The British fascination with Thugs—murderous robbers in 19th-century India—is explored, particularly focusing on how the British understood and responded to them. The article questions the credibility of existing information about Thugs, arguing that the British understanding was heavily influenced by orientalist perspectives and shaped by the limitations of their knowledge-gathering mechanisms. The central question addressed is why the British administration invested such significant resources in eradicating Thugs. The author's approach will focus on analyzing the portrayal of Thugs in 19th-century British journalistic and legal discourse, rather than on the factual existence of Thugs themselves. The aim is to utilize the 'monster' metaphor as a key methodological tool to explain the British response. The study also investigates the lasting impact of the 'discovery' of the Thugs on the historical narratives and societal perceptions of India.

The author reviews existing scholarship that questions the authenticity of the colonial archive on Thugs, citing works by van Woerkens and Thianyí, and Macfie which highlight the orientalist nature of the British perception of Thugs. The article draws upon the work of Mary Douglas, Victor Turner, and Michel Foucault on the concept of the 'monster' to provide a theoretical framework for understanding the British response. It acknowledges the use of the term 'thug' and its variations in historical accounts, highlighting the semantic shift from a general meaning of 'cheat' to the specific connotation of a murderous robber. Previous historical accounts are examined, including those by Stanislas Julien, Zia-ud-din Barani, and Jean de Thévenot, analyzing how the image of the Thug evolved across time and various sources. Early writings on Thugs, such as those by Richard Sherwood, are contrasted with later accounts, revealing a shift in the emphasis from economic or social factors to religious or ritualistic motivations.

The author employs a Foucauldian perspective on the 'monster' as an epistemological construct to analyze the British colonial response to the Thugs. This framework helps to understand how the Thugs, as a group that resisted easy classification within the colonial administrative system, became a source of anxiety and a threat to established knowledge. The methodology involves a detailed analysis of 19th-century journalistic and legal discourse surrounding Thugs, examining how the British narrative of Thugs was constructed and disseminated. The article explores the efforts of the British Thug Department to suppress Thuggee, highlighting the innovative legal instruments employed to tackle this perceived threat. The author examines the limitations of the colonial information-gathering mechanisms and how these limitations contributed to the creation of the 'monster' image of the Thugs. The study draws upon archival sources such as Sleeman's *Rammeseera* and colonial government records to illustrate the processes of knowledge production and the creation of the Thug narrative.

The article demonstrates that the British image of the Thug was largely a construct arising from the inherent limitations of their administrative and classification systems. The Thugs' resistance to conventional categorization, based on religion, caste, or language, contributed to their portrayal as a monstrous and unique threat. The massive investment of resources and the unprecedented legal innovations employed to combat Thuggee highlight the anxiety and fear associated with this perceived threat. The analysis of colonial texts reveals a shift in the narrative of Thugs over time, from an understanding rooted in economic and social factors to one emphasizing religious and ritualistic motivations. This shift suggests a deliberate construction of the Thugs as a deeply ingrained, uniquely 'Indian' phenomenon. The study shows how the colonial desire to control and classify India's diverse population, coupled with the limitations of their knowledge systems, led to the creation of a 'monster' that served to justify British rule and expansion. The investigation also points to the absence of critical perspectives in contemporary accounts, with only limited skepticism expressed about the scale of the Thug menace.

The findings suggest that the British perception of the Thugs was not a reflection of reality but a product of the colonial context. The 'monster' metaphor helps explain the disproportionate colonial response, revealing the anxieties and limitations of the colonial administration's knowledge-gathering and classification systems. The Thugs served as a convenient symbol of the 'other,' enabling the justification of British expansion and control. The study's analysis of the legal innovations employed to suppress Thuggee highlights the inherent tensions between colonial power and the complexities of Indian society. The article's discussion emphasizes the lasting consequences of the colonial construction of the Thugs, demonstrating its impact on historical narratives, societal perceptions, and the treatment of tribal and marginalized populations in India.

This study demonstrates the profound impact of colonial knowledge production on shaping perceptions of Indian society. By analyzing the British construction of the Thugs as an epistemological monster, the paper reveals how colonial anxieties and limitations shaped administrative responses and created lasting historical narratives. The analysis highlights the need for critical engagement with colonial sources and underscores the importance of understanding the power dynamics inherent in the process of knowledge creation. Future research could explore the cross-cultural aspects of monstrous representations in colonial contexts and analyze how these narratives have shaped contemporary understandings of marginalized communities in postcolonial India.

The study primarily relies on colonial sources, acknowledging the inherent biases present in these materials. A deeper exploration of non-colonial perspectives might provide a more nuanced understanding of the phenomenon. While the author utilizes the 'monster' metaphor as a valuable analytical tool, this approach inevitably involves an interpretation of complex historical events, which may be open to different perspectives. The focus on the British perspective might limit the understanding of the experiences and agency of the people classified as Thugs themselves.