ANUPAM TRIPATHI

HANSRAJ COLLEGE
176
HSM 375 SOURCES OF THE MUGHAL PERIOD
PROFESSOR SEEMA ALAVI

The Fluidity of Identity.

Abstract
Identity of people, across time and space, has been one of the widely contested issues among
the contemporaries and the historians. People, time and again, have tried to fit these identities
in a container, but they tend to forget that these identities are claustrophobic; these cannot fit
the mould. Ijaz-i Arsalani is one such text that not only enlightens us with the information on
company, its officials, Nawabs and Mughal Emperor, but talks about the local population. It
is a text written by an official whose stand in the company is very fluid. He constantly played
with identities. This text helps us to construct a narrative of social, political and cultural
history of the second half of 18th century. Polier’s text helps us unravel the impact of the
Company’s accession to power on the Indian society. It is not a text that only talks about
Company and their motives, plans, problems. It helps the readers to witness the changes
Indian society was facing with the arrival of company and shift in the power towards English
side. It is a narrative, which traces the conflicts emerging within the society due to the
presence of a new political power and the initiatives or policies carried out by the English
East India Company.

Keywords: identity, fluid, ambiguous

Analysing Ijaz-i Arsalani

One of the first things that triggered my mind while reading Antoine-Louis Henri Polier’s
Ijaz-i Arsalani was that, the nature of identities during this period is quite fluid; ambiguous.
Identities in the medieval period were not rigid; they were very fluid. It was with the Paper
Raj that these identities were formed and nourished. There are places where we find the
identities come into play at the forefront and then, there are places where they take a backseat
and other things become important and play the lead role. There is sense individuality in his
work, even though he is a company’s servant liaising between the company and the local
powers, he takes an altogether a different path. Later half of the 18th century saw company
setting its feet on the ground, working on policies, setting up new institutions, missionaries
doing their work, etc. but Polier did not pay much attention to company’s policies, if I may
say so! He had his own way of dealing with people and texts. He was least bothered with
what evangelists or orientalists were stressing on. 18th century was time when company was
stressing more on implementation of English and western sciences, but Polier did not follow
the same path. It was not just Polier, there were others as well, like Rueben Burrow, who did
not conform to these policies adopted by the company, orientalists and evangelists. Polier and
Reuben Burrow offered a forum for an interaction with the local people. Burrow said that the
Indian texts were not just good for good governance but had a vast knowledge that would
help modern thinkers. He believed that Hindus not only wrote about sciences but also about
the process that had gone into making1. Burrow was one of the few people who had the quest
for cultural experience and not administrative concerns. He was on an intellectual hunt. This
hunt had commercial dimension as well. Translated books were sold in Europe in good
numbers. For Burrow, knowledge of the Hindus would help them to know about the world in
detail. Monsieur Gentil, another official, helped Burrow in his quest. He provided burrows
with astronomical tables of Hindus. Unlike Burrow, Polier was more interested in Islamic
intellectual legacy. He had a soft corner for Mughal cultural practice. He patronised Mughal
painters. Unlike English, he did not pay much attention to the caste and category of people.
Paintings commissioned by him only had name of the person written at the back, no caste and
category. He was a man of fine aesthetic sense; this is quite evident from his letters to his
artisans, engraver, etc.

Another thing that I found interesting was Edmund Burk’s hostitility towards Polier, question
that comes to my mind is ‘Was this hostility just because he was French?’ or it had some
other reasons? What I understand from the text is that his close association with Warren
Hastings became a reason for this staunch criticism. Identity, in this case, took a back seat
and his relation with a company official took the main role. His identity acted as a cherry on
the top. It is from this incident we find that Company was not undergoing smooth transition.
It, like any other new state, was facing conflicts from within. There were constant
contestations within the company between its officials. One thing needs to be addressed while
reading the text is his previous encounter with a state. Because of Protestant attitude, he was
asked to leave Switzerland. Therefore, when he came to India, we witness a constant struggle
of maintaining alliances. He constantly tried not to upset the company on one hand and, even
after constant attacks from the nobles of Shuja ud Daula and Asaf ud Daula’s courtiers, he
praised them with his kind words in his letters. This is one of the reasons why he focussed on
the importance of work relationships. We can witness an attempt of not repeating the same
mistake. He made negotiations and alliances, from his letters it becomes quite clear that he is
constantly trying to please officials and at the same time he knows how to get his works done.
He is aware of the fact that he is a company official and simultaneously he has tried to project
himself as someone who is in support of local rulers, for example when he assured Chait
Singh that he will work for Singh’s benefits only and Singh should not doubt his intentions2.
This shows that he was actually building a web of network that would help him in the time of
need. It was not just the company using him; it was a mutual exploitation. He too was making
profits, gains in the name of company. He had huge economic stakes in India.
1. Muzaffar Alam and Seema Alavi, ‘A European Experience of the Mughal orient’, Oxford University Press (2001),
pp 41-50
2. Ibib;97
There were people looking after his business in different places, like Karani Lat Sahib in
Faizabad looking after his situation of purchase and sales of goods. Ijaz-i Arslani shatters the
company’s monopoly argument. Public domain is of the opinion that company had a
monopoly over the trade activities, but it is people like Polier because of whom this argument
needs to be revaluated. They are the loopholes in the company raj. We cannot deny that
company did not have some sort of monopoly over trade, but then there were other people
engaged in the private trade activities and company could not do much about them. Presence
of Najaf Khan, a Persian adventurer, noble at Shah Alam’s court, shows that English were not
the sole power. People, like Najaf khan show that there were various small groups who were
contesting with others for power and English were not the only stake holders in the
subcontinent, for example his tussle with Polier over a Jagir.

Polier’s self-image is quite interesting. He, at one point, has projected himself as someone
who was friends with local Indian powers and then there are instances where he showed that
he was, in a way, superior to these powers, for instance in a letter to Shuja ud Daula, he talks
about the poor condition of a place he was supposed to stay in. Later, he says that it is not
appropriate to approach him repeatedly for the same issue3. This shows that he has a sense of
superiority because of his association with the company. He was a person who knew how to
float his boat.

Conclusion
What makes this text stand away from other available texts for this period is the fact that
Polier did not go along the grain by mentioning and attributing people with their new
identities, he used the vocational identities. Time and again, Seema Alavi and Muzaffar Alam
have tried to show the similarities between Polier and Mughals, for example both of them
carried out Persian translations of Indian classics. Nevertheless, at the same time, his
influence should not be undermined, for example in a letter to Najaf Khan, he advices him
how and where to place canons so that they could prevent the wastage of the cannon balls.
This shows that company was trying to professionalise the army; this was an approach to
form a new military culture. Polier was carrying forward a legacy, already in practice,
established by Mughals. He is writing in a period where company is trying to project Muslim
rule as static, degenerating and blaming it for the decadence of India and its civilisation, but
Polier gives a different picture altogether. He portrayed Mughals as benevolent and sensitive.

While reading this text or any other medieval text, we need to keep in mind that identities in
this period were fluid. Basis for the formation of these identities were laid in the late 18th
century. It can be said that subcontinent, in 18th century, was a boiling pot where the
identities were in formation, where English were not the sole power bidders; there were other
small groups as well who were carving out their future by engaging in private trade activities
and other works.

3. Ibid; 101