Partition of India-the story

[SoulOnIce]

You both are probably right, but this is how it is known to us. i my opinion the relation between the Doctrine of Lapse and the hindu religion was that as the right of adoption was a 'traditional' process but by denying this the Britishers were interfering with the 'holy' or i must say the sacred culture of monarchy!

The tinge of religion as I see it was that doctrine of lapse violated the rights and privileges bestowed on the adherents of the hindu or islamic faith by that very faith.

It was a trick to snatch property, by not recognizing the legitimacy of religious law there was an inherent discrediting of that religion which was then amplified by the land-grabbing

 

[NyczAce]

You both are probably right, but this is how it is known to us. i my opinion the relation between the Doctrine of Lapse and the hindu religion was that as the right of adoption was a 'traditional' process but by denying this the Britishers were interfering with the 'holy' or i must say the sacred culture of monarchy!

Ya you are somewhat right, but
There was no relation with the Hindu religion(nor Muslim) at all, i mean there couldn't have been, Muslims were the prominent rulers at that time.Doctrine of Lapse only interfered with the 'traditional rule' which was that, only the son or some close member related to the ruler can hold the throne.But the Brits made their own laws and took this as an opportunity to annex land.

 

[Xeric]

Bogus history. It was after 1857 revoly by Hindus and Muslims alike, that the British East India company became wary of the discontent among Indians. Bahadur Shah Zafar was the weakest Mughal emperor, I doubt the British would have dared to speak the word "India" had Akbar been the ruler.

Well please don't call this a 'bogus history' just due to one sentence.

And yes you are absolutely right when you say that Bahadur was a weak leader. rather i must say he was the weakest.

This is what it usually happens when you follow monarchy. You don't get a gem out of your seed always! Somewhere down the line a liability is born and when you still pass on the inheritance to someone not competent enough this is what you get at the end.

 

[third eye]

You both are probably right, but this is how it is known to us. i my opinion the relation between the Doctrine of Lapse and the hindu religion was that as the right of adoption was a 'traditional' process but by denying this the Britishers were interfering with the 'holy' or i must say the sacred culture of monarchy!

It was not to do with the morarchy.

Among hindus , it was felt ( & even now is sometimes felt) that upon death only a son ( & the elder son in case of more than one) could light the pyre of a father on his death.

Thats why a son was a must & hence the need to adopt one if not born.Add to this the necessity to pass on the kingdom / inheritance so that the kingdom /property reamined in the family.

The brits broke this chain / tradition for their vested interests by the Doctrine of Lapse.

 

[Xeric]

It was not to do with the morarchy.

Among hindus , it was felt ( & even now is sometimes felt) that upon death only a son ( & the elder son in case of more than one) could light the pyre of a father on his death.

Thats why a son was a must & hence the need to adopt one if not born.Add to this the necessity to pass on the kingdom / inheritance so that the kingdom /property reamined in the family.

The brits broke this chain / tradition for their vested interests by the Doctrine of Lapse.

So that's what i m talking about.
The link has thus been established.
Pyre lit by son-son must be available-passage of kingdom via inheritance

 

[Xeric]

BEGINNING OF THE REVOLT
A regiment in Barakpur near Calcutta refused to use greased cartridges. They were summarily punished. In Meerut on 10th May 1857, the Colonel-in-Command used very harsh measures against those sepoys who refused to use the cartridges. they were publicly disgraced, punished and imprisoned. The sepoys revolted and killed their British officers. They librated their comrades, set on fire their barracks and openly revolted. They marched to Delhi and took bahadur Shah Zafar out of the fort and proclaimed him emperor on 1 May 1857. At this moment Delhi became the center of revolt and Bahadur Shah its symbol. The rebellious sepoys from all over the country turned towards Delhi and all the Indian Chiefs who took part in the revolt proclaimed their loyalty to the Moghal emperor.

Other troops mutinied in Cawnpore, Lucknow, Jhansi and other places, attacked the residencies and killed the Eurpeans. Nana sahib, the adopted son of the last Peshwa Baji Rao II who had not been recognized by the British had already joined the revolt. Nana Sahib took the lead in Cawnpore and attacked General Wheeler's forces. Wheeler surrendered and Nana Sahib agreed that the British women and children could go unharmed by boat to Allahabad, but the rebel forces attacked causing many deaths. At Lucknow Sir Henry Lawrence was in command. He was besieged in the residency and fought bravely till death. The Rani of Jhansi rose in Jhansi. Tn the Deccan there were rising at Kolhapur, Bombay and Southern Marhatta territories. In these areas Sir Salar Jang, Chief Minister of Hyderabd proved friendly to the British and kept the from spreading.

Rani Laxmibhai of Jhansi joined the rebels when the British refused to acknowledge her right to adopt a heir to the gaddi of Jhansi. She was driven out of Hjansi after a fierce battle. She captured Gwalior with the help of Tantia Tope. Rani Jhansi died fighting on 17 June 1858.

 

[Xeric]

END OF THE REVOLT

The British quickly regained the control of Delhi. they now mustered their forces. general Havelock marched from Bombay and captured Allahabad on 11 June 1858. He then left for Cawnpore and entered Lucknow to relieve the troops, though he could not save Sir Henry Lawrence. The indians fought desperately but were defeated.

Delhi was the center of movement. The British besieged it on 8 june but made no headway. gen Jhon Nichlson attacked Delhi on 14 September and broke through walls. The British captured Delhi and sacked it. The emperor was captured. The British killed as many of his sons as they could find with atleast one killed in his presence. Captain Hodson, a ruthless British commander, shot two princes and killed them. Rest of his sons were hanged and their heads were presented to the aging father in a tray. This broke the old emperor's heart and he gave himself up. He was sent as a state prisoner to Rangoon where he died a few years later.

 

[Halaku Khan]

This is about the assassination of MK Gandhi. You will see that there are a number of interesting and suspicious circumstances surrounding that event.

--------------------------------------------------------------------
Mahatma Gandhi's Assassination

by Rajinder Puri

Mahatma Gandhi was assassinated by Nathuram Godse on January 30, 1948. Godse was accompanied by Narayan Apte. Both were hanged. The two traveled from Bombay to Delhi via Gwalior to perform the murder. Some of the named conspirators in the murder were already under police surveillance because they owned small arms. The authorities therefore must have been aware of the impending danger.

Despite India’s independence the administration remained under British control, run by officers in key posts appointed by the British, with Lord Mountbatten as Governor-General and General Boucher as the Army Commander in Chief. Total British control becomes evident from the Mountbatten Papers in which Home Minister Sardar Patel is quoted repeatedly complaining to Lord Mountbatten that the police and army were abetting the communal riots. Clearly the Sardar was powerless.

After the assassination a leading freedom fighter alleged that the Home Ministry was criminally negligent by allowing the murder to occur. The leader blamed the government and Sardar Patel for allowing the murder to happen. That leader was Jaya Prakash Narayan.

On June 3 1947 the Congress Working Committee passed the resolution accepting the Partition of India. There was communal tension but no communal riots to speak of in Punjab. Gandhi observed ‘maun vrat’ (day of silence) on that occasion. He was reportedly isolated by Nehru and Patel and was unhappy. Mountbatten visited him and said he hoped that Gandhi would not oppose the Partition under the Mountbatten Plan. Mountbatten also noted that he was surprised that Gandhi should have observed his day of silence on such a crucial occasion. Gandhi wrote on a scrap of paper his reply: “Have I ever opposed you?” Mountbatten preserved that paper as historical evidence and it is still there in the Mountbatten papers.

But as India became independent on August 15, 1947 Gandhi became increasingly unhappy. He was sidelined by Nehru and Patel who moved about in ministerial flagged cars. Gandhi was a marginalized figure. The riots that escalated after Independence brought about the biggest transfer of populations in recorded history. Inder Gujral’s father and Bhimsen Sachar, who opted to stay on in Pakistan, along with millions of Hindus, were forced to flee to India. An estimated million people were slaughtered in the engineered riots while the police and army stood aside. Over ten million were rendered homeless as they fled their homes to uncharted territory to become refugees.

Gandhi became restive and realized his blunder in compromising. He started plans to undo his mistake. The intelligence that kept watch on all activities in Birla House, where Gandhi stayed, was aware of his unhappiness. That is why Mountbatten met Gandhi and advised him not to oppose the Partition. By doing so he would harm the future of Nehru and Patel who were his creations and disciples. But Gandhi persevered with his plans. He gathered 50 Punjabi refugee families, most of them housed in Delhi’s Purana Quila camp, and finalized plans to travel to Lahore and settle down there to create peace and harmony between India and Pakistan. Gandhi had already written to Jinnah about his desire to settle down in Pakistan. Jinnah said Gandhi was most welcome and invited him to come to Karachi. But Gandhi decided to travel by road to Lahore and settle down there. Plans were finalized for Gandhi and the fifty families to start their journey to Lahore on February 14, 1948. Exactly one fortnight earlier Godse assassinated Gandhi.


Did Gandhi suspect he would be killed? On the day he was killed he finalized his last will and testament by which he recommended that the Congress Party should be dissolved and converted into a social organization named the Lok Sevak Sangh. Had Gandhi carried out his plan he would have been a nuisance for Mountbatten, Nehru and Patel because he would have worked for Indo-Pakistan reconciliation. He had already been totally marginalized in the Congress thanks to his erstwhile loyalists, Nehru and Patel. But the same Gandhi after death became the global brand image for the Congress Party. Surprisingly there is little or no mention by historians of Gandhi’s plans to settle down in Lahore. Why? Because his assassination aborted the plan?

For some strange reason Godse’s trial was held in camera. Godse’s defence was not allowed to be publicized by the Indian government. It was whisked away to Britain. One British weekly published it. Years later it was available to those who searched for it. It is now available on the Internet. The demands for truth about Netaji Subhash Bose are still resonating. Should not the truth about Gandhi’s assassination also be reappraised? Godse’s legal defence, which counters several allegations of the prosecution regarding the assassination, could provide a starting point.

January 28, 2008

 

[Xeric]

This is about the assassination of MK Gandhi. You will see that there are a number of interesting and suspicious circumstances surrounding that event.

--------------------------------------------------------------------
Mahatma Gandhi's Assassination

by Rajinder Puri

Mahatma Gandhi was assassinated by Nathuram Godse on January 30, 1948. Godse was accompanied by Narayan Apte. Both were hanged. The two traveled from Bombay to Delhi via Gwalior to perform the murder. Some of the named conspirators in the murder were already under police surveillance because they owned small arms. The authorities therefore must have been aware of the impending danger.

Despite India’s independence the administration remained under British control, run by officers in key posts appointed by the British, with Lord Mountbatten as Governor-General and General Boucher as the Army Commander in Chief. Total British control becomes evident from the Mountbatten Papers in which Home Minister Sardar Patel is quoted repeatedly complaining to Lord Mountbatten that the police and army were abetting the communal riots. Clearly the Sardar was powerless.

After the assassination a leading freedom fighter alleged that the Home Ministry was criminally negligent by allowing the murder to occur. The leader blamed the government and Sardar Patel for allowing the murder to happen. That leader was Jaya Prakash Narayan.

On June 3 1947 the Congress Working Committee passed the resolution accepting the Partition of India. There was communal tension but no communal riots to speak of in Punjab. Gandhi observed ‘maun vrat’ (day of silence) on that occasion. He was reportedly isolated by Nehru and Patel and was unhappy. Mountbatten visited him and said he hoped that Gandhi would not oppose the Partition under the Mountbatten Plan. Mountbatten also noted that he was surprised that Gandhi should have observed his day of silence on such a crucial occasion. Gandhi wrote on a scrap of paper his reply: “Have I ever opposed you?” Mountbatten preserved that paper as historical evidence and it is still there in the Mountbatten papers.

But as India became independent on August 15, 1947 Gandhi became increasingly unhappy. He was sidelined by Nehru and Patel who moved about in ministerial flagged cars. Gandhi was a marginalized figure. The riots that escalated after Independence brought about the biggest transfer of populations in recorded history. Inder Gujral’s father and Bhimsen Sachar, who opted to stay on in Pakistan, along with millions of Hindus, were forced to flee to India. An estimated million people were slaughtered in the engineered riots while the police and army stood aside. Over ten million were rendered homeless as they fled their homes to uncharted territory to become refugees.

Gandhi became restive and realized his blunder in compromising. He started plans to undo his mistake. The intelligence that kept watch on all activities in Birla House, where Gandhi stayed, was aware of his unhappiness. That is why Mountbatten met Gandhi and advised him not to oppose the Partition. By doing so he would harm the future of Nehru and Patel who were his creations and disciples. But Gandhi persevered with his plans. He gathered 50 Punjabi refugee families, most of them housed in Delhi’s Purana Quila camp, and finalized plans to travel to Lahore and settle down there to create peace and harmony between India and Pakistan. Gandhi had already written to Jinnah about his desire to settle down in Pakistan. Jinnah said Gandhi was most welcome and invited him to come to Karachi. But Gandhi decided to travel by road to Lahore and settle down there. Plans were finalized for Gandhi and the fifty families to start their journey to Lahore on February 14, 1948. Exactly one fortnight earlier Godse assassinated Gandhi.


Did Gandhi suspect he would be killed? On the day he was killed he finalized his last will and testament by which he recommended that the Congress Party should be dissolved and converted into a social organization named the Lok Sevak Sangh. Had Gandhi carried out his plan he would have been a nuisance for Mountbatten, Nehru and Patel because he would have worked for Indo-Pakistan reconciliation. He had already been totally marginalized in the Congress thanks to his erstwhile loyalists, Nehru and Patel. But the same Gandhi after death became the global brand image for the Congress Party. Surprisingly there is little or no mention by historians of Gandhi’s plans to settle down in Lahore. Why? Because his assassination aborted the plan?

For some strange reason Godse’s trial was held in camera. Godse’s defence was not allowed to be publicized by the Indian government. It was whisked away to Britain. One British weekly published it. Years later it was available to those who searched for it. It is now available on the Internet. The demands for truth about Netaji Subhash Bose are still resonating. Should not the truth about Gandhi’s assassination also be reappraised? Godse’s legal defence, which counters several allegations of the prosecution regarding the assassination, could provide a starting point.

January 28, 2008

Well it is sad to listen that your owns turn against you. Gandhi is known to us a shrewd politician, nevertheless he was a peace lover and had always worked for the betterment of india. Nehru on the other hand was a bug. There might be a possibility that Gandhi had come to known that he has no more place in india after the partition. As being discussed in another thread, Nehru and Mountbatten were close rather very close to even share beds. This nexus might have warned Gandhi that 'bad' is coming. There was no ther reason to kill him.

 

[Xeric]

CAUSE OF THE FAILURE OF THE WAR OF INDEPENDENCE
Many causes were responsible for the failure of Independence War 1857. In the first place the uprising was localized. There were many parts of india which were not affected by the revolt.

The freedom fighters failed to account of the lack of leadership among the. Though Rani of Jhansi was a capable woman, but she she was neither the head of all the forces nor an experienced military commander. General Bakht Khan was a brilliant person, but he was not in charge of the whole show. The royal forces worked without any coordination. They were short of modern weapons. They fought with the help of primitive weapons such as pikes and swords. There was no centralized leadership which could keep the rebels under control.

The royal forces had no forward looking plan to be implemented after the capture of power. The educated indians also did no support the revolt. they were putting an end to the backwardness of their country. They believed that the British government was destroying the feudal forces in the country and bringing in a new era of progress.

The British were more disciplined. They had control over the seas. They were in a position to bring in more men and material. A large number of troops were quickly sent to india. the British were well equipped with the modern weapons.

 

[Xeric]

EEFECT OF THE WAR
The indian revolt of 1857 was ruthlessly suppressed. The punishments meted out to survivors were unparalleled for their severity. The innocent suffered with the guilty.

Whole villages were burnt down on suspicion. The rulers were convinced that it was not merely a mutiny, but national rising on a large scale. It failed because it was not coordinated and because there were no outstanding leaders to take a central command.

Since the Muslims had played a leading role and the Muslims as well the Hindus had proclaimed Bahadur Shah Zafar as emperor of india, the British were especially sever on the Muslims after the war.

Wells were stuffed with dead bodies.

Any person suspected of being a rebel was tied with a canon and blown to bits.

The manner in which the people were slaughtered was the height of barbarity, sewing the Muslims in pig skins, smearing them with pork fat before execution and burning their bodies and forcing Hindus to defile themselves.

Town walls were adorned with heads of suspected rebel leaders, Communities suspected of harboring rebels were tortured with all the inmates dying deaths.

Wherever the British advanced, whole villages were sacked and people massacred regardless of their sin.

 

[wtf]

BTW, What do your textbooks say about Moplah revolts ?
Moplah Riots - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

It has a controversial topic even in India. Textbooks often gloss over the incident because it is not clear if it was a revolt against British or a communal riot. The Wagon incident finds more coverage in the textbooks than the original rebellion.

 

[wtf]

EEFECT OF THE WAR
The indian revolt of 1857 was ruthlessly suppressed. The punishments meted out to survivors were unparalleled for their severity. The innocent suffered with the guilty.

Whole villages were burnt down on suspicion. The rulers were convinced that it was not merely a mutiny, but national rising on a large scale. It failed because it was not coordinated and because there were no outstanding leaders to take a central command.

Since the Muslims had played a leading role and the Muslims as well the Hindus had proclaimed Bahadur Shah Zafar as emperor of india, the British were especially sever on the Muslims after the war.

Wells were stuffed with dead bodies.

Any person suspected of being a rebel was tied with a canon and blown to bits.

The manner in which the people were slaughtered was the height of barbarity, sewing the Muslims in pig skins, smearing them with pork fat before execution and burning their bodies and forcing Hindus to defile themselves.

Town walls were adorned with heads of suspected rebel leaders, Communities suspected of harboring rebels were tortured with all the inmates dying deaths.

Wherever the British advanced, whole villages were sacked and people massacred regardless of their sin.

Our textbooks are mostly the same except for less use of the words Hindu or Muslim (I don't remember the sewing up in pig skin, defilement stories). I do remember the textbook (or a book the teacher gave for extra reading) having a picture of a man tied to a cannon. I remember the Pork Fat/ Pig Fat grease story being in the books.

 

[wtf]

So that's what i m talking about.
The link has thus been established.
Pyre lit by son-son must be available-passage of kingdom via inheritance

Thanks, got the Brittanica link. I think it was more about the kingdom than the pyre, but that is a minor point.
doctrine of lapse (rules of succession) -- Britannica Online Encyclopedia

 

[Xeric]

Our textbooks are mostly the same except for less use of the words Hindu or Muslim (I don't remember the sewing up in pig skin, defilement stories). I do remember the textbook (or a book the teacher gave for extra reading) having a picture of a man tied to a cannon. I remember the Pork Fat/ Pig Fat grease story being in the books.

The reason is obvious on this. We fought/struggled for the independence on the basis of Two Nation Theory, on the other hand you have been voting for a United india.

What else should be written else? Brother and sisters or some do praimee

We were two identities and we still believe that firmly. Already much have been discussed on this, don't want to start it all over again.
Chill