Modern History upto 1857

1757 - Battle of Plassey: The British defeat Siraj-ud-daulah

1760 - Battle of Wandiwash: The British defeat the French

1761 - Third battle of Panipat

1764 - Battle of Buxar: The British defeat Mir Kasim

1765 - The British get Diwani Rights in Bengal, Bihar and Orissa

1767 -1769 - First Mysore War

1772 - Warren Hastings appointed as Governor of Bengal

1773 - The Regulating Act passed by the British Parliament

1775 -1782 - The First Anglo-Maratha war

1780-1784 - Second Mysore War : The British defeat Hyder Ali

1784 - Pitt's India Act

1790-1792 - Third Mysore War between the British and Tipu

1793 - Permanent Settlement of Bengal

1799 - Fourth Mysore War: The British defeat Tipu

1802- Treaty of Bassein

1803-1805 - The Second Anglo-Maratha war

1814-1816 - The Anglo-Gurkha war

1817-1818 - The Pindari war

1824-1826 - The First Burmese war

1829 - Prohibition of Sati

1831 - Mysore administration taken over by East India Company

1833 - Renewal of Company's Charter

1833 - Abolition of Slavery throughout the British Empire

1838 - Tripartite treaty between Shah Shuja, Ranjit Singh and the British

1839-1842 - First Afghan war

1843 - Gwalior war

1845-1846 - First Anglo-Sikh war

1848 - Lord Dalhousie becomes the Governor-General

1848-1849 - Second Anglo-Sikh war

1852 - Second Anglo-Burmese war

1853 - Railway & Telegraph line introduced

1857 - First War of Indian Independence: The Sepoy Mutiny

1857 - Zanshichi Rani Laxmibai - Freedom struggle in 1857

1858 - British Crown takes over the Indian Government

1877 - The Queen of England proclaimed Empress of India

1878 - Vernacular Press Act

1881 - Factory Act

1885 - First meeting of the Indian National Congress

1897 - Plague in Bombay; Famine Commission

1899 - Lord Curzon becomes Governor-General and Viceroy

1905 - The First Partition of Bengal

1906 - Formation of Muslim League

1911 - Partition of Bengal modified to create the Presidency of Bengal

1912 - The Imperial capital shifted from Calcutta to Delhi

1913 - Educational Resolution of the Government of India

1915 - Defence of India Act

1916 - Home Rule League, Foundation of Women's University at Poona

1919 - Rowlatt Act evokes protests; Jalianwalla Bagh massacre;

1920 - The Khilafat Movement started, Non-co-operation Movement

1921 - Moplah (Muslim) rebellion in Malabar; Census of India

1922 - Civil Disobedience Movement, Chauri-Chaura violence

1925 - Reforms Enquiry committee Report

1927 - Indian Navy Act; Simon Commission Appointed

1928 - Simon Commission comes to India: Boycott by all parties

1929 - Lord Irwin promises Dominion Status for India; Trade Union split

1930 - Salt Satyagraha, First Round Table Conference

1931 - Second Round Table Conference; Irwin-Gandhi Pact

1932 - Third Round Table Conference, Poona Pact

1934 - Civil Disobedience Movement called off; Bihar Earthquake

1937 - Inauguration of Provincial Autonomy

1939 - Political deadlock in India as Congress ministries resign

1942 - Cripps Mission, Quit India Movement, Indian National Army

1944 - Gandhi-Jinnah Talks break down on Pakistan issue

1946 - Interim Government formed, Constituent Assembly's first meeting

1904 - 1947 - History of Indian Flag

3 June 1947 - Lord Mountbatten's plan for partition of India

15 Aug 1947 - Partition of India and Independence

Siraj Ud Daulah captures Calcutta

India's History : Medieval India : Siraj-ud-daulah captures Calcutta 1756

The Battle of Plassey

As the East India Company grew in size so did its lust for power. The decline of
the Mughal empire and the rise of regional provinces like Bengal, presented the
Company an opportunity for political interference. In 1740, Nawab Alivardi Khan
of Bengal became practically independent. In 1756, his death led to a power
struggle between his widow Ghasiti Begum and grandson Siraj Ud Daulah who
became the Nawab of Bengal.
The company's support for Ghasiti Begum earned it the wrath of Siraj. The
Company also started fortifying the Fort William without the Nawab's permission.
On 20th June 1756, Siraj attacked and took over Fort William. Many of the English
prisoners, who were imprisoned in a tiny room, died. This is often portrayed as
the Black Hole of Calcutta. Many believe that the incident has been greatly
exaggerated to suit the purpose of the Company.

The Company Fights back

The company sent in relief troops from Fort St. George of the Madras
headquarters. The troops led by Robert Clive and Admiral Watson retook Calcutta
on 2nd January, 1757. The treaty of Alinagar was signed between the Nawab and
the Company.

However Clive's military ambitions were on the ascendancy. His troops captured
the French settlement of Chandernagore. He tempted Siraj's uncle Mir Jafar to
ally with him in exchange for the Nawab's position. On 23rd June, 1757, the
Company troops marched against Siraj. Betrayed by his own men Siraj was
defeated in the Battle of Plassey, which is said to have lasted only a few hours.
He was soon assassinated in his capital Murshidabad. From being traders, the
Company turned kingmakers in Bengal and Mir Jafar was installed as the new
Nawab. Clive got his pound of flesh from the Nawab in terms of 234,000 pounds
and was awarded an annual salary of 30,000 pounds per year. This made him
one of the richest Britons in the world. The company also secure rights over a
large area south of Calcutta. Construction of a new Fort William was started and
was completed in 16 years in 1773. These events led to the rise of Calcutta and
the decline of Murshidabad.

The Battle of Wandiwash

India's History : Modern India : Battle of Wandiwash: The British defeat the
French - 1760

French defeated in Battle of Wandiwash

English and French had their companies in India. Madras and Pondicherry were
the chief trading centres for the English whereas the French centre was on the
Coromandel Coast. The relations between both the companies were uncertain.
The Carnatic region was totally disturbed politically. The governor was so
engrossed with Marathas and Northern India that he hardly had any time for the
Carnatic. Later the Marathas killed the governor. The appointment of the new
Nawab worsened the problems of the Carnatic region. But till this time the
English and French did not take active interest in Indian politics.
In 1740, England and France took opposite sides in the War of the Austrian
Succession. This brought the two companies in India technically in the state of
war. French both by sea and land had besieged Madras. So in June 1748 to
avenge the capture of Madras, a large army was sent under Rear Admiral
Boscawen. But by October the War of Austrian Succession had been concluded
and under the treaty Madras was restored to English.

Then during the second Carnatic War, where Duplex, governor of Pondicherry,
opened negotiations with the English and the treaty was concluded. The English
and the French have decided not to the quarrels of the native princes and took
possession of the territories, which are actually occupied by them during the
treaty.
In the third Carnatic war, the British East India Company defeated the French
forces at the battle of Wandiwash ending almost a century of conflict over
supremacy in India. From 1744, the French and English fought a series of battles
for supremacy in the Carnatic region. This battle gave the British trading
company a far superior position in India compared to the other Europeans.

Third Battle of Panipat

India's History : Modern India : Third battle of Panipat: Ahmed Shah Abdali
defeats the Marathas; Accession of Madhava Rao Peshwa ; Rise of Hyder ali :
1761
TITLE
Prelude to Panipat

The Mughal Empire of north-western India had been in decline for some time
after Ahmad Shah's first attacks against them in 1749, eventually culminating in
his sacking of Delhi in 1757. He left them in nominial control however, which
proved to be a fateful mistake when his son, Timur Shah, proved to be utterly
incapible of maintaining control of the Afgan troops. Soon the local Sikh
population rose in revolt and asked for the protection of the Marathas, who were
soon in Lahore. Timur ran for the hills of Afganistan.

Ahmad Shah could not allow this to go unchecked, and in 1759 rose an army
from the Pashtun tribes with help from the Baloch, and invaded India once again.
By the end of the year they had reached Lahore, but Marathas continued to pour
into the conflict and by 1760 had formed a huge single army of over 100,000 to
block him.

Setting up defensive works in the excellent ground near Panipat, they blocked
Ahmad's access back to Afganistan. They then moved in almost 150 pieces of
modern long-range rifled artillery from France. With a range of several
kilometres, these guns were some of the best in the world and a powerful force
that had previously made the Marathas invincible on the battlefield.

Siege

The Afgan forces arrived in late 1760 to find the Marathas in well-prepared
works. Realizing a direct attack was hopeless, they set up for a siege. The
resulting face-off lasted two months. During this time Ahmad continued to
receive supplies from locals, but the Marathas own supply line was cut off.

Realizing the situation was not in their favour, the Marathas under Sadashiv Bhau
decided to break the siege. His plan was to pulverise the enemy formations with
cannon fire and not to employ his cavalry until the Muslims were throughly
softened up. With the Afgans now broken, he would move camp in a defensive
formation towards Delhi, where they were assured supplies.

The line would be formed up some 12km across, with the artillery in front,
protected by infantry, pikemen, musketeers and bowmen. The cavalry was
instructed to wait behind the artillery, ready to be thrown in when control of
battlefield had been established.

Behind this line was another ring of 30,000 young Maratha soldiers who were not
battle tested, and then the roughly 30,000 civilians entrained. Many were middle
class men, women and children on their piligrimage to the Hindu holy places and
shrines, a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to see Aryavarta (Aryan Land). The
civilians were supremely confident in the Maratha army, regarding it as one of
the best in the world, and definitely one of the most powerful in Asia. Behind the
civilians was yet another protective infantry line, of young inexperienced
soldiers.

Battle opens

Before dawn on January 14, 1761 the Maratha forces emerged from the trenches,
pushing the artillery into position on their pre-arranged lines, some 2km from the
Afgans. Seeing that the battle was on, Ahmad positioned his 60 smoothbore
cannon and opened fire. However, because of the short range of the weapons,
the Maratha lines remained untouched. Ahmad then launched a cavalry attack to
break their lines.

The first defensive salvo of the Marathas went over the Afgan's heads and
inflicted very little damage, but the Afgan attack was nevertheless broken by
Maratha bowmen and pikemen, along with some musketeers stationed close to
the artillery positions. The second and subsequent salvos were fired at point
blank range, and the resulting carnage sent the Afgans reeling back to their
lines. The European-style plan had worked just as envisioned.

The Marathas then started moving their formation forward, led by the artillery.
The Afgans responded with repeated cavalry attacks, all of which failed. About
17,000 Afgan cavalry and infantrymen lost their lives in this opening stage of the

battle. Gaping holes were opened in their ranks, and in some places the Afgans
and their Indian Muslim allies began to run away.

The Marathas cavalry charge

At this stage it looked as though Bhausaheb would clinch victory for the
Marathas once again. However, some of the Maratha lieutenants, jealous of the
exploits of their artillery chiefs, decided to exploit the gaps in the enemy lines
despite strict instructions not to charge or engage Afgan cavalry. They Maratha
horsemen raced through their own artillery lines and charged towards the
demoralised Afgans, intending to cut the faltering army in two.

The over-enthausiasm of the charge saw many of the Maratha horses exhausted
long before they had traveled the two kilometres to the Afgan lines, some simple
collasped. Making matters worse was the suffocating odour of the rotting corpses
of men and animals from the fighting of the previous months.

In response, the Afgan officers stiffened their troops resistance. Abdali called up
his reserves and cavalry of musketeers, who fired an extensive salvo at the
Maratha cavalry, who were unable to withstand the rifled muskets of the Afgans.

With their own men in the firing line, the Maratha artillery could not respond, and
about 7,000 Maratha cavalry and infantry perished before the hand to hand
fighting began at around 2PM. By 4PM the tired Maratha infantry began to
succumb to the onslaught of attacks from fresh Afgan reserves protected by their
armoured leather jackets.

Attack from within

The Maratha Muslim logistics infantrymen (Rohillas), who had not been trusted to
fight in the front line because their loyalty was suspector, rather, who were
suspected of being loyal to the Koran or fellow Muslims and not to their country
now responded to the calls of the Afgan army for jihad and revolted. This caused
brought confusion and great consternation to loyal Maratha soldiers, who
thought that the enemy has attacked from behind.

Sadashivrao Bhau, seeing his forward lines dwindling and civilians behind, felt he
had no choice but to come down from his elephant and take a direct part in the
battle on horseback at the head of his troops. He left instructions with his
bodyguards that, if the battle were lost, they must kill his wife Parvati bai, as he
could not abide the thought of her being dishonoured by Afgans.

Some Maratha soldiers, seeing that their general had disappeared from his
elephant, panicked and began to flee. Vishwasrao, the son of Prime Minister
Nanasaheb, had already fallen to Afgan sniper fire, shot in the head. Sadashivrao
Bhau and his bodyguard fought to the end, the Maratha leader having three
horses shot out from under him.

Rout

The Afgans pursued the fleeing Maratha army and the civilians, while the
Maratha front lines ramined largely intact, with some of their artillery units
fighting until sundown. Choosing not to launch a night attack, made good their
escape that night. Parvati bai escaped the armageddon with her bodyguards,
and eventually returned to Pune.

The Afgan cavalry and pikemen ran wild through the streets of Panipat, killing
any Maratha soldiers or civilians who offered and resistance. About 6,000 women
and children sought shelter with Shuja (allies of Abdali) whose Hindu officers
persuaded him to protect them.

Afgan officers who had lost their kin in battle were permitted to carry out
masscres the next day, also in Panipat and the surrounding area. They arranged
victory mounds of severed heads outside their camps. About 10,000 Maratha
civilians and soldiers alike were slain this way on 15th January 1761. Many of the
fleeing Maratha women jumped into the Panipat well rather than risk rape and
dishonour. Many others did their best to hide in the streets of Panipat when the
North Indian Hindus of the town refused to give them refuge.

Abdali's soldiers arrested about 10,000 women and another 10,000 young
children and men brought them to their camps. The women were raped, many
committed suicide because of constant rapes perpetrated on them. All of the
prisoners were exchanged or sold as sex slaves to Afganistan or North India,
transported on carts, camels and elephants in bamboo cages.

A conservative estimate places Maratha losses at 35,000 on the Panipat

battlefield itself, and another 10,000 or more in surrounding areas. The Afgans
are thought to have lost some 30,000.

Following the battle

To save their kingdom, the Mughals once again changed sides and welcomed the
Afgans to Delhi. However the news soon rose that Marathas in the south had
organised another 100,000 men to avenge their loss and rescue the prisoners.
He left Delhi two months after the battle, heading for Afganistan with his loot of
500 elephants, 1500 camels, 50,000 horses and about 22,000 women and
children.

The Mughals remained in nominal control over small areas of India, but were
never a force again. The empire officially ended in 1857 when its last emperor
was accused of being involved in the Sepoy Mutiny and exiled.

The Marathas expansion was stopped in the battle, and soon broke into infighting
within their empire. They never regained any unity, and were soon under
increasing pressure from the British. Their claims to empire were officially ended
in 1818.

Meanwhile the Sihks, the original reason Ahmad invaded, were left largely
untouched by the battle. They soon re-took Lahore. When Ahmad returned in
March 1764 he was forced to break off his siege after only two weeks due to
rebellion in Afganistan. He returned again in 1767, but was unable to win any
decisive battle. With his own troops arguing over a lack of pay, he eventually
adbandoned the district to the Sihks, who reamained in control until 1849.

The Battle of Buxar

India's History : Modern India : Battle of Buxar: The British defeat Mir Kasim 1764

Battle of Buxar
The company sent in relief troops from Fort St. George of the Madras
headquarters. The troops led by Robert Clive and Admiral Watson retook Calcutta
on 2nd January, 1757. The treaty of Alinagar was signed between the Nawab and
the Company.

However Clive's military ambitions were on the ascendancy. His troops captured
the French settlement of Chandernagore. He tempted Siraj's uncle Mir Jafar to
ally with him in exchange for the Nawab's position. On 23rd June, 1757, the
Company troops marched against Siraj. Betrayed by his own men Siraj was
defeated in the Battle of Plassey, which is said to have lasted only a few hours.
He was soon assassinated in his capital Murshidabad. From being traders, the
Company turned kingmakers in Bengal and Mir Jafar was installed as the new
Nawab. Clive got his pound of flesh from the Nawab in terms of 234,000 pounds
and was awarded an annual salary of 30,000 pounds per year. This made him
one of the richest Britons in the world. The company also secures rights over a
large area south of Calcutta. Construction of a new Fort William was started and
was completed in 16 years in 1773. These events led to the rise of Calcutta and
the decline of Murshidabad.

It is said that the origins of Calcutta's most famous public festival - the Durga
Puja can be traced to the victory of the British in Plassey. Raja Naba Kissen Deb,
a financial backer of the Company, threw a party in honor of Robert Clive during
the occasion of Durga Puja.
In 1760, Mir Jafar was succeeded by his son-in-law Mir Kasim. He handed over
the districts of Chittagong, Midnapore and Burdwan to the Company. Robert Clive
returned to England in the same year. Mir Kasim (reign:1760 to 1763), made an
attempt to recover Bengal from the hands of British. In 1764, he enlisted the help
of Mughal Emperor Shah Alam II and Nawab Shuja Ud Daulah of Oudh. But their
troops were defeated in the Battle of Buxar by the company troops led by Major
Hector Munro.
The armies of Mir Kasim and his allies Emperor Shah Alam II and Shuja-ud-daula,
Nawab of Avadh, out-matched the British in number. To Mir Kasim's force of
40,000 Robert Clive's army commanded by Major Hector Munro had about
18,000 men. Early on, East India Company forces had to retreat across the river.
But they were allowed to get away; the forces retreat across the river. But they
were allowed to get away; the forces regrouped and through a naval force
attacked through the river route. Mir Jafar also had trained Afghan cavalry and
modern cannon manned by European mercenaries and led a charge on the
Company's forces. However, the Company relied on its strength of sequenced
shooting-its musketeers put up volley of gunfire. This coordinated gun shooting
became very much a trademark of the British way of war over the next few
decades. The sheer power of gunfire ensured that attacking cavalry scattered.
The establishment of British paramountcy along with the diwani(revenue
administration) of Bengal, Bihar and Orissa was the major significance of The
battle of Buxar.

Diwani Rights

India's History : Modern India : The British get Diwani Rights in Bengal, Bihar
and Orissa ; Conquest of Orissa : 1765

Battle of Buxar

Battle of Buxar, was a decisive battle fought between British and Indian forces at
Buxar, a town on the Ganges River. Mir Kasim, the nawab (governor) of Bengal,
wanted to rid his territory of British control. He formed an alliance with the

Nawab of Oudh and Shah Alam II, the Mughal emperor. The combined Indian
armies invaded Bengal and clashed with British troops, led by Major Hector
Munro, in October 1764. A hotly contested battle resulted in victory for the
British. As a result of this triumph, in 1765, Robert Clive signed the Treaty of
Allahabad with the Nawab of Oudh and Shah Alam II. The treaty effectively
legalized the British East India Company's control over the whole of Bengal.

Diwani rights
Shuja was restored to Awadh, with a subsidiary force and guarantee of defence,
the emperor Shah Alam solaced with Allahabad and a tribute and the frontier
drawn at the boundary of Bihar. In Bengal itself he took a decisive step. In return
for restoring Shah Alam to Allahabad he received the imperial grant of the diwani
or revenue authority in Bengal and Bihar to the Company. This had hitherto been
enjoyed by the nawab, so that now there was a double government, the nawab
retaining judicial and police functions, the Company exercising the revenue
power. The Company was acclimatized, as it were, into the Indian scene by
becoming the Mughal revenue agent for Bengal and Bihar. There was as yet no
thought of direct administration, and the revenue was collected by a Companyappointed deputy-nawab, one Muhammad Reza Khan.
But this arrangement made the Company the virtual ruler of Bengal since it
already possessed decisive military power. All that was left to the nawab was the
control of the judicial administration. But he was later persuaded to hand this
over to the Company's deputy-nawab, so that its control was virtually complete.
Inspite of all this the East India Company was again in the verge of bankruptcy
which stirred them to a fresh effort at reform. On the one hand Warren Hastings
was appointed with a mandate for reform, on the other an appeal was made to
the State for a loan. The result was the beginnings of state control of the
Company and the thirteen-year governorship of Warren Hastings.

Hastings's first important work was that of an organizer. In the two and a half
years before the Regulating Act came into force he put in order the whole Bengal
administration. The Indian deputies who had collected the revenue on behalf of
the Company were deposed and their places taken by a Board of Revenue in
Calcutta and English collectors in the districts. This was the real beginning of
British administration in India.

First Mysore War

India's History : Modern India : First Mysore War: The British conclude a
humiliating peace pact with Hyder Ali - 1767 -1769

The First Battle

The second half of the eighteenth century was a period of great confusion in
Indian history which witnessed the rise of a colonial power. The only state which
offered stiff resistance to their expansion was Mysore, which fought not one but
four wars. Tipu participated in all those four Mysore wars, in two of which he
inflicted serious blows on the English. In fact Tipus rule starts in the midst of a
war against the English and ends in the midst of war against them. His short but
stormy rule was eventful for his several engagements with his neighbours, the
Marathas and the Nizam, as well, whose shortsighted policy prompted them to
join the colonials against Mysore.

In the First Mysore war Tipu, a lad of 17 years, suddenly surprised the English
when he appeared at the gates of Madras in September 1767. He caused great
consternation to the Governor of Madras, to the Nawab of Carnatic, Muhammed
Ali, and to almost all Councilors who very narrowly escaped being taken in the
country-house in the Company's garden. Happily for them a small vessel that by
accident was opposite the garden furnished them with the means of escaping.
Thus, it was a providential escape of the entire Madras government, which were
about to be captured by Tipu, who had been in independent command of a body
of troops in the First Mysore war.

Warren Hastings
India's History : Modern India : Death of Madhava Rao Peshwa; Warren Hastings
appointed as Governor of Bengal : 1772

Warren Hastings
Hastings, Warren (1732-1818) Governor (1772-1774) and Governor General
(1774-1785) of the fort william in Bengal. Warren Hastings abandoned the policy
of hesitation of his predecessors about the question of establishing political
dominance in India, and bringing about a series of reforms and waging wars
against the challengers to his expansionist plan and conquering new lands. He
laid the foundation of British power in India. But his contributions did not refrain
parliament from impeaching him under manifold charges including corruption,
oppression and unauthorised wars. He was recalled in 1785 and tried in
parliament, but ultimately acquitted.

Warren Hastings was born at Churchill in Oxfordshire on 6 December 1732. His

family was in reduced circumstances so he was brought up by an uncle, who took
him to London and in 1743 sent him to school at Westminster, where he proved
to be an excellent scholar. On leaving school he obtained a junior appointment in
the east india company's Bengal service. He arrived at Calcutta in September
1750.

Hastings's first appointment was at kasimbazar, a major centre for procuring silk.
He was at Kasimbazar in 1756 when Nawab sirajuddaula was provoked to attack
and storm Calcutta, rounding up the British at Kasimbazar in the process. On his
release Hastings joined the British refugees from Calcutta. He married one of
them, Mary, widow of an officer who had been killed at Calcutta. Neither the first
Mrs Hastings nor the two children that she bore her husband were to live long.

From 1758 Hastings served as the company's Resident at murshidabad with the
new nawab, mir jafar, in whose favour the British had intervened at Palashi. In
1760 a coup engineered by the British brought down Mir Jafar and replaced him
with another nawab, mir qasim. Shortly afterwards, Hastings went down to
Calcutta and succeeded to the council that managed the company's affairs under
a new governor, henry vansittart. Hastings allied with the governor in disputes
that split the council about the extent to which the nawab should be permitted to
regulate the private trade of British merchants. Hastings and Vansittart favoured
conciliation. Tensions with the nawab, however, erupted into armed conflict and
Mir Qasim was driven out of Bengal. Vansittart resigned his governorship and
returned to Britain. In January 1765 Hastings followed him.

In Britain Hastings sought to influence future Indian policy and to secure his
return with a prestigious position. In 1768 he was appointed second in the
council of the settlement at Fort St George, Madras.

Hastings spent two successful years at Madras. His management of the

company's commercial concerns was particularly commended. In 1771 the
directors of the East India Company, looking for a new governor of Bengal, chose
Hastings. He returned to Calcutta on 17 February 1772.

Appointment as a Governer
Hastings saw himself in 1772 as governor of what he regarded as a province now
fully part of the British empire. He dismissed formal acknowledgements of

Mughal authority over Bengal as harmful fictions. He had orders to assert the
company's direct authority over a government that had been largely delegated
to Indian officials. He complied with alacrity. He had no qualms about making
further incursions into areas of government allocated to the nawabs. He believed
that sovereignty, a concept that he frequently invoked, was vested in the 'British
nation' and that there must be no equivocation about that.

Hastings shared the view, universal among contemporary Europeans, that

Bengal was a naturally rich province with a highly productive agriculture and
skilled manufacturers that had suffered from misgovernment under its later
Indian rulers and during the British take-over. It had been afflicted in 1770 by a
very severe famine. The new regime's task was to enable recovery to take place.
In the years after 1772 Hastings developed a distinctive point of view on how this
should be done. He believed that Bengal must be governed in ways to which its
people were presumed to be accustomed. Indian methods of government and
Indian law must be preserved. The British should aim 'to rule this people with
ease and moderation according to their own ideas, manners, and prejudices'.

Revenue was the central issue of early British government in India. The British
were uncertain as to how much they could extract from the province without
inflicting damage on it. In 1772 Hastings decided that the best way of finding out
what Bengal could afford to pay was to invite competition for the right to collect
revenue for a period of five years. Where the existing zamindars or hereditary
revenue managers, did not make adequate offers, higher bids would be
accepted. This so-called 'farming' system was adjudged even by Hastings to
have been a failure. For the rest of Hastings's administration the company
negotiated revenue assessments year by year, usually with the zamindars.

As diwan of Bengal after 1765, the company acquired responsibility for

administering civil justice, cases of property and inheritance being closely
involved with the payment of revenue. Criminal justice was the concern of the
nawab, who enforced the Islamic criminal law. Hastings believed that the British
must intervene to restore a decayed system of indigenous justice. He created
new hierarchies of courts, both civil and criminal, under British supervision. The
law administered by the courts was to be the law already in force in Bengal.
Hastings set about obtaining translations that would make this law accessible to
those Europeans who had to administer it.

As governor of Bengal, Hastings had not only to direct the internal administration
of a huge province, but he had to conduct complex diplomacy with Indian states
and on occasions with other European powers. By the 1770s it was impossible for
the British in Bengal or in their other settlements at Madras and Bombay to

isolate themselves from the new order of states that was replacing the Mughal
empire. Hastings had no ambition to make new conquests, but he was strongly in
favour of seeking influence by alliances. His ideal of peaceful influence over allies
bore little relation, however, to the way events were to unfold. The company was
to be repeatedly drawn into war, beginning with a war against the Rohillas in
1774 fought to strengthen the company's major ally in northern India, the
nawab-wazir of Oudh in whose territory British troops were maintained.

In 1773 the national government in Britain intervened to impose reforms on the

East India Company. Authority in Bengal was to be concentrated in a governor
general and a new Supreme Council of five. A Supreme Court, staffed by royal
judges, was also to be established in Calcutta. Hastings was chosen as the first
governor general, but three men, John Clavering, George Monson and philip
francis, were sent out to join the council directly from Britain.

The three new councillors from Britain began an unremitting opposition to

Hastings immediately after their arrival in Calcutta on 19 October 1774. Acting
together, they constituted a majority. They quickly professed to find corruption
behind every policy of the old government and to believe that Hastings was
allowing the resources of Bengal to be plundered and wasted. Francis, an
intellectual of a calibre to match Hastings, was a particularly formidable
opponent of the governor general.

The new councillors began by denouncing the war against the Rohillas.
Hastings's revenue policy was also condemned and Indians were encouraged to
bring accusations of personal corruption against him. The leading accuser was
maharaja nanda kumar, who evidently calculated that he stood to gain ample
rewards were the new councillors to displace Hastings. His accusations of bribetaking were probably much exaggerated, but it is likely that Hastings had
received some irregular payments. Before anything could be proved, charges of
forgery were brought against Nanda Kumar in the new Supreme Court. He was
found guilty, sentenced to death and executed on 5 August 1775. Critics of
Hastings from his own time onwards have drawn the not unreasonable inference
that he promoted the prosecution and may have influenced the verdict. What
can be established is that the prosecution against Nanda Kumar was promoted
by his Indian enemies with the encouragement of Hastings's friends.

Hastings recovered control over the government as two of his opponents,

Monson and Clavering, died, leaving Francis alone to carry on the opposition
against Hastings. After fighting a duel against Hastings on 17 August 1780, in
which he was slightly wounded, Francis finally left India.

Hastings remained in office until 1785. War was the main source of the
difficulties that he faced in his last years. From 1778 the British were fighting the
Marathas. In 1780 the formidable armies of Mysore invaded the Carnatic territory
which was under the protection of the British. In January 1781 the first French
expeditionary force arrived in India to support Mysore.

Hastings took credit for the diplomacy that broke up the formidable Indian
coalition opposing him and for sending money, supplies and troops on a very
large scale from Bengal to Madras, thus enabling the Mysore forces to be pushed
back and the French to be contained. With some justification, Hastings saw
himself as the saviour of the British empire in India. Nevertheless, the scale of
the wars did Hastings great damage with opinion in Britain. He was accused of
being a warmonger with a lust for conquest that had landed the company in
ruinously expensive wars.

The needs of the war were the cause of some very contentious dealings by
Hastings with the company's dependants and allies in northern India. Chait
Singh, the raja of Benares, was required to pay an increased subsidy to the
company. On the pretext that he was evading legitimate demands, Hastings
proposed to exact a large fine from him on a personal visit in 1781. The raja's
retainers resisted and forced Hastings to flee from the city.

Although British authority was quickly restored, the episode left a strong
impression that Hastings had acted tyrannically as well as subjecting himself to
needless risks. From Benares Hastings went on to try to raise extra funds from
the company's ally the nawab of Oudh by forcing him to resume alienation of
land revenue and to confiscate a large hoard of treasure in the possession of his
mother and grandmother, the Begums of Oudh. Again, Hastings appeared to
have acted with a ruthless high-handedness.

Throughout his governorship, Hastings was a generous patron of the arts and of
learning. He took a particular pride in the translation of the Bhagavat Gita made
by charles wilkins, for which he wrote a memorable preface. His interests laid the
foundations for the creation of the Bengal Asiatick Society (now asiatic society)
of 1784.

In February 1785, in failing health, Hastings resigned his office. He landed in

England on 13 June 1785, after an absence of over sixteen years. He had not
unreasonable expectations of acclaim and honours on his return, but he was in

fact to meet attacks that culminated with his being put on trial. The trial began in
1788 and lasted until he was acquitted in 1795.

Unfortunately for Hastings, Edmund Burke, whose revulsion against what he saw
as gross misgovernment in British India had focused on Hastings, was not
prepared to let him go. Burke had undoubtedly fallen under the influence of
Philip Francis after his return to Britain in 1780, but he had formed his own views
about India and he was driven by a passionate concern for justice. He believed
that the East India Company was laying India waste by rapacious policies within
its own provinces, by the exploitation of its allies and by its wars. He held
Hastings to be responsible for all this. In 1786 Burke produced charges for an
impeachment to be voted by the House of Commons and then to be heard by the
House of Lords. The first charge, which related to the Rohilla war, was thrown out
by the Commons, but the second, on Hastings's dealings with the raja of
Benares, was passed, as were others introduced in the 1787 session of
Parliament. On 10 May 1787 Hastings was formally impeached.

Huge crowds attended the early sessions of the trial that was regarded as a great
public spectacle. But by 30 May 1791, when the prosecution closed their case,
few could doubt that the tide was running in Hastings's favour. In a new climate
of opinion with a more assertive British nationalism in reaction to the French
Revolution, empire came increasingly to be seen as part of Britain's greatness
rather than as a cause of shame. Hastings's claims to have been the saviour of
empire were therefore viewed sympathetically. In 1795, when the Lords gave
judgement, in every case a large majority voted 'not guilty'.

The stark legal alternatives of 'guilty' or 'not guilty' are an inappropriate basis for
any assessment of a career as complex as Hastings's. It is impossible to endorse
Burke's extravagantly vituperative abuse of him. Few would now believe that he
deserved impeachment let alone being found guilty. On the other hand, the
argument that he had no significant case to answer, beyond some minor
blemishes committed in a good cause and was the victim of Francis's envy and
Burke's malice is not sustainable. Strictly within the terms argued out in the
impeachment, Hastings was vulnerable to accusations of high-handedness in
Benares and Oudh and he had accumulated a fortune by methods that the new
official morality of the late eighteenth century did not sanction.

Any assessment of him on terms that go beyond those of the Impeachment must
recognise Hastings's exceptional qualities of mind, he brought a creative
intelligence of a very high order to Indian government. He also showed an
appreciation of Indian culture and a regard for individual Indian people most
unusual in any British official in high office at any time. Partly in reaction to him,

future British administration in India would be more closely bound by rules and
more distant from Indians.

After his acquittal in 1795, Hastings lived for another 23 years. His life was that
of a country gentleman, engaged in local affairs and farming the ancestral family
estate that he had been able to recover. Public employment never came again,
but at least in the last years of his life, he was treated with much respect and
received some public recognition. He died on 22 August 1818 in his 85th year.

Death of Madhava Rao Peshwa

1737 saw the death of the Peshwa brothers, Baji Rao and Chimaji.Baji Rao's son,
Balaji Bajirao (Nanasaheb) succeeded as the Peshwa. The three brothers
Nanasaheb, Sadashivrao and Raghunathrao continued the able rule of Peshwa
for the next 25 years. The 1761 Panipat battle, between Marathas and Ahmad
Shah Abdalli, destroyed both Abdalli and Peshwas. Though Marathas won the
war, they had to face a hard blow when they lost Sadashivrao and Nanasaheb
Peshwa's eldest son. Nanasaheb died grief-striken in the same year. His second
son Thorale Madhav Rao assumed the title. And his uncle Raghunath Rao acted
as his care taker.

Madhavrao Peshwa defeated Haider Ali of Mysore and Nizam of Hyderabad. In

1769, Marathas lead by Mahadaji Shinde, headed the North India campaign. They
defeated the Jats and took hold of Agra and Mathura. They reinstated the Mughal
Emperor on the throne, who was living on the East India Company Pension.

After Madhav Rao Peshwa's death in 1772, Raghunathrao's attempts to be the

Peshwa were foiled by the ministers. Hurt, he joined the British. The state came
under the rule of ministers headed by Nana Phadnavis and Mahadaji Shinde.

The Regulating Act - 1773

India's History : Modern India : The Regulating Act passed by the British
Parliament - 1773

Regulating Act
By 1773 the East India Company was in dire financial straits. The Company was
important to Britain because it was a monopoly trading company in India and in
the east and many influential people were shareholders. The Company paid

400,000 annually to the government to maintain the monopoly but had been
unable to meet its commitments because of the loss of tea sales to America
since 1768. About 85% of all the tea in America was smuggled Dutch tea. The
East India Company owed money to both the Bank of England and the
government; it had 15 million lbs of tea rotting in British warehouses and more
en route from India.

Lord North decided to overhaul the management of the East India Company with
the Regulating Act. This was the first step along the road to government control
of India. The Act set up a system whereby it supervised (regulated) the work of
the East India Company but did not take power for itself.

The East India Company had taken over large areas of India for trading purposes
but also had an army to protect its interests. Company men were not trained to
govern so North's government began moves towards government control. India
was of national importance and shareholders in the Company opposed the Act.
The East India Company was a very powerful lobby group in parliament in spite
of the financial problems of the Company.

The Act said that:

That, for the government of the presidency of fort William in Bengal, there shall
be a Governor General, and a Council consisting of four councillors with the
democratic provision that the decision of the majority in the Council shall be
binding on the Governor General.
That Warren Hastings shall be the first Governor General and that Lt. General
John Clavering, George Monson, Richard Barwell and Philip Francis shall be four
first Councillors.
That His Majesty shall establish a supreme court of judicature consisting of a
Chief Justice and three other judges at Fort William, and that the Court's
jurisdiction shall extend to all British subjects residing in Bengal and their native
servants.
That the company shall pay out of its revenue salaries to the designated persons
in the following rate: to the Governor General 25000 sterling, to the Councillors
10,000 sterling, to the Chief Justice 8000 sterling and the Judges 6000 sterling a
year.
That the Governor General, Councillors and Judges are prohibited from receiving
any gifts, presents, pecuniary advantages from the Indian princes, zamindars
and other people.

That no person in the civil and military establishments can receive any gift,
reward, present and any pecuniary advantages from the Indians.
That it is unlawful for collectors and other district officials to receive any gift,
present, reward or pecuniary advantages from zamindars and other people.
The provisions of the Act clearly indicate that it was directed mainly to the
malpractice and corruption of the company officials. The Act, however, failed to
stop corruption and it was practised rampantly by all from the Governor General
at the top to the lowest district officials. Major charges brought against Hastings
in his impeachment trial were those on corruption. Corruption divided the Council
into two mutually hostile factions- the Hastings group and Francis group. The
issues of their fighting were corruption charges against each other.
Consequently, Pitt's India act, 1784 had to be enacted to fight corruption and to
do that an incorruptible person, lord Cornwallis, was appointed with specific
references to bring order in the corruption ridden polity established by the
company.
Anglo-Maratha War
India's History : Modern India : The First Anglo-Maratha war - 1775 - 1782

The First Anglo-Maratha War

First Anglo-Maratha War, the result of the Bombay government's alliance with the
would-be Maratha peshwa, Raghoba. Hastings sent an expedition across the
peninsula from Calcutta to Surat (1778, arrived 1779) and broke the coalition
between the Marathas, Haidar Ali, and the nizam. The company had already
showed its might by defeating the combined forces of Mughal Shah Alam and
Bengal's Nawab Siraj-ud-Daulah at the Battle of Plassey. Soon hostilities broke
out between the Company and the Marathas. The first Anglo-Maratha war took
place between 1775-82 and resulted in a humiliating defeat of the Company's
forces, which in turn resulted in the treaty of Salbai. Soon the Maratha Empire
was in a position to regain its lost glory and it had found a genius in Madhaji
Schindia. But his death in 1794 dashed all hopes of Maratha revivalism. Soon
they followed the Mughals into dissolution. The Treaty of Salbai (1782) obtained
for Bombay 20 years' peace with the Marathas and the cession of Salsette and
Elephanta.

Second Mysore War

India's History : Modern India : Second Mysore War : The British defeat Hyder Ali
- 1780-1784

Second Mysore War - The British wins over Hyder Ali

Hyder Ali used to work as a general in the army of the King of Mysore before
overthrowing him and establishing his own kingdom, he is famous for his epic
battles with the British. He is best known for his invasions of the Malabar coast
region between 1766 until his death and the historic defeat of the British in the
first Mysore war in 1767-69. Warren Hastings sent from Bengal Sir Eyre Coote,
who, though repulsed at Chidambaram, defeated Hyder thrice successively in the
battles of Porto Novo, Pollilur and Sholingarh, while Tippoo was forced to raise
the siege of Wandiwash, and Vellore was provisioned. On the arrival of Lord
Macartney as governor of Madras, the British fleet captured Negapatam, and
forced Hyder Ali to confess that he could never ruin a power, which had
command of the sea. He had sent his son Tippoo to the west coast, to seek the
assistance of the French fleet, when his death took place suddenly at Chittur in
December 1782. Tipu took over as ruler of Mysore after the death of his father
around 1782.

The Pitt's Act

India's History : Modern India : Pitt's India Act - 1784

The Pitt's Act

After the Regulating Act of 1773 to regulate the affairs of the Company in India,
the second important step taken by the British Parliament was the appointment
of a Board of Control under Pitt's India Bill of 1784. It provided for a joint
government of the Company (represented by the Directors), and the Crown
(represented by the Board of Control).

A Board of six members was constituted with two members of the British Cabinet
and four of the Privy Council. One of who was the President and who soon
became, in effect, the minister for the affairs of the East India Company. The
Board had all the powers and control over all the acts and operations, which
related to the civil, military and revenues of the Company.

The Council was reduced to three members and the Governor-General was
empowered to overrule the majority. The Governors of Bombay and Madras were
also deprived of their independent powers. Calcutta was given greater powers in
matters of war, revenue, and diplomacy, thus becoming in effect the capital of
Company possessions in India.

By a supplementary the Bill passed in 1786, Lord Cornwallis was appointed as

the first Governor-General, and he then became the effective ruler of British India
under the authority of the Board of Control and the Court of Directors. The
constitution set up by the Pitt's India Act did not undergo any major changes
during the existence of the Company's rule in India.

The Charter Act of 1813 abolished the trading activities of the Company and
henceforth became purely an administrative body under the Crown. Thereafter,
with few exceptions, the Governor-General and the Council could make all the
laws and regulations for people (Indians and British).

The salient features relating to the governance of the kingdom of Bengal were:

There shall be a Board of Control consisting of maximum six parliamentarians

headed by a senior cabinet member to direct, superintend and control the affairs
of the company's territorial possessions in the East Indies.
The Court of Directors shall establish a Secret Committee to work as a link
between the Board and the Court.
The Governor General's council shall consist of three members one of whom shall
be the commander-in-chief of the King's army in India. In case the members
present in a meeting of the council shall any time be equally divided in opinion,
the Governor General shall have two votes (one his own and another casting
vote).
The government must stop further experiments in the revenue administration
and proceed to make a permanent settlement with zamindars at moderate rate
of revenue demand. The government must establish permanent judicial and
administrative systems for the governance of the new kingdom.
All civilians and military officers must provide the Court of Directors a full
inventory of their property in India and in Britain within two months of their
joining their posts.
Severe punishment including confiscation of property, dismissal and jail, shall be
inflicted on any civilian or military officer found guilty of corruption.

Receiving gifts, rewards, presents in kind or cash from the rajas, zamindars and
other Indians are strictly prohibited and people found guilty of these offences
shall be tried charged with corruption.
Parliament directly appointed Lord charles cornwallis to implement the Act.
Immediately after his joining as Governor General in 1786, Cornwallis embarked
upon the responsibility of reform works reposed on him by parliament. In 1793
he completed his mission. He introduced permanent settlement, announced a
judicial code, established administrative and police systems and then left for
home in the same year.

The Third Mysore War

India's History : Modern India : Third Mysore War between the British and Tipu 1790-1792

The Two Rivals-Marathas & The Nizam

The Treaty of Mangalore carried the seeds of strife with the Marathas, because
they were disappointed in their expectation of acting as the mediators and of
recovering their losses in the North of Mysore. Tipu had emerged with enhanced
prestige whom even the mighty English could not humble. This excited the
jealousy of both the Martha's and the Nizam who fought a war with him for two
years from 1785 to 1787. The Nizam was also not friendly towards Mysore ever
since he had come to power in 1761. He regarded himself as the overlord of the
entire south, and expected Haidar and Tipu to be his tributaries. As he was
military imbecile he allied himself either with the Marathas or the English to
distress the Mysore rulers. There was always a pro-British party at Hyderabad
which dissuaded the Nizam from begin cordial to Tipu. In the war that followed
Tipu had the upper hand despite the alliance of his two neighbors. The war came
to an end in April 1787 by the Treaty of Gajendragadh by which he ceded Badami
to the Marathas hoping to win their support against the English or at least to
prevent them from joining the English.

Tipu was disappointed in his expectations. Far from joining him to remove the
English from India, both of them, the Marathas and the Nizam joined the English
in a powerful confederacy against Tipu in the Third Mysore war.

The Defeat
The allies struggled hard for nearly two years from 1790 to 1792. Lord Cornwallis
who had surrendered to the Americans at Saratoga in the new world assumed
the command, and with great difficulty he was successful in a surprise night
attack to enter into the island of Srirangapatna on 6th Feb. 1792. Tipu was made
to make peace by surrendering half of his kingdom, and paying three crores has
indemnity, apart from sending two of his sons as hostages to Madras. This was a
serious blow to Tipu.

Permanant Settlement of Bengal

India's History : Modern India : Permanent Settlement of Bengal - 1793

Permanant Settlement

Permanent Settlement Concluded by the Cornwallis administration in 1793,

Permanent Settlement was a grand contract between the east india company
government and the Bengal landholders (zamindars and independent talukdars
of all denominations). Under the contract, the landholders or zamindars were
admitted into the colonial state system as the absolute proprietors of landed
property. Besides being turned into proprietors of land, the zamindars were
endowed with the privilege of holding their proprietary right at a rate which was
to continue unchanged for ever. Under the contract the government was barred
from enhancing its revenue demand on the zamindars.

Objectives and effects of Permanent Settlement The conclusion of the permanent

settlement with zamindars had some immediate objectives in view. These may
be classified as:

placing revenue paying on a definite footing and making revenue collection sure
and certain;
ensuring a minimum revenue;
relieving officials of revenue matter and engaging them to other spheres of
administration; and finally,
forging an alliance between the zamindar class and the colonial rulers.

Though not entirely but largely, government succeeded in achieving these shortterm goals. The revenue-paying agency was put on a definite footing in the
person of zamindar. The government now knew how much was to be its annual
inflow from land and the zamindars also knew for certain their contractual
obligation to government. Formerly, neither the government nor the revenue
payers knew exactly where did they stand as regards revenue collection and
payment.

Tipu Sultan : Fourth Battle of Mysore

India's History : Modern India : Fourth Mysore War: The British defeat Tipu;
Death of Tipu; Partition of Mysore ; Tipu's history - 1799

Tipu Sultan

The second half of the eighteenth century was a period of great confusion in
Indian history, which witnessed the rise of a colonial power. The only state that
offered stiff resistance to their expansion was Mysore, which fought not one but
four wars. Tipu participated in all those four Mysore wars, in two of which he
inflicted serious blows on the English. In fact Tipus rule starts in the midst of a
war against the English and ends in the midst of war against them. His short but
stormy rule was eventful for his several engagements with his neighbours, the
Marathas and the Nizam, as well, whose shortsighted policy prompted them to
join the colonials against Mysore. Tipu remained fully involved in warfare from his
youth until his fall in the fourth Mysore war. From 1760 when Haidar Ali allied
himself with the French against the English to 1799 when Wellesly destroyed
Tipu, Mysore had become the terror of Leadenhall Street, the headquarters
of the East India Company. These forty years of Tipu both as a prince and a ruler
witnessed continuous warfare.

Having learnt the western technique of warfare, Tipu was not slow in making use
of it. He was himself bold, dashing, and a person of undaunted adventurous
spirit. Under his leadership Mysore army proved a school of military science
to Indian princes. The dread of an European army no longer wrought any magic
on him. Tipus infliction of serious blows on the English in the first and second
Mysore wars damaged their reputation as an invincible power. Grant wrote to
Shelburne, An English army much superior to one which under a Lawrence, or
a Clive, five and twenty ago made Hindoostan, nay some of the powers of Europe
tremble at the bare recital of its victories, now for the first time was retreating in
the face of an Indian army. This was a reference to colonel Baileys capture
and general Munros flight in the second Mysore war. Alexander Dow wrote his
history, We were alarmed, as if his horses had wings to fly over our walls.

Tipu was a far-sighted ruler, who discerned the danger to the freedom of the land
by the colonial expansion, which necessitated continuous warfare. Apart from
this he had his own agenda to assert his own authority over the neighbours, the
Marathas and the Nizam, who were not reconciled to the rise and growth of
Mysore as an independent powerful state. This weakness of the neighbours was
fully exploited by the English whose shrewd political sense involved them as
allies against Mysore. In all four Mysore wars the Marathas and the Nizam were
willing to support the English rather than either Haider or Tipu. In the third
Mysore war all three formed a powerful confederacy against Tipu, and in the

fourth Mysore war the Nizam was an ally of the English. The third cause for the
continuous warfare was the need to suppress the far too many units of
independent power, the feudatories and small principalities, whose mutual
rivalries and ambition had caused great confusion in Karnataka. It was Tipus
policy to establish a strong central authority which would serve the people
better.

Thus the English, the Marathas, the Nizam and the feudatories were the principal
causes for Tipus wars. The most serious wars were against the English, who
had never been confronted with a more formidable foe. In the first Mysore War
Tipu, a lad of 17 years, suddenly surprised the English when he appeared at the
gates of Madras in September 1767. He caused great consternation to the
governor of Madras, to the Nawab of Carnatic, Muhammad Ali, and to almost all
the councillors who very narrowly escaped being taken in the country house in
the companys garden. Happily for them a small vessel that by accident was
opposite the garden furnished them with the means of escaping. Thus, it was
a providential escape of the entire Madras government, which were about to be
captured by Tipu, who had been placed in independent command of a body of
troops in the first Mysore war.

Tipus training in the art of war started as early as 1763, when he was hardly 13
years old, in Haidars attack on Malabar where Tipu displayed great dash and
courage. That was his first experience of war. He was present in Haidars
negotiations with the Nizam in the first Mysore war when the tact and
resourcefulness of the young prince impressed the Nizam and won him over to
Haidars side. It was Tipu who obtained the ratification of the treaty of Alliance
between the Nizam and Haidar in 1767. Tipu had gone to the Nizams camp at
the head of 6000 troops and successfully concluded the treaty. This was the first
diplomatic assignment of Tipu, who was well received by the Nizam, who
conferred on him the title of Nasib-ud-daula (fortune of the state) and also
Fateh Ali Khan.

Tipu had taken great interest in the Mysore-Maratha war of 1769-72. After the
death of Peshwa Madhava Rao in 1772, he was sent to the northern part of the
Mysore to recover the territories which the Marathas had occupied. By the time
of second Mysore war he had gained great experience both of warfare and
diplomacy. In September 1780 he inflicted a crushing defeat on Colonel Baillie
near Polilur. This was the first and the most serious blow the English had suffered
in India. The whole detachment was either cut or taken prisoners. Of the 86
European officers 36 were killed, and 3820 were taken prisoners of whom 508
were Europeans. The English had lost the flower of their army. Baillie himself was

taken prisoner. This defeat caused so much consternation in Madras that half of
its Black Town was deserted. Sir Hector Munroe, the hero of Buxar, who had
defeated three rulers of India (Mughal Emperor Shah Alam, Oudh Nawab Shujaud-daulah, and the Bengal Nawab Mir Qasim) in a single battle, would not face
Tipu. He ran for his life to Madras throwing all his cannons in the tank of
conjeevaram.

Likewise, Tipu inflicted a serious defeat on Colonel Braithwaite at Annagudi near

Tanjore on 18 February 1782. This army consisted of 100 Europeans, 300 cavalry,
1400 sepoys and 10 field pieces. Tipu seized all the guns and took the entire
detachment prisoners. One should remember that the total force of a few
hundred Europeans was the standard size of the colonial armies that had caused
havoc in India prior to Haidar and Tipu. In December 1781 Tipu had successfully
seized Chittur from British hands. Thus Tipu had gained sufficient military
experience by the time Haidar died in December 1782.

The second Mysore war came to an end by the treaty of Mangalore. It is an

important document in the history of India. It was the last occasion when an
Indian power dictated terms to the English, who were made to play the role of
humble supplicants for peace. Warren Hastings called it a humiliating
pacification, and appealed to the king and parliament to punish the Madras
government for the faith and honour of the British nation have been equally
violated. The English would not reconcile to this humiliation, and worked hard
from that day, 11 March 1784, to subvert Tipus power. The treaty redounds
great credit to the diplomatic skill of Tipu. He had honourably concluded a longdrawn war. He frustrated the Maratha designs to seize his northern possessions.
The great advantage was psychological, the mode of conclusion was highly
satisfactory to him. The march of the commissioners all the way from Madras to
Mangalore seeking peace made Munro remark that such indignities were
throughout poured upon the British, that united efforts seemed necessary to
repudiate the treaty at the earliest time. Such public opinion in the country
highly gratified Tipu who felt it was his great triumph over the English. That was
the only bright spot in his contest with the English, the only proud event which
had humbled a mighty power.

The treaty of Mangalore carried the seeds of strife with the Marathas, because
they were disappointed in their expectation of acting as the mediators and of
recovering their losses in the north of Mysore. Tipu had emerged with enhanced
prestige whom even the mighty English could not humble. This excited the
jealousy of both the Marathas and the Nizam who fought a war with him for two
years from 1785 to 1787. The Nizam was also not friendly towards Mysore ever
since he had come to power in 1761. He regarded himself as the overlord of the
entire south, and expected Haidar and Tipu to be his tributaries. As he was
militarily imbecile he allied himself either with the Marathas or the English to
distress the Mysore rulers. There was always a pro-British party at Hyderabad
which dissuaded the Nizam from being cordial to Tipu. In the war that followed
Tipu had the upper hand despite the alliance of his two neighbours. The war
came to an end in April 1787 by the treaty of Gajendragadh by which he ceded
Badami to the Marathas hoping to win their support against the English or at
least to prevent them from joining the English.

Tipu was disappointed in his expectations. Far from joining him to remove the
English from India, both of them, the Marathas and the Nizam, joined the English
in a powerful confederacy against Tipu in the third Mysore war. The allies
struggled hard for nearly two years from 1790 to 1792. Lord Cornwallis who had
surrendered to the Americans at Saratoga in the new world assumed the
command and with great difficulty he was successful in a surprise night attack to
enter into the island of Srirangapatana on 6 February 1792. Tipu was made to
make peace by surrendering half of his kingdom, and paying three crores as
indemnity, apart from sending two of his sons as hostages to Madras. This was a
serious blow to Tipu.

Very soon Tipu was able to build up his power again, paid the indemnity, and got
his sons back. He intensified his contacts with the French, the Turks and the
Afghans. The Nizam was also made friendly, who was made to recruit a
contingent of 14000 troops under a French, Raymond, who was friendly to Tipu.
Napoleon was also on the way to India to help Tipu, who had invited Zaman Shah
of Afghanistan as well to help him remove the English from India. When all these
plans were about to mature, destiny willed otherwise. Napoleon was defeated at
Accre in Syria and forced back to France. Zaman Shah was made to beat a hasty
retreat to Kabul because of British machinations that brought about a rear action
from Iran on Afghanistan. Wellesley forced the Nizam to disband Raymond and
accept a British detachment under subsidiary system. Having finished this task
he declared war on Tipu, sending the largest English army ever assembled in
India. The fourth Mysore war was a short affair. Keeping Tipu in false hopes, he
suddenly surprised him by unacceptable demands. When Tipu refused to accept
them, the English breached the fort and in a bloody encounter, fighting against
heavy odds he was killed on 4 May 1799. The last hope for the freedom of the
land was thus extinguished. He died a soliders death for the defence of the
cherished values of his land under a spontaneous combustion of hostile forces.

Treaty of Bassein
India's History : Modern India : Treaty of Bassein - 1802

Treaty of Bassein

After being victorious over the Nizam at Kharda, Nana Phadnavis' influence in
Poona was enhanced. But soon the Marathas indulged in internal quarrels. Tired
of Nana Phadnavis' dictatorship, Peshwa Madhavrao Narayan committed suicide
on October 25, 1795. After various plots and counter-plots on December 4, 1796,
Baji Rao II, son of Raghoba, became the Peshwa and Nana Phadnavis as his chief
minister. Taking advantage of the instable situation among the Marathas, the
Nizam recovered the territories which were taken by the Marathas after his
defeat at Kharda.

Lord Wellesley
When Lord Wellesley arrived as a Governor-General on April 26, 1798, he
engineered the policy of Subsidiary Alliance. He was of the firm conviction that
the best way of safeguarding the interest of England was to reduce the whole

country into a military dependence on the East India Company. Though there was
no conflict between the English and the Marathas, the English began to gain
more strength.

The English prospects were brightened after the death of Nana Phadnavis on
March 13, 1800. Thus the last chance of keeping the Marathas in order was
wiped out. This has been nicely said in the words of Colonel Palmer, the British
resident at Poona: "With him departed all the wisdom and moderation of the
Maratha government." It was Nana who could forsee the danger of Subsidiary
Alliance. Nana's death meant the removal of the barrier that had checked to a
great extent the disruptive activities of the Maratha chiefs.

Both Daulat Rao Sindhia and Jaswant Rao Holkar entered into a fierce struggle
with each other for supremacy at Poona. The Peshwa favoured Sindhia and finally
became a puppet in his hand. On April 12, 1800 Wellesley advised the Poona
Residents to manage the secret treaty with Poona for turning out Sindhia. But the
Peshwa remained unmoved and the Resident suggested that only immediate
destruction will make the Peshwa bow.

Treaty of Bassein signed

Matters among the Marathas were becoming worse by the Peshwa's own
intrigues. It worsened more when the Peshwa murdered Vithuji Holkar, brother of
Jaswant Rao Holkar in April 1801. This made Holkar rise in rebellion with a huge
army and on October 23, he defeated the combined armies of Sindhias and the
Peshwas at Poona and captured the city. Jaswant Rao Holkar made Amrit Rao's
son Vinayak Rao the Peshwa and on the other hand Baji Rao took refuge in
Bassein. And in this helpless situation, Baji Rao had no hesitation to accept the
Subsidiary Alliance and signed with the East India Company the Treaty of Bassein
on December 31, 1802.

The treaty provided for an English force of 6,000 to be permanently stationed

with the Peshwa, and for its maintenance the districts yielding twenty six lakh
rupees were to be given to the Company. It also stated that the Peshwa could not
enter into any treaty or declare war without consulting the Company and that the
Peshwa's claim upon the Nizam and Gaekwar would be subject to the arbitration
of the Company. The Peshwa also renounced his claim over Surat.

On May 13, 1803 Baji Rao II was restored to Peshwarship under the protection of
the East India Company. This treaty of Bassein was an important landmark in the
history of British supremacy in India. This led to expansion of the sway and
influence of the East India Company over the Indian subcontinent. However, the
treaty was not acceptable to both the Marathas chieftains - the Shindes nd
Bhosales. This directly resulted in the Second Anglo-Maratha war in 1803.

The Second Anglo Maratha War

India's History : Modern India : The Second Anglo-Maratha war: The British
defeat the Marathas at Assaye: Treaty of Amritsar : 1803 - 1805

The Second Battle

AIthough the defeat of Tipu left the Marathas as the chief rivals to Britain, the
Second Maratha War arose initially from internal conflict within the Maratha
Confederacy. The Peshwa, Baji Rao II, was still the offiicial head of the Marathas,
but the most powerful were Doulut Rao Sindhia of Gwalior, and Jaswant Rao
Holkar of Indore; lesser powers were the Gaekwar of Baroda and Ragogee
Bhonsla, Raja of Berar. Marquess Wellesley's attempts to bring these states into
his `subsidiary' system were unsuccessful, and civil war among the Marathas
resulted in the utter defeat of the Peshwa's forces by Holkar at the battle of
Poona (25 October 1802). Baji Rao II fled to British protection, and by the Treaty
of Bassein formed an alliance with the British, ceding territory for the
maintenance of a subsidiary force, and agreeing to treat with no other power.
This considerably extended British influence in western India, but Wellesley was
still concerned over possible French interference, given the French influence in
the Maratha forces, notably from Perron.

Marquess Wellesley determined to support the Peshwa, and Arthur Wellesley led
a force, which re-installed Baji Rao in Poona, without opposition, on 13 May 1803.
By early August, negotiations with Sindhia having failed, the governor-general
moved against the two principal Maratha forces: a combined army of Sindhia and
the Raja of Berar in the Deccan, about 50,000 strong, including 10,500 regular

infantry; and further north, Sindhia's main army, about 35,000 strong,
commanded by Perron. Marquess Wellesley formed two armies, the northern
under General Gerard Lake, and the southern under Arthur Wellesley.
Collaborating with the latter was the Hyderabad Contingent, some 9,400 strong,
and in addition to Wellesley's own army, more than 11,000 strong were some
5,000-allied Mysore and Maratha light horse.

The British defeats the Marathas

On 6 August 1803 Arthur Wellesley received news of the failure of negotiations,
and marched immediately upon the fortification of Ahmednagar. On 8 August he
stormed and took the city, laid siege to Ahmednagar fort, and accepted its
surrender on 12 August. This success had a profound effect upon the Maratha
chieftain Gokhale, one of the Peshwa's supporters whose forces were present
with Wellesley; he wrote that `These English are a strange people and their
General a wonderful man. They came here in the morning, looked at the pettahwall, walked over it, killed all the garrison, and returned to breakfast.'

Wellesley encountered the army of Sindhia and Ragojee Bhonsla at Assaye on 23

September. The latter numbered between 40,000 and 50,000 men, including
three brigades of regular infantry, the largest under the command of the exHanoverian sergeant, Pohlmann. Despite the numbers, Wellesley determined to
attack; as Colonel Stevenson's Hyderabad force was not within range of support,
Wellesley had only some 7,000 men, of whom perhaps 500 had to guard his
baggage, and of the remainder, he had only three European regiments (l9th Light
Dragoons, 74th Foot and 78th Foot). The Mysore and Maratha light horse, some
believed to be of dubious loyalty, could not be used in the main action. Despite
sustaining heavy casualties in their frontal attack, the small British and Company
force won a considerable victory; it was Wellesley's first major success, and one
which he always held in the highest estimation, even when compared to his later
triumphant career. His losses, however, were severe, numbering nearly 650
Europeans and more than 900 Indian troops; from a strength of about 500 rank
and file, the 74th lost ten officers and one volunteer killed and seven wounded,
and 124 other ranks killed and 270 wounded, a casualty-rate of about threequarters of those engaged. Having sustained such casualties, and having fought
the battle after a 24-mile march, Wellesley was unable immediately to pursue his
defeated enemy, who had left 98 guns on the field, which they had bravely
attempted to defend.

Wellesley pressed on in due course, until the Raja of Berar's army, with large
numbers of Sindhia's cavalry made a stand at Argaum on 29 November 1803.
They numbered probably between 30,000 and 40,000, Wellesley's army about

10-11,000, the European part being only the remains of those who had fought at
Assaye, plus the 94th Scotch Brigade from Stevenson's force. The European
infantry outpaced the rest as Wellesley ordered a frontal attack; the Marathas
broke, abandoning 38 guns and Wellesley's cavalry did severe execution in the
pursuit. Wellesley suffered barely 360 casualties in all. On 15 December 1803 a
ferocious British assault captured the fortress of Gawilghur; the Raja of Berar
sued for peace next day, and on 17 December ceded the province of Cuttack to
the Company, and other territory to its allies.

Treaty of Amritsar
After the Treaty of Amritsar with British which simply stated that the International
boundry of line between the Sarkar Khalsa and British India is Satluj. Ranjit singh
was virtually made master of all the territory to the west of Satluj. But.. there
was several small kingdoms, like Peshawar, Rawalpindi, Kashmir, Multan, Sialkote
which were ruled by Afghani or local chiefs.

Thus, Ranjit singh first turned towards North towards Kangra valley which was
taken over from Raja Sansar Chand by Gurkhas. Ranjit Singh's forces fought with
Gurkhas in Kangra Valley in the end the Gurkha leader Amar Singh thapa fled
leaving the field to the Sikhs. Ranjit singh entered the fort of Kangra and held a
royal Darbar which was attended by the hill chiefs of Chamba, nurpur, Kotla,
Shahpur, Guler, Kahlur, Mandi, Suket and Kulu. Desa Singh Majithia was
appointed governor of Kangra.

Then Ranjit singh sent a force under the command of Hukma Singh Chimmi to
Jammu and himself marched on to Khushab. The fort of Khushab was held by
Jaffar Khan, a Baluch chief. He gave up the city and defended the fort stoutly.
Ranjit singh invited him to vacate the fort and accept a jagir. In few months,
Jaffar Khan accepted Ranjit singh's terms and gave up the fort. He was given a
jagir and allowed to remain in Khushab with his family.

Anglo-Gurkha War, Anglo-French struggles

India's History : Modern India : The Anglo-Gurkha war ; Anglo-French struggles 1814-1816

In 1768, the Gurkhas - a tribe of the Western Himalayas, conquered the Nepal
valley. Slowly they built up a powerful State with considerable military strength
and desire to expand. On the northern side they were checked by the Chinese
Empire and on the southern side the Gurkhas extended their dominion as far as
River Tista on the east and Sutlej on the west. The Gurkhas got in possessions
the whole of strong country which skirts the northern frontier of Hindustan.

Gurkha-English Conflicts
In 1801, the East India Company occupied the Gorakpur district with which the
Gurkhas in Tarai became conterminous with the uncertain and ill-defined
northern frontier of the British dominions. At the times of Lord Minto, the Gurkhas
conquered Bhutwal lying north. However the Company again regained Bhutwal.
Thus the conflicting interest between the Gurkhas and the English continued
sowing the seeds of the war.

In May 1814, the Gurkhas attacked the three police stations in Bhutwal. Then in
October, Governor-General Lord Hastings declared a war against the Gurkhas.
Lord Hastings himself took the charge of the war and decided to attack the
Gurkhas at the four points along the entire line of Sutlej to the Kosi. The British
even tried to bribe the Nepalese Government. But to vanquish the Nepalese was
not an easy task for Lord Hastings. Again it was very difficult for the British
soldiers to go through the mountainous region.

Treaty of Sagauli - 1815

In 1814-1815, the British had to accept defeats. Major-Generals Marley and John
Wood, who were to advance towards Nepal capital, retreated after some
unsuccessful attempts. General Gillespie lost his life in Kalanga. Major-General
Martindell was defeated at Jaitak. However all these defeats were again retrieved
when in April 1815, Colonel Nicolls and Gardener captured Almora in Kumaon

and on May 15, 1815, General Ochterlony compelled the Gurkha leader Amar
Singh Thapa, to surrender the fort of Malaon. And finally on November 28 1815,
the Gurkhas signed a treaty of Sagauli. The Nepal Government hesitated to ratify
the treaty and the hostilities began again. General Ochterlony advanced towards
the Nepal capital and defeated the Nepalese at Makwanpur on February 28,
1816. This compelled the Nepal Government to ratify the treaty. As per the treaty
the Nepalese gave up their claims to places in the lowlands along the southern
frontier, gave away Garhwal and Kumaon on the west of Nepal to the British and
also withdrew from Sikkim. They also agreed to receive a British Resident at
Katmandu. The Nepal Government ever since remained true to its alliance with
the English.

Third Anglo-Maratha Battle: Pindari

India's History : Modern India : The Pindari war - 1817-1818

Pindari
Of uncertain origin, the term `Pindari' described a type of irregular light horsecum-bandit which flourished in central India in the late l8th and early l9th
centuries, originating with the break-up of the Mogul armies. Of no one race,
tribe or religion, they included any to whom the prospect of lawlessness
appealed, including Marathas, Afghans and Jats; generally organised in loose
bands led by chieftains, they sometimes served the Maratha states, receiving no
wage but even paying for the prospect of loot and plunder. They congregated in
Malwa, with the tacit approval of Sindhia and Holkar, from where they set out,
usually in November, to plunder throughout Hindustan, into British territory and

even to the Coromandel coast. The most powerful chieftain, Amir Khan, had
regularly organised regiments, estimated at 12,000 light horse, 10,000 infantry
and an estimated artillery train of between 80 and 200 guns; to which other
Pindari bands added a further 15,000 cavalry, 1,500 infantry and 20 guns.

By 1817 the ravages of these bandits had become intolerable, so the Governor
General (and Commander in-Chief), the Earl of Moira (later Marquess HASTINGS)
determined to crush them; but the renewed hostility of the Maratha powers
turned what began as a drive against freebooters into a war against the peshwa,
Indore, and the Bhonsla raja of Nagpore. (Jaswant Rao Holkar of Indore had died
in 1811, and in the minority of his successor, his favourite mistress became
regent; she was murdered by the Indore military commanders in 1817 who
committed their forces to the peshwa when hostilities began). To combat this
menace, the Governor General formed two armies, taking personal command of
the Grand Army which assembled at Cawnpore in four divisions, each of two
infantry and a cavalry brigade; and General Sir Thomas Hislop's Army of the
Deccan, seven divisions strong. Troops from all three presidencies were involved.

Two of the possible foes provided little opposition; Sindhia was pressured into
neutrality, and by signing the Treaty of Gwalior agreed to take action against the
Pindaris, whom he had been protecting; and the Pindaris themselves did not
pose the predicted threat. Amir Khan accepted conditions imposed by the British
and disbanded his forces, in return for a territorial settlement which became the
state of Tonk in Rajputana; the remaining Pindari forces were attacked and
dispersed, one of their principal leaders, Karim, surrenderirig, and another, Chitu,
fled to the jungles where he was killed by a tiger.

Marathas finally crushed

More serious was the reaction of the other Marathas, whose simmering
discontent turned into open war in November 1817. As Peshwa Baji Rao II
assembled his forces, the commander of the British units at Poona, Colonel C. B.
BURR, withdrew from the cantonments with the Resident, and concentrated on a
ridge at Kirkee. The residency at Poona was burned, and on 5 November 1817
the Peshwa's army moved to attack the position at Kirkee; their strength was
estimated as up to 18,000 cavalry, 8,000 infantry and fourteen guns, against
which Burr had five Bombay sepoy battalions and an auxiliary battalion, about
2,000 strong, and 800 Europeans (Bombay Europeans and a detachment of 65th
Foot). Burr attacked immediately and the Marathas bolted, the Peshwa's entire
force being routed for the loss of nineteen dead and 67 wounded, only two of
these casualties falling upon BURR's European troops. General Lionel SMITH

arrived to reinforce BURR on the l3th, and on 17 November another action was
fought at Poona, which completed the defeat of the Peshwa's army.

At Nagpore the Bhonsla mustered his forces, ostensibly for a drive against the
Pindaris, but turned against the British when news was received of the Peshwa's
revolt. The British force at Nagpore was only about 1,300 strong, comprising
three troops of 6th Bengal Cavalry, the 1/20th and 1/24th Madras Native
Infantry, and some auxiliaries, commanded by Lieutenant-Colonel H. S. SCOTT.
Like BURR, Scott withdrew from the cantonments to a defensible position; at
Seetabuldee on 26 November 18,000 men of the Nagpore army, including some
3,000 Arabs employed by the Bhonsla, attacked him. After a fight of some
eighteen hours the Nagpore army withdrew, Scott's force having sustained 367
casualties, testimony to the determination with which sepoy units could fight,
even without European support. On 12 December relief arrived in the form of
Brigadier-General J. DOVETON's 2nd Division of the Army of the Deccan, which
assaulted Nagpore on 16 December. After several hours' fighting the 21,000strong Nagpore army was routed, some thousands withdrawing into the city,
where they capitulated on 24 December after several days of bombardment.

Despite the defeat at Poona, the Peshwa's army was still in being and, about
28,000 strong on New Years Day 1818 fell upon a British detachment at
Coiygaum. Commanded by Captain STAUNTON of the 21st Bombay Native
Infantry, this comprised only about 600 of his own battalion, two Madras Artillery
6pdrs and 300 auxiliary horse. Staunton occupied that part of Corygaum village
not held by the enemy, and a house-to-house fight raged from noon until 9 p.m.
This remarkable defence, in which only Staunton and two other officers remained
unscathed, resisted all efforts of the Peshwa's army, which retired and broke up
upon news of the approach of General Lionel Smith. Concerning the exertions of
the British officers (even two assistant-surgeons, one of whom was killed, had led
bayonet-charges throughout the day), Smith described their efforts as `almost
unparalleled ... in such a struggle the presence of a single European was of the
utmost consequence, and seemed to inspire the native soldiers with the usual
confidence of success'; but this action, coming at the end of a 28-mile march,
reflected equal credit upon the sepoys as upon their leaders.

After vainly attempting to negotiate to prevent the state becoming hostile, Sir
Thomas HISLOP engaged the army of Indore at Mahidpore on 23 December 1817.
The Indore forces mustered some 30,000 light horse, 5,000 infantry and 100
guns; Hislop's 5,500-strong 1st and 3rd Divisions of the Army of the Deccan
included few Europeans, only the flank companies of the lst Foot and Madras
Europeans. Because of the disparity in numbers, Hislop attacked immediately;
the Maratha horse fled, but the infantry and gunners (trained in European style)
made a gallant stand until they were overthrown. Hislop lost 174 killed, 614

wounded and three missing. Mahidpore virtually ended the war, as peace was
concluded with Indore shortly after. Following a chase, Baji Rao II surrendered to
Sir John MALCOLM in May 1818, and was sent as a state pensioner to Bithur, near
Cawnpore, devoid of power or influence; his heir, Nana Sahib, would become
infamous forty years later. An infant was recognised as raja of Nagpore, under
British guardianship, and when the Bhonsla died without direct heirs in 1853, his
territory was annexed. The war finally ended the power of the Maratha states,
although Gwalior was still not completely negated as an opponent.

Modern India : The First Burmese War

India's History : Modern India : The First Burmese War - 1824-1826

Burmese War
On September 23, 1823 an armed party of Burmese attacked a British guard on
Shapura, an island close to the Chittagong side, killing and wounding six of the
guard. Two Burmese armies, one from Mariipur and another from Assam, also
entered Cachar, which was under British protection, in January 1824. War with
Burma was formally declared on the March 5, 1824. On May 17 a Burmese force
invaded Chittagong and drove a mixed sepoy and police detachment from its
position at Ramu, but did not follow up its success.

The British rulers in India, however, had resolved to carry the war into the
enemys country; an armament, under Commodore Charles Grant and Sir
Archibald Campbell, entered the Rangoon river, and anchored off the town on
May 10, 1824. After a feeble resistance the place, then little more than a large
stockaded village, was surrendered, and the troops were landed. The place was
entirely deserted by its inhabitants, the provisions were carried off or destroyed,
and the invading force took possession of a complete solitude. On May 28 Sir A.
Campbell ordered an attack on some of the nearest posts, which were all carried
after a steadily weakening defence. Another attack was made on the June 10 on
the stockades at the village of Kemmendine. Some of these were battered by
artillery from the war vessels in the river, and the shot and shells had such effect
on the Burmese that they evacuated them, after a very unequal resistance.

It soon, however, became apparent that the expedition had been undertaken
with very imperfect knowledge of the country, and without adequate provision.
The devastation of the country, which was part of the defensive system of the
Burmese, was carried out with unrelenting rigour, and the invaders were soon
reduced to great difficulties. The health of the men declined, and their ranks
were fearfully thinned. The monarch of Ava sent large reinforcements to his

dispirited and beaten army; and early in June an attack was commenced on the
British line, but proved unsuccessful. On June 8 the British assaulted. The enemy
were beaten at all points; and their strongest stockaded works, battered to
pieces by a powerful artillery, were in general abandoned.

With the exception of an attack by the prince of Tharrawaddy in the end of

August, the enemy allowed the British to remain unmolested during the months
of July and August. This interval was employed by Sir A. Campbell in subduing
the Burmese provinces of Tavoy and Mergui, and the whole coast of Tenasserim.
This was an important conquest, as the country was salubrious and afforded
convalescent stations to the sick, who were now so numerous in the British army
that there were scarcely 3,000 soldiers fit for duty. An expedition was about this
time sent against the old Portuguese fort and factory of Syriam, at the mouth of
the Pegu river, which was taken; and in October the province of Martaban was
reduced under the authority of the British.

The rainy season terminated about the end of October; and the court of Ava,
alarmed by the discomfiture of its armies, recalled the veteran legions which
were employed in Arakan, under their renowned leader Maha Bandula. Bandula
hastened by forced marches to the defence of his country; and by the end of
November an army of 60,000 men had surrounded the British position at
Rangoon and Kemmendine, for the defence of which Sir Archibald Campbell had
only 5,000 efficient troops. The enemy in great force made repeated attacks on
Kemmendine without success, and on December 7, Bandula was defeated in a
counter attack made by Sir A. Campbell. The fugitives retired to a strong position
on the river, which they again entrenched; and here they were attacked by the
British on the 15th, and driven in complete confusion from the field.

Sir Archibald Campbell now resolved to advance on Prome; about 100 m. higher
up the Irrawaddy river. He moved with his force on February 13, 1825 in two
divisions, one proceeding by land, and the other, under General Willoughby
Cotton, destined for the reduction of Danubyu, being embarked on the flotilla.
Taking the command of the land force, he continued his advance till March 11,
when intelligence reached him of the failure of the attack upon Danubyu. He
instantly commenced a retrograde march; on the 27th he effected a junction
with General Cottons force, and on April 2 entered the entrenchments at
Danubyu without resistance, Bandula having been killed by the explosion of a
bomb. The English general entered Prome on the 25th, and remained there
during the rainy season. On September 17, an armistice was concluded for one
month. In the course of the summer General Joseph Morrison had conquered the
province of Arakan; in the north the Burmese were expelled from Assam; and the
British had made some progress in Cachar, though their advance was finally
impeded by the thick forests and jungle.

The armistice having expired on November 3, the army of Ava, amounting to

60,000 men, advanced in three divisions against the British position at Prome,
which was defended by 3,000 Europeans and 2,000 native troops. But the British
still triumphed, and after several actions, in which the Burmese were the
assailants and were partially successful, Sir A. Campbell, on December 1,
attacked the different divisions of their army, and successively drove them from
all their positions, and dispersed them in every direction. The Burmese retired on
Malun, along the course of the Irrawaddy, where they occupied, with 10,000 or
12,000 men, a series of strongly fortified heights and a formidable stockade. On
the 26th they sent a flag of truce to the British camp; and negotiations having
commenced, peace was proposed to them on the following conditions:

The cession of Arakan, together with the provinces of Mergui, Tavoy and Ye the
renunciation by the Burmese sovereign of all claims upon Assam and the
contiguous petty states the Company to be paid a crore of rupees as an
indemnification for the expenses of the war residents from each court to be
allowed, with an escort of fifty men it was also stipulated that British ships should
no longer be obliged to unship their rudders and land their guns as formerly in
the Burmese ports

This treaty was agreed to and signed, but the ratification of the king was still
wanting; and it was soon apparent that the Burmese had no intention to sign it,
but were preparing to renew the contest. On January 19, accordingly, Sir A.
Campbell attacked and carried the enemys position at Malun. Another offer of
peace was here made by the Burmese, but it was found to be insincere; and the
fugitive army made at the ancient city of Pagan a final stand in defence of the
capital. They were attacked and overthrown on February 9, 1826; and the
invading force being now within four days march of Ava, Dr Price, an American
missionary, who with other Europeans had been thrown into prison when the war

commenced, was sent to the British camp with the treaty (known as the treaty of
Yandaboo) ratified, the prisoners of war released, and an instalment of 25 lakhs
of rupees. The war was thus brought to a successful termination, and the British
army evacuated the country.

Abolition of Sati
India's History : Modern India : Prohibition of Sati - 1829

Sati Stigma

Within the Indian culture, the highest ideal for a woman are virtue, purity, and
allegiance to her husband. From this tradition stems the custom in which a wife
immolates herself on the funeral pyre of her deceased husband as proof of her
loyalty. This custom in which a woman burns herself either on the funeral pyre of
her deceased husband or by herself with a momento after his death is now
referred to as sati or, in England, as suttee. In the original meaning, "Sati" was
defined as a woman who was "true to her ideals". A pious and virtuous woman
would receive the title of "Sati." Sati was derived from the ancient Indic language
term, sat, which means truth. Sati has come to signify both the act of immolation
of a widow and the victim herself, rather than its original meaning of "a virtuous
woman".

The term"sati" is associated with the Hindu goddess Sati. In the Hindu
mythology, Sati who was the wife of Lord Shiva, consumed herself in a holy pyre.
She did this in response to her father's refusal to invite Shiva to the assembly of
the Gods. She was so mortified that she invoked a yogic fire and was reduced to
ashes. Self-sacrifice, like that of the original Sati, became a "divine example of
wifely devotion". The act of Sati propagated the belief that if a widow gives up
her life for her husband, she will be honored. Socially, the act of sati played a

major role in determining the true nature of a woman. Self-sacrifice is considered

the best measure of judging the woman's virtue as well as her loyalty to her
husband. The following applies to the ideal wife: "if her husband is happy, she
should be happy; if he is sad, she should be sad, and if he is dead, she should
also die. Such a wife is called a Patrivrata". The upbringing of many Indian girls
emphasized the concept of Patrivrata as the only way for a woman to merit
heaven.

This concept of meriting heaven through self-sacrifice became embedded within

the minds of many as the only assurance for a female to gain salvation. A
female's life must be lived in full devotion to her husband; otherwise she will be
doomed for eternity and will live a cruel existence as a widow. According to
Ananda Coomaraswamy: "Women were socially dead after the death of their
husbands and were thought to be polluting". Only a woman who is sexually and
legally possessed by a husband is respected within the Indian society.

By sacrificing herself a widow saves herself from the cruel existence of

widowhood and ends the threat she possesses for society. She is considered a
member of society who has unrestrained sexual vigor, and thus may harm
society with immoral acts. A widow was seen as having irrepressible sexual
powers and could be a danger to her society. Remarriage in India was not
favored. A widow was not allowed to remarry, nor was she able to turn to
religious learning, and hence lived a bleak and barren life. The pain that a sati
endures on the pyre was less painful of an experience than the torture she must
endure physically and emotionally as a widow. If a widow decided not to join her
husband, she was separated from the social world of the living and considered to
be a "cold sati". She was only allowed to wear rags and was treated by her family
and members of society as an impure, polluted being. The prohibition, in which
she is unable to adorn herself, was considered justifiable, done for the widow's
"own interest".

The British government in 1829 prohibited the custom of sati. British India
declared the practice of sati as illegal and punishable by criminal courts. Such a
law revealed much about the British thought and opinion of India and its
customs.

East India Company takes over the Administration

India's History : Modern India : Raja of Mysore deposed and its administration
taken over by East India Company : 1831

Mysore
The old province of Mysore comprised the areas of Mysore, Talakad, Kodagu and
Srirangapatnam. The Wodeyar dynasty, which was founded by Yaduraya in 1399
AD, has dominated most of Mysore history. Chikkadevara Wodeyar was the man
who expanded the Mysore Empire while Kantareeva Narasimha Raja Wodeyar
recaptured Mysore from the Dalavayis. The interim period saw the rise to power
of two of India's most famous personalities-Hyder Ali and Tipu Sultan. Tipu Sultan
was the first to build an army on scientific lines and took on the might of the
British. Known as the Tiger of Mysore, his acts of courage, bravery are renowned.
This brave heart died at Srirangapatna fighting till the last.

The modern phase of Mysore began from 1800 with the ascent to the throne of
Krishnaraja Wodeyar III. Governor William Bentick took over Mysore in 1831 and
in 1881 restored it back to Chamaraja Wodeyar.

Company's Charter renewed

India's History : Modern India : Renewal of Company's Charter; Abolition of
company's trading rights : 1833

Renewal of Charter
After the separation of the Companys commercial and political financial
accounts, tracking charges to Indian territorial revenues became somewhat
easier. Company accounts distinguished a class of territorial expenses incurred in
Britain that were chargeable to the Indian revenues. After the 1833 Charter
Renewal that abolished the Companys commercial operations, calculating what
were called Home Charges become straightforward anything spent by the
Company in Britain was an expense for the Indian treasury. Whether all these

charges represented a transfer of wealth from India as a drain or tribute or

whether some or all should be considered payments for services rendered is a
difficult question and one that this paper cannot really answer. However, the
impact of the Home Charges upon Indian budgets between 1815 and 1859 is
clear.

It was only after passage of the Charter Act of 1833 had closed India Company
trading operations that a shift occurred. After that date, the regime began a
systematic policy of building and improving public works. For example, the
regime invested 2.2 million sterling in improving three grand trunk roads:
Peshawar-Delhi-Calcutta; Calcutta to Bombay; and Bombay to Agra. In the
1850s the state began work for the first time on new irrigation projects. The
Ganges Canal that tapped into the perennial water flow of the Himalayan river
sources, finished in 1854, cost 1.4 million sterling. The Kaveri, Godavari and
Krishna river systems in the south were also completed.

These long-term East India Company fiscal data reveal several characteristic
features of the Companys fiscal approach: First, decision-makers at home and
in India were bent on creating a usable revenue surplus each year suitable for
commercial investment (until 1833) and paying dividends to the holders of East
India Company stock. To do so, they raised their revenue demands in each
territory acquired to levels equal to the highest assessments made by previous
Indian regimes. Second, those surpluses produced were never adequate to meet
the combined administrative, military and commercial expenses of the Company.
Third, the Company resorted to borrowing on interest-bearing bonds in India and
at home in steadily rising amounts to meet its obligations. Fourth, the escalating
cost of the East India Company armies and of incessant warfare formed the
greatest single fiscal burden for the new regime. Finally, the Company allocated
negligible funds for public works, for cultural patronage, for charitable relief, or
for any form of education. The Company confined its generosity to paying
extremely high salaries to its civil servants and military officers. Otherwise
parsimony ruled. These characteristics marked the East India Company fiscal
system from its inception to its demise in 1859.

Abolition of Slavery
India's History : Modern India : Abolition of Slavery throughout the British
Empire - 1833
Slavery Act

The common law of England did not recognize anyone as a slave (although in
Scotland, which does not have the common law, bondage still existed until the
late eighteenth century, when it was abolished by legislation). Slavery, however,
existed in a number of British colonies, principally in the West Indies.

The Slavery Abolition Bill 1833 was passed by the House of Commons and by the
House of Lords.

It received the Royal Assent (which means it became law) on 29 August 1833
and came into force on 1 August 1834. On that date slavery was abolished
throughout the vast British Empire.

The Act automatically applied as new possessions (principally in Africa)

subsequently became part of the British Empire.

There were a number of exceptions.

First, its application to the Colony of the Cape of Good Hope (now the Cape
Province of the Republic of South Africa) was delayed for 4 months and its
application to the Colony of Mauritius (now the Republic of Mauritius) was
delayed for 6 months.

Secondly, section 64 excluded Ceylon (now Sri Lanka), St Helena and the
territories in the possession of The Honourable East India Company, namely in
British India, but the section was subsequently repealed. The Honourable East
India Company, in theory, administered large parts of India as an agent for the
Mogul Emperor in Delhi.

Subsequently, section 1 of 5 & 6 Vict c 101 was enacted which prohibited certain
officers of The Honourable East India Company from being involved in the
purchase of slaves, but it did not actually abolish slavery in India. It was the

provisions of the Indian Penal Code 1860 which effectively abolished slavery in
India by making the enslavement of human beings a criminal offence.

Purposes of the Act

The purposes of the Slavery Abolition Act 1833 were described in the preamble
to the Bill as:

the abolition of slavery throughout the British colonies;

for promoting the industry of the manumitted slaves; and
for compensating the persons hitherto entitled to the services of such slaves.
The second purpose was achieved by providing for a period of apprenticeship.
The third purpose was achieved by appropriating 20 million a huge sum in
those days to compensate slave owners.

Tripartite Treaty
India's History : Modern India : Tripartite treaty between Shah Shuja, Ranjit Singh
and the British : 1838

The Treaty
The debacle of the Afghan civil war left a vacuum in the Hindu Kush area that
concerned the British, who were well aware of the many times in history it had
been employed as the invasion route to India. In the early decades of the
nineteenth century, it became clear to the British that the major threat totheir
interests in India would not come from the fragmented Afghan empire, the
Iranians, or the French, but from the Russians, who had already begun a steady
advance southward from the Caucasus.

At the same time, the Russians feared permanent British occupation in Central
Asia as the British encroached northward, taking the Punjab, Sindh, and Kashmir.
The British viewed Russia's absorption of the Caucasus, the Kirghiz and
Turkmenlands, and the Khanates of Khiva and Bukhara with equal suspicion as a
threat to their interests in the Indian subcontinent.

In addition to this rivalry between Britain and Russia, there were two specific
reasons for British concern over Russia's intentions. First was the Russian
influence at the Iranian court, which prompted the Russians to support Iran in its
attempt to take Herat, historically the western gateway to Afghanistan and
northern India. In 1837 Iran advanced on Herat with the support and advice of
Russian officers. The second immediate reason was the presence in Kabul in
1837 of a Russian agent, Captain P. Vitkevich, who was ostensibly there, as was
the British agent Alexander Burnes, for commercial discussions.
The British demanded that Dost Mohammad sever all contact with the Iranians
and Russians, remove Vitkevich from Kabul, and surrender all claims to
Peshawar, and respect Peshawar's independence as well as that of Qandahar,
which was under the control of his brothers at the time. In return, the British
government intimated that it would ask Ranjit Singh to reconcile with the
Afghans. When Auckland refused to put the agreement in writing, Dost
Mohammad turned his back on the British and began negotiations with Vitkevich.

In 1838 Auckland, Ranjit Singh, and Shuja signed an agreement stating that
Shuja would regain control of Kabul and Qandahar with the help of the British
and Sikhs; he would accept Sikh rule of the former Afghan provinces already
controlled by Ranjit Singh, and that Herat would remain independent. In practice,
the plan replaced Dost Mohammad with a British figurehead whose autonomy
would be as limited as that of other Indian princes.
It soon became apparent to the British that Sikh participationadvancing toward
Kabul through the Khyber Pass while Shuja and the British advanced through
Qandahar--would not be forthcoming. Auckland's plan in the spring of1838 was
for the Sikhs--with British support--to place Shuja on the Afghan throne. By
summer's end, however, the plan had changed; now the British alone would
impose the pliant Shuja.

The First Afghan War, 1839-1842

India's History : Modern India : The First Afghan War : 1839 - 1842

First Afghan War

With the failure of the Burnes mission (1837), the governor general of India, Lord
Auckland, ordered an invasion of Afghanistan, with the object of restoring shah
Shuja (also Shoja), who had ruled Afghanistan from 1803 to 1809. From the point
of the view of the British, the First Anglo-Afghan War (often called "Auckland's
Folly") was an unmitigated disaster. The war demonstrated the ease of
overrunning Afghanistan and the difficulty of holding it.

An army of British and Indian troops set out from the Punjab in December 1838
and by late March 1839 had reached Quetta. By the end of April the British had
taken Qandahar without a battle. In July, after a two-month delay in Qandahar,
the British attacked the fortress of Ghazni, overlooking a plain that leads to India,
and achieved a decisive victory over the troops of Dost Mohammad, which were
led by one of his sons. The Afghans were amazed at the taking of fortified
Ghazni, and Dost Mohammad found his support melting away. The Afghan ruler
took his few loyal followers and fled across the passes to Bamian, and ultimately
to Bukhara, where he was arrested, and in August 1839 Shuja was enthroned
again in Kabul after a hiatus of almost 30 years. Some British troops returned to
India, but it soon became clear that Shuja's rule could only be maintained by the
presence of British forces. Garrisons were established in Jalalabad, Ghazni, KalatiGhilzai (Qalat), Qandahar, and at the passes to Bamian.

Omens of disaster for the British abounded. Opposition to the British-imposed

rule of Shuja began as soon as he assumed the throne, and the power of his
government did not extend beyond the areas controlled by the force of British
arms.

Dost Mohammad escaped from prison in Bukhara and returned to Afghanistan to

lead his followers against the British and their Afghan protege. In a battle at
Parwan on November 2, 1840, Dost Mohammad had the upper hand, but the
next day he surrendered to the British in Kabul. He was deported to India with
the greater part of his family. Sir William Macnaghten, one of the principal
architects of the British invasion, wrote to Auckland two months later, urging
good treatment for the deposed Afghan leader.

Shuja did not succeed in garnering the support of the Afghan chiefs on his own,
and the British could not or would not sustain their subsidies. When the cash

payments to tribal chiefs were curtailed in 1841, there was a major revolt by the
Ghilzai.

By October 1841 disaffected Afghan tribes were flocking to the support of Dost
Mohammad's son, Muhammad Akbar, in Bamian. Barnes was murdered in
November 1841, and a few days later the commissariat fell into the hands of the
Afghans. Macnaghten, having tried first to bribe and then to negotiate with the
tribal leaders, was killed at a meeting with the tribal chiefs in December. On
January 1, 1842, the British in Kabul and a number of Afghan chiefs reached an
agreement that provided for the safe exodus of the entire British garrison and its
dependents from Afghanistan. Unfortunately, the British would not wait for an
Afghan escort to be assembled, and the Ghilzai and allied tribes had not been
among the 18 chiefs who had signed the agreement. On January 6 the
precipitate retreat by some 4,500 British and Indian troops with 12,000 camp
followers began and, as they struggled through the snowbound passes, Ghilzai
warriors attacked the British. Although a Dr. W. Brydon is usually cited as the only
survivor of the march to Jalalabad (out of more than 15,000 who undertook the
retreat), in fact a few more survived as prisoners and hostages. Shuja remained
in power only a few months and was assassinated in April 1842.

The destruction of the British garrison prompted brutal retaliation by the British
against the Afghans and touched off yet another power struggle among potential
rulers of Afghanistan. In the fall of 1842 British forces from Qandahar and
Peshawar entered Kabul long enough to rescue the British prisoners and burn the
great bazaar. All that remained of the British occupation of Afghanistan was a
ruined market and thousands of dead (one estimate puts the total killed at
20,000). Although the foreign invasion did give the Afghan tribes a temporary
sense of unity they had lacked before, the accompanying loss of life (one
estimate puts the total killed at 25,000) and property was followed by a
bitterness and resentment of foreign influence that lasted well into the twentieth
century and may have accounted for much of the backlash against the
modernization attempts of later Afghan monarchs.

The Gwalior War

India's History : Modern India : The Gwalior War - 1843

The Gwalior War

Years of turbulence and intrigue in Gwailor culminated in 1843 in the adoption of
the child-heir Jayavi Rao Sinhia to the vacant throne. With the country's
geographical position so strategically significant to British interests, especially
regarding the Punjab and Sind, and the fact that Gwailor possessed significant
military forces, the British naturally wanted certain re-assurances from the
Gwailor council of regency. The council refused even to discuss the situation with
Lord Ellenborough and, in 1843, war was declared.

The British formed two armies: one at Agra under Sir Hugh Gough; and one at
Jansi under Major-General John Grey. Opposing them was an army, which
included European-trained "regulars" and a formidable force of artillery.

On 29th December 1843, Gough's force of two cavalry and three infantry
brigades encountered about 17,000 Marathas in a strong position at
Maharajpore. Naturally Gough attacked immediately and, despite strong
resistance, the Mahrathas were routed and 56 guns captured. Gough suffered
almost 800 casualties.

On the same day, Grey's column encountered a second Maratha force some
12,000 strong at Punniar, about 20 miles away from Gough. Again the British
attacked, and again the Marathas were routed and their artillery captured.

Under these twin blows, the Gwalior regency capitulated and on 31st December
1843 a treaty was signed that effectively gave control of the country to the
British.

First Anglo-Sikh War

India's History : Modern India : First Anglo-Sikh war - 1845-1846

Anglo-Sikh War

ANGLO-SIKH WAR 1, 1845-46, resulting in partial subjugation of the Sikh

kingdom, as the outcome of British expansionism. It was near-anarchical
conditions that overtook the Lahore court after the death of Maharaja Ranjit
Singh in June 1839. The English, by then firmly installed in Firozpur the Sikh
frontier, about 70 km from Lahore, the Sikh capital, were watching the
happenings across the border with more than neighbour's interest The disorder
that revealed there promised them a good opportunity for direct intervention.

Up to 1838, the British troops on the Sikh frontier had amounted to one regiment
at Sabathu in the hills and two at Ludhiana with six pieces of artillery, equaling in
all about 2,500 men. The total rose to 8,000 during the time of Lord Auckland
(1836 42) who increased the number of troops at Ludhiana and created a new
military post at Firozpur, which was actually Past of Sikh kingdom's dominion
south of the Sutlej. British preparations for a war with the Sikhs began seriously
in 1843 when the new governor-general, Lord Ellenborough (1842-44), discussed
with the Home government the possibilities of a military occupation of the
Punjab. English and Indian infantry reinforcement began arriving at each of the
frontier posts of Firozpur and Ludhiana. Cavalry and artillery regiments moved up
to Ambala and Kasauli. Works were in the process of erection around the
magazine at Firozpur, and the fort at Ludhiana began to he fortified. Plans for the
construction of bridges over the rivers Markanda and Ghaggar were prepared,
and a new road link to join Meerut and Ambala was taken in hand. Exclusive of
the newly constructed cantonments of Kasauli and Shimla, Ellenborough had
been able to collect a force of 11,639 men and 48 guns at Ambala, Ludhiana and
Firozpur. Everywhere," wrote Lord Ellenborough, we are trying to get things in
order and especially to strengthen and equip the artillery with which the fight will
be."

Seventy boats of thirty-five tons each, with the necessary equipments to bridge
the Sutlej at any point, were under construction; fifty-six pontoons were on their
way from Bombay for use in Sindh, and two steamers were being constructed to
ply on the River Sutlej. in November 1845," he informed the Duke of Wellington,
"the army will be equal to any operation. I should be sorry to have it called to the
field sooner." In July 1844, Lord Ellenborough was replaced by Lord Hardinge
(1844-48), a Peninsula veteran, as governor-general of India. Hardinge further
accelerated the process of strengthening the Sutlej frontier for a war with the
Sikhs. The abrasive and belligerent Major George Broadfoot as the political agent
on the Punjab frontier replaced the affable Colonel Richmond. Lord Cough, the
commander-in-chief, established his headquarters at Ambala. In October 1844,
the British military force on the frontier was 17,000 infantry and 60 guns.
Another 10,000 troops were to be ready by the end of November. Firozpur's

garrison strength under the command of Sir John Littler was raised to 7,000; by
January 1845, the total British force amounted to 20,000 men and 60 guns. We
can collect," Hardinge reported to the Home government, 33,000 infantry, 6,000
cavalry and 100 guns in six weeks." In March additional British and Indian
regiments were quietly moved to Flrozpur, Ludhiana and Ambala. Field batteries
of 9 pounders with horses or bullocks to draw them, and 24 additional pieces of
heavy ordnance were on their way to the frontier. In addition, 600 elephants to
draw the battering train of 24-pounder batteries had reached Agra, and 7,000
camels between Kanpur and the Sutlej were to move up in the summer to
Firozpur, which was to be the concentration point for a forward offensive
movement.

Lord Hardinge, blamed unnecessarily by the Home government for inadequate

military preparations for the first Sikh war, had, during the seventeen months
between Ellen borough's departure and the commencement of hostilities with the
Sikhs, increased the garrison strength at Ferozpur from 4,596 men and 12 guns
to 10,472 men and 24 guns; at Ambala from 4,113 men and 24 guns to 12, 972
men and 32 guns; at Ludhiana from 3,030 men and 12 guns to 7,235 men and
12 guns, and at Meerut from 5,573 men and 18 guns to 9,844 men and 24 guns.
The relevant strength of the advanced armies, including those at the hill stations
of Sabathu and Kasauli, was raised from 24,000 men and 66 guns to 45,500 men
and 98 guns. These figures are based on official British papers, particularly
Hardinge's private correspondence on Punjab affairs with his predecessor, Lord
Ellenborough. Thus Total number of British troops around Punjab was 86,023 men
and 116 guns. In addition to the concentration of troops on the border, an
elaborate supply depot was set up by the British at Basslan, near Raikot, in
Ludhiana district. The Lahore Darbar's vamps or representatives and news
writers in the cis-Sutlej region sent alarming reports of these large-scale British
military movements across the border. The Sikhs were deeply wrought upon by
these war preparations, especially by Broad foots acts of hostility. The rapid
march in November 1845 of the governor-general towards the frontier and a
report of Sir Charles Napier's speech in the Delhi Gazette saying that the British
were going to war with the Sikhs filled Lahore with rumors of invasion. The Sikh
ranks, alerted to the danger of a British offensive, started their own preparations.
Yet the army pinches or regimental representatives, who had taken over the
affairs of the Lahore forces into their own hands after the death of Wazir Jawahar
Singh, were at this time maintaining, according to George Campbell, a British
civilian employed in the cis-Sutlej territory, Memoirs of My Indian Career ,
"Wonderful order at Lahore.. and almost puritanical discipline in the military
republic."

However, the emergence of the army Panchayats as a new centre of power

greatly perturbed the British authority that termed it as "unholy alliance between

the republican army and the Darbar." In this process Sikh army had indeed been
transformed. It had now assumed the role of the Khalsa. It worked through
elected regimental committees declaring that Guru Gobind Singh's ideal of the
Sikh commonwealth had been revived, with the Sarbatt Khalsa or the Sikh as a
whole assuming all executive, military and civil authority in the State. The British
decried this as "the dangerous military democracy of the panchayat system," in
which soldiers were in a state of success mutiny. " When the British agent made
a reference the Lahore Darbar about military preparations in the Punjab, it
replied that there only defensive measures to counter the signs of the British.
The Darbar, on other hand, asked for the return of the estimated at over
seventeen lakh of the Lahore grandee Suchet Singh had left buried in Firozpur,
the restoration of the village of Mauran granted by Maharaja Ranjit Singh to one
of his generals Hukam Singh Malvai, but subsequently resumed by the ruler of
Nabha with the active connivance of the British, and free passage of Punjabi
armed constabulary a right that had been acknowledged by the British on
paper but more often than not in practice. The British government rejected the
Darbar's claims and severed diplomatic relations with it. The armies under Hugh
Gough and Lord Hardinge began proceeding towards Firozpur. To forestall their
joining those at Firozpur, the Sikh army began to cross the Sutlej on 11
December near Harike Pattan into its own territory on the other side of the river.
The crossing over the Sutlej by Sikhs was made a pretext by the British for
opening hostilities and on 13 December Governor-General Lord Hardinge issued
a proclamation announcing war on the Sikhs. The declaration charged the State
of Lahore with violation of the treaty of friendship of 1809 and justified British
preparations as merely precautionary measures for the protection of the Sutlej
frontier. The British simultaneously declared Sikh possessions on the left bank of
the Sutlej forfeit.

Hesitation and indecision marred Sikh military operations. Having crossed the
Sutlej with five divisions, each 8,000 - 12,000 strong, an obvious strategy for
them would have been to move forward. They did in a bold sweeping movement
first encircle Firozpur, then held by Sir John Littler with only 7,000 men, but
withdrew without driving the advantage home and dispersed their armies in a
wide semicircle from Harike to Mudki and thence to Ferozeshah, 16 km southeast
of Firozpur. The abandonment of Firozpur as a first target was the result of the
treachery of the Sikh Prime Minister, Lal Singh, who was in treasonable
communication with Captain Peter Nicholson, the assistant political agent of the
British. He asked the latter's advice and was told not to attack Firozpur. This
instruction he followed seducing the Sikhs with an ingenious excuse that, instead
of falling upon an easy prey, the Khalsa should exalt their fame by captivity or
the death of the Lat Sahib (the governor general) himself A division precipitately
moved towards Ludhiana also remained inactive long enough to lose the benefit
of the initiative The Khalsa army had crossed the Sutlej borne on a wave of
popular enthusiasm, it was equally matched (60000 Sikh soldiers vs. 86,000
British soldiers) if not superior to the British force. Its soldiers had the will and
determination to fight or die, but not its commanders. There was no unique

among them, and each of them seemed to act as he thought best. Drift was the
policy deliberately adopted by them. On 18 December, the Sikhs came in touch
with British army, which arrived under Sir Hugh Gough, the commander-in-chief,
from Ludhiana. A battle took place at Mudki, 32 km from Flrozpur. Lal Singh, who
headed the Sikh attack, deserted his army and fled the field when the Sikhs
stood firm in their order, fighting in a resolute and determined manner. The
leaderless Sikhs fought a grim hand-to-hand battle against the more numerous
enemy led by the most experienced commanders in the world. The battle
continued with unabated fury till midnight (and came thereafter to be known as
"Midnight Mudki"). The Sikhs retired with a loss of 17 guns while the British
suffered heavy causalities amounting to 872 killed and wounded, including
Quartermaster-General Sir Robert Sale, Sir John McCaskill and Brigadier Boulton.
Reinforcements were sent for from Ambala, Meerut and Delhi. Lord Hardinge,
unmindful of his superior position of governor-general, offered to become
second-in-command to his commander-in-chief.

The second action was fought three days later, on 21 December at Ferozeshah,
16 km both from Mudki and Firozpur. The governor-general and the commanderin-chief, assisted by reinforcements led by General Littler from Firozpur, made an
attack upon the Sikhs who were awaiting them behind strong entrenchments.
The British 16,700 men and 69 gunstried to overrun the Sikhs in one
massive cavalry, infantry and artillery onslaught, but the assault was stubbornly
resisted. Sikhs' batteries fired with rapidity and precision. There was confusion in
the ranks of the English and their position became increasingly critical. The
growing darkness of the frosty winter night reduced them to sore straits. The
battle of Ferozeshah is regarded as one of the most fiercely contested battles
fought by the British in India. During that "night of horrors," the commander-inchief acknowledged, "We were in a critical and perilous state." Counsels of
retreat and surrender were raised and despair struck the British camp. In the
words of General Sir ISope Grant, Sir Henry Hardinge thought it was all up and
gave his sworda present from the Duke of Wellington and which once belonged
to Napoleonand his Star of the ISath to his son, with directions to proceed to
Firozpur, remarking that "if the day were lost, he must fall. "

Lal Singh and Tej Singh again came to the rescue of the English. The former
suddenly deserted the Khalsa army during the night and the latter the next
morning (22 December), which enabled the British to turn defeat into victory. The
British loss was again heavy, 1,560 killed and 1,721 wounded. The number of
causalities among officers was comparatively higller. The Sikhs lost about 2,000
men and 73 pieces of artillery.

A temporary cessation of hostilities followed the battle of Ferozeshah. The

English were not in a position to assume the offensive and waited for heavy guns

and reinforcements to arrive from Delhi. Lal Singh and Tej Singh allowed them
the much-needed respite in as much as they kept the Sikhs from recrossing the
Sutlej. To induce desertions, Lord Hardinge issued a proclamation on the
Christmas day inviting all natives of Hindustan to quit the service of the Sikh
State on pain of forfeiting their property and to claim protection from the British
government. The deserters were also offered liberal rewards and pensions.

A Sikh sardar, Ranjodh Singh Majlthia, crossed the Sutlej in force and was joined
by Ajit Singh, of Ladva, from the other side of the river. They marched towards
Ludhiana and burnt a portion of the cantonment. Sir Harry Smith (afterwards
Governor of Cape Colony), who was sent to relieve Ludhlana, marched eastwards
from Firozpur, keeping a few miles away from the Sutlej. Ranjodh Singh Majithia
harried Smith's column and, when Smith tried to make a detour at Baddoval,
attacked his rear with great vigor and captured his baggage train and stores (21
January). But Harry Smith retrieved his position a week later by inflicting a defeat
on Ranjodh Singh Majithia and Ajlt Singh, of Ladva, (28January).

The last battle of the campaign took place on 10 February. To check the enemy
advance on Lahore, a large portion of the Sikh army was entrenched in a
horseshoe curve on the Sutlej near the village of Sabhraon, under the command
of Tej Singh while the cavalry battalions and the dreaded ghorcharas under Lal
Singh were a little higher up the river. Entrenchments at Sabhraon were on the
left bank of the Sutlej with a pontoon bridge connecting them with their base
camp. Their big guns were placed behind high embankments and consequently
immobilized for offensive action. The infantry was also posted behind earthworks
and could not, therefore, be deployed to harass the opponents.

Early in February, the British received ample stores of ammunition from Delhi. Lal
Singh had already passed on to the English officers the required clues for an
effective assault. Gough and Hardinge now decided to make a frontal attack on
Sabhraon and destroy the Darbar army at one blow. A heavy mist hung over the
battlefield, enveloping both contending armies. As the sun broke through the
mist, the Sikhs found themselves encircled between two horseshoes: facing them
were the British and behind them was the Sutlej, now in spate. After a
preliminary artillery duel, British cavalry made a feint to check on the exact
location of the Sikh guns. The cannonade was resumed, and in two hours British
guns put the Darbar artillery out of action. Then the British charged Sikh
entrenchments from three sides. Tej Singh fled across the pontoon bridge as soon
as the contest started and had it destroyed making reinforcement or return of
Sikh soldiers impossible. Gulab Singh Dogra stopped sending supplies and
rations from Lahore. Lal Singh's ghorcharas did not put in their appearance at
Sabhraon. In the midst of these treacheries, a Sikh warrior, Sham Singh
Attarivala, symbolizing the unflinching will of the Khalsa, vowed to fight unto the

last and fall in battle rather than retire in defeat. He rallied the ranks depleted by
desertions. His courage inspired the Sikhs to make a determined bid to save the
day, but the odds were against them. Sham Singh fell fighting in the foremost
ranks along with his dauntless comrades. The British casualties at Sabhraon were
2,403 killed; the Sikhs lost 3,125 men in the action and all their guns were either
captured or abandoned in the river. Captain J.D. Cunningham, who was present
as an additional aide-de-camp to the governor-general, describes the last scene
of the battle vividly in his A History of the Sikhs: "...although assailed on either
side by squadrons of horse and battalions of foot, no Sikh offered to submit, and
no disciple of Guru Gobind Singh asked for quarter. They everywhere showed a
front to the victors, and stalked slowly and sullenly away, while many rushed
singly forth to meet assured death by contending with a multitude. The victors
looked with stolid wonderment upon the indomitable courage of the
vanquished.... "

Lord Hugh Gough, the British commander-in-chief, under whose leadership the
two Anglo-Sikh wars were fought, described Sabhraon as the Waterloo of India.
Paying tribute to the gallantry of the Sikhs, he said: "Policy precluded me publicly
recording my sentiments on the splendid gallantry of our fallen foe, or to record
the acts of heroism displayed, not only individually, but almost collectively, by
the Sikh sardars and the army; and I declare were it not from a deep conviction
that my country's good required the sacrifice, I could have wept to have
witnessed the fearful slaughter of so devoted a body of men."

Lord Hardinge, who saw the action, wrote: " Few escaped; none, it may be said,
surrendered. The Sikhs met their fate with the resignation, which distinguishes
their race.

Two days after their victory at Sabhraon, British forces crossed the Sutlej and
occupied Kasur. The Lahore Darbar empowered Gulab Singh Dogra, who had
earlier come down to Lahore with regiments of hillmen, to negotiate a treaty of
peace. The wily Gulab Singh first obtained assurances from the army Parishes
that they would agree to the terms he made and then tendered the submission
of the darbar to Lord Hardinge. The governor-general, realizing that the Sikhs
were far from vanquished, forbore from immediate occupation of the country. By
the terms imposed by the victorious British through the peace treaty of 9 March,
the Lahore Darbar was compelled to give up Jalandhar Doab, pay a war
indemnity amounting to a million and a half sterling, reduce its army to 20,000
infantry and 12,000 cavalry, hand over all the guns used in the war and
relinquish control of both banks of the Sutlej to the British. A further condition
was added two days later on 11 March: the posting of a British unit in Lahore till
the end of the year on payment of expenses. The Darbar was unable to pay the
full war indemnity and ceded in lieu thereof the hill territories between the Beas

and the Indus. Kashmir was sold to Gulab Singh Dogra for 75 lakh rupees. A week
later, on 16 March, another treaty was signed at Amritsar recognizing him as
Maharaja of Jammu and Kashmir, affirming the suspicion that Gulab Singh Dogra
indeed was involved in sedition against Khalsa Sarkar. Although Maharani Jind
Kaur continued to act as the regent and Raja Lal Singh as water of the minor
Maharaja Duleep Singh, effective power had passed into the hands of the British
resident, Colonel Henry Lawrence. And thus end the First Anglo-Sikh war..

Lord Dalhousie
India's History : Modern India : Lord Dalhousie becomes the Governor-General 1848
Lord Dalhousie

Lord Dalhousie was born in 1812 in Scotland Castle. His original name was James
Andrew Broun Ramsay. Lord Dalhousie was educated at Christ Church and
Harrow, Oxford. Lord Dalhousie was the start behind the city derivative its name.

At the age of 25 elected in the British parliament. Lord Dalhousie was a View
Councilor and president for the Board of Trade. On 12th January 1848, Lord
Dalhousie was appointed as Governor General of India. He ruled India about
eight years from 1848 to 1856 and it was one of the greatest periods for British
rule. His rule to different reform was brought to develop the situations of India.

The annexation policy was a deadly weapon for conquest which increased the
East India Company rule to the elevation of glory. The annexation policy was
known as the Doctrine of Lapse. The Doctrine of Lapse was based on the
forfeiture for the right rule in the non-appearance for a natural successor. By
Doctrine Lapse policy the province of Satara was annexed in 1848, the state of
Sambhalpur in 1849, the state of Jhansi in 1853 and the state of Nagpur in 1954
was also annexed.

Additional system of annexation brought victory. The state of Punjab was

annexed in 1849 after the Second Anglo Sikh war. The state of Burma also known
as Pegu in 1852 was annexed. In 1853, the territory of Berar and in 1856, Oudh
was also annexed.

Lord Dalhousie was one of the major personalities. Because of the Mutiny of
1857 took place. Although beginning by the Sepoys for the Indian Army. It gave a
chance for the discontent Indian rulers to express their dissatisfied. The Sepoy
mutiny, the mutiny for peons was dismissed by Lord Dalhousie and the British.
Lord Dalhousie was also known as a successful administrator. In India, many
places have been named after Dalhousie to mark his great achievements.

In 1857, the revolt was followed with many changes to include the shift of Indian
administration as of East India Company to the dignity, honor, crown and
territorial control of the local princes. In 1857, many revolts preceded reflecting
the Indian opposition to the British domination. Include the chuar and Ho
rebellion of Midnapur in 1768, 1820-22, 1831 and the Sanyasi revolt of 1770.
Rajmahal hills of the Santhals rebelled in 1855.

Lord Dalhousie proved in the administration matters with the demarcation of

different sections for the administrative machinery and appointment for
Lieutenant Governor of Bengal. Lord Dalhousie was introduced the nonregulation system. The non-regulation states were under a Chief Commissioner
responsible to the Governor General in council. Oudh, Punjab, Burma was nonregulating states.

Lord Dalhousie was one of the founded Telegraph and Postal systems. He was
developed railway and roads services. He was contributed to the unity and
modernization of India. He was great achievement for the creation of central,
modernized states. Lord Dalhousie changes law, legalized re-marriage and
abolished the disability for a transfer to Christianity to inherit paternal property.

The field of educational, Lord Dalhousie improves such as the vernacular

education system was appreciated worthy. Lord Dalhousie was established Anglo
Vernacular Schools. The free trade policy was started with announcing free ports.
By now Indian trade was dominated with the English. The reforms of military Lord
Dalhousie included the transfer of the Bengal Artillery as of Calcutta to Meerut.

Lord Dalhousie retired on 29th February 1856 and died during 1860 at Scotland
for misery for 4 years as of physical distress and pain. A hill station Chamba
District for Himachal Pradesh has been named behind Lord Dalhousie.

The Second Anglo-Sikh War

India's History : Modern India : Second Anglo-Sikh war : (Rise of Sikh Power)
British annex Punjab as Sikhs are defeated : 1848-1849

The Second Anglo-Sikh War

ANGLO-SIKH WAR II, 1848-49, which resulted in the abrogation of the Sikh
kingdom of the Punjab, was virtually a campaign by the victors of the first AngloSikh war (1945-46) and since then the de facto rulers of the State finally to
overcome the resistance of some of the sardars who chafed at the defeat in the
earlier war which, they believed, had been lost owing to the treachery on the
part of the commanders at the top and not to any lack of fighting strength of the
Sikh army. It marked also the fulfillment of the imperialist ambition of the new
governor-general, Lord Dalhousie (184856), to carry forward the British flag up to
the natural boundary of India on the northwest. According to the peace

settlement of March 1846, at the end of Anglo-Sikh war I, the British force in
Lahore was to be withdrawn at the end of the year, but a severer treaty was
imposed on the Sikhs before the expiry of that date.
Sir Henry Hardinge, the then governor-general, had his Agent, Frederick Currie,
persuade the Lahore Darbar to request the British for the continuance of the
troops in Lahore. According to the treaty, which was consequently signed at
Bharoval on 16 December 1846, Henry Lawrence was appointed Resident with
"full authority to direct and control all matters in every department of the State."
The Council of Regency, consisting of the nominees of the Resident and headed
by Tej Singh, was appointed. The power to make changes in its personnel vested
in the resident. Under another clause the British could maintain as many troops
in the Punjab as they thought necessary for the preservation of peace and order.
This treaty was to remain in operation until the minor Maharaja Duleep Singh
attained the age of 16. By a proclamation issued in July 1847, the governorgeneral further enhanced the powers of the Resident. On 23 October 1847, Sir
Henry Hardinge wrote to Henry Lawrence: "In all our measures taken during the
minority we must bear in mind that by the treaty of Lahore, March 1846, the
Punjab never was intended to be an independent State. By the clause I added
the chief of the State could neither make war or peace, or exchange or sell an
acre of territory or admit a European officer, or refuse us a thoroughfare through
his territories, or, in fact, perform any act without our permission. In fact the
native Prince is in fetters, and under our protection and must do our bidding."
In the words of British historian John Clark Marshman, "an officer of the
Company's artillery became, in fact, the successor to Ranjit Singh." The Sikhs
resented this gradual liquidation of their authority in the Punjab. The new
government at Lahore became totally unpopular. The abolition of tigers in the
Jalandhar Doab and changes introduced in the system of land revenue and its
collection angered the landed classes. Maharani Jind Kaur, who was described by
Lord Dalhousie as the only woman it the Punjab with manly understanding and in
whom the British Resident foresaw a rallying point for the well-wishers of the
Sikh dynasty, was kept under close surveillance. Henry Lawrence laid down that
she could not receive in audience more than five or six sardars in a month and
that she remains in purdah like the ladies of the royal families of Nepal, Jodhpur
and Jaipur.

In January 1848, Henry Lawrence took leave of absence and traveled back home
with Lord Hardinge, who had completed his term in India. The former was
replaced by Frederick Currie and the latter by the Earl of Dalhousie. The new
regime confronted a rebellion in the Sikh province of Multan, which it utilized as
an excuse for the annexation of the Punjab. The British Resident at Lahore
increased the levy payable by the Multan governor, Diwan Mul Raj , who, finding
himself unable to comply, resigned his office. Frederick Currie appointed General
Kahn Singh Man in his place and sent him to Multan along with two British
officers P.A. Vans Agnew and William Anderson, to take charge from Mul Raj The

party arrived at Multan on 18 April 1848, and the Diwan vacated the Fort and
made over the keys to the representatives of the Lahore Darbar But his soldiers
rebelled and the British officers were set upon in their camp and killed This was
the beginning of the Multan outbreak.

Some soldiers of the Lahore escort deserted their officers and joined Mul Raj's
army. Currie received the news at Lahore on 21 April, but delayed action Lord
Dalhousie allowed the Multan rebellion to spread for five months. The interval
was utilized by the British further to provoke Sikh opinion. The Resident did his
best to fan the flames of rebellion. Maharani Jind Kaur, then under detention in
the Fort of Sheikupura, was exiled from the Punjab She was taken to Firozpur and
thence to Banaras, in the British dominions. Her annual allowance, which
according to the treaty of Bharoval had been fixed at one and a half lakh of
rupees, was reduced to twelve thousand. Her jewellery worth fifty thousand of
rupees was forfeited; so was her cash amounting to a lakh and a half. The
humiliating treatment of the Maharani caused deep resentment among the
people of the Punjab Even the Muslim ruler of Afghanistan, Amir Dost
Muhammad, protested to the British, saying that such treatment is objectionable
to all creeds."

Modern India : The Second Anglo-Burmese War

India's History : Modern India : Second Anglo-Burmese war - 1852
The Second Anglo-Burmese War
Causes of the Second Anglo-Burmese War

After the treaty of Yandaboo 1826 (After first Anglo-Burmese War), a large
number of British merchants had settled on the southern coast of Burma and
Rangoon. Tharrawady, the new king of Burma (1837-1845), refused to consider
the treaty of Yandaboo, binding on him. The British Residents also did not get
proper treatment at the court and so finally the Residency had to be withdrawn
in 1840.

The British merchants often complained of ill treatment at the hands of the
Governor of Rangoon. They sent a petition to Lord Dalhousie. Dalhousie was
determined to maintained British prestige and dignity at all the costs and so
deputed Commodore Lambert to Rangoon to negotiate the redress of grievances
and demand compensation.

Declaration of War
At first the King of Burma was inclined to avoid war and so removed the old
Governor and appointed the new one. But when a deputation of some naval
officers was refused admission, Lambert adopted a very provocative line of
action. He captured one of the Burmese King's ships. With this incident, the
Burmese did not resist and the war was declared.
On April 1, 1852, British forces reached Rangoon. The famous Pagoda of Rangoon
was stormed on April 14, 1852. A month later Bassein, situated at Irrawaddy
Delta was captured. Prome was occupied in October and Pegu in November.
Dalhousie wanted the Burmese king to recognise the conquest of the Lower
Burma. On the refusal of the king to conclude the treaty, Dalhousie annexed
Pegu by issuing a proclamation on December 20, 1852.

End of the War

By the annexation of Pegu the eastern frontier of the British Indian Empire was
extended upto the banks of Salween. Major Arthur Phayre was appointed
Commissioner of the newly acquired British province extending as far as Myede.

Introduction of Railways and Telegraph System

India's History : Modern India : Railway opened from Bombay to Thane;
Telegraph line from Calcutta to Agra : 1853

Anglo-Indians
In 1833 the Charter of the East India Company was renewed. Influenced no doubt
somewhat by the Anglo-Indians' petition, Section 87 of the said Act stated that
-`No native of the said territories, nor any natural born subject of His Majesty
resident therein, shall, by reason of his religion, place of birth, descent, colour, or
any of them, be disabled from holding any place, office, or employment under
the said Company. In theory all posts were thrown open to people of any race in
India, but in practice only the subordinate trades were bestowed upon Indians
and Anglo-Indians, since higher services could be filled only by recruitment in
England. Fortunately for Anglo-Indians, about this same time (1833), English took
the place of Persian as the official language of the Courts and Government
offices. In future English was to be the only medium of correspondence in
commercial houses. English being their mother-tongue, the Anglo-Indians had an
advantage in this direction and very soon many of the community found
employment under Government and in commercial firms as clerks, though in
subordinate positions. This advantage, however, was only temporary because
Lord Bentinck, who was Governor-General from 1828 to 1836, with the
cooperation of Lord Macaulay who drew up his famous Minute on Education in
1835, determined that `The linguistic disadvantage of Indians should be
removed, and accordingly instruction in English was ordered to be imparted in
Indian schools. Very soon the graduates from Indian Universities and educated
young men from the Government High Schools were rapidly elbowing AngloIndians out of the clerical posts which they had filled efficiently.

Fortune once again came to the rescue of Anglo-Indians for soon new avenues of
employment were opening up for them. In 1825 the first railway had run in
England. In 1845 the East India Railway was projected in India. Simultaneously

railway schemes were set on foot in Madras and Bombay. The first train in India
ran from Bombay to Thana in 1853. In 1851 the Telegraph system was
inaugurated. During the latter half of the 19th century (1850-1900) Anglo-Indians
found ample employment on the railways, and in the telegraph and custom
services. These departments needed men of adventurous stock who were willing
to endure the hardships, risks, and perils of pioneers. The Anglo-Indians had in
them the spirit of their forefathers and so the community furnished - `The
Navigation Companies with captains, second officers, engineers and mechanics.
From them were recruited telegraph operators, artisans and electricians. They
supplied the railways with station staffs, engine-drivers, permanent wayinspectors, guards, auditors - in fact every higher grade of railway servant. The
Mutiny of 1857 too had proved beyond doubt the absolute loyalty of the AngloIndians and removed the suspicion which had been responsible for the repressive
measures of the latter part of the 18th century and the first half of the 19th
century. The latter part of the 19th century and the first decade of the 20th
century were once again a period of prosperity and contentment for AngloIndians.