ICSE Class 8 · Chapter 6

India in the 18th Century ICSE Class 8: Mughal Decline and Regional Kingdoms

Updated 15 October 2026 · Fact-checked

In 18th-century India the Mughal Empire declined after Aurangzeb's death in 1707 because of weak rulers, wars of succession, quarrelling nobles, revolts and foreign invasions. Regional powers rose in its place: Hyderabad, Awadh and Bengal under former Mughal governors, and the Rajputs, Sikhs, Mysore and the Marathas, who became strongest under the Peshwas.

What India in the 18th Century is about

At the start of the 18th century the Mughal Empire was still the largest state in the subcontinent. Yet within fifty years of Aurangzeb's death in 1707, the emperor in Delhi controlled little more than the area around his capital. Governors of provinces became independent rulers in all but name, old rivals of the Mughals grew powerful, and invaders from the north-west plundered Delhi.

The CISCE curriculum asks for the major causes of the decline of the Mughal Empire, a brief study of the regional kingdoms (Hyderabad, Awadh, Bengal, the Rajputs, the Sikhs, Mysore and the Marathas) and, in more detail, the rising power of the Marathas under the Peshwas.

The 18th century was not simply a time of darkness. Many regional states were well governed and their economies prospered. But constant warfare between them, and their failure to unite, created an opening that the English East India Company used in the next chapter. Keep that link in mind: it explains why this chapter comes just before 'Traders to Rulers'.

Weightage: CISCE publishes no question paper, marking scheme or chapter weightage for Class VIII History and Civics: your school sets and marks the exam. India in the 18th Century sits in the History: India in the 18th Century section of the CISCE Curriculum for Upper Primary Classes (VI-VIII).Source: CISCE Curriculum for Upper Primary Classes (VI-VIII), RDCD 2016

Key concepts

Causes of the decline of the Mughal Empire

1. Weak successors: after Aurangzeb (died 1707), most emperors were weak and depended on powerful nobles; several ruled only briefly.
2. Wars of succession: there was no fixed rule of succession, so princes fought each other for the throne, weakening the army and treasury.
3. Aurangzeb's policies: his long campaigns in the Deccan (over 25 years) drained men and money, and many historians argue that some of his policies, such as reimposing the jizya tax (1679), alienated sections of his subjects, including Rajput allies.
4. Factions among nobles: groups of nobles competed for power and high posts; for example, the Sayyid brothers made and unmade emperors for a few years.
5. Crisis in the jagir system: there was not enough revenue-yielding land to pay all the nobles, causing discontent and harsh pressure on peasants.
6. Revolts: Marathas, Sikhs, Jats and some Rajput rulers rebelled against Mughal authority.
7. Foreign invasions: Nadir Shah of Persia sacked Delhi in 1739 and carried away immense wealth, including the Peacock Throne; Ahmad Shah Abdali of Afghanistan invaded several times between 1748 and 1767.
8. Rise of European companies: the English and French companies grew in strength and later took advantage of the empire's weakness.

Worked example

(4 marks) Explain four causes of the decline of the Mughal Empire after 1707.

Try it first, then show the solutionSolution

Weak successors of Aurangzeb - 1 mark.
Wars of succession among princes - 1 mark.
Quarrelling nobles and the jagir crisis - 1 mark.
Foreign invasions (Nadir Shah 1739, Abdali) / revolts of regional powers - 1 mark.

Answer: (1) The later Mughals were weak rulers controlled by nobles. (2) Without a fixed rule of succession, princes fought costly wars for the throne. (3) Nobles split into rival groups, and the shortage of jagirs caused discontent. (4) Invasions by Nadir Shah, who sacked Delhi in 1739, and Ahmad Shah Abdali drained the empire's wealth and prestige.

Successor states: Hyderabad, Awadh and Bengal

These three states were founded by Mughal governors (subadars) who never formally broke with the emperor but became independent in practice, passing power to their families.

Hyderabad: founded by Nizam-ul-Mulk Asaf Jah, a powerful Mughal noble who became governor of the Deccan and from 1724 ruled it as his own state. He appointed his own officials and collected revenue without sending it to Delhi.

Awadh: Saadat Khan (Burhan-ul-Mulk) became governor of Awadh in 1722. Awadh's fertile land in the Ganga plain made it rich. He and his successors reduced Mughal interference and controlled the revenue, the army and the courts.

Bengal: Murshid Quli Khan, appointed to manage Bengal's revenue, became its ruler and moved the capital to Murshidabad. Later, Alivardi Khan seized power (1740). Bengal was very wealthy from trade; its nawabs tried to control European trading companies, which later led to conflict with the English (Chapter 7).

Common features: hereditary rule, control of revenue and army, formal respect to the Mughal emperor but real independence.

Worked example

(3 marks) Name the founders of the states of Hyderabad, Awadh and Bengal.

Try it first, then show the solutionSolution

Hyderabad: Nizam-ul-Mulk Asaf Jah - 1 mark.
Awadh: Saadat Khan (Burhan-ul-Mulk) - 1 mark.
Bengal: Murshid Quli Khan - 1 mark.

Answer: Hyderabad was founded by Nizam-ul-Mulk Asaf Jah, Awadh by Saadat Khan (Burhan-ul-Mulk) and Bengal by Murshid Quli Khan. All three were Mughal officials who became independent in practice.

The Rajputs and the Sikhs

Rajputs: many Rajput kings had served the Mughals as nobles. In the 18th century they tried to expand their power.

Sawai Jai Singh of Amber founded the city of Jaipur (1727) and built astronomical observatories, known as Jantar Mantar, at Delhi, Jaipur, Ujjain, Mathura and Varanasi.
Rajput states were, however, divided by rivalries and later came under Maratha pressure.

Sikhs:

Guru Gobind Singh founded the Khalsa in 1699.
After his death, Banda Bahadur led a revolt against Mughal authority in Punjab; he was captured and executed in 1716.
Sikh fighting bands called misls (about twelve) controlled different areas; together they formed the Dal Khalsa and met at Amritsar to take common decisions.
They collected a protection tax called rakhi from cultivators.
At the end of the century Ranjit Singh united the misls and captured Lahore in 1799, building a strong Sikh kingdom.

Worked example

(2 marks) What were misls? Who united them?

Try it first, then show the solutionSolution

Misls: Sikh bands or confederacies controlling different territories in Punjab - 1 mark.
Ranjit Singh united them and captured Lahore in 1799 - 1 mark.

Answer: Misls were bands of Sikh fighters, each controlling its own territory in Punjab, which acted together as the Dal Khalsa. Maharaja Ranjit Singh united them and captured Lahore in 1799.

Mysore under Haidar Ali and Tipu Sultan

Mysore was ruled by the Wodeyar dynasty, but real power passed to Haidar Ali, a commander in its army, who took control in 1761.

Haidar Ali modernised the army, using European-style training and artillery.
His son Tipu Sultan ruled from 1782 to 1799. He is often called the 'Tiger of Mysore'.
Tipu reformed the administration, introduced new coins, a new calendar and new weights and measures, encouraged trade, and used rockets in war.
He stopped the export of sandalwood, pepper and cardamom through the ports of his kingdom by private traders, which hurt the English Company's trade.
Mysore fought four wars with the English Company (the Anglo-Mysore wars). Tipu was killed defending his capital, Seringapatam (Srirangapatna), in 1799.

Worked example

(3 marks) Why was Mysore a strong power in the late 18th century?

Try it first, then show the solutionSolution

Able rulers: Haidar Ali and Tipu Sultan - 1 mark.
Modernised army with European-style training and artillery; rockets - 1 mark.
Strong administration and economy; control of trade - 1 mark.

Answer: Mysore had capable rulers in Haidar Ali and Tipu Sultan, who built a modern army trained on European lines and equipped with artillery and rockets. Tipu also reformed the administration and controlled trade in valuable goods, strengthening the state's finances.

The Marathas under the Peshwas

Shivaji (crowned 1674) founded a Maratha kingdom in western India. After his death, the Peshwas, the chief ministers of the Maratha king (Chhatrapati), became the real rulers, with their base at Pune.

Balaji Vishwanath (Peshwa from 1713) strengthened Maratha power and won Mughal recognition of Maratha rights.
Baji Rao I (1720-1740), a brilliant general, expanded Maratha power into Malwa, Gujarat and Bundelkhand and raided as far as Delhi in 1737.
Balaji Baji Rao (Nana Saheb, 1740-1761) extended Maratha influence across much of India.

How they raised money: they collected chauth (one-fourth of land revenue) and sardeshmukhi (a further one-tenth) from areas under their influence.

The Maratha confederacy: powerful chiefs set up their own states: the Sindhias at Gwalior, the Holkars at Indore, the Gaikwads at Baroda and the Bhonsles at Nagpur. They accepted the Peshwa as leader but often acted independently.

Third Battle of Panipat (1761): the Marathas were defeated by Ahmad Shah Abdali. This was a severe blow, though the Marathas recovered under leaders such as Mahadji Sindhia and the minister Nana Phadnavis.

Weaknesses: rivalry among chiefs, and the burden of chauth made many other rulers hostile to them.

Worked example

(4 marks) Describe the rise of Maratha power under the Peshwas.

Try it first, then show the solutionSolution

Peshwas became real rulers; Balaji Vishwanath gained Mughal recognition - 1 mark.
Baji Rao I expanded into Malwa, Gujarat and Bundelkhand; raid on Delhi (1737) - 1 mark.
Chauth and sardeshmukhi collected from a wide area - 1 mark.
Confederacy of Sindhia, Holkar, Gaikwad and Bhonsle; set back at Panipat 1761 - 1 mark.

Answer: After Shivaji, the Peshwas became the real rulers of the Maratha state. Balaji Vishwanath won Mughal recognition of Maratha rights, and Baji Rao I expanded into Malwa, Gujarat and Bundelkhand, reaching Delhi in 1737. The Marathas collected chauth and sardeshmukhi across a wide area, and chiefs such as the Sindhias, Holkars, Gaikwads and Bhonsles formed a confederacy under the Peshwa. Their advance was checked at the Third Battle of Panipat (1761).

Why the regional powers could not replace the Mughals

1. Constant wars among themselves: the Marathas fought Hyderabad, Mysore and the Rajputs; the Nizam and Mysore fought each other.
2. No unity: they did not cooperate even against outside threats, such as Abdali or the English.
3. Short-term alliances with Europeans: rulers sought English or French help against rivals, giving the companies influence.
4. Military gap: European-trained armies, discipline and artillery gave the companies an edge, though Mysore and some Maratha chiefs did modernise.
5. Financial strain: wars emptied treasuries, leading to heavier demands on peasants.
Result: the English East India Company was able to defeat them one by one, beginning with Bengal.

Worked example

(2 marks) How did divisions among Indian rulers help the English East India Company?

Try it first, then show the solutionSolution

Rulers fought one another and did not unite - 1 mark.
The Company allied with some against others and defeated them one by one - 1 mark.

Answer: Because Indian rulers fought one another and never united, the Company could ally with one ruler against another and defeat them separately, steadily expanding its power.

India in the 18th Century in real life

Each concept, met in an everyday situation. Read the situation, answer the question in your own words, then compare with the model answer. The one-line hook is what to remember.

Wars of succession

Suppose a large family business has no rule about who takes over when the founder retires, so all five children fight in court for years over control.

What happens to the business? Which cause of Mughal decline does this resemble?

Try it first, then show the solutionSolution

Money and energy go into the quarrel instead of the business.
Rivals and managers take advantage of the confusion.
The Mughals had no fixed rule of succession, so princes fought costly wars for the throne.

Answer: The business weakens while its rivals grow. The Mughal Empire suffered in the same way from repeated wars of succession after Aurangzeb's death.

Memory hook: No rule for the throne, every heir fights alone.

Successor states

Imagine branch managers of a big company in different cities who stop sending profits to head office, appoint their own staff and pass the branch to their children, though they still put the company's name on the signboard.

Which 18th-century states were formed in a similar way?

Try it first, then show the solutionSolution

Governors kept formal respect for the emperor (the signboard).
In practice they controlled revenue, army and appointments.
Power became hereditary in their families.

Answer: Hyderabad, Awadh and Bengal, whose Mughal governors became independent rulers in practice while formally accepting the emperor.

Memory hook: Mughal name on the board, local ruler in charge.

Divided rivals and an outsider

Suppose three neighbouring shopkeepers keep undercutting and quarrelling with each other, and a large chain store from outside offers to help one of them against the other two in return for a share of the profits.

What is likely to happen in the long run? How does this resemble the 18th century?

Try it first, then show the solutionSolution

The outsider gains influence over each shop in turn.
The local shops lose control of their own business.
Indian rulers similarly sought European help against rivals, letting the Company gain power.

Answer: The chain store will end up controlling all three. In the same way, quarrelling Indian rulers sought help from the English Company, which then defeated or controlled them one by one.

Memory hook: Divided neighbours, welcome conqueror.

Topics in this chapter

Decline of the Mughal Empire and the Rise of Regional Kingdoms

India in the 18th Century: key facts

Mughal decline: Aurangzeb died 1707; Nadir Shah sacked Delhi 1739; Abdali's invasions 1748-1767; Third Battle of Panipat 1761
Successor states: Awadh: Saadat Khan, governor 1722; Hyderabad: Nizam-ul-Mulk Asaf Jah, from 1724; Bengal: Murshid Quli Khan; Alivardi Khan 1740
Sikhs and Rajputs: Khalsa 1699; Banda Bahadur executed 1716; Jaipur founded 1727 (Sawai Jai Singh); Ranjit Singh takes Lahore 1799
Mysore: Haidar Ali in control 1761; Tipu Sultan 1782-1799; killed at Seringapatam 1799; Four Anglo-Mysore wars.
Peshwas: Balaji Vishwanath (from 1713); Baji Rao I (1720-1740); Balaji Baji Rao (1740-1761); Chauth = 1/4 of land revenue; sardeshmukhi = a further 1/10.

How the school exam asks India in the 18th Century

The question patterns to expect, and the method that works for each.

Question type	How it is asked	Method
Causes of decline (4 marks)	Explain the causes of the decline of the Mughal Empire.	Four distinct causes: rulers, succession, nobles and jagirs, invasions or revolts.
Regional kingdoms (2-3 marks)	Who founded Hyderabad / Awadh / Bengal? Write a note on Tipu Sultan / the misls.	Founder, date if sure, two features.
Marathas (4 marks)	Describe the rise of the Marathas under the Peshwas; what were chauth and sardeshmukhi?	Peshwas in order, regions conquered, revenue system, confederacy, Panipat.
Map or picture-based (2-3 marks)	A map of 18th-century states or a picture of Jantar Mantar is given for identification.	Name the state or monument, its ruler and one feature.

Tricks to remember India in the 18th Century

Short memory aids. Say each one aloud once, then use it on a question the same day.

Successor states: H-A-B
'Have A Biscuit': Hyderabad (Nizam), Awadh (Saadat Khan), Bengal (Murshid Quli Khan).
Use it when: The three successor states and founders.
Peshwas in order
'Big Bold Boss': Balaji Vishwanath, Baji Rao I, Balaji Baji Rao.
Use it when: Order of the first three Peshwas.
Confederacy families
'Smart Hawks Guard Borders': Sindhia (Gwalior), Holkar (Indore), Gaikwad (Baroda), Bhonsle (Nagpur).
Use it when: Maratha chiefs and their capitals.

India in the 18th Century: exam-level solved questions

Ordered from exam level to HOTS. Cover the solution, write your own, then compare step by step.

Example 1: Nadir Shah · 1 mark · MCQExam level

Nadir Shah, who sacked Delhi in 1739, was the ruler of:
(a) Afghanistan
(b) Persia (Iran)
(c) Mysore
(d) Awadh

Try it first, then show the solutionSolution

Ahmad Shah Abdali was the Afghan ruler.
Nadir Shah ruled Persia.

Answer: (b) Persia (Iran).

Example 2: Assertion and reason: chauth · 1 mark · Assertion-reasonHarder exam level

Assertion (A): The Marathas' collection of chauth made many other Indian rulers hostile to them.
Reason (R): Chauth was one-fourth of the land revenue of an area, demanded even from areas the Marathas did not directly rule.
(a) Both A and R are true and R explains A
(b) Both A and R are true but R does not explain A
(c) A is true but R is false
(d) A is false but R is true

Try it first, then show the solutionSolution

Chauth was a heavy demand on other rulers' territories: R is true.
This made rulers such as the Rajputs and the Nizam resent the Marathas: A is true and R explains it.

Answer: (a) Both A and R are true and R explains A.

Example 3: Impact of Nadir Shah's invasion · 3 marks · Short answerHarder exam level

How did Nadir Shah's invasion of 1739 weaken the Mughal Empire?

Try it first, then show the solutionSolution

He sacked Delhi and carried away enormous wealth, including the Peacock Throne.
The treasury was emptied, so the emperor could not pay his army and nobles.
The emperor's prestige was destroyed, encouraging governors and rivals to act independently.

Answer: Nadir Shah plundered Delhi and carried away immense wealth, including the Peacock Throne. The empty treasury left the emperor unable to pay his army and nobles, and his humiliation showed the empire's weakness, encouraging governors and rivals to assert their independence.

Example 4: Comparing two kinds of states · 3 marks · Short answerHOTS / competency

Distinguish between the origins of Bengal and of the Maratha state in the 18th century.

Try it first, then show the solutionSolution

Bengal: a successor state, founded by a Mughal governor (Murshid Quli Khan) who became independent in practice.
Maratha state: grew out of resistance to the Mughals, founded by Shivaji.
Bengal kept formal loyalty to the emperor; the Marathas fought and later dominated the Mughals.

Answer: Bengal was a successor state: its governor, Murshid Quli Khan, an official of the empire, quietly became an independent ruler while still formally respecting the emperor. The Maratha state arose from armed resistance to the Mughals under Shivaji and, under the Peshwas, expanded at the empire's expense, even raiding Delhi.

Example 5: Tipu Sultan · 3 marks · Short answerExam level

Mention three measures of Tipu Sultan that show he was a modernising ruler.

Try it first, then show the solutionSolution

Modern army with European-style training; use of rockets.
New coins, calendar, and weights and measures.
Encouragement of trade and control of exports such as sandalwood and pepper.

Answer: Tipu Sultan trained his army on European lines and used rockets in war; he introduced new coins, a new calendar and new weights and measures; and he encouraged trade while controlling the export of valuable goods like sandalwood, pepper and cardamom.

Example 6: Third Battle of Panipat · 2 marks · Short answerHarder exam level

State the significance of the Third Battle of Panipat (1761).

Try it first, then show the solutionSolution

The Marathas were defeated by Ahmad Shah Abdali, with heavy losses.
It checked Maratha expansion in the north and further weakened Indian powers, helping the English Company.

Answer: At Panipat in 1761, Ahmad Shah Abdali defeated the Marathas, who lost many soldiers and leaders. The defeat checked their expansion in north India and weakened the strongest Indian power just as the English Company was rising.

Example 7: The 18th century: decline or change? · 4 marks · Long answerHOTS / competency

'The 18th century in India was only a period of decline.' Do you agree? Give reasons.

Try it first, then show the solutionSolution

Decline: the Mughal Empire collapsed; invasions plundered Delhi.
But regional states such as Awadh, Hyderabad and Mysore were well administered and prosperous.
Cultural and scientific activity continued, for example Jai Singh's observatories.
However, wars among the regional powers opened the way for the English; so it was a period of change rather than only decline.

Answer: Not entirely. The Mughal Empire did collapse and Delhi was plundered by Nadir Shah and Abdali. But regional states such as Awadh, Hyderabad and Mysore were well run and prosperous, and Sawai Jai Singh built observatories and a planned city. It was a period of change, with power shifting to the regions; its weakness lay in constant wars among these states, which the English later exploited.

Case-study practice (Section B style)

Read the situation, then answer every part. In a school exam set on the board pattern this is a 7-mark question split into 2 + 2 + 3 marks.

Picture-based: Jantar Mantar

Study the description of a picture and answer the questions.

The picture shows a group of huge stone and plaster structures in an open courtyard in Jaipur. One is a giant sundial with a tall triangular wall and curved quadrants on each side. The structures were built in the 18th century by a Rajput ruler.

(i) · 2 marks
Identify the monument and the ruler who built it.
Answer
Answer: The Jantar Mantar (observatory) at Jaipur, built by Sawai Jai Singh of Amber.
1 mark each.
(ii) · 2 marks
Name two other cities where this ruler built similar observatories. Which city did he found?
Answer
Answer: Any two of Delhi, Ujjain, Mathura and Varanasi. He founded Jaipur (1727).
1 mark for two cities, 1 for Jaipur.
(iii) · 3 marks
What does this monument tell us about the 18th century, which is often described only as a time of decline?
Answer
Answer: It shows that even as the Mughal Empire declined, regional rulers supported science, learning and architecture. Jai Singh's interest in astronomy and his planned city show creativity and good administration in the regions, so the century was one of change and regional growth, not only decline.
1 mark for regional patronage, 1 for science, 1 for the judgement.

Where the marks are

How a typical answer is split into step marks. Show every step: a right final answer alone rarely earns full marks.

What were chauth and sardeshmukhi? (2 marks) (2 marks)

Step	Marks
Chauth: one-fourth of the land revenue.	1
Sardeshmukhi: an additional one-tenth.	1

Write a short note on Hyderabad in the 18th century. (3 marks) (3 marks)

Step	Marks
Founded by Nizam-ul-Mulk Asaf Jah, governor of the Deccan.	1
Independent in practice from 1724; formal respect for the emperor.	1
Appointed own officials, controlled revenue; fought the Marathas.	1

Explain four causes of the decline of the Mughal Empire. (4 marks) (4 marks)

Step	Marks
Weak successors.	1
Wars of succession.	1
Nobles' factions and jagir crisis.	1
Foreign invasions / revolts.	1

Where students lose marks in India in the 18th Century

The slips examiners see most often, and what to write instead.

Mistake: Confusing Nadir Shah and Ahmad Shah Abdali
Both invaded India in the same period.
Do this: Nadir Shah: Persia, sacked Delhi 1739. Abdali: Afghanistan, won Panipat 1761.
Usually costs: 1 mark.
Mistake: Writing that Hyderabad, Awadh and Bengal openly rebelled against the emperor
They became independent in practice.
Do this: Say they kept formal loyalty while ruling independently.
Usually costs: 1 mark.
Mistake: Treating the Peshwa as the Maratha king
The Peshwa was technically the chief minister.
Do this: Peshwa = chief minister of the Chhatrapati, who became the real ruler.
Usually costs: 1 mark.
Mistake: Writing chauth as one-tenth
Mixing the two levies.
Do this: Chauth = 'chau' (four): one-fourth. Sardeshmukhi = one-tenth.
Usually costs: 1 mark.

Practice questions on India in the 18th Century

Write each answer on paper first. Open the hint only if you are stuck, and the answer only when you have finished.

Q1 · 1 mark · MCQExam level
The Mughal emperor whose death in 1707 is taken as the start of the empire's decline was:
(a) Akbar
(b) Shah Jahan
(c) Aurangzeb
(d) Bahadur Shah II
Hint
Long Deccan wars.
Answer
(c) Aurangzeb.
Q2 · 1 mark · MCQHarder exam level
Which Peshwa raided Delhi in 1737?
(a) Balaji Vishwanath
(b) Baji Rao I
(c) Balaji Baji Rao
(d) Madhav Rao
Hint
Peshwa 1720-1740.
Answer
(b) Baji Rao I.
Q3 · 1 mark · Very short answerExam level
Who founded the Khalsa and in which year?
Hint
Tenth Guru.
Answer
Guru Gobind Singh, in 1699.
Q4 · 1 mark · Very short answerHarder exam level
What was sardeshmukhi?
Hint
One-tenth.
Answer
An additional levy of one-tenth of the land revenue claimed by the Marathas.
Q5 · 2 marks · Very short answerExam level
Why was Awadh a prosperous state?
Hint
Location.
Answer
It lay in the fertile Ganga plain, producing rich crops, and it was on the main trade route between north India and Bengal.
Q6 · 2 marks · Very short answerHarder exam level
Name the capitals of the Sindhias and the Holkars.
Hint
Both in central India.
Answer
Sindhias: Gwalior; Holkars: Indore.
Q7 · 3 marks · Short answerHarder exam level
What was the jagir crisis and how did it weaken the Mughals?
Hint
Too many nobles, too little land.
Answer
Nobles were paid through jagirs, the right to collect revenue from land. As the number of nobles grew, there was not enough good land to assign, so nobles were discontented and squeezed peasants harder. This weakened their loyalty to the emperor and caused peasant unrest.
Q8 · 2 marks · Very short answerExam level
Why is Banda Bahadur important in Sikh history?
Hint
After Guru Gobind Singh.
Answer
He led the Sikhs in a major revolt against Mughal rule in Punjab after Guru Gobind Singh's death and set up his own administration, until he was captured and executed in 1716.
Q9 · 3 marks · Short answerHarder exam level
Why did the Maratha confederacy become weak by the end of the century?
Hint
Chiefs and Panipat.
Answer
The big chiefs (Sindhia, Holkar, Gaikwad, Bhonsle) acted independently and often quarrelled with each other and the Peshwa; the defeat at Panipat in 1761 cost many leaders and soldiers; and their chauth demands made other Indian rulers hostile.
Q10 · 4 marks · Long answerHOTS / competency
Suggest how the history of India might have been different if the regional powers had united against outside threats. Give two points.
Hint
Panipat and the Company.
Answer
(1) A united front of the Marathas, Sikhs, Rajputs and the Nizam might have defeated Abdali at Panipat without such heavy losses. (2) The English Company could not have used one ruler against another and would have found it much harder to conquer Bengal, Mysore and the Maratha lands one by one. India might have remained under Indian rulers longer.
Q11 · 2 marks · Very short answerHOTS / competency
Give two reasons why Tipu Sultan was seen as a major threat by the English Company.
Hint
Army and trade.
Answer
He had a strong, modernised army that fought the Company repeatedly, and he controlled trade in valuable goods like sandalwood and pepper, hurting the Company's profits.

Test your recall

Answer in your head or on paper first, then open the card. Pulling an answer out of memory makes it stick far better than re-reading.

1.When did Aurangzeb die?Show answer
1707.
2.Who sacked Delhi in 1739?Show answer
Nadir Shah of Persia.
3.Who founded Jaipur?Show answer
Sawai Jai Singh (1727).
4.Who was the 'Tiger of Mysore'?Show answer
Tipu Sultan.
5.Where were the Peshwas based?Show answer
Pune.
6.Who defeated the Marathas at Panipat in 1761?Show answer
Ahmad Shah Abdali.

Best order to study it

Learn the causes of Mughal decline.
Learn the three successor states and their founders.
Learn the Rajputs and Sikhs in brief.
Learn Mysore under Haidar Ali and Tipu Sultan.
Learn the Marathas under the Peshwas in detail.
Understand why the regional powers could not resist the English.

Quick revision checklist

The night before the exam: can you do each of these without looking?

Mughal decline: weak successors after 1707, succession wars, nobles' factions, jagir crisis, revolts, Nadir Shah 1739, Abdali 1748-1767, European companies.
Successor states: Hyderabad (Nizam-ul-Mulk, 1724), Awadh (Saadat Khan, 1722), Bengal (Murshid Quli Khan; Alivardi Khan 1740).
Rajputs: Sawai Jai Singh, Jaipur 1727, Jantar Mantar observatories.
Sikhs: Khalsa 1699, Banda Bahadur (d. 1716), misls and Dal Khalsa, rakhi, Ranjit Singh takes Lahore 1799.
Mysore: Haidar Ali (from 1761), Tipu Sultan (1782-1799), modern army and rockets, killed at Seringapatam 1799.
Marathas: Peshwas Balaji Vishwanath, Baji Rao I, Balaji Baji Rao; chauth 1/4, sardeshmukhi 1/10; Sindhia, Holkar, Gaikwad, Bhonsle; Panipat 1761.

India in the 18th Century: frequently asked questions

How much detail is needed on each regional kingdom?

The CISCE curriculum says the regional kingdoms should be studied briefly, with the Marathas under the Peshwas in more detail. Know the founder, two features and the main date for each.

Was Aurangzeb solely responsible for the decline?

No. His long wars and some policies added to the strain, but historians also stress weak successors, the jagir crisis, revolts and invasions. Give several causes, not just one.

Why is Hyderabad called a 'successor state'?

Because it grew out of a Mughal province whose governor became independent in practice, succeeding to Mughal power in that region.

Based on: CISCE Curriculum for Upper Primary Classes (VI-VIII), History and Civics (Class VIII); CISCE RDCD: Curriculum Pre-School to Class VIII