Then something called the “Sepoy mutiny” happened....why did both Hindus and Muslims revolted and how the situation ended.By 1850 the British east India Company controlled most of India?
The trigger for the mutiny related to grease used to lubricate cartridges for use in muzzle loaded rifles. There were rumours that the grease was a combination of pig fat (religiously unacceptable to Muslims) and cow fat (religiously unacceptable to Hindus). That pretty much put the whole army offside. The British were not very tactful in the way that they dealt with the situation and would not compromise. Of course the Indians were a proud and ancient bunch of people, and subjugation by a foreign power was always a cause for resentment.
The mutiny was brutally suppressed.
Saturday, March 10, 2012
What were the troubles faced by the British East India company? and what were they're achievements?
TROUBLES: WARDING OFF OTHER COLONIAL EXPLOITERS.
ACHIEVEMENTS: GREAT FOR THE QUEEN!....EN A DISASTER FOR THE COLONIES!
BEFORE THE COLONIAL ERA INDIA WAS ONE OF THE MAJOR ECONOMIES IN THE WORLD!
INDIA AND CHINA ACOUNTED FOR ABOUT 50% OF WORLDS GDP!
(REMEMBER: COLUMBUS FOUND AMERICA IN SEARCH OF INDIA! MOTIVATED BY ITS RICHES... HENCE THE NATIVES WERE CALLED INDIANS!)
WHEN THE BRITISH LEFT INDIA POVERTY WAS OVER 50%..NOW ITS DOWN BY ROUND 25%...
FURTHER THE FAMINES DURING BRITISH RULE, MASSACRE OF JALIAN WALA BAGH ETC... (JUST GOGGLE!)
DURING THE COLONIAL ERA OVER 40 MILLION INDIANS LOST THEIR LIVES... AS MANY AS DURING WW2...
IN CHINA THEY ALMOST MADE THE NATION OPIUM ADDICTED!
IN AFRICA THEY TOOK NATIVES AS SLAVES TO BRAZIL ETC!
ACHIEVEMENTS: GREAT FOR THE QUEEN!....EN A DISASTER FOR THE COLONIES!
BEFORE THE COLONIAL ERA INDIA WAS ONE OF THE MAJOR ECONOMIES IN THE WORLD!
INDIA AND CHINA ACOUNTED FOR ABOUT 50% OF WORLDS GDP!
(REMEMBER: COLUMBUS FOUND AMERICA IN SEARCH OF INDIA! MOTIVATED BY ITS RICHES... HENCE THE NATIVES WERE CALLED INDIANS!)
WHEN THE BRITISH LEFT INDIA POVERTY WAS OVER 50%..NOW ITS DOWN BY ROUND 25%...
FURTHER THE FAMINES DURING BRITISH RULE, MASSACRE OF JALIAN WALA BAGH ETC... (JUST GOGGLE!)
DURING THE COLONIAL ERA OVER 40 MILLION INDIANS LOST THEIR LIVES... AS MANY AS DURING WW2...
IN CHINA THEY ALMOST MADE THE NATION OPIUM ADDICTED!
IN AFRICA THEY TOOK NATIVES AS SLAVES TO BRAZIL ETC!
British East India Company in financial trouble- P.O.V. of England and colonies?
I need to know the point of view of both the colonies and England on the British East India Company being in financial trouble.British East India Company in financial trouble- P.O.V. of England and colonies?
Okay, first, this is your homework, and for us to spoon feed you the answers would be cheating.
Second, this is royalty, and your question is about economic history.British East India Company in financial trouble- P.O.V. of England and colonies?
Thanks for that...
Was that the wood cargo ship the Bismark?
Okay, first, this is your homework, and for us to spoon feed you the answers would be cheating.
Second, this is royalty, and your question is about economic history.British East India Company in financial trouble- P.O.V. of England and colonies?
Thanks for that...
Report Abuse
British East India Company in financial trouble- P.O.V. of England and colonies?Was that the wood cargo ship the Bismark?
What was the diffrence in english east india company and british east india company tell fast urgent?
english east indian company is only authentic one, the britsh east indian company did not exist for the reason it denotes unifide country including scot land ,wales etc which become later unifide in to briton or great briton.What was the diffrence in english east india company and british east india company tell fast urgent?
The question itself is a bit confusing There was no British East India company but one "East company" which was first permitted to trade in India during the regime of Mughal badsah Jehangir. Tomas Roe was the then head of the company. They obtained permission of monopoly trade in India. Subsequently their monopoly status ended. In 1858 following the queen Victoria's promalgation, governance of India went under the British Parliament by ending East India company's rule is a separate matter and nothing to do with so called renaming of East India company. There was neither a separate British East India company, nor the then East India company was renamed after 1858 as stated by one answerer.What was the diffrence in english east india company and british east india company tell fast urgent?
hello
The English east india company was formed for trade with the Indian subcontinent and Southeast Asia. The company's main trade was in cotton, silk, indigo dye, saltpetre, tea and opium. It was granted an English Royal Charter by Elizabeth I on 31 December 1600, with the intention of favouring trade privileges in India
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Honourable_鈥?/a>
by the Government of India Act 1858 the British Crown assumed direct rule, following the events of the Indian Rebellion of 1857, and the company was renamed British east india companyWhat was the diffrence in english east india company and british east india company tell fast urgent?
The original 鈥楬onourable East India Company鈥?faced only slight competition from the 鈥楨nglish Company Trading to the East Indies鈥?which was formed by competitor traders who were unable to trade with India under the original charter of the HEIC which offered a monopoly, in 1708 the two were combined becoming the 鈥楿nited Company of Merchants of England Trading to the East Indies鈥? It was called the British East India Company to distinguish it from other East India Companies (for example Dutch or French) English would have changed to British following the Act of Union in 1707 which united England and Wales with Scotland.
The question itself is a bit confusing There was no British East India company but one "East company" which was first permitted to trade in India during the regime of Mughal badsah Jehangir. Tomas Roe was the then head of the company. They obtained permission of monopoly trade in India. Subsequently their monopoly status ended. In 1858 following the queen Victoria's promalgation, governance of India went under the British Parliament by ending East India company's rule is a separate matter and nothing to do with so called renaming of East India company. There was neither a separate British East India company, nor the then East India company was renamed after 1858 as stated by one answerer.What was the diffrence in english east india company and british east india company tell fast urgent?
hello
The English east india company was formed for trade with the Indian subcontinent and Southeast Asia. The company's main trade was in cotton, silk, indigo dye, saltpetre, tea and opium. It was granted an English Royal Charter by Elizabeth I on 31 December 1600, with the intention of favouring trade privileges in India
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Honourable_鈥?/a>
by the Government of India Act 1858 the British Crown assumed direct rule, following the events of the Indian Rebellion of 1857, and the company was renamed British east india companyWhat was the diffrence in english east india company and british east india company tell fast urgent?
The original 鈥楬onourable East India Company鈥?faced only slight competition from the 鈥楨nglish Company Trading to the East Indies鈥?which was formed by competitor traders who were unable to trade with India under the original charter of the HEIC which offered a monopoly, in 1708 the two were combined becoming the 鈥楿nited Company of Merchants of England Trading to the East Indies鈥? It was called the British East India Company to distinguish it from other East India Companies (for example Dutch or French) English would have changed to British following the Act of Union in 1707 which united England and Wales with Scotland.
Why did the British East India Company have so much unsold tea?
Colonists were buying smuggled tea, for cheaper prices then the BEI Co, so they in-turn sold dirt cheap tea to England, that was of better quality then the smugglers. So you would think the colonists would go for it, but England also needed taxes to pay for the costs from the French and Indian War. So they put a tax on the BEI Co's tea, which in turn, made the colonists flip out. For no apperent reason. lolWhy did the British East India Company have so much unsold tea?
Ark is more or less right, but I thought the problems started when the BEI company pointed out that it could not compete with smuggled tea and got the tax lifted. That threatened to put the smugglers out of business, so they organised a raid on the BEIC tea in Boston.Why did the British East India Company have so much unsold tea?
Bostonraclette english to arabic translation
Ark is more or less right, but I thought the problems started when the BEI company pointed out that it could not compete with smuggled tea and got the tax lifted. That threatened to put the smugglers out of business, so they organised a raid on the BEIC tea in Boston.Why did the British East India Company have so much unsold tea?
Boston
What is The British East India Company and it's significance?
They were a British organization originally set up to do business in India, like many greedy businessmen before them; they ended up trying to take over the country and destroyed an entire nation. Ghandi eventually drove them out through peaceful protest and demonstrations. Please study this subject passionately; it is one that will serve you great purpose later in your life. Below is a link that will give you more info on the subject.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/East_India_鈥?/a>What is The British East India Company and it's significance?
It was a famous tea company, and the British King during pre-Revolution times prevented tea companies from Holland from selling to Americans and only allowed the British East India Company to sell to America.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/East_India_鈥?/a>What is The British East India Company and it's significance?
It was a famous tea company, and the British King during pre-Revolution times prevented tea companies from Holland from selling to Americans and only allowed the British East India Company to sell to America.
What is meant by the term Mughal Empire? / The British East India Company?
The Mughal Empire was the largest state in the subcontinent of India.The Mughals,a Timurid Muslim dynasty from Persia,had invaded in the early 16th century and gradually conquered much of India.
The British East India Company was a private trading company that had controlled trade between England and India from the early 17th century.Between 1757 and 1849 they gradually took over the administration of the whole of the Indian subcontinent.After the Indian Mutiny of 1857-1858,the East India Company was dissolved,and the British government took over direct rule of India from London.
The British East India Company was a private trading company that had controlled trade between England and India from the early 17th century.Between 1757 and 1849 they gradually took over the administration of the whole of the Indian subcontinent.After the Indian Mutiny of 1857-1858,the East India Company was dissolved,and the British government took over direct rule of India from London.
How did the british east india trading company and the arabs affect the trade routes?
This is a homework question and i dont want to go straight to wikipedia because my teacher will know it's copied when i cant tell him what some terms mean so i would like help from another source so i turned to the yahoo answers community thanx!How did the british east india trading company and the arabs affect the trade routes?
Hello Waleed, i Am researching it aswell, by my teacher who teaches us geography, Biology,and chemistry,How did the british east india trading company and the arabs affect the trade routes?
yo its me qasim using my bro account i haven't found anything yet probably not going 2 bring anything in 2marrow but i might look at wiki
Hello Waleed, i Am researching it aswell, by my teacher who teaches us geography, Biology,and chemistry,How did the british east india trading company and the arabs affect the trade routes?
yo its me qasim using my bro account i haven't found anything yet probably not going 2 bring anything in 2marrow but i might look at wiki
How did the british east india company win control of much of india?
if any body is at HHS in hesperia is chapter 11 in book but please somebody answer my question please!!!!!!How did the british east india company win control of much of india?
The Birtish saw much in India during the time of Imperialism. It was rich with recourses and a large labor force. The East India Trading Co. was set up by the British (and among other Imperialistic powers) to take advantage of the resources in Europe, India, and the New World. The Mughal Dynasty controlled India at this time. The company set up trading posts in Bombay, Calcutta, and Madras. This East India Trading Co. was set up by Queen Elizabeth I in the 1600s. By 1700 the Mughal was in decline and there was no effective central power. The East India expanded its trade and its political power. At the Battle of Plassey in 1757, the English defeated the Mughal governor. Most historians regard this as the start of the British Empire in India. Over the next few hundred years the British slowly laid there laws on the Indian people with taxes, parlamient, and a monoply of trade. in 1857 there was the Sepoy Rebellion. This was a Rebellion of India's finest military men that were direct body guards to the ruler of India. The British put down this rebellion and soon after had complete control over India through it's military and politics.medal of honor server vocelli
The Birtish saw much in India during the time of Imperialism. It was rich with recourses and a large labor force. The East India Trading Co. was set up by the British (and among other Imperialistic powers) to take advantage of the resources in Europe, India, and the New World. The Mughal Dynasty controlled India at this time. The company set up trading posts in Bombay, Calcutta, and Madras. This East India Trading Co. was set up by Queen Elizabeth I in the 1600s. By 1700 the Mughal was in decline and there was no effective central power. The East India expanded its trade and its political power. At the Battle of Plassey in 1757, the English defeated the Mughal governor. Most historians regard this as the start of the British Empire in India. Over the next few hundred years the British slowly laid there laws on the Indian people with taxes, parlamient, and a monoply of trade. in 1857 there was the Sepoy Rebellion. This was a Rebellion of India's finest military men that were direct body guards to the ruler of India. The British put down this rebellion and soon after had complete control over India through it's military and politics.
Could somebody please give me a simple explanation of what the british east india company was?
history isnt my best subject and any help would be appreciated :(|||East India Company, British
Commercial company (1600 - 1858) chartered by Queen Elizabeth I and given a monopoly of trade between England and the Far East. In the 18th century, the company became, in effect, the ruler of a large part of India, and a form of dual control by the company and a committee responsible to Parliament in London was introduced by Pitt's India Act 1784. The end of the monopoly of China trade came in 1834, and after the Indian Mutiny of 1857 - 58 the crown took complete control of the government of British India. The India Act 1858 abolished the company.
The East India Company set up factories in Masulipatam, near modern Madras (now Chennai), in 1611 ; on the west coast of India in Surat in 1612 ; on the east coast in Madras in 1639 ; and near Calcutta (now Kolkata) on the Hooghly (one of the mouths of the Ganges) in 1640. By 1652 there were some 23 English factories in India. Bombay (now Mumbai) came to the British crown in 1662, and was granted to the East India Company for 拢 10 a year. The British victory in the Battle of Plassey in 1757 gave the company control of Bengal.|||A group of British merchants who were given the power to trade with India.|||it was a british trading company, that first started out trading spices and other 'exotic' goods from India and finished clothing etc. to India
went on to rule India until the British govt. took over sometime in the 19th century.|||British East India Company was a trading company which was given permission to trade goods to and from India.
The British were keen on expediting India with a possibility to exploit its great wealth and mythical treasures. They wanted to gain the support and favor of the Mughal Empire in order to increase their influence. Thier chance came when the son of Mughal Empror fell ill and none other then an English doctor treated him. In return he asked for trading lisence for East India Company which was cordially granted.
East India Company started to trade and increase its influence culturally, socially and militarily, while the Mughal Emprors were in thier deep slumber of the situation, losing thier grip on astray states declaring independence from the Empire
The English started fighting against and conquring these independent states and finally they were able to capture Delhi which was the capital of India.
The history of India is full of blood and deciet, and East India Company is one character in this drama remembered for its role of securing a foothold in India|||The British East India Company, sometimes referred to as "John Company", was the first joint-stock company. It was granted an English Royal Charter by Elizabeth I on December 31, 1600, with the intention of favouring trade privileges in India. The Royal Charter effectively gave the newly created Honourable East India Company (HEIC) a 21 year monopoly on all trade in the East Indies. The Company transformed from a commercial trading venture to one that virtually ruled India as it acquired auxiliary governmental and military functions, until its dissolution in 1858.|||Before going i'd like to tell u that i got this answer from Wikipedia,
The British East India Company, sometimes referred to as "John Company", was the first joint-stock company. It was granted an English Royal Charter by Elizabeth I on December 31, 1600, with the intention of favouring trade privileges in India. The Royal Charter effectively gave the newly created Honourable East India Company (HEIC) a 21 year monopoly on all trade in the East Indies. The Company transformed from a commercial trading venture to one that virtually ruled India as it acquired auxiliary governmental and military functions, until its dissolution in 1858.
The company's flag initially had the flag of England, the St. George's Cross, in the cornerContents [hide]
1 Impact
2 History
2.1 The foundation years
2.2 Footholds in India
2.3 Expansion
2.4 The road to a complete monopoly
2.4.1 Trade monopoly
2.4.2 Saltpetre Trade
2.5 The basis for the monopoly
2.5.1 Opium Trade
2.5.2 Colonial monopoly
2.5.3 Local resistance
2.6 Regulation of the company's affairs
2.6.1 Financial troubles
2.6.2 Regulating Acts
2.6.2.1 East India Company Act 1773
2.6.2.2 East India Company Act (Pitt's India Act) 1784
2.6.2.3 Act of 1786
2.6.2.4 Charter Act 1813
2.6.2.5 Charter Act 1833
2.6.2.6 Charter Act 1853
2.7 The end
2.8 East India Club
3 Flags
4 Ships
5 East India Company Records
6 References
7 See also
8 External links
Impact
Based in London, the company presided over the creation of the British Raj. In 1617, the Company was given trade rights by the Mughal Emperor. 100 years later, it was granted a royal dictate from the Emperor exempting the Company from the payment of custom duties in Bengal, giving it a decided commercial advantage in the Indian trade. A decisive victory by Sir Robert Clive at the Battle of Plassey in 1757 established the British East India Company as a military as well as a commercial power. By 1760, the French were driven out of India, with the exception of a few trading posts on the coast, such as Pondicherry.
The Company also had interests along the routes to India from Great Britain. As early as 1620, the company attempted to lay claim to the Table Mountain region in South Africa, later it occupied and ruled St Helena. The Company also established Hong Kong and Singapore; employed Captain Kidd to combat piracy; and cultivated the production of tea in India. Other notable events in the Company's history were that it held Napoleon captive on St Helena, and made the fortune of Elihu Yale. Its products were the basis of the Boston Tea Party in Colonial America.
Its shipyards provided the model for St Petersburg, elements of its administration survive in the Indian bureaucracy, and its corporate structure was the most successful early example of a joint stock company. However, the demands of Company officers on the treasury of Bengal contributed tragically to the province's incapacity in the face of a famine which killed millions of people in 1770-1773.
History
British and other European settlements in India
The foundation years
The Company was founded as The Company of Merchants of London Trading into the East Indies[1] by a coterie of enterprising and influential businessmen, who obtained the Crown's charter for exclusive permission to trade in the East Indies for a period of fifteen years. The Company had 125 shareholders, and a capital of 拢72,000. Initially, however, it made little impression on the Dutch control of the spice trade and at first it could not establish a lasting outpost in the East Indies. Eventually, ships belonging to the company arrived in India, docking at Surat, which was established as a trade transit point in 1608. In the next two years, it managed to build its first factory (as the trading posts were known) in the town of Machilipatnam in the Coromandel Coast in the Bay of Bengal. The high profits reported by the Company after landing in India (presumably owing to a reduction in overhead costs effected by the transit points), initially prompted King James I to grant subsidiary licenses to other trading companies in England. But, in 1609, he renewed the charter given to the Company for an indefinite period, including a clause which specified that the charter would cease to be in force if the trade turned unprofitable for three consecutive years.
The Company was led by one Governor and 24 directors who made up the Court of Directors. They were appointed by, and reported to, the Court of Proprietors. The Court of Directors had ten committees reporting to it.
Footholds in India
Traders were frequently engaged in hostilities with their Dutch and Portuguese counterparts in the Indian Ocean. A key event providing the Company with the favour of Mughal emperor Jahangir was their victory over the Portuguese in the Battle of Swally in 1612. Perhaps realizing the futility of waging trade wars in remote seas, the English decided to explore their options for gaining a foothold in mainland India, with official sanction of both countries, and requested the Crown to launch a diplomatic mission. In 1615, Sir Thomas Roe was instructed by James I to visit the Mughal emperor Jahangir (who ruled over most of the subcontinent, along with Afghanistan). The purpose of this mission was to arrange for a commercial treaty which would give the Company exclusive rights to reside and build factories in Surat and other areas. In return, the Company offered to provide to the emperor goods and rarities from the European market. This mission was highly successful and Jahangir sent a letter to the King through Sir Thomas Roe. He wrote:
Upon which assurance of your royal love I have given my general command to all the kingdoms and ports of my dominions to receive all the merchants of the English nation as the subjects of my friend; that in what place soever they choose to live, they may have free liberty without any restraint; and at what port soever they shall arrive, that neither Portugal nor any other shall dare to molest their quiet; and in what city soever they shall have residence, I have commanded all my governors and captains to give them freedom answerable to their own desires; to sell, buy, and to transport into their country at their pleasure.
For confirmation of our love and friendship, I desire your Majesty to command your merchants to bring in their ships of all sorts of rarities and rich goods fit for my palace; and that you be pleased to send me your royal letters by every opportunity, that I may rejoice in your health and prosperous affairs; that our friendship may be interchanged and eternal. [1]
Expansion
The company, under such obvious patronage, soon managed to eclipse the Portuguese Estado da India, which had established bases in Goa, Chittagong and Bombay (which was later ceded to England as part of the dowry of Catherine de Braganza). It managed to create strongholds in Surat (where a factory was built in 1612), Madras (1639), Bombay (1668) and Calcutta (1690). By 1647, the Company had 23 factories, each under the command of a 'factor' or master merchant, and 90 employees in India. The major factories became the walled forts of Fort William in Bengal, Fort St George in Madras and the Bombay Castle. In 1634, the Mughal emperor extended his hospitality to the English traders to the region of Bengal (and in 1717 completely waived customs duties for the trade). The company's mainstay businesses were by now in cotton, silk, indigo dye, saltpeter and tea. All the while, it was making inroads into the Dutch monopoly of the spice trade in the Malaccan straits, which the Dutch had acquired by ousting the Portuguese in 1640-41. In 1711, the Company established a trading post in Canton (Guangzhou), China, to trade tea for silver. In 1657, Oliver Cromwell renewed the charter of 1609, and brought about minor changes in the holding of the Company. The status of the Company was further enhanced by the restoration of monarchy in England. By a series of five acts around 1670, King Charles II provisioned it with the rights to autonomous territorial acquisitions, to mint money, to command fortresses and troops and form alliances, to make war and peace, and to exercise both civil and criminal jurisdiction over the acquired areas. By 1689, the Company was arguably a "nation" in the Indian mainland, independently administering the vast presidencies of Bengal, Madras and Bombay and possessing a formidable and intimidating military strength. From 1698 the company was entitled to use the motto "Auspico Regis et Senatus Angliae" meaning, "Under the patronage of the King and Parliament of England".
The road to a complete monopoly
Trade monopoly
The prosperity that the employees of the company enjoyed allowed them to return to their country and establish sprawling estates and businesses, and to obtain political power. Consequently, the Company developed for itself a lobby in the English parliament. However, under pressure from ambitious tradesmen and former associates of the Company (pejoratively termed Interlopers by the Company), who wanted to establish private trading firms in India, a deregulating act was passed in 1694. This allowed any English firm to trade with India, unless specifically prohibited by act of parliament, thereby annulling the charter that was in force for almost 100 years. By an act that was passed in 1698, a new "parallel" East India Company (officially titled the English Company Trading to the East Indies) was floated under a state-backed indemnity of 拢2 million. However, the powerful stockholders of the old company quickly subscribed a sum of 拢315,000 in the new concern, and dominated the new body. The two companies wrestled with each other for some time, both in England and in India, for a dominant share of the trade. However, it quickly became evident that, in practice, the original Company faced scarcely any measurable competition. Both companies finally merged in 1702, by a tripartite indenture involving them both as well as the state. Under this arrangement, the merged company lent to the Treasury a sum of 拢3,200,000, in return for exclusive privileges for the next three years, after which the situation was to be reviewed. The amalgamated company became the United Company of Merchants of England Trading to the East Indies.
In the following decades there was a constant see-saw battle between the Company lobby and the parliament. The Company sought a permanent establishment, while the Parliament would not willingly allow it greater autonomy, and so relinquish the opportunity to exploit the Company's profits. In 1712, another act renewed the status of the Company, though the debts were repaid. By 1720, 15% of British imports were from India, almost all passing through the Company, which reasserted the influence of the Company lobby. The license was prolonged until 1766 by yet another act in 1730.
At this time, Britain and France became bitter rivals, and there were frequent skirmishes between them for control of colonial possessions. In 1742, fearing the monetary consequences of a war, the government agreed to extend the deadline for the licensed exclusive trade by the Company in India until 1783, in return for a further loan of 拢1 million. The skirmishes did escalate to the feared war, and between 1756 and 1763 the Seven Years' War diverted the state's attention towards consolidation and defence of its territorial possessions in Europe and its colonies in North America. The war also took place on Indian soil, between the Company troops and the French forces. Around the same time, Britain surged ahead of its European rivals with the advent of the Industrial Revolution. Demand for Indian commodities was boosted by the need to sustain the troops and the economy during the war, and by the increased availability of raw materials and efficient methods of production. As home to the revolution, Britain experienced higher standards of living, and this spiralling cycle of prosperity, demand and production had a profound influence on overseas trade. The Company became the single largest player in the British global market, and reserved for itself an unassailable position in the decision-making process of the Government.
William Pyne notes in his book The Microcosm of London (1808) that
On the 1st March, 1801, the debts of the East India Company amounted to 拢5,393,989 their effects to 拢15,404,736 and their sales increased since February 1793, from 拢4,988,300 to 拢7,602,041. [emphasis added]
Saltpetre Trade
Sir John Banks, a businessman from Kent who negotiated an agreement between the King and the Company began his career in a syndicate arranging contracts for victualling the navy, an interest he kept up for most of his life. He knew Pepys and John Evelyn and founded a substantial fortune from the Levant and Indian trades. He also became a Director and later, as Governor of the East Indian Company in 1672, he was able to arrange a contract which included a loan of 拢20,000 and 拢30,000 worth of saltpetre for the King 'at the price it shall sell by the candle'[citation needed] - that is by auction - where an inch of candle burned and as long as it was alight bidding could continue. The agreement also included with the price 'an allowance of interest which is to be expressed in tallies.'[citation needed] This was something of a breakthrough in royal prerogative because previous requests for the King to buy at the Company's auctions had been turned down as 'not honourable or decent.'[citation needed] Outstanding debts were also agreed and the Company permitted to export 250 tons of saltpetre. Again in 1673, Banks successfully negotiated another contract for 700 tons of saltpetre at 拢37,000 between the King and the Company. So urgent was the need to supply the armed forces in the United Kingdom, America and elsewhere that the authorities sometimes turned a blind eye on the untaxed sales. One governor of the Company was even reported as saying in 1864 that he would rather have the saltpetre made than the tax on salt. [2]
The British East India Company developed a triangular commerce among China, India and Britain that enabled the English to drink tea and wear silk.
The basis for the monopoly
Opium Trade
In the eighteenth century, illegal opium was highly sought after by Chinese drug addicts, and so in 1773, the Company assumed the British monopoly of opium trading in Bengal. As opium trade was illegal in China, Company ships could not carry opium to China. So the opium produced in Bengal was sold in Calcutta on condition that it be sent to China [3].
Despite the Chinese ban on opium imports, reaffirmed in 1799, it was smuggled into China from Bengal by traffickers and agency houses averaging 900 tons a year. The proceeds from drug-runners at Lintin were paid into the Company鈥檚 factory at Canton and by 1825, most of the money needed to buy tea in China was raised by the illegal opium trade. In 1838, with opium smuggling approaching 1400 tons a year, the Chinese imposed a death penalty on opium smuggling and sent a new governor, Lin Zexu to curb smuggling. This finally resulted in the Opium War of 1840, eventually leading to the British seizing Hong Kong and opening of the Chinese market to British drug traffickers.
Colonial monopoly
Robert Clive, 1st Baron Clive, became the first British Governor of Bengal.The Seven Years' War (1756 鈥?1763) resulted in the defeat of the French forces and limited French imperial ambitions, also stunting the influence of the industrial revolution in French territories. Robert Clive, the Governor General, led the Company to an astounding victory against Joseph Fran莽ois Dupleix, the commander of the French forces in India, and recaptured Fort St George from the French. The Company took this respite to seize Manila[2] in 1762. By the Treaty of Paris (1763), the French were forced to maintain their trade posts only in small enclaves in Pondicherry, Mahe, Karikal, Yanam, and Chandernagar without any military presence. Although these small outposts remained French possessions for the next two hundred years, French ambitions on Indian territories were effectively laid to rest, thus eliminating a major source of economic competition for the Company. In contrast, the Company, fresh from a colossal victory, and with the backing of a disciplined and experienced army, was able to assert its interests in the Carnatic from its base at Madras and in Bengal from Calcutta, without facing any further obstacles from other colonial powers.
Local resistance
However, the Company continued to experience resistance from local rulers. Robert Clive led company forces against French-backed Siraj Ud Daulah to victory at the Battle of Plassey in 1757, thereby snuffing out the last known resistances in Bengal. This victory estranged the British and the Mughals, since Siraj had effectively been a Mughal feudatory ally. But the Mughal empire was already on the wane after the demise of Aurangzeb, and was breaking up into pieces and enclaves. After the Battle of Buxar, Shah Alam, the ruling emperor, gave up the administrative rights over Bengal, Bihar, and Orissa. Clive thus became the first British Governor of Bengal. Haider Ali and Tipu Sultan, the legendary rulers of Mysore (in Carnatic), also gave a tough time to the British forces. Having sided with the French during the war, the rulers of Mysore continued their struggle against the Company with the four Anglo-Mysore Wars. Mysore finally fell to the Company forces in 1799, with the slaying of Tipu Sultan. With the gradual weakening of the Maratha empire in the aftermath of the three Anglo-Maratha wars, the British also secured Bombay and the surrounding areas. It was during these campaigns, both against Mysore and the Marathas, that Arthur Wellesley, later Duke of Wellington, first showed the abilities which would lead to victory in the Peninsular War and at the Battle of Waterloo. A particularly notable engagement involving forces under his command was the Battle of Assaye. Thus, the British had secured the entire region of Southern India (with the exception of small enclaves of French and local rulers), Western India and Eastern India. The last vestiges of local administration were restricted to the northern regions of Delhi, Oudh, Rajputana, and Punjab, where the Company's presence was ever increasing amidst the infighting and dubious offers of protection against each other. Coercive action, threats and diplomacy aided the Company in preventing the local rulers from putting up a united struggle against it. The hundred years from the Battle of Plassey in 1757 to the Sepoy Mutiny of 1857 were a period of consolidation for the Company, which began to function more as a nation and less as a trading concern.
See also: Company rule in India in the History of South Asia series for the history of the Company's rule in India between 1757 and 1857.
Regulation of the company's affairs
Monopolistic activity by the company triggered the Boston Tea Party.
Financial troubles
Though the Company was becoming increasingly bold and ambitious in putting down resisting states, it was getting clearer day by day that the Company was incapable of governing the vast expanse of the captured territories. The Bengal famine, in which one-sixth of the local population died, set the alarm bells ringing back home. Military and administrative costs mounted beyond control in British administered regions in Bengal due to the ensuing drop in labour productivity. At the same time, there was commercial stagnation and trade depression throughout Europe following the lull in the post-Industrial Revolution period. The desperate directors of the company attempted to avert bankruptcy by appealing to Parliament for financial help. This led to the passing of the Tea Act in 1773, which gave the Company greater autonomy in running its trade in America. Its monopolistic activities triggered the Boston Tea Party in the Province of Massachusetts Bay, one of the major events leading up to the American War for Independence.
Regulating Acts
East India Company Act 1773
By this Act (13 Geo. III, c. 63), the Parliament of Great Britain imposed a series of administrative and economic reforms and by doing so clearly established its sovereignty and ultimate control over the Company. The Act recognized the Company's political functions and clearly established that the "acquisition of sovereignty by the subjects of the Crown is on behalf of the Crown and not in its own right."
Despite stiff resistance from the East India lobby in parliament, and from the Company's shareholders, the Act was passed. It introduced substantial governmental control, and allowed the land to be formally under the control of the Crown, but leased to the Company at 拢40,000 for two years. Under this provision, the governor of Bengal Warren Hastings was promoted to the rank of Governor General, having administrative powers over all of British India. It provided that his nomination, though made by a court of directors, should in future be subject to the approval of a Council of Four appointed by the Crown - namely Lt. General John Clavering, George Monson, Richard Barwell and Philip Francis. He was entrusted with the power of peace and war. British judicial personnel would also be sent to India to administer the British legal system. The Governor General and the council would have complete legislative powers. Thus, Warren Hastings became the first Governor-General of India. The company was allowed to maintain its virtual monopoly over trade, in exchange for the biennial sum and an obligation to export a minimum quantity of goods yearly to Britain. The costs of administration were also to be met by the company. These provisions, initially welcomed by the Company, backfired. The Company had an annual burden on its back, and its finances continued steadily to decline.
East India Company Act (Pitt's India Act) 1784
This Act (24 Geo. III, s. 2, c. 25) had two key aspects:
Relationship to the British Government - the Bill clearly differentiated the political functions of the East India Company from its commercial activities. For its political transactions, the Act directly subordinated the East India Company to the British Government. To accomplish this, the Act created a Board of Commissioners for the Affairs of India usually referred to as the Board of Control. The members of the Board of Control were the Chancellor of the Exchequer, a Secretary of State, and four Privy Councillors, nominated by the King. The Act specified that the Secretary of State, "shall preside at, and be President of the said Board".
Internal Administration of British India 鈥?the Bill laid the foundation of the British centralized bureaucratic administration of India which would reach its peak at the beginning of the twentieth century with the governor-generalship of George Nathaniel Curzon, 1st Baron Curzon.
The expanded East India House, Leadenhall Street, London, as rebuilt 1799-1800, Richard Jupp, architect (as seen c. 1817; demolished in 1929)Pitt's Act was deemed a failure because it was immediately apparent that the boundaries between governmental control and the Company's powers were obscure and highly subject to interpretation. The government also felt obliged to answer humanitarian voices pleading for better treatment of natives in British occupied territories. Edmund Burke, a former East India Company shareholder and diplomat, felt compelled to relieve the situation and introduced before parliament a new Regulating Bill in 1783. The Bill was defeated due to intense lobbying by Company loyalists and accusations of nepotism in the Bill's recommendations for the appointment of councillors.
Act of 1786
This Act (26 Geo. III c. 16) enacted the demand of Lord Cornwallis, that the powers of the Governor-General be enlarged to empower him, in special cases, to override the majority of his Council and act on his own special responsibility. The Act also enabled the offices of the Governor-General and the Commander-in-Chief to be jointly held by the same official.
This Act clearly demarcated borders between the Crown and the Company. After this point, the Company functioned as a regularized subsidiary of the Crown, with greater accountability for its actions and reached a stable stage of expansion and consolidation. Having temporarily achieved a state of truce with the Crown, the Company continued to expand its influence to nearby territories through threats and coercive actions. By the middle of the 19th century, the Company's rule extended across most of India, Burma, Malaya, Singapore and Hong Kong, and a fifth of the world's population was under its trading influence.
Charter Act 1813
The aggressive policies of Lord Wellesley and the Marquis of Hastings led to the Company gaining control of all India, except for the Punjab, Sind and Nepal. The Indian Princes had become vassals of the Company. But the expense of wars leading to the total control of India strained the Company鈥檚 finances to the breaking point. The Company was forced to petition Parliament for assistance. This was the background to the Charter Act of 1813 (53 Geo. III c. 155) which, among other things:
asserted the sovereignty of the British Crown over the Indian territories held by the Company;
renewed the Charter of Company for a further twenty years but,
deprived the Company of its Indian trade monopoly except for trade in tea and the trade with China;
required the Company to maintain separate and distinct its commercial and territorial accounts; and,
opened India to missionaries.
Charter Act 1833
The Industrial Revolution in Britain, and the consequent search for markets, and the rise of laissez-faire economic ideology form the background to this act.
The Act:
divested the Company of its commercial functions;
renewed for another twenty years the Company鈥檚 political and administrative authority;
invested the Board of Control with full power and authority over the Company. As stated by Kapur Professor Sri Ram Sharma, thus, summed up the point: "The President of the Board of Control now became Minister for Indian Affairs".
carried further the ongoing process of administrative centralization through investing the Governor-General in Council with, full power and authority to superintend and, control the Presidency Governments in all civil and military matters.
initiated a machinery for the codification of laws;
provided that no Indian subject of the Company would be debarred from holding any office under the Company by reason of his religion, place of birth, descent or colour. However, this remained a dead letter well into the 20th century.
Meanwhile, British influence continued to expand; in 1845, the Danish colony of Tranquebar was sold to Great Britain. The Company had at various stages extended its influence to China, the Philippines, and Java. It had solved its critical lack of the cash needed to buy tea by exporting Indian-grown opium to China. China's efforts to end the trade led to the First Opium War with Britain.
Charter Act 1853
This Act provided that British India would remain under the administration of the Company in trust for the Crown until Parliament should decide otherwise.
The end
The efforts of the company in administering India emerged as a model for the civil service system in Britain, especially during the 19th century. Deprived of its trade monopoly in 1813, the company wound up as a trading enterprise. In 1858, the Company lost its administrative functions to the British government following the 1857 uprising which began with what the Company's Indian soldiers called the Sepoy Mutiny, Indian Rebellion of 1857 or War of Independence of 1857. India then became a formal crown colony. In the early 1860s, all of the Company's Indian possessions - including its armed forces - were appropriated by the Crown. The Company was still managing the tea trade on behalf of the British government (and supplying Saint Helena). When the East India Stock Dividend Redemption Act came into effect, the Company was dissolved on January 1, 1874. The Times reported, "It accomplished a work such as in the whole history of the human race no other company ever attempted and as such is ever likely to attempt in the years to come."
In 1987, coffee merchants Tony Wild and David Hutton created a public limited company called "The East India Company" and in 1990 registered versions of the Company's coat of arms as a trademark, although the Patent Office noted 'Registration of this mark shall give no right to the exclusive use of the words "The East India Company"' [4]. By December 1996, this company had a website at www.theeastindiacompany.com. It sold St Helena coffee branded with the Company name and also produced a book on the history of the Company. This company has no legal continuity with the original Company, even though it claims on its website to have been founded in 1600.
East India Club
On the eve of the demise of the East India Company, the East India Club in London was formed for current and former employees of the East India Company. The Club still exists today and its club house is situated at 16 St. James's Square, London.
Post 1801 the flag contains the Union Flag of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland in the canton.
The East India Company flag changed over time. From the period of 1600 to 1707 (Act of Union between England and Scotland) the flag consisted of a St George's cross in the canton and a number of alternating Red and White stripes. After 1707 the canton contained the original Union Flag consisting of a combined St George's cross and a St Andrew's cross. After the Act of Union 1800, that joined Ireland into the United Kingdom, the canton of the East India Company's flag was altered accordingly to include the new Union Flag with the additional St Patrick's cross. There has been much debate and discussion regarding the number of stripes on the flag and the order of the stripes. Historical documents and paintings show many variations from 9 to 13 stripes, with some images showing the top stripe being red and others showing the top stripe being white.
At the time of the American Revolution the East India Company flag would have been identical to the Grand Union Flag. The flag probably inspired the Stars and Stripes (as argued by Sir Charles Fawcett in 1937). [5] Comparisons between the Stars and Stripes and the Company's flag from historical records present some convincing arguments. The John Company flag dates back to the 1600s whereas the United States adopted the Stars and Stripes in 1777 [6].
The stripes and gridlike appearance of the flag gave rise to several pieces of imperial slang. Most notably is the phrase 'riding the gridiron'; this referred to travelling on a ship flying the company flag to / from India.
Ships
A ship of the East India Company can also be called an East Indiaman.
Earl of Abergavenny
Royal Captain
East India Company Records
Unlike all other British Government records, the records from the East India Company (and its successor India Office) are not in The National Archives at Kew, London, but are stored by the British Library in London as part of the Asia, Pacific and Africa Collection. The catalogue is searchable online in the Access to Archives catalogues. Many of The East India Company Records are freely available online under an agreement that FIBIS have with the British Library.
Commercial company (1600 - 1858) chartered by Queen Elizabeth I and given a monopoly of trade between England and the Far East. In the 18th century, the company became, in effect, the ruler of a large part of India, and a form of dual control by the company and a committee responsible to Parliament in London was introduced by Pitt's India Act 1784. The end of the monopoly of China trade came in 1834, and after the Indian Mutiny of 1857 - 58 the crown took complete control of the government of British India. The India Act 1858 abolished the company.
The East India Company set up factories in Masulipatam, near modern Madras (now Chennai), in 1611 ; on the west coast of India in Surat in 1612 ; on the east coast in Madras in 1639 ; and near Calcutta (now Kolkata) on the Hooghly (one of the mouths of the Ganges) in 1640. By 1652 there were some 23 English factories in India. Bombay (now Mumbai) came to the British crown in 1662, and was granted to the East India Company for 拢 10 a year. The British victory in the Battle of Plassey in 1757 gave the company control of Bengal.|||A group of British merchants who were given the power to trade with India.|||it was a british trading company, that first started out trading spices and other 'exotic' goods from India and finished clothing etc. to India
went on to rule India until the British govt. took over sometime in the 19th century.|||British East India Company was a trading company which was given permission to trade goods to and from India.
The British were keen on expediting India with a possibility to exploit its great wealth and mythical treasures. They wanted to gain the support and favor of the Mughal Empire in order to increase their influence. Thier chance came when the son of Mughal Empror fell ill and none other then an English doctor treated him. In return he asked for trading lisence for East India Company which was cordially granted.
East India Company started to trade and increase its influence culturally, socially and militarily, while the Mughal Emprors were in thier deep slumber of the situation, losing thier grip on astray states declaring independence from the Empire
The English started fighting against and conquring these independent states and finally they were able to capture Delhi which was the capital of India.
The history of India is full of blood and deciet, and East India Company is one character in this drama remembered for its role of securing a foothold in India|||The British East India Company, sometimes referred to as "John Company", was the first joint-stock company. It was granted an English Royal Charter by Elizabeth I on December 31, 1600, with the intention of favouring trade privileges in India. The Royal Charter effectively gave the newly created Honourable East India Company (HEIC) a 21 year monopoly on all trade in the East Indies. The Company transformed from a commercial trading venture to one that virtually ruled India as it acquired auxiliary governmental and military functions, until its dissolution in 1858.|||Before going i'd like to tell u that i got this answer from Wikipedia,
The British East India Company, sometimes referred to as "John Company", was the first joint-stock company. It was granted an English Royal Charter by Elizabeth I on December 31, 1600, with the intention of favouring trade privileges in India. The Royal Charter effectively gave the newly created Honourable East India Company (HEIC) a 21 year monopoly on all trade in the East Indies. The Company transformed from a commercial trading venture to one that virtually ruled India as it acquired auxiliary governmental and military functions, until its dissolution in 1858.
The company's flag initially had the flag of England, the St. George's Cross, in the cornerContents [hide]
1 Impact
2 History
2.1 The foundation years
2.2 Footholds in India
2.3 Expansion
2.4 The road to a complete monopoly
2.4.1 Trade monopoly
2.4.2 Saltpetre Trade
2.5 The basis for the monopoly
2.5.1 Opium Trade
2.5.2 Colonial monopoly
2.5.3 Local resistance
2.6 Regulation of the company's affairs
2.6.1 Financial troubles
2.6.2 Regulating Acts
2.6.2.1 East India Company Act 1773
2.6.2.2 East India Company Act (Pitt's India Act) 1784
2.6.2.3 Act of 1786
2.6.2.4 Charter Act 1813
2.6.2.5 Charter Act 1833
2.6.2.6 Charter Act 1853
2.7 The end
2.8 East India Club
3 Flags
4 Ships
5 East India Company Records
6 References
7 See also
8 External links
Impact
Based in London, the company presided over the creation of the British Raj. In 1617, the Company was given trade rights by the Mughal Emperor. 100 years later, it was granted a royal dictate from the Emperor exempting the Company from the payment of custom duties in Bengal, giving it a decided commercial advantage in the Indian trade. A decisive victory by Sir Robert Clive at the Battle of Plassey in 1757 established the British East India Company as a military as well as a commercial power. By 1760, the French were driven out of India, with the exception of a few trading posts on the coast, such as Pondicherry.
The Company also had interests along the routes to India from Great Britain. As early as 1620, the company attempted to lay claim to the Table Mountain region in South Africa, later it occupied and ruled St Helena. The Company also established Hong Kong and Singapore; employed Captain Kidd to combat piracy; and cultivated the production of tea in India. Other notable events in the Company's history were that it held Napoleon captive on St Helena, and made the fortune of Elihu Yale. Its products were the basis of the Boston Tea Party in Colonial America.
Its shipyards provided the model for St Petersburg, elements of its administration survive in the Indian bureaucracy, and its corporate structure was the most successful early example of a joint stock company. However, the demands of Company officers on the treasury of Bengal contributed tragically to the province's incapacity in the face of a famine which killed millions of people in 1770-1773.
History
British and other European settlements in India
The foundation years
The Company was founded as The Company of Merchants of London Trading into the East Indies[1] by a coterie of enterprising and influential businessmen, who obtained the Crown's charter for exclusive permission to trade in the East Indies for a period of fifteen years. The Company had 125 shareholders, and a capital of 拢72,000. Initially, however, it made little impression on the Dutch control of the spice trade and at first it could not establish a lasting outpost in the East Indies. Eventually, ships belonging to the company arrived in India, docking at Surat, which was established as a trade transit point in 1608. In the next two years, it managed to build its first factory (as the trading posts were known) in the town of Machilipatnam in the Coromandel Coast in the Bay of Bengal. The high profits reported by the Company after landing in India (presumably owing to a reduction in overhead costs effected by the transit points), initially prompted King James I to grant subsidiary licenses to other trading companies in England. But, in 1609, he renewed the charter given to the Company for an indefinite period, including a clause which specified that the charter would cease to be in force if the trade turned unprofitable for three consecutive years.
The Company was led by one Governor and 24 directors who made up the Court of Directors. They were appointed by, and reported to, the Court of Proprietors. The Court of Directors had ten committees reporting to it.
Footholds in India
Traders were frequently engaged in hostilities with their Dutch and Portuguese counterparts in the Indian Ocean. A key event providing the Company with the favour of Mughal emperor Jahangir was their victory over the Portuguese in the Battle of Swally in 1612. Perhaps realizing the futility of waging trade wars in remote seas, the English decided to explore their options for gaining a foothold in mainland India, with official sanction of both countries, and requested the Crown to launch a diplomatic mission. In 1615, Sir Thomas Roe was instructed by James I to visit the Mughal emperor Jahangir (who ruled over most of the subcontinent, along with Afghanistan). The purpose of this mission was to arrange for a commercial treaty which would give the Company exclusive rights to reside and build factories in Surat and other areas. In return, the Company offered to provide to the emperor goods and rarities from the European market. This mission was highly successful and Jahangir sent a letter to the King through Sir Thomas Roe. He wrote:
Upon which assurance of your royal love I have given my general command to all the kingdoms and ports of my dominions to receive all the merchants of the English nation as the subjects of my friend; that in what place soever they choose to live, they may have free liberty without any restraint; and at what port soever they shall arrive, that neither Portugal nor any other shall dare to molest their quiet; and in what city soever they shall have residence, I have commanded all my governors and captains to give them freedom answerable to their own desires; to sell, buy, and to transport into their country at their pleasure.
For confirmation of our love and friendship, I desire your Majesty to command your merchants to bring in their ships of all sorts of rarities and rich goods fit for my palace; and that you be pleased to send me your royal letters by every opportunity, that I may rejoice in your health and prosperous affairs; that our friendship may be interchanged and eternal. [1]
Expansion
The company, under such obvious patronage, soon managed to eclipse the Portuguese Estado da India, which had established bases in Goa, Chittagong and Bombay (which was later ceded to England as part of the dowry of Catherine de Braganza). It managed to create strongholds in Surat (where a factory was built in 1612), Madras (1639), Bombay (1668) and Calcutta (1690). By 1647, the Company had 23 factories, each under the command of a 'factor' or master merchant, and 90 employees in India. The major factories became the walled forts of Fort William in Bengal, Fort St George in Madras and the Bombay Castle. In 1634, the Mughal emperor extended his hospitality to the English traders to the region of Bengal (and in 1717 completely waived customs duties for the trade). The company's mainstay businesses were by now in cotton, silk, indigo dye, saltpeter and tea. All the while, it was making inroads into the Dutch monopoly of the spice trade in the Malaccan straits, which the Dutch had acquired by ousting the Portuguese in 1640-41. In 1711, the Company established a trading post in Canton (Guangzhou), China, to trade tea for silver. In 1657, Oliver Cromwell renewed the charter of 1609, and brought about minor changes in the holding of the Company. The status of the Company was further enhanced by the restoration of monarchy in England. By a series of five acts around 1670, King Charles II provisioned it with the rights to autonomous territorial acquisitions, to mint money, to command fortresses and troops and form alliances, to make war and peace, and to exercise both civil and criminal jurisdiction over the acquired areas. By 1689, the Company was arguably a "nation" in the Indian mainland, independently administering the vast presidencies of Bengal, Madras and Bombay and possessing a formidable and intimidating military strength. From 1698 the company was entitled to use the motto "Auspico Regis et Senatus Angliae" meaning, "Under the patronage of the King and Parliament of England".
The road to a complete monopoly
Trade monopoly
The prosperity that the employees of the company enjoyed allowed them to return to their country and establish sprawling estates and businesses, and to obtain political power. Consequently, the Company developed for itself a lobby in the English parliament. However, under pressure from ambitious tradesmen and former associates of the Company (pejoratively termed Interlopers by the Company), who wanted to establish private trading firms in India, a deregulating act was passed in 1694. This allowed any English firm to trade with India, unless specifically prohibited by act of parliament, thereby annulling the charter that was in force for almost 100 years. By an act that was passed in 1698, a new "parallel" East India Company (officially titled the English Company Trading to the East Indies) was floated under a state-backed indemnity of 拢2 million. However, the powerful stockholders of the old company quickly subscribed a sum of 拢315,000 in the new concern, and dominated the new body. The two companies wrestled with each other for some time, both in England and in India, for a dominant share of the trade. However, it quickly became evident that, in practice, the original Company faced scarcely any measurable competition. Both companies finally merged in 1702, by a tripartite indenture involving them both as well as the state. Under this arrangement, the merged company lent to the Treasury a sum of 拢3,200,000, in return for exclusive privileges for the next three years, after which the situation was to be reviewed. The amalgamated company became the United Company of Merchants of England Trading to the East Indies.
In the following decades there was a constant see-saw battle between the Company lobby and the parliament. The Company sought a permanent establishment, while the Parliament would not willingly allow it greater autonomy, and so relinquish the opportunity to exploit the Company's profits. In 1712, another act renewed the status of the Company, though the debts were repaid. By 1720, 15% of British imports were from India, almost all passing through the Company, which reasserted the influence of the Company lobby. The license was prolonged until 1766 by yet another act in 1730.
At this time, Britain and France became bitter rivals, and there were frequent skirmishes between them for control of colonial possessions. In 1742, fearing the monetary consequences of a war, the government agreed to extend the deadline for the licensed exclusive trade by the Company in India until 1783, in return for a further loan of 拢1 million. The skirmishes did escalate to the feared war, and between 1756 and 1763 the Seven Years' War diverted the state's attention towards consolidation and defence of its territorial possessions in Europe and its colonies in North America. The war also took place on Indian soil, between the Company troops and the French forces. Around the same time, Britain surged ahead of its European rivals with the advent of the Industrial Revolution. Demand for Indian commodities was boosted by the need to sustain the troops and the economy during the war, and by the increased availability of raw materials and efficient methods of production. As home to the revolution, Britain experienced higher standards of living, and this spiralling cycle of prosperity, demand and production had a profound influence on overseas trade. The Company became the single largest player in the British global market, and reserved for itself an unassailable position in the decision-making process of the Government.
William Pyne notes in his book The Microcosm of London (1808) that
On the 1st March, 1801, the debts of the East India Company amounted to 拢5,393,989 their effects to 拢15,404,736 and their sales increased since February 1793, from 拢4,988,300 to 拢7,602,041. [emphasis added]
Saltpetre Trade
Sir John Banks, a businessman from Kent who negotiated an agreement between the King and the Company began his career in a syndicate arranging contracts for victualling the navy, an interest he kept up for most of his life. He knew Pepys and John Evelyn and founded a substantial fortune from the Levant and Indian trades. He also became a Director and later, as Governor of the East Indian Company in 1672, he was able to arrange a contract which included a loan of 拢20,000 and 拢30,000 worth of saltpetre for the King 'at the price it shall sell by the candle'[citation needed] - that is by auction - where an inch of candle burned and as long as it was alight bidding could continue. The agreement also included with the price 'an allowance of interest which is to be expressed in tallies.'[citation needed] This was something of a breakthrough in royal prerogative because previous requests for the King to buy at the Company's auctions had been turned down as 'not honourable or decent.'[citation needed] Outstanding debts were also agreed and the Company permitted to export 250 tons of saltpetre. Again in 1673, Banks successfully negotiated another contract for 700 tons of saltpetre at 拢37,000 between the King and the Company. So urgent was the need to supply the armed forces in the United Kingdom, America and elsewhere that the authorities sometimes turned a blind eye on the untaxed sales. One governor of the Company was even reported as saying in 1864 that he would rather have the saltpetre made than the tax on salt. [2]
The British East India Company developed a triangular commerce among China, India and Britain that enabled the English to drink tea and wear silk.
The basis for the monopoly
Opium Trade
In the eighteenth century, illegal opium was highly sought after by Chinese drug addicts, and so in 1773, the Company assumed the British monopoly of opium trading in Bengal. As opium trade was illegal in China, Company ships could not carry opium to China. So the opium produced in Bengal was sold in Calcutta on condition that it be sent to China [3].
Despite the Chinese ban on opium imports, reaffirmed in 1799, it was smuggled into China from Bengal by traffickers and agency houses averaging 900 tons a year. The proceeds from drug-runners at Lintin were paid into the Company鈥檚 factory at Canton and by 1825, most of the money needed to buy tea in China was raised by the illegal opium trade. In 1838, with opium smuggling approaching 1400 tons a year, the Chinese imposed a death penalty on opium smuggling and sent a new governor, Lin Zexu to curb smuggling. This finally resulted in the Opium War of 1840, eventually leading to the British seizing Hong Kong and opening of the Chinese market to British drug traffickers.
Colonial monopoly
Robert Clive, 1st Baron Clive, became the first British Governor of Bengal.The Seven Years' War (1756 鈥?1763) resulted in the defeat of the French forces and limited French imperial ambitions, also stunting the influence of the industrial revolution in French territories. Robert Clive, the Governor General, led the Company to an astounding victory against Joseph Fran莽ois Dupleix, the commander of the French forces in India, and recaptured Fort St George from the French. The Company took this respite to seize Manila[2] in 1762. By the Treaty of Paris (1763), the French were forced to maintain their trade posts only in small enclaves in Pondicherry, Mahe, Karikal, Yanam, and Chandernagar without any military presence. Although these small outposts remained French possessions for the next two hundred years, French ambitions on Indian territories were effectively laid to rest, thus eliminating a major source of economic competition for the Company. In contrast, the Company, fresh from a colossal victory, and with the backing of a disciplined and experienced army, was able to assert its interests in the Carnatic from its base at Madras and in Bengal from Calcutta, without facing any further obstacles from other colonial powers.
Local resistance
However, the Company continued to experience resistance from local rulers. Robert Clive led company forces against French-backed Siraj Ud Daulah to victory at the Battle of Plassey in 1757, thereby snuffing out the last known resistances in Bengal. This victory estranged the British and the Mughals, since Siraj had effectively been a Mughal feudatory ally. But the Mughal empire was already on the wane after the demise of Aurangzeb, and was breaking up into pieces and enclaves. After the Battle of Buxar, Shah Alam, the ruling emperor, gave up the administrative rights over Bengal, Bihar, and Orissa. Clive thus became the first British Governor of Bengal. Haider Ali and Tipu Sultan, the legendary rulers of Mysore (in Carnatic), also gave a tough time to the British forces. Having sided with the French during the war, the rulers of Mysore continued their struggle against the Company with the four Anglo-Mysore Wars. Mysore finally fell to the Company forces in 1799, with the slaying of Tipu Sultan. With the gradual weakening of the Maratha empire in the aftermath of the three Anglo-Maratha wars, the British also secured Bombay and the surrounding areas. It was during these campaigns, both against Mysore and the Marathas, that Arthur Wellesley, later Duke of Wellington, first showed the abilities which would lead to victory in the Peninsular War and at the Battle of Waterloo. A particularly notable engagement involving forces under his command was the Battle of Assaye. Thus, the British had secured the entire region of Southern India (with the exception of small enclaves of French and local rulers), Western India and Eastern India. The last vestiges of local administration were restricted to the northern regions of Delhi, Oudh, Rajputana, and Punjab, where the Company's presence was ever increasing amidst the infighting and dubious offers of protection against each other. Coercive action, threats and diplomacy aided the Company in preventing the local rulers from putting up a united struggle against it. The hundred years from the Battle of Plassey in 1757 to the Sepoy Mutiny of 1857 were a period of consolidation for the Company, which began to function more as a nation and less as a trading concern.
See also: Company rule in India in the History of South Asia series for the history of the Company's rule in India between 1757 and 1857.
Regulation of the company's affairs
Monopolistic activity by the company triggered the Boston Tea Party.
Financial troubles
Though the Company was becoming increasingly bold and ambitious in putting down resisting states, it was getting clearer day by day that the Company was incapable of governing the vast expanse of the captured territories. The Bengal famine, in which one-sixth of the local population died, set the alarm bells ringing back home. Military and administrative costs mounted beyond control in British administered regions in Bengal due to the ensuing drop in labour productivity. At the same time, there was commercial stagnation and trade depression throughout Europe following the lull in the post-Industrial Revolution period. The desperate directors of the company attempted to avert bankruptcy by appealing to Parliament for financial help. This led to the passing of the Tea Act in 1773, which gave the Company greater autonomy in running its trade in America. Its monopolistic activities triggered the Boston Tea Party in the Province of Massachusetts Bay, one of the major events leading up to the American War for Independence.
Regulating Acts
East India Company Act 1773
By this Act (13 Geo. III, c. 63), the Parliament of Great Britain imposed a series of administrative and economic reforms and by doing so clearly established its sovereignty and ultimate control over the Company. The Act recognized the Company's political functions and clearly established that the "acquisition of sovereignty by the subjects of the Crown is on behalf of the Crown and not in its own right."
Despite stiff resistance from the East India lobby in parliament, and from the Company's shareholders, the Act was passed. It introduced substantial governmental control, and allowed the land to be formally under the control of the Crown, but leased to the Company at 拢40,000 for two years. Under this provision, the governor of Bengal Warren Hastings was promoted to the rank of Governor General, having administrative powers over all of British India. It provided that his nomination, though made by a court of directors, should in future be subject to the approval of a Council of Four appointed by the Crown - namely Lt. General John Clavering, George Monson, Richard Barwell and Philip Francis. He was entrusted with the power of peace and war. British judicial personnel would also be sent to India to administer the British legal system. The Governor General and the council would have complete legislative powers. Thus, Warren Hastings became the first Governor-General of India. The company was allowed to maintain its virtual monopoly over trade, in exchange for the biennial sum and an obligation to export a minimum quantity of goods yearly to Britain. The costs of administration were also to be met by the company. These provisions, initially welcomed by the Company, backfired. The Company had an annual burden on its back, and its finances continued steadily to decline.
East India Company Act (Pitt's India Act) 1784
This Act (24 Geo. III, s. 2, c. 25) had two key aspects:
Relationship to the British Government - the Bill clearly differentiated the political functions of the East India Company from its commercial activities. For its political transactions, the Act directly subordinated the East India Company to the British Government. To accomplish this, the Act created a Board of Commissioners for the Affairs of India usually referred to as the Board of Control. The members of the Board of Control were the Chancellor of the Exchequer, a Secretary of State, and four Privy Councillors, nominated by the King. The Act specified that the Secretary of State, "shall preside at, and be President of the said Board".
Internal Administration of British India 鈥?the Bill laid the foundation of the British centralized bureaucratic administration of India which would reach its peak at the beginning of the twentieth century with the governor-generalship of George Nathaniel Curzon, 1st Baron Curzon.
The expanded East India House, Leadenhall Street, London, as rebuilt 1799-1800, Richard Jupp, architect (as seen c. 1817; demolished in 1929)Pitt's Act was deemed a failure because it was immediately apparent that the boundaries between governmental control and the Company's powers were obscure and highly subject to interpretation. The government also felt obliged to answer humanitarian voices pleading for better treatment of natives in British occupied territories. Edmund Burke, a former East India Company shareholder and diplomat, felt compelled to relieve the situation and introduced before parliament a new Regulating Bill in 1783. The Bill was defeated due to intense lobbying by Company loyalists and accusations of nepotism in the Bill's recommendations for the appointment of councillors.
Act of 1786
This Act (26 Geo. III c. 16) enacted the demand of Lord Cornwallis, that the powers of the Governor-General be enlarged to empower him, in special cases, to override the majority of his Council and act on his own special responsibility. The Act also enabled the offices of the Governor-General and the Commander-in-Chief to be jointly held by the same official.
This Act clearly demarcated borders between the Crown and the Company. After this point, the Company functioned as a regularized subsidiary of the Crown, with greater accountability for its actions and reached a stable stage of expansion and consolidation. Having temporarily achieved a state of truce with the Crown, the Company continued to expand its influence to nearby territories through threats and coercive actions. By the middle of the 19th century, the Company's rule extended across most of India, Burma, Malaya, Singapore and Hong Kong, and a fifth of the world's population was under its trading influence.
Charter Act 1813
The aggressive policies of Lord Wellesley and the Marquis of Hastings led to the Company gaining control of all India, except for the Punjab, Sind and Nepal. The Indian Princes had become vassals of the Company. But the expense of wars leading to the total control of India strained the Company鈥檚 finances to the breaking point. The Company was forced to petition Parliament for assistance. This was the background to the Charter Act of 1813 (53 Geo. III c. 155) which, among other things:
asserted the sovereignty of the British Crown over the Indian territories held by the Company;
renewed the Charter of Company for a further twenty years but,
deprived the Company of its Indian trade monopoly except for trade in tea and the trade with China;
required the Company to maintain separate and distinct its commercial and territorial accounts; and,
opened India to missionaries.
Charter Act 1833
The Industrial Revolution in Britain, and the consequent search for markets, and the rise of laissez-faire economic ideology form the background to this act.
The Act:
divested the Company of its commercial functions;
renewed for another twenty years the Company鈥檚 political and administrative authority;
invested the Board of Control with full power and authority over the Company. As stated by Kapur Professor Sri Ram Sharma, thus, summed up the point: "The President of the Board of Control now became Minister for Indian Affairs".
carried further the ongoing process of administrative centralization through investing the Governor-General in Council with, full power and authority to superintend and, control the Presidency Governments in all civil and military matters.
initiated a machinery for the codification of laws;
provided that no Indian subject of the Company would be debarred from holding any office under the Company by reason of his religion, place of birth, descent or colour. However, this remained a dead letter well into the 20th century.
Meanwhile, British influence continued to expand; in 1845, the Danish colony of Tranquebar was sold to Great Britain. The Company had at various stages extended its influence to China, the Philippines, and Java. It had solved its critical lack of the cash needed to buy tea by exporting Indian-grown opium to China. China's efforts to end the trade led to the First Opium War with Britain.
Charter Act 1853
This Act provided that British India would remain under the administration of the Company in trust for the Crown until Parliament should decide otherwise.
The end
The efforts of the company in administering India emerged as a model for the civil service system in Britain, especially during the 19th century. Deprived of its trade monopoly in 1813, the company wound up as a trading enterprise. In 1858, the Company lost its administrative functions to the British government following the 1857 uprising which began with what the Company's Indian soldiers called the Sepoy Mutiny, Indian Rebellion of 1857 or War of Independence of 1857. India then became a formal crown colony. In the early 1860s, all of the Company's Indian possessions - including its armed forces - were appropriated by the Crown. The Company was still managing the tea trade on behalf of the British government (and supplying Saint Helena). When the East India Stock Dividend Redemption Act came into effect, the Company was dissolved on January 1, 1874. The Times reported, "It accomplished a work such as in the whole history of the human race no other company ever attempted and as such is ever likely to attempt in the years to come."
In 1987, coffee merchants Tony Wild and David Hutton created a public limited company called "The East India Company" and in 1990 registered versions of the Company's coat of arms as a trademark, although the Patent Office noted 'Registration of this mark shall give no right to the exclusive use of the words "The East India Company"' [4]. By December 1996, this company had a website at www.theeastindiacompany.com. It sold St Helena coffee branded with the Company name and also produced a book on the history of the Company. This company has no legal continuity with the original Company, even though it claims on its website to have been founded in 1600.
East India Club
On the eve of the demise of the East India Company, the East India Club in London was formed for current and former employees of the East India Company. The Club still exists today and its club house is situated at 16 St. James's Square, London.
Post 1801 the flag contains the Union Flag of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland in the canton.
The East India Company flag changed over time. From the period of 1600 to 1707 (Act of Union between England and Scotland) the flag consisted of a St George's cross in the canton and a number of alternating Red and White stripes. After 1707 the canton contained the original Union Flag consisting of a combined St George's cross and a St Andrew's cross. After the Act of Union 1800, that joined Ireland into the United Kingdom, the canton of the East India Company's flag was altered accordingly to include the new Union Flag with the additional St Patrick's cross. There has been much debate and discussion regarding the number of stripes on the flag and the order of the stripes. Historical documents and paintings show many variations from 9 to 13 stripes, with some images showing the top stripe being red and others showing the top stripe being white.
At the time of the American Revolution the East India Company flag would have been identical to the Grand Union Flag. The flag probably inspired the Stars and Stripes (as argued by Sir Charles Fawcett in 1937). [5] Comparisons between the Stars and Stripes and the Company's flag from historical records present some convincing arguments. The John Company flag dates back to the 1600s whereas the United States adopted the Stars and Stripes in 1777 [6].
The stripes and gridlike appearance of the flag gave rise to several pieces of imperial slang. Most notably is the phrase 'riding the gridiron'; this referred to travelling on a ship flying the company flag to / from India.
Ships
A ship of the East India Company can also be called an East Indiaman.
Earl of Abergavenny
Royal Captain
East India Company Records
Unlike all other British Government records, the records from the East India Company (and its successor India Office) are not in The National Archives at Kew, London, but are stored by the British Library in London as part of the Asia, Pacific and Africa Collection. The catalogue is searchable online in the Access to Archives catalogues. Many of The East India Company Records are freely available online under an agreement that FIBIS have with the British Library.
How much would the British East India company be worth in today's terms?
568,623 billion dollarsHow much would the British East India company be worth in today's terms?
Well, when?
At several times in its history the EIC was nearly bankrupt.How much would the British East India company be worth in today's terms?
At it's pinnacle the HEIC was granted a 21 year monopoly on the 31st of December 1600, over the East Indies, which is effectively India. India's GDP in 2006 was $4.156 trillion dollars. So that's roughly what a company would be worth if it had first say when it came to trade throughout the entire country.
Well, when?
At several times in its history the EIC was nearly bankrupt.How much would the British East India company be worth in today's terms?
At it's pinnacle the HEIC was granted a 21 year monopoly on the 31st of December 1600, over the East Indies, which is effectively India. India's GDP in 2006 was $4.156 trillion dollars. So that's roughly what a company would be worth if it had first say when it came to trade throughout the entire country.
The tea act allowed the British East India Company?
A.)to carry tea directly to the colonies without the usual heavy tax
B.) to force the colonist to pay heavy tax
C.) to carry tea directly to the colonist with the heavy taxThe tea act allowed the British East India Company?
B
B.) to force the colonist to pay heavy tax
C.) to carry tea directly to the colonist with the heavy taxThe tea act allowed the British East India Company?
B
Who was Named governor-general of the British East India Company in India?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Viceroy_of_鈥?/a>Who was Named governor-general of the British East India Company in India?
What do you mean by "named". Each and every governor general had a name.
What do you mean by "named". Each and every governor general had a name.
When was the British East India Company granted an English Royal Charter ?
British merchants founded the East India Company in 1600 and were granted a Royal Charter by Elizabeth I ,, on the 31st December 1600.
During the `Seven Years War ` company troops under Robert Clive all but expelled the French . From 1784 British East India was governed jointly by the company and a committee responsible to the British Government , which took complete control in 1858 , after the Indian Mutiny.When was the British East India Company granted an English Royal Charter ?
The Company was granted an English Royal Charter, under the name Governor and Company of Merchants of London Trading into the East Indies, by Elizabeth I on 31 December 1600, making it the oldest among several similarly formed European East India Companies, the largest of which was the Dutch East India Company.mercedes benz usa raw foods
During the `Seven Years War ` company troops under Robert Clive all but expelled the French . From 1784 British East India was governed jointly by the company and a committee responsible to the British Government , which took complete control in 1858 , after the Indian Mutiny.When was the British East India Company granted an English Royal Charter ?
The Company was granted an English Royal Charter, under the name Governor and Company of Merchants of London Trading into the East Indies, by Elizabeth I on 31 December 1600, making it the oldest among several similarly formed European East India Companies, the largest of which was the Dutch East India Company.
How was the Dutch East India Company like the British East India Company?
Please give me a detailed answer. thank you!How was the Dutch East India Company like the British East India Company?
The Dutch East India Company was a sea based trading organisation. They founded South Africa for the Dutch and had ports of call on the West Coast of India.How was the Dutch East India Company like the British East India Company?
http://india_resource.tripod.com/eastind鈥?/a>
The Dutch East India Company was a sea based trading organisation. They founded South Africa for the Dutch and had ports of call on the West Coast of India.How was the Dutch East India Company like the British East India Company?
http://india_resource.tripod.com/eastind鈥?/a>
Which group did the British East India Company increasingly rely on to enforce its policies?
The British Army. The strategy was to divide India and conquer it. The British Army helped capture Serampingtam, for example, when fighting against the Tipu Sultan. Later, the Army fought the Maratha Confederacy. The main opponent of the British East India Company was the Mughal Empire.
How much money can I make if I wanna sell a 100 yrs old british east India company coin and wer should I sell ?
"legally"How much money can I make if I wanna sell a 100 yrs old british east India company coin and wer should I sell ?
Sorry mate Not much i guess! On ebay you should be able to sell it for $2 -$5! But also depens on special characteristcs(if any). Such as limited edition! Here the link
:http://www.ebay.com/sch/i.html?_nkw=1910+india+coin%26amp;_sacat=0%26amp;_odkw=1910+british+east+india+coin%26amp;_osacat=0%26amp;_from=R40
Sorry mate Not much i guess! On ebay you should be able to sell it for $2 -$5! But also depens on special characteristcs(if any). Such as limited edition! Here the link
:http://www.ebay.com/sch/i.html?_nkw=1910+india+coin%26amp;_sacat=0%26amp;_odkw=1910+british+east+india+coin%26amp;_osacat=0%26amp;_from=R40
Who did the British East India Company sell its spices to?
Which countries/ places in particular?Who did the British East India Company sell its spices to?
Gambia. The British port there was big. Traded for ivory and such. Kind of a free port most times. So other ships could trade for it. England, And Spain,Portugal,france, If not at war with them. Any one they could. Trade was trade with them. Controlling the Gambia was a big thing. The river there runs deep into Africa. So Africa's goods for spice. Then Gambia sold spice to other lands.
Gambia. The British port there was big. Traded for ivory and such. Kind of a free port most times. So other ships could trade for it. England, And Spain,Portugal,france, If not at war with them. Any one they could. Trade was trade with them. Controlling the Gambia was a big thing. The river there runs deep into Africa. So Africa's goods for spice. Then Gambia sold spice to other lands.
Indian's lifestyle during the British East India Company?
what was life like, what labour did they do, what free-time did they have, what did the indians feel about it?Indian's lifestyle during the British East India Company?
Practically slaves. The british forced them to grow opium so the brits coulds ship it to china and make a lot of money, resulting in the Chinese becoming drug addicts. THen the Chinese try to stop this, but the British send a fleet to beat up the Chinese. The Chinese say "Ok! You can sell your drugs here!" and the British continue to sell Opium to the chinese, the fags.
Anyway, no freetime, mainly farming, and the indians were pissed.Indian's lifestyle during the British East India Company?
SLAVERY!?!baby boy names 2011 medal of honor allied
Practically slaves. The british forced them to grow opium so the brits coulds ship it to china and make a lot of money, resulting in the Chinese becoming drug addicts. THen the Chinese try to stop this, but the British send a fleet to beat up the Chinese. The Chinese say "Ok! You can sell your drugs here!" and the British continue to sell Opium to the chinese, the fags.
Anyway, no freetime, mainly farming, and the indians were pissed.Indian's lifestyle during the British East India Company?
SLAVERY!?!
In your opinion: British East India Company?
In your opinion could the British East India Company have established themselves as a "country" on their own? (so to speak)
Why or why not?In your opinion: British East India Company?
To be honest, they did. The 'capital' was Calcutta, which is a port. 'John Company' was a trading company and had mainly good relations with the numerous maharajahs.
The British East India Company arrived in India in the early 1600s, struggling and nearly begging for the right to trade and do business. By the late 1700s the thriving firm of British merchants, backed by its own army, was essentially ruling India.
In the 1800s English power expanded in India, as it would until the mutinies of 1857-58. After those very violent spasms things would change, yet Britain was still in control. And India was very much an outpost of the mighty British Empire.
Regular British troops only arrived after other European countries realised the commercial value of trading with India.
See also: Clive of India.
Things really started to fall apart in 1857. Whether the Mutiny was really about greased cartridges which had to be bitten into and offended religious taboos held by both Muslim and Hindu sepoys (Indian soldiers) is not altogether clear, but the situation of the British in India started to go downhill from then on. It took 90 years for India to gain independence from the 'Great' British Raj and the British managed to bungle that, resulting in Partition, with the state of Pakistan being divided into West Pakistan bordering Persia to the west and East Pakistan (now Bangladesh) on the eastern side of the sub-Continent.In your opinion: British East India Company?
both yes and no. the Company was very powerful but its power came from the Crown. had they rebeled their income would have vanished and the Royal navy would have hunted their ships down- even assuming that the Britishers in the service of the Company would have gone along with treason
Why or why not?In your opinion: British East India Company?
To be honest, they did. The 'capital' was Calcutta, which is a port. 'John Company' was a trading company and had mainly good relations with the numerous maharajahs.
The British East India Company arrived in India in the early 1600s, struggling and nearly begging for the right to trade and do business. By the late 1700s the thriving firm of British merchants, backed by its own army, was essentially ruling India.
In the 1800s English power expanded in India, as it would until the mutinies of 1857-58. After those very violent spasms things would change, yet Britain was still in control. And India was very much an outpost of the mighty British Empire.
Regular British troops only arrived after other European countries realised the commercial value of trading with India.
See also: Clive of India.
Things really started to fall apart in 1857. Whether the Mutiny was really about greased cartridges which had to be bitten into and offended religious taboos held by both Muslim and Hindu sepoys (Indian soldiers) is not altogether clear, but the situation of the British in India started to go downhill from then on. It took 90 years for India to gain independence from the 'Great' British Raj and the British managed to bungle that, resulting in Partition, with the state of Pakistan being divided into West Pakistan bordering Persia to the west and East Pakistan (now Bangladesh) on the eastern side of the sub-Continent.In your opinion: British East India Company?
both yes and no. the Company was very powerful but its power came from the Crown. had they rebeled their income would have vanished and the Royal navy would have hunted their ships down- even assuming that the Britishers in the service of the Company would have gone along with treason
The British East India Company had an official monopoly on trade from India to Britain and its empire. What do?
Help. :(The British East India Company had an official monopoly on trade from India to Britain and its empire. What do?
What do? what? That statement is true.
What do? what? That statement is true.
How did the British East India Company take control of India?
WITH WEAPONS I ASSUME!
WATCH:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=90BErr08a鈥?/a>
as it is too long video over to min 9 and watch a few mins.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F2g_OtX6t鈥?/a>
THAT SAYS A LOT OF TRUTH...
WATCH:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=90BErr08a鈥?/a>
as it is too long video over to min 9 and watch a few mins.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F2g_OtX6t鈥?/a>
THAT SAYS A LOT OF TRUTH...
The British East India Company had an official monopoly on trade from India to Britain and its empire.?
what does that mean?The British East India Company had an official monopoly on trade from India to Britain and its empire.?
THAT MEANS THAT INDIA WAS EXPOLITED TO THE UTTER MOST... OVER 40 MILLION INDIAN LOST THEIR LIVES DUE TO MISGOVERNMEWNT BY THE BRITISH!
WATCH: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F2g_OtX6t鈥?/a>
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=90BErr08a鈥?/a>
as it is too long video over to min 9 and watch a few mins.
http://ashishthakare.blogspot.com/2005/1鈥?/a>
http://www.worldproutassembly.org/archiv鈥?/a>
THE INDUSTRIAL REVOLUTION WAS MOSTLY FINANCED BY THE EXPLOITATION OF COLONIES IN ASIA.
THE QUESTION SHOULD BE: WHY DID THE BRITISH GO TO INDIA?
TO HELP THE POOR INDIANS?
OR
TO MAKE PROFIT?
EDUCATION, RAILWAYS ETC WERE BYPRODUCTS AND NOT INTENDED TO HELP INDIA...
EDUCATION: TO RAISE A ENGLISH SPEAKING INDIAN GENERATION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE WORKS UNDER THE BRITISH OR CIVIL SERVANTS. AFRICA AND CHINA WERE BRITISH COLONIES TOO, NOW WHY DIDNT THEY PROFIT FROM ENGLISH AS INDIA DID!?!
RAILWAYS: TO TRANSPORT GOOD EFFECTIVELY OUT OF INDIA.
TO CALL THEM "POSITIVE EFFECTS" IS BASELESS AS LONG AS THERE ARE MUCH LONGER "NEGATIVE" LIST.
BEFORE THE COLONIAL ERA INDIA WAS ONE OF THE MAJOR ECONOMIES IN THE WORLD.
INDIA AND CHINA ACOUNTED FOR ABOUT 50% OF WORLDS GDP!
(REMEMBER: COLUMBUS FOUND AMERICA IN SEARCH OF INDIA! MOTIVATED BY ITS RICHES... HENCE THE NATIVES WERE CALLED INDIANS!)
WHEN THE BRITISH LEFT INDIA POVERTY WAS OVER 50%..NOW ITS DOWN BY ROUND 25%...
FURTHER THE FAMINES DURING BRITISH RULE DUE TO MISGOVERNMENT, MASSACRE OF JALIAN WALA BAGH ETC... (JUST GOGGLE!)
I HEAR THAT THE "MASSACRE OF JALIAN WALA BAGH" IS TO BE TAKE OUT OF BRITISH SCHOOL BOOKS...
DURING THE COLONIAL ERA OVER 40 MILLION INDIANS LOST THEIR LIVES... AS MANY AS DURING WW2...
THE CRIMES OF COLONIAL EXPLOITATION IS A DARK TRUTH IN HISTROY THAT WE SHOULD ACCEPT AND NOT IGNORE OR DENY.
INDIA WOULDNT NEED ALL THOSE "AID" FROM ENGLAND OR OTHER NATIONS IF THE BRITISH WERE TO GIVE BACK THE RICHES THE STOLE IN INDIA DURING THE COLONIAL ERA... MAYBE START WITH THE KOHI-NOOR DIAMOND ON THE QUEENS CROWN!?!
IN CHINA THEY ALMOST MADE THE NATION OPIUM ADDICTED!
IN AFRICA THEY TOOK NATIVES AS SLAVES TO BRAZIL ETC!
WHAT SORT OF HELP OR DEVELOPMENT ARE WE TALKING ABOUT?
YEAH... EVERYTHING GREAT FOR THE QUEENS AND ENGLAND.
TO KNOW WHAT THE BRITISH DID TO IRAN JUST GOOGLE "OPERATION AJAX"!
THE BRITISH CAN SAY "WE DEVELOPED INDIA" TO SALVE THEIR CONSCIENCE BUT THAT WILL NEVER CHANGE THE HISTORIC FACTS....The British East India Company had an official monopoly on trade from India to Britain and its empire.?
it means the east trading company controlled all trades from india to the british empire which was quite extensive as during that time nearly all consumer products came from india like tea and spices.
THAT MEANS THAT INDIA WAS EXPOLITED TO THE UTTER MOST... OVER 40 MILLION INDIAN LOST THEIR LIVES DUE TO MISGOVERNMEWNT BY THE BRITISH!
WATCH: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F2g_OtX6t鈥?/a>
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=90BErr08a鈥?/a>
as it is too long video over to min 9 and watch a few mins.
http://ashishthakare.blogspot.com/2005/1鈥?/a>
http://www.worldproutassembly.org/archiv鈥?/a>
THE INDUSTRIAL REVOLUTION WAS MOSTLY FINANCED BY THE EXPLOITATION OF COLONIES IN ASIA.
THE QUESTION SHOULD BE: WHY DID THE BRITISH GO TO INDIA?
TO HELP THE POOR INDIANS?
OR
TO MAKE PROFIT?
EDUCATION, RAILWAYS ETC WERE BYPRODUCTS AND NOT INTENDED TO HELP INDIA...
EDUCATION: TO RAISE A ENGLISH SPEAKING INDIAN GENERATION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE WORKS UNDER THE BRITISH OR CIVIL SERVANTS. AFRICA AND CHINA WERE BRITISH COLONIES TOO, NOW WHY DIDNT THEY PROFIT FROM ENGLISH AS INDIA DID!?!
RAILWAYS: TO TRANSPORT GOOD EFFECTIVELY OUT OF INDIA.
TO CALL THEM "POSITIVE EFFECTS" IS BASELESS AS LONG AS THERE ARE MUCH LONGER "NEGATIVE" LIST.
BEFORE THE COLONIAL ERA INDIA WAS ONE OF THE MAJOR ECONOMIES IN THE WORLD.
INDIA AND CHINA ACOUNTED FOR ABOUT 50% OF WORLDS GDP!
(REMEMBER: COLUMBUS FOUND AMERICA IN SEARCH OF INDIA! MOTIVATED BY ITS RICHES... HENCE THE NATIVES WERE CALLED INDIANS!)
WHEN THE BRITISH LEFT INDIA POVERTY WAS OVER 50%..NOW ITS DOWN BY ROUND 25%...
FURTHER THE FAMINES DURING BRITISH RULE DUE TO MISGOVERNMENT, MASSACRE OF JALIAN WALA BAGH ETC... (JUST GOGGLE!)
I HEAR THAT THE "MASSACRE OF JALIAN WALA BAGH" IS TO BE TAKE OUT OF BRITISH SCHOOL BOOKS...
DURING THE COLONIAL ERA OVER 40 MILLION INDIANS LOST THEIR LIVES... AS MANY AS DURING WW2...
THE CRIMES OF COLONIAL EXPLOITATION IS A DARK TRUTH IN HISTROY THAT WE SHOULD ACCEPT AND NOT IGNORE OR DENY.
INDIA WOULDNT NEED ALL THOSE "AID" FROM ENGLAND OR OTHER NATIONS IF THE BRITISH WERE TO GIVE BACK THE RICHES THE STOLE IN INDIA DURING THE COLONIAL ERA... MAYBE START WITH THE KOHI-NOOR DIAMOND ON THE QUEENS CROWN!?!
IN CHINA THEY ALMOST MADE THE NATION OPIUM ADDICTED!
IN AFRICA THEY TOOK NATIVES AS SLAVES TO BRAZIL ETC!
WHAT SORT OF HELP OR DEVELOPMENT ARE WE TALKING ABOUT?
YEAH... EVERYTHING GREAT FOR THE QUEENS AND ENGLAND.
TO KNOW WHAT THE BRITISH DID TO IRAN JUST GOOGLE "OPERATION AJAX"!
THE BRITISH CAN SAY "WE DEVELOPED INDIA" TO SALVE THEIR CONSCIENCE BUT THAT WILL NEVER CHANGE THE HISTORIC FACTS....The British East India Company had an official monopoly on trade from India to Britain and its empire.?
it means the east trading company controlled all trades from india to the british empire which was quite extensive as during that time nearly all consumer products came from india like tea and spices.
Why did the British give special considerations to the British East India Company?
And Were Americans correct in not purchasing the tea from the Boston Tea Party?
quick answer is fine. not too extensiveWhy did the British give special considerations to the British East India Company?
British East India Tea Company faced ruin. To save the company Parliment passed the Tea Act.The act let the company sell tea to shopkeepers and bypass colonial merchants( Americans) who normally distributed the tea. Yes, Colonial merchants called for a boycott.google translations baby boy names 2011
quick answer is fine. not too extensiveWhy did the British give special considerations to the British East India Company?
British East India Tea Company faced ruin. To save the company Parliment passed the Tea Act.The act let the company sell tea to shopkeepers and bypass colonial merchants( Americans) who normally distributed the tea. Yes, Colonial merchants called for a boycott.
What changes did the british east india company made in india?
hey ppl can u pls help me i need to now some of the positive things british did to indiaWhat changes did the british east india company made in india?
railways,Telephone,the most important concept of india come because of british and the english language
railways,Telephone,the most important concept of india come because of british and the english language
What reforms did the british east India company bring to the Indian political system?
please be detailed and give your source if possible.
thanks:)What reforms did the british east India company bring to the Indian political system?
The East India Company brought political stability by bringing in good police,judicial and educational systems. They proceeded from the view that a strong company government was meant only for welfare of Indians. (They did not care about improving the economic condition of people) They kept relentless pressure on the Indian princes and petty principalities and annexed many of them when there was no male heir. They took sides in quarrels between Indian rulers and by precipitating wars annexed the little principalities. Even the frightened Indian rulers themselves thought it safe to live under the British umbrella by ceding large tracts of territory to the British rulers or by handing over to them powers to collect land revenue
thanks:)What reforms did the british east India company bring to the Indian political system?
The East India Company brought political stability by bringing in good police,judicial and educational systems. They proceeded from the view that a strong company government was meant only for welfare of Indians. (They did not care about improving the economic condition of people) They kept relentless pressure on the Indian princes and petty principalities and annexed many of them when there was no male heir. They took sides in quarrels between Indian rulers and by precipitating wars annexed the little principalities. Even the frightened Indian rulers themselves thought it safe to live under the British umbrella by ceding large tracts of territory to the British rulers or by handing over to them powers to collect land revenue
Why was the British East India Company important to the British government?
HELP HOMEWORK!Why was the British East India Company important to the British government?
THE EAST INDIA COMPANY WAS THE "PART" OF THE BRITISH EMPIRE THAT EXPLOITED AND SUPRESSED NATIVE IN DIFFERENT COUNTRIES AROUND THE GLOBE!
THE SOLE AIM: PROFIT AND RICHES FOR THE BRITISH EMPIRE AT ANY PRICE... MOSTLY THE PRICE WERE PAID BY THE NATIVES...
THE EAST INDIA COMPANY WAS THE "PART" OF THE BRITISH EMPIRE THAT EXPLOITED AND SUPRESSED NATIVE IN DIFFERENT COUNTRIES AROUND THE GLOBE!
THE SOLE AIM: PROFIT AND RICHES FOR THE BRITISH EMPIRE AT ANY PRICE... MOSTLY THE PRICE WERE PAID BY THE NATIVES...
How was the British East India Company an example of imperialis?
Pleeeaaase, I have a huge project and without this I am doomed!!!! have mercy!! :D jk but seriously pleaseHow was the British East India Company an example of imperialis?
ITS A PLEASURE TO HELP YOU:)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F2g_OtX6t鈥?/a>
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=90BErr08a鈥?/a>
as it is too long video over to min 9 and watch a few mins.
http://ashishthakare.blogspot.com/2005/1鈥?/a>
http://www.worldproutassembly.org/archiv鈥?/a>
THE INDUSTRIAL REVOLUTION WAS MOSTLY FINANCED BY THE EXPLOITATION OF COLONIES IN ASIA.
THE QUESTION SHOULD BE: WHY DID THE BRITISH GO TO INDIA?
TO HELP THE POOR INDIANS?
OR
TO MAKE PROFIT?
EDUCATION, RAILWAYS ETC WERE BYPRODUCTS AND NOT INTENDED TO HELP INDIA...
EDUCATION: TO RAISE A ENGLISH SPEAKING INDIAN GENERATION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE WORKS UNDER THE BRITISH OR CIVIL SERVANTS. AFRICA AND CHINA WERE BRITISH COLONIES TOO, NOW WHY DIDNT THEY PROFIT FROM ENGLISH AS INDIA DID!?!
RAILWAYS: TO TRANSPORT GOOD EFFECTIVELY OUT OF INDIA.
TO CALL THEM "POSITIVE EFFECTS" IS BASELESS AS LONG AS THERE ARE MUCH LONGER "NEGATIVE" LIST.
BEFORE THE COLONIAL ERA INDIA WAS ONE OF THE MAJOR ECONOMIES IN THE WORLD.
INDIA AND CHINA ACOUNTED FOR ABOUT 50% OF WORLDS GDP!
(REMEMBER: COLUMBUS FOUND AMERICA IN SEARCH OF INDIA! MOTIVATED BY ITS RICHES... HENCE THE NATIVES WERE CALLED INDIANS!)
WHEN THE BRITISH LEFT INDIA POVERTY WAS OVER 50%..NOW ITS DOWN BY ROUND 25%...
FURTHER THE FAMINES DURING BRITISH RULE DUE TO MISGOVERNMENT, MASSACRE OF JALIAN WALA BAGH ETC... (JUST GOGGLE!)
I HEAR THAT THE "MASSACRE OF JALIAN WALA BAGH" IS TO BE TAKE OUT OF BRITISH SCHOOL BOOKS...
DURING THE COLONIAL ERA OVER 40 MILLION INDIANS LOST THEIR LIVES... AS MANY AS DURING WW2...
THE CRIMES OF COLONIAL EXPLOITATION IS A DARK TRUTH IN HISTROY THAT WE SHOULD ACCEPT AND NOT IGNORE OR DENY.
INDIA WOULDNT NEED ALL THOSE "AID" FROM ENGLAND OR OTHER NATIONS IF THE BRITISH WERE TO GIVE BACK THE RICHES THE STOLE IN INDIA DURING THE COLONIAL ERA... MAYBE START WITH THE KOHI-NOOR DIAMOND ON THE QUEENS CROWN!?!
IN CHINA THEY ALMOST MADE THE NATION OPIUM ADDICTED!
IN AFRICA THEY TOOK NATIVES AS SLAVES TO BRAZIL ETC!
WHAT SORT OF HELP OR DEVELOPMENT ARE WE TALKING ABOUT?
YEAH... EVERYTHING GREAT FOR THE QUEENS AND ENGLAND.
TO KNOW WHAT THE BRITISH DID TO IRAN JUST GOOGLE "OPERATION AJAX"!
THE BRITISH CAN SAY "WE DEVELOPED INDIA" TO SALVE THEIR CONSCIENCE BUT THAT WILL NEVER CHANGE THE HISTORIC FACTS....
ITS A PLEASURE TO HELP YOU:)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F2g_OtX6t鈥?/a>
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=90BErr08a鈥?/a>
as it is too long video over to min 9 and watch a few mins.
http://ashishthakare.blogspot.com/2005/1鈥?/a>
http://www.worldproutassembly.org/archiv鈥?/a>
THE INDUSTRIAL REVOLUTION WAS MOSTLY FINANCED BY THE EXPLOITATION OF COLONIES IN ASIA.
THE QUESTION SHOULD BE: WHY DID THE BRITISH GO TO INDIA?
TO HELP THE POOR INDIANS?
OR
TO MAKE PROFIT?
EDUCATION, RAILWAYS ETC WERE BYPRODUCTS AND NOT INTENDED TO HELP INDIA...
EDUCATION: TO RAISE A ENGLISH SPEAKING INDIAN GENERATION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE WORKS UNDER THE BRITISH OR CIVIL SERVANTS. AFRICA AND CHINA WERE BRITISH COLONIES TOO, NOW WHY DIDNT THEY PROFIT FROM ENGLISH AS INDIA DID!?!
RAILWAYS: TO TRANSPORT GOOD EFFECTIVELY OUT OF INDIA.
TO CALL THEM "POSITIVE EFFECTS" IS BASELESS AS LONG AS THERE ARE MUCH LONGER "NEGATIVE" LIST.
BEFORE THE COLONIAL ERA INDIA WAS ONE OF THE MAJOR ECONOMIES IN THE WORLD.
INDIA AND CHINA ACOUNTED FOR ABOUT 50% OF WORLDS GDP!
(REMEMBER: COLUMBUS FOUND AMERICA IN SEARCH OF INDIA! MOTIVATED BY ITS RICHES... HENCE THE NATIVES WERE CALLED INDIANS!)
WHEN THE BRITISH LEFT INDIA POVERTY WAS OVER 50%..NOW ITS DOWN BY ROUND 25%...
FURTHER THE FAMINES DURING BRITISH RULE DUE TO MISGOVERNMENT, MASSACRE OF JALIAN WALA BAGH ETC... (JUST GOGGLE!)
I HEAR THAT THE "MASSACRE OF JALIAN WALA BAGH" IS TO BE TAKE OUT OF BRITISH SCHOOL BOOKS...
DURING THE COLONIAL ERA OVER 40 MILLION INDIANS LOST THEIR LIVES... AS MANY AS DURING WW2...
THE CRIMES OF COLONIAL EXPLOITATION IS A DARK TRUTH IN HISTROY THAT WE SHOULD ACCEPT AND NOT IGNORE OR DENY.
INDIA WOULDNT NEED ALL THOSE "AID" FROM ENGLAND OR OTHER NATIONS IF THE BRITISH WERE TO GIVE BACK THE RICHES THE STOLE IN INDIA DURING THE COLONIAL ERA... MAYBE START WITH THE KOHI-NOOR DIAMOND ON THE QUEENS CROWN!?!
IN CHINA THEY ALMOST MADE THE NATION OPIUM ADDICTED!
IN AFRICA THEY TOOK NATIVES AS SLAVES TO BRAZIL ETC!
WHAT SORT OF HELP OR DEVELOPMENT ARE WE TALKING ABOUT?
YEAH... EVERYTHING GREAT FOR THE QUEENS AND ENGLAND.
TO KNOW WHAT THE BRITISH DID TO IRAN JUST GOOGLE "OPERATION AJAX"!
THE BRITISH CAN SAY "WE DEVELOPED INDIA" TO SALVE THEIR CONSCIENCE BUT THAT WILL NEVER CHANGE THE HISTORIC FACTS....
Why was The British East India Company the best empire in India?
What were its advantages? why was it so good?Why was The British East India Company the best empire in India?
Was it? You could argue for other empires, like Gupta or Mogul. And what are you talking about anyway? The EIC was a trading organisation that segued into the British Raj. A case (unpopular to some) could be made for the Raj, but is that what you mean?google crome crysis 2
Was it? You could argue for other empires, like Gupta or Mogul. And what are you talking about anyway? The EIC was a trading organisation that segued into the British Raj. A case (unpopular to some) could be made for the Raj, but is that what you mean?
What was the Sepoy Mutiny and how did it ultimately end the rule of the british east india company?
also
what was the raj and the Indian civil service and why were they created?What was the Sepoy Mutiny and how did it ultimately end the rule of the british east india company?
The Indian Rebellion of 1857 began as a mutiny of sepoys of the British East India Company's army on 10 May 1857, in the town of Meerut, and soon escalated into other mutinies and civilian rebellions largely in the upper Gangetic plain and central India, with the major hostilities confined to present-day Uttar Pradesh, Bihar, northern Madhya Pradesh, and the Delhi region. The rebellion posed a considerable threat to Company power in that region, and it was contained only with the fall of Gwalior on 20 June 1858
what was the raj and the Indian civil service and why were they created?What was the Sepoy Mutiny and how did it ultimately end the rule of the british east india company?
The Indian Rebellion of 1857 began as a mutiny of sepoys of the British East India Company's army on 10 May 1857, in the town of Meerut, and soon escalated into other mutinies and civilian rebellions largely in the upper Gangetic plain and central India, with the major hostilities confined to present-day Uttar Pradesh, Bihar, northern Madhya Pradesh, and the Delhi region. The rebellion posed a considerable threat to Company power in that region, and it was contained only with the fall of Gwalior on 20 June 1858
What are India's riches BEFORE the the time when the British East India company arrived?
Pleas give examples. I'm having a very hard time looking up this on the net. Thanks in advance!What are India's riches BEFORE the the time when the British East India company arrived?
"The part of India known as Malabar," Marco Polo had written, "was the richest and noblest country in the world."
Up until the eighteenth century, interest in India was largely for trade and other commercial purposes. India was a land with multifarious riches: silks, spices, diamonds, gold. And these brought good prices in Western ports. In Boston, for instance, merchants dealing with Indian trade quickly grew in wealth and prestige. It was considered a distinction to have one's office on "India Wharf," where American captains sought for their families and business acquaintances such treasures as carnelian necklaces, pieces of valuable cobweb Dacca muslin and even rare books in SanskritWhat are India's riches BEFORE the the time when the British East India company arrived?
the wonderful smell of monkeys and elephants mixed with the b.o. of 250kagillion people who would later become stars in the world of telephone customer service.
"The part of India known as Malabar," Marco Polo had written, "was the richest and noblest country in the world."
Up until the eighteenth century, interest in India was largely for trade and other commercial purposes. India was a land with multifarious riches: silks, spices, diamonds, gold. And these brought good prices in Western ports. In Boston, for instance, merchants dealing with Indian trade quickly grew in wealth and prestige. It was considered a distinction to have one's office on "India Wharf," where American captains sought for their families and business acquaintances such treasures as carnelian necklaces, pieces of valuable cobweb Dacca muslin and even rare books in SanskritWhat are India's riches BEFORE the the time when the British East India company arrived?
the wonderful smell of monkeys and elephants mixed with the b.o. of 250kagillion people who would later become stars in the world of telephone customer service.
What does modern day Goldman Sachs and colonial times British East India Company have in common?
Yahoo! Answers deleted this question before as being offensive. Please do not respond with any sexual innuendos or any other obnoxious or offensive language since I don't want this question deleted, again.
Hint: The correct answer has to do with monopolies and taxes.What does modern day Goldman Sachs and colonial times British East India Company have in common?
Why ask the question if you obviously already know the answer?
Hint: The correct answer has to do with monopolies and taxes.What does modern day Goldman Sachs and colonial times British East India Company have in common?
Why ask the question if you obviously already know the answer?
What was the British East India Company?
And why is it referred to as a company that owned a nation?What was the British East India Company?
A "COMPANY" OF BRITISH ORIGIN FORMED TO EXPLOIT AND SUPRESS NATIVE DURING THE ERA OF COLONIAL EXPLOITATION!
http://ashishthakare.blogspot.com/2005/1鈥?/a>
THE INDUSTRIAL REVOLUTION WAS MOSTLY FINANCED BY THE EXPLOITATION OF COLONIES IN ASIA.
THE QUESTION SHOULD BE: WHY DID THE BRITISH GO TO INDIA?
TO HELP THE POOR INDIANS?
OR
TO MAKE PROFIT?
EDUCATION, RAILWAYS ETC WERE BYPRODUCTS AND NOT INTENDED TO HELP INDIA...
EDUCATION: TO RAISE A ENGLISH SPEAKING INDIAN GENERATION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE WORKS UNDER THE BRITISH OR CIVIL SERVANTS. AFRICA AND CHINA WERE BRITISH COLONIES TOO, NOW WHY DIDNT THEY PROFIT FROM ENGLISH AS INDIA DID!?!
RAILWAYS: TO TRANSPORT GOOD EFFECTIVELY OUT OF INDIA.
TO CALL THEM "POSITIVE EFFECTS" IS BASELESS AS LONG AS THERE ARE MUCH LONGER "NEGATIVE" LIST.
BEFORE THE COLONIAL ERA INDIA WAS ONE OF THE MAJOR ECONOMIES IN THE WORLD.
INDIA AND CHINA ACOUNTED FOR ABOUT 50% OF WORLDS GDP!
(REMEMBER: COLUMBUS FOUND AMERICA IN SEARCH OF INDIA! MOTIVATED BY ITS RICHES... HENCE THE NATIVES WERE CALLED INDIANS!)
WHEN THE BRITISH LEFT INDIA POVERTY WAS OVER 50%..NOW ITS DOWN BY ROUND 25%...
FURTHER THE FAMINES DURING BRITISH RULE DUE TO MISGOVERNMENT, MASSACRE OF JALIAN WALA BAGH ETC... (JUST GOGGLE!)
I HEAR THAT THE "MASSACRE OF JALIAN WALA BAGH" IS TO BE TAKE OUT OF BRITISH SCHOOL BOOKS...
DURING THE COLONIAL ERA OVER 40 MILLION INDIANS LOST THEIR LIVES... AS MANY AS DURING WW2...
THE CRIMES OF COLONIAL EXPLOITATION IS A DARK TRUTH IN HISTROY THAT WE SHOULD ACCEPT AND NOT IGNORE OR DENY.
INDIA WOULDNT NEED ALL THOSE "AID" FROM ENGLAND OR OTHER NATIONS IF THE BRITISH WERE TO GIVE BACK THE RICHES THE STOLE IN INDIA DURING THE COLONIAL ERA... MAYBE START WITH THE KOHI-NOOR DIAMOND ON THE QUEENS CROWN!?!
IN CHINA THEY ALMOST MADE THE NATION OPIUM ADDICTED!
IN AFRICA THEY TOOK NATIVES AS SLAVES TO BRAZIL ETC!
WHAT SORT OF HELP OR DEVELOPMENT ARE WE TALKING ABOUT?
YEAH... EVERYTHING GREAT FOR THE QUEENS AND ENGLAND.
TO KNOW WHAT THE BRITISH DID TO IRAN JUST GOOGLE "OPERATION AJAX"!!!
THE BRITISH CAN SAY "WE DEVELOPED INDIA" TO SALVE THEIR CONSCIENCE BUT THAT WILL NEVER CHANGE THE HISTORIC FACTS....
A "COMPANY" OF BRITISH ORIGIN FORMED TO EXPLOIT AND SUPRESS NATIVE DURING THE ERA OF COLONIAL EXPLOITATION!
http://ashishthakare.blogspot.com/2005/1鈥?/a>
THE INDUSTRIAL REVOLUTION WAS MOSTLY FINANCED BY THE EXPLOITATION OF COLONIES IN ASIA.
THE QUESTION SHOULD BE: WHY DID THE BRITISH GO TO INDIA?
TO HELP THE POOR INDIANS?
OR
TO MAKE PROFIT?
EDUCATION, RAILWAYS ETC WERE BYPRODUCTS AND NOT INTENDED TO HELP INDIA...
EDUCATION: TO RAISE A ENGLISH SPEAKING INDIAN GENERATION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE WORKS UNDER THE BRITISH OR CIVIL SERVANTS. AFRICA AND CHINA WERE BRITISH COLONIES TOO, NOW WHY DIDNT THEY PROFIT FROM ENGLISH AS INDIA DID!?!
RAILWAYS: TO TRANSPORT GOOD EFFECTIVELY OUT OF INDIA.
TO CALL THEM "POSITIVE EFFECTS" IS BASELESS AS LONG AS THERE ARE MUCH LONGER "NEGATIVE" LIST.
BEFORE THE COLONIAL ERA INDIA WAS ONE OF THE MAJOR ECONOMIES IN THE WORLD.
INDIA AND CHINA ACOUNTED FOR ABOUT 50% OF WORLDS GDP!
(REMEMBER: COLUMBUS FOUND AMERICA IN SEARCH OF INDIA! MOTIVATED BY ITS RICHES... HENCE THE NATIVES WERE CALLED INDIANS!)
WHEN THE BRITISH LEFT INDIA POVERTY WAS OVER 50%..NOW ITS DOWN BY ROUND 25%...
FURTHER THE FAMINES DURING BRITISH RULE DUE TO MISGOVERNMENT, MASSACRE OF JALIAN WALA BAGH ETC... (JUST GOGGLE!)
I HEAR THAT THE "MASSACRE OF JALIAN WALA BAGH" IS TO BE TAKE OUT OF BRITISH SCHOOL BOOKS...
DURING THE COLONIAL ERA OVER 40 MILLION INDIANS LOST THEIR LIVES... AS MANY AS DURING WW2...
THE CRIMES OF COLONIAL EXPLOITATION IS A DARK TRUTH IN HISTROY THAT WE SHOULD ACCEPT AND NOT IGNORE OR DENY.
INDIA WOULDNT NEED ALL THOSE "AID" FROM ENGLAND OR OTHER NATIONS IF THE BRITISH WERE TO GIVE BACK THE RICHES THE STOLE IN INDIA DURING THE COLONIAL ERA... MAYBE START WITH THE KOHI-NOOR DIAMOND ON THE QUEENS CROWN!?!
IN CHINA THEY ALMOST MADE THE NATION OPIUM ADDICTED!
IN AFRICA THEY TOOK NATIVES AS SLAVES TO BRAZIL ETC!
WHAT SORT OF HELP OR DEVELOPMENT ARE WE TALKING ABOUT?
YEAH... EVERYTHING GREAT FOR THE QUEENS AND ENGLAND.
TO KNOW WHAT THE BRITISH DID TO IRAN JUST GOOGLE "OPERATION AJAX"!!!
THE BRITISH CAN SAY "WE DEVELOPED INDIA" TO SALVE THEIR CONSCIENCE BUT THAT WILL NEVER CHANGE THE HISTORIC FACTS....
Did any Indians from the British East India Company fight in the Battle of the Bulge in WW2?
since the British were involved in the battle, and India was a British colonyDid any Indians from the British East India Company fight in the Battle of the Bulge in WW2?
The majority of British Indian troops were fighting the Japanese, some in Africa,,very few in Europe, probably none at the Battle of the Bulge.broadview security smokey bones
The majority of British Indian troops were fighting the Japanese, some in Africa,,very few in Europe, probably none at the Battle of the Bulge.
What was the role of the British East India Company?
Also, what benefits did India receive from the company?
Thanks!What was the role of the British East India Company?
The British East India Company was formed in 1600 when a group of merchants were given a monopoly of all trade with East Indies. The ships first arrived in 1608. Trading posts were on the east and west coasts of India. A famine in 1769 and 70 in Bengal was not addressed by the British East India Company and one-third of he population died. In 1773 Lord North put a Governor-General in charge of India.The annexation of native states, poor treatment of the peasants, and bad revenue policies led to the Rebellion of 1857 (the Sepoy Mutiny). In 1858 the East India Company went out of business. There after the British King was in charge of India.
Thanks!What was the role of the British East India Company?
The British East India Company was formed in 1600 when a group of merchants were given a monopoly of all trade with East Indies. The ships first arrived in 1608. Trading posts were on the east and west coasts of India. A famine in 1769 and 70 in Bengal was not addressed by the British East India Company and one-third of he population died. In 1773 Lord North put a Governor-General in charge of India.The annexation of native states, poor treatment of the peasants, and bad revenue policies led to the Rebellion of 1857 (the Sepoy Mutiny). In 1858 the East India Company went out of business. There after the British King was in charge of India.
In 1773, Lord North, attempting to save the British East India Company, gave the company the right to sell tea?
In 1773, Lord North, attempting to save the British East India Company, gave the company the right to sell tea to the colonists free of the taxes colonial tea sellers had to pay. The colonists responded angrily in an event known as the
1) Boston Massacre
2) Boston Tea Party
3) Act of Intoleration
4) Boston BoycottIn 1773, Lord North, attempting to save the British East India Company, gave the company the right to sell tea?
The Boycott came first, the Tea Party was after the boycott on all British goods had been going for several months.
1) Boston Massacre
2) Boston Tea Party
3) Act of Intoleration
4) Boston BoycottIn 1773, Lord North, attempting to save the British East India Company, gave the company the right to sell tea?
The Boycott came first, the Tea Party was after the boycott on all British goods had been going for several months.
What caused the British East India Company to go bankrupt?
It controlled vast amount of land and controlled primary trades across the world did it just become a other company?What caused the British East India Company to go bankrupt?
Inbreeding....What caused the British East India Company to go bankrupt?
You really need to learn to do web searches, or at very least, to use Wikipedia:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/East_India_鈥?/a>
Inbreeding....What caused the British East India Company to go bankrupt?
You really need to learn to do web searches, or at very least, to use Wikipedia:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/East_India_鈥?/a>
Does the British India clothing company have a website?
I've seen this clothing store in many malls in Malaysia. I'm sure it's in Singapore and surrounding Asian cities. I live in the US now and want to get ahold of British India clothes and I'm wondering if they have a website. I can't find one! I know there's one in the KLCC mall in Kuala Lumpur and also in the Great Eastern mall. I believe that there is on in the Mid-Valley Megamall as well.Does the British India clothing company have a website?
Sorry, I did a Yahoo! search, and I only could find this link:
http://www.answers.com/topic/british-eas鈥?/a>
I'm not sure that this is what you were looking for... Probably something more up to date. LOL.
try this...
http://britishindia.asia/index.html
I am a long time fan of British India clothes from day 1 when it appeared and I must say, their cotton range is super comfy and wears well.
I can squash it in my bag and all but it somehow straightens itself up after a few hours of wear - so its pretty good for travellers.
the one u r looking for is this one..
=)
im a big fan of british india..
http://britishindia.asia/index.html
Here's the real website:
www.britishindia.com.my
It's a Malaysian company founded by a women!! Pat Liew
or you can try this one..
http://www.britishindia.com.my/aboutbritishindia.html
i dont know
Sorry, I did a Yahoo! search, and I only could find this link:
http://www.answers.com/topic/british-eas鈥?/a>
I'm not sure that this is what you were looking for... Probably something more up to date. LOL.
try this...
http://britishindia.asia/index.html
Report Abuse
Does the British India clothing company have a website?I am a long time fan of British India clothes from day 1 when it appeared and I must say, their cotton range is super comfy and wears well.
I can squash it in my bag and all but it somehow straightens itself up after a few hours of wear - so its pretty good for travellers.
Report Abuse
the one u r looking for is this one..
=)
im a big fan of british india..
http://britishindia.asia/index.html
Report Abuse
Does the British India clothing company have a website?Here's the real website:
www.britishindia.com.my
It's a Malaysian company founded by a women!! Pat Liew
Report Abuse
or you can try this one..
http://www.britishindia.com.my/aboutbritishindia.html
Report Abuse
i dont know
Which describes a key feature of the British East India Company's trading-post empire?
The British established port stations along the Red Sea coast including the port of Aden in Yemen.
The British built port cities on the coasts of India to control the resources of the vast Ganges River Valley.
The British extended control over new territory deep into the interior of Indian and Malaysian jungles.
The British built naval fortresses in strategic locations where foreigners stopped to pay for safe conduct.Which describes a key feature of the British East India Company's trading-post empire?
The British built port cities on the coasts of India to control the resources of the vast Ganges River Valley.applebees happy hour fondue
The British built port cities on the coasts of India to control the resources of the vast Ganges River Valley.
The British extended control over new territory deep into the interior of Indian and Malaysian jungles.
The British built naval fortresses in strategic locations where foreigners stopped to pay for safe conduct.Which describes a key feature of the British East India Company's trading-post empire?
The British built port cities on the coasts of India to control the resources of the vast Ganges River Valley.
What was the British East India Company?
what was the British east india company and why was it created? what was one positive or negative effect it had on its society. i have to teach my kids this tomorow and im seeming to forget some info.What was the British East India Company?
It was a quasi-governmental multinational corporation that slowly took over most of India. One positive: Enlightened European values meant far less of the type of brutality and inhumanity that was typical of the life of the peasant in the Mughal Empire, or in one of the independent principalities. One negative: It was a for-profit venture, so it wasn't always exactly seeking what was best for most Indians.What was the British East India Company?
It is a company promoted to look after the British empire interests in India.one positive effect is that it brought unity among Indians.Negative effect is that they lost control all over India due to lack of over sight and very bad behavior towards general public.
It was a quasi-governmental multinational corporation that slowly took over most of India. One positive: Enlightened European values meant far less of the type of brutality and inhumanity that was typical of the life of the peasant in the Mughal Empire, or in one of the independent principalities. One negative: It was a for-profit venture, so it wasn't always exactly seeking what was best for most Indians.What was the British East India Company?
It is a company promoted to look after the British empire interests in India.one positive effect is that it brought unity among Indians.Negative effect is that they lost control all over India due to lack of over sight and very bad behavior towards general public.
What were 3 reasons British citizens supported the efforts of the British East India Company in India?
um what were 3 reasons British citizens supported the efforts of the British East India Company in India. I need three reasons or benefits, i need sources!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!What were 3 reasons British citizens supported the efforts of the British East India Company in India?
01) THE COLONIAL EXPLOITATION AND CRIMES MADE ENGLAND A DEVEOPLED NATION.
02) THW WEALTH EXPLOITED FROM INDIA MADE THEIR LIVING AS BETTER AS IT WAS NEVER BEFORE.
03) IT GAVE THEM POWER ON A GLOBAL STAGE, CONSIDERING THAT A ISLAND THE SIZE OF A PEANUT EXPLOITED ALMOST THE WHOLE OF ASIA WITH MURDER AND SLAUGHTER.What were 3 reasons British citizens supported the efforts of the British East India Company in India?
1: It got them money
2: They were brown people, so it didn't matter.
3: They weren't Christian, so it didn't matter.
(these ARE NOT my views, just an attempt to answer the question)
01) THE COLONIAL EXPLOITATION AND CRIMES MADE ENGLAND A DEVEOPLED NATION.
02) THW WEALTH EXPLOITED FROM INDIA MADE THEIR LIVING AS BETTER AS IT WAS NEVER BEFORE.
03) IT GAVE THEM POWER ON A GLOBAL STAGE, CONSIDERING THAT A ISLAND THE SIZE OF A PEANUT EXPLOITED ALMOST THE WHOLE OF ASIA WITH MURDER AND SLAUGHTER.What were 3 reasons British citizens supported the efforts of the British East India Company in India?
1: It got them money
2: They were brown people, so it didn't matter.
3: They weren't Christian, so it didn't matter.
(these ARE NOT my views, just an attempt to answer the question)
When did the British East India company really become important and how quickly it replaced Hollands position?
also, why Holland declined in importance as a trade nation? was Holland the capital region or Amsterdam was the capital city of the Hanseatic League during its existance?
did the British east India company replace the Hanseatic League? or when and why it switched to London? and which other cities in Britain and why?
how Holland became after and how much colony area it lost and why?
thansk for your answers!When did the British East India company really become important and how quickly it replaced Hollands position?
Hanseatic League is a purely a trade arrangement encompassing Baltic coast %26amp; the Netherlands. They had a chain of trading posts extending beyond, including one at London. These trading posts became significant enclaves. The London Kontor, established in 1320, stood west of London Bridge near Upper Thames Street.
British (English) East India Company was given a Royal charter by Queen Elizabeth I. It started operations in India at Masulipatam (on East coast) %26amp; Surat (West coast) ports that lasted till 1857 when the Crown took over proclaiming the (England's) Queen Victoria as the Empress of Indian Empire. Gradually the Company's network of factories expanded. Then they built two forts - Fort St.George at a fishing hamlet that now is Chennai ('Madras' before) city. The other was Fort William near Kalighat, that grew up to Kolkata (Calcutta) city. Both were established in late 1600s. Then the Company started to dabble in local politics or rather they were sucked in it. Near Chennai they had this succession ot the throne of 'Carnatic' in issue. French too joined the rivalry. But the British won it and their protege became CarnaticNawab.
Robert Clive (then Captain) played a prominent part and his clever strategy won for th British their position. In Bengal around Ft.William another succession war was played out for the Murshidabad throne. There was a war on the plains of Plassey (Palash is a popular native tree; called 'flame of the forest' due to its vermilion to orange coloured flowering in summer) in 1857m. Again Robert Clive won the war laying the foundation to the political career of the Company, who virtually ran the Bengal government with sole rights to collect taxes on behalf of Bengal Nawab. But in Buxaur war (1964), two hundred miles to the west they established their first province and firmed up the hold on Bengal that has become Company property. They established their capital at Ft.William and Col. Robert Clive became the Governor of Company possessions. His successor Warren Hastings expanded it like an Empire and assumed the title, 'Governor-General'.
Holland (the Netherlands or 'Dutch') were not in India, but in Sumatra and Java Islands of present day Indonesia. Parallel to the 'Company' they had their own 'Dutch East India Company'.
There were a few Dutch factories on South indian coast who quickly wound up operations to concentrate on their Island possessions of East Indies.Danish factory at a place called 'Tranquebar' the point where the coast juts towards the northern tip (Jaffna) of Sri Lanka. It was the only Danish presence in india and was finally closed.When did the British East India company really become important and how quickly it replaced Hollands position?
You are getting a little confused here, I think. The Dutch East India company traded in the east as did the British East India Company The VOC as it was known was highly successful - it declined due to maladministration rather than anything else and was a spent force by the end of the 17th century having enjoyed success for about 200 years. The British East India Company was founded during the 16th century and operated in different sphers (principally the Indian mainland and was a private commercial enterprise that flourished until the middle of the 19th century when it went pear shaped due to the Indian mutiny. At this point the Crown stepped in and took over the company and the British Raj began - which would last another 100 years. It was administered from London's Leadenhall area and once nationalised the hq building was demolished soon after and is now the site of the iconic Lloyd's Insurance Building
did the British east India company replace the Hanseatic League? or when and why it switched to London? and which other cities in Britain and why?
how Holland became after and how much colony area it lost and why?
thansk for your answers!When did the British East India company really become important and how quickly it replaced Hollands position?
Hanseatic League is a purely a trade arrangement encompassing Baltic coast %26amp; the Netherlands. They had a chain of trading posts extending beyond, including one at London. These trading posts became significant enclaves. The London Kontor, established in 1320, stood west of London Bridge near Upper Thames Street.
British (English) East India Company was given a Royal charter by Queen Elizabeth I. It started operations in India at Masulipatam (on East coast) %26amp; Surat (West coast) ports that lasted till 1857 when the Crown took over proclaiming the (England's) Queen Victoria as the Empress of Indian Empire. Gradually the Company's network of factories expanded. Then they built two forts - Fort St.George at a fishing hamlet that now is Chennai ('Madras' before) city. The other was Fort William near Kalighat, that grew up to Kolkata (Calcutta) city. Both were established in late 1600s. Then the Company started to dabble in local politics or rather they were sucked in it. Near Chennai they had this succession ot the throne of 'Carnatic' in issue. French too joined the rivalry. But the British won it and their protege became CarnaticNawab.
Robert Clive (then Captain) played a prominent part and his clever strategy won for th British their position. In Bengal around Ft.William another succession war was played out for the Murshidabad throne. There was a war on the plains of Plassey (Palash is a popular native tree; called 'flame of the forest' due to its vermilion to orange coloured flowering in summer) in 1857m. Again Robert Clive won the war laying the foundation to the political career of the Company, who virtually ran the Bengal government with sole rights to collect taxes on behalf of Bengal Nawab. But in Buxaur war (1964), two hundred miles to the west they established their first province and firmed up the hold on Bengal that has become Company property. They established their capital at Ft.William and Col. Robert Clive became the Governor of Company possessions. His successor Warren Hastings expanded it like an Empire and assumed the title, 'Governor-General'.
Holland (the Netherlands or 'Dutch') were not in India, but in Sumatra and Java Islands of present day Indonesia. Parallel to the 'Company' they had their own 'Dutch East India Company'.
There were a few Dutch factories on South indian coast who quickly wound up operations to concentrate on their Island possessions of East Indies.Danish factory at a place called 'Tranquebar' the point where the coast juts towards the northern tip (Jaffna) of Sri Lanka. It was the only Danish presence in india and was finally closed.When did the British East India company really become important and how quickly it replaced Hollands position?
You are getting a little confused here, I think. The Dutch East India company traded in the east as did the British East India Company The VOC as it was known was highly successful - it declined due to maladministration rather than anything else and was a spent force by the end of the 17th century having enjoyed success for about 200 years. The British East India Company was founded during the 16th century and operated in different sphers (principally the Indian mainland and was a private commercial enterprise that flourished until the middle of the 19th century when it went pear shaped due to the Indian mutiny. At this point the Crown stepped in and took over the company and the British Raj began - which would last another 100 years. It was administered from London's Leadenhall area and once nationalised the hq building was demolished soon after and is now the site of the iconic Lloyd's Insurance Building
Compare and contrast the British East India Company with a multinational corporation?
Which multinational corporation could you compare and contrast to the British East India Company?Compare and contrast the British East India Company with a multinational corporation?
Any I supooded.
Any I supooded.
How were the Dutch East India Trading Company and the British East India Company similar?
How were the Dutch East India Trading Company and the British East India Company similar?How were the Dutch East India Trading Company and the British East India Company similar?
They both were "trading" in India.How were the Dutch East India Trading Company and the British East India Company similar?
They both have the name "East" in their names.
"Allow myself to introduce myself"How were the Dutch East India Trading Company and the British East India Company similar?
They were both given a royal charter to trade in the east indies.popeyes menu battlefield 3
They both were "trading" in India.How were the Dutch East India Trading Company and the British East India Company similar?
They both have the name "East" in their names.
"Allow myself to introduce myself"How were the Dutch East India Trading Company and the British East India Company similar?
They were both given a royal charter to trade in the east indies.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)