Sir William Jones and the British Attitudes towards India

S. N. Mukherjee

doi:10.1017/S0035869X00122683

Sir William Jones and the British Attitudes towards India

Published online by Cambridge University Press: 15 March 2011

S. N. Mukherjee

Article contents

Extract
References

Get access

Rights & Permissions

Extract

James Mill in his efforts to belittle the achievements of the Hindus took Jones as his chief antagonist; he tried to show how the Orientalist suffered from illusions about the Hindus and tended to magnify their importance without having any idea of what the term civilization meant. He said that Jones's description of the life of the Arabs and Hindus far surpassed the “rhapsodies of Rousseau on the happiness and virtue of savage life”. To Mill, Jones was a misguided man who failed to grasp the problems of India; his reason gave way to the romantic fascination of the East and so in his judgment on India he was uncritical. Ever since the first publication of Mill's work in 1817 the history of the British policy in India had been presented as if it were a struggle between Jones and Mill, the romantic versus the rationalist. This theme was developed in a recent conference on Indian historiography. Elsewhere Jones is described as a medievalist. In fact most of these writers presented Jones as James Mill had depicted him, even though their sympathies may have been with him.

Type: Articles
Information: Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society , Volume 96 , Issue 1 , January 1964 , pp. 37 - 47

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0035869X00122683 [Opens in a new window]
Copyright: Copyright © The Royal Asiatic Society 1964

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

^{page 37 note 1} Mill, James. The history of British India, Vol. 2, p. 138 (London, 1826)Google Scholar.

^{page 37 note 2} Op. cit., pp. 139–140.

^{page 37 note 3} Philips, C. H. (ed.) Historians of India, Pakistan and Ceylon, pp. 217–229 (London, 1961)Google Scholar.

^{page 37 note 4} Bearce, G. D.British attitudes towards India, pp. 20–24. (O.U.P. London, 1961.)Google Scholar

^{page 37 note 5} Reichwein, A.China and Europe: Intellectual and artistic contacts in the eighteenth century, pp. 151–52 (trans. Powell, J. P.) (London, 1926)Google Scholar.

^{page 38 note 1} Jones, Sir William. Poems consisting chiefly of translations of Asiatick languages, p. 174 (Oxford, 1772)Google Scholar.

^{page 38 note 2} Jones, Sir William. Moallakat or seven Arabian poets in The Works of Sir William Jones, Vol. 10, p. 8 (London, 1807)Google Scholar.

^{page 38 note 3} Preface. Sir William Jones's poems. Selected by Benthall, J. (Cambridge, 1961)Google Scholar.

^{page 38 note 4} I use the phrase in the same way as Collingwood has used it. See Collingwood, R. G.The idea of history, pp. 76–78 (Oxford, 1961)Google Scholar.

^{page 38 note 5} Jones, Sir William. The history of the life of Nader Shah. Works. Vol. 12, p. 434Google Scholar.

The history of Nader Shah was published in London in 1773; it was based on Mirza Mahdi's Tārīkh-i-Nāḍirī, of which Jones published a verbal French translation in 1770.

^{page 38 note 6} A first indication of a new trend in Jones's historical ideas is to be found in the memorandum which he wrote during his journey to India. Here for the first time he showed his interest in such problems as the confirmation of the tradition of the Deluge and the early history of India. Perhaps the study of Halhed's Gentoo Laws, which starts with the Hindu idea of creation, stimulated his interest in comparing the Hindu mythology with the Biblical tradition. See Shore, J., Memoirs of the life, writings and correspondence of Sir W. Jones, p. 228 (London, 1804)Google Scholar. Cf. “On the origin and families of nations.” Asiatick Researches (As.R.) Vol. III, pp. 479–480.

^{page 39 note 1} Letter to Lady Georgiana 24.10.1791. Spencer papers, Althorp. Lady Georgiana was the mother of George John, the second Earl Spencer, who was William Jones's pupil and life-long friend.

^{page 39 note 2} Jones, Sir William “On Asiatick History civil and natural”. As.R. Vol. IV, p. 13Google Scholar.

^{page 39 note 3} Letter to Charles Chapman 26.4.1784 as published in Shore, J., Memoirs p. 247Google Scholar.

^{page 39 note 4} Letter to George John. 22.7.1787. Spencer papers, Althorp.

^{page 40 note 1} Letter to George John. 5.8.1789.

^{page 40 note 2} Letters to Joseph Banks. 25.2.1788 and 24.9.1788. In the collection of copies of the correspondence of Sir Joseph Banks made for Dawson Turner (D.T.C.) Vol. 6, 19–20 ff. and 78. f.

^{page 40 note 3} Letter to George John. 12.8.1787. Spencer papers.

^{page 40 note 4} Ibid.

^{page 40 note 5} Letter to Lady Georgiana. 8.10.1787. Spencer papers.

^{page 40 note 6} Jones, Sir William. Sacontala or the fatal ring, an Indian drama by Calidas, translated from the original Sanscrit and Pracrit, p. 1 (Calcutta, 1789)Google Scholar. Cf. Père Pons to Père Halde. 23.11.1740 as published in Lettres édifiantes. Vol. XIV, p. 72 (Paris, 1781)Google Scholar.

^{page 41 note 1} Sacontala, p. II.

^{page 41 note 2} Op. cit., pp. II–III.

^{page 41 note 3} Letter to George John. 4.9.1787. Spencer papers.

The story that Jones sent to George John was a garbled version of the drama. According to Jones's version, Śakuntalā was living with the king in his palace when Durvāsā visited Duṣyanta, the King, and caused the long separation of the couple.

^{page 41 note 4} The catalogue of the library of the late Sir William Jones. No. 477 (London, 1831)Google Scholar.

^{page 41 note 5} Wilkins, Sir Charles. The Bhagvat Geeta or dialogues of Krishna and Arjoon in eighteen lectures (London, 1785)Google Scholar and The Heetopades of Veeshnoo Sharma (London, 1789)Google Scholar.

^{page 41 note 6} Geeta, p. 7.

^{page 42 note 1} Sacontala, pp. IX–X.

^{page 42 note 2} Op. cit., pp. III–IV.

^{page 42 note 3} Op. cit., p. IX.

^{page 42 note 4} Op. cit., p. VII.

^{page 42 note 5} Pinto, V. de Sola, “Sir William Jones and English literature”. Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies. Vol. XI (1946), p. 687Google Scholar.

^{page 43 note 1} Jones, Sir William. “On the mystical poetry” As.R. Vol. III, p. 183Google Scholar.

^{page 43 note 2} Letter to George John. 23.8.1787. Spencer papers.

^{page 43 note 3} Jones, Sir William. “On the antiguity of the Indian Zodiack.” As.R. Vol. II, p. 289Google Scholar. The term Hindu is used here for what came to be called Indo-European.

^{page 43 note 4} Jones, Sir William. “On the Indian game of chess.” Op. cit., p. 159Google Scholar.

^{page 44 note 1} Letter to George John. 26.8.1787.

^{page 44 note 2} Ibid.

^{page 44 note 3} Ibid.

^{page 44 note 4} Jones, Sir William. “On the philosophy of the Asiaticks.” As.R. Vol. IV, pp. 76–78Google Scholar.

^{page 44 note 5} Op. cit., p. 174.

^{page 45 note 1} Letter to George John. 2.9.1787. Spencer papers.

^{page 45 note 2} Letter to George John. 4.9.1787. Spencer papers.

^{page 45 note 3} “As to the works of the Greeks I perfectly agree with you and think every line of them to be a gem of exquisite beauty but I consider the Romans as bright only with borrowed rays, . . . The Hindus and Arabs are perfectly original and to my taste (which can be no more a rule for others than my smell) their compositions are sublime and beautiful in a high degree.” Letter to Robert Orme 12.10.1786 N. L. W., c 14005 (National Library of Wales MS.). This was written in reply to Robert Orme's claim that the Greek literature was superior to that of the Indians, “I am convinced that the Indian mythology can never furnish ideas of such fine taste as the genius of the Greeks have improved and invented for theirs”. R.O. to W.J. 11.3.1786, Orme Collections 214.5. 46 f.

^{page 45 note 4} Jones, Sir William. “The second discourse.” As.R. Vol. I, p. 407Google Scholar.

^{page 45 note 5} Op. cit., p. 405.

^{page 45 note 6} Jones, Sir William “On Asiatick History.” As.R. Vol. IV, pp. 7–8Google Scholar.

^{page 46 note 1} Britain Discovered as published in Shore, J., Memoirs pp. 416–489Google Scholar.

^{page 46 note 2} Jones, Sir William. Al Sirajiyyah: or the Mohamedan Law of inheritance; with a commentary, pp. IX–XI (Calcutta, 1792)Google Scholar.

^{page 46 note 3} Op. cit., p. XII. His theory of the Indian system of law and government could be traced in his translation of Manu, Books VII, VIII, and IX. See his Institutes of Hindu law or ordinances of Manu, p. 194, cf. Mill, J., The history of British India, Vol. I, p. 260Google Scholar.

^{page 46 note 4} Al Sirajiyya, p. XIII.

^{page 47 note 1} Letter to Lady Georgiana. 24.10.1791. Spencer papers.

^{page 47 note 2} Derrett, J. D. M. “Sanskrit legal treatises compiled at the instances of the British”, Z.F.vergleichende Rechtswissenschaft, pp. 109–112 (Stuttgart, 1961)Google Scholar.

^{page 47 note 3} Hobsbawm, E. J., Age of Revolution, p. 139Google Scholar, cf. Misra, B. B.Indian Middle Classes, pp. 10–17Google Scholar.

^{page 47 note 4} Walpole, Horace to Robertson, William. 26.6.1791. Correspondence (ed. Lewis, W. S.), Vol. 15, pp. 211–212Google Scholar.

^{page 47 note 5} Mill, James. History of British India, pp. 56–57Google Scholar.

Article contents

Sir William Jones and the British Attitudes towards India

Extract

Access options

References

Save article to Kindle

Save article to Dropbox

Save article to Google Drive

Reply to: Submit a response

Your details

You have entered the maximum number of contributors

Conflicting interests