Sindh under British rule
This is a collection of articles archived for the excellence of their content. Readers will be able to edit existing articles and post new articles directly |
Sindh under British rule
By Shaikh Aziz
Subjugation of a sovereign country is a deplorable act and must be condemned by all freedom-loving forces. The occupation of Sindh by the British in 1843, using its resources was not opposed only by the ousted rulers but the occupiers themselves. The British had been planning it much before its actual annexation on February 17, 1943, and finally sealing its fate on March 24. Their aims and objective, as recorded by historians, were to get an access to warm waters and central Asia on the pretext of stopping the expansionist policies of Czarist powers through Afghanistan, and expand their empire as far as they could.
The British, in their later writings, confessed that Sindh’s annexation was needed to control the whole Indian subcontinent, for which they required a gateway to sea by developing Karachi as the third largest port of India, and not to rely on Kolkatta (Calcutta) and Mumbai (Bombay) only. The capture of Sindh was also considered vital as the Britishers wanted to rule the rest of Indian subcontinent. They managed things in a manner that they siphoned 1,000 million sterling pounds from India during the next 90 years, besides constantly plundering its resources, depriving the people of its cultural wealth through their presence, and financing the two World Wars they fought.
But many feel that it was a blessing in disguise. Not compromising the sacrifices the people of Sindh had to make, Sindh would have been a changed place had the Britishers not taken it over. Keeping the Sindh of Talpurs (1781-1843) and Kalhora (1699-1781) rulers in view – their works for the welfare of people, their foreign trade, and law and order – one cannot but think that Sindh would have still been living in the mediaeval period, in the clutches of feudal lords and chained in personal jails.
Talpurs inherited the Sindh setup from Kalhoras, whose 82-year rule was spent in quelling internal strife, silencing the opposition and trying to save their rule from one aggressor or another. The internal feuds were of such magnitude that they had to pacify various tribes either by granting jagirs or favours. They did not introduce a proper educational system. Their period corresponded to the early industrial revolution. The businessmen traded with the outside world which benefited the Sindh treasury. But in the absence of planning, no effort was made to derive any advantage from this.
When the Talpurs ruled Sindh, the fruits of industrial growth had been introduced to parts of India, including setting up of the printing press and newspaper, giving birth to the dissemination of knowledge at a faster pace. During the Talpur era books were either imported from India or got published from there. Even the Sindhi language had eight scripts and no effort was made to get a unified script. Some canals from Indus were dug to flow at the natural level and in case of inundation there was no proper method to protect people and crops, while during winter the higher lands would go without vegetation, sometimes causing droughts. This also resulted in migrations.
People were highly taxed and the money went to the ruling families and used at their discretion. The only education was given by the mullahs at their seminaries, assisted by villagers and noble men. No hospitals existed and private hakims ran dispensaries based on herbal medicines. Epidemics were rampant causing large number of avoidable deaths. The modes of communication were traditional.
The system of governance suffered from disciplinary faults of every kind. This is why today our research scholars do not find a dependable record of what happened 200 years ago. Only a few manuscripts of religious nature made it into safe hands and were preserved in personal libraries of learned people who could afford them.
The British, who had thought of using the Indus course during Kalhora period, undertook a survey of Sindh and decided to bring changes in the infrastructure at an opportune time. In doing so they wanted to earn the good wishes of the people. After annexation, they gave a unified script to Sindhi language, made it the official language, reformed the educational system, improved communication, introduced a railway system 17 years after annexation, and brought printing press to the region.
They first surveyed the country and classified its land according to its productivity. For the purpose of harnessing Indus water, they established a Canal Department in 1844. They prepared a revenue record, evolved a system that could be maintained, set up a record of rights to make proper use of land; introduced a judicial system; established a police organisation; and introduced social reforms. Foremost importance was given to the establishment of a seaport connected with road works and rail.
The next priority was an irrigation system and bringing millions of acres of virgin land under cultivation. Though opposed by Punjab, the British administration in Sindh got a loan for Sukkur Barrage after a long battle with the British parliament and made the largest canal irrigation system operational by 1931, bringing eight million acres under cultivation in the first instance. An irrigation plan to take water to Thar desert was also planned along with more projects but time did not allow them to implement it all.
The British came with deceit and they knew what their goal was. For instance, they wanted Karachi as the backbone for their economic activity in the subcontinent. They had perceived the growth of Karachi 164 years ago and when in 1880s markets, roads, schools and other amenities were being added, the planners had a picture of what the future city would look like. The main arteries now serving a population of over 15 million were built when the city had a population of less than 100,000 people, and growth was so tremendous that in 1933 the city was elevated to the status of a municipal corporation with an aerodrome established in 1924.
The rest of Sindh, where majority of the population lives on agriculture, owes its present status to the canal irrigation network, an effective education and social services system the British rulers perceived and implemented. Had the British not ‘taken over’ Sindh, democracy might have come, but it is difficult to imagine when and at what cost. Our previous rulers had no perception of public welfare, and in the absence of education and effective mode of communication there was no awareness among the people to demand democracy or end to personal rule.
The presence of alien rule shaped the sense of freedom among us. The leaders could visualise what the future would bring, thus the capitalist class thought it better to lead the freedom movement so that their interests could remain protected. Rendering large-scale sacrifices, we attained both freedom and democracy. What happened after Independence is a matter of academic discussion.
Sindh under Soomra rule
THE literary conference on ‘Soomra period in Sindh’, organised by the Sindhi department of Karachi University, proceedings of which were reported in Dawn (Nov 25), is a welcome step towards understanding history of Sindh. The period the Soomra dynasty ruled Sindh undoubtedly was an epoch as pointed out by the learned speakers.
However, Elahi Bukhsh Soomro, a scion of the above lineage, challenged the commonly-accepted origin of Soomras, saying it was generally believed that the Soomros were Hindu Rajputs. However it was yet to be established whether they were native Hindus of Rajput stock or their ancestors came from Arabian peninsula or elsewhere. “History has to prove all this”, he further said.
According to the Chronological Dictionary of Sindh from geological times to AD 1539, a magnum opus (written/edited by renowned scholar M. H. Panhwar), which is based on the authority of various histories, Soomras were local ethnic group of Rjaput Hindu origin. They were initially converted to Ismaili sect under the infulence of missionaries sent by Fatmid Caliphs of Egypt, Imam Zahir and Mustansir.
They subsequently acquired great influence and power by inter-marrying with local Arab landowners. They took control of Sindh from the last Hubari governor, Ali Bin, in AD 1011. However, they were found still practising a lot of Hindu customs in 1471 when Mahmud of Begra tried to convert them to Sunnism.
The few historians who traced their ancestry to Arbas, however, have, no significantly dependable evidence to prove their hypothesis. Mirza Qalech Beg, a great scholar, on authority of Tuhfat-ul-kiram (written in 18th century) regards those of Arab stock belonging to Samarra, a city of the present-day Iraq, who migrated to Sindh in the days of Caliph Mamun Abbasi in the 8th century.
This presupposition, simply based on similarity of the name of the tribe with the city, therefore, appears to be far-fetched. The city of Samarra, originally named Surra Man Raa (he who sees it is delighted), was built by Caliph al-Mustasim (833-47), apropos of Encyclopedia of Islam, volume VIII. Caliph al-Mustasim left Baghdad because his regiment of Central Asian Turks, whom he preferred over Arab soldiers, could not reconcile with the latter. He, therefore, built a new capital at a distance of 90 miles from Baghdad to enjoy more autonomy from the Byzantine politics of the old capital.
Thus the city of Samarra was not only constructed much afterward than the purported time of migration of the tribe but the original name of the city also did not match with the name of the tribe.
Accordingly, most historia are in agreement now that the Soomra clan was made up of the native Hindu Rajputs who accepted Islam in the early days of the Arab rule which even their indigenous names such as Bhungar, Doda, Punhun, Khinrah, Chanesar and Hamir substantially corroborate. Besides, when Mahmud Ghaznavi attacked Multan and Utch and, thereafter, Sindh, Ismailis who followed the Fatmid Caliph and not Abbasids were masters of Sindh.
The correspondence between Sumrah, progenitor of the tribe, and Fatmid Imams referred by a prominent historian of Sindh, Rahimdad Khan Moulai Shidae, in “Janat al-Sindh, moreover is sufficient evidence to clear the mist.
MANZOOR H. KURESHI Karachi
