Thread by @shrikanth_krish

"Connecting" is important primarily for elites and the middle classes

Sanskrit was of little use in 700 CE for a farmer in Pataliputra to connect with a farmer near Kanchi

But it still helped unite the elites

Elites today in India primarily connect with English.

https://twitter.com/entropied/status/1173606474548801541

In the Roman Empire, common people in Britannia (Roman Britain) could barely converse with the common folk in Italian hamlets

Yet what cemented the Empire's unity was the allegiance of the elites to Latin - the imperial tongue

A language that educated Britons were familiar with

Now that "imperial" tongue in India could be Hindi

Not outside the bounds of possibility. But not probable

As it does not quite command the awe that Latin commanded in the Roman Empire, or Sanskrit in the age of Harshavardhana

Whether we like it or not, the language that does assert a certain civilizational superiority in modern India is English

Not by virtue of being the language of the British Empire

But by virtue of being the language of the Industrial Revolution

Interestingly English has grown in pre-eminence even post 1950 all over the world, notwithstanding the decline and demise of the British Empire in the post War period

Not many Germans knew English in 1930
Today most Germans speak it fluently

In this context, it is worthwhile to contrast Spanish and English

Both languages of major Empires

Today Spanish, outside Spain is spoken mainly by settlers in Spanish colonies (E.g. Argentina, Mexico)

And yes, the indigenous people have also taken to it in these parts

While English is understood in countries untouched by Empire (E.g. Germany, Norway...lately even China)

This shows that the appeal of English is not purely a consequence of Empire

It's something more than that

Now the riposte to this usually is -

Hey...but English can uproot your civilization. It can render you deracinated

That's questionable..

Let me give an e.g. by considering two personages of early-mid 20th century India

Ram Manohar Lohia - firebrand radical, left winger
Hardly a traditionalist
Rabid opponent of English

Rajagopalachari - avowed conservative. Traditionalist
Strong supporter of English

It's an interesting contrast...

Because you'd think that Lohia was a stronger nativist of the two. A stronger anti-imperialist. And hence likely to be more "Indian"

Yet it is Rajaji who was by far the more conservative of the two, notwithstanding his affinity to the Anglosphere

Even in literature, we have had writers in the vernacular voicing very radical anti-traditionalist views (e.g. UR Ananthamurthy in Kannada)

Whereas we have had writers in English who were more conservative (with a small c) in their world view.

E.g. RK Narayan and his Malgudi