The Doctrine of Lapse, a policy of annexation, was implemented by the East India Company in the Indian subcontinent about princely states, and it remained in effect until 1859. Lord Dalhousie, who served as the Governor-General of India from 1848 to 1856, formulated a strategy to address concerns about the succession of Hindu Indian states. This policy was utilized as an administrative approach to extend the influence of the British aristocracy. Aspirants preparing for the IAS Exam should familiarize themselves with the Doctrine of Lapse, considering its implications from both the UPSC prelims and mains perspectives. This article will delve into the Doctrine of Lapse, and its characteristics, and provide information on the states that were annexed under this policy.
The Doctrine of Lapse
Expansion Strategy
The British expansion in India adhered to a pro-imperialist approach, wherein the absence of a legitimate heir or ruler led to the automatic transfer of the state to British control. Adoption of children for ruling purposes was strictly prohibited under this policy.
- Before the introduction of this ideology, princely states had a longstanding tradition of adopting heirs. In the absence of a competent natural successor, an heir apparent would traditionally be chosen from a group of candidates known as bhajans, who were groomed for succession from an early age.
- All connections to the adoptee’s birth family were severed, and adoptions were not permitted to secure an heir. Granting titles and pensions to a ruler’s adopted child went against the policy, with only the ruler’s possessions being passed down to the adopted successor.
Direct Control over Indian States
- According to this doctrine, any princely state directly or indirectly under the sovereignty of the East India Company faced annexation if the ruler failed to produce a legitimate male successor.
- This included states that were either directly or indirectly controlled by the East India Company. Consequently, an Indian ruler’s adopted son could not be recognized as the legitimate heir to the throne.
Rejection of Adoption
- With the implementation of the Doctrine of Lapse, Indian kings encountered a rejection of traditional adoption practices.
- In the case of dependent nations, Lord Dalhousie asserted the paramount power’s right to approve adoptions and to act at its discretion in their absence.
- This translated into a rejection of last-minute adoptions and the annexation of states without a direct natural or adopted heir by the British.
Indian Mutiny and Revolt of 1857
- While the doctrine’s application was initially limited to dependent Hindu republics, Indian rulers and the old nobility were alarmed and resentful of the annexations.
- These policies significantly contributed to the discontent that culminated in the Indian Mutiny of 1857 and the subsequent widespread revolt against British rule.
The Doctrine of Lapse: Annexed States
1. Satara (1848 A.D.)
- The principality of Satara emerged as a brief-lived princely state in India, instated by the British following the culmination of the Third Anglo-Maratha War in 1818.
- Subsequently, in 1849, it was annexed by the British through the application of the Doctrine of Lapse.
- The Bhonsle family, direct descendants of Chhatrapati Shivaji, the founder of the Maratha Empire, governed the state during its existence.
2. Jaitpur and Sambalpur (1849 A.D.)
- Jaitpur, originally part of Panna State, was established in 1731 by Jagat Rai, the son of the renowned Bundela Rajput leader Chhatrasal.
- In 1765, the state of Ajaigarh was carved out from Jaitpur. By 1807, Jaitpur had come under British protection following the annexation of Central India by the British in 1807.
- The British took control of the principality in 1849 after the demise of its last ruler, Khet Singh, who died without an heir.
- Between 1808 and 1817, the Marathas seized and occupied Sambalpur. After the Third Anglo-Maratha War in 1817, the British returned Sambalpur to the Chauhan monarch, Jayant Singh.
- However, they withdrew his authority over the Chauhans’ eighteen vassal kingdoms.
- From 1818 to 1820, the British administered Sambalpur, after which local rule was reinstated, and the principality became a British protectorate.
- In 1849, the British utilized the Doctrine of Lapse to acquire Sambalpur when its monarch passed away without a direct male heir.
3. Baghat (1850 A.D.)
- In 1739, Mahindar Singh’s death led the British to treat Baghat as a lapsed state. A pension of Rs. 1,282 was granted to the royal family, and the state was officially annexed to British India.
4. Udaipur (1852 A.D.)
- Lord Canning later reversed the annexations of Baghat and Udaipur.
- The British government rejected the notion of acquiring the small Rajput state of Karauli, asserting that it was a “protected ally, not a dependent.”
5. Jhansi (1853 A.D.)
- Jhansi, an independent princely state from 1804 to 1853 ruled by the Maratha Newalkar family under British India’s suzerainty, came under British control in 1853 through the Doctrine of Lapse. From 1728 to 1804, it had been governed by the Peshwas.
6. Nagpur (1854 A.D.)
- The Maratha Bhonsle Maharajas of Nagpur, influential rulers of the Maratha Confederacy who had expanded their dominion across central and eastern India in the 18th century, entered into a subsidiary alliance at the end of the Third Anglo-Maratha War in 1818.
- Consequently, Nagpur became a princely state under British suzerainty.
Lord Dalhousie
- James Andrew Broun-Ramsay, 1st Marquess of Dalhousie, served as the Governor-General of India from 1848 to 1856.
- A distinguished Scottish statesman, Lord Dalhousie implemented a policy to expand the East India Company’s territorial influence.
- He introduced the Doctrine of Lapse in India, leading to the annexation of eight states within the country.
- Lord Dalhousie played a key role in the Second Anglo-Sikh War, which resulted in the incorporation of the entire province of Punjab into the British Empire.
The Doctrine of Lapse: Effects
- Numerous important Indian states lost independence under British colonization, leading to discontent among Indian princes.
- The perceived illegitimacy of the Doctrine of Lapse was a contributing factor to the Indian Revolt of 1857.
- Nana Sahib and the Rani of Jhansi faced issues with the British, including the discontinuation of Nana Sahib’s pension and the denial of the crown to Rani’s adoptive son.
- In 1856, Governor-General Dalhousie returned to the United Kingdom.
- Dalhousie’s leadership during the Indian Revolt in 1857 was criticized as a cause of the rebellion.
- Over time, criticism of the increasingly assertive nature of the Doctrine of Lapse grew.
- Surendra Sai, the revolutionary from Orissa, spoke out against the Doctrine of Lapse, asserting that aggression had laid the groundwork for the revolt.
Conclusion
The British initially arrived in India for trade, but their ambition to monopolize resources led to a significant increase in their power on the subcontinent. The Doctrine of Lapse, essentially an expansionist strategy of the British East India Company, involved forcefully or cunningly annexing neighboring Indian states to expand the British Empire’s territory. Dalhousie implemented this doctrine to enhance the British East India Company’s dominance over the Indian subcontinent, thereby boosting their profits. This approach, however, resulted in the British becoming unpopular, and the rulers of various states emerged as fierce adversaries, contributing to the underlying causes of the 1857 revolt.
Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs)
1. What is the Doctrine of Lapse?
A: The Doctrine of Lapse was a controversial policy introduced by Lord Dalhousie, the Governor-General of India during the mid-19th century. According to this doctrine, if a ruler of a princely state under British protection died without a natural heir, the British East India Company could annex the state, considering it lapsed, and not allow any adopted heir or relative to inherit the throne.
2. Why was the Doctrine of Lapse implemented?
A: The Doctrine of Lapse was implemented for several reasons. One primary motivation was to annex princely states without direct heirs to expand British territories in India. Lord Dalhousie also believed that by preventing the adoption of heirs, the British could ensure more efficient administration and avoid potential conflicts arising from succession disputes in these states. The doctrine was part of the larger policy of territorial aggrandizement pursued by the East India Company during that period.
3. What were the consequences of the Doctrine of Lapse?
A: The Doctrine of Lapse led to widespread resentment and opposition among the Indian princely states. Many rulers who had adopted heirs or were planning to do so felt threatened by the British policy. The annexations resulting from the Doctrine of Lapse heightened tensions between the British and the Indian rulers, contributing to the overall discontent that eventually culminated in the Indian Rebellion of 1857. The annexations also had long-term implications for the relationship between the British Raj and the princely states, shaping the dynamics of power and authority in colonial India.
In case you still have your doubts, contact us on 9811333901.
For UPSC Prelims Resources, Click here
For Daily Updates and Study Material:
Join our Telegram Channel – Edukemy for IAS
- 1. Learn through Videos – here
- 2. Be Exam Ready by Practicing Daily MCQs – here
- 3. Daily Newsletter – Get all your Current Affairs Covered – here
- 4. Mains Answer Writing Practice – here
