Besides the sketches, she has written extensively about Indian rulers at the time (e.g. Ranjit Singh). If you found this interesting, you would love the Empire Podcast... I believe they talk about Emily in the episode on Afghanistan (https://podcasts.apple.com/gb/podcast/79-invading-afghanista...); Dalrymple's book on the subject (Return of a King, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Return_of_a_King) is also a masterfully well researched, delightful read.
+1 to Empire Podcast. They have excellent series on a bunch of empires (well researched with references). Its one of those light, informative, non-boring podcasts:
- The British Empire & The Raj
- The Ottoman Empire
- The Russian Empire
- The United States as an Empire
etc
William Dalrymple's books are great reads. Makes reading history enjoyable. Highly recommend all his books, particularly his most recent 'The Golden Road'
Reading that one now. I finished The Anarchy before that and it was a great intro to the 18th century and how it made the ground fertile for upcoming colonial period.
> Her book, Portraits of the Princes and People of India, was published in 1844. It contained 24 lithographs that were drawn from her sketches of important Indian subjects such as Dost Mahomed Khan and Ranjit Singh.
Something about this era - I have an interest in Frederick Catherwood and his work at basically the same time in mesoamerica (although he focused more on ruins than modern people), https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frederick_Catherwood
When did India go from the land of mysticism to the open landfill that it is now? Since photography became easily accessible? Was India always this polluted?
Most of Western cities were open landfills till a few decades ago despite advantages reaped from colonialism.
India still has some negative momentum from nearly 300 years of European colonialism. 700 years of Islamic occupation that destroyed native universities like Nalanada didn’t help.
While European states invested in building up their human capital over the past 200 years, most of the Indian economy was turned into an extractive colonial state. The lack of investment set the country back by a lot. After Independence, it turned its back sharply on Capitalism (rightfully so, having suffered under extreme capitalism for a couple of hundred years). Unfortunately, that didn’t end up working very well either, since it lacked the strong Institutions and State Power required to succeed that way. Politically, Partition of the Country destroyed existing economic structures and trade routes that had existed for hundreds of years, setting back all countries in the subcontinent even further… and then you also had multiple wars.
Honestly its quite amazing that the subcontinent has remained as stable as it is today; it could very easily have descended into the carnage we see today in Myanmar.
The account you're replying to was created 49 minutes ago and has 2 comments, both on this thread, one already flagged and dead. Please don't waste your time engaging bait.
I see similar comments about my home town of San Francisco and I don't act all in denial like you do. I know why it's happening, I'm aware that it's a reality. People have solutions. Some have ideas.
But you're in denial.
You'll never improve if you can't admit there's a problem.
Above comment is accurate. All Indian indigenous systems were destroyed (education, governance, taxation etc) during the 1000 years of foreign occupation. India still operates under the oppressive system imposed by the colonizers to subjugate the population. The shock and ripple effects of the plunder, destruction and subsequent partition has crippled the subcontinent. It might take several centuries to rebuild and recover.
Even though pollution in India is bad and getting worse everyday, smog in Delhi is/was an exception, not the national norm (even among tier 1 cities, let alone tier 2 and below). That too not year round (though I must say Delhi/NCR is increasingly becoming unliveable).
Probably not one thing but the sequence of Islamic colonialism, followed by European colonialism, followed the splitting of India, the introduction of consumerist lifestyles (plastic crap), globalism, etc.
I imagine any society where the existing stable system is violently destroyed will have issues with people not having their original culture and way of life, but also they probably had to just survive, and didn’t have time for environmental concerns.
Calling Islam in India "Islamic colonialism" is not accurate. Colonial rule generally involves a foreign power governing a territory for the benefit of an external homeland, maintaining separation from the local population, and transferring wealth.
The Delhi Sultanates and Mughal Empire were based in India. Their rulers spent and reinvested revenue there, adopted Indian customs, intermarried with local elites, and depended heavily on Hindu generals, officials, bankers, and allies. Indigenous banking networks were integral to the Mughal state, which is very different from an overseas colonial administration stealing wealth for a distant metropole.
Criticizing bad rulers is fine. Rebellions were brutally crushed and heavy taxes imposed. But that is just like every pre-modern empire. Hindu and Muslim rulers alike conquered territory, exploited peasants, and fought rivals.
British rule was completely different. India was subordinated and resources were stolen and redirected toward Britain. India went from being one of the wealthiest nations under the Mughals to a carved out husk after the British were done.
The Islamic period in India was one of the most prosperous periods in India’s history, ever. India was responsible for 25% of the worlds GDP during Mughal Emperor Jahangirs reign. The decline of Indian economy is directly a consequence of British Policies.
Not true. It was rich, yes. The emperors took it all. The common people got nothing. Hence the big tombs etc. Indigenous institutions were destroyed, libraries and universities burnt. Religious structires destroyed and natives under constant threat and conflict. This is directly reflected by the complete lack of pioneering work in science, technology, astronomy, mathematics, philosophy and literature during this period. All of that was pre islamic invasion.
> Her book, Portraits of the Princes and People of India, was published in 1844. It contained 24 lithographs that were drawn from her sketches of important Indian subjects such as Dost Mahomed Khan and Ranjit Singh.
https://www.rct.uk/collection/1070252/portraits-of-the-princ...
https://archive.org/details/Eden30538
Something about this era - I have an interest in Frederick Catherwood and his work at basically the same time in mesoamerica (although he focused more on ruins than modern people), https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frederick_Catherwood
India still has some negative momentum from nearly 300 years of European colonialism. 700 years of Islamic occupation that destroyed native universities like Nalanada didn’t help.
Honestly its quite amazing that the subcontinent has remained as stable as it is today; it could very easily have descended into the carnage we see today in Myanmar.
I see similar comments about my home town of San Francisco and I don't act all in denial like you do. I know why it's happening, I'm aware that it's a reality. People have solutions. Some have ideas.
But you're in denial.
You'll never improve if you can't admit there's a problem.
The biggest issue we have is the mindset of the common (wo)man, regardless of why it is the way it is.
I’m going to guess you’ve only visited India's cities?
I imagine any society where the existing stable system is violently destroyed will have issues with people not having their original culture and way of life, but also they probably had to just survive, and didn’t have time for environmental concerns.
The Delhi Sultanates and Mughal Empire were based in India. Their rulers spent and reinvested revenue there, adopted Indian customs, intermarried with local elites, and depended heavily on Hindu generals, officials, bankers, and allies. Indigenous banking networks were integral to the Mughal state, which is very different from an overseas colonial administration stealing wealth for a distant metropole.
Criticizing bad rulers is fine. Rebellions were brutally crushed and heavy taxes imposed. But that is just like every pre-modern empire. Hindu and Muslim rulers alike conquered territory, exploited peasants, and fought rivals.
British rule was completely different. India was subordinated and resources were stolen and redirected toward Britain. India went from being one of the wealthiest nations under the Mughals to a carved out husk after the British were done.