The person who maintains the site is  from Aligarh. One day, I asked him about the Aligarh Muslim  University, how had it started, who founded it - Sir Syed Ahmad Khan,  what was the Christian read British attitude towards the Movement,  and did they cooperate with the Brits? He did not have answers so I  have tried to find them through this article. 
Before I move ahead  would like to quote eminent freedom fighter, founder of the Bhartiya  Vidya Bhavan Shri K M Munshi “Another problem that we have to  consider is the persistent demand for the rewriting of history to  foster communal unity. To my mind, nothing can be a greater mistake.  Suppressions and distortion of evidence, leading to false conclusions  about the past, is hardly the way to improve the present situation or  build up a better future”.
This piece was written in  2001 and  edited in 2017. It is based on inputs from volumes 10 & 11 of the  History and Culture of Indian People published by the Bhartiya Vidya  Bhavan and has six chapters namely - 
1. Background  	and Muslim Politics before the Aligarh Movement.
2. The  	Aligarh Movement 
3. Words of Syed  	Ahmad / Analysis. 
4. Role of British  	principals.
5. Summary.
6. Hindu Muslim  	relations. 
Background
The first  half of the period 1818 to 1905 was a period of concern and anxiety  for Indian Muslims. The Brits had swept away the last vestiges of  Muslim rule by annexing Sindh in 1843 and Avadh in 1856, exiling the  Mughal kings to Rangoon. The Deccan kingdom had a Muslim ruler in the  Nizam but he was more of an ally. So from being rulers of Hindusthan  they were being ruled over. (note Hindusthan means Urdu speaking  regions of the Indian Sub-continent. It does not mean India). 
Faced with  a difficult situation they asked, what led to our decline? According  to them the key reason was that Indian Muslims had drifted away from  the teachings of Islam due to the spread of Sufistic ideas. It was  therefore necessary to purge Indian Muslims of religious beliefs and  social customs and go back to the purity of Islam. The most notable  attempt was made as early as the 17th  century by Sheikh Ahmad Sirhindi in the days of Jehangir. There was  Saiyid Ahmad of Rai-Bareilly who was not only into social &  religious reform but also tried to get Punjab rid of Punjabi Sardar  domination in 1831. 
Next came  the Great Mutiny of 1857 in which the Muslims took an active part.  They hoped to revive the Mughul Empire but dream was shattered.  Thereafter, the  victorious Brits targeted them to take revenge for  their role in the Mutiny. The reform movement initiated earlier  gained fresh impetus after 1857. 
There were  a group of religious thinkers who influenced by the Wahabi idealogy  started preaching new ideas and gaining support. However, the  majority of Indian Muslims were adherents of the Hanafi School with  strong leanings towards Sufism and could not be won over by the soul  less, dry and rigid Wahabhi discipline. The foundation of Dar-al-Ulum  at Deoband in 1886 was the greatest achievement of the Wahabi school  of thought in India where as Farangi Mahal established during the  reign of Aurangzeb continued to represent the old Hanafi School. A  third important institution with a distinct ideology, more  progressive outlook was the Nadwat al-Ulama in Lucknow founded in  1898. 
While  religious and social reformers were busy all over Bharat the  economic conditions of the Muslims were fast deteriorating for two  reasons. 
One, with  the gradual decline of the Mughal Empire, they had been loosing all  the old privileges that they had so far enjoyed. Two, the anti-Muslim  policy of the Brits & their bias against modern education closed  new opportunities of material progress and opportunity. The crying  need of the moment was to help the Muslims overcome their reluctance  to adapt to the changed circumstances and gain the trust of the new  rulers. At this critical juncture came Sir Syed Ahmad Khan (SAK) who  went about this herculean task with a vision and firm resolve.
SAK was born in Delhi  in 1817. He was not the type who accepted religious dogmas at face  value but wanted to understand, interpret them himself. His articles  in the magazine Tahzib al-Akhlaq, started in 1870 after his return  from England, give evidence of a marked rationalistic and  non-conformist trend of thought that brought upon the wrath of  orthodox, pious Muslims. A wise man he gave up the thought of  religious reform, taking on the orthodox Muslims but took to social /  educational reform instead. 
He started off by  setting up two old styled madrasas at Moradabad and Ghazipur which  was followed by a school on modern lines at Aligarh, later on to  develop into the Muhammadan Anglo-Oriental College with the active  help and support of the Brits. He also laid the foundation of the  Muhammadan Educational Conference soon after the inception of the  Indian National Congress. The M.A.O.  rendered yeoman’s service to  the cause of Muslim education and was supported by the Calcutta  Madrasa and the Anglo-Arabic School in Delhi. 
Another  development during this period was the emergence  of Urdu as a literary  language. It was born in the military camps from the Hindi Khari Boli  during the later Mughal period. It was between 1818 to 1905 that Urdu  developed into a language of expression for religious, philosophic  thoughts. An Urdu translation of the Koran was made as late as 1791.  Now Urdu became popular and replaced Persian as the language of the  educated masses. 
To summarize the period  from 1818 to 1905 was for the Indian Muslims, on one hand a period of  frustration, of political decline, social demoralization and economic  deterioration. But on the other hand, it was a period of religious  revival, educational progress and a growing awareness that they were  no longer rulers of the country. 
Read  History of Urdu
Muslim Politics before the Aligarh Movement 
The Brit conquest was  bound to have a different impact on the Hindu & Muslim. The Hindu  regarded it as freedom from the miseries of Muslim rule while Muslims  regarded the Brits as their bitterest foe who had usurped the  political authority and special privileges that they had enjoyed so  far. 
There were  however, other factors at play that widened the already existing gulf  between these two communities.
The  hostile attitude of Muslims towards the English and their aversion to  secular education kept them aloof from English education imparted in  schools and colleges. Conversely, the establishment of the Hindu  College in 1817 gave a great impetus to english education amongst the  Hindus. For the next fifty years the Muslims made little progress.
Relations  between Hindus and Muslims were very honestly outlined by a liberal,  R M Sayani in his  Presidential address at the 12th  session of the Congress held in 1896. 
Excerpts  “Before the advent of the British in India, the Muslims were the  rulers of the country. The rulers and their chiefs were Muslims so  were the great landlords and officials. The court language was their  own. Every place of trust and responsibility, or carrying influence  and high emoluments, was theirs by birthright. The Hindus did occupy  the same position but were tenants-at-will of the Muslims. The  Muslims had complete access to the rulers and chief. The Hindus were  in awe of them. By a stroke of misfortune, the Muslims had to  abdicate their position and descend to the level of their Hindu  fellow-countrymen. The Muslims resented the treatment." 
"Meanwhile  the Brits introduced English education into the country. This  required hard application and industry. The Hindus were used to this,  as under Muslim rule, they had practically to master a foreign  tongue, and so easily took to new education. But the Muslim had not  yet become accustomed to this sort of thing. Moreover, they resented  competing with the Hindus, whom they had till recently regarded as  their inferiors. The Muslims were gradually ousted from their lands,  offices; in fact everything was lost save their honor. To the Hindus  it was the opposite. They were soon reduced to a state of utter  poverty. Ignorance and apathy seized hold of them while the fall of  their former greatness rankled in their hearts”. 
Thus the political  outlook of the 2 communities was different. English education was the  mainspring of all political evolutions of the Hindus while the  Muslims lagged behind. This difference of approach to politics was  manifest for the first time in the Wahabi Movement. Although the  later phase was a violent hatred against the English and organized  attempt to drive them out, it evoked no sympathy from the Hindus. 
The reason  it failed is simple. It was a purely Muslim movement to establish  Dar-ul-Islam in India “Muslim sovereignty pure and simple.”  Actually the Wahabis first declared war against the Sikhs, and later  transferred that hostility to the Brits when they conquered Punjab.  Although the movement had no anti Hindu sentiment unlike the Moplah  Rebellion that followed the Khilafat Agitation of 1921, all the  proclamations were issued in the name of Islam and appealed only to  Muslims. 
Read  Wahabi Movement
The differences in  political outlook were further reinforced by the fact that the  Muslims did not take an active part in different political  organizations like the Committees of Landholder’s Society, Bengal  British India Society. On the other hand as soon as the Muslims  became politically conscious they started separate organizations of  their own. A Muhammadan Association was started in Calcutta before  31/01/1856. 
The Hindus  regarded this separatist tendency as quite natural since they were a  separate unit. Gradually the Muslim leaders realized the value of  English education. Although Muslims took to modern education in  larger numbers the gap between the two communities continued to  exist, rather large actually. 
The  differences got accentuated in connection with the legislation for  local self-government on elective basis. It is on this occasion that  for the first time a demand was made for separate  representation of the Muslims. The ball, now or later was set rolling by the Brits. Said Muhhammad  Yusuf on 3/05/1883 “But it would be an advantage and more fit  recognition of the claims of the Muslim population if provision could  be made in the Bill for the election of Muslims by reserving a  certain number of membership for that community”. 
The  keynote of this speech is a firm conviction that even in political  matters there is no common bond between the two communities and each  must be ready to safeguard its own interest. These thoughts were  shared by most Muslims all over India. I admire Yusuf for being  realistic unlike Hindus leaders who strive for the mirage of Hindu  Muslim unity. 
Reference  must be made to the visit of Jamal-ud-din Al-afghani (1893-97), a  notable figure of the Muslim world in the 19th  century. He agitated for the liberation of Muslims from European  influence and exploitation, for the union of all Islamic states under  a single Caliphate and the creation of a powerful Muslim empire  capable of resisting European influence. 
Hindu leaders, notably  B.C. Pal, believe that his visit hastened the split between Hindus  and Muslims, made Muslim leaders distance themselves from the  political activities of the Hindus.
While some  might not agree indications were not wanting that the pan-Islamic  sentiment had already been exerting influence upon Muslim minds.  Some Muslim leaders told Blunt, “During the Egyptian War 1881-82 we  all looked to Arabi (Pasha) to restore our fortunes, for we are in a  desperate state and need a deliverer”. (Amrita Bazaar Patrika  12/08/1869). The Indian Muslims had already begun to feel that  Muslims outside India were more closely allied to them then the  Hindus. 
The  Khilafat Movement (1921)  is ample proof of the Pan-Islamic  sentiment. Otherwise why would events in Turkey concern Indian  Muslims. Pan-Islamism is very much alive even 80 years later. Even  today Indian Muslims protest over the killings of Muslims in  Palestine and Rohingyas in Myanmar. 
Further  proof of the pan-Islamic sentiment may be traced to the evidence  given before the Hunter Commission by Muslim leaders where they  demanded entirely separate seating arrangements for the primary  education of Hindus and Muslims. And insist that Urdu be a medium of  instruction in a province like Bengal where the Muslims spoke  Bengali. Unfortunately successive Congress leaders, pre and post  Partition refuse to accept or understand the concept of Pan Islamism. 
To  summarize Muslim politics of the 19th  century followed a course that was different from the Hindus. While  the Hindus, influenced by English education, were developing their  ideas on modern lines, the Muslims launched the Wahabi Movement that  was violent and communal in character. Then came the Aligarh  movement, also conceived in a communal spirit. It brought about a  political and social regeneration of the Muslims but widened the  divide between the Hindus and Muslims. It created a distinct Muslim  unit in Indian politics. By starting the Khilafat Movement Gandhi  cemented the divide, organized the Muslims into a political unit on a  national level that was to culminate in Partition nearly fifty years  later.