Princely state

A princely state is any state under the reign of a prince and is thus a principality taken in the broad sense. The term refers not only to sovereign nations ruled by monarchs but also to lower polities ruled by various high nobles (often vassals in a feudal system). Such states may be sovereign or not and their reigning 'princes' may actually rule or be reduced in power, as under colonial indirect rule, sometimes becoming mere figureheads.

Specifically, the term "Princely States" (also called "Native States" or "Indian States") was used to refer to sovereign entities of British India that were not under the direct control of the British government but instead entered into treaties directly with the British monarch.

Main use

In English, the term "princely state" generally refers to a historical native state of the British Empire under an autochthonous princely house, while the term principality is preferred for analogous western feudal units.

Historically there were hundreds of native states in British India and in some other parts of the British Empire (mainly under the chartered British East India Company). These states were mostly brought into the British colonial sphere of influence by the East India Company, and after 1858 formally under the British crown, which assumed the role of paramount ruler and the title of "Emperor of India" as political (not dynastic) self-declared heir to the Padshah i-Hind of the former Mughal dynasty.

Unlike the British Provinces of India such as Bengal or Bombay, Madras, Central Provinces, United Provinces, which were ruled directly by the British government, rulers of princely states had treaty arrangements directly with their personal suzerain, the British Monarch. These treaties allowed a degree of local autonomy, and each state had its own laws, languages, holidays, ministers and princely ruler. Each was still under British protection and was thus essentially a vassal state.

At the time of independence in 1947 a few hundredvarious sources give significantly different numbers, depending on various criteria and probably incomplete listing such states existed in British India. Nearly 680 states were represented in a special chamber of the Indian legislative assembly called the Chamber of Princes.

Princely status and titles

The Indian rulers bore various titles — including Maharaja ("great king"), Badshah ("emperor"), Raja ("king"), Nawab ("governor"), Nizam, Wali, and many others. Whatever the literal meaning and traditional prestige of the ruler's actual title, the British government translated them all as "prince," in order to avoid the implication that the native rulers could be "kings" with status equal to that of the British monarch.

The least prestigious Hindu rulers often used the title Thakur or its variant Thakore.

More prestigious Hindu rulers -mostly existing before the Mughal Empire, or having split from such old states- often used the title "Raja," or a variant such as "Rana," "Rao," "Rawat" or "Rawal." Also in this 'class' were several Thakur sahibs and a few particular titles, such as Sar Desai.

The most prestigious Hindu rulers usually had the prefix "maha" ("great", compare for example Grand duke) in their titles, as in Maharaja, Maharana, Maharao, etc.

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

The Sikh princes (a syncretic religion, mixing many elements from Hinduism and Islam; politically concentrated in Punjab) usually adopted Hindu type titles when attaining princely rank; at a lower level Sardar was used.

Muslim rulers almost all used the title "Nawab" (originally the title of an amovable governor under real Mughal rule, but soon tending to hereditary succession whenever Delhi/Agra lost effective control over the province) with the prominent exceptions of the Nizam of Hyderabad & Berar, the Wali/Khan of Kalat, and the Wali of Swat. Other less usual titles included Darbar Sahib, Dewan, Jam, Mehtar (unique to Chitral) and Mir (from Emir).

Precedence and prestige

However, the actual importance of a princely state cannot be read from the title of its ruler, which was usually granted (or at least recognised) as a favour, often in recognition for loyalty and services rendered historically by the Mughal emperor, and later by the British rulers succeeding it as paramount power (first the HEIC, de facto; later the British crown, and ultimately assuming the style Emperor of India as successor to the emperor of the abolished Mughal realm). Although some titles were raised once or even repeatedly, there was no automatic updating when a state gained or lost real clout. In fact, princely titles were even awarded to holders of domains (mainly jagirs) and even zamindars (in principle tax collectors), which were not states at all. 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. There is also no strict relation 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.

The gun-salute system 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. 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. (There were many minor rulers who were not entitled to any gun salutes, and as a rule the majority of gun-salute princes had at least nine, with numbers below that usually the prerogative of Arab coastal Sheikhs also under British protection.) 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.

While the states of all these rulers (about 120) were known as salute states, there were far more so-called non-salute states of lower prestige, and even more princes (in the broadest sense of the term) not even acknowledged as such. On the other hand, the dynasties of certain defunct states were allowed to keep their princely status — they were known as Political Pensioners. Though none of these princes were awarded gun salutes, princely titles in this category were recognised as among certain vassals of salute states, and were not even in direct relation with the paramount power.

After independence, the (Hindu) Maharana of Udaipur displaced the Nizam of Hyderabad as the most senior prince in India, and the style Highness was extended to all rulers entitled to 9-gun salutes. When these dynasties had been integrated into the Indian Union they were promised continued privileges and an income, known as the Privy Purse, for their upkeep. Subsequently, when the Indian government abolished the Privy Purse in 1971, the whole princely order ceased to exist under Indian law, although many families continue to retain their social prestige informally; some descendents are still prominent in regional or national politics, diplomacy, business and high society.

At the time of Indian independence, only five rulers — the Nizam of Hyderabad, the Maharaja of Mysore, the Maharaja of Jammu and Kashmir, the Maharaja Gaekwad of Baroda and the Maharaja Scindia of Gwalior — were entitled to a 21-gun salute. Five more rulers — the Nawab of Bhopal, the Maharaja Holkar of Indore, the Maharana of Udaipur, the Maharaja of Kolhapur and the Maharaja of Travancore — were entitled to 19-gun salutes. The most senior princely ruler was the (Muslim) Nizam of Hyderabad, who was entitled to the unique style Exalted Highness. Other princely rulers entitled to salutes of 11 guns (soon 9 guns too) or more were entitled to the style Highness. No special style was used by rulers entitled to lesser gun salutes.

As paramount ruler, and successor to the Mughals, the British King-Emperor of India, for whom the style of Majesty was reserved, was entitled to an 'imperial' 101-gun salute — in the European tradition also the number of guns fired to announce the birth of a (male) heir to the throne).

All princely rulers were eligible to be appointed to certain British orders of chivalry associated with India, The Most Exalted Order of the Star of India and The Most Eminent Order of the Indian Empire. Even 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 possible (Knight Grand Commander of the Order of the Star of India).

Many Indian princes served in the British army (as others in local guard or police forces), often rising to the high official ranks; some even served while on the throne! Many of these were appointed as ADC etc., either to the ruling prince of their own house (in the case of relatives of such rulers) or indeed to the British King-Emperor. Many also saw action, both on the subcontinent and on other fronts, during both World Wars.

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.

The doctrine of lapse

Until 1858, the East India Company maintained that it could assume the sovereignty of a state whose ruler was deemed incompetent or who died without a direct heir. This policy contradicted the traditional right of Indian rulers to adopt an heir when they had no progeny. The doctrine of lapse was pursued most vigorously by the Governor-General Sir James Ramsay and the 10th Earl Dalhousie. Dalhousie annexed seven states, including the Maratha states of Nagpur, Jhansi, Satara, and Awadh (Oudh), whose nawabs he had accused of misrule. Resentment over the annexation of these states, which turned to indignation when the heirlooms of the maharajas of Nagpur were auctioned off in Calcutta by the East India Company, contributed to the rising discontent which exploded in the Indian rebellion of 1857 (the "Indian Mutiny"). The last Mughal emperor, who was accused of aiding the rebellion, was deposed. The doctrine of lapse was discontinued in the aftermath of the rebellion, as was rule by the East India Company. Although none of the states were restored, no more princely states were annexed.

Colonial governance

By the beginning of the 20th century, the four largest states — Hyderabad, Mysore, Jammu and Kashmir, and Baroda — were directly under the authority of the governor-general, in the person of a resident. Two agencies, Rajputana Agency and Central India Agency, oversaw 20 and 148 princely states, respectively. The remaining princely states had political officers, or agents, who answered to the administrators of India's provinces. Five princely states were under the authority of Madras, 354 of Bombay, 26 of Bengal, 2 of Assam, 34 of Punjab, 15 of Central Provinces and Berar; and 2 of United Provinces.

In the early 1930s, most of the princely states under the authority of India's provinces were organised into agencies answerable to the governor-general, on the model of the Central India and Rajputana agencies. The new agencies were the Eastern States Agency, Punjab States Agency, Baluchistan Agency, Deccan States Agency, Madras States Agency, and the Northwest Frontier States Agency. The Baroda residency was combined with the princely states of northern Bombay Presidency into the Baroda, Western States, and Gujarat Agency. Gwalior was separated from the Central India Agency and placed under its own resident, and the states of Rampur and Benares, formerly under the authority of the United Provinces, were placed under the Gwalior residency in 1936. The princely states of Sandur and Banganapalle in Mysore Presidency were transferred to the authority of the Mysore resident in 1939.

Accession

After independence in 1947, the princely states were forced to accede — and thus sign away their political autonomy — either to the secular (but mainly Hindu) dominion of India or the new Islamic dominion called Pakistan (consisting of West Pakistan and East Pakistan, i.e. East Bengal, later to break away as Bangladesh, separated by the whole north of India). The accession was to be chosen by its ruling Prince, not the residents, akin to the 16th century European principle of cuius regio eius religio. Most acceded peacefully, except for four: Junagadh, Hyderabad, Baluchistan (Kalat), and Jammu & Kashmir.

Junagadh, the largest state in the Kathiawar peninsula (now in Gujarat), with a Hindu majority, acceded to Pakistan on the wishes of its Nawab. However the people revolted, and Junagadh was invaded by the neighbouring micro-state of Mangrol. Finally, in 1948, Junagarh was annexed by India, and the Nawab fled to Karachi.

A similar fate befell the Nizam of Hyderabad, a Muslim dynasty which had been the highest in rank since the abolition of the Mughals at Delhi and the Kingdom of Oudh. He had chosen to stay independent if not allowed to accede to Pakistan (and, thus, form a landlocked Muslim enclave in India). There followed much political wrangling, which, however, was inconclusive. Nonetheless, when the irregular militia of the Nizam's prime minister (the Razakars) began terrorising trains passing through the Hyderabad state, India annexed Hyderabad by an invasion under the rubric of a "Police Action." The Nizam was deposed, though allowed to stay in Hyderabad.

Jammu and Kashmir, although a Muslim majority, ruled by a Hindu Raja, was infiltrated by Pakistani army regulars and tribesmen from the North-West Frontier Province, and sought military help from India to repulse them. This was given only after the Raja acceded his state to India as requested by Lord Mountbatten the first Governor General of the Dominion of India. Until that time, the Raja had avoided acceding either to India or to Pakistan, hoping that he could somehow maintain his sovereignty. This has led to one of the most famous territorial disputes of the world.

The Khan of Kalat, Mir Ahmad Yar Khan, declared independence in 1947. Between August 1947, when the British left the Indian subcontinent, and March 1948, Kalat was an independent country, until Pakistan forcibly annexed Baluchistan.

Post Independence

India

On accession by a princely state, its territories and administrations merged into the Union of India. The rulers of the princely states were allowed to retain their hereditary titles and official residences. Depending upon their size, importance and revenue they were also allowed to retain additional properties and given privy purses (in compensation of the state's revenue which now would go the new Union). On abolition of the privy purse (and the right to the hereditary titles) by the government in 1975 the princely states ceased to exist as recognised political entities.

His Highness Nawab Mohammed Abdul Ali Azim Jah, the Prince of Arcot, is the only royal in India who was not affected by the abolition of privy purses. In the order of precedence, he enjoys the rank of cabinet minister of the state of Tamil Nadu.

The Nawab hails from a family that traces its lineage back to the second caliph, Hazrat Omar Bib-Khattab. The title 'Prince of Arcot', uniquely using the European style prince, was conferred on his ancestor by the British government in 1870 after the post of Nawab of Carnatic (a title granted by the Mughal emperor) was abolished.

Former states sometimes still maintain and observe their ceremonies, forms of address etc. either as family traditions or as popular folk-customs. For example, processions during the popular Gangaur festival in Jaipur begin, as per tradition, from the City Palace, which remains the private residence of its former royal family.

Pakistan

In present-day Pakistan's tribal region in the North-West Frontier Province, the princely frontier states were maintained till 1971 when all states were abolished by merger into the republic, and all princely titles being abolished in 1972. Post independence, a new hereditary salute had been granted in 1966 by President Ayub Khan this being 15 guns for the Wali of Swat, ruler of one of the last princely states to be created (1926). Before Swat was granted a gun salute, there were already four other Gun-Salute States in Pakistan: Bahawalpur, Kalat, Khairpur and Chitral. A few lesser ranking non-salute states also acceded to Pakistan including Dir, Hunza, Kharan, Nagar, and Amb. Abstraction is made here of Kashmir and Punjab, both under Maharajas, which are disputed and/or divided with India.

Contributions

The princely states and their royal families have made many contributions to India, pre and post Independence, in diverse fields. They were the ones to have established the game of cricket in India, culminating in the famous tour of England in the 1930s under the captainship of the Maharajkumar (i.e. prince of the blood) of Vizianagaram (Vizzy). Another legendary cricketer was Ranjitsinhji, Jam Saheb (a specific ruler's title) of Nawanagar (Jamnagar). The Gwalior state provided crucial financial support to Jamshedji Tata's Steel venture in its early years. Today, many former royals continue family and military traditions as officers in the armed forces, while others are leading politicians.

Other Princely states

British Empire: Princely states existed elsewhere in the British Empire. Some of these were considered by the Colonial Office (or earlier by the BHEIC) as satellites of, and usually points of support on the naval routes to, British India, some important enough to be raised to the status of salute states.
- A number of Arab states around the Persian Gulf, including Oman, the present-day United Arab Emirates, and Kuwait, were British protectorates under native rulers.
- On the Malay peninsula a number of states, known as the Malay states, were administered by local rulers, who recognized British sovereignty; they still reign, but now constitutionally, in the constitutive states of modern Malaysia.
Netherlands: Indirect rule through princely states (or even mere tribal chieftaincies) was also practiced in other European nation's colonial empires. An example is the Dutch East Indies (modern Indonesia), which had dozens of local rulers (Malay, and either Muslim, Hindu or animist). The colonial term in Dutch was regentschap.
However it is NOT customary to use the term princely state, although it would be technically correct, for western principalities, neither in the feudal past (there were many, especially in the Holy Roman Empire, see Fürst) nor for the presently independent Principality of Monaco or Principality of Liechtenstein

Sources and references

http://www.uq.net.au/~zzhsoszy/ips/main.html exclusively devoted to Indian princely states and domains
http://www.4dw.net/royalark/India/India.htm several general pages, and various states in great detail
http://www.rulers.org/ruli.html#india exhaustive lists of rulers and heads of government, and some biographies
http://www.worldstatesman.com/ exhaustive lists of rulers and heads of government, and many legal dates.

British rule in India | Indian Princely States

Fürstenstaat | État princier des Indes | 藩王国 | Vasallstat

Gourt Home::Gourt :: Princely state