Do You Agree with the View That the English East India Company Acquired the Sub-Continent Because of the Exigencies of the Trade?

Ques. Do you agree with the view that the English East India Company acquired the sub-continent because of the exigencies of the trade?

Ans. The history of Eighteenth Century in India is a highly examined and discussed topic among historians because of complexities ushered by the transitions and events that occurred in this phase. Starting from the weakening and the final collapse of the Mughal Empire,to the rise of the new regional kingdoms which were the hubs of effective state-builiding,and finally with establishment and political ascendancy;these tranisitions have been interpreted differently by different Historians hailing from Nationalist,Revisionist and Imperial schools of Historiography.

The first-half of the Eighteenth Century has triggered a major debate about the nature of state and the socio-economic changes that took place during the collapse of the Mughal Empire. Some historians attribute the term Dark Ages to the first-half on the Eighteenth Century while some contest this view by advocating that this period witnessed economic prosperity. The Historians who talk about the Dark Age theory attribute various fault lines to the Mughal control. Aurangzeb has been the focal point of attention in Sir Jadunath Sarkar's works. Aurangzeb's religious policies and Deccan campaigns prepared a base for Mughal decline. Sir Jadunath Sarkar talks about the peasant rebellions which dstroyed the Mughal stability as a reaction against the Muslim orthodoxy by the Hindu rebels. Marxist Historians like Satish Chandra attributed the structural flaws in the Mughal institutions of Jagir and Mansab responisble for the slackened financial functionining which led to the imperial collapse. Economic Historians like Irfan Habib believe that the exorbitant rates of land devenue led to peasant exploitation which in turn triggered peasant migration and rebellion. Satish Chandra altered his stance and said that a jagirdari crisis with distinct economic undertones finally shook the stability of the Empire. The provincial governors appointed by the emperor as administrators also started acting autonomously and payed lip service to the emperor at the same time. Provinces like Awadh and Bengal gained de facto independence beginning as local governors and later called nawabs,appointed their own officials and constructed quasi-independent states. This political decentralization became synonymous with the political decling of the Mughals. By the middle of the eighteenth century,the empire had fragmented into autonomous units,and this pointed towards disintegration. Muzaffar Alam and Sanjab Subramanyam stress that the empire was always a 'patchwo quilt' of areas over which imperial control operated at uneven levels,rather than a 'wall to wall carpet' uniform rule. Therefore,with the expansion of empire the exisiting systems of taxation and Mansabdari sytem could hardly by enforced rigorously in the newly acquired areas. According to Andre Wink,the decline of centralized Mughal Empire looked like a process of decentralization in which the local elites who had prospered under the Mughal hegemony started claiming sovereignity.The new regional successor states that came into existence were less centralized that the Mughal empire. Their existence led to military conflices and exorbitant exactions which paved the wat for de-urbanization,and a state of decline. Revisionist scholars do not agree with this bleak picture of the Eighteenth century and focus of the process of centralization.Frank Perlin argues that the political decentralization was parallel to the broader process of loacalization in the distribution of power. The death of Aurangzeb in 1707 officially exposed the 'patchwork quilt' and a network of fragmented and layered regional powers gained visibility. This marked the emergence of new polities/successor staes like Awadh,Bengal,Hyderabad. Historains have surveyed these regions and have assessed how the crystallization of political power took place.

Muzaffar Alam has worked on the case studies of Awadh and provides evidence of an economic impetus,cash nexus and heavy duty monetization in the region. This region was agriculturally rich and enjoyed economic growth. This growth led to the emergence of powerful zamindars who blatantly refused to part with their revenue and rose up to resist imperial authority. Culturally,Awadh retained the Mughal streaks and the emperor remained the reference point of legitimacy until the early nineteenth century. In the case of Hyderabad,historians have tried to identify the forces that lead to the crystallization of a social base which allowed the region to gain autnomy. Hyderabad's polity was based on a patron-client relationship,where the Nizam was the chief patron and presided over military and administrative blocks like nobles,vakils and military groups and this created a sub-political culture. The collaboration of vakils,military groups and financialy groups led to greater autonomy for the Mughal subedar. Mysore under Haidar Ali and Tipu Sultan acquired a centralized state form with elaborate state machinery to collect tax,trained army and the ruler derived its legitimacy from a cultural world shared by Hindus and Muslims.

By the middle of the Eighteenth century,regions like Awadh and Hyderabad stopped paying tribute to the Mughal emperor and exhibited a great deal of capacity for local integration. This reduced the emperor to a mere reference point for legitimacy. By this time,the British and French had become important political forces,though in the end the dominance was established by the British. By 1740,the British stake in inter-Asia trade had grown greatly and this instigated the French which led them to attack a British settlement in Madras in 1746. The British and the French fought continuosy in the years which followed,and supported contestants for the succession of nawabs of the Carnatic and Nizams of the Deccan. The British finally won over the French by 1748 and the nawab of Carnatic became their ally. By this time,the British troops had entered Bengal and their prinicipal settlement in Calcutta had been taken away by the Nawab's forces.The British recovered their settlement the following year and won the Battle of Plassey on behalf of a rival of the nawab,who then ruled under the British protection.Battle of Plassey was a hostile takeover and the Britishers were supported by Indian players. The Merchants and Bankers who had close ties with the EIC supported the British. After the victory,the British gained monopoly over Salt and acquired exclusive trading rights and dissolved the tolls. The Nawab of awadh tried to intervene