Question : “Neither Alexander the Great nor Napoleon could have won the empire of India by starting from Pondichery as a base and contending with a power which held Bengal and the command of the Sea.”
(2006)
Answer : 18th century India was marked by conflict between English and French for establishing political sway in India. In this conflict English defeated French. Important factors which contributed for the victory of England were capture of Bengal by the British and command of sea.
England and France started to struggle among each other for political supremacy in India. Three Carnatic wars were fought between them. These wars ultimately resulted into the victory of England. And by the treaty of Paris it was concluded that the French factories in India were restored but they could no longer be fortified or even adequately garrisoned with troops. They could serve with only as centres of trade and now the French lived in India under British protection. France was defeated in these wars due to making Pondichery as base. Pondichery was not a rich province in terms of resource. On the other hand the English had Bengal as a base. At that time Bengal was a rich resource Province. And resource of Bengal could be utilized for some profitable business. English utilized thin resource against France.
Also at that time English had command over sea. They utilized this also. Command over sea helped English in many way to transport arms and ammunitions, man-power etc against French. This helped British to defeat French. On the other hand French didn’t have control over sea. They were not a great naval power. They didn’t make serious effort to become a great naval power. Due to this inherent defect it can be said that neither Alexander nor Napoleon could defeat the English having Pondichery as base and by neglecting establishing control over sea. The defeat of French had a far reaching significance. For, the defeat paved the way for British to establish supremacy in South India and eventually whole of India. Also defeat of France boosted prestige of English.
Question : The battle of Plassey was 'not a great battle but a great betrayal'.
(2000)
Answer : G.B. Malleson puts it 'There never was a battle in which the consequences were so vast, so immediate and so permanent. From the very morrow of the victory the English became virtual masters of Bengal, Bihar and Orissa, 'The Battle of Plassey was of immense historical importance. It paved the way for the British mastery of Bengal and eventually the whole of India. It boosted British prestige and at a single stroke raised them to status of a major contender for the Indian Empire. The battle of plassey was hardly important from military view point. It was a mere skirmish. The total casulaties were 65 on company side and 500 in the Nawab's army. The English army showed no military superiority either in manouevre or strategy of the battle. it was desertion in Nawab's camp that gave clive the victory. After Mir Madan's death treacherous commanders held the field. If Mir Jafar and Rai Durlabh had remained faithful,, the outcome of the battle would have been different. It was treason that made clive victor. Perhaps it was in the game of diplomacy that Clive excelled. He played on the the fears of the Jagat Seth, worked up the ambition of Mir Jafar and won a victory without fighting K.M. Panniker believes that plassey war a transaction in which the rich bankers of Bengal and Mir Jafar sold out Nawab to the English.
Question : After 1757 there grew up a state of Bengal which was a 'sponsored state' as well as a 'plundered state'.
(1999)
Answer : The battle of Plassey (1757) was followed in the words of the Bengali poet Nabin Chandra Sen, by 'a night of eternal gloom for India'. The English proclaimed Mir Jafar the Nawab of Bengal and set out to gather the reward. The Company was granted undisputed right to free trade in Bengal, Bihar and Orissa. It also received the Zamindari of the 24 Parganas near Calcutta. Mir Jafar paid a sum of Rs. 17,700,000 as compensation for the attack on Calcutta to the company and the traders of the city. In addition, he paid large sums as 'gifts' or bribes to the high officials of the company. Even though Mir Jafar owed his position to the company, he soon repented the bargain he had struck. His treasury was soon emptied by the demands of the company's officials for presents and bribes, the lead in the matter being given by clive hismelf.
Mir Jafar soon discovered that it was impossible to meet the full demands; of the company and its officials, who on their part, began to criticise the Nawab for his incapacity in fulfilling their expectations. And so, in October 1760, they forced him to abdicate in favour of his son-in-law, Mir Qasim, who rewarded his benefactors by granting the company the Zamindari of the districts of Burdwan, Midnapore, and Chittagong, and giving handsome presents totalling 29 lakhs of rupees to the high English officials. Mir Qasim, however, belied English hopes, and soon emerged as a threat to their position and designs in Bengal. He was defeated in a series of battles in 1763 and fled to Award where he formed an alliance with Shuja-ud-Daulah, the Nawab of Awadh, and Shah Alam II, the fugitive Mughal Emperor. The three allies clashed with the company's army to Buxar on 22 October 1764 and were thoroughly defeated. In 1763, the British had retored Mir Jafar as Nawab and collected huge sums for the company and its high officials. On Mir Jafar's death, they placed his second son Nizam-ud-Daulah on the throne and as a reward to themselves made him sign a new treaty on 20 February 1765. By this treaty the Nawab was to disband most of his army and to administer Bengal through a Deputy Subahdar who was to be nominated by the company and who could not be dismissed without its approval.
The company thus gained supreme control over the administration (or nizamat) of Bengal. The company's authorities on their part set out to gather the rich harvest and drain Bengal of its wealth. In the years 1766, 1767 and 1768 alone, nearly £5.7 million were drained from Bengal. The abuses of the 'Dual government and the drain of wealth led to the impoverishment and exhaustion of that unlucky province. In 1770 Bengal suffered from a famine which in its effects proved one of the most terrible famines known in human history.
Question : The British conquered India 'in a fit of absent mindedness'.
(1997)
Answer : The English East India company had very humble beginnings in India. From the very beginning, it tried to combine trade and diplomacy with war and control of the territory where their factories were situated. Conditions in the South were more favourbale to the English as they did not have to face a strong Indian government there. The great Viayanagar Kingdom had been overthrown in 1565 and its place taken by a number of petty and weak states. It was easy to appeal to their greed or overawe them with armed strength. Interestingly enough, from the very beginning this company of profit-seeking merchants was also datermined to make Indians pay for the conquest of their own country.
It soon opened factories at Patna in Bihar, Balasore in Orissa and Dhaka and other places in Bengal. It now desired that in Bengal too it should have an independent settlement. It dreamt of establishing political power in India which would enable it to compel and Mughals to allow them a free hand in trade, to force Indians to sell cheap, and buy dear, to keep the rival European traders out and to make its trade independent of the policies of the Indian powers. Political power would also make it possible for it to appropriate Indian revenues and thus to conquer the country with its own resources. Such plans were explicitly put forward at the time.
The English schemes of territorial conquesets and political domination were revived during 1740s because of the visible decline of Mughal power. While they had, by the end of the 17th century, eliminated their Portuguese and Dutch rivals, France had appeared as a new rival. For nearly 20 years frok 1744 to 1763 the French and the English were to wage a bitter war for control over the trade, wealth and territory of India. The battle of Plassey in 1757 boosted British prestige and at a single stroke raised them to the status of a major contender for the Indian Empire.
Question : 'By certain of his actions Clive had marred both the glory and usefulness of his work'.
(1995)
Answer : Robert Clive was sent to Madras in 1744. He participated in first two Carnatic wars. He reached the zenith of fame due to his contribution in seize of Arcot and Pondicherry. But very soon he had to return due to illness. In 1755, Clive again came as Governor of Madras. Hearing of Black Hole Tragedy, he reached Fulta with his army and played a very important role in Battle of Plassey. In 1765 he came to India for second time as Governor of Bengal. In 1767 he returned to England where he was charged of corruption. Although he won the case but he committed suicide in 1774, due to in fame. He concluded two treaties of Allahabad in August 1765 with Shuja-ul- Daula, Nawab Wazir of Oudh, and Emperor Shah Alam II. By terms of the treaty, the Nawab had to surrender Allahabad and Kara to Emperor Shah Alam, he agreed to pay Rs. 50 lakhs to company as war indemnity and confirmed Balwant Singh, zamindar of Benaras, full possession of his estate.
Shah Alam was taken under the company’s protections and was to reside at Allahabad, in turn issued a firman dated 12th August 1765 granting in perpetuity Diwani of Bengal, Bihar and Orissa in return for the company making an annual payment of Rs. 26 lakhs to him and providing for expense of Nizamat of said provinces fixed at Rs. 53 lakhs. Clive’s political settlements showed considerable understanding of the realities of situation and political wisdom. He made Emperor and Nawab both a dependent of the Company.
Clive’s solution of the political tangle of Bengal was the setting up of the infamous Dual System whereby Company acquired real power while the responsibility for administration rested on the shoulders of the Nawab of Bengal. The Company acquired Diwani functions from the Emperor and the Nizamat functions from the Subahdar of Bengal. He forbade the servants of the Company from indulging in private trade and made payments of internal duties obligatory. To compensate the savants of the company for their low salaries and loss of income from cessation of private trade, a society of trade was formed in August 1765 with monopoly of trade in salt, betel nut and tobacco. All the production and import of these goods into Bengal was purchased by this Society and then sold at selected centres to the retailers. The evils of private trade had raised the prices of ordinary commodities of life and people of Bengal suffered. Clive decided to abolish the Society in January, 1707 but the work of the society was not actually wound up till September, 1768.