Explore the 1857 Revolt, known as India’s First War of Independence, its major causes including economic exploitation, religious interference, and political annexations, key leaders like Rani Lakshmibai and Nana Sahib, and its impact on Indian nationalism. A detailed historical analysis.
The first major expression of Indian people’s discontent and resistance against British rule occurred in 1857 in the form of an armed sepoy revolt. This sepoy revolt, also known as India’s First War of Independence or the Revolution of 1857, is one of the greatest events in world history, which shook the foundations of the largest European state, the British Empire. Before this, no such large revolt had occurred in any European empire or in any part of Asia. Although it began with Indian sepoys of the Company’s army, it soon took the form of a powerful people’s revolution, in which almost all sections of India—dispossessed chiefs, peasants, artisans—participated enthusiastically, and more than three lakh people were killed. This revolution is considered the foundation stone of Indian nationalism and a turning point in Indian history.
Major Causes of the 1857 Revolt
The 1857 Revolt was not merely the result of sepoy discontent or greased cartridges. Benjamin Disraeli, the leader of the contemporary Conservative Party in England, opined: “This revolt was not an accidental impulse, but the result of a conscious conspiracy… The rise and fall of empires do not happen due to greased cartridges. Such revolts occur due to the accumulation of proper and sufficient causes.” Lord Salisbury also said in the House of Commons that he was not prepared to believe that such a widespread and powerful movement could have arisen over greased cartridges.
In fact, this revolution was the result of the character of colonial rule, its policies, and the accumulated discontent and hatred of the people towards the Company’s administration. For more than a century, the British had been gradually extending their control over this country, and during this period, discontent and hatred towards foreign rule increased among various sections of Indian society. This discontent and hatred had gathered explosive material for the revolution, in which the greased cartridges acted as the spark.
Economic Causes
The great revolution of 1857 has often been considered merely a mutiny of Indian sepoys in the Bengal Army, but perhaps the most important cause of popular discontent was the economic exploitation of the country by the British and the destruction of the traditional economic structure, which plunged a large number of peasants, artisans, and handicraftsmen, as well as a large number of traditional landlords and chiefs, into poverty.
Land Revenue Policy
In reality, the administrative system of the East India Company was ‘inefficient and inadequate’. The landowners and peasants were all dissatisfied due to the land revenue policy, land-related laws, and exploitative administrative systems. Initially, the Company was in favor of maintaining a class of landlords who would naturally be partisan to the government. The Lieutenant Governor of the North-Western Provinces (later Agra and Oudh), Thomson, believed that large landlords could pose a threat to the Company, so he thought that the landlord class should not remain as such and the government should establish direct contact with the ryots. Due to this new policy, the Company abolished many zamindaris and deprived many taluqdars and hereditary landowners, who collected land revenue for the government, of their positions and rights.
At the time of the annexation of Oudh, the taluqdars held 25,543 villages, out of which 11,903 villages were given to those who were not taluqdars, meaning about half of the taluqdars’ villages were seized, and some lost everything.
Confiscation of Zamindaris
The famous ‘Inam Commission’ of Bombay confiscated 20,000 zamindaris in South India. At that time, it was the final phase of feudalism in India. In the feudal system, the people’s loyalty naturally remained towards their landlord or king. When the people saw that one after another Indian princely states were being abolished and the landlord class was also being eliminated, it shocked them greatly. They realized that the Company was changing the very form of India’s social and political life. Due to this, the people associated with the taluqdars and zamindars who lost property and prestige were very dissatisfied with the Company rule.
Miserable Condition of Peasants
The condition of the cultivating peasants was even worse. In the beginning of British rule, peasants were left at the mercy of landlords, who exploited them by increasing rent and through forced labor and other methods. In the first quarter of the 19th century, the land revenue payable to the Company was increased by up to 70 percent. This inhuman revenue practice was extended to Oudh, where the entire nobility had been summarily deposed. In case of crop failure, peasants had to borrow from moneylenders at high interest rates, and moneylenders cheated illiterate rural peasants in many ways. Besides, the common people were badly affected by corruption at lower levels. Due to land transfer becoming legal under British law, peasants often had to lose their land. In 1853 alone, 1,10,000 acres of land were auctioned in the North-Western Provinces, and for this reason, when the revolution began, banias, mahajans, and their properties became natural targets of peasant attacks. The sale of lands ruined not only small holders but also village elites, and as victims of the operations of British civil law, both these classes united in the revolutionary period of 1857-58 in a common effort to regain what they had lost.
Destruction of Trade and Industries
The discontent against the British was not limited to agricultural communities alone. The British economic policies were also against Indian trade and industries. In the regions under British control, they established their monopoly over trade and misused their political power to destroy Indian handicrafts and trade, which completely ruined India’s traditional economy and made many peasants, artisans, laborers, and artists destitute. Due to the Company’s one-sided free trade policy in 1813, local enterprises had to face corrupt competition from British imported goods. Now Europeans brought English goods to India and made weavers, cotton textile workers, carpenters, blacksmiths, and shoemakers unemployed. Every type of artisan became a beggar. When the development of railways enabled British traders to reach remote villages, the remaining small rural enterprises were also destroyed. Karl Marx wrote in 1853: “The destruction of the cotton cloth industry increased the burden on agriculture and finally the country became destitute.” The situation became even more horrific due to the destruction of traditional industries and the simultaneous lack of development of modern industries.
Religious and Social Causes
Missionary Propagation
One major reason for the people rising against British rule was the belief that their religion was in danger due to this rule. The main cause of this fear was the activities of Christian missionaries, who ‘were seen everywhere in schools, hospitals, prisons, and markets.’ These missionaries tried to convert people to Christianity and publicly made sharp and crude attacks on Hinduism and Islam. They openly ridiculed and condemned the people’s old and beloved traditions and beliefs.
Government Support for Propagators
The people suspected that the foreign government was protecting the activities of Christian missionaries. Some actions of the government and activities of high officials strengthened this suspicion. In 1850, the government made a law under which those who converted to Christianity by changing religion got rights in ancestral property. Besides, the government maintained Christian preachers or padres in the army at its own expense. Many civil and military officers considered it their religious duty to encourage missionary propagation and arrange for Christian religious education even in government schools and prisons. Major Edwards had said: “The ultimate purpose of our authority over India is to make the country Christian.” The way English officers, at the behest of the English government, started attacking social-religious traditions and beliefs hurt orthodox Hindus and Muslims.
Attacks on Social-Religious Traditions
The way English officers, at the behest of the English government, started attacking social-religious traditions and beliefs greatly shocked orthodox Hindus and Muslims. They felt that a foreign Christian government wanted to destroy their religion and culture by making laws in the name of social change. Social reforms like the abolition of Sati, widow remarriage laws, and arrangements for Western education for girls made Indians feel that the government was trying to Christianize Indian religion and society. Now schools and education offices were considered ‘satanic offices.’ Many people even considered railways and steamships as indirect means of converting Indian religion.
Not only that, previous Indian rulers had kept lands attached to temples and mosques tax-free for their priests or service institutions. Now the government’s policy of collecting tax from them hurt people’s religious sentiments. Besides, many Brahmin and Muslim families dependent on these lands became furious and started propagating that the British were bent on destroying their religion.
Racial Arrogance of the British
The British believed that racially they were superior to Indians and their civilization was superior to that of Indians. They viewed Indians with contempt. A rule made it mandatory for every Indian to salute Europeans while walking on the road. The British humiliated Indians by calling them pigs, blacks, etc., which naturally led to discontent among Indians towards the British. Besides, people from middle and upper classes of society, especially in North India, were not included in well-paid administrative positions, which spread discontent among them.
Political Causes
Doctrine of Lapse
Lord Wellesley had adopted a policy of effective control over Indian princely states and their gradual elimination under the cover of subsidiary alliances, but Dalhousie broke all limits of moral and political ethics and devised a new ‘Doctrine of Lapse’. According to this doctrine, any state, territory, or area under British influence would come under the Company if the ruler died childless or if the ruler was proved incompetent in the Company’s eyes. On the basis of this Doctrine of Lapse, between 1848 and 1856, Jhansi (1853), Satara (1848), Nagpur, Sambalpur, Baghat (1850), Udaipur (1852), and through military conquest Punjab, Pegu, and Sikkim were annexed to the British state.
The state of Oudh had been loyal to the Company for 70 years. During this period, it had never done anything against the Company’s interests. When Oudh was annexed in 1856 on the pretext of the interests of the governed and the Nawab was sent to Calcutta, it created a revolutionary sentiment throughout India, especially in Oudh and in the Company’s army, particularly among the sepoys of the Bengal Army, and they started thinking of ending the Company’s rule.
Annexation of Oudh
For the annexation of Oudh, Dalhousie argued that he would free the people from the Nawab’s mismanagement and the oppression of taluqdars, but the people got no relief. On the contrary, the common people now had to pay more land revenue and higher taxes on food items, houses, carts, opium, and justice. With the dissolution of the Nawab’s administration and army, thousands of nobles, gentlemen, officers, and sepoys became unemployed. Almost every peasant’s home had someone unemployed. The livelihood of merchants, shopkeepers, and artisans serving the Oudh court and nobles was lost. Besides, the British confiscated the estates of most taluqdars and zamindars. Their arms were seized and fortifications demolished, which greatly reduced their position and power in local society. In the eyes of the law, they were no longer different from their ordinary cultivators. The number of dispossessed taluqdars was about 21,000. To regain their lost estates and social position, these people became the most dangerous enemies of British rule.
Atmosphere of Distrust
Dalhousie’s annexation policy alerted all Indian kings. Native princes began to feel that the existence of all princely states was in danger; it was only a question of time. Due to the treaties and promises broken by the Company, questions had arisen about the Company’s political credibility. Malleson rightly said that Dalhousie’s policy and the statements and writings of other high officials had created a kind of ‘atmosphere of distrust’ and Indians began to feel that the British were ‘wolves in sheep’s clothing.’ This policy of annexing states or subjugating them was directly responsible for making many rulers like Nana Sahib, Rani of Jhansi, and Bahadur Shah bitter enemies of the British. Nana Sahib was the adopted son of the last Peshwa Bajirao II. The British refused to give him the pension that was being given to Bajirao and forced him to live far from his ancestral capital Poona, in Kanpur (Bithur). Similarly, the British insistence on annexing Jhansi ignited the anger of the proud Rani Lakshmibai. The Rani wished that her adopted son should sit on the throne of her late husband.
Mistreatment of the Mughal Emperor
In 1849, Dalhousie struck at the prestige of the Mughal dynasty by declaring that Bahadur Shah’s successor Prince Fakiruddin would have to leave the historic Red Fort and live in a very small residence near Qutub Minar outside Delhi. After Fakiruddin’s death in 1856, Lord Canning declared that Bahadur Shah’s successor prince would have to give up both the title of ‘Badshah’ and the ‘Palace’. This declaration naturally made the Indian public mind, especially Muslims, anxious and dissatisfied. They felt that the British wanted to humiliate the Timur dynasty.
Foreign Character of British Rule
Another major cause of discontent among Indians against the British government was its foreign character. The British remained perpetual foreigners in India. There was no relation or contact between them and the Indian people. Unlike previous foreign rulers, the British did not develop social interactions even with upper-class Indians. On the contrary, they remained intoxicated with racial superiority and treated Indians in a humiliating and hateful manner. They called Indians ‘blacks’ or ‘pigs’ and insulted them at every opportunity. Syed Ahmed Khan later wrote: “Even the highest classes of natives never appeared before officials without internal fear and trembling.” In fact, the British did not come to India to settle or make it their home. Their main purpose was to earn money and return to Britain with that money. Indians well recognized this foreign character of their new rulers. They never considered the British as their well-wishers and viewed every action of theirs with suspicion. Thus, a vague anti-British sentiment was already present in them, which had been expressed in many anti-British popular revolts even before the 1857 revolt.
Military Causes
The 1857 Revolt began with the revolt of the Company’s sepoys. But the big question is why the sepoys, who had enabled the Company to conquer India through their loyal service and who had good reputation and financial security, suddenly became rebellious? The simple answer is that the sepoys were also part of Indian society and therefore they too felt and were saddened by what happened to other Indians to some extent. The hopes, desires, and pains of other sections of society, especially peasants, were reflected among these sepoys. This sepoy was actually a ‘peasant in uniform’. If their close relatives were suffering from the destructive economic acts of the British government, these sepoys also felt that pain.
Religious or Caste Grievances
The sepoys were also afflicted with the general belief that the British were interfering in their religions and were bent on converting all Indians to Christianity. Their experiences also strengthened this belief because they knew that Christian preachers were present in the army at state expense. Besides, some British officers also propagated Christianity among sepoys in religious zeal.
The sepoys had their own religious or caste grievances. There were restrictions from military officers on sepoys wearing caste or sect symbols, keeping beards, or wearing turbans. The sepoys had been filled with complaints for a long time, and in 1856, their religious beliefs had clashed with the new conditions of service. According to the ‘General Service Enlistment Act’ issued by Lord Canning, every new recruit sepoy had to guarantee to serve overseas if necessary. This also hurt the sepoys’ sentiments, because according to the Hindu religious beliefs of that time, sea voyage was a sin and one could be excommunicated for it. When a sepoy named Sitaram returned from Afghanistan, he was excommunicated not only from his village but also from his barrack. Not only that, when posted in Sindh or Punjab, the sepoys’ foreign service allowance (batta) was also abolished, which caused heavy cuts in the salaries of most sepoys.
Humiliating Treatment of Sepoys
The sepoys had many other complaints. British officers often treated sepoys in a humiliating manner. A contemporary British observer wrote: “The officer and the sepoy remained strangers to each other, not friends. The sepoy is considered an inferior creature. He is scolded and rebuked. He is treated badly, considered like a negro. He is called ‘pig’… Junior officers… treat him as an inferior creature.” Even if an Indian sepoy was a superior warrior, he was paid less and treated, fed, and watered worse than an English soldier. His promotion prospects were negligible. No Indian sepoy, no matter how extraordinary his ability or bravery, could rise above a jamadar (second lieutenant) earning 60-70 rupees monthly. T.R. Holmes wrote: “The sepoy knew that no matter how dutiful he was, no matter how brave a soldier he became, he would never get salary equal to an English soldier. Thirty years of dutiful service would not save him from being subordinate to an English officer.”
Defects in Military Organization
The Bombay, Madras, and Bengal Presidencies had their own separate armies and commanders-in-chief. These armies had more Indian sepoys than English troops. The armies of Bombay and Madras Presidencies consisted mostly of people from different regions and small castes, making these armies diverse and without dominance of people from one region. But in the Bengal Presidency army, not only was the English military presence the least, but 60 percent of the recruited sepoys were mainly from Oudh and the Gangetic plains. Due to their upper-caste background of Bhumihars, Rajputs, and Brahmins, they had a great brotherhood in which all members worked in unity. Charles Napier had no trust in these ‘high-caste’ mercenary soldiers. The annexation of Oudh in 1856 shook the loyalty of these sepoys, because about 75,000 soldiers were recruited from that region. Sir James Outram had already warned Dalhousie: “Possibly without any exception, every agricultural family in Oudh… sends one member to the British army.” Oudh was the home of the sepoys, and its annexation made them feel that “the power the Company has acquired through their service and sacrifice is being used today to eliminate their king.” Besides, these uniformed peasants were also concerned about the deteriorating condition of peasants due to the arbitrary settlements in Oudh. Before the revolt, these sepoys had submitted about 14,000 petitions regarding problems caused by the revenue system. In other words, when the sepoys took up arms and openly rebelled against the British, it was not only because of the ‘cartridges’.
Discontent Among Sepoys
There is a long history behind the discontent of the sepoys. In Bengal, a sepoy revolt had occurred as early as 1764. The officers suppressed the revolt by blowing away 30 sepoys with cannons. In 1806, sepoys revolted in Vellore, but Gillespie suppressed it with terrible violence. In 1824, the 47th Regiment at Barrackpore was disbanded for refusing to go to Burma by sea route. Artillery shells were fired on its unarmed sepoys, and the sepoy leaders were hanged. In 1844, seven battalions revolted over salary and allowance issues. Similarly, just before the Afghan War, sepoys were about to revolt in Afghanistan. To end the discontent in the army, one Muslim and one Hindu subedar were shot. The discontent was so widespread among sepoys that in 1858, Bengal’s Lieutenant Governor Frederick Halliday had to say that “the Bengal army was more or less rebellious and always ready for revolt, and it is certain that sooner or later, if excitement and opportunity coincided, it would revolt.” Thus, along with the Indian people, there was widespread and sharp dislike, even hatred, towards foreign rule among the sepoys.
Immediate Causes
The gunpowder for the 1857 Revolt had been accumulated; only a spark was needed. The incident of greased cartridges provided that spark too, and when the sepoys came to revolt, the common people also rose up.
Cartridges Greased with Cow and Pig Fat
In 1856, the government decided to use the more powerful and accurate .577 caliber Enfield rifle in place of the old Brown Bess musket that had been in use for many decades. The new rifle used a modern firing system (percussion cap). In this rifle, the upper part of the cartridge had to be bitten off with teeth to open it. In January 1857, a rumor spread in the Bengal Army that the greased cartridges contained pig and cow fat. This was against the religious sentiments of both Hindus and Muslims. Military officers immediately denied the rumor without investigating it. Later it was found that cow and bull fat was indeed used in the Woolwich arsenal. English officers suggested that sepoys make new cartridges using goat or beeswax fat. This suggestion further confirmed the rumor among sepoys. The sepoys became convinced that the use of greased cartridges was a sinister attempt to defile their religion. Thus, when the Company was in the role of Aurangzeb, the soldiers had to become Shivaji.
Beginning of the 1857 Revolt
Due to several arson incidents in Calcutta on 24 January 1857, tension was already prevailing in the atmosphere. On 26 February 1857, the sepoys of the 19th Bengal Native Infantry at Berhampore, 120 miles from Calcutta, refused to use the new greased cartridges. These sepoys were punished for indiscipline. Immediately after that, on 29 March 1857, at the Barrackpore parade ground near Calcutta, the sepoys of the 34th Native Infantry Cantonment refused to use these cartridges, and a sepoy named Mangal Pandey shot and killed the regiment’s officer Lieutenant Baugh.
According to General John Hearsey, “Mangal Pandey was in some kind of religious madness.”
The General ordered Jamadar Ishwari Prasad to arrest Mangal Pandey, but except for one sepoy Sheikh Paltu, the entire regiment refused to arrest Mangal Pandey. British military officers easily controlled this sepoy revolt and disbanded the 34th N.I. Battalion. Mangal Pandey was court-martialed on 6 April 1857 and hanged on 8 April. Jamadar Ishwari Prasad was also hanged on 22 April. Sepoy Sheikh Paltu was promoted and made a jamadar in the Bengal Army.
The information about cartridges being greased had also disturbed all military cantonments in North India. Reports of disobedience, incitement, and looting were coming from Ambala, Lucknow, and Meerut cantonments. In Meerut, on 24 April, 85 sepoys of the 3rd Native Cavalry refused to take cartridges made from cow and pig fat. The court-martial of these 85 sepoys at Meerut Parade Ground on 9 May prepared the immediate background for the 1857 Revolt. They were sentenced to 10 years imprisonment along with the court-martial. Finally, on Sunday evening 10 May at 6:30 pm, the sepoys of the 20th Infantry and 11th Infantry revolted and freed their 85 imprisoned comrades of the 3rd Native Cavalry from Victoria Park Jail. The sepoys killed their European officers, their wives, and children. At that time, General Hewitt had 2,200 European soldiers, but he made no effort to stop this storm.
Revolutionaries’ Control over Delhi
The revolutionary sepoys marched towards Delhi after sunset. The 1857 Revolt began with the capture of Delhi as the center and symbol of power. On 12 May, the revolutionary sepoys captured Delhi city and declared Mughal Emperor Bahadur Shah II as the Emperor of Hindustan. In the campaign to capture Delhi, hundreds of British were killed, including the Company’s political agent Simon Fraser. The capture of Delhi and Bahadur Shah II declaring himself Emperor of Hindustan gave this revolution a positive political meaning. By this one act alone, the sepoys turned a military revolt into a revolutionary war. This is why the steps of revolutionary sepoys across the country automatically turned towards Delhi, and all Indian kings participating in the revolution did not delay in declaring their loyalty to the Mughal Emperor. Then, at the behest of the sepoys or possibly under their pressure, Bahadur Shah wrote letters to all kings and chiefs of India and appealed to them to establish a confederation of Indian states to fight and remove the British Empire.
The revolutionary sepoys declared Mughal Emperor Bahadur Shah II as the Emperor of Hindustan.
Extent and Intensity of the Revolt
The Meerut revolt and capture of Delhi was just the beginning. Soon after, a strong wave of revolution spread among sepoys and civilians throughout North India and some parts of West and Central India. Out of the Company’s 2,32,224 sepoys, about half left their regiments and blew away the ideal of the army that had been taught to them through years of training and discipline. In many princely states, the rulers remained loyal, but revolution erupted or came close to erupting in their armies. Many soldiers from Indore revolted and joined the revolutionaries. Similarly, more than 20,000 soldiers from Gwalior went with Tatya Tope and the Rani of Jhansi. Governor General Lord Canning wrote in despair on 19 June: “From Delhi to Kanpur and Allahabad in Rohilkhand and Doab, the country has not only rebelled against us but has become lawless from one end.”
Within a month of capturing Delhi, the revolution spread to almost all major centers—Kanpur, Lucknow, Banaras, Allahabad, Bareilly, Jagdishpur, and Jhansi—and the irritated rural population also came forward to help the revolutionaries. The revolutionaries uprooted the British administration everywhere. Since the revolutionaries had no leader of their own, they took local feudals, nawabs, and kings with them and entrusted them with leadership responsibility.
Lucknow
Lucknow (Uttar Pradesh) was a major center of the great revolution of 1857, where the revolt started on 4 June and was led by Begum Hazrat Mahal of Oudh. She organized sepoys, peasants, and zamindars and waged war against British rule. Under her leadership, revolutionary sepoys captured Lucknow and besieged the British Residency. During this siege, British Resident Henry Lawrence was killed. Her young son Birjis Qadr was declared Nawab, and he established a parallel administration, appointing Hindus and Muslims to important positions, presenting an example of religious unity.
The revolution in Lucknow gained further strength when a Dalit woman warrior Uda Devi joined the revolt with her husband Makka Pasi. Makka Pasi was a sepoy in the 22nd Native Infantry and played an important role in organizing sepoys. Uda Devi courageously participated in the Battle of Sikanderbagh in November 1857 disguised as a male soldier and climbed a tree to kill several British soldiers. Uda Devi’s sacrifice became a symbol of Dalit community and women’s participation in the revolution.
The British army made several attempts to recapture Lucknow. Havelock and Outram’s initial attacks failed, but in November 1857, General Colin Campbell entered Lucknow with the help of the Gurkha Regiment and rescued the trapped Europeans in the Residency. In March 1858, the British fully captured Lucknow. Begum Hazrat Mahal went to the Nepal Terai and continued guerrilla warfare, with sporadic attacks continuing until September 1858. The bravery of leaders like Begum Hazrat Mahal and Uda Devi made Lucknow an inspiring center of the 1857 Revolt, symbolizing the fight for social-economic exploitation and religious-cultural unity.
Kanpur
Kanpur (Uttar Pradesh) was a major center of the great revolution of 1857, where Nana Sahib (Dhondupant), the adopted son of the last Maratha Peshwa Bajirao II, led the revolutionaries. The British refused to recognize Nana Sahib as the Peshwa’s successor, stopped his pension, and exiled him from Poona. At that time, he was living in Bithur near Kanpur, where there was deep discontent among sepoys and local people against British land revenue policies and exploitation. On 5 June 1857, Nana Sahib, along with rebel sepoys of the 2nd Cavalry and 1st Native Infantry, captured Kanpur. He declared Delhi’s Mughal Emperor Bahadur Shah ‘Zafar’ as the Emperor of India and declared himself his representative Peshwa, establishing a parallel administration.
In Kanpur, the revolutionaries besieged the British cantonment, commanded by General Hugh Wheeler. A prominent courtesan Azijanbai, close associate of Nana Sahib, played an important role in this siege. Azijanbai not only provided financial assistance but also contributed to organizing local people and sepoys. Her intelligence and social influence helped unite the revolutionaries. After heavy losses during the siege, Wheeler surrendered on 27 June 1857. During this, an attack occurred on British soldiers and civilians boarding boats at Sati Chaura Ghat, known controversially in history as the ‘Sati Chaura Massacre’.
In July 1857, General Havelock recaptured Kanpur, but Nana Sahib did not accept defeat. Along with his trusted commander Tatya Tope and advisor Azimullah Khan, he recaptured Kanpur from the British in November 1857. Tatya Tope’s military strategy and Azimullah’s skill in organizing people through revolutionary pamphlets and letters played an important role in this victory. Azijanbai also helped boost the morale of sepoys and gather information during this time. But on 6 December 1857, the British army under Sir Colin Campbell finally captured Kanpur with heavy military force and artillery.
After this defeat, Nana Sahib, Tatya Tope, and Azijanbai went to Nepal Terai and Central India and continued guerrilla warfare. Azijanbai actively participated in the war and was involved in several attacks on British bases. Her stories of bravery and sacrifice are still alive in local folklore. The Kanpur revolt became an important chapter of the 1857 Revolt due to the bravery, strategy, and social unity of leaders like Nana Sahib, Tatya Tope, Azimullah, and Azijanbai.
Jhansi
Jhansi (Uttar Pradesh) was a major center of the great revolution of 1857, where the valiant Rani Lakshmibai and her trusted associate Jhalkaribai led the revolutionary sepoys. Under the British ‘Doctrine of Lapse’ policy, Lord Dalhousie refused to recognize Rani Lakshmibai’s adopted son Damodar Rao as the successor to her husband Raja Gangadhar Rao and annexed Jhansi to the British East India Company in 1853. Against this unjust decision, the Rani appealed up to London, met several British officials, and made every possible effort to save her state, but her appeals were rejected. Even at the beginning of the revolution, the Rani tried to negotiate with the British and proposed that if her demands were accepted, Jhansi would not become a threat to the British. But the British adamant attitude forced her to take the path of revolt.
In June 1857, in Jhansi’s military cantonment, sepoys of the 12th Native Infantry and other regiments revolted and declared the widowed Rani Lakshmibai as the ruler of the state. The Rani immediately took leadership of the revolutionaries. In her army, Jhalkaribai, a valiant woman from the Koli community, played an important role. Jhalkaribai was considered the Rani’s lookalike, due to which she often led strategic fronts in place of the Rani. The women in Rani Lakshmibai’s women’s squad were skilled in distributing ammunition and firing cannons. Her army fought fiercely against the British, with the Rani herself mounting a horse and entering the battlefield with a sword.
In March-April 1858, the British army under General Hugh Rose attacked Jhansi. The Rani and Jhalkaribai fought valiantly to defend the fort, but on 3 April 1858, the British captured Jhansi in the face of heavy military force and artillery. After that, Rani Lakshmibai escaped to Kalpi with Tatya Tope and her Afghan guards, from where she planned an attack on Gwalior. In June 1858, the Rani and Tatya Tope captured Gwalior. Gwalior’s Maharaja Jayajirao Scindia, who was loyal to the British, tried to fight against the Rani, but a large part of his army joined the Rani, as a result of which Scindia had to flee to Agra and take refuge with the British.
On 17 June 1858, Rani Lakshmibai attained martyrdom fighting the British in the Battle of Kota ki Sarai near Gwalior. In this battle, Jhalkaribai also took the front in place of the Rani and astonished the British with her bravery. The bravery, leadership, and sacrifice of Rani Lakshmibai and Jhalkaribai made the 1857 Revolt an inspiring chapter. Thus, the 1857 revolt was not just a military revolt but also a symbol of Hindu-Muslim unity and strong women’s participation, which ignited the spirit of freedom throughout India.
Bareilly
Bareilly (Uttar Pradesh) was a major center of the great revolution of 1857, where Khan Bahadur Khan, descendant of the former ruler of Rohilkhand Hafiz Rahmat Khan, led the revolt. He declared himself ‘Nawab Nazim’ and established an independent administration in Bareilly. Initially dependent on British pension, Khan Bahadur showed no interest in the revolution, but became active when the wave of revolt spread from Meerut and Delhi. In May 1857, sepoys of the 68th Native Infantry and 8th Cavalry Regiment in Bareilly started the revolt, led by Khan Bahadur. He organized about 40,000 soldiers, including sepoys, local zamindars, peasants, and volunteers, to form a strong army.
Under Khan Bahadur’s leadership, the rebels captured Bareilly, drove out British officials, broke the jail, and seized the treasury. He established a parallel administration, including tax collection, justice system, and military organization. His army spread the revolt to surrounding areas of Rohilkhand like Shahjahanpur, Pilibhit, and Moradabad and attacked British bases. Khan Bahadur’s strategy included both guerrilla and open warfare, which gave the British a tough fight.
In early 1858, the British army under General Colin Campbell launched a strong counterattack to recapture Bareilly. In the decisive battle of Bareilly in May 1858, Khan Bahadur’s army faced defeat. The rebels could not stand against heavy artillery and organized British army. After the defeat, Khan Bahadur fled to Nepal Terai, where he continued guerrilla warfare. Later he was captured and hanged by the British in 1860. The Bareilly revolt, under Khan Bahadur’s leadership, was important in igniting the spirit of independence in Rohilkhand and challenging British rule. This revolt was a powerful reaction against local discontent, especially British land revenue policies and social-economic exploitation.
Faizabad
Faizabad (present Ayodhya, Uttar Pradesh) was a major center of the great revolution of 1857, where Maulvi Ahmadullah Shah led the revolt. A resident of Madras (present Chennai), a scholar and staunch patriot, Maulvi Ahmadullah had started propagating armed revolution against the British much earlier. Reaching Faizabad in January 1857, he united sepoys, zamindars, and peasants against British rule through his passionate speeches and religious influence. When the revolt starting from Meerut and Delhi in May 1857 spread to Oudh, he emerged as a major revolutionary leader. Along with sepoys of the 22nd Native Infantry and local supporters, he captured Faizabad, drove out British officials, and seized government treasury and arms. His role was important in spreading the revolt to Lucknow, Sultanpur, and Barabanki. In 1858, the British army under General Colin Campbell recaptured Faizabad. After the defeat, Maulvi Ahmadullah fled to Nepal Terai and continued guerrilla warfare, but was killed in June 1858 in Powai (Madhya Pradesh) due to betrayal. His bravery and sacrifice gave a new direction to the 1857 freedom struggle.
Allahabad
After the news of the Meerut revolt spread, the revolution began in Allahabad (Prayagraj, Uttar Pradesh) on 6 June 1857. The leadership of the 1857 Revolt in Prayagraj was mainly by a teacher Maulvi Liaqat Ali Wahabi, who organized Indian sepoys and local people to conduct the revolt against British rule. The Indian sepoys of the 6th Oudh-India Infantry (OI) Regiment revolted. They tried to capture the fort on the banks of the Yamuna River, broke the jail to free prisoners, and set fire to British officials’ houses. British Colonel John Sherer arranged defenses in the European areas of the city, but sepoys killed many British families. By 11 June, British forces under Colonel James Neill recaptured it, using cannons to suppress the rebels and hanging hundreds of Indians.
Banaras
The revolution erupted in Banaras (Varanasi) on 4 June 1857, when upon receiving news of the Meerut revolt, sepoys of the 37th Native Infantry and Ludhiana Regiment revolted. The sepoys attacked British officials, looted the armory, and set fires in the city. The Raja of Banaras Ishwari Prasad Narayan Singh remained pro-British and helped the British, which did not allow the revolt to organize. British Commissioner Henry Carter and Colonel James Neill counterattacked by 5-6 June, suppressed the revolt, and re-established control over the city. The sepoys fled towards Allahabad and other places. The revolt in Banaras remained unorganized because of the Raja’s loyalty and the British army’s swift action.
Gorakhpur
Gorakhpur (Uttar Pradesh) was an important center of the great revolution of 1857, where the revolt started in June 1857. Upon the spread of news of revolts in Meerut and Delhi, sepoys of the 17th Native Infantry Regiment revolted, looted the treasury, broke the jail, and set fire to British properties. British Collector John Drummond and Magistrate Pankhurst fled. The revolt spread to rural areas, where peasants and zamindars joined. Local zamindars and Raja Radha Singh of Ambapur, Police Superintendent Nazim Ali, Maulvi, and sepoys led it. In June-July 1857, sepoys captured Gorakhpur and attacked British bases in Azamgarh, Basti, Deoria. In August-September, British army under Colonel Rowen defeated Radha Singh in the Battle of Ambapur on 28 August, recaptured the city, burned villages, and hanged or shot hundreds of rebels. Radha Singh fled but was later captured and hanged. The main cause of the revolt was peasants’ discontent, rent, and land disputes.
Jagdishpur
In Jagdishpur, Bihar, the leadership of the great revolution of 1857 was by zamindar Babu Kunwar Singh. Even at the age of seventy, he displayed indomitable courage and strategic skill against the British. The British land revenue policies and forced collections had ruined him economically, creating deep discontent in his mind. In July 1857, when rebel sepoys from Dinapur (Danapur) reached Arrah, Kunwar Singh took command of them, and inspired by him, the flame of revolution blazed in places like Patna, Arrah, Gaya, Chapra, Motihari, Muzaffarnagar, etc. In Arrah, he organized local people and sepoys, drove out British officials, and inflicted heavy losses on the British through guerrilla warfare strategy. He was seriously injured in the battle near Azamgarh in 1858, yet returned to Jagdishpur and liberated his fort. He passed away in April 1858, but his brother Amar Singh carried forward the revolution.
Spread of the Revolt to Other Areas
The great revolution of 1857 spread across various parts of India as a national movement, in which all classes, communities, and regions participated. It was not limited to big cities but affected small towns and rural areas as well. In Punjab, sepoys and local people participated in the revolt in Lahore, Ferozepur, Amritsar, Jalandhar, Rawalpindi, Jhelum, Sialkot, Ambala, and Gurdaspur. In Lahore, sepoys attacked British officials, while in Amritsar and Jalandhar, zamindars and peasants supported. In Haryana, the revolution was at its peak in Gurgaon (present Gurugram), Mewat, Bahadurgarh, Narnaul, Hisar, and Jhajjar. In Gurgaon, Rao Tularam and in Hisar, local leaders organized the revolt and gave a tough challenge to the British.
In Bengal, except Kolkata, military cantonments like Barrackpore, Berhampore, and Danapur were affected by the revolt. In Bombay Presidency, sepoys revolted in Nasik, Ahmednagar, and Kolhapur, although its impact was relatively less. In Central India, Gwalior, Indore, Sagar, Bundelkhand, and Raipur became major centers of revolt. In Gwalior, Rani Lakshmibai and Tatya Tope provided leadership to the revolt, while in Sagar and Bundelkhand, zamindars and tribal communities waged guerrilla war against the British. In Andhra Pradesh, peasants in Rayalaseema, Hyderabad, and Rajahmundry participated in the revolt against heavy rent and exploitation. South India, Madras (Chennai) remained largely untouched by this revolution, but leaders like Maulvi Ahmadullah propagated revolutionary ideas there.
The impact of the revolution crossed India’s borders. Sparks of revolt ignited even in Portuguese colonies in Goa and French rule in Pondicherry. In South Asia, echoes of the revolution were heard in Nepal, Afghanistan, Bhutan, and Tibet. In Nepal, Jung Bahadur supported the British, but many Nepali soldiers and locals supported the rebels.
Thus, this revolution was a united effort of Hindus, Muslims, Sikhs, Jats, tribals, peasants, zamindars, and sepoys. This revolution ignited the spirit of freedom throughout South Asia and became immortal in history as India’s national movement.
Administrative Agency ‘Jalsa’
Although there may have been a lack of any plan or organization before the revolution, as soon as the revolution started, the revolutionaries began efforts to form an organization. As soon as Delhi was captured, letters were sent to all surrounding states and rulers of Rajasthan seeking their support and inviting them to participate. In Delhi, an administrative agency of six soldiers and four civilians was formed, which took over the administration of Delhi under the name ‘Jalsa’. All decisions were taken by majority. The agency conducted the royal affairs in the name of the Emperor. A British official wrote that the form of Delhi’s government was somewhat like a dictatorship. The Emperor was supreme and was respected like a constitutional emperor. But in place of parliament, there was a council of soldiers in which power was vested. Similarly, efforts were made to form organizations in other centers as well.
Popular Character of the Revolt
The revolution was as widespread as it was deep. The extensive participation of peasants, artisans, daily wage laborers, and zamindars gave the revolution its real strength and also gave it the character of a ‘people’s revolution’, especially in the areas that are now included in Uttar Pradesh and Bihar. In this region, peasants and zamindars openly expressed their grievances by attacking usurers and new zamindars who dispossessed them of their land. Taking advantage of the revolution, they destroyed usurers’ account books and debt documents. They attacked courts, tehsils, offices, revenue documents, and police stations established by the British. In many battles, the participation of common people was more than that of sepoys. According to one estimate, out of about 1.5 lakh people who died fighting the British in Oudh, more than one lakh were ordinary civilians. The biggest thing is that even where the people did not join the revolution, they showed sympathy with the revolutionaries, they remained happy at every victory of the revolutionaries and socially boycotted soldiers who remained loyal to the British.
The popular character of the 1857 Revolt came to the fore when the British tried to crush it. They had to fight not only against revolutionary sepoys but also a full and ruthless battle against the people of Delhi, Oudh, North-Western Provinces, Agra, Central India, and West Bihar. Village after village was burned and there was a horrific massacre of rural and urban people. They had to hang people without any trial and hang them from trees in front of everyone. This shows how deeply the revolution had spread in these areas.
Hindu-Muslim Unity
Much of the strength of the 1857 Revolt lay in Hindu-Muslim unity. All revolutionaries accepted a Muslim, Bahadur Shah, as their Emperor. Hindu and Muslim revolutionaries and sepoys fully respected each other’s sentiments, such as wherever the revolution succeeded, orders were immediately issued to ban cow slaughter in respect of Hindus’ sentiments. Besides, Hindus and Muslims were given equal representation at every level of leadership. A British official Hutchinson reluctantly admitted: “In this matter, we cannot make Muslims fight against Hindus.”
Was the 1857 Revolt Planned?
The 1857 movement was an unexpected revolution arising from the confluence of sepoys’ and seething people’s discontent. The question arises whether it was a planned revolution or a sudden eruption? There is no evidence that this revolution was the result of any planned scheme. The leaders’ ways of working also do not suggest that they had made any plan beforehand. It is possible that the idea of making a plan was considered, but it does not seem that it was finalized.
Nana Sahib’s visits to Lucknow and Ambala in March and April 1857 and the revolution starting in May do not prove that he had planned the revolution. It is also not correct to say that Munshi Azimullah Khan and Rango Bapu planned the revolution. In fact, Nana Sahib’s representative Azimullah Khan went to London to advocate that Bajirao’s pension be given to Nana Sahib. On the way back, he went to Turkey and met Umar Pasha on the Crimea battlefield. Similarly, Rango Bapu was sent to London to appeal against Dalhousie’s decision to annex Satara to the British Empire. It is speculated from these two individuals’ personal trips to London that they were involved in planning the revolution. But there is no proof for such speculations. After capturing Bithur, all of Nana Sahib’s papers fell into British hands, including a letter written by Azimullah Khan to Umar Pasha that was never sent. It only stated that Indian soldiers had revolted against the British. This letter or any other letter of Azimullah Khan does not indicate that he ever planned an Indian revolution. Thus, the 1857 Revolt cannot be considered the result of any planned scheme against the British.
There is also no solid basis for believing stories like messages being sent everywhere through chapatis and lotus flowers or the prophecy that ‘British rule in India will last only a hundred years’. The truth is that this revolution was as surprising for Bahadur Shah as it was for the British. Even in the trial against Bahadur Shah, the British found no evidence of an organized revolution. Thus, there is serious doubt that a plan was made and the movement was run.
