Postcolonial Studies | Sepoy Mutiny of 1857 Sepoy Mutiny of 1857 · 2 Comments · In Terms & Issues The profound hypocrisy and inherent barbarism of bourgeois civilization lies unveiled before our eyes, turning from its home, where it assumes respectable forms, to the colonies, where it goes naked. Did they not, in India, to borrow an expression of that great robber, Lord Clive himself, resort to atrocious extortion, when simple corruption could not keep pace with their rapacity? While they prated in Europe about the inviolable sanctity of the national debt, did they not confiscate in India the dividends of the rajahs, who had invested their private savings in the Company’s own funds? While they combated the French revolution under the pretext of defending “our holy religion,” did they not forbid, at the same time, Christianity to be propagated in India, and did they not, in order to make money out of the pilgrims streaming to the temples of Orissa and Bengal, take up the trade in the murder and prostitution perpetrated in the temple of the Juggernaut?

These are the men of “Property, Order, Family, and Religion.” Karl Marx, The New-York Daily Tribune. 22 July, 1853. The story of the Sepoy War of 1857, (an attempt at a compromise between two more controversial titles, ‘the Sepoy Mutiny of 1857′ and ‘the Sepoy Rebellion of 1857,’ though “insurgency”might also fit) began long before March of 1857. The history of the war delves deep into the colonization and conquest of India and the cultural and religious oppression imposed on Indians by British rule. Furthermore, the telling of the history of the war is, to this day, an ongoing battle between two competing narratives, the history belonging to the British that won the war, and the history claimed by the Indians who were defeated. This article is an attempt to present a history of the Sepoy War that is derived from various points of view, accounting for the context of the histories related, and the points of view of the historians relating them.

Indian states during Revolt of 1857/CC Licensed The East India Company was a massive export company that was the force behind much of the colonization of India (See Spice Trade in India ). The power of the East India Company took nearly 150 years to build. As early as 1693, the annual expenditure in political “gifts” to men in power reached nearly 90,000 pounds (Marx 23). In bribing the Government, the East India Company was allowed to operate in overseas markets despite the fact that the cheap imports of South Asian silk, cotton, and other products hurt domestic business. By 1767, the Company was forced into an agreement that is should pay 400,000 pounds into the National Exchequer annually. By 1848, however, the East India Company’s financial difficulties had reached a point where expanding revenue required the massive expansion of British territories in South Asia. The Government began to set aside adoption rights of native princes and began the process of annexation of more than a dozen independent Rajs between 1848 and 1854 (Marx 51; Kaye 30).

In an article published in The New York Daily Tribune on July 28, 1857, Karl Marx notes that “in 1854 the Raj of Berar, which comprises 80,000 square miles of land, a population from four to five million, and enormous treasures, was forcibly seized” (Marx 51). (See Geography and Empire , Marx and the Idea of Commodity ) In order to consolidate and control these new holdings, a well-established army of 200,000 South Asians officered by 40,000 British soldiers dominated India by 1857. The last vestiges of independent Indian states had disappeared and the East India Company exported tons of gold, silk, cotton, and a host of other precious materials back to England every year. Religion Historians like J.A.B. Palmer and John Kaye trace the origins of the soldiers’ rebellion at Meerut to the Lee-Enfield Rifle. It was developed at the Enfield arsenal by James P. Lee and fired a .303 caliber ammunition that had to manually loaded before firing.

Loading involved biting the end of the cartridge, which was greased in pig fat and beef tallow. This presented a problem for native soldiers, as pig fat is a haraam, or forbidden, substance to Muslims, and beef fat is, likewise, deemed inauspicious for certain Hindus. Thus, the revolt occurred as a reaction to this particular intrusion into Hindu and Muslim culture, and then caught on as a national rebellion. Palmer dramatically relates this discovery, according to Captain Wright, commanding the Rifle Instruction Depot: Somewhere about the end of the third week in January 1857, a khalasi, that is to say a labourer, accosted a high Brahmin sepoy and asked for a drink of water from his lotah (water-pot). The Brahmin refused on the score of caste. The khalasi then said, “You will soon lose your caste, as ere long you will have to bite cartridges covered with the fat of pigs and cows,” or, it is added, “words to that effect.” (Palmer 15) Furthermore, historians taking similar positions argue that British legislation that interfered with traditional Hindu or Muslim religious practices were a source of antagonism.

Palmer and Kaye also argue throughout their respective work that the prohibition of practices such as saathi (often transliterated “sati”), or the ritual suicide of widows on their husbands’ funeral pyres, became a source of outrage. In other words, the growing intrusion of western culture became an impetus for rebellious soldiers, fearful that their culture was being annihilated. The long-belabored significance of the Lee-Enfield cartridge is challenged by the work of historians like Marx, Collier, Majumdar, Chaudhuri, and Malleson. These historians argue that the actions of soldiers at Meerut were the “last straw” for South Asians who had been victims of British cultural and class-based oppression and antagonism, and discard the notion that religion played an overwhelmingly vital role in fomenting revolt. For them, the root causes of the insurgency cannot be traced to a single, well-defined set of events and causes, but rather stemmed from an ongoing set of conflicts. Divide and Conquer Col. G.B. Malleson argues that forcing Western ideas on an Eastern people fundamentally backfired and the “divide and conquer” tactics employed by the British in India ultimately sowed the seeds of the rebellion.

He notes, “action of a different character … so dear to the untravelled Englishman, or forcing the ideas in which he has been nurtured upon the foreign people with whom he has brought into contact, assisted … to loosen the bonds of discipline, which, up to that period, had bound the [Sepoy] to his officer” (Malleson 8). In other words, the Sepoy soldiers found themselves constantly pitted against their countrymen in an army governed by what common soldiers came to feel were outside influences. In a colonial setting, this is the prime breeding ground for a coup (or in this case, a revolt) because any soldier’s allegiance is governed by competition with other soldiers in currying favor and accumulating power, not by discipline or obedience to the orders of superior officers, and he begins to affiliate himself with his own people rather than the military ethics forced on him. (See Nationalism ) Expansionism Greater still was the influence of British expansionism on the Sepoy Rebellion. Richard Collier explains how rapidly increasing territorial conquest also intensified Indian unrest: These annexations were a source of discontent and anxiety to many people besides the sepoys.

In eight years, Canning’s predecessor, the despotic Lord Dalhousie, at 35 the youngest Governor-General India had ever known, had annexed over 250,000 square miles — an area three times the size of England and Ireland. The Punjab, Sattara, Nagpur — Dalhousie’s hands had stretched out to embrace them all. ‘An Indian Governor General,’ stormed The Hindu Patriot, ‘is chartered to destroy dynasties with a scratch of his quill.’ Indignities were heaped upon crowned heads: the jewels of the Royal Family of Nagpur were publicly auctioned in Calcutta. (Collier 19) Participating in the military conquest of local authorities, then, and having first-hand knowledge of the effects of British expansionism would have fomented resistance in the Sepoys. Torture and Oppression On August 28, 1857, Marx published an article in The New York Daily Tribune in order to “[show] that the British rulers of India are by no means such mild and spotless benefactors of the Indian people as they would have the world believe” (Marx 72).

Marx cites the official Blue Books — entitled “East India (Torture) 1855-57″ — that were laid before the House of Commons during the sessions of 1856 and 1857. The reports revealed that British officers were allowed an extended series of appeals if convicted or accused of brutality or crimes against Indians. Concerning matters of extortion in collecting public revenue, the report indicates that officers had free rein of any methods at their disposal (Marx 73). Torture became a method for financial exploitation in colonial India, and was challenged by a petition from the Madras Native Association presented in January of 1856. The petition was dismissed on the basis of a lack of evidence, despite the fact that, according to Marx, “there was scarcely any investigation at all, the Commission sitting only in the city of Madras, and for but three months, while it was impossible, except in very few cases, for the natives who had complaints to make to leave their homes” ( 74).

Marx also refers to Lord Dalhousie’s statements in the Blue Books that there was “irrefragable proof” that various officers had committed “gross injustice, to arbitrary imprisonment and cruel torture” (76). In addition to torture, the Company levied extremely large taxes on the Indian people. Collier describes taxes as “a cynical outrage. A man could not travel twenty miles without paying toll at a river ferry, farmed out by the Company to private speculators. Land Tax, often demanded before the crop was raised, was made in quarterly installments … the annual rent for an acre of land was 3 s[hillings], yet the produce of that acre rarely averaged 8 s[hillings] in value” (Collier 20). Marx’s position, as illustrated by the introductory quote to this page, is that the Indians were victims of both physical and economic forms of class oppression by the British. In Marx’s analysis, the clash between the soldiers and their officers is the inevitable conflict that is the result of capitalism and imperialism. The Rebellion The military history of the rebellion is straightforward.

Prior to the “mutiny” at Meerut on May 9th, 1857, fires broke out on January 22nd near Calcutta. An incident occurred on February 25th of that year when the 19th regiment mutinied at Berhampore, and the 34th Regiment rebelled at Barrackpore on the 31st of March. At Berhampore, the regiment allowed one of its men to advance with a loaded musket upon the parade-ground in front of a line and open fire on his superior officer; a battle ensued. April saw fires at Allahabad, Agra, an Ambala, but the spark that lit the powder keg went off on May 9th in Meerut. Members of the 3rd regiment of light cavalry were awaiting sentencing and imprisonment for refusal to obey orders and to put the Lee-Enfield .303 caliber cartridge into their mouths. Once imprisoned, the 11th and 20th cavalry assembled and broke rank and turned on their commanding officers. After liberating the 3rd regiment, chaos ensued in Meerut, and the rebels engaged the remaining British Troops.

Meerut was the singlemost evenly balanced station in India in terms of the numbers of British and Indian soldiers. Troops and rebels were on near-even terms with 2,028 European Troops versus 2,357 sepoys, but the British had 12 field guns and the sepoys had no artillery. Both Collier and Marx indicate that the rebellion would have ended there had Major-General William Hewitt cut off the rebel army at the bridge between Meerut and Delhi, some 40 miles away, with added weapons (Collier 40). The 38th, 54th, and 74th regiments of infantry and native artillery under Bahkt Khan (c.1797- c.1859) joined the rebel army at Delhi in May. June 1857 marked the battle of Kanpur (Cawnpore). The last Maratha prince, Baji Rao II, decreed his title and 80,000 pound annual pension to his son Nana Sahib (c.1820- c.1859) and was refused twice.

Despite Sahib’s attempts to push his claim, Lord Dalhousie refused the Hindu nobleman. Thus, in June 1857, Nana Sahib led the sepoy battalions at Crawnpore against the British. Nana Sahib sent word to Sir Hugh Wheeler, commander of the British forces at Cawnpore warning of the attack, guaranteeing him safe passage. On June 27, Nana Sahib broke the pact and trapped Wheeler in his palace. The events leading up to Wheeler’s surrender and death have been recorded as the Cawnpore Massacre. The Cawnpore Massacres In the words of Sir Colin Campbell, leader of the British forces during the war: Never was devised a blacker scheme than that which Nena Sahib had planned. Our miserable countrymen were conducted faithfully enough to the boats-officers, men, women, and children. The men and officers were allowed to take their arms and ammunition with them, and were escorted by nearly the whole of the rebel army. It was about eight o’clock a.m. when all reached the riverside — a distance of a mile and a half.

Those who embarked first pushed off from the shore; but others found it difficult to get their boats off the banks, as the rebels had placed them as high as possible. At this moment the report of three guns was heard from the Nena’s camp. The mutineers suddenly leveled their muskets, guns opened from the banks, and the massacre commenced. Some of the boats were set on fire, volley upon volley was fired upon the poor fugitives, numbers of whom were killed on the spot … A few boats crossed over to the opposite bank, but there a regiment of native infantry (the 17th), just arrived from Azimghur, was waiting for them; and in their eagerness to slay the “Kaffirs,” rode their horses belly deep into the river to meet the boats, and hack our unhappy country men and women to pieces. (Campbell 112) Andrew Ward’s historical narrative, Our Bones Are Scattered, also relates an account of the terrible and bloody massacre that followed the rebellion at Cawnpore, as well as Delhi and Meerut. By July, when Nana Sahib had captured Gwalior, he was reinstated as prince.

The Siege of Delhi The siege of Lucknow lasted roughly from July 1st to August 31st. The commanding British officer, Sir Henry Lawrence, died early on during the siege. By July 25th two-thirds of the British forces had retreated across the river and Delhi had been taken by early September. Bahadur Shah, the last surviving Mogul ruler was installed as ruler and the devastating battle between rebel and British forces for control Delhi ensued. Soldiers faced down the horrific sight of the impregnable walls of Delhi and “more than fifty guns and mortars belching fire at Delhi’s northern walls from the water bastion on the east to the Mori bastion on the west” (Collier 246). As the siege wore on the Punjabi forces fighting for the British began to weary and there was talk of a retreat. Under General John Nicholas, Delhi had toppled by September 20th, at the cost of 3,835 soldiers, British and Indian, and 378 horses (Collier 264). Rebel forces retreated to Lucknow where the siege was approaching three months in length.

There the war lasted until late November, until the rebels were driven to defeat in the Ganges Valley in December and January by Hugh Rose and Colin Campbell. By July 8, 1858, a peace treaty was signed and the war ended. By 1859, Rebel leaders Bahkt Khan and Nana Sahib had been slain in battle. Conclusion Though the Sepoy War has been dismissed as a chaotic, disorganized peasant uprising, several facts go undisputed that offer a counterargument. The “unorganized peasants” of India fought one of the most powerful empires in the world to near defeat with limited resources and even more limited training. Nevertheless, the lesson of the Sepoy War is not one of victory or justice, but failure. Though the exact cause of the Sepoy War has yet to be agreed upon, and it is likely that there were many complex causes rather than one, it is clear that British interference governments and the oppression of the Indian people, religious and economic, created a bloody revolution. Fictional & Narrative Literature on the Sepoy War Alavi, Seema. The Sepoys and the Company: Tradition and Transition 1770-1830.

New York: Oxford U P, 1995. Farrell, J.G. The Siege of Krishnapur. New York: Carroll & Graf, 1985 (orig. 1973; Booker Prize winner). Fenn, Clive Robert. For the Old Flag: A Tale of the Mutiny. London: Sampson Low, 1899. Grant, James. First Love and Last Love: A Tale of the Mutiny. New York: G. Routledge & Sons, 1869. Kaye, Mary Margaret. Shadow of the Moon. New York: St. Martin’s Press, 1979. Masters, John. Nightrunners of Bengal. New York: Viking Press, 1951. Raikes, William Stephen. 12 Years of a Soldier’s Life In India. Boston: Ticknor and Fields, 1860. Works Cited Campbell, Sir Colin. Narrative of the Indian Revolt. London:George Vickers, 1858. Collier, Richard. The Great Indian Mutiny. New York: Dutton, 1964.

“Indian Mutiny.” Encyclopædia Britannica. Encyclopædia Britannica Online Academic Edition. Encyclopædia Britannica Inc. Web. 23 Mar. 1998. < >. Kaye, John William. A History of the Sepoy War In India. London: W.H. Allen & Co., 1878. Keene, H. George. British Administration During the Revolt of 1857. New Delhi: Inter- India Publications, 1985. “Lee-Enfield rifle.” Encyclopædia Britannica. Encyclopædia Britannica Online Academic Edition. Encyclopædia Britannica Inc. Web. 23 Mar. 1998. < >. Malleson, Colonel G.B. The Indian Mutiny of 1857. New York: Scribner & Sons, 1891. Marx, Karl & Freidrich Engels. The First Indian War of Independence 1857-1859. Moscow: Foreign Languages Publishing House, 1959. Palmer, J.A.B.

The Mutiny Outbreak at Meerut In 1857. Cambridge: University Press, 1966. Stokes, Eric. The Peasant Armed: The Indian Revolt of 1857. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1986. Ward, Andrew. Our Bones Are Scattered. New York: Holt & Co., 1996. Author: Nilesh Patel, Spring 1998 Last edited: June 2012 Sepoy Rebellion | The Revolt of 1857 in India By Kallie Szczepanski Updated August 09, 2016. In May of 1857, sepoys in the British East India Company 's army rose up against the British. The unrest soon spread to other army divisions and civilian towns across north and central India . By the time it was over, hundreds of thousands or even millions of people had been killed. India was changed forever. The British home government disbanded the British East India Company , taking direct colonial control of the British Raj in India.

Also, the Mughal Empire ended, and Britain sent the last Mughal emperor into exile in Burma . What Was the Indian Revolt of 1857 about? The immediate cause of the Indian Revolt of 1857 was a seemingly minor change in the weapons used by the British East India Company's troops. The East India Company upgraded to the new Pattern 1853 Enfield rifle, which used greased paper cartridges. In order to open the cartridges and load the rifles, sepoys had to bite into the paper and tear it with their teeth. Rumors began in 1856 that the grease on the cartridges was made of a mixture of beef tallow and pork lard; eating cows, of course, is forbidden in Hinduism , while consumption of pork is haram in Islam . continue reading below our video 4 Tips for Improving Test Performance Thus, in this one small change, the British had managed to seriously offended both Hindu and Muslim troops. The revolt started in Meerut, which was the first area to receive the new weapons.

The British manufacturers soon changed the cartridges in an attempt to calm the spreading anger among the sepoys, but this move backfired as well - the fact that they stopped greasing the cartridges only confirmed the rumors about cow and pig fat, in the sepoys' minds. Causes of Spreading Unrest: Of course, as the Indian Revolt spread, it took on additional causes of discontent among both sepoy troops and civilians of all castes. Princely families joined the uprising due to British changes to the inheritance law, making adopted children ineligible for their thrones. This was an attempt to control succession in many of the princely states that were nominally independent from the British. Large land-holders in northern India also rose up, since the British East India had confiscated land and redistributed it to the peasantry. Peasants were none too happy, either, though - they joined the revolt to protest heavy land taxes imposed by the British. Religion also prompted some Indians to join the mutiny. The East India Company forbade certain religious practices and traditions, including sati or widow-burning, to the outrage of many Hindus.

The company also tried to undermine the caste system , which seemed inherently unfair to post-Enlightenment British sensibilities. In addition, British officers and missionaries began to preach Christianity to the Hindu and Muslim sepoys. The Indians believed, quite reasonably, that their religions were under attack by the East India Company. Finally, Indians regardless of class, caste or religion felt oppressed and disrespected by the agents of the British East India Company. Company officials who abused or even murdered Indians were seldom punished properly; even if they were tried, they were rarely convicted, and those who were could appeal almost indefinitely. A general sense of racial superiority among the British fueled Indian anger across the country. End of the Rebellion and Aftermath: The Indian Revolt of 1857 lasted until June of 1858. In August, the Government of India Act of 1858 dissolved the British East India Company. The British government took direct control of the half of India formerly under the company, with various princes still in nominal control of the other half. Queen Victoria became the Empress of India. The last Mughal Emperor, Bahadur Shah Zafar , was blamed for the revolt (although he played little role in it).

The British government sent him into exile in Rangoon, Burma. The Indian army also saw huge changes after the revolt. Instead of relying heavily on Bengali troops from the Punjab , the British began to recruit soldiers from the "martial races" - those peoples considered particularly warlike, such as the Gurkhas and the Sikhs . Unfortunately, the Indian Revolt of 1857 did not result in freedom for India. In many ways, Britain reacted by taking firmer control of the "crown jewel" of its empire. It would be another ninety years before India (and Pakistan ) gained their independence. Sepoy Mutiny 1857 Home > Reference > History of India > Sepoy Mutiny 1857 Sepoy Mutiny 1857 Sepoy Mutiny 1857 was most well known uprisings against the British in colonised India. Some historians denoted it as First war of Independence. Subscribe to Free E-Magazine on Reference More on Sepoy Mutiny 1857 (57) • Less...

Sepoy Mutiny 1857, also known as Indian Rebellion of 1857, was a rebellion of the native foot soldiers of British Colonised India against the British Empire. It is considered as the first movement against the Britsh rulers which sparked the Indian freedom struggle . Origin of Sepoy Mutiny Sepoy mutiny or the Revolt of 1857 was one of the many revolutions to achieve independence. India came under complete control of British in the year 1857 and the constant urge and spirit of freedom started to in built itself in the natives of India. Sepoy mutiny that started long before March of 1857 in Kolkata is known as the first war for independence against British. Sepoy mutiny though was a widespread movement, but was ultimately unsuccessful and ended its course in 1858. It started from Meerut and eventually started spreading in Delhi , Agra , Kanpur and Lucknow .

Areas of Sepoy Mutiny The Sepoy Mutiny of 1857 started as a rebellion of soldiers or Sepoys of British East India Company's army on the 10th of May 1857, in the town of Meerut , and soon ignited into other mutinies and civilian uprisings, mostly in the upper Gangetic Plain and central India, with the major aggressions restrained to present-day Uttar Pradesh , Bihar , northern Madhya Pradesh , and the Delhi region. The insurgents of Sepoy Mutiny speedily captured large portions of the North-Western Provinces and Oudh, including Delhi, where they set up the Mughal ruler, Bahadur Shah Zafar, as Emperor of Hindustan. Other regions of Company-controlled India-Bengal province, the Bombay Presidency , and the Madras Presidency -remained calm for the larger part. In Punjab , just lately annexed by the British East India Company , the Sikh princes backed the Company by furnishing both soldiers and support.

The large princely states, Hyderabad , Mysore , Travancore, and Jammu and Kashmir , as well as the smaller ones of Rajputana, did not participate in the rebellion, and served, in Governor General Lord Canning 's words, as "breakwaters in a storm" for the Company. Uprising of British Indian Army in Sepoy Mutiny Mangal Pandey of the 34th Infantry at Barrackpur rebelled by firing at an officer on command against the use of the new cartridges. He was arrested and on 8 April he was hanged to death. This followed with repeated outbreak of revolt at Kolkata and Europeans were in a state of prolonged panic. In April 1857, Indian soldiers at cavalry unit in Meerut refused to use the new cartridges, which ultimately led to their arrest and were thrown into prison. Although this mutiny started among the native soldiers, the others who weren't affected by British rule also joined hands. An appeal was forwarded to 82-year-old Mughal Emperor Bahadur Shah Zafar for leading the revolt and proclaimed him the Emperor of India. Delhi Delhi was seized by the Sepoys on 12th May 1857.

The palace and the city were occupied. The old Mughal Emperor Bahadur Shah II was persuaded to lend support to the anti-British activities and was proclaimed the Emperor of India. In spite of strong resistance from the sepoys, the British recaptured the city on 20th September. The emperor was exiled to Rangoon (Burma) for life where the king died in 1862 at the age of eight seven. This was the end of the once mighty Mughal Dynasty in India . Kanpur The Sepoys captured Kanpur on 5th June 1857. Nana Sahib, the adopted son of Peshwa Baji Rao was proclaimed the Peshwa. He led the revolt in Kanpur along with Tantia Tope , his able and experienced Lieutenant. In June 1857 the General defeated Nana Sahib. Though Nana Sahib and Tantia Tope recaptured Kanpur in November 1857, they could not hold it for long as it was reoccupied by General Campbell on 6th December 1857.

Lucknow The Sepoys rebelled in Awadh soon after the events in Meerut. The rebellion broke out at Lucknow on 4th June. The rebels' initial attempts were unsuccessful. Begum Hazrat Mahal , who was acting as a regent for her son, besieged the British Residency along with the rebels, killing Sir Henry during the siege. The fighting continued till the end of the year. Ultimately the rebels were defeated in November 1857. In March 1858 the city was finally recaptured by the British after three weeks of fierce fighting. Jhansi Jhansi became centre of rebellion when war broke out. Lakhsmi Bai led the rebellion against the British. She proclaimed the ruler of the state. The British army besieged Jhansi. However, the mutiny failed due to lack of strong leadership and proper coordination. Causes of Sepoy Mutiny The Indian custom of daily living witnessed a gradual shattering of their future vision because of the continuous English intrusion. The East India Company had initially come to India with a very different intension, which although changed in due course. The first uprisings of 1857 were thus efficiently justified.

Numerous political, social, economic, religious and above all the military causes led to the heroic attempt of Sepoy Mutiny being held in such a manner. Effects of Sepoy Mutiny The Sepoy Mutiny had impressed upon every Indian in different ways, including even the British living in England. Numerous got divided into pro-British and anti-British groups and sects. The ruthless primary effect was that, thousands of native army-men were slaughtered mercilessly. However, the British authorities in London had highly justified these killings in the press. (Last Updated on : 11/12/2012) Recently Updated Articles in History of India • Roshanara Bagh Roshanara Bagh in Delhi is the birth place of Indian Cricket Council which is globally known as The Board of Control for Cricket in India, one of the main body to guide and foster the India Cricket after Independence of India in 1947. • Pari Mahal is known as the house of fairies, built by the Mughals at the top of Zabarwan Mountain Range. • Architecture of Shalimar Gardens deals with the Persian concept of designing which are similar to the Mughal Gardens of Delhi.

• Archeological Site in Kumrahar The Archeological Site in Kumrahar refers to the ancient remains of the city called Pataliputra. In the year 1989, the Government had buried the entire site with soil. There is a museum at the site at present, which is a home to a small replica of the original excavation. • What Is a Sepoy? What Is a Sepoy? Glossary of Asian History Terms, S What Is a Sepoy? An Indian sepoy stands sentry duty at a fort on Khyber Pass in 1895. Library of Congress Prints and Photos Collection By Kallie Szczepanski Updated November 01, 2015. A sepoy was an Indian infantryman employed by the armies of the British East India Company (c. 1700-1857), or later by the British Indian Army (1858-1947).

That change of control in colonial India, from the BEIC to the British government, actually came about as a result of the sepoys - or more specifically, because of the Indian Uprising of 1857 , which is also known as the "Sepoy Mutiny." Originally, the word sepoy was used somewhat derogatorily by the British, because it denoted a relatively untrained local militia man. Later in the British East India Company's tenure it was extended to mean even the most able of native foot-soldiers. The term "sepoy" comes from the Urdu word sipahi, which is itself derived from the Persian word sipah, meaning "army" or "horseman." For much of Persian history, from at least the Parthian era on, there was not much distinction between a soldier and a horseman. Ironically, despite the word's meaning, Indian cavalrymen in British India were not called sepoys, but sowars. continue reading below our video 10 Best Universities in the United States Interestingly, in the Ottoman Empire in what is now Turkey, the word sipahi was still used for cavalry troopers.

However, the British took their usage from the Mughal Empire, which used sepahi designate Indian infantry soldiers. Perhaps, as the Mughals were descended from some of the greatest cavalry fighters of Central Asia, they did not feel that Indian soldiers qualified as real cavalrymen, but that is only a surmise. In any case, the Mughals armed their sepoys with all the latest weapons technology of the day. They carried rockets, grenades, and matchlock rifles by the time of Aurangzeb (r. 1658-1707). When the British began to use sepoys, they recruited them from Bombay and Madras. Only men from the higher castes were considered eligible to serve as soldiers. Sepoys in British units were supplied with weapons, unlike some of those who served local rulers. The pay was approximatley the same, regardless of the employer, but the British were much more punctual about paying their soldiers regularly, and also provided rations rather than expecting the men to steal food from local villagers as they passed through a region. After the above-mentioned Sepoy Mutiny of 1857, the British were hesitant to trust either Hindu or Muslim sepoys again.

The soldiers from both major religions had joined the uprising, fueled by rumors (perhaps accurate) that the new rifle cartridges supplied by the British were greased with pork and beef tallow. Sepoys had to tear the cartridges open with their teeth, which meant that Hindus were injesting sacred cattle, while Muslims were accidentally eating unclean pork. After this, the British for decades recruited most of their sepoys from among the Sikh religion instead. The sepoys fought for the BEIC and the British Raj not only within greater India, but also in Southeast Asia, the Middle East, East Africa, and even in Europe during World War I and World War II. In fact, more than 1 million Indian troops served in the name of the UK during World War I. Today, the armies of India, Pakistan, Nepal, and Bangladesh all still use the word sepoy to designate soldiers at the rank of private. India's Sepoy Mutiny previous | next India's Sepoy Mutiny India had hundreds of independent states, with the British ruling less than half of its total area. It was a rule motivated by commerce.

From India, Britain's manufacturers were receiving raw cotton, and the British were exporting to India manufactured goods – one tenth of Britain's exports going to India. As the government for the British in India, the British East India Company was paying the expense of troops to defend their interests, saving the budget conscious British government this expense. Some of India's princely rulers were puppets of the East India Company. If such a prince failed to cooperate with the company, the company might dispose of him and annex his territory, ousting him from power using the Indian troops that it employed. Ninety-six percent of the company's army of 300,000 men in India were native to India. Among common Indians the introduction of rail lines and telegraphy had spread fear of being overwhelmed by the British, and they feared that the British intended to Christianize them. Rebellion against rule by foreigners came in 1857 from those the British East India Company had hired as troops – the Sepoys.

The British had introduced a new rifle which used rifle cartridges the end of which had to be bitten off before use, and the cartridges were rumored to be greased with oil made from animal fat – the fat of sacred cows being taboo to Hindus and the fat of pigs being repulsive to Muslims. In May 1857 a soldier shot his commander for forcing the Indian troops to use the new rifles. Violence against the British spread among the Sepoys, and it spread as leading landowners encouraged revolt among civilians, the landlords hoping to regain losses from land reform that the British had imposed on them. The revolt spread to Kanpur , on the Ganges River 250 miles southeast of Delhi, and it spread to Lucknow , 45 miles northeast of Kanpur. A leading participant in the rebellion was Bahadur Shah II, a Sufi Muslim belonging to the Mughal Dynasty, whose shaky diminishing empire, centered in Delhi , had been protected by the East India Company. Rebels looked to the Mughal shah the power that would drive the British from India. It was what Indians would view as their first war of independence and the British would call the Sepoy Mutiny.

The rebellion included attacks on various European civilians and on British women and children. The British press exaggerated, describing the rebels as tossing British babies into the air and bayoneting them for sport. But there were British women and children taken hostage at Kanpur when the rebels took control of that city, and on July 15, three days before an army under Britain's General Neill retook the city, the rebels slaughtered their hostages and threw the dismembered bodies into a deep well. By September, one year after Europe's Crimean War had ended, Queen Victoria was writing about the horrors committed on women and children in India making "one's blood run cold." In a letter to her uncle, King of the Belgians, she wrote that events in India were "so much more distressing than the Crimea – where there was glory and honourable warfare, and where the poor women and children were safe." The Kanpur massacre, as well as similar events elsewhere, were seen by some British as reason for unrestrained vengeance. The British "Army of Retribution" under General Neill committed its own series of atrocities in retaking Kapur. India remained too divided for success against the British.

It was divided in language, with Hindi spoken by only a third of the population, and Bengali by one-sixth. The powerful Indian state of Hyderabad was not interested in supporting the rebel leader, Emperor Bahadur Shah II. Other Indian states followed Hyderabad's example, and the Sikh warriors hired by the British also failed to join the rebellion. The British public viewed their military officers serving in India as gentleman-warriors defending dignity, God's purposes and Britain's civilizing mission. There was talk of "the resolute vigor of the Anglo Saxon race." The British viewed those Indians who supported the uprising as ungrateful and treacherous. During the rebellion the British government took control of India from the East India Company, Britain's possessions in India henceforth to be governed by a government-appointed viceroy and the British government's colonial office. And a more friendly policy toward the Indians was considered. Queen Victoria was concerned, and she exercised the crown's interest in foreign affairs and its right to give advice and to be consulted on government policy. In a proclamation she promised to preserve the rule of Indian princes in return for loyalty to the British crown. Indians under British rule were to be British subjects, and they were promised their own governance over local affairs.

Queen Victoria wrote about attracting Indians with British generosity, about the privileges which the Indians will receive in being placed on an equality with the subjects of the British Crown, and the prosperity following in the train of civilization. note45 Historian Arthur Herman writes that the Sepoy Mutiny left "a permanent stamp of race fear in England" and Britain's defeat of the mutiny reinforced the British attitude that they "were born to rule and the Indians to obey." note46 The rebellion made a stand in central India, under Tatya Tope, a Brahmin Maratha leader. He was captured and executed in April 1859, and in July the British described the rebellion as all but defeated. The British claimed that only a few thousand rebels were still in the field, men "belonging to the most guilty regiments and those which murdered their officers." The British exiled the Mughal emperor, Bahadur Shah II, to Burma and the Mughal Empire in India was formally liquidated. Britain's Queen Victoria promised the Indian people equal treatment under British law. There remained, however, widespread mistrust of British rule.

Sepoy Rebelllion Sepoy Rebellion In May 1857, Sepoys (Indian soldiers) in the Bengal Army revolted against their British officers. Before the mutiny was finally put down in 1859, it had spread over a large part of northern India. First Major Incident On March 31, 1857, the 34th Sepoy Regiment at Barrackpore allowed one of its men to attack his superior officer, a British Sergeant. The man was subsequently captured and hanged, and the entire regiment was dismissed as a collective punishment. Other Sepoys across India believed the punishment was too harsh. Meerut On May 9, members of the 3rd Regiment of Light Cavalry were imprisoned, sentenced to ten years of hard labor, and stripped of their uniforms in public for refusing to obey direct orders to use rifle cartridges greased with hog and/or beef fat (in direct violation of Hindu prohibitions against eating meat in any form). The next day, members of the 11th and 20th Cavalry broke rank and turned on their commanding officers.

They then killed every European and Indian Christian they could find, including all women and children, from master to servant, burned their houses, and began marching towards Delhi. Initially, the British chose not to pursue the mutineers. Delhi On May 11, the Sepoys from Meerut were joined by Indians from the Delhi bazzar. After attacking the Red Fort and killing a British officer, two women, and two others, they demanded that Bahadur Shah reclaim his throne. They then went on a rampage and killed every European and Indian Christian in the city they could find. Meanwhile, the British decided to begin striking back. Two columns left Meerut and Simla and proceeded slowly towards Delhi, fighting, killing, and hanging numerous Indians along the way. They also moved regiments from the Crimean War and diverted other regiments on their way to China to India. Delhi was finally recaptured by the British on September 20. Bahadur Shah was arrested and subsequently exiled to Rangoon, where he died in 1862.

Kanpur In June, 1857, the last Maratha prince, Baji Rao II, decreed his title and 80,000-pound annual pension to his son, Nana Sahib, but the decree was negated by Governor-General Lord Dalhousie. In response, Nana Sahib led the Sepoy battalions at Kanpur against the British. On June 25, he sent word to Sir Hugh Wheeler, commander of British forces there, requesting that he surrender, a request Wheeler accepted. But, as the British attempted to evacuate Kanpur on June 27, Sahib's men attacked and killed many of the soldiers. They then rounded up the surviving women and children, took them back to Kanpur, and massacred them. Lucknow In early July, 1857, Lucknow was attacked by a sizable Sepoy force. Although British commander Sir Henry Lawrence was killed early in the attack, the remaining soldiers were able to fend off the initial assault. The Sepoys laid siege to the city, and assaults were launched almost daily for the next three months.

On September 25, the British were reinforced by 1,000 Highlanders under the command of General Sir Henry Havelock. In October, another Highlander unit under Sir Colin Campbell came in to relieve them. On November 18, the British were finally able to evacuate their compound and flee to the recently retaken city of Kanpur. The British finally retook Lucknow by force in March, 1858. The last rebels were finally defeated in Gwalior on June 20, 1858. The Sepoy Rebellion was ended by the signing of a peace treaty, on July 8, 1858, although small pockets of resistance held out into early 1859. As a result of the Sepoy Rebellion, the British government purchased control of India from the East India Company , the officers of which the Sepoys had initially revolted against. World Book Encyclopedia Chicago: World Book-Childcraft International, Inc., 1979 The Toy Soldier Company | Best Selection of Plastic and Metal Toy Soldiers, Playsets and Accessories View Details Toy Soldier Collecting Welcome to the world of toy soldiers.

For those who know nothing about these "little men," we hope to make your visit here pleasant and informative. If you've never purchased toy soldiers before, you may have no idea what you're even supposed to be looking for. There is a huge variety of toy soldiers available today. One can find plastic and metal figures and accessories in scales from as small as an inch high (25mm) to just about 3 inches tall (70mm). Plastic soldiers are available unpainted or painted, while the metal toy soldiers we sell are generally painted. We offer over 15,000 sets of figures as well as our popular "playsets," which are instant collections of plastic figures and accessories that make ideal gifts for the young enthusiast. When deciding what to purchase, there are several factors to consider, among which are Scale, Materials and the Historical Eras of the toy soldier items you are seeking. Scale Toy soldiers can be as small as a 1/2 inch or as large as 3 inches. The most popular scales for toy soldier collectors are about 2 1/4 to 2 1/2 inches tall.

These scales are known as 54mm and 60mm (roughly 1/32nd the size of an average human being). These soldiers are big enough to have a good deal of detail, yet small enough to allow you to play with lots of them on a table top. We specialize in these scales, which are considered by most collectors and manufacturers to be interchangeable. This is the size that most people visualize when they see a toy soldier in their mind's eye, and many know them as 'army men' like the paratroopers in the movie 'Toy Story.' There are more metal and plastic figures produced in these scales than any other. While we carry plastic soldiers in many different scales, we stock metal figures only in this scale range. The second most popular scale is about an inch high, which we describe as 'Small Scale.' This scale range is known as HO (pronounced as 2 letters: H - O), and incorporates 1/72nd, 1/76th and 1/87th scales. The HO scale is popular with war gamers, as the small size allows for a great many figures to be set up in a limited space.

While they have the advantage of being quite inexpensive on a per-figure basis, playing with HO soldiers can be frustrating for the uninitiated as the tiny models have a hard time standing up on uneven surfaces, such as the living room rug, and tend to fall over with the slightest nudge, breeze or shake of the table-top. Some plastic lines are produced in 70mm scale (about 3 inches tall). Others come as small as 15mm (about 5/8 of an inch) and 28mm (a touch over an inch tall), for use in wargaming. While these scales attract a moderate number of collectors, they are quite specialized in nature. The 70mm figures pack in a greater amount of detail than smaller sizes. The 15mm and 28mm figures are generally cast in hard plastic and require assembly. These can be posed and altered by the purchaser for completely personalized army building, as they arrive in bits and pieces which must be assembled before they can be used. Materials There are a great many materials that have been used to make toy soldiers over the years , but we specialize in plastic and metal.

We say 'metal' rather than 'lead' because, since 1966, lead has been banned from use in toys. The metal, often tin, used in soldiers since then is considered non-toxic. Nevertheless, METAL TOY SOLDIERS MAY NOT BE SOLD TO CHILDREN UNDER THE AGE OF 14. Metal figures are generally more expensive per figure and more fragile. They are suited to display. Plastic figures, whether painted or unpainted, are considerably cheaper and generally more rugged. The quality of plastic varies depending on the manufacturer and the vintage of the figure. Hard plastic, which allows the collector to glue together his models in a variety of poses, is more brittle than soft plastic. Most of our figures are cast in soft plastic, which is by far the first choice of collectors. Unless otherwise mentioned, all figures we describe as plastic are soft plastic. Eras As you start to look around our website to find soldiers, you'll see figures available from practically every historical era in human history. Soldiers are available from ancient Greece and Rome, right through to the 21st Century and beyond. Very few figures have been devoted to military conflicts since World War II.

The most popular eras for soldier collectors are the Ancient World, the Middle Ages, the American Revolution, the Napoleonic Wars, the American Civil War and World War II.Our website features the most sophisticated search engine in the toy soldier hobby. Not only can you look for soldiers from the ancient world in general, for example, but you can focus in on specific areas, such as Rome, Greece or Carthage. If you look under the American Revolution, you can separate out character figures (such as George Washington or Lafayette, colonial infantry, British infantry or even Woodland Indians. Similar search sub-categories are featured for every era. Manufacturers/Makers Collectors often have a special fondness for particular soldier makers. Of these, Marx and Britains top the list in plastics, while Britains and Tradition lead in popularity for metal figures. In both metal and plastic collecting, soldiers by different manufacturers can often be mixed together in displays. By using the search function you can see lines that work well together from the same era. Learn More You can find more information about toy soldiers by exploring the links at the bottom of any page under Resources .

Don't forget to check out owner Jamie Delson's toy soldier blog, Harold's Rangers , and consider signing up for our email newsletter, which we send out once or twice per month. Enjoy your visit! Sepoy Mutiny Echoes Muslim-Western Clash - ABC News Sepoy Mutiny Echoes Muslim-Western Clash By HREF Email Sometimes, it only takes a little bit of grease to really throw the fat into the fire. When two cultures clash, misunderstandings over seemingly small things can flare into larger clashes or even violence. Late last month, detainees from the Afghan war went on a hunger strike at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, when American guards ripped a bed sheet from a prisoner's head. To the guards, the inmate was defying regulations and creating a security risk. To the prisoners, a Muslim was being denied his right to pray with a turban — albeit a makeshift one — covering his head. In May of 1857, a misunderstanding over a piece of weaponry proved to be the last straw for Muslims and Hindus already smoldering with resentment against the British in India.

The introduction of the Lee-Enfield rifle, seen by the British as just a nifty new piece of technology, sparked the Sepoy Rebellion — also known as the Indian mutiny or the First Indian War of Independence. "The choice of technology wasn't the cause, but it certainly was the trigger," said Glynn Wood, professor of international policy studies at the Monterey Institute of International Studies in California. "The troops saw it as one more example of foreigners having no sensitivity to them." ‘Ritual Defilement’ To load the new rifle, soldiers had to first bite off the end of the cartridge. The cartridge was well greased — with a combination of beef and pork fat. "It was offensive to both Hindus and Muslims," said Barbara Ramusack, head of the history department at the University of Cincinnati. For Muslim sepoys — the term for a native soldier — serving in the British army, pork was unclean, forbidden by the Koran. The Hindus held the cow to be sacred, and saw anything that would entail tasting beef fat product as an attempt to break their caste. To them, it was "ritual defilement," Ramusack said.

"You had to bite off the end of the cartridge, and then it would bring pollution into your body." The manufacturers of the rifle had no idea that their product would, with one fell swoop, offend followers of the two dominant religions on the Indian subcontinent. They also had no way of knowing that many Indians thought this was part of a British plot to destroy their faith — just as some Muslims today see some aspects of Western culture as a threat to Islam. In the first half of the 19th century, there was a big push by evangelical Protestant missionaries to convert the "heathen" overseas. Indians saw the introduction of the greased cartridges as a wedge to alienate them from their own religions so that they would have no choice but to turn to Christianity, Ramusack said. "It was the idea that you were being set up to be converted to Christianity," she said. Too Late to Stop the Violence The British eventually realized what a gaffe they had made and set about replacing the offending cartridges, but by then it was too late, Ramusack said. Word about the greased cartridges had already spread from army cantonment to cantonment.

In Meerut, 40 miles from Delhi, 85 sepoys flatly refused to use the new rifles. They were marched off in shackles for disobeying orders. When their colleagues tried to free them, things got nasty — and the sepoys began slaughtering not only British soldiers, but also civilians, including women and children. From Meerut, the mutineers moved on to Delhi, declaring their intention of restoring the Muslim Mughal Empire to its former glory. Indian princes whose power had been curtailed by the British joined in the rebellion, as did oppressed peasants. The violence swept across northern India. Before it was over, myriad atrocities had been committed on both sides, and thousands were dead. Although there were many Indians who protected Britons, popular opinion in Britain focused on the savagery of attacks against women and children. The grisly massacre at Cawnpore — where surrendering British troops were set upon by Indian fighters and the women and children were taken to a house and then butchered — became a rallying cry for outraged Britons. Shock and Revenge British revenge was thorough. "They carried out what could be described as a pogrom," said Wood.

The insurgency spelled the end of the Mughal Empire. The Emperor Bahadur Shah II, an elderly gentleman more interested in poetry than politics, was shipped off to Rangoon in Burma (now Myanmar), where he died in exile. The British government decided to remove the East India Company as India's administrator and take direct control itself. The uprising came as a great shock to Britain, says Ramusack. "The British were taken unawares. They didn't realize there was this discontent and opposition brewing. They thought they were bringing modernization," she said. "The British saw themselves as benevolent paternalists, but there was another side to what they were doing," she added. "They were very shocked that the Indians didn't appreciate what they were doing. They were very shocked by the attacks on women and children." There are some parallels between the distrust of modern Western culture felt by some in the Muslim world. "We see globalization as a good thing," said Ramusack. "But the impact is very uneven around the world.

It does threaten people's economic situation and the way in which they identify themselves." ‘Both Sides Have a Moral Imperative’ Wood sees similarities between the "indignity" Indians felt at what they saw as the British trampling their culture and the anger many in the Muslim world feel over Westernization — and at local rulers who they believe are supported by the West. "There's still the indignity that has to be explained," he said. "Much of it is resentment against the elites of the countries they are in. They can't speak out [against their rulers]. They're only allowed to speak if they're denouncing the West." He points to the resentment over the presence of U.S. troops in Saudi Arabia, home of the Muslim holy cities of Mecca and Medina. "You start with the fact that you can't go to Mecca unless you're a Muslim," Wood said. "They don't care about nationality — black Muslims are as welcome as Arabs. But [Muslims feel] the holy places shouldn't be visited by polluters. The next thing you know, the royal family has invited Westerners in and they don't go home." And the differences between the two cultures only exacerbate the situation.

"The things that you and I would do as a matter of daily practice are aggravating to the Saudis." For example, Saudi authorities are upset because the Pentagon decided U.S. servicewomen no longer have to swathe themselves in the abaya when venturing off base. An American service women challenged the original veil requirement. Americans are surprised by resentment at their presence in Saudi Arabia, since U.S. troops were sent there, in part, to protect that country against Saddam Hussein's forces during the Gulf War. "Both sides have a moral imperative to do what they do," said Wood. Wood believes that many of the governments under which many Muslim nations now chafe will eventually fold. But he does not see tensions between the Muslim world and the West dissipating any time soon. Westerners can develop a greater cultural sensitivity, and "the ways we handle trade issues and military issues are in our hands." But the conflict is a problem "that is not going to go away," he said. And when something does occur to set off those tensions, Wood says, it could be something very trivial. "The trigger could be something like the sight of a female ankle, although the underlying causes are much deeper than that." 0 Shares

Question: A sepoy was a soldier from which country?
Answer: INDIA