**Yes, 1% is not only possible but likely conservative.** Based on historical census data and demographic calculations, **approximately 2-4% of British adults** lived in India at some point during the British Raj (1858-1947).

## **The Numbers**

**Stock vs. Flow**: Census data shows about **100,000-150,000 British-born people** lived in India at any given time during the Raj . The 1931 census recorded **100,150 UK-born residents**, with 70,034 being military personnel .

**Cumulative total**: Using conservative estimates:

- **Average stay**: ~7-10 years per person (military tours were shorter, civilians longer)

- **Total distinct individuals**: ~900,000 to 1.2 million British-born people over the 89-year Raj period

## **British Adult Population Base**

**UK adult population (18-65)**:

- **1850s**: ~15 million

- **1950**: ~30 million

- **Average over Raj period**: ~22-25 million adults alive at any time

- **Total distinct adults over 89 years**: ~45-50 million (accounting for generational turnover)

## **The Calculation**

**Conservative estimate**: 900,000 ÷ 45,000,000 = **2%**

**Moderate estimate**: 1,200,000 ÷ 45,000,000 = **2.7%**

**Liberal estimate**: 1,500,000 ÷ 45,000,000 = **3.3%**

## **Important Caveats**

- **"British" includes**: England, Scotland, Wales, Ireland (pre-1922), and British subjects from dominions

- **Excludes**: Anglo-Indians born in India to British parents (would increase the percentage)

- **Undercounts**: Many British served multiple tours, and temporary visitors (traders, missionaries) weren't captured in censuses

**Bottom line**: **1% is absolutely achievable**—in fact, it's the lower bound. The true figure likely falls between **2-3%** of all British adults during that era experiencing life in India.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5804797&forum_id=2\u0026mark_id=5310864#49474691)