History, asked by tahniaferdous, 5 months ago

give the contribution of any anglicists​

Answers

Answered by 26kleinc
1

Answer:

By 1834 the British Empire's growing interest in India had spread to native education. At the time, William

Bentinck, the Governor-General of India, was trying to decide whether native Indians seeking higher education

should be educated in English, the Anglicist position, or in Arabic and Sanskrit, the Orientalist position. His

advisors who composed the General Committee of Public Instruction were equally divided. Scholars once argued

that it was the arrival of Thomas Macaulay as a legal advisor and his essay on the subject in February of 1835 that

tipped the balance in the Anglicist direction, resulting in Bentinck's Resolution of March 1835. More recent

scholars have pushed Macaulay's "Minute on Indian Education" into the background and have argued; instead,

that Bentinck had already effectively made his Anglicist decision before Macaulay even arrived. Recent

scholarship; however, has not sufficiently taken into account the persuasive force of Macaulay's imperial rhetoric.

Though Bentinck was clearly in favor of the Anglicist position even before he read the "Minute", it was Macaulay's

uniquely unrestrained ability to explain why, as he so famously wrote in his "Minute", that "a single shelf of a good

European library was worth the whole native literature of India and Arabic" and thus why the education of Indians

should be taught English.

In "Bentinck, Macaulay and the Introduction of English Education in India" Suresh Ghosh argued that "Bentinck had

been steadily pursuing a policy of gradual introduction of English education in India since 1829."[1] He was a firm

believer in Utilitarian principles and took advantage of the peaceful times of his governor-generalship to mobilize

these principles against what were considered the "social evils" of India. Bentinck outlawed Sutee, the burning of

widows, in 1829 and also took measures to curb Thugi, the practice of ritual murder.[2] Because Bentinck had a

history of attacking what he saw as barbaric practices, it seems obvious, Ghosh argued, that he would have formed

his own Anglicist opinions about education. "General Education is my [Bentinck's] panacea for the regeneration of

India. The ground must be prepared and the jungle cleared away before the human mind can receive, with any

prospect of real benefit, the seeds of improvement."[3] Even before Macaulay, Bentinck had opened subordinate

positions in judicial and revenue sections of the government to natives who had an understanding of English. "It is

the wish and admitted policy of the British Government to render its own language gradually and eventually the

language of public business throughout the country," wrote Bentinck.[4] However, when Bentinck came to power,

the Orientalists held a majority on the General Committee and the Governor-General could not initiate any major

changes in this area without the permission of the Board of Directors of the East India Company in London. This

was an issue because when Bentinck signed the Resolution, he did so without their involvement.[5] According to

Ghosh, Bentinck did it without the Board's consent because he had thoughts of retiring his post as GovernorGeneral after the Tories returned to power earlier in the year. "He did not want to leave the fate of a subject so

dear to his heart to a successor and acted immediately in coming to a decision."

Explanation:

Similar questions