Revolt of 1857-Failure & Impact

AKHIL VERMA (Assistant Professor)

Email-akhilverma08@gmail.com
Deptt Of History
Samastipur College, Samastipur
PG 2ND Sem CC-7 Unit-3

Causes for the failure of the revolt

Lack of planning, Organization and Leadership -

Movement without planning, organization and leadership is bound to be a failure. The

revolt of 1857 was no exception. The revolt was supposed to have started on May 31,

1857 as decided by Nana Sahib and his colleagues.But an incident at Meerut whereby

the soldiers had to bite cartridges made of pig fat and cow fat added fuel to the fire leading

to the revolt breaking out early. The leaders had no made plans.The movement had no

leader on top to guide people and command obedience. Every movement requires some

sort of discipline and a leader to guide and help. But since the Revolt unexpectedly broke

out on May 10, 1857, there is nothing much the leaders could do.

Indian Help to the British-

Unfortunately, some of the Indian prince's helped the British government at that point of

time. The Sikh princes of Nabhya, Patiala and Kapurthala and the rulers of Hyderabad

and Gwalior very openly helped the British suppress the war with men and money. Holkar

and Scindia remained loyal to the British. Their help at this point of time riveted the

shackles of British yoke over India for almost another century.

Impact of the Revolt

End of company’s rule –

The British Parliament passed an "Act for the Better Government of India" in 1858,

whereby the administration responsibility was passed into the hands of the British Queen

and her Parliament. With this, the rule of the Company came to an end.The Board of

Control was abolished and the Board of Directors had no power left. A secretary of State

for India was to take the place of the President of the Board of Control. He was advised

by a board of fifteen members. The designation of the Governor-General was changed.

While he remained Governor-General for the provinces under his rule, he came to be

known as Viceroy while dealing with Nawabs, Rajas and native princes.

Policy of Divide and Rule-

During the Revolt of 1857 the Hindus and Muslims had unity and fought together for the

welfare of the country.The British government realized that the unity of the Hindus and

Muslims was posing a serious threat and therefore the best thing would be to create a

wall between the two communities.Thus, they adopted the "Divide and Rule" that

completely destroyed the relationship.So much so that the unrest between the two

communities has still not been resolved. As the Muslims had taken a prominent role in

the Revolt, they were deprived of patronage in education, business and services and

Hindus were given preferential treatment. At a later stage the Policy was reversed. The

British used this disharmony to their advantage and widened the gulf between the two

major communities. It was on this ground that India had to be partitioned on the event of

her independence in 1947.

Economic Exploitation of India-

Economic exploitation of the country was an inevitable situation after the Revolt. In words

of Majumdar, "the extinction of the East India Company's Rule brought in grave economic

perils to India. India now became a dumping ground of British manufacturers and an

almost inexhaustible field for investment of capital for it offered unlimited scope for

commercial and industrial enterprises like railways, steamers, tea, and coffee plantations

etc". The British henceforth started abusing political power for the enhancement of their

commercial and economic interest.

End of Peshwaship and the Mughal Rule-

Nana Sahib escaped after the Revolt as he had actively taken part in it. He could not be

traced after that. With his escape the Peshwaship came to an end. The title of Mughal

emperor was also abolished as the last Mughal emperor, Bahadur Shah Zafar died in

1862 and he also took part in the Revolt. Thus came the end of the glorious Mughal

dynasty founded by Babur in 1526 in the first battle of Panipat.

Reorganization of Army-

The British soldiers realized that the numerical inferiority of the British Indian army was

one of the causes of the Revolt. The British soldiers were increased in number which

means, the expenditure also increased. Artillery and other advanced means of warfare

were in the care of British hands. In order to break down the unity of the Indian soldiers,

they were divided and separated.

Change in the British Policy towards Indian states-

To appease native princes, the British declared that they would honour all treaties and
the agreement entered into by the East India Company with the native rulers. Further,
Doctrine of Lapse was abandoned and the right to adoption recognized. The Indian

princes were assured that their territories would never be annexed.Henceforth, the

continual existence of Native States was guaranteed. However, there were clearly defined

restrictions and limitations to them. The military prowess was greatly reduced.

Rise of Nationalism-

The sacrifices of some great Indian rulers during the Revolt of 1857 aroused feelings of

Nationalism among men. Nana Sahib, Rani of Jhansi and Bahadur Shah became

National heroes. People celebrated their heroism and their attempts to fight for freedom.

The revolt became a symbol of challenge to the mighty British power in India. According

to Tara Chand, "the memory of 1857 substantiated the later movement, infused courage

into the hearts of the fighters furnished a historical basis for the grim struggle and gave it

a moral stimulus - (its) memory distorted but hallowed with the sanctity, perhaps did more

damage to the cause of the British rule in India than the revolt itself".

Nature of the Revolt

The revolt of 1857 evokes passionate reactions. To the contemporary British analysts, it
was a mutiny of a section of misguided sepoys. Charles Ball, John Kaye or Colonel
Malleson all dwelled on the familiar theme of mutiny fomented by conspiratorial
aristocrats.

On the other hand Indian nationalists have regarded the Revolt’s nature to be the early
footprint of the freedom struggle. V.D. Savarkar called it India’s first war of independence.

This binary portrayal of the nature of the 1857 revolt continued even after independence.
Dr. R.C. Mazumder found no trace of nationalist spirit in it. Sharply contradicting
Mazumder’s views, Dr. S.B. Chaudhuri thinks the revolt had a national character. The
active participation of different cross-sections of Indian society, all impelled by hatred for
the British, and entitles it to be called a national uprising.
More recently, historians have focused on the revolt in its local and especially agrarian
settings. They suggest that the participation of peasants provides the link between the
military mutiny and the rural uprisings. The peasants participated in the Revolt for many
different reasons in many different regions. As in Awadh, they made common cause with
the talukdars against the common enemy. Hence they followed the lead given by the
talukdars. But there are many instances where the peasants in revolt chose their leaders
from the ranks of ordinary people. Thus the civil rebellions in the countryside were ‘more
than simply a feudal reaction’.

In areas where the grievances of disgruntled aristocracy coincided with the outbursts of
peasants and artisans, there were broad based insurgencies.

Nationalism in its developed form might not have motivated the rebels. But patriotism in
the sense of a shared antipathy against the British was not altogether absent. And it is
this that invests the Revolt with a new meaning. In the words of Eric Stokes, “To India,
1857 bequeathed a more living and enduring presence”.

The revolt of 1857 was a landmark event in the history of India. It was the first great
struggle of the Indians for freedom from British imperialism. The period after the revolt
saw major changes in British policies and in the administrative set-up of India. Broadly
speaking, the revolt sowed the seeds of nationalism in the minds of the Indian masses.

***************************