We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 12 February 2009
When I was invited to read a paper on Indian history at a meeting of the Royal Historical Society I felt not only honoured by the request, but also gratified to learn that the Society intended to bring within its scope the encouragement of the study of the history of our Indian Empire, an empire whose progress and growth is a wondrous fact in the history of the world. The history of the Hindu kingdoms and the history of the government of the Mahomedans should be the special province of the Royal Asiatic Society, for no Englishman can deal with them in a satisfactory manner without a knowledge of the classical languages of the East. He must study and compare the original historians of India. The systematic study of the history of British dominion in India must be the most effectual agency in removing that ignorance (so strange and so discreditable) which prevails among all classes in England regarding the history of our Indian Empire. The responsibility for a just, impartial and stable government of India has been committed for good or evil into the hands of Parliament, and through Parliament to the electoral body of Great Britain; but the electoral body must fail to discharge that great responsibility if the reading multitude remain ignorant of the history of English government in India. It is also the duty and the interest of England that the young men who are sent from our universities to be the main instruments of administering the government of our Indian Empire in all its extensive and complicated branches should be trained to pursue the study of history in a scientific spirit, so that they may be able to apply scientific methods of inquiry to an examination in detail of the development of our administration in India. Many years spent in examining the musty documents in the Indian archives has brought home to me the value of the light which history may shed on practical problems. In India there is no problem which is old, there is no problem which is new. Measures which were supposed to be new would never have been passed if they had been studied by the dry light of history. In the Record Office under his charge the Indian civilian will generally find some material which will reward the labour of research.
1 ‘In 1846 M. Gallois Montbrun, the father of the gentleman who until recently was Mayor of Pondicherry—to whose courteous help in making search and enquiry regarding the diary I desire here to express my indebtedness—unearthed the manuscript, which up to then had lain unheeded in the house of the representatives of the family. M. Montbrun, who took the deepest interest in old vernacular writings, then proceeded to make a copy of it. But he apparently started with selections only, for the volume from which the translation for the Government of Madras was originally made is full of breaks. This was not observed until the actual work of editing was commenced. The omissions then noticed led to inquiry, and it was ascertained that M. Montbrun had subsequently supplied the blanks by a supplemental volume, which, however, was not forthcoming. Further search was made, and this resulted in the discovery of the undoubted originals of volumes i. and ii. The volume now being published is practically a fresh translation from these. —Ranga Pillai's Diary, vol. i. General Introduction, pp. xiii, xiv.Google Scholar Another copy of the Diary, which is in the National Library in Paris, was made by M. Areel, but at present it is impossible to ascertain whether it is perfect. In 1870 was published Le Siège de Pondichéry en 1746: Extrait des Mémoires Inédits de Ranga Poullé Divan de la Compagnie des Indes, par F. N. Laude, Procureur-Général. In 1889, M. Julien Vinson, Professor of the Special School of Living Oriental Languages at Paris, published a translation of some portions of it, which he followed up in 1894 by a volume amplifying these, and bearing the title of Les Français dans l'Inde. This, however, does not go beyond 1748, and is composed of extracts referring only to a few special matters.’
1 With regard to the early history of Madras, we owe a good deal to Mr. Talboy Wheeler, to whose work in the field of Indian history sufficient justice has not been done; to Mr. Pringle, whose early death prevented the completion of his most excellent Selections from the Madras Records; to Mr. William Foster, Superintendent of Records at the India Office, who is so willing to aid any fellow-labourer, and to bestow on him the fruits of his own research.
2 The Journal of Peter Floris is in the India Office. Extracts from it were printed by Purchas.
1 Alfred the Great sent an embassy, under Bishop Sighelm, of Sherborne, to do honour to the tomb of a Holy Thomas. Gibbon hints that the envoys got no further than Alexandria, the great centre-point of the East and West, where they collected their cargo, and invented the legend. According to the legend of antiquity the Gospel was preached in India by St. Thomas. It was preached in the eighth century by Thomas Cana, an Armenian merchant, as Marco Polo was informed on the spot, at Meleapoor, the native name for St. Thomé.
2 Payntings, painted cloths, i.e. chintz.
3 Morrees (mūri), blue cloth.
4 Percalla (parkālā), spangled cloth.
5 Naik, H. (Nāyak) was a general name for the Lords of Madura and other places in Southern India until the middle of the tenth century.
6 The Founding of Fort St. George, Madras, by Foster, William, p. 10.Google Scholar
1 Original Correspondence, No. 1791.
1 Pattimar, Tam., messenger.
1 A pagoda was worth forty-two fanams, or about seven shillings.
2 The Consultations and Diary Book of the President and Governor, &c., Council of George, Fort St., 09 24, 1744.Google Scholar
3 L'Inde Française avant Dupleix, par des Fosses, H. Castonnel, p. 49.Google Scholar
4 It was called by the natives Puduchere, which, by degrees, was corrupted to Pondicherry.
1 Dupleix, by Cultru, Prosper, p. 200.Google Scholar
1 Mill, , History of India, vol. iii. p. 41.Google Scholar
1 Orme, , vol. i. p. 61.Google Scholar
1 Dupleix, by Cultru, Prosper, p. 203.Google Scholar
1 Orme, , i. 63.Google Scholar Mill writes: ‘Here the operations of repairing were to be renewed, and in still more unfavourable circumstances. To get the wood they required, a road was made across a marsh, a league in circumference; the rains were incessant; disease broke out among the people; and many of the officers showed a bad disposition; yet the work was prosecuted with so much efficiency, that in forty-eight days the fleet was ready for sea.’—Vol. iii. p. 44.
2 Despatch from David, Fort St., 10 17, 1746Google Scholar. Orme states: ‘The fight finished with the entrance of the night; about thirty-five men were killed in the English squadron, and the greatest part of these on board the forty-gun ship. We are not exactly informed of the loss sustained by the French; but it was believed that the killed and wounded together did not amount to less than 300. One of their ships, that which mounted thirty guns, was in less than half an hour dismasted and so much shattered that immediately after the action Mr. De la Bourdonnais ordered her to proceed to Bengal to be refitted in the Ganges.’—Vol. i. p. 64.
1 Orme, , vol. i. p. 64.Google Scholar
2 Pillai, Ranga's Diary, vol. ii. p. 113.Google Scholar
1 Pillai, Ranga's Diary, vol. ii. p. 121.Google Scholar
2 This was the major form of salute, and was accorded only to officials of high degree. It still exists in the French army.
3 Pillai, Ranga's Diary, vol. ii. p. 223.Google Scholar
1 Pillai, Ranga's Diary, vol. ii. p. 128.Google Scholar
1 Pillai, Ranga's Diary, vol. ii. p. 166.Google Scholar
1 Orme states: ‘They proceeded to Bengal; for the 60-gun ship was now so leaky, that it was feared the shock of firing her own cannon would sink her if she should be brought into an engagement.’—Vol. i. p. 67.Google Scholar
1 Despatch from David, Fort St., 10 17, 1746.Google Scholar
1 Pillai, Ranga's Diary, vol. ii. p. 233.Google Scholar
1 Grose states: ‘The Governor and Council settled the price of the ransom with the French Commodores at 1,100,000 pagodas, or 421,666£ sterling.
2 Pillai, Ranga's Diary, vol. ii. p. 291.Google Scholar
1 Pillai, Ranga's Diary, vol. ii. p. 292.Google Scholar
1 MM. d'Esprémesnil, Bonneau, Desforges, and Paradis, all Pondicherry men.
1 A Voyage to the East Indies, began in 1750, with Observations continued till 1764, by Grose, John Henry (second edition), vol. ii. p. xxi.Google Scholar
1 A Letter to A Proprietor of the East India Company. London: Printed for T. Osborne in Grays Inn, MDCCL.
1 Only a bill of exchange for 3,000 pagodas.
1 ‘To Mr. Morse … a Bond for Pagodas 10,000
Mr. Salomons … ditto 40,000
Mess. Jones and Moses … ditto 15,000
Mr. Heyman … ditto 10,000
Mess. Edw. and Jos. Fowke … ditto 5,400
Mr. Peter Baillieu … ditto 5,000
The Church Stock … ditto 2,000
The Mayor's Court* … ditto 2,000.’
* Mr. Monson made a mistake; the Mayor's Court lent 4,368 pagodas, and he omitted the bonds for smaller sums.
1 Orme writes: ‘His knowledge in mechanics rendered him capable of building a ship from the keel: his skill in navigation of conducting him to any part of the globe: and his courage, of defending him against an equal force. In the conduct of an expedition he superintended all the details of the service, without being perplexed either with the variety or number of them. His plans were simple, his orders precise, and both the best adapted to the service in which he was engaged. His application was incessant; and difficulties served only to heighten his activities, which always gave the example of zeal to those he commanded.’ —Orme, , vol. i. p. 73.Google Scholar
