History of the British Raj

=Prelude: Company Rule in India=

Although the British East India Company had "administered" its factory areas in India—beginning with Surat early in the 17th century, and including by the century's end, Fort William near Calcutta, Fort St George in Madras and the Bombay Castle—its victory in the Battle of Plassey in 1757 marked the real beginning of the Company rule in India. The victory was consolidated in 1764 at the Battle of Buxar (in Bihar), when the defeated Mughal emperor, Shah Alam II, granted the Company the "Diwani" ("right to collect land-revenue") in Bengal, Bihar, and Orissa. The Company soon expanded its territories around its bases in Bombay and Madras: the Anglo-Mysore Wars (1766–1799) and the Anglo-Maratha Wars (1772–1818) gave it the control of most of India south of the Narmada River.

Earlier, in 1773, the British Parliament granted regulatory control over East India Company to the British government and established the post of Governor-General of India, with Warren Hastings as the first incumbent. [ [http://www.indhistory.com/regulating-act.html The Regulating Act - 1773 ] ] In 1784, the British Parliament passed Pitt's India Act which created a Board of Control for overseeing the administration of East India Company.Hastings was succeeded in 1784 by Cornwallis, who promulgated the Permanent Settlement with the zamindars.

Lord Cornwallis, the Governor-General who established the Permanent Settlement in Bengal.
Richard Wellesley, 1st Marquess Wellesley, who rapidly expanded the Company's territories with victories in the Anglo-Maratha Wars and Anglo-Mysore Wars
Madras Presidency, ca. 1880. Two-thirds of the presidency fell under the "Ryotwari" land revenue system.At the turn of the 19th century, Governor-General Wellesley began what became two decades of accelerated expansion of Company territories.Harvnb|Ludden|2002|p=133] This was achieved either by "subsidiary alliances" between the Company and local rulers or by direct military annexation. The subsidiary alliances created the Princely States (or "Native States") of the Hindu Maharajas and the Muslim Nawabs, prominent among which were: Cochin (1791), Jaipur (1794), Travancore (1795), Hyderabad (1798), Mysore (1799), Cis-Sutlej Hill States (1815), Central India Agency (1819), Kutch and Gujarat Gaikwad territories (1819), Rajputana (1818), and Bahawalpur (1833). The annexed regions included the "Northwest Provinces" (comprising Rohilkhand, Gorakhpur, and the Doab) (1801), Delhi (1803), and Sindh (1843). Punjab, Northwest Frontier Province, and Kashmir, were annexed after the Anglo-Sikh Wars in 1849; however, Kashmir was immediately sold under the Treaty of Amritsar (1850) to the Dogra Dynasty of Jammu, and thereby became a princely state. In 1854 Berar was annexed, and the state of Oudh two years later.

The East India Company also signed treaties with various Afghan rulers and with Ranjit Singh of Lahore to counterbalance the Russian support of Persia's plans in western Afghanistan. In 1839, the Company's effort to more actively support Shah Shuja as "Amir" in Afghanistan, led to the First Afghan War (1839-42) and resulted in a military disaster for it. As the British expanded their territory in India, so did Russia in Central Asia with the taking of Bukhara and Samarkand in 1863 and 1868 respectively, and thereby setting the stage for The Great Game of Central Asia. [Harvnb|Ludden|2002|p=135]

In the Charter Act of 1813, the British parliament renewed the Company's charter but terminated its monopoly, opening India to both private investment and missionary work. With increased British power in India, supervision of Indian affairs by the British Crown and parliament increased as well; by the 1820s, British nationals could transact business under the protection of the Crown in the three Company presidencies. In the Charter Act of 1833, the British parliament revoked the Company's trade license altogether, making the Company a part of British governance, although the administration of British India remained the province of Company officers. [Harvnb|Ludden|2002|p=134]

Starting in 1772, the Company began a series of land revenue "settlements," which would create major changes in landed rights and rural economy in India. In 1793, the Governor-General Lord Cornwallis promulgated the permanent settlement in the Bengal Presidency, the first socio-economic regulation in colonial India. Harvnb|Robb|2004|pp=126-129] It was named "permanent" because it fixed the land tax in perpetuity in return for landed property rights for a class of intermediaries called zamindars, who thereafter became owners of the land. It was hoped 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, the land itself would become a marketable form of property that could be purchased, sold, or mortgaged.Harvnb|Peers|2006|pp=45-47] However, 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 three decades following the permanent settlement. [Harvnb|Tomlinson|1993|p=43] In southern India, Thomas Munro, who would later become Governor of Madras, promoted the "ryotwari" system, in which the government settled land-revenue directly with the peasant farmers, or "ryots".Harvnb|Peers|2006|p=47] Based on the utilitarian ideas of James Mill, who supervised the Company's land revenue policy during 1819-1830, and David Ricardo's Law of Rent, it was considered by its supporters to be both closer to traditional practice and more progressive, allowing the benefits of Company rule to reach the lowest levels of rural society. However, in spite of the appeal of the "ryotwari" system's abstract principles, class hierarchies in southern Indian villages had not entirely disappeared—for example village headmen continued to hold sway—and peasant cultivators came to experience revenue demands they could not meet. [ Harvnb|Peers|2006|p=47, Harvnb|Brown|1994|p=65]

Land revenue settlements constituted a major administrative activity of the various governments in India under Company rule.Harvnb|Brown|1994|p=67] 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 of Indian Civil Service officers 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. Since, in many regions, the land tax assessment could be revised, and since it was generally computed at a high level, it created lasting resentment which would later come to a head in the rebellion which rocked much of North India in 1857. [Harvnb|Metcalf|Metcalf|2006|p=79]

Indian Rebellion of 1857

The rebellion began with mutinies by "sepoys" of the Bengal Presidency army; in 1857 the presidency consisted of present-day Bangladesh, and the Indian states of West Bengal, Bihar and UP. However, most rebel soldiers were from the UP region, and, in particular, from "Northwest Provinces" (especially, Ganga-Jumna Doab) and Oudh, and many came from landowning families.Harvnb|Bandyopadhyay|2004|pp=169-172 Harvnb|Bose|Jalal|2003|pp=88-103 Quote: "The 1857 rebellion was by and large confined to northern Indian Gangetic Plain and central India.", Harvnb|Brown|1994|pp=85-87, and Harvnb|Metcalf|Metcalf|2006|pp=100-106] Within weeks of the initial mutinies—as the rebel soldiers wrested control of many urban garrisons from the British—the rebellion was joined by various discontented groups in the hinterlands, in both farmed areas and the backwoods. The latter group, forming the "civilian rebellion", consisted of feudal nobility, landlords, peasants, rural merchants, and some tribal groups. [Harvnb|Metcalf|Metcalf|2006|p=101]

Lord Dalhousie, the Governor-General of India from 1848 to 1856, who devised the Doctrine of Lapse.
Meerut, Delhi, Cawnpore (Kanpur), Lucknow, Jhansi, and Gwalior.
Lakshmibai, The Rani of Jhansi, one of the principal leaders of the rebellion who earlier had lost her kingdom as a result of the Doctrine of Lapse.

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.Harvnb|Brown|1994|p=88] Some Indian soldiers, misreading the presence of missionaries as a sign of official intent, were persuaded that the East India Company was masterminding mass conversions of Hindus and Muslims to Christianity. [Harvnb|Metcalf|1991|p=48] Changes in the terms of their professional service may also have created resentment. As the extent of British jurisdiction expanded with British victories in wars and with annexation of territory, the soldiers were now not only expected to serve in less familiar regions (such as Lower Burma after the Second Burmese War in 1852-53), but also make do without the "foreign service," remuneration that had previously been their due. [Harvnb|Bandyopadhyay|2004|p=171, Harvnb|Bose|Jalal|2003|p=90]

The civilian rebellion was more multifarious in origin. The rebels consisted of three groups: feudal nobility, rural landlords called "taluqdars", and the peasants. The nobility, many of whom had lost titles and domains under the Doctrine of Lapse, which derecognised adopted children of princes as legal heirs, felt that the British had interfered with a traditional system of inheritance. Rebel leaders such as Nana Sahib and the Rani of Jhansi belonged to this group; the latter, for example, was prepared to accept British paramountcy if her adopted son was recognized as the heir. [Harvnb|Bandyopadhyay|2004|p=172, Harvnb|Bose|Jalal|2003|p=91, Harvnb|Brown|1994|p=92] The second group, the "taluqdars" had lost half their landed estates to peasant farmers as a result of the land reforms that came in the wake of annexation of Oudh. As the rebellion gained ground, the "taluqdars" quickly reoccupied the lands they had lost, and paradoxically, in part due to ties of kinship and feudal loyalty, did not experience significant opposition from the peasant farmers, many of whom too now joined the rebellion to the great dismay of the British. [Harvnb|Metcalf|Metcalf|2006|p=102] Heavy land-revenue assessment in some areas by the British may have resulted in many landowning families either losing their land or going into great debt with money lenders, and providing ultimately a reason to rebel; money lenders, in addition to the British, were particular objects of the rebels' animosity. [Harvnb|Bose|Jalal|2003|p=91, Harvnb|Metcalf|1991|ch=2, Harvnb|Bandyopadhyay|2004|p=173] The civilian rebellion was also highly uneven in its geographic distribution, even in areas of north-central India that were no longer under British control. For example, the relatively prosperous Muzaffarnagar district, a beneficiary of a British irrigation scheme, and next door to Meerut where the upheaval began, stayed mostly calm throughout. [Harvnb|Brown|1994|p=92]

Effects on economy

Quote box2
width = 30em
align = right
bgcolor = WhiteSmoke
halign = left
quote = "A significant fact which stands out is that those parts of India which have been longest under British rule are the poorest today. Indeed some kind of chart might be drawn up to indicate the close connection between length of British rule and progressive growth of poverty."
source = — Jawaharlal Nehru, on the economic effects of the British rule, in his book "The Discovery of India" [harvnb|Nehru|1946|p=295]

In the second half of the 19th century, both the direct administration of India by the British crown and the technological change ushered in by the industrial revolution, had the effect of closely intertwining the economies of India and Great Britain. [Harv|Stein|2001|p=259, Harv|Oldenburg|2007] In fact many of the major changes in transport and communications (that are typically associated with Crown Rule of India) had already begun before the Mutiny. Since Dalhousie had embraced the technological change then rampant in Great Britain, India too saw rapid development of all those technologies. Railways, roads, canals, and bridges were rapidly built in India and telegraph links equally rapidly established in order that raw materials, such as cotton, from India's hinterland could be transported more efficiently to ports, such as Bombay, for subsequent export to England. [Harv|Oldenburg|2007, Harv|Stein|2001|p=258] Likewise, finished goods from England were transported back just as efficiently, for sale in the burgeoning Indian markets.Harv|Oldenburg|2007] However, unlike Britain itself, where the market risks for the infrastructure development were borne by private investors, in India, it was the taxpayers—primarily farmers and farm-labourers—who endured the risks, which, in the end, amounted to £50 million. [Harv|Stein|2001|p=258] In spite of these costs, very little skilled employment was created for Indians. By 1920, with the fourth largest railway network in the world and a history of 60 years of its construction, only ten per cent of the "superior posts" in the Indian Railways were held by Indians. [Harv|Stein|2001|p=159] The rush of technology was also changing the agricultural economy in India: by the last decade of the 19th century, a large fraction of some raw materials—not only cotton, but also some food-grains—were being exported to faraway markets.Harv|Stein|2001|p=260] Consequently, many small farmers, dependent on the whims of those markets, lost land, animals, and equipment to money-lenders.. More tellingly, the latter half of the 19th century also saw an increase in the number of large-scale famines in India. Although famines were not new to the subcontinent, these were particularly severe, with tens of millions dying, [Harv|Bose|Jalal|2003|p=117] and with many critics, both British and Indian, laying the blame at the doorsteps of the lumbering colonial administrations.

Indian Railways, when India had the fourth largest railway network in the world. Railway construction in India began in 1853.
Victoria Terminus, Bombay, which was completed in 1888.
Agra canal (c. 1873), a year away from completion. The canal was closed to navigation in 1904 in order to increase irrigation and aid in famine-prevention.
Lord Ripon, the Liberal Viceroy of India, who instituted the Famine Code

Beginnings of self-government

The first steps were taken toward self-government in British India in the late 19th century with the appointment of Indian counsellors to advise the British viceroy and the establishment of provincial councils with Indian members; the British subsequently widened participation in legislative councils with the Indian Councils Act of 1892. Municipal Corporations and District Boards were created for local administration; they included elected Indian members.

The Government of India Act of 1909 — also known as the Morley-Minto Reforms (John Morley was the secretary of state for India, and Gilbert Elliot, fourth earl of Minto, was viceroy) — gave Indians limited roles in the central and provincial legislatures, known as legislative councils. Indians had previously been appointed to legislative councils, but after the reforms some were elected to them. At the centre, the majority of council members continued to be government-appointed officials, and the viceroy was in no way responsible to the legislature. At the provincial level, the elected members, together with unofficial appointees, outnumbered the appointed officials, but responsibility of the governor to the legislature was not contemplated. Morley made it clear in introducing the legislation to the British Parliament that parliamentary self-government was not the goal of the British government.

The Morley-Minto Reforms were a milestone. Step by step, the elective principle was introduced for membership in Indian legislative councils. The "electorate" was limited, however, to a small group of upper-class Indians. These elected members increasingly became an "opposition" to the "official government". The Communal electorates were later extended to other communities and made a political factor of the Indian tendency toward group identification through religion.

John Morley, the Secretary of State for India from 1905 to 1910, and Gladstonian Liberal. The Government of India Act of 1909, also known as the "Minto-Morley Reforms" allowed Indians to be elected to the Legislative Council.
King George V and Queen Mary at the Delhi Durbar on December 12, 1911, when the King was crowned Emperor of India.
Mesopotamia during World War I.
Khudadad Khan, the first Indian to be awarded the Victoria Cross, the British Empire's highest war-time medal for gallantry. Khan, who hailed from Chakwal District, Punjab, in present-day Pakistan, died in 1971.

World War I and its aftermath

World War I would prove to be a watershed in the imperial relationship between Britain and India. 1.4 million Indian and British soldiers of the British Indian Army would take part in the war and their participation would have a wider cultural fallout: news of Indian soldiers fighting and dying with British soldiers, as well as soldiers from dominions like Canada and Australia, would travel to distant corners of the world both in newsprint and by the new medium of the radio.Harvnb|Brown|1994|pp=197-198] India’s international profile would thereby rise and would continue to rise during the 1920s. It was to lead, among other things, to India, under its own name, becoming a of the League of Nations in 1920 and participating, under the name, "Les Indes Anglaises" (The British Indies), in the 1920 Summer Olympics in Antwerp. [ [http://www.la84foundation.org/6oic/OfficialReports/1920/1920.pdf Olympic Games Antwerp 1920: Official Report] , Nombre de bations representees, p. 168. Quote: "31 Nations avaient accepté l'invitation du Comité Olympique Belge: ... la Grèce - la HollandeLes Indes Anglaises - l'Italie - le Japon ..." ] Back in India, especially among the leaders of the Indian National Congress, it would lead to calls for greater self-government for Indians.

In 1916, in the face of new strength demonstrated by the nationalists with the signing of the Lucknow Pact and the founding of the Home Rule leagues, and the realization, after the disaster in the Mesopotamian campaign, that the war would likely last longer, the new Viceroy, Lord Chelmsford, cautioned that the Government of India needed to be more responsive to Indian opinion. Towards the end of the year, after discussions with the government in London, he suggested that the British demonstrate their good faith – in light of the Indian war role – through a number of public actions, including awards of titles and honors to princes, granting of commissions in the army to Indians, and removal of the much-reviled cotton excise duty, but most importantly, an announcement of Britain's future plans for India and an indication of some concrete steps. After more discussion, in August 1917, the new Liberal Secretary of State for India, Edwin Montagu, announced the British aim of “increasing association of Indians in every branch of the administration, and the gradual development of self-governing institutions, with a view to the progressive realization of responsible government in India as an integral part of the British Empire.” This envisioned reposing confidence in the educated Indians, so far disdained as an unrepresentative minority, who were described by Montague as "Intellectually our children".Harvnb|Metcalf|Metcalf|2006|p=166] The pace of the reforms where to be determined by Britain as and when the Indians were seen to have earned it.Harvnb|Metcalf|Metcalf|2006|p=166] However, although the plan envisioned limited self-government at first only in the provinces – with India emphatically within the British Empire – it represented the first British proposal for any form of representative government in a non-white colony. the plan envisioned limited self-government at first only in the provinces – with India emphatically within the British Empire – it represented the first British proposal for any form of representative government in a non-white colony.

Earlier, at the onset of World War I, the reassignment of most of the British army in India to Europe and Mesopotamia had led the previous Viceroy, Lord Harding, to worry about the “risks involved in denuding India of troops.” Revolutionary violence had already been a concern in British India; consequently in 1915, to strengthen its powers during what it saw was a time of increased vulnerability, the Government of India passed the Defence of India Act, which allowed it to intern politically dangerous dissidents without due process and added to the power it already had – under the 1910 Press Act – both to imprison journalists without trial and to censor the press.Harvnb|Brown|1994|pp=201-203] Now, as constitutional reform began to be discussed in earnest, the British began to consider how new moderate Indians could be brought into the fold of constitutional politics and simultaneously, how the hand of established constitutionalists could be strengthened. However, since the reform plan was devised during a time when extremist violence had ebbed as a result of increased war-time governmental control and it now feared a revival of revolutionary violence,Harvnb|Metcalf|Metcalf|2006|p=166] the government also began to consider how some of its war-time powers could be extended into peace time.

Consequently in 1917, even as Edwin Montagu announced the new constitutional reforms, a sedition committee chaired by a British judge, Mr. S. A. T. Rowlatt, was tasked with investigating war-time revolutionary conspiracies and the German and Bolshevik links to the violence in India,Harvnb|Lovett|1920|p=94, 187-191] Harvnb|Sarkar|1921|p=137] Harvnb|Tinker|1968|p=92] with the unstated goal of extending the government's war-time powers.Harvnb|Brown|1994|pp=203-204] The Rowlatt committee presented its report in July 1918 and identified three regions of conspiratorial insurgency: Bengal, the Bombay presidency, and the Punjab.Harvnb|Brown|1994|pp=203-204] To combat subversive acts in these regions, the committee recommended that the government use emergency powers akin to its war-time authority, which included the ability to try cases of sedition by a panel of three judges and without juries, exaction of securities from suspects, governmental overseeing of residences of suspects, and the power for provincial governments to arrest and detain suspects in short-term detention facilities and without trial.

With the end of World War I, there was also a change in the economic climate. By year’s end 1919, 1.5 million Indians had served in the armed services in either combatant or non-combatant roles, and India had provided £146 million in revenue for the war.Harvnb|Brown|1994|pp=195-196] The increased taxes coupled with disruptions in both domestic and international trade had the effect of approximately doubling the index of overall prices in India between 1914 and 1920. Returning war veterans, especially in the Punjab, created a growing unemployment crisis Harvnb|Stein|2001|p=304] and post-war inflation led to food riots in Bombay, Madras, and Bengal provinces, a situation that was made only worse by the failure of the 1918-19 monsoon and by profiteering and speculation. The global influenza epidemic and the Bolshevik Revolution of 1917 added to the general jitters; the former among the population already experiencing economic woes, and the latter among government officials, fearing a similar revolution in India. [Harvnb|Ludden|2002|p=208]

To combat what it saw as a coming crisis, the government now drafted the Rowlatt committee's recommendations into two Rowlatt Bills.Harvnb|Spear|1990|p=190] Although the bills were authorised for legislative consideration by Edwin Montagu, they were done so unwillingly, with the accompanying declaration, “I loathe the suggestion at first sight of preserving the Defence of India Act in peace time to such an extent as Rowlatt and his friends think necessary.” In the ensuing discussion and vote in the Imperial Legislative Council, all Indian members voiced opposition to the bills. The Government of India was nevertheless able to use of its "official majority" to ensure passage of the bills early in 1919. However, what it passed, in deference to the Indian opposition, was a lesser version of the first bill, which now allowed extra-judicial powers, but for a period of exactly three years and for the prosecution solely of “anarchical and revolutionary movements,” dropping entirely the second bill involving modification of the Indian Penal Code. Even so, when it was passed the new Rowlatt Act aroused widespread indignation throughout India and brought Mohandas Gandhi to the forefront of the nationalist movement.

Meanwhile, Montagu and Chelmsford themselves finally presented their report in July 1918 after a long fact-finding trip through India the previous winter.Harvnb|Brown|1994|pp=205-207] After more discussion by the government and parliament in Britain, and another tour by the Franchise and Functions Committee for the purpose of identifying who among the Indian population could vote in future elections, the Government of India Act of 1919 (also known as the Montagu-Chelmsford Reforms) was passed in December 1919. The new Act enlarged both the provincial and Imperial legislative councils and repealed the Government of India’s recourse to the “official majority” in unfavorable votes. Although departments like defense, foreign affairs, criminal law, communications and income-tax were retained by the Viceroy and the central government in New Delhi, other departments like public health, education, land-revenue and local self-government were transferred to the provinces. The provinces themselves were now to be administered under a new dyarchical system, whereby some areas like education, agriculture, infrastructure development, and local self-government became the preserve of Indian ministers and legislatures, and ultimately the Indian electorates, while others like irrigation, land-revenue, police, prisons, and control of media remained within the purview of the British governor and his executive council. The new Act also made it easier for Indians to be admitted into the civil service and the army officer corps.

A greater number of Indians were now enfranchised, although, for voting at the national level, they constituted only 10% of the total adult male population, many of whom were still illiterate. In the provincial legislatures, the British continued to exercise some control by setting aside seats for special interests they considered cooperative or useful. In particular, rural candidates, generally sympathetic to British rule and less confrontational, were assigned more seats than their urban counterparts. Seats were also reserved for non-Brahmins, landowners, businessmen, and college graduates. The principal of “communal representation,” an integral part of the Minto-Morley reforms, and more recently of the Congress-Muslim League Lucknow Pact, was reaffirmed, with seats being reserved for Muslims, Sikhs, Indian Christians, Anglo-Indians, and domiciled Europeans, in both provincial and Imperial legislative councils. The Montagu-Chelmsford reforms offered Indians the most significant opportunity yet for exercising legislative power, especially at the provincial level; however, that opportunity was also restricted by the still limited number of eligible voters, by the small budgets available to provincial legislatures, and by the presence of rural and special interest seats that were seen as instruments of British control.

1930s: Government of India Act (1935)

[
Ramsay MacDonald to the right of Mahatma Gandhi at the Second Round Table Conference in London, October 1931.] In 1935, after the Round Table Conferences, the British Parliament approved the Government of India Act of 1935, which authorised the establishment of independent legislative assemblies in all provinces of British India, the creation of a central government incorporating both the British provinces and the princely states, and the protection of Muslim minorities. The future Constitution of independent India would owe a great deal to the text of this act. [Harv|Low|1993|pp=40, 156] The act also provided for a bicameral national parliament and an executive branch under the purview of the British government. Although the national federation was never realised, nationwide elections for provincial assemblies were held in 1937. Despite initial hesitation, the Congress took part in the elections and won victories in seven of the eleven provinces of British India,Harv|Low|1993|p=154] and Congress governments, with wide powers, were formed in these provinces. In Great Britain, these victories were to later turn the tide for the idea of Indian independence.

World War II

With the outbreak of World War II in 1939, the viceroy, Lord Linlithgow, declared war on India’s behalf without consulting Indian leaders, leading the Congress provincial ministries to resign in protest. The Muslim League, in contrast, supported Britain in the war effort; however, it now took the view that Muslims would be unfairly treated in an independent India dominated by the Congress. The British government—through its Cripps' mission—attempted to secure Indian nationalists' cooperation in the war effort in exchange for independence afterwards; however, the negotiations between them and the Congress broke down. Gandhi, subsequently, launched the “Quit India” movement in August 1942, demanding the immediate withdrawal of the British from India or face nationwide civil disobedience. Along with all other Congress leaders, Gandhi was immediately imprisoned, and the country erupted in violent demonstrations led by students and later by peasant political groups, especially in Eastern United Provinces, Bihar, and western Bengal. The large war-time British Army presence in India led to most of the movement being crushed in a little more than six weeks;Harv|Metcalf|Metcalf|2006|pp=206-207] nonetheless, a portion of the movement formed for a time an underground provisional government on the border with Nepal. In other parts of India, the movement was less spontaneous and the protest less intensive, however it lasted sporadically into the summer of 1943.Harvnb|Bandyopadhyay|2004|pp=418-420]

With Congress leaders in jail, attention also turned to Subhas Bose, who had been ousted from the Congress in 1939 following differences with the more conservative high command;Harvnb|Nehru|1942|p=424] Bose now turned to the Axis powers for help with liberating India by force.Harv|Low|1993|pp=31-31] With Japanese support, he organised the Indian National Army, composed largely of Indian soldiers of the British Indian army who had been captured at Singapore by the Japanese. From the onset of the war, the Japanese secret service had promoted unrest in South east Asia to destabilise the British War effort, [Harvnb|Lebra|1977|p=23] and came to support a number of puppet and provisional governments in the captured regions, including those in Burma, the Philippines and Vietnam, the Provisional Government of Azad Hind (Free India), presided by Bose. [Harvnb|Lebra|1977|p=31, Harv|Low|1993|pp=31-31] Bose's effort, however, was short lived; after the reverses of 1944, the reinforced British Indian Army in 1945 first halted and then reversed the Japanese U Go offensive, beginning the successful part of the Burma Campaign. Bose's Indian National Army surrendered with the recapture of Singapore, and Bose died in a plane crash soon thereafter. The trials of the INA soldiers at Red Fort in late 1945 however caused widespread public unrest and nationalist violence in India. [Harvnb|Chaudhuri|1953|p=349, Harvnb|Sarkar|1983|p=411,Harvnb|Hyam|2007|p=115]

Transfer of Power

In January 1946, a number of mutinies broke out in the armed services, starting with that of RAF servicemen frustrated with their slow repatriation to Britain.Harv|Judd|2004|pp=172-173] The mutinies came to a head with mutiny of the Royal Indian Navy in Bombay in February 1946, followed by others in Calcutta, Madras, and Karachi. Although the mutinies were rapidly suppressed, they found much public support in India and had the effect of spurring the new Labour government in Britain to action, and leading to the Cabinet Mission to India led by the Secretary of State for India, Lord Pethick Lawrence, and including Sir Stafford Cripps, who had visited four years before.

Also in early 1946, new elections were called in India in which the Congress won electoral victories in eight of the eleven provinces. [Harv|Judd|2004|p=172] The negotiations between the Congress and the Muslim League, however, stumbled over the issue of the partition. Jinnah proclaimed August 16, 1946, Direct Action Day, with the stated goal of highlighting, peacefully, the demand for a Muslim homeland in British India. The following day Hindu-Muslim riots broke out in Calcutta and quickly spread throughout India. Although the Government of India and the Congress were both shaken by the course of events, in September, a Congress-led interim government was installed, with Jawaharlal Nehru as united India’s prime minister.

Later that year, the Labor government in Britain, its exchequer exhausted by the recently concluded World War II, decided to end British rule of India, and in early 1947 Britain announced its intention of transferring power no later than June 1948.

As independence approached, the violence between Hindus and Muslims in the provinces of Punjab and Bengal continued unabated. With the British army unprepared for the potential for increased violence, the new viceroy, Louis Mountbatten, advanced the date for the transfer of power, allowing less than six months for a mutually agreed plan for independence. In June 1947, the nationalist leaders, including Nehru and Abul Kalam Azad on behalf of the Congress, Jinnah representing the Muslim League, B. R. Ambedkar representing the Untouchable community, and Master Tara Singh representing the Sikhs, agreed to a partition of the country along religious lines. The predominantly Hindu and Sikh areas were assigned to the new India and predominantly Muslim areas to the new nation of Pakistan; the plan included a partition of the Muslim-majority provinces of Punjab and Bengal.

Many millions of Muslim, Sikh, and Hindu refugees trekked across the newly drawn borders. In Punjab, where the new border lines divided the Sikh regions in half, massive bloodshed followed; in Bengal and Bihar, where Gandhi's presence assuaged communal tempers, the violence was more limited. In all, anywhere between 250,000 and 500,000 people on both sides of the new borders died in the violence. [Harv|Khosla|2001|p=299] On August 14, 1947, the new Dominion of Pakistan came into being, with Muhammad Ali Jinnah sworn in as its first Governor General in Karachi. The following day, August 15, 1947, India, now a smaller "Union of India", became an independent country with official ceremonies taking place in New Delhi, and with Jawaharlal Nehru assuming the office of the prime minister, and the viceroy, Louis Mountbatten, staying on as its first Governor General.

Notes

References

Contemporary General Histories

*Harvard reference
last1=Bandyopadhyay
first1=Sekhar
authorlink1=
year=2004
title=From Plassey to Partition: A History of Modern India
place=
publisher=New Delhi and London: Orient Longmans. Pp. xx, 548.
isbn=8125025960
url=https://www.orientlongman.com/display.asp?isbn=978-81-250-2596-2 .
*Harvard reference
last1=Bose
first1=Sugata
authorlink1=Sugata Bose
last2=Jalal
first2=Ayesha
authorlink2=Ayesha Jalal
year=2003
title=Modern South Asia: History, Culture, Political Economy
place=
publisher=London and New York: Routledge, 2nd edition. Pp. xiii, 304
isbn=0-415-30787-2
url=http://www.amazon.com/Modern-South-Asia-Sugata-Bose/dp/0415307872/ .
*Harvard reference
last1=Brown
first1=Judith M.
authorlink=
year=1994
title=Modern India: The Origins of an Asian Democracy
place=
publisher=Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press. Pp. xiii, 474
isbn=0198731132
url=http://www.oup.com/uk/catalogue/?ci=9780198731139 .
*Harvard reference
last1=Copland
first1=Ian
authorlink=
year=2001
title=India 1885-1947: The Unmaking of an Empire (Seminar Studies in History Series)
place=
publisher=Harlow and London: Pearson Longmans. Pp. 160
isbn=0582381738
url= .
*Harvard reference
last1=Judd
first1=Dennis
authorlink=
year=2004
title=The Lion and the Tiger: The Rise and Fall of the British Raj, 1600-1947
place=
publisher=Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press. Pp. xiii, 280
isbn=0192803581
url=http://www.oup.com/us/catalog/general/subject/HistoryWorld/India/?view=usa&ci=9780192803580 .
*Harvard reference
last1=Kulke
first1=Hermann
last2=Rothermund
first2=Dietmar
authorlink=
year=2004
title=A History of India
place=
publisher=4th edition. Routledge, Pp. xii, 448
isbn=0415329205
url=http://www.amazon.com/History-India-Hermann-Kulke/dp/0415329205/ .
*Harvard reference
last1=Ludden
first1=David
authorlink=
year=2002
title=India And South Asia: A Short History
place=
publisher=Oxford: Oneworld Publications. Pp. xii, 306
isbn=1851682376
url=http://www.oneworld-publications.com/cgi-bin/cart/commerce.cgi?pid=145&log_pid=yes
*Harvard reference
last1=Markovits
first1=Claude (ed)
authorlink=
year=2005
title=A History of Modern India 1480-1950 (Anthem South Asian Studies)
place=
publisher=Anthem Press. Pp. 607
isbn=1843311526
url=http://www.amazon.com/History-Modern-1480-1950-Anthem-Studies/dp/1843311526/ .
*Harvard reference
last1=Metcalf
first1=Barbara
last2=Metcalf
first2=Thomas R.
authorlink=
year=2006
title=A Concise History of Modern India (Cambridge Concise Histories)
place=
publisher=Cambridge and New York: Cambridge University Press. Pp. xxxiii, 372
isbn=0521682258
url=http://www.amazon.com/Concise-History-Modern-Cambridge-Histories/dp/0521682258/ .
*Harvard reference
last1=Peers
first1=Douglas M.
authorlink=
year=2006
title=India under Colonial Rule 1700-1885
place=
publisher=Harlow and London: Pearson Longmans. Pp. xvi, 163
isbn=058231738
url= .
*Harvard reference
last1=Robb
first1=Peter
authorlink=
year=2004
title=A History of India (Palgrave Essential Histories)
place=
publisher=Houndmills, Hampshire: Palgrave Macmillan. Pp. xiv, 344
isbn=0333691296
url=http://www.amazon.com/History-India-Palgrave-Essential-Histories/dp/0333691296/ .
*Harvard reference
last1=Sarkar
first1=Sumit
authorlink=
year=1983
title=Modern India: 1885-1947
place=
publisher=Delhi: Macmillan India Ltd. Pp. xiv, 486
isbn=0333904257
url= .
*Harvard reference
last1=Spear
first1=Percival
authorlink=
year=1990
title=A History of India, Volume 2
place=
publisher=New Delhi and London: Penguin Books. Pp. 298
isbn=0140138366
url=http://www.amazon.com/History-India-Vol-2/dp/0140138366/ref=pd_ybh_a_6/104-7029728-9591925 .
*Harvard reference
last1=Stein
first1=Burton
authorlink=
year=2001
title=A History of India
place=
publisher=New Delhi and Oxford: Oxford University Press. Pp. xiv, 432
isbn=0195654463
url=http://www.amazon.com/History-India-World/dp/0631205462/ref=pd_ybh_a_7/104-7029728-9591925 .
*Harvard reference
last1=Wolpert
first1=Stanley
authorlink=Stanley Wolpert
year=2003
title=A New History of India
place=
publisher=Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press. Pp. 544
isbn=0195166787
url=http://www.amazon.com/New-History-India-Stanley-Wolpert/dp/0195166787/ .

Monographs and Collections

*Harvard reference | last = Anderson | first = Clare | year = 2007 | title = Indian Uprising of 1857–8: Prisons, Prisoners and Rebellion| publisher = New York: Anthem Press, Pp. 217 | isbn = 9781843312499 | url = http://atlantis.terrassl.net/anthempress.com/product_info.php?cPath=52&products_id=293&osCsid=9a2s9o8mdu8066m551rr407123
*Harvard reference | last = Ansari | first = Sarah | year = 2005 | title = Life after Partition: Migration, Community and Strife in Sindh: 1947–1962 | publisher = Oxford and London: Oxford University Press, Pp. 256 | isbn = ISBN 019597834X
*Harvard reference
last1=Bayly
first1=C. A.
authorlink1=Christopher Alan Bayly
year=1990
title=Indian Society and the Making of the British Empire (The New Cambridge History of India)
place=
publisher=Cambridge and London: Cambridge University Press. Pp. 248
isbn=0521386500
url= .
*Harvard reference| last1=Bayly| first1=C. A. | authorlink1=Christopher Alan Bayly
year=2000| title=Empire and Information: Intelligence Gathering and Social Communication in India, 1780-1870 (Cambridge Studies in Indian History and Society)| place=| publisher=Cambridge and London: Cambridge University Press. Pp. 426| isbn=0521663601| url=
*Harvard reference | last1 = Brown | first1 = Judith M. (ed.) | last2 = Louis (ed.) | first2 = Wm. Roger | year = 2001 | title = Oxford History of the British Empire: The Twentieth Century | publisher = Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press. Pp. 800 | isbn = 0199246793 | url = http://www.amazon.com/Oxford-History-British-Empire-Twentieth/dp/0199246793
*Harvard reference | last = Butalia | first = Urvashi | year = 1998 | title = The Other Side of Silence: Voices from the Partition of India | publisher = Durham, NC: Duke University Press, Pp. 308 | isbn = 0822324946
*Harvard reference
last1=Chandavarkar
first1=Rajnarayan
authorlink=
year=1998
title=Imperial Power and Popular Politics: Class, Resistance and the State in India, 1850-1950
place=
publisher=(Cambridge Studies in Indian History & Society). Cambridge and London: Cambridge University Press. Pp. 400
isbn=0521596920
url=http://www.amazon.com/Imperial-Power-Popular-Politics-Resistance/dp/0521596920/ .
*Harvard reference
last1= [http://www.lse.ac.uk/collections/internationalHistory/whosWho/chatterji.htm Chatterji, Joya]
first1=
authorlink=
year=1993
title=Bengal Divided: Hindu Communalism and Partition, 1932–1947
place=
publisher=Cambridge and New York: Cambridge University Press. Pp. 323
isbn=0521523281
url= .
*Harvard reference
last1=Copland
first1=Ian
authorlink=
year=2002
title=Princes of India in the Endgame of Empire, 1917-1947
place=
publisher=(Cambridge Studies in Indian History & Society). Cambridge and London: Cambridge University Press. Pp. 316
isbn=0521894360
url=http://www.amazon.com/Princes-Endgame-19171947-Cambridge-Studies/dp/0521894360/ .
*Harvard reference
Surname1 = Fay
Given1 = Peter W.
Year = 1993
Title = The Forgotten Army: India's Armed Struggle for Independence, 1942-1945.
URL =
Publisher = Ann Arbor, University of Michigan Press.
ISBN = 0472083422 .
* Gilmartin, David. 1988. "Empire and Islam: Punjab and the Making of Pakistan". Berkeley: University of California Press. 258 pages. ISBN 0520062493.
*Harvard reference
last1=Gould
first1=William
authorlink=
year=2004
title=Hindu Nationalism and the Language of Politics in Late Colonial India
place=
publisher=(Cambridge Studies in Indian History and Society). Cambridge and London: Cambridge University Press. Pp. 320
isbn=0521830613
url=http://www.amazon.com/Nationalism-Language-Politics-Colonial-Cambridge/dp/0521830613/ .
*Harvard reference
Surname1 = Hyam
Given1 = Ronald
Year = 2007
Title = Britain's Declining Empire: The Road to Decolonisation 1918-1968.
URL =
Publisher = Cambridge University Press.
ISBN = 0521866499. .
*Harvard reference
last=Jalal
first=Ayesha
date=1993
year=1993
title=The Sole Spokesman: Jinnah, the Muslim League and the Demand for Pakistan
place=
publisher=Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 334 pages
publication-year=1993
isbn=0521458501 .
*Harvard reference
last=Khan
first=Yasmin
date=September 18 2007
year=2007
title=The Great Partition: The Making of India and Pakistan
place=
publisher=New Haven and London: Yale University Press, 250 pages
publication-year=2007
isbn=0300120788
*Harvard reference
last1=Khosla
first1=G. D.
chapter=Stern Reckoning
date=2001
year=2001
editor1-last=Page
editor1-first=David
editor2-last=Inder Singh
editor2-first=Anita
editor3-last=Moon
editor3-first=Penderal
editor4-last=Khosla
editor4-first=G. D.
editor5-last=Hasan
editor5-first=Mushirul
title=The Partition Omnibus: Prelude to Partition/the Origins of the Partition of India 1936-1947/Divide and Quit/Stern Reckoning
place=
publisher=Delhi and Oxford: Oxford University Press
url=http://www.amazon.com/Partition-Omnibus-comprising-Imperial-Contribution/dp/0195671767/
isbn=0195658507
*Harvard reference
last1=Low
first1=D. A.
authorlink=
year=1993
title=Eclipse of Empire
place=
publisher=Cambridge and London: Cambridge University Press. Pp. xvi, 366
isbn=0521457548
url=http://www.amazon.com/Eclipse-Empire-D-Low/dp/0521457548/ .
*Harvard reference
last1=Low
first1=D. A.
authorlink=
year=2002
title=Britain and Indian Nationalism: The Imprint of Amibiguity 1929-1942
place=
publisher=Cambridge and London: Cambridge University Press. Pp. 374
isbn=0521892619
url=http://www.amazon.com/Britain-Indian-Nationalism-Amibiguity-19291942/dp/0521892619/ .
*Harvard reference
last1=Low
first1=D. A. (ed.)
authorlink=
year=1977, 2004
title=Congress & the Raj: Facets of the Indian Struggle 1917-47
place=
publisher=New Delhi and Oxford: Oxford University Press. Pp. xviii, 513
isbn=0195683676
url= .
*Harvard reference
last=Metcalf
first=Thomas R.
authorlink=
year=1991
title=The Aftermath of Revolt: India, 1857-1870
place=
publisher=Riverdale Co. Pub. Pp. 352
isbn=8185054991
url=
*Harvard reference | last = Metcalf | first = Thomas R. | year = 1997 | title = Ideologies of the Raj | publisher = Cambridge and London: Cambridge University Press, Pp. 256 | isbn = 0521589371
*
*Harvard reference | last = Porter | first = Andrew (ed.) | year = 2001 | title = Oxford History of the British Empire: Nineteenth Century | publisher = Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press. Pp. 800 | isbn = 0199246785 | url = http://www.amazon.com/Oxford-History-British-Empire-Nineteenth/dp/0199246785
*Harvard reference | last = Ramusack | first = Barbara | year = 2004 | title = The Indian Princes and their States (The New Cambridge History of India) | publisher = Cambridge and London: Cambridge University Press. Pp. 324 | isbn = 0521039894 | url = http://www.amazon.com/Indian-Princes-States-Cambridge-History/dp/0521267277
* Shaikh, Farzana. 1989. "Community and Consensus in Islam: Muslim Representation in Colonial India, 1860—1947". Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. 272 pages. ISBN 0521363284.
* Talbot, Ian and Gurharpal Singh (eds). 1999. "Region and Partition: Bengal, Punjab and the Partition of the Subcontinent". Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press. 420 pages. ISBN 0195790510.
* Talbot, Ian. 2002. "Khizr Tiwana: The Punjab Unionist Party and the Partition of India". Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press. 216 pages. ISBN 0195795512.
*Harvard reference
last1=Wainwright
first1=A. Martin
authorlink=
year=1993
title=Inheritance of Empire: Britain, India, and the Balance of Power in Asia, 1938-55
place=
publisher=Praeger Publishers. Pp. xvi, 256
isbn=0275947335
url=http://www.amazon.com/Inheritance-Empire-Britain-Balance-1938-55/dp/0275947335/ .
*Harvard reference
last1=Wolpert
first1=Stanley
authorlink=
year=2006
title=Shameful Flight: The Last Years of the British Empire in India
place=
publisher=Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press. Pp. 272
isbn=0195151984
url= .

Articles in Journals or Collections

*Harvard reference
last1 = Banthia
first1 = Jayant
last2 = Dyson
first2 = Tim
year = 1999
title = Smallpox in Nineteenth-Century India
journal = Population and Development Review
volume = 25
issue = 4
pages = 649-689
url = http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0098-7921%28199912%2925%3A4%3C649%3ASINI%3E2.0.CO%3B2-K
*Harvard reference
last1=Brown
first1=Judith M.
last2=
first2=
chapter=India
pages = 421-446
date=
year=2001
editor1-last=Brown
editor1-first=Judith M.
editor2-last=Louis
editor2-first=Wm. Roger
title=Oxford History of the British Empire: The Twentieth Century
volume=
place=
publisher=Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press
publication-year=2001
isbn=0199246793
*Harvard reference
last = Caldwell
first = John C.
year = 1998
title = Malthus and the Less Developed World: The Pivotal Role of India
journal = Population and Development Review
volume = 24
issue = 4
pages = 675-696
url = http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0098-7921%28199812%2924%3A4%3C675%3AMATLDW%3E2.0.CO%3B2-%23
*Harvard reference
last = Derbyshire
first = I. D.
year = 1987
title = Economic Change and the Railways in North India, 1860-1914
journal = Population Studies
volume = 21
issue = 3
pages = 521-545
url = http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0026-749X%281987%2921%3A3%3C521%3AECATRI%3E2.0.CO%3B2-O
*Harvard reference
last1=Drayton
first1=Richard
last2=
first2=
chapter=Science, Medicine, and the British Empire
pages = 264-276
date=
year=2001
editor1-last=Winks
editor1-first=Robin
editor2-last=
editor2-first=
title=Oxford History of the British Empire: Historiography
volume=
place=
publisher=Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press
publication-year=2001
isbn=0199246807
*Harvard reference
last = Dyson
first = Tim
year = 1991
title = On the Demography of South Asian Famines: Part I
journal = Population Studies
volume = 45
issue = 1
pages = 5-25
url = http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0032-4728%28199103%2945%3A1%3C5%3AOTDOSA%3E2.0.CO%3B2-V
*Harvard reference
last = Dyson
first = Tim
year = 1991
title = On the Demography of South Asian Famines: Part II
journal = Population Studies
volume = 45
issue = 2
pages = 279-297
url = http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0032-4728%28199107%2945%3A2%3C279%3AOTDOSA%3E2.0.CO%3B2-S
*Harvard reference
last1=Frykenberg
first1=Robert E.
last2=
first2=
chapter=India to 1858
pages = 194-213
date=
year=2001
editor1-last=Winks
editor1-first=Robin
editor2-last=
editor2-first=
title=Oxford History of the British Empire: Historiography
volume=
place=
publisher=Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press
publication-year=2001
isbn=0199246807
*Harvard reference
last = Gilmartin
first = David
year = 1994
title = Scientific Empire and Imperial Science: Colonialism and Irrigation Technology in the Indus Basin
journal = The Journal of Asian Studies
volume = 53
issue = 4
pages = 1127-1149
url = http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0021-9118%28199411%2953%3A4%3C1127%3ASEAISC%3E2.0.CO%3B2-S
*Harvard reference
last = Goswami
first = Manu
year = 1998
title = From Swadeshi to Swaraj: Nation, Economy, Territory in Colonial South Asia, 1870 to 1907
journal = Comparative Studies in Society and History
volume = 40
issue = 4
pages = 609-636
url = http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0010-4175%28199810%2940%3A4%3C609%3AFSTSNE%3E2.0.CO%3B2-Q
*Harvard reference
last = Harnetty
first = Peter
year = 1991
title = 'Deindustrialization' Revisited: The Handloom Weavers of the Central Provinces of India, c. 1800-1947
journal = Modern Asian Studies
volume = 25
issue = 3
pages = 455-510
url = http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0026-749X%28199107%2925%3A3%3C455%3A%27RTHWO%3E2.0.CO%3B2-5
*Harvard reference
last1=Heuman
first1=Gad
last2=
first2=
chapter=Slavery, the Slave Trade, and Abolition
pages = 315-326
date=
year=2001
editor1-last=Winks
editor1-first=Robin
editor2-last=
editor2-first=
title=Oxford History of the British Empire: Historiography
volume=
place=
publisher=Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press
publication-year=2001
isbn=0199246807
*Harvard reference
last = Klein
first = Ira
year = 1988
title = Plague, Policy and Popular Unrest in British India
journal = Modern Asian Studies
volume = 22
issue = 4
pages = 723-755
url = http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0026-749X%281988%2922%3A4%3C723%3APPAPUI%3E2.0.CO%3B2-B
*Harvard reference
last = Klein
first = Ira
year = 2000
title = Materialism, Mutiny and Modernization in British India
journal = Modern Asian Studies
volume = 34
issue = 3
pages = 545-580
url = http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0026-749X%28200007%2934%3A3%3C545%3AMMAMIB%3E2.0.CO%3B2-I
*Harvard reference
last1=Kubicek
first1=Robert
last2=
first2=
chapter=British Expansion, Empire, and Technological Change
pages = 247-269
date=
year=2001
editor1-last=Porter
editor1-first=Andrew
editor2-last=
editor2-first=
title=Oxford History of the British Empire: The Nineteenth Century
volume=
place=
publisher=Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press
publication-year=2001
isbn=0199246785
*Harvard reference
last1=Moore
first1=Robin J.
last2=
first2=
chapter=Imperial India, 1858-1914
pages = 422-446
date=
year=2001a
editor1-last=Porter
editor1-first=Andrew
editor2-last=
editor2-first=
title=Oxford History of the British Empire: The Nineteenth Century
volume=
place=
publisher=Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press
publication-year=2001a
isbn=0199246785
*Harvard reference
last1=Moore
first1=Robin J.
last2=
first2=
chapter=India in the 1940s
pages = 231-242
date=
year=2001b
editor1-last=Winks
editor1-first=Robin
editor2-last=
editor2-first=
title=Oxford History of the British Empire: Historiography
volume=
place=
publisher=Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press
publication-year=2001b
isbn=0199246807
*Harvard reference
last = Raj
first = Kapil
year = 2000
title = Colonial Encounters and the Forging of New Knowledge and National Identities: Great Britain and India, 1760-1850
journal = Osiris, 2nd Series
volume = 15
issue = Nature and Empire: Science and the Colonial Enterprise
pages = 119-134
url = http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0369-7827%282000%292%3A15%3C119%3ACEATFO%3E2.0.CO%3B2-9
*Harvard reference
last = Ray
first = Rajat Kanta
year = 1995
title = Asian Capital in the Age of European Domination: The Rise of the Bazaar, 1800-1914
journal = Modern Asian Studies
volume = 29
issue = 3
pages = 449-554
url = http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0026-749X%28199507%2929%3A3%3C449%3AACITAO%3E2.0.CO%3B2-J
*Harvard reference
last1=Raychaudhuri
first1=Tapan
last2=
first2=
chapter=India, 1858 to the 1930s
pages = 214-230
date=
year=2001
editor1-last=Winks
editor1-first=Robin
editor2-last=
editor2-first=
title=Oxford History of the British Empire: Historiography
volume=
place=
publisher=Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press
publication-year=2001
isbn=0199246807
*Harvard reference
last = Robb
first = Peter
year = 1997
title = The Colonial State and Constructions of Indian Identity: An Example on the Northeast Frontier in the 1880s
journal = Modern Asian Studies
volume = 31
issue = 2
pages = 245-283
url = http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0026-749X%28199705%2931%3A2%3C245%3ATCSACO%3E2.0.CO%3B2-K
*Harvard reference
last = Roy
first = Tirthankar
year = 2002
title = Economic History and Modern India: Redefining the Link
journal = The Journal of Economic Perspectives
volume = 16
issue = 3
pages = 109-130
url = http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0895-3309%28200222%2916%3A3%3C109%3AEHAMIR%3E2.0.CO%3B2-F
*Harvard reference
last = Simmons
first = Colin
year = 1985
title = 'De-Industrialization', Industrialization and the Indian Economy, c. 1850-1947
journal = Modern Asian Studies
volume = 19
issue = 3
pages = 593-622
url = http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0026-749X%281985%2919%3A3%3C593%3A%27IATIE%3E2.0.CO%3B2-K
*Harvard reference
last1=Talbot
first1=Ian
last2=
first2=
chapter=Pakistan's Emergence
pages = 253-263
date=
year=2001
editor1-last=Winks
editor1-first=Robin
editor2-last=
editor2-first=
title=Oxford History of the British Empire: Historiography
volume=
place=
publisher=Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press
publication-year=2001
isbn=0199246807
* Harvard reference
Surname1 = Tinker
Given1 = Hugh
Year = 1968
Title = India in the First World War and after. Journal of Contemporary History, Vol. 3, No. 4, 1918-19: From War to Peace. (Oct., 1968), pp. 89-107
URL =
Publisher = Sage Publications
ID = ISSN: 00220094.
*Harvard reference
last1=Tomlinson
first1=B. R.
last2=
first2=
chapter=Economics and Empire: The Periphery and the Imperial Economy
pages = 53-74
date=
year=2001
editor1-last=Porter
editor1-first=Andrew
editor2-last=
editor2-first=
title=Oxford History of the British Empire: The Nineteenth Century
volume=
place=
publisher=Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press
publication-year=2001
isbn=0199246785
*Harvard reference
last1=Washbrook
first1=D. A.
last2=
first2=
chapter=India, 1818-1860: The Two Faces of Colonialism
pages = 395-421
date=
year=2001
editor1-last=Porter
editor1-first=Andrew
editor2-last=
editor2-first=
title=Oxford History of the British Empire: The Nineteenth Century
volume=
place=
publisher=Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press
publication-year=2001
isbn=0199246785
*Harvard reference
last = Watts
first = Sheldon
year = 1999
title = British Development Policies and Malaria in India 1897-c. 1929
journal = Past and Present
volume =
issue = 165
pages = 141-181
url = http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0031-2746%28199911%290%3A165%3C141%3ABDPAMI%3E2.0.CO%3B2-1
*Harvard reference
last1=Wylie
first1=Diana
last2=
first2=
chapter=Disease, Diet, and Gender: Late Twentieth Century Perspectives on Empire
pages = 277-289
date=
year=2001
editor1-last=Winks
editor1-first=Robin
editor2-last=
editor2-first=
title=Oxford History of the British Empire: Historiography
volume=
place=
publisher=Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press
publication-year=2001
isbn=0199246807

Classic Histories and Gazetteers

*Harvard reference
last = Imperial Gazetteer of India vol. IV
first =
title = The Indian Empire, Administrative
publisher = Published under the authority of His Majesty's Secretary of State for India in Council, Oxford at the Clarendon Press. Pp. xxx, 1 map, 552.
year = 1907
*Harvard reference
Surname1 = Lovett
Given1 = Sir Verney
Year = 1920
Title = A History of the Indian Nationalist Movement
URL =
Publisher = New York, Frederick A. Stokes Company
ISBN = 81-7536-249-9
*Harvard reference
last1=Majumdar
first1=R. C.
authorlink1
last2=Raychaudhuri
first2=H. C.
authorlink2=
last3=Datta
first3=Kalikinkar
year=1950
title=An Advanced History of India
place=
publisher=London: Macmillan and Company Limited. 2nd edition. Pp. xiii, 1122, 7 maps, 5 coloured maps.
isbn=
url= .
*Harvard reference
last1=Smith
first1=Vincent A.
authorlink1
year=1921
title=India in the British Period: Being Part III of the Oxford History of India
place=
publisher=Oxford: At the Clarendon Press. 2nd edition. Pp. xxiv, 316 (469-784)
isbn=
url= .

Tertiary Sources

*Harvard reference
last1=Oldenburg
first1=Philip
chapter= [http://encarta.msn.com/encyclopedia_761557562_13/India.html#S133 "India: Movement for Freedom"]
date=2007
year=2007
editor1-last=
editor1-first=
editor2-last=
editor2-first=
title=Encarta Encyclopedia
url=
isbn= .
*Harvard reference
last1=Wolpert
first1=Stanley
chapter= [http://www.britannica.com/eb/article-47042/India India: British Imperial Power 1858-1947 (Indian nationalism and the British response, 1885-1920; Prelude to Independence, 1920-1947)]
date=2007
year=2007
title=Encyclopædia Britannica
url=
isbn= .

ee also

*British Raj
*Company rule in India
*British East India Company