Blue Blood-y Buggers
For the last several years the media, specially the print media has been rather shamelessly lionising the erstwhile Indian royalty. So one is treated to pictures of palaces, stories of riches and glory and images of bejeweled and obese men and women.
So what is my take on this .? Here it is
At the time of independence, India was one of the poorest countries in the world. While one can lay some of the blame at the doorstep of the British, we must remember that in even when India became independent, there were some 250 plus "princely states" and kingdoms, ruled by kings of various degrees of importance and a uniform degree of dereliction of duty to their people. So this poverty was the outcome of centuries of exploitation and misrule. The palaces that one sees in glorious full colour reproduction were built while the people toiled and spent lives in darkness. While the kings in full regalia attended the Delhi durbar of Queen Victoria, or holidayed in the south of France, their subjects were starving to death. They shamelessly added to their coffers and built magnificent palaces while doing nothing for the public. And this mindless and unpardonable neglect of duty went on for several hundred years. Only the other day on some TV channel there was a documentary about a famous necklace owned by the Maharaja of Patiala. Among other things, it was recorded , that when he died he left behind 80 plus children from 20 or so wives. This king was so f**_king busy, he could never have had time for any governance.
Finally, to add legendary insult to historical injury, some of the dynasties have claimed descent from Rama and some from Krishna.
Then came Independence, and at least some good sense prevailed. Or perhaps they made a virtue of an inescapable necessity. Barring a few exceptions (the most infamous being the Nizam of Hyderabad), the kingdoms agreed to join the Indian union. But they retained some of the privileges and properties and were given generous pensions by the government. In the time of Indira Gandhi's government, she abolished the Privy Purse and the pensions and the 'kings" squealed like indignant school children. They claimed that they had given "their own" property to the government and now they had been betrayed. How ridiculous. They should have been glad they were not guillotined as happened in the French Revolution.
In the years that went by, some of them joined political parties, but very few rose to any prominence. It was clear that the masses of India had had enough of them and did not want them back in power even if through election. Most of the rest sat around for some 20 years reminiscing the past and blaming fate. The Mysore ex-king kept jumping form party to party (an unusual case of party-hopping !!) , the favourite of the moment being the one that he perceived would help him get back his palaces. He even turned designer, hold your breath, designing of all the things, saris !!!
In conclusion, the only positive things that can be said about them are that some (very few) were good rulers and actually worked for the public good. And their myopic vision and constant internal bickering and fighting gave the British a chance to establish control over India. Without this , we wouldn't have been an independent country.
For the last several years the media, specially the print media has been rather shamelessly lionising the erstwhile Indian royalty. So one is treated to pictures of palaces, stories of riches and glory and images of bejeweled and obese men and women.
So what is my take on this .? Here it is
At the time of independence, India was one of the poorest countries in the world. While one can lay some of the blame at the doorstep of the British, we must remember that in even when India became independent, there were some 250 plus "princely states" and kingdoms, ruled by kings of various degrees of importance and a uniform degree of dereliction of duty to their people. So this poverty was the outcome of centuries of exploitation and misrule. The palaces that one sees in glorious full colour reproduction were built while the people toiled and spent lives in darkness. While the kings in full regalia attended the Delhi durbar of Queen Victoria, or holidayed in the south of France, their subjects were starving to death. They shamelessly added to their coffers and built magnificent palaces while doing nothing for the public. And this mindless and unpardonable neglect of duty went on for several hundred years. Only the other day on some TV channel there was a documentary about a famous necklace owned by the Maharaja of Patiala. Among other things, it was recorded , that when he died he left behind 80 plus children from 20 or so wives. This king was so f**_king busy, he could never have had time for any governance.
Finally, to add legendary insult to historical injury, some of the dynasties have claimed descent from Rama and some from Krishna.
Then came Independence, and at least some good sense prevailed. Or perhaps they made a virtue of an inescapable necessity. Barring a few exceptions (the most infamous being the Nizam of Hyderabad), the kingdoms agreed to join the Indian union. But they retained some of the privileges and properties and were given generous pensions by the government. In the time of Indira Gandhi's government, she abolished the Privy Purse and the pensions and the 'kings" squealed like indignant school children. They claimed that they had given "their own" property to the government and now they had been betrayed. How ridiculous. They should have been glad they were not guillotined as happened in the French Revolution.
In the years that went by, some of them joined political parties, but very few rose to any prominence. It was clear that the masses of India had had enough of them and did not want them back in power even if through election. Most of the rest sat around for some 20 years reminiscing the past and blaming fate. The Mysore ex-king kept jumping form party to party (an unusual case of party-hopping !!) , the favourite of the moment being the one that he perceived would help him get back his palaces. He even turned designer, hold your breath, designing of all the things, saris !!!
In conclusion, the only positive things that can be said about them are that some (very few) were good rulers and actually worked for the public good. And their myopic vision and constant internal bickering and fighting gave the British a chance to establish control over India. Without this , we wouldn't have been an independent country.
No comments:
Post a Comment