It is a simple truism patent even to the uneducated that the most tiny house cannot be built without a foundation strong enough to support its weight. When writers who profess to write the history of the Revolution that was enacted in India in 1857 ignore this common sense principle and do not try to discuss the real causes that led to it and impudently maintain that the vast edifice of the Revolution was built on a blade of straw, they must either be fools or, what is more probable, knaves. Anyway, it is certain that they are unfit for the holy work of the historian.
In all great religious and political revolutions, it is almost impossible to connect together links apparently inconsistent, without thoroughly understanding the principles which are at their root. On seeing a great work of machinery composed of innumerable screws and wheels doing work of tremendous magnitude if we do not understand how the power is produced, we may feel bewildering astonishment, but never the inner pleasure due to knowledge. When writers describe such stirring events as the French Revolution or the religious revolution of Holland, the very splendour and magnitude of the crises they paint, often, dazzle and confuse their mind’s eye and they rarely gather sufficient coolness and courage to go deep into the underlying principles. But without an exposition of the hidden causes and the mysterious forces that worked beneath, the essence of a revolution can never be made plain. And therefore it is that history attaches more importance to the exposition of principles than to mere narrative.
While searching after principles, historians often commit another mistake. For every act, there are various causes, direct and indirect, general and particular, accidental and necessary. In their proper classification lies the true skill of the historian. In this process of classification many historians get mixed up and make the accidental into a
necessary cause. These make themselves as ridiculous as the judge in the story who, in a case of arson, put all the responsibility on the match instead of the man who struck it. The real importance of any event can never be understood by this confusion of causes. Not merely that, but mankind begins positively to curse the memory of men who are represented as having started, with a light heart and private selfish motives, a Revolution in the course of which countless lives are lost and immense expanses of country devastated. And therefore, in writing the history of any event in general, and of revolutionary movements in particular, a writer cannot give a true idea of them by means of simple description, or even by tracing them backwards to accidental causes. An upright and impartial historian must try to discover the foundations on which the revolutionary structure was erected. He must try to discover and discuss fundamental causes.
Mazzini, in a critical article on Carlyle’s French Revolution, has said that every revolution must have had a fundamental principle. Revolution is a complete rearrangement in the life of historic man. A revolutionary movement cannot be based on a flimsy and momentary grievance. It is always due to some all-moving principle for which hundreds and thousands of men fight, before which thrones totter, crowns are destroyed and created, existing ideals are shattered and new ideals break forth, and for the sake of which vast masses of people think lightly of shedding sacred human blood. The moving spirits of revolutions are deemed holy or unholy in proportion as the principle underlying them is beneficial or wicked. As in private life, so also in history, the deeds of an individual or a nation are judged by the character of the motive. If we forget this test, we cannot appreciate the vast difference between the empire-building wars of Alexander the Great and Italy’s fight for liberty under Garibaldi. Just as to decide about the merits of these two different events one has to consider the prime motive of the chief actors in those wars, so also to write a full history of a revolution means necessarily the tracing of all the events of that revolution back to their source, - the motive, the innermost desire to those who brought it about. This is the telescope which will show clearly the lights and shadows obscured by the blurred presentation of partial and prejudiced historians. When a beginning is made in this manner, order appears in the apprent chaos of inconsistent facts, crooked lines become straight, and straight lines appear crooked, light appears where darkness is, and darkness
spreads over light, what appeared ugly becomes fair and what looked beautiful is seen to be deformed. And expectedly, or unexpectedly, but in a clear form, the Revolution comes into the light of real history.
The history of the tremendous Revolution that was enacted in India in the year 1857 has never been written in this scientific spirit by any author, Indian or foreign. And hence there are current throughout the world most extraordinary, misleading, and unjust ideas about that Revolutionary War. English authors have committed, in this respect, all the faults noted above. Some of them have not made any attempt beyond merely describing the events, but most of them have written the history in a wicked and partial spirit. Their prejudiced eye could not or would not see the root principle of that Revolution. Is it possible, can any sane man maintain, that that all- embracing Revolution could have taken place without a principle to move it ? Could that vast tidal wave from Peshawar to Calcutta have risen in flood without a fixed intention of drowning something by means of its force ? Could it be possible that the sieges of Delhi, the massacres of Cawnpore, the banner of the Empire, heroes dying for it, could it ever be possible that such noble and inspiring deeds have happened without a noble and inspiring end ? Even a small village market does not take place without an end, a motive; how, then, can we believe that that great market opened and closed without any purpose- the great market whose shops were on every battle field from Peshawar to Calcutta, where kingdoms and empires were being exchanged, and where the only current coin was blood ? No, no. The market was neither opened nor closed without a purpose. English historians have always ignored this point, not because it is difficult to ascertain it, but because it is against their interests to admit the truth.
Even more deceptive than this indifference, and one which changes or distorts the whole spirit of the Revolution of 1857 is the other device of English historians copied by their Indian sycophants,- the device, namely, of describing the rumour as to the greased cartridges as the moving cause of the Revolution. An Indian writer drawing inspiration from English history and English1 money says, “Foolish people went mad simply at the rumour that cartridges were greased with cows’ and pigs’ fat. Did anyone
1 çÆMçHçç3ççb®çí yçb[ õ çÆJçvçç3çkçÀ kçÀçíb[oíJç DççíkçÀ
inquire as to whether the report was true? One man said and another believed; because the second became disaffected, a third joined him, and so like a procession of blind men, a company of inconsiderate fools arose, and rebellion broke out.” We propose to discuss later on whether people blindly believed the rumour about cartridges. But it will be plain to anyone who has read even the English historians closely and thought about the matter, that a great attempt has been made to father all the responsibility of the Revolution on this rumour. It isnot surprising that to one, who thinks that a mighty rising like that of ‘57 can be produced by such trifles, it was only ’ a company of inconsiderate fools.’ If the Revolution had been due only to the cartridges, why did Nana Sahib, the Emperor of Delhi, the Queen of Jhansi, and Khan Bahadur Khan of Rohilkhand join it ? These were not surely going to serve in the English army, nor were they compelled to break the cartridges with their teeth ! If the rising were due wholly or chiefly to the cartridges, it would have stopped suddenly as soon as the English Governor-General issued a proclamation that they should not be used any more ! He gave them permission to make cartridges with their own hand, But instead of doing so, or ending the whole by leaving the Company’s service altogether, the sepoys rose to fight in battle. Not only the sepoys but thousands of peaceful citizens and Rajas and Maharajas also rose, who had no direct or indirect connection with the army. It is therefore clear that if was not these accidental things that roused the spirit of the sepoy and the civilian, kind and pauper, Hindu and Mahommedan. Equally misleading is the theory that the rising was due to the annexation of Oudh. How many were fighting, taking their lives in their hands, that had no interest whatsoever in the fortunes of the Oudh dynasty? Then, what was their motive in fighting? The Nabob of Oudh himself was imprisoned in the fort of Calcutta; and according to the English historians, his subjects were very much disaffected under his regime. Then, why did Talukdars, soldiers, and almost every one of his subjects unsheath their swords for him ? A ‘Hindu’ of Bengal wrote an essay in England at that time about the Revolution. In it the ‘Hindu’ says, ‘You have no idea how many simple and kind-hearted people who had never seen the Nabob, nor were ever again likely to see, wept in their huts when the sorrows of the Nabob were being related before them. And you do not also know how many soldiers were daily taking an oath, after the tears had flown, to avenge this
insult on Wajid Ali Shah, as if a calamity had falle on themselves in person.’ Why did the Sepoy feel this sympathy with the Nabob and why did eyes which had never seen the Nabob glisten with tears? It is plain, therefore, that the Revolution did not break out simply on account of the annexation of Oudh.
The fear of greased cartridges and the annexation of Oudh were only temporary and accidental causes. To turn these into real causes would never help us in understanding the real spirit of the Revolution. If we were to take them as the real moving causes, it would mean that, without these, the Revolution would not have taken placed- that without the rumour of greased cartridges and without the annexation of Outh, the Revolution would not have been there. It would be impossible to find a theory more foolish and more deceptive. If there had been no fear of the cartridges, the principle underlying that fear would have cropped up in some other form and produced a Revolution just the same. Even if Oudh had not been annexed, the principle of annexation would have manifested itself in the destruction of some other kingdom. The real causes of the French Revolution were not simply the high prices of grain, the Bastille, the King’s leaving Paris, or the feasts. These might explain some incidents of the Revolution but not the Revolution as a whole. The kidnapping of Sita was only the incidental cause of the fight between Rama and Ravana. The real causes were deeper and more inward. What, then, were the real causes and motives of this Revolution ? What were they that they could make thousands of heroes unsheath their swords and flash them on the battlefield? What were they that they had the power to brighten up pale and rusty crowns and raise from the dust abased flags ? What were they that for them men by the thousand willingly poured their blood year after year ? What were they that Moulvies preached them, learned Brahmins blessed them, that for their success prayers went up to Heaven from the mosques of Delhi and the temples of Benares ?
These great principles were Swadharma and Swaraj. In the thundering roar of ‘Din, Din,’ which rose to protect religion, when there were evident signs of a cunning, dangerous, and destructive attack on religion dearer than life, and in the terrific blows dealt at the chain of slavery with the holy desire of acquiring Swaraj, when it was evident that chains of political slavery had been put round them and their God-given liberty
wrested away by subtle tricks- in these two, lies the root-principle of the Revolutionary War. In what other history is the principle of love of one’s religion and love of one’s country manifested more nobly than in ours? However much foreign and partial historians might have tried to paint our glorious land in dark colours, so long as the name of Chitore has not been erased from the pages of our history, so long as the names of Pratapaditya and Guru Govind Singh are there, so long the principles of Swadharma and Swaraj will be embedded in the bone and marrow of all the sons of Hindusthan ! They might be darkened for a time by the mist of slavery - even the sun has its clouds - but very soon the strong light of these self-same principles pierces through the mist and chases it away. Never before were there such a number of causes for the universal spreading of these traditional and noble principles as there were in 1857. These particular reasons revived most wonderfully the slightly unconscious feelings of Hindusthan, and the people began to prepare for the right for Swadharma and Swaraj. In his Proclamation of the establishment of Swaraj, the Emperor of Delhi says, ‘Oh, you sons of Hindusthan, if
we make up our mind we can destroy the enemy in no time ! We will destroy the enemy and will release from dread our religion and our country, dearer to us than life itself2. What is holier in this world than such a Revolutionary War, a war for the noble principles propounded in this sentence, ‘release from dead our religion and our country, dearer to us than life itself? The seed of the Revolution of 1857 is in this holy and inspiring idea, clear and explicit, propounded from the throne of Delhi, THE PROTECTION OF RELIGION AND COUNTRY. In the Proclamation issued at Bareilly, he says “Hindus and Mahomedans of India! Arise ! Brethren, arise ! Of all the gifts of God, the most gracious is that of Swaraj. Will the oppressive Demon who has robbed us of it b y deceit be able to keep it away from us for ever? Can such an act against the will of God stand for ever? No, no. The English have committed so many atrocities that the cup of their sins is already full. To add to it they have got now the wicked desire to destroy our holy religion ! Are you going to remain idle even now? God does not wish that you should remain so; for he has inspired in the
2 Leckey’s Fictitious Exposed and Urdu works
hearts of Hindus and Mahomedans the desire to turn the English out of our country. And by the grace of God, and your valour, they will soon be so completely defeated that in this our Hindusthan there will not remain even the least trace of them ! In this our army, the differences of smal and great shall be forgotten, and equality shall be the rule; for, all who draw the sword in this holy war for the defence of religion are equally glorious. They are brethren, there is no rank among them. Therefore, I again say to all my Hindi brethren, ‘Arise and jump into battlefield for this divinely ordained and supreme duty! " The man who, after seeing such magnificent utterances by the Revolutionary leaders, does not understand its principles is, as we said, either a fool or a knave. What stronger evidence is needed to prove that Indian warriors drew their swords at the time for Swardharma and Swaraj, feeling it the duty of every man to fight for the rights given to man by God ? These Proclamations issued at different times and placed during the war make it unnecessary to dilate more on its principles. These Proclamations were not issued by nonentities; but they were orders issued from adorable and powerful thrones. They were burning expressions of the agitated feelings of the time. In these the real heart of the Nation had spoken out, when at the time of war, there was no occasion to conceal real sentiments through pressure or fear. This trmendous, heroic shout, ‘Swadharma and Swaraj,’ proclaims to the world the character of the Revolution in which ‘all who draw the sword are equally glorious.’
But were these two principles understood as different and exclusive of each other ? At least, orientals have never had the idea that Swadharma and Swaraj have no connection with each other. The Eastern mind has maintained a full and traditional belief, as is also said by Mazzini, that there is no vast barrier between Heaven and earth but that the two are ends of one and the same thing. Our idea of Swadharma, too, is not contradictory to that of Swaraj. The two are connected as means and end. Swaraj without Swadharma is despicable and Swadharma without Swaraj is powerless. The sword of material power, Swaraj, should always be ready drawn for our object, our safety is the other world, Swadharma. This trend of the Eastern mind will be often found in its history. The reason why, in the
East all revolutions take a religious form, nay more, the reason why Eastern history knows of no revolutions unconnected with religion, lies in the all- embracing meaning that the word ‘Dharma’ has. That this dual principle of Swadharma and Swaraj, always seen in the history of India, appeared also in the Revolution of 1857, should be a matter of no surprise. We have already referred to the first Proclamation of the Emperor of Delhi. Afterwards when Delhi was beseiged by the English and the war was at its height, the Emperor issued another Proclamation addressing all Indians thus : ‘Why has God given us wealth, land, power? They are not for individual pleasure, but they are give for the holy object of defence of our religion’. But where are now the means to attain this holy end ? As said in the Proclamation given above, where is the gift of Swaraj, the greatest of all the gifts of God ?
Where is wealth ? Where is land? Where is power? In the plague of slavery, all this divine independence is all but dead. In the above Proclamation, in order to show how the plague of slavery was destroying India, full descriptions are given as to how the Kingdoms of Nagpur, Ayodhya, and Jhansi were tramples down into dust. And it awakens the people to the fact that they are guilty of the sin of destroying religion in the house of God, having lost these means of defending religion. The command of God is, Obtain Swaraj, for that is the chief key to the protection of Dharma. He who does not attempt to acquire Swaraj, he who sits silent in slavery, he is an atheist and hater of Religion. Therefore, rise for Swadharma and acquire Swaraj !
Rise for Swadharma and acquire Swaraj !” What divine events in the history of India are due to the realisation of this prionciple ! The poet- saint Ramdas gave the same dictum to the Mahrattas 250 years ago. “Die for your Dharma, kill the enemies of your Dharma while you are dying; in this way fight and kill, and take back your kingdom !” This alone is the principle
in the Revolutionary War of 1857. This is its mental science. The true and clear form, is the above verse of Ramdas.3
Seeing at it through this telescope, what a spectacle comes into view ! The war fought for Swadharma does not lose its lustre by defeat. The splendour of Guru Govind Singh’s life is none the less, because his efforts did not immediately succeed at the time. Nor do we think the less of the rising of 1848 in Italy, because the Revolution failed completely at that time.
Justin McCarthy says : “The fact was that throughout the greater part of the northern and north-western provinces of the Indian peninsula, there was a rebellion of the native races against the English power. It was not alone the Sepoy who rose in revolt - it was not by any means a merely military mutiny. It was a combination of military grievance, national hatred, and religious fanaticism against the English occupation of India. The native princes and the native soldiers were in it. The Mahomedan and the Hindu forgot their old religious antipathies to join against the Christian. Hatred and panic were the stimulants of that great rebellious movement. The quarrel about the greased cartridges was but the chance spark flung in among all the combustible material. If that spark had not lighted it, some other would have done the work The Meerut Sepoys found, in a moment, a leader, a flag, and a cause, and the mutiny was transformed into a revolutionary war. When they reached the Jumna, glittering in the morning light, they had all unconsciously seized one of the great critical moments of history and converted a military mutiny into a national and religious war ! “4
3 Oçcçç&mççþçÇ cçjçJçW ~ cçjçíçÆvç DçJçI3ççbmç cççjçJçí. ~ cçççÆjlççb cçççÆjlççb I3ççJçW ~ jçp3çí DççHçáuçW ~~
4 History of Our Own Times, Vol.III. Charles Ball writes : “At length, the torrent overflowed the banks, and saturated the moral soil of India. It was then expected that those waves would overwhelm and destroy the entire European element and that, when the torrent of rebellion should again confine itself within bounds, patriotic India, freed from its alien rulers, would bow only to the independent sceptre of a native price. The movement, now, assumed a more important aspect. It became the rebellion of a whole people incited to outrage by resentment for imaginary wrongs and sustained in their delusions by hatred and fanaticism.“5
White writes in his Complete History of the Great Sepoy War :- “I should be wanting in faithfulness as an historian if I failed to record with admiration the courage displayed by the Oudhians. The great fault of the Oudh Talukdars from a moral point of view was their having made a common cause with the murderous mutineers. But for this, they might have been regarded as noble patriots, fighting in a good cause, pro rege et pro patria, for the King and the Motherland” – for Swaraj and Swadesh !
5 Indian Mutiny, Vol.I, page 644.