History Revision The Indian Raj

1. History RevisionThe Indian Raj Recap of (a) The early stages of the British East Indian Company when they went looking for spices in Bantam – why the EIC started, what the problems with getting there, what were the issues that arose about finding things to trade. http://interhigh-history.wikispaces.com/Year+8-+4.+The+coming+of+the+Raj Y8HiU4A UK explores the worldPPwk20.ppt

2. Recall last week • The East Indian Company (EIC) started right at the end of Elizabeth 1 reign (she died iin 1603). • It was all because the Portuguese had found a way to sail round Africa to reach the ‘East Indies’ modern day Sumatra and the Philippines – where they were buying all manner of spices and selling to Europe at high prices. • As we said, spices were important to make not very nice food taste a bit better and also preserve to prevent it going bad. • At this time there was no money so you had to ‘trade’ – swap something of yours for something of theirs. The only thing the English has to swap was broadcloth – a really nice woollen cloth – but not much use to those living near the Equator! So their eyes turned to India, which had lots of cotton goods – a really good to trade with!

3. (b) The East India Company from 1608 to 1700 The early stages of the EIC in India until 1700 – how they set up the factory at Surat, how they managed to do achieve more than the Portuguese and their attitudes to life in India – important person Sir Thomas Roe http://interhigh-history.wikispaces.com/Year+8-+4.+The+coming+of+the+Raj Y8HiU4B India 1 PPwk21.ppt

4. So they tries to set up a ‘factory’ in Surat in NE India • A factory then was a trading post. People who worked in factories where ‘ factors’ – people who bought and sold things. But you needed permission for the government to do this in a foreign country. • In 1608, in sea captain William to make an agreement with the Mughal Emperor, Jahangir. While Jahangir liked Hawkins, a sea captain was not really significant enough to sign an important agreement with. • So it was not until the arrival of a ‘proper’ ambassador, Sir Thomas Roe, sent by King James I in 1615, before the Company was able to set up a base in India. • Now the Mughal palaces were very grand, and Jahangir was used to everyone doing what he wanted. But Roe was not too impressed by it all and as a result Jahangir really respected him for that and they got on well and soon made a deal.

5. So why did the English do better that the Portuguese and other foreigners? • Partly because Roe would not bow down to Jahangir, but also because, under Roe the British did not ever start a fight. • The Portuguese, and the French too, were always ripe for a quarrel and this cost them lots of money in men, ships and weaponry – Roe said It was the beggaring of Portugal – but when attacked, the British were able to defend themselves and win – which gained them enormous respect from the Mughal court. For a while Surat was the main base. But in 1641, another factory was set up in S India at St. George . This, in time, became Madras. • Meanwhile, while Charles I was loosing his head and the Commonwealth of Oliver Cromwell took over, there was money and support for this trade, with the Navy committed to helping them. Once Charles II took over, his new wife, Catherine, a Portuguese princess brought Bombay (now Mumbai) as her dowry. So our influence was growing and all was doing well!

6. (c) The East India Company - Conquest and Corruption The EIC in the 18th century – remember the title: Conquest and Corruption – and remember Clive as the important person. Why did the EIC change from talking and negotiating to fighting? What was the cause of all the corruption on the EIC? What was the result? http://interhigh-history.wikispaces.com/Year+8-+4.+The+coming+of+the+Raj Y8HiU3C Conquest and Corruption PPwk22.ppt

7. And thus it was for sometime … • The British were busy trading. But then the French arrived in force, and for a while they were happy just to trade too. • But in 1741 a certain Joseph Duplex was put in charge and he began to meddle in local politics. In Europe and America, there were several wars going on, and in each the British and the French were on opposite sides. So Duplex took the chance to steal Madras from the British. The local Mogul chief, known as the Nawab of Carnatic, demanded the French hand back Madras to him. • When they refused, the Nawab’s army,10,000 strong, attacked the French to teach them a lesson. The French with less 1000 men but with superior technology beat them roundly! Duplex took over as Nawab, and had not the French refused to support him, India may well have become a French colony. In the event, the French forced Duplex to give Madra back to the British.

8. It would appear that this gave ideas to a young Englishman Robert Clive… • A local dispute between 2 princes gave him his chance. As Chanda Sahib, was laying siege to another one, Muhammad Ali , Clive snuck into Chanda Sahib's capital of Arcot with 200 English and 300 sepoys (local soldiers) and took the town! He then installed Muhammad Ali as Nawab and he got the reputation for being a great organiser. • Follow the much reported event of the Black Hole of Calcutta, it which, supposedly 123 out of 143 men died in an airless hole. A dispute between the local nawab and the British commander of Begal, the nawab of Bengal, Siraj overcame and took the remaining soldiers and the Black Hole of Calcutta incident was reputedly the result. This was a red rag to the British, and led Clive into further exploits.

9. So first he … • …sorted out the French, who he saw as the root cause of the original dispute. This removed French influence from the region of Bengal once and for all. • He then turned his sights on Siraj. The English history at the time told of the Battle of Plassey as a great victory of a small army against a huge one. • But it was not quite like that. In fact, Clive was much cleverer than that! • First of all he decided on a suitable replacement Nawab, Mir Jafar, and also bought off some influential people. When it came to the battle between his 2700 soldiers against 50,000 of Siraj’s, it looked bad. Not so, once you realise that the friends of Mir Jafar, a large portion of the army, had every intention of changing sides half way through!

10. It is now that we come to the seamier side of things … • On winning the battle, Clive kept his word and gave the Nawab to Mir Jafir. But he also gave himself a huge amount of land that had been owned by Siraj. This might seem to be less than honest. • But the point of this, is that it was very common practice among British officials of EIC. In fact, it was well know about this time, that many men were in India to make their fortunes! This was often by taking some of the taxes due t the EIC for themselves. So corruption was rife. • This was such a problem, that while the officials led a very rich lifestyle, the EIC was rapidly going broke.

11. From the British government's point of view, this was leading to an extremely bad press. The EIC officials were getting rich from this system while the EIC itself was not making any money at all. • By the 1770s the EIC were unable to pay for the use of British armed services and then had to ask the British government for a one million pound loan to keep the company going. • Many people in Britain saw that, while the officials returned home wealthy, the tax payer was having to bail out the company itself. • So one condition of the grant was that the government got involved and tried to stamp out corruption .

12. Another problem the British government had was that the EIC was more concerned with tax collection than for the betterment of civil society in the sub-continent. • This way of making money made perfect sense to the EIC, but liberals in Britain were far from happy as they saw that India was kept poor and their people were suffering. • [This was about the time when anti-slavery was becoming an issue and treating native peoples badly was seen as blameworthy if not downright wicked.] • The result was the creation of a 'Board of Control' in 1784 whose president was a member of the Cabinet and was directly answerable to parliament.

13. (d) The East India Company – Towards Mutiny India in the 19th century – how did the way the English thought about the Indians change and why was that? This led to unhappiness among the Indians who made up the bulk of the army and finally to the ‘Indian Mutiny’ – what was the actual spark that lit that particular powder keg? Know that the Indians were not all good (they did some fairly bad things – know about 2 of them) but how did the British respond? [This ended with the British parliament being disgusted with the EIC and taking over.] http://interhigh-history.wikispaces.com/Year+8-+4.+The+coming+of+the+Raj Y8HiU4D pre mutiny PPwk23.ppt Y8HiU4E The Great Punch Up PPwk24.ppt

14. How did the British behave towards the Indians until the 19th century? • Many people, including influential people like Warren Hastings, believed that the Indian institutions and laws worked well for the Indians. Although the British remained in charge, local matters were dealt with locally using customs that had been in place for some time. • This showed the British had great respect for the local people • Also in the early days, only men from Britain came out to work. Originally their first task, before they could get paid work, was to learn the language. So often Englishmen, stuck out in India for years at a time, would marry local girls and have families. • So there was a lot of inter–racial socialising and mutual respect on that level too.

15. So what changed around the beginning of the 19th century • Several things did, but the main causes were the arrival of the wives and an influx of missionaries. • Given the long and dangerous sea journeys, unless you had to be in India, you did not come for the ride! So very few wives and families arrived before 1800. • At about this time, the church began to see India as a great place to go and save these poor ignorant Indians. • So there were 2 new groups of people arriving, who brought with them very different ideas about what was right and what was not. • To start off with, the arrival of white women reduced the social contact between the races. The families were housed in compounds and only visited each other. There was social mixing between the Indian Princes and the higher level administrators, but not between regular people.

16. So what changed around the beginning of the 19th century • So as the white women had never met Indians socially, and saw them primarily in the role of servants, and did not learn the language, they did not understand their ways of life and did not approve of their religion at all. • And some of the things that the Indians did was very disapproved of. With the support of the missionaries, for example, they wage d war on these practices, and eventually got them outlawed.

17. Examples of practices that the British hated • An example of this from the early nineteenth century was the discovery and condemnation of female infanticide, which was believed to be very widespread in parts of northern and western India. This infanticide was caused by the concept of dowry – in which a father had to give a lot of money or goods to husbands of his daughters. All their inheritance could leave the family as a result of their daughters, so many families killed their female babies as they could not afford the dowry. • The practice of suttee, the burning of widows on their husbands funeral pyres, which the British actually formally outlawed in 1829, caused outrage. It was seen as a very good reason to bring in the missionaries to persuade the Indians to reform their ways.

18. In India • So towards 1800, opinions among the British were changing. • India seemed to be suffering not merely from an unfortunate recent history but from deeply ingrained backwardness. • [ This was largely though ignorance and lack of contact and basic lack of understanding that different did not necessarily mean worse] • It needed to be 'improved' by firm, benevolent foreign rule. • The legal system was not working efficiently • Superstition, in the guise of their religious beliefs needed challengingly by missionaries propagating the rationality embodied in Christianity • All obstacles to free trade between Britain and India should be removed, thus opening India's economy to the stimulus of an expanding trade with Europe. • Education should be remodelled.

19. So this led to a split between the 2 races • As you can imagine, this bred some discontent among the Indians, from being respects equals, they were demoted to ignorant peasants with no real morals. • While many willingly joined the army and took jobs in the civil service, because it suited them, there was a simmering resentment, that was fed by the issues mentioned and others too. • It was this split that eventually fed into the ‘Indian Mutiny’ as it was called by the British.

20. What was supposed to have firework that started it all off? • One day in January 1857 a low-caste labourer at Dum-Dum asked a sepoy (Indian soldier) for a drink of water from his bottle. • The soldier, being a high caste Indian, had naturally refused. His caste would not allow him to as the low cast man would defile it by his touch. • [Ever heard of the untouchables?] • ‘You will soon lose your caste altogether,’ the labourer told him, ‘For the Europeans are going to make you bite cartridges soaked in cow and pork fat. And then where will your caste be?’ • [The significance of this was that Hindus cannot eat beef and Muslims cannot eat pork, so greasing the cartridges in either would demonstrate a complete lack of honour towards both religions by the British]

21. What was supposed to have firework that started it all off? • News of the warning had soon spread throughout the barracks; • At least one British Officer foresaw trouble and suggested that the Indian soldiers should add their grease to their own cartridges in ways they saw fit. • However, the majority did not take this view. Some approached their men, promising them that would never be asked to do anything against their religion, and there was no wish by the British to turn them all into Christians (which was another worry both Hindus and Muslims had). • While others foolishly just told them off for being silly! • But too few attempted to talk to them at all and soon rebellion was bubbling up.

22. Next… • One man, on drugs, tried to attack his commander, but this was forestall by a sepoy soldier. • On another occasion, a number of soldiers refused to load their cartridges as they believed the pork/beef fat rumour and were dismissed from the army in a very publically humiliating way. • This led to a rebellion in the ‘lines’ [where the Indian soldiers lived]. When the Colonel went to investigate, he was shot. Then followed a rampage of killing against all the Europeans they could find. This included 2 of the women as well. [For the gory details do read the PP from wk44]

23. As result of this another incidents … • Henry Havelock was put in charge. He said: • Mutineers must be attacked and annihilated; and if there are few in any regiments, and not immediately announced to be shot or hanged, the whole regiment must be deemed guilty and given up to prompt military execution. • And this is just what happened! • In some places, gallows were immediately erected after they had been subdued and scores of natives suspected of rebellion were hanged on them. Hanging parties also went out into the surrounding districts and amateur hangmen were busy. One gentleman boasted of the numbers he had ‘finished off in an artistic manner’ with mango trees for gibbets and elephants for drops, the victims of this wild justice being strung up, as though for pastime, in ‘the form of a figure of eight.’ • The British response generally to the uprising was ferocious and bloodthirsty.

24. Back home in London, the Government had already decided that harshness was not to inform their policy. • On the 1st November 1858 a proclamation was read out all over India that the East India Company was to be abolished, to be replaced by the British Government, and that the Queen offered pardon to all those rebels who had not taken part in the murder of Europeans. • Religions toleration would be respected as would ancient customs. Queen Victoria became Empress of India.

25. History RevisionSlavery (a) An example of the slave trade occurring before the 15th century, know its name and dates, and 5 important things about it e.g. where the slaves came from, how they were treated etc. http://interhigh-history.wikispaces.com/Year+8-+5.+Slavery Y8HiU5A History of slavery PPwk26.ppt

26. Now many of you – like Alex - have your own work tucked away • Slavery played a major role in ancient Greek civilization between the 8th Century B.C and the 6th Century A.D. • There may have been as many, if not more, slaves than free people in ancient Greece. Of the 250,000 to 300,000 people in Athens (at its biggest), between a quarter and a third of them were slaves. • The slave masters were the wealthy Greek households. • Some slaves were captured in wars. Others were born slaves. Some people were forced into slavery when they could not afford to pay money they owed. if a family needed money, they might sell one of the children into slavery. Kidnapping was another fairly common way in which one could have been sold into slavery. • Slaves were purchased at a slave market. The price one might have paid for a slave in ancient Greek times varied depending on their appearance, age and attitude. Those who were healthy, attractive, young and submissive, could sell for as much as 10 minae. Those who were old, weak and stubborn might have sold for as little as 1/2 a mina. • They worked as domestic servants, factory workers, shopkeepers, mineworkers, farmworkers and as ship's crewmembers. Some slaves were owned by the state, like slave-archers from Scythia, who were used as "police" by the Athens government. • A few slaves had special skills, such as nurses, teachers, or pottery painters. Most slaves did the hardest and most unpleasant jobs. A lucky slave might save enough money to buy his freedom.

27. But for those who cannot find theirs here is one to help! • Slaves in the Middle Ages: 6th - 15th century AD in the Muslim World • Captured in the region around Lake Chad, they were sold to Arab households in a Muslim world which by the 8th century stretched from Spain to Persia. • Slavery was an accepted part of life in Arabia during the time of Muhammad, in the 7th century, and the Qur'an offers no arguments against the practice. It merely stated, particularly in relation to female slaves, that they must be well treated. In general that has been the case, compared with the barbaric treatment of slaves in some Christian communities. • But slaves were not always the losers! • The Muslim habit of using slaves in the army has led to one unusual result - in itself an indication of the trust accorded to slaves in Middle Eastern communities. • In 1250 the slave leaders of the Egyptian army, known as Mamelukes, deposed the sultan and seized power. • A succession of rulers from their own ranks control much of the Middle East, as the Mameluke dynasty, for nearly three centuries.

28. History RevisionSlavery (b) Explain fully how the Trade Triangle worked http://interhigh-history.wikispaces.com/Year+8-+5.+Slavery Y8HiU5B From Africa PPwk28.ppt and again at the start of Y8HiU5C Middle passage PPwk29.ppt

29. The workings of the triangular trade • The transatlantic slave trade is often described as the triangular trade, which summarizes the movement of goods first from Britain to West Africa, then across the Atlantic Ocean to the Americas, and finally back to Britain. • Copper, cloth, glassware, ammunition, guns and manila (fibre used for rope and matting) went from Britain to West Africa; • People were then transported as slaves from Africa to the Americas. This was called the ‘Middle Passage’. • Finally raw sugar, rum, rice, coffee, tobacco and cotton from the plantations were then shipped from the Americas back to Britain. • Why was triangular trade so controversial? The Middle passage (from Africa to the Caribbean with slaves as cargo) was seen as barbaric in its treatment of the cargo.

30. The trade triangle The Middle Passage. Why?

31. History RevisionSlavery Remember, choose only 2 of (c), (d) and (e) (c) Concern about the Middle Passage gave rise the 1807 Abolition Act. Be able to explain how the 2 sides of the case argued for and against the banishment of slave trading. Have 2 good points each, made by named groups or individuals. http://interhigh-history.wikispaces.com/Year+8-+5.+Slavery Y8HiU5B From Africa PPwk28.ppt and again Y8HiU5D Abolition PPwk30.ppt

32. Recall that the owners on the plantations were desperate for workers • So the plantation owners said: • As the white workers died because of the hot conditions they HAD to have people who were used to the climate. • And if they had to pay wages, the whole British economy would collapse if they were not allowed to use slaves. That Britain would become a poor, third rate country. • There were others like Colonel Phipps said that Africans made slaves of their own people, so what was the harm of buying slaves from them. After all slaves were slaves wherever they were! • Then there was Mr Knox, a sea captain, who argued that the slaves were well cared for and – even happy perhaps? • [This is a brief summary of some of the ideas – please look at the PowerPoint for enough to get you by]

33. But there were many against it • Sir William Dolben's Act was passed. This stated that there should be a maximum number of slaves on each ship according to its size – quite a lot fewer than had been carried before. • There was Equiano’s evidence that was used to persuade people that slave trading was bad. Look at the PowerPoint to find a point or 2 that he made. • Or perhaps the evidence from the homework you did http://old.antislavery.org/breakingthesilence/up_from_slavery/stage1_intro.htm

34. History RevisionSlavery Remember, choose only 2 of (c), (d) and (e) (d) Following the 1807 Act, more changes were still needed to be made. Be able to summarize what happened as a result of acts in Parliament in 1807, 1833 and 1838. http://interhigh-history.wikispaces.com/Year+8-+5.+Slavery Y8HiU5D Abolition PPwk30.ppt

35. 1807 – The Abolition Act passes • The act abolished the slave trade* in the British Empire, but not slavery itself. • Slavery had been abolished in England itself in Somersett's Case in 1772, • Legal decision made in 1772 by Lord Chief Justice Mansfield with regard to slavery on English soil. • African born slave James Somerset had been brought to London by his owner Charles Stewart from Boston. 1771 Somerset ran away from his master, was caught and placed in irons on a ship bound for Jamaica. • Mansfield ruled that English law did not support the keeping of a slave on English soil. • But slavery remained legal in most of the British Empire until the Slavery Abolition Act 1833. * the transportation of slaves from one place to another in boats.

36. Slavery Abolition Act 1833 • Abolished slavery throughout most of the British Empire • (with the notable exceptions "of the Territories in the Possession of the East India Company," the "Island of Ceylon," and "the Island of Saint Helena") • But in practical terms, however, only slaves below the age of six were freed, as all slaves over the age of six were redesignated as "apprentices". Apprentices in the UK were trainees but were not free but were bound to their master for a fixed number of years – just like slaves. • The Act also included the right of compensation for slave-owners who would be losing their property – this amounted to claims worth £20 million – 40% of the Government’s income for that year! Equivalent to £270 billion if it was today’s government.

37. 1 August 1838 • As apprentices they would have gained their freedom after 7 years. • But peaceful protests continued until a resolution to abolish apprenticeship was passed and de facto freedom was achieved for many earlier than anticipated. • Full emancipation for all was legally granted ahead of schedule on 1 August 1838, making Trinidad the first British colony with slaves to completely abolish slavery.

38. History RevisionSlavery Remember, choose only 2 of (c), (d) and (e) (e) Know the name of one parson who was an Abolitionist and be able to say 3 things about how they were involved. http://interhigh-history.wikispaces.com/Year+8-+5.+Slavery Y8HiU5D Abolition PPwk30.ppt

39. There is a big choice here • You all described one person for homework. • But you could choose Equiano or Wilberforce or any of the old campaigners we read about through out the unit – so take your pick!