Page 90 - DHIS204_DHIS205_INDIAN_FREEDOM_STRUGGLE_HINDI

Unit 7: The First Major Challenge

S. N. Sen: The Mutiny was inevitable. No dependent nation can for ever reconcile itself to foreign Notes
domination. A despotic government must ultimately rule by the sword though it might be sheathed
in velvet. In India the sword was apparently in the custody of the Sepoy Army. Between the Sepoy
and his foreign masters there was no common tie of race, language and religion...The Mutiny was
not inevitable in 1857 but it was inherent in the constitution of the empire.
Maulana Abul Kalam Azad: The question naturally arises if the uprising was a result of a nationalist
upsurge alone. The answer cannot be an unqualified affirmative if nationalism is understood in its
modern sense. There is no doubt that the participants were moved by patriotic considerations, but
these were not strong enough to provoke a revolt. Patriotism had to be reinforced by an appeal to
religious passion before the People arose.... As I read about the events of 1857 I am forced to the
sad conclusion that Indian national character had sunk very low. The leaders of the revolt could
never agree. They were mutually jealous and continually intrigued against one another. They
seemed to have little regard for the effects of such disagreement on the common cause. In fact,
these personal jealousies and intrigues were largely responsible for the Indian defeat.
S. B. Chaudhuri: First War of Independence it certainly was, as in the whole canvas of the recorded
history of India it would be difficult to find a parallel to this gigantic anti-foreign combine of all
classes of people and of many provinces of India. There was never a war in India lasting
continuously for more than a year and simultaneously in all the regions which had for its objective
the abasement and ejectment of the alien rulling power.
Eric Stokes: 1857 stands firmly in a historical continuum. Not of course that it was the direct
product of social forces blowing off the political crust but rather fortuitous conjuncture that laid
these forces bare. Like 1848 in Europe—despite obvious disparities—it was an uprising sans issue
that could catch a society moving into the early stages of modernisation.
Self-Assessment
1. Fill in the blanks:
(i) ............... remarks that Indian in 1857 was a geographical expression and the Bengalees,
the Punjabis, the Hindustanis, the Maharashtrians and the people in the south did not
realise that they belonged to the same nation.
(ii) ............... was in not favour of retaining an imperium in imperia had recognised the
succession of prince Faquir-ul-Din.
(iii) The New land revenue settlements made by the East India Company in ............... .
(iv) The Religious Disabilities Act of ............... modified Hindu customs.
(v) In ............... the sepoys at Berrackpur had refused to serve across the seas in Burma and
the 47th regiment had been disbanded.
7.6 Summary

• Dalhousie’s annexations and the Doctrine of lapse had caused suspicion and uneasiness in
the minds of almost all ruling princes in India. The right of succession was denied to the
Hindu Princes. The guarantee of adoption to the throne “did not extent to any person in
whose veins the blood of the founder of the dynasty did not run”
• While the Panjab, Pegu, Sikkim had been annexed by the ‘Right of Conquest’, Satara, Jaipur,
Sambhalpur, Baghat, Udaipur, Jhansi and Nagpur were annexed by the application of the
Doctrine of Lapse. Oudh was annexed on the pretext of “ the good of the governed”. Regal
titles of the Nawabs of Carnatic and Tanjore were abolished and the pension of Peshwa Baji
Rao II’s adopted son was stopped. The Indians held that the existence of all states was
threatened and absorption of all states was a question of time. The common belief current
was that annexations were not because of the Doctrine of Lapse, but due to the ‘Lapse of all
Morals’ on the part of the East India Company. That the fears of the people were not without
foundation is clear from the correspondence of one of the architects of British India, Sir
Charles Napier, who wrote: “Were I Emperor of India for twelve years.... no India prince
should exist. The Nizam should no more be heard of... Nepal would be ours...”

LOVELY PROFESSIONAL UNIVERSITY 85