The Battle of Plassey

[bandit]

This is a discredited story, which originated in the feverish account of Holwell. Very soon after, British sources themselves began to sound extremely diffident about the whole incident, but it was felt necessary to maintain the fiction in the interests of European credibility.

I agree its been discredited, the reason for the ruse seems to have been to give the English a reason to depose Siraj-ud-daula. But its still cited as alleged, and thats how I have come to know about it. Maybe I should have put alleged before that incident, but pardon a sleepy mind in a theory class, you tend to lose focus.

Not according to M/s. Majumdar, Raychaudhuri and Datta.

Immediately before this, in March, the expedition had driven the French out of Chandernagore (this was a consequence of the Seven Years' War, 1756 to 1763, in Europe, which among other things, pitted Britain and France against each other). Watson and Clive then proceeded to Plassey in June. In a pre-battle conference, Clive was for retreat, Watson pressed for a conclusion.

The matter of the forgery arose out of another incident. The intermediary for the payment of bribes to Mir Jafar and Rai Durlabh was Omichand, who took the money from Jagat Seth and conveyed it to the two recipients. For this service, Omichand wanted a very large share of the plunder. Clive agreed, Watson didn't, and Clive got over the difficulty by preparing a special copy of the contract admtting Omichand's claims, and forging Watson's signature to it.

I am confused, M/s. Majumdar, Raychaudhuri and Datta don't agree with which part of my post???

The matter of forgery, didn't I say the same thing that Clive forged the signature of his superior officer beacuse he wasn't agreeing to Clive's plan?

This doesn't address the larger question about the growing distance between Hindu and Muslim in Bengal.

I never set about explaining the communal problem in Bengal!!!

As I mentioned I just put up a very short version of events without delving into its social or political aspect.

 

[Joe Shearer]

Thanks for asking. But, I would like Joe Shearer to send his posts about the debacle in Plassey. He is quite knowledgeable about history. I have to learn from him and many others. However, when I have free time to think over this important event I will take that opportunity, and will write. However, the perspective may be a little different. Thanks.

The battle itself was trivial and uninteresting; those not in the gravy pool fought a skirmish, a junior commander, Mir Madan, was killed gallantly resisting the evidence of his, and everyone else's senses, his fellow commander, Mohanlal, got inflamed by this death and attacked the British fiercely, he was putting the British under great pressure, when Siraj-ud-Daulah made the fatal mistake of consulting his chief (but already bought over) general. That worthy, in a manner that would have made his descendants proud, advised a dignified retreat, and finally forced the recall of an amazed Mohanlal, who was closely engaged, as described earlier, with the British, who were beginning to feel quite unhappy about the failure of a bribed army to turn its feet up and die.

When Mohanlal disengaged reluctantly, it quite demoralised his troopers, who caught sight of other units tearing off the battlefield, suddenly realised that someone had been bought, and vanished themselves. That left the Nawab to find his own way back to Murshidabad and an eventual sordid death by assassination.

The British seem to have decided to fight future battles, not buy up the opposing generals.

My point, however, is that I got the impression that eastwatch was writing this from the community point of view. The military history of the British in eastern India and the history of Hindu-Muslim relations mostly cover the entire history of Bengal and Upper India from 1757 to 1947 and even beyond.

Between the two of you, can you not make it easier for us common plebs? Of course, you can always maintain two separate threads.

 

[Joe Shearer]

Im curious to know what transpired at the battle of Plassey.

The Wikipedia article doesn't mention the word 'Hindu' or 'Muslim' !

Revisionism or Political correctness ?

Can members (esp eastwatch and Joe Shearer) give a better account ?

Again, it is for eastwatch to explain what he meant. I think he meant that after Plassey, Hindu-Muslim relations began to deteriorate, not immediately, but over nearly two hundred years, peaking in 1947.

Since this is the wrong thread, I will confine myself to some bullets in this respect only.

1. Commencement of British rule in Bengal;
2. Gradual replacement of Persian with English as an administrative language;
3. Disenfranchisement of Muslims and those Hindus who were well-versed in Persian, in favour of those who knew English;
4. Increasing popularity of English education among Hindus;
5. Surendranath Bannerjee's imprisonment; protests all over northern India, indifferent to Muslim or Hindu;
6. Partition of Bengal in 1905; Hindus shocked, Muslims recognise greater opportunities in Muslim majority province;
7. Far greater participation by Hindus in agitation against partition of Bengal than by Muslims; beginnings of different paths taken;
8. Nawab of Dhaka invites several thousand delegates (to All India Conference on Muslim Education) to Dhaka;
9. All India Muslim League decided; offices shifted under noses of Bengalis to Lucknow;
10. Increasing pollitical activity by Bengali Muslims parallel to activism by Upper India and western India Muslims;
11. Fazlul Haque sets up political party, gains wide acceptance among all classes and religions;
12. Muslim League active, Fazlul Haque completely confuses both League and Congress by switching frequently;
13. Two Nation Theory pushed to illogical conclusion by Gandhi/Nehru/Patel resistance to Jinnah's constitutional proposals, first agreement to CMP, followed by sudden rejection in public without warning;
14. Formal partition only option left due to Congress refusal to consider other options;
15. Partition visualised including two Muslim majority homelands sought by Jinnah;
16. Partition of Calcutta condition by Congress, influenced by Bengali Hindus who wanted separation due to apprehensions of unfair treatment by majority;
17. Further developments in East Pakistan based on developments related to linguistic sensitivity.

I sincerely request that the rest of the sociological discussion should be at "Creation of Bangladesh..." and that this thread should stay on military history.

But of course it is the choice of Justanobserver and eastwatch.

 

[bandit]

Two Nation Theory pushed to illogical conclusion by Gandhi/Nehru/Patel resistance to Jinnah's constitutional proposals, first agreement to CMP, followed by sudden rejection in public without warning;

Nice.

I'd like to discuss these with you in detail, but maybe later.

 

[Joe Shearer]

Nice.

I'd like to discuss these with you in detail, but maybe later.

DON'T EVEN THINK ABOUT IT! NOT ON PDF, NOT UNLESS I GET A MODERATOR OF CHOICE.

There are nearly half-a-dozen threads, probably more, on PakTeaHouse, where we've really turned this subject inside out. Believe me, there's nothing left to be said. If you go there and look up the old threads, here's a run-down on the dramatis personae:

• YLH - Magister Ludorum; sharp and aggressive, Pakistani hyper-patriot but spares nobody who can't make his point clear, typically harshest on bigots of any variety, ultra-secular; takes no prisoners. A remarkable personality about whom the world will hear more;
• Bloody Civilian, BCiv or BC: Difficult to imagine left of YLH, but this is he; can't stand the military. Trouble is, he's too nice to press home a point, especially against the Hindutva brigade;
• AZW: Left of centre but not obtrusively so, really the balancing factor among Pakistani Young Turks on PTH. He's actually rebuked YLH and lived to tell the tale, to our general astonishment;
• Feroz Khan: Razor sharp mind in impeccable manners; Left of centre, very like AZW;
• Nusrat Pasha: Decency embodied;
• Bin Ismail: If ever I turn religious, it'll be because of this man, alone. His interpretation of Islam is seductive; I can imagine him converting a province single handed, But scrupulously fair to all religions, which he says he is bound to be as a Muslim. Amazing experience, and a refeshing one. Not political;
• PMA: Crusted old conservative; deserves respect;
• D_a_n: Crusted young conservative (not really, I'm kidding); extracts respect; ex-fauji, and hell on critics of the 'fauj'. His running battles with BCiv are a treat to watch;
• Raza Habib Raja: Secular Bin Ismail; you can't quarrel with him;
• Tilsim: Earnest and full of sincerity; genuinely gets hurt by the Maudoodi Army and by Hindutva merchants;
• Raza Rumi: owner of the blog; he's normally never at the Colosseum, usually at the Senate or in the Forum; figure that out;

All these are Pakistani. If we had a smart government, we'd swap Kashmir for this lot, and we'd come out ahead. We don't have a smart government.

• Gorki: Indian, known as the most polite, also the most unputdownable; fan of Gandhi, Nehru and maybe even Patel (we haven't dared to check); stands up to the worst bigots and the worst trolls and beams love at them, resulting in their staying on in the thread!!! Merde!
• Hayyer; Indian, crisp and to the point. Knows everything about Kashmir - everything;
• Majumdar: Indian, conservative, faintly cynical, usually comes up with startling twist on commonplace facts; funny as hell, with tongue firmly parked in cheek; hates Gandhi, hates Nehru, charter member of Jinnah fan club;
• Luq: Indian. No fools suffered. He executes them on sight, using two words where others would use three;
• Vajra, bonobashi:Indian who thinks he's Bangladeshi; nice old buffer, quite harmless, goes apeshit about Hindutva idiots, needs straitjacket and restraining shots; writes a kind of early twentieth century prose;

 

[bandit]

DON'T EVEN THINK ABOUT IT! NOT ON PDF, NOT UNLESS I GET A MODERATOR OF CHOICE.

There are nearly half-a-dozen threads, probably more, on PakTeaHouse, where we've really turned this subject inside out. Believe me, there's nothing left to be said. If you go there and look up the old threads, here's a run-down on the dramatis personae:

• YLH - Magister Ludorum; sharp and aggressive, Pakistani hyper-patriot but spares nobody who can't make his point clear, typically harshest on bigots of any variety, ultra-secular; takes no prisoners. A remarkable personality about whom the world will hear more;
• Bloody Civilian, BCiv or BC: Difficult to imagine left of YLH, but this is he; can't stand the military. Trouble is, he's too nice to press home a point, especially against the Hindutva brigade;
• AZW: Left of centre but not obtrusively so, really the balancing factor among Pakistani Young Turks on PTH. He's actually rebuked YLH and lived to tell the tale, to our general astonishment;
• Feroz Khan: Razor sharp mind in impeccable manners; Left of centre, very like AZW;
• Nusrat Pasha: Decency embodied;
• Bin Ismail: If ever I turn religious, it'll be because of this man, alone. His interpretation of Islam is seductive; I can imagine him converting a province single handed, But scrupulously fair to all religions, which he says he is bound to be as a Muslim. Amazing experience, and a refeshing one. Not political;
• PMA: Crusted old conservative; deserves respect;
• D_a_n: Crusted young conservative (not really, I'm kidding); extracts respect; ex-fauji, and hell on critics of the 'fauj'. His running battles with BCiv are a treat to watch;
• Raza Habib Raja: Secular Bin Ismail; you can't quarrel with him;
• Tilsim: Earnest and full of sincerity; genuinely gets hurt by the Maudoodi Army and by Hindutva merchants;
• Raza Rumi: owner of the blog; he's normally never at the Colosseum, usually at the Senate or in the Forum; figure that out;

All these are Pakistani. If we had a smart government, we'd swap Kashmir for this lot, and we'd come out ahead. We don't have a smart government.

• Gorki: Indian, known as the most polite, also the most unputdownable; fan of Gandhi, Nehru and maybe even Patel (we haven't dared to check); stands up to the worst bigots and the worst trolls and beams love at them, resulting in their staying on in the thread!!! Merde!
• Hayyer; Indian, crisp and to the point. Knows everything about Kashmir - everything;
• Majumdar: Indian, conservative, faintly cynical, usually comes up with startling twist on commonplace facts; funny as hell, with tongue firmly parked in cheek; hates Gandhi, hates Nehru, charter member of Jinnah fan club;
• Luq: Indian. No fools suffered. He executes them on sight, using two words where others would use three;
• Vajra, bonobashi:Indian who thinks he's Bangladeshi; nice old buffer, quite harmless, goes apeshit about Hindutva idiots, needs straitjacket and restraining shots; writes a kind of early twentieth century prose;

You describe it as a slaughter house, and you invite me to it.

I knew you disprove of my pathetic history but this is too much

 

[justanobserver]

I think he meant that after Plassey, Hindu-Muslim relations began to deteriorate, not immediately, but over nearly two hundred years, peaking in 1947.

On the bright side we now have another excellent thread in the Military History section (all thanks to your sir) !

 

[TopCat]

I still wonder, how Bengal famine of 1767-1770 reshaped the political sphere of Bengal when Bengal lost 1/3rd of its population? Joe Shearer do you have any thought to it?

 

[Joe Shearer]

You describe it as a slaughter house, and you invite me to it.

I knew you disprove of my pathetic history but this is too much

Oh, come on. I never described it as a slaughter house. More like advanced postgraduate seminar. Very high class, if you can stick to the listed (there are others, I'll mention them separately if you want). Also, typically, the Pakistanis, and Gorki and Hayyer, are exquisitely courteous, with two exceptions, and that too if they are in a temper. These are people defenceless in front of the gross bad manners of Indian trolls, so for some time, I appointed myself Gorkha watchman. Soon gave up; the bad manners and mean-mindedness was terrible. There are only four killers in that lot: YLH, Luq, D_a_n and Vajra. Nobody else even gets hot under the collar.

At least read the damn thing. Ask sparklingway for another opinion. Or that liberal democrat young lady, some nick ending with 'girl'. They are more or less the benchmark liberals on this forum.

I didn't disapprove of your history, not at all, but you should get to the level of eastwatch. He gets my bp up, but his history is very, very sound, very high order, somewhat badly articulated. Very interesting ideas. If I live through the bp attacks. He'll probably kill me off within the month.

 

[Joe Shearer]

I still wonder, how Bengal famine of 1767-1770 reshaped the political sphere of Bengal when Bengal lost 1/3rd of its population? Joe Shearer do you have any thought to it?

Janab, I am sorry and embarrassed to say this, but I haven't. You are right, it had an impact and we should think about it. Do you think it's worth spending a little time working on facts relating to it and coming back for a further conversation?

After all, as you have pointed out, it was a shattering event. It must have had an impact. In some ways, it ties in with this theory that eastwatch keeps shoving down our throat, about the significance of migration in the Muslim population of Bengal. He was speaking of a period between 300 to 700 years earlier, but one wonders if the massive scale of death encouraged migration even as late as this.

 

[TopCat]

Janab, I am sorry and embarrassed to say this, but I haven't. You are right, it had an impact and we should think about it. Do you think it's worth spending a little time working on facts relating to it and coming back for a further conversation?

After all, as you have pointed out, it was a shattering event. It must have had an impact. In some ways, it ties in with this theory that eastwatch keeps shoving down our throat, about the significance of migration in the Muslim population of Bengal. He was speaking of a period between 300 to 700 years earlier, but one wonders if the massive scale of death encouraged migration even as late as this.

Yes its worth to look at it as it was the event within 10 years of Pallassy when most of the administration was still under the exisitng sultanate structure. Right after pallasey battle there were a huge increase of tax (20% of the produced) and were imposed by the Nababs with the blessing of East India Company. Then the famine came, 1/3rd of the population died. Murshidabad became a dead city. Birbhum and surrounding aread turned Jungles. And the Bengal became unreachable from rest of India due to pirates and Jungles. I think this single event broke the total economy (includes clothing, silk, metal industry in Murshidabad) and administrative structure of then Bengal. The only institution left was the British East India Company.

I hope others could shed some light on it.

 

[Joe Shearer]

@justanobserver

You won't mind my pointing out two features about the Battle of Plassey; this was the commencement of the recruitment of Biharis into the East India Company troops, the beginning of the Bengal Presidency Army, which conquered north India for the British, and which rose against them in the Indian Mutiny; and the beginning of a series of battles through which the British won India.

Is it possible to discuss those issues?

 

[GUNNER]

@justanobserver

You won't mind my pointing out two features about the Battle of Plassey; this was the commencement of the recruitment of Biharis into the East India Company troops, the beginning of the Bengal Presidency Army, which conquered north India for the British, and which rose against them in the Indian Mutiny; and the beginning of a series of battles through which the British won India.

Is it possible to discuss those issues?

Forgive my interruption but you have my vote on this. It will be rather intersting to debate how the Bengalis and Biharis formed the vanguard of the British march into the rest of India and yet the same troops spearheaded the revolt or mutiny in 1857. By then, British had to call on the troops from newly conquered Punjab to quel the uprising.

 

[hillman32]

Nawab Siraj had 2 shortcomings and those were causes of his defeat and eventual fall.

- He had a big heart and he always forgave people who betrayed him. Mir Jaffar betrayed him 3 times earlier but apologized and was forgiven.

- Other was Nawab's failure to spend his treasury for purchase of weapons and ammunition and training of his troops. He thought he must not spend his own money for this purpose. English General were amazed to see Big Rooms after Rooms filled with gold and silver that was not used for defeating the opponents and was fell in the hands of those opponents.

 

[justanobserver]

@Joe Shearer

Aap isse apna hi thread samajhiye

Mi casa es su casa





sorry for the late reply