1857 A Mutiny

The Revolutionary Upheaval of 1857

Although dismissed by some as merely a sepoy's mutiny or revolt, or as a protest
against the violation of religious rights by the British, the great uprising of 1857 is
slowly gaining recognition as India's first war of independance. And in it's broad sweep
it was the greatest armed challenge to colonial rule during the entire course of the
nineteenth century. Attracting people from all walks of life - both Hindus and
Muslims, it triggered demands for radical social and economic reforms, calling for a
new society that would be more democratic and more representative of popular
demands.

Early Precedents

Neither was it a bolt out of the blue. Although not very well known, the period
between 1763 and 1856 was not a period during which Indians accepted alien rule
passively. Numerous uprisings by peasants, tribal communities and princely states
confronted the British. Some were sustained - others sporadic - a few were isolated
acts of revolutionary resistance - but nevertheless they all challenged colonial rule.
Precipitated by the policy of unchecked colonial extraction of agricultural and forest
wealth from the region - the period saw tremendous growth in rural poverty, the
masses being reduced to a state of utter deprivation.

Even as official taxation was back-breaking enough, British officers routinely used
their powers to coerce additional money, produce, and free services from the Indian
peasants and artisans. And courts routinely dismissed their pleas for justice. In the
first report of the Torture Commission at Madras presented to the British House of
Commons in 1856, this was acknowledged along with the admission that officers of
the East India Company did not abstain from torture, nor did they discourage its use.
That this was a practice not confined to the Madras presidency alone is confirmed by
a letter from Lord Dalhousie to the Court of Directors of the East India Company in
September , 1855 where he admits that the practice of torture was in use in every
British province. Click for more details

Desperate communities had often no choice but to resist to the bitter end. Armed
revolts broke out practically every year - only to be brutally suppressed by the
British. Lacking the fire power of the British arsenal - they were invariably
outgunned. And lacking the means of communication available to the British -
individual revolts were also unable to trigger sympathetic rebellions elsewhere.
Disadvantageous timing led to crushing defeats. Yet, some of these struggles raged
for many years. Click for more details

Amongst the most significant were the Kol Uprising of 1831, the Santhal Uprising of
1855, and the Kutch Rebellion which lasted from 1816 until 1832. There was also a
precedence for a soldiers mutiny when Indian soldiers in Vellore (Tamil Nadu,
Southern India) mutinied in 1806. Although unsuccessful, it led to the growth of
unofficial political committees of soldiers who had several grievances against their
British overlords.
Seething Grievances

For instance, in the Bengal Army, the 140,000 Indians who were employed as "Sepoys"
were completely subordinate to the roughly 26,000 British officers. These sepoys bore
the brunt of the First Britsh-Afghan War (1838-42), the two closely contested Punjab
Wars (1845-6, and 1848-9) and the Second Anglo-Burmese War. They were shipped
across the seas to fight in the Opium Wars against China (1840-42) and (1856-60) and
the Crimean War against Russia (1854). Although at constant risk of death, the Indian
sepoy faced very limited opportunities for advancement - since all positions of
authority were monopolized by the Europeans.

Many of the sepoys in the Bengal Army came from the Hindi speaking plains of UP
where (excluding Oudh) the British had enforced the "Mahalwari" system of taxation
which involved constantly increasing revenue demands. In the first half of the 19th
century - tax revenues payable to the British increased 70%. This led to mounting
agricultural debts with land being mortgaged to traders and moneylenders at a very
rapid rate. This inhumane system of taxation was then extended to Oudh where the
entire nobility was summarily deposed.

As a result, the dissatisfaction against the British was not confined to the agricultural
communities alone. By bankrupting the nobility and the urban middle class - demand
for many local goods was almost eliminated. At the same time local producers were
confronted with unfair competition from British imports. The consequences of this
were summarized by the rebel prince Feroz Shah, in his August 1857 proclamation:
"the Europeans by the introduction of English articles into India have thrown the
weavers, the cotton dressers, the carpenters, the blacksmiths and the shoe-makers
and others out of employ and have engrossed their occupations, so that every
description of native artisan has been reduced to beggary."

Contrast this turn of events with the arrival of Mughal rule in India. Babar, in spite of
his distaste for the Indian climate and customs, noted the tremendous diversity and
skill of Indian craftspeople, and saw in that a great potential for expanding Indian
manufacturing. Quite unlike the British, the Mughals built on the manufacturing
strengths of the Indian artisan - (already well establish in the earlier Sultanate
period) - and took them to dazzling heights in the later periods. But by the mid-19th
century, this pre-industrial virtuosity in manufacturing had been virtually choked of
by British policies. A British chronicler of the period, Thomas Lowe noted how " the
native arts and manufactures as used to raise for India a name and wonder all over
the western world are nearly extinguished in the present day; once renowned and
great cities are merely heaps of ruins..."

All this inevitably prepared the ground for the far more widespread revolt of 1857.
Although concentrated in what is now UP in modern India - the 1857 revolt spread
from Dacca and Chittagong (now Bangladesh) in the East to Delhi in the West. Major
urban centres in Bengal, Orissa, and Bihar including Cuttack, Sambhalpur, Patna and
Ranchi participated. In Central India - the revolt spread to Indore, Jabalpur, Jhansi
and Gwalior. Uprisings also took place in Nasirabad in Rajasthan, Aurangabad and
Kolhapur in Maharashtra and in Peshawar on the Afghan border. But the main
battleground was in the plains of UP - with every major town providing valiant
resistance to the British invaders.

Starting out as a revolt of the Sepoys - it was soon accompanied by a rebellion of the
civil population, particularly in the North Western Provinces and Oudh. The masses
gave vent to their opposition to British rule by attacking government buildings and
prisons. They raided the "treasury", charged on barracks and court houses, and threw
open the prison gates. The civil rebellion had a broad social base, embracing all
sections of society - the territorial magnates, peasants, artisans, religious mendicants
and priests, civil servants, shopkeepers and boatmen.

For several months after the uprising began in Meerut on May 10, 1857 - British rule
ceased to exist in the northern plains of India. Muslim and Hindu rulers alike joined
the rebelling soldiers and militant peasants, and other nationalist fighters. Among the
most prominent leaders of the uprising were Nana Sahib, Tantia Tope, Bakht Khan,
Azimullah Khan, Rani Laksmi Bai, Begum Hazrat Mahal, Kunwar Singh, Maulvi
Ahmadullah, Bahadur Khan and Rao Tula Ram. Former rulers had their own grievances
against the British, including the notorious law on succession which gave the British
the right to annexe any princely state if it lacked "legitimate male heirs".

Expressions of Popular Will

The rebels established a Court of Administration consisting of ten members - six from
the army and four civilians with equal representation of Hindus and Muslims. The
rebel government abolished taxes on articles of common consumption, and penalized
hoarding. Amongst the provisions of it's charter was the liquidation of the hated
'Zamindari' system imposed by the British and a call for land to the tiller.

Although the former princes who joined with the rebels did not go quite as far,
several aspects of the proclamations issued by the former rulers are noteworthy. All
proclamations were issued in popular languages. Hindi and Urdu texts were provided
simultaneously. Proclamations were issued jointly in the name of both Hindus and
Muslims. Feroz Shah - in his August 1857 proclamation included some significant
points. All trade was to be reserved for Indian merchants only, with free use of
Government steam vessels and steam carriages. All public offices were to be given to
Indians only and wages of the sepoys were to be revised upwards.

Overpowered by British Might, Betrayed by the Princes

Threatened by such a radical turn of events, the British rulers poured in immense
resources in arms and men to suppress the struggle. Although the rebels fought back
heroically - the betrayal by a number of rulers such as the Sikh princes, the
Rajasthani princes and Maratha rulers like Scindia allowed the British to prevail. Lord
Canning (then Governor General) noted that " If Scindia joins the rebels, I will pack
off tomorrow". Later he was to comment: " The Princes acted as the breakwaters to
the storm which otherwise would have swept us in one great wave". Such was the
crucial importance of the betrayal of the princes. The British were also helped by the
conservatism of the trading communities who were unwilling to put up with the
uncertanties of a long drawn out rebellion.

But equally important was the superior weaponry and brutality of the British in
defending their empire. British barbarity in supressing the uprising was
unprecedented. After the fall of Lucknow on May 8, 1858 Frederick Engels
commented: " The fact is, there is no army in Europe or America with so much
brutality as the British. Plundering, violence, massacre - things that everywhere else
are strictly and completely banished - are a time honoured privilege, a vested right of
the British soldier ..". In Awadh alone 150,000 people were killed - of which 100,000
were civilians. The great Urdu poet, Mirza Ghalib wrote from Delhi, " In front of me, I
see today rivers of blood". He went on to describe how the victorious army went on a
killing spree - killing every one in sight - looting peoples property as they advanced.

Bahadur Shah's three sons were publicly executed at "Khooni Darwaaza" in Delhi and
Bahadur Shah himself was blinded and exiled to Rangoon where he died in 1862.
Refusing to plead for mercy from the British, he courageously retorted: " The power
of India will one day shake London if the glory of self-respect remains undimmed in
the hearts of the rebels". Thomas Lowe wrote: "To live in India now was like standing
on the verge of a volcanic crater, the sides of which were fast crumbling away from
our feet, while the boiling lava was ready to erupt and consume us"

The 1857 revolt which had forged an unshakable unity amongst Hindus and Muslims
alike, was an important milestone in our freedom struggle - providing hope and
inspiration for future generations of freedom lovers. However, the aftermath of the
1857 revolt also brought about dramatic changes in colonial rule. After the defeat of
the 1857 national revolt - the British embarked on a furious policy of "Divide and
Rule", fomenting religious hatred as never before. Resorting to rumors and
falsehoods, they deliberately recast Indian history in highly communal colors and
practised pernicious communal politics to divide the Indian masses. That legacy
continues to plague the sub-continent today. However, if more people become aware
of the colonial roots of this divisive communal gulf - it is possible that some of the
damage done to Hindu-Muslim unity could be reversed. If Hindus and Muslims could
rejoin and collaborate in the spirit of 1857, the sub-continent may yet be able to
unshackle itself from it's colonial past.

Under the administration of the Marquess of Dalhousie (Governor-General 1848-56),

the last of the independent Indian states, including the wealthy Muslim state of Oudh,
were annexed by the British. To consolidate this new territory, some degree of
Westernisation was introduced: an Indian railway and road system was developed and
the first three Indian universities were founded, creating a tier of higher-caste men
educated according to the British system but not fully incorporated into those careers
of civil service and army awaiting them. Child marriage and the practice of suttee
previously had been abolished and, in 1856, a regulation was passed requiring sepoys
to serve overseas thereby losing caste. Both the annexation and consolidation
heightened tension between government and population and mutiny was inevitable
when the Indian section of the army was allocated cartridges smeared with the fat of
cows and pigs, unclean to both Hindu and Muslim elements.
The mutiny lasted thirteen months: from the rising of Meerut on 10 May 1857 to the
fall of Gwalior on 20 June 1858.The sepoys were quickly joined by large numbers of
civilians supporting the reinstatement of both a Moghul and a Maratha emperor and by
landlords, particularly those of Oudh, penalised by the new administration and its
policy of exporting raw materials for manufacture in Britain. Historians agree that the
mutiny was characterised by violent reprisals on either side but, at least in British
historical tradition, the most significant events are the massacres at Meerut,
Cawnpore and Lucknow; post-mutiny literature dwelling on the fate of women and
children especially.

The mutiny, regarded by many as India's first War of Independence, was to have
important consequences and the structure of British India was to be re-organised
extensively. Increasingly, India came under direct Crown rule as the British East India
Company was dispossessed of its functions and, in 1877, Queen Victoria was crowned
Empress. Despite the severity of European reprisal as each territory had been regained
and its subsequent defensive proposals of military alteration, a measure of conciliation
had been introduced to administrative policy. Integration of the higher castes and
princes was now considered important, land policy was revised and plans for radical
social change were shelved. The attitude of British India and the Metropolitan was now
dual: on the one hand, a sense that the conservative mistrust was justified and ,on the
other, that the alienation between the two cultures must be lessened if government
was to be maintained. Both parts of this duality are explored in the colonial literature
of Britain and British India and in Colonial Representations of India in Prose Fiction.

Lakshmi Bai

(c.1830-1858)

Lakshmi Bai, the Rani of a principality called Jhansi in northern India, led an uprising
against a takeover of her homeland by the British. She became a heroine and a symbol
of resistance to the British rule.

Lakshmi Bai was born around 1830 into a wealthy, high-caste family. She was named
Manukarnika, which is one of the names of the holy river Ganges. As a young woman,
she learned to read, write and debate. She also learned to ride horses and use
weapons while playing with her adopted brothers. She accepted the name Lakshmi Bai
when she married Gangadhar Rao, the maharajah of Jhansi and became the Rani
(short for maharani, the wife of maharajah) of Jhansi.
Gangadhar Rao was between forty and fifty years of age at the time of their wedding.
This was his second marriage. His first wife died without producing an heir. The new
Rani of Jhansi gave birth to a son, but he died when he was three months old.
Subsequently, Damodar Rao, Gangadhar's relative, became their adopted son. In 1853,
Gangadhar Rao died.

The Governor-General of India, the Marquess of Dalhousie, announced that since

Gangadhar Rao left no heir, the state of Jhansi would be annexed by the British
Government. The British rejected the claim that Damodar Rao was the legal heir.
According to Hindu law, little Damodar Rao was Gangadhar's heir and successor. In the
Hindu religion, a surviving son, either biological or adopted, had an obligation to
perform certain sacrifices after his father's death to prevent his father from being
condemned to punishment or hell. The refusal of the British to acknowledge the
legitimacy of Rajah's adopted son caused a serious consternation in the local
population. Rani appealed her case to London, but that appeal was turned down.

Not wishing to give up her kingdom, Lakshmi Bai assembled a volunteer army of 14,000
rebels and ordered that defenses of the city itself be strengthened. Jhansi was
attacked by the British in March 1858. Shelling of Jhansi was fierce and the British
were determined not to allow any rebels to escape while Rani was determined not to
surrender. The British noted that the Indian soldiers fighting them showed more vigor
than they ever had while following British orders. Women were also seen working the
batteries and carrying ammunition, food and water to the soldiers. Rani, herself, was
seen constantly active in the defense of the city. Jhansi, however, fell to the British
forces after a two week siege. A priest from Bombay who witnessed the British victory,
said that what followed were four days of fire, pillage, murder and looting without
distinction. He said it was difficult to breathe due to strong smell of burning flesh.
British historians, on the other hand, suggested that while four to five thousand people
died in battle, the civilians were spared.

The Rani managed to escape on horseback under the cover of darkness and within
twenty-four hours rode over one hundred miles to the fortress of Kalpi. Several other
Indian rulers joined the rebel forces there. It is believed that the Rani was influential
in convincing the others to go on the offensive and seize the fortress of Gwalior. This
maneuver was successful and helped rally the rebel forces together.

It wasn't long, however, before the British forces determined to win Gwalior back. A
fierce battle ensued. Rani was in charge of the eastern side of defense, however she
lost her life on the second day of fighting. The British won back Gwalior. Rani's body
was given a ceremonial cremation and burial by the faithful servants. Sir Hugh Rose,
the commander of the British force, wrote later, "The Ranee was remarkable for her
bravery, cleverness and perseverance; her generocity to her Subordinates was
unbounded. These qualities, combined with her rank, rendered her the most
dangerous of all the rebel leaders." A popular Indian ballad said,

How valiantly like a man fought she,

The Rani of Jhansi
On every parapet a gun she set
Raining fire of hell,
How well like a man fought the Rani of Jhansi
How valiantly and well!

Rani LaxmiBai
1828/1835 – 17 June 1858

Equestrian statue of Rani Laxmi Bai at Agra.

Alternate name: Manu,Manikarnika
Place of birth: Kashi, Uttar Pradesh, India
Place of death: Gwalior,India
Movement: 1857 rebellion

Lakshmibai, The Rani of Jhansi (c. 1828/1835 – June 17, 1858) was the queen of the
Maratha-ruled princely state of Jhansi in North India. She was one of the leading
figures of the Indian rebellion of 1857, and a symbol of resistance to British rule in
India.

Contents

• 1 Early life
• 2 Annexation
• 3 The War
• 4 Epilogue
• 5 Literature on Jhansi ki Rani
• 6 References
• 7 See also

• 8 External links

Early life

She was born at Kashi and died at Gwalior. Her childhood name was Manikarnika. She
is sometimes referred to as the Boudicca of India.
Lakshmi Bai was a Maharashtrian born sometime around 1828 at Kashi (presently
known as Varanasi). Her father Moropanth Tambey was a Karhade Brahmin and her
mother Bhagirathibai was cultured, intelligent and religious.Manikarnika was
affectionately called Manu by her family. Manu lost her mother at the age of four, and
responsibility of looking after the young girl fell to her father. She completed her
education and martial training, which included horse riding, fencing and shooting,
when she was still a child.

She was married to Raja Gangadhar Rao Newalkar, the Maharaja of Jhansi in 1842, and
became the queen of Jhansi. After their marriage, she was given the name Lakshmi
Bai.

In 1853 Gangadhar Rao fell very ill and he was persuaded to adopt a child. To ensure
that the British would not be able to contest the adoption, the Rani had it witnessed
by the local British representatives. Maharaja Gangadhar Rao expired the following
day, 21 November 1853.

Annexation

At that time, Lord Dalhousie was the Governor General of British India. Though little
Damodar Rao, adopted son of late Maharaja Gangadhar Rao and Rani Lakshmi Bai, was
Maharaja's heir and successor under Hindu tradition, the British rulers rejected Rani's
claim that Damodar Rao was their legal heir. Lord Dalhousie decided to annex the
state of Jhansi under the Doctrine of Lapse.

The Rani then did the unprecedented: she sought the advice of a British lawyer, John
Lang, and appealed her case in London. Although these petitions were well-argued,
they were ultimately rejected. The British Indian authorities clearly sought to punish
Rani for her presumptuous behavior.[citation needed] They confiscated the state jewels and
deducted her husband's debts from her annual pension of Rs. 60,000. She was required
to leave Jhansi fort for the Rani Mahal in Jhansi town, as well. But Rani Lakshmi Bai
was determined to defend Jhansi. She proclaimed her decision with the famous
words :Mi mahji Jhansi nahi dehnar (I will not give up my Jhansi).

The War
The Ranee of Jhansi, an illustration from Chambers's History of the Revolt in India.
London, 1859.

Jhansi became a center of the rebellion upon the outbreak of violence in 1857. Rani
Lakshmi Bai started strengthening the defense of Jhansi and assembled a volunteer
army. Women were recruited as well as men and given military training. Rani was
accompanied by her generals. Many from the local population volunteered for service
in the army ranks, with the popular support for her cause on the rise.

In September and October of 1857, the Rani led the successful defense of Jhansi from
the invading armies of the neighboring rajas of Datia and Orchha.

In January of 1858, the British Army started its advance on Jhansi, and in March laid
siege to the city. After two weeks of fighting the British captured the city, but the
Rani escaped in the guise of a man, strapping her adopted son Damodar Rao closely on
her back. She fled to Kalpi where she joined Tantya Tope.

During the battle for Gwalior the Rani met her death on 17 June. During this battle the
Rani's original horse was mortally wounded. He had to be replaced by a younger, more
energetic, but less trained horse.

The folklore surrounding her during the war is that during the battle the Rani was
trying to escape and two British officers followed her. The horse reached a cliff and
being insufficiently trained, could not pass over it. The British set upon her by
surrounding her. As she was cornered, she knew there was only one option to take was
to jump off which she did. A Brahmin, who found her, carefully took her into his
ashram. She lay there unconscious for a moment then her last words were "Jai Hind!",
meaning victory to India. In actual fact, most sources have the Rani being shot or run
through with a saber and there is no mention of a cliff. It is also unlikely that the
many princes who led the Mutiny were in any way more than peripherally concerned
with the concept of a united India. All were uniformly concerned with the loss of their
personal powers and privileges, and at most, with regional issues. Indeed Laksmi Bai's
main objective throughout the Mutiny seems to have been to secure the throne of
Jhansi for her adopted son. For a considerable length of time after the start of the
Mutiny, she was in correspondence with the British and professed to be on the British
side, stating in her letters that she hoped in return that the East India Company would
eventually restore all privileges to her son. There are also allegations that Lakshmi Bai
did not do enough to prevent the massacre of the British garrison at Jhansi. It is
probable that soldiers in her pay took part in the massacre.

The British captured Gwalior three days later. In his report of the Battle for Gwalior,
General Rose commented that the Rani had been "the bravest and the best" of the
rebels. Because of her unprecedented bravery, courage and wisdom and her
progressive views on women's empowerment in 19th century India, and due to her
sacrifices, she became an icon of Indian nationalist movement.

Epilogue

The fall of Jhansi and the death of Rani Lakshmibai was the last series of the
resistance to British Raj under the Sepoy Mutiny. Its immediate effects included:
 • Due to her bravery, she became a national hero and the epitome of female
bravery in India. When the Indian National Army, formed by Subhas Chandra
Bose of Indian prisoners of war to fight the British created its first female
regiment, it was named after her.
• Her father, Moropant Tambe, was captured and hanged a few days after the
fall of Jhansi.
• Her adopted son, Damodar Rao, was given a pension by the British Raj,
although he never received his inheritance.
• The administration of an undivided India passed on from the East India
Company to the British crown.
• The Rani was memorialized in bronze statues at both Jhansi and Gwalior, both
of which portray her in equestrian style.

Lakshmibai was born at Banaras of Moropant Tembe and Bhagirathibai. She was
married to Gangadhar Rao Navalkar, the ruler of Jhansi, a small state created by the
Peshwas. Moropant was a protégé of Peshwa Baji Rao II and accompanied him even
after the Peshwa lost his kingdom. A liberal father, he had provided, proper education
& martial training to his daughter. Gangadhar Rao died in 1853 CE without Issue.
Lakshmibai was not allowed to adopt a successor by the Governor General. The idea
was to annex such regions of childless rulers to British Empire, under their infamous
`Doctrine of Lapse’.

The young queen engaged a British Lawyer John Lang for appeal to the Directors of
The East India Company in England, (who ruled India on behalf of the British Queen)
against the decision.

The appeal failed and Jhansi was annexed to British administration. The Queen was
given a humiliating monthly pension of five thousand rupees, which was too small even
to maintain her small band of followers. The British thought that in all probability she
may leave Jhansi and go to her father’s shelter. But the courageous queen decided not
to leave her domain at any cost, and got ready to face the consequences.

The rebellion against British by the sepoys broke out at Meerut and Delhi on the 10th
of May 1857. Gradually it spread to other parts of northern India. Jhansi claimed
authority of the queen Lakshmibai on 9th of June. From that date till the 4th of April
1858, Lakshmibai defended her fort against Sir Hugh Rose. But realizing that her
position was becoming weak by hours, she made a adventurous escape from Jhansi fort
through the cordon of British troops, on horseback and went to Kalpi and joined the
indomitable Tantia Topi (a.k.a Tatia Topi) who had taken on the British relentlessly.
They together started recruiting soldiers from Oudh and Doab. The Rajputs and
Brahmins, comprised infantry; Rohillas and Muslims formed cavalry. The Queen
personally lead the newly formed battalion. She used to dress in military uniform of
crimson jacket, crimson trousers and a white turban. It was impossible to tell her
gender.

But General Rose captured Kalpi, from which Lakshmibai's troops were fighting the
British. The Queen and Tantia Topi fled to the jungle. General Rose thinking that the
rebellion was over, left and issued orders to disband his troops.

At this juncture, the Rani and Tantia Topi astounded the British by capturing the fort
of Gwalior which had good store of arms and ammunition on the 4th of June 1858. It
was the hottest part of summer season. The ruler of Gwalior fled and all his troops
joined the Rani of Jhansi! Now the rebel army had a equipped contingent, well trained
in the British way of warfare.

The ruler of Gwalior was protégé of the British and General Rose, reached Morar on
the border of Gwalior. Stores and ammunitions were seized with the help of his huge
army, on 16th of June. Next day, General Rose crossed Gwalior and met Rani's cavalry,
which she was personally leading. The old fashioned muzzle-loaders and clumsy swords
of Lakshmibai's troops were no match against well-equipped British army. In the battle
that ensued, the Rani fought bravely but was killed. Thus died the young and brave
queen far away from her beloved Jhansi overpowered by a superior force.

Rani Lakshmibai is described as a very pretty lady with round face, very delicately
shaped nose and bright eyes. She was of medium height and neither stout nor lean.
Her portrait with sword and shield shows a determined and pensive expression.

Mangal Pandey

Mangal Pandey (c. July 19, 1827–8 April 1857) (Hindi: मंगल पाडे), also known as Shaheed
Mangal Pandey (Shaheed means martyr in Hindustani), was a sepoy (soldier) in the
34th Regiment of the Bengal Native Infantry (BNI) of the English East India Company.

Life

Pandey was born in the village of Nagwa in district Ballia Uttar Pradesh. Families in
Nagwa village claim Mangal Pandey to be their first ancestor and trace their family
lineage to him.[1] There is some dispute over his exact place of birth. One account
(Misra, 2005) claims that Mangal Pandey was born in a Bhumihar Brahmin family to
Divakar Pandey of Surhupur village of Faizabad district’s Akbarpur Tehsil.[1] He joined
the British East India Company forces in 1849 at the age of 22, as per this account.
Pandey was part of the 5th Company of the 34th BNI regiment. He is primarily known
for attacking his British officers in an incident that sparked what is known to the
British as the Sepoy Mutiny of 1857 and to Indians as the First War of Indian
Independence. Mangal Pandey was a devout Brahmin and he practiced his religion
diligently.gfytd

The 1857 Incident

At Barrackpore (now Barrackpur), near Calcutta on March 29, 1857, in the afternoon,
Lieutenant Baugh, Adjutant of the 34th Native Infantry, was informed that several
men of his regiment were in an excited state. Further, it was reported to him that one
of them, Mangal Pandey raged in front of the regiment's barracks on the parade
ground, armed with a loaded musket, calling upon the men to rebel and threatening to
shoot the first European he set his eyes on. Baugh immediately buckled on his sword,
placed loaded pistols in his holsters, mounted his horse, and galloped to the lines.
Pandey, who heard the hoof-beat of the approaching horse, took position behind the
station gun, which was in front of the quarter-guard of the 34th, took aim at Baugh
and fired. He missed Baugh, but the bullet struck his horse in the flank, and both
horse and rider were brought down..[2] Baugh quickly disentangled himself, and,
seizing one of his pistols, advanced towards Pandey and fired. He missed. Before
Baugh could draw his sword, Pandey attacked him with a talwar(an Indian heavy
sword) and closing with the adjutant, slashed him on the shoulder and neck and
brought him to the ground. It was then that another sepoy, Shaikh Paltu, intervened
and tried to restrain Pandey even as he tried to reload his musket.[2]

The English Sergeant-Major, Hewson, had arrived on the ground, summoned by a

native officer, prior to Baugh. He had ordered the jemadar in command of the
quarter-guard to arrest Mangal Pandey. To this, the jemadar expostulated that he
could not take Pandey on alone. At this, Hewson ordered him to fall in his guard with
loaded weapons. In the meantime, Baugh had arrived on the field shouting 'Where is
he? Where is he?' Hewson called out to Baugh, 'Ride to the right, Sir, for your life. The
sepoy will fire at you!' [3] At that point Pandey fired, with the consequences outlined in
the last paragraph.

Hewson had charged towards Pandey as he was fighting with Lieutenant Baugh. He
then locked in combat with Pandey and was knocked to the ground from behind by a
blow from Pandey's musket. The sound of the firing had brought other sepoys from the
barracks; they remained mute spectators. At this juncture, Shaikh Paltu, while trying
to defend the two Englishmen called upon the other sepoys to assist him. [2] Assailed by
other sepoys, who threw stones and shoes at his back, he called on the guard to help
him hold Pandey, but they threatened to shoot him if he did not let go of Pandey. [3]

On the order of the Jemadar of the troops, a man called Ishwari Prasad, the sepoys
advanced and struck at the two prostrate officers. They then threatened Shaikh Paltu
and ordered him to release Pandey, whom he had been vainly trying to hold back.
However, Paltu, continued to hold Pandey until Baugh and the sergeant-major had had
time to rise. [2] Himself wounded by now, Paltu was obliged to loosen his grip. He
backed away in one direction and Baugh and Hewson in another, while being struck
with the butt ends of the guards' muskets.

In the meantime, report of the incident had been carried to the commanding officer
General Hearsey, who then galloped to the ground with his two sons. Taking in the
scene, he rode up to the guard, drew his pistol and ordered them to do their duty by
seizing Mangal Pandey. The General threatened to shoot the first man that disobeyed.
The men of the guard fell in, and followed Hearsey in the direction where Pandey was
still ranting and raving. Pandey, then realizing the situation he had put himself in, put
the muzzle of the musket to his breast and discharged it by pressing the trigger with
his foot. He collapsed burned and bleeding but not mortally wounded.[2]

He recovered, was brought to trial less than a week later. When asked whether he had
been under the influence of any substances, he admitted to having used bhang ( an
Indian drug) and opium of late. He pleaded to not knowing what he was doing when
intoxicated. He stated steadfastly that he had mutinied on his own accord and that
none had played any role in egging him on. When asked to defend himself, he said "I
did not know what I was doing. I did not know who I wounded and who I did not. What
more shall I say? I have nothing more to say. I have no evidence." [3] He was sentenced
to death by hanging along with the Jemadar. His execution was scheduled for April 18,
but was carried out ten days prior to that date. The Jemadar Ishwari Prasad joined
him on the gallows on April 21. [2]

The 34th N.I. Regiment was disbanded "with disgrace" on May 6 as a collective
punishment, after a detailed investigation by the Government, for failing to perform
their duty in restraining a mutinous soldier and protecting their officer. This came
after a period of six weeks in the course of which, petitions for leniency were
examined in Calcutta. Shaikh Paltu was promoted on the spot to the post of Havaldar
(native sergeant) by General Hearsay, for his gallant conduct. .[2]

Motivation

The primary motivation behind Mangal Pandey's behaviour is attributed to a new type
of bullet cartridge used in the Enfield P-53 rifle which was to be introduced in the
Bengal Army that year.

The cartridge was rumoured to having been greased with animal fat (primarily pig fat
and cow fat, which animals are not consumed by Muslims and Hindus respectively, the
former being abhorrent to Muslims and the latter a holy animal of the Hindus).[4] The
cartridges had to be bitten at one end prior to use.[5] The mutineers were of the
opinion that this was an intentional act of the British, with the aim of defiling their
religions.

Commandant Wheeler of the 34th BNI was known as a zealous Christian preacher, and
this may also have impacted the Company's behaviour. The husband of Captain Wilma
Halliday of 56th BNI had the Bible printed in Urdu and Nagri and distributed among the
sepoys, thus raising suspicions amongst them that the British were intent on converting
them to Christianity.[6]

Also, the 19th and 34th Native Infantry were stationed at Lucknow during the time of
annexation of Oudh for mis-government by the Nawab on February 7, 1856. The
annexation had another implication for sepoys in the Bengal Army (a significant
portion of whom came from that princely state). Before the annexation, these sepoys
had the right to petition the British Resident at Lucknow for justice—a significant
privilege in the context of native courts. As a result of the annexation, they lost that
right, since that state no longer existed. Moreover, this action was seen by the
residents of the state as an affront to their honour, the annexation being done in
violation of an existing treaty.

Thus, it was quite natural that sepoys were affected by the general discontent which
had been stirred up by the annexation. In February 1857, both these regiments were
situated in Barrackpore.

The 19th Native Infantry Regiment is important because it was the regiment charged
with testing the new cartridges on February 26, 1857. However, right up to the mutiny
the guns had not been issued to them and the cartridges in the magazine of the
regiment were as free of grease as they had been through the preceding half century.
However, the paper used in wrapping the cartridges was of a different colour, arousing
suspicions. The non-commissioned officers of the regiment refused to accept the
cartridges on the 26 February. This information being conveyed to the commanding
officer, Colonel Mitchell, he took it upon himself to try to convince the sepoys that the
cartridges were no different from those they had been accustomed to and that they
need not bite it. He concluded his exhortation with an appeal to the native officers to
uphold the honour of the regiment and a threat to court-martial such sepoys as
refused to accept the cartridge. However, the next morning the regiment rose in
rebellion and it was only due to the persuasive powers of Colonel Mitchell and his
sagacity that the sepoys were convinced to return to their barracks. A Court of Enquiry
was ordered which after an investigation lasting nearly a month, recommended the
disbanding of the regiment. The same was carried out on the 31 March. The 19th N.I.
Regiment, far from being dismissed with dishonour, as is held by some, were allowed
to retain their uniforms and provided by the Government with an allowance to return
home.