Jump to content

Princely state

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
This article is about the British-Indian usage. For the global concept, seePrincipality.
Colonial India
British Indian Empire
Imperial entities of India
Austrian India1778–1785
Swedish India1731–1813
Dutch India1605–1825
Danish India1620–1869
French India1668–1954
Portuguese India
(1505–1961)
Casa da Índia1434–1833
Portuguese East India Company1628–1633
British India
(1600–1947)
EIC in India1600–1757
Company rule in India1757–1858
British rule in Portuguese India1797–1813
British Raj1858–1947
British rule in Burma1824–1948
Princely states1721–1949
Partition of India1947
Princely state
Individual residencies
Agencies
Lists

Aprincely state(also callednative stateorIndian state) was a nominally sovereign[1]entity of theBritish Indian Empirethat was not directly governed by the British, but rather by an Indian ruler under a form ofindirect rule,[2]subject to asubsidiary allianceand thesuzeraintyorparamountcyof theBritish crown.

At the time of the British withdrawal, 565 princely states were officially recognized in the Indian subcontinent,[3]apart from thousands ofzamindari estatesandjagirs.In 1947, princely states covered 40% of the area of pre-independence India and constituted 23% of its population.[4]The most important states had their own British political residencies:Hyderabadof theNizams,Mysore,PudukkottaiandTravancorein the South,Jammu and Kashmir,andIndorein Central India. The most prominent among those – roughly a quarter of the total – had the status of asalute state,one whose ruler was entitled to a set number ofgun saluteson ceremonial occasions.

The princely states varied greatly in status, size, and wealth; the premier 21-gun salute states of Hyderabad and Jammu and Kashmir were each over 200,000 km2(77,000 sq mi) in size. In 1941, Hyderabad had a population of over 16 million, while Jammu and Kashmir had a population of slightly over 4 million. At the other end of the scale, the non-salute principality ofLawacovered an area of 49 km2(19 sq mi), with a population of just below 3,000. Some two hundred of the lesser states even had an area of less than 25 km2(10 sq mi).[5][6]

History[edit]

1765–1805 map of India, shown with a territorial division between Hindus, Muslims and the British.
Political subdivisions of the Indian Empire in 1909 with British India (pink) and the princely states (yellow)

The Princely states at the time of Indian independence were mostly formed after the disintegration of the Mughal empire. Many Princely states had a foreign origin due to the long period of external migration to India. Some of these were the rulers ofHyderabad(Turks),Bhopal(Afghans),Rampur(Pashtun) andJanjira(Abyssinian). Among the Hindu kingdoms, most of the rulers wereKshatriya.Only theRajput statesand a scattering ofSouth Indian kingdomscould trace their lineage to the pre-Mughal period.[7]

British relationship with the princely states[edit]

India under the BritishRaj(the "Indian Empire" ) consisted of two types of territory:British Indiaand thenative statesorprincely states.In itsInterpretation Act 1889,theBritish Parliamentadopted the following definitions:

(4.) The expression "British India" shall mean all territories and places within Her Majesty's dominions which are for the time being governed by Her Majesty through the Governor-General of India or through any governor or other officer subordinate to the Governor-General of India.
(5.) The expression "India" shall mean British India together with any territories of any native prince or chief under the suzerainty of Her Majesty exercised through the Governor-General of India, or through any governor or other officer subordinate to the Governor-General of India.[8]

In general the term "British India"had been used (and is still used) also to refer to the regions underthe rule of the East India Companyin India from 1774 to 1858.[9][10]

TheBritish Crown's suzerainty over 175 princely states, generally the largest and most important, was exercised in the name of the British Crown by the central government of British India under the Viceroy; the remaining approximately 400 states were influenced by Agents answerable to the provincial governments of British India under a governor, lieutenant-governor, or chief commissioner.[11]A clear distinction between "dominion" and "suzerainty" was supplied by the jurisdiction of the courts of law: the law of British India rested upon the legislation enacted by the British Parliament, and the legislative powers those laws vested in the various governments of British India, both central and local; in contrast, the courts of the princely states existed under the authority of the respective rulers of those states.[11]

Princely status and titles[edit]

Sayajirao Gaekwad III,TheMaharajaofBaroda State.

The Indian rulers bore various titles – includingMaharajaorRaja( "king" ),Sultan,Nawab,Emir,Raje,Nizam,Wadiyar(used only by the Maharajas ofMysore,meaning "lord" ), Agniraj Maharaj for the rulers of Bhaddaiyan Raj,Chogyal,Nawab( "governor" ), Nayak,Wāli,Inamdar,[12]Saranjamdar[13]and many others. Whatever the literal meaning and traditional prestige of the ruler's actual title, the British government translated them all as "prince", to avoid the implication that the native rulers could be "kings" with status equal to that of the British monarch.

An old image of theBritish Residencyin the city ofQuilon,Kerala

More prestigious Hindu rulers (mostly existing before the Mughal Empire, or having split from such old states) often used the title "Raja",Raje"or a variant such asRai,Rana,Babu"Rao", "Rawat" or Rawal. Also in this 'class' were severalThakurs or Thai oresand a few particular titles, such asSardar,Mankari(or Mānkari/Maankari),Deshmukh,Sar Desai,Istamuradar,Saranjamdar,Raja Inamdar etc.

The most prestigious Hindu rulers usually had the prefix "maha" ( "great", compare for example Grand Duke) in their titles, as inMaharaja, Maharana, Maharao,etc. This was used in many princely states includingMewar,TravancoreandCochin.The state ofTravancorealso hadqueens regentstyledMaharani,applied only to sister of king in Kerala.

There were also compound titles, such as (Maha)rajadhiraj, Raj-i-rajgan, often relics from an elaborate system of hierarchical titles under theMughal emperors.For example, the addition of the adjectiveBahadurraised the status of the titleholder one level.

Furthermore, most dynasties used a variety of additional titles such asVarmain South India. This should not be confused with various titles and suffixes not specific to princes but used by entire (sub)castes. This is almost analogous toSinghtitle in North India.

TheSikhprinces concentrated atPunjabusually adopted Hindu-type titles when attaining princely rank; at a lower levelSardarwas used.

Muslimrulers almost all used the title "Nawab"(the Arabic honorific ofnaib,"deputy", used of the Mughal governors, who became de facto autonomous with the decline of the Mughal Empire), with the prominent exceptions of theNizamofHyderabad & Berar,theWāli/KhanofKalatand theWāli of Swat. Other less usual titles includedDarbar Sahib,Dewan,Jam,Mehtar(unique toChitral) and Mir (fromEmir).

Precedence and prestige[edit]

However, the actual importance of a princely state cannot be read from the title of its ruler, which was usuallygranted(or at least recognized) as a favor, often in recognition for loyalty and services rendered to theBritish Raj.Although some titles were raised once or even repeatedly, there was no automatic updating when a state gained or lost real power. In fact, princely titles were even awarded to holders of domains (mainlyjagirs) and eventaluqdarsandzamindars,which were not states at all. Most of the zamindar who hold the princely titles were in fact erstwhile princely and royal states reduced to zamindari by the British EIC. Various sources give significantly different numbers of states and domains of the various types. Even in general, the definition of titles and domains are clearly not well-established.

An 1895 group photograph of the eleven-year-oldKrishnaraja Wadiyar IV,ruler of theprincely state of MysoreinSouth India,with his brothers and sisters. In 1799, his grandfather, then aged five, had been granted dominion of Mysore by the British and forced into asubsidiary alliance.The British later directly governed the state between 1831 and 1881.
The Govindgarh Palace of the Maharaja ofRewa.The palace which was built as a hunting lodge later became famous for the firstwhite tigersthat were found in the adjacent jungle and raised in the palace zoo.
TheNawab of JunagarhBahadur Khan III (seated centre in an ornate chair) shown in an 1885 photograph with state officials and family.
Photograph (1900) of the Maharani ofSikkim.Sikkim was under thesuzeraintyof the Provincial government of Bengal; its ruler received a 15-gun salute.

In addition to their titles all princely rulers were eligible to be appointed to certain British orders of chivalry associated with India, theMost Exalted Order of the Star of Indiaand theMost Eminent Order of the Indian Empire.Women could be appointed as "Knights" (instead of Dames) of these orders. Rulers entitled to 21-gun and 19-gun salutes were normally appointed to the highest rank, Knight Grand Commander of the Order of the Star of India.

Many Indian princes served in theBritish Army,theIndian Army,or in local guard or police forces, often rising to high ranks; some even served while on the throne. Many of these were appointed as anAide de camp,either to the ruling prince of their own house (in the case of relatives of such rulers) or indeed to the British monarchs. Many sawactive service,both on the subcontinent and on other fronts, during both World Wars.

Apart from those members of the princely houses who entered military service and who distinguished themselves, a good number of princes received honorary ranks as officers in the British and Indian Armed Forces. Those ranks were conferred based on several factors, including their heritage, lineage, gun-salute (or lack of one) as well as personal character or martial traditions. After the First and Second World Wars, the princely rulers of several of the major states, includingGwalior,Patiala,Nabha,Faridkort,Bikaner,Jaipur,Jodhpur,Jammu and Kashmirand Hyderabad, were given honorary general officer ranks as a result of their states' contributions to the war effort.

  • Lieutenant/Captain/Flight Lieutenant or Lieutenant-Commander/Major/Squadron Leader (for junior members of princely houses or for minor princes)
  • Commander/Lieutenant-Colonel/Wing Commander or Captain/Colonel/Group Captain (granted to princes of salute states, often to those entitled to 15-guns or more)
  • Commodore/Brigadier/Air Commodore (conferred upon princes of salute states entitled to gun salutes of 15-guns or more)
  • Major-General/Air Vice-Marshal (conferred upon princes of salute states entitled to 15-guns or more; conferred upon rulers of the major princely states, including Baroda,Kapurthala,Travancore,BhopalandMysore)
  • Lieutenant-General (conferred upon the rulers of the largest and most prominent princely houses after the First and Second World Wars for their states' contributions to the war effort.)
  • General (very rarely awarded; the Maharajas of Gwalior and Jammu & Kashmir were created honorary Generals in the British Army in 1877, the Maharaja of Bikaner was made one in 1937, and the Nizam of Hyderabad in 1941)[citation needed]

It was also not unusual for members of princely houses to be appointed to various colonial offices, often far from their native state, or to enter the diplomatic corps.

Salute states[edit]

Main article:Salute state
HH Maharaja Sir Jayaji Rao ScindiaofGwalior State,General SirHenry Daly(Founder of TheDaly College), with British officers andMarathanobility(Sardars,Jagirdars&Mankaris) inIndore,Holkar State,c. 1879.

Thegun salutesystem was used to set unambiguously the precedence of the major rulers in the area in which the British East India Company was active, or generally of the states and their dynasties. As heads of a state, certain princely rulers were entitled to be saluted by the firing of an odd number of guns between three and 21, with a greater number of guns indicating greater prestige. Generally, the number of guns remained the same for all successive rulers of a particular state, but individual princes were sometimes granted additional guns on a personal basis. Furthermore, rulers were sometimes granted additional gun salutes within their own territories only, constituting a semi-promotion. The states of all these rulers (about 120) were known assalute states.

AfterIndian Independence,the Maharana ofUdaipurdisplaced theNizamof Hyderabad as the most senior prince in India, becauseHyderabad Statehad not acceded to the newDominion of India,and the styleHighnesswas extended to all rulers entitled to 9-gun salutes. When the princely states had been integrated into the Indian Union their rulers were promised continued privileges and an income (known as thePrivy Purse) for their upkeep. Subsequently, when the Indian government abolished the Privy Purse in 1971, the whole princely order ceased to be recognised under Indian law, although many families continue to retain their social prestige informally; some descendants of the rulers are still prominent in regional or national politics, diplomacy, business and high society.

At the time of Indian independence, only five rulers – theNizamofHyderabad,the Maharaja ofMysore,the Maharaja ofJammu and Kashmir state,the MaharajaGaekwadofBarodaand the MaharajaScindiaofGwalior– were entitled to a 21-gun salute. Six more[citation needed]– the Nawab ofBhopal,theMaharaja HolkarofIndore,the Maharaja ofBharatpur[citation needed],the Maharana ofUdaipur,the Maharaja ofKolhapur,theMaharajaofPatiala[citation needed]and the Maharaja ofTravancore– were entitled to 19-gun salutes. The most senior princely ruler was theNizam of Hyderabad,who was entitled to the unique styleExalted Highnessand21-gun salute.[14]Other princely rulers entitled to salutes of 11 guns (soon 9 guns too) or more were entitled to the styleHighness.No special style was used by rulers entitled to lesser gun salutes.

Asparamount ruler,and successor to the Mughals, the BritishKing-Emperorof India, for whom the style ofMajestywas reserved, was entitled to an 'imperial' 101-gun salute—in the European tradition also the number of guns fired to announce the birth of an heir (male) to the throne.

Non-salute states[edit]

Coinage of king Manak Pal (1772-1804),Princely State of Karauli.Karauli mint. Struck in the name of the Mughal emperorShah Alam II.Dated 1784-5 CE

There was no strict correlation between the levels of the titles and the classes of gun salutes, the real measure of precedence, but merely a growing percentage of higher titles in classes with more guns. As a rule the majority of gun-salute princes had at least nine, with numbers below that usually the prerogative of Arab Sheikhs of theAden protectorate,also under British protection.

There were many so-called non-salute states of lower prestige. Since the total of salute states was 117 and there were more than 500 princely states, most rulers were not entitled to any gun salute. Not all of these were minor rulers –Surguja State,for example, was both larger and more populous thanKarauli State,but the Maharaja of Karauli was entitled to a 17-gun salute and the Maharaja of Surguja was not entitled to any gun salute at all.

A number of princes, in the broadest sense of the term, were not even acknowledged as such.[example needed]On the other hand, the dynasties of certain defunct states were allowed to keep their princely status – they were known aspolitical pensioners,such as the Nawab ofOudh.There were also certain estates of British India which were rendered aspolitical saranjams,having equal princely status.[15]Though none of these princes were awarded gun salutes, princely titles in this category were recognised as a form ofvassalsof salute states, and were not even in direct relation with the paramount power.

Largest princely states by area[edit]

Eleven largest princely states in terms of area
Name of princely state Area in square miles Population in 1941 Present State Title, ethnicity, and religion of ruler Gun-salute for ruler
Jammu and Kashmir 84,471 4,021,616 including Gilgit, Baltistan (Skardu), Ladakh, and Punch (mostly Muslim, with sizeable Hindu and Buddhist minority) Jammu and Kashmir Maharaja,Dogra,Hindu 21
Hyderabad State 82,698 16,338,534 (mostly Hindu with a sizeable Muslim population) Telangana,Maharashtra,Karnataka Nizam,Turkic,Sunni Muslim 21
Khanate of Kalat 73,278 250,211 (chiefly Sunni Muslim) Balochistan, Pakistan KhanorWali,Baloch,Sunni Muslim 19
Jodhpur State 36,071 2,125,000 (mostly Hindu with a sizeable Muslim population) Rajasthan Maharaja,Rathore,Hindu 17
Kingdom of Mysore 29,458 7,328,896 (Chiefly Hindu, with pockets of Muslim populations) Karnataka Wodeyardynasty;Maharaja;Kannadiga;HinduKshattriya(Urs/Arasu in Kannada) 21
Gwalior State 26,397 4,006,159 (chiefly Hindu, with a sizeable Muslim population) Madhya Pradesh Maharaja,Maratha,Hindu 21
Bikaner State 23,317 936,218 (chiefly Hindu, with a low Muslim minority) Rajasthan Maharaja, Rathore, Hindu 17
Bahawalpur State 17,726 1,341,209 (Chiefly Muslim, with a sizeable Hindu, Sikh minority) Punjab (Pakistan) Nawab Amir, Abbasid, Muslim 17
Jaisalmer State 16,100 76,255 (Chiefly Hindu with a sizeable Muslim population) Rajasthan Maharaja,Bhati,Hindu 15
Jaipur State 15,601 2,631,775 (Chiefly Hindu, with a sizeable Muslim population) Rajasthan Maharaja,Kachhwaha,Hindu 17
Bastar State 13,062 306,501 (Chiefly Hindu, with a low Muslim population) Chhattisgarh Maharaja,Kakatiya-Bhanj,Hindu -

Doctrine of lapse[edit]

Main article:Doctrine of lapse

A controversial aspect of East India Company rule was thedoctrine of lapse,a policy under which lands whose feudal ruler died (or otherwise became unfit to rule) without a male biological heir (as opposed to an adopted son) would become directly controlled by the company and an adopted son would not become the ruler of the princely state. This policy went counter to Indian tradition where, unlike Europe, it was far more the accepted norm for a ruler to appoint his own heir.

The doctrine of lapse was pursued most vigorously by the Governor-GeneralSir James Ramsay,10th Earl (later 1st Marquess) ofDalhousie.Dalhousie annexed seven states, includingAwadh(Oudh), whose Nawabs he had accused of misrule, and theMarathastates ofNagpur,Jhansi,Satara,Sambalpur,andThanjavur.Resentment over the annexation of these states turned to indignation when the heirlooms of the Maharajas of Nagpur were auctioned off in Calcutta. Dalhousie's actions contributed to the rising discontent amongst the upper castes which played a large part in the outbreak of theIndian mutiny of 1857.The last Mughal Badshah (emperor), whom many of the mutineers saw as a figurehead to rally around, was deposed following its suppression.

In response to the unpopularity of the doctrine, it was discontinued with the end of Company rule and theBritish Parliament's assumption of direct power over India.

Imperial governance[edit]

Main articles:Agencies of British IndiaandResidencies of British India
Photograph (1894) of the 19-year-oldShahaji II BhonsleMaharajah ofKolhapurvisiting the British resident and his staff at the Residency

By treaty, the British controlled the external affairs of the princely states absolutely. As the states were not British possessions, they retained control over their own internal affairs, subject to a degree of British influence which in many states was substantial.

By the beginning of the 20th century, relations between the British and the four largest states –Hyderabad,Mysore,Jammu and Kashmir, andBaroda– were directly under the control of thegovernor-general of India,in the person of a Britishresident.Two agencies, forRajputanaandCentral India,oversaw twenty and 148 princely states respectively. The remaining princely states had their own British political officers, or Agents, who answered to the administrators of India's provinces. The agents of five princely states were then under the authority ofMadras,354 underBombay,26 ofBengal,two underAssam,34 underPunjab,fifteen under theCentral Provinces and Berarand two under theUnited Provinces.

Chamber of Princes meeting in March 1941

TheChamber of Princes(Narender MandalorNarendra Mandal) was an institution established in 1920 by aroyal proclamationof theKing-Emperorto provide a forum in which the rulers could voice their needs and aspirations to the government. It survived until the end of theBritish Rajin 1947.[16]

By the early 1930s, most of the princely states whose agencies were under the authority of India's provinces were organised into new Agencies, answerable directly to the governor-general, on the model of the Central India and Rajputana agencies: theEastern States Agency,Punjab States Agency,Baluchistan Agency,Deccan States Agency,Madras States Agencyand theNorthwest Frontier States Agency.TheBaroda Residencywas combined with the princely states of northern Bombay Presidency into theBaroda, Western India and Gujarat States Agency.Gwaliorwas separated from the Central India Agency and given its own Resident, and the states ofRampurandBenares,formerly with Agents under the authority of the United Provinces, were placed under theGwalior Residencyin 1936. The princely states ofSandurandBanganapallein Mysore Presidency were transferred to the agency of the Mysore Resident in 1939.

Principal princely states in 1947[edit]

The native states in 1947 included five large states that were in "direct political relations" with the Government of India. For the complete list of princely states in 1947, seeLists of princely states of India.

In direct relations with the central government[edit]

Five large princely states in direct political relations with the Central Government in India[17][18][19][20]
Name of princely state Area in square miles Population in 1941 Approximate revenue of the state (in hundred thousandRupees) Title, ethnicity, and religion of ruler Gun-salute for ruler Designation of local political officer
Baroda State 13,866 3,343,477 (chiefly Hindu, with a sizeable Muslim population) 323.26 Maharaja,Maratha,Hindu 21 Resident at Baroda
Hyderabad State 82,698 16,338,534 (mostly Hindu with a sizeable Muslim minority) 1582.43 Nizam,Turkic,Sunni Muslim 21 Resident in Hyderabad
Jammu and Kashmir 84,471 4,021,616 including Gilgit, Baltistan (Skardu), Ladakh, and Punch (mostly Muslim, with sizeable Hindu and Buddhist populations) 463.95 Maharaja,Dogra,Hindu 21 Resident in Jammu & Kashmir
Kingdom of Mysore 29,458 7,328,896 (Chiefly Hindu, with sizeable Muslim populations) 1001.38 Wodeyar(means Owner inKannada) andMaharaja,Kannadiga,Hindu 21 Resident inMysore
Gwalior State 26,397 4,006,159 (chiefly Hindu, with a sizeable Muslim population) 356.75 Maharaja,Maratha,Hindu 21 Residentat Gwalior
Total 236,890 35,038,682 3727.77

Central India Agency,Gwalior Residency,Baluchistan Agency,Rajputana Agency,Eastern States Agency

88 princely states forming the Central India Agency[21][22]
Name of princely state Area in square miles Population in 1941 Approximate revenue of the state (in hundred thousandRupees) Title, ethnicity, and religion of ruler Gun-salute for ruler Designation of local political officer
Indore State 9,341 1,513,966 (chiefly Hindu, with a sizeable Muslim population) 304.9 Maharaja,Maratha,Hindu 19 (plus 2 local) Residentat Indore
Bhopal 6,924 785,322 (chiefly Hindu, with a sizeable Muslim population) 119.82 Nawab(m)/Begum(f),Afghan,Muslim 19 (plus 2 local) Political Agent in Bhopal
Rewah 13,000 1,820,445 (chiefly Hindu, with a sizeable Muslim population) 65 Maharaja,BaghelRajput,Hindu 17 Second largest state inBaghelkhand
85 smaller and minor states (1941) 22,995 (1901) 2.74 million (Chiefly Hindu, 1901) 129 (1901)
Total 77,395 (1901) 8.51 million (1901) 421 (1901)
42 princely states forming the Eastern States Agency[21][23]
Name of princely state Area in square miles Population in 1941 Approximate revenue of the state (in hundred thousandRupees) Title, ethnicity, and religion of ruler Gun-salute for ruler Designation of local political officer
Cooch Behar 1,318 639,898 (chiefly Hindu and Muslim) 91 Maharaja,Koch(Kshattriya), Brahmo 13 Resident for the Eastern States
Tripura State 4,116 513,010 (chiefly Vaishnavite, with a sizeableSanamahiminority) 54 Maharaja,Tripuri,Vaishnavite (Kshattriya) 13 Resident for the Eastern States
Mayurbhanj State 4,243 990,977 (chiefly Hindu) 49 Maharaja,Kshattriya, Hindu 9 Resident for the Eastern States
39 smaller and minor states (1941) 56,253 6,641,991 241.31
Total 65,930 8,785,876 435.31

Gwalior Residency(two states)

Two states under the suzerainty of the Resident at Gwalior, Gwalior having direct relations with the central government.[17][24]
Name of princely state Area in square miles Population in 1941 Approximate revenue of the state (in hundred thousandRupees) Title, ethnicity, and religion of ruler Gun-salutefor ruler Designation of local political officer
Rampur 893 464,919 (chieflyHinduandMuslim,in 1931) 51 Nawab,Pathan,Muslim 15 Political Agent at Rampur
Benares State 875 391,165 (chiefly Hindu, 1931) 19 Maharaja,Bhumihar,Hindu 13 (plus 2 local) Political Agent at Benares
Total 1,768 856,084 (1941, approx.) 70
23 princely states forming theRajputana Agency,with the Resident for Rajputana at Abu[25][26]
Name of princely state Area in square miles Population in 1941 Approximate revenue of the state (in hundred thousandRupees) Title, ethnicity, and religion of ruler Gun-salute for ruler Designation of local political officer
Udaipur (Mewar) 13,170 1,926,698 (chieflyHinduandBhil) 107 Maharana,SisodiaRajput,Hindu 19 (plus 2 personal) Political Agent for theMewarand Southern Rajputana States
Jaipur 15,610 3,040,876 (chiefly Hindu) 188.6 Maharaja,KachwahaRajput,Hindu 17 (plus 2 personal) Political Agent at Jaipur
Jodhpur (Marwar) 36,120 2,555,904 (chiefly Hindu) 208.65 Maharaja,RathorRajput,Hindu 17 Political Agent for the Western States ofRajputana
Bikaner 23,181 1,292,938 (chiefly Hindu) 185.5 Maharaja,Rathor Rajput, Hindu 17 Political agent for the Western States of Rajputana
17 salute states, 1 chiefship, 1zamindari 42,374 3.64 million (chiefly Hindu, 1901) 155 (1901)
Total 128,918 (1901) 9.84 million (1901) 320 (1901)
Three princely states forming the Baluchistan Agency[27][28]
Name of princely state Area in square miles Population in 1941 Approximate revenue of the state (in hundred thousandRupees) Title, ethnicity, and religion of ruler Gun-salute for ruler Designation of local political officer
Kalat 73,278 250,211 (chiefly Sunni Muslim) 21.3 KhanorWali,Baloch,Sunni Muslim 19 Political Agent in Kalat
Las Bela 7,132 68,972 (chiefly Sunni Muslim) 6.1 Jam,Baloch,Sunni Muslim Political Agent in Kalat
Kharan 14,210 33,763 (chiefly Sunni Muslim) 2 Nawab,Baloch,Sunni Muslim Political Agent in Kalat
Total 94,620 352,946 29.4

Other states under provincial governments

Madras(5 states)

5 states under the suzerainty of the Provincial Government ofMadras[27]
Name of princely state Area in square miles Population in 1901 Approximate revenue of the state (in hundred thousand)Rupees Title, ethnicity, and religion of ruler Gun-salutefor ruler Designation of local political officer
Travancore 7,091 2,952,157 (chiefly Hindu and Christian) 100 Maharaja,Kshatriya-Samanthan,Hindu 21 (including two guns personal to the then ruler) Resident in Travancore and Cochin
Cochin 1,362 812,025 (chiefly Hindu and Christian) 27 Raja,Samanta-Kshatriya,Hindu 17 Resident in Travancore and Cochin
Pudukkottai 1,100 380,440 (chiefly Hindu) 11 Raja,Kallar,Hindu 11 Collector of Trichinopoly (ex officioPolitical Agent)
2 minor states (BanganapalleandSandur) 416 43,464 3
Total 9,969 4,188,086 141

Bombay(354 states)

354 states under the suzerainty of the Provincial Government ofBombay[29]
Name of princely state Area in square miles Population in 1901 Approximate revenue of the state (in hundred thousandRupees) Title, ethnicity, and religion of ruler Gun-salute for ruler Designation of local political officer
Kolhapur 2,855 910,011 (chieflyHindus) 48 Maharaja",Chhtrapati"Maratha,Hindu 19 Political Agent for Kolhapur
Cutch 7,616 488,022 (chiefly Hindu) 20 Maharao,JadejaRajput,Hindu 17 Political Agent in Cutch
Junagarh 3,284 395,428 (chiefly Hindu) 27 Nawab,Pathan,Muslim 11 Agent to the Governor in Kathiawar
Navanagar 3,791 336,779 (chiefly Hindu) 31 Jam Sahib,JadejaRajput,Hindu 11 Agent to the Governor in Kathiawar
349 other states 42,165 4,579,095 281
Total 65,761 6,908,648 420

Central Provinces(15 states)

15 states under the suzerainty of the Provincial Government of theCentral Provinces[30]
Name of princely state Area in square miles Population in 1901 Approximate revenue of the state (in hundred thousandRupees) Title, ethnicity, and religion of ruler Gun-salutefor ruler Designation of local political officer
Kalahandi 3,745 284,465 (chiefly Hindu) 4 Raja,Kshatriya,Hindu 9 Political Agent for theChhattisgarhFeudatories
Bastar 13,062 306,501 (chiefly Animist) 3 Raja,Kshatriya, Hindu Political Agent for theChhattisgarhFeudatories
13 other states 12,628 1,339,353 (chiefly Hindu) 16 11
Total 29,435 1,996,383 21

Punjab(45 states)

45 states under the suzerainty of the Provincial Government of thePunjab[31][32]
Name of princely state Area in square miles Population in 1941 Approximate revenue of the state (in hundred thousandRupees) Title, ethnicity, and religion of ruler Gun-salutefor ruler Designation of local political officer
Bahawalpur State 16,434 1,341,209 (chiefly Muslim) 335 Nawab,Daudputra,Muslim 17 Political Agent forPhulkianStates and Bahawalpur
Patiala State 5,942 1,936,259 (chiefly Sikh) 302.6 Maharaja,Sikh 17 (and 2 personal) Political Agent for Phulkian States and Bahawalpur
Nabha State 947 340,044 (chiefly Sikh) 38.7 Maharaja,Sikh 13 (and 2 local) Political Agent for Phulkian States and Bahawalpur
Jind State 1,299 361,812 (chiefly Sikh) 37.4 Maharaja,Sikh 13 (and 2 personal) Political Agent for Phulkian States and Bahawalpur
Kapurthala State 645 378,380 (chiefly Sikh) 40.5 Maharaja,Ahuluwalia, Sikh 13 (and 2 personal) Commissioner of theJullundurDivision (ex officioPolitical Agent)
Faridkot State 638 199,283 (chiefly Sikh) 22.7 Raja,Sikh 11 Commissioner of the Jullundur Division (ex officioPolitical Agent)
Garhwal State 4,500 397,369 (chiefly Hindu) 26.9 Maharaja,RajputHindu 11 CommissionerofKumaun(ex officioPolitical Agent)
Khayrpur State 6,050 305,387 (chiefly Muslim) 15 (plus 2 local) Mir,TalpurBaloch,Muslim 37.8 Political Agent for Khairpur
25 other states 12,661 (in 1901) 1,087,614 (in 1901) 30 (in 1901)
Total 36,532 (in 1901) 4,424,398 (in 1901) 155 (in 1901)

Assam(26 states)

26 states under the suzerainty of the Provincial Government ofAssam[33][34]
Name of princely state Area in square miles Population in 1941 Approximate revenue of the state (in hundred thousandRupees) Title, ethnicity, and religion of ruler Gun-salutefor ruler Designation of local political officer
Manipur 270.3 512,069 (chiefly Hindu and Animist) 19 Raja,Kshatriya,Hindu 11 Political Agent in Manipur
25 Khasi States 3,778 213,586 (Khasi and Christian) ~1 (1941, approx.) Deputy Commissioner, Khasi and Jaintia Hills
Total 12,416 725,655 20 (1941; approx.)

Burma[edit]

See also:Shan StatesandWa States
Burma(52 states)
52 states inBurma:all exceptKantarawadi,one of theKarenni States,were included in British India until 1937[35]
Name of princely state Area in square miles Population in 1901 Approximate revenue of the state (in hundred thousandRupees) Title, ethnicity, and religion of ruler Gun-salute for ruler Designation of local political officer
Hsipaw(Thibaw) 5,086 105,000 (Buddhist) 3 Sawbwa,Shan,Buddhist 9 Superintendent,Northern Shan States
Kengtung 12,000 190,000 (Buddhist) 1 Sawbwa,Shan, Buddhist 9 SuperintendentSouthern Shan States
Yawnghwe 865 95,339 (Buddhist) 2.13 Sawbwa,Shan, Buddhist 9 Superintendent Southern Shan States
Mongnai 2,717 44,000 (Buddhist) 0.5 Sawbwa,Shan, Buddhist Superintendent Southern Shan States
5Karenni States 3,130 45,795 (Buddhist and Animist) 0.035 Sawbwa,Karenni,Buddhist Superintendent Southern Shan States
44 other states 42,198 792,152 (Buddhist and Animist) 8.5
Total 67,011 1,177,987 13.5

State military forces[edit]

Main article:Indian State Forces

The armies of the Native States were bound by many restrictions that were imposed bysubsidiary alliances.They existed mainly for ceremonial use and for internal policing, although certain units designated as Imperial Service Troops, were available for service alongside the regular Indian Army upon request by the British government.[36]

According to theImperial Gazetteer of India vol. IV 1907,p. 85,

Since a chief can neither attack his neighbour nor fall out with a foreign nation, it follows that he needs no military establishment which is not required either for police purposes or personal display, or for cooperation with the Imperial Government. The treaty made with Gwalior in 1844, and the instrument of transfer given to Mysore in 1881, alike base the restriction of the forces of the State upon the broad ground of protection. The former explained in detail that unnecessary armies were embarrassing to the State itself and the cause of disquietude to others: a few months later a striking proof of this was afforded by the army of the Sikh kingdom of Lahore. The British Government has undertaken to protect the dominions of the Native princes from invasion and even from rebellion within: its army is organised for the defence not merely ofBritish India,but of all the possessions under thesuzeraintyof the King-Emperor.[37]

In addition, other restrictions were imposed:

The treaties with most of the larger States are clear on this point. Posts in the interior must not be fortified, factories for the production of guns and ammunition must not be constructed, nor may the subject of other States be enlisted in the local forces.... They must allow the forces that defend them to obtain local supplies, to occupy cantonments or positions, and to arrest deserters; and in addition to these services they must recognise theImperialcontrol of the railways, telegraphs, and postal communications as essential not only to the common welfare but to the common defence.[38]

The Imperial Service Troops were routinely inspected by British army officers and had the same equipment as soldiers in theBritish Indian Army.[39]Although their numbers were relatively small, the Imperial Service Troops were employed in China andBritish Somalilandin the first decade of the 20th century, and later saw action in theFirst World WarandSecond World War.[39]

Political integration of princely states[edit]

In 1920, Congress declared that attainment ofswarajfor Indians was its goal. It asked "all the sovereign princes of India to establish full responsible government in their states".Mahatma Gandhiassured the princes that Congress will not intervene in internal affairs of the princely states.[40]

In his presidential address at Lahore session in 1929,Jawaharlal Nehrudeclared: "The Indian states cannot live apart from the rest of the (sic) India".[41]

In 1937, Gandhi played a major role in formation of federation involving a union between British India and the princely states with an Indian central government.[42]

In July 1946, Nehru pointedly observed that no princely state could prevail militarily against the army of independent India.[43]

The era of the princely states effectively ended with Indian independence in 1947; by 1950, almost all of the principalities hadaccededto either India or Pakistan.[44]The accession process was largely peaceful, except in the cases ofJammu and Kashmir(whose ruler decided to accede to India following aninvasionby Pakistan-based forces, resulting in a long-standingdisputebetween the two countries),[45]Hyderabad State(whose ruler opted for independence in 1947, followed a year later bythe invasion and annexationof the state by India),Junagarhand its vassalBantva Manavadar(whose rulers acceded to Pakistan, but wereannexedby India),[46]andKalat(whose ruler declared independence in 1947, followed in 1948 by the state's accession to Pakistan).[47][48][49]

India[edit]

Main article:Political integration of India

At the time ofIndian independenceon 15 August 1947, India was divided into two sets of territories, the first being the territories of "British India",which were under the direct control of theIndia Officein London and thegovernor-general of India,and the second being the "princely states", the territories over whichthe Crownhadsuzerainty,but which were under the control of their hereditary rulers. In addition, there were several colonial enclaves controlled by France and Portugal. The integration of these territories intoDominion of India,that had been created by the Indian Independence Act 1947 by the British Parliament, was a declared objective of theIndian National Congress,which theGovernment of Indiapursued over the years 1947 to 1949. Through a combination of tactics,SardarVallabhbhai PatelandV. P. Menonin the months immediately preceding and following the independence convinced the rulers of almost all of the hundreds of princely states to accede to India. In a speech in January 1948, Vallabhbhai Patel said:

As you are all aware, on the lapse of Paramountcy every Indian State became a separate independent entity and our first task of consolidating about 550 States was on the basis of accession to the Indian Dominion on three subjects. Barring Hyderabad and Junagadh all the states which are contiguous to India acceded to Indian Dominion. Subsequently, Kashmir also came in... Some Rulers who were quick to read the writing on the wall, gave responsible government to their people; Cochin being the most illustrious example. In Travancore, there was a short struggle, but there, too, the Ruler soon recognised the aspiration of his people and agreed to introduce a constitution in which all powers would be transferred to the people and he would function as a constitutional Ruler.[50]

Although this process successfully integrated the vast majority of princely states into India, it was not as successful in relation to a few states, notably the former princely state ofKashmir,whose Maharaja delayed signing the instrument of accession into India until his territories were under the threat of invasion by Pakistan, and the state ofHyderabad,whose ruler decided to remain independent and was subsequently defeated by theOperation Poloinvasion.

Having secured their accession, Sardar Patel and V. P. Menon then proceeded, in a step-by-step process, to secure and extend the central government's authority over these states and to transform their administrations until, by 1956, there was little difference between the territories that had formerly been part of British India and those that had been princely states. Simultaneously, the Government of India, through a combination of diplomatic and economic pressure, acquired control over most of the remaining European colonial exclaves on the subcontinent. Fed up with the protracted and stubborn resistance of the Portuguese government; in 1961 theIndian Armyinvaded and annexedPortuguese India.[51]These territories, like the princely states, were also integrated into the Republic of India.

As the final step, in 1971, the 26th amendment[52]to theConstitution of Indiawithdrew recognition of the princes as rulers, took away their remaining privileges, and abolished the remuneration granted to them byprivy purses.


As per the terms of accession, the erstwhile Indian princes receivedprivy purses(government allowances), and initially retained their statuses, privileges, and autonomy in internal matters during a transitional period which lasted until 1956. During this time, the former princely states were merged into unions, each of which was headed by a former ruling prince with the title ofRajpramukh(ruling chief), equivalent to a state governor.[53]In 1956, the position ofRajpramukhwas abolished and the federations dissolved, the former principalities becoming part of Indian states. The states which acceded to Pakistan retained their status until the promulgation of a new constitution in 1956, when most became part of the province ofWest Pakistan;a few of the former states retained their autonomy until 1969 when they were fully integrated into Pakistan. The Indian government abolished the privy purses in 1971, followed by the government of Pakistan in 1972.[citation needed]

In July 1946,Jawaharlal Nehrupointedly observed that no princely state could prevail militarily against the army of independent India.[43]In January 1947, Nehru said that independent India would not accept thedivine right of kings.[54]In May, 1947, he declared that any princely state which refused to join theConstituent Assemblywould be treated as an enemy state.[55]There were officially 565 princely states when India and Pakistan became independent in 1947, but the great majority had contracted with the British viceroyto provide public services and tax collection. Only 21 had actual state governments, and only four were large (Hyderabad State,Mysore State,Jammu and Kashmir State,andBaroda State). Theyaccededto one of the two new independent countries between 1947 and 1949. All the princes were eventually pensioned off.[56]

Pakistan[edit]

Main article:Princely states of Pakistan

During the period of theBritish Raj,there were four princely states in Balochistan:Makran,Kharan,Las BelaandKalat.The first three acceded to Pakistan.[57][58][59][60]However, the ruler of the fourth princely state, theKhan of KalatAhmad Yar Khan,declared Kalat's independence as this was one of the options given to all princely states.[61]The state remained independent until it was acceded on 27 March 1948. The signing of the Instrument of Accession by Ahmad Yar Khan, led his brother,Prince Abdul Karim,to revolt against his brother's decision in July 1948, causing anongoing and still unresolved insurgency.[62]

Bahawalpurfrom the Punjab Agency joined Pakistan on 5 October 1947. The princely states of theNorth-West Frontier States Agencies.included the Dir Swat and Chitral Agency and the Deputy Commissioner of Hazara acting as the Political Agent for Amb and Phulra. These states joined Pakistan on independence from the British.[citation needed]

See also[edit]


References[edit]

  1. ^Ramusack 2004,pp. 85Quote:"The British did not create the Indian princes. Before and during the European penetration of India, indigenous rulers achieved dominance through the military protection they provided to dependents and their skill in acquiring revenues to maintain their military and administrative organizations. Major Indian rulers exercised varying degrees and types of sovereign powers before they entered treaty relations with the British. What changed during the late eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries is that the British increasingly restricted the sovereignty of Indian rulers. TheCompanyset boundaries; it extracted resources in the form of military personnel, subsidies or tribute payments, and the purchase of commercial goods at favorable prices, and limited opportunities for other alliances. From the 1810s onwards as the British expanded and consolidated their power, their centralized military despotism dramatically reduced the political options of Indian rulers. "(p. 85)
  2. ^Ramusack 2004,p. 87Quote:"The British system of indirect rule over Indian states... provided a model for the efficient use of scarce monetary and personnel resources that could be adopted to imperial acquisitions in Malaya and Africa. (p. 87)"
  3. ^Bhargava, R. P. (1991),The Chamber of Princes,Northern Book Centre, pp. 312–323,ISBN978-81-7211-005-5
  4. ^Datar, Arvind P. (18 November 2013)."Who betrayed Sardar Patel?".The Hindu.
  5. ^Markovits, Claude (2004).A history of modern India, 1480–1950.Anthem Press. pp. 386–409.ISBN9781843310044.
  6. ^The India Office and Burma Office List: 1945.Harrison & Sons, Ltd. 1945. pp. 33–37.
  7. ^Zubrzycki, John (2024).Dethroned.Oxford University Press. p. 41.ISBN978-1-80526-053-0.Princely States at the time of Indian independence owed their existence to the slow collapse of the Mughal Empire following the death of Aurangzeb in 1707. Centuries of foreign domination meant that many of the rulers who carved out their own states were outsiders. The Nizams of Hyderabad were of Turkoman stock. Bhopal was established by one of Aurangzeb's Afghan generals. Rampurs first ruler, Nawab Faizullah Khan, was a Pashtun. Tonk in present day Rajasthan was founded by Pindari freebooters. The seaboard state of Janjira was the creation of an Abysinnian pirate. Among the Hindu kingdoms, most of the rulers were Kshatriya. Only the Rajput states and a scattering of South Indian kingdoms could trace their lineage to the pre-Mughal period.
  8. ^Interpretation Act 1889 (52 & 53 Vict. c. 63), s. 18
  9. ^1.Imperial Gazetteer of India, volume IV, published under the authority of theSecretary of State for India-in-Council,1909, Oxford University Press. page 5. Quote: "The history of British India falls, as observed by Sir C. P. Ilbert in hisGovernment of India,into three periods. From the beginning of the seventeenth century to the middle of the eighteenth century the East India Company is a trading corporation, existing on the sufferance of the native powers and in rivalry with the merchant companies of Holland and France. During the next century the Company acquires and consolidates its dominion, shares its sovereignty in increasing proportions with the Crown, and gradually loses its mercantile privileges and functions. After the mutiny of 1857 the remaining powers of the Company are transferred to the Crown, and then follows an era of peace in which India awakens to new life and progress. "2.The Statutes: From the Twentieth Year of King Henry the Third to the...byRobert Harry Drayton,Statutes of the Realm – Law – 1770 Page 211 (3) "Save as otherwise expressly provided in this Act, the law of British India and of the several parts thereof existing immediately before the appointed..."3.Edney, M. E. (1997)Mapping an Empire: The Geographical Construction of British India, 1765–1843,University of Chicago Press. 480 pages.ISBN978-0-226-18488-34.Hawes, C.J. (1996)Poor Relations: The Making of a Eurasian Community in British India, 1773–1833.Routledge, 217 pages.ISBN0-7007-0425-6.
  10. ^Imperial Gazetteer of India vol. II 1908,pp. 463, 470 Quote1:"Before passing on to the political history of British India, which properly begins with the Anglo-French Wars in theCarnatic,... (p. 463) "Quote2:"The political history of the British in India begins in the eighteenth century with the French Wars in the Carnatic. (p.471)"
  11. ^abImperial Gazetteer of India vol. IV 1907,p. 60
  12. ^Great Britain. Indian Statutory Commission; Viscount John Allsebrook Simon Simon (1930).Report of the Indian Statutory Commission...H.M. Stationery Office.Retrieved9 June2012.
  13. ^All India reporter.D.V. Chitaley. 1938.Retrieved9 June2012.
  14. ^"King of all rewinds".The Week.
  15. ^Govindlal Dalsukhbhai Patel (1957).The land problem of reorganized Bombay state.N. M. Tripathi.Retrieved9 June2012.
  16. ^Vapal Pangunni Menon (1956)The Story of the Integration of the Indian States,Macmillan Co., pp. 17–19
  17. ^abImperial Gazetteer of India vol. IV 1907,p. 92
  18. ^"Mysore", Indian States and Agencies,The Statesman's Year Book 1947,pg 173, Macmillan & Co.
  19. ^"Jammu and Kashmir", Indian States and Agencies,The Statesman's Year Book 1947,pg 171, Macmillan & Co.
  20. ^"Hyderabad", Indian States and Agencies,The Statesman's Year Book 1947,pg 170, Macmillan & Co.
  21. ^abImperial Gazetteer of India vol. IV 1907,p. 93
  22. ^"Central India Agency", Indian States and Agencies,The Statesman's Year Book 1947,pg 168, Macmillan & Co.
  23. ^"Eastern States", Indian States and Agencies,The Statesman's Year Book 1947,pg 168, Macmillan & Co.
  24. ^"Gwalior Residency", Indian States and Agencies,The Statesman's Year Book 1947,pg 170, Macmillan & Co.
  25. ^Imperial Gazetteer of India vol. IV 1907,pp. 94–95
  26. ^"Rajputana", Indian States and Agencies,The Statesman's Year Book 1947,pg 175, Macmillan & Co.
  27. ^abImperial Gazetteer of India vol. IV 1907,p. 96
  28. ^"Baluchistan States", Indian States and Agencies,The Statesman's Year Book 1947,pg 160, Macmillan & Co.
  29. ^Imperial Gazetteer of India vol. IV 1907,p.97
  30. ^Imperial Gazetteer of India vol. IV 1907,p.102
  31. ^Imperial Gazetteer of India vol. IV 1907,p.100
  32. ^"Punjab States", Indian States and Agencies,The Statesman's Year Book 1947,pg 174, Macmillan & Co.
  33. ^Imperial Gazetteer of India vol. IV 1907,p.103
  34. ^"Assam States", Indian States and Agencies,The Statesman's Year Book 1947,pg 160, Macmillan & Co.
  35. ^Imperial Gazetteer of India vol. IV 1907,p.101
  36. ^Lt. Gen. Sir George MacMunn, page 198 "The Armies of India",ISBN0-947554-02-5
  37. ^Imperial Gazetteer of India vol. IV 1907,p. 85
  38. ^Imperial Gazetteer of India vol. IV 1907,pp. 85–86
  39. ^abImperial Gazetteer of India vol. IV 1907,p. 87
  40. ^Sisson, Richard; Wolpert, Stanley (2018).Congress and Indian Nationalism: The Pre-Independence Phase.University of California Press. p. 381.ISBN978-0-520-30163-4.Retrieved14 August2023.
  41. ^Phadnis, Urmila (1968).Towards the Integration of Indian States, 1919-1947.Thesis Phil. Banaras Hindu University. Asia Publishing House. p. 90.ISBN978-0-210-31180-6.Retrieved14 August2023.
  42. ^Singh, R. (2017).Gandhi and the Nobel Peace Prize.Taylor & Francis. p. 4.ISBN978-1-351-03612-2.Retrieved14 August2023.
  43. ^abMenon, Shivshankar (20 April 2021).India and Asian Geopolitics: The Past, Present.Brookings Institution Press. p. 34.ISBN978-0-670-09129-4.
  44. ^Ravi Kumar Pillai of Kandamath in the Journal of the Royal Society for Asian Affairs, pages 316–319https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/03068374.2016.1171621
  45. ^Bajwa, Kuldip Singh (2003).Jammu and Kashmir War, 1947–1948: Political and Military Perspectiv.New Delhi: Hari-Anand Publications Limited.ISBN9788124109236.
  46. ^Aparna Pande (16 March 2011).Explaining Pakistan's Foreign Policy: Escaping India.Taylor & Francis. pp. 31–.ISBN978-1-136-81893-6.
  47. ^Jalal, Ayesha(2014),The Struggle for Pakistan: A Muslim Homeland and Global Politics,Harvard University Press, p. 72,ISBN978-0-674-74499-8:"Equally notorious was his high-handed treatment of the state of Kalat, whose ruler was made to accede to Pakistan on threat of punitive military action."
  48. ^Samad, Yunas(2014). "Understanding the insurgency in Balochistan".Commonwealth & Comparative Politics.52(2): 293–320.doi:10.1080/14662043.2014.894280.S2CID144156399.:"When Mir Ahmed Yar Khan dithered over acceding the Baloch-Brauhi confederacy to Pakistan in 1947 the centre's response was to initiate processes that would coerce the state joining Pakistan. By recognising the feudatory states of Las Bela, Kharan and the district of Mekran as independent states, which promptly merged with Pakistan, the State of Kalat became land locked and reduced to a fraction of its size. Thus Ahmed Yar Khan was forced to sign the instrument of accession on 27 March 1948, which immediately led to the brother of the Khan, Prince Abdul Karim raising the banner of revolt in July 1948, starting the first of the Baloch insurgencies."
  49. ^Harrison, Selig S.(1981),In Afghanistan's Shadow: Baluch Nationalism and Soviet Temptations,Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, p. 24,ISBN978-0-87003-029-1:"Pakistani leaders summarily rejected this declaration, touching off a nine-month diplomatic tug of war that came to a climax in the forcible annexation of Kalat.... it is clear that Baluch leaders, including the Khan, were bitterly opposed to what happened."
  50. ^R. P. Bhargava (1992)The Chamber of Princes,p. 313
  51. ^Praval, Major K.C. (2009). Indian Army after Independence. New Delhi: Lancer. p. 214.ISBN978-1-935501-10-7.
  52. ^"The Constitution (26 Amendment) Act, 1971",indiacode.nic.in,Government of India, 1971, archived fromthe originalon 6 December 2011,retrieved9 November2011
  53. ^Wilhelm von Pochhammer,India's road to nationhood: a political history of the subcontinent(1982) ch 57
  54. ^Lumby, E. W. R. 1954.The Transfer of Power in India, 1945–1947.London:George Allen & Unwin.p. 228
  55. ^Tiwari, Aaditya (30 October 2017)."Sardar Patel – Man who United India".Press Information Bureau.
  56. ^Wilhelm von Pochhammer,India's road to nationhood: a political history of the subcontinent(1981) ch 57
  57. ^Pervaiz I Cheema; Manuel Riemer (22 August 1990).Pakistan's Defence Policy 1947–58.Palgrave Macmillan UK. pp. 60–.ISBN978-1-349-20942-2.
  58. ^Farhan Hanif Siddiqi (2012).The Politics of Ethnicity in Pakistan: The Baloch, Sindhi and Mohajir Ethnic Movements.Routledge. pp. 71–.ISBN978-0-415-68614-3.
  59. ^T.V. Paul (February 2014).The Warrior State: Pakistan in the Contemporary World.OUP USA. pp. 133–.ISBN978-0-19-932223-7.
  60. ^Bangash, Y. K. (2015),"Constructing the state: Constitutional integration of the princely states of Pakistan",in Roger D. Long; Gurharpal Singh; Yunas Samad; Ian Talbot (eds.),State and Nation-Building in Pakistan: Beyond Islam and Security,Routledge, pp. 82–,ISBN978-1-317-44820-4
  61. ^Nicholas Schmidle (2 March 2010).To Live or to Perish Forever: Two Tumultuous Years in Pakistan.Henry Holt and Company. pp. 86–.ISBN978-1-4299-8590-1.
  62. ^Syed Farooq Hasnat (26 May 2011).Global Security Watch—Pakistan.ABC-CLIO. pp. 94–.ISBN978-0-313-34698-9.

Bibliography[edit]

  • Bangash, Yaqoob Khan (2016). "A Princely Affair: The Accession and Integration of the Princely States of Pakistan, 1947–1955". Oxford University Press Pakistan.ISBN9780199407361
  • Bhagavan, Manu. "Princely States and the Hindu Imaginary: Exploring the Cartography of Hindu Nationalism in Colonial India"Journal of Asian Studies,(Aug 2008) 67#3 pp 881–915in JSTOR
  • Bhagavan, Manu.Sovereign Spheres: Princes, Education and Empire in Colonial India(2003)
  • Copland, Ian (2002),Princes of India in the Endgame of Empire, 1917–1947,(Cambridge Studies in Indian History & Society). Cambridge and London:Cambridge University Press.Pp. 316,ISBN978-0-521-89436-4.
  • Ernst, W. and B. Pati, eds.India's Princely States: People, Princes, and Colonialism(2007)
  • Harrington, Jack (2010),Sir John Malcolm and the Creation of British India, Chs. 4 & 5.,New York:Palgrave Macmillan.,ISBN978-0-230-10885-1
  • Jeffrey, Robin.People, Princes and Paramount Power: Society and Politics in the Indian Princely States(1979) 396pp
  • Kooiman, Dick.Communalism and Indian Princely States: Travancore, Baroda & Hyderabad in the 1930s(2002), 249pp
  • Markovits, Claude (2004)."ch 21:" Princely India (1858–1950) ".A history of modern India, 1480–1950.Anthem Press. pp. 386–409.ISBN978-1-84331-152-2.
  • Ramusack, Barbara (2004),The Indian Princes and their States,The New Cambridge History of India,Cambridge and London: Cambridge University Press. Pp. 324,ISBN978-0-521-03989-5
  • Pochhammer, Wilhelm vonIndia's Road to Nationhood: A Political History of the Subcontinent(1973) ch 57excerpt
  • Zutshi, Chitralekha (2009). "Re-visioning princely states in South Asian historiography: A review".Indian Economic & Social History Review.46(3): 301–313.doi:10.1177/001946460904600302.S2CID145521826.

Gazetteers[edit]

  • Imperial Gazetteer of Indiavol. II (1908),The Indian Empire, Historical,Published under the authority of His Majesty'sSecretary of State for India in Council,Oxford at the Clarendon Press. Pp. xxxv, 1 map, 573.online
  • Imperial Gazetteer of India vol. III (1907),The Indian Empire, Economic (Chapter X: Famine, pp. 475–502,Published under the authority of His Majesty's Secretary of State for India in Council, Oxford at the Clarendon Press. Pp. xxxvi, 1 map, 520.online
  • Imperial Gazetteer of India vol. IV (1907),The Indian Empire, Administrative,Published under the authority of His Majesty's Secretary of State for India in Council, Oxford at the Clarendon Press. Pp. xxx, 1 map, 552.online

External links[edit]

Wikimedia Commons has media related toPrincely states of India.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Princely_state&oldid=1231468339"