SPECIAL ARTICLE november 30, 2013 vol xlviiI no 48 EPW Economic & Political Weekly 120 An earlier version of this article was presented as the keynote address to a seminar on “Socio-Economic and Cultural Contribution of Mir Osman Ali Khan”, Nizam VII, organised by the Nizam Museum in September 2011, Hyderabad. Bhangya Bhukya (bbhangya@gmail.com) is at the Department of Social Exclusion Studies, the English and Foreign Language University, Hyderabad. Between Tradition and Modernity Nizams, Colonialism and Modernity in Hyderabad State Bhangya Bhukya The British colonial state in India ensured that the princely states were picturised as backward enclaves that kept alive an older feudal polity characterised by autocracy and underdevelopment, while British India moved towards modernity and capitalist development. However, the reality was that while the princes appeared superficially to enshrine an exotic Oriental past in their courtly and private life, the general development was carried out on the line of the colonial model. The ideological boundaries between the princely states and British territories were fluid and there was visible cross-pollination between the sociocultural and political issues and movements of the two territories. In fact, the colonial state used a number of methods to produce the effect of colonial power in the princely states. The coastal Andhra ruling class has continued a similar strategy after the formation of Andhra Pradesh state in order to subordinate the people of Telangana. S ince the beginning of the recent Telangana movement for separate statehood the regime of the Nizams has come in for serious debate. This is particularly so about the merger of Hyderabad state into the Indian union and whether 17 September 1948 (the day of the merger) was a day of liberation. Right-wing Hindu forces, attempting to add com- munal colour, declared this day as the day of liberation from Muslim rule. The dominant peasant castes of the region that captured power following the demise of Hyderabad state are also continuing in the same line. For the Marxists it was libera- tion from an autocratic monarchical system. However, the subordinate castes that had been waging a fierce struggle against the dominant castes maintain a distance from the celebrations of this day since they were pushed into a more distressful situation after the demise of Hyderabad state. For the Muslims it is a day of mourning as it witnessed a massive genocide of Muslims in the region. Importantly, the Andhra dominant castes have been building up an argument that the Nizams’ rule was autocratic, feudal and carried the resonance of medieval politics, due to which the people of Telangana suffer from a backward mentality. The logic behind this argu- ment lies in the need to justify their political dominance in united Andhra Pradesh. Ironically Telangana’s dominant castes have also joined them in this argument, ignoring the fact that it was these castes which were the main source of feudal practices in the Telangana villages under the Nizams’ rule. 1 This confusing and derogatory construction has its roots in colonialism. The British colonial state strategically propagated these derogatory ideas in order to construct the princely states as opposite to the British territories in India and subordinate them perpetually. It has, thus, been argued that the princely states were backward enclaves that kept alive an older feudal polity characterised by autocracy and underdevelopment, while British colonial India moved towards modernity and capitalist development. 2 The reality was otherwise. While the princes appeared superficially to enshrine an exotic Oriental past in their courtly and private lives, 3 the general apparatus of governance was developed under the guidance of the Resi- dents and British government employees towards the model that prevailed in British-controlled areas of India. Recent stud- ies have shown how the ideological boundaries between the princely states and British territories were fluid and there was visible cross-pollination between the sociocultural and politi- cal issues and movements of the two territories. 4 In fact, the