India. Maratha historians hold the view that the Marathas lost nothing of political importance by it except the loss of 75,000 soldiers, that Ahmed Shah Abdali practically gained nothing by it and the battle led to no decisive results.

G. S. Sardesai writes, ‘Notwithstanding the terrible losses in manpower suffered n that field by the Marathas, the disaster decided nothing. In fact, it pshed forward in the distant sequel two prominent members of the dominant race, Nana Phadnavis and Mahadji Sindhia, both miraculously escaping death on that fatal day, who resuscitated the power to its former glory. Not long after the Battle of Panipat, the Maratha power began to prosper again as before and continued to do so for forty years, until the death of Mahadji sindhia or until British supremacy was established early in the 19^th century by the Second Maratha War (1803). The disaster of Panipat was indeed like a natural visitation destroying life but leading to no decisive political consequences. To maintain that the disaster of Panipat put an end to the dreams of supremacy cherished by the Marathas is to misunderstand the situation as recorded in contemporary documents.

Sir J. N. Sarkar, on the other hand maintains, ‘It has become a fashion with the Maratha historians to minimize the political results of the third Battle of Panipat. But a dispassionate survey of Indian history will show how unfounded this chauvinistic claim is. A Maratha army, did no doubt, restore the exiled Mughal Emperor to the capital of his fathers in 1772, but they came there not as Kingmakers, not as the dominators of the Mughal Empire and the real masters of his nominal ministers and generals. That proud position was secured by Mahadaji Sindhia only in 1789 and by the British in 1803’.

J. N. Sarkar’s view seems more objective. The Maratha losses in manpower were great. Out of the total of about one lakh persons only a few thousands escaped alive. So great was the disaster that for nearly three months the Peshwa could not get authentic details about the casualties and the fate of the military leaders. Even the Peshwa succumbed to the news of the disaster. J. N. Sarkar writes ‘This battle by removing nearly all the great Maratha captains and statesmen including the Peshwa Balaji Baji Rao, left the path absolutely open and easy to the guilty ambition of Raghunath(rao) dada, the most infamous character in Maratha History. Other losses time could have made good, but this was the greatest mischief done by the debacle at Panipat’. G. S. Sardesai counters this argument when he writes, ‘Panipat, in itself, brought to the Marathas a unique experience in politics and war, and heightened their national pride and sentiment as nothing else could have done. The disaster instead of damping their spirits, made them shine higher as when a nation is on the path of advancement and progress, such ups and downs are inevitable. Such valiant soldiers as Dattaji, Jankoji, Ibrahim Khan, Sadashivrao, did not die in vain. They left their mark on the fortunes of their nation and prepared it for a greater effort such as the young Peshwa Madhavrao actually put forth. Out of death cometh life is only too true. Although one generation, the older one was cut off, the younger generation soon rose to take its place and perform the nations service as before. The disaster was felt as personal by almost every home in Maharashtra and every soul was stirred by it to rise to the Nation’s call’.

The disaster of Panipat certainly lowered Maratha prestige in the Indian political world. The Marathas who could not protect their dependents or themselves came to be looked upon as a weak reed to bank upon.

Again, the Maratha dream of an empire extending over all parts of India was irretrievably lost. True, the Marathas took the Mughal Emperor under their protection and escorted him to Delhi in 1772 and again in 1789, but they never made any attempt to recover the provinces of Punjab and Multan or to play the role of the wardens of the Northwest frontier.

Sidney Owen writes that by the third Battle of Panipat, ‘the Maratha power was, for the first time, shattered to atoms, and though the hydra-headed monster was not killed, it was not effectually scotched, that it remained practically quiescent, until great British statesmen were in a condition to cope with, and ultimately to master and disintegrate it’. Certainly, the battle cleared the way for the rise of the British power in India. ‘It is significant’, writes R. B. Sardesai, ‘that while the two combatants, the Marathas and the Musalmans, were locked in deadly combat on the field of ancient Kurukshetra, Clive, the first founder of the British Empire in India, was on his way to England to explain the feasibility of his dreams of an Indian Empire to the Great Commoner, Lord Chatham, then the Prime Minister. Panipat indirectly ushered in a new participant in the struggle for Indian supremacy. This is indeed the direct outcome of that historical  event, which on that account marks a turning point in the history of India’.

SIGNIFICANCE OF THE BATTLE OF PLASSEY

 The battle – rather the rout of Plassey – was hardly important from the military view-point. It was a mere skirmish. The total casualties were 65 on the Company’s side and 500 in the Nawab’s army. The English army showed no military superiority either in maneuvers or strategy of the battle. It was desertion in the Nawab’s camp that gave Clive the victory. After Mir Mudan’s death treacherous commanders held the field. If Mir Jaffar and Rai Durlabh had remained faithful the outcome of the battle would have been different. It was treason that drove the Nawab from the battlefield, it was treason that removed the Nawab’s army from the battlefield, it was treason that made Clive the victor.

Perhaps it was in the game of diplomacy that Clive excelled. He played on the fears of the Jagat Seths, worked up the ambition of Mir Jaffar and won a victory without fighting. K. M. Pannikar believes that Plassey was a transaction in which the rich bankers of Bengal and Mir Jaffar sold out the Nawab to the English.

The Battle of Plassey is important because of the events that followed it. Plassey put the British yoke on Bengal which could not be put off. The new Nawab, Mir Jaffar, was dependent on British bayonets for the maintenance of his portion in Bengal and for protection against foreign invasions. An English army of 6000 troops was maintained in Bengal to help the nawab maintain his position. Gradually all real power passed into the hands of the company. How hopeless was the position of Mir Jaffar is clear from the fact that while he wanted to punish Diwan Rai Durlabh and Ram Narayan, the deputy Governor of Bihar, for disloyalty, the English held his hand. Mr. Watts, the British resident at Murshidabad, held considerable influence.  Gulam Husain Khan, the Muslim historian noted that English recommendation was the only sure way to office. Very soon, Mir Jaffar found the English yoke galling and intrigued with the Dutch to oust the English from Bengal. Clive thwarted this design and defeated the Dutch at Bedara (Nov 1759). When Mir Jaffar refused to read the writing on the wall, he had to give place to Mir Kasim a nominee of the company in 1760.

The Battle of Plassey and the subsequent plunder – for there was not much different then between fair trade and plunder – of Bengal placed at the disposal of the English vast resources. The first instalment of wealth paid to the Company immediately after Plassey was a sum of 800,000 pounds, all paid in coined silver. In the graphic language of Macaulay, ‘the fleet which conveyed this treasure to Calcutta consisted of more than a hundred boats’. Bengal then was the most prosperous province, industrially advanced and commercially great. ‘The immense commerce of Bengal’ wrote Verilst in 1767, ‘might be considered as the central point to which all the riches of India were attracted. Its manufactures find their way to the remotest part of India’. The vast resources of Bengal helped the English to conquer the wars of the Deccan and extend their influence over northern India.

A great transformation came about in the position of the English company in Bengal. Before Plassey, the English Company was just one of the European companies trading in Bengal and suffering various exactions at the hands of the Nawab’s officials. After Plassey the English Company virtually monopolized the trade and commerce of Bengal. The French never recovered their lost position in Bengal, the Dutch made a last bid in 1759 but were humbled. From commerce the English proceeded to monopolize political power in Bengal.

Plassey proved a battle with far reaching consequences in the fate of India. ‘There never was a battle’ writes Malleson, ‘in which the consequences were so vast, so immediate and so permanent’. Col. Malleson certainly overstates the case when he writes that it was Plassey which ‘made England the great Mohammedan power in the world; Plassey which forced her to become one of the main factors in the settlement of the burning Eastern Question; Plassey which necessitated the conquest and colonization of the Cape of Good Hope; of Mauritius, the protectorate over Egypt’. Nevertheless, the battle of Plassey was an important event in the chain of developments that made the English the masters of India.

Eric Stoker, a modern writer, describes ‘the Plassey Revolution as the first English essay in private profiteering on a grandiose scale’. The consequences of Plassey shaped the form of British overrule and the modes of cultural contact. 

MODERNIZATION OF JAPAN (1868-1893)

The Meiji era in Japan, under the dynamic leadership of Mikado (emperor) Mutsuhito, witnessed all round progress. Although the Meiji era continued up to 1912, we will however, restrict our discussion up to 1893 in this note.

During this period Japan adopted and assimilated European culture and civilization, political and economic institutions to some extent; and reformed and reorganized its army, developed its naval forces, and made a good beginning of industrialization and modernization as discussed below:

Political and constitutional innovations: The Meiji Restoration was followed by

1. -  the abolition of feudalism in 1871,

2. -   introduction of competitive civil service examinations for recruitment to the bureaucracy and

3. -   promulgation of the constitution in 1889 as the gift of the divine Emperor.

Hence the constitution had about it an aura of sanctity. It was for this reason that the constitution remained unamended in its wording till after 1945.

Under this constitution, like the King of England, the Emperor of Japan was the fountain of all power; and like the English Cabinet Minister, the Japanese Ministers assumed full responsibility for his acts. However, unlike the King of England whose succession was fixed by Acts of the British Parliament, the Emperor of Japan was not subject to the parliament because he himself was divine and of divine ancestry.

The Constitution guaranteed certain basic rights to the Emperor’s subjects and cast upon them certain duties as well. It provided for the Imperial Diet or Parliament, consisting of two chambers

1.   the house of Representatives, elected by about the one percent

2.   a House of Peers, composed of members of the Imperial family, of higher ranks of nobility, of representatives of peers of lower ranks of nobility, of certain imperial appointees and of the highest tax payers chosen by their fellows.  

Industrial and economic revolution: The Meiji era, during 1868-1893, also inaugurated the industrial and economic revolution in Japan. The mechanical appliances of the West were adopted and thus the industrial revolution was brought to Japan. New factories, mills and workshops were erected, railways and telegraph lines were build and steamships were constructed in 1877, the telephone was introduced in Japan. At the same time, foreign trade of Japan grew at great speed and currency and banking were developed on the western patterns. Postal savings banks were also introduced. In accomplishing the industrial and economic revolution, the government took the lead; and this was according to the general character of the revolution in Japan. The Japanese had a burning desire to keep their nation completely independent and strong against foreign powers. Hence the government of Japan was averse to borrowing more from abroad than seemed absolutely necessary, so that their jealousy cherished national autonomy might not be jeopardized by foreigners through their investments in, and loans to, Japan. The same national goal promoted the Japanese government to promote the growth of those industries which would assist the army and navy and which would at the same time complete with foreign products both at home and abroad. Accordingly, foundries, arsenals’ and shipyards were build. Mines were exploited. Paper mills, chemical works and glass and cement producing factories were build. By 1890 more than 200 steam factories sprang into existence. It was however not until after 1895 that phenomenal economic, industrial and technological developments occurred.

Intellectual changes: The Meiji Era witnessed numerous intellectual changes. The imperial government of Japan introduced compulsory primary education developed secondary and higher education and established universities patterned on the models of America and Europe. Trained and experienced teachers, professors, technicians, technologists, engineers and doctors and surgeons were imported from Europe and America. Thousands of books on science, history, political science, literature and many other subjects were translated from western languages to Japnese. Newspapers and periodicals appeared.

Modern Japanese army: The abolition of feudalism was followed by a change in the character of the army. In 1872 the beginnings of conscription were made and a nationwide plan was introduced for building the army form men of all ranks of society. This meant ‘a nation in arms’.

New Japanese Laws and Courts: The Japanese reorganized their laws and courts with a view to be freed from extraterritoriality which was viewed by them as a galling badge of national inferiority in 1890.

1.   A new civils code patterned after western models

2.   The code of commercial law patterned on the German model

3.   The criminal code patterned after the French precedents, were promulgated.

By 1899, all codes were operational. As soon as the codes went into full operation, the Japanese whole heartedly to adopt the machines and the scientific techniques of the Far East. She also entered upon a path, which if pursued successfully, would make her its master’ (Ref: K. S. Latourette, A Short History of the Far East (1957) The Macmillan Co., New York, p. 421).

SINO JAPANESE WAR (1894-95)

Having fully developed her strategic industries and armed and naval forces, Japan aspired to become a Great Power in the Far East in particular and the world in general. The closing years of the 19^th century witnessed the Sino-Japanes War (1894-95), in which Japan won brilliant and easy victories over China and Korea.

Japanese interests in Korea: Prior to the Sino Japanese War, Korea was under the nominal suzerainty of China. The Chinese nominal control over Korea accompanied with continued chaotic conditions in Korea, menaced the security of Japan. Korea in the hands of an enemy was regarded by the Japanese as ‘a dagger thrust at the heart of trade interests in Korea. It was, therefore, essential for Japan to detach Korea from the Chinese connection and bring it under Japanese control.

War with Korea and China: In 1894, Japan served the King of Korea with an ultimatum to accept and implement the Japanese program of reforms. The King however, avoided the issue and consequently Japan attacked Korea and took away the King as a war prisoner. China also fought on the side of Korea was defeated. In less than a year, the Japanese overran practically the whole of Korea and southern Manchuria and were on the point of attacking Peking

Treaty of Shimonoseki (1895): The Sino Japanese War came to an end by the Treaty of Shimonoseki on April 17, 1895, under which

China recognized the full and complete independence of Korea.

China ceded the Liao-Tung Peninsula and Port Arthur in Manchuria and Island of Formosa to Japan and

China had to pay a war indemnity of twenty crore taels to Japan.

MA Sociology Part I Notes (Sem II) Paper I Contemporary Social Theories

Click on the topic you want to learn / know more about:

Contemporary Social Theories

 Unit I: Structural Functionalism and Micro Sociology

• Structural Functionalism and Conflict Theories

- Functionalism

- Herbert Spencer

- Emile Durkhiem

- Robert Merton

- Malinowski

- Radcliff Brown

- Talcott Parsons

- Conflict Theory

- Classical Theorist - Conflict Theory

- Conflict Schools of the Modern Era

- Elite Theory - Conflict Theory

- Current trends in Conflict Theory

• Symbolic Interactionism

- Criticisms of Symbolic Interactionism

- George Herbert Mead

- Blumer and the Chicago School

- Geoffman & Dramaturgical Perspective

• Ethnomethodology, Garfinkle & Ethnomethodological Enquiry

- Conversational Analysis

- Ethnomethodologists and Mainstream Sociology

• Narrative Analysis

Unit II: The Critical and Postmodern Turn

• Western Marxism

• Critical Theory

- Ideas of Jurgen Habermas

• The Frankfurt School

• Post-structuralist and Postmodern theories

Unit III: Theorizing Structure, Network and Risk

• Theories of Structuration

• Habitus and Practice

• Theories of Networks

• Risks and Liquidity

Unit IV: Plural Registers

• Post-colonial critique

• Standpoint Theories and Beyond

• The Feminist Critique

• Sociology from Below: Dalit Sociological Perspectives

- The Book View and the Field View

- Major Trends of Social Transformation