• Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

'More than a Mutiny, less than a War of Independence' - Do you agree with this description of the Events of 1857-8 in India?

Extracts from this document...


The original outbreaks, of which the one at Meerut is typical, took place in an environment governed by military discipline. They were obviously and classically mutinies (so 'more than a' mutiny1). The mutineers were later joined by others who were not soldiers or in any way bound by military rules. In that obvious additional sense the events were more than 'mutinies' or 'a mutiny', and to use that word to describe the whole is a mistake as well as a slur, intended or not, on the participants. Was it a war? Not in the classic legal sense since there were just hostilities, with no formal declaration, but certainly, with armies of soldiers confronting each other, in the normal sense of the term. Was it a war of independence? One might argue that all wars are wars of independence: the participants seek, whatever the issues, to maintain their freedom of action with regard to them. To capitalise the phrase as 'War of Independence' is to make grander claims, and in this case we may reasonably assume that the claim is that it was a war of Indian national independence. Was it national? Traditionally the 1857 events have been assigned to the Ganges valley, but recent writers have tried to suggest that they were 'national' because disorders were observed widely across the sub continent. In fact, although there were disturbances as far east as Chittagong, as far west as Peshawar and further south than Mumbai, a glance at the movements of the British relief armies shows them heading north from Chennai, north-east from Mumbai, south-east from Peshawar and west from Calcutta. ...read more.


Farming for food had been reduced in favour of farming for cash crops such as indigo and, infamously, opium. The East India Company was a major player in this trade as was Jardine Matheson; but their profits made India more vulnerable to famine. Indian crafts and industries, particularly textile industries, were deliberately and significantly disadvantaged by tariffs in favour of British products. In many areas Indian options were reduced to a choice between working in the opium or indigo plantations or joining the British army. Where these factors operated there was anti British feeling on a large scale. Besides these there were numerous special groups such as the Nawab of Awadh's jugglers and former soldiers, and zamindars whose fortunes ebbed and flowed as the British tried different ways of getting more 'tax Britannica' out of the Indians. Some of these grievances were felt very widely, but the Scindia of Gwalior was not going to take up arms for an indigo planter and nor, given a choice, would Bahadur Shah have done; tax farmers and tax payers had very different grievances. It would be hard to find any example in history where a national rising was exclusively motivated by economic considerations. We can agree that the causes of the rising went wider and deeper than simply military issues, but that in the economic sphere there were several different 'wars of independence' being fought, none of them national and not all of them against the British. ...read more.


and the hajji Ferozh Shah all failed the test. But we do not deny that the Welsh were engaged in a War of Independence because Llywelyn and Owain Glyndwr failed, nor the Saxons because Hereward the Wake did not remove William the Conqueror. Historians have a duty to inform, but they speak to the uninformed. For the uninformed a label assumes disproportionate significance because it acts as an emotional doorway to the truth. If one is emotionally committed to a view of things, one will not willingly enter by a doorway marked with words which seem to promise that an objectionable alternative view lies within. The handful of British chauvinists who gave offence by presenting themselves at Lucknow in 2007 may be the last with any shred of an emotional commitment to the word 'Mutiny'. There are far more who want to cherish the phrase 'War of Independence' because, like a national flag, it provides a decent covering to an undignified jostling of heroes and scoundrels propelling bandwagons of every description. What technically began as a mutiny developed into several unsuccessful 'Indian wars of independence'. 1 unless it is shown that they were co-ordinated by the chapatti master plan, in which case we are back to 'a mutiny' 2 We have to exclude the little local difficulty between the Ranee and her neighbours for this to be true. ?? ?? ?? ?? 'More than a mutiny, but less than a War of Independence' - how far do you agree with this description of the events of 1857-8 in India? H.D.J.Nicklin Page 1 of 3 ...read more.

The above preview is unformatted text

This student written piece of work is one of many that can be found in our International Baccalaureate History section.

Found what you're looking for?

  • Start learning 29% faster today
  • 150,000+ documents available
  • Just £6.99 a month

Not the one? Search for your essay title...
  • Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

See related essaysSee related essays

Related International Baccalaureate History essays

  1. Discuss the short and long term consequences of the Indian Mutiny 1857

    Recruitment of the sepoys also changed. Before 1857 many sepoys came from Hindu Brahmin and Rajput castes but those areas were where a lot of rebellions came from and the British feared a new mutiny if they kept recruiting sepoys from these areas.

  2. The United States War of Independence had nothing in common with the Latin American ...

    had to be shipped within Empire."(Axelrod, 63).The ministry issued the Sugar Act of 1764 which "purpose was to raise revenue for the British Government" (Axelrod, 68). Additionally the Grenville Ministry passed the Stamp Act which added additional income for Great Britain by taxing all legal documents and papers but was later repealed due to the revolts that were to follow.

  1. Notes on Italian unification - background and main events

    There were 25, 000 Neapolitan troops in Italy. But in just under a month, the Neapolitan army was defeated - 6th June; victory over the Neapolitans - By the end of July, the Neapolitans surrendered and agreed to evacuate Sicily - The reasons behind this; o It was an unequipped

  2. the causes and consequences of the spanish civil war

    Historian Shlomo Ben-Ami dismisses the simplistic view of some historians that, due to this divide, the break down of Spanish democracy was inevitable. He argues that 'The Republic's failure was not irreversibly conditioned. It was caused by policies, some obviously bad and highly inadequate, and the reaction to them.'

  1. Women During the Period of Crusades. Crusades were expeditions as well as being ...

    For rather I in such wish to die than be slain when my husband cometh home, for he charged me to keep it." By the Second Crusade, kings and nobles were required to leave property and assets to be managed and protected by women.

  2. Detailed Revision notes on the Peloponnesian War and Punic Wars.

    land way to port, Sparta could not destroy walls and got wary of Athenian intentions * Athens exiled Themistocles, a vigorous anti-Spartan leader o exile was for political losers or aspiring tyrants * Popular replacement was Cimon who was Pro-Sparta and helped create Athen's maritime empire * Sparta invades Attica

  1. The Crusades. Were the Christian Attacks on Muslims Justified?

    Moreover, the Christians preformed ?such slaughter? that the men were ?up to their ankles in the enemy?s blood? (?Capture?). It was unjust, unreasonable, and inhumane for the Christians to carry out such brutal actions towards a group of people Ironically, the Bible states that it is wrong to kill and

  2. Notes on the History and Development of the Arab-Israeli Conflict

    Half of them went to Syria and Syria's President Assad sought an alternative leadership to Arafat but to no avail - In June 1983, Syria declared Arafat 'persona non grata' and he was ordered to leave the country, whereby he fled to Tunis - Syria's position in Lebanon at first seemed precarious.

  • Over 160,000 pieces
    of student written work
  • Annotated by
    experienced teachers
  • Ideas and feedback to
    improve your own work