Anglo-Mysore War (5:08 PM)

 Reasons for Animosity between Mysore Vs EIC, Hyderabad,

Marathas, and Travancore:
 Mysore wanted to dominate the whole of south India politically,
therefore rivalry with Indian neighbours.
 Mysore wanted to dominate the trade of south India and this was
against the interest of EIC.
 Therefore rise of Mysore as a political, military, and mercantilist
(fulfilment of profit motive via trade) power threatened the British.
 Mysore followed a policy of military fiscalism which was similar to the
policy followed by EIC.
 Mysore used resources from land revenue and trade to modernize its
military with help of the french.
 Therefore it competed with EIC in core interesting areas of EIC, thus
a threat to EIC.
 In 4 Anglo-Mysore wars usually, Hyderabad and Marathas fought on
the side of EIC except in 1780-82 when there was an alliance
between Marathas, Hyderabad, and Mysore against EIC.
 Nana Fadnavis was 1st to realize the political ambitions of EIC in
India.
 Therefore took initiative to create the above alliance.
 1st Anglo-Maratha and so was the 2nd Anglo-Mysore war in 1780-
1784, while Hyderabad was turning against EIC as EIC took over
Guntur.
 However, EIC soon settled disputes by returning Guntur to
Hyderabad and signing the treaty of Salbai, in 1782 that ended the
war with Marthas and creating a military alliance between EIC and
Marathas.
 Therefore breaking an alliance of Indian powers and replacing it with
a triple alliance of EIC, Hyderabad, and Marathas by 1782.
 Also, the aggressive foreign policy of tipu contributed to the isolation
of Mysore.
 Results of 4 Anglo-Mysore wars:
  In 1st 2 Anglo-Mysore wars(1766-69 and 1780-84) status-quo was
maintained territorially.
 However, Mysore lost roughly half of the territory to EIC, Marathas,
and Hyderabad in the 3rd Anglo-Mysore war in 1789-92(Malabar,
Baramahal, Dindigul).
 Further Major loss of territory in the 4th Anglo-Mysore war, where
Tipu died defending his capital, Seringapatam, and the Wodeyar
Dynasty was restored to power and the Subsidiary alliance was
signed with more in 1799.
 EIC focused on taking over coastal areas like Malabar, Canara, and
surrounding Mysore.
Travancore (5:52 PM)
 In 1800 a British resident was stationed in Travancore, therefore EIC
influence began after the strict rule of Matanda Verma and Rama
Verma ended.
 In 1805 there was a revolt by Nair troops due to grievances related to
salaries and Travancore signed a subsidiary alliance, in return for
military help by EIC.
 However, the promise of non-interface in internal affairs wasn't kept
by the British resident.
 Therefore 1809, Diwan Vellu Thapi revolted with help of peasants
and Nair troops, and this revolt was crushed.
Carnatic (6:06 PM)
 In 1801 Carnatic was annexed by Wellesly after the death of ally
Mohamad Ali.
Anglo-Maratha War (6:07 PM)
 1st Anglo-Maratha war in 1775-82.
 2nd Anglo-Maratha war in 1803-05.
 3rd Anglo-Maratha war in 1817-19.
 Importance of Deccan for British:
 Large coastal areas, that is west coast with Marthas(Konkan coast
and some Malabar coast).
 High cotton trade with china from Gujarat.
 1st Anglo-Maratha war in 1775-82:
 Reasons:
 Raghunath Rao was removed as Peshwa in the Barbhai conspiracy
by Nana Fadnavis.
 As Raghunath Rao had become Phehwa after the killing of Narayan
Rao.
 Now Raghunath Rao went to EIC in Bombay. and the signed treaty of
Surat that led to the 1st Anglo-Maratha War.
 Treaty of Surat, 1775:
 The Governor of Bombay presidency of EIC agreed to help
Raghunath Rao to regain Peshwaship and in return, Raghunath Rao
promised Salsette and Bassin near Bombay,
 Events:
 After regulating act of 1773 by the British parliament governors of
Bombay and madras were subordinated to the Governor-General of
Bengal in matters of War and Peace except in emergency
circumstances when they could act independently.
 Therefore Governor of Bombay acted independently by signing the
treaty of Surat.
 To prevent War expenditure Governor-General of Bengal overturned
the Treaty of Surat and negotiated and negotiated a treaty of
Purandar.
 EIC recognized Madhav Rao-II as Peshwa and EIC got Salsette and
Bassin.
 Marathas to not allow the french any position in their domain,
however, Nana Fadnavis gave the french a port.
 Therefore treaty could not be finalized and war resumed.
 By 1782 British were defeated; a contributory factor was the alliance
between Indian powers.
 However it was an inconclusive victory, therefore Marathas signed a
treaty of Salbai, whereby war was ended, and the Marathas got back
their territory with EIC, British recognized Madhav Rao-II as Peshwa.
 British retained Salsette and France to not allow any position.
  Raghunath Rao was pensioned off.
2nd Anglo-Maratha war, 1803-05 (6:48 PM)
 Background:
 Due to high war expenditure, the Pitts India act of 1784 banned
imperial expansion.
 But this policy changed with Wellesley.
 In 1802 Wellesley signed a Subsidiary alliance with Gaekwad of
Baroda in return for help in a succession dispute.
 Reasons for war:
 Wellesley was an empire builder.
 Fractionalism rose in Maratha's polity after the suicide of Peshwa
Madhava Rao due to over-controlling Nana Fadnavis and increased
opposition to Nana.
 Baji Rao-II(son of Raghunath Rao) wanted to remove the influence of
Nana Fadnavis.
 In 1800, Nana Fadnavis who could have kept Maratha Sardar died,
therefore factionalism increased further.
 In 1802, Holker of Indore defeated Scindia and also Baji Rao-II.
 Now Baji Rao-II went to EIC to regain Peshwaship and signed the
treaty of Bassin 1803, whereby he signed a Subsidiary alliance with
EIC and now the 2nd Anglo-Maratha war began.
 Result:
 EIC was victorious in the war.
 Subsidiary alliance signed with Scindia.
 Scindia lost all territory north of Yamuna including Delhi & Agra and
all his part in Gujarat.
 Bhonsle of Nagpur lost Orissa to EIC.
 Tributaries of Marathas (those who pay annual tributes) like Jats,
Bundelas, Rajputs, and Rohillas signed a Subsidiary alliance with
EIC.
  Due to high war expenditure, Wellesly was recalled and Cornwallis
again made the governor-general of Bengal with clear instructions to
follow the policy of non-interference and no expansion.
The policy of Paramountcy, 1813 (7:18 PM)
 It meant that henceforth a new policy of paramountcy was initiated by
hastings.
 The British were to be the significant/supreme power among all other
forces in India.
 therefore British interests were to be Paramount and to protect these
paramount interests British to have the right to interfere in the internal
affairs of Indian states and even the right to annex Indian states.
 Therefore from 1813, Indian states were to have no rights if British
interests demanded so(Indian states had rights rover internal affairs
in a subsidiary alliance).
 Therefore Paramountcy was a subsidiary alliance less any rights for
the Indian state.
3rd Anglo-Maratha war, 1817-19 (7:50 PM)
 Reasons for the war:
 The policy of Paramountcy again gave a push to imperial expansion.
 Since 1803, the Subsidiary alliance, Peshwa Baji Rao-II was a
puppet of the EIC and he now wanted to regain independence from
EIC control.
 Also, the policy of non-interference since 1805 allowed Maratha
Sardars to consolidate power and feel confident militarily.
 Therefore Baji Rao-II allied with Marathas to overthrow British
dominance and the 3rd Anglo-Maratha war began.
 Results of the war:
 EIC was victorious in this war.
 Peshwaship was abolished, therefore Peshwa Baji Rao-II was the
last Peshwa.
 Maharashtra which is Swarajya was annexed by the British.
 A subsidiary alliance was signed with Holkar and Bhonsle and lost
significant territory to EIC.
  Therefore by 1819, EIC has total control over all territory south of
Vindhyas.
Annexation fo Awadh (7:57 PM)
 Dalhousie:
 He implemented and used the policy of Paramountcy to expand the
British empire in India.
 He annexed territories in the following ways:
 Annexing territory instead of payment of subsidy, for example, Berar
from Hyderabad in 1853.
 By fighting wars for example 2nd Anglo-Sikh war that led to the
annexation of Punjab.
 Via doctrine of lapse which was the product of the policy of
Paramountcy.
 Under this those state was annexed where there was no legal heir
that is no biological heir of the ruler.
 The annexation was justified as an unclear line of succession could
lead to political unstably due to succession disputes, therefore,
putting British interests under threat.
 Examples of such annexation under the doctrine of lapse:
 Sambalpur-1849.
 Bhagat-1850.
 Satara-1848.
 Udaipur-1852.
 Nagpur-1853.
 Jhansi-1854.
 To protect the British Paramount interest from maladministration in
Awadh, he annexed Awadh in 1856.
 To safeguard British paramount interest from the threat of neighbour
powers he fought and won the 2nd Burma war and annexed Pegu in
lower Burma.
 2nd Anglo-Sikh war to prevent any possibility of Russian influence in
India via Afghanistan.
The topic of the next class: