Company rule in India

This article is about the rule of the East India Company on the Indian subcontinent from 1773 to 1858. For rule by the British Crown from 1858 to 1947, seeBritish Raj.For the history of the East India Company until 1756, seeEast India Company.

Company rule in India(sometimesCompanyRaj,fromHindi:rāj,lit. 'rule') was the rule of theBritish East India Companyon theIndian subcontinent.This is variously taken to have commenced in 1757, after theBattle of Plassey,when theNawab of BengalSiraj ud-Daulahwas defeated and replaced withMir Jafar,who had the support of the East India Company;or in 1765, when the Company was granted thediwani,or the right to collect revenue, inBengalandBihar;or in 1773, when the Company abolished local rule (Nizamat) in Bengal and established a capital inCalcutta,appointed its firstGovernor-GeneralofFort William,Warren Hastings,and became directly involved in governance.The East India Company significantly expanded its influence throughout the Indian subcontinent after theAnglo-Mysore Wars,Anglo-Maratha Wars,andAnglo-Sikh Wars.Lord William Bentinckbecame the first Governor General of India in 1834 under theGovernment of India Act 1833.The Company India ruled until 1858, when, after theIndian Rebellion of 1857and theGovernment of India Act 1858,theIndia Officeof theBritish governmentassumed the task of directly administering India in the newBritish Raj.

Company rule in India
1757/1765/1773–1858
Areas ofSouth Asiaunder Company rule (a) 1774–1804 and (b) 1805–1858 shown in two shades of pink
Status	Colony andPrincely states
Capital	Calcutta
Official languages	1773–1858: English 1773–1836:Persian 1837–1858: primarilyHindustani/Urdu but also:Languages of South Asia.
Government	Administered by theEast India Companyfunctioning as aquasi-sovereignpower on behalf of theBritish Crownand regulated by theBritish Parliament
Governor-General
• 1774–1785(firstFort William)	Warren Hastings
• 1834–1835(first India)	Lord William Bentinck
• 1857–1858(last)	Charles Canning
Historical era	Early modern
•Battle of Plassey	23 June 1757
•Treaty of Allahabad	16 August 1765
•Anglo-Mysore Wars	1767–1799
•Anglo-Maratha Wars	1772–1818
•Anglo-Sikh Wars	1845–1846, 1848–1849
•Government of India Act	2 August 1858
• Nationalisation of the Company and assumption of direct administration by theBritish crown	2 August 1858
Area
1858	1,940,000 km2(750,000 sq mi)
Currency	Rupee
Preceded by Succeeded by Maratha Confederacy Mughal Empire Sikh Empire Ahom kingdom Bengal Subah Oudh State Carnatic Sultanate See list of other states British Raj
Today part of	India Pakistan Bangladesh

Expansion and territory

TheEnglish East India Company( "the Company" ) was founded in 1600, asThe Company of Merchants of London Trading into the East Indies.It gained a foothold in India with the establishment of afactoryinMasulipatnamon the Eastern coast of India in 1611 and the grant of the rights to establish a factory inSuratin 1612 by the Mughal EmperorJahangir.In 1640, after receiving similar permission from theVijayanagara rulerfarther south, a second factory was established inMadrason the southeastern coast.Bombayisland, not far from Surat, a formerPortuguese outpostgifted toEnglandasdowryin the marriage ofCatherine of BraganzatoCharles II,was leased by the Company in 1668. Following theAnglo-Mughal War,the Company was allowed byEmperor Aurangzebto establish a presence on the eastern coast as well; far up that coast, in theGanges Delta,a factory was set up in Calcutta. Since, during this time othercompanies—established by thePortuguese,Dutch,French,andDanish—were similarly expanding in the region, the English Company's unremarkable beginnings oncoastal Indiaoffered no clues to what would become a lengthy presence on theIndian subcontinent.

The company's victory underRobert Clivein the 1757 Battle of Plassey and another victory in the 1764Battle of Buxar(in Bihar) consolidated the company's power and forced emperorShah Alam IIto appoint it thediwan,or revenue collector, ofBengal,Bihar, andOrissa.The Company thus became the de facto ruler of large areas of thelower Gangetic plainby 1773. It also proceeded by degrees to expand its dominions around Bombay and Madras. TheAnglo-Mysore Wars(1766–1799) and theAnglo-Maratha Wars(1772–1818) left it in control of large areas of India south of theSutlej River.With the defeat of theMarathas,no native power represented a threat for the Company any longer.

The expansion of the company's power chiefly took two forms. The first of these was the outright annexation of Indian states and subsequent direct governance of the underlying regions, which collectively came to compriseBritish India.The annexed regions included theNorth-Western Provinces(comprisingRohilkhand,Gorakhpur,and theDoab) (1801), Delhi (1803), Assam (Ahom Kingdom1828), andSindh(1843).Punjab,North-West Frontier Province,andKashmir,were annexed after theAnglo-Sikh Warsin 1849-1856 (Period of tenure of Marquess of Dalhousie Governor General); however, Kashmir was immediately sold under theTreaty of Amritsar(1850) to theDogra dynastyofJammu,and thereby became a princely state. In 1854Berarwas annexed, and the state ofOudhtwo years later.

The second form of asserting power involved treaties in which Indian rulers acknowledged the company'shegemonyin return for limited internalautonomy.Since the Company operated under financial constraints, it had to set uppoliticalunderpinnings for its rule.The most important such support came from thesubsidiary allianceswith Indian princes during the first 75 years of Company rule.In the early 19th century, the territories of these princes accounted for two-third of India.When an Indian ruler, who was able to secure his territory, wanted to enter such an alliance, the Company welcomed it as an economical method of indirect rule, which did not involve the economic costs of direct administration or the political costs of gaining the support of alien subjects.

• 
  India in 1765 and 1805 showing East India Company Territories in pink.
• 
  India in 1837 and 1857, showing East India Company-governed territories in pink.

In return, the Company undertook the "defence of these subordinate allies and treated them with traditional respect and marks of honor."Subsidiary alliances created theprincely states,of the Hindumaharajasand the Muslimnawabs.Prominent among the princely states were:Cochin(1791),Jaipur(1794),Travancore(1795),Hyderabad(1798),Mysore(1799),Cis-Sutlej Hill States(1815),Central India Agency(1819),CutchandGujarat Gaikwad territories(1807–1820),Rajputana(1818),andBahawalpur(1833).

The Governors-General

Coins issued by the East India Company 1787 to 1840 CE

• 
  Silver Half-Rupee 1787 Bengal Presidency, Murshidabad Mint, issued in the name of Shah Alam II, Mughal Emperor
• 
  Silver Rupee 1835, William IV, King
• 
  Copper Half-Anna 1835, William IV, King
• 
  Silver Rupee 1840, Victoria, Queen

(The Governors-General (locum tenens) are not included in this table unless a major event occurred during their tenure.)

Governors-Generals of Fort William(Bengal) (1773 – 1834)

Governor-General	Period of Tenure	Events
Warren Hastings	20 October 1773 – 1 February 1785	Great Bengal famine of 1770(1769–73) Rohilla War(1773–74) First Anglo-Maratha War(1777–83) Chalisafamine(1783–84) Second Anglo-Mysore War(1780–1784)
Charles Cornwallis	12 September 1786 – 28 October 1793	Cornwallis Code(1793) Permanent Settlement Cochinbecome semi-protected States under British (1791) Third Anglo-Mysore War(1789–92) Doji barafamine(1791–92)
John Shore	28 October 1793 – March 1798	East India Company Armyre-organised and down-sized. FirstPazhassi RevoltinMalabar(1793–97) Jaipur(1794) &Travancore(1795) come under British protection. Andaman Islandsoccupied (1796) Company took control of coastal regionCeylonfromDutch(1796).
Richard Wellesley	18 May 1798 – 30 July 1805	NizamofHyderabadbecomes first State to signSubsidiary allianceintroduced by Wellesley (1798). Fourth Anglo-Mysore War(1798–99) SecondPazhassi RevoltinMalabar(1800–05) Nawab of OudhcedesGorakhpurandRohilkhanddivisions;Allahabad,Fatehpur,Cawnpore,Etawah,Mainpuri,Etahdistricts; part ofMirzapur;andteraiofKumaun(Ceded Provinces,1801) Treaty of Basseinsigned byPeshwaBaji Rao IIacceptingSubsidiary Alliance Battle of Delhi(1803). Second Anglo-Maratha War(1803–05) Remainder ofDoab,DelhiandAgra division,parts ofBundelkhandannexed fromMaratha Empire(1805). Ceded and Conquered Provincesestablished (1805) Subsidiary alliances created theprincely states,of the Hindu maharajas and the Muslim nawabs.
Charles Cornwallis(second term)	30 July 1805 – 5 October 1805	Financial strain in East India Company after costly campaigns. Cornwallis reappointed to bring peace, but dies inGhazipur.
George Hilario Barlow(locum tenens)	10 October 1805 – 31 July 1807	Vellore mutiny(10 July 1806)
Lord Minto	31 July 1807 – 4 October 1813	Invasion of Java Occupation of Mauritius
Marquess of Hastings	4 October 1813 – 9 January 1823	Anglo-Nepal War of 1814 Annexation ofKumaon,Garhwal,and eastSikkim. Cis-Sutlej states(1815). Third Anglo-Maratha War(1817–18) States of Rajputanaaccept Britishsuzerainty(1817). Singaporewas founded (1818). Cutchaccepts British suzerainty (1818). Gaikwads of Barodaaccept British suzerainty (1819). Central India Agency(1819).
Lord Amherst	1 August 1823 – 13 March 1828	First Anglo–Burmese War(1823–26) Annexation ofAssam,Manipur,Arakan,andTenasserimfrom Burma
William Bentinck	4 July 1828 – 22 April 1834	Bengal Sati Regulation, 1829 Thuggee and Dacoity Suppression Acts, 1836–48 Mysore Stategoes under British administration (1831–81) Bahawalpuraccepts British Suzerainty (1833) Government of India Act (1833)

Governors-Generals of India (1834 – 1858)

Governor-General	Period of Tenure	Events
William Bentinck	22 April 1834 – 20 March 1835	Coorgannexed (1834).
Lord Auckland	4 March 1836 – 28 February 1842	North-Western Provincesestablished (1836) Post Offices were established (1837) Agra famine of 1837–1838 Adenis captured by Company (1839) First Anglo-Afghan War(1839–1842) Massacre of Elphinstone's army(1842).
Lord Ellenborough	28 February 1842 – June 1844	First Anglo-Afghan War(1839–42) Annexation of Sindh(1843) Indian Slavery Act, 1843
Henry Hardinge	23 July 1844 – 12 January 1848	First Anglo-Sikh War(1845–46) Sikhs cedeJullundur Doab,Hazara,andKashmirto the British underTreaty of Lahore(1846) Sale ofKashmirtoGulab SinghofJammuunderTreaty of Amritsar(1846).
Marquess of Dalhousie	12 January 1848 – 28 February 1856	Second Anglo-Sikh War(1848–1849) Annexation of Punjab andNorth-West Frontier Province(1849–56) Construction begins onIndian Railways(1850) Caste Disabilities Removal Act, 1850 Firsttelegraph linelaid in India (1851) Second Anglo-Burmese War(1852–53) Annexation ofLower Burma Ganges Canalopened (1854) Annexation ofSatara(1848),JaipurandSambalpur(1849),NagpurandJhansi(1854) underDoctrine of Lapse. Annexation ofBerar(1853) andAwadh(1856). Postage Stamps for Indiawere introduced. (1854). Public Telegram services starts operation (1855).
Charles Canning	28 February 1856 – 1 November 1858	Hindu Widows' Remarriage Act(25 July 1856) FirstIndian universitiesfounded (January–September 1857) Indian Rebellion of 1857(10 May 1857 – 20 June 1858) largely inNorth-Western ProvincesandOudh Liquidation of theEnglish East India CompanyunderGovernment of India Act 1858

Regulation of Company rule

Until Clive's victory atPlassey,the East India Company territories in India, which consisted largely of thepresidencytowns of Calcutta, Madras, and Bombay, were governed by the mostly autonomous—and sporadically unmanageable—town councils,all composed of merchants.The councils barely had enough powers for the effective management of their local affairs, and the ensuing lack of oversight of the overall Company operations in India led to some grave abuses by Company officers or their allies.Clive's victory, and the award of thediwaniof the rich region of Bengal, brought India into the public spotlight in Britain.The company's money management practices came to be questioned, especially as it began to post net losses even as some Company servants, the "Nabobs", returned to Britain with large fortunes, which—according to rumours then current—were acquired unscrupulously.By 1772, the Company needed British government loans to stay afloat, and there was fear in London that the company's corrupt practices could soon seep into British business and public life.The rights and duties of the British government with regards the company's new territories also came to be examined.The British parliament then held several inquiries and in 1773, during the premiership ofLord North,enacted theRegulating Act,which established regulations, its long title stated, "for the better Management of the Affairs of theEast India Company,as well inIndiaas inEurope".

AlthoughLord Northhimself wanted the company's territories to be taken over by the British state,he faced determined political opposition from many quarters, including some in theCity of Londonand theParliament of Great Britain.The result was a compromise in which the Regulating Act—although implying the ultimate sovereignty of theBritish Crownover these new territories—asserted that the company could act as a sovereign power on behalf of the Crown.It could do this while concurrently being subject to oversight and regulation by the British government and parliament.The Court of Directors of the company were required under the Act to submit all communications regarding civil, military, and revenue matters in India for scrutiny by the British government.For the governance of the Indian territories, the act asserted the supremacy of thePresidency of Fort William (Bengal)over those ofFort St. George (Madras)andBombay.It also nominated a Governor-General (Warren Hastings) and four councillors for administering the Bengal Presidency (and for overseeing the company's operations in India)."The subordinate Presidencies were forbidden to wage war or make treaties without the previous consent of the Governor-General of Bengal in Council,except in case of imminent necessity. The Governors of these Presidencies were directed in general terms to obey the orders of the Governor-General-in-Council, and to transmit to him intelligence of all important matters. "However, the imprecise wording of the Act left it open to be variously interpreted; consequently, the administration in India continued to be hobbled by disunity between the provincial governors, between members of the council, and between the Governor-General himself and his Council.TheRegulating Actalso attempted to address the prevalent corruption in India: Company servants were henceforth forbidden to engage in private trade in India or to receive "presents" from Indian nationals.

In 1783, theFox–North coalitiontried to reform colonial policy again with a bill introduced byEdmund Burkewhich would have transferred political power over India from the East India Company to a parliamentary commission. The bill passed theHouse of Commonswith the enthusiastic support of Foreign SecretaryCharles James Fox,but was vetoed by theHouse of Lordsunder pressure from KingGeorge III,who then dismissed the government and formed anew ministryunder Fox's rivalWilliam Pitt the Younger.Pitt's India Actleft the East India Company in political control of India but established aBoard of Controlin England both to supervise the East India Company's affairs and to prevent the company's shareholders from interfering in the governance of India.The Board of Control consisted of six members, which included one Secretary of State from the British cabinet, as well as theChancellor of the Exchequer.Around this time, there was also extensive debate in the British Parliament on the issue of landed rights in Bengal, with a consensus developing in support of the view advocated byPhilip Francis,a member of the Bengal council and political adversary of Warren Hastings, that all lands in Bengal should be considered the "estate and inheritance of native land-holders and families".

Mindful of the reports of abuse and corruption in Bengal by Company servants, the India Act itself noted numerous complaints that"'divers Rajahs, Zamindars, Talukdars, and landholders' had been unjustly deprived of 'their lands, jurisdictions, rights, and privileges'".At the same time the company's directors were now leaning towards Francis's view that the land-tax in Bengal should be made fixed and permanent, setting the stage for thePermanent Settlement(see sectionRevenue collectionbelow).The India Act also created in each of the three presidencies a number of administrative and military posts, which included: a Governor and three Councilors, one of which was the Commander in Chief of the Presidency army.Although the supervisory powers of the Governor-General-in-Council in Bengal (over Madras and Bombay) were extended—as they were again in the Charter Act of 1793—the subordinate presidencies continued to exercise some autonomy until both the extension of British possessions into becoming contiguous and the advent of faster communications in the next century.

Still, the new Governor-General appointed in 1786,Lord Cornwallis,not only had more power than Hastings, but also had the support of a powerful British cabinet minister,Henry Dundas,who, as Secretary of State for theHome Office,was in charge of the overall India policy.From 1784 onwards, the British government had the final word on all major appointments in India; a candidate's suitability for a senior position was often decided by the strength of his political connections rather than that of his administrative ability.Although this practice resulted in many Governor-General nominees being chosen from Britain's conservativelanded gentry,there were some liberals as well, such asLord William BentinckandLord Dalhousie.

British political opinion was also shaped by the attemptedImpeachment of Warren Hastings;the trial, whose proceedings began in 1788, ended with Hastings' acquittal, in 1795.Although the effort was chiefly coordinated by Edmund Burke, it also drew support from within the British government.Burke accused Hastings not only of corruption, but—appealing to universal standards of justice—also of acting solely upon his own discretion, without concern for law, and of wilfully causing distress to others in India. Hastings' defenders countered that his actions were consistent with Indian customs and traditions.Although Burke's speeches at the trial drew applause and focused attention on India, Hastings was eventually acquitted, due in part to the revival ofnationalism in Britainin the wake of theFrench Revolution.Nonetheless, Burke's effort had the effect of creating a sense of responsibility in British public life for the company's dominion in India.

Soon rumblings appeared amongst merchants in London that the monopoly granted to the East India Company in 1600, intended to facilitate its competition againstDutchandFrenchin a distant region, was no longer needed.In response, in theCharter Act of 1813,the British Parliament renewed the company's charter but terminated its monopoly except with regard to tea and trade with China, opening India both to private investment and missionaries.With increased British power in India, supervision of Indian affairs by theBritish CrownandParliamentincreased as well. By the 1820s British nationals could transact business or engage in missionary work under the protection of the Crown in the three presidencies.Finally, under the terms of TheSaint Helena Act 1833,the British Parliament revoked the company's monopoly in the China trade and made it an agent for the administration of British India.TheGovernor-General of Bengalwas redesignated as theGovernor-General of India.The Governor-General and his executive council were given exclusive legislative powers for the whole of British India.Since the British territories in north India had now extended up to Delhi, the Act also sanctioned the creation of aPresidency of Agra.With the annexation ofOudhin 1856, this territory was extended and eventually became theUnited Provinces of Agra and Oudh.In addition, in 1854, a lieutenant-governor was appointed for the region of Bengal, Bihar and Odisha, leaving the Governor-General to concentrate on the governance of India as a whole.

• 
  A view of Calcutta from Fort William, 1807.
• 
  Government House, Fort St. George, Madras, the headquarters of theMadras Presidency.
• 
  Warren Hastings,the first Governor-General ofFort William (Bengal)who oversaw the Company's territories in India.
• 
  The trial of Warren Hastings in the Court of Westminster Hall, 1789.

Revenue collection

Main articles:Permanent Settlement,Zamindar,Ryotwari,andEconomy of India under Company rule

In the remnant of theMughal Empirerevenue system existing in pre-1765 Bengal,zamindars,or "land holders", collected revenue on behalf of the Mughal emperor, whose representative, ordiwan,supervised their activities.In this system, the assortment of rights associated with land were not possessed by a "land owner", but rather shared by the several parties with stake in the land, including the peasant cultivator, thezamindar,and the state.Thezamindarserved as an intermediary who procured rent from the cultivator, and after withholding a percentage for his own expenses, made available the rest, asrevenueto the state.Under the Mughal system, the land itself belonged to the state and not to thezamindar,who could transfer only his right to collect rent.On being awarded thediwanior overlordship of Bengal following theBattle of Buxarin 1764, theEast India Companyfound itself short of trained administrators, especially those familiar with local custom and law; tax collection was consequently farmed out. This uncertain foray into land taxation by the company, may have gravely worsened the impact of afamine that struck Bengal in 1769–70,in which between seven and ten million people—or between a quarter and third of the presidency's population—may have died.However, the company provided little relief either through reduced taxation or by relief efforts,and the economic and cultural impact of the famine was felt decades later, even becoming, a century later, the subject ofBankim Chandra Chatterjee's novelAnandamath.

In 1772, under Warren Hastings, the East India Company took over revenue collection directly in theBengal Presidency(then Bengal and Bihar), establishing a Board of Revenue with offices in Calcutta andPatna,and moving the pre-existing Mughal revenue records fromMurshidabadto Calcutta. In 1773, afterOudhceded the tributary state ofBenaras,the revenue collection system was extended to the territory with a CompanyResidentin charge.The following year—with a view to preventing corruption—Companydistrict collectors,who were then responsible for revenue collection for an entire district, were replaced with provincial councils at Patna, Murshidabad, and Calcutta, and with Indian collectors working within each district.The title, "collector", reflected "the centrality of land revenue collection to government in India: it was the government's primary function and it moulded the institutions and patterns of administration".

The Company inherited a revenue collection system from the Mughals in which the heaviest proportion of the tax burden fell on the cultivators, with one-third of the production reserved for imperial entitlement; this pre-colonial system became the Company revenue policy's baseline.However, there was vast variation across India in the methods by which the revenues were collected; with this complication in mind, a Committee of Circuit toured the districts of expanded Bengal Presidency in order to make a five-year settlement, consisting of five-yearly inspections and temporarytax farming.In their overall approach to revenue policy, Company officials were guided by two goals: first, preserving as much as possible the balance of rights and obligations that were traditionally claimed by the farmers who cultivated the land and the various intermediaries who collected tax on the state's behalf and who reserved a cut for themselves; and second, identifying those sectors of the rural economy that would maximise both revenue and security.Although their first revenue settlement turned out to be essentially the same as the more informal pre-existing Mughal one, the company had created a foundation for the growth of both information and bureaucracy.

In 1793, the new Governor-General,Lord Cornwallis,promulgated the permanent settlement of land revenues in the presidency, the first socio-economic regulation in colonial India.By the terms of the settlement rajas and taluqdars were recognised as zamindars and they were asked to collect the rent from the peasants and pay revenue to the company. It was namedpermanentbecause it fixed the land tax in perpetuity in return for landed property rights forzamindars;it simultaneously defined the nature of land ownership in the presidency, and gave individuals and families separate property rights in occupied land. Since the revenue was fixed in perpetuity, it was fixed at a high level, which in Bengal amounted to £3 million at 1789–90 prices. According to thePermanent Settlementif the zamindars failed to pay the revenue on time, the zamindari right would be taken from them.According to one estimate, this was 20% higher than the revenue demand before 1757.Over the next century, partly as a result of land surveys, court rulings, and property sales, the change was given practical dimension.An influence on the development of this revenue policy were the economic theories then current, which regarded agriculture as the engine of economic development, and consequently stressed the fixing of revenue demands in order to encourage growth.The expectation behind the permanent settlement was that knowledge of a fixed government demand would encourage the zamindars to increase both their average outcrop and the land under cultivation, since they would be able to retain the profits from the increased output; in addition, it was envisaged that land itself would become a marketable form of property that could be purchased, sold, or mortgaged.A feature of this economic rationale was the additional expectation that the zamindars, recognising their own best interest, would not make unreasonable demands on the peasantry.

However, these expectations were not realised in practice, and in many regions of Bengal, the peasants bore the brunt of the increased demand, there being little protection for their traditional rights in the new legislation.Forced labourof the peasants by the zamindars became more prevalent as cash crops were cultivated to meet the Company revenue demands.Although commercialised cultivation was not new to the region, it had now penetrated deeper into village society and made it more vulnerable to market forces.The zamindars themselves were often unable to meet the increased demands that the company had placed on them;consequently, many defaulted, and by one estimate, up to one-third of their lands were auctioned during the first two decades following the permanent settlement. The new owners were oftenBrahminandKayasthaemployees of the Company who had a good grasp of the new system, and, in many cases, some had prospered under it.

Since the zamindars were never able to undertake costly improvements to the land envisaged under the Permanent Settlement, some of which required the removal of the existing farmers, they soon became rentiers who lived off the rent from their tenant farmers.In many areas, especially northern Bengal, they had to increasingly share the revenue with intermediate tenure holders, calledjotedars,who supervised farming in the villages.Consequently, unlike the contemporaneousEnclosure movementin Britain, agriculture in Bengal remained the province of the subsistence farming of innumerable smallpaddy fields.

The zamindari system was one of two principal revenue settlements undertaken by the Company in India.Insouthern India,Thomas Munro,who would later become Governor of Madras, promoted theryotwarisystem or the Munro system, in which the government settled land-revenue directly with the peasant farmers, orryots.It was first tried in small scale by Captain Alexander Read in the areas that were taken over from the wars with Tipu Sultan. Subsequently, developed by Thomas Munro, this system was gradually extended all over South India. This was, in part, a consequence of the turmoil of theAnglo-Mysore Wars,which had prevented the emergence of a class of large landowners; in addition, Munro and others felt thatryotwariwas closer to traditional practice in the region and ideologically more progressive, allowing the benefits of Company rule to reach the lowest levels of rural society.At the heart of theryotwarisystem was a particular theory ofeconomic rent—and based onDavid Ricardo'sLaw of Rent—promoted byutilitarianJames Millwho formulated the Indian revenue policy between 1819 and 1830. "He believed that the government was the ultimate lord of the soil and should not renounce its right to 'rent', i.e. the profit left over on richer soil when wages and other working expenses had been settled."Another keystone of the new system of temporary settlements was the classification of agricultural fields according to soil type and produce, with average rent rates fixed for the period of the settlement.According to Mill, taxation of land rent would promote efficient agriculture and simultaneously prevent the emergence of a "parasitic landlord class".Mill advocatedryotwarisettlements which consisted of government measurement and assessment of each plot (valid for 20 or 30 years) and subsequent taxation which was dependent on the fertility of the soil.The taxed amount was nine-tenths of the "rent" in the early 19th century and gradually fell afterwards.However, in spite of the appeal of theryotwarisystem's abstract principles, class hierarchies in southern Indian villages had not entirely disappeared—for example village headmen continued to hold sway—and peasant cultivators sometimes came to experience revenue demands they could not meet.In the 1850s, a scandal erupted when it was discovered that some Indian revenue agents of the company were using torture to meet the company's revenue demands.

Land revenue settlements constituted a major administrative activity of the various governments in India under Company rule.In all areas other than the Bengal Presidency, land settlement work involved a continually repetitive process of surveying and measuring plots, assessing their quality, and recording landed rights, and constituted a large proportion of the work ofIndian Civil Serviceofficers working for the government.After the Company lost its trading rights, it became the single most important source of government revenue, roughly half of overall revenue in the middle of the 19th century;even so, between the years 1814 and 1859, the government of India ran debts in 33 years.With expanded dominion, even during non-deficit years, there was just enough money to pay the salaries of a threadbare administration, a skeleton police force, and the army.

• 
  A riverside scene in rural east Bengal (present-dayBangladesh), 1860
• 
  Charles Cornwallis, the Governor-General of India when Permanent Settlement was introduced
• 
  A Kochh Mandai woman of east Bengal with an agricultural knife and a freshly harvestedjackfruit(1860)
• 
  Paddy fields in theMadras Presidency,c. 1880. Two-thirds of the presidency fell under theRyotwarisystem.

Army and civil service

Main article:Presidency armies

In 1772, when Hastings became the first Governor-General one of his first undertakings was the rapid expansion of the Presidency's army. Since the available soldiers, orSepoys,from Bengal—many of whom had fought against the British in the Battle of Plassey – were now suspect in British eyes, Hastings recruited farther west from the "major breeding ground" of India's infantry in easternAwadhand the lands aroundBanarasincludingBihar.Thehigh casterural HinduRajputsandBrahminsof this region, known asPurbiyas(Hindi, lit. "easterners" ), had been recruited by Mughal Empire armies for two hundred years;the East India Company continued this practice for the next 75 years, with these soldiers comprising up to eighty per cent of the Bengal army. British in Malabar also converted Thiyyar army, called as Thiyya pattalam into a special regiment centered at Thalassery called as TheThiyyar Regimentin 1904.However, in order to avoid any friction within the ranks, the company also took pains to adapt its military practices to their religious requirements. Consequently, these soldiers dined in separate facilities; in addition, overseas service, considered polluting to their caste, was not required of them, and the army soon came to recognise Hindu festivals officially. "This encouragement of high caste ritual status, however, left the government vulnerable to protest, even mutiny, whenever the sepoys detected infringement of their prerogatives."

East India Company armies after the Re-organisation of 1796
British troops	Indian troops
	Bengal Presidency	Madras Presidency	Bombay Presidency
	24,000	24,000	9,000
13,000	Total Indian troops: 57,000
Grand total, British and Indian troops: 70,000

TheBengal Armywas used in military campaigns in other parts of India and abroad: to provide crucial support to a weak Madras army in theThird Anglo-Mysore Warin 1791, and also inJavaandCeylon.In contrast to the soldiers in the armies of Indian rulers, the Bengal sepoys not only received high pay, but also received it reliably, thanks in great measure to the company's access to the vast land-revenue reserves of Bengal.Soon, bolstered both by the new musket technology and naval support, the Bengal army came to be widely well-regarded.The well-disciplined sepoys attired in red-coats and their British officers began to arouse "a kind of awe in their adversaries. In Maharashtra and in Java, the sepoys were regarded as the embodiment of demonic forces, sometimes of antique warrior heroes. Indian rulers adopted red serge jackets for their own forces and retainers as if to capture their magical qualities."

In 1796, under pressure from the company's board of directors in London, the Indian troops were re-organised and reduced during the tenure ofJohn Shoreas Governor-General.However, the closing years of the 18th century saw, with Wellesley's campaigns, a new increase in the army strength. Thus in 1806, at the time of theVellore Mutiny,the combined strength of the three presidencies' armies stood at 154,500, making them one of the largeststanding armiesin the world.

East India Company armies on the eve of theVellore Mutinyof 1806
Presidencies	British troops	Indian troops	Total
Bengal	7,000	57,000	64,000
Madras	11,000	53,000	64,000
Bombay	6,500	20,000	26,500
Total	24,500	130,000	154,500

As the East India Company expanded its territories, it added irregular "local corps", which were not as well trained as the army.In 1846, after theSecond Anglo-Sikh War,a frontier brigade was raised in theCis-Sutlej Hill Statesmainly for police work; in addition, in 1849, the "Punjab Irregular Force"was added on the frontier.Two years later, this force consisted of "3 light field batteries, 5 regiments of cavalry, and 5 of infantry".The following year, "a garrison company was added,... a sixth infantry regiment (formed from the Sind Camel Corps) in 1853, and one mountain battery in 1856".Similarly, a local force was raised after the annexation of Nagpur in 1854, and the "Oudh Irregular Force" was added after Oudh was annexed in 1856.Earlier, as a result of the treaty of 1800, theNizam of Hyderabadhad begun to maintain a contingent force of 9,000 horse and 6,000-foot which was commanded by Company officers; in 1853, after a new treaty was negotiated, this force was assigned toBerarand stopped being a part of the Nizam's army.

East India Company armies on the eve of theIndian rebellion of 1857
Presidencies	British troops				Indian troops
	Cavalry	Artillery	Infantry	Total	Cavalry	Artillery	Sappers & Miners	Infantry	Total
Bengal	1,366	3,063	17,003	21,432	19,288	4,734	1,497	112,052	137,571
Madras	639	2,128	5,941	8,708	3,202	2,407	1,270	42,373	49,252
Bombay	681	1,578	7,101	9,360	8,433	1,997	637	33,861	44,928
Local forces and contingents					6,796	2,118		23,640	32,554
"" (unclassified)									7,756
Military police									38,977
Total	2,686	6,769	30,045	39,500	37,719	11,256	3,404	211,926	311,038
Grand Total, British and Indian troops									350,538

In the Indian rebellion of 1857 almost the entire Bengal army, both regular and irregular, revolted.It has been suggested that after the annexation of Oudh by the East India Company in 1856, many sepoys were disquieted both from losing their perquisites, as landed gentry, in the Oudh courts and from the anticipation of any increased land-revenue payments that the annexation might augur.With British victories in wars or with annexation, as the extent of British jurisdiction expanded, the soldiers were now not only expected to serve in less familiar regions (such as in Burma in theAnglo-Burmese Warsin 1856), but also make do without the "foreign service", remuneration that had previously been their due, and this caused resentment in the ranks.The Bombay and Madras armies, and the Hyderabad contingent, however, remained loyal. The Punjab Irregular Force not only did not revolt, it played an active role in suppressing the mutiny.The rebellion led to a complete re-organisation of the Indian army in 1858 in the newBritish Raj.

Civil service

The reforms initiated after 1784 were designed to create an elite civil service where very talented young Britons would spend their entire careers. Advanced training was promoted especially at theEast India Company College(until 1853).Haileybury emphasised theAnglican religionand morality and trained students in the classicalIndian languages.Many students held toWhiggish,evangelical,andUtilitarianconvictions of their duty to represent their nation and to modernise India. At most there were about 600 of these men who managed the Raj's customs service, taxes, justice system, and its general administration.The company's original policy was one of "Orientalism",that is of adjusting to the way of life and customs of the Indian people and not trying to reform them. That changed after 1813, as the forces of reform in the home country, especially evangelical religion, Whiggish political outlook, and Utilitarian philosophy worked together to make the company an agent of Anglicization and modernisation. Christian missionaries became active, but made few converts. The Raj set out to outlawsati(widow-burning) andthuggee(ritual banditry) and upgrade the status of women. Schools would be established in which they would teach theEnglish language.The 1830s and 1840s, however, were not times of prosperity: After its heavy spending on the military, the company had little money to engage in large-scale public works projects or modernisation programs.

• 
  A Royal Artillery encampment atArcot,Madras Presidency,1804.
• 
  East India CompanySepoys(Indian infantrymen) inred coatsoutsideTipu Sultan's former summer palace inBangalore,1804
• 
  Military Orphan School for private soldiers of the East India Company,Howrah,Bengal Presidency,1794.
• 
  A new "writer" in the East India Company Civil Service arrives in Calcutta. Apalanquintransport awaits him.

Trade

Main article:Economy of India under Company rule

After gaining the right to collect revenue in Bengal in 1765, the Company largely ceased importinggold and silver,which it had hitherto used to pay for goods shipped back to Britain.

Export of bullion to India, by EIC (1708–1810)

Years	Bullion (£)	Average per annum
1708/9-1733/4	12,189,147	420,315
1734/5-1759/60	15,239,115	586,119
1760/1-1765/6	842,381	140,396
1766/7-1771/2	968,289	161,381
1772/3-1775/6	72,911	18,227
1776/7-1784/5	156,106	17,345
1785/6-1792/3	4,476,207	559,525
1793/4-1809/10	8,988,165	528,715

In addition, as under Mughal Empire rule, land revenue collected in the Bengal Presidency helped finance the company's wars in other parts of India.Consequently, in the period 1760–1800, Bengal'smoney supplywas greatly diminished; furthermore, the closing of some local mints and close supervision of the rest, the fixing ofexchange rates,and the standardisation ofcoinage,paradoxically, added to the economic downturn.During the period, 1780–1860, India changed from being an exporter of processed goods for which it received payment inbullion,to being an exporter ofraw materialsand a buyer ofmanufactured goods.More specifically, in the 1750s, mostly fine cotton and silk was exported from India to markets in Europe, Asia, and Africa; by the second quarter of the 19th century, raw materials, which chiefly consisted of raw cotton, opium, and indigo, accounted for most of India's exports.Also, from the late 18th century British cotton mill industry began to lobby the government to both tax Indian imports and allow them access to markets in India.Starting in the 1830s, British textiles began to appear in—and soon to inundate—the Indian markets, with the value of the textile imports growing from £5.2 million 1850 to £18.4 million in 1896.TheAmerican Civil Wartoo would have a major impact on India's cotton economy: with the outbreak of the war,American cottonwas no longer available toBritish manufacturers;consequently, demand for Indian cotton soared, and the prices soon quadrupled.This led many farmers in India to switch to cultivating cotton as a quick cash crop; however, with the end of the war in 1865, the demand plummeted again, creating another downturn in the agricultural economy.

At this time, the East India Company's trade with China began to grow as well. In the early 19th century, demand forChinese teahad greatly increased in Britain; since the money supply in India was restricted and the company was indisposed to shipping bullion from Britain, it decided uponopium,which had a large underground market inQing Chinaand which was grown in many parts of India, as the most profitable form of payment.However, since the Chinese authorities had banned the importation and consumption of opium, the Company engaged them in theFirst Opium War,and at its conclusion, under theTreaty of Nanjing,gained access to five Chinese ports,Guangzhou,Xiamen,Fuzhou,Shanghai, andNingbo;in addition, Hong Kong was ceded to the British Crown.Towards the end of the second quarter of the 19th century, opium export constituted 40% of India's exports.

Another major, though erratic, export item wasindigo dye,which was extracted fromnatural indigo,and which came to be grown in Bengal and northern Bihar.In 1788, the East India Company offered advances to ten British planters to grow indigo; however, since the new (landed) property rights defined in the Permanent Settlement, did not allow them, as Europeans, to buy agricultural land, they had to in turn offer cash advances to local peasants, and sometimes coerce them, to grow the crop.In early 19th century Europe, blue clothing was favoured as a fashion, and blue uniforms were common in the military; consequently, the demand for the dye was high.The European demand for the dye, however, proved to be unstable, and both creditors and cultivators bore the risk of the market crashes in 1827 and 1847.The peasant discontent in Bengal eventually led to theIndigo rebellionin 1859–60 and to the end of indigo production there.In Bihar, however, indigo production continued well into the 20th century; a centre of indigo production there,Champarandistrict, became an early testing ground, in 1917, forMohandas Karamchand Gandhi's strategy ofnon-violent resistanceagainst theBritish Raj.

• 
  Photograph of East India Company factory in Painam,Sonargaon,a major producer of the celebratedDhakamuslins.
• 
  "Mellor Mill" inMarple,Greater Manchester, England, was constructed in 1790–1793 for manufacturing muslin cloth.
• 
  OpiumGodown(Storehouse) inPatna,Bihar (c. 1814). Patna was the centre of the Company opium industry.
• 
  Indigo dyefactory inBengal.Bengal was the world's largest producer ofnatural indigoin the 19th century.

Justice system

Until the British gained control of Bengal in the mid-18th century, the system of justice there was presided over by the Nawab of Bengal himself, who, as the chief law officer,Nawāb Nāzim,attended to cases qualifying for capital punishment in his headquarters,Murshidabad.His deputy, theNaib Nāzim,attended to the slightly less important cases. The ordinary lawsuits belonged to the jurisdiction of a hierarchy of court officials consisting offaujdārs,muhtasils,andkotwāls.In the rural areas, or theMofussil,thezamindars—the rural overlords with the hereditary right to collect rent from peasant farmers—also had the power to administer justice. This they did with little routine oversight, being required to report only their judgments in capital punishment cases to theNawāb.

By the mid-18th century, the British too had completed a century and a half in India, and had a burgeoning presence in the threepresidencytowns of Madras, Bombay, and Calcutta. During this time the successiveRoyal Chartershad gradually given the East India Company more power to administer justice in these towns. In the charter granted byCharles IIin 1683, the company was given the power to establish "courts of judicature" in locations of its choice, each court consisting of a lawyer and two merchants. This right was renewed in the subsequent charters granted byJames IIandWilliam IIIin 1686 and 1698 respectively. In 1726, however, the Court of Directors of the Company felt that more customary justice was necessary for European residents in the presidency towns, and petitioned the King to establishMayor's Courts.The petition was approved and Mayor's courts, each consisting of a Mayor and nine aldermen, and each having the jurisdiction in lawsuitsbetweenEuropeans, were created in Fort William (Calcutta), Madras, and Bombay. Judgments handed down by a Mayor's Court could be disputed with an appeal to the respective Presidency government and, when the amount disputed was greater thanRs.4,000, with a further appeal to theKing-in-Council.In 1753, the Mayor's courts were renewed under a revisedletters patent;in addition,Courts of Requestsfor lawsuits involving amounts less than Rs. 20 were introduced. Both types of courts were regulated by the Court of Directors of the East India Company.

After its victory in theBattle of Buxar,the Company obtained in 1765 theDiwāniof Bengal, the right not only to collect revenue, but also to administer civil justice in Bengal. The administration of criminal justice, theNizāmatorFaujdāri,however, remained with theNawāb,and for criminal cases the prevailingIslamic lawremained in place. However, the company's new duties associated with theDiwāniwere leased out to the Indian officials who had formerly performed them. This makeshift arrangement continued—with much accompanying disarray—until 1771, when the Court of Directors of the Company decided to obtain for the company the jurisdiction of both criminal and civil cases.

Soon afterwards Warren Hastings arrived in Calcutta as the first Governor-General of the company's Indian dominions and resolved to overhaul the company's organisation and in particular its judicial affairs. In the interior, orMofussil,diwāni adālats,or acivil courts of first instance,were constituted in each district; these courts were presided over by EuropeanZilājudges employed by the company, who were assisted in the interpretation of customary Indian law by Hindupanditsand Muslimqazis.For small claims, however, Registrars and Indian commissioners, known asSadr AmīnsandMunsifs,were appointed. These in their turn were supervised by provincialcivil courts of appealconstituted for such purpose, each consisting of four British judges. All these were under the authority of theSadr Diwāni Adālat,or theChief Civil Court of Appeals,consisting of the Governor of the Presidency and his Council, assisted by Indian officers.

Similarly for criminal cases, Mofussilnizāmat adālats,or Provincialcourts of criminal judicature,were created in the interior; these again consisted of Indian court officers (panditsandqazis), who were supervised by officials of the company. Also constituted wereCourts of circuitwithappellate jurisdictionin criminal cases, which were usually presided over by the judges of the civil appellate courts. All these too were under aSadr Nizāmat Adālator a Chief Court of Criminal Appeal.

Around this time the business affairs of the East India Company began to draw increased scrutiny in theHouse of Commons.After receiving a report by a committee, which condemned the Mayor's Courts, theCrownissued a charter for a new judicial system in theBengal Presidency.TheBritish Parliamentconsequently enacted the Regulating Act of 1773 under which the King-in-Council created aSupreme Courtin thePresidency town,i.e.Fort William.The tribunal consisted of one Chief Justice and threepuisne judges;all four judges were to be chosen frombarristers.The Supreme Court supplanted the Mayor's Court; however, it left the Court of Requests in place. Under the charter, the Supreme Court, moreover, had the authority to exercise all types of jurisdiction in the region of Bengal, Bihar, and Odisha, with the only caveat that in situations where the disputed amount was in excess of Rs. 4,000, their judgment could be appealed to thePrivy Council.Both the Act and the charter said nothing about the relation between thejudiciary(Supreme Court) and theexecutive branch(Governor-General); equally, they were silent on theAdālats(bothDiwāniandNizāmat) created by Warren Hastings just the year before. In the new Supreme Court, the civil and criminal cases alike were interpreted and prosecuted accorded toEnglish law;in theSadr Adālats,however, the judges and law-officers had no knowledge of English law, and were required only, by the Governor-General's order, "to proceed according to equity, justice, and good conscience, unlessHinduorMuhammadan lawwas in point, or some Regulation expressly applied ".

There was a good likelihood, therefore, that the Supreme Court and theSadr Adālatswould act in opposition to each other and, predictably, many disputes resulted. Hastings' premature attempt to appoint the Chief Justice,Sir Elijah Impey,an old schoolmate fromWinchester,to the bench of theSadr Diwāni Adālat,only complicated the situation further. The appointment had to be annulled in 1781 by a parliamentary intervention with the enactment of the Declaration Act. The Act exempted the Executive Branch from the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court. It recognised the independent existence of theSadr Adālatsand all subsidiary courts of the company. Furthermore, it headed off future legal turf wars by prohibiting the Supreme Court any jurisdiction in matters of revenue (Diwāni) or Regulations of the Government enacted by the British Parliament. This state of affairs continued until 1797, when a new Act extended the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court to the province ofBenares(which had since been added to the company's dominions) and "all places for the time being included in Bengal". With the creation of theCeded and Conquered Provincesin 1805, the jurisdiction would extend as far west as Delhi.

In the other two presidencies,MadrasandBombay,a similar course of legal changes unfolded; there, however, the Mayor's Courts were first strengthened toRecorder's Courtsby adding a legal president to the bench. The Supreme Courts in Madras and Bombay were finally established in 1801 and 1823, respectively. Madras Presidency was also unusual in being the first to rely on village headmen andpanchāyatsfor cases involving small claims. This judicial system in the three presidencies was to survive the company's rule, the next major change coming only in 1861.

• 
  The house ofSir Thomas Strange,who in 1800 became the first Chief Justice of the Fort of St. George (Madras) and wroteElements of Hindu Law(1825).
• 
  An 1833 Lithograph of theSadr Diwāni Adālat,the Chief Civil Court for Indians, on Chowringhee Road, Calcutta.
• 
  Coloured engraving of the judges and officers of Hindu (top row) and Muslim (bottom row) law in the Recorder Court in Bombay, 1805.
• 
  The Court-House Building on Apollo Street, Bombay (third building on left, just beyond the domed Ice House) shown in 1850.

Education

Further information:History of education in the Indian subcontinent

Education of Indians had become a topic of interest among East India Company officials from the outset of the company's rule in Bengal.In the last two decades of the 18th century and the first decade of the nineteenth, Company officials pursued a policy of conciliation towards the native culture of its new dominion, especially in relation to education policy.During the 19th century, the Indian literacy rates were rumoured to be less than half of post independence levels which were 18.33% in 1951. The policy was pursued in the aid of three goals: "to sponsor Indians in their own culture, to advance knowledge of India, and to employ that knowledge in government".

The first goal was supported by some administrators, such as Warren Hastings, who envisaged the company as the successor of a great Empire, and saw the support of vernacular learning as only befitting that role. In 1781, Hastings founded theMadrasa 'Aliya,an institution in Calcutta for the study ofArabicandPersianlanguages, andIslamic law.A few decades later a related perspective appeared among the governed population, one that was expressed by the conservative Bengali reformer Radhakanta Deb as the "duty of the Rulers of Countries to preserve and Customs and the religions of their subjects".

The second goal was motivated by the concerns among some Company officials about being seen as foreign rulers. They argued that the company should try to win over its subjects by outdoing the region's previous rulers in the support of indigenous learning. Guided by this belief, theBenares Sanskrit Collegewas founded inVaranasiin 1791 during the administration of Lord Cornwallis. The promotion of knowledge of Asia had attracted scholars as well to the company's service. Earlier, in 1784, theAsiatick Societyhad been founded in Calcutta byWilliam Jones,apuisne judgein the newly established Supreme Court of Bengal. Soon, Jones was to advance hisfamous thesison the common origin ofIndo-European languages.

The third related goal grew out of the philosophy then current among some Company officials that they would themselves become better administrators if they were better versed in the languages and cultures of India. It led in 1800 to the founding of theCollege of Fort William,in Calcutta byLord Wellesley,the then Governor-General. The college was later to play an important role both in the development ofmodern Indian languagesand in theBengal Renaissance.Advocates of these related goals were termed, "Orientalists".The Orientalist group was led byHorace Hayman Wilson.Many leading Company officials, such asThomas MunroandMontstuart Elphinstone,were influenced by the Orientalist ethos and felt that the company's government in India should be responsive to Indian expectations. The Orientalist ethos would prevail in education policy well into the 1820s, and was reflected in the founding of thePoona Sanskrit CollegeinPunein 1821 and theCalcutta Sanskrit Collegein 1824.

The Orientalists were, however, soon opposed by advocates of an approach that has been termedAnglicist.The Anglicists supported instruction in the English language in order to impart to Indians what they considered modern Western knowledge. Prominent among them wereevangelicalswho, after 1813—when the company's territories were opened toChristian missionaries—were interested in spreading Christian belief; they also believed in using theology to promote liberal social reform, such as theabolition of slavery.Among them wasCharles Grant,the Chairman of the East India Company. Grant supported state-sponsored education in India 20 years before a similar system was set up in Britain. Among Grant's close evangelical friends wereWilliam Wilberforce,a prominentabolitionistand member of the British Parliament, andSir John Shore,the Governor-General of India from 1793 to 1797. During this period, many Scottish Presbyterian missionaries also supported the British rulers in their efforts to spread English education and established many reputed colleges likeScottish Church College(1830),Wilson College(1832),Madras Christian College(1837), andElphinstone College(1856).

However, the Anglicists also includedutilitarians,led byJames Mill,who had begun to play an important role in fashioning Company policy. The utilitarians believed in the moral worth of an education that aided the good of society and promoted instruction inuseful knowledge.Suchusefulinstruction to Indians had the added consequence of making them more suitable for the company's burgeoning bureaucracy. By the early 1830s, the Anglicists had the upper hand in devising education policy in India. Many utilitarian ideas were employed inThomas Babbington Macaulay'sMinute on Indian Educationof 1835. TheMinute,which later aroused great controversy, was to influence education policy in India well into the next century.

Since English was increasingly being employed as the language of instruction, Persian was abolished as the official language of the company's administration and courts by 1837. However, bilingual educations was proving to be popular as well, and some institutions such as the Poona Sanskrit College commenced teaching both Sanskrit and English. Charles Grant's son,Sir Robert Grant,who in 1834 was appointed Governor of theBombay Presidency,played an influential role in the planning of the first medical college in Bombay, which after his unexpected death was namedGrant Medical Collegewhen it was established in 1845. During 1852–1853 some citizens of Bombay sent petitions to the British Parliament in support of both establishing and adequately funding university education in India. The petitions resulted in theEducation Dispatch of 1854sent bySir Charles Wood,thePresident of the Board of Controlof the East India Company, the chief official on Indian affairs in the British government, toLord Dalhousie,the then Governor-General of India. The dispatch outlined a broad plan of state-sponsored education for India, which included:

1. Establishing a Department of Public Instruction in eachpresidency or province of British India.
2. Establishing universities modelled on theUniversity of London(as primarily examining institutions for students studying in affiliated colleges) in each of thePresidency towns(i.e.Madras,Bombay,and Calcutta)
3. Establishing teachers-training schools for all levels of instruction
4. Maintaining existing Government colleges and high-schools and increasing their number when necessary.
5. Vastly increasing vernacular schools forelementary educationin villages.
6. Introducing a system ofgrants-in-aidforprivate schools.

The Department of Public Instruction was in place by 1855. In January 1857, theUniversity of Calcuttawas established, followed by theUniversity of Bombayin June 1857, and theUniversity of Madrasin September 1857. The University of Bombay, for example, consisted of three affiliated institutions: theElphinstone Institution,theGrant Medical College,and thePoona Sanskrit College.The company's administration also founded high-schoolsen massein the different provinces and presidencies, and the policy was continued duringCrown rulewhich commenced in 1858. By 1861, 230,000 students were attending public educational institutions in the four provinces (the three Presidencies andNorth-Western Provinces), of whom 200,000 were in primary schools.Over 5,000 primary schools and 142 secondary schools had been established in these provinces.Earlier, during the Indian rebellion of 1857, some civilian leaders, such as Khan Bhadur Khan ofBareilly,had stressed the threat posed to the populace's religions by the new education programmes begun by the company; however, historical statistics have shown that this was not generally the case. For example, inEtawahdistrict in the then North-Western Provinces (present-dayUttar Pradesh), where during the period 1855–1857, nearly 200 primary, middle-, and high-schools had been opened by the company and tax levied on the population, relative calm prevailed and the schools remained open during the rebellion.

• 
  A coloured-in photograph (1851) of Hindu College, Calcutta, which had been founded in 1817 by a committee headed byRaja Ram Mohun Roy.In 1855, the Government of theBengal Presidencyrenamed itPresidency Collegeand opened it to all students.
• 
  An engraving (1844) of a youth, who according to the engraver, Emily Eden, was "a favourite and successful young student at theHindu Collegein Calcutta, where scholars acquire a very perfect knowledge of English, and have a familiarity with the best English writers ".
• 
  An 1844 engraving ofGrant Medical College(left) andSir Jamsetjee Jeejeebhoy Hospital(right background) in Bombay made by G. R. Sargeant the year before the medical college was formally opened.
• 
  An 1855 photograph of the same two institutions. In 1857, Grant Medical College became one of three institutions affiliated with the newly establishedUniversity of Bombay.The college was funded partly by the Jeejeebhoy family and partly by the East India Company.

Social reform

In the first half of the 19th century, the British legislated reforms against what they considered were iniquitous Indian practices. In most cases, the legislation alone was unable to change Indian society sufficiently for it to absorb both the ideal and the ethic underpinning the reform. For example, upper-caste Hindu society in theIndo-Aryan speakingregions of India had long looked askance at the remarriage of widows in order to protect both what it considered was family honour and family property. Even adolescent widows were expected to live a life of austerity and denial.TheHindu Widows' Remarriage Act, 1856,enacted in the waning years of Company rule, provided legal safeguards against loss of certain forms of inheritance for a remarrying Hindu widow, though not of the inheritance due her from her deceased husband. However, very few widows actually remarried. Some Indian reformers, such asRaja Ram Mohan Roy,Ishwar Chandra Vidyasagar,even offered money to men who would take widows as brides, but these men often deserted their new wives.

Post and telegraph

Postal services

Further information:Postal history of India

Before 1837, the East India Company's dominions in India had no universal publicpostal service,one that was shared by all regions. Althoughcourier servicesdid exist, connecting the more important towns with their respective seats of provincial government (i.e. thePresidency townsof Fort William (Calcutta),Fort St. George(Madras), andBombay), private individuals were, upon payment, only sparingly allowed their use. That situation changed in 1837, when, by Act XVII of that year, a public post, run by the company's Government, was established in the company's territory in India. Post offices were established in the principal towns and postmasters appointed. The postmasters of the Presidency towns oversaw a few provincial post offices in addition to being responsible for the main postal services between the provinces. By contrast, theDistrict collectors(originally, collectors of land-tax) directed the District post offices, including their local postal services. Postal services required payment in cash, to be made in advance, with the amount charged usually varying with weight and distance. For example, the charge of sending a letter from Calcutta to Bombay was onerupee;however, that from Calcutta toAgrawas 12annas(or three-quarter of a rupee) for eachtola(three-eighths of an ounce).

After the recommendations of the commission appointed in 1850 to evaluate the Indian postal system were received, Act XVII of 1837 was superseded by the Indian Postal Act of 1854. Under its provisions, the entire postal department was headed by aDirector-General,and the duties of aPostmaster-Generalwere set apart from those of a Presidency Postmaster; the former administered the postal system of the larger provinces (such as theBombay Presidencyor theNorth-Western Provinces), whereas the latter attended to the less important Provinces (such asAjmer-Merwaraand the major Political Agencies such asRajputana). Postage stamps were introduced at this time and the postal rates fixed by weight, dependent no longer also on the distance travelled in the delivery. The lowest inland letter rate was half anna for1⁄4tola, followed by one anna for1⁄2tola, and 2 annas for a tola, a great reduction from the rates of 17 years before. TheIndian Post Officedelivered letters, newspapers, postcards, book packets, and parcels. These deliveries grew steadily in number; by 1861 (three years after the end of Company rule), a total of 889 post offices had been opened, and almost 43 million letters and over four and a half million newspapers were being delivered annually.

• 
  Lithograph of the General Post Office on Chowringhee Street, Calcutta, 1833, four years before the India-wide postal service was established under the Indian Postal Act of 1837.
• 
  Two fourannastamps issued in 1854. Stamps were issued for the first time for all of British India in 1854. The lowest denomination was1⁄2anna blue, followed by 1 anna red, and 4 annas blue and red. The stamps were printed from lithographic stones at the Surveyor-General's Office in Calcutta.
• 
  Since the four anna stamps were composed of two colours, they required two different printings, one for Queen Victoria's head in blue, and the other for the surrounding red frame. In these, rare stamps, shown on a letter mailed from Bombay toVenice,the head was accidentally oriented upside-down in relation to the frame.
• 
  Asemaphore"telegraph" signalling tower in Silwar (Bihar), 13 February 1823, thirty years before electric telegraphy was rapidly introduced into India by the East India Company.

Telegraphy

Before the advent ofelectric telegraphy,the word "telegraph" had been used forsemaphoresignalling. During the period 1820–1830, the East India Company's Government in India seriously considered constructing signalling towers ( "telegraph" towers), each a hundred feet high and separated from the next by eight miles, along the entire distance from Calcutta to Bombay. Although such towers were built in Bengal and Bihar, the India-wide semaphore network never took off. By mid-century, electric telegraphy had become viable, and hand signalling obsolete.

W. B. O'Shaughnessy,a professor of chemistry in theCalcutta Medical College,received permission in 1851 to conduct a trial run for a telegraph service from Calcutta toDiamond Harbouralong the riverHooghly.Four telegraph offices, mainly for shipping-related business, were also opened along the river that year. The telegraph receiver used in the trial was agalvanoscopeof O'Shaughnessy's design and manufactured in India. When the experiment was deemed to be a success a year later, the Governor-General of India,Lord Dalhousie,sought permission from the Court of Directors of the company for the construction oftelegraph linesfrom "Calcutta to Agra, Agra to Bombay, Agra to Peshawar, and Bombay to Madras, extending in all over 3,050 miles and including forty-one offices". The permission was soon granted; by February 1855 all the proposed telegraph lines had been constructed and were being used to send paid messages. O'Shaughnessy's instrument was used all over India until early 1857, when it was supplanted by theMorse instrument.By 1857, the telegraph network had expanded to 4,555 miles of lines and sixty two offices, and had reached as far as thehill stationofOotacamundin theNilgiri Hillsand the port ofCalicuton the southwest coast of India. During the Indian rebellion of 1857, more than seven hundred miles of telegraph lines were destroyed by the rebel forces, mainly in theNorth-Western Provinces.The East India Company was nevertheless able to use the remaining intact lines to warn many outposts of impending disturbances. The political value of the new technology was, thus, driven home to the company, and, in the following year, not only were the destroyed lines rebuilt, but the network was expanded further by 2,000 miles.

O'Shaughnessy's experimental set-up of 1851–52 consisted of both overhead and underground lines; the latter included underwater ones that crossed two rivers, theHooghlyand theHaldi.The overhead line was constructed by welding uninsulated iron rods,13+1⁄2feet long and 3/8 inch wide, end to end. These lines, which weighed 1,250 pounds per mile, were held aloft by fifteen-foot lengths of bamboo, planted into the ground at equal intervals—200 to the mile—and covered with a layer each of coal tar andpitchfor insulation. The underwater cables had been manufactured in England and consisted ofcopper wirecovered withgutta-percha.Furthermore, in order to protect the cables from draggingship anchors,the cables were attached to the links of a7⁄8-inch-thick (22 mm) chain cable. An underwater cable of length 2,070 yards was laid across the Hooghly river atDiamond Harbour,and another, 1,400 yards long, was laid across the Haldi atKedgeree.

Work on the long lines from Calcutta toPeshawar(through Agra), Agra to Bombay, and Bombay to Madras began in 1853. The conducting material chosen for these lines was now lighter, and the support stronger. The wood used for the support consisted of teak, sal,fir,ironwood,or blackwood (Terminalia elata), and was either fashioned into whole posts, or used in attachments to ironscrew-pilesormasonrycolumns. Some sections had uniformly strong support; one such was the 322-mile Bombay-Madras line, which was supported bygraniteobeliskssixteen feet high. Other sections had less secure support, consisting, in some cases, of sections oftoddy palm,insulated with pieces of sal wood fastened to their tops. Some of the conducting wires or rods were insulated, the insulating material being manufactured in either India or England; other stretches of wire remained uninsulated. By 1856, iron tubes had begun to be employed to provide support, and would see increased use in the second half of the 19th century all over India.

The first Telegraph Act for India was Parliament's Act XXXIV of 1854. When the public telegramme service was first set up in 1855, the charge was fixed at one rupee for every sixteen words (including the address) for every 400 miles of transmission. The charges were doubled for telegrammes sent between 6PM and 6AM. These rates would remain fixed until 1882. In the year 1860–61, two years after the end of Company rule, India had 11,093 miles of telegraph lines and 145 telegraph offices. That year telegrams totallingRs.500,000 in value were sent by the public, the working expense of theIndian Telegraph Departmentwas Rs. 1.4 million, and thecapital expenditureuntil the end of the year totalled Rs. 6.5 million.

Railways

Further information:Rail transport in India § History

The firstinter-city railwayservice in England, theStockton and Darlington Railway,had been established in 1825;in the following decade other inter-city railways were rapidly constructed between cities in England. In 1845, the Court of Directors of the East India Company, forwarded to the Governor-General of India,Lord Dalhousie,a number of applications they had received from private contractors in England for the construction of a wide-ranging railway network in India, and requested a feasibility report. They added that, in their view, the enterprise would be profitable only if large sums of money could be raised for the construction. The Court was concerned that in addition to the usual difficulties encountered in the construction of this new form of transportation, India might present some unique problems, among which they counted floods, tropical storms in coastal areas, damage by "insects and luxuriant tropical vegetation", and the difficulty of finding qualified technicians at a reasonable cost. It was suggested, therefore, that three experimental lines be constructed and their performance evaluated.

Contracts were awarded in 1849 to theEast Indian Railway Companyto construct a 120-mile railway fromHowrah-Calcutta toRaniganj;to theGreat Indian Peninsular Railway Companyfor a service from Bombay toKalyan,thirty miles away; and to theMadras Railway Companyfor a line fromMadras citytoArkonam,a distance of some thirty nine miles. Although construction began first, in 1849, on the East Indian Railways line, with an outlay of £1 million, it was the first-leg of the Bombay-Kalyan line—a 21-mile stretch from Bombay toThane—that, in 1853, was the first to be completed (see picture below).

Map of the completed and planned railway lines in India in 1871, thirteen years after the end of Company rule.

The feasibility of a train network in India was comprehensively discussed by Lord Dalhousie in hisRailway minute of 1853.The Governor-General vigorously advocated the quick and widespread introduction of railways in India, pointing to their political, social, and economic advantages. He recommended that a network oftrunk linesbe first constructed connecting the inland regions of each presidency with its chief port as well as each presidency with several others. His recommended trunk lines included the following ones: (i) from Calcutta, in theBengal Presidency,on the eastern coast toLahorein the north-western region of thePunjab,annexed just three years before; (ii) fromAgrain north-central India (in, what was still being calledNorth-Western Provinces) toBombay cityon the western coast; (iii) from Bombay toMadras cityon the southeastern coast; and (iv) from Madras to the southwestern Malabar coast (see map above). The proposal was soon accepted by the Court of Directors.

During this time work had been proceeding on the experimental lines as well. The first leg of the East Indian Railway line, abroad gaugerailway, from Howrah toPandua,was opened in 1854 (see picture of locomotive below), and the entire line up to Raniganj would become functional by the time of the Indian rebellion of 1857. The Great Indian Peninsular Railway was permitted to extend its experimental line toPoona.This extension required planning for the steep rise in theBor Ghatvalley in theWestern Ghats,a section15+3⁄4miles long with an ascent of 1,831 feet. Construction began in 1856 and was completed in 1863, and, in the end, the line required a total of twenty five tunnels and fifteen miles of gradients (inclines) of 1 in 50 or steeper, the most extreme being theBor Ghat Incline,a distance of1+3⁄4miles at a gradient of 1 in 37 (see picture above).

Each of the three companies (and later five others that were given contracts in 1859) was ajoint stockcompanydomiciledin England with itsfinancial capitalraised inpounds sterling.Each company was guaranteed a 5 per cent return on its capital outlay and, in addition, a share of half the profits. Although the Government of India had nocapital expenditureother than the provision of the underlying land free of charge, it had the onus of continuing to provide the 5 percent return in the event of net loss, and soon all anticipation of profits would fall by the wayside as the outlays would mount.

The technology of railway construction was still new and there was norailway engineeringexpertise in India; consequently, all engineers had to be brought in from England. These engineers were unfamiliar not only with the language and culture of India, but also with the physical aspect of the land itself and its concomitant engineering requirements. Moreover, never before had such a large and complex construction project been undertaken in India, and no pool of semi-skilled labour was already organised to aid the engineers. The work, therefore, proceeded in fits and starts—many practical trials followed by a final construction that was undertaken with great caution and care—producing an outcome that was later criticised as being "built to a standard which was far in excess of the needs to the time". The Government of India's administrators, moreover, made up in their attention to the fine details of expenditure and management what they lacked in professional expertise. The resulting delays soon led to the appointment of a Committee of theHouse of Commonsin 1857–58 to investigate the matter. However, by the time the Committee concluded that all parties needed to honour the spirit rather than the letter of the contracts, Company rule in India had ended.

Although, railway construction had barely begun in the last years of this rule, its foundations had been laid, and it would proceed apace for much of the next half century. By the turn of the 20th century, India would have over 28,000 miles of railways connecting most interior regions to the ports of Karachi, Bombay, Madras, Calcutta,Chittagong,andRangoon,and together they would constitute the fourth-largest railway network in the world.

• 
  Photograph (1855) showing the construction of the Bhor Ghaut incline bridge, Bombay; the incline was conceived by George Clark, the Chief Engineer in the East India Company's Government of Bombay.
• 
  Photograph (1858) of the Dapoorie viaduct over the Mula River near Poona in Bombay Presidency.
• 
  Photograph (1897) of the first locomotive, shown on the right and christened "multum in parvo"(barely visible on the wheel casing), which was used by theEast Indian Railway Companyin 1854 on its 23-mile line fromHowrahtoPandua.
• 
  The trunk lines proposed by the Governor-General of India,Lord Dalhousiein hisRailway minute of 1853(shown in red on a 1908 railway map of India).

Canals

The first irrigation works undertaken during East India Company's rule were begun in 1817. Consisting chiefly of extensions or reinforcements of previous Indian works, these projects were limited to the plains north of Delhi and to the river deltas of theMadras Presidency.A small dam in theKaveri riverdelta, built some 1,500 years before, and known as theGrandAnicut,was one such indigenous work in South India. In 1835–36, SirArthur Cottonsuccessfully reinforced the dam, and his success prompted more irrigation projects on the river. A little farther north, on theTungabhadra river,the 16th centuryVijayanagararuler,Krishna Deva Raya,had constructed severalweirs;these too would be extended under British administration.

In plains above Delhi, the mid-14th centurySultan of Delhi,Firoz Shah Tughlaq,had constructed the 150-mile longWestern Jamna Canal.Taking off from the right bank of theJamna riverearly in its course, the canal irrigated the Sultan's territories in theHissarregion ofEastern Punjab.By the mid-16th century, however, the fine sediment carried by theHimalayanriver had gradually choked the canal. Desilted and reopened several decades later byAkbar the Great,theWestern Jamna Canalwas itself tapped by Akbar's grandsonShah Jahan,and some of its water was diverted to Delhi. During this time another canal was cut off the river. The 129-mileEastern Jamna CanalorDoab Canal,which took off from the left bank of the Jamna, also high in its course, presented a qualitatively different difficulty. Since it was cut through steeply sloped land, its flow became difficult to control, and it was never to function efficiently. With the decline of Mughal Empire power in the 18th century, both canals fell into disrepair and closed.The Western Jamna Canal was repaired byBritish Armyengineers and it reopened in 1820. The Doab Canal was reopened in 1830; its considerable renovation involved raising the embankment by an average height of 9 ft. for some 40 miles.

The Ganges Canal highlighted in red stretching between its headworks off theGanges riverinHardwarand its confluence with theJumna riverbelowCawnpore(now Kanpur).

Farther west in thePunjab region,the 130-mile longHasli Canal,had been constructed by previous rulers.Taking off from theRavi riverand supplying water to the cities ofLahoreandAmritsar,this left-bank canal was extended by the British in theBari DoabCanalworks during 1850–1857. The Punjab region, moreover, had much rudimentary irrigation by "inundation canals". Consisting of open cuts on the side of a river and involving no regulation, the inundation canals had been used in both the Punjab andSindhfor many centuries. The energetic administrations of theSikhandPathangovernors of Mughal West Punjab had ensured that many such canals inMultan,Dera Ghazi Khan,andMuzaffargarhwere still working efficiently at the time of the Britishannexation of the Punjabin 1849–1856 (period of tenure of the Marquess of Dalhousie Governor General).

The first new British work—with no Indian antecedents—was theGanges Canalbuilt between 1842 and 1854. Contemplated first by Col.John Russell Colvinin 1836, it did not at first elicit much enthusiasm from its eventual architect SirProby Thomas Cautley,who balked at idea of cutting a canal through extensive low-lying land in order to reach the drier upland destination. However, after theAgra famine of 1837–38,during which the East India Company's administration spentRs.2,300,000 on famine relief, the idea of a canal became more attractive to the company's budget-conscious Court of Directors.In 1839, theGovernor General of India,Lord Auckland,with the Court's assent, granted funds to Cautley for a full survey of the swath of land that underlay and fringed the projected course of the canal. The Court of Directors, moreover, considerably enlarged the scope of the projected canal, which, in consequence of the severity and geographical extent of the famine, they now deemed to be the entireDoabregion.

The enthusiasm, however, proved to be short lived. Auckland's successor as Governor General,Lord Ellenborough,appeared less receptive to large-scale public works, and for the duration of his tenure, withheld major funds for the project.Only in 1844, when a new Governor-General,Lord Hardinge,was appointed, did official enthusiasm and funds return to the Ganges canal project. Although the intervening impasse, had seemingly affected Cautely's health and required him to return to Britain in 1845 for recuperation, his European sojourn gave him an opportunity to study contemporary hydraulic works in Great Britain and Italy. By the time of his return to India even more supportive men were at the helm, both in theNorth-Western Provinces,withJames Thomasonas Lt. Governor, and inBritish IndiawithLord Dalhousieas Governor-General.Canal construction, under Cautley's supervision, now went into full swing. A 350-mile long canal, with another 300 miles of branch lines, eventually stretched between the headworks inHardwarand—after splitting into two branches at Nanau nearAligarh—the confluence with the Ganges atCawnpore(now Kanpur) and with the Jumna (nowYamuna)mainstematEtawah.The Ganges Canal, which required a total capital outlay of £2.15 million, was officially opened in 1854 by Lord Dalhousie.According to historian Ian Stone:

It was the largest canal ever attempted in the world, five times greater in its length than all the main irrigating lines ofLombardyand Egypt put together, and longer by a third than even the largest USA navigation canal, thePennsylvania Canal.

• 
  Watercolor (1863) titled "TheGanges Canal,Roorkee,Saharanpur District(U.P.) ". The canal was the brainchild ofSir Proby Cautley;construction began in 1840, and the canal was opened by Governor-General Lord Dalhousie in April 1854
• 
  Photograph (2008) of an East India Company-era (1854) bridge on theGanges CanalnearRoorkee,Uttar Pradesh, India.
• 
  Photograph (1860) of the head works of the Ganges Canal inHaridwartaken bySamuel Bourne
• 
  Photograph (2008) of the head works of the Ganges Canal in Haridwar, viewed from the opposite side.

See also

• British India
• British Raj
• Economic deindustrialisation of India
• Glossary of the British Raj(Urdu words)
• Government of India Act 1858
• Governor-General of India
• History of Bangladesh
• History of India
• History of Pakistan
• Opium Trading in Mumbai
• Secretary of State for India
• The History of British India

References

General histories

• Bandyopadhyay, Sekhara (2004).From Plassey to Partition: A History of Modern India.New Delhi: Orient Longman.ISBN978-81-250-2596-2.
• Bayly, C. A.(1987).Indian Society and the Making of the British Empire.The New Cambridge History of India. Vol. II.1. Cambridge University Press.ISBN978-0-521-38650-0..
• Bayly, C.A.The Raj: India and the British 1600–1947(1990)
• Bose, Sugata;Jalal, Ayesha(2004) [First published 1997].Modern South Asia: History, Culture, Political Economy(2nd ed.). London: Routledge.ISBN978-0-415-30786-4.
• Brown, Judith Margaret (1994).Modern India: The Origins of an Asian Democracy.Oxford University Press.ISBN978-0-19-873112-2.
• Dalrymple, William (2019).The Anarchy: The Relentless Rise of the East India Company(Hardcover). New York: Bloomsbury publishing.ISBN978-1-63557-395-4.
• Judd, Denis (2010).The Lion and the Tiger: The Rise and Fall of the British Raj, 1600–1947.Oxford University Press.ISBN978-0-19-280579-9.
• Lawson, Philip (1993).The East India Company: A History(Routledge)excerpt and text search
• Ludden, David (2002).India and South Asia: A Short History.Oneworld.ISBN978-1-85168-237-9.
• Markovits, Claude (2004).A History of Modern India, 1480–1950.Anthem Press.ISBN978-1-84331-152-2.Retrieved5 November2011.
• Metcalf, Barbara Daly;Metcalf, Thomas R.(2006).A Concise History of Modern India.Cambridge University Press.ISBN978-0-521-86362-9.
• Moon, Penderel(1989).The British Conquest and Dominion of India(Hardcover). Duckworth Publishing.ISBN978-0715621691.
• Peers, Douglas M. (2006).India under Colonial Rule: 1700–1885.Pearson Education.ISBN978-0-582-31738-3.
• Riddick, John F. (2006).The History of British India: A Chronologyexcerpt and text search,covers 1599–1947
• Riddick, John F. (1998).Who Was Who in British India,Covers 1599–1947.
• Robb, Peter (2002).A History of India(1st ed.). Palgrave Macmillan.ISBN978-0-333-69129-8.
• Robb, Peter (2011) [First published 2002].A History of India(2nd ed.). Palgrave Macmillan.ISBN978-0-230-34549-2.
• Spear, Percival(1990) [First published 1965].A History of India.Vol. 2. Penguin Books.ISBN978-0-14-013836-8.
• Stein, Burton; Arnold, David (2010).A History of India.John Wiley and Sons.ISBN978-1-4051-9509-6.
• Wolpert, Stanley (2008).A New History of India.Oxford University Press.ISBN978-0-19-533756-3.

Monographs and collections

• Ambirajan, S. (2007) [1978],Classical Political Economy and British Policy in India,Cambridge University Press,ISBN978-0-521-05282-5,retrieved20 February2012
• Anderson, Clare (2007),The Indian Uprising of 1857–8: prisons, prisoners, and rebellion,Anthem Press,ISBN978-1-84331-295-6,retrieved5 November2011
• Bayly, C. A.(2000),Empire and Information: Intelligence Gathering and Social Communication in India, 1780–1870 (Cambridge Studies in Indian History and Society),Cambridge and London: Cambridge University Press. Pp. 426,ISBN978-0-521-66360-1
• Chakrabarti, D.K. 2003. The Archaeology of European Expansion in India, Gujarat, c. 16th–18th Centuries (2003) Delhi: Aryan Books International
• Chaudhuri, Kirti N.The Trading World of Asia and the English East India Company: 1660–1760(Cambridge University Press, 1978)
• Bose, Sumit (1993),Peasant Labour and Colonial Capital: Rural Bengal since 1770 (New Cambridge History of India),Cambridge and London: Cambridge University Press..
• Chandavarkar, Rajnarayan (1998),Imperial Power and Popular Politics: Class, Resistance and the State in India, 1850–1950,(Cambridge Studies in Indian History & Society). Cambridge and London:Cambridge University Press.Pp. 400,ISBN978-0-521-59692-3.
• Das, Amita; Das, Aditya.Defending British India against Napoleon: The Foreign Policy of Governor-General Lord Minto, 1807–13( Rochester: Boydell Press, 2016)ISBN978-1-78327-129-0.online review
• Erikson, Emily.Between Monopoly and Free Trade: The English East India Company, 1600–1757(Princeton University Press, 2014)
• Farnie, D. A. (1979),The English Cotton Industry and the World Market, 1815–1896,Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press. Pp. 414,ISBN978-0-19-822478-5
• Gilmour, David.The Ruling Caste: Imperial Lives in the Victorian Raj(New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux, 2005).
• Guha, R. (1995),A Rule of Property for Bengal: An Essay on the Idea of the Permanent Settlement,Durham, NC: Duke University Press,ISBN978-0-521-59692-3.
• Hossain, Hameeda.The Company weavers of Bengal: the East India Company and the organization of textile production in Bengal, 1750–1813(Oxford University Press, 1988)
• Marshall, P. J. (1987),Bengal: The British Bridgehead, Eastern India, 1740–1828,Cambridge and London: Cambridge University Press
• Marshall, P. J. (2007),The Making and Unmaking of Empires: Britain, India, and America c. 1750–1783,Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press. Pp. 400,ISBN978-0-19-922666-5
• Metcalf, Thomas R. (1991),The Aftermath of Revolt: India, 1857–1870,Riverdale Co. Pub. Pp. 352,ISBN978-81-85054-99-5
• Metcalf, Thomas R. (1997),Ideologies of the Raj,Cambridge and London: Cambridge University Press, Pp. 256,ISBN978-0-521-58937-6
• Misra, Maria (1999),Business, Race, and Politics in British India, c. 1850–1860,Delhi: Oxford University Press. Pp. 264,ISBN978-0-19-820711-5
• Porter, Andrew, ed. (2001),Oxford History of the British Empire: Nineteenth Century,Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press. Pp. 800,ISBN978-0-19-924678-6
• Roy, Tirthankar (2011) [First published 2000],Economic History of India, 1857–1947(3rd ed.), Oxford University Press,ISBN978-0-19-807417-5,retrieved19 February2012
• Stokes, Eric (1986), Bayly, C.A. (ed.),The Peasant Armed: The Indian Revolt of 1857,Oxford: Clarendon Press, p. 280,ISBN978-0-19-821570-7.
• Stone, Ian (2002) [First published 1984],Canal Irrigation in British India: Perspectives on Technological Change in a Peasant Economy,Cambridge South Asian Studies, Cambridge and London: Cambridge University Press. Pp. 392,ISBN978-0-521-52663-0
• Tomlinson, B. R. (1993),The Economy of Modern India, 1860–1970 (The New Cambridge History of India, III.3),Cambridge and London: Cambridge University Press..
• Travers, Robert (2007),Ideology and Empire in Eighteenth Century India: The British in Bengal (Cambridge Studies in Indian History and Society),Cambridge and London: Cambridge University Press. Pp. 292,ISBN978-0-521-05003-6

Articles in journals or collections

• Banthia, Jayant; Dyson, Tim (December 1999), "Smallpox in Nineteenth-Century India",Population and Development Review,25(4): 649–689,doi:10.1111/j.1728-4457.1999.00649.x,JSTOR172481,PMID22053410
• Broadberry, Stephen; Gupta, Bishnupriya (2009), "Lancashire, India, and shifting competitive advantage in cotton textiles, 1700–1850: the neglected role of factor prices",Economic History Review,62(2): 279–305,doi:10.1111/j.1468-0289.2008.00438.x,S2CID54975143
• Caldwell, John C. (December 1998), "Malthus and the Less Developed World: The Pivotal Role of India",Population and Development Review,24(4): 675–696,doi:10.2307/2808021,JSTOR2808021
• Clingingsmith, David; Williamson, Jeffrey G. (2008),"Deindustrialization in 18th and 19th century India: Mughal decline, climate shocks and British industrial ascent",Explorations in Economic History,45(3): 209–234,doi:10.1016/j.eeh.2007.11.002
• Drayton, Richard (2001), "Science, Medicine, and the British Empire", in Winks, Robin (ed.),Oxford History of the British Empire: Historiography,Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press, pp. 264–276,ISBN978-0-19-924680-9
• Frykenberg, Robert E. (2001), "India to 1858", in Winks, Robin (ed.),Oxford History of the British Empire: Historiography,Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press, pp. 194–213,ISBN978-0-19-924680-9
• Harnetty, Peter(July 1991), "'Deindustrialization' Revisited: The Handloom Weavers of the Central Provinces of India, c. 1800–1947 ",Modern Asian Studies,25(3): 455–510,doi:10.1017/S0026749X00013901,JSTOR312614,S2CID144468476
• Heuman, Gad (2001), "Slavery, the Slave Trade, and Abolition", in Winks, Robin (ed.),Oxford History of the British Empire: Historiography,Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press, pp. 315–326,ISBN978-0-19-924680-9
• Klein, Ira (1988), "Plague, Policy and Popular Unrest in British India",Modern Asian Studies,22(4): 723–755,doi:10.1017/S0026749X00015729,JSTOR312523,PMID11617732,S2CID42173746
• Klein, Ira (July 2000), "Materialism, Mutiny and Modernisation in British India",Modern Asian Studies,34(3): 545–580,doi:10.1017/S0026749X00003656,JSTOR313141,S2CID143348610
• Kubicek, Robert (2001), "British Expansion, Empire, and Technological Change", in Porter, Andrew (ed.),Oxford History of the British Empire: The Nineteenth Century,Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press, pp. 247–269,ISBN978-0-19-924678-6
• Raj, Kapil (2000), "Colonial Encounters and the Forging of New Knowledge and National Identities: Great Britain and India, 1760–1850",Osiris,2nd Series,15(Nature and Empire: Science and the Colonial Enterprise): 119–134,doi:10.1086/649322,JSTOR301944,S2CID143243650
• Ray, Rajat Kanta (July 1995), "Asian Capital in the Age of European Domination: The Rise of the Bazaar, 1800–1914",Modern Asian Studies,29(3): 449–554,doi:10.1017/S0026749X00013986,JSTOR312868,S2CID145744242
• Roy, Tirthankar (Summer 2002), "Economic History and Modern India: Redefining the Link",The Journal of Economic Perspectives,16(3): 109–130,doi:10.1257/089533002760278749,JSTOR3216953
• Tomlinson, B. R. (2001), "Economics and Empire: The Periphery and the Imperial Economy", in Porter, Andrew (ed.),Oxford History of the British Empire: The Nineteenth Century,Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press, pp. 53–74,ISBN978-0-19-924678-6
• Washbrook, D. A. (2001), "India, 1818–1860: The Two Faces of Colonialism", in Porter, Andrew (ed.),Oxford History of the British Empire: The Nineteenth Century,Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press, pp. 395–421,ISBN978-0-19-924678-6
• Wylie, Diana (2001), "Disease, Diet, and Gender: Late Twentieth Century Perspectives on Empire", in Winks, Robin (ed.),Oxford History of the British Empire: Historiography,Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press, pp. 277–289,ISBN978-0-19-924680-9

Classic histories and gazetteers

• Allan, J., and Sir T. Wolseley Haig.The Cambridge shorter history of India(edited by Henry Dodwell. 1934) pp 399–589
• The Imperial Gazetteer of India(PDF).Vol. IV: The Indian Empire, Administrative. Oxford: Clarendon Press. 1909.
• Majumdar, R. C.; Raychaudhuri, H. C.; Datta, Kalikinkar (1950),An Advanced History of India,London: Macmillan and Company Limited. 2nd edition. Pp. xiii, 1122, 7 maps, 5 coloured maps.
• Wilson, Horace H(1845),The History of British India from 1805 to 1835,London: James Madden and Co.,OCLC63943320
• Smith, Vincent A. (1921),India in the British Period: Being Part III of the Oxford History of India,Oxford: At the Clarendon Press. 2nd edition. Pp. xxiv, 316 (469–784)
• Thompson, Edward, and G. T. Garratt.Rise and fulfilment of British rule in India(Macmillan and Company, 1934.) 699pp; from 1599 to 1933
• Unknown (1829),Historical and Ecclesiastical Sketches of Bengal; From the Earliest Settlement, Until the Virtual Conquest of that Country by the English, in 1757,Calcutta
• Bruce, John (1810),Annals of the Honorable East-India Company: from their establishment by the charter of queen Elizabeth, 1600 to the Union of the London and the English East India Companies 1707–8, Vol-I,Black, Parry, and Kingsbury
• Bruce, John (1810),Annals of the Honorable East-India Company: from their establishment by the charter of queen Elizabeth, 1600 to the Union of the London and the English East India Companies 1707–8, Vol-II,London, Black, Parry, and Kingsbury
• Marshman, John Clark (1867),The History of India From the Earliest Period to the Close of Lord Dalhousie's Administration – 1867, Vol-I,Longmans, Green

Further reading

• Carson, Penelope (2012).The East India Company and Religion, 1698–1858.The Boydell Press.ISBN978-1-84383-732-9.
• Damodaran, Vinita; Winterbottom, Anna; Lester, Alan, eds. (2015).The East India Company and the Natural World.Palgrave Macmillan.ISBN978-1-349-49109-4.
• Erikson, Emily (2014).Between Monopoly and Free Trade: The English East India Company, 1600–1757.Princeton Analytical Sociology Series. Princeton University Press.ISBN978-0-691-15906-5.LCCN2014933831.
• Gardner, Leigh; Roy, Tirthankar (2020).The Economic History of Colonialism.Bristol University Press.ISBN978-1-5292-0763-7.
• Nierstrasz, Chris (2015).Rivalry for Trade in Tea and Textiles: The English and Dutch East Indian Companies (1700–1800).Palgrave Macmillan.ISBN978-1-349-57156-7.
• Kulke, Hermann; Rothermund, Dietmar (2004) [First published 1986].A History of India.Routledge.ISBN978-0-415-32920-0.
• Ogborn, Miles (2007).Indian Ink: Script and Print in the Making of the English East India Company.University of Chicago Press.ISBN978-0-226-62041-1.
• Roy, Tirthankar (2022).Monsoon Economies: India's History in a Changing Climate.History for a Sustainable Future series. The MIT Press.ISBN9780262543583.LCCN2021033921.
• Roy, Tirthankar (2013).An Economic History of Early Modern India.Routledge.ISBN978-0-415-69063-8.
• Roy, Tirthankar (2012).India in the World Economy: From Antiquity to the Present.New Approaches to Asian History series. Cambridge University Press.ISBN978-1-107-00910-3.
• Vaughn, James M. (2019).The Politics of Empire at the Accession of George III: The East India Company and the Crisis and Transformation of Britain's Imperial State.The Lewis Walpole Series in Eighteenth-Century Culture and History. Yale University Press.ISBN978-0-300-20826-9.
• Winterbottom, Anna (2016).Hybrid Knowledge in the Early East India Company World.Cambridge Imperial and Post-Colonial Studies Series. Palgrave Macmillan.ISBN978-1-349-56318-0.

External links

• This article incorporates text from this source, which is in thepublic domain.Country Studies.Federal Research Division.
• Indiafrom Congress
• Pakistanfrom Congress