How exactly did the British win the Battles of Plassey and Buxar?

Jul 2015
28
Australia
#1
I am reading a book about the British East India Company in India and am astonished how a private British company could manage to win these two very important battles against the Indians and gain control of important Indian states.

Most of the EIC troops were Indian sepoys trained by the British but even then the European and sepoy troops were still outnumbered by 5 to 1 or more.
The guns and weapons used by both sides seemed to be similar and the Indians seemed to have much larger numbers of cannons too.

It's like the Indian troops just had no heart for a fight and gave up easily.

After these battles the EIC was left in control of Bengal and other states. It all just seems too easy.

From what I have read so far the Indian rulers only cared for their own positions and cared nothing for their people. But what did the ordinary Indian think about this conquest by foreigners? What about the Indian sepoys trained to fight against other Indians? What was their motivation?
 

M.S. Islam

Ad Honorem
Jul 2012
2,783
Dhaka
#2
Battle of Plassey was won before the battle began, through palace intrigue. Nawab's army stood down watching while only a handful of troops fiercely loyal to the Nawab actually fought, along with a small French contingent. It was no contest.
 

kandal

Ad Honorem
Aug 2015
2,406
USA
#3
I am reading a book about the British East India Company in India and am astonished how a private British company could manage to win these two very important battles against the Indians and gain control of important Indian states.

Most of the EIC troops were Indian sepoys trained by the British but even then the European and sepoy troops were still outnumbered by 5 to 1 or more.
The guns and weapons used by both sides seemed to be similar and the Indians seemed to have much larger numbers of cannons too.

It's like the Indian troops just had no heart for a fight and gave up easily.

After these battles the EIC was left in control of Bengal and other states. It all just seems too easy.

From what I have read so far the Indian rulers only cared for their own positions and cared nothing for their people. But what did the ordinary Indian think about this conquest by foreigners? What about the Indian sepoys trained to fight against other Indians? What was their motivation?
One shouldn't apply 21st century notions of nationalism to the 18th century, and ask why Indians could fight Indians on the behalf of foreigners. Also the so called 'Indian rulers' in these battles, against whom the British fought, were not technically Indians themselves. They took pride in their Muslim Turkish/Afghan/Persian invader origins. These battles were really between two invader groups who used Indian soldiers on both sides for supremacy and getting rich. History of India is a lot complex.
 
Last edited:

M.S. Islam

Ad Honorem
Jul 2012
2,783
Dhaka
#5
One shouldn't apply 21st century notions of nationalism to the 18th century, and ask why Indians could fight Indians on the behalf of foreigners. Also the so called 'Indian rulers' in these battles, against whom the British fought, were not technically Indians themselves. They took pride in their Muslim Turkish/Afghan/Persian invader origins. These battles were really between two invader groups who used Indian soldiers on both sides for supremacy and getting rich. History of India is a lot complex.
Even in 21st century, a great part of Indians take pride in their Aryan invader origin.
 
Jun 2017
440
usa
#7
Even in 21st century, a great part of Indians take pride in their Aryan invader origin.
Nope, we don't because we don't know of any other land. Our ancient religious leaders and our ancient holy lands are right here in the subcontinent unlike the timurids and the christians. Too bad for you guys that you have to make history up in order to justify the later invasions.
 

kandal

Ad Honorem
Aug 2015
2,406
USA
#8
Nope, we don't because we don't know of any other land. Our ancient religious leaders and our ancient holy lands are right here in the subcontinent unlike the timurids and the christians. Too bad for you guys that you have to make history up in order to justify the later invasions.
Oh sure, there are no Aryan invaders or Aryan migrants into India. All the Hindus and their leaders are of the original indigenous Indians, Dalits. This is the belief of the Ultra-extremist Hindus. LOL!
 
Apr 2015
4,052
India
#9
I am reading a book about the British East India Company in India and am astonished how a private British company could manage to win these two very important battles against the Indians and gain control of important Indian states.

Most of the EIC troops were Indian sepoys trained by the British but even then the European and sepoy troops were still outnumbered by 5 to 1 or more.
The guns and weapons used by both sides seemed to be similar and the Indians seemed to have much larger numbers of cannons too.

It's like the Indian troops just had no heart for a fight and gave up easily.

After these battles the EIC was left in control of Bengal and other states. It all just seems too easy.

From what I have read so far the Indian rulers only cared for their own positions and cared nothing for their people. But what did the ordinary Indian think about this conquest by foreigners? What about the Indian sepoys trained to fight against other Indians? What was their motivation?
British were able to win Battle of Plassey because of Mir Jafar, Nawab's uncle who sided with British to get the throne.
 

Similar History Discussions