NAME – KHUSHI YADAV
DEPARTMENT – PHILOSOPHY
ROLL NO – 22/036
TOPIC - Colonial Knowledge and the Census: The Making of Colonial
Knowledge in India
Introduction
Colonialism was about more than just taking over land; it also meant taking control of
knowledge. In India, British colonial officials aimed to comprehend, categorize, and manage
the vast subcontinent by establishing a knowledge system that would bolster their imperial
goals. A key instrument in this endeavor was the census. The 1901 Census of India, as
outlined in the Report on the Census of India, 1901 by H.H. Risley and E.A. Gait, exemplifies
how colonial powers generated knowledge about the Indian populace to strengthen their
authority.
Rather than being a simple counting tool, the census was crucial in classifying individuals,
reinforcing social hierarchies, and portraying India's rich diversity in ways that benefited the
colonial agenda. This paper will delve into how the 1901 Census, especially through the
contributions of Risley and Gait, objectified Indian society and reinforced colonial
dominance. By referencing Bernard Cohn’s insights in his essay "The Census, Social
Structure, and Objectification in India," this paper will argue that the census was more than
just a statistical tool; it was a vital component of colonial rule.
Colonialism and the Making of Colonial Knowledge
Colonial knowledge, as noted by scholars like Edward Said, was never impartial or objective
when it came to depicting the colonized world. Rather, it served as a means to uphold
power. The British, especially, employed different strategies to gather information about
their colonies, which ultimately supported their rule. One of the key examples of this system
of colonial knowledge is the census.
Context of the 1901 Census
The 1901 Census took place after the 1857 Rebellion, which prompted the British to rethink
their colonial approach. They realized they needed a deeper understanding of the Indian
population to effectively manage the vast and varied subcontinent. This Census turned out
to be the most thorough and organized data collection effort in colonial India, focusing on
gathering information about the population's size, caste, religion, occupation, and language.
Additionally, the colonial authorities were motivated by a need to govern the "native"
population more effectively by sorting them into manageable groups. H.H. Risley, the
Census Commissioner, played a key role in creating a system that classified the Indian
population into strict ethnic and racial categories. He was convinced that India could be
segmented into distinct groups, each with unique traits. This oversimplified classification
had significant implications for how both the British and Indians perceived the country’s
social structure.
Risley and Gait’s Contributions to the 1901 Census
HH RISLEY E.A. GAIT
H.H. Risley and E.A. Gait played key roles in the development of the 1901 Census. Risley’s
contribution was especially significant. As the Census Commissioner, he created the
structure for the census, which involved sorting people by race, ethnicity, and caste. He
thought that using a scientific method for categorization would help clarify the complexities
of Indian society. However, his approach often oversimplified and misrepresented the true
nature of social structures in India. Risley, influenced by the racial theories of his time,
introduced the idea of "racial" divisions within the Indian population, claiming that various
"races" in India possessed distinct traits. His efforts aimed to categorize the population into
broad ethnic and racial groups, a task that would become a hallmark of British colonialism in
India. E.A. Gait, who worked closely with Risley, was tasked with putting these concepts into
practice in the field, assisting in the creation of detailed reports that would later inform
colonial policies in India.
The Objectification of Indian Society
One of the most significant impacts of the 1901 Census was its role in objectifying Indian
society. By categorizing people into specific, fixed groups, the census created an image of
Indian society as static and unchanging. These classifications were not based on the fluidity
of social roles or identities in India but rather on rigid categories that the British could easily
manipulate.
The census’s system of categorization was a direct manifestation of the colonial attitude
that sought to control the "native" population by imposing artificial divisions. By
categorizing people into racial and ethnic groups, the British were able to present Indian
society as fragmented and divided, which in turn justified their rule as necessary to maintain
order. In effect, the census transformed Indian society into an object to be studied,
measured, and controlled.
Bernard Cohn’s work on the census highlights how these categories, although presented as
neutral and scientific, were shaped by colonial power structures. As Cohn argues, the census
played a critical role in the “objectification” of Indian society, reducing its complexity to
easily manageable units. The long-term impact of this objectification was the solidification
of social hierarchies based on caste, race, and religion.
The Impact of the Census on Colonial Governance
The census had far-reaching consequences for British colonial governance in India. By
creating a framework of social categories, the census allowed the British to administer India
more efficiently. The British used the data collected to make decisions about resource
allocation, political representation, and social welfare.
One of the most notable uses of the census was in the creation of policies related to caste
and religion. For example, the census allowed the British to identify and classify different
religious groups in India, which helped them implement policies of religious divide and rule.
By categorizing people according to religion and caste, the British reinforced existing social
divisions and prevented the rise of unified resistance movements.
Furthermore, the census had a lasting effect on India’s political landscape. By
institutionalizing categories like “Hindu,” “Muslim,” and “Christian,” the census laid the
groundwork for later political movements in India that were based on religious identities.
These categories became deeply embedded in the political consciousness of India,
particularly during the partition of India in 1947, which was heavily influenced by religious
identities.
Bernard Cohn’s Analysis of the Census
Bernard Cohn’s essay, "The Census, Social Structure, and Objectification in India," offers a
critical analysis of the role of the census in the construction of colonial knowledge. Cohn
argues that the British colonial authorities used the census to create a fixed, static view of
Indian society, one that was easier to govern and control. The categories created by the
census, while presented as scientific, were deeply political and shaped by colonial
ideologies.
Cohn emphasizes the role of the census in objectifying Indian society. By reducing India’s
complex social fabric to a set of categories based on race, religion, and caste, the British
presented Indian society as inherently fragmented and primitive. This categorization not
only helped the British maintain control but also influenced how Indians viewed themselves
and their society.
Cohn’s analysis highlights how the census was more than just a tool for gathering
information—it was a tool for shaping the political and social realities of India. The census
helped create a colonial worldview that saw Indian society as something to be studied,
measured, and ultimately controlled.
Comparative Analysis: Colonial Knowledge and Nationalism
The influence of the census on Indian society extended beyond the colonial era. The
classifications established by the census continued to influence India’s political scene after
independence. Nationalist leaders, especially in the early 20th century, faced the challenge
of navigating the social divisions that the British had created. Although many of these
leaders opposed the strict caste and religious separations enforced by the British, they still
had to utilize these categories to rally support.
Take Mahatma Gandhi, for instance. His emphasis on the untouchables, whom he referred
to as "Harijans," was partly a reaction to the colonial census system that had solidified the
caste system. Gandhi aimed to confront the social hierarchies upheld by the British while
also leveraging these colonial classifications to bring people together for a shared purpose.
In a similar vein, the establishment of separate electorates for Muslims, as outlined in the
Montagu-Chelmsford reforms, stemmed directly from the British strategy of using the
census to fragment the Indian population along religious lines. This divisive approach
continued to influence Indian politics, ultimately leading to the partition of India in 1947..
Conclusion
The 1901 Census of India marked a significant chapter in the story of British colonialism. It
wasn't just about gathering statistics; it served as a means to shape perceptions of Indian
society that aligned with British interests. By dividing the population into strict categories,
the British crafted a simplified and objectified view of Indian society, which helped maintain
their colonial dominance.
The impact of the 1901 Census is still felt in India today, especially in the ways caste,
religion, and ethnicity are perceived and politicized. As highlighted by Bernard Cohn, the
census played a crucial role in the colonial agenda, establishing a governance framework
that lingered even after the end of British rule. While the nationalist movement in India
sought to challenge these colonial classifications, it also had to navigate the entrenched
divisions that had become a fundamental part of the nation’s political landscape.
Bibliography
1. H.H. Risley and E.A. Gait, Report on the Census of India, 1901.
2. Bernard Cohn, "The Census, Social Structure, and Objectification in India" in
Anthropologist Amongst the Historians, Delhi: Oxford University Press, 1987, pp.
224-254.
3. Prakash, Gyan. The Colonial Origins of Modern Social Thought. Delhi: OUP, 1999.
4. Chatterjee, Partha. The Nation and its Fragments: Colonial and Postcolonial Histories.
Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1993.
