Contents ............................................................................................................................................................2 Localized uprisings..................................................................................................................................2 Tribal Uprisings .......................................................................................................................................3 Impact of British Rule on Tribal economy...........................................................................................3 Impact of British rule on the tribal polity ...........................................................................................4 Impact of British rule on tribal societies.............................................................................................4 Character of the Uprisings..................................................................................................................6 Practice Questions..............................................................................................................................7 Q The tribal revolts against the British rule were the results of the total economic and social disruptions. Elaborate.....................................................................................................................7 Q Tribal revolts in India during the 19 th century were no more than barbaric reaction against civilization. Critically examine.........................................................................................................8 Peasant Revolts.....................................................................................................................................10  The Rangpur Dhing, 1783 (Bengal) ...........................................................................................11  Indigo Revolt, 1860 (Bengal).....................................................................................................11  Pabna Revolt, 1870 (Bengal).....................................................................................................11  Deccan Agrarian Riots, 1875 (Maharashtra).............................................................................12  Eka Movement, 1920-21 (Awadh)............................................................................................12  Tebhaga Movement, 1946 (Bengal)..........................................................................................13  Telangana Movement, 1946-51................................................................................................13 Politico-Religious Uprisings...................................................................................................................15  Sanyasi Rebellion (1770 s-1820 s), Bengal..................................................................................15  Fakir Uprising (1776-77)............................................................................................................15  Pagalpanthi Rebellion (1825-50) in Bengal...............................................................................16  Faraizi Revolt (1838-57), Bengal ...............................................................................................16  Kuka revolt (1871), Punjab........................................................................................................16  Moplah rebellion (1830 s-1921), Kerala....................................................................................16 Feudal Uprisings....................................................................................................................................18

 Polygar rebellion (1799-1806) ..................................................................................................18  Rebellion of Velu Thampi..........................................................................................................18 Practice Question..............................................................................................................................19 Q Discuss the Indian response to British imperialism in the pre-nationalist phase.....................19 Earlier we have studied how British policies during financial phase got further intensified

leading to resentment among Indians. As public`s knowledge regarding the exploitative

government started increasing, their anger too, started getting manifested into various

forms:-

 Proto-Nationalist Reaction- It consisted of localized uprisings and the Great revolt of

1857.

 Nationalist Reaction- Movement led by various organizations formed by educated

middle class culminating into the Congress.

Localized uprisings

British Indian Empire was created piecemeal as one region after the other was conquered

and annexed by the British over a period of 100 years (1757-1857).

With British rule, their laws, administration, institutions, officials and agents arrived in the

newly conquered regions and fundamentally altered the basic pattern of regional politics,

society and economy. Such disruption was patently harmful for the interests of the local

community and leadership, resulting in deep seated resentment.

In the absence of modern political consciousness and nationalism, these communities

expressed their discontent in traditional ways.

 This often took the shape violent rebellion or non-cooperation with the oppressor

class/regime.

These uprisings had a distinctly localized character.

 There was no simultaneous uprising across British India since different communities

across India came under British rule at different stages of time.

 There was no grand alliance of oppressed classes at a larger scale. There was no class

consciousness among Indians at this stage. Further, the limitations of physical

infrastructure prevented a wider regional consciousness or alliance.

 These uprisings often took the shape of communal movements organized along the lines

of religious, caste or tribal identity since the society of this period was traditionally

based on these parochial parameters. Consciousness had not yet emerged to check such

limitations.

As British rule expanded across India from the mid-18 th - mid 19 th centuries, more than 100

such localized uprisings had occurred. They may be divided into the following categories-

 Tribal Uprisings

 Peasant revolts

 Politico-Religious rebellions

 Rebellions by dispossessed Feudal elements

Tribal Uprisings

During the pre-capitalist stage of development, the tribals enjoyed almost complete

autonomy resulting in their virtual isolation from the mainstream socio-economic and

political system.

 As such, they were not subjected to the exploitative tendencies of these systems.

 Further, they were shielded from the problems, crisis ad affected these structures.

As a result the diverse tribal communities spread across the forests, deserts and plateaus of

India and enjoyed relative stability.

 Although the level of material and logical development was not very high, the tribals

enjoyed relative peace, equality and general contentment.

 Over thousands of years they had attained perfect harmony with nature and enjoyed

relative safety from the disruptions of the civil society.

However, with the expansion of the British rule especially during the Industrial phase, the

isolation of the tribes was violently disrupted. It permanently destroyed the traditional tribal

way of life including the tribal economy, polity and society life which led to various

upheavals among tribal communities. Ramachandra Guha explains this phenomenon as

'unquiet woods' of the 19 th century.

Impact of British Rule on Tribal economy

Before After

Self-sufficient nature Private ownership of land

Economic isolation

Economic equality because of joint

ownership of resources.

Hunting, gathering, fishing were important

occupations

Subsistence agriculture with shifting

cultivation.

Absolute ownership of its traditional

territory.

Zamindari system was introduced which

changed the land ownership criteria and

converted tribals to mere tenants. It led to-

 Landlessness

 Poverty

 Rural/tribal indebtedness

 Bonded labour

Government ownership of forest was

introduced.

Development of mining and plantation

industries led not only to interference in

tribal regions but also in exploitation of tribal

labour in such industries.

Impact of British rule on the tribal polity

Before After

Political autonomy

Political equality

Democratic organization owing to socio-

political equality.

It was highly integrated with the tribal belief

system.

Strict British political control

British laws, courts, bureaucracy and police

increasingly restricted the traditional tribal

economic pursuits in favour of Zamindars

and traders.

The tribals thus lost not only their autonomy

but were subjected to inherently hostile

political machinery.

Impact of British rule on tribal societies

Before After

Unique customs, religion, practices, Since it was important for British and their

collaborators to destroy the social and

language and culture.

Naturalism and Animism were the pillars of

tribal religion.

No sharp social divisions. Caste, Varna,

Gotra, and religious distinctions were

absent.

Gender equality was there.

spiritual connection between tribals and

their habitat and they consciously tried to

destroy the tribal religion and culture.

 Conscious attempt was made to

mainstream the tribal societies. Tribal

societies were fragmented and forcibly

separated from their tribal customs and

language.

 The different tribal deities were

characterized either as Avatars of

Brahmanical gods or as demons of the

Christian missionaries and Islamic clerics.

They faced Sanskritisation as well as

religious conversions from other

religions.

As the tribals were forcibly integrated to

mainstream society, not only did they

permanently lose their culture but were

relegated to the lowest rank within the

society. This became the basis for the

ideological justification of their brutal

exploitation.

High

rents

Absentee

Landlordism

Lack of Capital

investment in land

Eviction of land

by landlords/

Mahajans

Indebtedness

As such the establishment of British rule violently disrupted the traditional tribal way of life.

Their simple and happy existence was rudely interrupted and replaced by brutal

exploitation. Thus, violent rebellion was a natural outcome of tribal resentment. Some

major uprisings were:-

1. Kol uprising- Buddho Bhagat (1832)
2. Santhal uprising (Hool) - Murmu brothers (1855)
3. Munda Rebellion (Ulgulan) - Birsa Munda (1899)

Character of the Uprisings-

Colonial historians such as Eric Stokes have termed these uprisings as primary resistance. He

argues that it was traditional societies` act of violent defiance, from which usually follows

the imposition of colonial rule in response.

Likewise DN Dhanagare termed the revolts as `pre-political` because of lack of organization,

programme and ideology.

However, sub-altern historians have challenged such ignorant observations. Ranajit Guha

and Sumit Sarkar have re-evaluated is of the opinion that these tribal uprisings highlight

their sophisticated political character.

According to them the element of critical consciousness is visible in every aspect of these

tribal revolts including their objectives, methods and targets. Ranajit Guha points out that

the tribals not only their immediate oppressors i.e. Zamindars, moneylenders, traders, and

Christian missionaries but also the British officials, government buildings, post offices and

law courts. Further, the tribals understood the symbolic importance attacking government

buildings as they represented the physical manifestation of foreign exploitation.

Ranajit Guha further points out that tribal method of political organization and mobilization

reflected a high level of sophistication.

 Tribal uprisings were not the spontaneous outpourings of rage that they had been

portrayed as.

 Rather, the tribal leadership carefully mobilized their communities to united political

action.

 Leadership displayed remarkable political maturity in transforming the symbols of tribal

way of life into symbols of resistance. For example, all the tribal uprisings, warriors were

organized into traditional hunting parties.

 Additionally some tribal leaders were able to transform their uprisings into Messianic

cult. For example, by giving the framework of Ram Rajya to his resistance, Birsa Munda

transformed the Munda uprising to, millenarian movement resulting in massive and

enthusiastic participation.

According to Sumit Sarkar, the objectives of these tribal revolts also reflect their mature

political insight.

 They desired not to simply resist 'civilization' but, in fact, to overthrow the exploitative

regime behind it and restore their political autonomy.

 This is also reflected in their conscious choice to attack British officials and the symbols

of British power along with their collaborators.

 The decision to frame these insurrections within the framework of religion and culture

was a conscious political choice of the leadership. They appreciated the deep bonds that

existed between the tribals and their land and religion. They wanted to mobilize this

energy and thus they consciously pursued this objective of restoring or preserving the

distinct tribal culture, language, religion and identity.

Practice Questions

Q The tribal revolts against the British rule were the results of the total

economic and social disruptions. Elaborate.

British rule not only interfered but completely shattered the traditional way of life of tribals.

This led to the rise of various tribal uprisings, a phenomenon described by Ramachandra

Guha as 'unquiet woods' of 19 th century.

Disturbance in Economic life of tribals-

 Land Revenue policy of British paved way for Private ownership of land. Thus entry of

Zamindars and moneylenders, known as Dikus (outsiders) to tribals, into forest lands led

to disruption in the isolated socio-economic structure of the tribals.

 Secondly, through introduction of Zamindari system in their region, tribals were reduced

to mere tenants.

 Then, high revenue demand along with dependence on moneylenders led to

indebtedness of tribals.

 With the introduction of railways, mining and plantation activities, tribal land was

acquisitioned and also they were exploited as bonded labour leading to poverty.

 Their huge forest tracts were reduced and shifting cultivation was also banned leading to

massive economic disruptions.

 In all these developments, British administration was also party to their exploitation

leading to massive tribal resentment.

Disturbance in social life of tribals-

 In order to suppress the tribal society, social and spiritual connection with their land and

habitat needed to be destroyed. Through their political and economic policies, British

were able to do that.

 Conscious attempt was made to mainstream the tribal societies which were fragmented

and forcibly separated from their tribal customs and language.

 Their religious beliefs were first framed under Sanskritic structure and then voluntarily

given a lower rank in that hierarchy.

 Christian missionaries also find this as an opportune moment for initiating religious

conversions.

This led to various revolts such as-

 Kol Uprising (1831-32)

 Santhal Hool (1855-56)

 Munda Ulgulan (1899)

Tribal resentment led to such a varied and intense struggle that it even cautioned the Indian

national movement. Therefore, tribal issues were not only made an intrinsic part of the

national struggle but also incorporated into the Constitution of India through 5 th and 6 th

schedules among many to address their unique needs.

Q Tribal revolts in India during the 19 th

century were no more than barbaric

reaction against civilization. Critically examine.

Tribal revolts in India during 19 th century were an act of defiance against an oppressive and

exploitative rule. While colonial historians look at it as apolitical and localized in nature, sub

altern scholars focus on its political sophistication and depth of knowledge of a hitherto

isolated section of society.

Colonial historian Eric Stokes has termed these uprisings as primary resistance. These were

barbaric violent acts of a traditional society, from which usually followed the imposition of

colonial rule in response.

Contemporary British media and scholars tried to portray tribals as inherently barbaric and

demonic in order to justify their cruel actions.

They have even tried to relegate these uprisings as pre-political in nature because of lack of

organization, programme and ideology.

This view was challenged by sub-altern scholars like Ranajit Guha and Sumit Sarkar. Ranajit

Guha argued that-

 Critical political consciousness and sophistication is visible in tribal revolts, their

objectives, methods and targets such as Zamindars, moneylenders, traders and Christian

missionaries along with exploitative institutions.

 Tribal uprisings ere not the spontaneous outpourings of rage that they had been

portrayed as. Rather they carefully mobilized their community for united political action.

 Leaders like Birsa Munda even gave religious colour to the movement to mobilize public.

Similarly, Sumit Sarkar has also thoroughly studied and opined that:-

 Tribals desired not simply to resist 'civilization' imposed by British but also to overthrow

the whole regime behind it.

 They had clear understanding of not only enemies but also of their friends.

In this manner, tribal resistance can said to be an early form of nationalism which clearly

understood the materialist machinery of British rule and laid down certain modes of

resistance which later inspired the freedom struggle.

Peasant Revolts

The peasants of India were among the worst affected classes to suffer under British rule.

Ever since the establishment of colonial rule, British made a conscious attempt to maximize

agrarian revenue regardless the suffering of the Indian peasantry.

The specific factors for peasant discontent with colonial rule are as follows-

 The heavy burden of taxation pushed the peasants towards desperation.

 Peasants were alienated from their traditional rights, privileges and even property as

British administrative innovations such as the Zamindari, Ryotwari and Mahalwari

settlements created the problem of landlessness.

 Since the beginning of the 19 th century, as the British destroyed Indian handicrafts to

flood the Indian market with British cotton. There was a major wave of migration from

Indian cities to the villages as artisans lost their livelihoods. This increased the burden on

agriculture further compounding the problems of the Indian peasantry.

 With the influx of the urban artisans, the landholding structure of India collapsed.

Holdings were fragmented resulting in stagnation,

 Due to stagnant agriculture, problem of disguised unemployment increased

substantially.

 Combined effect of these problems was a perceptible rise in the rural poverty.

 Since the British were never interested in actually promoting agriculture, they never

attempted to create robust mechanism for agrarian credit. As a result, farmers easily fell

into the clutches of predatory moneylenders.

 As a result of rural indebtedness, the peasants lost their property, their homes, their

land ultimately their freedom. Bonded labour reared its ugly head.

 With the accelerating pace of British industrialization, the demand for Indian raw

materials kept rising. In response, British encouraged, often forcibly the cultivation of

cash crops such as cotton, jute, indigo, sugarcane, tea etc.

 Commercialization of Agriculture resulted in acute food shortages without giving

efficient result to the cultivators as the bulk of the produce was transferred to European

planters and the traders.

 Further the Indian farmers were exposed to Global price supply fluctuations.

Additionally, the British traders and planters easily shift the burden of losses onto the

farmers.

 Combined effect of these developments was frequent famines throughout the entire

length of colonial rule in India.

The peasants expressed their discontent either by abandoning agriculture altogether or by

rebelling violently against state and its representatives.

 Thus these two methods were used by the peasants even during British rule.

 It should also be remembered there was a basic difference between British colonial

regime and medieval Indian states. On one hand, medieval Indian states were simply

superimposed on the rural civic society. Medieval Indian rulers depended upon the

active cooperation of the rural intermediaries such as Zamindars, Talukdars, and

Mirasidars etc. These elements played an important role in balancing interests of the

state and those of the peasantry.

 On the other hand, the British were able to either remove the Indian intermediaries

either altogether or undermine them so thoroughly that they became irrelevant. When

it came to balancing British interests against that of the peasantry, the old local

machinery replaced by British institutions, laws, courts, these were at best apathetic and

often openly hostile towards the peasants. Thus the peasants were aggrieved by feeling

of hopelessness and desperation which resulted in several open rebellions.

Thus it is not surprising that throughout British rule in India, several large and small peasant

rebellions took place including-

 The Rangpur Dhing, 1783 (Bengal) - The peasants of Rangpur in

North Bengal organized themselves under the leadership of Kena Sarkar against the

Ijaradar of Rangpur Debi Singh introduced by Warren Hastings in Bengal.

• Although the rebellion was suppressed, it forced the British to reconsider their

position in the Ijaradar leading to the introduction of Permanent Settlement in 1793.

 Indigo Revolt, 1860 (Bengal) - Indigo farmers in Bengal stopped

cultivating Indigo as a symbol of protest against the British planters who were forcing

them to cultivate the crop to coercive contracts.

• Dinabandhu Mitra`s play 'Neel Darpan' became much popular. Newspapers such as

"The Hindoo Patriot" and "Som Prakash" brought attention to the matter.

• Due to the involvement of the Bengali intelligentsia, the issue received global

attention and British were forced to prohibit the forcible cultivation of Indigo in

Bengal.

• However, Indigo cultivation continued in Bihar where a local intelligentsia was yet to

emerge.

 Pabna Revolt, 1870 (Bengal) - The jute farmers of Pabna were

demanding remission of rent and concession of dues owing to severe crop failures.

However, the local Zamindars did not relent.

• Thus the peasants rebelled against the Zamindars and the government under the

leadership of Ishan Chandra Roy (Birodhi Raja).

• Apart from that an Agrarian League was formed in Pargana district in 1873 in order

to mobilize peasants. This experiment was recorded in several districts leading to

peasant consolidation.

• Although the rebellion was widely suppressed but it clearly demonstrated that

Commercialization of Agriculture in India was a major contributor in Pabna region.

 Deccan Agrarian Riots, 1875 (Maharashtra) - The region of

Deccan especially around Poona was swept by wave of agrarian riots by peasants against

Marwari traders and sahukars.

• On superficial levels, it seems that this was a case of linguistic and cultural conflict
• However, upon closer observation, it becomes clear that this was manifestation of

class conflict.

• The Ryotwari system had created the platform for the entry of moneylenders into

the rural Deccan. This opportunity was capitalized upon by some individuals of the

Marwari community.

• Gradually the Deccan peasantry entered into the clutches of these Marwari

Mahajans and sahukars resulting in rising poverty, landlessness and bonded labour.

• The British legal machinery offered no protection to the peasants from these

predatory moneylenders and even favoured the exploitative class. The issue was

further contrasted as class differences overlapped with cultural and linguistic

distinctions.

• The peasants targeted the houses of the moneylenders, the shops of Marwari

traders, government buildings and Kotwalis.

• The public burning of moneylenders` account ledgers emerged as the most common

activity.

• The uprising lasted almost two years during which the Deccan riots Commission was

appointed and recommended substantial reforms.

• The local Marathi intelligentsia especially The Poona Sarvajanik Sabha made a strong

case in favour of the peasants.

• The Deccan Agriculturalists Relief Act, 1979 provided some protections to the

peasants including the provision that individual could not be imprisoned simply for

defaulting on a loan.

 Eka Movement, 1920-21 (Awadh) - In the backdrop of the call for

non-payment of revenue during the Non-cooperation movement, the farmers of Awadh

began a no-rent campaign against the local intermediaries such as Zamindars, Taluqdars,

and Numbardars.

• With this the fractures became visible in the grand alliance of Indians that Mahatma

Gandhi had raised against the British.

• The no rent campaign was the direct attack on Mahatma Gandhi`s vision of class

alliance that threatened to violently divide Indians among each other. Therefore, the

Marxist historians alleged that the rising peasant radicalism against Zamindars was

the real factor that prompted Mahatma Gandhi to suddenly withdraw the non-

cooperation movement. Thus, according to them the Chauri-Chaura incident was

simply a convenient excuse.

Throughout 1920 s and 1930 s, there was a significant rise in Kisan Sabhas throughout the

country. Ultimately, efforts of various Kisan sabhas culminated into the formation of All

India Kisan Sabha in Lucknow session of Congress in 1936.

At the same time, Communist organizations also started focusing on increasing their reach

to the masses. While Congress was constrained vis-à-vis class collaboration, communist

movement favoured radical demands.

• In 1935, Comintern Communist parties throughout the world to form united fronts.

After that, many Communists joined AIKS and came closer to Congress through

Congress Socialist Party.

• However, their radical demands and Congress` inability to implement them during its

Ministry rule led AIKS to adopt red flag as its official banner. Its impact can be seen

in the radical peasant movements of 1940 s:-

 Tebhaga Movement, 1946 (Bengal): Bengal faced one of the most

severe humanitarian crises in the form of Great famine of 1943. Per capita entitlement

of rice grains was very low as it was diverted for the needs of British military during

Second World War and decline in rice import from Myanmar.

• The communists responded adequately to the food crisis. Through Bengal Provincial

Kisan Sabha, they carried on extensive relief works and gained popularity in Bengal.

• Under the movement, peasants harvested the paddy and took it to their own

Khamar (storehouse) and then invited the landlords to come and take their one-

third share. Here, the peasants carved out their 'Tebhaga elaka' or liberated zones.

• Ultimately, the government of Bengal led by the Muslim League conceded

sharecroppers` demand in Bargadar Bill in January, 1947 but they had to drop it

because of internal opposition from Muslim League and from the Congress.

• Thereafter, the movement took a violent turn and could only be controlled by strong

police action.

 Telangana Movement, 1946-51- Under the rule of Nizam, the agrarian

relations were on feudal lines where Jagirdars, pattadars, deshmukhs and deshpandes

acted as the intermediary class.

• After Commercialization of agriculture, Sahukars were also increasing which

increased the burden of agricultural labour.

• Economic dislocation due to Second World War added to the worries of the

peasants.

• Since mid-1946, attacks started on notorious landlords. The demands of the

peasants were regarding wage increase, abolition of Vetti bonded labour, illegal

exactions, and the recently imposed grain levy.

• Gradually, the struggle merged with freedom struggle against Nizam`s government.

Politico-Religious Uprisings

Throughout the length of colonial rule, series of uprisings were organized by religious

communities against colonial rule under the banner of religion.

Superficially, they appear to be religious revolts against a foreign and exploitative regime

that had hurt native religious sentiments. In other words, they seem to be a religious

reaction to British colonialism.

However, upon closer observation, it becomes clear that in reality the basic grievances

underlined these rebellions were of a political or economic nature.

 The response to these grievances simply happened to be enveloped in religion.

 Thus, it would be more accurate to characterize them as politico-religious uprisings.

 The following factors may be attributed to the emergence of this combination-

• Such uprisings were the norm during medieval age and had become engrained in the

body politic of India.

• The Mughal period witnessed revolts by Sikhs, Satnamis, Jats, Rajputs and Marathas

which were all raised under the banner of religion.

• The Indian society of the 18 th and 19 th centuries was deeply attached to religion.

Thus religion was an immensely powerful mobiliser. Moreover, the leadership of

these religious communities drew upon their religious authority as the main basis of

their power. Thus, organizing these rebellions under the umbrella of religious

uprising was a natural choice for them.

Some important politico-religious movements against the British rule are as follows-

 Sanyasi Rebellion (1770 s-1820 s), Bengal- It was organized under

the leadership of Sanyasis (Hindu wandering mendicants) who mobilized the peasantry

of Bengal against the British.

 Causes

• The impoverishment of the Bengal peasantry and old Zamindars following the

establishment of British rule meant that they were unable to support these Sanyasis

who were dependent upon their alms.

• The British considered these Sanyasis the unlawful elements that were extorting

money from the populace. Thus, they imposed restrictions upon their annual

pilgrimages.

• The Sanyasi rebellion took place in several stages over five decades before it could

be brutally suppressed during the 1820 s.

 Fakir Uprising (1776-77) - Following the British rule Fakirs (Muslim

wandering mendicants) too, came under immense pressure. Thus, they organized a

massive rebellion with the assistance of local peasants, Zamindars, Rajputs, Pathans and

disbanded soldiers of the nawab`s army.

• Their leaders included Majnu Shah and Chirag Shah. They set up parallel state within

Bengal and claimed the right to levy taxes.

 Pagalpanthi Rebellion (1825-50) in Bengal- It was a peaceful and

tolerant sect of Muslims led by Karim Shah followed by his son Tipu Shah.

• They borrowed the philosophy of Sufism along with nature worship and the worship

of Hindu gods.

• Under the leadership of Tipu Shah they raised a peasant uprising in North Bengal

against both Zamindars and British government.

 Faraizi Revolt (1838-57), Bengal- It was an offshoot of Wahabism

established by Haji Shariatullah to purify the practice of Islam in Bengal.

• Under the leadership of his son Dudu Mian the movement became politicized

resulting in an uprising of Muslim peasants in North Bengal against Hindu Zamindars,

moneylender and the East India Company.

• During the revolt of 1857, the Faraizis entered a coalition with the Wahabis in Bihar

and Awadh. Generally they were more organized than other rebels.

 Kuka revolt (1871), Punjab- It I also known as the Namdhari movement

and had emerged as the Puritanical movement within Sikhism that aimed to purify the

Sikh religious practices and society by removing external influences.

• Under Baba Ram Singh, the movement became politicized with the objective of

restoring the Sikh Empire.

• Notably, the rebellion was peaceful characterized by public protests and boycott of

British goods, laws and schools.

• Ultimately, the uprising was suppressed with the use of ruthless military force.

 Moplah rebellion (1830 s-1921), Kerala- the Moplahs were the

descendants of Arab Muslim settlers who had arrived in the Malabar and married local

women between the 7 th and 9 th centuries. The word Moplah thus means son-in-law in

Malayalam. Traditionally, the Moplahs constituted the cultivator class of North Malabar.

The land ownership structure of this region was as follows-

• Jenmis belonging primarily to the Namboodri Brahmin community enjoyed

hereditary titles of large tracts of arable land.

• Below them were the Kudiyam primarily belonging to the Hindu Nair community.

They oversaw cultivation and managed revenue collection.

• Below them were the Moplah who were Muslim and the primary producers. Thus,

the religious divide overlapped the class divide and tensions were always present in

this relationship.

• However, the different classes and communities lived in relative harmony due to a

shared linguistic identity and custom of inter-religious marriages.

• Additionally, the Moplahs enjoyed limited ownership rights over the land that they

had cultivated for generations.

Situation changed drastically when Tipu Sultan annexed North Malabar during 1790 s.

• Either to cultivate a loyal class among locals, land ownership was taken away from

the Jenmis and given away to Moplahs. This continued in much resentment and

bloodshed between both communities.

• Following the defeat of Tipu Sultan, north Malabar was restored to Travancore and

the traditional land structure was revived.

• Additionally, the Moplahs also lost their traditional protections and privileges.

This resulted in a series of communal riots over the entire 19 th century.

• Finally in 1896 normalcy was restored when following the suppression of a major riot

reforms were instituted to give relief to the Moplahs.

However, the dormant communalism of North Malabar was revived in the backdrop of

the Khilafat movement. The Moplahs led by Ali Musaliar and Variyamkunath

Kunjahmmad Haji organized a powerful revolt. The tragedy was that instead of targeting

only the British, the Moplahs also targeted ordinary Hindus and Christians.

Many prominent scholars including CP Ramaswamy Iyer bitterly criticized Mahatma

Gandhi for supporting the Khilafat cause and communalizing the national politics.

Feudal Uprisings

Eighteenth century India presented the picture of political fragmentation. Mughal Empire

was disintegrating and regional kingdoms were trying to consolidate their position. In this

scenario central authority remained weak as both the imperial crown a well as the regional

rulers came to depend heavily upon powerful feudatories.

Thus, there was a distinct rise of feudalism in 18 th century India. The feudal class exercised

influence in the following manner-

 They enjoyed hereditary titles over fertile lands;

 They performed prominent roles in both local as well as central politics

 They were able to accumulate the bulk of the taxes generated in their regions

 Using this wealth they raised large armies and constructed powerful forts

In other words, this feudal class emerged as the virtually autonomous ruling class of 18 th

century India.

However, as the British Empire expanded from the second half of the 18 th century onwards,

the Indian feudal class was gradually deprived of its wealth, power and autonomy.

Thus, the natural reaction of the dispossessed Indian ruling class was rebellion. Kathleen

Gough describes this phenomenon as 'Restorative rebellions'.

Some important feudal rebellions were as follows-

 Polygar rebellion (1799-1806) - Polygars also known as the Palaiyagars

were the intermediate level feudal chiefs in the Mysore state who had been present

since the glory days of the Vijayanagara Empire.

• Following the defeat of Tipu Sultan in fourth Anglo-Mysore war, the British annexed

much of the Mysore and stripped the Polygars of their revenue, military and

administrative powers.

• Many disgruntled Polygars rebelled against the British but were crushed ruthlessly.

 Rebellion of Velu Thampi- Velu Thampi was the Diwan of Travancore and

was opposed to the Subsidiary alliance treaty that the British had recently imposed upon

his state.

• It had substantially increased the financial burden of Travancore
• The British had started meddling the internal politics of Travancore

Thampi alongwith some top military officials hatched conspiracy to forcibly expel the British

from Travancore. However, the revolt was suppressed with overwhelming military

superiority.

Practice Question

Q Discuss the Indian response to British imperialism in the pre-nationalist

phase.

British imperialism disrupted the whole dynamic of Indian society as well as its politico-

economic structure. However, in absence of nationalist consolidation, these people led

localized struggles in their own distinct ways.

Causes-

 Territorial annexations led to loss of authority for local rajas, feudal lords etc.

 Land revenue policy- Permanent settlement, Ryotwari and Mahalwari systems created a

land market and turned peasants into tenants-at-will.

 High revenue demand led to huge burden on peasants.

 Absentee landlordism and rise of intermediaries further indebted peasants.

 Ecological imperialism led to interference in traditional lifestyles of tribals.

 Deindustrialization led to loss of employment and burden on land.

 Famines- more than a hundred small and big famines took place during a century`s rule

of the British causing huge dislocation in lives of people.

 Role of Christian missionaries in religious conversions vitiated the atmosphere.

Indian Response-

 Tribals- due to their isolated lifestyles, tribals were even more reactionary to British

policies. Throughout 19 th century, forests were volatile from Bhils of Khandesh to

Mundas of Chhota Nagpur Plateau.

• Their mode of resistance was generally violent and they acted against British as well

as their collaborators such as moneylenders, Zamindars etc.

• Examples include Santhal hool uprising of 1856 and Munda Ulgulan of 1899.

 Peasants- peasants not only lost their tenancy rights but were also facing excessive

illegal cess (abwabs) alongwith an increasing burden on land.

• Commercialization of agriculture did not help Indians because ultimate price was

fixed by British in such a manner so as to suit their own needs.

• Peasants' struggle varied from no-rent campaigns to violent uprisings such as

Deccan riots of 1875.

 Politico-religious uprisings- peasants` problems, at times, took religious symbols in an

anti-colonial struggle.

• Movements such as Sanyasi revolt, Faraizi movement, Moplah etc. had peasant

grievances as their base which manifested itself in a religious idiom.

• On the other hand, rebellions like Kuka movement were puritanical in nature which

was aimed at religious reforms. They took anti-British stand considering it

responsible for religious issues.

 Feudal revolts- These were restorative in nature led by dispossessed rajas, nawabs or

landlords.

• With mass support of armed revolutionaries, they were primarily aimed at re-

establishing traditional rule.

• Polygars in Tirunelveli and adjoining regions and Velu Thampi in Mysore are few

examples.

These Indian responses were brutally crushed by the British but they created fertile ground

for resistance on which Great revolt of 1857 was built and later nationalist movement

picked up threads from here to launch a continuous struggle.

Tribals` as well as peasants` discontent erupted many times from late 18 th century till

independence. Whereas one school of thought attaches great importance to these revolts,

other refutes it as an apolitical, feudal and violent struggle of an unorganized community.

Colonial school of thought undermines these revolts on following grounds-

 These were barbaric violent acts of traditional societies which paved the way for colonial

rule in response

 These were apolitical in nature as they did not have knowledge about broader

contemporary happenings nor did they have any alternative in mind.

 An examination of contemporary British report, newspapers, cartoons etc. tells how

British tried to make them look like demons and 'uncivilized'.

Apart from that, the lack of geographical contiguity and inability to forge grand alliance

also suggests a lack of consciousness.

However, this view can be challenged on following grounds-

 Both tribals and peasants were completely aware of the situation as they particularly

approached the British legal machinery and officialdom for their grievances.

 Sub-altern scholars such as Ranajit Guha and Sumit Sarkar argues that-

• Once protests began, they specifically targeted British institutions and their

collaborators such as moneylenders, Zamindars etc. This shows their consciousness.

• They had politically organized their groups in an efficient manner. For example,

peasants received support from middle class intelligentsia and tribals such as Birsa

Munda used religious symbols to mobilize people.

• Rebellion itself was a conscious political action which was taken only after

community meetings, inaction on grievances etc.

• Not only were they aware of enemies but also of their friends.

Although there were certain lack of coordinated actions among peasants and tribals but

perhaps that was because of inadequate transport and communication. Retrospectively, it

can be said that they left such a strong legacy of resistance which has become part of Indian

body politic even till now.

Contents

Causes.....................................................................................................................................................2

1. Issue of greased cartridges .............................................................................................................2
2. Economic causes.............................................................................................................................3
3. Political causes................................................................................................................................3
4. Administrative causes.....................................................................................................................4
5. Military causes................................................................................................................................5
6. Socio-cultural causes.......................................................................................................................6

Practice Questions..............................................................................................................................6

Q. The Sepoy Mutiny of 1857 was a sudden, unexpected and contained phenomenon. Discuss. 6

Q. The Great Revolt of 1857 was a spontaneous uprising of malcontents which disappeared as

quickly as it had appeared. Comment. ...........................................................................................7

Storm Centres and leaders .....................................................................................................................8

Spread and Extent of the Revolt...........................................................................................................10

Targets ..........................................................................................................................................10

Causes for the failure of the revolt.......................................................................................................10

Practice Questions............................................................................................................................12

Q. Discuss the causes for the failure of the revolt of 1857 in ending British rule in India. ..........12

Consequences of the Revolt of 1857....................................................................................................13

1. Queen`s Proclamation, 1858 ........................................................................................................13
2. An Act for the Better Government of India, 1858 ........................................................................13
3. Military Reorganization.................................................................................................................14
4. End of the British civilizing mission...............................................................................................14
5. Intensification of Racism...............................................................................................................14
6. Divide and Rule policy...................................................................................................................14

Practice Questions............................................................................................................................15

Q. The Revolt of 1857 was no more than minor footnote in Indian history. It failed in ending

British rule and was unsuccessful in altering the situation in India. Critically analyze.................15

Q. Discuss the Political and military changes introduced by the British following the revolt of

1. .............................................................................................................................................16

Q. The revolt of 1857 was the major watershed in the development of major British cultural and

social policies towards India. Elaborate........................................................................................17

Q Discuss the economic consequences of the great revolt of 1857.............................................18

Nature of the Revolt of 1857................................................................................................................19

Conclusion.............................................................................................................................................22

Practice Questions............................................................................................................................22

Q. The revolt of 1857 was neither the first nor national nor a war of independence. In the

context of this statement, evaluate the nature of the revolt.......................................................22

Q. The uprising of 1857 was nothing more than a selfish sepoy mutiny having neither native

leadership nor popular support. Discuss......................................................................................23

Q. The Revolt of 1857 was something more than a sepoy mutiny and something less than a

national war of Independence......................................................................................................23

Q. The revolt of 1857 began as sepoy mutiny but ended as a War of Independence. Comment.

......................................................................................................................................................23

Q. The Revolt of 1857 was one in long series of anti-British rebellions. Discuss critically...........25

The revolt of 1857 is often regarded as a watershed of modern India history. It brought

about permanent shift in the British colonial policy towards India.

Further, the revolt has been a matter of intense historical discussion as different historians

from the very beginning have interpreted its causes, nature and consequences through

different perspectives.

Thus, it is important to understand the causes behind this uprising.

Causes

1. Issue of greased cartridges- Colonial historians such as LER Rees, James

Outram and W. Taylor have identified the greased cartridges issue as the single most

important cause for the mutiny of the sepoys.

However, this reveals two important flaws in the colonial understanding-

 The revolt was a simple sepoy mutiny

 The mutiny was spontaneous and unexpected

On the other hand, it becomes clear that the greased cartridge issue simply acted as the

trigger that ignited sepoys. The gunpowder of resentment had been accumulating among

Indians since the establishment of British rule.

In fact, the revolt was not a spontaneous uprising. Deep seated resentment over economic,

political, administrative, military and socio-cultural grievances had made it inevitable. It

would have happened sooner or later. The greased cartridges issue simply ensured that it

began as a sepoy mutiny.

1. Economic causes- The British policies of direct plunder, over-taxation, and

deindustrialization, commercialization of agriculture and complete destruction of native

commerce had totally destroyed the balance of traditional Indian economy and transformed

it into a primarily agrarian and rural economy.

British rule had become synonymous with famine, poverty, landlessness, deprivation,

bonded labour and economic dependency.

The peasants and artisans were the worst affected but apart from a small minority of urban

merchants, the economic interests of India`s traditional Zamindars, merchants and bankers

had also been hurt.

Thus British colonial rule caused resentment among every section of the Indian society.

1. Political causes- British adopted a deceitful attitude towards Indian rulers such

policy of Ring fence, Effective control, Subsidiary alliance and Doctrine of Lapse. They either

imposed an unequal alliance from them or annex their territory outright.

 The British policy of imperialism during the initial phase also caused suspicion among

Indian rulers.

 The abolition of titles and pensions enjoyed by Indian rulers were perceived as broken

promises. The annexation of Awadh on the pretext of misgovernance caused huge

resentment among the rulers, taluqdars and the ordinary peasants. It was seen as a

clear betrayal as Awadh had been a friendly British ally since 1765.

 The people of the newly annexed regions felt immense resentment due to British

economic exploitation and could easily remember the relative better times of native

rule.

 Further, the alien character of the British rule alienated Indians from it. Unlike previous

foreign invaders, the British consciously avoided cultural assimilation with India. Rather,

they were more interested in draining India`s wealth to Britain. Thus, British rule

appeared permanently as foreign and exploitative to ordinary Indians.

 The issue of absentee sovereigntyship- It was allowing British crown to relegate Indian

affairs in the hands of a private company. This was leading to mal-administration and

exploitation causing resentment among Indians.

1. Administrative causes-

 Institutional racial discrimination- The colonial administrative machinery was inherently

racist. Indians were discriminated against in matters of appointment, salary, promotions,

transfers, postings etc. For example

• no Indian could aspire to enter civil services;
• no Indian in the army could attain a rank higher than Subedar;
• Indian soldiers received a salary that was on average five times lower than European

counterparts of the same rank;

• the barracks and mess of Indian soldiers were separate and inferior to European

soldiers;

• European officials routinely verbally and physically abused Indian soldiers often

referring to them with derogatory names.

 Replacement of Persian with English as the court language- In 1837 Persian was

replaced by English as official language for all government business.

• Earlier, the Muslim Ashrafia community (affluent class) which was fluent in Persian

was employed as government officials. Suddenly, they lost their major source of

income and were forced into penury.

 Insensitivity of the administration and its alien character- the colonial administration

was designed not to serve the Indians but to make their exploitation more efficient.

• The machinery was guided by the objective of maximizing economic returns for the

British and revenue.

• Thus, it emerged as the enforcer for the drain of wealth.
• Further, the administration maintained a clearly demarcated boundary between

Europeans and Indians and made no attempt to win the trust of Indians.

• As a result, it assumed the character of an insensitive, exploitative and distinctly

alien regime.

• Ordinary Indians felt no goodwill towards it. Rather, they felt extreme resentment.

 Petty corruption- The lower level of administration is the first point of contact between

the state and the people.

• British administrative machinery that emphasized upon absolute control and the

suppression of common aspirations provided an opportunity for petty officials such

as low clerks, constables, watchmen, revenue assessors and accountants who freely

exploit the people.

• Petty corruption was a major contributor towards the erosion of public trust in the

colonial regime that caused deep seated resentment.

• British economic interests which were often in conflict with the interests of ordinary

Indians.

• Thus, British laws, courts, institutions and the police had an inherent anti-Indian bias.
• Indians also, gradually recognized this and became increasingly desperate. Gripped

by a sense of helplessness, the general masses were fuming with anger and

perpetually looking for ways to express it.

• British response was invariably to terrorize and demoralize Indians which further

angered Indians.

• Thus, the large amount of civilian participation during the great revolt was not

surprising.

1. Military causes-

 Racial discrimination (as discussed earlier)

 Sepoy was essentially a peasant in uniform. This discontent mirrored the general

discontent of ordinary Indians. For example, the sepoys of Awadh were the largest

section of rebels since Awadh had recently been annexed.

 Rising religious tensions- Service in the companies` army was coming increasingly at

odds with the religious preferences, beliefs and practice of the Indian sepoys.

• British officials and chaplains openly mocked Hindu gods and the Islamic faith and

pressurized soldiers to accept Christianity.

• The General Service Enlistment Act, 1856 required that every new recruit would

have to provide an undertaking that they would not refuse to serve abroad. This was

in violation of the upper caste taboo against oversea travel.

• Thirdly, rumours that the British were mixing animal bone dust into the flour

alarmed both Hindus and Muslim soldiers.

• Greased cartridges issue.

 The economic interests of Indian sepoys had also been harmed in the recent years-

• In 1849, Dalhousie passed a resolution discontinuing the foreign service allowance

(Bhatta) for soldiers serving in Sindh and Punjab.

• The Indian Post Act, 1854 also abolished the military post and made the use of

postage stamps compulsory which added further economic burden on the sepoys.

 The myth of British invincibility had been shattered. In the recent past, the British had

suffered some embarrassing defeats during Anglo-Sikh war, the Crimean war and the

first Anglo-Afghan war.

• Their aura of invincibility was broken emboldening the Indian Sepoys to act.
• There was a well-established tradition of Indian Sepoy mutinies against British

officials.

• The company`s army left no space for the sepoy to register his discontent in a

peaceful manner.

• Further, the military organization made no attempt to address the root causes of

sepoy discontent.

• Therefore sepoy mutinies were an essential ingredient of British military history in

India.

• In this sense, the mutiny of 1857 was a continuation of the series of earlier mutinies

including the Bengal mutiny (1764), Vellore mutiny (1806), Barrackpore mutiny

(1825), mutiny during the Afghan war (1840).

1. Socio-cultural causes

 Social reform legislations such as the ban on Sati (1829), Widow Remarriage (1856) and

allowing girls to receive education alarmed the conservative Indians. These acts were

perceived as an undue interference in Indian social matters. Conservative Indians

became suspicious that the British were deliberately trying to destroy the fabric of

Indian society in order to Christianize and westernize it.

 The activities of the Christian missionaries and the attitude of the government towards

them also alarmed Indians.

• Forcible conversions, mass conversions and conversions by inducement were either

overlooked or actively supported by the British administration.

• The hostilities of the Indian Christian missionaries towards the Indian religions and

the open support given to them by the British government caused further

resentment.

 The taxation of Indian places of religious worship such as mosques and temples

infuriated the Maulvis and Pundits along with pious Indians from all backgrounds. This

was an unprecedented development in Indian history.

 Lex Loci Act, 1850 and Religious Disabilities Act, 1856 allowed a Christian convert who

inherit the property of his 'heathen' father. This removed a major hurdle towards the

mass conversion of Hindus to Christianity and was perceived as a direct attack on

Hinduism by the British.

Therefore, Great Revolt of 1857 was the outcome of general discontent that had

accumulated over decades among Indians of all classes due to a variety of factors.

Practice Questions

Q. The Sepoy Mutiny of 1857 was a sudden, unexpected and contained

phenomenon. Discuss.

The great revolt of 1857 was initiated by Sepoy mutiny and gradually spread to other

classes. However, British colonialist undermine its intensity by confining it to just a

spontaneous outburst of sepoys` anger. A thorough understanding of the revolt will help us

understand its multiclass nature and deep seated anger.

The reasons for sepoy mutiny were several-

 Racial discrimination faced by sepoys on a regular basis in promotions, postings,

transfers, abuses etc.

 Economic grievances of sepoys were ever increasing- Foreign Service allowance was

abolished in 1849, lower salary than their British counterparts, India Post was

introduced in 1854 after which even sepoys had to compulsorily buy postage adding to

financial burden.

 Religious concerns of the sepoys- mocking of Hindu gods and Islamic faith by the

officers, issue of greased cartridges, rumour that bone and dust had been mixed in the

flour, General Service Enlistment Act, Lex Loci Act etc. had created discontentment.

 Sepoys were also 'peasants in uniform' and sorry state of affairs in countryside affected

them directly.

 Finally, annexation of Awadh on flimsy grounds shook the loyalty of sepoys, majority of

who belonged to Awadh.

However, neither was it sudden, nor unexpected, nor contained because-

 General discontent had been fuming since the beginning of the Company raj.

 Ruling class was angry against dispossession of their territories. Taluqdars of Awadh had

already showed signs of anger.

 Educated middle-class was facing discrimination in services.

 Christian missionaries and threat of religious conversion affected both Hindus and

Muslims equally.

 British Land revenue policy and constant famines had hit farmers disproportionately.

 Various uprisings, mutinies etc. had already taken place which had charged the

atmosphere.

Owing to such a situation, sepoy mutiny was just the beginning of the largest revolt that had

taken place in British India by then which forced British to introspect and alter its approach.

Q. The Great Revolt of 1857 was a spontaneous uprising of malcontents which

disappeared as quickly as it had appeared. Comment.

The Great Revolt of 1857 was the culmination of several grievances accumulating since the

very beginning of the British rule. Its spontaneity is the colonial interpretation of the revolt

in order to undermine the maladministration of the Company rule.

Malcontents which led to the revolt were as follows-

 British Economic policies- Land revenue policy of the British which caused indebtedness

and resentment in the rural region.

• Deindustrialization leading to unemployment and an excessive burden on the land.
• Famines were continuously increasing alongwith excessive taxation and even illegal

exactions became unbearable burden on the people.

 British Political Policies- Landed magnates and feudal elements were frustrated by

British policies such as Doctrine of Lapse, Subsidiary alliances, the way Awadh was

annexed on the charge of misgovernance, and Summary settlement etc.

 Military Policies- Sepoys` discontent had been on the rise since many decades on issues

of racial discrimination and religious concerns.

• Secondly, economic issues arose with withdrawal of Foreign Service allowance by

Dalhousie in 1849.

 Social Policies- Ban on Sati Practice, Widows` Remarriage Act etc. was considered a

threat on culture by Conservative class.

• Acts like Religious Disabilities Act, 1856 were viewed with suspicion even by

educated class.

 Administrative Policies- Racial discrimination, petty corruption, Persian was replaced by

English as the official language etc. alienated Indians further.

The revolt was not spontaneous at all as these grievances had been accumulating since

decades which can be gauged from the following facts-

 Peasant revolts such as Rangpur Dhing (1783) etc. had already mobilized peasants.

 Tribal uprisings such as Koli uprising, Santhal Hool etc. had created awareness among

tribals regarding the oppressive rule.

 Politico-religious rebellions such as Sanyasi revolt and Faraizi movement had observed

massive participation of people showing signs of discontent.

 Feudal revolts like Paika revolt is an indication of the discontent shown by landed

magnates who readily provided leadership to the great revolt.

 Sepoy mutinies were going on since atleast the beginning of 19 th century and thus every

section of society that participated in the great revolt was already mobilized.

Thirdly, the essence of the revolt never disappeared. It only shifted from proto-nationalist

phase to a more organized nationalist phase and concerted struggle against the colonial

regime began to ultimately end only on 15 th August, 1947.

Although, it ended in 1858, but it left such a strong legacy that more than fifty years later VD

Savarkar termed it as the 'First War of Independence'.

Storm Centres and leaders

Region Leader/S

Meerut Soldiers

Delhi Bahadur Shah Zafar

Begum Zeenat Mahal

General Bakht Khan

Kanpur Nana Saheb

Tania Tope

Azimullah

Bareilly Khan Bahadur

Jhansi Rani Lakshmi Bai

Lucknow Begum Hazrat Mahal

Faizabad Maulvi Ahmadullah

Patna Maulvi Pir Ali

Arrah (Jagdishpura) Kunwar Singh

The revolt was largely a north Indian affair affecting the region between Delhi and Bihar that

began on 10 th May, 1857 when sepoys at Meerut killed their superiors and freed their

imprisoned comrades, looted the armoury and marched to Delhi. At Delhi, they proclaimed

Bahadur Shah Zafar as the leader of the revolt. This was a development of immense political

significance.

 With this act, the sepoys had transformed their mutiny into a general revolt of Indians

against the British.

 Further, this proclamation gave an all India sense to the revolt since the long history of

Mughal rule had transformed the Mughals to a symbol of an all India unity.

 The rebels drafted letters to the rulers across India encouraging them to join the

rebellion and expel the British.

Thus, the Indian sepoys exhibited sophisticated Political consciousness proclaiming Bahadur

Shah Zafar as their leader.

Spread and Extent of the Revolt

 Areas- North India ( mainly Ganga-Yamuna doab)

 Classes- peasants, artisans, shopkeepers, petty traders, Zamindars, rulers, native officers

(elites who had suffered).

Most of the intellectual class remained neutral.

 Religions- Hindus and Muslims participated enthusiastically and displayed complete

unity.

 Genders- Both men and women participated in large numbers. Women were performing

leadership roles.

 Civilian participation was extremely high.

 Castes- All castes participated but the participation of the upper castes was the most

intense.

Targets

 British armouries, offices, courts and forts. Along with it, British officials, soldiers

civilians (traders, bankers, women and children).

 Indian collaborators such as big Zamindars, money lenders and loyal Indian princes were

also targeted.

 British infrastructure like postage and telegraph infrastructure was targeted alongwith

blocking of major roads and canals.

Causes for the failure of the revolt-

 The revolt was not an All India movement. It was confined primarily to the North India.

• The other parts remained peaceful. Therefore, the British could regroup and tackle

the rebels with relative ease.

• Had the regional spread been larger the British would have faced much difficulty.

 The revolt could not mobilize all Indians.

• General participation remained limited to the North-West provinces and Awadh.

 In fact, in other regions, the British could rely upon the support of powerful Indian allies

such as the Scindias of Gwalior and the Maharaja of Patiala.

• Furthermore, powerful elements such as big Zamindars and moneylenders who

owed their fortunes to the British rule, emerged as 'breakwaters in the storm'.

 The revolt also suffered due to lack of proper planning and coordination. The Indian

leadership was also suffering from mutual suspicions and mistrust.

 The British were able to isolate the pockets of Indian resistance and suppress them one

by one.

• The Indians were unable to present a unified front.

 The revolt also suffered due to a deficit of a proper leadership. Bahadur Shah Zafar was

an unwilling and incapable rebel.

 Other leaders were guided by their narrow personal dynastic or regional interest. For

example, Nana Saheb was fighting for the restoration of his pension while Rani Lakshmi

Bai and Begum Hazrat Mahal were fighting for the restoration of their respective states.

• This deficit was also reflected in the attitude of other elements and the British were

able to exploit it.

• For example, bulk of the Taluqdars of Awadh happily laid down their arms once they

were guaranteed the restoration of their feudal privileges.

• CA Bayly has pointed out that the rebels had various motives which were not always

connected to any specific grievance against the British. Often they fought against

each other and this disunity played into British hands.

• Thomas Metcalfe argues that united in defeat, the rebel leaders would have fallen at

each other`s throats in victory.

 The rebellion also suffered due to the lack of any clear national vision. For the majority

of the rebels, their revolt meant the restoration of old India by ending British rule.

• Viewed within long arc of history, the revolt appears to be a medieval reaction to

British imperialism. It was a backward looking and a feudal movement as it lacked

national character.

• This explains the limited spread, dissipation and enthusiasm of the rebels.
• It lacked ability to create true alliance between the different classes on common

national objective.

• Even Pt. Jawahar Lal Nehru believed that the revolt was the 'last flicker in Indian

feudalism`s flame'.

 The British also had access to better equipment, logistics and reinforcements.

• While the rebels had to mobilize the limited resources that they had commandeered

from the British, their opponents had a vast network of well supplied military

garrisons across the entire subcontinent.

• Further, the British were also able to bring fresh troops to India from abroad.

Therefore, seeing purely from a strategic and logical perspective, the British position

was insurmountable.

 The rebellion lacked the academic support of the Indian middle class intelligentsia.

• The urban intellectual class remained neutral. Therefore, the revolt was unable to

graduate from narrow feudal roots to proper national revolt.

• In other words, the revolt suffered due to the lack of the positive influence hat this

class may have had upon it.

• Here also, Thomas Metcalfe is of the opinion that the rebellion was negative as they

did not have any plan to bring any alternative system to replace the British Raj. This

was perhaps because of lack of intellectual participation.

 The rebels also lacked proper understanding of British imperialism.

• They perceived British Indian Empire as a traditional 'Indian' power. They did not

realize that the British Empire was in fact, the world`s most formidable global

superpower. To overcome such an opponent, foreign assistance was crucial. In fact,

French assistance had been crucial in the success of the Americans against the British

almost a century earlier.

• However, the Indian rebels did not appeal to the enemies of Britain for any

assistance.

Practice Questions

Q. Discuss the causes for the failure of the revolt of 1857 in ending British rule

in India.

The revolt of 1857 was such an intense and violent yet unplanned struggle that the reasons

which led to its emergence also became responsible to some extent for its failure. However,

reasons for failure are broad based which demands proper scrutiny.

Causes for the failure of the revolt-

 Lack of national character- the revolt was not an All India movement as it was confined

primarily to the North India.

 Although a few people belonging to landed class revolted yet overall this class acted as

'breakwater in the storms'. For example, Scindias of Gwalior supported British.

 Lack of leadership- Bahadur Shah Zafar proved the weakest link whereas the revolt

demanded a 'man of the moment'.

 Disunity among revolutionaries- CA Bayly argues that the rebels had various motives

which were not always connected to any specific grievance. This disunity played into

British hands.

 Lack of any clear national vision- There was a lack of any alternative proposal among

revolutionaries. The idea revolved more around the 18 th centuries` India which was

against the current of the time.

 Military and Strategic superiority of the British- Not only they controlled superior arms

and ammunitions but the infantry organization and generalship of officers such as

Hudson and Outram could not be matched. Also infrastructure such as Telegraph,

postage etc. provided communication and hence speed and effectiveness to the British

army.

 Aloofness of Intelligentsia from the revolt proved negative as in the absence of any

ideological justification it could neither gain huge support among middle class nor could

secure global empathy.

 Lack of understanding regarding Colonialism- Revolutionaries considered British as

'traditional Indian ruler' and as such missed the concept of colonial loot and how to

respond to that.

However, to look at the decline of the revolution as a failure would be an injustice to it

because-

 It forced British to make some amendments in its political, economic, social, cultural and

administrative policies.

 It prepared the ground to launch future struggle and left an insight on how to achieve

multiclass collaboration.

 It created an idea which can never be killed. It can be observed in any struggle. Ideas

may bore fruit in a distant future. The genesis of such an idea for independence of the

Indian nation can be seen in the revolt.

The revolt of 1857 declined due to various reasons but in this failure were the seeds of

Indian independence which makes it a watershed moment in the Indian history.

Consequences of the Revolt of 1857

1. Queen`s Proclamation, 1858 - Presented by Canning in assembly of

Princes at Allahabad. It proclaimed that -

 No Indian state shall be annexed

 No Indian shall be forced to convert

 There shall be equal protection under the law for all Indians

 There shall be no discrimination against Indians in matters of recruitment for the

services

 India shall be governed directly by the Crown

1. An Act for the Better Government of India, 1858

 The Board of Control was abolished

 It was replaced by the Secretary of State for India with a council of 15 members

 The Governor General of India was made answerable to the Secretary of State and was

given the additional role of a Viceroy

1. Military Reorganization

 The proportion of European soldier to Indian soldier was increased.

 Sensitive and Strategic wings of the army such has Intelligence and Artillery were

monopolized by European officials.

 Principle of division and counterpoise was utilized to reorganize army along regional

and sectarian lines in order to prevent future general mutiny.

 Indian sepoys were distanced physically, materially as well as ideologically from the

civilian population to prevent the infection of general discontent.

 Myth of martial races was introduced to discourage recruitment from those regions that

had been most active during the revolt.

1. End of the British civilizing mission- The British had realized that

their aggressive social reform movement in India had backfired. Thus, they abandoned their

mission 'civilize India'. Instead, they adopted much more conservative approach towards

reform.

 In this way they fulfilled two objectives simultaneously-

• They neutralized the animosity of conservative Indians
• At the same time by declaring the Indians 'unfit for civilization', they were able to

come up with a new justification for their continued rule.

1. Intensification of Racism- the British declared that Indians were unfit for

civilization and self-governance because they were racially inferior. On the other hand, the

'racially superior' whites were declared as the master race.

 Following the Great Revolt, a strict policy of racial segregation was introduced in order

to maintain 'racial purity' of the master race.

1. Divide and Rule policy- the British came to the realization that in order to

ensure the longevity of their regime, they would need to ensure that Indians never unite

against them.

 Thus, they envisioned to exploit India`s diversity to their advantage.

 The biggest strength of the Revolt of 1857 had been its remarkable Hindu-Muslim unity.

 The British worked deliberately to destroy this unity and permanently divide these

communities politically. Thus, the Divide and Rule policy became the official social policy

of the British in India. Later, this policy was applied to further groups as well such as

different languages, castes, classes and genders.

Practice Questions

Q. The Revolt of 1857 was no more than minor footnote in Indian history. It

failed in ending British rule and was unsuccessful in altering the situation in

India. Critically analyze.

The Great Revolt of 1857 is such a massive yet controversial episode of Indian history which

has amassed a lot of research. For one school of thought, it was a minor episode which did

not have any far reaching result while other school considers it as the beginning of national

freedom struggle.

Many historians try to delegitimize as well as undermine the impact of the revolt by

declaring it as a minor episode on the following grounds-

 British rule continued apace for ninety years even after the revolt.

 Secondly, this revolt was one in the long series of many such revolts and was equally

unsuccessful in ending British rule.

 British exploitation not only continued but even accelerated during the financial phase.

 The Revolt was also unable to change the fundamental structure of Indian society and

politics.

 British wars, taxations and racial discrimination continued and even intensified.

 British policy towards Indian rulers did not remain constantly friendly. It was an unequal

partnership.

However, a comprehensive understanding of the revolt indicates how it was a watershed

moment in Indian history-

 Complete shift in the British attitudes and policies- Political, Economic, administrative,

Social and cultural.

 Specific changes became visible immediately after the revolt which shows the gravity of

the challenge imposed by the revolt-

• Queen`s Proclamation
• Act for Better Government, 1858
• Military reorganization
• Conservative liberalism
• Racism increased
• Divide and Rule Policy.

 Its impact on the society was so deep that scholars such as SN Sen has also emphasized

upon its national character.

• JL Nehru while talking about its feudal character also highlights the patriotic

character of the revolt.

• Sub-altern studies while emphasizing on folk songs and oral history has unraveled

the songs, poems, plays in regional dialects in Awadh, Bihar and Haryana among

others which show how deeply the revolt had affected the communities.

While talking about the Great Revolt, it must be understood that although it could not

succeed in its aim immediately yet it was a major event which altered the British rule

permanently and created a foundation for nationalist struggle.

Q. Discuss the Political and military changes introduced by the British

following the revolt of 1857.

The revolt of 1857 came as a rude shock for the British. On the one hand, a violent uprising in India

and on the other, harsh criticism in the British Parliament and intellectuals against the Company rule

led to the end of its rule. However, British political and military change in its aftermath was more

continuity than change for India.

Political changes-

 Queen`s Proclamation- Direct rule of the Crown was established as the Company rule was

bound to end in that scenario but British wanted to hold India even more tightly.

 Office of Secretary of State for India was created who was assisted by a council of 15 members.

 Offices of Viceroy and Governor General were merged and the title of Viceroy was used for

direct representative of the Viceroy.

 Beginning of Legislative devolution through act of 1861 but in reality, it only shifted the burden

of administration on provinces without enough resources at disposal.

 End of territorial annexation to pacify princely states. However, actually they were made junior

partners in the exploitative machinery.

 Representation to Indians in the Secretary`s Council was provided through Act of 1861 but only

loyalists were nominated.

 Policy of divide and rule was meant to exploit diversities of Indian society in British favour.

Military changes-

 Policy of balance and counterpoise: - Indian regiments were created in the name of region and

castes so that national consciousness should not develop among soldiers.

 A Better balance was created in the army between the European and Indian elements. For e.g.

the ratio of European soldiers to Indian sepoys in Bengal army was increased from 1:4 to 1:2.

 The Post of officers was secured in the hands of the British.

 Artillery was placed only under British command.

 The concept of martial and non-martial races was introduced. This was an instrument of 'divide

and rule'.

 It was observed that ordinary Indian sepoy was nothing but 'Peasant in Uniform' and it was felt

necessary to check this connection. Thus it was attempted to isolate sepoys from ordinary

peasants.

Thus, the post-1857 Political and military policies of British learnt some important lessons from the

revolt of 1857 and were designed to avoid any such conflict in future

Q. The revolt of 1857 was the major watershed in the development of major

British cultural and social policies towards India. Elaborate.

The revolt of 1857 was such a setback for British political enterprise in India that it forced it

to rethink even the cultural and social policies which were directly responsible for creating

discontent among people.

Cultural and Social Policies

Pre-1857 Post-1857

Cultural policy in this phase was guided by

the 'civilizing mission' of the British. There

was a superiority complex among British

that they were chosen by God to culturally

uplift backward civilizations.

Although their real aim was to 'Westernize'

Indians to establish a market for their

products and finding appropriate workforce

for subordinate posts.

During this time they were guided mainly

by Utilitarianism and Liberalism.

British social policy was reformist in nature

such as ban on Sati practice (1829),

Widows` Remarriage Act (1856) etc.

As shocked by the revolt of 1857, British

racial superiority complex gained such a

position that now they considered Indians

as 'barbarians' who were not capable

enough to be civilized.

Any iota of doubt regarding British aims to

bring Indians at par with British was also

shed. Racial differentiation reached its

peak with Ilbert Bill controversy (1882).

Liberal and Utilitarian polices paved way

for authoritarianism.

Now British left any policy of proactive

reforms and rather tried to align with

conservative section of the society. Any

reforms at all, were only because of

significant efforts of one or the other

Indian reformist.

The British approach towards Indian socio-cultural policies took a complete reversal post

1857 as the revolt not only brought racial tensions but also threatened the interests of

British rule. In order to protect their economic interests, British readily adopted

conservative stance.

Q Discuss the economic consequences of the great revolt of 1857.

The Great Revolt of 1857 threatened British economic interests which were paramount for

an industrial nation which was constantly facing challenges from other industrial nations as

well as from its most prized colony.

Thus, the British economic policy changed from Capital phase to 'Financial phase'-

 Drain of Wealth- Home charges i.e. the amount that the Indian government was liable

to pay to the British government and private British capitalists became the mode of

drain of wealth from India to Britain.

It consisted of many items such as-

• Guaranteed profit of railways,
• Interest on government loans,
• The amount which was spent in Britain for military purchase for the British Indian

army,

• Pension to retired British officers,
• A portion of the salaries and dividends of British officers and investors, remitted to

Britain, etc.

 The infrastructure built by the British was a machinery to fulfill their own interests

rather than economic growth of Indians.

 Protectionist policy in favour of British goods whereas Indian market was shattered

under the garb of laissez-faire system.

 Influx of British Capital in India- British industrial capacity was reaching saturation and

at this point Indian market was a lucrative avenue for their capital.

 Prevention of the development of Indian capital- All infrastructure projects, mining,

plantation sectors etc. were developed through British capital and thus profits accrued

to them either.

 Commercialization of Agriculture- Whereas commercialization of agriculture is a

positive sign for economy, in Indian case the rates were fixed by the British and thus

peasant could not benefit from the market price. On the other hand, land under grains

reduced causing famines and hardships.

After 1857, rather than adopting direct mode of plunder, British used subtle methods to

deprive India of its wealth which was gradually understood and highlighted by moderates

thus challenging the British 'benevolence'

Nature of the Revolt of 1857

The revolt of 1857 is one of the most important chapters of modern Indian History.

Understandably, divergence of views exists among historians regarding its nature and

generating a consensus is difficult.

Broadly, there are two extreme positions regarding this issue-

1. The colonial historians tend to characterize it as a simple sepoy mutiny. On the other

hand, nationalist scholars framed it as national war of independence.

1. Recent research concludes that the reality lies somewhere in the middle.

The different views regarding the nature of the revolt are as follows-

British Scholars/officials

 John Lawrence, Seeley and Malleson- 'Selfish Sepoy Mutiny'

• These scholars characterize it as a selfish sepoy mutiny. According to them, they

enjoyed no political leadership or popular support. However, this view has been

challenged on the grounds that the uprising may have started as the mutiny of

soldiers but it did not remain confined to it.

• Further, it should also be kept in mind that the mutiny did not affect the entire army.

The major portion remained loyal to the British.

 JG Medley- The revolt was a racial struggle for the supremacy between whites and

blacks.

• This has also been rejected because even if it is true that all whites were on one side,

the same cannot be said for the blacks of India.

• More precisely it was a struggle between blacks and black supported whites.
• If anything, racial consciousness affected the British mind far more profusely than

the Indian mind.

 According to TR Holmes, the revolt started as a conflict between civilization and

barbarism. He has tried to frame it as a conflict between the Occident and the Orient.

• However, this viewpoint has narrow racism. While overlooking the atrocity of British

against Indians, it focuses on so called barbarism of Indians against European women

and children alone.

• In reality, the revolt witnessed barbarity from both sides.

 According to LER Rees, the revolt was a religious war against Christians. He argues that

religious justifications were given by Indians o commit atrocities against Christians.

• However, this position has also been rejected on the ground that both sides used

religious rhetoric to justify their actions.

• However, religion had little influence over the material interest on either side.
• James Outram tried to term it as the Hindu-Muslim conspiracy against British rule.

However, this viewpoint has also been rejected on the grounds that there is little

evidence on any major conspiracy.

• In fact, the unity between Hindus and Muslim was primarily a function of the

unpopularity of the British rule rather than the religious alliance to overthrow the

British.

The British historians were clearly interested in securing the moral high ground for

themselves. Thus, their interpretations need objective scrutiny.

Nationalist historians

In contrast to the British historians, nationalist scholars such as VD Savarkar, KC Panikkar, JC

Vidyalankar, and Ashok Mehta have tried to portray the revolt as well planned war of

independence, a nationalist uprising and as the first war of Indian independence.

 From the early twentieth century, nationalist leaders began looking towards the revolt

as an inspiring movement. They interpreted it as a people`s revolt and its leaders as

nationalist leaders.

 The prominent views of this perspective were as follows-

• VD Savarkar and Ashok Mehta have portrayed the revolt as the first war of Indian

independence and nationalist movement respectively.

• Similarly, KC Panikkar emphasized that the aim of the revolt was to expel the British

and establish national state.

• Thus, it was national movement rather than an ordinary uprising. Lala Lajpat Rai in

his Young India described the revolt as political as well as National Uprising.

• SC Bose described it as a national uprising rather than a sepoy mutiny. In 1870,

future British PM Benjamin Disraeli while speaking from the core of the house of

commons characterized revolt as India`s national revolt.

The nationalist interpretation also suffers from lack of objectivity in their enthusiasm to crop

up the revolt as the starting point of India`s national struggle against colonialism. They

overlooked certain important facts regarding the nature and character of the revolt. Their

position also needs to be evaluated correctly.

Balanced perspective

Post-independence, Indian scholars conducted extensive research into the revolt and

reinterpreted its character.

 Prominent among them are RC Majumdar, SN Sen and SB Chaudhary. Apart from them,

certain political figures such as JL Nehru and Maulana Azad have also questioned the

national perspective.

• JL Nehru even writes in the Discovery of India that the leadership came from feudal

background and was motivated by a narrow feudal vision. They exploited the general

feeling of discontent for their own advantage. At the same time he concedes that

nationalistic undertones were present in the revolt of the Sepoys and the

commoners.

• Maulana Azad has pointed to the selfish and characterless leadership of the

movement that was wholly unpatriotic and driven by narrow dynastic and class

interests.

• Further, in the absence of nationalism, the rebels were organized along the lines of

religion and caste. Thus, the uprising cannot be regarded as the nationalist uprising.

• At the same time, Maulana Azad has assigned he blame for the revolt to British

exploitation.

 RC Majumdar is of the opinion that it was 'neither the first, nor national, nor a war of

independence'.

• The 1857 uprising was neither the first mutiny nor the first popular revolt against the

British. Instead, it was the most powerful one of the long series of powerful revolts

against colonial exploitation.

• It is hard to ascribe a national character to the revolt due to its limited territorial

spread and participation. Further, the leadership had no all India national vision

rather they were motivated by a narrow dynastic and regional vision. Also Indian

nationalism was still in its embryonic stage.

• Further, revolt was hardly a war of independence either. Neither did it involve

elaborate planning nor did the vision of rebels include modern ideas fundamental to

the independence such as socio-economic freedom, secular sovereignty, legal and

political equality, constitutionalism and limited government. Thus, it was at best, an

anti-colonial revolt.

 Dr. SN Sen- While the revolt of 1857 did not involve any elaborate planning, it should

still be considered a war of independence or a revolutionary war.

• He argues that revolutions are often mostly the work of a minority with or without

popular support.

• The revolt transformed from a sepoy mutiny into a revolutionary war once the

rebellious soldiers proclaimed Bahadur Shah Zafar as their leader and convinced

section of the aristocracy and the common population to join them.

• According to him, when a rebellion wins the sympathy of a substantial majority, it

can claim a national character.

• Thus, the revolt of 1857 may have started as a sepoy mutiny but it ended as a war of

independence in a national revolt.

• Whereas revolutions are often characterized by sudden and tremendous change, the

time span over which such changes manifest is illusory.

• In the larger historical theme, developments over centuries may in fact, qualify as

revolutionary.

• Example, the effects of American and French revolutions have radiated across

history over the past two centuries.

• In this context, the revolt of 1857 was definitely a revolutionary development.

 Dr. SB Chaudhary in his book 'Civil Rebellions in the Indian Mutiny' (1857-59), regards

the revolt of 1857 as the coming together of two series of disturbances resulting from-

1. Military grievances and 2. Civilian grievances.

• Here he responds to the views of Dr. Sen and argues that merger of the military and

civil disturbances transformed the revolt into something like a War of

Independence.

• At the same time, he also points out the relatively independent motivations behind

these disturbances and argued that the revolt was something less than truly national

war of independence.

Conclusion

On the basis of this discussion, it can be said that the revolt was definitely more than a

simple sepoy mutiny. It involves the participation of section of civilian population including

rulers, Zamindars, peasants, artisans and petty traders apart from Indian sepoys.

At the same time, it was also something less than the first war of national independence.

However, its impact should not be underestimated. Not only did it trigger a major overhaul

of the colonial regime, it also emerged as a major source of inspiration for the later

generation of nationalists.

Practice Questions

Q. The revolt of 1857 was neither the first nor national nor a war of

independence. In the context of this statement, evaluate the nature of the

revolt.

As the revolt of 1857 shook the foundations of Company rule so as the interpretation of

balanced researchers shook the foundations of earlier colonial and nationalist views which

were extremely tilted towards their respective perspectives.

In this background, RC Majumdar, while challenging the earlier interpretations said the

given statement because-

'Neither the first': he is of the opinion that indeed it was the most powerful revolt but in

the long series of revolts against colonial exploitation.

Hundreds of small and big revolts had already taken place throughout the length and

breadth of the nation. The population was already charged in various regions of the country.

'Nor National': He argues that it is hard to ascribe a national character to the revolt due to

its limited territorial spread and participation.

Further, the leadership had no all India national vision rather they were motivated by a

narrow dynastic and regional vision. Also Indian nationalism was still in its embryonic stage.

'Nor a War of Independence': revolt was hardly a war of independence either. Neither did it

involve elaborate planning nor did the vision of rebels include modern ideas fundamental to

the independence such as socio-economic freedom, secular sovereignty, legal and political

equality, constitutionalism and limited government. Thus, it was at best, an anti-colonial

revolt.

Nature of the Revolt

 Colonial historians have either tried to confine the revolt to a sepoy mutiny or scholars

such as LER Rees and James Outram tried to give it a religious colour.

 According to TR Holmes, the revolt started as a conflict between civilization and

barbarism. He has tried to frame it as a conflict between the Occident and the Orient.

 Nationalist historians such as VD Savarkar and Ashok Mehta termed it as the 'First War

of Independence'.

 However, more nuanced understanding emerged gradually to further counter not only

colonial and nationalist perspective but also that of RC Majumdar.

• SN Sen argues that it should be considered war of independence as gradually the

sepoy mutiny transformed into a wider struggle.

• SB Chaudhary is also of the opinion that both military and civil grievances merged in

the revolt making it a broader struggle.

• Sub-altern studies have also highlighted the popular participation of people across

caste, class and gender.

The Great revolt of 1857 can said to be one of its own kind. Although it was not completely

national but it represented a 'nation in the making'.

Q. The uprising of 1857 was nothing more than a selfish sepoy mutiny having

neither native leadership nor popular support. Discuss.

Q. The Revolt of 1857 was something more than a sepoy mutiny and

something less than a national war of Independence.

Q. The revolt of 1857 began as sepoy mutiny but ended as a War of

Independence. Comment.

In the interpretation of the revolt of 1857 we will find a deliberate attempt on part of

Colonial scholars to undermine the nature of revolt and delegitimize its popular character.

Scholars such as John Lawrence, Seeley and Malleson considers it as a selfish sepoy mutiny

on following basis-

 The revolt enjoyed neither the political leadership nor popular support.

 Further, the mutiny did not affect the entire army and the major portion of it even

remained loyal to the British.

To counter this view, nationalist scholars reached the other extreme and declared as the

first war of independence.

However, a general consensus has emerged in recent years that it was not a mere sepoy

mutiny.

 SN Sen argues that revolt transformed from a sepoy mutiny into a revolutionary war of

independence once the rebellious soldiers proclaimed Bahadur Shah Zafar as their

leader and convinced section of the aristocracy and the common population to join

them.

 According to him, when a rebellion wins the sympathy of a substantial majority, it can

claim a national character.

 Thus, the revolt of 1857 may have started as a sepoy mutiny but it ended as a war of

independence in a national revolt.

It is clear that it was something more than a sepoy mutiny but some scholars even argue

that it was something less than a national war because-

 Thomas Metcalfe argues that it was not national because its popular character was

limited only to upper India and there too, to upper class.

 RC Majumdar is also of the opinion that geographical spread of the revolt does not allow

it to be called a national revolt.

However, despite the limited geographical spread it was a popular revolutionary revolt

where interests of various sections combined to give it a multi-class and multi-religious

character.

Q. The Revolt of 1857 was one in long series of anti-British rebellions. Discuss

critically.

RC Majumdar is of the opinion that the revolt of 1857 was one in the long series of

rebellions which were going on since the British rule had started in India. He criticizes the

viewpoint of it being the First War of Independence.

It was one in the long series of anti-British rebellions because-

 Peasant revolts against excessive taxations, land revenue policy, indebtedness, famine

etc. had been going on since atleast Rangpur Dhing (1783).

 Tribals had established a culture of resistance against British intrusion in the forests

throughout the pre-1857 anti-British struggle.

 Feudal uprisings in the pre-1857 had been equally intense if not more than the feudal

participation in 1857.

 Same class of people had been struggling fruitlessly to repeat the same in 1857 as well.

 Even in the post-1857 period anti-British struggle went on till the freedom was achieved.

However, this view can be challenged on the following grounds-

 Merger of civilian and military disturbances- it was a rare moment where civilian and

military grievances joined hands in a single revolt.

 Hindu-Muslim unity observed in this revolt was a special yet rare phenomenon in the

freedom struggle.

 Speed and scale of the movement was unprecedented.

 Despite some disunity, the participation of India ruling class in a popular revolt was a

unique feature.

 Class cooperation and multiclass collaboration of such a scale could only be observed

later in the Gandhian phase.

 British response was so immediate and dramatic which had not happened earlier.

The achievement of the revolt was that it completely transformed the face of nationalist

struggle as well as that of colonial struggle.