Revolt of 1857 and British Expansion in India MCQ - Practice Questions with Answers

There is a chain: Plassey in 1757 opened political leverage in Bengal through Mir Jafar and court conspiracy; Buxar in 1764 was more decisive because Mir Qasim, Shuja-ud-Daulah and Shah Alam II were defeated together; the Treaty of Allahabad in 1765 then gave Diwani rights over Bengal, Bihar and Orissa. This made revenue the base of the Company's army and administration. Therefore, the accurate sequence is political leverage, stronger recognition of sovereignty, and revenue-backed power through Diwani.

The Enfield rifle cartridge suspicion is called the immediate trigger: sepoys feared cow and pig fat would offend Hindu and Muslim religious sensibilities. But the same notes warn that the revolt was not caused by one issue alone. Older grievances included loss of allowances, racial discrimination, fear of overseas service after the General Service Enlistment Act of 1856, annexation policies, missionary anxiety, revenue pressure and the disruption caused by Awadh's annexation. Thus the single-cause assertion is false, while the broader-reasons statement is true.

There is a clear chain for the Company's rise in Bengal. Plassey in 1757 opened political influence through court conspiracy and Mir Jafar, rather than a full conquest. Buxar in 1764 was deeper because Mir Qasim, Shuja-ud-Daulah and Shah Alam II were defeated together, strengthening recognition of Company power. The Treaty of Allahabad in 1765 then gave Diwani rights over Bengal, Bihar and Orissa, so revenue could finance the army and administration. That is why the influence-recognition-revenue sequence is the safest reading.

Subsidiary Alliance, associated most clearly with Lord Wellesley, required an Indian ruler to accept a British force, pay for it, and surrender independent diplomacy. A ruler under it could look ceremonially sovereign while losing control of defence and foreign policy. Doctrine of Lapse was different: it annexed states when adoption was not recognised for succession to sovereignty. Awadh is marked as the key exception because it was annexed in 1856 on the stated ground of misgovernment, not by lapse. Therefore only the statement on Subsidiary Alliance is correct.

The three revenue systems differ by their assessment base. Permanent Settlement in Bengal, Bihar and Orissa fixed revenue and recognised zamindars as proprietors or revenue intermediaries. Ryotwari, associated with Thomas Munro and Alexander Read, dealt directly with cultivators or ryots in Madras and later Bombay. Mahalwari, shaped in the North-Western Provinces and parts of Punjab, settled revenue with the village estate or mahal. The correct matching is Permanent Settlement with zamindars, Ryotwari with cultivators, and Mahalwari with the village estate.