GS Notes

1.2.3 - Modern Indian History Notes 07

23 min read

Based on the provided summary, here are the detailed academic notes in the requested format.

Elaborate Notes

Jat Kingdom of Bharatpur

  • Origins and Agrarian Uprisings: The Jats, a prominent agrarian community in the Delhi-Agra-Mathura region, were among the first to challenge Mughal authority. Their resistance began during the reign of Jahangir but intensified under Aurangzeb. According to historian Satish Chandra, in his work Medieval India: From Saltanat to the Mughals, the primary cause was the oppressive land revenue policies of the Mughal state. The increasing pressure on the peasantry, exacerbated by the Jagirdari crisis of the late 17th and early 18th centuries, led to a series of revolts. The first major Jat uprising was under the leadership of Gokula in 1669. These were not merely peasant revolts but took on the character of a regional struggle for autonomy.

  • State Formation under Churaman and Badan Singh: The process of state formation was institutionalized under Churaman (1695-1721). He established a stronghold at Thun and organized the Jats into a formidable military force. After Churaman, his nephew Badan Singh consolidated the disparate Jat zamindars and was recognized by the Mughal emperor Muhammad Shah as ‘Raja’. He laid the foundation of the Bharatpur state and built forts like Deeg.

  • Consolidation under Maharaja Suraj Mal (1756-1763): The Jat kingdom reached its zenith under Suraj Mal, often referred to as the “Plato of the Jat tribe.” He was a shrewd diplomat and a brilliant military strategist.

    • Territorial Expansion: He consolidated the state, which at its peak extended from the Ganga in the east to the Chambal in the south, and from the subah of Agra in the west to Delhi in the north.
    • Third Battle of Panipat (1761): Suraj Mal initially offered support to the Marathas against Ahmad Shah Abdali. However, as documented by Jadunath Sarkar in Fall of the Mughal Empire, he withdrew due to strategic disagreements with the Maratha commander, Sadashivrao Bhau, who rejected his advice for a guerrilla-style warfare and the protection of their heavy baggage and non-combatants.
    • Administrative and Military Reforms: Suraj Mal attempted to create a modern and efficient state. He established a Mughal-like land revenue system to maximize state income. Critically, he sought to modernize his army by employing European officers, particularly French and German, to train his troops. He also tried to centralize power by removing powerful family members from court, a move aimed at preventing internal factionalism.

  • Decline and Nature of the State: Following Suraj Mal’s death in 1763, the Jat kingdom declined due to succession disputes and pressure from rising powers like the Marathas and the British. While the state was founded on the grievances of the peasantry, it was not a utopian state for them. To sustain its large army and administration, the Jat state imposed land revenue demands that were often higher than those under the Mughals, a common feature of the ‘military-fiscalist’ states of the 18th century, as analyzed by historians like C.A. Bayly in Rulers, Townsmen and Bazaars (1983).

Afghan Kingdoms (Rohilkhand and Farrukhabad)

  • Background of Afghan Settlement: Afghans had been a significant part of the North Indian military labour market for centuries. They arrived as mercenaries and traders, with their political influence peaking under the Lodi dynasty and later Sher Shah Suri (1540-1545). After the end of the Suri dynasty following the Second Battle of Panipat (1556), they were politically fragmented, serving as military adventurers under various rulers.

  • Rise of ‘Successor’ States: The decline of the Mughal Empire after Aurangzeb provided a power vacuum that these Afghan chiefs exploited.

    • Farrukhabad: Muhammad Khan Bangash, a Bangash Pathan adventurer, carved out a principality east of Delhi. In 1713, during the reign of the Mughal emperor Farrukhsiyar, he established Farrukhabad, naming it after the emperor as a symbolic gesture of fealty, even while exercising de facto autonomy.
    • Rohilkhand: The opportunity for a larger Afghan state came with the shattering blow of Nadir Shah’s invasion (1739). Ali Muhammad Khan, a Rohilla Afghan, consolidated his power in the fertile Himalayan foothills of Katehr and founded the kingdom of Rohilkhand. He was officially recognized as the Mughal governor in 1740, which provided a veneer of legitimacy to his rule.

  • Role in 18th-Century Politics:

    • Third Battle of Panipat (1761): The Rohillas under Najib-ud-Daula and the Bangash Pathans under Ahmad Khan Bangash played a crucial role in the Third Battle of Panipat. Citing ethnic affinity, they allied with the Afghan invader Ahmad Shah Abdali against the Marathas, contributing significantly to the Maratha defeat. Najib-ud-Daula effectively controlled Delhi as the regent (Mir Bakshi) from 1761 to 1770.
    • Decline and Annexation: The departure of Abdali left the Indian Afghans vulnerable. Rohilkhand faced constant pressure from the Nawab of Awadh to its east and the Marathas to its south. In 1772, the Rohillas signed a treaty with Shuja-ud-Daula, the Nawab of Awadh, for protection against the Marathas. When the Rohillas allegedly failed to pay for this protection, Shuja-ud-Daula, with military assistance from the British East India Company (EIC), invaded and annexed Rohilkhand in the Rohilla War of 1774. This event became a major point of controversy in the impeachment proceedings against Warren Hastings in Britain. The remaining part of the Rohilla territory was constituted as the princely state of Rampur.

The Rajputs

  • Mughal-Rajput Relations under Akbar: Prior to the Mughals, the Rajput polity was characterized by a horizontal structure of clan-based territories. As per historians like Satish Chandra, Akbar’s policy was one of co-option rather than conquest.

    • Co-option and Mansabdari: Akbar integrated powerful Rajput chiefs, like those from Amber, Bikaner, and Jodhpur, into the Mughal nobility as mansabdars (rank-holders). They were given high administrative and military posts.
    • Watan Jagir: Their hereditary kingdoms were recognized as Watan Jagirs, which were heritable and non-transferable, unlike the regular jagirs. This secured their loyalty and transformed the Rajput polity into a more vertical, hierarchical structure, with these powerful chiefs at the top, subservient only to the Mughal emperor. This alliance was a cornerstone of Mughal military strength for over a century.

  • Tensions during Aurangzeb’s Reign: The stable relationship began to fray under Aurangzeb. This was not primarily due to religious bigotry, as some colonial historians argued, but due to complex political and strategic considerations.

    • Marwar Succession Crisis (1678-81): Following the death of Maharaja Jaswant Singh of Marwar without an immediate heir, Aurangzeb intervened in the succession. Marwar’s strategic location on the trade route from Delhi to the ports of Gujarat made its control crucial. This interference was seen as a threat to Rajput autonomy.
    • Mewar’s Involvement: Rana Raj Singh of Mewar, seeking to reassert Mewar’s primacy in Rajputana, allied with the Rathors of Marwar against the Mughals.
    • Failure of the Revolt: The revolt of 1680-81 failed because other major Rajput houses, such as Amber and Bikaner, did not join. They feared that a successful revolt would lead to the dominance of Mewar, upsetting the established balance of power.

  • Rajputs in the 18th Century:

    • Assertion of Independence: With the weakening of the central Mughal authority, Rajput rulers began to act as independent sovereigns. Sawai Jai Singh II of Amber (r. 1699-1743) was the most prominent. He founded the meticulously planned city of Jaipur, was a great patron of science and astronomy (building five Jantar Mantars), and played a key role as a power-broker in Delhi politics.
    • Maratha Incursions: The greatest challenge to Rajput independence in the 18th century came from the Marathas. From the 1740s onwards, Maratha armies under leaders like Holkar and Scindia regularly raided Rajputana, imposing heavy tributes (chauth and sardeshmukhi). They also frequently interfered in the internal succession disputes of Rajput states, further weakening them financially and militarily. As Stewart Gordon notes in The Marathas 1600-1818 (1993), this constant depredation prevented the Rajputs from forming a united front or a powerful consolidated empire.

Mysore

  • Origins in the Vijayanagara Empire: The kingdom of Mysore emerged as a feudatory state under the Vijayanagara Empire. Following the Battle of Talikota (1565) and the subsequent decline of Vijayanagara, the Wodeyar dynasty gradually asserted its independence.
  • Centralization under Chikkadevaraja Wodeyar (1673-1704): Chikkadevaraja Wodeyar was a key figure who centralized the administration, reformed the revenue system, and built a powerful military, transforming Mysore into a significant regional power.
  • The Rise of Hyder Ali:
    • Political Context: By the mid-18th century, the Wodeyar kings had become mere figureheads, with real power wielded by two ministers, the brothers Nanjaraj (the army chief) and Devaraj (the prime minister). Their corrupt and inefficient rule created a political vacuum.
    • Hyder Ali’s Ascent (1761-1782): Hyder Ali, a man of obscure origins, began his career as a junior officer in the Mysore army. Through sheer military brilliance and administrative skill, he rose through the ranks. In 1761, he overthrew the powerful Nanjaraj and established his de facto rule over Mysore, though he never formally assumed the title of ‘king’.
  • Military and Administrative Reforms: Hyder Ali is credited with creating one of the most efficient military machines of 18th-century India.
    • European Model Army: He was among the first Indian rulers to recognize the superiority of European military training and technology. He established an arsenal with French assistance at Dindigul and employed French trainers to drill his infantry and artillery.
    • The Risala System: His army was organized into risalas (regiments). Each risala was a self-contained unit with its own artillery, transport, and supply train, commanded by an officer appointed directly by and loyal to Hyder. This structure provided immense flexibility and speed, making the Mysore army highly mobile and effective.
    • State Centralization: A powerful, modern army required a strong fiscal base. Hyder Ali moved decisively to centralize power by subjugating the local chieftains known as Poligars (Palaiyakkarars). These hereditary local lords, remnants of the Vijayanagara system, controlled land, collected revenue, and maintained private armies, effectively acting as rulers of the countryside. By crushing their power, Hyder established direct control over land revenue, significantly increasing the state’s resources, a process analyzed by Burton Stein in his study of the South Indian state system.

Prelims Pointers

  • Jat Kingdom:

    • Founder of Bharatpur state: Churaman Jat.
    • Consolidated by: Maharaja Suraj Mal.
    • Suraj Mal initially supported the Marathas in the Third Battle of Panipat (1761) but later withdrew.
    • The Jat kingdom’s territory extended from the Ganga to the Chambal and included Agra and Mathura.
    • Early Jat revolt leader against Mughals: Gokula (1669).

  • Afghan Kingdoms:

    • Farrukhabad kingdom was founded by Muhammad Khan Bangash (a Bangash Pathan) in 1713.
    • Rohilkhand kingdom was founded by Ali Muhammad Khan (a Rohilla Afghan) around 1737-40.
    • Rohillas and Bangash Pathans supported Ahmad Shah Abdali in the Third Battle of Panipat (1761).
    • The Rohilla chief who controlled Delhi after the battle was Najib-ud-Daula.
    • The Rohilla War (1774) involved the Nawab of Awadh (Shuja-ud-Daula) and the British East India Company, leading to the annexation of Rohilkhand.

  • Rajputs:

    • Mughal policy under Akbar involved co-opting Rajput chiefs into the Mansabdari system.
    • Watan Jagir was a heritable and non-transferable land grant given to Rajput rulers by the Mughals.
    • The Rajput revolt of 1680-81 involved Marwar and Mewar against Aurangzeb.
    • Sawai Jai Singh II of Amber founded the city of Jaipur.
    • He built five astronomical observatories known as Jantar Mantars in Delhi, Jaipur, Ujjain, Mathura, and Varanasi.
    • In the 18th century, Rajput states were frequently raided by the Marathas for chauth and sardeshmukhi.

  • Mysore:

    • Mysore was initially a feudatory of the Vijayanagara Empire, ruled by the Wodeyar dynasty.
    • Hyder Ali overthrew the minister Nanjaraj to take control of Mysore in 1761.
    • Hyder Ali modernized his army with French assistance.
    • He organized his army into self-sufficient units called risalas.
    • He subjugated local chieftains called Poligars to centralize state power and revenue collection.

Mains Insights

1. The Nature of 18th-Century ‘Successor’ and ‘Rebel’ States: * Continuity and Change: The states that emerged in the 18th century, like the Jat kingdom, Rohilkhand, and even Mysore, were not entirely new creations. They often adopted and adapted Mughal administrative structures, particularly in land revenue (the Zabti system). However, the social base of the ruling elite changed, with local magnates, military adventurers (like Hyder Ali), or zamindars (like the Jats) coming to power. * Debate on the 18th Century: The rise of these regional powers is central to the historiographical debate on the 18th century. The traditional view (Jadunath Sarkar) saw it as a ‘dark age’ of chaos following Mughal decline. Revisionist historians (C.A. Bayly, Muzaffar Alam) argue for ‘regional efflorescence’, where economic prosperity continued and new, dynamic political systems emerged at the regional level, even if the imperial center weakened.

2. State Formation as a Process of Military Fiscalism: * The Military-Fiscal Link: States like Mysore under Hyder Ali are prime examples of ‘military-fiscalism’. The need to build a modern, European-style army required a vast and consistent flow of revenue. * Impact on Society: This drive for revenue led to greater centralization. Rulers like Hyder Ali had to break the power of intermediary local chiefs (Poligars) to establish a direct link with the agricultural producers. This process, while strengthening the state, could also be highly disruptive and oppressive for the peasantry, who now faced a more efficient and demanding revenue-extraction machinery.

3. Geopolitical Alliances and the Rise of the EIC: * Fluid Alliances: The 18th century was marked by constantly shifting alliances. The Rajputs fought the Mughals but feared each other more; the Rohillas allied with Abdali against the Marathas; the Nawab of Awadh allied with the British to annex Rohilkhand. * British Exploitation: This fragmented political landscape was masterfully exploited by the British East India Company. They used their superior military discipline and resources to intervene in local conflicts, playing one power against another (e.g., helping Awadh against the Rohillas in 1774), and gradually establishing their own dominance through mechanisms like subsidiary alliances. The failure of Indian powers to form a united front was a key reason for their eventual subjugation.

4. The Mughal-Rajput Relationship: Beyond Religious Binaries: * A Political Symbiosis: The Mughal-Rajput relationship, especially from Akbar to Shah Jahan, was a political masterstroke based on mutual benefit. The Mughals gained a loyal warrior class to stabilize their empire, while the Rajputs gained imperial prestige, security, and the power to consolidate their own positions against local rivals. * Aurangzeb’s Policy - A Strategic Re-evaluation: Aurangzeb’s conflict with Marwar and Mewar should be viewed through a strategic, not purely religious, lens. His primary motive was to control a vital trade route and prevent the emergence of a single, overly powerful Rajput state that could challenge imperial authority. The lack of unity among the Rajputs themselves during this conflict underscores the primacy of regional power politics over religious solidarity.

Previous Year Questions

Prelims

  1. Who among the following rulers of the medieval period is credited with the foundation of the city of Agra? (UPSC CSE 2023 - Note: This is an illustrative question on medieval rulers, similar in style) (a) Balban (b) Sikandar Lodi (c) Firoz Shah Tughlaq (d) Iltutmish Answer: (b) Sikandar Lodi founded the city of Agra in 1504.

  2. With reference to Indian history, who of the following were known as “king makers” in the early 18th Century? (UPSC CSE 2021 - Illustrative, contextual) (a) Sayyid Brothers (b) Nizam-ul-Mulk (c) Saadat Khan (d) Zulfiqar Khan Answer: (a) Sayyid Brothers (Hussain Ali Khan and Abdullah Khan) were powerful nobles who played a dominant role in making and unmaking Mughal emperors from Farrukhsiyar to Muhammad Shah.

  3. Which one of the following is a very significant aspect of the Champaran Satyagraha? (UPSC CSE 2018 - Illustrative of factual event-based questions) (a) Active all-India participation of lawyers, students and women in the National Movement (b) Active involvement of Dalit and Tribal communities of India in the National Movement (c) Joining of peasant unrest to India’s National Movement (d) Drastic decrease in the cultivation of plantation crops and commercial crops Answer: (c) Joining of peasant unrest to India’s National Movement. Champaran was the first major movement where Gandhi took up the cause of peasants, integrating their local grievances into the larger national struggle.

  4. Consider the following statements: (UPSC CSE 2019 - Illustrative of statement-based questions on the period)

    1. In the Third Battle of Panipat, Ahmad Shah Abdali defeated Ibrahim Lodi.
    2. Tipu Sultan was killed in the Third Anglo-Mysore War.
    3. Mir Jafar was a commander in the army of Siraj-ud-daulah at the Battle of Plassey. Which of the statements given above is/are correct? (a) 1, 2 and 3 (b) 3 only (c) 2 and 3 only (d) None Answer: (b) 3 only. Statement 1 is incorrect; Abdali defeated the Marathas. Statement 2 is incorrect; Tipu Sultan was killed in the Fourth Anglo-Mysore War (1799). Statement 3 is correct.

  5. With reference to the period of the Indian freedom struggle, which of the following was/were the reason/reasons for the launch of the Swadeshi Movement? (UPSC CSE 2022 - Illustrative) (a) The partition of Bengal by Lord Curzon (b) The sentence of 6 years of imprisonment to Lokmanya Tilak (c) The death of Lala Lajpat Rai (d) The passing of the Rowlatt Act Answer: (a) The partition of Bengal by Lord Curzon in 1905 was the immediate cause for the launch of the Swadeshi Movement.

Mains

  1. Clarify how mid-eighteenth century India was beset with the spectre of a fragmented polity. (UPSC CSE 2017)

    Answer: The mid-eighteenth century in India marked a period of profound political transformation characterized by the decline of the central Mughal authority and the rise of a fragmented polity. This fragmentation can be understood through the following points:

    • Decline of Mughal Empire: The death of Aurangzeb in 1707 triggered wars of succession and weakened the administrative and military machinery of the empire. Later Mughals were ineffective rulers, leading to the rise of powerful nobles and provincial governors.
    • Rise of ‘Successor’ States: Provincial governors of major provinces like Bengal (Murshid Quli Khan), Awadh (Saadat Khan), and Hyderabad (Nizam-ul-Mulk) carved out autonomous kingdoms. While they often maintained nominal allegiance to the Mughal emperor, they operated as de facto independent rulers, collecting revenue and waging wars.
    • Emergence of ‘Rebel’ States: Groups that had historically challenged Mughal authority consolidated their power to form new states. The Marathas established a vast confederacy, the Jats created the kingdom of Bharatpur through agrarian uprisings, and the Sikhs established Misls in Punjab.
    • Foreign Invasions: The invasions of Nadir Shah (1739) and Ahmad Shah Abdali (multiple invasions, culminating in 1761) shattered the remaining prestige of the Mughal empire, exposed its military hollowness, and created further chaos, allowing powers like the Rohilla Afghans to establish their own chiefdoms.
    • Ascendancy of European Companies: The political vacuum was exploited by European trading companies, particularly the British East India Company, which transformed from a commercial entity into a territorial power after the Battle of Plassey (1757) and Buxar (1764).

    Thus, mid-18th century India was not a singular political entity but a complex mosaic of competing regional powers, successor states, and foreign entities, all vying for control in the shadow of a collapsing imperial structure.

  2. Why did the armies of the British East India Company – mostly comprising of Indian soldiers – win consistently against the more numerous and better equipped armies of the then Indian rulers? Give reasons. (UPSC CSE 2021)

    Answer: The consistent victories of the British East India Company’s armies against larger Indian forces can be attributed to a combination of superior military, organizational, and strategic factors, rather than just technological superiority.

    • Military Discipline and Training: The EIC’s army, though composed mainly of Indian sepoys, was drilled and trained according to modern European standards. They were taught to fight in disciplined formations, fire in volleys, and respond to a clear chain of command. This professional discipline often proved decisive against larger, less organized Indian armies that relied on individual heroism.
    • Superior Command and Leadership: British officers provided effective and sustained leadership. Unlike many Indian armies where leadership was often hereditary and prone to internal rivalries, the EIC’s officer corps was professional.
    • Infantry and Artillery Coordination: The British mastered the coordination of mobile artillery with disciplined infantry. Their light, maneuverable cannons could inflict heavy damage before the main engagement, disrupting enemy formations.
    • Financial Strength and Regular Pay: The EIC, backed by the burgeoning British economy and its own efficient revenue collection in India, could pay its soldiers regularly. In contrast, many Indian rulers were fiscally weak, and their soldiers were often irregularly paid, leading to low morale and frequent defections.
    • Exploitation of Indian Divisions: The British were adept at diplomacy and espionage. They skillfully exploited the deep-seated rivalries among Indian princes, using one against another and ensuring that they rarely faced a united Indian front. For instance, they used the Nawab of Awadh’s help to defeat the Rohillas.

    In conclusion, the British victories were a result of a superior military system—characterized by discipline, leadership, and logistics—and a shrewd political strategy that capitalized on the fragmented nature of the Indian polity.

  3. The Third Battle of Panipat was fought in 1761. Why were so many empire-shaking battles fought at Panipat? (UPSC CSE 2014)

    Answer: Panipat’s location and strategic importance made it a natural battlefield for numerous decisive conflicts in Indian history. The reasons for its significance are manifold:

    • Strategic Location: Panipat is situated on the Grand Trunk Road, on a flat plain about 90 km north of Delhi. Any invading force from the northwest, the traditional invasion route into India, had to pass through Panipat to seize the political capital, Delhi.
    • Proximity to Delhi: For the rulers of Delhi, Panipat was the ideal ground to confront an invader. It was close enough to allow the emperor to supply and reinforce his army but distant enough to prevent a direct, immediate threat to the capital if the initial engagement went poorly.
    • Geographical Features: The vast, flat plain was suitable for the cavalry-heavy armies of the medieval period, allowing for large-scale troop movements and engagements. The Yamuna River flowed nearby, providing a crucial source of water for the armies.
    • Economic Viability: The surrounding region was fertile and agriculturally rich, capable of sustaining large armies for extended periods, which was essential for the long campaigns typical of the era.
    • Prestige and Symbolism: As battles like the First (1526) and Second (1556) had already decided the fate of empires, Panipat gained a symbolic reputation as the place where the destiny of Hindustan was decided, encouraging future contenders to seek a decisive victory there.

    The Third Battle of Panipat (1761) between the Marathas and Ahmad Shah Abdali was another such empire-shaking event, which checked Maratha expansion northward and created a power vacuum that was eventually filled by the British.

  4. Examine the factors that led to the rise of regional powers in 18th century India. How did their polity and economy differ from the Mughal system? (Hypothetical, based on topic)

    Answer: The rise of regional powers in the 18th century was a direct consequence of the decentralization and eventual disintegration of the Mughal Empire.

    Factors for the Rise of Regional Powers:

    1. Weakening of Central Authority: The reigns of weak ‘Later Mughals’ after Aurangzeb led to a decline in the emperor’s ability to command loyalty and enforce orders.
    2. Jagirdari and Mansabdari Crisis: A shortage of profitable jagirs (land grants) and factionalism among the nobility undermined the administrative backbone of the empire. Nobles began to treat their jagirs as hereditary fiefdoms.
    3. Agrarian and Zamindar Uprisings: Oppressive revenue demands led to widespread revolts by peasant communities and local zamindars (like the Jats and Sikhs), who carved out their own spheres of influence.
    4. Foreign Invasions: The devastating raids of Nadir Shah (1739) and Ahmad Shah Abdali exposed the military impotence of the Mughal state and accelerated its collapse.

    Differences in Polity and Economy:

    • Polity:
      • Continuity: Most successor states like Awadh and Hyderabad maintained the structure of Mughal administration, including law, revenue departments, and official titles.
      • Change: The basis of power shifted from imperial appointment to regional military strength and local support. In states like the Maratha confederacy, the polity was less centralized than the Mughal ideal, functioning as a collection of semi-independent chiefs under a nominal Peshwa. Rulers like Hyder Ali focused intensely on military modernization along European lines, a departure from the traditional Mughal military system.
    • Economy:
      • Continuity: The basic unit of revenue collection remained the land. The systems of assessment and collection were often direct adaptations of Mughal practices.
      • Change: There was a significant shift in economic centers of gravity from imperial cities like Delhi and Agra to regional capitals like Lucknow, Hyderabad, Pune, and Srirangapatna. According to historians like C.A. Bayly, these regions saw continued economic vibrancy, with the emergence of new service gentry, bankers, and merchants who supported the regional states. The focus shifted from a pan-Indian imperial economy to a network of inter-linked regional economies.

  5. Analyze the role of Hyder Ali in the consolidation of the Mysore kingdom. How did his military innovations pose a challenge to the British? (Hypothetical, based on topic)

    Answer: Hyder Ali was the principal architect of the powerful 18th-century Mysore state. His role was transformative, moving Mysore from a traditional kingdom to a centralized military-fiscalist state that posed a formidable challenge to the British East India Company.

    Consolidation of the Mysore Kingdom:

    1. Political Centralization: Hyder Ali usurped power from the corrupt ministers of the Wodeyar dynasty in 1761. He then systematically crushed the authority of the Poligars—hereditary local chieftains who controlled land and private armies. This broke the power of intermediaries and established direct state control over the agrarian economy, vastly increasing state revenue.
    2. Administrative Efficiency: He established a robust and loyal bureaucracy to manage the expanded state resources, ensuring that the revenue collected could be channeled directly into his state-building and military projects.
    3. Territorial Expansion: He pursued an aggressive policy of expansion, conquering territories in Malabar, Kanara, and parts of modern-day Tamil Nadu and Andhra Pradesh, which gave him control over rich agricultural lands and crucial trade ports.

    Military Innovations and Challenge to the British:

    1. Europeanization of the Army: Hyder Ali was a pioneer in adopting European military techniques. He employed French advisors to train his infantry in the use of modern firearms and tactics. He also established a formidable artillery corps.
    2. Development of Rocket Technology: Mysore’s army was famous for its use of iron-cased rockets, which had a longer range and were more destructive than those used by other Indian powers. This technology often caused panic and disruption in enemy ranks.
    3. The Risala System: He organized his army into flexible, self-sufficient regiments called risalas. This structure allowed for rapid deployment and maneuverability, making the Mysore army one of the most mobile in India and highly effective in guerrilla-style warfare.

    These innovations meant that, unlike other Indian rulers, Hyder Ali could match the British in both conventional battles and swift cavalry raids. The First Anglo-Mysore War (1767-69) ended with Hyder Ali dictating terms to the British at the gates of Madras, a humiliation the EIC would not forget. His powerful state and modernized army presented a direct and sustained military threat to British expansion in South India, a challenge that would continue and intensify under his son, Tipu Sultan.

Graph View