Appendix A Chronology of Colonial Period


1498 – Vasco De Gama lands in India via the sea route. During this time there existed an elaborate Indian Ocean economy.

1599 – English East India Company formed

1602 – Dutch East India Company formed.

1658 – French East India Company formed

1707 – Death of Aurangzeb and end of Mughal rule

1785 – Robert Clive in India

1835 – Macaulay plans to civilize the natives so that a class of people is created who think and do exactly like their masters. His words were to this effect: I have traveled across the length and breadth of India and I have not seen one person who is a beggar, who is a thief. Such wealth I have seen in this country, such high moral values, people of such caliber, that I do not think we would ever conquer this country, unless we break the very backbone of this nation, which is her spiritual and cultural heritage, and, therefore, I propose that we replace her old and ancient education system, her culture, for if the Indians think that all that is foreign and English is good and greater than their own, they will lose their self-esteem, their native self culture and they will become what we want them, a truly dominated nation.(Macaulay was the British version of Allauddin Khilji whose goal was similar to break the self esteem and the will of the people)

(Source: The Awakening Ray, Vol. 4 No. 5, And The Gnostic Centre)

The main philosophy was to incrementally indoctrinate the children with principles that are sympathetic to colonizer’s philosophy. Make future generations weak in mind, body and spirit. Avoid teaching children the basic facts about their own history. Teach them that natural aggression is wrong and docile submission is right. Teach them that any basis of a moral foundation, like the principles of religion, is a weakness to be avoided in the name of freedom and also redefine the concept of patriotism to support colonizer’s views.

1853 - Sir Arthur Cunningham was the first to archeologically examine Harappa in 1853 and 1856. Finding some Kushana coins in the site, he attributed the city to the Kushana period (Imam 1966) It is shocking to note that about one hundered miles of the Lahore-Multan railway was ballasted by bricks retrieved from the ruins at Harappa by rapacious railroad contractors; “ No invader of India had ever so ruthlessly and  wantonly destroyed her ancient remains as did the railway contractors in the civilized 19th century ” (Edwin Bryant – Quest for the origins of the vedic culture Page 331-332). This made the Anglo Saxon realize that the Indians have the remains of civilization just like the Mesopotamia. The big plan for India was created to change the course of history of India. The British by this time were already doing research on all the other ancient civilization such as Egypt, Mesopotamia etc

1857 – First War of independence- the sepoy mutiny made the British aware that a united India would be disastrous for their rule in the subcontinent. This was when they laid the groundwork for a divide and rule policy for the Indian sub-continent. After the war, Whitehall assumed direct responsibility for the administration of India, ending 250 years of rule by the British East India Company. This war changed the resolve of the British towards Indians and made them racist towards the native population. Till then the practice of marriage with the local women was considered normal (especially Punjabis and Muslims) and mixed blood was not frowned upon. After the change in attitude the British made sure that they segregated the native population from themselves and their family and created a class system for privileges and favor. This was also the beginning of the creation of cantonments where the British segregated themselves


1863 – Max Muller proposes the Aryan Invasion Theory – Probably due to the absence of finding any civilization this concocted theory was proposed and it took a life of its own. Since the native version of the history was discarded the Harappan phase of Indian civilization was brushed aside.

1867 - Creation of Deoband Muslim school so that Ashrafs can come closer to the rest of the local Muslim converts and create a united Muslim front against the British. Till then the Ashrafs looked upon  themselves as the higher and the ruling class. Syed Ahmed Khan starts the Aligarh Muslim education center to bring Muslims to the forefront of the European education. Deobandis who were Muslim reformers who setup the first madrassahs for the purpose of training future clerics were not in agreement with the Aligarh School of reformers.

1875 – First seals of Indian civilization found by Sir Alexander Cunningham in 1875(Source: Ancient Civilizations by Hugh Bowden) – This made the Anglo Saxons realize that the Indians have the remains of civilization just like the Mesopotamia. The big plan for India was created to change the course of history of India by influencing the elite class of the Indian society and to shape future generations, control the schools. The British by this time were already doing research on all the other ancient civilization such as Egypt, Mesopotamia etc. They had for the last few centuries already studied the Islamic civilization( the first Arabic chair in the west was set up in 1630s). Indus civilization was not pursued rigorously in case a large section of Indians get nationalistic feelings. The British had committed a great mistake in 1857 by accidentally uniting Moslems and Hindus against them in some areas by their policies. They were more careful in their game after that. However, they saw that the true danger to their dominance were the educated Hindus who were in possession of both Western and traditional Indic knowledge. This was the class that could easily challenge them, as it was still wedded to the Hindu ways and capable of using the power of the newly acquired Western knowledge against the British. Sir John Stratchey (FInance minister 1874): “The existence side by side of these (Hindu and Muslim) hostile creeds is one of the strong points in our political position in India. The better classes of Mohammedans are a source of strength and not weakness. They constitute a comparatively small but an energetic minority of the population whose political interests are identical with ours.” Sir James Caird of Thanjavur, 1879: "there was no class except Brahmins, which was so hostile to the English."

1881 – The first census in British India done. This is a massive project to really classify the largest human group into various classes by their origins and social strata supposedly for benign motive. This has helped the British and later the west to target individual groups for various religious and military purposes. This census also helped the British to map the kinship pattern among various social groups, which they continued to monitor till the 20th century.

1885 – Indian National Congress formed as a tool of the British government to influence the course of the Independence movement and for the emancipation of the suffering Indians. The main reason for forming this organization is to create a platform to dissipate the nationalistic sentiments and to control the nature of the debate and pace of the changes in the political class of the Indians. The political consciousness of the Hindus could be molded and controlled with such platform. The terms of debate between the Hindus and Muslims were also influenced with the help of key people in the party as it evolved in the next 50 years. The main philosophy was to shape the political philosophy, infiltrate the government: Whenever and wherever possible place those sympathetic to your philosophy into office at all levels—the higher, the better—so they can sway the direction of the country within every function of government, promising solutions and benefits for all. In such a way you can tilt legislation toward incrementally increasing the control of and dependency on government—a government that you are shaping.

1906 - split of Bengal during The Great Game at the height of rivalry between the Russians and the British in the Eurasian landmass. The British needed an ally who would be able to resist the thrust of the Tsars. Russian expansion started in 1582 and continued to central Asia and the pacific till late 1700s. The next target of the Russians was Tibet and British were worried about Tibet coming under the influence of Russia. The long-term plan was to keep India under the British dominion for the next 500 years and was expressed in commonwealth speeches in early 1900-1910.

1911 – Capital shifts from Calcutta to New Delhi. This was to reduce the increasing demands for independence in the enlightened Bengal, which had the most interaction with the west. This was a diversion so that the seat of power should be perceived similar to the Mughal Empire. This also broke the deep intellectual nationalist discourse in Bengal and weakened it. The ultimate aim is to make sure that the    Muslims would also start seeing a Muslim homeland in Indian sub-continent.

1917 – First World War. Fall of Ottoman Empire and creation of Middle Eastern states under the direct influence of the British. British looked at the Muslims of the Middle East and the Muslims of the India as one and built relationship with the Arabs and the ashrafs of the sub-continent. The British oust the Ottomans from Jerusalem and Baghdad; in the Balfour Declaration, Britain declares its support for the  establishment of a 'national home for the Jewish people' in Palestine. In return, the unwritten agreement with the Arabs is the creation of a Muslim homeland in the Indian sub-continent.

1920s - Discovery of MohenjoDaro, Harrapa – final confirmation of the existence and history of Indian civilization. This may have made the British to push through the plans for division of India.

1930 – Plans to divide the country hatched when the Middle East was secure after the First World War and Saudi Arabia was already a state. The assessment of the colonial powers was that the history of the natives has been discovered with archeology and they would find their true belonging. It would be difficult to keep     the country colonized for a long time.

1935 - The GOVERNMENT OF INDIA ACT passed by the British parliament. Burma and Aden were separated from India. British India was divided into 11 provinces, each under an appointed governor and an  appointed executive council. Each province was to have an elected legislature (bicameral in six provinces and unicameral in five), with a ministry responsible to it. Representation was to be based on the communal award. The provincial governments were to enjoy wide autonomy, though the governors retained certain emergency powers. The ultimate objective was the establishment of an All-India Federation, to include the Indian states as well as the provinces of British India.

1939 – Second World War – British still to recover from the First World War and willing to lessen their burden in the empire.

1940 - Lahore resolution for a separate Muslim homeland. Secretly British were siding with the Muslim League/Ashrafs to create a homeland for them for future collaboration. There is increasing evidence that Lahore resolution was made in that location and time so that the future homeland of the Pakistan will have Punjab as the cultural/political and military center.

1947 – Indian Independence/partition. Creation of Pakistan.

1971 – Split of Pakistan the largest Muslim nation into Pakistan and Bangladesh


Appendix B Chronology of Cold War containment and elimination of communism


1945-1968 – Chaos in US and confusion on containment of USSR. Idealist policy of the US turns to failure in Vietnam.

1968-1989 – long term containment of USSR and communism and propaganda against communism. Nixon and H Kissinger actively took up a realist policy towards the spread of communism and against supporters of USSR which includes India. Long term India policy was created after 1971 war and was accelerated after

1975 Pokhran I atomic test. According to John Pilger: Brzezinski not long ago revealed that on July 3, 1979, unknown to the American public and Congress, President Jimmy Carter secretly authorized $500 million to create an international terrorist movement that would spread Islamic fundamentalism in Central Asia and destabilize the Soviet Union. The CIA called this Operation Cyclone and in the following years poured $4 billion into setting up Islamic training schools in Pakistan (Taliban means student) Zealot were sent to CIA training camps in Virginia-where future Al-Qaeda members were taught sabotage skills- i.e. terrorism. Others were trained in an Islamic school in Brooklyn. In Pakistan, they were trained by British M16 officers and trained by SAS The result quipped Brezinski, was a few stirred up Muslims meaning the Taliban (Pilger 2002) quoted in Afzal Khan 2002. The other target of this operation was India with a similar outcome as the Soviet Union. The Indian strategy was to create sufficient momentum so that a fault line is created first in the border in Kashmir and then wider fault line inside India with the help of minorities. US during the early 70s had the weakest economy compared to the western European countries. It had to increase its deficit to fund the massive defense spending and increase its GDP over the next 25 years to finally become the biggest economy in the world. In the same way they had a plan to contain the soviet empire and get control over most of the countries. in their economy and strategic space. By developing technology and having monopoly US was able to create a large lead over many advanced countries.

For specifically India US made sure that the goodwill which India had with the people of US after the independence was reduced by the late 80s and all India related culture in the world was in the end of the list in popularity.


US 1945 –1968


1957. The Cold War was scarcely a decade old. Samuel Huntington : The Soldier and the State constituted a warning: America's liberal society, Huntington argued, required the protection of a professional military  establishment steeped in conservative realism. In order to keep the peace, military leaders had to take for granted—and anticipate—the "irrationality, weakness, and evil in human nature." Liberals were good at reform, not at national security. "Magnificently varied and creative when limited to domestic issues," Huntington wrote, "liberalism faltered when applied to foreign policy and defense." Foreign policy, he explained, is not about the relationship among individuals living under the rule of law but about the relationship among states and other groups operating in a largely lawless realm. During the Second World War and the decade following it, the United States reached its apogee as a classic nation-state. During the 1960s, as is now clear, America began a slow but unmistakable process of transformation. The signs hardly need belaboring: racial polarity, educational dysfunction, social fragmentation of many and various kinds. William Irwin Thompson, in Passages About Earth: An Exploration of the New Planetary Culture, writes, "The educational system that had worked on the Jews or the Irish could no longer work on the blacks; and when Jewish teachers in New York tried to take black children away from their parents exactly in the way they had been taken from theirs, they were shocked to encounter a violent affirmation of negritude." US perception of Nehru and India quote from Kaplan in The Atlantic: Loy Henderson, a U.S. diplomat, showed that insight time and time again: in the 1930s he was among the first to warn against Stalin; in the late 1940s he was the first to warn against the Soviet threat to the Caucasus and the Aegean; in the early 1950s he was the first to see that the Iranians would one day come to despise us and the first to see through Nehru's idealism and vanity to the anti-Americanism beneath the surface. The Americans for many generations still remember till today the anti-Americanism which is anti-imperialism of Nehru and Menon. Kennan displayed insight when he suggested that if the West held fast, the Soviet Union would eventually implode. Something similar is being tried on India with Jihad. This is the most turbulent period in US history, which created social and demographic change in US population. The liberation movement and civil rights in the 60 created chaos and disorder and directly impacted the foreign policy of US during the cold war. The idealistic phase of the foreign policy was at its peak during this time. Many commentators point to the feeling of US ripping apart due to the chaos created by anti-war protest, scandals, assassination and Cuban missle crisis. The influence of Indian culture , new age movement and eastern mystics and philosophy changed America for ever but was deeply resented by the conservatives and old social order. The deep resentment to this influence among the religious right made   them view India and its culture in a negative way. Some of them actually looked at Indian culture with antipathy combined with Indian support of USSR by Nehru. The conservative right also were against the  culture of defeatism and disorder. The neo-conservatives were born during this time who created an entire culture to overcome the disorder of the 60s and 70s. Nixon probably developed the feeling of hatred against India and its culture which he believed spawned the liberal culture during this time. The Neo-cons came to occupy the top echelons of the Pentagon dept by the early 1990s and were influential in developing the post cold war policies.


US 1971-1992



This period US experienced the ruthless cold war pressure and the US society changed to the external challenges. The leftists and the right wing came together for NSC68 and created a plan to contain and eliminate communism and supporters of communism globally. The climax and sudden end of the cold war, the disintegration of the Soviet Union, the Arab-Israeli wars, the formation and activities of the Palestinian Liberation Organization, the oil crisis, the Egyptian-Israeli peace treaty, the Persian Gulf War, and the Iranian revolution effected American society as never before. India after 1971 war and 1975 was a target of the enormous cold war realist plan. The scope of the plan for India may never be known but the plan put India in a path which could disintegrate the country and eliminate the entire civilization in the long run.  During this period all the culture movement of the 60s and cults, swamis, Buddhism and other new age groups where discouraged and suppressed though popular western media. These were considered influencing the anti-war protests and creating chaos in the society and promoting leftists.

The end of the Vietnam war created bitter memories of the anti-war protests and also the pentagon by the end of 80s was filled with war veterans.. The period after 1980 brought out the new religious right in the main stream and after 1986 there has been a resurgence of the religious right in US. The country became more religious during this period due to the experience with fighting the communist regime.


US 1993-2003


By 1994 the Neo-cons were in control of the house and the religious right of the conservatives in 1994 passed the Religious Bill act which put countries which do not tolerate religious diversities under notice and . They were bitter critics of the flower children who rose to power with Clintons presidency in 1993. The neo conservatives and the compassionate conservatives and moderate conservatives took over the senate and the house by 2000/2002 under GW Bush. Israel is in a position to influence who takes charge of US foreign policy in its neighborhood. This was analogous to a highly valued client will be able to exercise his preference that a certain officer handles his case when dealing with a firm. Given the power of the AIPAC, the entrenched  connections of Israel with the US armaments industry and thence the Pentagon, the presence of people like Wolfowitz in the DOD, it is no surprise. Add to this the oil interest, and it is a foregone conclusion that those who have the ear of GOTUS highest reaches (such as Cheney) will be making the decisions. DOD is clearly on top of SD in the Washington power struggle. SD gets to take charge of second-string areas (from the White House point of view) like South Asia. This is as much a reflection on the relative equality between the lobbying strengths of India and Pakistan in Washington, as compared to the overwhelming power of the Israeli lobby as far as the Middle East is concerned, as anything else.


Appendix C  The Hidden Agenda

Ten reasons why Romila Thapar's meeting with Mahmud of Ghazni at Somnath is historic

By Chandan Mitra

Typical of the leftist view of  the  Muslim invasions is that of Romilla Thapar in her work on Mohammad of Ghazni. Chandan Mitra, the editor of Pioneer summarizes Ms Thapar’s stance in the following column;

Eminent historian Romila Thapar has an agenda and a central character in her authoritative monograph on the high-profile temple at Somnath in Gujarat. But it is an agenda that dare not take its name. And as for the central dramatis persona, she does not even mention him. After regretting the involvement of various Congress leaders, including India's first President Rajendra Prasad, in the rebuilding of the Somnath temple in 1951, Thapar refers to the most recent challenge to the "secular credentials of Indian society". That being the rath yatra organised by the VHP "in association with leaders of the BJP". L.K. Advani, who electrified India with his 1991 campaign and put his party on the road to power by making Hindutva a mainstream ideology, is not named throughout the narrative.


As a historical work, Thapar's scholarship is difficult to fault. She has meticulously studied various accounts of Mahmud of Ghazni's destruction of the temple in the 11th century. She has carried the narrative through to contemporary times, explaining the reasons for the resurgence of Hindu sentiment in the 19th century on this issue, leading to the temple's rebuilding after Independence. The volume, however, is so apparent in its purpose that it can only preach to the converted.

Considering the dwindling band of Marxists and their fellow-travelers in the arena of Indian history (since they don't control university appointments any more), it is doubtful how many would uncork champagne bottles at the publication of this scholastic endeavor. For the general public, the book makes laborious reading. Even secular fundamentalists from a non-history background would not be tempted to persevere through the Byzantine complexities of textual and interpretational rivalries among the Turks, Arabs, Chalukyas, Rajputs, Jainas, Shaivites, colonialists and the Hindu nationalists.

If a sahmat-type organization were to sum up Thapar's treatise in a pamphlet, it would read something like this.

Undeniably, Mahmud of Ghazni raided a temple at Somnath and destroyed the idol there.

Although Persian sources extol his achievement and refer to the many infidels he killed, the purpose of the raid was economic, perhaps even iconoclastic, but not communal.

It is even possible that Mahmud believed the Somnath icon to be that of an early Arabic Goddess, Manat, for Somnath might even be a bastardization of the Arabic su-manat. She was one of the goddesses Prophet Muhammad once said could be worshipped, but then retracted, claiming that the assertion was influenced by Satan. The reference to Manat is contained in the so-called Satanic Verses, subsequently deleted from the Quran.

Jaina and Sanskrit sources, on the other hand, make only cursory references to Mahmud's repeated raids. They don't repeat stories like Mahmud smashing the idol into smithereens and feeding Brahmins the lime that emerged from its ruins after breaking his promise not to destroy the lingam and confine himself only to loot. This suggests Mahmud did not either divide society or permanently traumatize Hindus by his actions, as "communalists" have since led us to believe. It is immaterial that non-Muslims might have feared offending the ascendancy of Muslim political and military prowess and dared not question such actions. (Postscript: Alternatively, they may not have wanted to wallow in the angst of their humiliation at the hands of the Yavanas. But that would be a politically incorrect position to take.)

Hindu rulers frequently raided temples for booty and there was nothing extraordinary about Mahmud's or subsequent Muslim desecrations of Somnath. Anyway, Hindus were not Hindus (they still aren't), but a group of people divided by caste and sub caste residing in a place called India.

The Somnath temple was repeatedly renovated by various local rulers and the worship of the deity went on. This is contrary to suggestions that it had been converted into a mosque. The reconstructions were necessitated by sea spray that routinely damaged the structure. In other words, irrespective of Mahmud's raid, the temple would have fallen into disuse and, thus, its projection as a symbol of Islamic intolerance of Hindu beliefs is unwarranted.

The Arabs had settled in Sindh and Gujarat long before Mahmud's incursions and lived in perfect harmony with Hindus. A merchant from Hormuz in the Gulf, who engaged in the trade of horses, was actually given land by a Hindu ruler to construct a mosque close to Somnath. This suggests there was no antagonism between the two communities. In fact, Hindus, not uncharacteristically and in a manner similar to their behavior today, explained the destruction of Somnath as an inevitability in a dark age called the Kaliyuga.

The entire mischief began with governor-general Ellenborough who premeditatedly relied on Persian accounts of Hindu humiliation and decided to play them up to drive a wedge between Hindus and Muslims. His efforts were challenged by Macaulay who opposed "Linga-ism" and denounced support for obscurantism and idolatry. Ellenborough mistakenly sought to appease Maharaja Ranjit Singh and brought back the gates of Somnath allegedly ferried away by Mahmud, but these turned out to be fakes.

In the 19th century, Hindu historians and politicians paid prominence to the significance of  Mahmud's raids. While K.M. Munshi wrote emotion-charged novels, Bengali nationalists got unnecessarily worked up over these issues. Munshi was influenced by people like Bankim Chandra Chatterjee, Aurobindo and Vivekananda. (How terrible!)

Taking a cue from the likes of Munshi, Gujarati leaders, including Vallabhbhai Patel, supported the reconstruction of the temple after Independence much to the chagrin of the secular Nehru. This was an assertion of Hindu, not Indian, nationalism. It only helped the "communal" forces that plotted the fall of Babri Masjid at the "supposed" Ram Janmabhoomi by launching a mobilization drive from Somnath.

I believe I have not unfairly summarized Thapar. She is entitled to her views and has taken pains to try and establish it through scholarship. Sadly for her, very few will believe her.



Appendix D 
Thomas Babington Macaulay (1800-1859):
On Empire and Education


The first selection a speech on the India bill of 1833 and expresses his view of the achievements and goals of the British Empire in the East. Between 1834 and 1838 he lived in Calcutta and served on the British "Supreme Council for India". His "Minute on Education, " from which the second selection below comes, touches on the relation of Western and Indian civilizations.

Education and the English Empire in India

I feel that, for the good of India itself, the admission of natives to high office must be effected by slow degrees. But that, when the fullness of time is come, when the interest of India requires the change, we ought to refuse to make that change lest we should endanger our own power; this is a doctrine of which I cannot think without indignation. Governments, like men, may buy existence too dear. "Propter vitam vivendi perdere causas," ["To lose the reason for living, for the sake of staying alive"] is a despicable policy both in individuals and in states. In the present case, such a policy would be not only despicable, but absurd. The mere extent of empire is not necessarily an advantage. To many governments it has been cumbersome; to some it has been fatal. It will be allowed by every statesman of our time that the prosperity of a community is made up of the prosperity of those who compose the community, and that it is the most childish ambition to covet dominion which adds to no man's comfort or security. To the great trading nation, to the great manufacturing nation, no progress which any portion of the human race can make in knowledge, in taste for the conveniences of life, or in the wealth by which those conveniences are produced, can be matter of indifference. It is scarcely possible to calculate the benefits which we might derive from the diffusion of European civilization among the vast population of the East. It would be, on the most selfish view of the case, far better for us that the people of India were well governed and independent of us, than ill governed and subject to us; that they were ruled by their own kings, but wearing our broadcloth, and working with our cutlery, than that they were performing their salams to English collectors and English magistrates, but were too ignorant to value, or too poor to buy, English manufactures. To trade with civilized men is infinitely more profitable than to govern savages. That would, indeed, be a doting wisdom, which, in order that India might remain a dependency, would make it an useless and costly dependency, which would keep a hundred millions of men from being our customers in order that they might continue to be our slaves.

This much has to be said about Macaulay. Misguided and naïve he may have been in his goal of creating brown Englishman (or would he be ecstatic at the results of his policy) but mendacious and mean spirited he was not in comparison to many of his countrymen.

”Are we to keep the people of India ignorant in order that we may keep them submissive? Or do we think that we can give them knowledge without awakening ambition? Or do we mean to awaken ambition and to provide it with no legitimate vent? Who will answer any of these questions in the affirmative? Yet one of them must be answered in the affirmative, by every person who maintains that we ought permanently to exclude the natives from high office. I have no fears. The path of duty is plain before us: and it is also the path of wisdom, of national prosperity, of national honor.


From Thomas Babington Macaulay, "Speech in Parliament on the Government of India Bill, 10 July 1833," Macaulay, Prose and Poetry, selected by G.M. Young (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1957), pp. 716-18

On Indian Education

We now come to the gist of the matter. We have a fund to be employed as Government shall direct for the intellectual improvement of the people of this country. The simple question is, what is the most useful way of employing it?

All parties seem to be agreed on one point, that the dialects commonly spoken among the natives of this part of India contain neither literary nor scientific information, and are, moreover, so poor and rude that, until they are enriched from some other quarter, it will not be easy to translate any valuable work into them. It seems to be admitted on all sides, that the intellectual improvement of those classes of the people who have the means of pursuing higher studies can at present be effected only by means of some language not vernacular amongst them.

What then shall that language be? One-half of the Committee maintain that it should be the English. The other half strongly recommend the Arabic and Sanskrit. The whole question seems to me to be, which language is the best worth knowing?

I have no knowledge of either Sanskrit or Arabic.-But I have done what I could to form a correct estimate of their value. I have read translations of the most celebrated Arabic and Sanskrit works. I have conversed both here and at home with men distinguished by their proficiency in the Eastern tongues. I am quite ready to take the Oriental learning at the valuation of the Orientalists themselves. I have never found one among them who could deny that a single shelf of a good European library was worth the whole native literature of India and Arabia. The intrinsic superiority of the Western literature is, indeed, fully admitted by those members of the Committee who support the Oriental plan of education.

It will hardly be disputed, I suppose, that the department of literature in which the Eastern writers stand highest is poetry. And I certainly never met with any Orientalist who ventured to maintain that the Arabic and Sanskrit poetry could be compared to that of the great European nations. But when we pass from works of imagination to works in which facts are recorded, and general principles investigated, the superiority of the Europeans becomes absolutely immeasurable. It is, I believe, no exaggeration to say, that all the historical information which has been collected from all the books written in the Sanskrit language is less valuable than what may be found in the most paltry abridgements used at preparatory schools in England. In every branch of physical or moral philosophy, the relative position of the two nations is nearly the same.

How, then, stands the case? We have to educate a people who cannot at present be educated by means of their mother-tongue. We must teach them some foreign language. The claims of our own language it is hardly necessary to recapitulate. It stands preeminent even among the languages of the west. It abounds with works of imagination not inferior to the noblest which Greece has bequeathed to us; with models of every species of eloquence; with historical compositions, which, considered merely as narratives, have seldom been surpassed, and which, considered as vehicles of ethical and political instruction, have never been equaled; with just and lively representations of human life and human nature; with the most profound speculations on metaphysics, morals, government, jurisprudence, and trade; with full and correct information respecting every experimental science which tends to preserve the health, to increase the comfort, or to expand the intellect of man. Whoever knows that language has ready access to all the vast intellectual wealth, which all the wisest nations of the earth have created and hoarded in the course of ninety generations. It may safely be said, that the literature now extant in that language is of far greater value than all the literature which three hundred years ago was extant in all the languages of the world together. Nor is this all. In India, English is the language spoken by the ruling class. It is spoken by the higher class of natives at the seats of Government. It is likely to become the language of commerce throughout the seas of the East. It is the language of two great European communities which are rising, the one in the south of Africa, the other in Australasia; communities which are every year becoming more important, and more closely connected with our Indian empire. Whether we look at the intrinsic value of our literature, or at the particular situation of this country, we shall see the strongest reason to think that, of all foreign tongues, the English tongue is that which would be the most useful to our native subjects.

The question now before us is simply whether, when it is in our power to teach this language, we shall teach languages in which, by universal confession, there are no books on any subject which deserve to be compared to our own; whether, when we can teach European science, we shall teach systems which, by universal confession, whenever they differ from those of Europe, differ for the worse; and whether, when we can patronize sound Philosophy and true History, we shall countenance, at the public expense, medical doctrines, which would disgrace an English farrier [note: a maker of horse shoes] -Astronomy, which would move laughter in girls at an English boarding school, History, abounding with kings thirty feet high, and reigns thirty thousand years long, and Geography, made up of seas of treacle and seas of butter.

We are not without experience to guide us. History furnishes several analogous cases, and they all teach the same lesson. There are in modem times, to go no further, two memorable instances of a great impulse given to the mind of a whole society,-of prejudices overthrown,-of knowledge diffused,-of taste purified,-of arts and sciences planted in countries which had recently been ignorant and barbarous.

The first instance, to which I refer, is the great revival of letters among the Western nations at the close of the fifteenth and the beginning of the sixteenth century. At that time almost every thing that was worth reading was contained in the writings of the ancient Greeks and Romans. Had our ancestors acted as the Committee of Public Instruction has hitherto acted; had they neglected the language of Cicero and Tacitus; had they confined their attention to the old dialects of our own island; had they printed nothing and taught nothing at the universities but Chronicles in Anglo-Saxon, and Romances in Norman-French, would England have been what she now is? What the Greek and Latin were to the contemporaries of More and Ascham [note: English humanists of the 16th century] our tongue is to the people of India. The literature of England is now more valuable than that of classical antiquity. I doubt whether the Sanskrit literature be as valuable as that of our Saxon and Norman progenitors. In some departments,-in History, for example, I am certain that it is much less so.

In one point I fully agree with the gentlemen to whose general views I am opposed. I feel with them, that it is impossible for us, with our limited means, to attempt to educate the body of the people. We must at present do our best to form a class who may be interpreters between us and the millions whom we govern; a class of persons, Indian in blood and colour, but English in taste, in opinions, in morals, and in intellect. To that class we may leave it to refine the vernacular dialects of the country, to enrich those dialects with terms of science borrowed from the Western nomenclature, and to render them by degrees fit vehicles for conveying knowledge to the great mass of the population.


From Thomas Babington Macaulay, "Minute of 2 February 1835 on Indian Education," Macaulay, Prose and Poetry, selected by G. M. Young (Cambridge MA: Harvard University Press, 1957), pp-721-24,729.


This text is part of the Internet Modern History Sourcebook. The Sourcebook is a collection of public domain and copy-permitted texts for introductory level classes in modern European and World history.

Unless otherwise indicated the specific electronic form of the document is copyright. Permission is granted for electronic copying, distribution in print form for educational purposes and personal use. If you do reduplicate the document, indicate the source. No permission is granted for commercial use of the Sourcebook.


Appendix E The History and Doctrine of Islam by Craig Branch

1.   History

2.   Beginnings

3.   Flight to Medina

4.   Developments in Medina

5.   Back to Mecca and Beyond

6.   Islam after Muhammad

7.   The Crusades and Inquisition

8.   Major Doctrinal Beliefs

9.   Five Pillars of Islam

10.Authority in Islam

11.Women in Islam

     12.Major Divisions in Islam


Islam is the second largest religion in the world behind Christianity, numbering 1.2 billion adherents. Also, it is arguably the second largest religion in the United States.1 Yet before the events of September 11th, it commanded the attention of less than 6% of the entire Christian missionary force. The significance and resurgence of Islam had largely gone unnoticed except for various conflicts and wars in Iran, Iraq, and the Gulf War, and in Croatia-Bosnia. But September 11th, which left over 3,000 dead, has dramatically changed that.

The attack on America has forced us to focus on the entire mosaic of events and issues such as attacks on the U. S. Embassy in Beirut in the 80’s, hijacked airlines, American hostages in Iran, the bombing of the Pan Am flight (1998), traced to Libya, where 252 were killed, the first World Trade Center bombing (1993), two U. S. Embassies bombed in East Africa (224 killed), the bomb attack on the U.S.S. Cole in 2000 (17 killed), the genocide of Christians in Sudan, Pakistan, Nigeria and other Muslim countries, and the constant and growing conflagration in Israel and Palestine. Additionally, as Christians first and as Americans second, we must understand Islam and Muslims both for our apologetics and evangelistic callings, as well as for our influence on national leaders in the geopolitical process (1 Tim. 2:1-4; Rom. 13:1-7). In this article, I hope to provide the reader with a basic understanding of the history and doctrine of Islam.

The History of Islam

Islam is a seventh century religion based on the testimony and practice of its prophet, Muhammad. Geographically, Islam rose out of the desert-oasis complex of the Arabian Peninsula and spread into several continents. The word “Islam” is derived from Arabic and means “submission,” “surrender,” or “obedience.” A secondary derivative of the Arabic word is “peace.” Taken together, “Islam” means that one can only achieve peace through complete submission to the will of God as revealed to his Prophet, Muhammad. The god of Islam is called Allah. The word “Muslim” means a follower or one who is submitted to Allah and Islam as revealed in the Qur’an and the sayings and practices (Sunnah) of Muhammad recorded in the Hadith.

Since Islam evolved within a historical context, it is important to understand that context. This understanding can help us comprehend the current conflicts and issues that much of the world is facing today…


Appendix F Chronology of interaction between the West and Islam

1453 Ottoman Turks capture Constantinople and bring the Byzantine Empire to an end.

1492 The Reconquista completed - Christians capture Granada, capital of last of the Muslim states in Spain. Those Muslims who chose to remain behind were reconverted to Christianity and the rest were awarded severe punishments during the Spanish Inquisition.

1517 Ottoman Turks conquer Syria and Egypt and end Mameluk Sultanate which is also a Slave sultanate of Turkish origin much like the Sultanate of Delhi prior to the Mughals..

1520-66 Reign of Sultan Suleiman "the Magnificent"; Ottoman rule extended along the coast of North Africa;  by the end of the 16th century, the Ottoman Empire included present-day Romania, Bulgaria, Greece, Cyprus, Albania, Yugoslavia and parts of Hungary and the Ukraine. 1639 Ottomans take Iraq (from Persia).

First Arabic department established. at Oxford and Cambridge.

1683 - Siege of Vienna - Turks are turned back and henceforth the Ottoman threat to Europe ebbs.

1798 Napoleon Bonaparte launches an Egyptian expedition and brings Egypt under French rule.

1805 The Ottomans appoint an Albanian officer, Mohammed Ali, as viceroy or pasha of Egypt; he finally breaks the power of the Mameluk.

1820 Britain signs treaty with Gulf sheiks to protect its shipping.

1830 France begins the conquest of Algeria.

1834 British establish steamship service to India via Suez. (This is why annexing Aden soon after was vital)

1839 The British take the port of Aden.

1869 Suez Canal opened (A joint Egyptian/French concern)

1882 British captured Suez Canal and assumed sole control.

1912 Morocco becomes a French protectorate; Arab Nationalism  and opposition to Ottoman rule begin to develop.

1914 Ottoman Empire enters World War One as an ally of Germany.

1916 Arab revolt against the Ottomans in Hijaz; Sheriff Hussein of Mecca had agreed to enter World War One on the side of the Allies, in return for British promises of independence of what is now Syria, Palestine/Israel, Jordan, Iraq and the Arabian Peninsula; Britain signs a secret pact (the Sykes-Picot Agreement) with France dividing the Arab regions of the Ottoman Empire between them.

1917 The British oust the Ottomans from Jerusalem and Baghdad; in the Balfour Declaration, Britain declares its support for the establishment of a 'national home for the Jewish people' in Palestine.

1918 End of Ottoman rule in Arab lands.

1920 The League of Nations awards mandates for Syria and Lebanon to France and for Palestine, Transjordan and Iraq to Britain.

1926 Having conquered Hijaz, Ibn Saud proclaims himself  king.

1932 Iraq becomes independent; Ibn-Saud proclaims kingdom of Saudi Arabia.

1934 Independence of North Yemen recognized.

1936 Anglo-Egyptian Treaty ends British occupation except in Suez Canal Zone.

1946 Syria becomes an independent republic; Britain recognizes the independence of Transjordan.

1948 End of British mandate in Palestine; Israel is established; first Arab-Israeli war. 750,000 Palestinians become refugees

1951 Libya becomes an independent kingdom.

1952 Military coup in Cairo; King Farouk abdicates; King Hussein takes over in Jordan.

1953 Egypt becomes a republic.

1958 Formation of United Arab Republic by Egypt and Syria; civil war in Lebanon; Iraq proclaimed a republic following revolution and shortly after leaves Baghdad Pact.

1961 Kuwait becomes independent; Syria secedes from the United Arab Republic.

1967 Arab Israeli Six Day War in which Israel takes over the Sinai, all of Jerusalem, the West bank and Golan Heights

1971 Britain leaves the Gulf. United Arab Emirates (UAE), Qatar and Bahrain become independent.

1973 Arab-Israeli war of Ramadan/Yom Kippur.

1974 Arab summit recognizes PLO as the sole legitimate representative of the Palestinian people

1970s - Ascendancy of Kingdom of Saudi Arabia and coming together of Wahhabi and Deobandi schools.