Modern Indian History Notes 11

The Second Carnatic War (1749-1754)

• Context of Intervention: The war was not a direct extension of a European conflict, unlike the first. Instead, it stemmed from the volatile political landscape of the Deccan. Following the death of Asaf Jah I, the Nizam of Hyderabad, in 1748, a power vacuum emerged. This instability, as noted by historian Percival Spear in A History of India, Volume 2, provided a fertile ground for European companies to transform their commercial ambitions into political ones. Joseph-François Dupleix, the French Governor-General, pioneered the strategy of intervening in local succession disputes to place puppet rulers on the thrones of Indian states.
• The Disputed Thrones:
  • Hyderabad: A succession dispute arose between Nasir Jung (son of Asaf Jah I) and Muzaffar Jung (grandson of Asaf Jah I).
  • Carnatic (Arcot): A parallel conflict emerged between the incumbent Nawab, Anwar-ud-din Khan (supported by the British), and a challenger, Chanda Saheb (son-in-law of a former Nawab, Dost Ali Khan).
• Phase I (1749-1751) - French Ascendancy:
  • Dupleix formed a grand alliance with Chanda Saheb and Muzaffar Jung. In the Battle of Ambur (1749), this combined force defeated and killed Anwar-ud-din Khan. His son, Muhammad Ali, fled to Trichinopoly (Tiruchirappalli) and sought British help.
  • Chanda Saheb was installed as the Nawab of Arcot. Subsequently, the French and their allies confronted and killed Nasir Jung in 1750. Muzaffar Jung was proclaimed the Nizam of Hyderabad.
  • French Gains: Muzaffar Jung rewarded the French handsomely. He granted them territory near Pondicherry and the important port of Masulipatnam. Dupleix was appointed Governor of all Mughal territories south of the river Krishna. Muzaffar Jung also gifted a substantial sum of £50,000 each to the French Company and its troops.
  • However, Muzaffar Jung was assassinated in 1751 by resentful Pathan Nawabs. The astute French commander, Marquis de Bussy-Castelnau, quickly quelled the chaos and installed Salabat Jung (another son of Asaf Jah I) as the new Nizam. In return for sustained French military protection, Salabat Jung ceded a vast and valuable territory known as the Northern Circars (comprising Mustafanagar, Ellore, Rajahmundry, and Chicacole) to the French. This marked the genesis of the subsidiary alliance system, where a European power maintained troops at the expense of an Indian ruler, effectively controlling his foreign policy.
• Phase II (1751-1754) - British Resurgence:
  • The British position appeared dire, with their candidate, Muhammad Ali, besieged at Trichinopoly. It was at this juncture that Robert Clive, then a clerk in the English East India Company (EIC), proposed a daring diversionary attack on Arcot, the capital of the Carnatic.
  • The Siege of Arcot (1751): Clive, with a small force of 210 men, successfully captured Arcot and then withstood a 53-day siege by Chanda Saheb’s forces. This act of tactical brilliance, widely praised by military historians, shattered the myth of French invincibility and boosted British morale.
  • The tide turned decisively in favour of the British. Chanda Saheb was eventually captured and executed by the forces of the Raja of Tanjore in 1752.
• Conclusion and Recall of Dupleix: The French government, alarmed by the heavy financial losses from the war and pressured by the British, decided to recall Dupleix in 1754. His successor, Charles Godeheu, negotiated the Treaty of Pondicherry (1755) with the British, which stipulated non-interference in the internal affairs of native states. The net outcome was a strategic stalemate: the French retained their influence in Hyderabad under Bussy, while the British established their protégé, Muhammad Ali, as the undisputed Nawab of the Carnatic.

The Third Carnatic War (1756-1763)

• Global Conflict - The Seven Years’ War: This war was a direct consequence of the outbreak of the Seven Years’ War in Europe in 1756. As argued by C.A. Bayly in Indian Society and the Making of the British Empire (1988), the Indian theatre was intrinsically linked to the global struggle for colonial and maritime supremacy between Britain and France.
• Course of the War:
  • The French government dispatched a strong military contingent under Comte de Lally in 1758. Lally initially achieved success by capturing Fort St. David.
  • Lally’s Tactical Blunder: In a critical error of judgment, Lally recalled Bussy from Hyderabad to assist in an attack on Madras. This left the Northern Circars vulnerable. A British force from Bengal, led by Colonel Forde, seized the opportunity and captured the Northern Circars in 1758-59. This deprived the French of a crucial source of revenue and strategic depth.
  • Battle of Wandiwash (1760): This was the decisive battle of the war, fought near Vandavasi in Tamil Nadu. The British forces, under Sir Eyre Coote, inflicted a crushing defeat on the French army led by Lally and Bussy (who was taken prisoner). The superiority of the British artillery and the discipline of their troops were key factors in their victory.
  • Following this victory, the British captured Pondicherry in 1761, effectively dismantling the French power structure in India.
• Treaty and Consequences: The war concluded with the Treaty of Paris (1763).
  • The treaty restored the French factories, including Pondicherry and Chandernagore, but with a crucial caveat: they were forbidden from fortifying these settlements or maintaining troops. This reduced the French presence in India to mere trading posts.
  • As historian Sekhar Bandyopadhyay notes in From Plassey to Partition, the Third Carnatic War definitively ended the French political ambition in India and established the British as the paramount European power.
  • The war also saw the deployment of a large number of British Royal troops in India. These experienced soldiers gave the EIC a significant military advantage over Indian states, a fact demonstrated by their confidence in challenging the Nawab of Bengal at the Battle of Plassey in 1757, even while the Third Carnatic War was underway.

Long-Term Effects of the Carnatic Wars and Lead-up to Plassey

• The Rise of the EIC as a Political Power: The Carnatic Wars were the crucible in which the EIC was forged from a trading company into a territorial power. It learned the art of Indian diplomacy, warfare, and the profitable system of subsidiary alliances. Hyderabad, having ceded the Northern Circars to the French and later to the British (1766), eventually became the first state to formally sign Wellesley’s Subsidiary Alliance treaty in 1798.
• Conflict in Bengal - The Farrukhsiyar Farman (1717):
  • The seeds of conflict in Bengal were sown by a farman (royal decree) issued by the Mughal Emperor Farrukhsiyar. This granted the EIC significant trading privileges, including the right to trade in Bengal, Gujarat, and the Deccan without paying customs duties, in exchange for a meager annual payment of Rs. 3,000.
  • Crucially, the farman also granted the Company the right to issue dastaks (trade permits) to certify that goods belonged to the Company and were thus exempt from duties.
  • Misuse of Dastaks: The primary point of contention, as highlighted by Bipan Chandra in History of Modern India, was the rampant misuse of these dastaks. Company officials used them for their private trade, thereby evading taxes that Indian merchants were forced to pay. This not only caused a huge loss of revenue to the Bengal Nawab’s treasury but also created an unfair competitive advantage for the EIC’s servants.
  • Successive Nawabs of Bengal, from Murshid Quli Khan to Alivardi Khan, had resisted the worst of the Company’s assertions, disallowing fortification of Calcutta and misuse of dastaks, but the issue remained a festering wound in the relationship between the Nawab and the EIC, setting the stage for the direct confrontation at Plassey.

Prelims Pointers

• Second Carnatic War (1749-54): Fought over succession disputes in Hyderabad and the Carnatic.
• Parties in Hyderabad: Nasir Jung (supported by British) vs. Muzaffar Jung (supported by French).
• Parties in Carnatic: Anwar-ud-din/Muhammad Ali (supported by British) vs. Chanda Saheb (supported by French).
• Key French Figures: Joseph-François Dupleix (Governor-General), Marquis de Bussy-Castelnau.
• Key British Figure: Robert Clive.
• Battle of Ambur (1749): French-led alliance defeated and killed Anwar-ud-din.
• Siege of Arcot (1751): A turning point where Robert Clive captured and defended Arcot.
• Key French Gain: The Northern Circars (ceded by Nizam Salabat Jung to the French).
• End of War: Dupleix was recalled in 1754. Resulted in French influence in Hyderabad and British influence in the Carnatic.
• Third Carnatic War (1756-63): Indian theatre of the global Seven Years’ War.
• Key French Commander: Comte de Lally.
• Key British Commander: Sir Eyre Coote.
• Decisive Battle: Battle of Wandiwash (1760), a decisive British victory.
• Concluding Treaty: Treaty of Paris (1763).
• Outcome of Treaty of Paris: French factories were restored but could not be fortified or garrisoned. French political ambitions in India were effectively ended.
• Farrukhsiyar’s Farman (1717): Granted duty-free trade rights to the EIC in Bengal for an annual payment of Rs. 3,000.
• Dastak: A trade permit issued by EIC officials to exempt goods from customs duty. Its misuse for private trade by Company servants was a major cause of conflict with the Nawabs of Bengal.
• Subsidiary Alliance (Early Form): Bussy stationing French troops in Hyderabad at the Nizam’s expense was a precursor to Wellesley’s later system.

1. Chronology of Key Events:
   1. First Carnatic War (1746-48) - Treaty of Aix-la-Chapelle.
   2. Second Carnatic War (1749-54) - Treaty of Pondicherry.
   3. Battle of Plassey (1757).
   4. Third Carnatic War (1756-63) - Battle of Wandiwash (1760).
   5. Treaty of Paris (1763).

Mains Insights

1. Reasons for French Failure and British Success in India:

   • Company Structure: The English EIC was a private enterprise with a board of directors focused on profitability and efficiency, allowing for quick decision-making. The French Compagnie des Indes was a state-controlled body, often suffering from bureaucratic delays, state interference, and a lack of focus on purely commercial interests.
   • Naval Supremacy: The British Royal Navy was superior to the French navy. It could reliably bring in supplies and troops from Europe and, more importantly, cut off French reinforcements, as was evident during the Third Carnatic War.
   • Financial and Economic Strength: Britain was undergoing the early stages of the Industrial Revolution, giving its company superior financial resources. The British EIC’s trade volume and profits from India (especially after gaining control of Bengal) far outstripped the French. French forces under Lally were often unpaid, leading to low morale.
   • Quality of Leadership and Personnel: While Dupleix was a brilliant strategist, his successors like Lally lacked his diplomatic skill and temperament. The British, on the other hand, had a series of capable leaders like Robert Clive, Sir Eyre Coote, and Stringer Lawrence who were both skilled commanders and pragmatic administrators.
   • Role of European Politics: The French government often prioritized its continental and American interests over its Indian ambitions. Dupleix was recalled precisely because the French state wanted to de-escalate conflict with Britain to secure its American possessions.

2. The Carnatic Wars as a Turning Point in Indian History:

   • Shift from Commerce to Empire: The wars marked the definitive shift of European companies from being mere traders on the coast to becoming “kingmakers” and territorial powers in the interior.
   • Demonstration of European Military Superiority: The wars showcased the effectiveness of small, well-disciplined, and well-equipped European armies (supported by Indian sepoys trained in European methods) against much larger, but poorly organized, traditional Indian armies. This shattered the military prestige of Indian rulers.
   • Perfection of the ‘Subsidiary Alliance’ System: Dupleix and Bussy’s stationing of French troops in Hyderabad was the blueprint for the system later perfected by Lord Wellesley. This system became the primary tool for British imperial expansion, allowing them to control Indian states without the costs of direct administration.
   • Destabilization of South Indian Polity: The continuous warfare and political intrigue led to the weakening of major South Indian powers like the Nizam of Hyderabad and the Nawab of the Carnatic, paving the way for their eventual subjugation by the British and the rise of new powers like Mysore under Hyder Ali.

3. Historiographical Debate: Was British Conquest Accidental or Planned?

   • The “Accidental” School (e.g., John Seeley): This viewpoint argues that the British acquired their Indian empire in a “fit of absent-mindedness.” The EIC was primarily a commercial body, drawn into local politics to protect its trade interests against French competition and regional instability. Each step towards political power was a pragmatic response to immediate crises rather than part of a grand imperial design. The Carnatic Wars fit this narrative as an escalation of a commercial rivalry.
   • The “Planned” School (e.g., Nationalist Historians): This perspective suggests that the British had clear imperial ambitions from the outset. The Carnatic Wars were a deliberate strategy to eliminate their primary European rival, and the intervention in local politics was a calculated move to gain political and economic control. The immediate aftermath of Plassey (1757), where the EIC began systematically plundering Bengal’s wealth, is cited as evidence of a pre-existing plan for exploitation and rule.
   • A Synthesis View (e.g., C.A. Bayly): Modern historians often take a middle path. They argue that while there was no detailed blueprint for conquest from London, the Company officials on the ground, like Clive and Dupleix, were ambitious men who saw and seized opportunities for personal and national glory. The conquest was a complex process driven by a combination of commercial greed, political ambition, the “pull” of the crumbling Mughal system, and the “push” of the Anglo-French global rivalry.