This chapter examines the growth and transformation of cities under colonial rule, from the late eighteenth century to the twentieth century. The British established new cities, such as Calcutta, Bombay and Madras, which grew from small fishing villages and trading posts into great port capitals of the empire. At the same time, older cities such as Delhi, Varanasi, Lucknow and many others were transformed - pulled down, rebuilt, and remodelled to serve the new needs of the colonial state. The chapter studies colonial urbanisation through the changing streets, buildings, institutions and social worlds of these cities.
The chapter stresses that colonial cities were not simply European cities transplanted to India. They were hybrid spaces, shaped by the meeting of British power and Indian society, by the needs of trade, administration, health and defence, and by the everyday lives of the millions who lived and worked in them. The history of these cities is told through maps, photographs, town planning reports, censuses, and the architecture itself, which survive as documents of the colonial past.
The British East India Company's first settlements were trading posts, established at Madras (1639), Bombay (1661) and Calcutta (1690). These grew into the great port cities of the empire, the centres of trade, banking, administration and the military. Their growth was dramatic: Calcutta, the capital of British India until 1911, was described as the second city of the British empire, and Bombay grew into the commercial and financial capital of India. The port cities were the engines of colonial economy, through which exports and imports flowed.
These port cities were economically oriented towards the sea, the empire and the world market, rather than towards the Indian hinterland. They developed a distinctive urban culture, with European quarters, churches, clubs, courts, banks and racecourses, alongside the crowded Indian quarters of the bazaars. The presence of the port and the customs house, the army cantonment and the government buildings all stamped these cities with the character of the empire.
While the port cities were new, the older towns of India were transformed by colonial rule. Delhi, for example, was the capital of the Mughal empire, but after the Revolt of 1857 the British pulled down large parts of the city, especially around the Red Fort, to make way for the British army and for new roads and railway lines. Similar demolitions occurred at other centres, as the British sought to make the old cities safe for their administration, trade and defence.
The transformation of the old cities is visible in their architecture and layout. New buildings - railway stations, post offices, law courts, colleges and town halls - were erected in European styles, standing out among the older buildings. The railways, introduced from the 1850s, had a particularly dramatic effect: they broke through the old city walls, shifted the centres of commercial activity, and brought new crowds, new industries and new suburbs into being. The railway station, often built in a grand style, became a symbol of the new order.
Colonial town planning was driven by the concerns of health, sanitation and order, especially after the devastating famines and epidemics of the nineteenth century. The colonial authorities worried that the overcrowded "native quarters" were unhealthy and disorderly, and they undertook schemes of "improvement": clearing congested areas, laying out new roads, providing water supply and drainage, and creating parks and gardens. In Bombay, for example, the municipality reclaimed land from the sea and laid out the city with its long promenades.
These schemes were often imposed without consulting the residents, and they frequently displaced large populations. The colonial town planning embodied a particular vision of the city, one in which European notions of order, health and beauty were applied to Indian conditions. The results were mixed: some improvements genuinely benefited public health, but they also reinforced the separation between the European and Indian parts of the city, and they reflected the colonial belief in the superiority of European urbanism.
The most dramatic story of colonial urbanism is that of Delhi. In 1911, the British decided to shift their capital from Calcutta to Delhi, and they planned a new imperial city, New Delhi, to be built south of the old city of Shahjahanabad. The architect Edward Lutyens designed New Delhi with its grand central vista, the Rajpath, leading from the Viceroy's House (now Rashtrapati Bhavan) to the India Gate, with broad avenues and monumental government buildings.
New Delhi was planned as a symbol of imperial power. Its buildings were massive, symmetrical and set far apart, dwarfing the individual and expressing the permanence and glory of the empire. The construction of New Delhi took two decades, from 1911 to 1931, and it was built by Indian labour, while the design and the vision were entirely European. New Delhi and old Delhi existed side by side, two cities within one, each expressing a different world.
The historian studies colonial cities through a range of sources: maps and surveys, town planning reports, municipal records, censuses, photographs and paintings, and the buildings themselves. The maps made by the British, such as the detailed survey maps of Calcutta and Delhi, are particularly valuable: they show the streets, the blocks, the institutions and the density of population, allowing the historian to reconstruct the physical city as it was.
Photographs are another rich source. From the mid-nineteenth century, the British photographed their cities extensively, recording the public buildings, the streets, and sometimes the ordinary people. These photographs both document the city and present it from the viewpoint of the coloniser, often emphasising the grandeur of the British public buildings and the "picturesque" poverty of the Indian quarters. Like all sources, they must be read critically.
A striking feature of colonial cities was the segregation of the population. The port cities were divided into the European town and the Indian town, separated by boundaries of race, class and sanitation. In the nineteenth century, this segregation was formalised by cantonments and civil lines, which housed the British army and officials, and by the new suburbs, which attracted wealthy Indians, while the crowded old quarters housed the poor.
The urban population was also divided by caste, community and occupation. Cities drew migrants from the countryside, and the growing labour force of coolies, construction workers and mill hands lived in crowded, unsanitary tenements. The colonial city was thus a world of extremes: magnificent public buildings and parks for the few, and overcrowded, disease-ridden quarters for the many. The census reports of the colonial period document these divisions in detail.
The colonial cities were deeply affected by the famines and epidemics of the late nineteenth century. The terrible famines of 1866, 1876-78, 1896-97 and 1899-1900 drove millions of starving peasants to the cities in search of relief, and the cities were overwhelmed. At the same time, the cities themselves suffered from cholera, plague and other epidemics, and the colonial authorities responded with draconian measures of quarantine and the demolition of "insanitary" housing.
The plague of Bombay in 1896 is a famous example. The plague, which swept the city, led to the imposition of strict measures of segregation, the burning of infected houses and the evacuation of whole districts. These measures, and the urban improvements that followed, showed the reach of the colonial state into the most intimate spaces of city life. The city, in the colonial imagination, was both the pride of the empire and its constant anxiety.
Not all colonial urban growth was directed by the British. Indian merchants, princes and philanthropists also built and transformed cities. Bombay's textile mills, financed by Indian capital, transformed the city and created a vast industrial working class. The cotton mills of Ahmedabad, another colonial city, were owned and run by Indian industrialists. The mercantile communities of the port cities - Parsis, Marwaris, Gujaratis, Chettiars - accumulated wealth and built impressive houses, temples, and public institutions.
The Indian princes also built new capitals, such as Jaipur's later extensions and Mysore city, and Indian philanthropists founded schools, colleges, hospitals and parks. The chapter stresses that colonial cities were not simply imposed on a passive society; they were created through the interaction of colonial power and Indian agency, and they reflected the ambitions of both.
The colonial city has left an enduring legacy. The port cities remain the great commercial capitals of independent India, and the architecture of the British era - the railway stations, the courts, the colleges, the clubs - still dominates many city centres. The planned New Delhi continues to serve as the capital of India, and the great public buildings of the empire have been taken over by the institutions of the republic.
At the same time, the colonial city's problems have also persisted: the gap between the planned centre and the unplanned periphery, the segregation of rich and poor, and the struggle for housing, water and sanitation. The history of the colonial city is therefore not merely a matter of the past; it explains much about the Indian city of today, its monuments, its inequalities and its continuing transformation.
| City | Foundation / Growth | Character |
|---|---|---|
| Madras | 1639, trading post | Early Company settlement |
| Bombay | 1661, dowry to Charles II | Commercial and financial capital; mills |
| Calcutta | 1690, Company trading post | Capital of British India until 1911 |
| New Delhi | Planned 1911-1931 | Imperial capital, Lutyens' design |
| Feature | Colonial Character |
|---|---|
| Railways | From 1850s; broke walls, shifted commerce, built suburbs |
| Port cities | Oriented to sea and empire, not the hinterland |
| Town planning | Driven by health, sanitation and order; segregation |
| Segregation | European town vs Indian town; cantonments, civil lines |
| Architecture | European styles: stations, courts, colleges, Viceroy's House |
| Sources | Maps, photographs, town planning reports, censuses, buildings |
The colonial city was the stage on which the empire performed its power and the arena in which a new Indian urban world was born. Port cities like Calcutta, Bombay and Madras grew into global commercial capitals; old cities like Delhi were torn down and rebuilt; and a wholly new imperial capital rose at New Delhi. Through railways, town planning, segregation and epidemic control, the colonial state reshaped urban space, while Indian merchants, industrialists and millions of migrants shaped it in their turn. The legacy of these cities is all around us - in their monuments and slums, their boulevards and their bazaars. To study the colonial city is to study the making of modern India itself.