Rebellion 1857

Title: Rebellion 1857

Editor: P C Joshi

Publisher: National Book Trust, India 2009 (First NBT Edition 2007)

ISBN: 978-81-237-4935-8

Pages: 381

The rebellion in 1857 against the British, variously termed Sepoy Mutiny and the First War of Independence was a landmark event in the history of India. Her definite separation from medieval era and mindset can be traced back to this war which raged in North India, particularly in today’s UP, Bihar, Madhya Pradesh and Delhi. The sepoys, recruited by the British to serve in their native forces rebelled against their commanders, marched on to Delhi, made the old Moghul, Bahadur Shah emperor of India and ruled the land under their dominion. The British eventually defeated them and subjected them to inhuman punishments like blowing from the mouths of cannon. However, the incident created a furore in England and reform measures were immediately taken. India was put directly under the administration of the Crown in 1858. On the home turf, it encouraged nationalist movements, resulting finally in independence in 1947.

This book is a compilation of essays published to mark the centenary of the rebellion in 1957. It so happened that the compendium contains articles sponsored by the Communist Party of India. The editor, P C Joshi was its Secretary General and the authors, both Indian and foreign are leftists, as evidenced by frequent and often irrelevant quotations from Marx. Noted historian, Prof. Irfan Habib has written a foreword to the book. Satinder Singh, writing under the pseudonym of Talmiz Khaldun has put the events in a succinct way. He argues that though the war was termed a mutiny by the British, their rule had vanished from most of the provinces. On the other hand, the war, termed the first war of independence affected only 1/6^th of its area and 1/10^th of the population. The suppression forces also figured Indians among them. Hence the terminology is not appropriate on both sides. The seeds of mutiny was sown deep by the actions of the East India Company like alienating of the peasants by excessive land measures, replacement of zamindars by absentee landlords and strict enforcement of land revenue. The forceful annexation of Oudh in 1856 caused resentment among the company’s soldiers themselves, as most of them were natives of that province. Wherever the land was annexed by the British, the old nobles and courtiers lost all livelihood and acted as captains of insurgency. Abolition of Persian as the official language and the introduction of competitive exams for public appointments prevented the Muslim nobles from reaching out to the establishment. Adding to the woes of the people, the economic depression in 1825-54 caused sharp decline in prices rendering the farmers exposed to severe financial burden. The English, who had won all battles in India, lost heavily in the Sikh and Afghan wars, thereby losing the sheen of invincibility in the minds of the people. They thought it possible to defeat their white masters in a properly drawn out battle. When Sindh and Punjab were attached to the company’s empire, foreign service allowance earlier granted to the soldiers had to be stopped, causing much resentment among the ranks. The company’s religious reforms like the abolition of Sati, killing of girl child and the 1850 law which ensured paternal inheritance to converted sons evoked opposition from a large section of the society still steeped in a medieval mindset. The government’s open support to Christian missionaries, often providing them with police protection and who indulged in uncharacteristically nasty and tactless propaganda against the people’s beliefs and gods infuriated them. The trigger for the revolt came in the form of Enfield rifles, whose cartridges had to be torn out of the envelopes by mouth was believed to be greased with the lard of cow and the pig. Such an affront on the religious sentiments of the Hindus and Muslims was bound to evoke repercussions of the most horrifying kind.

When the mutiny broke out on 11 May 1857, the soldiers marched on to Delhi and crowned the aged Bahadur Shah, the emperor of India (shahen-shah-e-Hind). This was their greatest mistake. By crowning a Mughal, they alienated the sympathies of the Rajputs who had to eke out a humiliating existence under the Mughals in the past. They absolutely had no interest to continue like slaves as had been their lot in the last two centuries. The Sikhs and the Nizam were also against them for similar reasons. Punjab proved to be the stronghold of the British.

The rebels established democratic procedures for administering the country under their rule. A court of administration was set up at Delhi with ten members, with a president (Sadr-e-Jalsa). The emperor’s seal of approval was mandatory for every decision of the court to become law. However, the weak emperor was more of a puppet than a sovereign as shown by the spineless confession put forward by Bahadur Shah when he was conquered by the British. He said, “The mutinous soldiers has established a Court in which all matters were deliberated upon, and decisions taken. But I never took any part in their conferences…As regards the orders under my seal and under my signatures, the facts are that from the day soldiery came and killed the European officers, and made me a prisoner, I remained so thereafter. They caused to be prepared papers they thought fit, brought them to me and compelled me to affix my seal. Sometimes they brought the rough draft orders and had their copies in my office. Hence several rough drafts in many different hands have been filed in the proceedings. Frequently, they had my seal fixed on empty unaddressed envelopes. I neither knew the contents of the letters nor as to whom they were being sent” (p.43-44). Indifference and actual opposition of the propertied classes, namely new landlords (zamindars), merchants, money lenders and educated middle classes ensured British dominance over them.

The effects of the rebellion and its after-effects were far reaching. The British stopped the practice of actively involving in the religious affairs of the people. Even rightful and just reforms were sidelined. Indians adopted English education in a big way, which prompted a nationalist movement to be born. Muslims were sidelined by the government after the mutiny. Imperial consolidation in India took place, with railways reaching out to a large portion of the land.

K M Ashraf discusses the Islamic revivalism which was also a source of dissent. Tipu’s war in Mysore was termed a jihad and radical Muslims answered the call. Shah Abdul Aziz, a Wahabi leader proclaimed British India, dar-ul-Harb (enemy territory) in early 19^th century. Pious Muslims had no other way than to wage a holy war against the rulers of such an enemy territory. However, conservative Muslims’ rage was not solely against the British. They declared a jihad against the Sikh regime in Punjab in 1826! Ashraf also examines the role of the noted Urdu poet, Ghalib (Mirza Asadullah Khan) in the court of Bahadur Shah who stayed in Delhi during the mutiny and promptly turned coats when the British overpowered the capital.

Benoy Ghosh’s account of the role of Bengali intelligentsia and Gopal Haldar’s review of Bengali literature during this period brings out the province’s educated mindset clearly. The educated middle class in Bengal opposed the rebellion. They had no sympathy to the rebel’s demands which were prompted by religious fanaticism, ignorance and outdated moral precepts. They had no role in a regime organized by the rebels, as there were no middle classes in a feudal society which the rebels sought to establish. P C Joshi’s articles on ‘1857 in our History’ is nothing but propaganda. He liberally quotes from Marx with the exclusion of all historians. His essay contains one remark by a British priest, who harbours the most incendiary feeling towards India and its people. The reverend speaks, “Whatever misfortunes come on us as long as our empire in India continues, so long let us not forget that our chief work is the propagation of Christianity in the land. Until Hindustan from Cape Comorin to the Himalayas embrace the religion of Christ and until it condemns the Hindu and Muslim religions, our efforts must continue persistently” (p.167). P C Joshi asserts that the sepoys didn’t establish feudal order back, as the Court was working above the emperor. Also peasants and dispossessed landlords were in the forefront of the riots. P C Gupta, S Ehtesham Husain, K M Ashraf, Gopal Haldar and P C Joshi examines the waves caused by the rebellion in the literature of Hindi,Urdu, and Bengali languages and folk songs.

Another part of the book is dedicated to demonstrate the level of awareness, support and popular mindset of the peoples of Britain, France, Italy, Russia and China. Unfortunately, all these articles are written by prominent leftists, particularly from China in which the authors resort to emotional tirade against the British calling them robbers, pirates, killers etc. The responses in these countries were subservient to their own national prejudices. Britain’s enemies naturally supported the Indian cause. A large portion of the French people sided with the British due to common colonial interests and racial prejudices.

The book is indeed a good effort to piece together various aspects of the struggle as reflected in people’s minds working in varied fields like literature, folk songs and press. Such books are essential to bring out in colourful detail, a forgotten but important chapter of India’s history. However, such efforts should ensure a level-headed and unpartisan approach not displayed by this book, which is a purely one-sided narration based on the leftist point of view.

The book is recommended, however.

Rating: 2 Star