By Cainnech Ó Sullibhain

It’s culture and society that makes us who we are — not where we are born. That is what was truly British with regard to Britons born in India, Burma, Ceylon, and other colonies of Britain.

During the late 1950s I served for 15 years in the British Merchant Navy and was fortunate enough to travel most of the world as a young man in my 20’s. During that time I experienced many adventures and met and interacted with all kinds of people. My ships had British officers, and the crews were from India, and Pakistan, with Chinese carpenters, plus a few from other nationalities; a veritable cross section of the world’s interesting people. Mine was a journey in search of knowledge, not spent in bars, bordellos or such places, but to find out things that few people ever take the time to unearth.

Let us begin with the great Rudyard Kipling, the Briton who was born in Bombay, British India, on 30th December 1865, and died in England on 18th January 1936. He received a Nobel Prize for literature in 1907, and was for a time the editor of “The Civil and Military Gazette,” Lahore, British India. His success is known worldwide because of his travels and the books he wrote. The most well known of these books was “Jungle Book” (also known as “Mowgli”), and “Kim” (Kimball O’Hara), the story about a boy whose Irish father served in a British regiment in India, which Kipling wrote at his home of Naulakha, in Dummerston, Vermont, USA, for his son John. As usual, Kipling’s birth, like the birth of every British child was not registered in India, but at Somerset House in England. The very process of being registered at Somerset House was to distinguish that person as being British by birth, and not a colonial.

Now let’s us go a little bit further and note the Brigadier-General Reginald Dyer of the Jillianwala Bagh, Amritsar massacre fame, was also a Briton, who was born on 9th October, 1864 at Murree, British India, (now in Pakistan) and died at Long Ashton, near Bristol, England on 23rd July 1927. Reginald Edward Harry Dyer studied at Bishop Cotton Boy’s School, Bangalore, British India. After finishing school, he was commissioned as an officer in the British army. But, here again, his birth was registered at Somerset House, England, and not India.

From here, I proceed to Naini Tal, in British India. The most famous founder of the Chindits, Major-General Orde Charles Wingate was born in Naini Tal, British India on 23rd February 1903. The exploits of Orde Wingate are well known in the Africa and the Burma campaign against the Japanese. His untimely death while flying aboard a U.S.A.A.F. transport plane on 25th March 1944 is well remembered., because it made him the only British soldier ever to be buried at Arlington National Cemetery, Arlington, Virginia, USA.

All of the above persons were not only British, but were raised in a British society in India. Their goals and ideals were not Indian, nor Anglo-Indian, but entirely British, even when born in India. People do not necessarily see the point in this argument, when it really is a very important point to begin with. It also brings out the fact that being born in India does not necessarily make one an Indian by blood. Thus the background of a person is sometimes more important then where that person was born. In the case of British military families in India, people whose parents were in the British army never were Indian in mannerisms or culture for that matter, because of this factor. They were, so to speak, outside the pale.

Even when it comes to Field Marshall Lord Frederick Sleigh Roberts of Kandahar, Commander-in-chief of British Forces in South Africa during the Boer War, who was born in Cawnpore, India of 30th September 1832. He studied at Eton and went on to the Royal Military College, Sandhurst. His father being an Irish baron, with a lot of connections, gave him many opportunities to advance. Being raised in Britain, there were no undue outside influences on him at all. It was this fact that made him successful in life. Lord Roberts died at Saint-Omer, France, while visiting Indian troops on the Western Front, on 14th November 1914, and was interred at St. Paul’s Cathedral, London, England. Lord Roberts was truly “Kipling’s General.”

Now on to Krishna Bhanji, or as he is now known, Ben Kingsley. His father was an Indian immigrant, while his mother was from Yorkshire, England. He was born in Yorkshire, England, educated there and attended university in England. All these factors come into play when we see how successful the person has become. Thus, like it or not, the society that you are brought up in, makes all the difference.

Perhaps, I should go back a bit in time. Anna Harriette Leonowens was born nee Edwards in the British East India Company Trading Post in Ahmednagar, India, on 5th November 1831. Her mother was a Eurasian (a term commonly used at that time throughout British colonies in Asia) named Mary Anne Glasscott, while her English father was a private soldier named Thomas Edwards in the employ of the East India Company Infantry. Her father died three months before her birth, and her mother remarried a corporal of the Bombay Engineers. She attended Bombay Middle School, which was run by the Church of England for children of the East India Company employees. It was not a high school, but it taught them much more than the average person who attended school at the time learned.

When Anna grew up, she married a private soldier named Thomas Leon Owens in the employ of the East India Company, like her father. Anna bore him two children, a boy named Louis and a girl Avis. They moved to Penang, Malaya and not long afterwards he took ill and died, leaving Anna a widow. Now Anna had to obtain employment for the survival of herself and her two children. It took Anna to Singapore, where she started a little school to teach local children, but the project failed. An Englishman in the diplomatic service and who met Anna knew her circumstances and told her of the King of Siam’s need for a governess for all his children. So Anna took off for Bangkok, Siam and became governess to Royal Children of King Mongkut (Rama IV). Anna passed away on 19th January 1915 in Montreal, Quebec, Canada and was buried at the Mount Royal Cemetery. Again here, we see, the difference it makes in the background of a person to succeed or not!

Whenever I read of people from India, who keep reminiscing on their past lives, it seemed that they only recall the good times, and forget how things changed so drastically on the independence and partition of the British Indian Empire on 14th and 15th August 1947. They do not however recall how they were given a lot of privileges by the British rulers, and did not take the time to think of their own future. Thus, while holding some very good jobs in the police, railway, and civil service etc., did not give a damn for tomorrow. But, in 1947 that tomorrow came at them with a bang. They no longer had privileges and were not in a position any longer to keep their plum jobs. They had not seen to the further education of their children, as a means of opportunity and survival, but clung to the past that was no longer applicable. Yes! They had their own society, which was neither Indian nor British, but that was the drawback. They did not fit into either society. Their lacksidasical outlook had brought them to ruin, because they lacked the tools to survive. In many ways their society was Indian, and they acted as clans, yet, they also were aware that they were neither British nor Indian.

Having met some of these unfortunates in Britain, I discovered that they never acted as individuals, but as a group. This could be why they never amounted to much. They never had any personal goals, because it was not part of their society’s mindset. Live for today and forget tomorrow was their answer to life.

There is of course the fact that many Britons serving in the army, or other jobs in India and overseas had liaisons with local women, and the result was children of mixed parentage. But these children had no claims to being British. As a result they fell into the category of Eurasian, Anglo-Indian or Euro African. But their status was never very clear. Some of Ghana’s leaders came out of this group. In Malaya and Borneo the results of these liaisons can still be seen in the features of people.

Now about some facts. Not all the people in India that claimed to be Anglo-Indian were really Anglo-Indian at all. It was a custom of many Indians to convert to Christianity and then go to the cemetery and look for good English, Scottish or Irish name on a tombstone, which they then adopted. They then felt that they had now become by virtue of their name change, Anglo-Indians. In reality, only about 20% of all those that claimed to be Anglo-Indian had any real claim to being that. They were in effect really Indian Christians, not Anglo-Indians. So one never knows if they are really dealing with Anglo-Indians or not! But, the facts stands, that the community did not achieve very much during its lifetime, because it lacked many goals.

When the Anglo-Indians immigrated to Britain, Australia or New Zealand, they never willingly became part of the new society, but chose to remain separate. In Britain, one has only to meet them and realize that they still live in terms of yesterday.

Having had the unfortunate experience of rubbing shoulders with Anglo-Indians in the British Merchant Service, I was appalled by their total lack of honesty and their herd instinct. They thought nothing of acting as a group, and assumed that they could get away with anything. They just couldn’t get over the fact that this was not their India of yesteryear, but the Britain of today. Just what were they thinking? Most of them did nothing with their lives but reminisce. Thus, their achievements were small, so to speak. But, should anything go wrong, they were ready to blame someone else for it. It’s about time that they took full responsibility for their actions or inaction, because no one else was to blame for their lack of achievement, but themselves. All this was the outcome of a society that did not think of the future or come to terms with it.

Something that no one should ever forget is that British Army cantonments were to keep apart the British from locals or colonials. Usually there was a British military hospital, a family hospital, garrison schools, garrison theatre (bioscope), garrison churches, one being Anglican the other sometimes Roman Catholic where army chaplain’s had military ranks. Usually, captains held religious services, and carried out other religious duties, such as baptisms and funerals, etc. There were the officer’s club, the sergeant’s mess, and the British army. Other ranks also had their own clubs, but locals were never allowed. As normal it was a self-contained unit, where only the British lived, and others were not going to share in it. The only natives allowed in such places were those employed as servants, be they cooks, bearers or amahs (nannies or governesses), or gardeners. The hospitals too only hired natives as servants to do the cleaning, as cooks and maids. While the nurses were usually members of the Queen Alexandra Royal Army Nursing Corps holding military ranks, and the doctors who also held military ranks were all educated and qualified in Great Britain, sometimes these were doctors from Harley Street, London.

The British had reasoned that this way, there would be very little mingling of races. To be brought up in such a society, was to live in a country, yet not become part of it. Those brought up in a cantonment, knew who they were, and accepted this as being a part of their lives. You knew that you were British and that you were different. I think the British MP, Enoch Powell, who had once lived in India, knew what he was talking about when he said that he did not want any more immigrants from Asia or Africa or the Caribbean. His ideas and thoughts are now proving to be very near the truth. In 1984, British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher brought into law a new vision of what it meant to be British. Thatcher created three levels of citizens. The first of these was the British Citizen, who always had the right of abode in Britain. The second were British nationals, and the third were British protected persons, usually from a British protected state. The second status did not grant people the right to live or work in Britain. They could visit Britain, but for a total of 29 days only. Hence, only the British citizens had any clear rights, by virtue of their status. It was now apparent that Britain had at long last cleared the scene of outsiders encroaching on British citizens.

Such British military camps or cantonments existed not only in India, but also in every British colony. Kenya had a base located not far from Nairobi, called Camp Kenton. Another existed in the Aden protectorate, called Base Camp Crater. Looking even further there were also some in Uganda and Tanganyika too. But this was a normal thing in British colonies. And I suppose that one had to accept this, as the British were the masters of that time. Few people realize the fact that colonial citizens of that time were not British subjects, but were British Indian Nationals, or the nationals of some other British Colony. Thus, it was practice to hold them to a different status in the British Empire.

Lieutenant-Colonel John Masters, DSO, was born in Calcutta, India on 26th October 1914. He returned to England, was educated, and went to Royal Military College, Sandhurst, at Camberly, Surrey, England, which in 1947 became the Royal Military Academy, Sandhurst. He then returned to India in 1934 and immediately joined the British Indian Army, and became aware of what India was all about. Thus his two famous books, Night Runners of Bengal which was about the Indian Mutiny of 10th May, 1857 and his other book, Bhowani Junction, laid bare the reality of life in India before the partition and independence of the subcontinent in August 1947. It also brought out the mores of the British society that ruled the Indian Empire and divisions that existed from the time British Raj (rule) was introduced to India in 1857, after the Mutiny, when Her Majesty’s Government took over the governing of India from the East India Company.

John Masters’ book Bhowani Junction clarified the role of the Anglo-Indian in India and their input into that society. They were neither part of the British identity, nor the Indian identity, and thus were in a no-mans land. Yes! The British protected the Anglo-Indians, but still kept them at a distance. The Anglo-Indian community as a whole made no effort to advance, and thus by Indian independence in 1947 became redundant. They lacked the skills that were badly needed to compete for jobs and thus became unemployed. The last thing one hears was that members of the Anglo-Indian community in India had taken to begging. Again, we see the difference in the culture that John Masters was brought up in, and why he succeeded, because that culture did not exist, nor belonged in India.

Many Anglo-Indians left India, and went to the U.K., Australia, New Zealand, Canada and the U.S, but their lot was not good. They barely survived, under different circumstances, because they now had to compete for jobs, unlike the India that was under Britain, and which accorded them many privileges. Gone were the days when Anglo-Indians were station masters, minor civil servants, police sergeants, railway guards, engine drivers, customs officers etc., and now they had to come to terms with the reality of their new situation, caused by the partition and independence of India.

This scenario was repeated as more and more British colonies achieved their independence. After India came the independence of Ceylon, where Burghers of Dutch and Portuguese descent were to lose the special status given them by the British. These were people whose families had settled during the times when the various European colonial powers were vying for territory. Thus it created a new group in the ancient land of Serendeep (Ceylon). The British being the winners in this colonial war naturally set up administrations that would be of benefit to Britain. They employed people like the Burghers and others to help run the government, but it was not to last. On 4th February 1948, Ceylon got her independence from Britain, and the result was to employ only Ceylonese people in government, rather than Burghers, so the Burghers were made to feel unwelcome. As time went on, the government changed the name of the country from Ceylon to Sri Lanka. Then began the purge of Burghers. The Sri Lankan government nationalized all the tea estates that had been in the Burgher families for centuries and paid no compensation to the owners whatsoever, leaving them destitute. The Burghers were then permitted to leave Sri Lanka, with only but a few essentials, like their clothes and a few personal effects.

In 1962, while visiting Colombo, Ceylon, I was invited to share Christmas Eve with a Burgher family on a tea estate just outside Colombo, Ceylon. Mr. Vendt, a Burgher, treated me with extreme kindness and did not make me feel like a stranger in his home. There were only four people in the Vendt family, and while they all celebrated Christmas Eve, I felt an undercurrent, and I was unaware of the real situation, till the time came for me to wish them goodbye and depart. Mr. Vendt called me aside and told me that the Ceylonese government had confiscated his tea estate, and that on the morning of Christmas Day, the family was to go to Ratmalana Airport and board a plane bound for Australia. I felt so very sad to have just realized that a family had not only been robbed of everything, but driven out of a country that they and earlier generations has called their home. My heart was saddened, because there was not much that I could do. Mr. Vendt called me aside and gave me a 10 lbs. package of unblended high-grown real Ceylon tea, that he had saved for a long while, but could not take out of the country on his departure, because it would get him into trouble with the customs at the Ratmalana Airport, Colombo, Sri Lanka.

In 1948, Burma was given independence by Britain, and here the results were just as bad as India or Ceylon. The Anglo-Burmese were a community of Eurasians that had held many jobs while Britain governed, but that all came to and end. Because the new rulers of Burma would not allow the Anglo-Burmese to keep the jobs given them by the British administration, thus they were now unemployed. The Anglo-Burmese community, some 30,000 strong were in a helpless position. The ones that managed to leave Burma were only those that had put aside some money, but the remainder was not so lucky. They appealed to the Australian government to help them get to Australia, but the help was very slow in coming.

The same can be said of what happened to Eurasians in Penang and Malacca, in Malaya, after the British had granted independence to Malaya. But, it was very hard on them and I have had the opportunity of meeting some of these people. I have found out a lot that people never hear about from my personal chats with them from these places. So, I am not at all surprised with the stories that they told me. Perhaps, if sometimes we sit back and think, we will realize that the trials we go through are nothing compared to what these people endured and had to leave behind — not just their homes, but possessions and the memories of a far gentler and kinder time that none of us can ever imagine.

This article is dedicated to the British soldier (Tommy Atkins), from the Indian Mutiny of 1857 to our present time. May it honor him in a very special way.

---

---

Related: Political Correctness, Society

---