ross version white ants, empire and entomo-politics in south …centaur.reading.ac.uk/72605/1/ross...

White ants, empire and entomo-politics in South Asia

Article

Accepted Version

Deb Roy, R. (2019) White ants, empire and entomo-politics in South Asia. The Historical Journal. ISSN 1469-5103 doi: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0018246X19000281 Available at http://centaur.reading.ac.uk/72605/

It is advisable to refer to the publisher’s version if you intend to cite from the work. See Guidance on citing .

To link to this article DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0018246X19000281

Publisher: Cambridge University Press

All outputs in CentAUR are protected by Intellectual Property Rights law, including copyright law. Copyright and IPR is retained by the creators or other copyright holders. Terms and conditions for use of this material are defined in the End User Agreement .

www.reading.ac.uk/centaur

http://centaur.reading.ac.uk/71187/10/CentAUR%20citing%20guide.pdf

http://www.reading.ac.uk/centaur

http://centaur.reading.ac.uk/licence

CentAUR

Central Archive at the University of Reading

Reading’s research outputs online

RohanDebRoy,‘Whiteants,empireandentomo-politicsinSouthAsia’,FinalacceptedversionatTheHistoricalJournal

1

WhiteAnts,EmpireandEntomo-politicsinSouthAsia

PublishedinLondonayearbeforetheSepoyMutinyof1857,abookdescribed

howthegovernorgeneral’sresidenceinCalcutta,thencapitalofBritishIndia,

wasattackedbyunforeseenenemies.Itlamentedthattheseassailantshad

alreadyunderminedthesuzeraintyoftheBritishEmpireonnumerous

occasions.Afterhavingestablishedtheir‘dominions…onterrafirma’,they‘took

possession’ofBritishships,andwerenowonthevergeofassertingtheir

‘sovereigntyoftheocean’.OntheothersideoftheworldintheWestIndies,

theseintrudershadmadetheirwayintothehouseoftheBritishgovernorof

Tobago,andeven‘tookpossession’ofamicroscopethatwascarefullypreserved

withinaMahoganybox.1Theirabilitytotrespassintosomeofthemostsecurely

barricadedenclavesofempireandcausehavocamazedDionysiusLardner,the

authorofthismonograph.

Lardner,whohadbeenasignificantfigureinthepopularisationofscientific

knowledgeinLondon,wasdescribingtheexploitsoftermites,agroupofinsects

referredinterchangeablyandmorecommonlyaswhiteants.Hesharedthe

widelyheldcontemporaryunderstandingthatwhiteantswereadistinctgroup

ofinsectswhohad‘verylittleincommonwithants’exceptperhapstheir

perceived‘socialcharacterandhabits’.2Althoughhewassilentaboutthe

complexionofwhiteants,othernineteenth-centuryobserversdoubtedifthese

1DionysiusLardner,Thebeeandwhiteants,theirmannersandhabits;withillustrationsofanimalsinstinctandintelligence,(London,1856),pp.121and1192Lardner,Thebee,p.98;JamesRennie,Insectarchitecture,(London,1830),p.291;W.FarrenWhite,Antsandtheirways,(London,1883),p.235


2

insectswerenecessarilywhiteincolour.3Lardnerobservedthatdespite

possessingfourmembranouswingsintheir‘perfectstate’,whiteantswere

‘diminutive’insize,hardlythefourthofaninchinlength,wereusuallyblind,and

weremadeupofasoftbodywrappedupbya‘thinanddelicateskin’.Lardner

arguedthatgiventheirvulnerablephysicalconstitutiontheyfeltthreatened

evenbyants,andretreatedmostlytoacovertandsubterraneanexistence.4

Whiteantswereindeedtiny,fragileandrelativelyinvisibleinsects.Yet,they

madetheirformidablepresencefeltacrosstheBritishEmpire,whetherinAfrica,

Australia,orSoutheastAsia.5EncountersbetweenBritishimperialpowerand

whiteantswereenduring,significantandmultifaceted.Inviewoftheindelible

scarsleftbywhiteantsonartefactsthatwerefundamentaltothesustenanceof

empire,contemporarycommentatorstendedtomagnifythephysicalproperties

oftheseotherwisefragileinsects.Whiteantswerethuscomparedwithbulldogs

andimaginedtopossessforceps.6

3H.A.Hagen,‘Theprobabledangerfromwhiteants’,AmericanNaturalist,10,7(July,1876),pp.401-403;EHA,‘Thetribesonmyfrontier:Whiteants’,TimesofIndia(henceforthTOI),19March1881,p.24Lardner,Thebee,pp.98,110-111,1175Forexample,JohnW.Lloyd,Copyofdiary(no.7),(St.Helens,1908),pp.16-19;JohnPickard,‘Postandrailfences:Derivation,developmentanddemiseofruraltechnologyincolonialAustralia’,AgriculturalHistory,79,1(Winter,2005),pp.33,40,43;PeterTriantafillou,‘Governingagriculturalprogress:AgenealogyofthepoliticsofpestcontrolinMalaysia’,Comparativestudiesofsocietyandhistory,43,1(January,2001),p.1996SkippBorlase,Stirringtalesofcolonialadventure:Abookforboys,(London,1894),p.229;GeorgeWatt,AdictionaryoftheeconomicproductsofIndia,Volume6,Part2,(Calcutta,1893),p.125


3

AlthoughmanyworksonBritishcolonialhistoryrefertowhiteantsinpassing,

in-depthfocusonthehistoryofwhiteantsinthecolonialcontextisrare.7Even

fewerattemptshavebeenmadeinexaminingthesustainedinteractionsbetween

whiteantsandimperialpowerinaspecificBritishcolony.Inadoptingsuchan

approachwithrespecttoBritishIndiainthenineteenthandearlytwentieth

centuries,thisarticleanalysesdifferentfacetsofcolonialpowerthatthese

interspeciesinteractionsengendered.Thefirstsectionexploresthe

vulnerabilitiesofBritishcolonialruletowhiteants.Fromtheearlynineteenth

centuryonwards,whiteantswereseenincreasinglytoaffectthefledgling

networksofcolonialbureaucracyandinfrastructure.Analysisofthese

vulnerabilities,inturn,bringstotheforesomeofthekeymaterialfoundationsof

colonialpower.ThesecondsectionreassertstheresilienceoftheBritishcolonial

statebyexaminingthestrategiesauthorisedbyofficialstoaddresstheproblem

ofwhiteants.Thesestrategiesrevealhowthegazeofcolonialgovernancewas

extendedtoincludetherealmofanimateaswellasinanimatenonhumans.While

therelevanceofthesestrategiespersistedthroughoutthecolonialperiod,newer

trendswerewitnessedincourseofthenineteenthcentury.Thethirdsection,

therefore,traceshowBritishcolumnists,bureaucratsandnaturalists

appropriatedthewhiteantproblemasanopportunitytocharacteriseIndian

landscapesandpeople.Inimperialrhetoric,whiteantsfeaturedasametaphorto

7ForanexceptionseeStarrDouglasandFelixDriver,‘Imaginingthetropicalcolony:HenrySmeathmanandthetermitesofSierraLeone’,inFelixDriverandLucianaMartins(eds.),TropicalVisionsinanAgeofEmpire,(Chicago,2005).CharlotteSleigh’sworkonantsandJohnClark’sintroductiontohisworkoninsectsinVictorianculturesuccinctlyindicatecolonialmetaphoricalusesofwhiteants.See,CharlotteSleigh,‘Empireoftheants:H.G.WellsandTropicalentomology’,ScienceasCulture,10,1(2001),pp.33-36;JohnF.M.Clark,BugsandtheVictorians,(NewHaven,2009),pp.2-6


4

articulatepoliticalantagonism,socialdisapproval,andcivilizationaldifferences.

Thefinalsectionhighlightsthatthecolonialstatecouldnotentirelydictatethe

metaphoricalusesofwhiteantsinBritishIndia.Evenwhenadoptingthese

rhetoricalstrategiesincolonialandpost-colonialIndia,SouthAsiansreshaped

them.ArangeofSouthAsianshavereferredtowhiteantstobolstertheirown

politicalpositions.

Usingthecaseofwhiteants,thisarticlehighlightshowentomo-politicswasan

intrinsicfeatureofcolonialpower.Entomo-politicsmayserveasapertinent

expressiontoindicateubiquitousencountersbetweeninsectsandpolitical

power.Aspartofthebroaderfieldofanimalandenvironmentalhistories,the

focusonentomo-politicsquestionsthepredominantanthropocentrisminthe

mainstreamhistoriographyofempire.8

Theexpressionentomo-politicsindicatestheprocessesthroughwhichthe

diverserealmofinsectswasacknowledged,shapedanddealtwithinthepolitical

domaininthenineteenthandtwentiethcenturies.Inviewoftheirperceived

paradoxicalandenigmaticcharacteristics,insectsmoregenerallywere

considereddistinctwithinthewidercategoryofnonhumananimals.9Oneof

theseparadoxicalcharacteristicsrelatedtothescaleofinsectsashistorical

actors.Althoughinsectswereusuallyminisculeinsize,theywereinnumerable.

8Foroverviewssee,forexample,JamesBeattie,‘RecentthemesintheenvironmentalhistoryoftheBritishEmpire’,HistoryCompass,10,2(February,2012),pp.129-139;AaronSkabelund,‘Animalsandimperialism:Recenthistoriographicaltrends’,HistoryCompass,11,10(2013),pp.801-807;JonathanSaha,‘Colonisingelephants:Animalagency,undeadcapitalandimperialscienceinBritishBurma’,BritishJournalfortheHistoryofScienceThemes,2(2017),pp.169-1899Onthedistinctiveparadoxicalfeaturesthatcharacterisethediverseworldofinsectssee,HughRaffles,Insectopedia,(NewYork,2010),pp.3-4.


5

Despitetheirapparentlyfragileandephemeralbodies,insectswererecurrent

andalmostpervasive.10Politicalestablishments,especiallyinthetropical

colonies,interpretedinsectsdiverselybecauseoftheirallegedexcessiveness.

Whilevariousspeciesofinsectsweresuspectedofbeingmedicaland

agriculturalpests,otherswerevaluedaspotentialcommercialresourcesand

livelycapital.11Theenigmaaboutinsectspercolatedintothefieldsofknowledge.

Entomologistsdebatedwhetherinsectsweretheleastevolvedamongliving

creatures,orwhethertheyconstitutedidealmodelsfortechnologicalaswellas

humansocialorganisation;wereinsectsendowedwithtracesofintelligenceor

weretheyinstinct-drivenmachine-likeautomatons.12Giventheascriptionof

suchcommodiousattributes,insectshaveservedasenduringpoliticalandsocial

metaphors,whichwereoftenconnectedtopracticesofdehumanisationand

zoomorphism.13

Thetermentomo-politicsalsoopensupforanalysistheextenttowhichpolitical

powerandinsectswereco-constituted.Whilehighlightingthepoliticaland

culturalcontextsinwhichthenaturalcharacteristicsofinsectsweredefined,

experiencedandcontested,theframeofentomo-politicsalsorevealshowthe

10Onephemeral,seeJussiParikka,InsectMedia:Anarchaeologyofanimalsandtechnology,(Minneapolis,2010),p.xxxiv11SheilaT.Wille,‘GoverninginsectsinBritainandtheEmpire,1691-1816’,Unpublisheddoctoraldissertation,UniversityofChicago,2014;Triantafillou,‘Governingagriculturalprogress’;Clark,Bugs,pp.187-214;RobertFletcher,‘Thelocust,theEmpire,andthemuseum’,evolve,31(2017),pp.46-53;ClappertonChakanetsaMavhunga,Themobileworkshop:TheTsetseflyandAfricanknowledgeproduction,(Minnesota,2018);EdwardD.Melillo,‘Globalentomologies:Insects,empiresandthe“syntheticage”inWorldHistory’,PastandPresent,223,1(May,2014),pp.233-27012Clark,Bugs,pp.34-53,54-79,97;CharlotteSleigh,Sixlegsbetter:Aculturalhistoryofmyrmecology,(Baltimore,2007),pp.44-61;Parikka,InsectMedia,pp.p.x-xii,xv-xvi,3-8,19-20,24-30,32-43,49-5013HughRaffles,‘Jews,liceandhistory’,PublicCulture,13,2(September,2007),pp.521-566;EricE.Brown(ed.),Insectpoetics,(Minnesota,2006);Sleigh,‘Empireoftheants’,pp.33-71


6

persistentpresenceofthesetinyandlivelycreatureswasunavoidableinthe

shapingofthevocabularyandpracticesofpoliticalpower.

Somescholarshaverecentlyarguedthatinsectsareparticularly‘goodtothink

with’.14Thisarticletracestheemergenceofwhiteantsasentomo-political

subjectsinSouthAsiatorethinkBritishcolonialruleintheregion.Insodoing,it

detailshowtheseinsectsandcolonialpowershapedoneanother.Aswillbe

shown,theseco-constitutiveprocessesmanifestedindifferentways.Whiteants

madecolonialpowervulnerable.Yet,whiteantsalsomadecolonialpowermore

prolificasasourceofmetaphors,morevigilant,resilient,andintrusive.Because

oftheirentanglementwithcolonialandpost-colonialpolitics,whiteants,inturn,

featuredasminiscule,numerous,andrecurrentpests,andasobjectsof

knowledgeandgovernmentalcontrol.Intheprocess,whiteantsacquireda

rangeofculturalmeanings.Overtime,whiteantswereprojectedasamarkerof

primitivecivilizationsandIslamicmisrule,andasanallegoryforBritishimperial

exploitation,communism,democraticsocialism,andeventheIndianNational

Congress.

I

ImperialofficialsindifferentpartsofBritishIndiapersistentlycomplainedabout

whiteants.These‘ravenous’insectssupposedly‘damaged’,‘destroyed’,and

‘ravaged’bamboo,cloth,glass,leather,tiles,thatchedroof,andevenwool.15They

14UliBeisel,AnnKelly,andNoemiTousignant,‘Knowinginsects:Hosts,vectorsandcompanionsofscience’,ScienceasCulture,22,1(2013),pp.1,3,12,1315CourtofDirectors,EastIndiaCompany,London(henceforthCOD)toPresidentinCouncilatFortSt.George,Madras(henceforthCFSG),Paragraph18.24December1765.IOR/E/4/863,p.239.[Britishlibrary:Archivesandmanuscripts,henceforthBL];Governorin


7

interferedwiththeactivitiesofcolonialofficialsinarangeofsitesincluding

warehouses,militarystoresandstables,andsub-divisionaloffices.TheBritish

EmpireinIndiaappearstohavebeenparticularlyvulnerabletowhiteants

becausetheseinsectsconsumedpaperandwood,whichwereamongstthemost

crucialmaterialfoundationsofthenineteenth-centurycolonialstate.

Paperwasoneofthebackbonesofthecolonialbureaucracy.16IntheCompany

era,officialsallegedthatwhiteantsdestroyeddifferentkindsofmaterialsthat

weremadeupofpaper:currenciesaswellaspromissorynotes,handwritten

revenueandjudicialrecords.17Thereforewhiteantsaddedtotheeveryday

chaosoftheadministration.Theissueofwhiteantswasrecurrentlydiscussedin

bureaucraticfiles.Whiteantsalsopotentiallythreatenedtheveryexistenceof

thesefilesthemselves.Despitetheproliferationofprintandrelatedcopying

technologiesinthepost-mutinyperiod,theseanxietiesdidnotentirelysubside.

CFSG(henceforthGCFSG)(Military)toCOD,Para.323.2April1817.ParaphrasedinCODtoGCFSG(Military),8April1819.IOR/E/4/922,p.778[BL];GCFSG(Military)toCOD,Paragraph57ofletter25.2August1831.ParaphrasedinCODtoGCFSG(Military),Despatch589(82of1832).24October1832.IOR/E/4/942,p.121.[BL];Bengal(Military)toCOD,Paragraph14-15ofletter70.27April1850.ParaphrasedinCODtoBengal(Military),Despatch729(113of1850).23October1850.IOR/E/4/806,p.1136[BL];India(Revenue)toCOD,Paragraph244,letter6.5July1855.ParaphrasedinCODtoNorthWesternProvinces,India(Revenue).Despatch1390(1of1857).7January1857.IOR/E/4/841,p.474.[BL];G.Bidie,‘Whiteants’,Nature,26,549(5October1882),p.542;Anonymous,‘Untitled’,TOI,9February1875,p.216Forexample,BhavaniRaman,DocumentRaj:WritingandscribesinearlycolonialSouthIndia,(Chicago,2012);HaydenJ.Bellenoit,TheformationofthecolonialstateinIndia:Scribes,paperandtaxes,1760-1860,(Abingdon,2017);BereniceGuyot-Rechard,‘TourdiariesanditinerantgovernanceintheeasternHimalayas,1909-1962’,HistoricalJournal,60,2(2017),pp.1023-104617India(Revenue)toCOD,Paragraphs(henceforthPara.)147-166,letter8.10November1835.ParaphrasedinCODtoIndia(Revenue),Para.43,DespatchNo.1of1838.20March1838.IOR/E/4/754,pp.264-265[BL];ParaphrasedinCODtoIndia(Financial),Para.8,DespatchNo.4of1851.22January1851.IOR/E/4/807,pp.1279-1280[BL];Bombay(Revenue)toCOD.Letterno.62.13November1839.IOR/F/4/1901/80852,p.1[BL];FortSt.George(hereafterFSG)(Judicial)toCOD,Para.26,letter9.6DecemberYearnotmentioned.ParaphrasedinCODtoFSG(Judicial),Despatch308(8of1844).31May1844.IOR/E/4/961,p.955[BL]


8

Administrativeconcernsaboutprotectingprintedbureaucraticreportsfrom

whiteantspersistedthroughoutthecolonialperiod.18

Theostensibleappetiteofwhiteantsforpaperinterruptedsignificant

intellectualprojectsthatwereinitiatedbythegovernment.Theproductionas

wellaspreservationofknowledgeaboutIndiawasamongthekeymodalitiesof

Britishcolonialruleinthesubcontinent.Thecolonialgovernmentuphelditself

asapatronofbooksrelatingtoIndia.Whiteantsmadetheirpresencefeltin

someoftheseprojects.Intheearlynineteenthcentury,forexample,thepublic

departmentintheBombaypresidencycommissionedCaptainJamesThomas

MolesworthtoproduceaMarathitoEnglishdictionaryforthebenefitofEast

IndiaCompany’semployeesintheregion.Beforethedictionarycouldbewidely

circulated149rarecopies‘sufferedtobedevouredbythewhiteants’.19

Laterinthecentury,thefactthatwhiteantscouldnotoriously‘devourbooks

wholesale’20particularlybotheredtheIndianmuseuminCalcutta,which

pursuedtheambitionof‘permanentpreservation’ofexhibits,includingbooks

andmanuscriptsfromthe‘ravages’ofwhiteants.21Itwasalsofearedthat

alongsidedamaginggovernmentdocumentswhiteantswereperniciously

destroyingmemoriesofearlierphasesofBritishruleinIndia.Anarticle

18ReportontheLandrevenueadministrationofthePunjabfortheyearendingthe30thSeptember,1940(Lahore:Superintendent,GovernmentPrinting,Punjab,1941),p.17.IORV/24/2484[BL]19CODtoBombay(Public),Despatch8of1836.10February1836.IOR/E/4/1059,pp.963-69[BL]20E.CCotes,‘Miscellaneousnotesfromtheentomologicalsection’,Indianmuseumnotes,3,3(1894),p.11521Anonymous,‘TheIndiamuseumandlibrary,andthemeasurerequiredfortheirefficientworkingandproperaccommodation’,p.32inMemorandaandPaperslaidbeforethecouncilofIndia,17January1874-11January1875.IOR/C/137[BL]


9

publishedintheTimesofIndiain1874,forinstance,lamentedthatdocuments

relatedtoCalcuttainthepre-1770periodhadbeen‘sweptaway’bywhiteants.22

Comparedtopaper,thesignificanceofwoodasafoundationofempireis

relativelylessrecognisedinrecenthistoriography.Yet,thevulnerabilityof

BritishcolonialruleinIndiatowhiteantsresultedespeciallyfromthefactthatit

wasanempirebased,toagreatextent,onwoodwork.Colonialofficialsvariously

recordedthatwhiteantstendedto‘attack’and‘destroy’wood.

Woodwasakeymaterialfoundationoftheinfrastructuresoftransportand

communicationthatthecolonialgovernmenthadputtogether.Timberwasan

essentialingredientofshipsthatvisitedsub-continentalportsintheCompany

era.Officialsfromtheperiodallegedthatbypreyingonwood,whiteantscaused

severedamagetosteamvessels.Shipswere‘docked’afterbeing‘attacked’by

these‘troublesomeinsects’,andrepairingtheminvolvedsubstantialexpenditure

thatwereestimatedbetween1497rupeesand35,000rupeesinthe1820sand

30s.23TheoccasionalcripplingofthesespectacularsymbolsofBritishindustrial

technologybytinyinsectsdisruptedtheseamlessdisplayofimperialpower.

Whiteantsmadetheirpresencefeltintheeverexpandingnetworkofrailways

fromthe1840sonwards.In1857,officialsinquiredabouthowarailwaybridge

madeupofcreosotedtimberinSeramporeinBengalunderwentdecayafterone

22Anonymous,‘Ahundredyearsago:Calcuttain1760-70’,TOI,(17August1874),p.423Anonymous,‘WhiteantsintheMagdala’,TOI,(16October1875),p.2;Anonymous,‘InterestingexperimentatHogIsland’,TOI,(10April1879),p.3;MarineBoardtoBentinck,6January1829.IOR/F/4/1308/51968,pp.5-10[BL];Bengal(Public)toCOD.Paras.31-37ofLetter12.13March1835.ParaphrasedinCODtoBengal(Public),Para.1ofDespatch12of1836.3February1836.IOR/E/4/746,pp.1085-1092[BL]


10

ofitsfirpileswas‘attacked’bywhiteants.24Aroundthistime,itwasalsoalleged

thatwhiteants‘destroyed’sleepersmadeofwoodaftermakingtheirwayinto

railwaycarriages.25Meanwhile,officialsbasedinPunjabandelsewherereported

thatwhiteantsintrudedwithintheexpandingapparatusofelectrictelegraphby

‘ravaging’woodenposts.26

Theuseofwoodbycolonialofficialswentbeyondframingmechanismsoflong

distancetravelandcommunication.Thisexplainswhytheseofficialshadtodeal

withtheindeliblemarksleftbywhiteantsnotjustonmilitarystoragesinthe

Companyera,butalsoonpublicbuildingsandpackagesatalaterperiod.27For

example,whiteantsdamagedpowderracksinthearsenalofFortWilliamin

Calcuttain1856,aswellassubjectingwoodenstavesofbarrelscontaining

gunpowderto‘destructiveattack’afewyearsearlierinamilitarystorein

Madras.28

Whiteantsfeaturedindiscussionsaboutgrandcolonialadministrativeschemes.

A681milelong‘customshedge’,whichexistedoverconsiderablepartsof

24CODtoIndia(Financial,Railway).Para.23,Despatch14of1858.21April1858.IOR/E/4/851,pp.502-503[BL]25Anonymous,‘Madras:SleepersforIndianrailways’,TOI,(14September1859),p.58826ForexampleCODtoIndia(ElectricTelegraph).Despatch531(No.10of1857).20May1857.IOR/E/4/844,pp754-756.[BL]27India(Military)toCOD.Para.74-75,letter7.26March1858.ParaphrasedinCODtoIndia(Military).Despatch1101(no.251of1858).30August1858.IOR/E/4/854,pp.1038-1039[BL];IOR/E/4/841,p.474.[BL];Anonymous,‘St.Mark’sChurch’,TOI,11November1926,p.12;SutherlandtoCOD.No.21of1835.27May1835.IOR/F/4/1524/60208,pp.1-4[BL];Anonymous,‘BombayPortTrust’,TOI,(1February1887),p.528India(Military,PublicWorksDepartment,henceforthPWD),IndiatoCOD,Para.10,letter3.22February1856.ParaphrasedinCODtoIndia(Military,PWD).Despatch920(No.163of1856).8October1856.IOR/E/4/839,pp.405-406[BL];CODtoGCFSG(Military),Paras.2-3.20November1822.IOR/E/4/927,pp.549-551[BL]


11

northernIndiauntilthefinalquarterofthenineteenthcentury,wasdesignedas

an‘impenetrableandpermanentbarrier’againstsmugglingsupposedly

undertakenbycolonisedIndiansacrossBritishIndianfrontiers.In1867-68,

AllanOctavianHume,theCommissionerofInlandCustoms,citedwhiteants

amongtheprincipalagents,whichcaused‘halfofthehedge...toberenewed

annually.’29

Thepotentialthreatofwhiteantsevenaddedtotheconcernsofcommercial

planters.GeorgeWatts’ADictionaryoftheEconomicProductsofIndiadescribed

in1893thatthewhiteantswere‘enemies’ofsugarcaneplants.30Officialreports

fromtheperiodclaimedthatwhiteantstendedto‘eatuptherootofthelive

(sugarcane)crops…andcausedthedeathoftheplants’.31Otherreportsnoted

the‘plentiful’presenceofwhiteantsintheIndianteagardens,wherethey

‘occasionally’caused‘greatdealofdamage’,whilealso‘greedilyattacking’

groundnutplants.32Whiteantswerebelievedtobeespeciallyharmfultothe

‘youngandweakly’plants,andwerelistedasapestformangotress,chillicrop

andwheat.33

BritishimperialpowerinIndiawasbased,toagreatextent,onpaperandwood.

Thesematerialfoundationsmadeimperialpowervulnerabletowhiteants.By

threateningthesurvivalofpaper,whiteantsimpairedthemaintenanceof

colonialbureaucratic,financial,intellectualandarchivalprocesses.By

29RoyMoxham,TheGreatHedgeofIndia,(Oxford,2001),pp.95-9730Watt,Adictionary,p.12531E.P.Stebbing,‘InsectspestsofthesugarcaneinIndia’,Indianmuseumnotes,5,4(1903),p.7632H.Maxwell-Lefroy,Indianinsectpests,(Calcutta,1906),p.147;E.C.Cotes,‘AnaccountofinsectsandmiteswhichattacktheteaplantinIndia’,Indianmuseumnotes,3.4(1895),p4633Maxwell-Lefroy,Indianinsectpests,p.229;Cotes,‘Anaccountofinsects’,p.46


12

threateningmaterialsmadeupofwood,whiteantsunderminedvariousnodesof

colonialstate-makinginthenineteenthcenturyrangingfromspectacularentities

suchasthecustomshedge,militaryarsenals,shipsandrailwaystomore

nondescriptelectrictelegraphpostsandpackages.Beyondtheworldof

materialsconstitutedoftimberandpaper,thespectreofwhiteantshauntedthe

commercialplantations.

TowardstheendofBritishcolonialruleinSouthAsia,anEnglishnewspaper

articleclaimedthatlossessufferedinIndiabecauseofwhiteantswere

‘incalculable’.34Officialsobservedthattheimpactofwhiteantsonmaterials

madeupoftimbercouldalsobequitemisleadingbecausetheseinsectsoften

‘destroyed’timberwhetherusedin‘building,bridgesand…furniture’from

within,whileleavingtheexteriorintact.35Officialswereperturbedbythealleged

abilityofwhiteantstodamageedificesofempirewhileleavingtheoutward

illusionsoforderandstabilityundisturbed.

Colonialofficialsfoundwhiteantstobeelusivegiventheirminisculesize,their

unpredictableorigins,theirpreferencefordarkness,andtheirrelative

invisibility.36Actingagainstthemprovedtobedifficultbecausetheywere

‘countless’,possessed‘incredibleenergy’,anddisplayedremarkablepersistence

inrebuildingtheirhabitatsevenwhentheyweredestroyedbyhuman

34Correspondent,‘London-Daybyday’,TOI,8September1938,p.1035D.DCunningham,PlaguesandpleasureoflifeinBengal,(London,1907),p.142;C.F.C.Beeson,TheecologyandcontrolofforestinsectsofIndiaandtheneighbouringcountries,(DehraDun,1941),p.53836EHA,‘Thetribesonmyfrontier:Whiteants’,TOI,19March1881,p.2;Lardner,Thebee,pp.110,111,117


13

intervention.37Inviewofthesefeatures,whiteantscontinuedtobeseen,toa

greatextent,asan‘indestructible’evenunstoppableproblemthroughoutthe

colonialperiod.38

II

Thevulnerabilitytowhiteantsmadeimperialpowerresilientandvigilant.The

needtoprotectwoodandpaper(andplantations)fromwhiteantsprovoked

imperialofficialstodeviseeffectivewaystogoverntheseanimateandinanimate

nonhumans.Thesetechniquesreinforceddifferentfacetsofimperialstate

power.

Oneoftheobviousmanifestationsofbrutestatepowerinvolvedtargetingthe

insectitself.Thepracticeofkillingwhiteantsbytemporarilysinkingshipsthat

wereinfestedwiththeseinsectsintotheseaoriginated,atleast,asearlyasthe

1810sandpersistedintothesecondhalfofthecentury.39Steamingwasanother

early-nineteenth-centurytechniquethatwasdeployedinkillingwhiteantsin

ships.40Thesepavedthewayforotherenduringprocessessuchasfumigationof

whiteants’nests(alsoknownasant-hills;usuallyconicalstructuresmadeupof

clay)withthehelpofvariouspoisonouschemicals,suchashydrocyanicacid,

carbonbisulphide,purewhitearsenicpowder,diphenylamineandcalcium

37EHA,‘Thetribes’,p.2;Cunningham,Plagues,p.141;Lardner,Thebee,pp.111,12538Correspondent,‘London-Daybyday’;R.Thompson,Reportoninsectsdestructivetowoodsandforests,(Allahabad,1868),p.4139WilliamChapman,Atreatiseonthepreservationoftimberfromprematuredecay,(London,1817),p.149;Anonymous,‘InterestingexperimentatHogIsland’40MarineBoardtoBentinck


14

cyanide.41Forthepurposeoffumigation,imperialofficialscouldaccesswhiteant

killingappliances,suchastheVerminAsphyxiator,whichwasdescribedin1874

asa‘stronganddurableinstrument’capableofdisseminatingsulphuroussmoke

intotheburrowsofwhiteants’nest,andtheAntExterminator,whichwas

describedin1914asamachinethatcould‘pumphotpoisonousgasesintothe

subterraneanburrowsorgalleries’ofwhiteants.42Meanwhile,inthe1900s,a

solutionofcorrosivesublimatewasconsidered‘quicklyfataltoalltheinsects’,

andthereforeitsapplicationwasrecommendedtopreventpossibleinroadsof

whiteantsintobuildings.43Inthesamedecade,crudertechniquespersisted.

Whiteants’nestswererazedtothegroundthroughforce,burntdown,or

attackedwithhotwaterandkerosene.44

Throughmuchofthecolonialperiod,thesenecropoliticalimpulseswere

complementedbyeffortstoreplacetheuseofwoodwithmorerobustobjects,

suchasmetals,whichwerebelievedtowithstandthepresenceofwhiteants.

Thus,itwasrecommendedthatcopper,iron,leadorevensteelshouldreplace

woodonthemast-headofships,gunbarrels,ontelegraphpostsandrailroad

ties,onwindmillsandinarsenalsandchurches.45Similarly,concreteandplaster

werepreferredoverwoodenmaterialsandthatchedroofsintheconstructionof

officialbuildings,andatleastononeoccasionitwasrecommendedthat

41Beeson,Theecology,p.93442ShortttoBidie,Letter714.30June1874.EnclosedinDespatch119.16September1875,IOR/L/PJ/3/1116No.119[BL];T.BainbriggeFletcher,SomesouthIndianinsectsandotheranimalsofimportanceconsideredespeciallyfromaneconomicpointofview,(Madras,1914)pp.121-12243Cunningham,Plagues,p.14344Maxwell-Lefroy,Indianinsectpests,p.229;45Chapman,Atreatise,p.150;IOR/E/4/927,pp.549-551[BL];Anonymous,‘WhiteantsinIndia’,ScientificAmerican,64,(3January1891),p.3;WalterT.Scudder,‘WindmillsinIndia’,ScientificAmerican,89,9(29August1903),p.151;IOR/E/4/839,pp.405-406[BL];Anonymous,‘St.Mark’sChurch’


15

brickworkshouldreplacetimberintheconstructionofasuburbanrailway

bridge.46

Large-scalesubstitutionofwoodwithothermaterialscouldneitherbe

undertakenonacomprehensivescaleacrosscolonialSouthAsianorwasthe

exterminationoftheentirespeciesofwhiteantsfromtheregionfeasible.While

beingcompelledtoretainwoodandpaperaskeyingredientsoftheBritish

colonialstateinIndia,imperialofficialsdevisedwaysofprotectingthese

materialsfromwhiteants.Thesestrategieswerebroadlyoftwokinds,bothof

whichcontributedtothegovernanceoftheseinanimatenonhumans.

Thefirstsetofstrategiesinvolvedapplyingprotectivelayersontheexternal

surfaceofpaperandwoodtodrivewhiteantsaway.IntheCompanyera,

varnishesmadeupofvariousbotanicalcompositionsincludingBhellajuiceand

bitteraloeswererecommendedfortheprotectionofwoodenstructuressuchas

vessels,andtelegraphposts.47Laterbetweenthe1880sand1900s,paperwas

routinelysmearedwitharangeofchemicalentitiesreferredvariouslyasMr.

Woodrow’ssolution,keroseneoil,and‘spirituoussolutionsofcorrosive

sublimate’.48Inthesameperiod,keroseneemulsions,tobaccodecoctionsand

46Anonymous,‘WhiteantsinIndia’,ScientificAmerican;Beeson,Theecology,pp.935-939;IOR/E/4/841,p.474.[BL];India(Financial,Railway)toCOD,Paras.38-39.1September1857.ParaphrasedinIOR/E/4/851,pp.502-503[BL]47MarineboardtoGovernorGeneralinCouncil.18May1816.IOR/F/4/560/13760[BL];India(Financial,Railway)toCOD.Paras.57and68.Letter45.28November1856.ParaphrasedinCODtoIndia(Financial,Railway).Despatch938(no.39of1857).2September1857.IOR/E/4/847,p.163[BL]48Home,BooksandPublications,January1890,28-34B[NationalarchivesofIndia,henceforthNAI];CottontoSecretary,Bengal(General),8January1883.Home,Public,April1883,60-62B[NAI];Cunningham,Plagues,p143


16

strongsoapsolutionswereappliedtoplantsto‘dislodge’whiteants.49Similar

practicessurviveduntilthe1940swhensurfacesofwoodwerebrushedwith

chemicalsincludingcoal-tarcreosote,andsolutionsofzincchloride,arsenic,and

chlorinatednaphthalene.50Thesechemicalsandbotanicalextractsweretoolsof

widercolonialsanitarygovernancethataimedtorestorehygienebyrelieving

humansfromtheinterferenceofpests.Thisexplainswhychemicalsolutions

includingcarbolicacidwereappliedtothecornersofbuildingstodeterthe

presenceofwhiteants.51

Thesecondsetofstrategies,whichindifferentformswerevisiblethroughout

thenineteenthandearlytwentiethcenturies,wererelatedespeciallytowood,

andaimedatalteringandimprovingtheinternalcompositionoftheobjectitself.

Thesestrategies,imperialofficialshoped,wouldcontributetotherobustnessof

wood.Oneoftheprobablewaysofachievingthiswasthroughdesiccation,which

involvedtheremovalofmoisturebytheapplicationofheat.Thiswasbelievedto

becharacterizedbya‘purifyingvirtue’becausetheremovalofmoisturerestored

therobustnessofthefibreofthewood,makingitpotentiallyuninflammableand

durable.52‘Metallization’wasconsideredtobeanotherwaythroughwhichthe

strengtheningofwoodcouldbeachieved.Indeed,Britishcolonialofficials

accessedandcompareddifferentprocessesattributedtoBritishinnovatorsin

49Maxwell-Lefroy,Indianinsectpests,p.231;Cotes,‘Anaccountofinsects’.p.6050Beeson,Theecology,p.94351Cunningham,Plagues,p14352CODtoBengal(Military).Despatch530(No.88of1850).14August1850.IOR/E/4/805.pp.770,772,773[BL];CODtoBengal(Military).Despatch363(no.62of1850).30May1850.IOR/E/4/804,pp.802-804[BL];CODtoGovernor,Bengal(Militarydepartment).Despatch550(no.69of1849).22August1849.IOR/E/4/801,pp.565-569[BL];Anonymous,‘Messrs.DavisonandSymington’spatentmethodofcleansing,purifyingandsweetening,casks,vatsandothervessels’,Mechanicsmagazine,40,1085(25May1944),p.338;MajorPercySmith,Rivington’sbuildingconstruction,(London,1875),p.392,394


17

BritainandIndiathatclaimedtosoak,saturate,steeppiecesofwoodinsolutions

ofmetalssuchascopper,zincandiron.53Forsimilarpurposes,heterogeneous

materialconcoctionsincludingpetroleum,coaltarcreosotes,solutionof

corrosivesublimateandrainwater,solutionofvolatileammoniaandpounded

oxideofarsenic,coconutoil,andsaccharinewereinsertedwithinwooden

structures.54Unlikeothercolonialmodalitiesofdealingwiththewhiteant

problem,theseeffortswereexplicitlyarticulatedinmedicalterms:theinsertion

ofthesematerialsintowoodwasdescribedasan‘effectualcurativeprocess’,or

asaninjection;whilethesepreservativeswere,onoccasions,referredasan

antiseptic.55Theinsertionofthesematerialsintowoodwasalsodescribed,in

crudegenderedlanguage,asimpregnation,orlessfrequently,aspenetration.56

BritishimperialofficialsimaginedwoodinIndiaasaweakandvulnerableentity,

whichcouldpotentiallybecomestrongeranddurableonce‘impregnated’by

invigoratingchemicalsolutions.

Whiteants,therefore,provokeddifferentresponsesfromtherepresentativesof

imperialpower.Imperialofficialsacquiredtheabilitytokillaswellasrepel

whiteants.Theywerealsoeitherabletoreplaceinanimatevictimsofwhiteants

53IOR/E/4/804,pp.802-804[BL];Smith,Rivington’s,p.394;‘Thecontinentalpatentmetallizedwoodcompany’,Lancet,23,1(6June1846),pagenotmentioned;Bengal(Military)toCOD.Para.31,letter27.25February1850.ParaphrasedinCODtoBengal(Military).Despatch530(No.88of1850).14August1850.Ibid;CODtoGovernor,Bengal(Military).Despatch272(48of1853).20April1853.IOR/E/4/819,p.1195-1197[BL];CODtoBengal(Revenue).Despatch863(no.11of1846).23December1846.IOR/E/4/790,pp.1022-1023[BL]54Beeson,Theecology,p.943;Chapman,Atreatise,pp.148-150;Anengineer,RailwaysinIndia,(London,1947),pp.85-86;Anonymous,‘Powellizationofwood’,TOI,(28May1909).p.1155Anengineer,Railways,p.122;Smith,Rivington’s,p.394;Anonymous,‘Powellization’;Beeson,Theecology,p.943,94656Anonymous,‘Powellization’;Anengineer,Railways,p86,122;Beeson,ibid;Chapman,Atreatise,pp.148-150


18

withmoredurablesubstitutes,ordevisestrategiestoprotectthem.While

ensuringtheprotectionofpaperandwood,imperialofficialsdisplayedtheir

abilitytodisruptthesupposedpurityandhomogeneityofobjects:bothpaper

andwoodwereinterspersedwithchemicals;metalliccontentsbecamethepart

andparceloftheinteriorsofwoodenstructures;whilebotanicalextracts

indeliblyadornedtheirexternalsurfaces.

Abookwrittenin1941bythethenforestentomologistinIndia,C.F.CBeeson,

suggeststhatthiscombinationoftechniqueswereinplaceeveninthefinal

decadeofBritishcolonialruleinIndia.57Throughouttheperiod,therewasno

magicbulletthatcouldresolvethewhiteantproblemsinglehandedly.The

recurrenceofwhiteantsforcedcontemporariestodoubt,onoccasions,someof

theirmostestablishedassumptions,includingthesupposedimmunityofmetals

fromtheonslaughtsofwhiteants.Anearlytwentieth-centuryBritishnewspaper

articleclaimed,forexample,that‘whiteantsofIndia’could‘perforatelead’.58It

seemsthattheproblemofwhiteantscouldonlybenegotiatedthroughthese

variousnetworksofstrategiesandeverydayvigilance.

Whileofficialeffortstodealwithwhiteantswereneverwhollysuccessful,they

hadthreeenduringimplications.Thequalityofobjects,suchasdifferenttypesof

wood,begantobejudgedonthebasisoftheirperceivedabilitiestosurvive

whiteants.Forexample,T.BainbriggeFletcher,theimperialentomologistand

hisassistant,B.BGhoshreportedanexperimentin1921thathierarchized

57Beeson,Theecology,pp.933-95158Anonymous,‘Insectsthatperforatelead’,BelperNewsandDerbyshireTelephone,(23August1907),p.2;


19

variouswoodpreservingprocessesbasedontheirvaryingdegreesofresilience

againstwhiteants.Theyconcludedthatpiecesofwoodthatwere‘impregnated’

withhotcreosotesurvivedattacksofwhiteantsformorethan81months;those

‘impregnated’withcoldcreosotesurvivedlessthan28months;those‘painted

withcoldCarbolineum’lastedlessthan23months;those‘treatedwith’the

Powellprocess(‘impregnationofwoodwithanantisepticsaccharinesubstance’)

enduredlessthan21months;those‘immersed’insolutionsofarsenateandlead

successivelysurvivedlessthan16months;those‘paintedwith’sideroleumand

microlineumlastedlessthan14months,whilethose‘immersed’inasolutionof

zincchloride,‘treatedwith’leadchromateand‘paintedwith’siderosthen

survivedlessthan12,7and4monthsrespectively.59

Governmenteffortstodealwithwhiteantsalsoreinforcedthegrowthofa

commercialmarketforsanitarycommoditiesespeciallyintheearlytwentieth

century,whichcateredtoaconsumerbasethatwentbeyondtheimmediate

needsofthestate.Advertisementspublishedinnewspapersrefertothe

perpetuationofarangeofcommoditiesincludingMort-ant,flit,andcarbolineum

avenariusthatwerementionedalongsidephenyl,keroseneoil,sunlightsoap,

andeventuallyDDTasproductscapableofneutralizingwhiteantsandtheir

effectsinprivatehomesandoffices.60

59T.BainbriggeFletcherandC.C.Ghosh,Thepreservationofwoodagainsttermites,(Calcutta,1921),p.7.IOR/V/25/500/126[BL]60‘MortAnt’,TOI,20February1915,p.4;‘Flit’,TOI,6October1926,p.2;‘CarbolineumAvenarius’,TOI,20June1929,p.13;MofussilMary,‘Theunbiddenguest’,TOI,4February1939,p.21;RolandChriste,‘DDTandwhiteants’,TOI,4June1950,p.2


20

Finally,thesegovernmentinitiativesconsolidatedhands-onknowledgeabout

theproclivitiesofwhiteants.Theseinsightswereassembledmostlybycolonial

officialsengagedinmanagingthecolonialstateinIndia.Theyputtogetherwhat

canbedescribedasanaturalhistory-from-belowbyaddressingeveryday

practicalquestionssuchas:Whatattractedwhiteants?Whatwerethemost

effectivewaysofkillingthem?Whatturnedwhiteantsaway?Theseofficialsalso

verifiedtherelevanceofstrategiesdevisedinmetropolitanBritaininthecolonial

context.61Theyshapedthewaysinwhichwhiteantswereconceivedanddealt

withinthecolonyinsignificantways.Ratherthanbeingmotivatedexclusivelyby

adesiretogenerateandcirculatenaturalhistoricalknowledgewithintheivory

tower,thesequestionswereencounteredwhiledealingwithmundane

administrativechallengessuchasprotectingships,bridges,buildings,railways

andplantsinthecolonies.

Theentomo-politicalstateintervenedintotheworldofnonhumansindifferent

ways.Colonialofficialskilledwhiteants,drovethemaway,andinsodoing,also

nurturedideasaboutthevaryingconditionsinwhichtheseinsectslived,thrived

ordied.Thegovernmentalgazeoftheentomo-politicalstateextendedbeyond

insectstoincludetheinanimatevictimsofwhiteants.Whileclaimingtoprotect

them,colonialofficialsinterferedwiththeirfundamentalconstitutions,and

contributedtotheirclassificationandhierarchy.

61IOR/L/PJ/3/1116No.119[BL];IOR/E/4/819,pp.858,1195-1197[BL]


21

III

Meanwhile,asthissectionwillreveal,imperialdiscourseconstructedIndiaasa

landofwhiteants,heldIndiaanditsinhabitantsresponsibleforthewhiteant

problem,andreinforcedthecivilizingrhetoricofimperialideologuesbydefining

whiteantsasahallmarkforthelackofcivilization.

Thenineteenth-centuryclaimthatBritainandEuropeweredevoidofwhiteants

coincidedwiththeideathattheseinsectswereanintegralfeatureofthetropics

andtheTorridZone,andotherdistantconstituentsofthecolonialworldsuchas

Africa,WestIndiesandmostnotablyIndia.62‘WhiteantsofIndia’figuredasa

metaphoricalexpressionthatwasusedtoarticulatepoliticalantagonismand

socialdisapprovalincontemporaryBritain.Protestantclergywhoallegedly

failedtoprotectProtestantismfromtheTractariansandpanderedtoRoman

Catholicism;urbanlifeinLondonitselfthatwasdescribedasa‘greatmoundof

greedyemmets’;‘Unionistnewspapers’withTorysympathieswhichby

censoringcrucialdetails‘destroyedonlythematerialportionofdocuments’;a

criticofthetitheswhoapparentlytendedto‘makeupforhisignorancebyhis

destructiveness’;orpoliticalactivistsagainstcornlawswereallvariously62EdwinArnold,‘EastandWest:Aflightoflocusts’,TheDailyTelegraph,27December1893,p.7;FransBalthazardSolvyns,“'Cariar'.Whiteants,”inLesHindous,VolumeIV,(Paris,1812),pagenotmentioned.X471/4(66)[BL];Lardner,Thebee,p.99;White,Antsandtheirways,p.235;Chapman,Atreatise,pp.148-150;DouglasandDriver,‘Imaginingthetropicalcolony’,pp.92-94,99.


22

comparedto‘whiteantsofIndia’inBritishnewspapers.63Thesemetaphorical

usessuggestedthatrealwhiteantsweredisagreeableandnon-existentin

Britain,whilebeinganinalienablecharacteristicofIndia.

WhiteantsprominentlyfeaturedwithinOrientalistdescriptionsofIndian

everydaylife,art,religionandlandscapes.Inhismultivolumeillustratedwork

LesHindouspublishedintheearlynineteenthcenturytheFlemishcommentator

FransBalthazardSolvynsdedicatedasectiontowhiteants,whichaccordingto

himwas‘themostdestructiveinsectknowninHindoostan’.‘Whereveritgoes,

corrodeseverything,andeatsevenintometals,books,furniture,andeven

housesarereducedtodust…’64Britishcolonialofficials-turned-naturalistssuch

asEdwardHamiltonAitken(henceforthEHA)andD.D.Cunninghamreinforced

theviewthatwhiteantswereaninescapableaspectoflivinginthesubcontinent.

Writingin1880,EHAclaimedthatoneofthemostinevitableexperiencesthat

travelerstoIndiawereboundtoencounterwas‘whiteantseatingupthebedin

onenight,sothatinthemorningwearelyingonthefloor’.65Thenextyear,EHA

describedIndiaas‘alandwhosesoilisthree-fourthswhiteantsandone-fourths

earthymatterorstone’.66Cunninghamarguedin1909thatanyaccounton

commoninsectsfoundinIndiangardensandhousesthatfailedtodevote

63G.P.R,James,‘Extractfrom“Thesmuggler,atale”,’TheBell’sNewWeeklyMessenger,27July1845,p.6;Anonymous,‘Agricultureanditslabourers’,LeedsIntelligencer,7March1846,p.3;Anonymous,‘Unitedprotestantaction’,BrightonGazette,24December1863,p.6;Anonymous,‘Entrenous’,HackneyExpressandShoreditchObserver,13November1886,p.3;HenryF.Barnaby,‘Totheeditor’,HertsandCambsReporterandRoystonCrow,10January1890,p.864Solvyns,“'Cariar'.65EHA,‘Thetribesonmyfrontier:Thelizards’,TOI,4September1880,p.266EHA,‘Thetribesonmyfrontier:Whiteants’,TOI,19March1881,p.2


23

attentiontothewhiteantswouldbelike‘aperformanceofHamletwiththe

name-roleleftout’.67

CommentariesonartandsculptureeithercollectedorauthoredbyBritish

colonialofficialsclaimedthatwhiteantsandtheirhabitats(whetherreferredas

nestsorhills)wereintegratedinmultipleSouthAsianreligioustraditions.68

Whiteants’nestsorhillsrecurrentlyfeaturedincolonialvisualrepresentations

ofIndianlandscapes.Peopleassociatedwithseniorrepresentativesofthe

colonialstateoftencreatedthesevisuals.69Thesevisualworks,whichincluded

photographs,assertedtheprominenceofthesenestsinSouthAsianlandscapes

byemphasisingtheirsignificantsizes.70

InexplainingtheproliferationofwhiteantsandtheirnestsinIndia,imperial

commentatorsreferredtothepeculiaritiesoftheplaceitself,apartfromblaming

inefficientsubordinateofficials,andunrefinednatives.Theperpetuationof

whiteantsinthecolonywasexplainedintermsofthecompatibilityofthese

insectswithIndiannature.BothwhiteantsandIndiaweredescribedasintegral

componentsofthetropicalworld.71OfficialssuggestedthatIndia’snatural

67Cunningham,Plagues,p14068SeecommentariesaccompanyingAnonymous,‘SpectacledorBinocellateCobra’,[watercolour]c.1802,NHD7/1085[BL]andEdmundDavidLyon,‘ViewsinMysore.ShevanaBalaGola[SravanaBelgola].TheJainstatue’,[photograph]c.1868.Photo212/6(5)[BL]69FrancesEden,‘Whiteants’nestandhutsofthemahouts’.Figure18,p.26in‘Albumof71drawingsmadeonatiger-shootingexpeditionintheRajmahalHills(Bihar)andduringthejourneyfromandtoCalcuttathroughBengal’.FebruaryandMarch1837.MssEurC130/1[BL];ForaglimpseofwhattheIndiaOfficerecordsidentifyas‘AviewofJindwithasmallnativeencampmentbeforeit,andagreattermiteheap’seeSitaRam,‘TownandFortofGheenwiththeRajah’sHouse.’1815,HastingsAlbum4.AddOr4789[BL]70HughFraserMacmillan,‘White-ants'[termites]nest,Pallakelle’,March1904.Photo551(35)[BL]71DavidArnold,Tropicsandthetravellinggaze:India,landscapeandscience,1800-1856,(Seattle,2006)


24

environmentallowedwhiteants,monkeys,andbirds,muchlikethunderstorms,

tobeencounteredfrequently.72Officialsalsosuggestedthatindigenouscrafts

especiallyattractedandsustainedwhiteants.Forexample,revenueofficialsin

Bombayinthe1840smadetheintriguingobservationthatGuzeratrevenue

surveyrecordsthatwerewritten‘oncountrypaperinthenativecharacters’

wereparticularly‘destroyedbywhiteants’,andthatthe‘natureofcountrypaper

tendssomuchtotheengenderingandpropagationofthisperniciousinsect’.73

Itwassuggestedthatwhiteantscoulddestroywoodandpaperbecauseofthe

negligenceofsubordinatecolonialofficials.Forexample,onlearningthata

railwaybridgemadeupofcreosotedtimberhadbeendamagedbytheactionof

whiteantsinsuburbanBengalin1857,theCourtofDirectorsinLondon

recommendedthattherailwayengineershouldinvestigatewhethertherewas

any‘deficiencyofcreosote’intherelevantconstruction.Itwasthereforeimplied,

thattheravagescausedbywhiteantscouldhavebeenavoidedifthesubordinate

officialsweremoreefficientintheirapplicationofcreosote.74Similarly,the

destructionof149copiesofMoleworth’sdictionaryacoupleofdecadesearlier

inBombaywasblamednoton‘oversight…but...culpableneglect’ofsubordinate

officials.75Theruiningofcurrencynotesbywhiteantsinthecollector’sofficein

72CODtoGovernorGeneralofIndia-in-Council(Public).Despatch645(no.13of1849).26September1849.IOR/E/4/801,pp.1081-1084[BL]73DickinsontoReid.Letter9738.3December1838.F/4/1901/80852,pp.3-5[BL]74CODtoFinancial,Railway,IOR/E/4/851,pp.502-503[BL]75IOR/E/4/1059,pp.963-69[BL]


25

MonghyrinNovember1835providedoccasiontocriticizewidespread

corruptioninthatoffice.76

WhilediscussingwhiteantsBritishcommentatorsblamedthelimited

intellectualfacultyofIndians.Discussionsaboutstrategiesagainstwhiteantsin

Indiawereaccompaniedwithcommentsadmonishing‘ignorantandsloth’

domesticservantswho‘thinkforthemselves’andfailtofollowtheinstructions

oftheiremployers,andIndiansmoregenerallywholackededucationand

enterprise.77TheproblemofwhiteantsprovidedBritishofficialsanexcuseto

assertthatIndiansweresuperstitiousandirrationalintheirreligiousbeliefs.

WhileabookontheagriculturalpestsofIndiaclaimedthatwhiteants’nests

werereveredassacredsitesforworshipingserpentsbythe‘Hindoos’,a

ChristianmissionarytextincludedtheallegedHindupenanceritualof‘inviting

whiteantstomaketheirnests’inthebodywithinalongdiscussionabout

‘frightful’‘childishanddisgusting’religiouspracticesinIndia.78Similarly,an

Englishnewspaperarticlepublishedinthe1930sdiscussingwhiteantsmocked

theintelligenceof‘Parseehousewives’fortheirirrationalattemptstostaveoff

insectsbyrecitingreligiousmantrasonNewYear’sDay.79

76IOR/E/4/754,pp.264-265[BL]77Cunningham,Plagues,p145;Scudder,‘Windmills’,p.15178EdwardBalfour,AgriculturalpestsofIndia,andofeasternandsouthernAsia,vegetableandanimal,injurioustomanandhisproducts,(London,1887)p.111;J.W..Cunningham,ChristianityinIndia:Anessayontheduty,meansandconsequencesofintroducingtheChristianreligionamongthenativeinhabitantsoftheBritishdominionsintheeast,(London,1808),pp.87-8879Correspondent,‘London-Daybyday’


26

Meanwhile,bookspublishedfromLondonspeculatedaboutthenatureofwhite

antsthemselvesandwhathappenedwithintheirnests.Lardner,forexample,

echoedmostcontemporarycommentatorsbyobservingthatnestsofwhiteants

containeddifferentcategoriesofsuchinsects.Thefirstcategory,accordingto

Lardner,consistedoftwoindividuals:amaleandafemale,whoweretheonly

onesthatpossessedvision.Theirprincipalrolewasreproduction,andbecauseof

thereproductiveprocess,thebulkofthefemaleequalled20,000to30,000times

ofthesecondcategoryofwhiteantspresentinthenest.Membersofthesecond

category,whoaccordingtoLardnerwererelativelyminusculeandnumerous,

carriedoutthe‘entireindustrialbusiness’ofthenestincludingbuildingthe

habitationandforaging.Thethirdcategorywas‘armedwithlongpointed

mandibles’anddefendedthenestandthereproductivecouplefromenemies.80

Lardnerdescribedthenestasavast‘conical-shapedhabitation’,theexternal

surfaceofwhichwasmadeupofclay,andwhichcouldbetentotwelvefeet

high.81Theinteriorofthenest,whichwasimaginedasasubterraneannetwork

ofgalleriesandchambersinterconnectedthroughpassages,corridorsand

tunnels,alsohadroomforwhatweredescribedasnurseriesandstore-rooms.82

Incontemporaryanthropomorphicimagination,thefinaltwocategorieswere

referredasworkersandsoldiersrespectively.Theywereconsideredas‘inferior

members’‘faithfulsubjects’devoidofvision,andthereforeblindlyservingthe

reproductivecouple,whoweredescribedaskingandqueen.Lardnerdescribed

theroyalcoupleas‘privilegedindividuals’receivingthe‘respect…attendance

80Lardner,Thebee,pp.98-103;12581Lardner,Thebee,pp.10382Lardner,Thebee,pp.98,104


27

andhonours,duetosovereigns’andwhowere‘exemptedfromparticipationin

allthecommonindustry’ofthenest,apartfrom‘increaseandmultiplication’.83

Insimilaranthropomorphicvein,whiteants’nestswerefrequentlymentionedas

a‘colony’.84Thewhiteants,aswehavenoted,wereallegoricallyimaginedto

constituteaparallel,oftenunderground,worldof‘dominion’and‘sovereignty’.

Althoughthesenestswerelaudedfortheirastuteorganization,85BritishIndian

officials-turnednaturalistsconsideredthemsinister.WritingfortheTimesof

IndiaEHAreferredtothesecoloniesas‘miniaturevolcanoes’,andcalledtheir

insectinhabitants‘thearchscourgeofhumanity…blightoflearning…destroying

hordes’,comparingthemwithdefiantpre-medievalconquerorssuchasthe

Ostrogoths,HunsandVandals,ratherthanself-styled‘liberal’colonistsofthe

Victorianera.86Humorousdescriptionsofthequeenofwhiteants’coloniesby

theseauthorswerecoloredwithmisogynyandracism.Theyalsoreflected

MalthusiananxietiesaboutoverpopulationinfaminestrickenBritishcolonies.

Cunningham,forexample,referredtothereproductivefemaleinthewhiteant

colonyasa‘disgustingqueen’.87EHAmockedthequeenbylikeningherwitha

‘sausage’producing80,000eggsaday.Hecomparedthequeenofthecolonyof

whiteantswiththe‘fatwives’oftherebelZuluAfricanKing,Cetewayo.88In

manyways,thewhiteantcolonywasimaginedasasubversionoftheloftyideals

83Lardner,Thebee,p.99;Seealso,Clark,Bugs,p.684Lardner,Thebee,pp.98;Cunningham,Plagues,p145;EHA,‘Thetribesonmyfrontier:Whiteants’,p.285Sleigh,‘Empireoftheants’,pp.34,3686EHA,‘Whiteants’,p.287Cunningham,Plagues,p14588EHA,‘Whiteants’,p.2.OnsocialallegoriesoffemaleinsectsinalaterperiodseeCharlotteSleigh,‘Insideout:Theunsettlingnatureofinsects’,inBrown(ed.),InsectPoetics,pp.288-297


28

ofVictoriancultureandpoliticalstabilitythattheBritishwerepromisingto

introduceincolonialIndia.

Contemporarywritersintheimperialage,manyofthemBritish,appropriated

thequestionofwhiteantstoassertcivilizationaldifferences.Theyagreedthat

whileBritishcolonialinterestsdiscardedwhiteantsasaharmfulpest,

inhabitantsof‘theeast’,andofpartsof‘IndiaasinAfrica’knewhowtomakeuse

ofwhiteants.Itwasobservedthatthesepeopleacceptedwhiteantsasobjectsof

food.89Oneauthorsuggestedthatwhileinsect-eatinghadprecedentsindifferent

civilizationsinprevioushistoricalepochs,thesepracticeseventuallysurvived

moreextensivelybeyondWesternEuropeandamongthe‘savagenations’.90An

articlepublishedintheScientificAmericanin1893entitled‘WhiteantsinIndia’

impliedthatinconsumingwhiteants,‘theAfricans’sharedtheeating

preferencesoflizards,toads,andbirds.91Evenwhenencouragingtheir

compatriotstoeatinsects(includingwhiteants),Britishwritersacknowledged

thatmanycontemporariesconsideredthesepracticesamarkerofthelackof

civilization.TheEntomologistintheImperialDepartmentofAgriculturefor

India,H.Maxwell-Lefroy,claimedin1909thateatinginsectsreflectedthe

‘expertnessofthelittle-civilisedportionofmankind’,andthat‘peoplewho

practisethishabitarenotthoseofwhom…civilizationreaches’.92

89H.Maxwell-Lefroy,Indianinsectlife,(Calcutta,1909),p.277;Lardner,Thebee,p.101;VincentM.Holt,Whynoteatinsects?(London,1885),pp.5590Holt,Whynot,pp.33,4791Anonymous,‘WhiteantsinIndia’92Maxwell-Lefroy,Indianinsectlife,p.276;Holt,Whynot,pp.32-33,47


29

Beforeheacquiredhisnotorietyasthepioneerofeugenics,FrancisGaltonhad

writtenatravellers’manual,firstpublishedin1855,inwhichhearguedthat

nativesof‘wildcountries’(asdistinctfrom‘civilisedandpartlycivilisednations’)

dugholes‘inthesidesof’whiteants’nestsandusedthemasovensforthe

purposesofcooking.93AnothertravelnarrativepublishedinLondonin1912

claimedthatthe‘negroes’ofWestAfricaperpetrated‘ghastlyformsoftorture’

byforciblyfasteninghumanstowhiteants’nests.Theauthorobservedthatit

wasnotunusualintheregiontofindskeletonsofhumanstiedtonests,tento

twentyfeethigh.94

Thesewritersbelievedthatunlikewhatwastobeexpectedincontemporary

‘civilisedEngland’,95whiteantswereintegratedwithinvarioussocialpracticesof

the‘Negroes’ofWestAfrica,intheso-calledwildcountriesandin‘theeast’.An

articleintheAmericanNaturalistin1876arguedthatadvancementof‘culture’

wasantitheticaltotheproliferationofwhiteants.ItclaimedthatinAfricaand

India,‘whereacenturyagomassiveant-hillsweretobefoundneartheshore,

nowsomedays’journeyinlandhavetobemadetofindthem.’Thisperiod,

accordingtothearticle,coincidedwiththe‘stepbystep…retreatofwhiteants…

infrontofarapidlyadvancingculture’,when‘mankind’tookcontroloverwhite

ants,forcingthisrepresentativeof‘nature(to)stepbehind’.Therefore,the

hundred-yearperiodthatmarkedamongotherdevelopmentstheadventof

93FrancisGalton,Theartoftravel;orshiftsandcontrivancesavailableinwildcountries,4thedition(London,1867),pp.iv,20594MaryGaunt,AloneinWestAfrica,(London,1912),p194-19595Galton,Theartoftravel,(2ndedition,1856),p.iii


30

colonialruleinAfricaandIndia,thisarticleimplied,wenthandinhandwith‘the

advanceofculture’andthe‘retreatofwhiteants’.96

Meanwhile,inIndia,whiteantsweredescribedbyBritishnaturalistslikeEHAas

‘thefoeofcivilization…theGoths…ofIndianlife’.97ThetitleofEHA’sbookTribes

onmyFrontier:AnIndiannaturalist’sforeignpolicy,firstpublishedin1881,

whichcontainsachapteronwhiteants,isrevealing.98Incolonialethnographic

discourse,tribeswereconstructedasprimitivesavages,whowerebelievedto

inhabittheoutskirtsofcivilizedcolonialrule.Therefore,greatercontroland

extensionofthefrontiersofempirewasoftenjustifiedintermsoftheneedto

incorporatethetribesmorefirmlywithinthesphereofmodernityandcivilized

governance.99Thefrontierwasalsoimaginedasathresholdwhereencounters

withtheuncanny,theunknownandtheunfamiliarbecamemorefrequent.The

inclusionofwhiteantsasoneofthe‘tribesonmyfrontier’meantthattheinsect

wasdeployedasametaphorforthesupposedlyunrulyanduncivilizedsubjects

inhabitingtheperipheriesofimperialcontrol.Thetitledeliberatelysuggestsa

linkbetweenthe‘foreignpolicies’oftheBritishnaturalistandtheBritish

imperialist,implyingthatthegraspofnaturebyculture,thedominationof

nonhumansbyhumans,andtheconquestoftheso-calledtribesbytheostensibly

civilizedwereanalogousprocesses.100

96Hagen,‘Theprobabledanger’,pp.409-41097EHA,‘Whiteants’98EHA,TheTribesonmyfrontier:AnIndiannaturalist’sforeignpolicy,(London,1904)99Forexample,GertrudeM.Godden,‘Nagaandotherfrontiertribesofnorth-eastIndia’,JournaloftheAnthropologicalInstituteofGreatBritainandIreland,26(1897),pp.161-167;ElizabethKolsky,‘Thecolonialruleoflawandthelegalregimeofexception:Frontier“fanaticism”andstateviolenceinBritishIndia’,AmericanHistoricalReview,120,4(2015),pp.1218-1246100OnwhiteantsandcolonialmetaphorsinothercontextsseeDouglasandDriver,‘Imagining’,pp.106-108,109-110;Clark,Bugs,pp.2-3


31

Thus,controlofwhiteants(andtheprotectionofwoodandpaper)wasnot

merelyanecessitytoensuretheunhinderedfunctioningofBritishcolonial

power,butmoreintimatelyentangledwiththefundamentalcivilizingideologies

ofempireitself.Backedwithsuchideologicalcertitude,Britishofficials

advocatedthedestructionofwhiteantsinthemostevocativelanguage.EHA,for

example,describedthe‘wholesaleslaughterofwhiteants’bybats,owls,kites

andcrowsas‘thegreatcrusade’whichtheseanimalsjoined,‘washingout…the

scandaloftheirpastlives’.101Otherwritersdescribedgovernmenteffortsagainst

whiteantsasresistance,afight,andwaragainsta‘publicenemy’.102

Whiteantsalsoprovokedcolonialapologists,onoccasions,toproposemore

heinousformsofwidespreadservitudethanwasexplicitinBritishIndiainthe

secondhalfofthenineteenthcentury.Forexample,in1859,ananonymous

newspaperentrylamentedtheabsenceofslavelabourinthesubcontinent.The

authorclaimingtobe‘onewhohasbeenasugarplanterbothinEastandWest

Indies’arguedthatthisabsenceofslaveswouldfrustratetheabilityofplantation

interestsinIndiatocompetewithplantersincountriessuchasCuba,where

slaveryexistedatthetime.Theauthorarguedthatravagescausedbywhiteants

toagricultureinIndia,coupledwithathoroughlyinadequateirrigationnetwork,

couldonlybecompensatedbytherelentlesshardworkperformedbyslave

labour,because‘thesableAfricanundercoercioninatropicalclimateisthemost

101EHA,‘Whiteants’102IOR/E/4/801,pp.pp1081-1084;Anonymous,‘Awaragainstwhiteants’,TOI,17April1902,p.4;Anonymous,‘Fightingthewhiteant’,TOI,26April1912,p.6;Anonymous,‘Apublicenemy’,TOI,6February1936,p.10


32

efficientcultivator,whendirectedbytheskill,enterprise,andintellectofthe

whiteman..’103

IV

SouthAsianssharedtheBritishimperialpracticeofdescribingwhiteantsas

sinistercreatures,evenwhenrepresentingtheirownpoliticalagendasand

institutions.ThepioneeringBengalinovelistBankimchandraChattopadhyay’s

iconicworkAnandaMathhadaprincipalprotagonistwhoarguedthatfeedingon

‘whiteants’earth’(probablyreferringtothewhiteants’nestmadeupofclay)

wasaprominentsymboloftheimpoverishmentofHindusubjectsunder‘Muslim

rule’priortotheconsolidationofBritishcolonialismintheIndian

subcontinent.104Similarly,asthehistorianMushirulHasansuggests,the

nineteenth-centuryintellectualNazirAhmadcomparedfactorsthatcontributed

collectivelytotheunderminingof‘shariat’lawsandthelossofIslamicidentityin

SouthAsiawithwhiteants.105

ThelegaciesofBritishsymbolicusesofwhiteantscanbetracedinpost-colonial

scholarlyliteratureonIndia,attimesauthoredbySouthAsiansthemselves.In

1941,PercivalChristopherWren,whohadbeenearlieremployedatthecolonial

103Anonymous,‘Cultivationofsugar’,MorningPost,29December1859,p.3.Contemporarywriterswithalternativeopinionsinvokedinsectstoindictslaveryaswell.SeeJamesMoore,‘Darwin’sprogressandtheproblemofslavery’,ProgressinHumanGeography,34,5(2010),p.580104BankimchandraChattopadhyay,AnandaMath,5thedition,(Calcutta,1892),p.25.Onhispoliticssee‘prefacetothesecondedition’.Also,TanikaSarkar,‘ImaginingaHindunation:HinduandMusliminBankimchandra’slaterwritings’,EconomicandPoliticalWeekly,29,39(14September1994),pp.2553-2561105MushirulHasan,Amoralreckoning:Muslimintellectualsinnineteenth-centuryDelhi,(Delhi,2012/2007),p.156


33

Indianeducationalservice,wroteashortstorycalled‘Whiteants’.106Setin‘a

villageinwesternIndia’,thisstoryusesthemetaphorofwhiteantsintwo

contradictoryways.First,thestorydescribesIndianparticipantsatthelower

levelofthecolonialjudicialapparatusascorruptandevil.Wrensymbolically

comparedtheseIndianswithwhiteants,whomadethe‘woodenpillars’of

suburbancourthousesvacuous,andthereforerenderedthefoundationsof

coloniallawandjusticedysfunctional.

But,morerevealinglythestoryalsoanticipatesthatIndiannationalistscould

appropriatewhiteantsasametaphorforBritishimperialismitself.Inan

electrifyingspeechinthestory,afictitiousIndiannationalistleader,Mohandas

LalaMisraisheardstatingthatbehind‘theircoveringorfaçadeofjustice’and

‘theirprotectivecrustoftalkandshowofeducation,sanitation’and

administration,thecolonialgovernment‘areslayingtheSoulofaPeople,as

secretly,butassurelyandterribly,asthewhiteantinsectsdestroymaterial

things’.107

ThissecondpossibilityhintedbyWrenacquiredunexpectedafterlifeinan

articleauthoredbyIndianacademicGaneshPrasadin1960.Theauthor

comparedthetraditionalvillage,‘onlytheskeleton’ofwhich‘survivedthe

techno-economicconquestunderBritishrule’,withahollowtreethecoreof

106PercivalChristopherWren,‘Whiteants’,inOddbutevenso-storiesstrangerthanfiction,(London,1941);H.F.Oxbury,‘Wren,PercivalChristopher(1875-1941)’,Oxforddictionaryofnationalbiography,http://www.oxforddnb.com/view/10.1093/ref:odnb/9780198614128.001.0001/odnb-9780198614128-e-38154[retrievedon21September2018]107Wren,‘Whiteants’,p.3


34

whichhadbeeneatenupbywhiteants.‘Thewhiteantshadeatentheone;the

WhiteSahebshaddamagedtheother’ssoulbeyondrepair’.108

Meanwhile,apartfrombeingperceivedasdetrimentaltocolonialgovernance,

realwhiteantsbegantobeseenasathreattovarioussymbolsoftheemerging

Indiannation.Municipalcorporations,whichwerelocalcivicbodiessetupby

thecolonialgovernmentinkeyurbancentres,increasinglyaccommodated

Indianrepresentativesinthesecondhalfofthenineteenthcentury,andbecame

institutionswherethefirstgenerationofIndiannationalistscouldasserttheir

influence.109Whiteantsmadetheirpresencefeltintheseinstitutionsfromthe

1880sonwards.InameetingoftheBombaymunicipalcorporationheldonthe

10thofDecember1888,whichwasdominated,atleastnumerically,bySouth

Asianmembers,whiteantswereallegedtohavedestroyedstationerybelonging

tothemunicipality.110Inasimilarmeetingafewyearslater,anIndianmember

oftheBombaymunicipalcorporationmovedaresolutionpointingoutthatwhite

antshaddamagedthecablesrequiredtoinstallelectriclightsatthemunicipal

office.111WhiteantscontinuedtokeepIndianofficialsatthemunicipalitybusy

evenaftertheformalendofBritishcolonialrulein1947.112Whiteants,allegedly,

interferedwithpost-colonialgovernance.Newspaperreportsfromthe1950s

and1960srefertoinstancesinwhichwhiteantswereblamedfordamaging

propertybelongingtogovernmenthospitals,disruptingprovincialelectionsby

108GaneshPrasad,‘EclecticisminmodernIndia’,IndianJournalofPoliticalScience,21,3(July-September,1960),p.239109ForexamplePrashantKidambi,‘NationalismandthecityincolonialIndia,Bombay,c.1890-1940’,JournalofUrbanHistory,38,5(2012),pp.950-967110Anonymous,‘BombayMunicipalCorporation’,TOI,11December1888,p.6111Anonymous,‘Bombaycorporation’,TOI,11October1901,p3112Christe,‘DDT’


35

eatingintoballotboxesandballotpapers,andfordestroyingstocksofwheatby

makingtheirwaysintogovernment-owned‘godowns’.113

Evenmetaphoricalusesofwhiteantshavepersisteduntilveryrecenttimes.

CampaigningfortheHimachalPradeshassemblyelectionsinNovember2017,

theIndianPrimeMinisterNarendraModicomparedhispoliticaladversary,the

Congress,towhiteants."Ifyoucleanjustonthesurface,termitescomeback

afterafewdays.TheCongressparty'sdepravedmentalityisliketermites.You

cannotjustchangethegovernmentandexpecttobedonewithit,youhaveto

takethemoutfromtheroots.OnlythenwecanfreeHimachalofthisdisease,"he

said.114

Atthesametime,post-colonialIndiaalsowitnessednewertrends.Indeed,in

whatappearstohavebeenabreakfrompredominantnineteenth-centuryBritish

imperialdiscourse,whiteants’nestsinlatecolonialSouthAsiawereupheldby

someasanidealmodelinadeeplyconflictedandchangingworld.SouthAsian

writersaswellasthosewhodescribedthemselvesasAnglo-Indians,too,

contributedtothesenewertrends,andinsodoingarticulatedtheirspecific

politicalcontextsandideologicalbiases.

S.H.Prater,aformercuratoroftheNaturalHistoryMuseuminBombay,wasthe

PresidentoftheBombayPresidencybranchoftheAnglo-IndianandDomiciled

113Anonymous,‘Newinsecticideforwhiteants’,TOI,28May1950,p.15;Anonymous,‘Whiteantsdelayelectionresults’,TOI,1February1952,p.5;Anonymous,‘Whiteantseatballotpapers’,TOI,6March1955,p.1;Anonymous,‘Termiteseatupunsoldwheat’,TOI,3December1960,p.1114‘Congressliketermites,wipethemout,saysPMModiinHimachal’,NDTV,4November2017,https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DvAkviUz4hw[accessedon19September2018]


36

EuropeanAssociationbetween1930and1947,anditsrepresentativetothe

BombayLegislativeCounciluntil1947.AftertheendofBritishruleinIndia,he

waselectedtotheIndianConstituentAssemblyin1948asarepresentativeof

theAnglo-Indiancommunity.Hewroteanarticleonwhiteants,whichwas

publishedintheTimesofIndiainDecember1947.Inayearmarkedby

decolonisationandcontinuingcommunalriotsacrossSouthAsia,Prater,an

electedrepresentativeofaminoritycommunityinSouthAsia,echoedanarticle

authoredbyoneMajorB.HockingoftheOrdnancelaboratoriesinCawnporetwo

yearsearliertoarguethatwhiteantscouldserveasamodelfor‘harmonious’

existence.115Hesuggestedthatthe‘harmoniouslife’withinthewhiteants’nest

wasachievedthrough‘theidealsofcommunismfulfilledtotheletter’.Prater

observedthateachindividual(thequeen,theking,workers,soldiersetc.)

workeduniformlyandcarriedouttheirdesignatedfunctionsfor‘common

welfareandgood’;therewasno‘differentiatedscaleofwages’andeach

individualhadtheir‘shareintheproductsofthecommunityasawhole’.Prater

deniedthattherewasarulingclassinthewhiteants’nest,suggestingthatevery

individualhad‘equalstatus’,andthatevenkingsandqueenswere‘sovereigns

onlyinname’.They,likeotherinhabitantsofthenest,arguedPrater,‘arebut

cogsinthecommunalmachine,whereeachindividualbecomesamechanical

unit,completingitsappointedtaskandreceivingitsshareoffood’.Theviewthat

thequeen’ssovereigntyandprivilegeweretemperedbyhercaptivestatus

withintheroyalcellexistedinthenineteenthcentury.Yet,theideathatthe

organisationofinsectlifewithinthewhiteants’nestreflectedavisionof115S.H.Prater,‘Thesocialsystemoftermitesorwhiteants’,TOI,28December1947,p.4;B.Hocking,‘Entomologyandwar’,IndianJournalofEntomology,7,1-2(JuneandDecember1945),p.2.OnPraterseeSalimAli,"StanleyHenryPrater."JournaloftheBombayNaturalHistorySociety,57,3(1960),pp.637-642.


37

communism,characterisedby‘amicabledivisionoflabour’anddissolutionof

hierarchies,appearstohavebeenrelativelyrecent.116

Inpost-colonialIndia,thecelebrationofwhiteants’nestsasamodelfor

communism,asevidentinPrater’sarticle,seemstohaveacquiredanenduring

afterlife.However,thisideacouldbeappropriatedtoendorsecontradictory

socialpractices.Inhispresidentialaddresstothe‘internationalsymposiumon

termitesinthehumidtropics’heldinNewDelhiinOctober1960,MithanLal

Roonwal,whowasthePresidentoftheZoologicalSocietyofIndia,returnedto

thistheme,describingwhiteants’nestsas‘nature’sfirstexperimentinlarge

scalesocialism’.117Revealingly,hecombinedthisdiscussionwithacelebrationof

the‘castesystem’amongstinsects.Discriminationbetweenhumansonthebasis

ofcastesystemhasbeenoneofmostviolentaspectsofSouthAsiansocietyand

thisnecessitatedsignificantpoliticalprotestsincolonialandpost-colonialIndia.

While,therewasalongtraditionwithinnaturalhistoryofreferringtodifferent

categoriesofwhiteantsas‘castes’,itishighlyunlikelythatRoonwalwas

oblivioustothesociologicalimplicationsof‘caste’inthecontemporaryIndian

context.‘Culturally,thestudyofthetermitesociety,whichhasarigidcaste

system,isofthegreatestinteresttohumansocialorganization’,heargued.He

founditcommendablethatwhiteants‘ungrudgingly’participatedinacaste-

baseddivisionoflabour.Helinkedthesupposed‘socialharmony’amongstwhite

antswiththeirvoluntaryparticipationinaleaderless‘rigidcastesystem’,

116Prater,‘Thesocialsystem’;Prater’scomparisonoftheorganisationwithinwhiteants’nestwithcommunismwasn’tentirelyoriginal.Forafarlesssympathetictakeonthesimilaritiesbetweencommunisticprinciplesandthewhiteants’nestseeMauriceMaeterlinck,Thelifeofthewhiteant,(NewYork,1927),pp.69,161-164117M.L.Roonwal,‘Addressbythepresident’,inInternationalsymposiumontermitesinthehumidtropics,ProceedingsofNewDelhisymposium,(Paris,1962),p.10


38

praisingthefactthateachcategoryofwhiteantsfunctionedalongthewaysthey

werepredeterminedbybirth.118Injustifyingthecastesystemamongwhiteants

hecondoned,andprobablymirrored,thediscriminatoryspiritinwhichcaste

systemswereprevalentinhumansociety.

TheidealizationofwhiteantsincontemporaryIndiacouldbeevenmoreexplicit.

TowardstheendoftheNehruvianperiod,theTimesofIndiapublishedapiece

thatpraisedwhiteantsforconstructingexemplarypolities.Itarguedthatthe

worldofwhiteantswascharacterizedbyideologicalvalues,whichhumans

shouldemulate.Thus,accordingtothispiece,thewhiteantswere‘pure

republicans’;theyconstitutedaworldmarkedbythe‘highestformsof

democraticsocialism’,andtheabsenceof‘linguisticorculturalfeuds’,orCold

War‘betweenoneismandanother’.Itacknowledgedthat‘evenifsomecasteism’

existeditwas‘regularlykeptundercheck’,andevenifwarswere‘occasionally

fought’,peacewas‘soonrestoredregardlessoftheprice’.Whiteants,according

tothispiece,seemtohaveremovedsomeoftheimpedimentstowardseffective

governance,suchasverboseargumentsabouttherelativemeritsof‘privateand

publicsectors’,revolutionariesandbeatniks.‘Alltheangryyoungtermiteswere

liquidatedaeonsago’.119Theworldofwhiteants,itimplied,displayedsomeof

thecontradictionscharacteristicofmanystrong,independentandmodern

nationstates:democracy,peaceandstabilityco-existingwithintolerance

towardspoliticaldissent.Manyoftheseidealsweredrawnfrompolitical

vocabularyrecurrentincontemporaryIndia.Theworldofwhiteantswasupheld

118Roonwal,‘Address’,pp.9-10119Anonymous,‘Gotothewhiteant,sluggard’,TOI,9October1960,p.8


39

asautopia,whichreflectedvaluesthattheauthor,onemightspeculate,desired

thefledglingIndiannationtorepresent.

V

Thisarticlehasshownthatwhiteantsaddedtothechaosofcolonialgovernance

byinterferingwiththepoliticaldomainsofbureaucracyandinfrastructure.120

Although,whiteantsmaynothaveconsideredthemselvesasanti-imperial

actors,theiractivities,ineffect,inhibitedtheconsolidationofimperialpower.

Thevantagepointofentomo-politicsenableshistorianstocontestanysurviving

mythabouttheuncompromisingcompletenessofimperialpower.Atthesame

time,self-awarenessofvulnerabilitydidnotmakethecolonialstateweaker,or

generallyindecisive.121Onthecontrary,thewhiteantproblemrevealsthat

colonialpowerinIndiawasfoundedonanincreasinglydeep-rootedstatethat

wasvigilantaboutnumerousnodeswherethecherishedstabilityofBritishrule

couldberuptured.Thus,theinfinitesimalpresenceofwhiteantsweretrackedin

arangeofsitesincludinggovernors’houses,railwaycarriagesandbridges,ships,

hedgesandtelegraphposts,andevenintheundergroundgalleriesandchambers

ofinsects’nests.Thewhiteantproblemmadethecolonialstatemoreresilient

120OnchaosandempireJonWilson,Indiaconquered:Britain’sRajandtheChaosofEmpire,(London,2016)121Infact,accountsofvulnerabilitycouldbeinvokedtojustifyandevenco-existwithviolentimperialaggression.SeeKimWagner,‘“Treadinguponfires”:The“mutiny”-motifandcolonialanxietiesinBritishIndia’,PastandPresent,218,1(February,2013),pp.171-172,175,191,193,194;RanajitGuha,‘NotathomeinEmpire’,CriticalInquiry,23,3(Spring,1997),pp.482-493.OnviolenceandvulnerabilityWilson,India


40

andintrusive.Thesphereofstrictgovernmentalinterventionwasextendedto

includebothanimateandinanimatenonhumans,whiletheissueofwhiteants

wasappropriatedtostereotypecolonisedlandscapes,peoplesandcultures.

Nonetheless,entomo-politicalencountersinSouthAsiawerenotentirelywithin

thecontrolofthecolonialstate.Despiteeffectiveinterventionsofthestate,white

antsdidn’tvanishaltogether,andremainedobjectsofeverydaycontroltillthe

finaldecadeofcolonialruleandafter.Meanwhile,colonisedandpost-colonial

SouthAsiansusedwhiteantstoarticulatetheirowndistinctpoliticalagendas.

Focusonentomo-politicsalsohighlightssomeofthekeymaterialfoundationsof

colonialpowerinBritishIndiainthelongnineteenthcentury.122Whiteants

cametotheattentionofcolonialofficialsbecausetheyostensibly‘ateinto’wood

andpaper,whichwereconsideredamongtheessentialingredientsonwhich

colonialruleinIndiawasfounded.Thesematerialsthereforeacquiredpolitical

significance,andprotectingthemfromwhiteantsbecameapriorityforthe

governmentanditsrepresentatives.Seenfromtheperspectiveofwhiteants,

Empireappearstohavebeena‘power-saturatedmaterial-discursive’123

assemblage,sustainedbymaterialslikewood,paper,varnishes,metallic

particles,protectiveandpoisonouschemicals,ontheonehand,andhierarchical

discoursesofrace,placeandcivilisation,ontheother.

122Onpaper,forexample,Raman,DocumentRaj;Guyot-Rechard,‘Tourdiaries’.Onwoodinanotherimperialcontext,AlanMikhail,NatureandEmpireinOttomanEgypt:Anenvironmentalhistory,(Cambridge,2011),pp.124-168123HughRaffles,‘Towardsacriticalnaturalhistory’,Antipode,37,2(March2005),p.377.OntheenmeshesofmaterialsandpoliticsseealsoTonyBennettandPatrickJoyce(eds.),MaterialPowers:Culturalstudies,historyandthematerialturn,(Abingdon,2010);BruceBraunandSarahJ.Whatmore(eds.),PoliticalMatter:Technoscience,democracyandpubliclife,(Minneapolis,2010)


41

Finally,thehistoryofentomo-politicsexaminedinthisarticleconteststhenotion

thatinsectsbelongedpurelytothedomainofnaturallife.124InhisInsectMedia,

JussiParikkapointsout,citingthephilosopherRosiBraidotti,thatlife(including

insect-life)‘isthedoublearticulationofbios(politicsanddiscourse)andzoe

(nonhumanintensity),acontinuousintensivecreationthatisalsocontinuously

articulatedonasociallevelofpowerandknowledge….’125Historianshave

beguntoexplorethepolitical,culturalandepistemologicalcontextsinwhichthe

livelynaturalcharacteristicsofinsectswerestudied,recognizedand

exploited.126Theyhavecontributedtoanapproachthat,followingthe

anthropologistHughRaffles,canbereferredtoas‘criticalnaturalhistory’,that

takes‘seriouslyboththe“natural”andthe“historical”’,andtheirinter-

relationships.127Buildingontheseinsights,thisarticlehasdrawnattentionto

thewaysinwhichinsectswere,asDonnaHarawaywouldsuggest,‘natural-

cultural’creatures,whichbelongedexclusivelytoneitherdomains.128The

naturalpropertiesofwhiteants,toagreatextent,wereexperienced,recorded

andrestrainedbycolonialofficials.Incontrollingwhiteants,colonial

governmentalofficialsalsoconsolidatedandsharedtheirknowledgeofthe

conditionsinwhichwhiteantsthrivedandperished.Whiteantsfeaturedin

memoirsofofficials-turned-naturalists,incolonialliteraryfiction,andwere

commissionedassubjectsofart.Whiteantswereusedasaflexiblemetaphorto

articulateamyriadofpoliticalpositions:Thus,humanassociationwithwhite

antswasclaimedtobeamarkerofprimitivecivilizationsandIslamicmisrule;

124Forexample,Hagen,‘Theprobabledanger’,pp.409-410125Parikka,InsectMedia,p.xxiv126Clark,Bugs;Sleigh,Sixlegsbetter;Melillo,‘Globalentomologies’127Raffles,‘Towards’,p.375128DonnaHaraway,Whenspeciesmeet,(Minneapolis,2008),pp.25,47,62


42

theostensiblesocialorganizationofwhiteantswerecomparedinvarious

momentswithBritishimperialexploitation,communism,democraticsocialism,

andeventheIndianNationalCongress.Ahistoryofentomo-politicsincolonial

andpost-colonialSouthAsiathusrevealsthatinsectssuchaswhiteantswere

shapedby,andtraversedtheporousdomainsofnature,cultureandpolitics.

ross version white ants, empire and entomo-politics in south …centaur.reading.ac.uk/72605/1/ross...

Documents