Our Man in Ajmer
literaryreview.co.uk
Our Man in Ajmer
1–10 of 34 posts
Re: Our Man in Ajmer
#2> …complex game of political chess being played by Nur Jahan with her rival and stepson, Shah Jahan
For some context, Shah Jahan is best known outside India as the king who commissioned and spent his fortune on the Taj Mahal.
The description in the review drives home how when the British arrived, India was about a third of world GDP, Britain, not so much.
Re: Our Man in Ajmer
#3This is one of those reviews that is so well-executed that I almost don't want to read the actual book because it may not actually live up to the quality of the review.
Re: Our Man in Ajmer
#4This is one of those reviews that is so well-executed that I almost don't want to read the actual book because it may not actually live up to the quality of the review.
I had the same feeling, the review is fantastic!
Re: Our Man in Ajmer
#5> …complex game of political chess being played by Nur Jahan with her rival and stepson, Shah Jahan For some context, Shah Jahan is best known outside India as the king who commissioned and spent his fortune on the Taj Mahal. The description in the review drives home how when the British arrived, India was about a third of world GDP, Britain, not so much.
> The description in the review drives home how when the British arrived, India was about a third of world GDP, Britain, not so much.
India's GDP share was much higher before the invading Mughal invasion started so they were part of the problem. See Angus Madison's historical list of the ten largest countries by GDP.
Re: Our Man in Ajmer
#6I am from Ajmer, India. Good to see my city name here. :)
Re: Our Man in Ajmer
#7> …complex game of political chess being played by Nur Jahan with her rival and stepson, Shah Jahan For some context, Shah Jahan is best known outside India as the king who commissioned and spent his fortune on the Taj Mahal. The description in the review drives home how when the British arrived, India was about a third of world GDP, Britain, not so much.
Shah Jahan also commissioned the Red Fort, still the nominal seat of Indian power - the site of all presidential addresses on Independence Day.
Re: Our Man in Ajmer
#8I don't know when and how I'll ever stop being salty about the colonial powers that absolutely looted my country.
Re: Our Man in Ajmer
#9> …complex game of political chess being played by Nur Jahan with her rival and stepson, Shah Jahan For some context, Shah Jahan is best known outside India as the king who commissioned and spent his fortune on the Taj Mahal. The description in the review drives home how when the British arrived, India was about a third of world GDP, Britain, not so much.
Shah Jahan also commissioned the Red Fort, still the nominal seat of Indian power - the site of all presidential addresses on Independence Day.
The Prime Minister makes the speech. Plus nobody would regard the Red Fort as the nominal seat of Indian Power. The vast majority of Indians would only think of the fort as the site of the Prime Minister's speech, if at all.
Re: Our Man in Ajmer
#10> …complex game of political chess being played by Nur Jahan with her rival and stepson, Shah Jahan For some context, Shah Jahan is best known outside India as the king who commissioned and spent his fortune on the Taj Mahal. The description in the review drives home how when the British arrived, India was about a third of world GDP, Britain, not so much.
I've posted this elsewhere, but not only is historical GDP hard to measure, if we are going by consumer spending, societies that developed Capitalism in the 18th and 19th centuries would dwarf the GDP of every other society in the world. One reason that the British were so successful in colonizing other countries is that the scale of production became so vast, crops so cheap, that food prices shot down and population began to boom: they literally had to export people.
And for all that, London, at the height of British power, had pollution so bad that it was unlivable, in the colder months the smog could choke you out it was so dense. Because they had people living in such close conditions, hygiene was non-existent, and only the rich were able to avoid the putrid underbelly of the working-class city. Well, I happen to know of some other cities with booming populations at the beginnings of industrial capitalism that may have the same problems...I don't live in India myself, but I would say most Indians would be happy if the GDP was cut in half, if they could have clean air and drinking water. But if its all about GDP, then I guess the British are in many ways responsible for lowering the overall "GDP" of 18th century South Asian countries (there was no India until the British showed up, and even before partition it was just called "Hindustan"). But the great industries of India today, and the conditions of working people, that has nothing to do with the British, even though it matters far more than how some Raj lived 300 years ago.