British Expansion in India: BPSC Prelims Notes
BPSC Prelims Demand
Focus on the Company’s shift from trade to territorial power; battles and treaties; Diwani; Subsidiary Alliance; Doctrine of Lapse; major annexations; and the Bihar links of Buxar, Bengal-Bihar diwani and Mir Qasim at Munger.
Overview
The English East India Company began as a trading corporation but became a territorial power in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries. Plassey (1757) opened the way in Bengal; Buxar (1764) strengthened Company power; the Diwani grant of 1765 gave it revenue rights in Bengal, Bihar and Orissa. Later expansion relied on the Subsidiary Alliance under Wellesley, wars, and the Doctrine of Lapse under Dalhousie.
Chronology
Methods of Expansion
| Method | What it meant | Key link |
|---|---|---|
| War and treaty | Military victory followed by political or revenue advantage. | Plassey, Buxar, Anglo-Mysore, Anglo-Maratha, Anglo-Sikh wars. |
| Diwani | Right to collect revenue, granted in 1765 for Bengal, Bihar and Orissa. | Company’s revenue base expanded sharply. |
| Subsidiary Alliance | Ruler accepted Company troops, paid for them or ceded territory, and lost independent foreign relations. | Wellesley, formally 1798. |
| Doctrine of Lapse | Company annexed a state when it refused to recognise succession without a male heir. | Dalhousie; Satara, Sambalpur, Udaipur, Nagpur and Jhansi. |
| Annexation for “misgovernment” | Different stated justification. | Awadh, 1856. |
Policies: What Not to Mix Up
| Policy | Correct fact | Common wrong statement |
|---|---|---|
| Subsidiary Alliance | Indian ruler maintained Company troops and surrendered foreign-policy independence. | “It was a direct annexation policy in every case.” |
| Doctrine of Lapse | Dalhousie’s policy about succession where a ruler died without a male heir. | “Awadh was annexed under it.” |
| Diwani | Revenue collection rights. | “It gave full ownership of all Indian land.” |
| Resident | Company representative at a princely court. | “A ruler independent of Company influence.” |
Subsidiary Alliance
Indian Culture material describes the policy as formally introduced by Lord Wellesley in 1798. A state accepting it had to keep Company troops, meet their cost in cash or territory, and conduct external relations through the Company Resident. This reduced political autonomy without always annexing the state immediately. Awadh accepted the arrangement in 1801 and lost a large, profitable territory.
Doctrine of Lapse and Awadh
Lord Dalhousie, Governor-General from 1848 to 1856, applied the Doctrine of Lapse where the Company refused to recognise succession without a male heir. NCERT lists Satara (1848), Sambalpur (1850), Udaipur (1852), Nagpur (1853) and Jhansi (1854). Awadh was annexed separately in 1856 under the Company’s allegation of misgovernment. This distinction is a favourite prelims trap.
Prelims Traps
- Diwani = revenue rights; it is not the same as the right to dispense criminal justice.
- Subsidiary Alliance = Wellesley; Doctrine of Lapse = Dalhousie.
- Awadh was annexed for alleged misgovernment, not under Doctrine of Lapse.
- Jhansi is a Doctrine of Lapse example.
- Punjab was annexed in 1849 after Anglo-Sikh wars; Sind in 1843.
- Mir Qasim shifted his capital to Munger, in present-day Bihar, not to Kolkata.