As the twentieth century came about, South Asia’s nineteenth-century anti-colonial struggles evolved into organized nationalist movements, such as the Indian National Congress (INC), religious revivalist movements, and the Swadeshi movement. These movements shaped a collective national consciousness in the face of British economic exploitation of the South Asian subcontinent.

In 1871, Dadabhai Naoroji, an early Indian nationalist who would later become the President of the INC, articulated the “Pros and Cons of British Rule” in India.^[1] He appreciated the benefits of British rule, yet also stated that “the natives call the British system Sakar ki Churi – the knife of sugar – … [because] there is no oppression, it is all smooth and sweet, but it is the knife, notwithstanding.”^[2] In Naoroji’s eyes, the primary disadvantage of British rule was the economic exploitation of India. The British claimed, “that the unilateral transfers of funds from India to Britain” were solely “returns on capital and payments for services rendered,” but nationalists like Naoroji argued that “the wealth drained away represented a potential investible surplus which would have contributed to economic development if it had remained within the country.”^[3] Many peasants fell into debt due to the British regime’s exploitative economic policies, such as heavy taxation of the peasantry.^[4] Accordingly, Naoroji argued that the British must satisfy Indians’ political aspirations and rights by giving them “a fair share” in their country’s legislation and administration.^[5] He further asserted that it is Britain’s duty to provide Indians with a government that enables them “to pay…the tribute or price for the rule…without starving or dying by famine.”^[6] It was against this backdrop of economic challenges and calls for increased Indian involvement in government that the INC, religious revival movements, and the Swadeshi movement emerged.

The Indian National Congress was founded by Allan Octavian Hume, a retired British Indian Civil Service officer.^[7] The INC was a space for educated Indians to engage in political discussions, and its initial aim was the Indianization of government services; this aspiration was reflected in the slogan “No taxation without representation.”^[8] The forum employed various strategies to shape the national consciousness; namely, it increased public education, conducted awareness-building lectures across Britain, deployed Vernacular and English newspapers critiquing government policies, and filed formal requests to investigate public grievances.^[9] In addition to these tactics, the INC’s strength lay in garnering support from participants of local organizations – i.e. the Triplicane Literary Society, Mahajana Sabha, Indian Association of Lahore, and Deccan Education Society – which represented Indians’ interests in government.^[10] The INC insisted that “interests of self, caste, and community be subordinated to the ‘public good’ and the Indian nation.”^[11] This vision reflected a limitation as it did not account for various Indians’ belief that “identity rested in one’s religious community.”^[12] Hence, the INC was largely unsuccessful at “drawing Muslims into their meetings…as many Muslim leaders argued that Congress could not be the spokesman for the interests of the two distinct ‘communities’ that comprised India.”^[13] These leaders regarded India as “a bride which has…two beautiful and lustrous eyes – Hindus and Mussalmans.”^[14] They disagreed with the INC’s vision that the British model of representative government was well-suited for India, opposing the idea of a majoritarian government and instead pressing for a model that reflected India’s communality.^[15] However, the lack of Muslim support also presented a strength for the INC, as by “eschewing all matters of religious controversy and social reform,” the forum was able to focus on other pressing issues instead. The INC positioned itself as a “loyal opposition” and deployed petitions supporting decreasing army expenditures at a time when Indian troops were being deployed to Burma.^[16] On balance, the INC shaped national consciousness as it echoed the idea advanced by Naoroji in 1871 that Indians deserve to participate in their nation’s government.

Religious revival movements also played a role in shaping national consciousness. Such movements featured in both the Hindu and Muslim folds. In the face of British colonialism, thinkers in both folds spoke for tradition in the context of what was modern. They wished to continue “with…tradition (in terms of texts, ritual, social life, and institutions) and yet, simultaneously, their self-conscious participation in the new world around them.”^[17] In the Hindu fold, reform movements such as the Arya Samaj and Ramakrishna Mission emerged. The Arya Samaj supported reforms concerning women as it opposed child marriage, supported widow remarriage, and encouraged educating women.^[18] In an effort to combat increased conversion to Christianity and Islam, they established new rituals of conversion to Hinduism – i.e. shuddhi – and supported the purification of lower castes.^[19] The Arya Samaj turned to the Vedas as a central religious text, and it opposed idolatry.^[20] This strong opposition to idolatry limited the Arya Samaj’s support base.^[21] The Ramakrishna Mission, on the other hand, supported idolatry and caste while also supporting Western institutions; the Mission’s leader contributed to a sense of pride in the Hindu religion as he represented it at Chicago’s World Parliament of Religions in 1893.^[22] Similarly, in the Muslim fold, movements associated with Deoband and Ahl-e-Hadith emerged; the Deobandi seminary taught classical Islamic texts but utilized the British classroom style.^[23] Both Hindu and Muslim revival movements also involved creating the ‘new woman.’ These women were to be modern while embodying traditional values; to illustrate, they were to be educated yet primarily remain in their homes under their husband’s control.^[24] Women’s literacy was preached to the female masses by the Begum of Bengal and Pandita Ramabhai.^[25] On balance, in both the Hindu and Muslim folds, revival movements emphasized the importance of religion in identity, blended traditional religious beliefs with British institutions, and reinvented the role of women. This blend of Indian culture and British institutions shaped national consciousness. The divides that would emerge between Hindus and Muslims – as exhibited by the 1893 riots surrounding cow protection – would also inform the national consciousness.^[26]

From 1805-1905, Indian nationalism was led by the Moderates, i.e. educated middle-class professionals of whom many had studied in Britain.^[27] However, the early twentieth century witnessed a transition to radical nationalism. This transition was influenced by various events during the 1890s to early 1900s, including the 1891 Age of Consent Bill and the Partition of Bengal. The Age of Consent Bill sparked social unrest between conservatives who opposed increasing the consummation age, and reformists who cited the Dharmashastras to say it was in line with Hindu beliefs; an important result of this controversial bill was that Hinduism emerged as a powerful rhetoric to oppose foreign rule.^[28] Meanwhile, in Bengal, opposition arose in response to British Acts that reduced elected representatives, placed Calcutta University under government control, and restricted press freedom.^[29] Both the Age of Consent Bill and the Acts imposed in Bengal involved opposition to colonial interference in society, shaping the national consciousness.

The subsequent Partition of Bengal in 1905 weakened the INC’s leadership in the region and further fueled anti-colonial nationalism.^[30] The 1904 Russo-Japanese War further encouraged Indian leaders to pursue self-rule, and their efforts resulted in the INC splitting into two groups: the Moderates and Extremists; the Extremists founded the Swadeshi Movement.^[31] The Swadeshi movement involved the boycott of British goods and the emergence of the nationalist slogan “Bande Mataram.”^[32] Through this movement, the nationalist agenda transitioned from solely seeking increased Indian involvement in government to swaraj, i.e. complete self-rule.^[33] While religious revival movements focused on bringing back original Hindu traditions, Swadeshi nationalists like Bal Gangadhar Tilak transformed the Ganesh and Shivaji religious festivals into arenas for political discourse.^[34] The Swadeshi movement yielded the envisioning of a new India that, as explained by Bipin Chandra Pal, would combine “the ancient spiritual treasures of the Hindus…the higher elements of Muhammadan culture…and…ideals of modern European civilization.”^[35] Nonetheless, Hindu-Muslim differences remained, as while Muslim leaders like Sayyid Ahmad Khan supported the idea of an Indian nation, they continued to oppose the notion of a majoritarian government that would advantage the Hindus and disadvantage Muslims.^[36]

On balance, in the late nineteenth century, the British colonial state’s economic exploitation of India fueled calls for increased Indian participation in government. This aspiration yielded the formation of the Indian National Congress, which employed petitions and education to advance its ideals. While the INC took a secular approach, religious revival movements focused on strengthening the religious aspect of Indian identity by blending ancient tradition with modern institutions. These movements also yielded a new role for women. Finally, as the 20^th century began, the Partition of Bengal sparked a divide between Moderate and Extremist nationalists, yielding the Swadeshi movement and calls for swaraj, i.e. self-rule. These movements all shaped the national consciousness as they preached economic and social nationalism.

Bibliography

Bose, Sugata, and Ayesha Jalal. 2004. Modern South Asia: History, Culture, Political Economy. Florence: Taylor & Francis Group. Accessed February 17, 2025. ProQuest Ebook Central.