Racism underlined the arguments of two dominant lines of thought that emerged from this assumption. Education in English became a high priority with the goal to speed up modernization and reduce administrative charges. Colonial authorities fervently debated the question of the best policy, falling roughly in one of the two main camps. The orientalists believed that education should happen in Indian languages and favored classical or court languages like Sanskrit or Persian.
Conversely, the utilitarians also called anglicists strongly believed that traditional India had nothing to teach regarding modern skills and the best education would happen in English. One of the most influential reformers, Thomas Babington Macaulay — , belonged to the latter group. Macaulay was a historian and politician who represented the tradition of Whig history, according to which the past is an inevitable progression towards ever greater liberty and enlightenment, culminating in modern forms of liberal democracy and constitutional monarchy.
In general, Whig historians emphasize the rise of constitutional government, personal freedoms, and scientific progress. Macauley went to India in and served on the Supreme Council of India until This aimed to create a class of anglicized Indians to serve as cultural intermediaries between the British and the Indians.
Macualay assumed that the creation of such a class was necessary before any reform of vernacular education. Under Macaulay, thousands of elementary and secondary schools opened, typically with all-male student bodies.
Missionaries opened their own schools that taught Christianity and the 3-Rs reading, writing, and arithmetic. Universities in Calcutta, Bombay, and Madras were established in , just before the Rebellion.
By , some 60, Indians had matriculated, chiefly in the liberal arts or law. About a third entered public administration and another third became lawyers. The result was a very well-educated professional state bureaucracy. Of the 1, top-level positions, almost all were held by Britons, typically with Oxbridge degrees.
By , the number of institutions had doubled and enrollment reached , The curriculum followed classical British standards et by Oxford and Cambridge and stressed English literature and European history. All these benefits of education, however, went to the Indian elites and middle classes, who were expected to serve as loyal supporters of the British rule in India. Historians of Indian education have generally linked the idea of educational reform under the British rule to colonial dominance and control.
Those who advocated actual reforms became less influential. This campaign served to strengthen imperial support at home and thus bolster the moral authority of the elites who ran the Empire. Rajabai Clock Tower, seen here shrouded in scaffolding, was completed in The Indian Rebellion of known also as the Great Uprising of resulted from an accumulation of factors over time rather than from any single event.
New sepoys local soldiers, usually of Hindu or Muslim background were recruited and to forestall any social friction, the Company took action to adapt its military practices to the requirements of their religious rituals.
Over time, however, sepoys developed a number of grievances. After the annexation of Oudh Awadh by the EIC in , many sepoys were disquieted both from losing their perquisites as landed gentry and from the anticipation of any increased land-revenue payments that the annexation might bring about. Furthermore, by , some Indian soldiers, interpreting the presence of missionaries as a sign of official intent, were convinced that the Company was masterminding mass conversions of Hindus and Muslims to Christianity.
Finally, changes in the terms of professional service also created resentment. Moreover, the new recruits of the Bengal Army, who until had been exempted from overseas service in observance of certain caste rituals, were now required a commitment for general service.
There were also grievances over the issue of promotions based on seniority. This as well as the increasing number of European officers in the battalions made promotion slow, and many Indian officers did not reach commissioned rank until they were too old to be effective.
The final spark was provided by the ammunition for the new Enfield P rifle. These used paper cartridges that came pre-greased. To load the rifle, sepoys had to bite the cartridges open to release the powder. The grease used was rumored to include tallow derived from beef, offensive to Hindus, and pork, offensive to Muslims. There were rumors that the British sought to destroy the religions of the Indian people and forcing the native soldiers to break their sacred code certainly increased this concern.
The Company was quick to reverse the effects of the policy in hopes that the unrest would be quelled. This, however, convinced many sepoys that the rumors were true and that their fears were justified. Civilians developed their own grievances against the Company. The nobility, many of whom lost titles and domains under the Doctrine of Lapse which refused to recognize the adopted children of princes as legal heirs, felt that the Company had interfered with a traditional system of inheritance.
In the areas of central India where such loss of privilege had not occurred, the princes remained loyal to the Company, even in areas where the sepoys had rebelled.
Rural landlords called taluqdars lost half their landed estates to peasant farmers as a result of the land reforms that came in the wake of annexation of Oudh. Eventually, the civilian rebellion was highly uneven in its geographic distribution and historians still attempt to explain why some areas rebelled while others remained calm.
At Meerut, a large military cantonment, 2, Indian sepoys and 2, British soldiers were stationed along with 12 British-manned guns. The station held one of the largest concentrations of British troops in India and this was later cited as evidence that the original rising was a spontaneous outbreak rather than a pre-planned plot.
The rebellion began as a mutiny of sepoys on May 10, , in the cantonment of the town of Meerut, and soon escalated into other mutinies and civilian rebellions, largely in the upper Gangetic plain and central India, with the major hostilities confined to present-day Uttar Pradesh, western Bihar, northern Madhya Pradesh, and the Delhi region. The large princely states of Hyderabad, Mysore, Travancore, and Kashmir, as well as the smaller ones of Rajputana, did not join the rebellion.
In some regions such as Oudh, the rebellion took on the attributes of a patriotic revolt against European presence. Some rebel leaders, such as Lakshmibai, the Rani of Jhansi, became folk heroes in the nationalist movement in India half a century later. In the Bengal Presidency, the revolt was entirely centered on Bihar, which experienced multiple disturbances in the Shahabad region where the revolt was led by Kunwar Singh.
In Punjab, the Sikh princes backed the Company by providing soldiers and support. In general, the rebels were disorganized, had differing goals, were poorly equipped, led, and trained, and had no outside support or funding. The rebellion was contained only with the Indian defeat in Gwalior on June 18, , during which Rani of Jhansi was killed. By , rebel leaders Bakht Khan and Nana Sahib had either been slain or had fled.
The rebellion and its aftermath resulted in the deaths of more than , Indians. The alleged killings of women and children by the rebels as well as wounded British soldiers left many British soldiers seeking revenge. The mutineers were hung or blown from cannon, an old Mughal punishment where sentenced rebels were tied over the mouths of cannons and blown to pieces when the cannons were fired.
Most of the British press, outraged by the stories of alleged rape and the killings of civilians and wounded British soldiers, did not advocate clemency of any kind. Incidents of rape allegedly committed by Indian rebels against European women and girls appalled the British public.
These atrocities were often used to justify the British reaction to the rebellion. The consensus was that there was no convincing evidence of such crimes having been committed, although numbers of European women and children had been killed outright.
In August, by the Government of India Act , the company was formally dissolved and its ruling powers over India were transferred to the British Crown. A new British government department, the India Office, was created to handle the governance of India, and its head, the Secretary of State for India, was entrusted with formulating Indian policy.
On a political level, the British assumed that the previous lack of consultation between rulers and ruled was a significant factor in contributing to the uprising. In consequence, Indians were drawn into government at a local level, although on a limited scale. Nonetheless, a new white-collar Indian elite comprised of a professional middle class was starting to arise, in no way bound by the values of the past. The Bengal army dominated the Indian army before and a direct result after the rebellion was the scaling back of the size of the Bengali contingent.
The Brahmin presence in the Bengal Army was reduced because of their perceived primary role as mutineers. The rebellion transformed both the native and European armies of British India. The old Bengal Army almost completely vanished from the order of battle. There were also fewer European officers, but they associated themselves far more closely with their soldiers. More responsibility was given to the Indian officers. The economy of British India was largely designed to protect and expand interests of the British economy, but the British collaborated closely with the Indian elites who, unlike the masses of ordinary Indians, benefited from the many economic changes.
In the second half of the 19th century, both the direct administration of India by the British Crown and the technological change ushered in by the Industrial Revolution closely intertwined the economies of India and Great Britain. Many of the major changes in transport and communications typically associated with Crown Rule of India began before the Indian Rebellion of Finished goods from England were transported back just as efficiently for sale in the burgeoning Indian markets.
In the 17th century, India was a relatively urbanized and commercialized country with a buoyant export trade, devoted largely to cotton textiles but also including silk, spices, and rice. Yet while the British cotton industry underwent technological revolution in the late 18th century, the Indian industry stagnated and industrialization in India was delayed until the 20th century.
Historians have suggested that occurred because India was still a largely agricultural nation with low wages. In Britain, wages were relatively high, so cotton producers had the incentive to invent and purchase expensive new labor-saving technologies.
In India, by contrast, wages were low, so producers preferred to increase output by hiring more workers rather than investing in technology. British control of trade and exports of cheap Manchester cotton are cited as other significant factors. Despite the unrivaled quality of Indian cotton, universally recognized as late as the end of the 18th century, Indian textile exports declined significantly over the 19th century. High tariffs against Indian textile workshops and British restrictions on Indian cotton imports quickly transformed India from the source of textiles to a source of raw cotton.
Industrial production as it developed in European factories was unknown until the s when the first cotton mills opened in Bombay, posing a challenge to the cottage-based home production system based on family labor.
While other Indian mills produced cheap coarse yarn and later cloth using local short-staple cotton and cheap machinery imported from Britain, Tata imported expensive longer-stapled cotton from Egypt and bought more complex ring-spindle machinery from the United States to spin finer yarn that could compete with imports from Britain.
In the s, Tata launched plans to expand into heavy industry using Indian funding. It became the leading iron and steel producer in India, with , employees in A plan for a rail system in India was first put forward in A few short lines were built in the s, but they did not interconnect. In , Governor-General Lord Hardinge allowed private entrepreneurs to set up a rail system in India. The colonial government encouraged new railway companies backed by private investors under a scheme that would provide land and guarantee an annual return of up to five percent during the initial years of operation.
The companies were to build and operate the lines under a year lease, with the government having the option to buy them earlier. Encouraged by the government guarantees, investment flowed in and a series of new rail companies were established, leading to rapid expansion of the rail system in India. Soon several large princely states built their own rail systems and the network spread across regions. British investors and engineers built a modern railway system by the late 19th century. It was the fourth largest in the world and was renowned for quality of construction and service.
The government was supportive, realizing its value for military use in case of another rebellion as well as its value for economic growth. All the funding and management came from private British companies.
The railways at first were privately owned and operated and run by British administrators, engineers, and skilled craftsmen. At first, only the unskilled workers were Indians. Historians note that until the s, both the Raj lines and the private companies hired only European supervisors, civil engineers, and even operating personnel such as locomotive engineers. Like hiring practices, building and maintaining the railways were designed to benefit mostly British companies.
The government required that bids on railway contracts be made to the India Office in London, shutting out most Indian firms. The railway companies purchased most of their hardware and parts in Britain.
There were railway maintenance workshops in India, but they were rarely allowed to manufacture or repair locomotives. It later transpired that there was heavy corruption in these investments, on the part of both members of the British Colonial Government in India and companies who supplied machinery and steel in Britain.
This resulted in railway lines and equipment costing nearly double what they should have. India provides an example of the British Empire pouring its money and expertise into a well-built system designed for military purposes after the Rebellion of with the hope that it would stimulate industry. The system was overbuilt and too expensive for the small amount of freight traffic it carried. However, it did capture the imagination of the Indians, who saw their railways as the symbol of an industrial modernity—but one that was not realized until after Independence.
The result was, on average, no long-term change in income levels. Agriculture was still dominant, with most peasants at the subsistence level. Extensive irrigation systems were built, providing an impetus for growing cash crops for export and for raw materials for Indian industry, especially jute, cotton, sugarcane, coffee, and tea.
Agricultural income imparted the strongest effect on GDP. Historians continue to debate whether the long-term impact of British rule was to accelerate or hinder the economic development of India. He vehemently attacked the EIC, claiming that Warren Hastings and other top officials had ruined the Indian economy and society. Indian historian Rajat Kanta Ray continues this line of attack, arguing that the new economy brought by the British in the 18th century was a form of plunder and a catastrophe for the traditional economy of the Mughal Empire.
Marshall shows that recent scholarship has reinterpreted the view that the prosperity of the formerly benign Mughal rule gave way to poverty and anarchy. He argues the British takeover did not make any sharp break with the past, which largely delegated control to regional Mughal rulers and sustained a generally prosperous economy for the rest of the 18th century.
Marshall notes the British went into partnership with Indian bankers and raised revenue through local tax administrators, keeping the old Mughal rates of taxation.
Many historians agree that the EIC inherited an onerous taxation system that took one-third of the produce of Indian cultivators. Instead of the Indian nationalist account of the British as alien aggressors, seizing power by brute force and impoverishing all of India, Marshall presents the interpretation supported by many scholars in India and the West that the British were not in full control but instead were players in what was primarily an Indian play and in which their rise to power depended upon excellent cooperation with Indian elites.
Marshall admits that much of his interpretation is still highly controversial among many historians. However, historians agree that the British rule did not change the divisive caste-based hierarchy of the Indian society and thus ordinary Indians remained excluded from the benefits of economic growth. The railway network in , when it was the fourth largest railway network in the world.
In , almost all the rail companies were taken over by the government. The following year, the first electric locomotive made its appearance. With the arrival of World War I, the railways were used to meet the needs of the British outside India. With the end of the war, the railways were in a state of disrepair and collapse.
The Indian National Congress has dominated Indian politics since leading the Indian independence movement. In the post-independence era, it has remained the most influential political party in India under the continuous leadership of the Nehru-Gandhi political dynasty.
Its objective was to obtain a greater share in government for educated Indians and create a platform for civic and political dialogue between educated Indians and the British Raj.
The first session was held in December and attended by 72 delegates. The rest were of Parsi and Jain backgrounds. Within the next few years, the demands of the Congress became more radical in the face of constant opposition from the British government. The organization decided to advocate in favor of the independence movement because it would allow a new political system in which the Congress could be a major party.
In , the Congress was split into two factions. The radicals, led by Bal Gangadhar Tilak, advocated civil agitation and direct revolution to overthrow the British Empire and the abandonment of all things British. The moderates, led by leaders like Dadabhai Naoroji and Gopal Krishna Gokhale, wanted reform within the framework of British rule. Tilak was backed by rising public leaders like Bipin Chandra Pal and Lala Lajpat Rai, who held the same point of view. Gokhale criticized Tilak for encouraging acts of violence and disorder.
But the Congress of did not have public membership and thus Tilak and his supporters were forced to leave the party. Mahatma Gandhi returned from South Africa in With the help of the moderate group led by Ghokhale, Gandhi became president of the Congress and formed an alliance with the Khilafat Movement, a pan-Islamic, political protest campaign launched by Muslims to influence the British government and increase Hindu Muslim unity. In protest, a number of leaders resigned to set up the Swaraj Party.
The British built the railways primarily for themselves, using their own technology and forcing Indians to buy British equipment. Each mile of the Indian railway constructed cost nine times as much as the same in the US, and twice that in difficult and less populated Canada and Australia. The bills were footed by Indian taxpayers and British investors received a guaranteed return on their capital.
Freight charges were dirt cheap, and Indians who traveled 3rd class paid for expensive tickets. The British desire to end their dependence on Chinese tea prompted them to set up plantations in India. Following many failed attempts, they managed to find a local version that worked. For this, the British felled vast forests, stripped the tribals who lived there of their rights, and then paid Indian labourers poorly to cultivate the cleared areas.
Once the tea was ready, it was shipped off to Britain or sold internationally. The little bit left in India was too expensive, until the Great Depression when weak global demand finally let Indians enjoy the delights of the drink. English language. The British made it absolutely clear that it was only taught to serve their own purpose. Worse still, there has been no formal apology for what the empire wreaked on its subjects. Instead, there is rising nostalgia for the empire as nationalism surges in a country that is now three ranks below India in the size of its economy.
By providing your email, you agree to the Quartz Privacy Policy. Skip to navigation Skip to content. Discover Membership. Editions Quartz. More from Quartz About Quartz. Follow Quartz. These are some of our most ambitious editorial projects. By Akshat Rathi Senior reporter. Published August 15, Last updated on August 17, This article is more than 2 years old. They achieved something of a coup by persuading the British that they needed to safeguard the interests of the minorities, a demand that fed into British strategies of divide and rule.
The inclusion of separate electorates along communal lines in the Act, subsequently enlarged in every successive constitutional act, enshrined a form of constitutional separatism. While there is no denying that Islam and Hinduism were and are very different faiths, Muslims and Hindus continued to co-exist peaceably.
There were, however, occasional violent outbursts which were driven more often than not by economic inequities. Even politically, the Congress and the League cooperated successfully during the Khilafat and Non Cooperation movements in Although Congress strove to stress its secular credentials with prominent Muslim members - for example, Maulana Azad served as its president through World War Two - it is criticised for failing to sufficiently recognise the importance of a conciliatory position towards the League in the inter-war years, and for its triumphant response to Congress's election victory.
The Muslim League advocated the idea of Pakistan in its annual session in , yet the idea did not achieve any political reality at the time. Furthermore, the League failed to achieve the confidence of the majority of the Muslim population in the elections of The lack of confidence in the Muslim League among the Muslim population was to be dramatically reversed in the elections. The intervening years saw the rise of Jinnah and the League to political prominence through the successful exploitation of the wartime insecurities of the British, and the political vacuum created when the Congress ministries which had unanimously come to power in resigned en masse to protest at the government's unilateral decision to enter India into the war without consultation.
The creation of Pakistan as a land for Muslims nevertheless left a sizeable number of Muslims in an independent India. The rejuvenated League skilfully exploited the communal card. At its Lahore session in , Jinnah made the demand for Pakistan into its rallying cry.
The ensuing communal violence, especially after Jinnah declared 'Direct Action Day' in August , put pressure on the British government and Congress to accede to his demands for a separate homeland for Muslims.
The arrival of Lord Louis Mountbatten as India's last viceroy in March , brought with it an agenda to transfer power as quickly and efficiently as possible. The resulting negotiations saw the deadline for British withdrawal brought forward from June to August Contemporaries and subsequent historians have criticised this haste as a major contributory factor in the chaos that accompanied partition. Mass migration occurred across the new boundaries as well as an estimated loss of a million lives in the communal bloodbaths involving Hindus, Muslims and also Sikhs in the Punjab.
The final irony must remain that the creation of Pakistan as a land for Muslims nevertheless left a sizeable number of Muslims in an independent India making it the largest minority in a non-Muslim state.
The Partitions of Memory: the afterlife of the division of India edited by S. Kaul Bloomington: Indiana University Press, Her research interests include British press and political culture , the British imperial experience in South Asia, the Indian press and communications in world history.
Kaul has also edited a collection of essays, Media and the British Empire Her forthcoming research project is a new history of India titled The Indian experience of the Raj. Search term:. Read more. This page is best viewed in an up-to-date web browser with style sheets CSS enabled.
While you will be able to view the content of this page in your current browser, you will not be able to get the full visual experience. Please consider upgrading your browser software or enabling style sheets CSS if you are able to do so. This page has been archived and is no longer updated.
Find out more about page archiving. Government in India While there was a consensus that Indian policy was above party politics, in practice it became embroiled in the vicissitudes of Westminster.
Financial gains and losses There were two incontrovertible economic benefits provided by India.
0コメント