Chapter 1 Introduction: How, When And Where

How Important Are Dates?

Historically, the study of history was often equated with memorising **specific dates** related to major events like coronations or battles. This led many to perceive history as boring or solely focused on chronology.

However, history is fundamentally about understanding **change over time**. It involves comparing the past with the present to see how things have transformed. This comparison naturally involves a sense of "before" and "after," referencing time.

Many everyday observations can spark **historical questions**. For example, seeing someone drink tea might lead one to wonder when tea consumption began, or travelling by train could raise questions about the origin of railways and earlier travel methods. Reading a newspaper might prompt curiosity about how news spread before printing.

Such questions relate to time, but not always to a single, precise date. Many historical processes, like the development of tea-drinking habits or the establishment of British rule, happened **gradually over a period**. It's often more accurate to refer to a **span or period** of time when certain changes became evident.

The historical focus on specific dates stemmed from earlier histories that concentrated primarily on the lives and policies of **rulers** and significant political or military events. For these events, exact dates were often recorded and debated.

Modern historians, however, explore a much **wider range of topics**. They investigate how people earned their living, what they produced and ate, the development of cities and markets, the formation of kingdoms, the spread of new ideas, and changes in cultures and society. This broader perspective shifts the emphasis from just specific dates to understanding the **processes** of change.

Fig. 1 depicts Brahmans presenting ancient Indian texts (Shastras) to Britannia, a symbol of British power. James Rennel, a key figure in British mapping of India under Robert Clive, commissioned this frontispiece for his first map of Hindustan. The image suggests a willing transfer of Indian knowledge and culture to British protection, portraying British rule as beneficial and welcomed by Indians. This reflects a colonial viewpoint where mapping and control were seen as intertwined, legitimising British dominance.

Which Dates?

The selection of dates considered "important" in history is not inherent to the dates themselves, but rather depends on **what events or processes the historian chooses to focus on**. If the subject of study changes, the relevant dates will also change.

For instance, histories written by British historians in India often focused on the **chronology of Governor-Generals and Viceroys**. The dates were tied to their appointments, activities, policies, and achievements. This approach made the lives of these British officials the central narrative, effectively marginalising the experiences and actions of Indians.

Organising history into chapters helps create **coherence** and makes the narrative understandable. However, a format centred on British administrators leaves little space for the diverse activities and experiences of different groups and classes within Indian society. To include these perspectives, a **different structural format** for history is needed, which would naturally highlight a new set of dates and render the old ones less central.

Fig. 2 shows a 1922 Lipton tea advertisement. Advertisements are valuable historical sources because they reveal how markets for new goods were developed and how consumer tastes were shaped. This particular ad uses the association with royalty (both British royalty personified by Prince Arthur and hints of Indian royalty with the palace background) to popularise tea and create a sense of prestige around its consumption.

How Do We Periodise?

**Periodisation** involves dividing history into different periods to capture the distinct characteristics and central features of a particular era. The terms used for periodisation are significant as they reflect the historian's understanding and interpretation of the past, highlighting the perceived changes between periods.

In 1817, **James Mill**, a Scottish economist and philosopher, published *A History of British India*, dividing Indian history into three periods: **Hindu, Muslim, and British**. This scheme became widely accepted at the time.

However, Mill's periodisation has significant problems. He believed Asian societies were **less civilised than Europe**. He argued that before the British, India was ruled by intolerant religious despots (Hindu and Muslim), characterised by caste issues and superstitious practices. Mill felt British rule was necessary to **civilise India** by introducing European systems and enlightenment.

This view portrays the period before British rule as one of "darkness," implying British rule brought progress and civilisation. This perspective is problematic as it ignores the rich cultural and intellectual achievements of pre-British India. It also cannot be accepted today because it is based on a biased and Eurocentric view.

Furthermore, characterising a period solely by the religion of the ruling dynasty is misleading. It suggests that only the rulers' faith mattered and ignores the fact that **multiple faiths coexisted** in Indian society throughout history. Even rulers within the same period did not always share the same faith.

Moving away from Mill's classification, historians have commonly divided Indian history into **'ancient', 'medieval', and 'modern'**. This periodisation originates from the West, where the 'modern' period is associated with progress, science, reason, democracy, liberty, and equality. The 'medieval' period was seen as lacking these characteristics.

Applying this Western model directly to India under British rule is also problematic. During the British period in India, people did **not experience equality, freedom, or liberty**. The period was also not necessarily one of genuine economic growth and progress for the majority. Therefore, calling this period 'modern' based on the Western definition is inappropriate for the Indian context.

Consequently, many historians prefer to refer to the period of British rule in India as the **'colonial' period**.

Fig. 3 shows Warren Hastings, the first Governor-General in 1773. Histories focused on Governor-Generals often glorified their actions and presented them as powerful figures through biographies and portraits. This reflects the British administrative view where the actions of these key individuals were seen as the driving force of Indian history during their rule.

What Is Colonial?

**Colonisation** is defined as the process where one country subjugates another, leading to significant changes across various aspects of life in the ruled country. This involves **conquest** and the establishment of **foreign rule**.

In India, British colonisation involved:

• Overpowering local rulers (nawabs and rajas).
• Establishing comprehensive control over the **economy and society**.
• Collecting **revenue** to cover their expenses.
• Purchasing goods they desired at **low prices**.
• Forcing the production of crops needed for **export**.
• Bringing about changes in Indian **values, tastes, customs, and practices**.

The political, economic, social, and cultural transformations resulting from this subjugation constitute the process of colonisation.

It is important to note that **not all sections of Indian society experienced these changes uniformly**. The impact of British rule varied depending on people's class, social status, and location. This is why history books about this period often use the title "Our Pasts" in the plural – to acknowledge the diverse experiences.

How Do We Know?

To understand the last 250 years of Indian history, historians rely on various sources of information.

Administration Produces Records

A primary source from the British period is the **official records of the British administration**. The British placed great importance on documentation, believing that writing down every instruction, plan, policy, decision, agreement, and investigation was crucial for proper study and debate. This led to an administrative culture heavy on memos, notings, and reports.

They also ensured that all important documents and letters were **carefully preserved**. Record rooms were established in all administrative offices, from village level to provincial secretariats and law courts. Specialised institutions like **archives** and **museums** were created specifically to house these important records.

These preserved documents, such as letters between different administrative branches or reports and instructions exchanged between officials, provide valuable insights into the British administration's workings, policies, and perspectives.

In the early 19th century, documents were manually copied by **calligraphists** (people skilled in beautiful writing). By the mid-19th century, with the advent of **printing**, multiple copies of records were produced, making them more accessible (though still primarily within the administration).

Fig. 4 shows the National Archives of India building, constructed in the 1920s in New Delhi near the Viceregal Palace. The location of important institutions like the National Museum and National Archives close to the centre of British power reflects the importance the British attached to preserving official records and their own history.

Surveys Become Important

Under colonial rule, the practice of conducting **surveys** became widespread and important. The British believed that effective administration required thorough knowledge of the country they were ruling.

Detailed surveys were carried out from the early 19th century to **map the entire territory**. Revenue surveys were conducted in villages to gather information about **topography, soil quality, flora, fauna, local histories, and cropping patterns**. All this data was considered necessary for administering the regions efficiently.

Starting in the late 19th century, **Census operations** were conducted every ten years. These surveys compiled detailed information about the population across all provinces of India, including data on **castes, religions, and occupations**.

Besides revenue and census surveys, the British also conducted various other types of surveys, such as **botanical, zoological, archaeological, anthropological, and forest surveys**, to gather comprehensive information about India's resources, people, and history from their perspective.

Fig. 5 shows a drawing of a custard-apple plant from the 1770s. Institutions like botanical gardens and museums established by the British collected plant specimens and information about their uses. Local artists were often employed to illustrate these specimens. This reflects the British interest in documenting India's natural world, partly for scientific purposes and partly for identifying potential resources and understanding local practices.

Fig. 6 depicts survey operations in Bengal in 1832, drawn by James Prinsep. The prominent display of surveying instruments in the foreground of the drawing highlights the perceived **scientific nature** and importance of the British surveying project. This mapping was not just for geographical knowledge but was integral to administrative control and resource management.

What Official Records Do Not Tell

While official records provide a wealth of information about the British administration's thoughts, interests, and what they chose to document and preserve, they offer a **one-sided perspective**. They primarily reflect the viewpoint of the officials and do not fully capture the experiences, feelings, or motivations of the broader population in the country.

To understand how ordinary people felt and why they acted in certain ways, historians must look for **alternative sources**. These sources are often more challenging to find and interpret but are crucial for a more complete picture of the past.

Other sources available include:

• **Diaries** written by individuals.
• **Accounts** left by pilgrims and travellers.
• **Autobiographies** of prominent figures.
• **Popular booklets** and pamphlets sold in local markets.
• **Newspapers**, which became platforms for public debate once printing spread.
• Writings by **leaders and reformers** expressing their ideas.
• Works of **poets and novelists** conveying emotions and societal observations.

A limitation of many of these non-official sources is that they were primarily created by **literate individuals**. Consequently, they may not fully represent the experiences and perspectives of illiterate groups such as tribals, peasants, mine workers, or the urban poor. Understanding the lives of these groups requires extra effort, but it is possible through careful research and interpretation of various sources.

Fig. 7 shows an image produced by the British after the 1857 rebellion, depicting Indian sepoys as "sharing the loot." Historians must analyse such images critically as they project the viewpoint of their creators. British representations often portrayed the rebels negatively, as greedy, vicious, and brutal, reflecting the colonial perspective on the uprising.