Research Paper: 1857 Indian Rebellion Been Elusive

Pages: 22 (7067 words)  ·  Bibliography Sources: 15  ·  Level: Master's  ·  Topic: Military  ·  Buy This Paper


[. . .] 63]

The strategy to fight the war of freedom in 1957 was not only missing but later it is also recorded that the local leadership including the landlords and holders of large land states were also among the rebels. They organized the rebels and supported their fight against the British forces for own reasons. The interests of the local communities to fight against the forces were diversified and so was the strategy to fight. The lack of formulating a strategy for fighting the war not only impacted the outcome but the effects of rebel wars were also diminished. The local forces and rebels remained localized and only small number of country cities was under the rebel fight and disobedience movement.

The shortcoming of national strategy to fight freedom war also played a significant role in determining the war efforts as not impacting the whole country. The strategy was formed in line with the local desires and capabilities of the local rebels. The attacks were also planned according to the perception of local power and symbol of the occupation. The targets were not set in accordance with the requirement to achieve a strategic objective. The least common objectives were mob driven and to repel the state rights, laws, and justice mechanism.

The soldiers and local rebels combined their efforts and gained the local support to fight for the cause as it deemed fit in the current circumstances. The national leadership could not develop an organized schema for the freedom fight. The national leadership was also reluctant to own the efforts of local rebels. It also resulted into lack of coordination and failed to derive a unified approach. The local communities, soldiers, and leadership including the landlords were also divided among themselves. [8: BipanChandra, eds. India's Struggle for Independence: 1857-1947. (New Delhi: Penguin Books India, 1989).]

The interest of the war leadership was main focus of attention and as a result it was easier for the organized British army to fight back. They could easily gather and acquire support of the opponent groups to gain their power back. However the instigation of the revolt movement provided enough evidence of the fact that the local community in India does not acknowledge the foreign occupation and there is room for developing the nationalized approach. The division of the communities and local leadership within their ranks provided a ground for weakening of the efforts.

The review of literature and analysis of historic accounts concludes that the spontaneous outbreak of turmoil in 1957 was not a planned act of strategy for instigating freedom war. However the later unfolding of events was marked by the sympathies of the local public. As a result the war out broke into a national spared however the lack of political and war strategy it could not create a remarkable impact on the national security and freedom from the occupation forces. The resentment in the local community against the British occupation through force came in the lime light and it was also understood that the Indian nation had the potential to pose problems for foreign occupational forces.

The national movement for liberation from British occupation missed out the necessary elements required to focus on a unified objective. The lack of strategy and underlying localized objectives of the landlords and rebel leaders also lead to a minimal affect in terms of the movement achievements. The munity was also several coordinated skills that provide basis for an objective achievement. The unified objective and coordination is necessary to formulate a strategy for the freedom war. The British forces were organized and had the support of a common agenda to fight against the rebels.

Bad Generalship:

The second most important issue is that the groups of rebels and community were divided into small numbers and a central leadership for war activities was also missing. The leadership emerging during the war times was also self-centered and focused on their goals. The British forces understood and reviewed the strength and weaknesses of the rabbles. They could easily identify that the usage mutiny movement is led by small groups and a national coordination and ability to fight a prolonged war is not present in the leadership of the local community. The lack of leadership and training to fight an organized war was not present among the groups of local community lead by local leaders. The ability to organize a national momentum of the war was required to fight against the leadership of an organized occupation and professional army. [9: Clare Anderson. The Indian Uprising of 1857-8: Prisons, Prisoners and Rebellion (New York: Anthem Press, 2007), 11.]

The account of history reveals that the Nana Sahib, Tantya Tope, KakshmiBai, and Kunwar Singh were among the local leaders of the rebels. However none of them could be of the caliber of their opponent army. The military leaders of British army were trained for the war and political scenarios. The English General Sir Henry Lawrence's statements are evident that the lack of generalship in the local rebel leaders was a major cause of their defeat. The ability of fighting a war and political foresight is also required to organize the rebel force to lead towards a sustainable fight for freedom. The British forces were not only trained and organized but they were also in possession of sophisticated arms and ammunition. The war materials and weapons were also in large numbers with the British forces. [10: Andrew Ward. Our Bones Are Scattered: The Cawnpore Massacres and Indian Mutiny of 1857 (London: John Murray Publishers, 1996), 53.]

The superiority of British forces supported them even after losing at the places of mutiny. The reinforcement of British forces allowed them to regain the occupation. The popular support for mutiny was also lacking along with the apathy of Indian rulers. The most of the Indian rulers sided along with British forces to regain the occupation and receive reinforcement. The notable among them were Nizan of Hyderabad and Sidha of Maratha to provide an active support for the British forces. Therefore the lack of notable leaders and required militancy generalship could not support the rebels. The loyalty of the notable landlords of various Indian states remained with the British providing them the comfortable grounds to fight back rebels. The British generals also accepted it later that the lords of the states and rulers of various areas providing them the required support otherwise the revolt could not have been suppressed. [11: Alison Blunt. "Embodying war: British women and domestic defilement in the Indian -- Mutiny --, 1857 -- 8." Journal of Historical Geography 26, no. 3 (2000): 403-428.]

The taluqdars of Avadh were also among the initial rebels however they were given assurance by the British Government that their occupied areas will be returned. It leads to the notion that they also backed out from the popular support of the rebels. The lack of high ideals and objectives lead to a low morale of the fighters and as a result the war of freedom 1957 could not gain the recognition that was required to be attained in order to achieve the named goals. The lack of patriotism was also one of the factors that lead to non-development of a single motive for war of freedom.

There are various views of historians about the war. Some of them categorize it as a war for the personal and regions reasons where as some present it as an anti-state revolt that was to reinstate the emperor of India and return of the ruling power to the emperor. However a balanced view of the history reveals that the localized and suppressed groups of soldiers expressed their anger and attacked the occupational forces. They were aware of the fact that their country was illegally and illegitimately run by the foreign forces. However a true sense of nationalism was not present in the rebels. The events of revolt unfolded with the spread of violence and information through communities. The lack of coordinated effort and the reaction in the whole state was missing. It is one of the major reason an active generalship was not present to lead the rebels into a unified objective. [12: George Bruce Mallesonand Colonel Malleson. Kay's and Malleson's History of the Indian Mutiny of 1857-8. Vol. 1 (London: Hesperides Press, 2006), 41.]

The wide spread of the mutiny and combination of Hindus and Muslims in the rebellious events forwarded the message that the nation is becoming united and the divide and rule principles are also diminishing. The nature of the acts was severe and the violence created through the rebel's activities created a concern for the British forces. The occupation was serious and organized as compared to the rebels and as a result they tried various methods to pacify public revolt. The single masters of India were under attack from various groups regardless of their religious beliefs.

The usage of divide and rule technique was over and the British forces also noticed that the unity… [END OF PREVIEW]

Four Different Ordering Options:

Which Option Should I Choose?

1.  Buy the full, 22-page paper:  $28.88


2.  Buy + remove from all search engines
(Google, Yahoo, Bing) for 30 days:  $38.88


3.  Access all 175,000+ papers:  $41.97/mo

(Already a member?  Click to download the paper!)


4.  Let us write a NEW paper for you!

Ask Us to Write a New Paper
Most popular!

Indian Diplomacy the History of European Settlement Essay

Indian Problem Essay

Tecumseh and the Quest for Indian Leadership Second Edition Term Paper

Indian Gaming Term Paper

Dam Building and Indian Lands Thesis

View 1,000+ other related papers  >>

Cite This Research Paper:

APA Format

1857 Indian Rebellion Been Elusive.  (2013, July 29).  Retrieved May 21, 2019, from

MLA Format

"1857 Indian Rebellion Been Elusive."  29 July 2013.  Web.  21 May 2019. <>.

Chicago Format

"1857 Indian Rebellion Been Elusive."  July 29, 2013.  Accessed May 21, 2019.