Chapter-5 : Expansion and Consolidation of British Rule in India

 

British Rule in India: Expansion and Consolidation

Early Motivations and Strategies (17th – Mid-18th Centuries)

• Focus on Trade:The British East India Company prioritized trade, establishing factories (trading posts) in coastal regions.
• Exploiting Political Instability:The fragmented political landscape in India allowed the British to manipulate local rulers for trade concessions and influence.
• Military Intervention:Wars secured trade routes and established alliances (e.g., Subsidiary Alliance System) that obligated Indian states to provide military support to the British.

Shifting Goals and Methods (Late 18th Century Onwards)

• Imperial Ambitions:British officials and politicians in Britain increasingly desired a full-fledged empire in India.
• Profit Motive:The immense wealth generated from trade in India fueled further expansionist ambitions.
• Military Victories:Decisive victories like Plassey (1757) weakened rival powers (French) and established British dominance.
• Aggressive Governors:Governors like Lord Wellesley (1798-1818) actively expanded British control through warfare and alliances.
• Shift in Terminology:Territories were no longer “acquired” but “conquered,” reflecting a more assertive British stance.

Challenges and Rivalries

• Maratha Power:The Marathas remained a significant force in India until their defeat at Panipat (1761).
• European Competition:France also sought influence in India, leading to Anglo-French conflicts.

The Long Road to Consolidation (c. 80 Years)

• Gradual Process:Establishing complete British control took a long time, marked by continuous warfare and political maneuvering.
• Lingering Rivalries:Even after key victories, the British didn’t completely eliminate regional powers like Mysore.
• Historical Context:Modern perspectives might not fully capture the complexities of the era’s power dynamics.

Unresolved Questions

• Reasons for British Success:Historians debate why the British conquered India with relative ease. Factors like internal conflicts within India and European rivalries are considered.

Additional Notes

• The British conquest of India can be seen as a multifaceted process driven by a combination of economic, political, and military factors.
• The timeline of British expansion is not clear-cut, with different historians proposing various turning points (e.g., 1740, 1757, 1761).
• Understanding British rule in India requires acknowledging both the agency of the British and the complex political landscape of pre-colonial India.

Why Did the British Succeed in India?

Military Superiority

• British firearms (muskets, cannons) surpassed Indian weaponry in firing speed and range.
• Indian attempts to modernize (hiring European officers) lacked originality and discipline.

Discipline and Organization

• The British employed a professional army with regular salaries and strict discipline.
• Indian rulers often struggled to pay troops, leading to reliance on unreliable mercenaries.

Leadership and Administration

• British officers were chosen based on merit, leading to a competent and loyal force.
• Indian leadership relied on hereditary positions and personal ties, compromising effectiveness.

Strong Leadership

• Figures like Clive, Hastings, and Dalhousie provided exceptional strategic direction.
• Second-tier British leaders were highly motivated and patriotic.
• While India had talented leaders (Haider Ali, Tipu Sultan), they lacked a cohesive team or a unified national vision.

Financial Strength

• The East India Company’s profits funded wars and expansion.
• England’s global trade provided vast resources and economic power.
• Most Indian states faced financial constraints, hindering military investment.

Nationalist Drive

• British national pride and a focus on material advancement fueled their ambition.
• Fragmented Indian kingdoms lacked a sense of national unity or a shared vision.

Bengal on the Eve of British Conquest

Bengal’s Prosperity

• Richest province of the Mughal Empire (present-day Bangladesh, Bihar, Odisha)
• Major exports: saltpeter, rice, indigo, textiles, etc.
• Flourishing trade attracted the British East India Company (EIC).

British East India Company in Bengal

• Established factories (trading posts) in Bengal (1630s onwards).
• Calcutta founded (1690s) as a key commercial center.
• Paid a small annual tax to the Mughal emperor for trade rights.
• EIC exports from Bengal far exceeded the tax paid (over £50,000 annually).

Factors Contributing to Bengal’s Prosperity

• Relatively stable compared to other regions facing conflicts.
• Population boom in Calcutta (15,000 in 1706 to 100,000 in 1750).
• Other prosperous cities like Dacca and Murshidabad.

Friction Between Bengal and EIC

• Nawabs (governors) of Bengal resented EIC’s special privileges.
• EIC’s trade concessions led to loss of revenue for Bengal.
• Growing tension laid the groundwork for future conflict.

Alivardi Khan’s Rule (1741-1756)

• Defeated Maratha incursions, maintained stability.
• Granted permission to the EIC to fortify Calcutta (later regretted).

Siraj-ud-Daulah Inherits Challenges (1756)

• Young and inexperienced ruler facing internal conflicts.
• Rivals within the court and a discontented population.
• Alarmed by the growing power of the EIC.

The Battle of Plassey and British Expansion in Bengal

Tensions Leading to Plassey (1756)

• British East India Company (EIC) misused trade privileges, harming Bengal’s finances.
• EIC fortified Calcutta without permission and harbored a fugitive, Krishna Das.
• Nawab Siraj-ud-Daulah suspected EIC collusion with the French and attacked Fort William (Calcutta).
• The “Black Hole Tragedy” (disputed by historians) further strained relations.

Clive, Conspiracy, and Conquest (1757)

• Robert Clive led a reinforced British force from Madras to Bengal.
• Clive secretly formed an alliance with Mir Jafar, a disloyal nawab official.
• The pact promised Mir Jafar the throne in exchange for aiding the British.
• With this betrayal, the British army under Clive defeated Siraj’s larger force at Plassey (June 23, 1757).
• Siraj was captured and murdered by Mir Jafar’s son.

Aftermath of Plassey

• Mir Jafar became Nawab, paying a large sum and ceding the zamindari of 24 Parganas to the EIC.
• The Battle of Plassey is considered a turning point for British dominance in India.
• The EIC gained:
  • Political influence: Effective control over Bengal’s affairs.
  • Military superiority: Established dominance over French rivals.
  • Economic benefits: Virtual monopoly on Bengal’s trade.

Mir Kasim (1760-1763)

• Mir Jafar’s growing frustration with EIC interference led to a failed conspiracy with the Dutch.
• Mir Kasim became Nawab in 1760 after a treaty with the EIC.
  • Key points of the treaty:
    • Ceded territories to the EIC (Burdwan, Midnapur, Chittagong).
    • Agreed to trade concessions and financial obligations.
  • Mir Jafar was forced to resign in favor of Mir Kasim.

Mir Kasim’s Reforms

• Mir Kasim attempted to assert control by:
  • Shifting the capital from Murshidabad to Munger.
  • Reorganizing the bureaucracy and reforming the army.
• These reforms clashed with EIC interests, leading to further conflict.

The Battle of Buxar and The Treaty of Allahabad

Friction Between Mir Kasim and EIC (1760s)

• Mir Kasim, Nawab of Bengal (1760-1763), clashed with the EIC over:
  • EIC officials’ abuse of trade permits (dastaks) for private gain.
  • Loss of tax revenue due to EIC’s duty-free trade privileges.
  • EIC’s support for defiant officials like Ram Narayan of Bihar.

Outbreak of War (1763)

• Mir Kasim attempted to abolish transit duties, further straining relations.
• The EIC defeated Mir Kasim’s forces in a series of battles (Katwa, Murshidabad, etc.).
• Mir Kasim fled to Awadh, forming an alliance with the Nawab of Awadh and the Mughal Emperor.

The Battle of Buxar (1764)

• A combined army led by Mir Kasim, the Nawab of Awadh, and the Mughal Emperor faced defeat by the British under Major Hector Munro.
• Significance of Buxar:
  • EIC victory established them as a major power in North India.
  • Mughal Emperor’s defeat signified a decline in Mughal authority.

Aftermath of Buxar

• Mir Jafar, reinstated as Nawab, ceded territories (Midnapore, Burdwan, Chittagong) for EIC troop maintenance.
• EIC gained duty-free trade in Bengal (except a 2% salt tax).
• Najmud-daulah, a minor, became Nawab with a British-appointed naib-subahdar holding real power.

The Treaty of Allahabad (1765)

• Two treaties negotiated by Robert Clive:
  • With the Nawab of Awadh:
    • Awadh ceded Allahabad and Kara to the Mughal Emperor.
    • Paid 50 lakh rupees as war indemnity.
    • Recognized Balwant Singh’s control over Banaras.
  • With the Mughal Emperor:
    • Emperor resided at Allahabad under EIC protection.
    • Granted the EIC the diwani (tax collection rights) of Bengal, Bihar, and Orissa for an annual payment.
    • Received 53 lakh rupees from the EIC for the nizamat (administration) rights.

Strategic Considerations Behind the Treaty

• Clive avoided annexing Awadh to escape the burden of defending a large territory.
• A friendly Awadh served as a buffer state against Afghan and Maratha threats.
• The Mughal Emperor, weakened by the defeat, became a mere figurehead, legitimizing EIC’s gains through a farman (decree).

Fate of Mir Kasim

• Lived in exile until his death in 1777.

Dual Government in Bengal (1765-1772)

The System

• Introduced by Robert Clive after the Battle of Buxar (1764).
• Divided power between the EIC and the Nawab of Bengal.
• EIC controlled:
  • Diwani (revenue collection) through appointed deputy diwans (Mohammad Reza Khan for Bengal).
  • Nizamat (administration) indirectly through the right to appoint the deputy subahdar (also often Mohammad Reza Khan).

Advantages for the EIC

• Maintained a facade of Mughal authority with the Nawab as a puppet ruler.
• EIC held real power by controlling finances and administration.

Disadvantages for Bengal

• Disastrous for the people:
  • Neither EIC nor Nawab focused on good governance or public welfare.
  • Administrative breakdown led to problems.

End of the Dual System

• Abolished by Warren Hastings in 1772 due to its inefficiencies.

 

Mysore’s Resistance to the East India Company (EIC)

The Rise of Haidar Ali (1761-1782)

• Weakened Mysore:After the Battle of Talikota (1565), Mysore emerged as a small kingdom under the Wodeyars. By the mid-18th century, it faced financial and political weakness due to repeated Maratha and Nizam incursions.
• Haidar Ali’s Rise:A soldier who rose to become Mysore’s de facto ruler in 1761. He possessed strong military skills and diplomatic acumen.
• Modernization Efforts:
  • Established an arms factory with French help to counter European weaponry.
  • Introduced Western training methods for his army.
  • Used diplomacy to outmaneuver opponents.

First Anglo-Mysore War (1767-1769)

• Context:EIC’s expansion in Bengal threatened Mysore’s trade and political influence.
• Alliances:EIC with the Nizam, Haidar Ali with the Marathas (later, the Nizam).
• Outcome:Inconclusive war; Treaty of Madras (1769) with prisoner exchange and no territorial gains.

Second Anglo-Mysore War (1780-1784)

• Causes:
  • EIC viewed Haidar Ali’s French alliance as a threat.
  • Haidar Ali felt betrayed by the EIC for not aiding him against the Marathas.
• Alliances:Haidar Ali with the Marathas and the Nizam (switched sides later).
• Major Battles:
  • Haidar Ali captured Arcot and defeated Colonel Baillie’s British army (1781).
  • British victories at Porto Novo (1781) and against Braithwaite (1782).
• Treaty of Mangalore (1784):Mutual restoration of conquered territories.

Tipu Sultan Takes Over (1782-1799)

• Haidar Ali’s death in 1782 led his son, Tipu Sultan, to continue his father’s policies of modernization and resistance to the EIC.

Third Anglo-Mysore War (1790-1792)

• Cause:Dispute between Mysore and Travancore (a British ally) over territory.
• Course of War:
  • Tipu defeated the British under General Meadows (1790).
  • British captured Bangalore and besieged Seringapatam (Tipu’s capital) twice.
• Treaty of Seringapatam (1792):Harsh terms for Mysore:
  • Loss of nearly half its territory to the British, Marathas, and the Nizam.
  • Heavy war indemnity of 3 crore rupees.
  • Tipu’s sons held hostage until payment completed.

Fourth Anglo-Mysore War (1799)

• Causes:
  • Tipu’s refusal to accept British dominance and attempts to expand his power.
  • Lord Wellesley’s desire to eliminate Tipu as a threat.
• Alliances:EIC with the Marathas and the Nizam.
• Outcome:British victory at Seringapatam (1799).
• Consequences:
  • Tipu Sultan’s death and end of Mysore as an independent kingdom.
  • British imposition of a puppet ruler and the Subsidiary Alliance system.

Significance of the Anglo- Mysore Wars

• Weakened Mysore’s power and paved the way for eventual British dominance in South India.
• Highlighted the strategic importance of the Mysore region for controlling South Indian trade routes.
• Established a pattern of alliances and betrayals among Indian powers and the EIC.

Tipu Sultan: A Complex Legacy

Military Leader and Modernizer

• Son of Haidar Ali, rose to power in 1782.
• Known as the “Tiger of Mysore” for his military prowess.
• Modernized his army with European influence and introduced rocket technology.
• Patron of science and technology, interested in naval development.

Administration and Diplomacy

• Supported French revolutionaries and adopted some of their ideals (Jacobin Club).
• Promoted economic development, including sericulture.
• Viewed by some as a tolerant ruler, by others as a bigot.
• Suppressed rebellions from both Hindus and Muslims.
• Maintained some Hindu temples within his kingdom.

Controversial Legacy

• British portrayed him as a fanatic, a view challenged by modern historians.
• Complexities in religious policies: protected some temples, demolished others.
• Ruled during a time of warfare and political instability.

Mysore After Tipu

• British divided Mysore’s territory among themselves, Marathas, and the Nizam.
• Re-established the Wodeyar dynasty under British control (Subsidiary Alliance).
• Mysore briefly taken over by the British in 1831 due to misrule, then restored in 1881.

The Anglo-Maratha Wars for Supremacy

Rise of the Marathas

• Mughal decline created an opportunity for the Marathas to expand their power.
• Controlled vast territories and collected tributes beyond their direct rule.
• Aimed to become rulers of North India in the mid-18th century.
• Maratha Confederacy:
  • Formed by Peshwa Bajirao I to manage Maratha expansion.
  • Key Maratha families: Gaekwad, Bhonsle, Holkar, Sindhia, Peshwa.
  • Weakened after the Third Battle of Panipat (1761) and death of Madhavrao I (1772).

Entry of the English

• Late 18th-Early 19th century: Three Anglo-Maratha Wars for supremacy.
• Causes:
  • English ambition to expand control.
  • Internal divisions within the Marathas.
  • English desire to replicate Bengal’s governance model in Bombay.

First Anglo-Maratha War (1775-1782)

• Background:
  • Power struggle following Madhavrao I’s death (1772).
  • Raghunathrao sought English aid against the Peshwa regency.
  • Treaty of Surat (1775): Raghunathrao ceded Salsette, Bassein to the English.
  • Treaty of Purandhar (1776): Peshwa regency renounced Raghunathrao.
• Course of War:
  • Initial Maratha victories under Mahadji Shinde.
  • Treaty of Wadgaon (1779): English surrendered after being surrounded.
  • Renewed conflict: English captured key Maratha territories.
• Treaty of Salbai (1782):
  • Ended the first phase of the war.
  • Key points:
    • Salsette remained with the English.
    • Most conquered territories returned to the Marathas.
    • Raghunathrao received a pension.
    • 20-year peace agreement.

Second Anglo-Maratha War (1803-1805)

Seeds of Conflict

• Similar to the first war, internal Maratha divisions provided an opportunity for the British.
• Peshwa Madhavrao Narayan’s suicide (1795) led to Bajirao II becoming Peshwa.
• Tension between Bajirao II and Nana Phadnavis (chief minister) created instability.
• Nana Phadnavis’ death in 1800 further weakened Maratha unity.

Course of War

• 1801: Peshwa Bajirao II murdered Jaswantrao Holkar’s brother, sparking conflict.
• Holkar defeated Peshwa and Scindia at Hadapsar (1802), installing Vinayakrao as Peshwa.
• Fearing Holkar, Bajirao II signed the Treaty of Bassein with the British (1802).

Treaty of Bassein (1802): A Turning Point

• Key terms for the Peshwa:
  • Accept a British subsidiary force stationed in his territory.
  • Cede territories to the British.
  • Surrender control over Surat city.
  • Give up claims on certain taxes.
  • Accept British arbitration in disputes.
  • Restrict foreign relations with European powers.
• Significance:
  • Gave the British a strategic foothold in Maratha territory.
  • Weakened Maratha independence by placing the Peshwa under British control.
  • Paved the way for further British expansion in India.

Maratha Resistance and British Victory

• Scindia and Bhonsle opposed the treaty and fought the British.
• Defeated by British forces under Arthur Wellesley (later Duke of Wellington).
• 1803-1804: Separate subsidiary treaties forced upon Scindia, Bhonsle, and Holkar.
• Marathas were reduced to vassals of the British and isolated from each other.

Impact of the Treaty of Bassein

• Though controversial, the treaty significantly benefited the British.
• Increased British military presence in central India.
• Set the stage for eventual Maratha defeat and British dominance.

Third Anglo-Maratha War (1817-1819)

Causes

• British Expansion:Lord Hastings sought to expand British control in India.
• Pindari Raids:Maratha mercenaries (Pindaris) raided British territories, creating tension.
• Treaty of Bassein:Angered other Maratha chiefs who saw it as a loss of independence.
• Maratha Unity:A temporary alliance formed against the British threat.

Course of War

• The Marathas launched attacks against British residencies in Pune and Nagpur.
• However, the Marathas were weakened by internal issues:
  • Poor administration and leadership.
  • Lack of unity among Maratha states.
• The British responded swiftly and decisively, defeating the Peshwa, Bhonsle, and Holkar.

Results

• Key Treaties:
  • Treaty of Poona (1817) with the Peshwa.
  • Treaty of Gwalior (1817) with Scindia.
  • Treaty of Mandasor (1818) with Holkar.
• Peshwa surrendered in 1818, ending the Maratha confederacy.
• Peshwaship abolished and Bajirao II became a British pensioner.
• A small state of Satara established under a descendant of Shivaji.

Significance

• Marked the end of Maratha power and established British dominance in India.

Why the Marathas Lost to the British

The Marathas’ defeat stemmed from several factors contributing to their decline:

• Ineffective Leadership:Later Maratha leaders lacked vision and unity compared to British officials like Elphinstone and Wellesley.
• Flawed State Structure:The Maratha state lacked a strong national identity and focus on social reforms unlike the British.
• Loose Political Confederacy:Internal rivalries and semi-independent Maratha chiefs weakened their collective power.
• Inferior Military:The Marathas lagged behind in military organization, weaponry, and discipline compared to the British.
• Unstable Economy:The Maratha leadership failed to develop a sound economic system to support their military and infrastructure.
• British Diplomatic Superiority:The British skillfully exploited Maratha disunity through alliances and a strong spy network.
• Outdated Social Structure:The Marathas clung to traditional social hierarchies, hindering national unity.

In essence, the Marathas’ weaknesses left them vulnerable to a more organized and strategically superior British force.

 

Conquest of Sindh by the British (Early 19th Century)

British Interest in Sindh

• Early 19th century: British interest in Sindh grew due to existing trade privileges granted by the Mughals.

Rise of Talpur Amirs

• 18th century: Talpuras, a Baluch tribe, rose to power in Sindh.
• Established control by 1783 under Mir Fath Ali Khan.
• Divided Sindh among brothers (Amirs) after his death (1800).

Early British Interactions

• 1758: British factory built at Thatta under Kallora rule.
• 1761: Kallora ruler confirmed trade privileges and excluded other Europeans.
• 1775: Tensions rose under a new ruler, leading to the closure of the British factory.

Napoleon and the “Great Game”

• Late 18th century: Fear of a Napoleon-Tipu Sultan alliance against India.
• 1799: Negotiations with Mir Fath Ali Khan to counter the perceived threat (unsuccessful).
• 1807: Treaty of “Eternal Friendship” signed under Lord Minto’s administration.
  • Aimed to create a barrier between Russia and British India.
  • Key points:
    • Excluded French from Sindh.
    • Exchanged diplomatic agents.

Treaty of 1832 (Bentinck Era)

• Provisions:
  • Free passage on the Indus for trade (excluding warships and war materials).
  • No British settlements in Sindh (travelers needed passports).
  • Amirs to cooperate with Jodhpur to control bandits.
  • Renewed old treaties.

Lord Auckland and Escalation

• 1836: Lord Auckland saw Sindh as strategic for Afghan affairs.
• 1838: New treaty imposed after Ranjit Singh captured a Sindhi town.
  • Offered protection in exchange for British troops stationed in the capital (at Amir’s expense).
  • Established a British resident with unrestricted movement.
• Tripartite Treaty of 1838:
  • Britain, Ranjit Singh, and Shah Shuja agreed on Afghan policy.
  • Shah Shuja surrendered claims on Sindh for British support.

Subsidiary Alliance (1839)

• British pressured Amirs to accept a subsidiary alliance.
• Key terms:
  • British troops stationed at Shikarpur and Bukkar.
  • Annual payment of Rs. 3 lakh for troop maintenance.
  • No foreign negotiations without British consent.
  • Provide supplies and abolish tolls on the Indus.
  • Assist in the Afghan War (1839-1842).

Capitulation and Annexation (1843)

• Amirs accused of disloyalty and hostility after the Afghan War.
• Forced to cede territories and accept further restrictions.
• Uprising led by the Amirs crushed by Charles Napier.
• Sindh annexed to the British Empire in 1843 under Governor-General Ellenborough.

Criticisms

• Historians condemn the conquest as a case of manufactured justifications.
• Seen as a power grab to compensate for British failures in Afghanistan.

 

Conquest of Punjab by the British

Consolidation of Sikh Power

• After Guru Gobind Singh’s death, Sikhs faced Mughal persecution and internal divisions.
• In 1721, Bhai Mani Singh helped reunite the Sikhs.
• Kapur Singh Faizullapuria formed the Dal Khalsa in 1784, uniting Sikhs politically and militarily.
• The weakness of the Mughals and Afghan invasions created opportunities for the Sikhs.
• Sikhs consolidated power through Misls, independent military groups with democratic structures.
• By the 18th century, numerous Misls ruled Punjab under Sikh chieftains.

Rise of Ranjit Singh

• Ranjit Singh, born in 1780, belonged to the Sukerchakiya Misl.
• He displayed political acumen from a young age.
• By the late 18th century, many Misls weakened, while Afghanistan faced internal struggles.
• Ranjit Singh used this instability to expand his territory through military conquest.
• He captured Lahore (political capital) and Amritsar (religious capital) by 1805.
• He maintained good relations with Dogras and Nepalese, incorporating them into his army.

Ranjit Singh and the British

• Fearing a Franco-Russian invasion, the British sent a mission to Lahore in 1807.
• Negotiations failed as Ranjit Singh wanted British neutrality in the Sikh-Afghan conflict and control of all Punjab, including territories south of the Sutlej River.
• In 1809, Ranjit Singh signed the Treaty of Amritsar, recognizing the Sutlej as the boundary between his kingdom and British India.
• He then focused on expanding westward, capturing Multan (1818), Kashmir (1819), and Peshawar (1834).
• In 1838, he signed the Tripartite Treaty with the British but refused them passage through his land to attack Afghanistan.
• Ranjit Singh’s reign (1809-1839) was marked by cautious diplomacy due to British power.

Punjab After Ranjit Singh

• After Ranjit Singh’s death in 1839, the Sikh empire began to decline.
• His successor, Kharak Singh, was weak, and court factions emerged.
• Kharak Singh and his son Nau Nihal Singh died within a year, creating chaos.
• The Sikh army, once strong, was weakened by internal conflicts, indiscipline, and unpaid troops.
• The Lahore government allowed British troops passage through Punjab during their Afghan campaign (1838-1842), disrupting the region.

Power Struggles and British Intervention

• A series of assassinations and power struggles between various groups followed.
• Rani Jindan, regent for the young Maharaja Daleep Singh, and her allies jockeyed for control.
• The Sikh army became increasingly dissatisfied with the Lahore government.
• British intervention grew as they saw an opportunity to exploit the instability.

The Anglo-Sikh Wars (1845-1849)

First Anglo-Sikh War (1845-1846)

• Causes:
  • Instability in Lahore after Ranjit Singh’s death (power struggle between Lahore court and the Sikh army).
  • Sikh suspicion of British expansionism (annexation of Gwalior, Sindh, and Afghan campaign).
  • British troop build-up near the Sikh border.
• Course of the War:
  • December 1845: War begins with Sikh army crossing the Sutlej.
  • Sikhs outnumbered British but suffered defeats due to treachery (Lal Singh and Teja Singh).
  • Key Battles: Mudki, Ferozeshah, Buddelwal, Aliwal, Sobraon (British victories).
  • February 1846: Lahore falls to British without resistance.
• Treaty of Lahore (March 1846):
  • Heavy war indemnity for Sikhs.
  • Jalandhar Doab annexed by British.
  • British resident established in Lahore.
  • Sikh army reduced in size.
  • Kashmir sold to Gulab Singh (separate treaty).
  • Daleep Singh remains ruler under Rani Jindan (regent) and Lal Singh (wazir).

Treaty of Bhairowal (December 1846):

• Sikhs dissatisfied with Lahore Treaty, particularly Kashmir’s loss.
• Rani Jindan removed as regent, replaced by a British-controlled council.

Second Anglo-Sikh War (1848-1849):

• Causes:
  • Humiliation of Sikh defeat and treaty terms.
  • Mistreatment of Rani Jindan.
  • Multan governor’s revolt against British revenue demands.
  • Sher Singh joining the revolt, triggering a wider uprising.
  • Lord Dalhousie’s expansionist ambitions.
• Course of the War:
  • British forces led by Lord Dalhousie.
  • Key Battles: Ramnagar, Chillianwala, Gujarat (British victories).
  • February 1849: Sikh surrender at Rawalpindi.
• Result:
  • Annexation of Punjab.
  • Sikh army and Sher Singh surrender.
  • Dalhousie promoted for his “services.”
  • Three-member board (Lawrence brothers and Charles Mansel) established to govern Punjab (later replaced by a chief commissioner).

Significance:

• Despite initial animosity, the wars fostered a sense of mutual respect between Sikhs and British for their fighting skills.
• Sikhs later served loyally in the British army, including the 1857 Sepoy Mutiny.

 

British Expansion Through Administrative Policy (1757-1857)

Methods of Expansion:

• Annexation by Conquest:Covered previously.
• Annexation by Diplomacy and Administration:This section explores three key policies.

1. Ring Fence Policy (Warren Hastings):

• Goal:Create buffer zones to protect British territories.
• Method:Ally with neighboring states and offer military support in exchange for financial contributions.
• Example:Awadh paid to defend against Afghan invaders and Marathas.

2. Subsidiary Alliance (Lord Wellesley):

• Goal:Establish British control over Indian states without direct conquest.
• Key Features:
  • Indian ruler stations British troops within their territory (financed by the ruler).
  • British Resident stationed at the Indian court.
  • Indian ruler cannot employ Europeans without British approval.
  • Indian ruler cannot wage war or negotiate with other states independently.
  • British offer military protection from external threats.
• Benefits for British:
  • Strategic troop placement.
  • Weakened Indian militaries.
  • Increased revenue from troop maintenance payments.
  • Control over Indian foreign policy.
• Drawbacks for Indian states:
  • Loss of independence.
  • Financial burden of maintaining British troops.
  • Limited ability to defend themselves.
  • Vulnerability to British interference in internal affairs.
• Evolution:
  • Started with offering military aid.
  • Progressed to demanding territory for troop maintenance.
  • Ended with potential annexation for non-payment.
• States Accepting Alliance:
  • Hyderabad, Mysore, Tanjore, Awadh, Peshwa, Bhonsle Raja of Berar, Scindia, Rajput states, Holkars.

3. Doctrine of Lapse (Lord Dalhousie):

• Claim:An Indian ruler without a natural heir could not adopt a successor; the state “lapsed” to the British.
• Justification (disputed):Based on Hindu law and custom (though unclear).
• Application:
  • Dalhousie enthusiastically applied the doctrine, annexing several states.
  • Most significant annexations: Satara, Jhansi, Nagpur.
• Criticisms:
  • Doctrine potentially misused for expansion.
  • Ignored the legitimacy of adopted heirs.
  • Increased resentment among Indian rulers.

Impact of Administrative Policies:

• Gradual expansion of British control across India.
• Weakening of Indian states through financial burdens and military limitations.
• Increased British influence in internal affairs.
• Seeds of discontent sown among Indian rulers (played a role in the 1857 Sepoy Mutiny).

Additional Notes:

• Annexation of Awadh (1856):
  • Justified by Dalhousie due to alleged misrule.
  • Seen as a harsh political move that contributed to the 1857 Sepoy Mutiny.

 

British India’s Relations with Neighboring Countries

Anglo-Bhutanese Relations

• British Occupation of Assam (1826):Increased interaction with Bhutan.
• Bhutanese Raids and Treaty (1863-1864):
  • Bhutanese raided Bengal and Assam.
  • British forced to surrender passes to Assam through a harsh treaty.
• British Annexation and Subsidy (1865):
  • British annexed the surrendered passes.
  • Bhutan ceded land in exchange for an annual subsidy.
  • Annexed land became productive with tea plantations.

Anglo-Nepalese Relations

• Gorkha Expansion (1760s-1800s):
  • Gorkhas took control of Nepal and expanded southward.
  • British annexed Gorakhpur (1801), bordering Nepal.
• Anglo-Nepalese War (1813-1816):
  • Caused by Gorkha capture of Butwal and Sheoraj.
  • Ended with Treaty of Sagauli (1816) favoring the British.
• Treaty of Sagauli (1816):
  • Nepal accepted a British resident.
  • Ceded Garhwal, Kumaon districts and abandoned claims to Terai.
  • Withdrew from Sikkim.
• Benefits for British:
  • Extended empire to the Himalayas.
  • Improved trade with Central Asia.
  • Gained hill stations (Shimla, Mussoorie, Nainital).
  • Gorkhas recruited into the British Indian Army.

Anglo-Burmese Relations

• Burmese Expansion and British Interests:
  • Early 19th century, Burma sought westward expansion.
  • British desired Burmese resources, markets, and to counter French influence.
• Three Anglo-Burmese Wars (19th Century):Resulted in Burma’s annexation (1885).

First Burma War (1824-1826):

• Caused by:
  • Burmese expansion into Arakan, Manipur, threatening Assam.
  • Ill-defined border leading to friction.
• Treaty of Yandabo (1826):
  • Burma paid war compensation (1 crore rupees).
  • Ceded Arakan and Tenasserim provinces.
  • Abandoned claims on Assam, Cachar, Jaintia.
  • Recognized Manipur’s independence.
  • Agreed to a commercial treaty and British resident in Ava.

Second Burma War (1852):

• Caused by:
  • British desire for Burmese resources and market access.
• Outcome: British occupied Pegu (remaining coastal province).

Third Burma War (1885):

• Caused by:
  • Anti-British King Thibaw and French influence in Burma.
  • British commercial grievances and fines.
• Outcome: British annexed Upper Burma.
  • Led to Burmese guerrilla resistance and later nationalist movements.
  • Burma separated from India (1935) and gained independence (1948).

 

Anglo-Tibetan Relations

Background:

• Tibet ruled by Buddhist monks (lamas) under loose Chinese control.
• British attempts at friendly relations had failed.
• British concerns:
  • Growing Russian influence in Lhasa.
  • Rumors of Russian arms in Tibet.

British Expedition (1904):

• Viceroy Curzon sent a military mission (led by Younghusband) to pressure Tibet.
• Tibetans refused negotiations and offered non-violent resistance.
• Younghusband forced his way to Lhasa (August 1904), Dalai Lama fled.

Treaty of Lhasa (1904):

• Harsh terms dictated by Younghusband:
  • Indemnity of 75 lakh rupees.
  • British occupation of Chumbi Valley for 75 years.
  • Recognition of Sikkim’s frontier.
  • Trade marts opened in Tibetan towns.
  • Tibet restricted foreign concessions and gave Britain some control over foreign affairs.
• Treaty revised later:
  • Indemnity reduced to 25 lakh rupees.
  • Chumbi Valley evacuated after 3 years (actually in 1908).

Significance:

• China ultimately benefitted:
  • Anglo-Russian convention (1907) limited outside influence in Tibet.
• British achieved:
  • Countering Russian influence (though temporary).

 

Anglo-Afghan Relations

Context:

• Early 19th century:
  • Increased Russian influence in Persia worried the British.
  • British sought a “scientific frontier” for India’s defense.
  • Desire for a friendly Afghanistan.

Forward Policy (1830s):

• Governor-General Auckland advocated for an active defense strategy.
• Goals:
  • Secure borders through treaties or annexation.
  • Install a friendly ruler in Afghanistan.

First Anglo-Afghan War (1839-1842):

• Dethroning Dost Mohammed and installing Shah Shuja failed.
• Afghan rebellion forced British retreat.
• British defeat:
  • Costly war (1.5 crore rupees, 20,000 casualties).
  • Reinforced Afghan independence sentiment.

Masterly Inactivity (1860s):

• Viceroy John Lawrence adopted a cautious approach.
• Policy:
  • Non-interference in Afghan internal affairs.
  • Maintain peace on the frontier.

Proud Reserve (1870s):

• Viceroy Lytton reversed the previous policy.
• Sought to define clear borders and influence spheres.

Second Anglo-Afghan War (1878-1880):

• Lytton’s forceful diplomacy alienated Sher Ali Khan (Afghan ruler).
• British invasion followed by Treaty of Gandamak (1879).
• Popular uprising forced British back into war.
• Abdur Rahman Khan became new Amir.
• British abandoned plans to dismember Afghanistan.

Aftermath:

• Afghanistan remained a buffer state between British India and Russia.
• Afghans regained full independence after World War I (1919).

 

British India and the North-West Frontier

British Expansion:

• Conquest of Sindh (1843) and Punjab (1849) brought them to the border with Afghanistan.

Tribal Control:

• Faced independent Baluch and Pathan tribes with nominal Afghan suzerainty.

Durand Line (1893):

• Defined Afghan and British territories.
• Aimed to maintain peace but led to tribal uprisings.

Curzon’s Policies (1899-1905):

• Withdrew troops from advanced posts.
• Replaced them with trained tribal levies led by British officers.
• Encouraged peace among tribes.
• Established North-West Frontier Province (NWFP) under central control.

Outcome:

• Curzon’s policies brought temporary peace to the region.
• NWFP became a Governor’s province in 1932 (now part of Pakistan).