[ My intention with my blog is to simply collect articles of
interest to me for purposes of future reference. I do my best to indicate who has actually composed the
articles. NONE of the articles have been written by me. – Louis Sheehan ]
East India Company
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The
East India Company (
EIC), originally chartered as the
Governor and Company of Merchants of London trading into the East Indies, and more properly called the
Honourable East India Company, was an
English, and later (from 1707)
[1] British joint-stock company,
[2] formed to pursue trade with the
East Indies but that ended up trading mainly with the
Indian subcontinent,
Qing Dynasty China,
North-West Frontier Province and
Balochistan. The company rose to account for half of the world's trade, particularly trade in basic commodities that included
cotton,
silk,
indigo dye,
salt,
saltpetre,
tea and
opium. The company also ruled the beginnings of the
British Empire in India.
[3]
The company received a
Royal Charter from
Queen Elizabeth in 1600,
[4] making it the oldest among several similarly formed European
East India Companies. Wealthy merchants and
aristocrats owned the Company's shares.
[5]
The government owned no shares and had only indirect control. The
company eventually came to rule large areas of India with its own
private armies, exercising military power and assuming administrative functions.
[6] Company rule in India effectively began in 1757 after the
Battle of Plassey and lasted until 1858 when, following the
Indian Rebellion of 1857, the
Government of India Act 1858 led to the
British Crown to assume direct control of India in the new
British Raj.
The company was dissolved in 1874 as a result of the
East India Stock Dividend Redemption Act
passed one year earlier, as the Government of India Act had by then
rendered it vestigial, powerless, and obsolete. The official government
machinery of
British India had assumed its governmental functions and absorbed its
presidency armies.
Founding
Soon after the defeat of the
Spanish Armada in 1588, London merchants presented a petition to
Queen Elizabeth I for permission to sail to the
Indian Ocean.
[7] The permission was granted and on 10 April 1591 three ships sailed from
Torbay England around the
Cape of Good Hope to the
Arabian Sea on one of the earliest English overseas Indian expeditions. One of them, the
Edward Bonventure, then sailed around
Cape Comorin and on to the
Malay Peninsula and subsequently returned to England in 1594.
[7]
In 1596, three more ships sailed east; however, these were all lost at sea.
[7] Three years later, on 22 September 1599,
[8]
another group of merchants met and stated their intention "to venture
in the pretended voyage to the East Indies (the which it may please the
Lord to prosper), and the sums that they will adventure", committing
£30,133.
[9] Two days later, on September 24, "the Adventurers" reconvened and resolved to apply to the Queen for support of the project.
[9]
Although their first attempt was not completely successful, they
nonetheless sought the Queen's unofficial approval, bought ships for
their venture, increased their capital to £68,373
[clarification needed], and convened again a year later.
[7]
This time they succeeded, and on 31 December 1600, the Queen granted a
Royal Charter to "
George, Earl of Cumberland, and 215
Knights,
Aldermen, and
Burgesses" under the name,
Governor and Company of Merchants of London trading with the East Indies.
[10]
For a period of fifteen years the charter awarded the newly formed
company a monopoly on trade with all countries east of the Cape of Good
Hope and west of the
Straits of Magellan.
[10] Sir
James Lancaster commanded the first East India Company voyage in 1601
[11] and in March 1604
Sir Henry Middleton commanded the
second voyage.
Initially, the company struggled in the
spice trade due to the competition from the already well-established
Dutch East India Company. The company opened a
factory in
Bantam on the first voyage and imports of
pepper from
Java
were an important part of the company's trade for twenty years. The
factory in Bantam was closed in 1683. During this time ships belonging
to the company arriving in India docked at
Surat, which was established as a trade transit point in 1608.
In the next two years, the company built its first factory in south India in the town of
Machilipatnam on the
Coromandel Coast of the
Bay of Bengal. The high profits reported by the company after landing in India initially prompted
King James I
to grant subsidiary licences 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, in turn, reported to the
Court of Proprietors which appointed them. Ten committees reported to
the Court of Directors.
English traders frequently engaged in hostilities with their Dutch
and Portuguese counterparts in the Indian Ocean. The company achieved a
major victory over the Portuguese in the
Battle of Swally
in 1612. The company decided to explore the feasibility of gaining a
territorial foothold in mainland India, with official sanction of both
countries, and requested that the Crown launch a diplomatic mission.
[12]
Jahangir investing a courtier with a robe of honour watched by Sir
Thomas Roe, English ambassador to the court of Jahangir at Agra from
1615–18, and others
In 1612, James I instructed
Sir Thomas Roe to visit the
Mughal Emperor Nuruddin Salim
Jahangir
(r. 1605 – 1627) to arrange for a commercial treaty that would give the
company exclusive rights to reside and build factories in
Surat
and other areas. In return, the company offered to provide the Emperor
with goods and rarities from the European market. This mission was
highly successful as Jahangir sent a letter to James through Sir Thomas
Roe:
[12]
"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"
—Nuruddin Salim Jahangir, Letter to James I.
Expansion
The company, benefiting from the imperial patronage, soon expanded its commercial trading operations, eclipsing 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).
The East India Company also launched a joint effort attack with the
Dutch United East India Company on Portuguese and Spanish ships off the
coast of China, which helped secure their ports in China.
[13] The company created
trading posts 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 governor if so chosen, and had 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 then in
cotton,
silk,
indigo dye,
saltpetre and
tea. The company's future, however, was braked by the signing of the
Treaty of Münster in 1648, which freed the
Netherlands from Spanish control allowing it to turn its full attention to expanding its trade both in home and distant waters
[14]
and enter a period recognised as Holland's 'Golden Age'. The Dutch were
aggressive competitors, and had meanwhile expanded their monopoly of
the spice trade in the
Malaccan straits by ousting the Portuguese in 1640–41. With reduced Portuguese and Spanish influence in the region, the EIC and
Dutch East India Company (VOC) entered a period of intense competition, resulting in the
Anglo-Dutch Wars of the 17th and 18th centuries.
Meanwhile, 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.
In an act aimed at strengthening the power of the EIC,
King Charles II
provisioned the EIC (in a series of five acts around 1670) 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.
[15]
William Hedges was sent in 1682 to
Shaista Khan, the
Mughal governor of Bengal in order to obtain a
firman,
an imperial directive that would grant England regular trading
privileges throughout the Mughal Empire. However, the company's governor
in London, Sir
Josiah Child, interfered with Hedges's mission, causing Mughal Emperor
Aurangzeb to break off the negotiations.
In 1689 a Mughal fleet commanded by
Sidi Yaqub
attacked Bombay. After a year of resistance the EIC surrendered in
1690, and the company sent envoys to Aurangzeb's camp to plead for a
pardon. The company's envoys had to prostrate themselves before the
emperor, pay a large indemnity, and promise better behaviour in the
future. The emperor withdrew his troops and the company subsequently
reestablished itself in Bombay and set up a new base in
Calcutta.
[16]
Mughal convoy piracy incident of 1695
In September 1695, Captain
Henry Every, an English pirate on board the
Fancy, reached the Straits of
Bab-el-Mandeb, where he teamed up with five other pirate captains to make an attack on the Indian fleet making the annual voyage to
Mecca. The
Mughal convoy included the treasure-laden
Ganj-i-Sawai, reported to be the greatest in the Mughal fleet and the largest ship operational in the
Indian Ocean, and its escort, the
Fateh Muhammed. They were spotted passing the straits en route to
Surat. The pirates gave chase and caught up with the
Fateh Muhammed some days later, and meeting little resistance, took some £50,000 to £60,000 worth of treasure.
[17]
Every continued in pursuit and managed to overhaul the
Ganj-i-Sawai,
who put up a fearsome fight but it too was eventually taken. The ship
carried enormous wealth and, according to contemporary East India
Company sources, was carrying a relative of the Grand Mughal, though
there is no evidence to suggest that it was his daughter and her
retinue. The loot from the
Ganj-i-Sawai totalled between £325,000
and £600,000, including 500,000 gold and silver pieces, and has become
known as the richest ship ever taken by pirates.
In a letter sent to the Privy Council by Sir
John Gayer, then governor of
Bombay
and head of the East India Company, Gayer claims that "it is certain
the Pirates...did do very barbarously by the People of the Ganj-i-Sawai
and Abdul Ghaffar's ship, to make them confess where their money was."
The pirates set free the survivors who were left aboard their emptied
ships, to continue their voyage back to India.
When the news arrived in England it caused an out-cry. In response, a
combined bounty of £1,000 (considered massive by the standards of the
time) was offered for Every's capture by the Privy Council and East
India Company, leading to the first worldwide manhunt in recorded
history. The plunder of
Aurangzeb's treasure ship had serious consequences for the English East India Company. The furious Mughal Emperor Aurangzeb ordered
Sidi Yaqub and
Nawab Daud Khan
to attack and close four of the company's factories in India and
imprison their officers, who were almost lynched by a mob of angry
Mughals,
blaming them for their countryman's depredations, and threatened to put
an end to all English trading in India. To appease Emperor Aurangzeb
and particularly his
Grand Vizier
Asad Khan, Parliament exempted Every from all of the Acts of Grace
(pardons) and amnesties it would subsequently issue to other pirates.
[18]
-
An 18th-century depiction of
Henry Every, with the
Fancy shown engaging its prey in the background
-
British pirates that fought during the Child's War engaging the
Ganj-i-Sawai.
-
Forming a complete monopoly
Trade monopoly
Rear view of the East India Company's Factory at Cossimbazar
The prosperity that the officers of the company enjoyed allowed them
to return to Britain and establish sprawling estates and businesses, and
to obtain political power. The company developed a
lobby in the English parliament. 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.
[19]
This allowed any English firm to trade with India, unless
specifically prohibited by act of parliament, thereby annulling the
charter that had been 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 £2 million. The powerful stockholders of
the old company quickly subscribed a sum of £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.
[19]
It quickly became evident that, in practice, the original company
faced scarcely any measurable competition. The companies merged in 1708,
by a tripartite indenture involving both companies and the state. Under
this arrangement, the merged company lent to the Treasury a sum of
£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.
[19]
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 licence was prolonged until 1766 by yet
another act in 1730.
At this time, Britain and France became bitter rivals. Frequent
skirmishes between them took place for control of colonial possessions.
In 1742, fearing the monetary consequences of a war, the British
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 £1 million. 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.
[20]
The war took place on Indian soil, between the company troops and the French forces. In 1757, the
Law Officers of the Crown delivered the
Pratt-Yorke opinion distinguishing overseas territories acquired by
right of conquest from those acquired by private
treaty.
The opinion asserted that, while the Crown of Great Britain enjoyed
sovereignty over both, only the property of the former was vested in the
Crown.
[20]
With the advent of the
Industrial Revolution,
Britain surged ahead of its European rivals. 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. Its
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.
William Henry Pyne notes in his book
The Microcosm of London (1808) that:
- "On the 1 March 1801, the debts of the East India Company to
£5,393,989 their effects to £15,404,736 and their sales increased since
February 1793, from £4,988,300 to £7,602,041."
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 that
Samuel Pepys and
John Evelyn had amassed a substantial fortune from the
Levant and Indian trades.
He became a Director and later, as Governor of the East India Company
in 1672, he arranged a contract which included a loan of £20,000 and
£30,000 worth of saltpetre — also known as
potassium nitrate, a primary ingredient in
gunpowder – 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 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 £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.
[21]
Basis for the monopoly
Colonial monopoly
The
Seven Years' War
(1756–1763) resulted in the defeat of the French forces, limited French
imperial ambitions, and stunting the influence of the Industrial
Revolution in French territories.
Robert Clive, the Governor General, led the company to a victory against
Joseph François 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 in 1762.
[22]
By the
Treaty of Paris (1763), France regained the five establishments captured by the British during the war (
Pondichéry,
Mahe,
Karikal,
Yanam and
Chandernagar)
but was prevented from erecting fortifications and keeping troops in
Bengal (art. XI). Elsewhere in India, the French were to remain a
military threat, particularly during the War of American Independence,
and up to the capture of Pondichéry in 1793 at the outset of the French
Revolutionary Wars 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 region from its base at
Madras and in
Bengal from
Calcutta, without facing any further obstacles from other colonial powers.
[citation needed]
Military expansion
The
Mughal Emperor Shah Alam II,
who with his allies fought against the East India Company during his
early years (1760–1764), only accepting the protection of the British in
the year 1803, after he had been blinded by his enemies and deserted by
his subjects.
The company continued to experience resistance from local rulers during its expansion. Robert Clive led company forces against
Siraj Ud Daulah, the last independent
Nawab of Bengal,
Bihar, and
Midnapore district in
Odisha to victory at the
Battle of Plassey
in 1757, resulting in the conquest of Bengal. This victory estranged
the British and the Mughals, since Siraj Ud Daulah was a Mughal
feudatory ally.
With the gradual weakening of the
Marathas in the aftermath of the three
Anglo-Maratha wars,
the British also secured the Ganges-Jumna Doab, the Delhi-Agra region,
parts of Bundelkhand, Broach, some districts of Gujarat, the fort of
Ahmmadnagar,
province of Cuttack (which included Mughalbandi/the coastal part of
Odisha, Garjat/the princely states of Odisha,
Balasore Port, parts of
Midnapore district of West Bengal), Bombay (
Mumbai)
and the surrounding areas, leading to a formal end of the Maratha
empire and firm establishment of the British East India Company in
India.
Hyder Ali and
Tipu Sultan, the rulers of the
Kingdom of Mysore,
offered much resistance to the British forces. Having sided with the
French during the Revolutionary 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 death of Tipu Sultan.
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 infighting and
offers of protection among the remaining princes. The hundred years from
the Battle of Plassey in 1757 to the
Indian Rebellion of 1857 were a period of consolidation for the company, which began to function more as an administrator and less as a trading concern.
A
cholera
pandemic began in Bengal, then spread across India by 1820. 10,000
British troops and countless Indians died during this pandemic.
[23] Between 1736 and 1834 only some 10% of the East India Company's officers survived to take the final voyage home.
[24]
In the early 19th century the Indian question of
geopolitical dominance and empire holding remained with the East India Company. .
[25]
The three independent armies of the company's Presidencies, with some
locally raised irregular forces, expanded to a total of 280,000 men by
1857.
[26] First recruited from mercenaries and low-caste volunteers, the
Bengal Army especially eventually became composed largely of high-caste Hindus and landowning Muslims.
Within the Army, British officers who initially trained at the company's own academy at the
Addiscombe Military Seminary,
always outranked Indians, no matter how long their service. The highest
rank to which an Indian soldier could aspire was Subadar-Major (or
Rissaldar-Major in cavalry units), effectively a senior
subaltern
equivalent. Promotion for both British and Indian soldiers was strictly
by seniority, so Indian soldiers rarely reached the commissioned ranks
of Jamadar or Subadar before they were middle aged at best. They
received no training in administration or leadership to make them
independent of their British officers.
During the wars against the French and their allies in the late
eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries, the East India Company's
armies were used to seize the colonial possessions of other European
nations, including the islands of
Réunion and
Mauritius.
There was a systemic disrespect in the company for the spreading of
Protestantism although it fostered respect for
Hindu and
Muslim,
castes
and ethnic groups. The growth of tensions between the EIC and the local
religious and cultural groups grew in the 19th century as the
Protestant revival grew in Great Britain. These tensions erupted at the
Indian Rebellion of 1857 and the company ceased to exist when the
company dissolved through the
East India Stock Dividend Redemption Act 1873.
[27]
Opium trade
In the 18th century, Britain had a huge trade deficit with
Qing Dynasty China and so in 1773, the Company created a British monopoly on
opium
buying in Bengal by prohibiting licensing opium farmers and prohibiting
private cultivation. The monopoly system established in 1799 continued
with minimal changes until 1947.
[28] As the
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.
[29]
Despite the Chinese ban on opium imports, reaffirmed in 1799 by the
Jiaqing Emperor, the drug was smuggled into China from Bengal by traffickers and agency houses such as
Jardine, Matheson & Co and
Dent & Co. in amounts averaging 900 tons a year. The proceeds of the drug-smugglers landing their cargoes at
Lintin Island were paid into the Company's factory at
Canton and by 1825, most of the money needed to buy tea in China was raised by the illegal opium trade.
The Company established a group of trading settlements centred on the
Straits of Malacca called the
Straits Settlements
in 1826 to protect its trade route to China and to combat local piracy.
The Settlements were also used as penal settlements for Indian civilian
and military prisoners.
In 1838 with the amount of smuggled opium entering China approaching
1,400 tons a year, the Chinese imposed a death penalty for opium
smuggling and sent a Special Imperial Commissioner,
Lin Zexu, to curb smuggling. This resulted in the
First Opium War (1839–1842). After the war
Hong Kong island was ceded to Britain under the
Treaty of Nanking and the Chinese market opened to the opium traders of Britain and other nations.
[28] The Jardines and
Apcar and Company dominated the trade, although
P&O also tried to take a share.
[30] A
Second Opium War fought by Britain and France against China lasted from 1856 until 1860 and led to the
Treaty of Tientsin
which legalised the importation of opium. Legalisation stimulated
domestic Chinese opium production and increased the importation of opium
from Turkey and Persia. This increased competition for the Chinese
market led to India reducing its opium output and diversifying its
exports.
[28]
Regulation of the company's affairs
Writers
The Company employed many junior clerks, known as "writers", to
record the details of accounting, managerial decisions, and activities
related to the Company, such as minutes of meetings, copies of Company
orders and contracts, and filings of reports and copies of ship's logs.
Several well-known British scholars and literary men had Company
writerships, such as
Henry Thomas Colebrooke in India and
Charles Lamb in England.
The Destruction of Tea at Boston Harbor, 1773
Financial troubles
Though the Company was becoming increasingly bold and ambitious in
putting down resisting states, it was getting clearer that the Company
was incapable of governing the vast expanse of the captured territories.
The
Bengal famine of 1770,
in which one-third of the local population died, caused distress in
Britain. 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. The 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 the American colonies, and allowed it an exemption from tea import
duties which its colonial competitors were required to pay.
When the American colonists, who included tea merchants, were told of
the act, they tried to boycott it, claiming that although the price had
gone down on the tea when enforcing the act, it also would help
validate the
Townshend Acts
and set a precedent for the king to impose additional taxes in the
future. The arrival of tax-exempt Company tea, undercutting the local
merchants, triggered the
Boston Tea Party in the
Province of Massachusetts Bay, one of the major events leading up to the
American Revolution.
Regulating Acts of Parliament
East India Company Act 1773
By the
Regulating Act of 1773 (later known as the East India Company Act 1773), 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 recognised 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 £40,000 for
two years. Under this provision governor of Bengal
Warren Hastings became the first
Governor-General of Bengal,
and had 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 Sir John Clavering,
The Honourable Sir George Monson,
Sir Richard Barwell, and
Sir Philip Francis.
[31]
Hastings 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. The company was allowed to maintain its virtual
monopoly over trade in exchange for the biennial sum and was obligated
to export a minimum quantity of goods yearly to Britain. The costs of
administration were to be met by the company. These provisions were
initially welcomed by the Company, but with the annual burden of the
payment to be met, its finances continued steadily to decline.
[31]
East India Company Act 1784 (Pitt's India Act)
The East India Company Act 1784 (
Pitt's India Act) had two key aspects:
- Relationship to the British government: the bill differentiated the
East India Company's political functions from its commercial activities.
In political matters the East India Company was subordinated to the
British government directly. 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 were the Chancellor of the Exchequer, the 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: the bill laid the
foundation for the centralised and bureaucratic British administration
of India which would reach its peak at the beginning of the 20th century
during the governor-generalship of George Nathaniel Curzon, 1st Baron Curzon.
Pitt's Act was deemed a failure because it quickly became apparent
that the boundaries between government control and the company's powers
were nebulous and highly subjective. The government felt obliged to
respond to humanitarian calls for better treatment of local peoples in
British-occupied territories.
Edmund Burke,
a former East India Company shareholder and diplomat, was moved to
address the situation and introduced a new Regulating Bill in 1783. The
bill was defeated amid lobbying by company loyalists and accusations of
nepotism in the bill's recommendations for the appointment of
councillors.
Act of 1786
The Act of 1786 (26 Geo. 3 c. 16) enacted the demand of
Earl 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 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 regularised
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
British Hong Kong, and a fifth of the world's population was under its trading influence.
East India Company Act 1793 (Charter Act)
The Company's charter was renewed for a further 20 years by the
Charter Act of 1793.
In contrast with the legislative proposals of the past two decades, the
1793 Act was not a particularly controversial measure, and made only
minimal changes to the system of government in India and to British
oversight of the Company's activities.
East India Company Act 1813 (Charter Act)
The aggressive policies of
Lord Wellesley and the
Marquis of Hastings
led to the Company gaining control of all India (except for the Punjab
and Sindh), and some part of then kingdom of Nepal under the
Sugauli Treaty.
The Indian Princes had become vassals of the Company. But the expense
of wars leading to the total control of India strained the Company's
finances. The Company was forced to petition Parliament for assistance.
This was the background to the
Charter Act of 1813 which, among other things:
- asserted the sovereignty of the British Crown over the Indian territories held by the Company;
- renewed the charter of the 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
- opened India to missionaries
One
Rupee coin issued by the East India Company, 1835 (
reverse)
Government of India Act 1833
The
Industrial Revolution in Britain, the consequent search for markets, and the rise of
laissez-faire economic ideology form the background to the
Government of India Act 1833 (3 & 4 Will. 4 c. 85). The Act:
- removed the Company's remaining trade monopolies and divested it of all its commercial functions
- renewed for another twenty years the Company's political and administrative authority
- invested the Board of Control with full power and authority over the Company. As stated by Professor Sri Ram Sharma,[32] "The President of the Board of Control now became Minister for Indian Affairs."
- carried further the ongoing process of administrative centralisation
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
- vested the Island of St Helena in the Crown [33]
British influence continued to expand; in 1845, Great Britain purchased the Danish colony of
Tranquebar. The Company had at various stages extended its influence to China, the Philippines, and
Java.
It had solved its critical lack of 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 (1839–1842).
English Education Act 1835
The English Education Act by the Council of India in 1835 to
reallocated funds from the East India Company to spend on education and
literature in India.
Government of India Act 1853
This Act (16 & 17 Vict. c. 95) provided that British India would
remain under the administration of the Company in trust for the Crown
until Parliament should decide otherwise. It also introduced a system of
open competition as the basis of recruitment for civil servants of the
company and thus deprived the Directors of their patronage system.
[34]
Under the act, for the first time the legislative and executive
powers of the governor general's council were separated. It also added
six additional members to the governor general's executive committee.
[35]
Indian Rebellion and disestablishment
The Indian Rebellion of 1857 resulted in widespread devastation in
India: many condemned the East India Company for permitting the events
to occur.
[citation needed] In the aftermath of the Rebellion, under the provisions of the
Government of India Act 1858, the British Government nationalised the Company.
The Crown took over its Indian possessions, its administrative powers and machinery, and its
armed forces.
The Company remained in existence in vestigial form, continuing to
manage the tea trade on behalf of the British Government (and the supply
of
Saint Helena) until the
East India Stock Dividend Redemption Act 1873
came into effect, on 1 January 1874. This Act provided for the formal
dissolution of the company on 1 June 1874, after a final dividend
payment and the commutation or redemption of its stock.
[36] 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."
Establishments in Britain
The Company's headquarters in
London, from which much of
India was governed, was
East India House in
Leadenhall Street. After occupying premises in Philpot Lane,
Fenchurch Street, from 1600 to 1621; in
Crosby House,
Bishopsgate,
from 1621 to 1638; and in Leadenhall Street from 1638 to 1648, the
Company moved into Craven House, an Elizabethan mansion in Leadenhall
Street. The building had become known as East India House by 1661. It
was completely rebuilt and enlarged in 1726–9; and further significantly
remodelled and expanded in 1796–1800. It was finally vacated in 1860
and demolished in 1861–62. The site is now occupied by the
Lloyd's building.
In 1607, the Company decided to build its own ships and leased a yard on the
River Thames at
Deptford. By 1614, the yard having become too small, an alternative site was acquired at
Blackwall:
the new yard was fully operational by 1617. It was sold in 1656,
although for some years East India Company ships continued to be built
and repaired there under the new owners.
In 1803, an Act of Parliament, promoted by the East India Company,
established the East India Dock Company, with the aim of establishing a
new set of docks (the
East India Docks) primarily for the use of ships trading with India. The existing Brunswick Dock, part of the
Blackwall Yard
site, became the Export Dock; while a new Import Dock was built to the
north. In 1838 the East India Dock Company merged with the
West India Dock Company. The docks were taken over by the
Port of London Authority in 1909, and closed in 1967.
The
East India College
was founded in 1806 as a training establishment for "writers" (i.e.
clerks) in the Company's service. It was initially located in
Hertford Castle, but moved in 1809 to purpose-built premises at
Hertford Heath,
Hertfordshire. In 1858 the college closed; but in 1862 the buildings reopened as a
public school, now
Haileybury and Imperial Service College.
The
East India Company Military Seminary was founded in 1809 at
Addiscombe, near
Croydon, Surrey, to train young officers for service in the
Company's armies
in India. It was based in Addiscombe Place, an early 18th-century
mansion. The government took it over in 1858, and renamed it the Royal
Indian Military College. In 1861 it was closed, and the site was
subsequently redeveloped.
In 1818, the Company entered into an agreement by which those of its
servants who were certified insane in India might be cared for at
Pembroke House,
Hackney, London, a private
lunatic asylum
run by Dr George Rees until 1838, and thereafter by Dr William
Williams. The arrangement outlasted the Company itself, continuing until
1870, when the India Office opened its own asylum, the Royal India
Asylum, at
Hanwell, Middlesex.
[37]
The
East India Club in London was formed in 1849 for officers of the Company. The Club still exists today as a private
gentlemen's club with its club house situated at 16
St. James's Square, London.
[38]
Legacy
The East India Company has had a long lasting impact on the Indian
Subcontinent. Although dissolved following the rebellion of 1857, it
stimulated the growth of the
British Empire.
Its armies after 1857 were to become the armies of British India and it
played a key role in introducing English as an official language in
India.
The East India Company was the first company to record the Chinese
usage of orange-flavoured tea which led to the development of
Earl Grey tea.
[39]
The East India Company introduced a system of merit-based appointments that provided a model for the British and Indian
civil service.
[40]
Although the EIC used Indian soldiers, these soldiers never could reach a title higher than
Non-commissioned officer, such as
sergeant or
corporal but never an officer in command of his own unit.
[27]
Flags
-
-
-
-
-
National Geographic (1917)
-
-
The flag had a
Union Flag in the canton after the creation of the Kingdom of Great Britain in 1707
-
The English East India Company flag changed over time. From the period of 1600 to the 1707
Acts 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
Acts of Union 1800
that joined Ireland with Great Britain to form the United Kingdom, the
canton of the East India Company's flag was altered accordingly to
include the new Union Flag with the additional
Saint Patrick's Flag.
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 was identical to the
Grand Union Flag. Sir
Charles Fawcett argued that the East India Company Flag inspired the
Stars and Stripes.
[41]
Coat of arms
The later coat of arms of the East India Company.
The East India Company's original
coat of arms was granted in 1600. The arms was as follows:
"Azure, three ships with three masts, rigged and under full sail,
the sails, pennants and ensigns Argent, each charged with a cross Gules;
on a chief of the second a pale quarterly Azure and Gules, on the 1st
and 4th a fleur-de-lis or, on the 2nd and 3rd a leopard or, between two
roses Gules seeded Or barbed Vert." The shield had as a
crest:
"A
sphere without a frame, bounded with the Zodiac in bend Or, between two
pennants flottant Argent, each charged with a cross Gules, over the
sphere the words DEUS INDICAT" (
Latin: God Indicates). The
supporters were two sea lions (lions with fishes' tails) and the
motto was
DEO DUCENTE NIL NOCET (Latin: Where God Leads, Nothing Hurts).
[42]
The Honourable East India Company's arms, granted in 1698, were:
"Argent a cross Gules; in the dexter chief quarter an escutcheon of the arms of France and England quarterly, the shield ornamentally and regally crowned Or." The crest was:
"A lion rampant guardant Or holding between the forepaws a regal crown proper." The supporters were:
"Two lions rampant guardant Or, each supporting a banner erect Argent, charged with a cross Gules." The motto was
AUSPICIO REGIS ET SENATUS ANGLIÆ (Latin: By right of the King and the Senate of England).
[42]
Ships
Ships of the East India Company were called
East Indiamen or simply "Indiamen".
[43] Some examples include:
During the period of the
Napoleonic Wars, the East India Company arranged for
letters of marque for its vessels such as the
Lord Nelson.
This was not so that they could carry cannons to fend off warships,
privateers and pirates on their voyages to India and China (that they
could do without permission) but so that, should they have the
opportunity to take a prize, they could do so without being guilty of
piracy. Similarly, the
Earl of Mornington, an East India Company
packet ship of only six guns too sailed under a letter of marque.
The company also had its own navy, the
Bombay Marine, equipped with warships such as the
Grappler. These vessels often accompanied vessels of the Royal Navy on expeditions, such as the
Invasion of Java (1811).
At the
Battle of Pulo Aura, which was probably the company's most notable naval victory,
Nathaniel Dance, Commodore of a convoy of Indiamen and sailing aboard the
Warley,
led several Indiamen in a skirmish with a French squadron, driving them
off. Some six years earlier, on 28 January 1797, five Indiamen, the
Woodford, under Captain Charles Lennox, the
Taunton-Castle, Captain Edward Studd,
Canton, Captain Abel Vyvyan, and
Boddam, Captain George Palmer, and
Ocean, Captain John Christian Lochner, had encountered Admiral
de Sercey
and his squadron of frigates. On this occasion the Indiamen also
succeeded in bluffing their way to safety, and without any shots even
being fired. Lastly, on 15 June 1795, the
General Goddard played a large role in the capture of seven Dutch East Indiamen off
St Helena.
The HEIC's ships were well built, with the result that the
Royal Navy bought several Company ships to convert to warships and transports. The
Earl of Mornington became HMS
Drake. Other examples include:
The company had many ports of call, some of which have seen their names changed over time.
Records
Unlike all other British Government records, the records from the East India Company (and its successor the
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: see
India Office Records. The catalogue is searchable online in the
Access to Archives catalogues.
[44] Many of the East India Company records are freely available online under an agreement that the
Families in British India Society have with the British Library. Published catalogues exist of East India Company ships’ journals and logs, 1600–1834;
[45] and of some of the Company's daughter institutions, including the
East India Company College, Haileybury, and
Addiscombe Military Seminary.
[46]
See also
East India Company:
East India Company – UK:
UK administration of India:
Other East India Companies:
-
- Assada Company, English, founded 1635 and ceased 1657
- Austrian East India Company, a series of companies going under the names of Société impériale asiatique de Trieste et Anvers, or Société asiatique de Trieste, based in Ostend and Trieste, founded 1775 by William Bolts and ceased 1785
- Dutch East India Company, founded 1602 and ceased 1798
- Danish East India Company, founded in 1616 and ceased 1846
- French East India Company, founded 1664 and ceased 1769
- Portuguese East India Company, founded 1628 and ceased 1633
- Swedish East India Company, founded 1731 and ceased 1813
General:
Notes and references
- Notes
- See Treaty of Union.
- The Dutch East India Company was the first to issue public stock.
- http://www.bl.uk/onlinegallery/features/trading/booksgifts1.html
- The Register of Letters &c. of the Governor and Company of Merchants of London trading into the East Indies, 1600–1619. On page three, a letter written by Elizabeth I on 23 January 1601 ("Witnes or selfe at Westminster the xxiiijth of Ianuarie in the xliijth yeare of or Reigne.") states, "Haue been pleased to giue lysence vnto or
said Subjects to proceed in the said voiadgs, & for the better
inabling them to establish a trade into & from the said East Indies
Haue by or tres Pattents vnder or great seale of England beareing date at Westminster the last daie of december last past incorporated or said Subjecte by the name of the Gournor & Companie of the merchaunts of London trading into the East Indies, & in the same tres Pattents haue geven them the sole trade of theast Indies for the terme of XVteen yeares ..."
- Baladouni, Vahe (1983). "Accounting in the Early Years of the East India Company". The Accounting Historians Journal 10 (2): 63–80. Retrieved 13 November 2012.
- This is the argument of Robins (2006).
- Imperial Gazetteer of India vol. II 1908, p. 454[full citation needed]
- http://books.google.com/books?id=HTCsAAAAIAAJ&printsec=frontcover&dq=The+East+India+Company:+And+the+British+Empire+in+the+Far+East&hl=en&sa=X&ei=5FRyU6q6KZahyATW-YLQAQ&ved=0CC0Q6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=The%20East%20India%20Company%3A%20And%20the%20British%20Empire%20in%20the%20Far%20East&f=false
- http://www.british-history.ac.uk/report.aspx?compid=68624
- Imperial Gazetteer of India vol. II 1908, p. 6
- Gardner, Brian (1972). The East India Company: a History. McCall Publishing Company. ISBN 0-8415-0124-6.
- The battle of Plassey ended the tax on the Indian goods. Indian History Sourcebook: England, India, and The East Indies, 1617 A.D
- Tyacke, Sarah
(2008). "Gabriel Tatton's Maritime Atlas of the East Indies, 1620–1621:
Portsmouth Royal Naval Museum, Admiralty Library Manuscript, MSS 352". Imago Mundi 60 (1): 39–62. doi:10.1080/03085690701669293.
- Bernstein, William J.,A Splendid Exchange: How Trade Shaped the World, Atlantic Monthly Press, 2008, p. 238.
- "East India Company" (1911). Encyclopædia Britannica Eleventh Edition, Volume 8, p.835
- Europe, 1450 to 1789: Encyclopaedia of the Early Modern World
- Burgess, Douglas R.
(2009). The Pirates' Pact: The Secret Alliances Between History's Most
Notorious Buccaneers and Colonial America. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill. ISBN 978-0-07-147476-4
- Fox, E. T. (2008). King of the Pirates: The Swashbuckling Life of Henry Every. London: Tempus Publishing. ISBN 978-0-7524-4718-6.
- The British East India Company—the Company that Owned a Nation. George P. Landow
- Thomas, P. D. G. (2008) "Pratt, Charles, first Earl Camden (1714–1794)", Oxford Dictionary of National Biography, Oxford University Press, online edn, accessed 15 February 2008 (subscription or UK public library membership required)
- SALTPETER the secret salt – Salt made the world go round
- Company incursion, Manila 1762–1763. See the Bib. for the citation of Sirs Draper and Cornish; see also Cushner's citation at the Wayback Machine (archived July 10, 2004).
- Cholera's seven pandemics. CBC News. 2 December 2008
- Holmes, Richard (2005). Sahib: the British soldier in India, 1750–1914. London: HarperCollins. ISBN 0-00-713753-2.
- Note: as of December 30, 1600, the official name: Governor and Company of Merchants of London trading with the East Indies
- McElwee, William (1974). The Art of War: Waterloo to Mons. Purnell Book Services. p. 72.
- Tolan, John; Veinstein, Gilles and Henry Laurens (2013). "Europe and the Islamic World: A History". Princeton University Press. pp. 275–276. ISBN 978-0-691-14705-5.
- Windle, James (2012). "Insights for Contemporary Drug Policy: A Historical Account of Opium Control in India and Pakistan". Asian Journal of Criminology 7 (1): 55–74. doi:10.1007/s11417-011-9104-0.
- EAST INDIA COMPANY FACTORY RECORDS Sources from the British Library, LondonPart 1: China and Japan
- Harcourt, Freda (2006-09-05). Flagships of Imperialism: The P & O Company and the Politics of Empire from Its Origins to 1867. Manchester University Press. p. 103. ISBN 978-1-84779-145-0. Retrieved 2013-11-05.
- Anthony,
Frank. Britain's Betrayal in India: The Story of the Anglo Indian
Community. Second Edition. London: The Simon Wallenberg Press, 2007
Pages 18- 19, 42, 45.
- Kapur
- http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/Will4/3-4/85/section/112
- M. Laxhimikanth, Public Administration, TMH, Tenth Reprint, 2013
- Laxhimikanth, Public Administration, TMH, Tenth Reprint, 2013
- East India Stock
Dividend Redemption Act 1873 (36 & 37 Vict. 17) s. 36: "On the First
day of June One thousand eight hundred and seventy-four, and on payment
by the East India Company of all unclaimed dividends on East India
Stock to such accounts as are herein-before mentioned in pursuance of
the directions herein-before contained, the powers of the East India
Company shall cease, and the said Company shall be dissolved." Where
possible, the stock was redeemed through commutation (i.e. exchanging
the stock for other securities or money) on terms agreed with the
stockholders (ss. 5–8), but stockholders who did not agree to commute
their holdings had their stock compulsorily redeemed on 30 April 1874 by
payment of £200 for every £100 of stock held (s. 13).
- Farrington 1976, pp. 125–32.
- East India Club
- Bringing back John Company
- "The Company that ruled the waves", in The Economist, 17–30 December 2011, p. 111.
- The Striped Flag Of The East India Company, And Its Connexion With The American "Stars And Stripes"
- "Honourable East India Company". Hubert Herald. Retrieved 10 February 2014.
- Sutton, Jean (1981) Lords of the East: The East India Company and Its Ships. London: Conway Maritime
- A2A – Access to Archives Home
- Farrington (ed.), Anthony (1999). Catalogue of East India Company ships’ journals and logs: 1600–1834. London: British Library. ISBN 0-7123-4646-5.
- Farrington 1976.
- Bibliography
- Andrews, Kenneth R. (1985). Trade, Plunder, and Settlement: Maritime Enterprise and the Genesis of the British Empire, 1480–1630. Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge University Press. ISBN 0-521-25760-3.
- Bowen, H. V. (1991). Revenue and Reform: The Indian Problem in British Politics, 1757–1773. Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge University Press. ISBN 0-521-40316-2.
- Bowen, H. V.; Margarette Lincoln, and Nigel Rigby, eds. (2003). The Worlds of the East India Company. Rochester, NY: Brewer. ISBN 0-85115-877-3.
- Brenner, Robert (1993). Merchants and Revolution: Commercial Change, Political Conflict, and London’s Overseas Traders, 1550–1653. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. ISBN 0-691-05594-7.
- Carruthers, Bruce G. (1996). City of Capital: Politics and Markets in the English Financial Revolution. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. ISBN 978-0-691-04455-2.
- Chaudhuri, K. N. (1965). The English East India Company: The Study of an Early Joint-Stock Company, 1600–1640. London: Cass.
- Chaudhuri, K. N. (1978). The Trading World of Asia and the English East India Company, 1660–1760. Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge University Press. ISBN 0-521-21716-4.
- Chaudhury, S. (1999). Merchants, Companies, and Trade: Europe and Asia in the Early Modern Era. London: Cambridge University Press.
- Farrington (ed.), Anthony (1976). The Records of the East India College, Haileybury, & other institutions. London: H.M.S.O.
- Farrington, Anthony (2002). Trading Places: The East India Company and Asia, 1600–1834. London: British Library. ISBN 0-7123-4756-9.
- Furber, Holden (1976). Rival Empires of Trade in the Orient, 1600–1800. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press. ISBN 0-8166-0787-7.
- Harrington, Jack (2010), Sir John Malcolm and the Creation of British India, New York: Palgrave Macmillan., ISBN 978-0-230-10885-1
- Keay, John (2010). The Honourable Company: A History of the English East India Company. HarperCollins UK. ISBN 978-0-00-739554-5. Retrieved 24 September 2011.
- Lawson, Philip (1993). The East India Company: A History. London: Longman. ISBN 0-582-07386-3.
- O'Connor, Daniel (2012). The Chaplains of the East India Company, 1601–1858. London: Continuum. ISBN 978-1-4411-7534-2.
- Riddick, John F. The history of British India: a chronology (2006) excerpt and text search, covers 1599–1947
- Riddick, John F. Who Was Who in British India (1998), covers 1599–1947
- Risley (ed.), Sir Herbert H. et al. (1908), The Indian Empire: Historical, Imperial Gazetteer of India 2, Oxford: Clarendon Press, under the authority of H.M. Secretary of State for India
- Risley (ed.), Sir Herbert H. et al. (1908), The Indian Empire: Administrative, Imperial Gazetteer of India 4, Oxford: Clarendon Press, under the authority of H.M Secretary of State for India
- Robins, Nick (2006). The Corporation that Changed the World: How the East India Company Shaped the Modern Multinational. London: Pluto Press. ISBN 0-7453-2524-6.
- Sen, Sudipta (1998). Empire of Free Trade: The East India Company and the Making of the Colonial Marketplace. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press. ISBN 978-0-8122-3426-8.
- Steensgaard, Niels (1975). The Asian Trade Revolution of the Seventeenth Century: The East India Companies and the Decline of the Caravan Trade. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. ISBN 0-226-77138-5.
- Sutherland, Lucy S. (1952). The East India Company in Eighteenth-Century Politics. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
- Dirks, Nicholas (2006). The Scandal of Empire: India and the creation of Imperial Britain. Cambridge, Massachusetts, London, England: The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press. ISBN 0-674-02166-5.
External links
- The Twilight of the East India Company: The Evolution of Anglo-Asian Commerce and Politics, 1790–1860[dead link]: Boydell & Brewer, Woodbridge, 2009
- From Trade to Colonization: Historical Dynamics of the East India Companies[dead link]
- Seals and Insignias of East India Company
- The Secret Trade The basis of the monopoly.
- Trading Places – a learning resource from the British Library
- Trading Places: The East India Company and Asia, a free seminar from the British Library on the history of the British East India Company.
- Port Cities: History of the East India Company
- Ships of the East India Company
- Plant Cultures: East India Company in India
- Library of Congress Federal Research Division Country Studies
- The British East India Company
- History and Politics: East India Company
- English Expansionism
- Nick Robins, New Statesman, 13 December 2004, "The world's first multinational"[dead link]
- Karl Marx, New York Tribune, 1853–1858, The Revolt in India
- East India Company: Its History and Results article by Karl Marx, MECW Volume 12, p. 148 in Marxists Internet Archive
- East India Club Gentlemen's club originally for officers and former officers of the Company, now open to others.
- Text of East India Company Act 1773
- Text of East India Company Act 1784
- John Stuart Mill and The East India Company, Vinay Lal's review of Lynn Zastoupil's 1994 book
- The
Richest East India Merchant: The Life and Business of John Palmer of
Calcutta, 1767–1836 (Worlds of the East India Company) by Anthony
Webster
- "The East India Company – a corporate route to Europe" on BBC Radio 4’s In Our Time featuring Huw Bowen, Linda Colley and Maria Misra
- A timeline of India in the 1800s
- HistoryMole Timeline: The British East India Company
Posted but not written by: Lou Sheehan