It has been said there are three general types of backward capital countries: staggered structure types, types lacking a national economy, and colonial types. This paper will take up India as a case study of the colonial type of country and will examine the process of change in an Indian city structure during the formation of the capitalist system. The research up until now of cities in colonial India has strongly emphasized the colonial aspect of the city. It has examined the relationship between British rule policy and the formation of the city.
However, such research has insufficiently considered the character of British rule policy, and the historical and regional characteristics peculiar to colonial India. It has more specifically ignored the British policy of“divide and rule”, which led to differences between British India and the Indian States. It has also overlooked historical and regional differences, in particular, the differences between northern and southern India.
With these above factors in mind, this paper will focus on Mysore, the capital of an Indian State controlled by a Hindu royal family. It will also examine the differences in the characteristics of the colonial city in general, as compared to Mysore, a somewhat different“royal city”.
The conclusions of this paper are as follows:
1) As for the process of change in the city structure, one can see four periods in reaction to the changing fortunes of the royal family: a) Pre-restoration (-1799), b) Post-restoration (1800-1831), c) Rule by British commissioners (1831-1881), and finally d) Post-rendition (1881-1947). The Post-rendition period can furthermore be divided into two subperiods, the Pre-CITB (City Improvement Trust Board) establishment (1881-1903), and the Post-CITB establishment (1903-1947).
2) In Mysore, there was no residential segregation based on race. In the more typical colonial city of Calcutta, the inferior living conditions of the Indian residential district were a problem, but in Mysore city planning was not implemented throughout the entire city region. Remarkably, there was no problem of racial segregation. However, even in Mysore, indirect British influence at the local level created a kind of segregation. For example, the British arranged for the preservation of open spaces in the eastern part of the city for the aesthetic pleasure of an important British official. The effect of this resembled segregation in that this eastern area was populated mainly by the British, but still segregation on the scale of that in Calucutta did not exist in Mysore.
3) The development of Mysore occurred in a mutual and synergistic fashion with the nearby city of Bangalore. Mysore developed as a royal city, a tourist city, and as a cultural city. Bangalore developed as a colonial city, an industrial city, and as an administrative city. Thus, the functions of each city assisted in the development of the other.
4) The meaning of“tradition”in Mysore is unique. In otherwords, because many of the historical buildings in Mysore were constructed at the begining of this century, they do not possess a tradition in the sense that the buildings are old. Instead, these buildings have a so-called“traditional”atmosphere in the sense that they represent a mixture of Hindu ideals and modern European architecture. This building style was ordered by the Hindu princes in an effort to synthesize Hindu values with modern European ideas.

抄録全体を表示