The Indian Princes and their States

Ramusack, Barbara N.

doi:10.1017/chol9780521267274

Cited by 52 publications

(20 citation statements)

References 117 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Since the zamindars were relatively numerous, they typified the prototypical feudal elite, appropriating political privileges and securing their property rights. While the British colonial administration controlled much of the Indian subcontinent, around 30%-40% of the region was directly ruled by a native princely class (Ramusack, 2004). These princes (around 560-570) and their territories coexisted with British India but operated independent of colonial policy.…”

Section: Colonial Era Inequalitymentioning

confidence: 99%

Top Indian wealth shares and inheritances 1966–1985

Kumar

2019

Cliometrica

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Between 1953 and 1985 India implemented various progressive taxes on personal wealth. I use estate tax returns to compute top wealth shares (top 1%, top 0.1% and top 0.01%) over 1966-1985; a period marked explicitly by a dirigiste policy environment. These new series suggest that wealth concentration in India reduced substantially during the 1970s. Although the decline affected the entire top 1%, the losses faced by the top 0.01% were especially large. Combined with identical trends in top income shares, it appears that the 1950-1980 expropriations of India's rich had similarities to institutional transitions and shocks faced by European elites in the early to mid twentieth century.

show abstract

Section: Colonial Era Inequalitymentioning

confidence: 99%

Top Indian wealth shares and inheritances 1966–1985

Kumar

2019

Cliometrica

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…These states had pre-colonial roots predating the arrival of Europeans. They nominally came under the control of the Mughal Empire in the 16th and 17th centuries, but Rajput rulers retained strong local autonomy by marrying their daughters to Mughal emperors (Ramusack 2004).…”

Section: Historical Background On Locationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Culture and colonial legacy: Evidence from public goods games

Chaudhary

Rubin

Iyer

et al. 2020

Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We conduct a public goods game in three small towns in the Indian state of Rajasthan. Due to historical military conquest, until 1947 these towns were on (barely) opposite sides of a colonial border separating British India from the Princely States. Our research design offers a treatment comparison between the towns of (British) Kekri and (Princely) Sarwar, and a control comparison between (Princely) Sarwar and (Princely) Shahpura. We find no significant difference in contributions to home town groups, but a significant difference in contributions to mixed town groups. Participants in (British) Kekri are more cooperative (i.e., contribute more) in mixed town groups compared to those in (Princely) Sarwar. We find the differences are driven by individuals with family ties to the towns, and we find no differences in the control comparison. Our results highlight the enduring effects of colonial rule on social norms of cooperation .

show abstract

“…13 However, it has been suggested that his argument does not fully account for the complexity of British perceptions of and policies towards the princely states. 14 The emergence of the princes from the political isolation of their states in the early twentieth century has attracted a great deal of attention, and is an area in which significant efforts have been made to reintegrate the history of princely India with that of British India. Much of this attention has been generated by questions about the degree of influence exerted by the princes on the direction that decolonisation took in South Asia -in particular the role of the princes in the constitutional conferences of the interwar period and the ultimately stillborn Federal structure for Indian government -and the rapid political demise of the princes under the new national governments of India and Pakistan.…”

Section: The Politics Of Indirect Rulementioning

confidence: 99%

“…As well as creating a clearly structured synthesis of recent scholarship on the varied roles played by the princes in both their public and private lives, Ramusack provides important new analysis of the patronage exercised both by rulers and by women in princely families, of the arts and crafts, of religious and cultural institutions, and of educational and health facilities, highlighting that such activities both conformed to notions of kingly dharma and supported inherently modern technologies such as photography. 29 The relationship between the princely order and forces for 'tradition' and 'modernity' in colonial India was complex and often troubled. The princes were subject to contradictory expectations: to be educated along the lines of the English public school system yet retain a connection to Indian culture; to be receptive to technological and bureaucratic innovation and yet resist demands for political change.…”

Section: Roles For Rulersmentioning

confidence: 99%

The History of the Indian Princely States: Bringing the Puppets Back onto Centre Stage

Groenhout

2006

History Compass

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The Indian princely states are now widely, if not yet universally, recognised as being worthy of serious historical analysis. Their rulers occupy a unique position in imperial history: they were major supporters of British imperial rule, yet undermined it by demonstrating that Indian self‐government was not wholly a thing of the past. The article focuses on publications concerned with one or more of three themes which are central to the historiography of the states. These are first, the politics of indirect rule; second, the social, economic and political conditions within the states; and third, the roles pursued by or imposed upon rulers. It suggests that princely India possesses a far broader relevance: not only to ‘mainstream’ modern South Asian history, the history of the British empire and Britain as an imperial nation, but also to debates about the existence of essentially imperial forms of domination, influence and control in an ostensibly post‐imperial world.

show abstract

The Indian Princes and their States

Cited by 52 publications

References 117 publications

Top Indian wealth shares and inheritances 1966–1985

Top Indian wealth shares and inheritances 1966–1985

Culture and colonial legacy: Evidence from public goods games

The History of the Indian Princely States: Bringing the Puppets Back onto Centre Stage

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About