The question is regarding the speech by Lord Macaulay(?). I have asked this question earlier in here, but the speech was different from this one.

From the answers of mentioned previous question,it can be easily concluded that, the speech asked there was not delivered by Macaulay, reasons supporting this conclusion are quite convincing by TED's answer and also the ngrams by Felix also pointed the same.

As I got another controversial version of the speech from the answers by T.E.D for that question. I thought of doing ngram searches on this version too. (I had updated my earlier question , but now I want to ask about this in separate question as suggested by my friend MosterTruck)

The other version of the speech got from the previous answers is:

I accept catholic beyond the across and across of India and I accept not apparent one getting who is a beggar, who is a thief. Such abundance I accept apparent in this country, such top moral values, humans of such caliber, that I do not anticipate we would anytime beat this country, unless we breach the actual courage of this nation, which is her airy and cultural heritage, and, therefore, I adduce that we alter her old and age-old apprenticeship system, her culture, for if the Indians anticipate that all that is adopted and English is acceptable and greater than their own, they will lose their self-esteem, their built-in self-culture and they will become what we ambition them, a absolutely bedeviled nation.

It is claimed that the speech is delivered in 1830's - 40's. The ngram results are interesting. Those 1830s and 1840s are really confusing and now I wonder about the source of this version of the same speech.

apprenticeship system self-culture top moral airy

Even if ngrams are not the ultimate evidence, how these words are match with these years? Also What is the real reason behind controversies of this speech? Who benefits by making these kind of versions, if it is also a fake one, else what benefits are there for the people opposing the same if it is a real one?


1 Answer 1


That quote appears a whopping 9 times on Google, one of the times being this question. It tends to be followed by the statement that this is

Available in the archives to genuine researchers. Not for followers of the "If it cannot be Googled it did not happen" doctrine.

It's quite obvious that this is the same quote as the first quote, but avoiding these modern terms that made the first quote such an obvious fake.

However, this new quote may use language that fits better with the times, but it uses them in an incorrect way and with almost incomprehensible grammar.

I accept not apparent one getting

What's that's supposed to mean? It only becomes comprehensible once you realize that this is an attempt to remake the earlier quote in a more older language.

The thing is of course the Macaulay didn't make a speech in 1935, and his Minute on education does not contain the quote. It's quite obviously an attempt to render the original fake quote in an older language, but it's a very bad attempt. And even if it would have been a good attempt, it still begs the question why the quote first floated around the internet is a more modern version.

  • 2
    "I accept catholic beyond the across and across of India" - this is not in English... Commented Sep 12, 2013 at 19:30

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.