The Revolt of 1857 was a product of the policies and the intent of the British Raj in India. The cumulative impact of the expansionist intent of the British Raj, the economic exploitation and the administrative changes over the years affected the entire population - rulers of the small kingdoms, sepoys, zamindars, traders, peasants, artisans, pundits, maulvis etc. The strong discontent resulted in a violent storm in the year 1857 that shook the British Empire in India to its very foundations.
The causes are discusses below-
ECONOMIC CAUSES
The colonial policies of the East India Company destroyed the traditional economic fabric of the Indian society. The peasantry could never really recover from the disabilities imposed by the new and a highly unpopular 'Revenue Settlement'. Impoverished by the heavy taxation, they often resorted to loans from moneylenders/traders at usurious rates, the latter in most cases evicting the former in case of non-payment of the debt. These moneylenders emerged as the new landlords, while the scourge of the indebtedness has continued to plague the Indian society to this day.
British Rule also meant misery for the Indian hand loom and the handicrafts men. The annexation of the Indian states cut off their major source of patronage. Added to this, the policies discouraged the Indian handicrafts and promoted British goods. The highly skilled Indian craftsmen had to look for alternate source of employment that hardly existed, given that the destruction of the Indian industry was not accompanied by development of the modern industries. Karl Marx remarked in 1853,'It was the British intruder who broke the Indian handloom and destroyed the spinning wheel. England began by depriving the Indian cotton from the European market; it then introduced a twist into Hindustan and in the end inundated the very mother country of cotton with cottons.'
Zamindars, the traditional landed aristocracy, often saw their land rights forfeited with the frequent use of a quo warranto by the administration. This resulted in a loss of status for them in the villages. In Awadh, the storm centre of the revolt, 21,000 taluqdars had their estates confiscated and they suddenly found themselves without a source of income,'unable to work, ashamed to beg, condemned to penury'. These dispossessed taluqdars seized the opportunity presented by the sepoy revolt to oppose the British Rule and regain what they had lost.
The destruction of the Indian industry increased the pressure on the land and agriculture, the lopsided development which resulted in the pauperisation of the country in general.
POLITICAL CAUSES
The East India Company's greedy policy of aggrandizement accompanied with false and broken promises resulted in a loss of political prestige for it, on one hand. And caused suspicion in the minds of almost all the ruling Kingdoms in India, on the other hand, with the use of policies such as 'Effective Control', 'Subsidiary Alliance' and 'Doctrine of Lapse'. The right to succession was denied to the Hindu princes. The Mughals were humbled when on Prince Faqiruddin's death in 1856, whose succession had been recognized constitutionally by Lord Dalhousie, Lord Canning announced that the next prince on succession would have to renounce the regal title and the ancestral Mughal palaces, in addition to the renunciations agreed upon by Prince Faqiruddin.
The collapse of the rulers, the erstwhile aristocracy - also adversely affected those sections of the society which derived their sustenance from cultural and religious pursuits.
ADMINISTRATIVE CAUSES
Rampant corruption in the Company's administration, especially among the police, low ranking officials, low order courts imparted a foreign and an alien look to the British rule in the eyes of the Indians.
SOCIO-RELIGIOUS CAUSES
Racial overtones and a superiority complex characterized the attitude of the British rule towards the native Indian population. The activities of the Christian missionaries, who followed the British flag, were looked upon with suspicion by Indians. The attempts at socio-religious reforms such as the abolition of sati, support to widow remarriage and women's education were seen as an interference in the social and the religious domain of the Indian society by the outsiders. These fears were further compounded by the Government's decision to tax the land belonging to Mosques and Temples and the legislative measures, such as the Religious Disabilities Act, 1856, which modified the Hindu customs, for instance, declaring that a change of religion did not debar a son from inheriting the property of his heathen father.
INFLUENCE OF THE OUTSIDE EVENTS
The Revolt of 1857 coincided by many events in which the British suffered heavy losses - the First Afgan War(1838-42), Punjab Wars(1845-49), Crimean Wars(1854-56), Santhal Rebellion(1855-57). These had obvious psychological repercussions.
DISCONTENT AMONG SEPOYS
The conditions of service in the Company's Army and cantonments increasingly came into conflict with the religious beliefs and prejudices of the sepoys. Restriction on wearing caste and sectarian marks, secret rumors of proselytizing activities of the Chaplin(often maintained on Company's expenses) were interpreted by Indian sepoys, who were generally conservative, as interference in their religious affairs.
To the religious Hindu of the time, crossing the seas meant the loss of caste. In 1856, Lord Canning's Government passed the General Service Enlistment Act which decreed that all future recruits to the Bengal Army would have to give an undertaking to serve anywhere where the service might be required.
The Indian sepoy was also unhappy with his emoluments compared to his British counterpart. A more immediate cause of the dissatisfaction was the order that the Indian sepoy would not be given the foreign service allowance 'bhatta' when serving in Sindh or in Punjab. The annexation of Awadh, home to many of the sepoys, further agitated the feelings.
The Indian sepoy was made to feel a subordinate at every step and was discriminated against racially and in matters of promotion and privileges. Finally, there had been a long history of revolts in the British Indian Army - in Bengal(1764), Vellore(1806), Barrakpore(1825) and during the Afgan Wars(1838-42) are a few to mention.
BEGINNING AND SPREAD
The reports about mixing of the bone dust in wheat flour(atta) and the introduction of the new Enfield rifle only enhanced the sepoys' growing disaffection with the Government. The cartridge of the new rifle had to be bitten off before loading and the grease was made of pig and beef fat. The administration did nothing to address the concerns of the sepoys. They felt their religion was in grave danger.
The greased cartridges did not create a new cause of discomfort but surely added to the discontent. The revolt began at Meerut, 58 km from Delhi, on the 10 May 1857, and soon covered wide areas from the Punjab in the North and Narmada in the south to Bihar in the east and Rajputana in the west.
Even before the revolt began there were rumblings of resentment in various cantonments. The 19th Native Infantry at Behrampur refused to use the greased cartridges and broke out in mutiny in Feb 1857, it was disbanded in March. A young sepoy of the 34th Native Infantry, Mangal Pande, went a step further, he shot his sergeant major in Barrackpore. He was executed on April 6 while his regiment was disbanded in May.
On 24th April, 90 men of the 3rd Native Cavalry stationed in Meerut refused to use the cartridges, on 9 May, 85 of them were dismissed, sentedced to 10 years imprisonment. This sparked off general mutiny among the Indian sepoys stationed at Meerut. The very next day, on the 10 May, they released their imprisoned comrades, killing their European officers in the process. They set off for Delhi after the sunset. In Delhi, the local infantry joined them, the aged and the powerless, Bahadur Shah Zafar was proclaimed the 'Emperor of India'.
The spontaneous rise of the Mughal King to the leadership of the country was a recognition of the fact that the long reign of Mughal dynasty had become the traditional symbol of India's political unity. Bahadur Shah Zafar after initial vacillation, wrote letters to the smaller rulers and chiefs of India urging them to fight together against the British regime.
The revolt of sepoys was accompanied by a rebellion of the civil population. They destroyed the account books belonging to the moneylenders who had displaced them from their lands, the British established law courts, revenue offices(tehsils) and police stations.
According to one estimate, of the total of about 150,000 men who died fighting the British in Awadh, over 100,000 were civilians.
STORM CENTRES AND LEADERS OF THE REVOLT
At Delhi, the nominal and the symbolic leadership belonged to the Mughal Emperor Bahadur Shah Zafar, but the real command lay with a court of soldiers headed by General Bhakt Khan who led the revolt of the Bareilly troops and brought them to Delhi. The court consisted 10 members, 6 from the Army and 4 from the civilian departments, the court conducted the affairs of the state in the name of the emperor. But the emperor, because of his weak personality, old age and lack of leadership qualities, proved to be the weakest link in the chain of leadership of the revolt.
At Kanpur, the natural choice was Nana Saheb, the adopted son of the last Peshwa, Baji Rao II. He was refused his family title and banished from Poona, he was living near Kanpur. He proclaimed himself Peshwa, after expelling the English from Kanpur and acknowledged Bahadur Shah as the emperor of India.
Begum Hazrat Mahal took over the reigns in Lucknow where the rebellion broke out in June and popular sympathy was in the favour of the deposed Nawab.
At Bareilly, Khan Bahadur, a descendent of the former ruler of Rohilkhand, was placed in command.
In Bihar, the revolt was led by Kunwar Singh, the zamindar of Jadishpur.
Maulvi Ahmadullah of Faizabad was another outstanding leader of the revolt.
The most outstanding leader of the revolt was Rani Laxmibai, who assumed leadership of the sepoys in Jhansi. Lord Dalhousie, had refused to allow her adopted son to succeed to the throne after the death of her husband, Raja Gangadhar Rao and had annexed the state by the application of the very unpopular 'Doctrine of Lapse'.
CAUSES OF THE FAILURE OF THE REVOLT
Limited territorial spread was one factor, there was no all-India veneer about the revolt. The eastern, the southern and the western parts of the country were largely untouched. Certain classes, groups did not join the revolt and instead sided with the British.
Big zamindars, taluqdars backed off once land restitution was spelt out. Money lenders saw their class interests better protected under the British patronage. Modern educated Indians saw the revolt as backward looking.
The Indian soldiers were poorly equipped, mostly fighting with the swords and spears and had few guns and muskets. The British soldiers, on the other hand, were equipped with the latest war weapons, like the Enfield rifle. The electric telegraph kept the British leadership always at the advantage and informed about the latest movements and strategy of the rebels.
The revolt was poorly organised with no coordination or a strong central leadership. The rebels represented diverse elements with differing sorrows and concepts of current politics.
Modern nationalism was still unknown in India, the revolt infact, played an important role in bringing the people together and fight for a common cause of a unified country.
CONSEQUENCES
The revolt led to many administration changes and the policy of governance.
(i)The direct responsibility for the administration of the country was assumed by the British crown and the Company rule was abolished.
(ii)The era of annexations and expansion ended, the British promised respect the dignity and rights of the native princes.
(iii)The Indian states were henceforth to recognize the paramountcy of the British Crown.
(iv)The Army, which was at the forefront of the rebellion, was thoroughly reorganized and the British military policy cae to be dominated by the idea of 'divide and counterpoise'.
(v)Racial hatred and suspicion between the Indians and the English was aggravated.
Credit : Spectrum's 'A Brief History Of Modern India'
The causes are discusses below-
ECONOMIC CAUSES
The colonial policies of the East India Company destroyed the traditional economic fabric of the Indian society. The peasantry could never really recover from the disabilities imposed by the new and a highly unpopular 'Revenue Settlement'. Impoverished by the heavy taxation, they often resorted to loans from moneylenders/traders at usurious rates, the latter in most cases evicting the former in case of non-payment of the debt. These moneylenders emerged as the new landlords, while the scourge of the indebtedness has continued to plague the Indian society to this day.
British Rule also meant misery for the Indian hand loom and the handicrafts men. The annexation of the Indian states cut off their major source of patronage. Added to this, the policies discouraged the Indian handicrafts and promoted British goods. The highly skilled Indian craftsmen had to look for alternate source of employment that hardly existed, given that the destruction of the Indian industry was not accompanied by development of the modern industries. Karl Marx remarked in 1853,'It was the British intruder who broke the Indian handloom and destroyed the spinning wheel. England began by depriving the Indian cotton from the European market; it then introduced a twist into Hindustan and in the end inundated the very mother country of cotton with cottons.'
Zamindars, the traditional landed aristocracy, often saw their land rights forfeited with the frequent use of a quo warranto by the administration. This resulted in a loss of status for them in the villages. In Awadh, the storm centre of the revolt, 21,000 taluqdars had their estates confiscated and they suddenly found themselves without a source of income,'unable to work, ashamed to beg, condemned to penury'. These dispossessed taluqdars seized the opportunity presented by the sepoy revolt to oppose the British Rule and regain what they had lost.
The destruction of the Indian industry increased the pressure on the land and agriculture, the lopsided development which resulted in the pauperisation of the country in general.
POLITICAL CAUSES
The East India Company's greedy policy of aggrandizement accompanied with false and broken promises resulted in a loss of political prestige for it, on one hand. And caused suspicion in the minds of almost all the ruling Kingdoms in India, on the other hand, with the use of policies such as 'Effective Control', 'Subsidiary Alliance' and 'Doctrine of Lapse'. The right to succession was denied to the Hindu princes. The Mughals were humbled when on Prince Faqiruddin's death in 1856, whose succession had been recognized constitutionally by Lord Dalhousie, Lord Canning announced that the next prince on succession would have to renounce the regal title and the ancestral Mughal palaces, in addition to the renunciations agreed upon by Prince Faqiruddin.
The collapse of the rulers, the erstwhile aristocracy - also adversely affected those sections of the society which derived their sustenance from cultural and religious pursuits.
ADMINISTRATIVE CAUSES
Rampant corruption in the Company's administration, especially among the police, low ranking officials, low order courts imparted a foreign and an alien look to the British rule in the eyes of the Indians.
SOCIO-RELIGIOUS CAUSES
Racial overtones and a superiority complex characterized the attitude of the British rule towards the native Indian population. The activities of the Christian missionaries, who followed the British flag, were looked upon with suspicion by Indians. The attempts at socio-religious reforms such as the abolition of sati, support to widow remarriage and women's education were seen as an interference in the social and the religious domain of the Indian society by the outsiders. These fears were further compounded by the Government's decision to tax the land belonging to Mosques and Temples and the legislative measures, such as the Religious Disabilities Act, 1856, which modified the Hindu customs, for instance, declaring that a change of religion did not debar a son from inheriting the property of his heathen father.
INFLUENCE OF THE OUTSIDE EVENTS
The Revolt of 1857 coincided by many events in which the British suffered heavy losses - the First Afgan War(1838-42), Punjab Wars(1845-49), Crimean Wars(1854-56), Santhal Rebellion(1855-57). These had obvious psychological repercussions.
DISCONTENT AMONG SEPOYS
The conditions of service in the Company's Army and cantonments increasingly came into conflict with the religious beliefs and prejudices of the sepoys. Restriction on wearing caste and sectarian marks, secret rumors of proselytizing activities of the Chaplin(often maintained on Company's expenses) were interpreted by Indian sepoys, who were generally conservative, as interference in their religious affairs.
To the religious Hindu of the time, crossing the seas meant the loss of caste. In 1856, Lord Canning's Government passed the General Service Enlistment Act which decreed that all future recruits to the Bengal Army would have to give an undertaking to serve anywhere where the service might be required.
The Indian sepoy was also unhappy with his emoluments compared to his British counterpart. A more immediate cause of the dissatisfaction was the order that the Indian sepoy would not be given the foreign service allowance 'bhatta' when serving in Sindh or in Punjab. The annexation of Awadh, home to many of the sepoys, further agitated the feelings.
The Indian sepoy was made to feel a subordinate at every step and was discriminated against racially and in matters of promotion and privileges. Finally, there had been a long history of revolts in the British Indian Army - in Bengal(1764), Vellore(1806), Barrakpore(1825) and during the Afgan Wars(1838-42) are a few to mention.
BEGINNING AND SPREAD
The reports about mixing of the bone dust in wheat flour(atta) and the introduction of the new Enfield rifle only enhanced the sepoys' growing disaffection with the Government. The cartridge of the new rifle had to be bitten off before loading and the grease was made of pig and beef fat. The administration did nothing to address the concerns of the sepoys. They felt their religion was in grave danger.
The greased cartridges did not create a new cause of discomfort but surely added to the discontent. The revolt began at Meerut, 58 km from Delhi, on the 10 May 1857, and soon covered wide areas from the Punjab in the North and Narmada in the south to Bihar in the east and Rajputana in the west.
Even before the revolt began there were rumblings of resentment in various cantonments. The 19th Native Infantry at Behrampur refused to use the greased cartridges and broke out in mutiny in Feb 1857, it was disbanded in March. A young sepoy of the 34th Native Infantry, Mangal Pande, went a step further, he shot his sergeant major in Barrackpore. He was executed on April 6 while his regiment was disbanded in May.
On 24th April, 90 men of the 3rd Native Cavalry stationed in Meerut refused to use the cartridges, on 9 May, 85 of them were dismissed, sentedced to 10 years imprisonment. This sparked off general mutiny among the Indian sepoys stationed at Meerut. The very next day, on the 10 May, they released their imprisoned comrades, killing their European officers in the process. They set off for Delhi after the sunset. In Delhi, the local infantry joined them, the aged and the powerless, Bahadur Shah Zafar was proclaimed the 'Emperor of India'.
The spontaneous rise of the Mughal King to the leadership of the country was a recognition of the fact that the long reign of Mughal dynasty had become the traditional symbol of India's political unity. Bahadur Shah Zafar after initial vacillation, wrote letters to the smaller rulers and chiefs of India urging them to fight together against the British regime.
The revolt of sepoys was accompanied by a rebellion of the civil population. They destroyed the account books belonging to the moneylenders who had displaced them from their lands, the British established law courts, revenue offices(tehsils) and police stations.
According to one estimate, of the total of about 150,000 men who died fighting the British in Awadh, over 100,000 were civilians.
STORM CENTRES AND LEADERS OF THE REVOLT
At Delhi, the nominal and the symbolic leadership belonged to the Mughal Emperor Bahadur Shah Zafar, but the real command lay with a court of soldiers headed by General Bhakt Khan who led the revolt of the Bareilly troops and brought them to Delhi. The court consisted 10 members, 6 from the Army and 4 from the civilian departments, the court conducted the affairs of the state in the name of the emperor. But the emperor, because of his weak personality, old age and lack of leadership qualities, proved to be the weakest link in the chain of leadership of the revolt.
At Kanpur, the natural choice was Nana Saheb, the adopted son of the last Peshwa, Baji Rao II. He was refused his family title and banished from Poona, he was living near Kanpur. He proclaimed himself Peshwa, after expelling the English from Kanpur and acknowledged Bahadur Shah as the emperor of India.
Begum Hazrat Mahal took over the reigns in Lucknow where the rebellion broke out in June and popular sympathy was in the favour of the deposed Nawab.
At Bareilly, Khan Bahadur, a descendent of the former ruler of Rohilkhand, was placed in command.
In Bihar, the revolt was led by Kunwar Singh, the zamindar of Jadishpur.
Maulvi Ahmadullah of Faizabad was another outstanding leader of the revolt.
The most outstanding leader of the revolt was Rani Laxmibai, who assumed leadership of the sepoys in Jhansi. Lord Dalhousie, had refused to allow her adopted son to succeed to the throne after the death of her husband, Raja Gangadhar Rao and had annexed the state by the application of the very unpopular 'Doctrine of Lapse'.
CAUSES OF THE FAILURE OF THE REVOLT
Limited territorial spread was one factor, there was no all-India veneer about the revolt. The eastern, the southern and the western parts of the country were largely untouched. Certain classes, groups did not join the revolt and instead sided with the British.
Big zamindars, taluqdars backed off once land restitution was spelt out. Money lenders saw their class interests better protected under the British patronage. Modern educated Indians saw the revolt as backward looking.
The Indian soldiers were poorly equipped, mostly fighting with the swords and spears and had few guns and muskets. The British soldiers, on the other hand, were equipped with the latest war weapons, like the Enfield rifle. The electric telegraph kept the British leadership always at the advantage and informed about the latest movements and strategy of the rebels.
The revolt was poorly organised with no coordination or a strong central leadership. The rebels represented diverse elements with differing sorrows and concepts of current politics.
Modern nationalism was still unknown in India, the revolt infact, played an important role in bringing the people together and fight for a common cause of a unified country.
CONSEQUENCES
The revolt led to many administration changes and the policy of governance.
(i)The direct responsibility for the administration of the country was assumed by the British crown and the Company rule was abolished.
(ii)The era of annexations and expansion ended, the British promised respect the dignity and rights of the native princes.
(iii)The Indian states were henceforth to recognize the paramountcy of the British Crown.
(iv)The Army, which was at the forefront of the rebellion, was thoroughly reorganized and the British military policy cae to be dominated by the idea of 'divide and counterpoise'.
(v)Racial hatred and suspicion between the Indians and the English was aggravated.
Credit : Spectrum's 'A Brief History Of Modern India'
No comments:
Post a Comment