Which one among the following wars ended by the Treaty of Salbai?

1. Rise of Regional Powers: The Maratha Empire (basic)

The Maratha Empire emerged as the most significant indigenous power to challenge Mughal hegemony in the 17th and 18th centuries. At its root, the Maratha rise was fueled by the visionary leadership of Chhatrapati Shivaji Maharaj, who leveraged the rugged geography of the Western Ghats to develop guerrilla warfare tactics (known as Ganimi Kava). Shivaji did not just build an army; he built a sense of national identity among the Marathi-speaking people. His defiance of Aurangzeb, including his daring escape from house arrest in Agra after being captured by Raja Jai Singh, became the stuff of legend and solidified his role as a symbol of resistance History, class XI (Tamilnadu state board 2024 ed.), The Mughal Empire, p.211.

Following Shivaji’s death in 1680, the Marathas faced their darkest hour. Aurangzeb executed Shivaji's son, Sambhaji, and captured the capital, Raigad. However, the Maratha spirit did not break. Under Rajaram and later Tarabai, the resistance shifted south to Gingee (in modern Tamil Nadu), turning the conflict into a pan-Indian struggle that eventually exhausted the Mughal treasury and manpower Exploring Society:India and Beyond, Social Science, Class VIII. NCERT(Revised ed 2025), The Rise of the Marathas, p.69. By the early 18th century, the power shifted from the Chhatrapatis to the Peshwas (Prime Ministers). Under leaders like Baji Rao I, the Maratha Empire transformed into a Confederacy, reaching the gates of Delhi and becoming the de facto masters of North India.

The trajectory of the Maratha Empire took a pivotal turn during the Third Battle of Panipat (1761). Although the Marathas were defeated by the Afghan invader Ahmad Shah Abdali, the consequences were far-reaching. The battle decimated the Maratha leadership but also left the Mughals completely shattered. Interestingly, the Marathas managed a remarkable recovery within a decade, becoming the protectors of the Mughal Emperor Shah Alam II History, class XI (Tamilnadu state board 2024 ed.), The Marathas, p.233. However, the temporary vacuum created by this conflict provided the perfect opening for a new player on the horizon: the British East India Company.

Sources: History, class XI (Tamilnadu state board 2024 ed.), The Mughal Empire, p.211; Exploring Society:India and Beyond ,Social Science, Class VIII . NCERT(Revised ed 2025), The Rise of the Marathas, p.69; History, class XI (Tamilnadu state board 2024 ed.), The Marathas, p.233

2. The Maratha Confederacy: Structure and Internal Politics (basic)

To understand the Anglo-Maratha wars, we must first understand the unique and complex political structure of the Marathas. Originally, under Shivaji Maharaj, the Maratha state was a centralized monarchy. However, as the power of the Chhatrapatis (Kings) declined over time, the office of the Peshwa (the Prime Minister) rose to prominence. Under the genius of Balaji Vishwanath, the Peshwaship became hereditary and virtually supreme, effectively shifting the center of power from Satara to Pune History, class XI (Tamilnadu state board 2024 ed.), Chapter 15, p.234-235.

The Maratha Confederacy was a brilliant but fragile solution to manage a rapidly expanding empire. Pioneered by Bajirao I, the greatest of the Peshwas, this system assigned prominent Maratha families specific "spheres of influence." These chiefs were expected to conquer and administer these territories in the name of the Maratha King, Shahu, while acknowledging the Peshwa as the functional head Rajiv Ahir, A Brief History of Modern India, Chapter 5, p.101. This allowed for rapid expansion, but it also sowed the seeds of decentralization. The five primary pillars of this confederacy were:

Confederacy Member	Seat of Power (Territory)
The Peshwa	Poona (Pune)
The Scindia (Sindhia)	Gwalior
The Holkar	Indore
The Gaekwad	Baroda
The Bhonsle	Nagpur

Internally, this structure was fraught with factionalism. While the Peshwa was the nominal coordinator, the individual chiefs often acted like independent monarchs. Jealousies and rivalries—particularly between the Scindias and the Holkars—frequently led to internal conflicts. Because they lacked a strong centralizing force after the mid-18th century, these chiefs often failed to present a united front against external threats like Ahmad Shah Abdali or, eventually, the British East India Company History, class XI (Tamilnadu state board 2024 ed.), Chapter 15, p.233-234. This internal discord was precisely the "weak link" the British exploited to dismantle Maratha power piece by piece.

Sources: History , class XI (Tamilnadu state board 2024 ed.), Chapter 15: The Marathas, p.233-235; Rajiv Ahir. A Brief History of Modern India (2019 ed.). SPECTRUM., Chapter 5: Expansion and Consolidation of British Power in India, p.101

3. First Anglo-Maratha War: The War of Treaties (intermediate)

The First Anglo-Maratha War (1775–1782) was born out of a classic succession struggle within the Maratha Empire. After the death of Peshwa Madhav Rao in 1772, a power vacuum emerged at Poona. His brother, Narayan Rao, was murdered in 1773, leading to a clash between the ambitious uncle, Raghunath Rao (Raghoba), and the supporters of the infant Peshwa, Madhav Rao II, led by the shrewd statesman Nana Phadnavis Modern India, Bipin Chandra, Indian States and Society in the 18th Century, p.34. Seeking power at any cost, Raghunath Rao turned to the British in Bombay, initiating a conflict that would be defined more by diplomatic papers than by battlefields alone. This war is often called the 'War of Treaties' because of the conflicting interests between the British Bombay Council and the Calcutta Council (led by Warren Hastings). The Bombay Council initially backed Raghunath Rao via the Treaty of Surat (1775), hoping to gain territories like Salsette and Bassein. However, the Calcutta Council condemned this and sent Colonel Upton to sign the Treaty of Purandhar (1776) with the Maratha regency, effectively abandoning Raghunath Rao Rajiv Ahir, A Brief History of Modern India, Expansion and Consolidation of British Power in India, p.102. This administrative confusion between British centers highlighted the lack of a unified British command at the time. The war reached a stalemate after the British suffered a major defeat at Talegaon and were forced to sign the humiliating Convention of Wadgaon in 1779 Modern India, Bipin Chandra, The British Conquest of India, p.73. However, Warren Hastings rejected this surrender and continued the war until 1782. Finally, the Treaty of Salbai was signed, largely due to the mediation of Mahadji Sindhia. Under this treaty, the British kept Salsette but returned other conquests, and most importantly, it established a twenty-year peace between the Marathas and the British Rajiv Ahir, A Brief History of Modern India, Expansion and Consolidation of British Power in India, p.103.

Sources: Modern India, Bipin Chandra, Indian States and Society in the 18th Century, p.34; Modern India, Bipin Chandra, The British Conquest of India, p.73; Rajiv Ahir, A Brief History of Modern India, Expansion and Consolidation of British Power in India, p.102; Rajiv Ahir, A Brief History of Modern India, Expansion and Consolidation of British Power in India, p.103

4. Parallel Rivalries: The Anglo-Mysore Wars (intermediate)

While the British were busy negotiating with the Marathas in the West, a formidable challenge emerged from the South: the Kingdom of Mysore. Under the leadership of Haidar Ali and his son Tipu Sultan, Mysore became the most consistent and innovative opponent of British expansion. Unlike many traditional Indian rulers, the Sultans of Mysore understood the importance of a modernized army, mercantilism, and even international diplomacy with the French to counter the English East India Company.

The First Anglo-Mysore War (1767–1769) was a rare moment where the British were decisively outmaneuvered. Haidar Ali’s swift cavalry appeared at the gates of Madras, forcing the British to sign the Treaty of Madras in 1769 Rajiv Ahir. A Brief History of Modern India (2019 ed.). SPECTRUM. Chapter 5: Expansion and Consolidation of British Power in India, p.96. This treaty was unique because it included a mutual restitution of conquests and a promise that the British would assist Haidar if he were attacked by another power. However, when the British failed to help Haidar against the Marathas later, the trust was broken, leading to the Second Anglo-Mysore War (1780–1784). It was during this conflict that Haidar Ali passed away, and Tipu Sultan took the mantle, concluding the war with the Treaty of Mangalore.

The rivalry reached its peak during the Third Anglo-Mysore War (1790–1792). Lord Cornwallis formed a Triple Alliance with the Marathas and the Nizam of Hyderabad to isolate Tipu. Despite Tipu’s tactical brilliance, the sheer resources of the alliance forced him into the humiliating Treaty of Seringapatam, where he lost half his kingdom and had to surrender two of his sons as hostages History, class XI (Tamilnadu state board 2024 ed.). Early Resistance to British Rule, p.281. The final chapter came in 1799 with the Fourth Anglo-Mysore War. Tipu Sultan refused to accept the Subsidiary Alliance, and in the ensuing battle, he died defending his capital, Seringapatam History, class XI (Tamilnadu state board 2024 ed.). Early Resistance to British Rule, p.282.

Sources: Rajiv Ahir. A Brief History of Modern India (2019 ed.). SPECTRUM., Chapter 5: Expansion and Consolidation of British Power in India, p.96; History, class XI (Tamilnadu state board 2024 ed.), Early Resistance to British Rule, p.281-282

5. Tools of Expansion: Subsidiary Alliance and Paramountcy (intermediate)

By the end of the 18th century, the British East India Company shifted its strategy from being a mere trading entity to an imperial power. The driving logic was that British goods would sell better if the entire subcontinent was under their direct or indirect control Modern India, Bipin Chandra, p.76. To achieve this without the constant expense of direct administration, Lord Wellesley (Governor-General 1798–1805) perfected the Subsidiary Alliance system.

The Subsidiary Alliance was essentially a "protection racket" disguised as a military treaty. An Indian ruler entering this alliance surrendered their external sovereignty in exchange for British "protection." The system had three main pillars:

• Military Control: The British would station a permanent armed contingent within the state's territory. The ruler had to pay for its maintenance or cede territory to cover the costs Themes in Indian History Part III, Rebels and the Raj, p.266.
• Diplomatic Isolation: The ruler could not employ any Europeans (especially French) in their service and could not negotiate with any other Indian ruler or go to war without British permission A Brief History of Modern India, Rajiv Ahir, p.120.
• Political Oversight: A British Resident was posted at the ruler's court. While theoretically a diplomat, the Resident often became the de facto power behind the throne.

While the Subsidiary Alliance was a tool of indirect control, the policy of Paramountcy (intensified under Lord Hastings) took this a step further. It asserted that the British Company’s authority was supreme or "paramount" in India. This justified the British intervening in the internal affairs of any state or even annexing it if they felt its administration was "corrupt" or if it threatened British interests. For instance, when Peshwa Baji Rao II signed the Treaty of Bassein (1802), he effectively signed away Maratha independence, leading to a sense of humiliation that triggered the Second Anglo-Maratha War History Class XI TN Board, The Marathas, p.234.

Feature	Impact on Indian Ruler	Strategic Benefit to British
British Contingent	Lost control over his own military and paid for British troops.	The Company maintained a large army at the expense of others.
British Resident	Lost internal administrative autonomy.	Constant surveillance and influence over the local court.
Foreign Policy	Could not form alliances with other powers (like the French).	Eliminated European rivals and prevented Indian states from uniting.

Sources: Modern India (Bipin Chandra), The British Conquest of India, p.76; THEMES IN INDIAN HISTORY PART III (NCERT), REBELS AND THE RAJ, p.266; A Brief History of Modern India (Rajiv Ahir/Spectrum), Expansion and Consolidation of British Power in India, p.120; History (Tamilnadu state board), The Marathas, p.234

6. The Treaty of Salbai (1782): Terms and Significance (exam-level)

The Treaty of Salbai (May 1782) served as the definitive conclusion to the First Anglo-Maratha War, a conflict that had reached a weary stalemate for both the British East India Company and the Maratha Confederacy. After the British suffered a humiliating setback at Wadgaon and later recovered some ground under General Camac, both sides realized that a prolonged war was unsustainable. The treaty was negotiated with the brilliant Maratha chief Mahadji Sindhia acting as the primary mediator and the mutual guarantor of the terms, effectively elevating his status within the Maratha Empire Rajiv Ahir, A Brief History of Modern India, Chapter 5, p.103.

The specific terms of the treaty were designed to restore a level of stability to the region. The primary provisions included:

• Territorial Adjustments: The British were permitted to retain Salsette, but they had to restore all other territories conquered since the Treaty of Purandhar (1776), including Bassein, to the Marathas Rajiv Ahir, A Brief History of Modern India, Chapter 5, p.103.
• Abandonment of Raghunathrao: The British agreed to stop supporting the pretender Raghunathrao, whose quest for the Peshwaship had sparked the war. In return, the Peshwa agreed to provide him a maintenance allowance Rajiv Ahir, A Brief History of Modern India, Chapter 5, p.104.
• Anti-European Clause: To safeguard British interests against their global rivals, the Peshwa was prohibited from supporting any other European nation (specifically the French).
• Mysore Connection: The treaty also stipulated that Haidar Ali of Mysore must return all territories he had seized from the British and the Nawab of Arcot Rajiv Ahir, A Brief History of Modern India, Chapter 5, p.104.

The significance of the Treaty of Salbai lies in the twenty-year peace it established between the two powers. This 'long peace' was a masterstroke for the British, as it allowed them to consolidate their gains in Bengal and focus their entire military might on the Anglo-Mysore Wars and the French threat without worrying about a Maratha invasion from the west. For the Marathas, while it preserved their independence for a generation, it also marked the beginning of internal friction as the various Maratha chiefs began to assert more autonomy from the Peshwa's central authority Rajiv Ahir, A Brief History of Modern India, Chapter 5, p.103.

Sources: A Brief History of Modern India (Spectrum), Chapter 5: Expansion and Consolidation of British Power in India, p.103; A Brief History of Modern India (Spectrum), Chapter 5: Expansion and Consolidation of British Power in India, p.104

7. Solving the Original PYQ (exam-level)

Now that you have mastered the building blocks of British expansionism, you can see how the Treaty of Salbai acts as the definitive bridge between military conflict and diplomatic strategy. The First Anglo-Maratha War emerged from internal Maratha power struggles and the British ambition to install Raghunath Rao as Peshwa. By applying your knowledge of the 1770s-80s timeline, you can identify that the British faced significant resistance, leading to a stalemate that required a long-term diplomatic 'ceasefire.' This resulted in a twenty-year period of relative peace, allowing the British to pivot their resources toward Mysore while consolidating their existing gains.

To arrive at the First Maratha War as the correct answer, think like a strategist: the Treaty of Salbai (1782) was the final resolution that restored territories taken since the Treaty of Purandhar and allowed the British to retain Salsette. As detailed in Rajiv Ahir, Spectrum - A Brief History of Modern India, Mahadji Sindhia played the pivotal role of mediator here. If you remember that this treaty provided a long breathing room before the next major clash, the logic points directly to (A) First Maratha War. This period of peace is a recurring theme in UPSC exams when discussing the transition of power in the 18th century.

UPSC frequently uses the other options as chronological or thematic traps. For instance, the Second Maratha War is often associated with the Treaty of Bassein, which actually triggered the war rather than ending it on such balanced terms. The Third Maratha War resulted in the total dissolution of the Maratha Confederacy, a far more drastic outcome than the status-quo-leaning Salbai. Finally, the Fourth Mysore War is a classic 'distractor'—while it occurred in the same general era (1799), it concluded with the fall of Seringapatam and the death of Tipu Sultan, involving a completely different regional power. Distinguishing between these specific outcomes is key to avoiding the common 'treaty-confusion' trap.