Class 8 Exam  >  Class 8 Questions  >  Why did the conflicts between the Company and... Start Learning for Free
Why did the conflicts between the Company and Sirajuddaulah lead to the Battle of Plassey?
  • a)
    To build more factories
  • b)
    To expand trade and gain trade concessions
  • c)
    To stop all trade activities
  • d)
    To start a new war
Correct answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer?
Most Upvoted Answer
Why did the conflicts between the Company and Sirajuddaulah lead to th...
Background of the Conflict
The conflicts between the British East India Company and Sirajuddaulah, the Nawab of Bengal, were rooted in the struggle for economic dominance in the region. The British sought to expand their trade interests, while Sirajuddaulah aimed to assert his authority over his territory.
Reasons for the Conflict
- Trade Expansion: The British East India Company wanted to expand trade and gain lucrative trade concessions. They aimed to control the lucrative markets of Bengal, which was rich in resources like silk, cotton, and spices.
- Political Tensions: Sirajuddaulah was wary of the Company's growing power and influence. He viewed their actions as a direct threat to his sovereignty and sought to curb their expansionist policies.
- Fortification of Calcutta: The Company's fortification of Calcutta without the Nawab's permission was seen as an act of defiance, escalating tensions further.
Consequences of the Conflict
- Battle of Plassey: The culmination of these tensions led to the Battle of Plassey in 1757. The East India Company, with the help of discontented local leaders, defeated Sirajuddaulah, marking a significant shift in power.
- Establishment of British Rule: This victory allowed the British East India Company to establish control over Bengal, paving the way for British dominance in India.
In summary, the conflicts stemmed from the Company's desire to expand trade and gain concessions, ultimately leading to the pivotal Battle of Plassey, which altered the course of Indian history.
Attention Class 8 Students!
To make sure you are not studying endlessly, EduRev has designed Class 8 study material, with Structured Courses, Videos, & Test Series. Plus get personalized analysis, doubt solving and improvement plans to achieve a great score in Class 8.
Explore Courses for Class 8 exam

Similar Class 8 Doubts

According to many analysts, labor-management relations in the United States are undergoing a fundamental change: traditional adversarialism is giving way to a new cooperative relationship between the two sides and even to concessions from labor. These analysts say the twin shocks of nonunion competition in this country and low-cost, high-quality imports from abroad are forcing unions to look more favorably at a variety of management demands: the need for wage restraint and reduced benefits as well as the abolition of “rigid” work rules, seniority rights, and job classifications.Sophisticated proponents of these new developments cast their observations in a prolabor light. In return for their concessions, they point out, some unions have bargained for profit sharing, retraining rights, and job¬-security guarantees. Unions can also trade concessions for more say on the shop floor, where techniques such as quality circles and quality-of-work-life programs promise workers greater control over their own jobs. Unions may even win a voice in investment and pricing strategy, plant location, and other major corporate policy decisions previously reserved to management.Opponents of these concessions from labor argue that such concessions do not save jobs, but either prolong the agony of dying plants or finance the plant relocations that employers had intended anyway. Companies make investment decisions to fit their strategic plans and their profit objectives, opponents point out, and labor costs are usually just a small factor in the equation. Moreover, unrestrained by either loyalty to their work force or political or legislative constraints on their mobility, the companies eventually cut and run, concessions or no concessions.Wage-related concessions have come under particular attack, since opponents believe that high union wages underlay much of the success of United States industry in this century. They point out that a long-standing principle, shared by both management and labor, has been that workers should earn wages that give them the income they need to buy what they make. Moreover, high wages have given workers the buying power to propel the economy forward. If proposals for pay cuts, two-tier wage systems, and subminimum wages for young workers continue to gain credence, opponents believe the U.S. social structure will move toward that of a less-developed nation: a small group of wealthy investors, a sizable but still minority bloc of elite professionals and highly skilled employees, and a huge mass of marginal workers and unskilled laborers. Further, they argue that if unions willingly engage in concession bargaining on the false grounds that labor costs are the source of a companys problems, unions will find themselves competing with Third World pay levels—a competition they cannot win.The passage provides information to answer which of the following questions?

According to many analysts, labor-management relations in the United States are undergoing a fundamental change: traditional adversarialism is giving way to a new cooperative relationship between the two sides and even to concessions from labor. These analysts say the twin shocks of nonunion competition in this country and low-cost, high-quality imports from abroad are forcing unions to look more favorably at a variety of management demands: the need for wage restraint and reduced benefits as well as the abolition of “rigid” work rules, seniority rights, and job classifications.Sophisticated proponents of these new developments cast their observations in a prolabor light. In return for their concessions, they point out, some unions have bargained for profit sharing, retraining rights, and job¬-security guarantees. Unions can also trade concessions for more say on the shop floor, where techniques such as quality circles and quality-of-work-life programs promise workers greater control over their own jobs. Unions may even win a voice in investment and pricing strategy, plant location, and other major corporate policy decisions previously reserved to management.Opponents of these concessions from labor argue that such concessions do not save jobs, but either prolong the agony of dying plants or finance the plant relocations that employers had intended anyway. Companies make investment decisions to fit their strategic plans and their profit objectives, opponents point out, and labor costs are usually just a small factor in the equation. Moreover, unrestrained by either loyalty to their work force or political or legislative constraints on their mobility, the companies eventually cut and run, concessions or no concessions.Wage-related concessions have come under particular attack, since opponents believe that high union wages underlay much of the success of United States industry in this century. They point out that a long-standing principle, shared by both management and labor, has been that workers should earn wages that give them the income they need to buy what they make. Moreover, high wages have given workers the buying power to propel the economy forward. If proposals for pay cuts, two-tier wage systems, and subminimum wages for young workers continue to gain credence, opponents believe the U.S. social structure will move toward that of a less-developed nation: a small group of wealthy investors, a sizable but still minority bloc of elite professionals and highly skilled employees, and a huge mass of marginal workers and unskilled laborers. Further, they argue that if unions willingly engage in concession bargaining on the false grounds that labor costs are the source of a companys problems, unions will find themselves competing with Third World pay levels—a competition they cannot win.The passage is primarily concerned with the

Top Courses for Class 8

Why did the conflicts between the Company and Sirajuddaulah lead to the Battle of Plassey?a)To build more factoriesb)To expand trade and gain trade concessionsc)To stop all trade activitiesd)To start a new warCorrect answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer?
Question Description
Why did the conflicts between the Company and Sirajuddaulah lead to the Battle of Plassey?a)To build more factoriesb)To expand trade and gain trade concessionsc)To stop all trade activitiesd)To start a new warCorrect answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer? for Class 8 2024 is part of Class 8 preparation. The Question and answers have been prepared according to the Class 8 exam syllabus. Information about Why did the conflicts between the Company and Sirajuddaulah lead to the Battle of Plassey?a)To build more factoriesb)To expand trade and gain trade concessionsc)To stop all trade activitiesd)To start a new warCorrect answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer? covers all topics & solutions for Class 8 2024 Exam. Find important definitions, questions, meanings, examples, exercises and tests below for Why did the conflicts between the Company and Sirajuddaulah lead to the Battle of Plassey?a)To build more factoriesb)To expand trade and gain trade concessionsc)To stop all trade activitiesd)To start a new warCorrect answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer?.
Solutions for Why did the conflicts between the Company and Sirajuddaulah lead to the Battle of Plassey?a)To build more factoriesb)To expand trade and gain trade concessionsc)To stop all trade activitiesd)To start a new warCorrect answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer? in English & in Hindi are available as part of our courses for Class 8. Download more important topics, notes, lectures and mock test series for Class 8 Exam by signing up for free.
Here you can find the meaning of Why did the conflicts between the Company and Sirajuddaulah lead to the Battle of Plassey?a)To build more factoriesb)To expand trade and gain trade concessionsc)To stop all trade activitiesd)To start a new warCorrect answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer? defined & explained in the simplest way possible. Besides giving the explanation of Why did the conflicts between the Company and Sirajuddaulah lead to the Battle of Plassey?a)To build more factoriesb)To expand trade and gain trade concessionsc)To stop all trade activitiesd)To start a new warCorrect answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer?, a detailed solution for Why did the conflicts between the Company and Sirajuddaulah lead to the Battle of Plassey?a)To build more factoriesb)To expand trade and gain trade concessionsc)To stop all trade activitiesd)To start a new warCorrect answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer? has been provided alongside types of Why did the conflicts between the Company and Sirajuddaulah lead to the Battle of Plassey?a)To build more factoriesb)To expand trade and gain trade concessionsc)To stop all trade activitiesd)To start a new warCorrect answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer? theory, EduRev gives you an ample number of questions to practice Why did the conflicts between the Company and Sirajuddaulah lead to the Battle of Plassey?a)To build more factoriesb)To expand trade and gain trade concessionsc)To stop all trade activitiesd)To start a new warCorrect answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer? tests, examples and also practice Class 8 tests.
Explore Courses for Class 8 exam

Top Courses for Class 8

Explore Courses
Signup for Free!
Signup to see your scores go up within 7 days! Learn & Practice with 1000+ FREE Notes, Videos & Tests.
10M+ students study on EduRev