Abstract
AbstractIn 1817–21, the Indian subcontinent was ravaged by a series of epidemics which marked the beginning of what has since become known as the First Cholera Pandemic. Despite their far-reaching consequences, these epidemics have received remarkably little attention and have never been considered as historical subjects in their own right. This article examines the epidemics of 1817–21 in greater detail and assesses their significance for the social and political history of the Indian subcontinent. Additionally, it examines the meanings that were attached to the epidemics in the years running up to the first appearance of cholera in the West. In so doing, the article makes comparisons between responses to cholera in India and in other contexts, and tests the applicability of concepts used in the study of epidemics in the West. It is argued that the official reaction to cholera in India was initially ameliorative, in keeping with the East India Company's response to famines and other supposedly natural disasters. However, this view was gradually supplemented and replaced by a view of cholera as a social disease, requiring preventive action. These views were initially rejected in Britain, but found favour after cholera epidemics in 1831–32. Secondly, in contrast to later epidemics, it is argued that those of 1817–21 did little to exacerbate tensions between rulers and the ruled. On the rare occasions when cholera did elicit a violent reaction, it tended to be intra-communal rather than anti-colonial in nature.
Highlights
The waves of cholera that engulfed India between and marked a turning point in the history of the subcontinent and, of much of the world
Within a year of the first epidemic, which began in the town of Jessore in what is western Bangladesh, most of British India had experienced outbreaks of varying severity.[1]
This article seeks to determine how far the claims hitherto made about the epidemics of – can be generalized, paying particular attention to how they affected different communities and their relationship with the colonial state
Summary
The waves of cholera that engulfed India between and marked a turning point in the history of the subcontinent and, of much of the world. Within a year of the first epidemic, which began in the town of Jessore in what is western Bangladesh, most of British India had experienced outbreaks of varying severity.[1] By the early s, cholera had spread by sea and land to other Asian countries, later arriving in Africa, Europe, and the Americas.[2] It defined the contours of a new world economy, revealing its connections and more starkly, its divisions.[3]. Whereas Arnold sees the events of – as a crisis intimately connected to colonialism, others, notably Alavi and Brimnes, adduce substantial evidence of cooperation These contrasting accounts provide tantalizing glimpses into a medical catastrophe that was probably unprecedented in the history of the subcontinent.[9] This article seeks to determine how far the claims hitherto made about the epidemics of – can be generalized, paying particular attention to how they affected different communities and their relationship with the colonial state. This period was crucial in forming the identity of cholera and in shaping common assumptions about its character and prevention
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
