Colonial Dravidian

Vijay makes a very important contribution on the Aryan-Dravidian debate and how all of it was cooked up by the British (Hindu/Muslim divide, caste system, martial races etc).

It is the absurdity and arrogance of the British to imagine they created/united India; India has always existed from the times of our AASI/Andamese/Negrito ancestors (maybe we should go back to 80’s Britain and call the AASI black so we are basically black according to one-drop rule).

Colonialism was an absurdity and travesty and did so much to hold back Hindustan (I define this from the Hindu Kush to the Indian Ocean). Even Lord Curzon mentions (again I go quoting colonial authorities; I’m such a munafiq) that Rivers are not real boundaries; India does not stop at the Indus but at her mountains (Hindu Kush, Himalaya) and oceans.

“3) Indian politics –<br />a) North South divide – North = Arya, South = Dravida or Non-Arya aka Natives”<br /><br />You are overemphasising the so-called North-South ‘Divide’ . ‘ Dravida’ referred ethonologically to the Pancha Dravida brahmins ; this included brahmins of Gujarat and Maharastra. 19th Century ametuer linguist Rev Caldwell mistakenly thought it referred to the four large south Indian languages and named the linguitic group as ‘ Dravidian family’ and as was the prevalent notion of 19th century thinkers , he conflated the linguistic group with a racial group. From a purely linguistic angle , his identification of the linguistic group is right, but wrongly named it and even more atrociouly mistook it for a race.<br /><br />It is testament to the success of the the 19th century colonial categories that western mistakes have become creed for a section of Indians.<br /><br />However , the bald ‘ Arya-Dravida’ division is prevalent only in Tamilnadu, and not in other south India states; that too it is politically hyped up. The irony is the Tamil literature knows no word called Dravida till late 19th century under colonial instruction. <br /><br />Political froth from Tamilnadu should not be mistaken as the opinion of majority of people. The majority of Hindus have refrained from taking control the social and historical narrative or even challenging the prevalent narratives which are of 19th century western provenance. That is their mistake. I don’t think the so-called ‘Out of India’ theory is the solution. One nonsense cannot be fought with another nonsense. Wherever you see nonsense , be relentless in challenging and exposing it.<br /><br />The so-called ‘arya-dravida’ divide has no histotical basis – however such toxic narartives need exposing . The narrative of “arya-dravida” divide in Tamilnadu is high decibel and aggressive – it gets more aggressive as it’s historical basis is non-existant and it is running on empty. History is made by aggressive lies in the short run – Satyameva Jayate is a pious hope

12 thoughts on “Colonial Dravidian”

  1. It has been my observation that every one has been concentrating on Indo-Aryan languages and not Dravidian languages, even now when it is becoming apparent that there is a lot of contribution of Iranian agriculturalists to Indian populations genetically (seemingly along the usual “discriminatory” upper-caste paternal lines) and when there is a good possibility that Dravidian languages are related to a section of these paleolithic people from Iran. Why should Indo-Aryan “steppe pastoralists” only get all the attention and hate? The Dravidian “savanna pastoralists” or “wheat-barley agriculturalists” should also get some, right? Too unfair if you ask me. Perhaps some new reactionary movement is in the making- something like an “Out of south India (or some preferable location within Indus) for Iranian agriculturalists” (the name’s a bit mouthful though) lol. But then, the descendants of the “savanna pastoralists” or “wheat-barley agriculturalists” are too fractured and invested in in-fighting (only for the good in some ways, Oh dear Lord!) that they can never mobilise the silly new movement (again for the good!). Anyway, I look forward to the day where news paper articles are published examining how the Dravidian ideology viewpoints also fare against all these findings from genetics, etc. as opposed to just holding the “Out of India”, etc. theories in regard. For example, the inequality issues- to see if they really exclusively have pure “steppe pastoralist” origins or pre-“steppe-pastoralist” (which includes the Tamil extremist descendants of “savanna pastoralists” or “wheat-barley agriculturalists”) origins, etc.

    1. On the other hand, I realise that it is not very beneficial to stick to these things about such remote past so obsessively. I myself have a tendency to do that what with my fascination about all these prehistoric happenings and I think I should cool down a lot, even if my fascination is just academic and at times unavoidably but undesirably garnished by perhaps somewhat naive personal moral compass. These sorts of jolts I tend to get occasionally, and this time I got one when I went to check out the latest of those usual AMT-OIT-related articles ( in the The Caravan magazine and found this other article about how a particular superbug’s spread is being affected by the high pollution in the river Ganga ( I know that it is a fallacy to say that all communication about the first problem should cease before the second problem is solved and I’m not doing that- just a thought that I may be attaching more importance to a subject matter than it really deserves, at least to some of its aspects.

    2. Yes this Aryan worship is disgraceful. We should call the AASI black and then gets ourselves black because of one-drop rule

  2. The modern Indian state is inconceivable without Western political ideas of the nation state. Indians would be better adjusted if they could judge and assess the Indian past dispassionately. Indian historians need to investigate the cultural changes among all Indian communities from the Indo-British encounter.

    1. Raj what are your thoughts on the state governed by Chandragupta Maurya and the Mughals [Afghanistan, Pakistan, Bangladesh, India]?

        1. Cyrus the Great ruled many Hindus (including Hindu Buddhists in this) too. Although we don’t know the exact breakdown it is conceivable that half his subjects were Hindus. Hindus were in prominent positions in the empire.

          I think the “modern nation state” so to speak can learn a lot from Cyrus the Great and the institutions he left behind. Too bad Umar tried to wipe out all educational, library, knowledge, cultural institutions of it.

          Iran and South Asia were open architecture plural diverse systems based on freedom.

    2. Ever questioned if Western Political ideas are actually Western ? Could it be that it was the result of cultural exchanges which Western were able to distill into their political process because of being resource sufficient at particular time in history ?

      Shows the Hinduism’s role in late enlightenment period, I have few other papers too which shows links to the translation of Arabic knowledge collection {which it inherited from various regions it took over & the parts which in which it contributed} & it’s role in the Western Enlightenment.

      So Western enlightenment was the result of the 2 things coming together –
      1) West becoming financially stronger & self sufficient in resources.
      2) It had various sources of knowledge which allowed it to question the beliefs & path it was following resulting in what we now term as Enlightenment.

      In the similar vein if you want what Missionaries copied from India check these books –
      Missionary Tropics: The Catholic Frontier in India (16th-17th Centuries)
      Catholic Orientalism: Portuguese Empire, Indian Knowledge (16th – 18th Centuries) (Oxford Theology and Religion M) -Enlightenment in Global History: A Historiographical Critique

      How this knowledge was used – To put the Eurocentric world-view as the best example for world to follow & accept it as the sole propagator of original ideas {Which was the actual objective of colonizers to prove that they were the best & thus they are civilizing the world via civilizing missions.}

      1. You are speaking to the choir Deep Bhatnagar and expect many more articles on this at Brown Pundits. There was a time when speaking like this could get someone labeled a “Nazi”. It remains an uphill fight.

        Would you like to submit a detailed researched article on this to Brown Pundits?

        I think the East should take pride in the rise of the west since the west and east have been closely tied for millenia and because the east inspired the rise of the west.

        1. I was responding to comment By Raj – // The modern Indian state is inconceivable without Western political ideas of the nation state. Indians would be better adjusted if they could judge and assess the Indian past dispassionately. Indian historians need to investigate the cultural changes among all Indian communities from the Indo-British encounter. //

          The claim of Western ideas in whatever way or form must be challenged due to the way historical developments & exchanges took place & the prevailing Eurocentrism in Academia. Secondly the cultural change among Indian communities from Indo-British encounter will only create more problems {since it will bring community into focus & not individual} & is almost impossible task to do.

          I don’t think i need to write article on BrownPundits, Just check links or articles i attach in my posts {Since i broadly outline the major points i gather from them & most of them are from peer reviewed books but i simply find free links of articles which seem most interesting to me}.

Comments are closed.

Brown Pundits