Abstract
The history of education in India has been looked into with a view which has been narrow in its expanse, often missing out on many social categories which had a relatively limited, yet important, presence in colonial India. Sufficient attention has been paid to the official policies of the British Indian government (starting from Macaulay’s Minute). However, a critical analysis of it is assumed to be provided by the nationalist discourse, which is popularly perceived as almost an antithesis of colonial education. In the entire process, the discussion on education broadly gets limited to two sections – the ruler and the ruled, thereby eschewing the diversity within the realm of those seeking and providing education. In this paper, an attempt will be made to understand the emerging importance of ‘Europeans and Eurasians’ as a social category with a peculiar position in colonial India. Though technically part of the ruling ‘race’, their economic standing was not always congruent with their assumed racial superiority. Termed as ‘poor whites’ their presence in India posed challenges to the British government especially after the 1857 mutiny. Employed in the ‘communication network’ of the British Raj, their presence in postal, railways and telegraph departments was imperative for its successful working. The first part of the paper seeks to explore the making of these European and Eurasian communities in India. An official stand regarding schooling of European and Eurasian children was formulated for the first time through Canning’s Minute of 29 October 1860. Analysis of this Minute is vital to understand the very nature of education extended along with religious overtones providing these schools with a distinct identity and status. Using archival sources, this paper seeks to explore the making of distinct schools for them at hill stations and in the plains. Many of these hill schools still exist and have become a symbol of ‘modernity’. Quite ironically their association with the colonial past provides them with a certain elite reputation in independent India (where nationalism is closely tied to education). Analysis of this opens up scope to investigate the ways in which ‘modernity’ is not only understood but professed and adapted through such an educational setup.
Introduction
The history of education in India as an area of study is placed at an interesting juncture as it falls into two distinct yet interlinked disciplines, namely, history and education. Analysed from two different vantage points, the focus on the period of British domination has been intense. Both as part of history and as part of education, the emphasis has been to unravel, understand and explore the nature of educational policies formed and their impact. Though varied aspects of history of education are being explored the emphasis on policy formation seems to have occupied centre stage for a long time now as it is usually seen as a take off point from which the narrative begins. In most of the early books on the history of education 1 – which can actually be termed as textbooks – the treatment, more often than not, was very linear in nature. Starting from Macaulay’s Minute in 1835 as the launchpad and tracing subsequent committees and commissions had been the usual approach. The other significant strand to emerge (which is studied as a binary opposite to imperial views and policies on education) was the nationalist effort towards education. In certain ways nationalist views have often been pitted against the colonial standpoints with regard to education. In such a situation, the attention gets focussed on two blocks – the colonised and the coloniser – leading to neglect at two levels (which in turn makes the purview of education very restrictive and limited). Firstly, the heterogeneity and variety of opinions, action and implication within each category were often not recognised. Secondly, sections not corresponding to either of these blocks were conveniently overlooked. Thereby the diversity within the realm of those seeking and providing education got eschewed. This paper, therefore, attempts to understand and analyse efforts made for education of one such social category, namely, Europeans and Eurasians which in turn held a peculiar position in colonial India. 2 In my paper I will be looking at the making of distinct policy for schooling of European and Eurasian children in India. But before plunging into the policy itself, the making of European and Eurasian families in India needs to be looked into in order to appreciate the policy itself.
The advent of European companies in India entailed changes not only in trade relations and networks but in the social realm as well. With these companies came young boys/men of European origin, many of whom eventually spent the larger part of their lives in India. Apart from taking part in economic and political interactions, many of them established a domestic life in India with Indian women resulting in the creation of a population of mixed descent (initially referred to as Eurasians). Even though the Portuguese, Dutch, French and British all contributed to the formation of ‘Eurasian’ communities in India, it was in British India that this emerged as a sizeable community since the British stayed the longest. 3 Further, through the process of enculturation and acculturation (of both Europeans and their newly formed families with Indian women) a distinct Eurasian community with a distinct way of living was created. Apart from population of mixed descent, there were many Europeans in India who lived in poor conditions, living a life marked by vagrancy and unemployment. With no connections or family affiliations left in England, many Europeans lived in India for the rest of their lives.
These poor European expatriates have been termed as ‘poor whites’ by scholars. Though numerically a minor part of the British Indian population of the 20th century, both – European expatriates and Eurasians – played a pivotal role in the working of the Empire as they manned the lifelines of the Empire namely the postal, telegraph and railways services in India. Thus their importance can neither be neglected nor overlooked. What is important is to move beyond the simplistic division of colonial society into the colonised and the coloniser and recognise the importance of a population of mixed descent in the making of the colonial societies. Ann Stoler, in her article titled ‘Making Empire respectable’ (1989), points out that the assumed racial distinctness which the coloniser emphasised in the colony was a false premise in itself. For her the colonial authority was constructed on two powerful but false premises – first that the European community in the colony was a discrete biological entity, easily identifiable, and secondly, it represents a common class interest, racial attributes and political affinities and superior culture. Both of these were absent in India and moreover the Eurasian and European community within India was far from uniform. The diversity of opinions, needs and actions within this social category were very much evident. Biologically also the distinctness was absent. Thus, homogeneity was clearly not a marker of European settlement in India.
To add to this, the status of Europeans and Eurasians in India was intersected by contradictory positioning. In order to understand we actually need to break up the clubbing together of Europeans and Eurasians as a category. The social positions they held in the ‘colonial order of things’ varied. With regard to poor Europeans, racial relation to the ruling elite and consequent whiteness of skin made them assume a higher status than the natives. At the same time, their economic positioning made them the poorer among the ruling elites (and also among some natives), clearly contradicting their racial superiority. For Eurasians also, the tag of European descent meant a higher status. Thus, racially they were also a step higher than the natives but always a step lower than the European in social status. Very evidently therefore, the economic and racial status of poor Europeans and Eurasians were incongruent. As mentioned before, the homogeneity which might be expected as a marker of this social class appears to be a false assumption. Heterogeneity within the social category itself and also among each section of it was very much evident. To substantiate this point further, a look at the making of European and Eurasian families will be undertaken separately.
Poor Europeans
Poverty, destitution, unemployment, vagrancy and orphans are terms not usually associated with the lives of Europeans in India but these were very much part of the European settlement in India. Technically belonging to the ruling elite – Europeans were assumed to be well off economically but this was not the case for all. 4 A substantial number of ‘poor white’ did exist in India and posed a problem for the colonial state for more than one reason. David Arnold in his essay on colonial vagrancy in India highlights the life of poor whites in India (Arnold, 1979). The colonial rule in India, like in many other colonies, rested on the premise of European racial superiority. Linking race to pseudo scientific logic gave added strength to the racial purity/superiority notion. Now this image of superiority, strength and well-being was under attack with the presence of European paupers, orphans and vagrants on the roads of Indian cities (especially Madras, Calcutta and Bombay). Therefore efforts were made to diminish the visibility of the ‘improper European’ in the public sphere. Officially, important laws/acts were also formulated to make this possible – this was done through the European Vagrancy Act of 1869, 1871 and 1874. These acts were crucial for they made possible the creation of institutions, such as workhouses, where the vagrants were placed – a policy of maintaining visual absence – away from the eyes of both the coloniser and the colonised. 5 Interestingly, these acts provide us with variety among vagrants and the destitute. Arnold categorises the source of vagrants to two occupations and establishments – overseas sailing and the army. Apart from these, there were cases of affluent Europeans going bankrupt and misfortune leading to a sharp decline in economic status, bringing Europeans to near destitution and leaving them dependent on charity and government aid. Arnold makes a very important point regarding these poor Europeans; though detested, ignored and wished out of sight they had an important role to play in the colonial regime, i.e. they had a utility factor and were absorbed within the colonial order of things in some way or another. Thus they were not strictly deported. ‘The involvement of poor whites in the economy and control of colonial India was far more extensive and significant than has hitherto been realised. It has, indeed, been the victim of a stubborn myth of the empire’ (Arnold, 1979).
Making of the Eurasian population
As pointed out before, sexual contact between European men and Indian women was not unheard of. 6 The children of these alliances were of mixed descent and mostly married in the same community thereby leading to an increase in number, which was enough to form a community. To trace their history briefly, the union among European men and Indian women was not new and therefore it was not perceived/experienced by British officials as something sudden or unusual. In the initial phase of its presence, the English East India Company carried on with the existing system. However a significant change in attitude seems to have occurred with the American war of independence leading to a loss of American colonies and revolt/rebellion/upsurge by the population of mixed descent in Haiti in 1791. This was seen as a significant setback and thus with the coming in of Cornwallis and Wellesley to India ‘a collaborative Raj was phased out by a coercive Raj’ (Ghosh, 2006). They adopted certain measures to discourage such interactions and proximities, causing neglect and apathy towards Eurasians whose formation colonial authorities had encouraged earlier. One of the reasons was that there was doubt about the loyalty of the mixed race population as it was believed that their loyalty was compromised. Interaction and mingling of European men and Indian women was no longer viewed as a casual response to human need to cohabit; rather it became a cause of concern especially as the number of children of mixed descent was on the rise and the economic status of these Eurasian families was more towards deprivation and poverty. The reason given for regulating the private life or relationships of company officials with Indian women was ‘moral’, especially moral corruption; there were also concerns over social frontiers. Ghosh (2006) points out that these interracial marriages and the status of mixed race children posed a problem for the company state as the company state was responsible for managing the affairs. It is precisely such an attitude of neglect and apathy which forced the Eurasian community to think for itself and to form a community (Hawes, 1996). Thus came leaders like Rickets who put forth various demands and in the process the community’s identity assumed a distinct shape (the process of identity formation is interesting as it corresponds to two seemingly opposing processes at the same time – belonging and distinctness). Thus a community was born and efforts were made by the community itself and by the British Indian government to look to its welfare.
However with the revolt of 1857, the perception seems to have changed primarily due to two reasons – responding to the call of the blood and the shift of administration from the Company to the Crown. Retrospective narratives (by Eurasian scholars) asserted that during the tough time of the rebellion the Eurasians responded to the call of the blood and contributed to saving the empire. Thus the crown had to make efforts for their own well-being in future. Along with it the ‘racial’-connect became the central factor which made them the responsibility of the British government. Interestingly, the perception about them then took a reverse turn. Because they belonged/had racial closeness to the ruling race – their loyalty became their asset as it was neither doubted nor questioned. As a result, Eurasians found themselves in supervisory roles and also manned the ‘lifelines’ of the empire – postal services, railways, telegraphs, etc. Scholars such as P.J. Marshall (1997) and Laura Bear (2007), working on the history of the military and the railways in India, have attested to the presence of Eurasians as trusted employees. Due to all of these concerns, efforts towards the education of poor European and Eurasians became a topic of official discussion and policy formation.
Education policy
One thing which is striking if one takes a long-term view of the Eurasian/Anglo-Indian community is the importance given to education. Right from the late 18th century, efforts were underway to provide for their education. Most of the early attempts culminated in the formation of orphanages and asylums for the children of soldiers. 7 The system of childcare for children of poor British parents in India had two motives. One was philanthropic, i.e. moral responsibility, and the second was pragmatic – to tackle the huge and rising number of uneducated and unemployed descendants of British fathers. 8 Thus, by the 18th century, schools for Eurasians were made and were of three types – charity based, military based and privately funded. Some could sustain themselves but many diminished due to a lack of funding or cooperation within trusts and so on. It was only after the mutiny that the crown had to pay attention to the community, both as an obligation and a duty. 9 Hawes points out that the priority was always given to Europeans first and then Eurasians. Within Eurasians also, the differentiation between legitimate and illegitimate status had important repercussions. According to him, the list of references was based on who was most deserving and not on who was most needy. ‘Deserving’ were those who had followed the appropriate code of public behaviour, i.e. Christian marriage between British or European men and women (Hawes, 1996).
What is more important to note are the reasons provided for making and funding such institutes and what were actually the perceptions about education or why education was considered so important after all – was it just the idea/feeling of charity for the orphans – and Christian values which provide the motivation – or was something else also at work? One obvious answer which is relevant (in the present time as well) is that education opened doors to regular employment which meant regular income, thus providing the potential to ameliorate the poor from poverty. However, there could be other reasons as well. One may also argue that emphasis on education was actually a sign which indicated the growing coherence of Anglo-Indian society – due to which a demand or necessity of education was being formulated in writing. But the basic question remains – why was education so central to the community’s well-being and prosperity? This aspect needs to be researched further.
Two people who practically laid out the basis of school education for social category under consideration were Lord Canning and Bishop Cotton. 10 The latter in his letter laid out the basic structure and Canning’s Minute of 1860 provided formal sanction and coherence. The plan of action according to Bishop was to be as follows – first, earnest efforts have to be made to open a school in one of the hill stations located in the Himalayas – preferably Mussorrie or Simla. So, hilly environment would keep them away from the debilitating climate. This made health and morality intrinsically related and placement on hills was therefore considered a healthier option. Secondly, day school of a humbler kind may be built on the plains for the Christian children residing in the great cities, as a hill school may not provide immediately what the poor section of the European and Eurasian population actually require. From these schools, brighter students may be promoted to hill schools by giving appropriate scholarship. Clearly, a hierarchy within schools was part of the plan. Hill schools were not only prestigious but Bishop also realised that the hill schools would cater to the higher classes as well. Based on the initial plan drafted by Bishop Cotton, Lord Canning drafted his Minute. According to Frank Anthony (1969), it was this Minute which was the Magna Carta of the Anglo-Indian community. What were the various reasons which made Bishop Cotton and Viceroy Canning focus on poor European and Eurasian children? What did Canning Minute’s entail and what was the nature of the official policy which was formed? These and many other questions will be explored in subsequent pages. Keeping in mind the scope of this paper, I will limit myself to a few of the most revealing analyses from the Minute.
It was only with Canning’s Minute of 1860 that a concrete policy decision was initiated for the first time. The making of the Minute was interesting. It is not just a document laying down the rationale for educating this social category, but is in fact a reflection of the variety of perceptions among colonial actors/agents. Very often, while talking about India’s history during the time of British domination, ideas/concepts expressed by the ruling government were assumed to be given or already well constructed views (against which, most often, nationalist views were placed). However, this assumed construction of the imperialist stand was not predetermined but was formulated over a period of time. Also, neither were these ideas unchangeable. The analysis of Canning’s Minute followed by the decade-long implementation of it reflects not only the making of a colonial stand but also the variegated/diverse trajectory that lies between policy formulation – declaration and finally its implementation. The story behind the making of the Minute and efforts towards its implementation reflect this mosaic of influences and wishes which clearly break the monolithic-like image of colonial policy making and decision making.
Bishop Cotton had an extremely central role in this regard. He came to India in 1858/1859 and very early on in his career as the Bishop raised this issue. One of the earliest letters written by Cotton himself very meticulously laid out the need for such schools. This letter is in fact extremely interesting for more than one reason. It not only includes the viewpoints of officials belonging to various departments of the imperial machinery, but it is also representative of the variety of colonial attitudes towards poverty among Europeans and the poor population of mixed descent. Here are the first lines from the letter: Whatever may be our hopes of benefitting the natives of India by direct Missionary efforts, by education, by good Government, and by contact with European thought, it is quite certain that the conduct and character of the Christians settled among them must have the most direct influence on their estimate of Christianity and Western civilisation. If a generation calling itself Christian, and descended wholly or partly from European parents, grow up in ignorance and evil habits, the effect on the Heathen and Mahomedan population will be most disastrous … it is nothing less than a national sin to neglect a class who are our fellow Christian and fellow subjects, whose presence in India is due to entirely our occupation of the country, but who, unless real efforts are made for their good, are in great moral and spiritual danger.
11
In his letter the Bishop used testimonies from many people to establish the need for separate formal institutes. All these people highlight different aspects – a common thread being the dearth of institutes. But the different points they raise were equally important. The major concerns of officers across the spectrum were as follows: firstly, as part of a Christian population of India they need to be taken care of as the company and consequent English settlement in India were responsible for their creation. Secondly, Christians have an indirect/unconscious impact on the natives – they need to be portrayed and maintained in a respectable light so that the image of Christians remains dignified and respectable and something worth emulating. Thirdly, the mixing of the Christian population with the natives (especially Muslims) was something which was detested. But such interactions were clearly taking place and this was something which had to be controlled, restricted and curtailed. Fourthly, the hills were the rightful place where Europeans and Eurasians could gain their optimum development and remain healthy. So, a hilly environment would keep them away from the debilitating climate. This made health and morality something intrinsically related and placement on hills was therefore considered a healthier option. The letter, thus, lays out a variety of reasons (including apprehensions) for the creation of these schools. What it is important to realise is that one of the factors for education (and especially the setting up of distinct schools) is based on religious identity and its manifestation.
Based on the initial plan drafted by Bishop Cotton, Lord Canning drafted his Minute. Known as the Canning Minute and dated 29 October 1860, it is a landmark document for many reasons. As mentioned before it was first time that any official stand was taken by the British government in India regarding organising for the education of European and Eurasian children. However, a reading of the Minute reveals a lot about the imperial perception of poor Europeans and Eurasians. The Minute is not just a document elaborating on what to do but, more importantly, why and how.
Canning reiterates Bishop’s views that the Eurasians have a claim on the government: The Eurasian class have an especial claim upon us. The presence of a British government has called them into being: they serve the government in many respects more efficiently than the natives can do so: and they are a class which, whilst it draws little or no support from its connection with England, is without that deep root in and hold of the soil of India from which our Native public servants, through their families and relatives, derive advantage.
12
Moving on with the Minute, Canning further points out that: If measures for educating these children are not promptly and vigorously encouraged and aided by the government, we shall soon find ourselves embarrassed in all large towns and stations with a floating population of Indianized English, loosely brought up, and exhibiting most of the worst qualities of both races; whilst the Eurasian population, already so numerous that the means of education offered to it are quite inadequate, will increase more rapidly than ever … I can hardly imagine a more profitless, unmanageable community than one so composed. It might be long before it would grow to be what could be a class dangerous to the State; but a very few years will make it, if neglected, a glaring reproach to the government, and to the Faith which it will, however ignorant and vicious, nominally profess. On the other hand if cared for betimes, it will become a source of strength to British rule and of usefulness to India.
Canning also realises one important fact that the government is in no position to take on the entire responsibility for educating these children. Concerted efforts from all the three sections – community (interestingly not the missionaries as their task lies with the non-Christian population), significant individuals and the government are required to make the scheme successful. Thus, Bishop’s idea of including the efforts of all three stakeholders in creating the schools is endorsed completely by Canning. Government’s role, he points out, will be to support through grant in aid – adding equal amounts of money collected by private subscription as the building and foundation fund; from the opening of the school it should receive a grant in aid to the fullest extent allowed by the rules; if the school be built where ground is at the disposal of the government the ground should be given; the headmaster should be put on the footing of a government chaplain with regard to pension. The management however is to be subject to inspection by the government officers of the Education Department – these were the very foundations of the official policy.
With regard to schools in the plains, Bishop viewed it as a future and subsidiary step in the scheme but Canning gave it more importance: I am strongly of the opinion that Schools in the Plains, should be provided as soon, at least, as schools in the Hills. The expense of education at a Hill School must, at the lowest, be beyond the means of vast number of Eurasian families settled at the great Provincial Stations. The climate of the Hills is not a necessity to Eurasian children; indeed it is held to be injurious to them, if at all weakly. A School for the lower class than that proposed for the Hills could, if placed at a well-chosen Station in the Plains, receive the day scholars of that station, and boarder from many other stations, on terms not too high for the earnings of their parents. I believe that the cost to boarders at such a school could be brought down to less than 10 Rupees a month. Such a School might receive European as well as Eurasian children; for, although the advantage of a Hill climate would be wanting, the children would not be worse off in this respect than their homes … but in any case I should be sorry to see the humbler and cheaper schools in the plains postponed to those in the Hills … this being so we ought not to begin from the top only. … the Schools now contemplated are not Charitable institutions; they are designed for a particular class, the families composing which can supply abundance of Scholars of the Church of England, and which, for the most part, would not willing to pay for the teaching of a School which was not essentially of that Church. I have no doubt that an attempt to accommodate such Schools to the teaching of children of all Churches would lead to its failure … but … I am of the opinion that the Government of India cannot with justice limit its support to these Schools alone. The very large number of Eurasian Roman Catholic scattered throughout the Upper Provinces, and employed under the Government, and the not inconsiderable number of Presbyterians settled in the country have their claims upon the government as well as the members of Church of England … assistance in the same form … should be extended to any Roman Catholic or Presbyterian School or any other school of a lower class …
Interestingly, all official policies use liberal, ideal language and expression. Legitimation is based on the fact that the step taken will be for betterment of not only the class under consideration but also the natives – as they get to interact with the Europeans and Eurasians. So betterment of one will automatically lead to betterment of the other. It is almost as if by virtue of being a European or Eurasian (even though poor) they have the power to influence and ‘civilise’ the natives.
One of the most important letters in this regard was written by Bishop Cotton to the Secretary of State of the Government of India. In this letter he expressed his wishes and intentions regarding the school at Jutog, Simla. Though these are specifically about the Simla School they are reflective of certain crucial aspects related to the understanding of how a school should be; what all should it constitute; and what terms need to be used.
With regard to the objective, Bishop opines that, ‘the general object is to found a School for what may be called the middle class of European and Eurasian residents in India … with the object to charge as low as possible’. Interestingly, with regard to pupils, ‘the first object (of the Simla School) is to train children to be, by God’s blessing, earnest and thoughtful Christians, and it is undoubtedly intended that the teaching should be that of the English Church’.
14
With regard to the religious constitution of schools which will fall within the purview of the Minute, the following defined rules seem to be desirable by the Bishop: … daily prayers, and spiritual instruction shall be regularly given, which all the scholars shall attend without exception. The chaplain of the station shall also be ex-officio member of the school committee, and the Master shall be a communicant of the English Church. Regular instruction shall be given at certain times in the Catechism and prayer book …
Even in contemporary times, the motto of many hill schools established during colonial times retains religious tones, however, they are well adapted to the postcolonial milieu and reflect the way modernity is understood in contemporary times. Sanjay Seth (2008), in his book titled Subject Lessons: The Western Education of Colonial India, views colonialism as a pedagogic enterprise where aspects of British rule were not only seen as justifying themselves but were also seen to have educative value, i.e. to educate the ‘natives’. Schools and colleges thus became one the most obvious agents of this pedagogic exercise. Interestingly, the knowledge disseminated and ‘education’ thus ‘imparted’ had unexpected repercussions and were used in varieties of ways by the colonised leading to anxieties, apprehension and dissatisfaction among the coloniser about the effect of such an enterprise. Therefore the very concept of western ‘knowledge’ as an unchanging, static construct needs to be problematised. In the process he not only problematises the popularly assumed correlation between western education and coming in of modernity in the colony but also investigates the variegated understanding of being modern. It is precisely this aspect of modernity in postcolonial India which can be investigated by looking at educational setups such as these hill schools and the way they construct and accommodate changing ways of perceiving and implementing modernity.
Conclusion
To conclude therefore, instead of taking Canning’s Minute as a simple piece of policy decision, analysis of its formulation has the potential to reveal the ways in which various colonial actors viewed the same policy (from different vantage points). Bishop Cotton’s concern was for the fellow Christian population in India which was formed due to the Company’s presence and which in turn had the potential to influence the native’s perception about the superior English race. Thus, the idea of Christian image and identity became extremely crucial. For Canning, formation of a community of mixed race without strong ties to either of the races meant a direction-less mass of people – uneducated and unemployed – most likely to become a great cause of concern for the administrators. For Charles Wood however, the policy thus formulated for Europeans and Eurasians was essentially marked by its non-military background. Such an analysis also reveals the way in which the same social category – namely Europeans and Eurasians – were perceived. An analysis of Bishop Cotton’s ideas about school and its content, and also the ways in which the Minute was perceived by officers in various provinces, and the nature of schools thus envisioned, clearly show the closeness of schools and religious values. The relationship between church and the schools thus formed is something which needs to be explored further. Though the link may be assumed to be natural in some sense as the cross always followed the crown (previously the company too) but the way it manifests itself in various aspects of schooling such as ideal teacher, school as a social space, the idea of the pupil, the curriculum of the school, the aim of education itself, needs to be explored further.
However, what becomes relevant to note is the fact that some of the hill schools formed through the above discussed policy still exist and are thriving. One may wonder what such research would offer in contemporary times. Independent India not only ascribes to a secular outlook (simultaneously providing space for minorities to safeguard their interests and identities), but also has a nationalist outlook. What can be researched further are the ways in which educational setups such as these hill schools contribute towards the understanding of what constitutes ‘modernity’ in postcolonial, independent India. The link with the colonial past is not simply replaced by a nationalist outlook but gets accommodated in a variety of ways for which straightforward explanations or assumptions do not suffice. For example, they represent high status, elite culture and a distinct identity in which discipline, manners, etiquettes, independence and national outlook are a few of the defining adjectives. Considered to be catering to the elites in colonial times, the link with the colonial past adds to their legacy and reputation. Even though some of them were made precisely for the non-elite Europeans and Eurasians, the products of these schools, i.e. students, represent postcolonial modern Indian. Though no longer expressed only in religious terms, the values professed and preferred somewhere reflect the understanding of what constitutes ‘modernity’ with English medium education as one of its central aspects. Somewhere the popular (though not accurate or easily acceptable) correlation between westernised education and modernity is not only assumed but favoured. Similarly, the link with the colonial past does not entail repulsion but adds to prestige. Future research endeavours should aim at an in-depth analysis of the ways in which these schools (and other educational institutions) have placed themselves in postcolonial setup and will provide us with insights into the making of modern India.