The Battle of Plassey

[MastanKhan]

Had it not been for the Arab immigrant Mir Zafar's treachery Siraj would have won the war! There's no religion in it, Hindus and Muslims fought side by side and died side by side. Religion never have been and neither will be a big issue for Bengalis.



Hi,

These are not good comments---arab---hindu---muslim---sikhs and people of all ethnicities ended up as taritors---and people of all races and ethnicities joined together to keep the english away and laid down their lives..

 

[LaBong]

Had it not been for the Arab immigrant Mir Zafar's treachery Siraj would have won the war! There's no religion in it, Hindus and Muslims fought side by side and died side by side. Religion never have been and neither will be a big issue for Bengalis.



Hi,

These are not good comments---arab---hindu---muslim---sikhs and people of all ethnicities ended up as taritors---and people of all races and ethnicities joined together to keep the english away and laid down their lives..

Hi Mastan Sir,

I try to call a spade a spade. In no way I was trying to generalise the Arabs, I have little or no knowledge about them to generalise! Political correctness is a sloppy way and is the first step of becoming a believer . Off course there were native traitors also along with him, I should have mentioned that as well.

 

[Capt.Popeye]

Originally Posted by MastanKhan
Hi,
"These are not good comments---arab---hindu---muslim---sikhs and people of all ethnicities ended up as taritors---and people of all races and ethnicities joined together to keep the english away and laid down their lives.."


Absolutely,
It would be obvious that it is rather unwise to either cherry-pick historical facts.
And what you have stated, rings true.

 

[Joe Shearer]

Had it not been for the Arab immigrant Mir Zafar's treachery Siraj would have won the war! There's no religion in it, Hindus and Muslims fought side by side and died side by side. Religion never have been and neither will be a big issue for Bengalis.



Hi,

These are not good comments---arab---hindu---muslim---sikhs and people of all ethnicities ended up as taritors---and people of all races and ethnicities joined together to keep the english away and laid down their lives..

I agree with Mastan Khan, but would go further than he did. There were Hindus, Muslims, recent immigrants, immigrants of two thousand years previously, all sorts of people - on both sides! This was not a batle between nationalities, nor between ethnicities, if I may use the word in such a way, but a mixed bag, a few loyalists, a lot of self-seeking adventurers.

Let us leave it at Mastan Khan's summary, and stop beating up the dead.

 

[niaz]

We must not forget the history of Nawabs of Bengal. First Nawab of Bengal was Murshid Quli Khan who became Subedar in 1717. He assumed title of Nawab (meaning deputy king or naib of king) soon after as Mughal power waned after Aurangzeb died. Last of this line was Sarfraz Khan who was defeated by Ali Vardi Khan in 1740 at the battle of Giria.

Sirajuddaula, maternal grandson and heir of Ali Vardi Khan, only came to power in 1756. Thus his line had been in power in Bengal for only 16 years; not long enough to generate the kind of loyalty among the soldiers which comes thru generations of rule.

Sirajuddaula, though a brave soldier, being young, lacked the maturity and guile of his grand father; who had received the titles of Mahabat Jang from the Delhi Emperor for his valor against the Marathas. Additionally, being the descended from the daughter’s side, his ascension to power was envied by many other rival aspirants. This fact was exploited by Lord Clive to the full.

IMO this is one of the main reason why large part of his army showed little hesitation in following their commander Mir Jafer and not rallying to the defense of their Nawab.

 

[eastwatch]

We must not forget the history of Nawabs of Bengal. First Nawab of Bengal was Murshid Quli Khan who became Subedar in 1717. He assumed title of Nawab (meaning deputy king or naib of king) soon after as Mughal power waned after Aurangzeb died. Last of this line was Sarfraz Khan who was defeated by Ali Vardi Khan in 1740 at the battle of Giria.

Sirajuddaula, maternal grandson and heir of Ali Vardi Khan, only came to power in 1756. Thus his line had been in power in Bengal for only 16 years; not long enough to generate the kind of loyalty among the soldiers which comes thru generations of rule.

Sirajuddaula, though a brave soldier, being young, lacked the maturity and guile of his grand father; who had received the titles of Mahabat Jang from the Delhi Emperor for his valor against the Marathas. Additionally, being the descended from the daughter’s side, his ascension to power was envied by many other rival aspirants. This fact was exploited by Lord Clive to the full.

IMO this is one of the main reason why large part of his army showed little hesitation in following their commander Mir Jafer and not rallying to the defense of their Nawab.

Dear Mr. Niaz,

I would like to take some clues from the historically true statements here in your post and add a few more sentences.

The Irani families of Mahabat Jung Ali Vardy Khan and his elder brother Haji Ahmed used to live in Delhi and were serving the govt there. But, because of many upheavals in Delhi it was almost impossible for them to live in Delhi and they went to Dekkan. From there they came to Murshidabad, the Capital of Sube Bengal.

Ali Vardy took a job in the GoB and rose quickly to high positions because he showed efficiency. Subsequently, he was assigned to the important post of the Administartor of Bihar by the then Nawab Malik Sujauddin Khan. When the Nawab died, Al Vardy conspired with the Mughal PM in Delhi to award him the post of Subedar of Bengal, which he duly received by paying taxes as well as big NAZRANA to the PM.

In the meantime, Malik Sarfaraz Khan, the son of late Nawab Suja declared himself the new Nawab in Murshidabad. Emboldened by the Badshahi Farman, Ali Vardy tried to enter the Bengal Capital with his troops. In the ensuing battle, Malik Sarfaraz lost and was killed. Ali Vardy came to the house of Begum Nafisa, the mother of slain Nawab and asked for forgiveness. Nafisa Begum was finally sent to live in Dhaka.

The political stability was shattered by this act by Ali Vardy. Meer Habib, the administrator of Orissa and a brother-in-law of the slain Nawab rebelled against him, and called the Maratha troops. There was a ten year war between Bengal and Marathas. This war had resulted in the weakening of Nawab's control of the country's events.

His own general, (Pathan) Mustafa Khan, rebelled against him when Maratha invasion was repulsed. After a battle, Nawab banished him and his other Pathan followers to Dwarbhanga in Bihar.

Ali Vardy had three daughters and his brother Haji Ahmed had three sons. These sons married their cousins. Haji Jainuddin, the second son-in-law of Ali Vardy and the father of Siraj-ud-Dowlah was the Administrator of Bihar.

He thoght it was dangerous to keep such a formidable enemy near his Capital. He also thought there would be struggle for the throne of Bengal when Ali Vardy died. So, he tried to befriend Mustafa Khan and get his loyalty. But, Jainuddin was killed by Mustafa Khan's troops in his own palace. His belly was cut open by the sudden thrust of a knife hidden in the turban of one of Mustafa's troops.

A battle then ensued between Ali Vardy's and Mustafa Khan's troops. Mustafa Khan probably was killed, I just cannot recall. But, the situation in Bengal was very unstable when a very young Siraj-ud-Dowlah took over the reign of Bengal.

Had his father survived the death of Ali Vardy, he would have certainly become the new Nawab. Situation would have been different in this case. Because, the conspirators would not have dared to go against an over 45 yr. old strong personality who had already earned loyalty from many different sections of Bengal nobles.

All these factors combined together to encourage an easy conspiracy against the young 22 year old new Nawab, who led a luxurious life in the palace. Although, he participated in battles against the Marathas and he was brave, but it was not sufficient to stop conspiracy against him.

He was very young and immature. So, he was not encircled by men of virtue, experience and bravery. He even had to fight against and kill his cousin, Shaukat Jung, who rose against Siraj in Purnea to claim the throne for himself. Such was the situation prevailing in Bengal.

On the other hand, his foes were formidable. His own relative Meer Zafar was not the initial conspirator, but he became the center of the events. Meer Zafar was the brother-in-law of Nawab Ali Vardy.

This is the reason why Robert Clive decided to involve him in the conspiracy. The initiators of conspiracy wanted General Yar Latif Khan to become the new Nawab. Clive decided that another Nawab from the same family would get endorsement from the nobles and generals, and the entire battle would seem like a palace coup.

In this post what I have written is the prelude to the Battle of Plassey. Events that took place in the battle and its aftermath are known and have been discussed by many others. Again, I wrote a long post, but, what I wrote is based on history.

 

[Kambojaric]

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.

I would also like too add the Urdu-Hindi controversy as well. The British first replaced Persian with Urdu. Then they went a step further and made Hindi the administrative language as well in some provinces e.g Bihar.

 

[Joe Shearer]

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.

@Joe Shearer
Aap isse apna hi thread samajhiye
Mi casa es su casa

sorry for the late reply

I shall assume that these two encouraging notes are a sufficient license to move on into the fascinating subject of the races in South Asia who really provided the military strength of various armies. Many of these races were traditional soldiers; they were not seen to be such by the British, but by mutual gravitation, they formed the bulk of British (East India Company) military forces. This changed when that sublime idiot, Roberts, Bobs Bahadur, perhaps under the influence of the prevailing racist temper of thinking in western Europe, came up with his brilliant theory of the Martial Races.

To give an example of what might be taken up by those of us who are interested, it would be - in Hindustan, the Rajputs and Brahmins of the Gangetic Plain (not of Rajasthan), the Ahoms, the Koch of the Brahmaputra Valley and the Terai; the Doms of Bengal and Jharkhand; the Bhils of Rajasthan and Malwa; the Marathas; the Bunts of Tulunadu; the Nairs of Kerala; the Thevars of Tamil Nadu and any other that are introduced by various correspondents.

I would like a day or two to do the necessary background research all over again, but hope to write four sections on each: old records of the involvement of each subject race in military activity; their record under the British; well-known campaigns and battles that they had been involved in; and current status.

Please let me know your views on this, so that I may make necessary course corrections before taking up any unnecessary effort.

 

[LaBong]

I'd personally like to know more about Doms. They were known to be fierce soldiers, sad very little or no account written about them in any other language but Bengali.

 

[GUNNER]

I shall assume that these two encouraging notes are a sufficient license to move on into the fascinating subject of the races in South Asia who really provided the military strength of various armies. Many of these races were traditional soldiers; they were not seen to be such by the British, but by mutual gravitation, they formed the bulk of British (East India Company) military forces. This changed when that sublime idiot, Roberts, Bobs Bahadur, perhaps under the influence of the prevailing racist temper of thinking in western Europe, came up with his brilliant theory of the Martial Races.

It will also be interesting to compare the composition of the Indian Army before and after the mutiny. Also the role played by conquest of Punjab and the mutiny in this shift towards other races, since we know that the martial race theory was put forward after 1857.

 

[Capt.Popeye]

Originally Posted by Joe Shearer
"Please let me know your views on this, so that I may make necessary course corrections before taking up any unnecessary effort. "


Please do go ahead. History has been quite easily abandoned by the roadside or made a "easy casualty" in our various discourses.

 

[Joe Shearer]

I'd personally like to know more about Doms. They were known to be fierce soldiers, sad very little or no account written about them in any other language but Bengali.

One of the most neglected areas is the study of the involvement of Indians of different classes and categories in organised warfare. In the east, it is not only the Doms, but also the Koch, the Rajbanshi and of course, the Ahom. I am not sure that it will be rewarding to go further east, to Burma, or even to the Nagas, or the Maug pirates of Arakan, who were a long-time thorn in the flesh of Dhaka. For that matter, it is beyond scope to consider the river-pirates; the point being made of course is that there was a 'subaltern' narrative of warfare, not just the heroic tribes in their shiny armour on their white horses, but light cavalry mounted on country tats and light infantry.

Again, all this is without even considering either the Gurkhali, or the Bhots.

When I was young, a Gurkha orderly talked to me one day, very solemn, about the 'Bhot'. "I know all about them", I said, with the breezy confidence of youth. "They belong to a country called Bhutan." "You know nothing", he told me very kindly; "The Bhots are huge people, ferocious fighters, never give up, kill everybody, all Gurkhas scared of them. Their country is far behind Bhutan, behind the mountains", he said.

Unfortunately, the Bhot is beyond the scope of notes to follow here.

It will also be interesting to compare the composition of the Indian Army before and after the mutiny. Also the role played by conquest of Punjab and the mutiny in this shift towards other races, since we know that the martial race theory was put forward after 1857.

I hope and trust that these notes are being thought of by all of you as collaborations, and not single-handed contributions by one person!

You are right in pointing out that the composition of the Indian Army before and after the Mutiny is of great interest, in fact, your two sentences are an excellent brief in themselves. Once again, I request help and support, and additional input.

Originally Posted by Joe Shearer
"Please let me know your views on this, so that I may make necessary course corrections before taking up any unnecessary effort. "


Please do go ahead. History has been quite easily abandoned by the roadside or made a "easy casualty" in our various discourses.

Good.

There is some interest, then, in considering war not just in the sense that these fora consider it, a jingoistic, bloody equivalent of an international cricket match, but in the sense of the causes, the organisation for war, the social and professional background of the armies in question, doctrine held by the respective military commands, tactical training and chain of command, and simply the military preparedness of the countries involved.

Vorwaerts!

 

[GUNNER]

I hope and trust that these notes are being thought of by all of you as collaborations, and not single-handed contributions by one person!

You are right in pointing out that the composition of the Indian Army before and after the Mutiny is of great interest, in fact, your two sentences are an excellent brief in themselves. Once again, I request help and support, and additional input.

Don't worry Joe. I'll be adding up on these lines but i require some time to dig up old stuff. Can we divide some stuff - as in areas or specific races or specific times - among oursleves so that one is not burdened by all the research and writing?

 

[Joe Shearer]

Don't worry Joe. I'll be adding up on these lines but i require some time to dig up old stuff. Can we divide some stuff - as in areas or specific races or specific times - among oursleves so that one is not burdened by all the research and writing?

I will be MOST GRATEFUL if we could several of us collaborate on these issues. Unfortunately, a valued source, Ganimi Kawa, is absent due to a surge of work; he was really good on east Indian subjects.

An area that would be of immediate interest would be the tribes and clans of Potohar, if that interests you. I had written briefly and badly on the Kamboh; the Gakkars, the Khaksar, the hill Rajputs, all await attention. It is not clear where the Lodi and the Suri should be classified. Would they belong here?

 

[GUNNER]

An area that would be of immediate interest would be the tribes and clans of Potohar, if that interests you. I had written briefly and badly on the Kamboh; the Gakkars, the Khaksar, the hill Rajputs, all await attention. It is not clear where the Lodi and the Suri should be classified. Would they belong here?

Going back to lodhis and suris would be an ardous task Joe. Let's be clear with what we intend to do. I think we should limit our efforts to a time period not very broad so as not to get lost in time.

If the idea is to trace the composition of the races forming bulk of the Indian army and their main battles plus their current status, then i think we should set the battle of plassey as the starting point with 1857 as the interval and on to the second world war as the end. So, we will be covering it in two portions. From Plassey to Mutiny and then from Mutiny to the shall we say partition or second world war.


What do you say? And if we have other interested parties !