Opinion National Interest PoV 50-Word Edit

ThePrint On Camera Videos In Pictures

Society & Culture Around Town Book Excerpts Vigyapanti The Dating Story

More Judiciary Education YourTurn Work With Us Campus Voice

Opinion National Interest PoV 50-Word Edit

ThePrint On Camera Videos In Pictures

Society & Culture Around Town Book Excerpts Vigyapanti The Dating Story

More Judiciary Education YourTurn Work With Us Campus Voice

How the East India Company mapped India for control

Long before the 1881 Census, the East India Company spent decades attempting to turn massive land tracts into an ordered empire.

In the 1757 Battle of Plassey, the East India Company (EIC) emerged victorious, transforming itself from a trading enterprise into an administrative power. The grant of Diwani rights in 1765 further cemented it as a revenue-collecting state in its own right. With the authority to collect land revenue in Bengal, Bihar, and Orissa, EIC now faced a Sisyphean task of state-making. With the newly acquired vast lands and millions of subjects to rule over, the Company realised that for effective governance of this strange land, it was imperative to make it intelligible. The colonial officer was constantly haunted by how little he knew of the land he now administered. Hence, they felt an incessant need to convert the vast social and physical spaces of India into measurable ‘facts’ to aid them in revenue assessment, territorial consolidation, and military intelligence. To address this, cartographers, surveyors and mappers were hired. 

This was an evolving cumulative process. Initial revenue surveys and topographical mapping gave way to the more ambitious trigonometric surveys that sought to measure the subcontinent with mathematical precision. Gazettes drew on the knowledge produced by such surveys. Parallel developments ensued within the domain of law where the early colonial endeavour witnessed the codification of Gentoo laws in an attempt to systematise existing Hindu legal traditions and expanded to document other local laws and customs across diverse communities, and later becoming consolidated into the Indian Penal Code of 1860. The Company officials invested in learning local languages, compiling dictionaries and curating cabinets of curiosities (Cohn, 1996). Through these practices, the colonial state sought to demystify the complexity of India into ordered knowledge. Simultaneously, the British Colonial Office aimed to create a synchronized, uniform population count across its global territories. Driven by the rise of the ‘information state,’ British officials viewed the census as a vital ‘science of government’ necessary for oversight, surveillance, and the efficient administration of imperial resources (Christopher, 2008).

Over time, these efforts expanded dramatically. Starting in the 1840s, successive Colonial Secretaries, most notably Lord Stanley and Joseph Chamberlain pushed for colonial governments to conduct censuses that coincided with the UK’s decennial counts (Christopher, 2008). The great surveys of the eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries, the provincial censuses of the 1800s and 1840s, and the systematic all-India census initiated in the 1880s all formed part of the ambitious project by the East India Company and later the British Crown to render their most lucrative colony legible for administration, taxation, and control . Such efforts produced new ways of seeing the land and its people. But their ambitions exceeded the immediate needs of governance as the knowledge generated through European expansion in India was not always solely about the colony, nor was it driven entirely by practical utility. The practices that informed imperial rule drew upon the scientific standards of the age, while the colonial encounter provided a vast laboratory in which these methods could be tested, expanded, and refined. The tension at the heart of these efforts was the oscillation between an openness to understanding India’s variety and the imperative to impose a stable, coherent narrative through which the colony could be rendered intelligible (Majeed, 2019). 

In 1765, the Governor of Bengal, Robert Clive (soon after acquiring the Dewani rights for collecting tax in Bengal, Bihar and Orissa)  tasked James Rennell, a naval officer and surveyor, with surveying the newly acquired Bengal territories. The following year, Rennell was appointed the First Surveyor General of Bengal, marking the dawn of a new age of systematic mapping in India.

The scale of ambition expanded after the fall of Seringapatam in 1799 during the Fourth Anglo-Mysore War, when the Company took control of territories in southern India. The Mysore Survey, as part of its broader effort to scientifically document newly acquired territories, was initiated. Appointed to lead the project, Colin Mackenzie submitted a plan in 1800 proposing both mathematical and physical objectives: a systematic geographical and geometrical survey based on triangulation, alongside the collection of information relevant to natural history (Markham, 1878).

By 1808, Mackenzie had completed much of the fieldwork, with his team extending the survey into the Ceded Districts in subsequent years. Every village, along with landmarks, roads, tanks, water channels, forests, hills, and other features, was to be carefully identified and recorded. The survey produced maps at varying scales and compiled extensive statistical accounts of district resources, with particular attention to administrative boundaries and villages.

In the same period, William Lambton, another Company officer, proposed a triangulated survey to measure the Indian subcontinent using a network of precisely calculated triangles anchored by carefully measured base lines. Beginning work in 1802, Lambton’s project was formally known as the Great Trigonometrical Survey (Keay, 2000). It aimed to establish a scientifically exact geographical framework for the entire country. Lambton’s mapping extended from Goa to Masulipatnam (Machilipatnam) and from Cape Comorin (Kanyakumari) to Nizam-administered Hyderabad and Maratha territories, covering a total area of 165,342 square miles (Roy, 1986).

The latter stages of the survey extended to northwards, towards the Himalayas, measuring at least 79 Himalayan peaks. Historians have argued that these surveys were not always driven purely by administrative needs. Mathew Edney (1997) for instance observes that the Trigonometrical Survey was chaotic, full of institutional conflict, expensive and was not particularly useful for administration. It served to demonstrate the potency of British scientific advancements. As Christopher Bayly (1996) elegantly puts it: ‘Empire was put to the service of the glories of national science, rather than the opposite.’

Accurate surveys,........

© ThePrint