History › Age of revolutions › New Imperialism: European empires at their peak
British Raj in India
company rule from 1757; Crown rule 1858–1947· Empire, kingdom or state· Asia
Well documentedSolid records, physical evidence or scientific consensus.
British rule over the Indian subcontinent, first by the East India Company from 1757, then directly by the Crown from 1858 to 1947.
See it on the History map →What happened
After winning the Battle of Plassey in 1757, the East India Company became ruler of Bengal and then most of India. A great revolt in 1857 by Indian soldiers (sepoys) and others was crushed, and in 1858 the British government took over; Queen Victoria became Empress of India in 1877. Britain built railways, ports, universities and a civil service, and drew heavy revenue from India. Independence came in 1947, with partition into India and Pakistan.
Why it matters
It made India the center of Britain's empire, spread the English language and British-style law, and shaped modern India, Pakistan, Bangladesh and Myanmar. Partition displaced an estimated 10 to 20 million people.
How we know
Huge government archives in London and Delhi, censuses from 1871 onward, parliamentary papers, Indian newspapers and memoirs, and economic data on trade, taxes and famines.
Still debated
Its economic effect is fiercely debated: did British rule modernize India or impoverish it? Estimates of famine deaths and of wealth 'drained' to Britain vary widely.
Connections (3)
▸Mughal Empire was replaced by the British Raj in IndiaWell documented
The connection
As Mughal authority fragmented after Emperor Aurangzeb's death in 1707, regional rulers and the East India Company filled the gap. In 1765 the Mughal emperor granted the Company the right to collect Bengal's taxes. After the 1857 revolt, the British exiled the last emperor, Bahadur Shah II, and the Crown took over in 1858.
When and how
Delhi and Bengal, 1707 to 1858: the Battle of Plassey (1757), the Company's tax grant, called the diwani (1765), and the 1857 uprising.
How we know
The 1765 grant, Company and Crown records, Mughal court chronicles, and the 1858 trial of Bahadur Shah II and his exile to Rangoon.
Debates and open questions
Was the empire already collapsing, or still resilient until British expansion? Many historians now see the 1700s as a time of dynamic regional states, not simply decline.
▸British Raj in India was the crown jewel of New Imperialism: European empires at their peakMostly agreed
The connection
India was Britain's most valuable possession, with nearly 300 million people by 1900. Indian taxes paid for a large army used across Asia and Africa, and India bought British goods. Protecting the routes to India, through Suez, Egypt and South Africa, drove much of Britain's further expansion. Queen Victoria became Empress of India in 1876.
When and how
British India, 1858–1947; Disraeli's government gave Victoria the title Empress of India in 1876; the 'jewel in the crown' phrase became common later.
How sure are we?
Trade and tax figures, Indian Army deployment records, and statements such as Viceroy Lord Curzon's 1901 remark that losing India would make Britain a third-rate power.
Debates and open questions
How much Britain actually profited from India, and how much wealth was drained from it, is debated; estimates differ enormously.
▸British Raj in India was ended by Indian independence and PartitionWell documented
The connection
British rule over India grew from East India Company conquests in the 1700s to direct Crown rule from 1858. The independence movement grew from the 1885 founding of the Indian National Congress. After World War II, an exhausted Britain, facing mass protest and a 1946 naval mutiny, handed power to India and Pakistan in August 1947.
When and how
Delhi and London, 1945–47; Prime Minister Clement Attlee, the last viceroy Lord Mountbatten, and Indian leaders Nehru, Jinnah and Gandhi shaped the handover.
How we know
The Indian Independence Act passed by Parliament in July 1947, British cabinet papers, and the official Transfer of Power documents published later.
Debates and open questions
Whether Britain left mainly because of Indian pressure or its own postwar weakness is debated, as is whether the rushed timetable worsened the Partition violence.