Education is no exotic implant in India. There is no country where the love of learning had so early an origin or has exercised so lasting and powerful an influence', wrote F.W. Thomas in 1891, in The History and Prospects of British Education in India. A telescopic view of our ancient and medieval concept of education reveals inscriptions on stone and copper, palm leaf manuscripts of temple archives and later, after paper was manufactured, pages upon pages of printed material. The knowledge, which has thus been preserved, is unrivalled in its antiquity and the intellectual subtlety of its contents by anything which has been produced by any other civilization of the world.

After settling down in the Indo-Gangetic plains, the Aryan tribes organised themselves into four classes according to the tasks required for the functioning of society. Those designated pastors and teachers were called Brahmins, those who fought for the protection of society came to be known as Kshatriyas, those who tilled and harvested the land and sold the produce were named Vaishyas, and those who performed menial jobs became the Shudras. Thus the responsibility for imparting education remained the monopoly of the Brahmins. Life of an individual was mapped into four periods or 'ashrams'. Brahmacharya (student life), Grahastashram (married life), Vanprasthashram (retirement), and Sannyas (renunciation). The first period ran from five to eighteen years, during which the student was expected to dedicate himself entirely to his studies. To remain free from all worldly distractions, the life of celibacy was enjoined, hence the word Brahmacharya for studenthood.

It was maintained that a child's education in fact started at the foetal stage; the education of the mother was regarded as important as that of the offspring. Various religious ceremonies were prescribed with a view to ensuring the health of the unborn child. Education was given at home from the age of five to eight, eleven or twelve, depending on whether the child was Brahmin, Kshatriya or Vaishya. Shudras were left out of the pale of education.

The child was placed under the care of a teacher after the Maunjibandhan (tying of the girdle made of munja grass) ceremony. He was expected to live with the teacher as a member of his family and serve him in every way. He was also required to observe the vows of celibacy and poverty and to live by begging for alms. The child learnt humility and became conscious of his indebtedness to society. At the same time society became aware of its responsibilities for the education of the new generation. The Samavartna ceremony marked the end of student life and the return home. At this time the student renounced the girdle and took leave of his teacher after offering him Gurudakshina according to his means.

From the above it is evident that education was a private affair in which the rulers played no role. They could subsidise educational institutions with grants of land or money but could not impose conditions or control teachers. Teachers and pupils were maintained at public expense and were influenced only by public opinion. The teachers were a highly honoured class; even the kings rose from their thrones to receive them in court. The following verse exemplfies the reverence accorded to them:

Gurur Brahma Gurur Vishnu Gurur Devo Mahesvarah

Gurureva Param Brahma Tasmai Sri Gurave Namah

The teacher is Brahma, the teacher is Vishnu, the teacher is the great God Shiva.

The teacher is the great Brahman-Supreme Divine Soul-incarnate. Bow to that teacher.

The immediate aim of education in ancient India was to prepare children for their roles as members of the castes they were born into and its ultimate aim was sa vidya ya vimuktye, meaning knowledge for the emancipation of the soul. The method of study was shravan, manan, nididhyasan, i.e., listening to the teacher, reflection on what had been listened to, and its constant repetition. Further, it was not considered enough for a student to merely acquire knowledge; the process of learning was not complete unless the knowledge acquired could be imparted to others.

Girls' education was not as strictly enforced as that of the boys, but they were free to study the Vedas and other subjects along with their brother pupils. The Artha Veda says that a girl must not marry until she has completed her studies. It was during the period of Manu that marriage of girls before the age of puberty was sanctioned. Manu held that the marriage of girls was as good as their initiation into the study of the Vedas, serving the husband was as good as education at an Ashram, and performance of household duties as good as religious rituals. The age of patriarchy had begun.

Several hundred years after the Aryans had settled in the Indo-Gangetic plains, and their social system, which was originally grounded on the rational premise of division of labour, had lost its logic, came the invasions of tribes from Central Asia, Afghanistan, Turkey and the Arabian peninsula. Their religion, Islam, gave the highest status to learning. One of the famous Hadith of Prophet Mohammad was, 'Seek knowledge even if it is in China'. Their system of education was also a private affair. In several other aspects too, parallels may be drawn between Hindu and the Muslim systems of education. Their schools of instruction, Maktabs and Madrasahs were associated with the mosques. There they were taught the Quran, that being regarded in Islam as the fountainhead of all learning. Other subjects like languages, arts and sciences all ensued from the study of the Quran.

In a manner similar to the Hindus, the Muslim child's education began with initiation in religion. The Bismillah ceremony was performed at the age of four or five. Whereas the Maktab (the Arabic root word is kutub, meaning 'he wrote') was the place where the children learnt the Quran, starting from the Arabic alphabet to the complete surahs, the Madrasahs (the Arabic root word is dars meaning 'lesson') covered other subjects such as grammar, logic, rhetoric, literature, theology, metaphysics, jurisprudence and medicine. Abul Fazal's Ain-i-Akbari gives an account of Akbar's interest in education. The Emperor, though himself unlettered, prescribed the curriculum of studies and included in it subjects of practical value to the student. 'These regulations', writes Abul Fazal, 'shed a new light on schools and cast a bright lustre over Madrasahs'. Since there was no formal arrangement.for girls' education they were instructed at home. Examples of princesses like Gulbadan Begum, daughter of Babar, Jahanara, daughter of Shah Jahan and Zebunnisa, daughter of Aurangzeb, testify to the presence of women literati among the aristocracy.

A new era in education began with the arrival of the British. 'Education in India under the British rule', wrote A.P. Howell in Education in British India, 'was first ignored, then violently and successfully opposed, then conducted on a system now universally admitted to be erroneous, and finally placed on its present footing'. Its trajectory under the British rule can be divided into four segments, from the early days of the British to 1813, from 1813 to 1853, from 1854 to 1920, and from 1921 to 1947. During the first period, the East India Company remained indifferent to matters pertaining to education. But when the Company's charter was renewed in 1813, it contained a clause which compelled it to assume responsibility for the education of Indians.

During the second period, the provinces were left free to adopt their own educational policies. This resulted in a controversy between those who favoured oriental learning and the use of Sanskrit and Persian and those who favoured the dissemination of Western knowledge through the use of English. The infamous Macaulay's Minute of 1835, deorientalised higher education and encouraged English education for upper classes. 'A single shelf of a good European library', Macaulay wrote, 'is worth the whole native literature of India and Arabia!'

The attempts of educationists and reformers to start national schools fall into two periods. The first active period was soon after the partition of Bengal and the second followed Mahatma Gandhi's preaching of boycott of government schools and colleges, which culminated in the Non-Cooperation resolution passed by Congress in 1920. It earnestly advised the 'gradual withdrawal of children from schools or colleges, owned, aided or controlled by government and in place of such schools and colleges, the establishment of national schools and colleges in the various provinces'. (Pattabhi Sitaramaiyya, History of Indian National Congress, Volume 1, page 203.)

It was in the wake of Mahatma Gandhi's appeal that Modern School was born. In the same year certain other institutions were established; National Muslim University of Aligarh (later Jamia Millia Islamia), Gujarat Vidyapith, Bihar Vidyapith, Kashi Vidyapith and other national schools of all grades. They worked independently of the official system, trying to revive the ideals of the ancient Hindu or Muslim education. Schools were established with the Gurukul philosophy of education, Arya Samaj, Sanatan Dharam, Khalsa, and Madrasahs.

In the fourth period, new constitutional reforms envisaged by the Act of 1919, were introduced. It was a period of provincial autonomy when the control and responsibility for education was finally transferred from the Government of India to the provinces. Full provincial autonomy was conceded by the Government of India Act 1935 whereby large powers were given to the Provincial Ministers of Education. Between 1937 and 1940, when Congress Ministries held office in seven out of eleven provinces, they drew up several schemes for reforming education, including Gandhiji's notion of Basic Education, which became known as the Wardha Scheme. This provided a detailed plan for primary education, based on Gandhian philosophy of learning in the mother tongue and early determination of vocational aptitude. But the Congress Ministries resigned amid political agitation and the Second World War broke out in 1939. The envisaged programme could not be properly implemented. The Government of India, meanwhile, prepared its own plan for educational development. Sir John Sargent, Educational Advisor to the Government of India was asked to prepare a memorandum on 'Post-war educational development in India'. This report, which covered different aspects of the Indian educational problems, became known as the Sargent Report. It wielded a powerful influence on contemporary educational thought.

Several of the schools which today belong to the public school category have evolved from the former Chief's Colleges. Those were institutions of secondary education which were established by the British, following the national uprising of 1857. Their primary purpose was to influence the princely families and gain their political support. They were placed under the supervision of the Political Department of the government. Meant for the education of the sons of princes, sardars, taluqdars, and jagirdars, they were located in princely states which, after independence, were merged into Rajasthan, Uttar Pradesh, Madhya Pradesh, Andhra Pradesh and Saurashtra. Rajkumar College, the first Chief's College, was founded in 1868 at Rajkot. Mayo College, Ajmer was founded in 1873, Sadul School, Bikaner in 1893, Rajkumar College, Raipur in 1894, Scindia School, Gwalior in 1897, Daly College, Indore in 1898; and two others_Colwin Taluqdars at Lucknow and Jagirdar's at Begumpet_both in 1913. Aitchison Chief's College was established in Lahore. Sons of rulers used to arrive at these educational institutions with armed guards, retinue of servants and private tutors.

Another group of schools were founded to impart a general education and military training to sons of army officers and military personnel. Residential schools, such as Lawrence School Sanawar (1847) and Lawrence School Lovedale (1858) were meant exclusively for Europeans and Anglo-Indians. There was nothing in the public school mould which was accessible to the common people until the appearance of Modern School on the educational scene in 1920. This was ten years prior to the time that witnessed the transfer of Chief's Colleges to modern public schools. This began with a movement initiated in the 1930s by F.C. Pearce of Scindia School, H.W. Barritt of Rajkot, C.H. Barry of Aitchison, Smith-Pearse of Raipur and A.E. Foot of Doon.

In 1921, the year after which Modern School was established, there were, according to the Quinquennial Review, 1922-27, 1,55,017 primary schools in the country, and a total enrollment of 61,09,752. This drop-in-the ocean public education at the primary level saw a further decline due to the rise of alternate schools' as stated above. Mahatma Gandhi mobilised the masses by launching his Non Cooperation Movement. So far as education was concerned, the withdrawal from government and recognised institutions, and repudiation of state grants and recognition were openly advocated. Parallel institutions known as national schools, were set up throughout the country.

It was hoped that these national institutions would breed a new race of Indians with a broad national outlook, free from slavish mentality. Their courses of study did not differ much from the Departmental schools but Hindi was studied as an all-India language instead of English, mother tongue was used as a medium of instruction and the use of Charkha was taught as a preliminary step towards economic independence of India from the West. This was the prevailing atmosphere, when Raghubir Singh, who was to found Modern School, wrote these words in his diary:

We are all aware of the system of education in India. There are four kinds of schools at present; government schools which are entirely financed and managed by the government, schools which require grant-in-aid from government including those run by foreign missions, those maintained by local public bodies, for example, Arya Samaj_independent schools so far as their finances are concerned but controlled in academic matters by the Department or university. The fourth type of schools are those which are conducted by private enterprise and on independent lines, and may be considered experiments in education. Such schools do not follow the common scheme of education but try to chalk out their own lines of work.

It was the last category to which Modern School belonged.

Raghubir Singh was to record the inception of his school in the following words:

The Modern School was started in 1920 by a body of men who were not satisfied with the existing schools and desired to provide something better for their children