1.2.3 - Modern Indian History Notes 17

Elaborate Notes

Political and Administrative Impact of the 1857 Revolt

The Revolt of 1857, while suppressed, marked a watershed moment in the history of British India, compelling the British Crown to overhaul the entire structure of governance and administration. The changes were not merely cosmetic but were designed to strengthen the imperial grip, prevent future uprisings, and create a more efficient system of control and exploitation.

• End of Company Rule and Assumption of Direct Control:

  • The most significant political change was the enactment of the Government of India Act, 1858. This Act liquidated the English East India Company and transferred its powers, territories, and revenues directly to the British Crown.
  • The Governor-General of India was redesignated as the Viceroy, signifying his role as the personal representative of the monarch. Lord Canning, who was the Governor-General during the Revolt, became the first Viceroy of India.
  • A new cabinet-level post, the Secretary of State for India, was created in London. This minister was a member of the British Parliament and was responsible for Indian affairs. He was assisted by a 15-member Council of India, composed of individuals with long experience in Indian administration. This established a system of ‘dual government’ where the ultimate authority rested with the British Parliament.

• Reorganization of the Administration:

  • Policing and Intelligence: The revolt exposed the inadequacies of the existing policing system. The British realized the need for a professional, hierarchical, and centrally controlled police force to maintain order and gather intelligence.

    • The Police Commission of 1860 was established to recommend reforms. Its recommendations formed the basis for the Indian Police Act, 1861.
    • This Act created a provincial police system. A province’s police force was headed by an Inspector-General, who reported to the provincial government. The district police was placed under a Superintendent of Police (SP), who was accountable to the District Magistrate (DM), thereby ensuring civilian control over the police. This established a clear chain of command and a specialised hierarchy that largely persisted until independence.
    • However, this reform also institutionalised a ‘Police Raj’. The police was primarily used as an instrument of coercion to suppress dissent and political activity, rather than for crime prevention. Indians were systematically excluded from commissioned officer ranks, reinforcing the racial hierarchy of the administration.

  • Civil Services: The British sought to create a steel frame of administration that was loyal and efficient, but they remained deeply suspicious of Indian capabilities and loyalty.

    • While the Charter Act of 1853 had introduced open competition for the Indian Civil Service (ICS), the system was heavily biased against Indians.
    • Post-1857, the British government actively resisted demands for holding simultaneous examinations in India and London. The argument was that it would dilute the ‘British character’ of the service.
    • The maximum age for entry was progressively lowered from 23 in 1859 to 19 in 1878, making it extremely difficult for Indian candidates, who had to travel to London and compete in an alien environment and language.
    • It was only after sustained pressure from the Indian National Movement that the recommendation of the Lee Commission (1924) led to the establishment of a Public Service Commission. The first simultaneous examination was held in India in 1922 at Allahabad, a decision stemming from the Government of India Act, 1919.

• Restructuring of the British Indian Army: The army, the very instrument that had rebelled, underwent the most radical reorganisation. The goal was to make it ‘revolt-proof’.

  • The Peel Commission (1859) submitted recommendations that guided army reforms for decades.
  • Policy of “Divide and Rule” and Counterpoise: The pre-revolt Bengal Army was seen as a homogenous ‘brotherhood’ of high-caste sepoys from Awadh and Bihar, which had facilitated collective action. The new policy was to create heterogeneous regiments, mixing different castes, communities, and regions to prevent any sense of solidarity from developing. As historian Tan Tai Yong argues in “The Garrison State” (2005), this was a deliberate strategy of creating internal checks and balances.
  • The Theory of ‘Martial Races’: The British developed a pseudoscientific ideology that classified certain Indian communities (e.g., Sikhs, Gurkhas, Pathans, Jats) as ‘martial’ and others (e.g., Brahmins, Bengalis) as ‘non-martial’. Recruitment was heavily skewed in favour of the ‘martial races’, who had largely remained loyal or assisted the British during the revolt. This was a policy of rewarding loyal groups and punishing those who had rebelled.
  • European Dominance: The ratio of European to Indian soldiers was increased. It was fixed at roughly 1:2 in the Bengal Army and 1:3 in the Bombay and Madras Armies. Crucially, key branches like artillery and strategic garrisons were placed exclusively in European hands.
  • Exclusion of Indians from Command: Indians were completely barred from the officer corps. The highest rank an Indian could aspire to was that of a Subedar. This ensured that command and control remained firmly in British hands.
  • Isolation of Sepoys: The army was deliberately insulated from the civilian population and nationalist influences. Sepoys were often housed in separate cantonments and their access to nationalist literature was restricted to foster a culture of apolitical loyalty to their regiment and the ‘salt’ (namak).

British Imperialist Ideologies

The nature of British rule was not just a product of administrative needs but was also deeply shaped by evolving ideologies in Britain. These intellectual currents provided the moral and philosophical justification for colonial domination.

• Orientalism (Dominant until c. 1813):

  • This school of thought was characterised by a scholarly interest in and often a deep appreciation for classical Indian languages, literature, and civilization. Prominent figures included Sir William Jones, who founded the Asiatic Society of Bengal in 1784.
  • Jones, in his work on philology, famously proposed a common ancestral source for Sanskrit, Greek, and Latin, suggesting a shared Indo-European heritage. This was used to argue that ancient Indian civilization was on par with classical European civilizations.
  • Colonial Justification through Orientalism:
    • Orientalists like Jones argued that India had experienced a ‘degradation’ from its ‘golden past’. They saw British rule as a benevolent custodianship, with the ‘white man’s burden’ being the restoration of this lost glory. This subtly denied Indians the agency to reform their own society.
    • The Aryan Invasion Theory, which partly emerged from these linguistic studies, implied that India’s past greatness was itself a product of an external (Western/Aryan) influence, thus legitimising the current foreign rule.
    • By advocating for ruling India in an ‘Indian way’ (i.e., respecting local customs and laws), Orientalists facilitated a smoother consolidation of power, as noted by historian C.A. Bayly in “Indian Society and the Making of the British Empire” (1988). This approach minimised immediate native resistance.

• The Shift to Authoritarianism (Cornwallis’s Era):

  • By the late 18th century, a more cynical and authoritarian view emerged, championed by figures like Lord Cornwallis (Governor-General, 1786-93).
  • Cornwallis held a deeply racist view of Indians, considering them inherently corrupt and untrustworthy. This led him to systematically exclude Indians from all senior positions in the administration, a policy known as Anglicisation.
  • His policies were driven by a belief in the superiority of the British system. For example, the Permanent Settlement of 1793 was an imposition of the English landlord model on Bengal’s agrarian structure, with little regard for Indian traditions.
  • He also promoted social aloofness. As historian Thomas R. Metcalf details in “Ideologies of the Raj” (1995), Cornwallis actively discouraged intermingling between British officials and Indians, banning officials with Indian wives from certain posts and fostering the creation of exclusive ‘white’ cantonments and civil lines. This was partly a reaction to the fear of ‘going native’ and a desire to prevent a settler-led revolt like the American Revolution.

• The Post-1813 Ideological Assault (Liberalism, Utilitarianism, Evangelicalism):

  • By the early 19th century, Orientalism came under attack from new, more aggressive ideologies in Britain, fueled by the Industrial Revolution and a growing sense of imperial confidence. The Charter Act of 1813, which ended the EIC’s trade monopoly, symbolised this shift.
  • Liberalism: Figures like Thomas Babington Macaulay argued that Britain’s mission was not to preserve Indian culture but to ‘civilise’ it by introducing Western education, ideas, and institutions. Macaulay’s infamous “Minute on Indian Education” (1835) sought to create a class of “persons, Indian in blood and colour, but English in taste, in opinions, in morals, and in intellect.” Social reforms like the abolition of Sati were driven by this liberal-interventionist impulse.
  • Utilitarianism: This was a more pragmatic and authoritarian ideology associated with James Mill and Jeremy Bentham.
    • In his influential work, “The History of British India” (1817), James Mill savagely critiqued Indian civilization, dismissing its achievements as mythical. He argued that what India needed was not preservation but a radical overhaul through ‘good governance’ – that is, a system of scientific laws and efficient administration imposed by an enlightened despot. For Utilitarians, the goal was the “greatest good for the greatest number,” which justified overriding Indian customs and traditions.
    • Their focus on ‘utility’ meant they supported the use of vernacular languages to spread Western knowledge more efficiently, diverging from the Anglicist liberals.
  • Evangelicalism: This was a religious movement championed by figures like Charles Grant. Evangelicals believed that the backwardness of India was rooted in its ‘heathen’ religions (Hinduism and Islam). They argued that India’s salvation lay in conversion to Christianity. The Charter Act of 1813 was a major victory for them, as it officially permitted Christian missionaries to operate in British India.

• Post-1857: The Climax of Racism and Authoritarianism:

  • The revolt intensified British racism and distrust of Indians. The earlier ‘civilising mission’ rhetoric was largely abandoned in favour of a justification for rule based on sheer racial superiority.
  • The British now argued that Indians were not just inferior but fundamentally ‘different’ and incapable of self-rule or genuine reform. As Metcalf argues, the idea of kinship was replaced by a rigid racial hierarchy. This ideology justified the denial of any meaningful power-sharing and the perpetuation of authoritarian rule for the foreseeable future.

Prelims Pointers

• The Government of India Act, 1858 abolished the East India Company and transferred governance to the British Crown.
• The title of Governor-General of India was changed to Viceroy.
• Lord Canning was the first Viceroy of India.
• A new office, the Secretary of State for India, was created in London, assisted by a 15-member Council.
• The Police Commission of 1860 led to the Indian Police Act, 1861.
• The 1861 Act established a provincial police hierarchy under an Inspector-General and district police under a Superintendent of Police (SP).
• The Peel Commission (1859) recommended the reorganisation of the British Indian Army.
• The ratio of European to Indian troops was increased to 1:2 in the Bengal army and 1:3 in Madras and Bombay armies.
• The British army policy promoted the concept of ‘martial races’ for recruitment (e.g., Sikhs, Gurkhas, Pathans).
• Key military departments like artillery were reserved for Europeans.
• The Charter Act of 1853 introduced open competition for the Indian Civil Services.
• The first simultaneous civil services examination in India was held in 1922 in Allahabad.
• The founder of the Asiatic Society of Bengal (1784) was Sir William Jones.
• James Mill, a Utilitarian thinker, authored “The History of British India” (1817).
• The Charter Act of 1813 allowed Christian missionaries to legally enter India and preach.
• Lord Cornwallis is associated with the Anglicisation of the administration and the Permanent Settlement (1793).
• Thomas Babington Macaulay’s “Minute on Indian Education” (1835) advocated for English-language education.

Mains Insights

Cause-Effect Relationships and Analytical Perspectives

1. From Intervention to Cautious Patronage:

   • Cause: The 1857 Revolt was partly blamed on aggressive social reforms (like the Widow Remarriage Act, 1856) and annexation policies (Doctrine of Lapse) that interfered with Indian religious and social customs.
   • Effect: Post-1857, the British adopted a policy of cautious non-interference in social and religious matters. They began to patronise traditional elites (princes, zamindars) as a bulwark against mass movements. The Queen’s Proclamation of 1858 explicitly promised to respect the rights, dignity, and honour of native princes and to abstain from interference in religious beliefs. This marked a shift from the pre-1857 ‘reformist’ zeal to a more conservative and status-quoist approach to social issues.

2. The Ideology of ‘Divide and Rule’ as State Policy:

   • Cause: The relative unity shown by Hindus and Muslims during the revolt alarmed the British.
   • Effect: The post-1857 administrative and military policies were deliberately designed to foster division. The ‘martial race’ theory in the army pitted communities against each other. In civil administration, the British started using census data to categorise and stereotype communities, hardening caste and religious identities. This strategy of creating and exploiting divisions became a cornerstone of British policy to maintain control.

3. The Contradiction of Liberalism in a Colonial Context:

   • Debate: British rule is often presented as a force that introduced modern institutions like the rule of law, civil services, and education. However, these institutions were fundamentally compromised by the racial and exploitative nature of colonialism.
   • Analysis: The ‘rule of law’ did not mean equality; Europeans were often tried in separate courts and received preferential treatment. The ‘merit-based’ civil service was designed to exclude Indians through structural barriers like age limits and location of exams. Western education, justified by liberals like Macaulay, was intended not to empower but to create a loyal class of clerks and intermediaries to serve the colonial state. Thus, the ‘modernising’ mission was a facade for creating a more efficient colonial apparatus.

4. Historiographical Debate on Orientalism:

   • Traditional View: Orientalism was a genuine intellectual movement reflecting an appreciation for Indian culture by scholars like William Jones.
   • Critical View (Edward Said): In his seminal work “Orientalism” (1978), Edward Said argued that Orientalism was not a benign field of study. It was a Western style for dominating, restructuring, and having authority over the Orient. By defining the ‘Orient’ as static, ancient, and incapable of self-governance, it created a body of knowledge that inherently justified colonial rule. It was a tool of power, not just a pursuit of knowledge.

Previous Year Questions

Prelims

1. The main reason for the transfer of the administration of India from the East India Company to the Crown by the Act of 1858 was: (UPSC CSE 2023 - Modified) (a) The Company was on the verge of bankruptcy. (b) To provide for better administration of India after the Revolt of 1857. (c) To end the dual control of the Board of Control and the Court of Directors. (d) To appease the Indian Princes and assure them of their territories.

   Answer: (b) Explanation: The Government of India Act, 1858, was a direct consequence of the Revolt of 1857. The British Parliament concluded that the East India Company’s administration was responsible for the uprising and that direct Crown control was necessary for the “better government of India.”

2. With reference to the period of colonial rule in India, “Home Charges” formed an important part of the drain of wealth from India. Which of the following funds constituted “Home Charges”? (UPSC CSE 2011 - Relevant)

   1. Funds used to support the India Office in London.
   2. Funds used to pay salaries and pensions of British personnel engaged in India.
   3. Funds used for waging wars outside India by the British. Select the correct answer using the codes given below: (a) 1 only (b) 1 and 2 only (c) 2 and 3 only (d) 1, 2 and 3

   Answer: (d) Explanation: Home Charges were a significant component of the drain of wealth, representing payments India had to make to Britain. This included the entire cost of the Secretary of State’s establishment (India Office), salaries and pensions for British civil and military officials, interest on public debt, and costs of military expeditions conducted by Britain using Indian resources.

3. The Ilbert Bill controversy was related to the (UPSC CSE 2013 - Relevant) (a) imposition of certain restrictions to carry arms by the Indians. (b) imposition of restrictions on newspapers and magazines published in Indian languages. (c) removal of disqualifications imposed on the Indian magistrates with regard to the trial of the Europeans. (d) removal of a duty on imported cotton cloth.

   Answer: (c) Explanation: The Ilbert Bill (1883) was proposed by Lord Ripon’s government to allow Indian judges and magistrates to preside over cases involving Europeans in British India. It faced intense opposition from the European community, exposing the deep-seated racism of the colonial administration, a direct legacy of the post-1857 era.

4. After the Santhal Uprising subsided, what was/were the measure/measures taken by the colonial government? (UPSC CSE 2018 - Relevant to post-revolt policy)

   1. The territories called ‘Santhal Parganas’ were created.
   2. It became illegal for a Santhal to transfer land to a non-Santhal. Select the correct answer using the code given below: (a) 1 only (b) 2 only (c) Both 1 and 2 (d) Neither 1 nor 2

   Answer: (c) Explanation: The British response to the Santhal Uprising (1855-56), which occurred just before the 1857 Revolt, foreshadowed post-1857 policies. The government created a separate district, Santhal Parganas, and enacted laws to protect tribal land from outsiders. This policy of creating non-regulation areas to pacify specific communities was a key administrative tool.

5. The Government of India Act of 1919 clearly defined (UPSC CSE 2015 - Relevant to administrative changes) (a) the separation of power between the judiciary and the legislature (b) the jurisdiction of the central and provincial governments (c) the powers of the Secretary of State for India and the Viceroy (d) None of the above

   Answer: (b) Explanation: This Act, for the first time, made a clear demarcation of subjects into ‘Central’ and ‘Provincial’ lists, introducing a form of federalism. This was a significant step in the evolution of the administrative structure that was established after 1858.

Mains

1. Why did the armies of the British East India Company – mostly comprising of Indian soldiers – win consistently against the more numerous and better equipped armies of the then Indian rulers? Give reasons. (UPSC CSE 2022)

   Answer: The consistent victories of the East India Company’s armies, despite being smaller, can be attributed to a combination of superior military strategy, discipline, technology, and the internal weaknesses of Indian states.

   • Superior Discipline and Training: The Company’s sepoys were subjected to rigorous European-style drill and discipline. They were trained to fight as a cohesive unit, responding to commands with precision, which was often lacking in the feudal levies of Indian rulers that relied more on individual heroism.
   • Advanced Military Technology and Tactics: The British possessed superior artillery, particularly mobile field artillery, and flintlock muskets that offered a faster rate of fire. Their use of infantry squares and volley firing tactics was highly effective against traditional cavalry charges.
   • Unified Command and Control: The Company’s army had a professional and hierarchical command structure. Decisions were made based on strategic objectives, unlike Indian armies which were often a loose coalition of feudal chiefs with divided loyalties and poor coordination.
   • Regular Payment and Logistics: Company soldiers were paid regularly and had a reliable system of supply and logistics. In contrast, soldiers of Indian rulers were often irregularly paid, leading to low morale, indiscipline, and frequent desertions.
   • Lack of Unity among Indian Rulers: Indian states failed to present a united front. They were plagued by internal rivalries and often sought British help against each other, allowing the Company to use its military prowess strategically in a ‘divide and rule’ fashion.
   • Strong Financial Backing: The EIC, with its vast trade revenues and financial support from London, could sustain long campaigns, which many cash-strapped Indian states could not.

2. To what extent did the role of the moderates prepare a base for the wider freedom movement? Comment. (UPSC CSE 2021)

   Answer: The Moderates (1885-1905) played a foundational role in preparing a base for the later, more widespread freedom movement, despite their limited immediate successes.

   • Economic Critique of Colonialism: Moderates like Dadabhai Naoroji (Poverty and Un-British Rule in India), R.C. Dutt, and G.V. Joshi were the first to provide a systematic and academic critique of British economic exploitation through the “Drain Theory.” This shattered the myth of benevolent British rule and became a central plank of nationalist agitation for decades.
   • Creation of a Pan-Indian Political Platform: The Indian National Congress, founded by them, was the first organization that brought together political workers from across the country. It created a sense of national unity and provided a platform for articulating common grievances, laying the groundwork for a truly national movement.
   • Constitutional and Administrative Reforms: Through their method of ‘petitions, prayers, and protests’, they advocated for greater Indian representation in legislative councils and the civil services. The Indian Councils Act of 1892 was a result of their efforts. While meagre, these reforms provided a space for Indians to gain legislative experience and push for further concessions.
   • Nurturing Political Awareness: Their resolutions, speeches, and newspaper articles educated the Indian public about political and economic issues, fostering a modern, secular political consciousness. They popularised concepts like democracy, civil liberties, and representative government.
   • Exposing the True Nature of British Rule: The failure of the British government to respond positively to their moderate demands eventually exposed the exploitative and racist nature of the colonial state. This disillusionment paved the way for the rise of more assertive, extremist nationalism under leaders like Tilak, Lajpat Rai, and Bipin Chandra Pal, who built upon the foundation laid by the Moderates.

3. The 1857 Uprising was the culmination of the recurrent big and small local rebellions that had occurred in the preceding hundred years of British rule. Elucidate. (UPSC CSE 2019)

   Answer: The 1857 Uprising was not a sudden event but the explosive climax of a century of accumulated grievances manifested in numerous, though localised, rebellions against British rule.

   • Political Resistance: From the very beginning, deposed rulers and chieftains resisted British expansion. This includes the resistance by the Poligars of Tamil Nadu (1799-1801), the rebellion of Velu Thampi of Travancore (1809), and the Kutch Rebellion (1819-31). These uprisings were driven by the loss of political power and sovereignty due to British annexationist policies.
   • Economic Grievances and Peasant Uprisings: British land revenue policies were ruinous for the peasantry. The high tax demands, rigidity of collection, and new property relations led to widespread discontent. The Sanyasi-Fakir Rebellion (1763-1800) in Bengal, the Santhal Uprising (1855-56) against zamindars and moneylenders protected by the British, and the Moplah outbreaks in Malabar were all powerful expressions of agrarian distress.
   • Tribal Revolts: The intrusion of colonial administration, moneylenders, and Christian missionaries into tribal areas disrupted their traditional way of life. This led to a series of fierce tribal rebellions, such as the Kol Uprising (1831-32) and the Bhil Uprisings in the Western Ghats. These were attempts to reclaim lost autonomy and resist the destruction of their culture.
   • Sepoy Mutinies: The 1857 Revolt was preceded by several smaller mutinies over religious sentiments, pay, and service conditions. The Vellore Mutiny of 1806, sparked by new regulations on turbans and caste marks, and the Barrackpore Mutiny of 1824 over service in Burma, were clear precursors, highlighting the sepoys’ sensitivity to perceived threats to their religion and caste. The 1857 Revolt was unique in that it brought together many of these disparate streams of discontent—princely, peasant, tribal, and military—into a large-scale, though not fully coordinated, conflagration against a common enemy. It was the “culmination” because it represented a consolidation of these recurrent local grievances into a significant, widespread challenge to British rule.

4. Clarify how mid-eighteenth century India was beset with the spectre of a fragmented polity. (UPSC CSE 2017)

   Answer: Mid-eighteenth century India was characterized by a highly fragmented and unstable political landscape, primarily due to the decline of the Mughal Empire and the rise of multiple successor states and foreign powers.

   • Decline of the Mughal Empire: The central Mughal authority, which had provided political cohesion for nearly two centuries, had become nominal after the death of Aurangzeb in 1707. Later Mughals were weak puppets, and devastating invasions by Nadir Shah (1739) and Ahmad Shah Abdali (e.g., Battle of Panipat, 1761) shattered the remaining prestige and power of the empire, creating a massive power vacuum.
   • Rise of Successor States: In the wake of Mughal decline, several provincial governors asserted their independence, creating autonomous ‘successor states’. These included Bengal under Murshid Quli Khan, Awadh under Saadat Khan, and Hyderabad under Nizam-ul-Mulk. While they often maintained nominal allegiance to the Mughal emperor, they ruled as independent monarchs, pursuing their own interests.
   • Emergence of New Regional Powers: New powers emerged, often challenging the Mughals directly. The Marathas, under the Peshwas, became the most formidable power, controlling vast territories in central and northern India. Other significant new states included the Sikh kingdom under Ranjit Singh in Punjab, the Jat kingdom of Bharatpur, and Mysore under Hyder Ali and Tipu Sultan.
   • Constant Warfare and Shifting Alliances: These regional powers were in a state of constant conflict with each other, vying for territory and resources. The Marathas fought with the Nizam, Mysore, and the Rohillas. This incessant warfare drained their resources and prevented the formation of a united front against external threats. Alliances were opportunistic and short-lived.
   • Entry of European Trading Companies: European powers, especially the British and the French, exploited this fragmentation. They transformed from mere traders into political and military players, intervening in the succession disputes and regional conflicts of Indian states. By offering military support to one contender in exchange for commercial and territorial concessions, they gradually undermined the sovereignty of Indian polities, culminating in the British victory at the Battle of Plassey (1757).

5. Examine the linkages between the nineteenth century’s Indian Renaissance and the emergence of national identity. (UPSC CSE 2019)

   Answer: The socio-religious reform movements of the 19th century, often termed the Indian Renaissance, were intrinsically linked to the emergence of a modern Indian national identity.

   • Critique of Social Evils and Cultural Regeneration: Reformers like Raja Ram Mohan Roy (Brahmo Samaj), Ishwar Chandra Vidyasagar, and Swami Dayanand Saraswati (Arya Samaj) attacked social ills such as Sati, the caste system, and child marriage. This process of self-criticism and reform created a sense of cultural self-worth and pride. By arguing that these evils were corruptions of a once-glorious past, they fostered a renewed pride in Indian heritage, which was a crucial emotional component of national identity.
   • Reinterpreting the Past: Movements like the Arya Samaj (“Back to the Vedas”) and the work of Orientalist-inspired Indian scholars created a narrative of a ‘golden age’ of Indian civilization. This constructed past, whether accurate or not, provided a common historical anchor for a diverse population and served as an ideological basis to claim that Indians were fit for self-rule.
   • Fostering Unity Beyond Regional and Sectarian Lines: While some movements had a regional or sectarian character, their overall impact was the creation of a public sphere where issues were debated on a pan-Indian scale. Organizations like the Brahmo Samaj and the Theosophical Society had branches across India, connecting intellectuals and fostering a sense of a shared community that transcended traditional boundaries.
   • Response to Colonial Hegemony: The Renaissance was also a response to the colonial critique of Indian society and religion. By reforming their own society, Indians were challenging the British justification for rule—the “white man’s burden” to civilize a “barbaric” people. This act of internal reform was an assertion of national agency and a claim to cultural parity with the West.
   • Creation of a Modern Intelligentsia: The reform movements, often linked with the spread of modern education, created a new class of intellectuals who thought in terms of the ‘nation’. It was this very class that went on to found the Indian National Congress and lead the early nationalist movement, using the very ideals of liberty, equality, and rationalism championed by the reformers to demand political rights and self-governance for the Indian nation.