Interna tional Jo urna l o f Applied Research 2021 ; 7 (1 1 ): 265 -2 67

ISSN Print: 2394-7500

ISSN Online: 2394-5869
Impact Factor: 8.4
Revolt of 1857: A new historical approach
IJAR 2021; 7(11): 265-267
www.allresearchjournal.com
Received: 15-09-2021 Dr. Refaq Ahmad
Accepted: 19-10-2021
Abstract
Dr. Refaq Ahmad The Importance of 1857 in India history is unquestionable and very relevant at present scenario. The
Assistant Professor,
revolution of 1857 has become a milestone in India history. Few years ago, we had celebrated the 150th
Department of Medieval and
anniversary of the great revolution. In the context of modern history, efforts are being made to redefine
Modern History, ISPGC,
University of Allahabad, and mark various aspects of the revolution, taking the basis of 1857. Every stream wants to see facts
Uttar Pradesh, India only to the extent of its arguments. But those streams are increasingly active by which history is
suppressed or crushed. They bring new facts to the fore.

Keywords: Revolt, revolution, arguments, stream, colonial, anti colonial, British economic policy, all
British policy etc.

Introduction
The importance of 1857 in Indian history is unquestionable and very relevant at present
scenario. The revolution of 1857 has become a milestone in Indian history. Few years ago,
we had celebrated the 150th anniversary of the Great Revolution. In the context of modern
history, efforts are being made to redefine and mark various aspects of the revolution, taking
the basis of 1857. The present paper is an attempt to touch upon the various dimensions of
revolution in the context of 'nation' and 'nationality'. Generally, various streams try to
establish the war of 1857 as the first anti-colonial freedom struggle, national rebellion, sepoy
mutiny, anti-British struggle of kings and feudal lords etc [1]. However, all these concepts
have facts and explanations for their respective establishments.
Every stream wants to see facts only to the extent of its arguments. But those streams are
increasingly active by which history is suppressed or crushed. They bring new facts to the
fore. Eminent historian Vipin Chandra says that the importance of the war of 1857 has
neither diminished in modern India nor can it ever be. Its relevance continues even today. Is
it no less a big deal that after this war there has been such a change in the circumstances and
Indian public that today we are an independent nation [2]. Nation building is a later process in
the context of nationality [3].
Facts of the Emerging of Nationality by the paper presented in the context of 1857 an attempt
has been made to identify the aspects. In recent years a number of historians have cast
serious doubts on the so-called 'agreement' that the rebel leaders were hopelessly conflicted
about their future vision [4]. There was no concept of an Indian nation in the modern sense
among the rebels of 1857. It cannot be said that completely [5]. Peasants actions were local
events that were confined within clear territorial boundaries, yet unlike the earlier peasant
revolts, there was now certainly greater coordination between regions and the rebels were
being influenced by influences from outside their territory [6]. Indian Peasants The British
geo-policy added fuel recession that lasted from 1810 to 1850, and the revolution of 1857
took to the fire of the global wider form.
The extent of the revolution was dominated by the rebels from different regions of north and
central India. There was coordination and dialogue, (new research is also providing evidence
of the reaction and trends in the regions of South India) and the flying rumors kept the rebels
Corresponding Author: in an unseen bond. The British Raj and their lives because of it. They all had a common
Dr. Refaq Ahmad
Assistant Professor,
sense of hatred for the upheaval that took place in even though and possibly its different
Department of Medieval and though cut off from each other by experiences, they stood against the same enemy at the
Modern History, ISPGC, same point in history. They took up arms to regain the area they believed to be the world of
University of Allahabad, their ancestors. Remarkable religious unity was observed during the rebellion, as all agreed
Uttar Pradesh, India
~ 265 ~
International Journal of Applied Research http://www.allresearchjournal.com

that India belonged to Hindus and Muslims in equal but the British government attacked the traditional values
measure [10]. In his latest book, C.A. Bailey has seen ‘a and beliefs of the Indians. Provided an opportunity to the
group of patriots rebellions in the Revolt of 1857. He writes Indian religious communities to unite and protest among
that the demand of the rebels was the restoration of that themselves. Although this initial opposition arose from
Indo-Mughal protectorate within the greater sphere of within the soldiers [16]. In this situation all the Indian masses
Mughal legitimacy, driven by mutual respect and a healthy united against the power and the struggle began. Although
balance between the regions and the masses [11]. As the there has been a wide discussion on the struggle of 1857
revolution progressed, then the so-called facilitators also regarding its nature, yet in its context this struggle is for the
accepted the British Raj with criticism. The Bengali future. It certainly gives rise to the elements of nationalism.
educated society opposed the British authority in its Any change-oriented conflict does not suddenly erupt
contexts, albeit in stifled words, to which their economic around the world, it is the most intense expression of a long
interests were attached. background. After the British colonized India, there were
The struggle of 1857 may not be entirely national in the many conflicts with some areas turning into colonies of
immediate context. The elements of nationalism are not India, sometimes by tribes and sometimes by farmers [17].
clearly visible, although in later writings there was an The struggle in different parts of 1857 was called the first
attempt to carve out its national character. Here it will be national revolt in this form. Although it had a limit.
necessary to discuss the immediate aspects of the struggle of The British scholars and officials never considered it as
1857, if the rebellion of 1857 is seen in economic, social, anything more than a military rebellion, Hindu Muslim
political and religious terms, then the feudal system was conspiracy and barbarism against civilization. Although, the
directly related to all these levels in its context [13]. British MP Benjamin Dezarely called it a 'national rebellion'
Contemporary economic policy (British government) was for the first time in the British Parliament. After that, in the
directly responsible for the revolution of 1857. In the United first decade of the 20th century, VD Savarkar called it
Provinces, mainly in the region of Awadh, De- India's first independence and written down his idea as a
industrialization led to commercial decline and limited book. Although many post-independence historians
resources of livelihood, increased pressure on land and questioned its national nature, Mazumdar does not consider
agriculture though Zamindars, talukdars the British it as India's first freedom struggle at any level [18]. Although
remained loyal to power, but when their interests were historians like Ashish Bhushan Chaudhary and S.N. Sen
affected, they also rose against power. Understanding the with soldirs and common people consider participation but
character of the British ruling class in economic discourse as do not call it a national struggle. But all these analysis have
well as the economic effects of British rule on India between their own perspective of seeing, understanding and
1757-1857 and its relationship with the struggle of 1857 analyzing history. But history cannot be seen in such a one-
should be investigated more deeply. Ashok Kumar Pandey sided way under any particular kind of interpretation It
writes that even though the immediate cause of the revolt in should be broken. Revolutions stand on many surfaces of
1857 may have been the greased cartridges, but at its root conflicts, many forces for their own reasons converge in one
100 years of English plundering, corruption and there was center and agree immediately to strike in one place. It is of
dissatisfaction arising out of the horrific destruction of course that in the pages of the history of the struggle of
agriculture, industry and trade due to barbaric oppression 1857, princes and soldiers of the British army appear
and anti-people economic policies. This is the reason why prominently, but it is also true that any revolution does not
farmers played an important role in this struggle. In 1857, survive only by rebellion within power. The same struggle
even though common soldiers and peasants were seen has survived in which the support of the common people is
standing with the feudal lords but after him 25-30 years, obtained. Although the struggle of 1857 could not progress
they are also seen fighting with feudal lords and towards success due to its inherent weaknesses. Most
moneylenders. In many areas the peasants and artisans importantly, the leadership of the rebellion was in the hands
forced the talukdars to take part in revolts while in some of feudal princes who were past-oriented. The struggle of
instances when the talukdars reconciled with the British 1857 continued to inspire the youth, farmers and laborers
even when the people continued to revolt. The biggest thing who aspire to bring about a change in the current situation.
is that the main initiative was taken by the soldiers i.e. the The important question here is that how to define the
uniformed farmers, the caste and sub-caste relations of the concept of Nation and nationality in the context of 1857.
revolt soldiers, who now took off their uniforms and joined The famous western scholar Hobbes baum writes that
the peasants, also used to connect them with the peasant nationality is formed before the nation and nationality is a
communities. The question remained about the Symbols of dynamic concept. The revolution of 1857 shoud be seen in
revolution- Chapatis, they spread from village to village [15]. these mentioned elements as a process of building up the
The public took different meanings from them and they nationality of India. At present, considering 1857 as a
remained a symbol rather than an indicator or cause of milestone, every part of the Indian society-Dalit, Muslim is
impending crisis. In this way, the evidence of the freedom conscious of the discussion of their respective role in the
mobilization of the common peasants and the common struggle of 1857 and that nation in the same sense and
people in the revolution cannot be ignored. context. Trying to find its place in construction attempts will
Politically, the policy of the British government was hostile have to be made to make the context of nationality in the
towards the princely state, Dalhousie's 'grab policy' and 'the context of 1857 in the future. The revolution of 1857 wanted
doctrine of lapse' etc., all the princely states were connected to unite and inspire all the elements of the making of India
with their interests. On the other hand, even at the religious and hand it over to the future, on which path a democratic
level, people of all religions and castes of the Indian society and democratic nation like India was later built.
lived together peacefully with their values and beliefs,
although these values were bad practices in other contexts,
~ 266 ~
International Journal of Applied Research http://www.allresearchjournal.com

References
1. Bipin Chandra. Rise and Growth of Nationalisan in
Indian, New Delhi, 1977, 11p.
2. Ibid. 12p.
3. Paul Brass, Language, Religion and Politics in North
India, London: Cambridge University press, 1974, p.98
4. Shekhar Bandhouppadhyay, Plassey to Partition, New
Delhi, 2007, 192-193
5. Ibid, 193p.
6. Thomas R. Metcalf, The Aftermath of Revolt: India
Princeton, 1857-1870, 96p.
7. Shekhar Bandhouppadhyay, Plassey to Partition, New
Delhi. 2007, 193p.
8. Gautam Bhadra, Four rebels of Eighteen-fifty seven In
Subalton Studies: Writings on south Asian History and
Society, ed. R. Guha, Delhi. 2007;4:65.
9. Rajat Ray K. Race, Religion and Realm: The Political
theory of the Reigning India Crusade, 1857. In India's
Colonial Encounter: Essays in Memory of Eric Stokes,
d. N. Gupta and M. Hazan; Delhi: Manohar. 1993,
134p.
10. Ranajit Guha. Elementary Aspects of Peasant surgency
in colonial India-Second impression, Delhi, 1994, 318p.
11. Bayly CA. Origins of Nationality in South Asia:
atriotism and Ethical Government in the making of
modern India, Delhi, 12p.
12. Judith Brown, Modern India: The regions of an Asian
Democracy, (Ind Ed.) New York. 1990, 90p.
13. Ibid, 192p.
14. Rudrangshu Mukherjee. Awadh in Revolt. A study of
popular resistance, Delhi. 1984;21:1857-1858.
15. Ranajit Guha. Elementary Aspects of Peasant
Insurgency in colonial India Second impression, Delhi,
1994, 239p.
16. Bayly CA. Editor's Concluding note: Eric Stokes and
the uprising if 1857. In the peasant Armed: The Indian
Rebellion of 1857, by Eric Stokes, Oxford, 1986, 226p.
17. Tirthankar Roy. The Economic History of India New
Delhi, 1857-1947, p. 121.
18. Majumdar RC. The Sepoy Mutiny and the Revolt of
1857, end ed. Calcutta. 1963, 32p.
19. Chandhari SB. Civil Rebellion in the Indian Multinies,
Calcutta, 1957, 192p.

~ 267 ~