Q. Analyse how the Nizam maintained a balance between autonomy and subordination under British Paramountcy.

Approach:
Introduction:
• By signing the Subsidiary Alliance in 1798, the Nizam accepted British supremacy but tactfully preserved internal autonomy, shaping a unique balance between subordination and sovereign governance.
Body:
Adopt a thematic structure. Each subheading should reflect a tension or balance and provide:
• 3–4 clear points,• Specific examples of both subordination and autonomy
• A short analytical insight
1. Subordination in Foreign Policy, Autonomy in Internal Governance
• British controlled diplomacy and defence
• Nizam retained civil administration, law-making powers, and HCS (Hyderabad Civil Service)
2. Military Dependency vs Internal Policing Sovereignty
• British cantonment in Secunderabad
• Nizam funded and nominally led the Hyderabad Contingent
• Internal policing remained under state control
3. Political Loyalty vs Strategic Leverage
• Loyalty during 1857 rewarded with trust and autonomy
• Titles like “Faithful Ally of the Crown” enhanced his prestige
• Avoided Doctrine of Lapse
4. Fiscal Autonomy vs Economic Constraints
• Own revenue system and budgets
• Strategic infrastructure (railways/telegraphs) under British control
• Trade and customs shaped by colonial priorities
5. Cultural Independence vs Symbolic Subordination
• Retained Persian/Urdu in court
• Patronized native arts and identity
• Maintained symbolic sovereignty through durbars, titles, flags.
Conclusion:
• Through strategic loyalty and internal assertion, the Nizam retained autonomy in administration and culture, avoiding annexation while functioning within colonial constraints.,

Introduction:
When the Nizam of Hyderabad signed the Subsidiary Alliance in 1798, he became the first Indian ruler to formally embrace British paramountcy. This marked the beginning of a complex power dynamic, where the Nizam sought to balance colonial subordination with continued exercise of authority over internal governance, culture, and identity.

Body:
Maintaining a balance between autonomy and subordination:
1. Subordination in External Affairs, Autonomy in Internal Administration
a) Subsidiary Alliance of 1798 placed foreign relations and defence firmly under British control.
b) Yet, the Nizam implemented Salar Jung’s modernisation reforms—revamping revenue, police, and judiciary systems.
c) Hyderabad had its own currency, stamps, civil service (Hyderabad Civil Service), and continued to legislate internally. 2. Military Dependency vs Policing Sovereignty
a) A British cantonment was established in Secunderabad, limiting Hyderabad’s military independence.
b) However, the Hyderabad Contingent, though British-supervised, was funded and nominally led by the Nizam.
c) Internal security and law enforcement remained under the
Nizam’s police and local militia.
3. Political Loyalty vs Strategic Leverage
a) The Nizam remained neutral during the Revolt of 1857, earning British trust and avoiding punitive action.
b) This loyalty allowed Hyderabad to evade annexation under the Doctrine of Lapse.
c) The British conferred titles like “Faithful Ally of the Crown”, boosting the Nizam’s courtly prestige.
4. Fiscal Autonomy vs Economic Constraints
a) Hyderabad raised its own revenue and maintained separate budgets for irrigation, education, and public works.
b) However, railways and telegraphs were controlled and imposed by the British for strategic use.
c) Trade policy and customs duties were largely shaped by British colonial interests.
5. Cultural Independence Amid Imperial Supremacy
a) Persian and Urdu remained the court languages until late 19th century, reflecting cultural autonomy.
b) The Nizam’s court supported Deccani architecture, literature, and music, distinct from colonial styles.
c) Royal durbars, titles, and symbols reinforced the idea of an independent princely identity within empire.

Conclusion:
The Nizam’s firm support to the British—especially during the 1857 Revolt earned him rare praise, with Lord Canning calling him “our firmest friend in India.” In return, Hyderabad was spared annexation under the Doctrine of Lapse, allowing the Nizam to retain internal autonomy despite formal colonial subordination.

Additional Embellishment:
Autonomy vs Subordination