When gifts aren’t an innocent show of affection
Subscribe to enjoy similar stories. In 1875, when the Prince of Wales visited India on a grand public relations tour, officials were confronted with an awkward issue. In keeping with protocol, wherever Queen Victoria’s son went, he would receive presents, from representatives of the Indian people as well as assorted rajahs and nawabs.
Madurai’s residents, for example, offered a beautiful “gold basket". A rani presented a “boomerang of steel inlaid with silver and gold mountings" while a rajah gave a bed of ivory (a naughty gesture, perhaps, given the prince’s known proclivity for climbing into beds where he did not belong). Over the next few months, Edward collected over 2,000 items in the subcontinent, ranging from jewellery and armour to nutcrackers.
The trouble, though, was this: the standard of the gifts acquired by this representative of imperial might surpassed those he was able to offer in return. In south India alone, the value of presents he gave was £8,000; the gifts he received, on the other hand, were worth some £20,000. It is no wonder that his entourage was unhappy.
The exchange of gifts in political settings was rarely an innocent demonstration of affection. It was, instead, an instrument of politics. Britain had mastered India, and loudly advertised its glory.
It was embarrassing, therefore, when the queen’s heir showed up in the country with a crate of niggardly gifts. Interestingly, this was not the first time Europeans found themselves in this situation. Even at the dawn of colonialism in India, there had been a list of laughably bad presents.
Read more on livemint.com
