Rise of English East India Company as political power
- Was the conquest of India a result of British policy?
- British arguments:
- Britain has no such policy and the conquest of India was the product of sub-imperialism.
- Which are the result of policies and actions and personal ambitions of senior officials of EIC like Robert Clive (Governor of Culcutta presidency), Richard Wellesley (Governor general of Bengal from 1798-1805), Hasting (Governor general of Bengal,1813-23), Dalhousie(Governor-general of India, 1848-56).
- They had personal ambitions for British polity and a personal desire for empire-building.
- Many senior EIC officials build good political careers after they retire from EIC.
- For example, Wellesley became Secretary of State, a cabinet member.
- In the Pitts India act of 1784, there was a parliamentary prohibition on conquest in India.
- The goal behind the royal charter of 1600 was trade and not empire building.
- Indian arguments:
- Yes, there was sub-imperialism in India, however, the British state cannot escape responsibility for imperialism in India as a tool of conquest TO EIC by the state as a charter of EIC that was a founding document issued by the state (initially by the crown and later by parliament)
- It gave power to EIC to wage war, sign treaties, acquire territory, and administer them.
- EIC had the military support of the Royal military in its military conflicts and without the royal military EIC could not have begun the conquest of India (Battle of Plassey 1757).
- Even the 1857 revolt was crushed with the help of the royal military.
- The state assisted EIC in setting up and developing EIC presidencies, for example, Bombay was given an annual rent of just 10 pounds to EIC by the crown.
- Therefore state helped EIC set up a strong base in India leading to higher profits via trade that led to the capability of EIC to have its big army.
- British crown, state, and important figures in British polity benefited monetarily from EIC trade and conquest.
- For example, 17,000 pounds were given by EIC to the crown/monarchy in the 17th century in return for the renewal of charters.
- In 1698, parliament auctioned the monopoly of British trade with east the New Company as it offered a 2 million pounds loan Vs 700,000 pounds offered by EIC(In 1709 EIC and New Company merged).
- In 1767, EIC was mandated by parliament/state to pay 400,000 pounds/ annum to the state therefore state wanted its share of EIC loot of Bengal after the battle of Plassey in 1757 and the battle of Buxar in 1764.
- Important figures were shareholders of EIC, for example, many parliamentarians and Queen Elizabeth herself.
- EIC became an important tool of the foreign policy of Britain as EIC dominated international trade in Britain.
- After the regulation act of 1773 and the Pitts India act of 1784, EIC affairs in India came under the supervision and control of the British state, and the board of control could pass binding orders to EIC.
- Now the principal servants of EIC in India could only be appointed after the approval of the crown.
- Therefore even if imperialism was not possible for the British state and opportunity made use of and even created by important EIC officials in India, that is sub-imperialism, the British state cannot escape responsibility for imperialism in India.
Events in empire building by EIC
- EIC Vs Aurangzeb,1686:
- EIC attacked the Mughals in Bengal as Aurangzeb's constant warfare hurt the overland trade, therefore hurting EIC's oceanic trade.
- EIC was crushed but then forgiven in return for 1.5 lakh rupees compensation as:
- Mughals got revenue from EIC in form of customs duties and from Indian merchants who sold goods to EIC in form of domestic taxes.
- Indian merchants got business from EIC.
- The inflow of gold due to EIC exports from India.
- Indian peasants and Artisans benefited as EIC trade generated demands for their goods.
- In fact, in 1691, Aurangzeb issued a Royal Farman that gave EIC the right to duty-free trade in return for just 3000 rupees/annum.
- Role of Britain-France rivalry:
- Role of Britain-France Rivalry.
- 3 Carnatic wars, 1746-48, 1749-54, and 1756-63.
- Battle of Plassey.
- 4th Anglo-Mysore war, 1799.
1st Carnatic war, 1746-48
- It was part of and the result of the Austrian war of succession in 1740-48.
- Where Britain and France with their allies fought in Europe, the Americas, and India.
- Dupleix was governor of the french EIC in Pondicerry(the main base of french in India since 1664).
- He has personal ambitions of empire-building and wanted the french EIC to dominate the international trade of South India.
- The conflict began in 1746 after capturing Fort Siant George in Madras, Dupleix refused to hand it over as promised to Nawab of Carnatic.
- This led to the 1st Carnatic 1746-178 with Carnatic and British EIC Vs French EIC.
- War was won by Dupleix, however, in North America British were victorious, and for France, its American possession was more important.
- Therefore under the treaty of Ax-la-Chaple 1748, France got back its possession in North America while the British got back Madras, therefore, status-quo was maintained.
- Now Dupleix searched for the next opportunity to increase french influence and this led to the 2nd Carnatic war.
The topic for the next class: 2nd Carnatic wars.
Here are 40 multiple-choice questions based on the class notes:
1. Who dominated European trade with the East before the age of discovery?
a) Arab traders
b) Dutch traders
c) Portuguese traders
d) Italian traders
Answer: d) Italian traders
2. What triggered the search for a northwest trade route to the East?
a) Conquest of Constantinople by the Ottoman Empire
b) Columbus' discovery of Central America
c) Vasco-de-Gama's discovery of a route to India
d) Amerigo Vespucci's discovery of South America
Answer: a) Conquest of Constantinople by the Ottoman Empire
3. Which European power dominated international trade in the East Indies for 100 years?
a) Dutch
b) Portuguese
c) British
d) French
Answer: b) Portuguese
4. What was the policy of the Portuguese in India?
a) Building a political empire in India
b) Dominating the high seas and oceanic trade
c) Establishing factories and trading centers
d) Engaging in forced conversions to Christianity
Answer: b) Dominating the high seas and oceanic trade
5. Which naval powers challenged Portuguese dominance in the late 16th century?
a) Dutch and French
b) Dutch and British
c) British and French
d) Spanish and Dutch
Answer: b) Dutch and British
6. When was the English East India Company (EIC) established?
a) 1600
b) 1612
c) 1652
d) 1681
Answer: a) 1600
7. What were the tools given to the EIC by the royal charter of 1600?
a) Monopoly over British trade with the East Indies
b) Right to wage war and acquire territories
c) Permission to administer acquired territories
d) All of the above
Answer: d) All of the above
8. Which presidencies served as regional headquarters of the EIC trade in India?
a) Madras, Bombay, and Calcutta
b) Madras, Delhi, and Calcutta
c) Bombay, Delhi, and Calcutta
d) Madras, Bombay, and Delhi
Answer: a) Madras, Bombay, and Calcutta
9. When did the British defeat the Portuguese navy in Surat?
a) 1608
b) 1612
c) 1620
d) 1661
Answer: c) 1620
10. Who became the Secretary of State in the British Cabinet after retiring from the EIC?
a) Robert Clive
b) Richard Wellesley
c) Warren Hastings
d) Thomas Roe
Answer: b) Richard Wellesley
11. Was the conquest of India solely the result of British policy?
a) Yes, it was a result of sub-imperialism.
b) No, it was the personal ambitions of EIC officials.
c) Yes, it was the result of British state support.
d) No, it was the result of Indian resistance.
Answer: b) No, it was the personal ambitions of EIC officials.
12. Which war led to the 1st Carnatic War in India?
a) War of Austrian Succession
b) American War of Independence
c) Seven Years' War
d) War of Spanish Succession
Answer: a) War
of Austrian Succession
13. Who was the governor of the French EIC during the 1st Carnatic War?
a) Vasco da Gama
b) Dupleix
c) Robert Clive
d) Warren Hastings
Answer: b) Dupleix
14. What happened in the 1st Carnatic War?
a) French captured Fort St. George in Madras
b) British captured Pondicherry
c) French defeated the Nawab of Carnatic
d) British defeated Dupleix
Answer: a) French captured Fort St. George in Madras
15. Which treaty ended the 1st Carnatic War?
a) Treaty of Paris
b) Treaty of Aix-la-Chapelle
c) Treaty of Versailles
d) Treaty of Ax-la-Chapelle
Answer: d) Treaty of Ax-la-Chapelle
16. Who benefited from the British EIC trade with India?
a) British crown and important figures in British polity
b) Indian peasants and artisans
c) Both a) and b)
d) None of the above
Answer: c) Both a) and b)
17. How did the British state assist the EIC in India?
a) Military support
b) Setting up and developing EIC presidencies
c) Financial benefits
d) All of the above
Answer: d) All of the above
18. What was the role of the British state after the Regulation Act of 1773 and the Pitts India Act of 1784?
a) Supervision and control of EIC affairs in India
b) Appointment of EIC officials
c) Passing binding orders to EIC
d) All of the above
Answer: d) All of the above
19. Which war led to the Battle of Plassey?
a) 1st Carnatic War
b) 2nd Carnatic War
c) 3rd Carnatic War
d) 4th Anglo-Mysore War
Answer: c) 3rd Carnatic War
20. Who emerged as the victor in the Battle of Plassey?
a) British East India Company
b) French East India Company
c) Dutch East India Company
d) Portuguese East India Company
Answer: a) British East India Company
21. What was the significance of the Battle of Plassey?
a) Established British dominance in Bengal
b) Led to the decline of the Mughal Empire
c) Strengthened the position of the British East India Company
d) All of the above
Answer: d) All of the above
22. How did Aurangzeb react to the attacks by the EIC in Bengal in 1686?
a) Crushed the EIC and forgave them in return for compensation
b) Formed an alliance with the EIC against other European powers
c) Ignored the attacks and focused on overland trade
d) Annexed Bengal and expelled the EIC from India
Answer: a) Crushed the EIC and forgave them in return for compensation
23. What was the impact of EIC trade on Indian peasants and artisans?
a) Increased demands for their goods
b) Improved living standards
c) Financial support from the EIC
d) All of the above
Answer: d) All of the above
24. How did the British crown benefit from EIC trade?
a) Receiving monetary contributions from the EIC
b) Shareholdership in the EIC
c) Control over EIC affairs
d) All of the above
Answer: d) All of the above
25. Which war led to the 4th Anglo-Mysore War in 1799?
a) War of Austrian Succession
b) American War of Independence
c) Seven Years' War
d) French Revolutionary Wars
Answer: d) French Revolutionary Wars
26. Who was the Governor-General of Bengal from 1798-1805?
a) Robert Clive
b) Richard Wellesley
c) Warren Hastings
d) Lord Dalhousie
Answer: b) Richard Wellesley
27. What were the personal ambitions of senior EIC officials?
a) Building a British empire in India
b) Gaining political power in British polity
c) Increasing profits for the EIC
d) All of the above
Answer: d) All of the above
28. Who appointed the principal servants of the EIC in India?
a) British crown
b) Board of Control
c) British Parliament
d) EIC shareholders
Answer: a) British crown
29. Which act prohibited conquest in India by the EIC?
a) Charter Act of 1600
b) Pitts India Act of 1784
c) Charter Act of 1833
d) Charter Act of 1853
Answer: b) Pitts India Act of 1784
30. What was the goal behind the royal charter of 1600?
a) Trade with India
b) Establishing a British empire
c) Colonization of India
d) Spread of Christianity
Answer: a) Trade with India
31. Who had the military support of the Royal military in India?
a) French East India Company
b) Dutch East India Company
c) British East India Company
d) Portuguese East India Company
Answer: c) British East India Company
32. How did the British state benefit monetarily from EIC trade and conquest?
a) Renewal of charters
b) Auctioning trade monopolies
c) Receiving annual payments from the EIC
d) All of the above
Answer: d) All of the above
33. Which war marked the beginning of the British conquest of India?
a) 1st Carnatic War
b) Battle of Plassey
c) 3rd Carnatic War
d) 4th Anglo-Mysore War
Answer: b) Battle of Plassey
34. Who controlled international trade in Britain during the dominance of the EIC?
a) Dutch East India Company
b) French East India Company
c) British East India Company
d) Spanish East India Company
Answer: c) British East India Company
35. When did the EIC presidencies in India come under the control of the British state?
a) Regulation Act of 1773
b) Charter Act of 1600
c) Pitts India Act of 1784
d) Charter Act of 1833
Answer: a) Regulation Act of 1773
36. What was the role of the Board of Control in relation to the EIC?
a) Supervision and control of EIC affairs
b) Appointment of EIC officials
c) Passing binding orders
to EIC
d) All of the above
Answer: d) All of the above
37. Who was the Governor-General of India during the Battle of Plassey?
a) Robert Clive
b) Warren Hastings
c) Richard Wellesley
d) Lord Dalhousie
Answer: a) Robert Clive
38. Which act abolished the EIC and transferred control of India to the British crown?
a) Charter Act of 1600
b) Pitts India Act of 1784
c) Charter Act of 1833
d) Charter Act of 1853
Answer: c) Charter Act of 1833
39. What was the impact of EIC rule on India's economy?
a) Drain of wealth from India to Britain
b) Destruction of local industries
c) Introduction of cash crops
d) All of the above
Answer: d) All of the above
40. When did India gain independence from British rule?
a) 1757
b) 1857
c) 1947
d) 1957
Answer: c) 1947
Q1: Was the conquest of India a result of British policy or the personal ambitions of senior officials of the English East India Company (EIC)?
Answer: The conquest of India was a result of both British policy and the personal ambitions of senior officials of the EIC. The British argue that there was no specific policy of conquest, and the sub-imperialism in India was the product of individual actions and ambitions of EIC officials like Robert Clive, Richard Wellesley, Hastings, and Dalhousie. These officials had personal ambitions for British polity and desired to build an empire. Many of them even pursued successful political careers after retiring from the EIC, with Wellesley becoming a cabinet member.
On the other hand, Indian arguments suggest that while sub-imperialism played a role, the British state cannot escape responsibility for imperialism in India. The state actively supported the EIC in its conquest of India. The EIC had the military support of the Royal military in its conflicts, and without this support, the EIC could not have initiated the conquest, as seen in the Battle of Plassey in 1757. Even the suppression of the 1857 revolt relied on the assistance of the royal military.
Furthermore, the state assisted the EIC in setting up and developing EIC presidencies in India. For instance, the crown provided Bombay presidency an annual rent of just 10 pounds, which helped establish a strong base for the EIC in India, leading to higher profits through trade and the ability to maintain a large army. The British crown, state, and important figures in British polity also benefited monetarily from EIC trade and conquest. Shareholders of the EIC included parliamentarians and even Queen Elizabeth herself.
After the Regulation Act of 1773 and the Pitts India Act of 1784, the British state gained direct supervision and control over EIC affairs, and the Board of Control could pass binding orders to the EIC. The crown also had the authority to approve the appointment of principal servants of the EIC in India. Therefore, while individual ambitions played a role, the British state cannot absolve itself of responsibility for imperialism in India.
Q2: Discuss the events in the empire building by the English East India Company (EIC).
Answer: The English East India Company (EIC) engaged in various events that contributed to its empire building in India. Two notable events in this process are the EIC's conflict with Aurangzeb in 1686 and the role of Britain-France rivalry in India.
In 1686, the EIC attacked the Mughals in Bengal due to Aurangzeb's constant warfare, which disrupted overland trade and, in turn, affected EIC's oceanic trade. Although the EIC was initially defeated, it was eventually forgiven by Aurangzeb in return for a compensation of 1.5 lakh rupees. The Mughals benefited from revenue generated through customs duties imposed on the EIC's trade and domestic taxes levied on Indian merchants selling goods to the company. Indian merchants also benefited from increased business opportunities, and the inflow of gold resulted from the EIC's exports from India. Additionally, Indian peasants and artisans saw increased demand for their goods due to EIC trade, providing them with economic opportunities. These factors highlight the mutually beneficial aspects of EIC's activities in India during this period.
The rivalry between Britain and France also played a significant role in the EIC's empire building. The three Carnatic Wars (1746-48, 1749-54, and 1756-63) were a result of this rivalry. Dupleix, the governor of the French EIC in Pondicherry, aimed to dominate international trade in South India and
pursued personal ambitions of empire-building. The first Carnatic War (1746-48) was triggered when Dupleix captured Fort St. George in Madras and refused to hand it over to the Nawab of Carnatic. Although Dupleix emerged victorious in this war, the Treaty of Aix-la-Chapelle in 1748 restored the status quo, with the British regaining control of Madras.
These events demonstrate the EIC's active engagement in military conflicts and strategic alliances to expand its influence and trade in India. The rivalry between Britain and France further propelled the EIC's endeavors and shaped its empire-building efforts on the Indian subcontinent.
0 Comments