# The reckoning

What the subcontinent held, what it lost and what arrived. Figures checked 2026-11-02. Disputed figures stay ranges with their authors named.

## Share of world output and people

Angus Maddison's final estimates put India near a third of the world's output and people in 1 CE, and at 4.2 percent of world GDP in 1950. India's GDP still grew in absolute terms, from about $91 billion in 1700 to $204 billion in 1913 in 1990 international dollars, both for the undivided subcontinent, while its share fell. Part of that fall is Western industrialisation, which made the rest of the world grow far faster, and part is India's falling share of world population, so the two lines belong together. The points from 1950 cover post-Partition India only: with Pakistan and Bangladesh added, the same file gives about 5.1 percent of GDP and 17.6 percent of people for 1950. The early figures are assumptions more than measurements: the file gives India $450 a head in 1 and 1000 and $550 in 1500, 1600 and 1700. Broadberry, Custodis and Gupta build GDP per head from output data and find India falling from over 60 percent of Britain's level in 1600 to 14.5 percent in 1871. That decline starts under late Mughal rule and carries on under the Company, so they say it cannot be attributed to colonialism alone. Over those years India's own GDP per head fell by about 23 percent, while Britain's more than tripled.

| Year | Output % | People % |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | 32 | 33.2 |
| 1000 | 27.8 | 28.1 |
| 1500 | 24.4 | 25.1 |
| 1600 | 22.4 | 24.3 |
| 1700 | 24.5 | 27.3 |
| 1820 | 16.1 | 20.1 |
| 1870 | 12.2 | 19.8 |
| 1913 | 7.5 | 16.9 |
| 1950 | 4.2 | 14.2 |
| 1973 | 3.1 | 14.8 |
| 2000 | 5.2 | 16.5 |
| 2008 | 6.7 | 17.1 |

## Output per person, percent of Britain

| Year | Percent |
|---|---|
| 1600 | c. 61.5 |
| 1650 | 58.8 |
| 1700 | 40.3 |
| 1750 | 34.2 |
| 1801 | 27.7 |
| 1811 | 25.5 |
| 1821 | 24.7 |
| 1831 | 22 |
| 1841 | 21.5 |
| 1851 | 18.8 |
| 1861 | 16.2 |
| 1871 | 14.5 |

Sources: Broadberry, Custodis and Gupta, 'India and the great divergence: An Anglo-Indian comparison of GDP per capita, 1600-1871', Explorations in Economic History 55 (2015), 58-75 (https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eeh.2014.04.003); Broadberry, Custodis and Gupta, working paper of 19 April 2014, Tables 13 and 14 (https://ora.ox.ac.uk/objects/uuid:a9b02ec3-4214-423a-9a72-9599e72c7480/files/m81fe1cbc0613dc70e687e1f2254f5655); Maddison, Historical Statistics of the World Economy: 1-2008 AD (final file, 2010) (https://www.rug.nl/ggdc/historicaldevelopment/maddison/data/md2010_horizontal.xlsx).

## The drain debate

There was a transfer out of India that Indians did not control: revenue raised in India paid pensions, salaries, debt and other Home Charges in London, under a government they did not elect. Its size is genuinely disputed. The authors below differ less on the arithmetic than on what counts: whether all of an export surplus was a loss, whether payments for loans and services bought anything of value, and whether the sums should be compounded at all. The $45 trillion figure means little without its method, so it is shown here with its method and its critics.

### Dadabhai Naoroji, Poverty and Un-British Rule in India (1901)

Argued that foreign rule carried India's wealth away with no return, through Home Charges, pensions, salaries and profits. He put the drain at nearly or above £30 million a year, nearer £40 million with unrecorded export profits, freight and insurance, against about £3 million a year around 1800. These are his rough figures, argued in a political case against British policy.

Sources: Naoroji, Poverty and Un-British Rule in India (London: Swan Sonnenschein, 1901), introduction (https://archive.org/details/povertyunbritish00naoruoft).

### Utsa Patnaik, 'Revisiting the Drain, or Transfers from India to Britain in the Context of Global Diffusion of Capitalism', in Chakrabarti and Patnaik (eds), Agrarian and Other Histories (2017)

Estimates the drain for 1765 to 1938 at £9.2 trillion, equal to $45 trillion. Her method, in her own words: "using India's export surplus earnings as the measure and compounding at a low interest rate of 5 percent." So the total treats the whole export surplus as drain and is a compounded present-day sum, not an amount that left India at the time.

Sources: Utsa Patnaik on Agrarian History and Imperialism, interview, Review of African Political Economy, 7 March 2019 (https://roape.net/2019/03/07/utsa-patnaik-on-agrarian-history-and-imperialism/) [second-hand].

### Jason Hickel, 'How Britain stole $45 trillion from India', Al Jazeera, 19 December 2018 (opinion piece)

An op-ed that took Patnaik's number to a mass audience. Hickel argues that Indian exporters were in effect paid out of tax revenue collected from them, and that this flow helped fund the industrialisation of Britain and much of the Western world. He reports her figure and method; it is not a separate estimate.

Sources: Hickel, 'How Britain stole $45 trillion from India', Al Jazeera, 19 December 2018 (https://www.aljazeera.com/opinions/2018/12/19/how-britain-stole-45-trillion-from-india).

### Tirthankar Roy, 'Did the British loot India?', History Reclaimed, 2 November 2022 (opinion piece)

Says Patnaik's claim is "based on dreadfully bad economics and is still untestable." He argues that nearly all 19th-century payments were market-mediated, such as service on loans raised in London at lower interest than in India, and that Home Charges were "rarely above one percent" of national income. On $45 trillion he writes that "the very thing the number measures cannot be defined." Roy is a professor of economic history at the LSE, but this essay appeared on an opinion site that defends the Empire, not in a refereed journal.

Sources: Roy, 'Did the British loot India?', History Reclaimed, 2 November 2022 (https://historyreclaimed.co.uk/did-the-british-loot-india/).

### K. N. Chaudhuri, 'India's International Economy in the Nineteenth Century: An Historical Survey', Modern Asian Studies 2(1), 1968, 31-50

A survey of India's external accounts. Roy reads it as a careful assessment that rejected the drain claim, and credits Chaudhuri with exposing the assumption that money not remitted to Britain would have been invested in India. Chaudhuri's stance is given here as Roy reports it.

Sources: Chaudhuri, 'India's International Economy in the Nineteenth Century: An Historical Survey', Modern Asian Studies 2(1), 1968, 31-50 (https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/modern-asian-studies/article/indias-international-economy-in-the-nineteenth-century-an-historical-survey1/BE8C02315DA773CA3D6DE9AC61A64059) [second-hand]; Roy, 'Did the British loot India?', History Reclaimed, 2 November 2022 (https://historyreclaimed.co.uk/did-the-british-loot-india/).

## Famines (excess deaths, millions)

### Great Bengal famine, 1769 to 1770, Bengal and Bihar

1.2 to 10.

No count exists. The Company reckoned in May 1770 that a third of the people had gone, and Warren Hastings wrote in 1772 of "at least one-third of the inhabitants"; ten million is that fraction of Bengal's people. Tim Dyson says the toll has almost certainly been overstated, and Rajat Datta is reported to put it near 1.2 million. We have not read his book: that low figure reaches us through a citation. No scholar offers a central figure.

Sources: Hunter, The Annals of Rural Bengal (1868) (https://archive.org/details/annalsofruralben01hunt); Environment and Society Portal, Bengal Famine of 1770 (https://www.environmentandsociety.org/tools/keywords/bengal-famine-1770) [second-hand]; Dyson, A Population History of India (Oxford University Press, 2018) (https://academic.oup.com/book/3581/chapter/144863710); Datta, Society, Economy and the Market: Commercialization in Rural Bengal, c. 1760-1800 (2000), pp. 262, 266 [second-hand]; Bengal famine of 1770, Wikipedia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bengal_famine_of_1770) [second-hand].

### Great Famine, 1876 to 1878, Madras, Bombay, Mysore and Hyderabad, then parts of the north

5.25 to 10.3; central 8.2 (Arup Maharatna (1992, 1996)).

The Famine Commission of 1880 put excess deaths at 5.25 million in the British provinces alone in 1877 and 1878, with two million fewer births. Visaria and Visaria give 5.55 million and Seavoy 6.1 million. Maharatna's 8.2 million covers all India and corrects for unregistered deaths. William Digby's 1901 table adds up to about 10.3 million. Mike Davis (2001) blames doctrine and grain exports for much of the toll.

Sources: Report of the Indian Famine Commission, Part I (1880), para. 81 (https://archive.org/details/dli.ernet.17292); Maharatna, The Demography of Indian Famines: A Historical Perspective (PhD thesis, LSE, 1992), Tables 1.1, 5.1 and 5.4 (https://researchonline.lse.ac.uk/id/eprint/132292/); Digby, 'Prosperous' British India: A Revelation from Official Records (1901) (https://archive.org/details/in.ernet.dli.2015.96399); Davis, Late Victorian Holocausts: El Nino Famines and the Making of the Third World (2001) [second-hand].

### Famine of 1896 to 1897, 1896 to 1897, United Provinces, Central Provinces and Berar, with parts of Madras, Bombay, Bengal, the Punjab and Upper Burma

0.75 to 5.15.

The clearest gap between an official count and a reconstruction. The Imperial Gazetteer put "actual famine mortality" in British districts at about 750,000. Maharatna, correcting registered deaths for under-registration across all India, gets 2.6 to 4.1 million, more than three times as many. Visaria and Visaria and Seavoy reach 5.15 million by adding official estimates for the declared famine areas. No single central figure is agreed.

Sources: The Imperial Gazetteer of India, vol. III, The Indian Empire: Economic (1907), ch. X, pp. 490-493 (https://archive.org/details/in.ernet.dli.2015.207356); Maharatna, The Demography of Indian Famines: A Historical Perspective (PhD thesis, LSE, 1992), Tables 1.1, 5.1 and 5.4 (https://researchonline.lse.ac.uk/id/eprint/132292/).

### Famine of 1899 to 1900, 1899 to 1900, Western and central India, including Gujarat and the Central Provinces

1 to 4.4.

The Famine Commission of 1901 thought about one million deaths in British districts could be put down to famine, at least a fifth of them from cholera. Seavoy gives 3.25 million and Maharatna 3.0 to 4.4 million for all India. It was the second great famine in three years.

Sources: The Imperial Gazetteer of India, vol. III, The Indian Empire: Economic (1907), ch. X, pp. 490-493 (https://archive.org/details/in.ernet.dli.2015.207356); Maharatna, The Demography of Indian Famines: A Historical Perspective (PhD thesis, LSE, 1992), Tables 1.1, 5.1 and 5.4 (https://researchonline.lse.ac.uk/id/eprint/132292/).

### Bengal famine, 1943 to 1944, Bengal

0.8 to 3.8; central 2.1 (Dyson and Maharatna (1991); Maharatna (1992, 1996)).

All figures are for Bengal alone. The low end is the provincial health department's registered excess, 0.8 to 1 million, with no allowance for unrecorded deaths. The Famine Inquiry Commission added about 40 percent to the recorded excess for unregistered deaths and gave about 1.5 million. Amartya Sen reached 2.6 to 3.05 million and settled on about 3 million; Paul Greenough gave 3.5 to 3.8 million. Dyson and Maharatna, using registration data for undivided Bengal, give 1.8 to 2.4 million, with 2.1 million as the best figure. About half the excess deaths fell in 1943 and about two-fifths in 1944, and malaria was the largest killer. How far wartime policy and the War Cabinet were to blame is still argued.

Sources: Famine Inquiry Commission, Report on Bengal (1945), Part II (https://indiaofthepast.org/sites/indiaofthepast.org/files/pdf/1940s/bengalfamine/ficreportpart2.pdf); Maharatna, The Demography of Indian Famines: A Historical Perspective (PhD thesis, LSE, 1992), Tables 1.1, 5.1 and 5.4 (https://researchonline.lse.ac.uk/id/eprint/132292/); Dyson and Maharatna, 'Excess mortality during the Bengal famine: A re-evaluation', Indian Economic and Social History Review 28(3), 1991, 281-297 (https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/indeco/v28y1991i3p281-297.html) [second-hand]; O Grada, 'The Ripple that Drowns? Twentieth-century famines in China and India as economic history' (UCD Working Paper 07/19, 2007) (https://researchrepository.ucd.ie/rest/bitstreams/1291/retrieve); Sen, Poverty and Famines: An Essay on Entitlement and Deprivation (1981), Appendix D [second-hand]; Greenough, Prosperity and Misery in Modern Bengal: The Famine of 1943-1944 (1982) [second-hand].

## What was taken

### Koh-i-Noor diamond

Taken: Surrendered under the Treaty of Lahore of 29 March 1849, imposed on the ten-year-old Maharaja Duleep Singh at the annexation of the Punjab. The treaty named the stone for the Queen of England, and it reached Queen Victoria on 3 July 1850.. Now: Royal Collection, set in Queen Elizabeth The Queen Mother's Crown of 1937, on show in the Jewel House at the Tower of London..

Recut in 1852, it now weighs 105.6 carats. India, Pakistan, Iran and Afghanistan have all claimed it. In April 2016 India's Solicitor General told the Supreme Court it was "neither stolen or forcibly taken"; the government then said its position had not yet been put to the court.

Sources: Royal Collection Trust, Maharaja Duleep Singh (https://www.rct.uk/collection/stories/maharaja-duleep-singh); Royal Collection Trust, RCIN 31703, Queen Elizabeth The Queen Mother's Crown (https://www.rct.uk/collection/stories/the-crown-jewels/queen-elizabeth-the-queen-mothers-crown); Royal Collection Trust, RCIN 31734, The Koh-i-nur armlet (https://www.rct.uk/collection/themes/exhibitions/victoria-albert-art-love/the-queens-gallery-buckingham-palace/the-koh-i-nur-armlet); Historic Royal Palaces, The Crown Jewels (https://www.hrp.org.uk/tower-of-london/history-and-stories/the-crown-jewels/); LiveLaw, 'Centre makes U-turn on Kohinoor Diamond', 19 April 2016 (https://www.livelaw.in/amp/centre-makes-u-turn-kohinoor-diamond-says-govt-stand-not-yet-conveyed-sc).

### Amaravati sculptures

Taken: Removed from the stupa at Amaravati in colonial excavations: 51 pieces by antiquarians in 1816 to 1817, then hundreds to Madras around 1850, on the argument that they were being saved from local destruction. The British Museum received 121 in 1880, nearly two-thirds of them from the 1850 group.. Now: British Museum, London, Room 33a..

Jennifer Howes (South Asian Studies, 2026) sets the museum's "rescue" story against the earlier antiquarian uses of the same stones. 

Sources: Howes, 'Decolonising the Rescue Narrative: Antiquarian Usage of Amaravati Sculptures in the British Museum', South Asian Studies 42(1), 2026, 5-24 (https://doi.org/10.1080/02666030.2026.2630477) [second-hand]; Restitution Matters, summary of Howes (2026) (https://restitutionmatters.org/publication/decolonising-the-rescue-narrative-antiquarian-usage-of-amaravati-sculptures-in-the-british-museum); British Museum, Room 33a, India: Amaravati (https://www.britishmuseum.org/collection/galleries/india-amaravati).

### Sultanganj Buddha

Taken: Found on 6 December 1862 by the British Library's record, though popular accounts say 1861, by the railway engineer E. B. Harris during works at Sultanganj in Bhagalpur district, Bihar. Harris sent it to Birmingham, where the ironmonger and former mayor Samuel Thornton paid the transport and offered it to the borough council in 1864.. Now: Birmingham Museum and Art Gallery..

A copper figure about 2.3 metres tall and over 500 kilograms, dated 500 to 700 CE by the museum. Bihar's Chief Minister wrote to the Union Culture Minister in July 2026 asking for its return. In 2010 Birmingham said it had received no official request.

Sources: ETV Bharat, 'Bihar Takes Steps To Bring Back Ancient Sultanganj Buddha From Birmingham Museum', 11 August 2026 (https://www.etvbharat.com/en/bharat/bihar-takes-steps-to-bring-back-sultanganj-buddha-from-birmingham-museum-enn26081104711) [second-hand]; Sultanganj Buddha, Wikipedia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sultanganj_Buddha) [second-hand]; The Tribune, report from London, 1 June 2010 (https://www.tribuneindia.com/2010/20100602/main5.htm).

### Tipu's Tiger

Taken: Taken from the music room of Tipu Sultan's palace at Srirangapatna after he was killed in the assault of May 1799, when, the V&A says, the East India Company's army looted the city's houses. Lord Wellesley sent it to the East India Company in London in 1800, and it was on show at East India House by 1803.. Now: Victoria and Albert Museum, London, museum number 2545(IS), transferred to South Kensington in 1879. The museum's record listed it as not on display in November 2026..

Made for Tipu about 1790: a painted wooden tiger mauling a prostrate figure, with an organ inside. 

Sources: V&A, Tippoo's Tiger, museum number 2545(IS) (https://collections.vam.ac.uk/item/O61949/tippoos-tiger-mechanical-organ-unknown/); V&A, Tipu's Tiger (https://www.vam.ac.uk/articles/tipus-tiger).

### Maharaja Ranjit Singh's throne

Taken: Taken from Lahore at the annexation of the Punjab in 1849 with the rest of the Sikh state treasury. Most of the treasury was auctioned, but Governor-General Dalhousie held the throne back for the East India Company. It went to Calcutta in 1853 and on to the Company's museum in London.. Now: Victoria and Albert Museum, London, Room 47a, museum number 2518(IS), moved to South Kensington in 1879..

Made by the goldsmith Hafiz Muhammad Multani. The V&A's own record dates it to about 1805 to 1810, while its gallery label says 1818 or later.

Sources: V&A, Maharaja Ranjit Singh's throne, museum number 2518(IS) (https://collections.vam.ac.uk/item/O18891/maharaja-ranjit-singhs-throne-throne-chair-hafiz-muhammad-multani/).

As of 26 September 2024: Government data showed 640 antiquities recovered since 2014, of which 578, about 90 percent, came from the United States. That includes 297 handed over during the Prime Minister's US visit that month.

Sources: The Tribune, 'India retrieved 640 antiquities since 2014, 90% from US', 26 September 2024 (https://www.tribuneindia.com/news/india/india-retrieved-640-antiquities-since-2014-90-from-us).

As of 27 March 2025: The Culture Minister told the Rajya Sabha that 642 antiquities had been repatriated since 2014, against 13 between 1955 and 2014.

Sources: Deccan Herald (PTI), 'In last 11 years, 642 antiquities repatriated from different countries', 27 March 2025 (https://www.deccanherald.com/india/in-last-11-years-642-antiquities-repatriated-from-different-countries-culture-minister-in-rajya-sabha-3465256) [second-hand]; IANS, 27 March 2025 (https://ianslive.in/pm-modi-led-govt-repatriated-642-artifacts-during-10-yrs-vis-a-vis-13-since-1955--20250327173157).

As of 30 July 2025: The Piprahwa gems, dug up by William Claxton Peppé in 1898 and kept by his family, came back to India after the government stopped their sale at Sotheby's Hong Kong that May. They returned through a private purchase by the Godrej Industries Group, so this colonial-era case ended in a sale, not a legal recovery.

Sources: NBC News, report on the return of the Piprahwa gems (https://www.nbcnews.com/world/asia/ancient-buddha-relics-sold-india-13-million-auction-postponed-rcna222148); Artnet News, on the return of the gems (https://news.artnet.com/art-world/buddha-gems-returned-sothebys-2672769).

As of 30 June 2026: A written Lok Sabha reply of 20 July 2026 put the total repatriated and authenticated since 2014 at 655. These counts change often, so read each with its date.

Sources: ETV Bharat, '615 Antiquities Repatriated From Various Countries From 2021 Till June 30 This Year', 20 July 2026 (https://www.etvbharat.com/en/bharat/several-antiquities-repatriated-from-various-countries-from-2021-till-june-30-this-year-government-tells-parliament-enn26072005462) [second-hand].

As of Standing position, checked 2 November 2026: No published count shows when the recovered items left India. Our inference is that most were stolen after Independence, because the ASI says it can pursue only antiquities illegally exported in violation of the Antiquities and Art Treasures Act, 1972, which leaves colonial-era removals largely outside these recoveries. The Culture Ministry said in 2016 that the ASI could not process the Koh-i-Noor because it left before Independence. Objects such as the Amaravati sculptures and the Sultanganj Buddha are left to diplomacy, and none of the five above has come back.

Sources: Orissa Post, 'Spell out efforts to bring back antiquities: CIC tells PMO' (https://www.orissapost.com/spell-out-efforts-to-bring-back-antiquities-cic-tells-pmo/amp/) [second-hand]; LiveLaw, 'Centre makes U-turn on Kohinoor Diamond', 19 April 2016 (https://www.livelaw.in/amp/centre-makes-u-turn-kohinoor-diamond-says-govt-stand-not-yet-conveyed-sc).

## Lost and introduced

### Lost: Land revenue and the settlements

The Company took its income from the land and settled it three ways. The Permanent Settlement of 1793 fixed the demand in Bengal, Bihar and Orissa for ever and made zamindars proprietors; ryotwari in Madras and Bombay assessed cultivators directly; the north-west assessed village communities. An estate that missed a payment could be auctioned, and the burden fell on cultivators whose rights were barely defined. Banerjee and Iyer (2005) find lower investment and yields after Independence in former landlord districts; Iversen, Palmer-Jones and Sen find no such effect once the Central Provinces are reclassified. How much of the legacy lasted is still argued.

Sources: The Fifth Report from the Select Committee on the Affairs of the East India Company, 1812 (Firminger ed., 1917), vol. I (https://archive.org/details/in.ernet.dli.2015.206958); Banerjee and Iyer, 'History, Institutions, and Economic Performance: The Legacy of Colonial Land Tenure Systems in India', American Economic Review 95(4), 2005 (https://pages.nyu.edu/debraj/Courses/Readings/BanerjeeIyer.pdf); Iversen, Palmer-Jones and Sen, re-examination of Banerjee and Iyer (https://papers.sioe.org/paper/943.html) [second-hand].

### Lost: Deindustrialisation

India was a major textile exporter in the early 1700s; by the mid-1800s it had lost its export market and much of its home market, mainly to Britain. Broadberry, Custodis and Gupta find "strong" deindustrialisation in the first three decades of the 1800s, an absolute fall in industrial output. They also find it modest, which goes against both Morris's denial and Bagchi's claim of a catastrophic collapse. Clingingsmith and Williamson give weight to Mughal decline and climate shocks as well as British factories.

Sources: Broadberry, Custodis and Gupta, 'India and the great divergence: An Anglo-Indian comparison of GDP per capita, 1600-1871', Explorations in Economic History 55 (2015), 58-75 (https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eeh.2014.04.003); Clingingsmith and Williamson, 'Deindustrialization in 18th and 19th century India: Mughal decline, climate shocks and British industrial ascent', Explorations in Economic History 45(3), 2008, 209-234 (https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/exehis/v45y2008i3p209-234.html) [second-hand].

### Lost: Indigenous schooling

William Adam's reports of 1835 to 1838 describe village schools spread across Bengal and Bihar. His famous 100,000 schools is an inference from about 150,000 villages, which he called a distant approximation, not a count. Macaulay's Minute of 2 February 1835 and the resolution of 7 March sent the Company's education money to English teaching. In 1931 Gandhi said British rule had uprooted this "beautiful tree"; Philip Hartog challenged him, and Dharampal's 1983 book gathers the British surveys on Gandhi's side. How much the schools taught, and how far they fell because of policy, is disputed.

Sources: Long (ed.), Adam's Reports on Vernacular Education in Bengal and Behar (1868) (https://archive.org/details/adamsreportsonve00adam); Sharp (ed.), Selections from Educational Records, Part I, 1781-1839 (1920) (https://archive.org/details/apwm_selections-from-educational-records-part-1-by-h.-sharp-1920-calcutta-superintend); Dharampal, The Beautiful Tree: Indigenous Indian Education in the Eighteenth Century (1983) [second-hand].

### Lost: Famine mortality

Maharatna's estimates for all India are 8.2 million deaths in 1876 to 1878, 2.6 to 4.1 million in 1896 to 1897, and 3.0 to 4.4 million in 1899 to 1900; Bengal in 1943 cost about 2.1 million more. Drought started most of these, and the argument is over what policy added: Davis blames doctrine and exports. On the other side stand the famine codes that followed 1880, and Roy credits the railways with ending dryland famines. Maharatna notes that India has had no famine of that scale since 1947.

Sources: Maharatna, The Demography of Indian Famines: A Historical Perspective (PhD thesis, LSE, 1992), Tables 1.1, 5.1 and 5.4 (https://researchonline.lse.ac.uk/id/eprint/132292/); Report of the Indian Famine Commission, Part I (1880), para. 81 (https://archive.org/details/dli.ernet.17292); Roy, 'Did the British loot India?', History Reclaimed, 2 November 2022 (https://historyreclaimed.co.uk/did-the-british-loot-india/).

### Lost: Artefacts

Objects of the first rank left India by treaty, excavation and plunder: the Koh-i-Noor by treaty, the Amaravati sculptures by excavation, Tipu's Tiger and the Lahore treasury as spoils of conquest. The British Museum said in 2010 that objects India had raised were acquired legitimately, and the Indian state's own recoveries are aimed at later thefts, so these objects stay where they are. Whether they count as loss, loot or shared heritage is the argument itself.

Sources: LiveLaw, 'Centre makes U-turn on Kohinoor Diamond', 19 April 2016 (https://www.livelaw.in/amp/centre-makes-u-turn-kohinoor-diamond-says-govt-stand-not-yet-conveyed-sc); The Tribune, report from London, 1 June 2010 (https://www.tribuneindia.com/2010/20100602/main5.htm); V&A, Maharaja Ranjit Singh's throne, museum number 2518(IS) (https://collections.vam.ac.uk/item/O18891/maharaja-ranjit-singhs-throne-throne-chair-hafiz-muhammad-multani/).

### Introduced: Railways and the telegraph

The first train ran from Bori Bunder to Thane on 16 April 1853, and by 1856 some 4,000 miles of telegraph joined Calcutta, Agra, Bombay, Madras and Peshawar. Donaldson (2018) finds railways cut trade costs and raised real incomes. Against that, they were built on a guaranteed five percent return paid from Indian revenue, which nationalists counted as part of the drain, and Davis argues that grain left famine districts on the same lines. Historians disagree on the net effect.

Sources: Danvers, Report to the Secretary of State for India in Council on Railways in India to the end of the year 1859 (1860) (https://archive.org/details/india.history.resource.109260); Shridharani, Story of the Indian Telegraphs: A Century of Progress (https://archive.org/details/in.ernet.dli.2015.242905); Donaldson, 'Railroads of the Raj: Estimating the Impact of Transportation Infrastructure', American Economic Review 108(4-5), 2018, 899-934 (https://www.aeaweb.org/articles?id=10.1257/aer.20101199) [second-hand]; Roy, 'Did the British loot India?', History Reclaimed, 2 November 2022 (https://historyreclaimed.co.uk/did-the-british-loot-india/); Davis, Late Victorian Holocausts: El Nino Famines and the Making of the Third World (2001) [second-hand].

### Introduced: Canals

The Ganges Canal, opened in 1854, was by the Imperial Gazetteer's account the first original irrigation work of any size in northern India, and the pattern for the great canals of the United Provinces and the Punjab. The Chenab Canal alone came to irrigate nearly two million acres. Whitcombe counts the cost in the north: salination, drainage problems and malaria. Imran Ali argues that the Punjab canal colonies, now in Pakistan, served imperial and landed interests before development. The gains were real but unevenly spread, and the Gazetteer's own figures have wells still watering about 30 percent of the irrigated area.

Sources: The Imperial Gazetteer of India, vol. III, The Indian Empire: Economic (1907), chapter on irrigation (https://archive.org/details/in.ernet.dli.2015.207356); Whitcombe, Agrarian Conditions in Northern India, vol. I (1972) [second-hand]; Ali, The Punjab under Imperialism, 1885-1947 (Princeton University Press, 1988) (https://press.princeton.edu/node/10664) [second-hand].

### Introduced: The census, the Survey of India and the ASI

The Survey dates from 1767, when James Rennell became Surveyor General of Bengal; the Great Trigonometrical Survey followed. The first all-India count, around 1872, was not taken on one date; the first synchronous census came on 17 February 1881. Alexander Cunningham's Archaeological Survey began in 1861, and much of this atlas rests on those three bodies. They were also tools of rule: Bernard Cohn and Nicholas Dirks argue that census categories turned fluid social identities into fixed ones, caste above all.

Sources: Survey of India, Who We Are (https://surveyofindia.gov.in/pages/who-we-are); Report on the Census of British India taken on the 17th of February 1881, vols I-III (https://ruralindiaonline.org/en/library/resource/report-on-the-census-of-british-india-taken-on-the-17th-of-february-1881-vols-i-iii/); Archaeological Survey of India, History (https://asi.nic.in/HQ/history-view/); Cohn, 'The Census, Social Structure and Objectification in South Asia', in An Anthropologist among the Historians (1987), 224-254 [second-hand]; Dirks, Castes of Mind: Colonialism and the Making of Modern India (Princeton University Press, 2001) [second-hand].

### Introduced: Universities

Following Wood's Despatch of 1854, universities opened at Calcutta on 24 January 1857, Bombay on 18 July and Madras on 5 September. They gave India a modern professional class that went on to lead much of the national movement. They also served a small English-educated minority while mass schooling stayed thin, so their net effect is read both ways.

Sources: Encyclopaedia Britannica, University of Calcutta (https://www.britannica.com/topic/University-of-Calcutta); GK Today, First Indian Education and University Milestones (https://www.gktoday.in/first-indian-education-and-university-milestones/) [second-hand].

### Introduced: A unified legal code

The Indian Penal Code of 1860, drafted under Macaulay's Law Commission in 1837, and the Evidence Act of 1872 gave British India one written criminal law. They also carried colonial purposes: the sedition offence was added in 1870, and personal law stayed separate for each religious community. The codes outlived the Raj by 77 years, until the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita and two companion laws replaced them on 1 July 2024. Whether that replacement changed more than the names is argued too.

Sources: Library of Congress, In Custodia Legis, 'Sedition Law in India' (https://blogs.loc.gov/law/2012/10/sedition-law-in-india/); LiveLaw, 'New Criminal Laws Replacing IPC, CrPC and Evidence Act To Come Into Force From July 1, 2024' (https://www.livelaw.in/amp/top-stories/new-criminal-laws-replacing-ipc-crpc-evidence-act-to-come-into-force-from-july-1-2024-250395).

## Languages

How many languages India has depends on where the line between language and dialect is drawn. Grierson's survey, the Census and Glottolog each draw it differently, so their numbers are not a trend. The Census itself warns that returned mother tongues need not match actual speech, and it groups them: Bhojpuri, with about 5 crore speakers, is counted under Hindi. The gap between 1,652 mother tongues in 1961 and 121 languages in 2011 is mostly a change in how the Census classifies, not languages dying out. The 1961 number is a list of mother-tongue names, so its nearest match in 2011 is 1,369, not 121. Since 1971 it has named separately only mother tongues with 10,000 speakers or more.

- Grierson's Linguistic Survey of India, published 1903 to 1928: 179 languages and 544 dialects. Sources: Digital South Asia Library, About the Linguistic Survey of India (https://dsal.uchicago.edu/books/lsi/about-lsi.html).
- Mother-tongue names published, Census 1961: 1,652, with no minimum number of speakers. Sources: Lok Sabha written answer on mother tongues in the Census (https://eparlib.nic.in/bitstream/123456789/652997/1/152098.pdf) [second-hand]; Deccan Herald, 'The nation and its languages' (https://www.deccanherald.com/opinion/the-nation-and-its-languages-3251161) [second-hand].
- Raw mother-tongue returns, Census 2011: 19,569. Sources: Census of India 2011, Paper 1 of 2018, Language: India, States and Union Territories (Table C-16) (https://new.census.gov.in/nada/index.php/catalog/42458/download/46089/C-16_25062018.pdf).
- Rationalised mother tongues, Census 2011: 1,369, with 1,474 further names left unclassified. Sources: Census of India 2011, Paper 1 of 2018, Language: India, States and Union Territories (Table C-16) (https://new.census.gov.in/nada/index.php/catalog/42458/download/46089/C-16_25062018.pdf).
- Mother tongues with 10,000 or more speakers, Census 2011: 270. Sources: Census of India 2011, Paper 1 of 2018, Language: India, States and Union Territories (Table C-16) (https://new.census.gov.in/nada/index.php/catalog/42458/download/46089/C-16_25062018.pdf).
- Languages, Census 2011: 121: 22 Scheduled and 99 non-Scheduled. Sources: Census of India 2011, Paper 1 of 2018, Language: India, States and Union Territories (Table C-16) (https://new.census.gov.in/nada/index.php/catalog/42458/download/46089/C-16_25062018.pdf).
- Share of people whose mother tongue is a Scheduled language, 2011: 96.71 percent. Sources: Census of India 2011, Paper 1 of 2018, Language: India, States and Union Territories (Table C-16) (https://new.census.gov.in/nada/index.php/catalog/42458/download/46089/C-16_25062018.pdf).
- Language-level entries tagged India, Glottolog 5.3 (2026): 485 by our count, including cross-border and extinct languages. Sources: Glottolog 5.3, CLDF release, languages table (https://github.com/glottolog/glottolog-cldf/releases/tag/v5.3); Glottolog, Downloads (https://glottolog.org/meta/downloads).

## How today's states were drawn

- 1947: British India is split into India and Pakistan on 15 August. Most of some 565 princely states have already acceded to one or the other; Junagadh, Hyderabad and Kashmir are still in contention. Sources: Indian Independence Act 1947 (https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/Geo6/10-11/30).
- 1948: Princely states are merged into provinces or grouped into new unions such as Rajasthan, Madhya Bharat and the Patiala and East Punjab States Union. Indian forces take Hyderabad in September. Sources: Menon, The Story of the Integration of the Indian States (1956) [second-hand].
- 1950: The Constitution of 26 January lists four kinds of unit: 9 Part A states from the old provinces, 8 Part B states from princely states and their unions, 10 Part C states, and the Andaman and Nicobar Islands in Part D. The United Provinces become Uttar Pradesh, and Cooch Behar goes to West Bengal. Sources: Constitution (Amendment of the First and Fourth Schedules) Order, 1950 (C.O. 3) (https://www.legitquest.com/act/constitution-amendment-of-the-first-and-fourth-schedules-order-1950/10023).
- 1953: The Andhra State Act takes the Telugu-speaking north of Madras State to form Andhra on 1 October, the first state of independent India made on language. Sources: The Andhra State Act, 1953 (30 of 1953) (https://www.indiacode.nic.in/bitstream/123456789/2176/1/A1953-30.pdf); The Constitution of India (as on 1 May 2024), First Schedule and footnotes (https://cdnbbsr.s3waas.gov.in/s380537a945c7aaa788ccfcdf1b99b5d8f/uploads/2024/07/20240716890312078.pdf).
- 1954: Bilaspur joins Himachal Pradesh on 1 July. Chandernagore, ceded by France, joins West Bengal on 2 October. Sources: The Himachal Pradesh and Bilaspur (New State) Act, 1954 (https://indiacode.nic.in/handle/123456789/1377?locale=en); Chandernagore (Merger) Act, 1954 (36 of 1954) (https://www.casemine.com/act/in/5a979d9e4a93263ca60b7152) [second-hand].
- 1956: On 1 November the States Reorganisation Act and the Seventh Amendment end the Part A, B and C system and redraw the map largely on language: 14 states and 6 union territories. Sources: The Constitution of India (as on 1 May 2024), First Schedule and footnotes (https://cdnbbsr.s3waas.gov.in/s380537a945c7aaa788ccfcdf1b99b5d8f/uploads/2024/07/20240716890312078.pdf).
- 1960: The Bombay Reorganisation Act splits Bombay into Maharashtra and Gujarat on 1 May: 15 states. Sources: The Constitution of India (as on 1 May 2024), First Schedule and footnotes (https://cdnbbsr.s3waas.gov.in/s380537a945c7aaa788ccfcdf1b99b5d8f/uploads/2024/07/20240716890312078.pdf).
- 1961: Dadra and Nagar Haveli becomes a union territory on 11 August. Goa, Daman and Diu, taken from Portugal in December, follows, with the Twelfth Amendment counting from 20 December. Sources: The Constitution of India (as on 1 May 2024), First Schedule and footnotes (https://cdnbbsr.s3waas.gov.in/s380537a945c7aaa788ccfcdf1b99b5d8f/uploads/2024/07/20240716890312078.pdf); Twelfth Amendment of the Constitution of India, Wikipedia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Twelfth_Amendment_of_the_Constitution_of_India) [second-hand].
- 1962: The Fourteenth Amendment makes the former French territory of Pondicherry a union territory, with effect from 16 August. Sources: The Constitution of India (as on 1 May 2024), First Schedule and footnotes (https://cdnbbsr.s3waas.gov.in/s380537a945c7aaa788ccfcdf1b99b5d8f/uploads/2024/07/20240716890312078.pdf).
- 1963: Nagaland is carved out of Assam and becomes the 16th state on 1 December. Sources: The Constitution of India (as on 1 May 2024), First Schedule and footnotes (https://cdnbbsr.s3waas.gov.in/s380537a945c7aaa788ccfcdf1b99b5d8f/uploads/2024/07/20240716890312078.pdf).
- 1966: The Punjab Reorganisation Act of 1 November creates Haryana as the 17th state, makes Chandigarh a union territory and passes the hill areas to Himachal Pradesh. Sources: The Constitution of India (as on 1 May 2024), First Schedule and footnotes (https://cdnbbsr.s3waas.gov.in/s380537a945c7aaa788ccfcdf1b99b5d8f/uploads/2024/07/20240716890312078.pdf).
- 1969: Madras State is renamed Tamil Nadu on 14 January. Sources: The Constitution of India (as on 1 May 2024), First Schedule and footnotes (https://cdnbbsr.s3waas.gov.in/s380537a945c7aaa788ccfcdf1b99b5d8f/uploads/2024/07/20240716890312078.pdf).
- 1971: Himachal Pradesh becomes the 18th state on 25 January. Sources: The Constitution of India (as on 1 May 2024), First Schedule and footnotes (https://cdnbbsr.s3waas.gov.in/s380537a945c7aaa788ccfcdf1b99b5d8f/uploads/2024/07/20240716890312078.pdf).
- 1972: The North-Eastern Areas (Reorganisation) Act of 21 January makes Manipur, Tripura and Meghalaya states, which brings the count to 21, and makes Mizoram and Arunachal Pradesh union territories. Sources: The Constitution of India (as on 1 May 2024), First Schedule and footnotes (https://cdnbbsr.s3waas.gov.in/s380537a945c7aaa788ccfcdf1b99b5d8f/uploads/2024/07/20240716890312078.pdf).
- 1973: Mysore is renamed Karnataka, and the Laccadive, Minicoy and Amindivi Islands become Lakshadweep, both on 1 November. Sources: The Constitution of India (as on 1 May 2024), First Schedule and footnotes (https://cdnbbsr.s3waas.gov.in/s380537a945c7aaa788ccfcdf1b99b5d8f/uploads/2024/07/20240716890312078.pdf).
- 1975: Sikkim, which voted on 14 April to end its monarchy and join India, becomes the 22nd state. The Thirty-sixth Amendment counts from 26 April; Sikkim marks 16 May as its statehood day. Sources: The Constitution of India (as on 1 May 2024), First Schedule and footnotes (https://cdnbbsr.s3waas.gov.in/s380537a945c7aaa788ccfcdf1b99b5d8f/uploads/2024/07/20240716890312078.pdf); 1975 in Sikkim, Wikipedia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1975_in_Sikkim) [second-hand].
- 1987: Mizoram and Arunachal Pradesh become states on 20 February, and Goa on 30 May, which makes 25 states. Daman and Diu stays a separate union territory. Sources: The Constitution of India (as on 1 May 2024), First Schedule and footnotes (https://cdnbbsr.s3waas.gov.in/s380537a945c7aaa788ccfcdf1b99b5d8f/uploads/2024/07/20240716890312078.pdf).
- 1992: The Sixty-ninth Amendment, in force from 1 February, gives Delhi its status as the National Capital Territory, with its own legislative assembly. It remains a union territory. Sources: The Constitution of India (as on 1 May 2024), First Schedule and footnotes (https://cdnbbsr.s3waas.gov.in/s380537a945c7aaa788ccfcdf1b99b5d8f/uploads/2024/07/20240716890312078.pdf).
- 2000: Three states are made in one month: Chhattisgarh from Madhya Pradesh on 1 November, Uttaranchal from Uttar Pradesh on 9 November, and Jharkhand from Bihar on 15 November. That makes 28 states. Sources: The Constitution of India (as on 1 May 2024), First Schedule and footnotes (https://cdnbbsr.s3waas.gov.in/s380537a945c7aaa788ccfcdf1b99b5d8f/uploads/2024/07/20240716890312078.pdf).
- 2007: Uttaranchal becomes Uttarakhand on 1 January, after Pondicherry became Puducherry on 1 October 2006. Sources: The Constitution of India (as on 1 May 2024), First Schedule and footnotes (https://cdnbbsr.s3waas.gov.in/s380537a945c7aaa788ccfcdf1b99b5d8f/uploads/2024/07/20240716890312078.pdf).
- 2011: Orissa is renamed Odisha on 1 November. Sources: The Constitution of India (as on 1 May 2024), First Schedule and footnotes (https://cdnbbsr.s3waas.gov.in/s380537a945c7aaa788ccfcdf1b99b5d8f/uploads/2024/07/20240716890312078.pdf).
- 2014: Telangana is carved out of Andhra Pradesh on 2 June as the 29th state. Hyderabad serves as joint capital for up to ten years. Sources: The Constitution of India (as on 1 May 2024), First Schedule and footnotes (https://cdnbbsr.s3waas.gov.in/s380537a945c7aaa788ccfcdf1b99b5d8f/uploads/2024/07/20240716890312078.pdf).
- 2015: The Hundredth Amendment, in force from 31 July, carries out the land boundary exchange with Bangladesh. The count of states does not change, but the territory of Assam, West Bengal, Meghalaya and Tripura does. Sources: The Constitution of India (as on 1 May 2024), First Schedule and footnotes (https://cdnbbsr.s3waas.gov.in/s380537a945c7aaa788ccfcdf1b99b5d8f/uploads/2024/07/20240716890312078.pdf).
- 2019: The Jammu and Kashmir Reorganisation Act ends the state on 31 October and makes two union territories, Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh: 28 states and 9 union territories. Sources: The Constitution of India (as on 1 May 2024), First Schedule and footnotes (https://cdnbbsr.s3waas.gov.in/s380537a945c7aaa788ccfcdf1b99b5d8f/uploads/2024/07/20240716890312078.pdf); The Jammu and Kashmir Reorganisation Act, 2019 (34 of 2019), India Code (https://www.indiacode.nic.in/handle/123456789/12030).
- 2020: Dadra and Nagar Haveli merges with Daman and Diu on 26 January into one union territory, which leaves 28 states and 8 union territories. Sources: The Constitution of India (as on 1 May 2024), First Schedule and footnotes (https://cdnbbsr.s3waas.gov.in/s380537a945c7aaa788ccfcdf1b99b5d8f/uploads/2024/07/20240716890312078.pdf); The Dadra and Nagar Haveli and Daman and Diu (Merger of Union territories) Act, 2019 (44 of 2019), India Code (https://indiacode.nic.in/handle/123456789/13079?locale=en).
- 2026: Kerala becomes Keralam on 25 August under the Kerala (Alteration of Name) Act, 2026. The count stands at 28 states and 8 union territories, and Jammu and Kashmir's statehood has not been restored as of 2 November 2026. Sources: The News Minute, 'Kerala is now officially Keralam as Union govt notifies name change' (https://www.thenewsminute.com/kerala/kerala-is-now-officially-keralam-as-union-govt-notifies-name-change) [second-hand]; AscentHR, 'Kerala Officially Renamed as Keralam' (https://ascent-hr.com/notification/kerala-officially-renamed-as-keralam/) [second-hand]; Deccan Herald, on Omar Abdullah's two years and statehood (https://www.deccanherald.com/india/jammu-and-kashmir/omar-abdullahs-two-years-will-delhi-restore-statehood-and-on-what-terms-4184887).

---
Content licence: CC BY-SA 4.0. Source repository: https://github.com/SkidGod4444/indianepics