The Coming of Age of Imperialism (1772-1813), Part IV

In June 1813, during the debate over the renewal of the East India Company's Charter, an important transformation took place. Aside from being a transformation between rival sets of policies, it fundamentally was a transformation in mentality, in the meaning of imperialism and colonial rule. In short, in June 1813, after 41 years of successive policies emanating from a number of Governor-Generals and scholars, and continuous debate, British imperialism came of age.

With the admission of missionaries into India for the first time, and the simultaneous defeat of Orientalism, the Evangelicals successfully articulated a rival mission for Britain - one much more bold, brazen and hegemonic than any that had existed previously. Eschewing the need to preserve Indian civilizations and cultures, or even to study their languages, the Evangelicals were among the first Britons to suggest that Britain, as the hegemonic power, could and should remake India. While this attitude surely had antecedents in actions by several of the "Orientalist" Governor-Generals, such as Cornwallis' 1793 Act of Permanent Settlement [which broke up communal lands into individual parcels of land and thus completely upset the agrarian system of Bengal], Grant and Wilberforce were among the first to forcefully state this attitude. In short, it was an attitude of a self-conscious, mature, imperialism, one that realized why Britain was in India, and what the British wanted to achieve there.

However, while Anglicism was surely more hegemonic than Orientalism, one should not conclude that Orientalism was devoid of hegemony or of pernicious effects and intentions. For while Orientalism was certain a much more benign form of hegemony than Evangelism and Anglicism, it was nevertheless hegemonic. It was a policy that was predicated firmly on the practical need to maintain and improve British power in India, and whatever other rationales for it, such as a moral mission to preserve Indian civilizations and to help launch a renaissance among the Indian intelligentsia, were purely secondary ones.

Furthermore, one should not see Anglicism and Orientalism as necessarily polar opposites of each other. While both were antagonistic policies that had a great deal of differences, in many ways, Anglicism was the logical conclusion of Orientalism. As the British Orientalists sought to know everything there was to know about India, India began taking on a possessive form which resulted in the notion that the British could speak for India. [1] Once this threshold had been crossed, it was only a matter of time before the entirety of Indian cultures and civilizations started becoming questioned and critiqued as "barbaric."

Go To Page: 1 2