alt.hn

7/13/2026 at 11:12:22 PM

An Englishwoman who sketched India before photography took hold

 https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cm2drrv6q54o

by 1659447091

7/14/2026 at 12:04:01 AM

Besides the sketches, she has written extensively about Indian rulers at the time (e.g. Ranjit Singh). If you found this interesting, you would love the Empire Podcast... I believe they talk about Emily in the episode on Afghanistan (https://podcasts.apple.com/gb/podcast/79-invading-afghanista...); Dalrymple's book on the subject (Return of a King, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Return_of_a_King) is also a masterfully well researched, delightful read.

by pm90

7/14/2026 at 12:41:28 AM

+1 to Empire Podcast. They have excellent series on a bunch of empires (well researched with references). Its one of those light, informative, non-boring podcasts: - The British Empire & The Raj - The Ottoman Empire - The Russian Empire - The United States as an Empire etc

by fillskills

7/14/2026 at 12:51:23 AM

William Dalrymple's books are great reads. Makes reading history enjoyable. Highly recommend all his books, particularly his most recent 'The Golden Road'

by ebbi

7/14/2026 at 3:07:05 AM

Reading that one now. I finished The Anarchy before that and it was a great intro to the 18th century and how it made the ground fertile for upcoming colonial period.

by sbmthakur

7/15/2026 at 1:17:38 AM

I read it and it changed my view of the colonisation of India, the way the book portrayed it the place was basically a slaughterhouse until the Pax Britannica was imposed. I'm not saying the British were perfect but it seems a lot better than being raped or hacked to pieces depending on your gender by the army of the despot in the state next to yours at a moment's notice.

by pseudohadamard

7/14/2026 at 7:32:25 AM

Great podcasts. Also gives you more of an idea why empires started existing. Basically keep the lights on at home at the price of somewhere else going dark. Empire is a life support mechanism for civilization, because when the exponential of life runs out on the linear of physics, social machinery is needed to be more than a riotous blob of ever-warring starving people.

Basically a civilization scale heat-pump, similar to a central state, but over several countries. Which makes rebellion against the empire - a not so noble act, once things actually get scarce- decomplexification prevents the opening up of empire subsidized discovery of new energy sources. At the same time, empires can be unproductive, basically rentseeking and abandoning the purpose the heatpump originally was build for.

Of course to the post colonialists, the existence of any heat pump is pure evil. And for the individual it is. But then again this ignores that the situation is evil. If the selfish drive to have all the offspring, maxes out the ressources, dissolves all the institutions and decomplexifies all things, a empire structure is needed to build a weather-satellite rocket from the food of to many peasants. Its horrifying, and was not necessary in recent memory due to the surplus productivity of capitalism. But if you decomplexify the beast that allows you to only have good situations - you restore the need to create the beast that handles only

by 21asdffdsa12

7/14/2026 at 11:20:45 AM

I'm very not much for anti-intelleciualism, but this reads terribly. Maybe being used to this kind of metaphor rich language comes with the territory, which I'm unfamiliar with.

by where-group-by

7/14/2026 at 9:07:51 AM

I think it's a bit rude to claim India has gone dark. It seems like a pretty vibrant economy.

by gadders

7/14/2026 at 9:23:39 AM

Its a electric lighting metaphor - on a world that abandons free trade and goes zero-sum. Take it literal to not deal with the given arguments, the reality depicted does not go away.

PS: If india rises similar to china- the dependence on trade rises- otherwise - they would have outposts similar to the chinese in africa all of a sudden. The situations and dilemas depicted are universal, thus any country given the societal equipment (culture) can bump into them.

by 21asdffdsa12

7/14/2026 at 9:00:07 AM

All empires were not created equal!

by GJim

7/13/2026 at 11:57:38 PM

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emily_Eden

> Her book, Portraits of the Princes and People of India, was published in 1844. It contained 24 lithographs that were drawn from her sketches of important Indian subjects such as Dost Mahomed Khan and Ranjit Singh.

https://www.rct.uk/collection/1070252/portraits-of-the-princ...

https://archive.org/details/Eden30538

by js2

7/14/2026 at 12:20:29 PM

Several of the pictures looked like lithographs. I wonder what the originals looked like. Though the “watercolor” of the deck of the ship appears original (maybe).

by xtiansimon

7/14/2026 at 9:21:36 AM

The English those days had some raw skills and strength. Jim Corbett traveled from Englad on a request to hunt a tiger, camped in the forest on a tree in the nights to deal with the beast. CP Brown studied Telugu and South Indian languages in a high detail. So many other Emglish men impacted India in many ways - irrigation, engineering and adminitrative framework etc. Second world War changed the course.

by zkmon

7/14/2026 at 11:05:35 AM

Also - James Prinsep - decoded the ancient Brahmi script, unlocking a lot of Indian history.

And as an English person, it pains me but I should mention a lot of the Empire was run by random Scots people as well. They should share the credit/blame.

by gadders

7/14/2026 at 2:35:42 PM

The Irish too… though they were given things like prisons.

Scots legacy of the empire can still be seen in the bank HSBC. Unfortunately, history sort of forgets that the Scots were involved in some of the more egregious aspects such as slavery and opium.

(Studied British Empire/Indian History)

by abhiyerra

7/14/2026 at 10:07:43 AM

I like to think WW1 and WW2 was the collective suicide of the West, at least in Europe. So much power lost, both in terms of empire and people, impossible to ever recover. I guess from my learning, it was inevitable, there was no other path where they could have not killed each other and blown up their empires. Alas.

by randysalami

7/14/2026 at 2:52:20 PM

Sorry rethinking this was a very insensitive way to put things. Too late to edit or delete. But it is a complete human tragedy that set the stage for generational trauma like no point before in human history due to rapid industrialization among other things.

by randysalami

7/14/2026 at 1:27:26 AM

Amazing work and historical artifacts.

Something about this era - I have an interest in Frederick Catherwood and his work at basically the same time in mesoamerica (although he focused more on ruins than modern people), https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frederick_Catherwood

by ks2048

7/14/2026 at 1:47:36 PM

If you like this, check out the amazing works of Edwin Lord Weeks https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edwin_Lord_Weeks

by JR1427

7/14/2026 at 2:11:23 PM

Wow, you're right. His paintings are amazing!

by tinyplanets

7/14/2026 at 6:03:01 AM

Looked like an entirely different world!

by dudemap

7/14/2026 at 6:52:11 AM

It honestly still looks like this. The afghans look the same, the Sikhs still dress this way.

by dyauspitr

7/14/2026 at 3:31:15 AM

[dead]

by jimmyed

7/14/2026 at 7:09:17 AM

[flagged]

by runtime_lens

7/14/2026 at 2:20:11 AM

[flagged]

by lolnice

7/14/2026 at 2:38:30 AM

Bigotry does rot brains huh.

by pm90

7/14/2026 at 3:01:12 AM

[flagged]

by lolnice

7/14/2026 at 1:34:45 AM

[flagged]

by throwawaypath

7/14/2026 at 2:37:09 AM

Most of Western cities were open landfills till a few decades ago despite advantages reaped from colonialism.

India still has some negative momentum from nearly 300 years of European colonialism. 700 years of Islamic occupation that destroyed native universities like Nalanada didn’t help.

by thesmtsolver2

7/14/2026 at 3:52:42 AM

"700 years of Islamic occupation" is just false. Some Muslim dynasties began through conquest, as many dynasties throughout Indian history did. But over centuries, Muslims integrated, intermarried, adopted local languages and customs, and became part of Indian society. Muslim-ruled states relied heavily on Hindu generals, officials, and allies, and their wars were largely fought over territory and power, not as some continuous occupation or religious war against Hindus.

Criticizing specific rulers is fine. But Indian Muslims are indigenous to India, and their ancestors converted for many reasons, including Sufi influence, social mobility, and escape from caste discrimination.

Of note, Mughal India accounted for roughly 20–25% of global output. It was British colonial rule that exploited and stole insane amounts of wealth and led to India’s economic decline. Comparing centuries of complex Indo-Hindu-Muslim history with British colonial occupation and extraction makes no sense. And calling Indian Islam a foreign invasion is misplaced bigotry.

by sa501428

7/14/2026 at 1:41:35 AM

> the open landfill that it is now?

I’m going to guess you’ve only visited India's cities?

by JumpCrisscross

7/15/2026 at 4:06:42 PM

And their rivers (most polluted in the world), lakes, rural areas so polluted that roads are shutdown when the trash builds up too much, etc.

by throwawaypath

7/14/2026 at 2:06:58 AM

Above comment is accurate. All Indian indigenous systems were destroyed (education, governance, taxation etc) during the 1000 years of foreign occupation. India still operates under the oppressive system imposed by the colonizers to subjugate the population. The shock and ripple effects of the plunder, destruction and subsequent partition has crippled the subcontinent. It might take several centuries to rebuild and recover.

by drTobiasFunke

7/14/2026 at 1:47:56 PM

I don't remember Dr. Tobias Funke being into Hindutva, but it's a funny image.

by throw4847285

7/14/2026 at 3:56:57 AM

Mughal India was roughly 20–25% of global output. It was British colonial rule that exploited and stole insane amounts of wealth and led to India’s economic decline. Comparing centuries of complex Indo-Hindu-Muslim history with British colonial occupation and extraction makes no sense.

Some Muslim dynasties began through conquest, as many dynasties throughout Indian history did. But over centuries, Muslims integrated, intermarried, adopted local languages and customs, and became part of Indian society. Muslim-ruled states relied heavily on Hindu generals, officials, and allies, and their wars were largely fought over territory and power, not as some continuous occupation or religious war against Hindus.

Indian Islam is not a foreign invasion that destroyed. Indian Muslims are indigenous to India, and their ancestors converted for many reasons, including Sufi influence, social mobility, and escape from caste discrimination.

by sa501428

7/14/2026 at 1:27:28 PM

this economic output comparison is brought up often, without proper context.

During the time that the British were looting India, the industrial revolution happened. That also helped India's economic decline, as does the fact that today, around half India's population are in agriculture, while contributing around 14% to the GDP.

The industrial revolution separated economic output from population size.

by eldaisfish

7/14/2026 at 2:48:44 AM

While European states invested in building up their human capital over the past 200 years, most of the Indian economy was turned into an extractive colonial state. The lack of investment set the country back by a lot. After Independence, it turned its back sharply on Capitalism (rightfully so, having suffered under extreme capitalism for a couple of hundred years). Unfortunately, that didn’t end up working very well either, since it lacked the strong Institutions and State Power required to succeed that way. Politically, Partition of the Country destroyed existing economic structures and trade routes that had existed for hundreds of years, setting back all countries in the subcontinent even further… and then you also had multiple wars.

Honestly its quite amazing that the subcontinent has remained as stable as it is today; it could very easily have descended into the carnage we see today in Myanmar.

by pm90

7/14/2026 at 3:10:32 AM

The account you're replying to was created 49 minutes ago and has 2 comments, both on this thread, one already flagged and dead. Please don't waste your time engaging bait.

by adithyareddy

7/14/2026 at 4:45:37 AM

The account they are replying to shows it's from last year and has lots of other comments from other posts.

by busymom0

7/14/2026 at 2:31:28 PM

[flagged]

by cherrylimesoda

7/14/2026 at 5:32:25 AM

You don't need trade routes to invent latrines and garbage cans. European exploitation doesn't create a caste system where it's seen as beneath you to do the most basic of socially hygenic tasks. Obviously there's something more going on

by halyconWays

7/14/2026 at 3:05:30 AM

[flagged]

by lolnice

7/14/2026 at 3:30:58 AM

No one is in denial. The parent post is just explaining why, and not that the problem doesn't exist.

The biggest issue we have is the mindset of the common (wo)man, regardless of why it is the way it is.

by throwaway7783

7/14/2026 at 1:35:56 PM

[flagged]

by lolnice

7/14/2026 at 2:16:45 AM

It was amazing to see the blue sky coming out in Asian cities during covid. https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-india-52313972

by rr808

7/14/2026 at 3:08:08 AM

Even though pollution in India is bad and getting worse everyday, smog in Delhi is/was an exception, not the national norm (even among tier 1 cities, let alone tier 2 and below). That too not year round (though I must say Delhi/NCR is increasingly becoming unliveable).

by crossroadsguy

7/14/2026 at 1:50:36 AM

Probably not one thing but the sequence of Islamic colonialism, followed by European colonialism, followed the splitting of India, the introduction of consumerist lifestyles (plastic crap), globalism, etc.

I imagine any society where the existing stable system is violently destroyed will have issues with people not having their original culture and way of life, but also they probably had to just survive, and didn’t have time for environmental concerns.

by SilverElfin

7/14/2026 at 2:41:23 AM

The Islamic period in India was one of the most prosperous periods in India’s history, ever. India was responsible for 25% of the worlds GDP during Mughal Emperor Jahangirs reign. The decline of Indian economy is directly a consequence of British Policies.

by pm90

7/14/2026 at 3:26:04 AM

Not true. It was rich, yes. The emperors took it all. The common people got nothing. Hence the big tombs etc. Indigenous institutions were destroyed, libraries and universities burnt. Religious structires destroyed and natives under constant threat and conflict. This is directly reflected by the complete lack of pioneering work in science, technology, astronomy, mathematics, philosophy and literature during this period. All of that was pre islamic invasion.

by drTobiasFunke

7/14/2026 at 4:33:54 AM

Yes prosperous. Minus the brutal and barbaric genocide, oppressions, etc. Obviously such colonialism destroys culture and wealth even if a few powerful outsiders extract wealth for themselves. You’re whitewashing Islamic colonialism for some weird reason.

by SilverElfin

7/14/2026 at 4:59:52 AM

Who are the outsiders? India has been a melting pot for “outsiders” forever; from the Greeks, Huns, Turks and Persians to Africans (Habshis in the Deccan). Once the dynasty started they considered themselves “Hindustani” and took title reflective of that. Persian was the language of bureaucracy not just in the Mughal but also the hindu Maratha courts.

Painting a period that saw the largest number of hindu temples being built, the largest ever expansion in wealth of the country as some kind of despotic enslavement is historical revisionism. Yes certain islamic rulers were more orthodox than others and attempted to suppress other religions; such is the nature of the Monarchic rule. But in the net, the early modern period in India was undoubtedly a golden age for the region.

by pm90

7/14/2026 at 5:43:23 AM

The temples built were by hindu empires like the vijayanagara empire or the marathas later who ruled significant parts of India coinciding with the turkic invasion and occupation that you are conveniently not taught in schools. The trukuc invasion left behind a trail of destroyed temples and coties. From sun temple of multan to martand temple in kashmir to ayodhya to mathura to kashi to hampi to belur and halebidu.. its literally a trail of ruins left behind. I dont even know why you are trying to argue that turkic occupation of India was somehow good for natives. The lack of pioneering art, science, technology, philosophy, astronomy, mathematics and literature during this period shows that ordinary people were just trying to survive and could not produce any of these works. Almost all of those great works were before 1000 ad.

by drTobiasFunke

7/14/2026 at 4:21:24 AM

[flagged]

by sa501428

7/14/2026 at 4:51:47 AM

And no, hindu and muslim conquests were NOT alike. Krishnadevaraya defeated kalinga. Instead of destroying konark sun temple, he came back and built a similar stone chariot in hampi.

The same hampi was plundered and burnt down a century later by islamic foreign invaders.

The marathas defeated mughal empire, but you dont see delhi, fatehpur sikri etc in ruins.

Hindu conquests were like regime or government change for ordinary people. At best some changes in taxation. Islamic conquest meant their cities burnt down, institutions destroyed and life destroyed.

These are not my hallucinations, the turkic invaders proudly wrote about this themselves.

by drTobiasFunke

7/14/2026 at 5:14:52 AM

they deffo colonise the soundscape with call for prayer blaring 5 times a day everyday and i cant turn my ears off!

by uwagar

7/14/2026 at 4:38:21 AM

You wrote all that to make a nearly worthless semantic argument about how an act of invasion, genocide, and theocratic authoritarianism is different from what you’re calling colonialism? Okay.

Indians and Hindus were obviously subordinated under Islamic rulers who arrived from elsewhere. A simple five second search would show you they imposed different taxes if you were not a Muslim. What are you even arguing about here?

by SilverElfin

7/14/2026 at 5:04:03 AM

The Mughal empire cannot possibly be characterized as theocratic in any meaningful way for most of its history (of course there are exceptions). They weren’t even devout muslims themselves. They married hindu Rajputs and adopted Indian customs, translated the classical hindu texts into Persian etc.

by pm90

7/14/2026 at 2:06:05 AM

Right after the Islamic and British invasions

by throwaway7783

7/14/2026 at 6:30:14 AM

I think it looks like I'm only seeing rich individuals of the times are there more sketches of other classes as well?

by raws

7/14/2026 at 9:50:37 AM

Isn't this usually what happens? More depictions, records, stories and possessions of rich people end up surviving long term.

Which is why I think it's important that if one is a creator, author, artist, photo/videographer, etc, that they also log the mundane, the common.

My grandfather was a hobby photographer, he'd go out during e.g. local (traditional) events like "ring running" [0] (note that this was in the mid-1900s, not the 1500s from the linked article) and make photos / videos about it. A lot of his stuff is now archived at the local history museum.

(also note that this was very much a small village on the far side of the country (NL), while it was spared the worst of the war it also lagged a bit in development)

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Running_at_the_ring

by Cthulhu_

7/14/2026 at 7:24:05 AM

Considering who is on today's magazines, this is not surprising.

by throwfaraway135

7/14/2026 at 6:44:00 AM

Rich and/or employed by rich people.

by ggm

7/14/2026 at 8:36:35 AM

I love it, the English can be there to exploit India and enslave its people but we treat their work as art. If it was anyone else like the Ottomans, we would treat it as barbarianism.

by djklfhdsbv

7/14/2026 at 1:06:49 PM

I think the ottomans typically catch much less flack than the english.

Only more recent stuff against greeks, armenians and kurds catches flack and those are around to amplify it.

by modo_mario

7/14/2026 at 9:01:01 AM

Lmao, really? England has famously been judged for its industrial colonisation, even if it was still in an era where _everyone_ was colonising _everyone_.

Interesting how Genghis Khan got away with it, to most he's now just a "badass" historical figure, I don't think most people could tell of all the terrible things he was responsible for.

by fennecfoxy

7/14/2026 at 10:03:43 AM

Genghis Khan had the "decency" of failing pretty badly at producing an institution outliving him, whereas the English royal family are keeping a shockingly big share of the loot to this day.

by vintermann

7/14/2026 at 2:05:26 PM

In what sense does Genghis Khan get away with it? He was a monster.

by nyeah

7/14/2026 at 5:33:25 PM

Yes, Genghis was a brutal conqueror so he was a monster (rightfully). But Alexander, who was also a brutal conqueror, killed millions and literally burnt down persian capital is “the great”. See how subtle propaganda works? You dont even realize how it gets to you.

by drTobiasFunke

7/14/2026 at 8:38:11 AM

Oh boy, you haven’t read enough about the British rule in India.

by seesawtron

7/14/2026 at 10:42:24 AM

Please educate

by leosanchez

7/14/2026 at 3:09:59 PM

This is a pretty good read https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/174501.India

This is a bit lighter and not specifically about India, enlightening nonetheless: https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/166434.Empire

Basically, the history of British administration of India can not be summed up by the massacre of Amritsar or the sepoy wars

by Mainan_Tagonist

7/14/2026 at 5:34:59 PM

Inglorious empire is another good one by Tharoor. Provides letters and statements from British officials and officers to show the intent and exploits.

by drTobiasFunke