Excellent study material for all civil services aspirants - being learning - Kar ke dikhayenge!
SHARE:
The 1857 Mutiny
1.0 First War of Independence
The uprising, which seriously threatened British rule in India, has been called by many names by historians, including the Sepoy Rebellion, the Great Mutiny, and the Revolt of 1857, however, many prefer to call it ‘India's first war of independence’. Undoubtedly, it was the culmination of mounting Indian resentment towards British economic and social policies over many decades. Until the rebellion, the British had succeeded in suppressing numerous riots and 'tribal' wars or in accommodating them through concessions till the Great Mutiny in the summer of 1857, during the viceroyalty of Lord Canning.
1.1 Causes
[Though the immediate cause of the Indian Revolt of 1857 was a minor change in the weapons used by the British East India Company's troops, there were many other religious and economic causes because of which the rebellion spread like wildfire. The East India Company upgraded to the new Pattern 1853 Enfield rifle, which used greased paper cartridges. In order to open the cartridges and load the rifles, sepoys had to bite into the paper and tear it with their teeth.
Rumors began in 1856 that the grease on the cartridges was made of a mixture of beef tallow and pork lard; eating cows, of course, is forbidden in Hinduism, while consumption of pork is haram in Islam. Thus, in this one small change, the British had managed to seriously offend both Hindu and Muslim troops. There were some additional causes also. Due to the British policy of ‘Doctrine of Lapse’, adopted children were ineligible for their thrones. Based on this doctrine the British had annexed a lot of princely states. This was an attempt to control succession in many of the princely states that were nominally independent from the British.
The British East India had confiscated large amount of land from the land-holders and redistributed them to the peasants. However, they had also imposed heavy land revenues on the peasant community. This angered both the peasants and the landlords. Oudh was particularly volatile because there were a large number of sepoys from Oudh and it directly impacted their families.
The British reformist zeal also had a contribution in fomenting trouble. The East India Company forbade certain religious practices and traditions, including sati or widow-burning, to the outrage of many Hindus. The company also tried to undermine the caste system, which seemed inherently unfair to post-Enlightenment British sensibilities. In addition, British officers and missionaries began to preach Christianity to the Hindu and Muslim sepoys and conversions had started happening. The Indians believed, quite reasonably, that their religions were under attack by the East India Company.
Finally, Indians regardless of class, caste or religion felt oppressed and disrespected by the agents of the British East India Company. Company officials who abused or even murdered Indians were seldom punished properly; even if they were tried, they were rarely convicted, and those who were could appeal almost indefinitely. A general sense of racial superiority among the British angered Indian across the country.
Economic policies of the British East India Company were also a cause for widespread and popular discontent. The peasants suffered due to high revenue demands and the strict revenue collection policy. Artisans and craftsmen were ruined by the large-scale influx of cheap British manufactured goods into India which, in turn, made their hand-made goods uneconomical to produce. People who made a living by following religious and cultural pursuits lost their source of livelihood due to the withdrawal of royal patronage caused by the displacement of the old ruling classes. A corrupt and unresponsive administration added to the miseries of the people. Hence the reasons can be summarized as under:]
- Economic exploitation by the British
- British Land Revenue laws, and Law and Order systems
- British tendency to prove themselves superior as compared to Indian history
- British policy of regional capture - Awadh's annexation and merger made the rulers angry
- One of the immediate reasons was the poor state of the soldiers in the Army
- The inclusion of the Enfield Rifle whose cartridges had animal fat thereby upsetting the religious sentiments of both Hindus and Muslims, and
- The fear of spread of Christianity.
1.2 The Beginning of the Revolt
On 29 March 1857, an Indian sepoy of the 34 Regiment, Mangal Pandey, killed two British officers on parade at Barrackpore. The Indian soldiers present refused to obey orders and arrest Mangal Pandey. However, he was arrested later on, tried and hanged.
The news spread like wildfire to all cantonments in the country and very soon a countrywide sepoy revolt broke out in Lucknow, Ambala, Berhampur and Meerut.
On 10 May 1857, soldiers at Meerut refused to touch the new Enfield rifle cartridges. The soldiers, along with other civilians, went on a rampage shouting ‘maro firangi ko’. They broke open jails, murdered European men and women, burnt their houses and marched to Delhi. Next morning, the appearance of the marching soldiers, in Delhi was a signal to the local soldiers, who in turn revolted, seized the city and proclaimed the 80-year-old Bahadur Shah Zafar, as the Emperor of India.
Within a month of the capture of Delhi, the revolt spread to the different parts of the country: Kanpur, Lucknow, Banaras, Allahabad, Bareilly, Jagdishpur and Jhansi. In the absence of any leader from their own ranks, the insurgents turned to traditional leaders of Indian society. At Kanpur, Nana Saheb-the adopted son of last Peshwa, Baji Rao II-led the forces. Rani Lakshmi Bai in Jhansi, Begum Hazrat Mahal in Lucknow and Khan Bahadur in Bareilly were the others in command. However, apart from a commonly shared hatred for alien rule, the rebels had no political perspective or a definite vision of the future. They were all prisoners of their own past, fighting primarily to regain their lost privileges. Unsurprisingly, they proved incapable of ushering in a new political order. John Lawrence rightly remarked that 'had a single leader of ability arisen among them (the rebels) we would have been lost beyond redemption'.
1.3 Spread of the Revolt
The epicenters of the Revolt of 1857 were at Delhi, Kanpur, Lucknow, Bareilly, Jhansi, and Arrah in Bihar. At Delhi the nominal and symbolic leadership belonged to the Emperor Bahadur Shah, but the real command lay with a Court of Soldiers headed by General Bakht Khan who had led the revolt of the Bareilly troops and brought them to Delhi. In the British army he had been an ordinary subedar of artillery. The court consisted of ten members, six from the army and four from the civilian departments. All decisions were taken by a majority vote. The court conducted the affairs of the state in the name of the 'Emperor The Government at Delhi'. However, Bahadur Shah Zafar's weak personality and old age and his lack of leadership qualities created political weakness at the nerve centre of the Revolt and resulted in a lot of damage to the rebellion.
At Kanpur Nana Sahib, the adopted son of Baji Rao II, the last Peshwa, led the revolt. He expelled the English from Kanpur with the help of the sepoys and proclaimed himself the Peshwa. At the same time he acknowledged Bahadur Shah as the Emperor of India and declared himself to be his Governor. The chief burden of fighting on behalf of Nana Sahib fell on the shoulders of Tatya Tope, one of his most loyal servants. During the siege of Kanpur, forces loyal to Nana Saheb launched an attack on the British forces holed up in the area. Eventually, many British army personnel were taken prisoner or killed (These killings later on became an excuse for the British to commit large-scale massacres of civilian populations in several centres of revolt, including Delhi). By the time British forces reached Kanpur, Tatya Tope and Nana Saheb had left the city. But the 1857 rebellion was not over yet. Tatya Tope continued to fight against a far superior British army. By November 1857, he had gathered a substantial force, many of them rebels from Gwalior, and tried to re-take Kanpur in an audacious bid. It was a bloody fight but the East India Company's forces emerged victorious. The Kanpur phase of the rebellion was effectively over.
Tatya Tope regrouped, at one stage joining hands with the legendary queen of Jhansi Rani Laxmi Bai, who was finally killed in battle.
He continued his guerilla campaign against the British for more than a year by aligning and realigning with various smaller rajas. He fought against the British near Sanganer, by the river Banas, and at Chotta Udaipur, among other places, quickly regrouping after every battle. Yet, with the rebellion firmly put down in most of north and central India, it was only a matter of time before the British, with their formidable military capabilities, would get hold of the last of the rebels, including Tatya Tope. Besides, Tatya Tope's forces had scattered and dwindled. According to mainstream historical accounts, he was finally captured in April 1859 after being betrayed by an aide, and executed by the British on 18 April, following a short military trial.
Nana Sahib was defeated at Kanpur. Defiant to the very end and refusing to surrender, he escaped to Nepal early in 1859, never to be heard of again.
At Lucknow Begum Hazrat Mahal proclaimed her young son, Birjis Kadr, as the Nawab of Awadh and led the revolt. Helped by the sepoys at Lucknow, and by the zamindars and peasants of Awadh, the Begum organised an all-out attack on the British. Compelled to give up the city, the latter entrenched themselves in the Residency building. In the end, the seige of the Residency failed, as the small British garrison fought back with exemplary fortitude and valour.
One of the great leaders of the Revolt of 1857, and perhaps one of the greatest heroines of Indian history was the young Rani Lakshmibai of Jhansi.
In 1842, Manikarnika as she was named by her parents was married to the Maharaja of Jhansi Raja Gangadhar Rao and was thereafter named Lakshmibai, a name which would go down in history and earn great respect. In 1851, the couple had a baby boy who they named Damodar Rao, but unfortunately the baby died when he was only four months old. Following the death of their infant son, the Raja and Lakshmibai adopted the son of Gangadhar Rao's cousin, named Anand Rao and renamed him Damodar Rao. This adoption was witnessed by a British political officer. Raja Gangadhar Rao also gave a letter to the British officer requesting them to give Lakshmibai the government of Jhansi for the rest of her life.
The Raja died in November 1853 and the British, under Governor General, Lord Dalhousie applied the Doctrine of Lapse, stating that they would not recognize the adopted child as the legal heir of the Raja and would hence annex Jhansi to British territory. In reaction of the unfairness on the part of the British regarding her territory, Lakshmibai consulted a British lawyer and appealed for the hearing of her case in London. This appeal was turned down. The British seized the state jewels of Jhansi and, in 1854, gave Lakshmibai a pension of Rs.60,000 and ordered her to leave her palace and the fort. She moved into a place called Rani Mahal, which has now been converted into a museum.
After being expelled from her palace, Lakshmibai was firm about protecting Jhansi from British annexation. Lakshmibai began securing her position and formed an army of both men and women who were given military training in fighting a battle.
The young Rani then decided to throw in her lot with the rebels, she fought valiantly at the head of her troops. Tales of her bravery and courage and military skill have inspired her countrymen ever since. Driven out of Jhansi by the British forces after a fierce battle in which "even women were seen working the batteries and distributing ammunition", she administered the oath to her followers that "with our own hands we shall not our Azadshahi [independent rule] bury". She captured Gwalior with the help of Tatya Tope and her trusted Afghan guards. Maharaja Sindhia, loyal to the British, made an attempt to fight the Rani but most of his troops deserted to her. Sindhia sought refuge with the English at Agra.
On June 16th 1858, General Rose's forces annexed Morar. On June 17th of the same year, near Phool Bagh in Gwalior, British troops under Captain Heneage fought Indian forces being commanded by Lakshmibai as they were trying to leave the area. Lakshmibai dressed as a man in a Sowar's uniform, completely armed on horseback, with her infant son tied to her back, began attacking the British troops. The British attacked back and Lakshmibai was grievously wounded. Since she did not want her body to be captured by the British she told a hermit to cremate her. Upon her death on June 18th 1858, her body was cremated as per her wishes. Three days after the death of Lakshmibai, the British captured the Fort of Gwalior.
The chief organiser of the Revolt in Bihar was the 80 year old Kunwar Singh, a ruined and discontented zamindar of Jagdishpur near Arrah. He was perhaps the most outstanding military leader and strategist of the Revolt. Maulavi Ahmadullah of Faizabad was another outstanding leader of the Revolt. He was a native of Madras where he had started preaching armed rebellion. In January 1857 he moved towards the north to Faizabad where he fought a large-scale battle against a company of British troops sent to stop him from preaching sedition. When the general revolt broke out in May, he emerged as one of its acknowledged leaders in Awadh.
The greatest heroes of the Revolt were, however, the sepoys, many of whom displayed great courage in the field of battle and thousands of whom unselfishly laid down their lives. More than anything else, it was their determination and sacrifice that nearly led to the expulsion of the British from India. In this patriotic struggle, they sacrificed even their deep religious prejudices.
2.0 WEAKNESSES OF THE REVOLT AND THE FINAL END
The Revolt of 1857 covered a wide territory and was very popular. However it could not embrace the entire country or all the groups and classes of Indian society. South India and most of Eastern and Western India remained relatively calm. Rulers of many Indian states and the big zamndars refused to join in. On the contrary they gave active help to the British in suppressing the Revolt. In fact, only about one percent of the chiefs of India joined the Revolt. Governor-General Canning later remarked that these rulers and chiefs "acted as the breakwaters to the storm which would have otherwise swept us in one great wave". Though the popular feeling in Madras, Bombay, Bengal and the Western Punjab favoured the areas remained relatively calm.
Most of the propertied classes were either cold towards the rebels or actively hostile to them. Even many of the taluqdars (big zamindars) of Awadh, who had joined the Revolt, abandoned it once the Government gave them an assurance that their estates would be returned to them. This made it very difficult for the peasants and soldiers of Awadh to sustain a prolonged guerrilla campaign.
The money-lenders who were the chief targets of the villagers' attacks were naturally hostile to the Revolt. The merchants, too, gradually became unfriendly. The rebels were compelled to impose heavy taxation on them in order to finance the war or to seize their stocks of foodstuffs to feed the army. The merchants often hid their wealth and goods and refused to give free supplies to the rebels. The zamindars of Bengal which were a creation of the British remained loyal. Moreover, the hostility of Bihar peasants towards their zamindars frightened the Bengal zamindars. Similarly, the big merchants of Bombay, Calcutta and Madras supported the British because their main profits came from foreign trade and economic connections with the British merchants.
The modern educated Indians were repelled by the rebels appeals to superstitions and their opposition to progressive social measures. The educated Indians wanted to end the backwardness of their country. They mistakenly believed that the British rule would help them accomplish these tasks of modernisation while the rebels, led by zamindars, old rulers and chieftains and other feudal elements, would take the country backward. It took them many more decades to realize that foreign rule was incapable of modernising the country and that it would instead impoverish it and keep it backward.
The revolutionaries of 1857 proved to be more far-sighted in this respect and had a better and better instinctive understanding of the evils of foreign rule and of the necessity to get rid of it. However unlike the educated intelligentsia they could not realize that the country had fallen prey to foreigners precisely because it had stuck to rotten and outmoded customs, traditions and institutions. They failed to see that national salvation lay not in going back to feudal monarchy but in going forward to a modem society, a modern economy, scientific education and modern political institutions. In any case, it cannot be said that the educated Indians were anti-national or loyal to a foreign regime. As events after 1858 were to show, they were soon to lead a powerful and modern national movement against British rule.
The lack of unity among Indian's was perhaps unavoidable at this stage of Indian history. Modern nationalism was yet unknown in India. Patriotism meant love of one's small locality or region or at most one's state. All-India interests and the consciousness that these interests bound all Indians together were yet to come. In fact, the Revolt of 1857 played an important role in bringing the Indian people together and imparting to them the consciousness of belonging to one country.
In the end, British imperialism, with a developing capitalist economy and at the height of its power the world over, and supported by most of the Indian princes and chiefs, proved militarily too strong for the rebels. The British Government poured immense supplies of men, money and arms into the country, though Indians had later to repay the entire cost of their own suppression.
History has shown us time and again that sheer courage cannot win against a powerful and determined enemy who has planned every step. The rebels were dealt an early blow when the British captured Delhi on 20 September 1857 after prolonged and bitter fighting. The aged Emperor Bahadur Shah was taken prisoner. The Royal Princes were captured and butchered on the spot. The Emperor was tried and exiled to Rangoon where he died in 1862, lamenting bitterly the fate which had buried him far away from the city of his birth. With this came to an end the great house of Mughals which had lost much of its greatness after Aurangzeb.
With the fall of Delhi the focal point of the Revolt disappeared. The other leaders of the Revolt carried on toe brave but unequal struggle, with the British mounting a powerful offensive against them. John Lawrence, Outram, Havelock, Neil, Campbell, and Hugh Rose were some of the British commanders who earned military fame in the course of this campaign. One by one, all the great leaders of the Revolt fell.
By the end of 1859, British authority over India was fully re-established, but the Revolt had not been in vain. It is a glorious landmark in our history. Though it was a desperate effort to save India in the old way and under traditional leadership, it was the first great struggle of the Indian people for freedom from British imperialism. It paved the way for the rise of the modem national movement.
The heroic and patriotic struggle of 1857, and the series of rebellions preceding it, left an unforgettable impression on the minds of the Indian people, established valuable local traditions of resistance to British rule, and served as a perennial source of inspiration in their later struggle for freedom. The heroes of the Revolt soon became household names in the country, even though the very mention of their names was frowned upon by the rulers.
COMMENTS