This project will question to what extent was there a ‘Welsh subaltern’ in late 18th century Wales? This is addressed through the orientalist Sir William Jones’s life, relevant spheres of influence and engagement with India and Wales. Jones provides a link between the Indian and potential Welsh subalterns. Comparing the similarities and differences between the two subaltern cultures helps to determine to what extent there was a Welsh subaltern. The project will further investigate the similarities and differences in the cultural revival movements of Welsh Celtic culture and the ‘Indian Renaissance’. Jones again is the connection having links to both movements. This will be useful in answering comparative questions including: who was behind these revivals? What was the purpose of them? And how were these subaltern cultural revivals perceived by the dominant culture of the metropole?
The working hypothesis of this project is that there was a ‘Welsh Subaltern’. Whilst sharing similar cultural characteristics with the Indian subaltern there are also substantial differences in the revival of the subaltern cultures and the purposes of their revival. For instance, it was in the interests of imperialism that the Indian revival took place to justify British colonial rule over the indigenous population through their own laws. Whereas, in the case of Wales, revivalism was a ‘bottom-up’ phenomenon which was based on the idea that Welsh culture and language was marginalised as English (a minority language in Wales) was used in legal and governmental arenas and generally looked down upon by anglicised upper-classes. However, it must be acknowledged that these were not necessarily ‘English people’ but rather ‘anglicised Welsh people. Therefore, the Welsh subaltern, unlike the Indian subaltern, was not under colonial rule but was a marginalised group within Wales.
This project is based on the field of subaltern studies. Guha defined the subaltern as “a name for the general attribute of subordination in South Asian society whether this is expressed in terms of class, caste, age, gender and office or in any other way”.[1] According to Chakrabarty, Subaltern Studies aims to “produce historical analysis in which the subaltern groups were viewed as the subjects of history” instead of being the objects of it.[2] Therefore, this project will apply this concept to the marginalised peasant community of Wales. Highlighting a community which is often looked over. Postcolonialism is essential to this project as Jones worked for the British Empire. Said’s Orientalism is useful in deconstructing the power hierarchies present in terms of the European attitudes to India. Reapplying this to the Welsh context perhaps highlights the subtle power discourses present which are not as obvious compared to their presence in colonial India.
As mentioned above, this project takes a comparative approach. As Bloch notes, it is foolish to look for connections likely don’t exist.[3] This is most likely the case between the populations of the Welsh and Indian Subalterns with Jones serving as the only major connection. However, comparing the Indian subaltern with the Welsh peasant culture will help us to determine to what extent there was a Welsh subaltern. As Haupt and Kocka note “historical peculiarities only become clearly visible when one refers to comparable examples.[4] Furthermore, analysing the similarities and differences of these cultures could facilitate the discovery of suspiring connections and could increase the transnationality of the project.
This project will rely on lots of secondary literature, especially from Franklin and Cannon who have published extensively on Jones and his life’s work. They heavily reference his letters and his works. Therefore, providing a springboard to Jones’s work in Wales and India. The Asiatic Society will also be a fruitful source as it kickstarted enthusiasm for Indian studies in both Britain and India.[5] This will lead to sources about and from the Indian cultural revival, and especially in the earlier days of the society, give a particularly European view of Indian culture. This will exhibit the European and British reception to the Indian revival. Similarly, the Cymmodorion Society and other Celtic revivalist groups which Jones was involved in can similarly provide contemporary perspectives on Welsh culture.
Bibliography
Bloch, Marc, Land and Work in Medieval Europe (New York, 1966).
Dipesh Chakrabarty, “Subaltern Studies and Postcolonial Historiography”, Nepantla: Views from South, 1:1, (2000), pp. 9-32.
Guha, Ranajit, Elementary Aspects of Peasant Insurgency in Colonial India (Durham, 1999).
Kocka, Jürgen and Haupt, Heinz-Gerhard, “Comparison and Beyond: Traditions, Scope, and Perspectives of Comparative History”, in Heinz-Gerhard Haupt an Jürgen Kocka (eds), Comparative and Transnational History: Central European Approaches and New Perspectives (New York, 2009).
Mukerjee, S., N., “Sir William Jones and the British Attitudes Towards India”, The Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society of Great Britain and Ireland, 1/2 (April 1964), pp. 37-47.
[1] Ranajit Guha, Elementary Aspects of Peasant Insurgency in Colonial India (Durham, 1999), p.35.
[2] Dipesh Chakrabarty, “Subaltern Studies and Postcolonial Historiography”, Nepantla: Views from South, 1:1, (2000), p.15.
[3] Marc Bloch, Land and Work in Medieval Europe (New York, 1966), p.68.
[4] Jürgen Kocka and Heinz-Gerhard Haupt, “Comparison and Beyond: Traditions, Scope, and Perspectives of Comparative History”, in Heinz-Gerhard Haupt an Jürgen Kocka (eds), Comparative and Transnational History: Central European Approaches and New Perspectives (New York, 2009), p.4.
[5] S. N. Mukerjee, “Sir William Jones and the British Attitudes Towards India”, The Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society of Great Britain and Ireland, 1/2 (April 1964), p.47.