British Empire Without India

Sep 2015
1,676
England
#71
The Portuguese started to bring in Indian fabrics into Europe since 1498 when Vasco da Gama first arrived in India. They had the monopoly until British and Dutch EICs cut into their trade in 1600 and 1602 respectively.

The Fabric of India: A Global Trade - Victoria and Albert Museum
Exactly. People at the V&A talking nonsense, on behalf of people who prefer to live a lie, in short. All entirely ludicrous and subsequent generations will look back in this era with sadness, embarrassment and shame.

'Over the following 250 years huge quantities of luxury muslins and chintzes were imported alongside inexpensive handkerchiefs, ginghams and calicos – often at the cost of the exploitation of Indian weavers. Indian textiles designed to suit western tastes overwhelmed European, especially British, textile manufacturing until the Industrial Revolution.'

Either or, but can't be both, unless you have lost your mind/critical faculties.

It can also be the first bold element above, if the facts of the matter/reality is the last, but not by the last. If it is not the last, the first can still be the case?

All quite simply, utter nonsense - and for what?

Since it is utter nonsense it will command/attract nil points of respect, niet, no nummer, nein, nout.
It is moronic, idiotic, and serving no sensible purpose. What normal average Indian person will be carried away by such an obvious lie. As if their sense of self-respect in this world needs some artificial enhancement, that they themselves will have to agree to, knowingly. And knowing it is nonsense from whence does/can an actual sense of self-respect from these statements emanate from?

When something is just like a con: looks like it, talks like it, acts like it; it's what it is.

Is it flattery through a sort of imagined (future) servile subordination? (does that sound civilised?), does the V&A have to? Do they feel like they have to?

Do they think that Indian people generally can't cope as well as they might, that the less well-off might experience feelings of resentment, or feel inadequate, about their own nations story/history, and in contrast to other histories, and their place generally in the history of the human race?

This is all of a piece: it is just another version of condescension. Sociableness, being civilised, is one thing, but offering people a lie to live with, is simply another, including if transitory.
 

M.S. Islam

Ad Honorem
Jul 2012
3,111
Dhaka
#72
Okay. That 250 years spanned over two periods- first 150 years (c. 1600-1750s) was normal trade that overwhelmed European, especially British, textile manufacturing. The next 100 years referred to post-colonial era that was done at the cost of the exploitation of Indian weavers.
 
Last edited:

Similar History Discussions