1answer.
Ask question
Login Signup
Ask question
All categories
  • English
  • Mathematics
  • Social Studies
  • Business
  • History
  • Health
  • Geography
  • Biology
  • Physics
  • Chemistry
  • Computers and Technology
  • Arts
  • World Languages
  • Spanish
  • French
  • German
  • Advanced Placement (AP)
  • SAT
  • Medicine
  • Law
  • Engineering
Lilit [14]
3 years ago
6

Pls help I will mark you brain list‼️‼️‼️‼️‼️‼️‼️‼️

Social Studies
2 answers:
Alexxx [7]3 years ago
8 0

Answer:

I think it's Delhi and Shanghai

777dan777 [17]3 years ago
8 0

Answer:

b and c i think

Explanation:

You might be interested in
PLEASE HELP THANK YOU I WILL REWARD BRAINLIEST
Naya [18.7K]
The East India Company deafeated Indians /
The East India Company took control over India.
3 0
3 years ago
‘Subsidiary Alliance introduced by Lord Wellesley was the most effective
Nitella [24]

Answer:

Subsidiary Alliance introduced by Lord Wellesley was the most effective

instrument for the expansion of British territory in India.’ Justify the

statement.Subsidiary Alliance was basically a treaty between the British East India Company and the Indian princely states, by virtue of which the Indian kingdoms lost their sovereignty to the English. It also was a major process that led to the building of the British Empire in India. It was framed by Lord Wellesley, the Governor-General of India from 1798 to 1805. It was actually used for the first time by the French Governor-General Marquis Dupleix.

The Nawab of Awadh was the first ruler to enter into the subsidiary alliance with the British after the Battle of Buxar. However, the Nizam of Hyderabad was the first to accept a well-framed subsidiary alliance.Features of the Subsidiary Alliance Treaty

The subsidiary alliance in India was planned by Lord Wellesley, but this term was introduced by French Governor Dupleix.

An Indian ruler entering into Subsidiary Alliance with the British had to dissolve his own armed forces and accept British forces in his territory.

He also had to pay for the British army’s maintenance. If he failed to make the payment, a portion of his territory would be taken away and ceded to the British.

In return, the British would protect the Indian state against any foreign attack or internal revolt.

The British promised non-interference in internal affairs of the Indian state but this was rarely kept.

The Indian state could not enter into any alliance with any other foreign power.

He could also not employ any other foreign nationals other than Englishmen in his service. And, if he were employing any, on the signing of the alliance, he had to terminate them from his service. The idea was to curb the influence of the French.

The Indian state could also not enter into any political connection with another Indian state without British approval.

The Indian ruler, thus, lost all powers in respect of foreign affairs and the military.

He virtually lost all his independence and became a British ‘protectorate’.

A British Resident was also stationed in the Indian Court.

Effects of the Subsidiary Alliance

As a result of Indian rulers disbanding their armies, many people were rendered unemployed.

Many Indian states lost their independence and slowly, most parts of India were coming under British control.

The Nizam of Hyderabad was the first to accept the Subsidiary Alliance in 1798.

Lord Clive also introduced the subsidiary system in Oudh and the Treaty of Allahabad was signed where the British promised the Oudh territory from enemies like Marathas.

Order in which the Indian States entered into Subsidiary Alliances

Hyderabad (1798)

Mysore (1799 – After Tipu Sultan was defeated in the Fourth Anglo-Mysore War)

Tanjore (1799)

Awadh (1801)

Peshwa (Marathas) (1802)

Scindia (Marathas) (1803)

Gaekwad (Marathas) (1803)

6 0
2 years ago
Five-year plans and collectivization are most
elena-s [515]
Try the 3rd one  Mikhail Gorbachev

7 0
3 years ago
Read 2 more answers
Which is an example of a crime against property?
Sati [7]
I think it would be B as it has to do with physical property
8 0
3 years ago
How were the slaves owned by africans treated differently from the slaves owned by europeans?
Ira Lisetskai [31]
Well in most of Europe it was illegal to have slaves and in the southern states such as Florida it was a normal thing and they would sell them in auctions and most would work in the fields with cotton or crops or would work in a house as a maid.
8 0
3 years ago
Other questions:
  • Cognitive dissonance theory is most helpful in understanding the impact of:
    11·1 answer
  • In sternberg's terms, _____ intelligence drives one's ability to adjust to different environments.
    13·1 answer
  • Millie sees pretty colored butterflies on all the walls. she also hears gentle music, which is not actually there. the presence
    13·1 answer
  • The name japan comes from the chinese word ri-ben meaning
    13·1 answer
  • How are members of the party-in-the-electorate selected
    9·2 answers
  • Our basketball team won a game last week by the score of 73–49, and yet not even one man on our team scored as much as a single
    14·1 answer
  • Explain what is meant bt "morden day engine of growth"
    9·1 answer
  • Cual es la energía potencial que tiene el agua, y que puede ser utilizada para obtener otras transformaciones energéticas
    13·1 answer
  • ¿Qué rasgos tenía cada especie de pinzón que le ayudaron a sobrevivir en su entorno?​
    11·1 answer
  • What part of the government has the power to declare war?.
    6·1 answer
Add answer
Login
Not registered? Fast signup
Signup
Login Signup
Ask question!