The revolution of 1857 marked an important turning point in the history of the colonial British India. It abruptly ended the rule of the ultra corrupt and smug British East India Company (BEIC) officials and the real looter, the British Crown, was forced expose itself and take direct of the colonial India to keep plundering it. It was start of what is called the “British Raj”. India’s most influential revolutionary, Savarkar, rightly called it the First War of India’s Independence, It was triggered by the revolt of Indian soldiers in Meerut which soon spread to several parts of India. Mark the words ‘revolt of Indian soldiers’ – fear of this revolt alone dictated their policy during the ‘Raj’ and they were forced to quit India when they saw it happening in 1946. The 1857 shake up was the first time the White looters felt the existential threat. At the gross level, they realized that must not allow Hindus and Muslims to unite. It the practical level it made divide and rule their central policy. The outcome of the 1857 revolution could have been different, had the Sikhs also participated; then the British would have been kicked out in1857 itself !! Many Sikhs later regretted the decision of their forefathers, as can be seen from the notings of Gadar revolutionaries.
However, the eternal law of Karma never fails. It must be seen as a Karmic justice if the corporate house called East India Company India is today owned by an Indian! And, an Indian rules Britain as its Prime Minister!!
Uprising of 1857 Shook the Foundation of the British Empire
The 1857 revolt was easily the most remarkable single event in the history the colonial British India. What added to its importance was the participation of people from almost all sections of the society and the Hindu-Muslim unity against a ‘third’ enemy. It also marked a new phase of struggle for freedom that successfully ended after 90 years. The 1857 struggle was triggered by the revolt of Indian soldiers in Meerut which soon spread to several parts of India. Such was the force of the pent-up anger against the exploitation by the East India Company that by the time the British could bring back ‘normalcy’ in 1858 with the help of regiments from Madras and Bombay and loss of over 400,000 lives, they were jolted to the roots. For the first time, the racist White plunderers felt existential threat in India, because for the first time oppressed Indians left them running to save their lives.
The summer of 1857 saw violence and brutality, perpetrated both by the Indians and the Britons, on an unprecedented scale. Never before in the history of British rule in India was there violence at such ghastly level. [The Forgotten Brutality of 1857 Revolt]
The “Corporate Rule” Over India was “Highly Unusual”
Commenting on the BEIC rule an observer wrote: “Of all human conditions, perhaps the most brilliant and at the same time the most anomalous, is that of the Governor General of British India. A private English gentleman, and the servant of a joint-stock company, during the brief period of his government he is the deputed sovereign of the greatest empire in the world; the ruler of a hundred million men; while dependent kings and princes bow down to him with a deferential awe and submission. There is nothing in history analogous to this position …”
The conditions which gave the British East India Company (BEIC) political power in India were highly bizarre. The Company had just a handful of “permanent staff”, was terribly mismanaged even as a corporate, had to be bailed out by the British banks, and it needed political support back home to even get this bail out. The ‘Corporate Rule’ of the BEIC over the vast Indian empire of countless people was the worst form of governance, far worse than what we imagine today from the concepts of dictatorship, theocracy, monarchy, or even autocracy. The BEIC officials were accountable only to the company’s board of directors and share-holders; they had no accountability towards the people even in slightest manner. In the capital market language, BEIC officials were only interested in ‘Maximizing the Profits for their Shareholders!’ By 1857, the corrupt Company had moved away from earning through trading to open plunder and savage exploitation of Indians living under their territorial control — and their demeanor also earned them too many enemies back home in Britain.
The 1857 uprising ended the Company rule and the British Crown had to take direct control of the Indian colony. Now it was ‘British Raj’ in India! Now India was governed in the name of the Crown. It was still as exploitative and as racist as ever, but now it had to put-on the mask of being a ‘responsible government‘ and was directly answerable to the British Parliament through a special Secretary of State dedicated to Indian affairs. It was certainly not the kind of ‘absolute unaccountable tyranny’ under the despotic and ultra corrupt Company Rule. Now Indians had some scope to negotiate laws in their favor, although the concessions were rare, too late and too little.
How the 1857 Uprising Reshaped Governance in the ‘British Raj’
The atrocities committed by both sides in Revolt of 1857 greatly widen the gulf between the rulers and the ruled. The measures they took in the aftermath left them badly alienated and isolated from the Indians — both ruling princes as well as the common masses. The British now began to openly display racial arrogance and assert racial supremacy. If the delusion of “Islamic Superiority” was the distinguishing feature of the 800 years of Islamic dark age that brutally oppressed the Hindus and destroyed their unique Vedic/Buddhist culture, the hallucination of “Racial Superiority” (master race) was the tyranny of the colonial rule – this time both for the Hindus and the ex-Hindus (Muslims). The white colonial atrocity was political and discriminatory and On-and-Off; it targeted specific groups at certain times, but the racial humiliation was constant all the time on all Indians. Even the ‘brown British’ products of Macaulay education were derided as unworthy lowly ‘babus’.
The uprising of 1857 hardened the British attitude and they even stopped pretending to be bringing ‘modernity and civility’ in this land of what they mocked as backward and worthless people. Now they were overly concerned about preventing revolt in the Indian army and mass uprising of the public. It forced them to indulge more viciously in the philosophy of “divide and rule”. It ushered in a new phase of hardened colonialism that lasted another 90 years, but the spark of rebellion and desire for autonomy only became stronger with time. The Queen promised many things to her ‘Indian subjects’ such as giving the government jobs based on merit, irrespective of cast and religion – but they were mere politically correct empty words. However, there was an accidental bright side: various Government of India Acts enforced during the Crown rule laid the legal foundation for India’s governance post independence.
The deep impact of the 1857 Revolt can be summarized as the following observations:
1) Kālā Pānī – Cellular Jail: Kālā Pānī implied transportation of Indian freedom fighters to Andaman island for “penal experiment”. It was easily among the darkest chapters of the “British Raj.”
As the ‘British Raj’ started in 1858, one of the first acts was to set up a penal colony on the Andaman and Nicobar Islands (a group of 572 islands in the Bay of Bengal) and start exiling prisoners to it. In fact, the devious idea was conceived while the British Rule was paralyzed by the 1857 rebellion. The island chain was chosen by 2 British doctors for the “penal experiment” on “deserters and rebels.” It was perfect for secrecy and isolation. The first batch of 200 “grievous political offenders” arrived after 8 days trip from Calcutta in early 1858. Soon prisoners started arriving from Calcutta, Madras, Karachi, Singapore and Burma, with their crime and punishment carved on a wooden plate on the neck. Back then, it was an isolated and hostile backwater and chances of survival negligible.
India’s greatest and most famous revolutionary icon, Vinayak Damodar Savarkar was imprisoned here for ten years, during 1911-21, for revolutionary activities. The wooden plate around his neck declared that he was to serve a 50-year double life sentence. He wrote – “as the gates of the prison shut behind me, I felt that I have ‘entered the jaws of death’.” Today, his prison cell has been marked with a sign board and is a central attraction for the tourists.
2) End of Company Rule: It led to fall of the Company rule. By a new act of the British parliament (the Government of India Act 1858) the British government took charge of the Indian Territory from the Company. The authority over India was now passed to the Secretary of State for India aided by a Council. The Secretary of State, being a member of British Cabinet, was responsible to the Parliament. The Governor General of India since 1833 under the Company rule now became the Viceroy and Governor-General of India after 1858, reflecting the double role. As Governor General he headed the central government of British India which administered the provinces – Bengal, Punjab, Bombay, Madras, United Province, etc. As Viceroy, he represented the Crown and exercised its authority over the hundreds of Princely States, which did not come under the British government. Thus, the princely states came directly under the British Crown and the provincial territories under the Governor General.
As the Secretary of State became the controlling authority of the Indian administration, the Viceroy was steadily reduced to a subordinate and figurehead status in his relation with the British government. Thus, the ultimate controlling authority came to reside in London, thousands of miles away from India. In such a situation, the opinion of Indians almost became irrelevant on the colonial policy making. At the same time, the voices of British businessmen, bankers and industrialists and politicians became much influential. Thus, the colonial administration became even more reactionary than it was before 1858 shedding even the pretense of liberalism.
3) Arousal of Nationalistic feeling among Indians: This was the biggest achievement of the 1857 revolt. It created a kind of spontaneous “national oneness” among Indians against a common enemy. It was symbolized in the choice of Mughal king Bahadur Shah Zafar (although mere symbolic) as the leader of the revolting Indians. The Azamgarh Proclamation of 1857 gave a call to people of all classes to unite against the British tyranny. It appealed to both “Hindoos and Mussalmans” to unite by addressing them as the “people of Hindustan”. It reminded them that collectively they can take on the mighty British Empire. Widespread involvement of the peasantry (from where most Indian soldiers came) was unique; it highlighted the feeling of resentment against colonial exploitation.
4) Change in the Administrative Mindset: The British attitude changed for the worse after the 1857 revolt. While earlier they talked of educating Indians (of course, only to create clerks for the administration through Macaulay education system) and modernizing India, but now they became apprehensive and began following reactionary policies. In terms of historian Percival Spear, “the (British) Indian Government’s honeymoon with progress was over!” Earlier they at least tried to create a perception that the British were ‘training’ and ‘preparing’ Indians for self-governance and that ‘power’ would be eventually transferred to them. But now they became openly derogatory – that there are inherent social and cultural ‘defects’ in the Indians and thus they can’t rule themselves. Therefore, the British rule must continue forever. Many policies reflected this mindset.
5) Increase in Hostility towards Educated Indians: Under the Company rule, spread of European education among Indians was encouraged after 1833 so that they could act as interpreters between the British and Indian public. It was Macaulay’s educational ideology that aimed to create Indians (cut off from their cultural roots) who would be ‘Indian in blood and color, but English in taste, in opinions, in morals, and in intellect’. Universities were set up in Calcutta, Madras and Bombay in the 1850s and higher education spread rapidly. Many British officials praised educated Indians who refused to participate in the 1857 revolt. But after 1857, they started to see them with suspicion because many of them had started to see the double standard of the British and how the foreigners were exploiting them. They also began to demand participation in the administration but the policies were not encouraging.
In frustration, more and more educated Indians began to join nationalistic movement. It was the beginning of “organized nationalism” in India. Dada Bhai Naraoji started the East India Association in 1866 in London with the aim of informing the British parliament about needs of Indian people. Satendra Nath Banerjee and Anand Mohan Bose started the Indian Association in Bengal in 1876 to highlight misrule of the British Government. Entry into Civil Services was another issue for the educated Indians due to the discriminating government policies.
In 1885, the Indian National Congress (INC) was founded, on the initiative of some top British officials with the aim of gathering educated Indians on a loyal platform from where they would advocate government policies. However, after initial honeymoon, the INC turned into a platform of nationalistic voices. The rulers could not tolerate Indians talking of freedom, justice and equality. Such sentiments were a serious threat to their colonial imperialistic discriminations. Yet, they consciously chose the INC for dialogue as if it represented the entire colonized people.
But they also helped create the Muslim League, a forum of highly ‘Hindu Phobic‘ power hungry Muslims who have not given up the idea of reviving Muslim rule (or dominance) in one way or another. This puppet group of mullahs served them beautifully to drive a wedge between Hindus and Muslims. They nurtured this group through scare mongering: insecure ‘minority Muslims’ in a ‘Hindu majority’ society. Later, the Jinnah gang exploited this British ploy to demand a separate Islamic State for Muslims. Thus, Pakistan was born — not for love of Islam, but purely as a result of neurotic Hindu Phobia. No historian has bothered to focus on this vital aspect, as the primary driving force for ‘partition’.
6) Restrictions on the Press: The British had earlier introduced the printing press, as a modernizing step in India. In 1835, the Indian Press was freed of restrictions and it was also welcomed enthusiastically by educated Indians. The Press was one of the reasons why Indians had, for some time, supported the British rule in India. They had recognized that the Press was a wonderful medium of ideas exchange and also to arouse nationalistic consciousness among the people and that it can play a great role in shaping public opinion and influencing government policies. The press gradually became a major weapon of the nationalist movement.
But under the Crown rule the British brought the Vernacular Press Act in 1878 to curb the freedom of the Indian press. This Act put serious restrictions on the freedom of the Indian language newspapers. However, widespread protests forced them to repeal the Act in 1882. Then for nearly 25 years the Indian press enjoyed considerable freedom. But again the colonial authorities brought laws to restrict press freedom in 1908 and 1910 to curb the Swadeshi and Boycott movements.
7) Renewed focus on ‘Divide and Rule’ policy: Threatened by the display of unity during the 1857 uprising, the British now more actively indulged in the policy of divide and rule. They would not miss any opportunity to pit province against province, caste against caste, group against group, but most viciously they provoked Hindus and Muslims against each other. Immediately after the 1857 revolt, they went after prominent Muslims (because titular Mughal king was chosen as rebels’ leader) and suppressed them, took away their properties and lands. But after 1870, they changed tactics and took a U-turn! Now they started to pamper Muslims in order to turn them both against the Hindus for communal divide and to weaken the nationalist movement. Partition of Bengal in 1905 (though reversed in 1911) was the worst form of communal divide — to separate Hindus and Muslims. They also discouraged Muslims from joining the Congress by calling it a ‘Hindu party’ and promoted creation of the Muslim League in 1906 with entirely communal agenda. [Ultimately, this filthy gimmick led to communal partition of India in 1947.]
An immediate fall out was the punitive division of Delhi State for its role in the revolt. The Western part (Haryana) was made part of Punjab and the Eastern part (Western UP) was added to the United Province.
8) Changes in the Army: The British Indian army went through a careful reorganization, largely to prevent another revolt. Charles Wood, the Secretary of State for India, wrote to the Viceroy Canning in 1861: “I never wish to see again a great army, very much the same in its feelings and prejudices and connections, confident in its strength, and so disposed to rise in rebellion together. If one regiment mutinies, I should like to have the next regiment so alien that it would be ready to fire into it. Thus the Indian army must remain a purely mercenary force.”
The ratio of Europeans to Indians in the army was raised. The European troops were kept in key geographical and military positions. The crucial branches of artillery, tanks and armored corps were put exclusively in European hands. The Indians were strictly excluded from the higher posts. In fact, till 1914, no Indian could rise above the rank of a subedar.
The Indian section of the army was organized along the policy of ‘divide and rule’ so as to prevent any potential united uprising against the British. In the recruitment process discrimination on the basis of caste, region and religion was widely practiced. An arbitrary division of Indians into categories of ‘martial’ and ‘non-martial’ was created. Thus, soldiers from Awadh, Bihar, central India, and south India, who had initially helped the British conquer India but later took part in the Revolt of 1857, were declared ‘non-martial’!! Their numbers were consciously reduced in the army.
On the other hand, Punjabis, Gurkhas, and Pathans who had assisted the British suppress the Revolt, were declared ‘martial’ and were preferentially recruited in large numbers. By 1875, half of the British Indian army was recruited from Punjab. In addition, Indian regiments were consciously created with a mix of various castes and groups so that soldiers don’t bond together easily. The narrow loyalties of caste, tribe, region and religion were encouraged among the soldiers in order to prevent rise of nationalistic sentiment. Thus, caste and communal companies were introduced in most regiments. Every effort was made to isolated soldiers from the normal social life by preventing access to newspapers, books, nationalistic literature etc.
Over time, as their oversea ventures multiplied, the Indian army became a costly affair. In 1904, it consumed around 52% of the Indian revenue. Of course, this burden was shouldered by the subject Indians.
Approximately 1.3 million Indian soldiers served in World War One, and over 74,000 of them lost their lives. They served the very British Empire that was oppressing their own people back home. These forgotten heroes fought “the War to end all wars” against enemies they did not know. They believed in the British promise to deliver progressive self-rule at the end of the War, not knowing that British would break their word. However, the British did construct a triumphal arch known as India Gate in Delhi in 1931 to commemorate the War. Today, hundreds visit it daily without knowing that it salutes the Indian soldiers who died in the WW1, serving the British. [Explore Why the Indian Soldiers of WW1 were forgotten]
About 2.3 million Indian soldiers participated in the WW2 and around 89,000 died serving. We can’t ignore the fact that war monger Churchill let 3 million Bengalis die of famine in the same period, as he chose to divert food to run the British war machinery. Such was the lack of basic humanitarian values in the White rulers.
9) Changed Relation with Princely States and Zamindars: After reversing the Doctrine of Lapse, the British decided to use the Princely States as pillars of the colonial rule. In 1876, Queen Victoria assumed the title of the “Empress of India” and Lord Curzon made it clear that the Princes ruled their States merely as agents of the British Crown. The Princes accepted the proposal and willingly became junior partners of the empire because they were assured of their privileged status and existence. But as paramount power, the British actively interfered in the day-to-day functioning of the States through the Resident under the pretext of modernizing the administration. Their prime motive was to use the rulers to suppress the nationalistic movements.
Likewise, they decided to use the Zamindars and landlords as shields to protect them from popular uprisings. They were hailed as the traditional and ‘natural’ leaders of the Indian people. As their interests were protected, these tiny lords also became firm supporters of the British Empire.
10) Boost to communication and transport: The British started an expansion spree of railway and road networks in India. Although done for quick movement of troops and faster transport to further colonial interests, it also gave Indians the opportunity to come together.
11) Foreign policy: As India came under the British government rule in 1858, a new dimension of foreign policy came into picture. It brought into picture neighboring countries. It would be wrong to call it a ‘new’ dimension because the Company officials were also doing something similar. Of course, the cost of ‘foreign ventures’ was fully borne by the Indian subjects — Indian soldiers shed their blood and the ‘subject taxpayers’ had to pick up the price tag!!
Abundance of Indian soldiers in the colonial India of too many people and scope for enormous economic exploitation made India their most lucrative venture in the entire history of British Imperial colonialism.
How much Wealth Britain plundered from India?
You might also like to explore
Indian Freedom Struggle: From 1857 To 1947
Issues and Challenges in India 