HISTORY – I

BOOK REVIEW

THE SCANDAL OF EMPIRE

By Nicholas B. Dirks

SUBMITTED TO –
Professor Hota Agni Kumar

SUBMITTED BY –
Pranjal Gautam
2019-5LLB-34

1
 CONTENTS

BOOK SELECTION........................................................................................................................3

INTRODUCTION............................................................................................................................4

SUMMARY...................................................................................................................................6

ANALYSIS..................................................................................................................................12

CONCLUSION.............................................................................................................................14

2
 BOOK SELECTION

The book that I have selected for this assignment is “The Scandal of Empire” by Nicholas B.
Dirks and the reason for the same is that although it might be partially true that the British
empire, as per the claims made by them, brought economic development and various other
infrastructural developments in colonial India, and the fact that these developments are
congratulated and celebrated in the British historiography, Dirks, in this book, reveals the
corrosive power of British Imperialism and the exploitations done by the East India Company
under the administration of Governor-General Warren Hastings and this is based on his view
that Scandal, instead of being incidental, was central to the Empire and served as the mould
in which capitalist expansion and imperialism was forged. This whistle-blowing style
diversion from the traditional method of historiography which emphasises on the ‘triumphs’
of the British empire is what interested me into selecting this book for the assignment.

3
 INTRODUCTION

An empire is a structure of domination in which diverse ethnic, cultural and national groups
are subjected to a single source of authority 1, it exploits the resources of the host or the
colonised nation. The British Empire, in the same sense, had an imperialist ideology.
Imperialism is the policy in which the empire expands its power or rule beyond its territorial
boundaries and as an ideology, it supports the acquisition of territory through but not
necessarily military expansion and draws on nationalist and racialist doctrines 2. An imperial
nation might thus mistake its ideology as that of a father figure bringing growth and
prosperity to the host nation. This ‘growth’ and ‘prosperity’ might not necessarily be
economical in nature but might also include socio-cultural reforms, in the context of India,
the abolition of Sati in which the imperialist notion of the supreme authority of religious texts
and the practice’s inconsistency with this authenticity prescribed by the texts was made
central to the idea of abolishing and the cruelty to females was marginalized. Hence, it can be
concluded that although there might be tangible proofs to economic or socio-cultural reforms
for the better, what motivated these reforms was a corrosive ideology which, in the aftermath
of the colonial rule not only lead to the compromise of the physical resources but the mindset
of the people itself.

Nicholas Dirks has an anti-imperialist perspective when it comes to historiography and in

each of the books he enquires into the ways in which the colonial state has mutated South-
Asian cultural and social formations, this book examines the scandal of the administration of
Warren Hastings, the then Governor-General of India and his impeachment on his return to
Britain. This is done in the context of his focus on the destructiveness of Imperialism.

In this book, Dirks argues that scandal, which is central to imperial origins was converted
into narratives of capitalist, national and imperial triumphs, this means that the accounts of
this scandal have been missing from various historical accounts of the East Indian Country’s
expansion in India, by Indian and Imperial historians and he seeks to reassert this connection
through this book.

1
Heywood, Andrew. Political Ideologies.
2
Supra note 1

4
Before observing the intricacies of the book, I believe that the objectives and the motivations
of the British empire must be enquired into and it must be established that the ideologies that
drove British Imperialism were the oriental and evangelical schools of thought.

Orientalist school of thought can be understood as the British forwarding the idea of their
restoration of the ‘decayed system’ in India based on their construction of Indian history
wherein it was thought of as ‘golden’ and ‘glorious’ which suffered degeneration. The British
then sought out to self-impose this restoration of India as their obligation and legitimised
colonial rule through the disintegration of the Aryan Civilisation and transform India into a
progressive model like Europe.

The Evangelical school of thought can be understood as the shift in colonial policy with the
industrial revolution, The British thought of Indians as ‘barbaric’ in nature and felt a need to
discipline and reform them of their barbaric nature, despite their own sinister tendencies, they
had a motive to “civilise” the colonised through enforcing the law.

5
 SUMMARY

For this assignment, I have emphasised on the following chapters, namely,

1) Scandal
2) Corruption

SCANDAL

In the 1600s, The East India Company was established and operated in a fairly desultory
manner, setting up coastal forts; engaged in trade, forming alliances, sometimes trying to take
on the Mughal, and sometimes contesting the Dutch, the Spanish and the French. Late in the
17th Century, the Mughal empire was at the peak of its success and the Maratha powers rose
in the southern India and western India during this time. Riches were made, trade expanded,
territories claimed and battles were fought but these roots were slowly growing and British
imperialism was not substantive enough until the 18th Century. There was a revolution which
alleviated the state of the political affairs of the 17th Century and had important effects on the
Economy, the English stock market was established and East India Company shares were the
most traded shares on the stock market. Thus, capitalism was born along with the empire and
eventually lead to the formation of the modern British state. The shares of the East India
Company were used as an influence to revive the forfeited status of the charter (1693) which
granted the company monopoly rights over trade and there was a report in 1695 which
enquired over the developing scandal and dealt with the issues of instant riches made by
bribing and insider trading. This parliamentary report led to the dismissal of the House of
Commons speaker, the lord president of the council was impeached and the governor of the
company was imprisoned. The company not only survived but made profits through the trade
of tea and made investors and parliamentarians the beneficiaries as they received constant
wealth from this trade. This tea was however laced with West Indies sugar, became and to
this day, remains the staple diet of the English. Various other commodities like cotton, silk
and Asian spice made the British dependent on the global economy and helped them
legitimise the role of the company.

It is said by Dirks that Scandal was associated deeply with the imperial venture and
mercantile trade, he says that the 18th century was in fact a long century in terms of imperial

6
scandal due to which, at that time, trade and empire led to crises in the English Society,
Culture and Politics

India’s governor-general Warren Hastings was put to impeachment trial by 1788 and this was
recognized through Europe since it was pillaged by a massive succession of Nabobs. Nabobs
are Englishmen who lived like princes after gaining riches on their return from the East and
this is a term that was an English corruption of the word Nawab which stood for governors of
provinces during Mughal periods. Burke presented a speech regarding the regulation of this
company in 1783 and hinted at the terrifying issue of Nabobs who were marrying into the
gentry and buying their way into the British Parliament ultimately leading to instability in the
investment and economic patterns.

It is to be clarified that Dirks realised that this imperial corruption was not the sole effect of
Warren Hasting’s time, he believed that Robert Clive was equally responsible for this. The
Pitt Act of 1784 was an important parliamentary measure passed to rein in company excesses
as well. Robert Clive was knighted and hailed as the Empire’s founder, he was indifferent to
the consequences of looting and collecting ‘presents’ and as a result of the Bengali Nawab,
Mir Jafar’s insistence on keeping land grant also known as a Jagir was almost brought to
disgrace. This gift came at the cost of the company profits and Clive’s enemies, obviously
criticised it. Although, in addition to convincing everyone that this was a gift from Mir Jafar,
he secured the right to extract 27000 pounds a year from the Bengali revenues for the rest of
his life.

There were various ‘presents’ being distributed to the company’s servants after the Battle of
Plassey in 1757 and were estimated to be around worth over 2 Million pounds between 1757
and 1765 by the selected committee of the House of Commons which sat in the years 1772-
1773. These ‘presents’, however, were speedy, direct means of taking bribes and enriched
these corrupt servants of the company.

These events and the events which followed serve as evidence to Dirk’s argument that
Scandal was at the heart of the beginnings of imperialism. He also says that these Scandals
were not the reason for the empire’s decline but rather the reason for the company’s uprising
which is otherwise recorded as problems in management and control.

Dirk, while realising that this Scandal was a terrifying occurrence, also realises that this
private profiteering and imperial aggrandizement served as necessary features to imperialism
which also has to conquest, expand and exploit, however, this has been totally underplayed in

7
imperial history and virtually erased. His main point of dissent with these practices in
historiography is the marginalisation of India’s importance and relevance to the main events
of that time and the centralisation of progress and growth which came at the cost of
disadvantages to the colonised.

The colonial rule has been often depicted as weak yet producing ethnic violence, political
weakness, nationalist extremism, religious exclusion and civilizational embarrassment in the
name of pre-colonial tradition. These scandals, however, reveal themselves and their meaning
after long durations of public outcry and formal investigations cease, these scandals point to
the underlying anxieties and tensions of an age and ironically resolve crises by repressing
these anxieties and tensions, these scandals require careful management and elicit widespread
attention which is vicarious in nature due to the fact that they produce a ‘spectacle’ through
which the fall of the mighty is seen. These scandals might be caused by undue greed, sexual
indiscretion, appetites driven by the desires of self-aggrandizement and self-fulfilment and
more often than not, extreme political ambitions. This public spectacle provides titillation by
the public and makes it subject to a morality play. There might be threats of the subversion of
public’s authority along with the rules and conventions of the public as well as private life-
changing radically, these scandals lead to benign outcomes. These scandals become ritual
moments and the reputation of one or more individuals is sacrificed in order to pave way for
the continuity of the scandalous ways of the others and minimal protocols and safeguards to
ensure that these excesses do not occur again are made.

These scandals might lead to reforms but these reforms, in fact, lead to the favour of the
potential agents rather than the victims of the scandal. Dirks suggests that the scandal itself,
instead of the systemic reasons for scandal must be erased. He also says that even in the
modern times, these scandals are endemic excesses are normalised and concealed under the
notions and our modern convictions about corporate responsibility, public virtue, free trade,
political determination and national sovereignty.

8
 CORRUPTION

This chapter seeks to explore the reasons for the alleged scourge of the integrity of the
company and its managerial probity along with private trade, and Dirks suggests that the
reason for the same might have begun the company itself.

In 1675, on private account, the right to trade was extended to any commodity to any port or
place in East India to northward of the equator with the exception of Formosa and Tonkin.
This lead to the origins or the rise of interlopers. Interlopers were basically virtual pirates
who operated on the high seas and they were suppressed early in the18th century and were
granted trading rights and privileges by the Mughal authorities which were then given to the
company for private purposes. These made it apparent that there were great riches to be made
in India and not only through meagre salaries given to the servants of the company. Political
capital was thus earned for and spent to secure appointments in India for young men eager to
gather fortune of the East. Some of these men could not adapt to these tropical conditions and
perished, the remaining secured riches of an unimaginable magnitude when compared to
what they could make at home.

Through Bonds, the company became the chief financier for public debt of the state and the
directors of the company gained massive influence in the parliament. 3.2 Million pounds
were to be lent by the company to the state and in return of this, the company secured major
favour in the political terms which helped bonds of the company become the most secure
form of investment and in addition to that, the East India Company was guaranteed monopoly
rights over trade.

The total value of exports to Asia from Britain doubled to over a million pounds a year
between the years of 1709 and 1749. At this same time, the company failed to pay yearly
dividends to the stakeholders. However, the Mughal Farman of 1717 waived off all customs
and fees for inland trade in commodities and private fortunes were made by people in the
company service.

9
The fortunes soon played a major role in domestic politics and economics too. Edward
Stephenson purchased Lord Dawley’s estate from Lord Bolingbroke and became the first
Bengal nabob to enter the house of commons. Remittances were ranged from 50,000 to
1,20,000 pounds a year between the years of 1731 and 1756. This, although an enormous
amount was nothing compared to the actual wealth taken by the servants of the company
from India. These remittances became forms of international trade in illegal transactions in
commodities such as gold and diamonds and tea with china and other trading companies.
Silver bullion and the company’s dependence on it in the first half of the 18 th century made
the company anxious to secure it and gain a political and economic foothold.

Clive became his career like many other youngsters of 18 th century Britain, being the son of a
lower level gentry who lived beyond their means was sent to India when he was around the
age of 17. He was tired by the banality of bureaucracy and joined the military where he was
hailed for his valour. Clive bailed his family out of debt upon his return to Britain and failed
to buy a seat in the parliament. He took over command upon the death of the commander of
Bombay on the route and he took full credit of the assault on the Maratha fort. Clive
conspired with Mir Jafar to unseat the nawab and upon successfully doing so, he received
presents like a Jagir as mentioned in the earlier chapter, he was also made the mansabdar by
Mir Jafar after the Battle of Plassey. His rewards seemed excessive and his defence that these
were voluntary presents was suspected which was later overshadowed by his military and
political accomplishments but it increased after the company was in crisis in 1770 due to
which the conspiracies of corruption around his jagir were symbolised.

Burke observed that there was a surreptitious entry of corruption and in ominous tones,
inveighed as such, he pointed out the fact that these Nabobs marry into families, enter into the
senate, ease estates by loans, raise the value by demand, cherish and protect relations which
lie heavily on patronage, and no house in England does not feel the same concerns and
interest that makes the eastern government’s reforms appear disgusting and officious. The
consequences of imperial corruption included the corruption of the values in England, in
other words, India corrupted Britain. He blamed the uncultured, unprincipled and untutored
Nabobs for the same who accumulated fortunes and wealth who would buy their way into the
gentry and into the parliament. This posed a threat to and challenged the ancient constitution.

Burke wasn’t alone who worried about the corruption of the metropole through the corruption
of the empire, a Nabob used the issues of corruption to justify fears of transformation in

10
society but burke worried about these tales which came at the cost of Indian princes as well
as peasants. For him, imperial corruption in India was important for Britain’s future and
spoke about the parasitic system which diverted the wealth of a nation through taxes into the
pockets of a few or narrow political critique. He argues that although the meaning of
corruption might have changed through the years, the scale is still staggering and the effects
of this corruption were overwhelming for India. The trial of Warren Hastings lasted for 9
years and his scandal became literally the greatest spectacle of the 18 th century, the Empire
emerged from the trial, stronger than ever and apparently, the enterprise had been cleansed of
corruption but something else had replaced it.

11
 ANALYSIS

In Scandal, it has been seen that his argument is premised in two principal contentions, the
first is that the empire in its origin is based on a scandal and the second one is that this
scandal has been converted into narratives of triumph in the contexts of imperialism,
capitalism and nationalism.

In Corruption, he sets the background for Warren Hasting’s impeachment using Burke’s
charges and describes that inland trade was core to supplementation of the minimal, or
meagre salaries given to the servants, this supplementation is the result of corruption. This
corruption transformed political and social classes in Britain through the returning of various
Nabobs from India who were middle-class British men who were made wealthy through
corrupt financial dealings and these men intended to purchase influential positions through
siphoned wealth who were viewed as troubling and corrupted. The central argument being the
one against Robert Clive who received a Jagir and various other privileges such as his right to
draw a substantial amount of wealth from the treasury which he made through the coup
against the Nawab of Bengal.

The single aim of the book is to establish that the British empire was based on a Scandal and
throughout the book, Dirks tries to critically examine the same issues over and over again in
contexts of various exploits done by the empire, which means that this book is Polemic in
nature and uses various chapters to drive that single point of the book. The chapters are
connected to each other in the sense that in one chapter, the author will reveal the scandals
and in the next one, the origins of it and the corruptions, then the timeline would proceed and
in that the author would reveal another context. It is interesting to note that the beginning of
the book slowly transforms itself into the conclusion of it and he tries to link these together to
drive the one single point he sought out to emphasise on throughout the book. The text holds
subtexts at the end of each chapter and is, according to me, are more often than not, post-
colonial in their nature. Chapters of this book may be read in isolation from one another but
the whole theme of the book, or to explain better, the collective theme of the book might be
lost while trying to emphasise on the individual themes of the book since every chapter is
interlinked and is in pursuance of a single objective. What I mean is, every conclusion of a
chapter is the background theme for the subsequent chapter and so on, the voice of the author

12
is enraged and he conveys this at the end of every chapter by revealing his contentions with
the incompleteness of a lot of historiographies.

However, it is criticised by William Dalrymple that he has not accessed enough primary
sources in the course of research and none in any of the Indian languages, moreover, he also
criticises on the fact that Dirks did not spend enough time on the private papers of Burke and
Warren Hastings which are easily available who are the two principals in Dirks’ study. He
strongly says that Dirk’s assaults have been formed on misinformation and Philip Francis has
been said to be the one feeding him this misinformation. He also says that Burke has never
been to India and relied on secondary sources, this evidence makes him ill-informed and as a
reason, this book, instead of being new research, is just polemic and its worldview is
simplistic and reductionist.

13
 CONCLUSION

Dirks has created a nicely written novel, with an appealing, vibrant, and often polemic style
that makes it available to the public beyond the ones Dirks has previously worked with. Dirks
also deals with several elements that make the company's early state and business-buildings
dynamic and even inconsistent and does an important job in disengaging elements of early
company policy. The ultimate purpose of Dirks, though, is evidently not to examine British
political machinations at the end of the eighteenth century, but just to reassert the
fundamental meaning of ' scandal ' at the core of the current discussions of imperialism.

In every case, Dirks claims that at least some of his work applies to the intellect and
contemplation of writing about an ' imperial crisis ' during an era of expansionism and to the
prosecution of a foreign war that is probably equally marked by corruption, tragedies and
ineptitude. The contemporary modes of the book can be definitely regarded as using
reflectivity as a weapon because it essentially leads to a greater contextualisation and instils a
sense of vitality and significance in the historical narrative of the 18th century.

14