Revolt of 1857

1. INTRODUCTION

The revolt of 1857  remained as the most remarkable movement in the Indian struggle for Independence, but it does not mean that this mutiny is first of its kind and be termed as ‘First war of Indian Independence’. A thorough analysis of reasons for the cause of the revolution itself aptly resembles and reflects some important and interesting facts which are majorly neglected by many historians who have misunderstood 1857 revolt as the first war of independence and a pre-planned, conspired and also an unified struggle in order to resist British Supremacy.

It can be reconciled to some extent that the revolt was first of its kind which gained a mass momentum. But the support was not from all parts of the country. The present paper tries to descript analytically the reasons behind the revolt and also projects some unknown facts where the major hand was planted due to personal grievances of the soldiers and civilians but not fought with an idea of Indianness. 

The discontent and disaffection of manifested the soldiers to open acts of defiance, unoften leading to active rebellions which sometimes assumed serious proportions. The more important of these are clearly traceable to political grievances. Many outbreaks were, however, of a mixed character originating in Agrarian discontent or other economic causes they were gradually fed by religious frenzy or unbridled passions of primitive tribes, ultimately taking a political turn and ending in a furious revolt against the British. But with regards to the 1857 mutiny, whatever the motive or the outcome of the risings, they show a continual upsurge of a popular character against the British authority, against the British authority, almost throughout the first century of the British rule in India. It is neither possible nor necessary to describe them in detail, or even to refer to them all, but a few typical instances may be lettered.

The  real causes or the precursors for the series of outbreaks can be classified as 1) political – personal grievances, Reaction against British Conquest, Misrule in protected states 2) Economic causes 3) Religious Frenzy 4) Social Causes 5) Military causes.

2. POLITICAL CAUSES OF THE REVIOLT

Personal Grievances

1. Doctrine of Lapse: Lord Dalhousie introduced the doctrine of Lapse which threw all codes of morality and political conduct to the winds. The right of succession was denied to the Hindu princes. The guarantee of adoption to the throne “did not extend to any person whose veins the blood of founder of dynasty did not run”. Dalhousie’s annexations and the doctrine of lapse had caused suspicions and uneasiness in the minds of almost all the ruling princes in India. The most outstanding leader of revolt was Rani Lakshmibai, who assumed the leadership of sepoys at Jhansi. Lord Dalhousie, the Governor General, had refused to allow her adopted son to succeed the throne after husband died and annexed the state by application of Doctrine of Lapse. The Rani tried everything to reverse the decision, but did not succeed. When it was clear that nothing was working out, then joined the sepoys and, in time, became on e of the most formidable enemies the British had to contend with.
2. Moan of Zamindars: In Bihar, the Revolt was led by Kunwar Singh, the Zamindar of Jagadishpur, and a 70 year old man on the brink of bankruptcy. He nursed the grudge against British. He had been deprived of his estates by them and his repeated appeals to be entrusted were not acknowledged and were futile. Therefore,even though had not planned an prising, he hesitatingly joined the sepoys when they reached Arrah from Dinapore.
3. Arrest of Raja Chait Singh of Varanasi: Chait Singh, Raja of Varanasi regularly used to pay his tributes to the British and also met many extorbitant demands made by Hastings. The more he yielded, the more excessive grew the demands. Because the whole of this demand could not be met by him in time, Hastings imposed a fine of Rupees fifty lakhs upon him and later arrested him. The Raja however effected to escape with the help of some zamindars and formed a large group of zamindars and Begums of Avadh with an extensive plan to revolt against British.

Reactions against British Conquest

1. Conquest of Malabar by British: Malabar passed into British hands by the treaties with Tipu Sultan in 1792. But, with a few exceptions, the Rajas of Malabar only defied the British, and were in a state of hostility for six years, keeping a considerable proportion of the Bombay army in constant hostile operations against them.
2. Aftermath of the conquest of Mysore: An aftermath of the conquest of Mysore was the rebellion of Dhundia wagh, a Maratha adventurer. He recruited number of discharged soldiers of Mysore, and was joined by many chiefs and killadars who were adversely affected by the British conquest. He thus became a formidable power, and though many British detachments were sent against him, he managed to evade him.he corresponded with various disaffected shiefs of British territories, asking them to make a ommon cause against the British. Ultimately he was defeated and killed in A.D. 1800 by Arthur Wellesley, the future Duke of Wellington.
3. The Poligars of South India: The Poligars of South India, who had maintained their independence from time immemorial, offered obstinate resistance to the imposition of the British authority. Series of rebellions broke out in different parts of south India – Tinnevalli, Ceded Districts (Anantapur, Kurnool, Ballery, Cuddapah) and North Arcot – all parts of the same struggle to overthrow the British Supremacy. Glowing tributes have been paid even by the British writers to their heroic and patriotic struggle to defend their country and liberty for a ling period.
4. The matter of Bendelkhand: Bubdelkand Passed into the hands of British as a result of the second Marathe was (1803-1805). But the new government was defied from the very beginning by the numerous chiefs entrenched in their forts, nearly one hundred and fifty in number. The Killadars of Ajaygarh and Kalanjar offered stubborn resistance to the British forces, Lakshman Dawa, the chieftain of Ajaygarh, when forced to surrender, requested the British authorities to blow him from the mouth of a gun. After he was taken captive to Calcutta, his mother, wife and children were killed by Lakshmanan’s father-in-law, who later killed himself, preferring death to disgrace and dishonour.

Misrule in Protected States

1. The “Absentee Sovereignty”: The absentee sovereignity of the British rule in India was an equally important political factor which worked out the minds of the Indian people against the British. The Pathans and the Mughals who had conquered had, in course of time, settled in India and became Indians. The revenue collected from the people was spent in this very country. In the case of the British, the Indians felt that they were being ruled from England from a distance of thousands of miles and the country was being drained of her wealth.
2. Reduction in Allowances: The disaffection, origibating from the reduction of allowances, soon took an anti-British turn and the rebels, 10,000 in number, aimed at the subversion of British power and influence in Travancore. Moreover, a sawar in the cavalry was paid Rs.27, out of which he had to pay for his own uniform, food and the upkeep of his mount, and he was ultimately left with only a rupee or two. In the military services, the highest post attainable by an Indian was that of a subedar on a salary of Rs.60 or Rs.70 and in the civil services that of a Sadr Amin on a salary of Rs.500 per month. The chances of promotion were very few.

3. ADMINISTRATIVE AND ECONOMIC CAUSES

In a large number of cases the disturbances were due to over-assessment of land, heavy exactions from cultivators, dispossession of old zamindar families by process of auction-sale or resumption, and depriving a large class of petty landholders of their tenure based on prescriptive to service which was no longer required. The annexation of Indian states produced startling economic and social effects. The Indian aristocracy was deprived of power and position. It found little chance to gain the same old position in the new administrative setup, as under the British rule all high posts, civil and military were reserved for the Europeans.

1. British Economic Policies: British economic policies in India worked against the interest of Indian trade and industry. The East India Company used its political power to destroy Indian handicrafts and industry and developed it into an accessory of a foreign exploitative system. According to Karl Marx in 1853, “It was the British intruder who broke up the Indian handloom and destroyed the spinning wheel. England began with depriving the Indian cottons from the European market; it then introduced twist into Hindustan and in the end inundated the very mother country of cotton with cottons”.
2. Annexation of lands: Almost every agricultural familyin Oudh had a representative in the army; there were 75,000 men from oudh. Whatever happened there was of immediate concern to the sepoy. The new land revenue system introduced after the annexation and confiscation of lands attached to charitable institutitions affected his well-being. That accounted for the 14,000 petitions received from the sepoys about the hardships of the revenue system.
3. Land Assessment in Malabar: the enhancement of land assessment led to a serious revolt in Malabar in 1802. ‘Led by Edachenna Kungan, the rebels captured the panamaram fort in the Wynad district o October 11, 802, and massacred its garrison. In 1803, the whole province was in ferment; rebellion had extended in all directions, and armed bands openly took the field against government troops.
4. Rising of duty on Salt: The cultivators of Savda and Chopda in Khandesh revolted in 1852. “the Government was patriarchally boycotted by the people; the people of Erandol refused to lend their carts for public and military service, mamlatdar’s messengers were intercepted, and a Subadar-Major was kept confined at Erandol.” “Though Erandol was recovered, Savda and Faizpur remained strong centres of disaffections. There the rebels had set up a government of their own in suppression of the existing one. A committee called panchayat condicted the local administration, collected the revenues and punished the offenders.

Several land owners of Saga Distict, Bundelkhand, broke out into rebellion in 1842. there was a violent mass agitation in surat, bordering on insurrection, in 1844, on account of the raising of duty on salt.

5. Administrative Machinery of Company: The administrative machinery of the East India Company was ‘inefficient and insufficient’. The land revenue policy was most unpopular. Many districts in the newly-annexed states were in permenant revolt and military had to be sent to collect the land revenue. In the district of Panipat, for example, 136 horsemen were employed for the performance of police duties. In the land revenue settlement of newly acquired territories, the English administration had aliminated the middleman by establishing direct contact with the peasants. Many talukdars, the hereditary landlords were deprived of their positions and gains. Many holders of rent-free tenures were dispossessed by the use of quo-warranto – requiring the holders of such land to produce evidence like title-deeds by which they held that land. Large estates were confiscated and sold by public auction to the highest bidders. Such estates were usually purchased by speculators who did not understand the tenants and fully exploited them.

4. SOCIAL CAUSES AND RELIGIOUS FRENZY

1. Fear of conversion of Religion: Though it was considered prestigious to be in company’s service and provided economic stability, the sepoys wanted to forego these advantages because a proclaimation was issued at Delhi which indicated the immediate cause for the revot stating: “It is well known in these days all the English have entertained these evil designs – first, to destroy the religion of whole Hindustani Army, and then to make the people by compulsion Christians. Therefore, we, solely on account of our religion, have combined with the people, and have not spared alive one infidel, and have re-established the delhi dynasty on these terms.” The rumours anout the Governments’s secret designs to promote conversions to Christianity further exasperated the sepoys. The official-missionary nexus gave credence to the rumour. In some cantonments, missionaries permitted to preach openly and their diatribe against other religions angered the sepoys.
2. Controversy of the Catridges: The reports about the mixing of bone dust in atta and the introduction of the Enfield rifle enhanced the sepoys’ growing disaffection and discontent towards the government. The catridges of new rifle had to be bitten off before loading and the grease was reportedly made of beef and pig fat. The army administration did nothing to allay these fears, and the sepoys felt their religion was in real danger.
3. Regiment at Barrackpur: The unhappiness of sepoys first surfaced in 1824 when the 47^th Regiment at Barrackpur was ordered to go to Burma. To the religious Hindu, crossing the sea meant loss of caste. The sepoys, therefore, refused to comply. The regiment was disbanded and those who led the opposition were hanged. The religious sensibilities of the sepoys who participated in the Afghan war were more seriously affected. During the ardous and disastrous campaigns, the fleeing sepoys were forced to eat and drink, whatever come their way. When they returned to India, those at home correctly sensed that they could not have observed caste stipulations and, therefore, were hesitant to welcome them back into their fraternity. Sitaram, who had gone to Afghanistan, found himself boycotted not only in his village, but also from his barracks. Hence, the prestigious of being in pay of the company was not enough to hold his position in society; religion and caste proved to be more powerful.
4. Religious Disabilities Act, 1850: This Act modified Hindu customs; a change of religion did not debar a son from inheriting property of his heathen father. Strange rumours were current in India that Lord Canning had been specially selected and charged with the duty of converting the Indians to Christianity. In this surcharged atmosphere even the railways and steamships began to be looked upon as indirect instruments for changing their faith. In this context, the Indian mind was getting increasingly getting convinced that the English were conspiring to convert them to Christianity. The activities of Christian padris and efforts of Dalhousie and Bethune towards woman education made Indians feel that through education British were going to conquer their civilization. Even ‘education offices’ set up by the British were styled as shaitani daftars.
5. Social Behaviour of Europeans: The European officers in India were very exacting and overbearing in their social behaviour. The Indian was spoken as nigger and addressed as a suar or pig, an epithet most resented by the Muslims. Even the best among them like Bird and Thomson insulted the native gentry whenever they had the opportunity of doing so.’ European officers and European soldiers on their hunting sprees were often guilty of indiscriminate criminal assaults on Indians. The European juries, which alone could try such cases, acquitted European criminals with light or no punishment. Such discrimination rankled in the Indian mind like a festering sore.

5. MILITARY CAUSES

1. Recruitment of Army: The Bengal Army was a great brotherhood in which all the members felt and acted in union and service in the army was hereditary. Three-fifths of the Army were drawn from Oudh to Northe-western provinces and most of them came from high caste Brahmin and Rajput families who were averse to accepting that part of the army discipline which treated them on par with the low caste recruits. Sir Charles Naiper had no confidence in the allegiance of ‘high caste mercenaries’. During the Governor-Generalship of Lord Dalhousie three mutinies had occurred in the army – the mutiny of the 22^nd N.I. in 1849, of the 66^th N.I in 1850 and the 38^th N.I. in 1852.
2. Demands of Sepoys not accommodated: Initially, the administration sought to accommodate the sepoys’ demands: caste and religion. But, with the extension of the Army’s operation not only to various parts of India, but also to countries outside, it was not possible to do so any more. Moreover, caste distinctions and segregation within a regiment were not conducive to the cohesiveness of a fighting unit. To begin with, the administration thought of an easy way out: discourage the recruitment of Brahmins; this apparently did not succeed and, by the middle of the nineteenth century, the upper castes predominated in Bengal Army, for instance.
3. General Service Establishment Act, 1856: This Act decreed that all future recruits for the Bengal army would have to give an undertaking to serve anywhere their services might be required by the government. The Act did not affect old incumbents, but was unpopular because service in the Bengal Army was usually hereditary. Moreover, those soldiers who had not been taken in the folds of the caste. Sepoys declared unfit for Foreign Service were not allowed to retire with pension, but were to be posted for duty at cantonments. The privilege of free postage so long enjoyed by the sepoys was withdrawn with the passing of the post Offices Act of 1854.

6. CONCLUSION

After the description of various political, social, economic, administrative, religious and military reasons, it can concluded that these causes were more characterized and influenced by groups of sepoys and religions like Hindus and Muslims and also personal grievances, but seldom can be found the idea of Indianness. Different people at parts of the country had different reasons because of which they have aggrieved but they really not aggrieved with the rule of British as a whole and nor wanted them to throw out of the country. There was neither pre-planned agenda nor an organized construction for the revolt. Sepoys at different parts have revolted for their own cause but not as a whole with unity.

Even if there was no planning and organization before the revolt, it was important that it was done, once it started. Immediately after the capture of Delhi a letter addressed to the rulers of all the neighbouring states and of Rajasthan soliciting their support and inviting them to participate. As far as political causes of 1857 revolt are concerned, they were more of personal in nature. If we look at economic causes, the peasants and some landlords were affected and therefore they have formed a group. By the virtue of the fact that sepoys who were in Army were not trained soldiers but they themselves were from the agricultural background. Therefore, their religious sentiments were also hurt.

Basing upon the causes explained above, it can be inferred that there was no conspiracy as such. But the Britishers viewed this as serious conspiracy of all Indians to chuck the power and rule of Britishers in India. Some historians and legal experts also observe that it was because of this revolt, England enacted Indian Penal Code in the year 1860 where it incorporated Conspiracy as a serious offence which is not so in England itself. However, the revolt of 1857 was not of a pure historical tragedy. Even in failure it served a grand purpose: a source of inspiration for the national liberation movement which later achieved what the revolt could not.

REFERENCES

1.  Srivastav M.P., “The Indian Mutiny, 1857”, Chigh Publications, Allahabad (1979)
2. Tarachand, “Story of Freedom Movement in India”, Vol.2 (1967)
3.  Majumdar R.C., “The Sepoy Mutiny in India & Revolt of 1857”, Calcutta Oriental Press Ltd. (1963)
4.  Taylor P.J.O, “What really happened during the Mutiny, A day by day account of major events of 1852-1859”.
5. Bipin Chandra, “India’s Striuggle for Independence”, Penguin Publications (1989)
6. Grover B.L., Grover S., “A new look at Modern Indian History”, S.Chand & Co.Ltd. 19^th Ed. (2002).
7. Spectrum’s Handbook of General Studies 2002,12^th edn. Spectrum India(Regd.) New Delhi
8. Tara Chand, History of Freedom Movement in India, Vol III,Publication Division, Ministry of Info & Brod.,1983.