SCIENCE AND THE RAJ Deepak Kumar Oxford University Press
AT A time when Western societies were still in a primitive state of development, the Indus valley civilisation had evolved sophisticated systems for drainage, water supply and urban planning. Centuries later, India continued to be in the forefront of astronomy, metallurgy, medicine, mathematics and a host of other fields of science and technology. Why, then,, do we now lag so far behind the Western world in science and technology? Many observers attribute this - as they do most other ills - to "colonial rule". How true is this? Some answers come from Deepak Kumar: in Science and the Raj, he examines the status and development of science in India in the context of colonisation, in the period 1857 to 1905.
In a thoroughly researched book, Deepak Kumar bases his analysis on examining the links of any effects with causes related to colonisation and to conscious colonial policy. He considers "colonial science to be inextricably woven into the whole fabric of colonialism" and that "colonial scientists... had to perform a dual role - to serve the colonial state and to serve science".
A review of the work done in a variety of fields, ranging from medicine to meteorology and from geology to zoology, are described. Kumar traces the developments in these fields, establishing the thesis that much of the work was driven by the economic interests of the imperial power.
Efforts by Indian scientists, educationists and others to "respond" to the initiatives and actions of the colonial power are dealt with. Private donations for science were forthcoming, but were often motivated by the prospects of getting thereby recognition (even a "title") from the British, or were limited to helping specific castes.
In contrast, J N Tata's proposal (made in 1898) for a big investment in scientific research could not fructify. The British seemed to be suspicious and uneasy with the proposal and did not support it.
Finally, Kumar attempts to drive home the point of colonial science being driven by colonial (imperial) needs. For example, he notes that "colonial scientists were now expected to work for the consolidation of the empire - consolidation through organised economic exploitation."
While the British did set up many institutions for science/technology education, these seem to have been linked to immediate and pearby needs (e.g., Roorkee Engineering College and the Ganges canal). As a result, as Kumar points out, Roorkee, after over 100 years ofexistence, had (in 1947) 3 professors, 6 assistant professors and 2 lecturers. In contrast, Tokyo Engineering college, established much later than Roorkee, bad in 1903 a staff of 24 professors, 24 assistant professors and 22 lecturers.
Kumar has been able to provide insights into the functioning of the "scientocracy" of the time by delving into notes and correspondence that lie buried in files. While there are many interesting suggestions and events, the 11 research paper" style of the report is likely to deter many lay readers. However, for professionals working in the field of history of science or science policy, as also for those with an interest inthese subjects, the book would be of great interest.
The book certainly represents a major effort to better understand the dynamics of the interaction between colonial imperatives and science in an interesting period of Indian history.
We are a voice to you; you have been a support to us. Together we build journalism that is independent, credible and fearless. You can further help us by making a donation. This will mean a lot for our ability to bring you news, perspectives and analysis from the ground so that we can make change together.
.png)