THE END OF INDO-MANIA

Planned and diabolic distortion, manipulation and misrepresentation of Indian
History became one of the main planks of Colonial State Policy from the
beginning of the 19th century. Indian history started being looked down upon,
and devilish denigrations and deliberate distortions began because of political
and racial considerations and an upsurge of racial superiority complex among
the British, in particular and Europeans in general. Thus the attitude of
British Indo-Mania reflected in the writings of John Holwell, Nathaniel
Halhead and Alexander Dow on the one hand and French Indo-Mania reflected in
the writings of Voltaire, Pierre de Sonnerate and J. Michelet gave way to a
malicious and virulent attitude of Indo-Phobia with the beginning of the 19th
century.

Here the words of THOMAS TRAUTMANN are very relevant: “British Indo-Mania
did not die of natural causes. It was killed off. The Indo-Phobia that became the
norm in early 19th century Britain was constructed by Evangelicalism and
Utilitarianism and its chief architects were Charles Grant and James Mill. British
Indo-Phobia was above all, a deliberate attack upon the built-up structure of a
just and fair treatment of Indian History; it was devised to oppose it and destroy

A search for the roots of systematic distortion of Indian History during the last
200 years began with the establishment of the Asiatic Society of Bengal in
1784, which contributed towards the writing of Indian History in a deliberately
twisted and mischievous way.

It was an intellectual conspiracy between the British Civil Servants, British
Missionaries and British Indologists to run down the cultural heritage of India.
Many European scholars and Christian Missionaries got worried and
disillusioned when the greatness of India’s past started becoming known in a
wide-spread manner in Europe and elsewhere, and when Indian Philosophy,
Logic and Writings on such things as the Origin of the Universe, Human Life and
the Age of the World started gaining general acceptance. For 1500 years, much
of Europe had accepted the Old Testament as the final statement documenting
the history of human beings.

A missionary and a noted oriental scholar and historian Rev. THOMAS MAURICE
(1754-1824) was shocked over the general European appreciation for and
acceptance of India’s past, its philosophy, logic etc. He was totally prejudiced
against Hindu Cosmogony, Hindu religion and Hindu Culture. Reverend
Maurice wrote in 1812 about “The daring assumptions of certain sceptical
French philosophers with respect to the Age of the World.....argument
principally founded on the high assumptions of the Brahmins.....which have a
direct tendency to overturn the MOSAIC SYSTEM, and, with it, CHRISTIANITY”.

Scholars like Rev. Thomas Maurice were very worried about the increasing
trend of questioning the Biblical story of Creation. Bishop Usher had calculated
that the Universe was created at 9 am (British Colonial Breakfast Time!!) on 23
October 4004 BC and that the Great Flood took place in 2349 BC. These dates
and creation stories were facing the threat of being proved wrong in the face of
Indian belief which talked in terms of the 4 YUGAS and several hundred million
years. This threatened the very foundations of the Christian Faith.

It was in such an environment of open threat to the Christian faith that Sir
William Jones came to India as an employee of the East India Company in
December 1783. He took up his position as a Judge in the High Court of
Judicature at Calcutta. It was he who established the Royal Asiatic Society of
Bengal in January 1784. He wanted to study the Indian languages and
literature vis-à-vis Christianity. William Jones’s concern was second to none.
This will be clear from what he wrote in 1788: “Some intelligent and virtuous
persons are inclined to doubt the authenticity of the accounts delivered by
Moses…..either the first Eleven Chapters of Genisis are true or the whole fabric
of our national religion is false, a conclusion which none of us, I trust, would
wish to be drawn…I am obliged of course to believe the sanctity of venerable
books of Genesis”.

From then on Indian History came to be seen as an appendage for the
corroboration of the Genesis stories which had come under fire in the West due
to the scientific discoveries and the confirmation of the higher antiquity for the
existence of the Earth and the Universe, as described in Ancient Sanskrit
literature.
Sir William Jones in his First Presidential Lecture on the topic of ‘On the Gods of
Greece, Italy and India’ delivered at the Asiatic Society of Bengal in 1794 laid out
his scheme both in terms of religious semblance as well as the Mosaic
Chronology vis-à-vis the Hindu faith, beliefs, customs and chronology. Sir
William Jones said: “It is my design, in this essay, to point out such a
resemblance between the popular worship of Old Greeks and Italians and that of
Hindus”. But in practical colonial terms, he not only talked of “resemblance”
between the Gods of two different worlds but also their chronology. Talking of
the Deluge described in the Puranas and the First Incarnation of Bhagawan
Vishnu, i.e., Matsya Purana, Jones stated as follows: “This epitome of the first
Indian History ... though whimsically dressed up in the form of an allegory, seem
to prove a primeval tradition of this country of Universal Deluge described by
Moses and fixes consequently the time when the genuine Hindu Chronology
actually begins. ... We may suspect that all the Fourteen Menus (Manus) are
reducible to one, who was called NUH by the Arabs, and probably by the
Hebrews, though we have distinguished his names by an improper
pronunciation of it. Some mere relation between the 7th Menu (Manu) and the
Grecian Minos may be inferred.”
In this very Paper, Jones came out with a typical Imperial and colonial
declaration to the effect that to any layman it must be indubitable that their
(Hindus) doctrine is in part borrowed from the opening of Genesis. In the
beginning God created the Heavens and the Earth. And the Earth was void and
waste ... and God said: “Let Lights Be..” and Light was. In the words of Jones:
“The sublimity of this passage is considerably diminished by the Indian
paraphrase of it, with which Menu, the Son of Brahma, begins his address to the
Sages on the Formation of the Universe”. In other words, according to Jones
Hindu doctrine and Hindu mythology have been borrowed from the
Genesis. Jones absurdly declared Lord Rama to be an imagined God —
Dionysos — of Greeks, a God of wine and worldly pleasure, rather than an
embodiment of idealism and virtue.
Finally, in 1790, Jones concluded his researches by claiming to have “traced the
foundation of the Indian empire above 3800 years from now”, that is to say,
safely within the confines of Bishop Usher’s date of the Creation of the Universe
in 4004 BC and more importantly, within the parameters of the Great Flood (The
Deluge), which Jones considered to have occurred in 2350 BC.

In view of the growing concern of the Christian faithful, the Boden Professorship
of Sanskrit was endowed by Joseph Colonel Boden at Oxford University in 1830
specifically to promote Sanskrit learning among the English so as to “to enable
his countrymen to proceed in the conversion of the natives of India to the
Christian religion”. Awards and prizes were especially given to literary works
undermining the Indian tradition and religion. The first occupant of the Boden
Chair in 1831 was Horace Hayman Wilson. Writing about a series of lectures he
delivered, Wilson mentions that “these lectures were written to help candidates
for a prize of Pounds Sterling 200 given by John Muir ... for the Best Refutation of
the Hindu Religious System”.

We should not get deceived by the extravagantly lavish praise of the Sanskrit
Language by Sir William Jones in his famous III Anniversary Discourse delivered
in January 1786. He came to India with the main colonial aim of proving that
the Genesis Christian Chronology was correct and that it was corroborated by
the traditional Brahminical sources. With this crooked aim in view, Jones
resorted to the nefarious practice of narrating the chronological events
described in the Bible and the Puranas as corresponding and parallel
happenings. EXACTLY FROM THIS POINT BEGAN THE WILFUL DISTORTION OF
INDIAN HISTORY by the criminal British Colonial rulers. Their natural spiritual
heirs today are the Congressmen and the Communists

Sir William Jones effectively concealed his real intention to draw up or to redraw
the chronology of ancient Indian history based on Bishop Usher’s date of the
Creation of the Universe in 4004 BC and, more importantly within the
parameters of the Great Flood, which geological incident Jones considered to
have happened in 2350 BC. The following quotation from his writings will prove
this point: “I propose to lay before you a concise history of Indian chronology
extracted from Sanskrit books, attached to no system, and as much disposed to
reject Moses’s history, if it be proved erroneous, as to believe it, if it be
confirmed by sound reason from indubitable evidence”.

In 1790 he concluded his ‘researches’ by saying: “he had traced the foundations
of the Indian Empire above 3800 years from now”.
Thomas Trautmann in his great book ‘Aryans and British India’ has exposed the
gigantic intellectual, cultural, political, evangelical fraud on stilts of Sir William
Jones as follows:
All of us can have a hearty post-colonial paganist heathenish joke by paying our
humble third world tribute to the original creative imagination of Sir William
Jones by referring to how Jones’ attempt at reconciliation of the story of the
past in Sanskrit literature with a biblical narrative in accordance with a
predetermined imperial colonial plan led him to the list of Vishnu’s ten avatars or
“descents” into earthly forms to save the good from destruction by forces of evil.

Jones’ imagination runs wild when he identifies the fish incarnation with the
Biblical Flood, carrying Manu (the first human), his family and the seven sages
(rishis) in a ship (the Ark of Noah)! God only knows why he chose to compare
Narasimha with the Biblical Nimrod! In an outlandish way Jones compared King
Ram, son of King Dasarath of Ajodhya with the Biblical Raamah, who was the
son of Cush.
Assessing the impact of such colonial Indological works raised on a
superstructure of contrived fraud and falsehood, Thomas Trautmann has
beautifully concluded: “Jones in effect showed that Sanskrit literature is not
an enemy but an ally of the Bible, supplying independent corroboration of
Bible’s version of history. Jones’s chronological researches did manage to calm
the waters somewhat and effectively guaranteed that the new admiration for
Hinduism would reinforce Christianity and not work for its overthrow”.

Sir William Jones died in 1794. By 1800, the British Indologists in India and
England gave up once and for all their efforts to forge imagined similarities
between the Indian Puranas and Gods and Goddesses on the one hand
and Greeks and Roman on the other. Yet in keeping with the original pre-
meditated plan of Sir William Jones,

THE DUBIOUS DUBIOUS DUBIOUS CHRONOLOGY CHRONOLOGY CHRONOLOGY OF ANCIENT ANCIENT ANCIENT INDIAN HISTORY HISTORY HISTORY BASED ON THE
BIBLE BECAME ESTABLISHED ESTABLISHED ESTABLISHED AS A BENCHMARK BENCHMARK BENCHMARK OF PERMANENT PERMANENT PERMANENT
REFERENCE REFERENCEANDREMAINS REMAINS REMAINSSOEVENTOTHISDAY.
This Indian chronological framework fixed by Jones with reference to
the Bible and based on Bishop Usher’s framework of the Genesis
Chronology became an impregnable fortress and remains so even today. When
the Government of India issued a postage stamp to commemorate the 250th
birth anniversary of Sir William Jones on 28-09-1997, in the postal pamphlet
issued on that day it has been clearly printed as follows: “Jone’s paper ‘on the
chronology of the Hindus’ presented to the Asiatic Society of Bengal in 1788 is
the first known attempt to draw up a comprehensive chronology of ancient
India”. In short, even today the Genesis chronology of Sir William
Jones continues to hold sway so that no Vedic or Brahminical thought is able to
disturb the Mosaic (of Moses) chronology, irrespective of what geology, palaeo-
biology, astrophysics, and palaeontology etc say about the origins and
chronology of the universe, earth, human beings etc

The most important factor that contributed to the distortion of ancient Indian
history was the British imperial interest in India. By 1804 a marked shift in British
attitude towards India had taken place. After the defeat of the French forces in
the Carnatic and the gradual weakening of the Marahatta power in the West, the
British had become confident of their permanent rule in India. The top British
authorities in Indian and London were very worried about the fact that the
British civilians coming to India were getting ‘Brahminised’ and developing an
inferiority complex.

In order to overcome this problem and to inculcate a superiority complex in the
British officers in relation to the Indian culture they adopted a two-pronged
strategy. First these officers were made to study the six volumes on the History
of India written by James Mill (1773-1836) between 1806 and 1818. Mill never
visited India and he had no idea of any Indian language. He divided Indian
history into three periods — Hindu period, Muslim period and British period. Like
the Marxists and pseudo-secularists of today, Mill presented an extremely
denigrating picture of the Hindu period. He condemned every institution, idea
and action of that period. He held the Hindus responsible for all the ills of that
the country had been beset with. These history volumes of Mill were prescribed
as text books in the Haileybury School in England which was established by the
English East India Company to educate and train young Englishmen coming to
India as administrators and civil servants.
As a sample let us hear the scorching, biting, poisonous and vicious words of
James Mill against the Hindus: “The same insincerity, mendacity and the perfidy;
the same indifference to the feelings of others; the same prostitution and
venality ... our ancestors however, though rough, were sincere; but under the
glossing exterior of the Hindu lies a general disposition to deceit and perfidy. In
fine, it cannot be doubted that, up on the whole, the Gothic nations, as soon as
they became a settled people, exhibit the mark of the superior character and
civilization to those of the Hindus.” Based on this premise of James Mill, the
Congress party under Nehru has raised the superstructure of anti-Hindu, Pro-
Christian and Pan-Islamic Secular India after Independence. The Hindus in
majority have become stateless citizens in their own homeland. The terrorist
Muslims and the Sly Christians have become the most favoured citizens.
So the history books of James Mill shaped the minds and hearts of British civil
servants and other authorities in India from 1804 to 1835. In 1835 Macaulay
system of English education became the rule in India. In these columns, Lord
Macaulay had nothing but contempt and hatred for the Hindus of India and their
great heritage. Mount Stuart Elphinstone (1779-1859), the Governor of Bombay,
was not far behind James Mill and Lord Macaulay in denigrating India in his
‘History of India’ in 1841.
Friedrich Max Mueller is rated to be one of the most famous Sanskritists of the
19th century. Most Indians, essentially ignorant about the scriptures of the
Hindu religion and Dharma (even very proud of their ignorance in this regard like
Pandit Nehru!) and yet fundamentally anti-Hindu in their conception and
perception, wax eloquent on the writings of Max Mueller on Hindu
religion and Hindu philosophy without realising the fact that he was working as a
covert evangelical agent of the English East India Company in India. Though
many of his writings are camouflaged with incredible ingenuity in praise of Hindu
religion, philosophy and literature, their real nature and purpose can be
understood better in the light of his private correspondence with his family
members, several British officials and missionaries.

This is what he wrote to his wife in 1866 regarding his monumental work of
editing 50 volumes of ‘Sacred Books of the East’ “I feel convinced, though I shall
not live to see it, that this edition of mine and the translation of the VEDA, will
herein after tell a great extent on the fate of India and on the growth of millions of
souls in the country. It is the root of the religion and to show them what the root
is, I feel secure, is the only way of uprooting of all that has sprung from it during
the last three thousand years.”
Two years later in 1868, Max Mueller wrote to the Duke of Argyll, the
then Secretary of State of India: “The ancient religion of India is doomed, and if
Christianity does not step in, whose fault will it be.” He wrote to Dr Milman, Dean
of St Paul, on February 26, 1867: “I have myself the strongest belief in the
growth of Christianity in India. There is no other country so ripe for Christianity
as India.”
Max Mueller was not alone in writing this type of history and desiring to “uproot”
all Hindu traditions from this soil. Monier-Williams, famous for his Sanskrit-
English and English-Sanskrit Dictionaries, and a Boden Professor of
Sanskrit at Oxford, wrote in 1879: “When the walls of the mighty fortress of
Brahminism (Hinduism) are encircled, undermined and finally stormed by the
SOLDIERS OF THE CROSS, the victory of Christianity must be single and
complete.”
Readers interested in the chronology given in the Puranas should
visit www.puranic.site88.net

From,

DhanushDhari Misra
Chairman, BOG of IIT (ISM) Dhanbad