The British were charged by God with the mission of not only ruling India but importantly of 'improving' India and its inhabitants.

The Mutiny undermined such certitude and prompted a recasting of British attitudes to the function and purpose of empire.

In the process, two distinct, if politically charged concepts of empire were formulated at the level of high politics in London, two rival definitions of trusteeship subsequently emerging.

From the Conservative Party a new, hard-headed rationale of empire was promoted, which was initially articulated by Disraeli, given shape by Salisbury and applied to India by Lytton (1876-1880) and Curzon (1899-1905).

What this rejected was the old notion of rule by consent, and in its place was substituted the concept of a permanent raj, founded on the basis of conquest and sustained by bureaucratic efficiency.

Accordingly, Indians would have to make do with good government, for self-government was beyond their reach.

Balanced against this construct was Gladstone's commitment of the Liberal Party at Midlothian (1880) to the form of trusteeship conjured up by T.B. Macauley in the 1830s.

Britain's duty was likened to a 'trust to be fulfilled', a trust that held out the promise to Indians of eventual independence once they had served an apprenticeship in the art of responsible government.

While such rivalry developed into a 'split personality' at Westminster, it spilled over to India only briefly, during the viceroyalty of Ripon.

For the most part India was governed according to the Conservative blueprint, and it was governed that way up to 1905, Curzon being its last if most famous exponent.

Synoptic Lecture Notes

LECTURE 6:

IMPERIAL SCHIZOPHRENIA [1858-1905]

Baby Englishman an equal to adult Indians From: Kipling Society and Royal Commonwealth Society

India and changing British Attitudes to Empire

* Seeds of divided personality to be found in incongruity of:

a) British becoming increasingly democratic at home

b) While becoming increasingly autocratic abroad

- John Morley [ S/S 1906-10] showed classic signs of split personality. Favoured alternate doses of reform and repression.

- Lord Curzon, by contrast, entirely focussed and sure-footed.

Imperial attitudes fluctuate depending on certain factors:

1. Factor of Party

After the Mutiny, India always likely to become Party question. But parliamentary debate on India dormant until 1870s

Then 'clear-cut' party differences emerge

2. Factor of Empire

- 1858-70 : Period of Informal Empire. India allowed to go her own way within limits

Informal empire - Empire based on trading relations; not territory

- 1870-1905 : Period of Formal Empire.

Britain beginning to be challenged as:

Policeman of World Order and Workshop of World by USA, France, Germany.

Resort to Nationalism as defensive reaction

- exemplified in Dilke's Greater Britain (1868)

Seeley's Expansion of England (1883)

- exemplified by Conservative Party commitment to Imperialism

viz : An Empire of Prestige; not necessarily of power.

Trusteeship Redefined : Rival Concepts of Empire

- Conservatives Provide New Rationale of Trusteeship.

Disraeli links Conservative Party to imperial platform at Crystal Palace 1872.

Empire now based on military strength and centralised control from London.

Gladstone fights 1880 election on Empire

Midlothian Principles enunciated:

* Asians have same rights as Britons

* Sentiments, needs of Indians must be considered

* Britain's mission in India includes LIBERTY

Gladstone = conscience of England [like Burke]

But no attempt to withdraw from Empire

Little attempt to prevent expansion

Not all Liberals are Gladstonians

* Are we really only talking about split personality in theory?

Indian Applications

1. Pattern of Conservative Viceroyalties

2. Policies:

a) External : Scientific Frontier Concept Annexations : Afghanistan/Burma

W = Whig    L = Liberal    C = Conservative

C    Mayo 1868

1/2    (W) Northbrook 1872

C    Lytton 1876

b) Internal : reneging on Macaulay's promise to Westernized Indians of representative government

L    Ripon 1880

1/2    W    Dufferin 1884

C    Lansdowne 1888

Case Study : Lord Lytton [1876-1880]

(Disraeli's appointee) - Censorship 1878 [Vernacular Press Act] - Apartheid in ICSo - Elevation of feudal, vested interests

Case Study : Lord Ripon [1880-1884] - (Gladstone's appointee) - Local Self-Govt. Bill 1882 - Ilbert Bill 1883 = Acid Test of Liberal Resolve

Liberalism found wanting

Conservatism the order of the day

Governments:

Liberal 1868-74

Conservative 1874-80

Liberal 1880-1885/6

Conservative 1885/6-1892

Liberal 1892-94

Conservative 1894-1906

Tutorial Questions to be Addressed

1. The Conservative Concept of Empire:
What does Lytton's viceroyalty illustrate about the imperial vision of Disraeli and Salisbury?

3. High Noon of Empire.
The India of Curzon - imperialism at its best?

Core Reading

Brown, Ch III

Hutchins, Ch 7

Additional Reading

D. Dilks, Curzon in India, vol. 1

M. Edwardes, High Noon of Empire: India under Curzon

C.C. Eldridge, England's Mission (Chs. 7-9 on Disraeli's imperial vision)

D. Fieldhouse, The Colonial Empires: A Comparative Study

S. Gopal, British Policy in India 1858-1905

M.D. Lewis (ed.), The British in India: Imperialism or Trusteeship?