The Chaos of Empire - The British Raj and the Conquest of India (Jon Wilson, 2016)

(504 pp)

Another recent book reviewing the history of the Brits in India.  As with this book (but in a different way), the author looks to challenge the view that Britain provided order if not enlightenment to significant benefit for India.  Author instead seeks to show that the British project was "rooted far more in violence than virtue, far more in chaos than in control."

Which seems right . . . but somehow the author seems to strain a bit too hard to make the point, constantly tossing in loaded words.

Still, this was useful in filling in more pieces of the puzzle.

A few things I noted:

1.  I didn't read this for a geography lesson, but the author had a comprehensible way of describing the country's geography and physical features in big-picture terms.  Including why that strip along the southwest coast is so different.

2.  Useful description of the incremental approach by which the British exerted control over various portions of the country.  Opportunistic not planned.  Business concerns not "good governance."  Widely varying structures (fortified ports from the 1600s; Clive's eastern India territories; Mysore/Marathas collaboration; "cantonments" in native states); never brought together effectively.

3.  I liked the discussion of the governance structures that preceded the Brits.  India was a sophisticated place where things worked reasonably well even if Mughals were in decline.  The story line has been that India needed the Brits to oversee the anarchic (backward) locals, but that seems to be mostly a story.  Brits mostly succeeded in breaking the old governance patterns without adequate replacement. 

4.  And many local bonds broke as new land policies etc. were pursued.  Of course that may have happened with or without the Brits.  Interesting idea that religious affiliation may have intensified because so many other bonds broke down; the idea is cited in Bengal/Calcutta breakdowns in the run-up to WWII (and the Partition violence; unaffiliated males migrate and cluster.

5.  Pretty much no discussion of caste.

6.  Discussing the thin overlay of Brit authority; but for many influential Indians the Brits were a source of order (profit) given that other structures were no longer operative, so there were plenty of locals willing to support the Brits.

7.  The dramatic effect of 1857 ("mutiny" or "rebellion" depending on one's perspective).  Delhi pretty much starts over.

8.  Brits managing to avoid socializing with or otherwise getting to know Indians.  Kind of weird.

9.  Robert Clive - perhaps the best opportunist on the scene.