In the first quarter of seventeenth century, in which of the following was/were the factory/factories of the English East India Company located? 1. Broach 2. Chicacole 3. Trichinopoly Select the correct answer using the code given below.
Contents12
- A1 only
- B1 and 2
- C3 only
- D2 and 3
Show answer
Answer: (A) 1 only
The English East India Company received its charter in 1600.
In the first quarter of the 17th century (1600-1625), their factory network was limited.
By 1619, they had established factories at:
- Agra
- Ahmedabad
- Baroda
- Broach on the west coast, all under Surat factory's control.
So Broach (Option 1) is correct.
Chicacole (Srikakulam) was under regional kingdoms in the early 17th century and later came under French control during the Carnatic Wars (18th century).
No EIC factory existed there.
Trichinopoly was under the Kingdom of Arcot and features in the 18th-century Carnatic Wars — no EIC factory here either in the 1600s.
Only Broach is correct.
Answer: (a).
The English East India Company received its royal charter in 1600 and initially established only a few factories on India's west coast under Surat's control by the 1620s.
UPSC tests precise chronology here - students often confuse early 17th century limited English presence with later 18th century expansion during the Carnatic Wars when places like Chicacole and Trichinopoly became strategically important.
English East India Company Early Factories (1600-1625)
Modern Indian History Broach first quarter of seventeenth century factory English East India Company
English East India Company's Early Factory Network (1600-1625)
EIC received royal charter in 1600 and established limited factory network by 1625
Broach was among the early factories under Surat's control by 1619
Chicacole and Trichinopoly had no EIC factories in early 17th century
West coast focus initially due to Mughal trade permits and Portuguese competition
The English East India Company received its royal charter in 1600 and began establishing trading posts called 'factories' in India. The first quarter of the 17th century (1600-1625) marked their initial expansion phase, primarily concentrated along India's western coast.
EIC Factory Network by 1625
Location | Established By | Status | Controlling Factory |
|---|---|---|---|
Surat | 1612 | Main factory | Independent |
Agra | 1619 | Active | Under Surat |
Ahmedabad | 1619 | Active | Under Surat |
Baroda | 1619 | Active | Under Surat |
Broach | 1619 | Active | Under Surat |
Chicacole | Not established | No EIC presence | N/A |
Trichinopoly | Not established | No EIC presence | N/A |
Early EIC Factories Map
Source: Sleepy Classes — Solved] In the first quarter of seventeenth century, in which of ... · sleepyclasses.com
Why West Coast Focus
Mughal permission: Jahangir granted trading rights in 1613 after Captain Best's naval victory
Portuguese competition: EIC challenged Portuguese monopoly on western trade routes
Cotton and textiles: Gujarat region was major textile production center
Secure base: Surat provided protection under Mughal authority
Question Context
This question tests knowledge of EIC's chronological expansion. In 1600-1625, EIC had limited presence - only Broach among the three options existed as an EIC factory. Chicacole and Trichinopoly became significant much later during 18th-century conflicts.
Trap: Chicacole sounds like an early EIC factory but had no EIC presence in early 1600s
Trap: Trichinopoly's prominence in Carnatic Wars makes it seem like an early establishment
Chronology confusion: Many factories established in 18th century, not 17th century
Geography trap: Eastern coast factories came much later than western coast ones
Chicacole (Srikakulam) in Colonial Period
Modern Indian History Chicacole
Chicacole (Srikakulam): From Regional Kingdom to French Control
Chicacole (modern Srikakulam) was under regional kingdoms in early 17th century
Came under French control during 18th century Carnatic Wars period
No English East India Company factory in early 1600s
Chicacole (present-day Srikakulam in Andhra Pradesh) was strategically located on India's eastern coast but remained under local rulers during the EIC's early expansion phase. It gained prominence only during the 18th-century European conflicts.
Chicacole Through Colonial Periods
%%{init: {"flowchart": {"wrappingWidth": 460}}}%%
flowchart TD
s1["`**Early 17th Century (1600-1625)**
Under regional kingdoms, no European trading posts`"]
s2["`**Mid-17th Century**
Local rulers maintain control, minimal European interest`"]
s3["`**18th Century**
French establish presence during Carnatic Wars period`"]
s4["`**Later Colonial Period**
Changes hands between European powers`"]
s1 --> s2
s2 --> s3
s3 --> s4Name confusion: Modern Srikakulam was historically called Chicacole
Timeline trap: French control in 18th century ≠ EIC factory in early 1600s
Geographic assumption: Eastern coast locations often established later than western ones
Trichinopoly in Carnatic Wars
Modern Indian History Trichinopoly
Trichinopoly: Strategic Center of 18th Century Conflicts
Trichinopoly was under Kingdom of Arcot in early 17th century
Became major battleground during Carnatic Wars (1740s-1760s)
No EIC factory existed here in first quarter of 17th century
Strategic importance emerged only during Anglo-French conflicts
Trichinopoly (modern Tiruchirappalli in Tamil Nadu) was part of the Kingdom of Arcot during the early 17th century when EIC was establishing its first factories. Its historical significance emerged much later during the Carnatic Wars of the 18th century.
Trichinopoly's Historical Role
Early 1600s: Under Kingdom of Arcot, no European trading presence
Carnatic Wars (1740s-1760s): Major battleground between British and French forces
Strategic location: Controlled trade routes between eastern and southern India
Modern significance: Important railway junction and industrial center
Chronology trap: Famous in Carnatic Wars ≠ early EIC factory location
Strategic importance confusion: Later military significance doesn't mean early commercial presence
Southern India assumption: Not all important southern cities had early EIC factories
European Factory System in India
Modern Indian History factory
European Factory System: Commercial Colonialism in India
Factories were fortified trading posts, not manufacturing units
Served as warehouses, offices, and residential quarters for European traders
System evolved from pure trade to territorial control
Each factory had a Chief Factor who managed trade and local relations
The term 'factory' in colonial context referred to trading establishments, not industrial manufacturing units. These were fortified commercial centers where European companies stored goods, conducted business, and housed their personnel.
European Companies and Their Factory Networks
Company | First Factory | Major Centers | Peak Period |
|---|---|---|---|
Portuguese | Cochin (1502) | Goa, Daman, Diu | 16th century |
Dutch (VOC) | Masulipatnam (1605) | Pulicat, Cochin, Chinsura | 17th century |
English (EIC) | Surat (1612) | Surat, Madras, Calcutta | 18th-19th century |
French | Surat (1668) | Pondicherry, Chandernagore | 18th century |
Danish | Tranquebar (1620) | Tranquebar, Serampore | 17th-18th century |
Factory System Structure
# European Factory
## Functions
- Trade operations
- Storage warehouse
- Administrative office
- Residential quarters
## Personnel
- Chief Factor
- Writers
- Merchants
- Guards
## Activities
- Buying local goods
- Selling European items
- Negotiating with rulers
- Collecting market intelligence
## Evolution
- Trading post
- Fortified center
- Administrative hub
- Territorial baseTerminology trap: 'Factory' meant trading post, not manufacturing center
Chronology confusion: Different companies established factories in different periods
Geographic spread: Early factories concentrated on coasts, inland came later
Authority levels: Some factories were independent, others subordinate to main centers