Tutorial 1

Topic: Critically examine the frameworks of mapping spaces in

colonial India. Would you agree that colonialism brought with it a new
geographical conception of India

Course Name: Colonialisms: Ideas in practice (M41406)

Monsoon Semester-2023

Submitted to: Dr. Nonica Datta

Submitted by: Ummer Farooq (MA 3rd semester)

In the annals of human history, colonialism has emerged as a complex and multifaceted
phenomenon involving economic, political, and social subjugation of diverse societies
by dominant powers. Among various tools characterizing colonial rule, mapping spaces
has played a significant role as one of the tools employed by the colonial powers to
exert control, delineate, and consolidate authority over colonized regions. Over nearly
two centuries, British colonial administrators harnessed Western cartographic
techniques and indigenous spatial perceptions to create intricate maps. These maps,
ostensibly objective in nature, often bore the imprint of colonial biases and interests,
making them powerful tools of governance and resource exploitation. Moreover,
colonialism precipitated a fundamental reimagining of India's geographical identity. It
ushered in a new conception rooted in the colonial agenda of control and resource
extraction. Maps ceased to be mere representations of land and instead became
instruments of dominance, demarcating territories, categorizing populations, and
facilitating resource extraction. This tutorial delves into the archives of colonial-era
cartography to unravel this complex transformation, exploring the intricate interplay of
power, knowledge, and geography.

Edward Said in his work "Orientalism", provided profound insights into the dynamics
of colonial domination, arguing that the West asserted its authority over the East
through the construction of knowledge. This perspective was further corroborated by
Michel Foucault's concept of knowledge as a form of power. Examining the British
colonial enterprise's use of cartography as a mechanism to assert dominance over
colonized territories offers a compelling lens through which to explore the intricate
relationship between knowledge and power. Numerous questions arise when delving
into cartographic history, particularly regarding the interplay between the mapping of
colonial spaces and imperialism.

In contemporary culture, maps are often perceived as objective representations of

reality, rarely subjected to critical examination. For an extended period, the role of
cartographic knowledge in perpetuating colonial values was largely overlooked.
Fortunately, recent years have witnessed scholars addressing this oversight,
recognizing the pivotal role of colonial maps in shaping new concepts, molding public
opinions, reinforcing colonial ideals, and solidifying national identities. It is now widely
acknowledged that understanding the interplay between colonial maps and history is
essential for comprehending the spread and endurance of colonization. Colonial maps
were frequently regarded as objective depictions of the land, accepted without question.
However, they were far from accurate representations of reality; instead, they served as
instruments of colonial governance, imposing Western perceptions and ideas on
subjugated lands. Scholars like J.B. Harley delved into the critique of maps as
expressions of colonial interests, highlighting not only obvious markers of colonial
domination but also the omissions and silences within these maps. An illustrative
example can be found in the city maps published by the Society for the Diffusion of
Useful Knowledge (SDUK), where indigenous people and their places of worship were
conspicuously absent. This illustrates that colonial maps were not reflections of reality
but rather reflections of the British conception of Indian landscapes, tailored to serve the
needs of the Raj.
Matthew Edney, in his book "Mapping an Empire: The Geographical Construction
of British India, 1765-1843" , defined mapping as the intellectual process of creating,
communicating, and accepting geographical conceptions. He emphasized that colonial-
era cartography went beyond academic pursuit; it was a means of reinforcing the
political control of imperial powers over their colonies, maintaining the status quo.
Edney also underscored the connection between Enlightenment ideals and colonial
mapmaking, highlighting the belief that rationality, scientific precision, and accuracy
could yield absolute knowledge. Advanced techniques like Trigonometric surveys were
viewed as rational and scientific, capable of providing accurate depictions of territories.
This bolstered the belief in Western superiority and justified their authority over colonial
lands.

Ian Burrow argued that mapping was not a value-free exercise but carried a distinct
political undercurrent. It was primarily a state activity due to the substantial capital
required for extensive surveys. Consequently, maps perpetuated state beliefs and
enforced standardized cartographic symbols. British mapmakers and surveyors
meticulously studied Indian geography to legitimize British political domination. Maps
were not merely utilitarian tools for constructing railways and roadways; their primary
purpose was legitimizing colonial rule. Mapping colonial spaces became synonymous
with possessing them, a process that created not only empires but also histories of
colonial territories, categorized into associative, progressive, reverential, romantic, and
nostalgic narratives. Names and symbols on maps were often used to assert political
authority over indigenous places and individuals, as exemplified by the naming of Mt.
Everest after British Surveyor General George Everest.

The significance of colonial maps lies in their role in shaping national identities both in
the imperial country and the colonies. The emergence of modern India as a nation-state
is a contentious issue, with right-wing nationalists envisioning it as a sacred, cohesive
territory encompassing the entire subcontinent. However, cartographic history presents
a different perspective. Early maps fragmented India into principalities, and the idea of a
unified nation was absent. The expansion of the Mughal Empire in the early 18th
century led to the merging of northern and southern regions, but the concept of India as
a whole was yet to be realized. European cartographers like James Rennell continued
to emphasize the importance of the Mughal power in their maps. The term "Hindustan"
primarily referred to the North Indian plains at this time. The British East India
Company's effective control over Bengal did not alter the perception that it was a
Mughal province, as the Company derived its authority from the Mughal court. However,
this changed in the 19th century as British dominance in India solidified, reflected in
subsequent generations of colonial maps that portrayed the growing imperial power,
gradually replacing Mughal influence.

From the early 18th to the late 19th century, map-making in India experienced a prolific
phase. Eminent cartographers such as James Rennell and John Talis played a pivotal
role in shaping the perception of India as a legitimate British colony. Early colonial maps
featured names of local ruling authorities, demonstrating how colonial maps intertwined
knowledge and power. As colonization advanced, local names were supplanted by the
British government's flag, reflecting the evolving dominance of imperial power.
Throughout the 19th century, colonial mapping contributed significantly to the formation
of the concept of modern India, with borders delineating the extent of British dominion.
This comprehensive mapping effort, funded by the British government, played a
substantial role in shaping the notion of India as a unified "geographical entity." This
transformed India from a collection of diverse regional entities into a coherent whole,
reinforcing the idea of a homogeneous nation.

Colonial maps also reflected the imposition of Western science and rationality on India.
The British portrayed their mapping techniques as precise, scientific, and objective,
thereby transforming colonial spaces into national territories that could be efficiently
controlled and integrated into the empire. Cartographic archives were seen as
repositories of knowledge about the lands and people under British authority,
constructing an image of India as an orderly space that could be readily mapped and
governed. Mapping also played a pivotal role in the creation of modern nation-states.
Maps, with their reproducibility and widespread recognition, solidified the concept of the
nation in the public imagination. The study of map-making reveals the interconnected
development of the concepts of empire and maps during the 19th century. Benedict
Anderson's notion of "imagined communities" becomes evident, as well-defined national
images fostered a sense of attachment between map readers and their imagined
nations. This mechanism was evident in India's independence movement, where
detailed maps defined the nation, stirring nationalist fervor and framing the narrative of
self-determination. Maps also portrayed external threats, shaping national identity in
opposition to perceived "foreign" or "enemy" countries. The mapping of India also
contributed to British national identity, rooted in colonial conquests and the possession
of overseas territories. British identity was intertwined with the belief in Western
superiority and the "White Man's Burden." The representation of colonial people as
"barbaric" and "uncivilized" further distanced the colonizer from the colonized.

The analysis of colonial maps is crucial because they not only shaped perceptions of
land and its inhabitants but also influenced colonial policies. Imperial mapping
objectified colonized territories and facilitated the appropriation of local cultures. Land
revenue systems like the Permanent Settlement and Ryotwari Settlement were
implemented with the assistance of maps. Thongchai Winichakul challenged the view
that maps merely represented existing realities, asserting that maps actively created
national geo-bodies with constructed historical identities. Colonial maps established
borders that did not exist previously, often resulting in contentious boundaries that
continue to fuel border disputes and international conflicts to this day.

Contrary to the notion that colonial maps were solely products of Western
Enlightenment, scholar Kapil Raj has shed light on their hybrid nature, shaped not just
by Enlightenment ideals but also by the knowledge and labor of indigenous people. This
aspect of colonial mapmaking, often overlooked, highlights the complex power
dynamics involved in the surveying and mapping process, where negotiation and
contestation between the colonizer and the colonized played a significant role.
Conclusion:

It is evident that colonial cartography was not merely an academic endeavor but a
crucial tool for the propagation of colonial ideals and practices. Maps were not objective
representations of reality; instead, they were instruments for perpetuating and
legitimizing imperial rule. The comprehensive nature of colonial maps allowed them to
encompass both the colonized people and their territories, serving as a means for the
British colonialists to assert intellectual mastery over Indian territories and justify their
dominion. Through geographical conquest, imperial powers established cultural and
ideological dominance. Mapping played a central role in strengthening national identities
and constructing the idea of a modern nation-state. Colonial maps were influential in
creating the perception of a coherent geographical entity, transforming diverse regions
into a unified whole. The study of colonial maps is not only vital for comprehending the
workings of colonialism and imperialism but also for understanding the intricate
relationship between knowledge, power, and authority.

Bibliography:

1] Arnold, David. ‘In a Land of Deat’, in The Tropics and the Travelling Gaze: India,
Landscape, and Science 1800-1856. Delhi, Permanent Black, 2005.

2] Barrow, Ian. Making History, Drawing Territory: British Mapping in India, 1756- 1905.
New Delhi: Oxford University Press, 2003.

3] Black, Jeremy. Geographies of an Imperial Power: The British World, 1618-1815.

Indiana: Indiana University Press, 2018.

4] Edney, Matthew. Mapping an Empire: The Geographical Construction of British India,

1765-1843. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1997.

5] Edney, Matthew. "The Irony of Imperial Mapping" in James R. Akerman (edited), The
Imperial Map: Cartography and the Mastery of Empire. Chicago: University of Chicago
Press, 2009.

6] Said, Edward W. Orientalism. New York: Pantheon Books, 1978.