Question

Indian rulers of independent kingdoms were easily dominated by the European colonial powers give reasons ​

Answer 1

Answer:

yes the Indian rulers were dominated by the Europeans as they had more powers than us and they used to do big trade and were known as big traders. actually Indians were the most powerful of all.

Answer 2

Indian rulers of independent kingdoms were easily dominated by the European colonial powers

Explanation:

• Imperial India was a part of the Indian subcontinent under the European imperial powers' control. Europeans had slowly taken over the Kingdoms of India and indirectly governed them through puppet rulers
• Europeans arrived in India because of commercial reasons. The Indian sub-continent was then world famous for its spices. After the decline of Mughals India was at this time not only weak but was also split by several opposing local rulers. The Mughal Empire's collapsed meant that there was considerable confusion over a vast number of Indians. Local rulers have battled each other relentlessly. The time the Europeans expanded, India was politically fragmented, making Europeans influence on the Sub-Continent significantly easier for them.
• Many Indians were willing to accept the government, and tried not to oppose the British presence in their countries or rebel against it because they recognized the advantages of their rule. The areas that were influenced by the British directly and indirectly were more stable. They deterred local rulers, were under their influence, from attacking their neighbors, so the level of violence in the country started declining.
• When it came to managing their new territories, the British adopted a smart strategy in India. At least at first, they did not directly manage most of their new territories. They did not interfere with the local "land owning"  rulers.
• Those rulers were dominated by the British. They used it to collect taxes and enforce legislation and order, and in return the autonomy of their local areas was allowed . These policies led to the acceptance of British influence by numerous Indian rulers, both Hindu and Muslim.
• They negotiated a bargain with the local Rajs, Nawabs and Sultans rather than just annexing many of the provinces. They promised not to strike local rulers  until the British were their heirs. This meant that after a ruler 's death many small states were legacy to the British.
• The British also signed treaties with local authorities that enable these territories to be peacefully absorbed. They decided to station the armed forces in a princely state and wanted some land rather than taxation. They also named a "resident" to check on the ruler. Little by little, the local rulers found that they had become the East Indian company's pure puppets.
• The British had followed a government-wide light-touch policy and did not mess with Indian customs and lifestyle. In fact, in the earliest years of the British rule numerous Indians had no direct interaction with the British so this assumed comparatively very less opposition to their rule by the public. Both of this led to ensuring that the British could govern large and varied territory.
• This persuaded several rulers to accept the British even if they knew their land was being exploited. As trade and economic growth grew in prosperity over the years, many local rulers were willing to collaborate with the British