Sikhs supported British during uprising of 1857-58

[A1Kaid]

Yaar it wouldn't surprise me Sikhs have always served others. Whether it be British, Hindus, and any other group. Many Indians actually helped the British East Indian company and worked with them to defeat and overthrow Mughal rulers.

 

[chharoonahmad]

Hi

I offer my thanks to everyone for your guidance.

I have another question which wanted to ask since a long time. The tipping point for the uprisng of 1857-58 was the introduction of gun cartridges covered in pig and cow fat (at least this is what they say in the books I have come across). Now as you are aware many of the history books are biased and full of lies. What did the British have in mind when they thought of introducing such cartridges? They were not silly or inept administrators. As a matter of fact their governance and administration were best of their kinds. So, what really went wrong? Is this "cartridge" story correct? Perhaps, as many of the members above have already pointed out that many among the elite had grudge against the British, so it was quite possible that they added fuel to some rumour which was just a rumour at its best. Was any of the cartridges tested in some kind of laboratory? Please let me know your opinion. Thanks.

And ya, Mir Sadiq was another betrayer!

Regards
Haroon

Would someone please help me with this?

 

[third eye]

Hi

I offer my thanks to everyone for your guidance.

I have another question which wanted to ask since a long time. The tipping point for the uprisng of 1857-58 was the introduction of gun cartridges covered in pig and cow fat (at least this is what they say in the books I have come across). Now as you are aware many of the history books are biased and full of lies. What did the British have in mind when they thought of introducing such cartridges? They were not silly or inept administrators. As a matter of fact their governance and administration were best of their kinds. So, what really went wrong? Is this "cartridge" story correct? Perhaps, as many of the members above have already pointed out that many among the elite had grudge against the British, so it was quite possible that they added fuel to some rumour which was just a rumour at its best. Was any of the cartridges tested in some kind of laboratory? Please let me know your opinion. Thanks.

And ya, Mir Sadiq was another betrayer!

Regards
Haroon

At the outset it may be noted that India was not a contiguous political entity back in 1857 as it was in 1947 . While a common thread ran along all those who rebelled against the East India Company they all did it for personal reasons. Each state ruler who took up the sword had his / her own reasons. The grievance was common i.e.loss of their power through the doctrine of lapse or other reasons.

As regards the sikhs, they had been defeated less than a decade ago & the Punjab had finally come under the EIC. They fought for the brits simply coz a soldier fights for his General who happened to be Brit.Not because they disliked the soldier of the Bengal Presidency .

On the cartridge issue it was a case of poorly thought & executed logistics / ordnance. Having subdued all of N India and having units of the Bengal Native Infantry ( BNI) commanded by officers with an average age of 55- 60 yrs who had been with their units for decades a sense of complacency / disregard set it wherein each felt that their units were insulated form dissent.

lack of regard for religious sentiment of the troops both hindu and muslim led to the conflagration.It gave a common platform with sufficient reason to troops of all classes to rebel leaving the Brits wiser but sadder men.

 

[chharoonahmad]

On the cartridge issue it was a case of poorly thought & executed logistics / ordnance. Having subdued all of N India and having units of the Bengal Native Infantry ( BNI) commanded by officers with an average age of 55- 60 yrs who had been with their units for decades a sense of complacency / disregard set it wherein each felt that their units were insulated form dissent.

Thanks a lot, third eye.

It is still hard for me that the British chose to use cow and pig fat, especially when they had studied the subcontinent culture and had been there for quite some time. The British officers were very experienced and professional. So, I don't think they had started thinking that their units were insulated from any kind of dissent.

Was coating the cartridges with cow and pig economical as compared to some other method? If using cow and pig fats would have saved them thousands of pounds then I think the Brits would have thought of taking the risk by introducing such 'taboo' cartridges. But if there were no economics involved, then it wouldn't surprise me if someone told me it was just a 'false' rumour fuelled by disgruntled princes, nawabs,etc.

Please let me know your opinion. Thanks.

 

[third eye]

Thanks a lot, third eye.

It is still hard for me that the British chose to use cow and pig fat, especially when they had studied the subcontinent culture and had been there for quite some time. The British officers were very experienced and professional. So, I don't think they had started thinking that their units were insulated from any kind of dissent.

Was coating the cartridges with cow and pig economical as compared to some other method? If using cow and pig fats would have saved them thousands of pounds then I think the Brits would have thought of taking the risk by introducing such 'taboo' cartridges. But if there were no economics involved, then it wouldn't surprise me if someone told me it was just a 'false' rumour fuelled by disgruntled princes, nawabs,etc.

Please let me know your opinion. Thanks.

Please do not mix the armies of EIC & those of the Crown. The EIC army was not officered by professional soldiers as we know them.

The subject of mutiny has been dealt with at length in different threads here however there is no conclusive proof on the fact that the cartridges were actually packed in lubricant which consisted of pig & cow fat. There are any number of opinions depending on which side opines .A point does stand out. The Sepoys who took umbrage to the grease on the bullets their officers asked them to use seemed to have no problems in using the same cartridges to shoot their officers with !

A common thread that ran along all officers of the Bengal army was that ' their men' were not swayed by rumors about greased cartridges and that the flour ( atta) issued to the Sepoys being mixed with bones of Pigs & cows - the aim being to break the caste / religion of the men. Sadly they were killed by the men they swore on.

The mutiny to my mind still stands as the best example of what a skillfully planed & executed Psychological warfare campaign can do & how it should be run.

Troops of the Bengal Army came mainly from Oudh ( Awadh), once that state came under the Brits in 1855-56 the Sepoys lost the allowance or " bhatta' they got for serving outside their state as Oudh too came under the EIC. Along side, there were rulers who had lost everything hence N India became a fertile ground for disgruntled .

The rest is history.

You may like to peruse this link:

http://www.victorianwars.com/viewtopic.php?f=12&t=378

 

[Musalman]

Sikh helped the british no doubt but that was not against the Muslim but actually because of the probians who revolted against the brits. These probian soldiers helped british capture Punjab in1846. Main muslim families of Punjab also helped the british like the Qizalbash of Lahore, Qureshis of Multan ( Our dear PM and Ex FM family) also helped the brits.

1857 kay hamam mai sub nagay hain. Syed Ahmed Khan was the No 1 supporter of Brits.

 

[chharoonahmad]

What were these "probian soldiers ", by the way? Thanks.

 

[Musalman]

Poorab mean east. Soldiers from UP were called probian. Please correct me if i am wrong

 

[Abu Zolfiqar]

Sikh helped the british no doubt but that was not against the Muslim but actually because of the probians who revolted against the brits. These probian soldiers helped british capture Punjab in1846. Main muslim families of Punjab also helped the british like the Qizalbash of Lahore, Qureshis of Multan ( Our dear PM and Ex FM family) also helped the brits.

1857 kay hamam mai sub nagay hain. Syed Ahmed Khan was the No 1 supporter of Brits.

the britishers even exploited sectarian tensions in Northern Kurram, near Afghan border.....tried to get Turris to fight the Waziris and Mehsuds --who by nature were very difficult to ''tame''

britishers number-1 talent was divide and conquer.......despite the fact that i am a very patriotic Pakistani who believes in 2 nation theory till the day i turn to dust -- i still sometimes ask what would have happened if all people in the region stood firm and fought the britishers like what Algerian did to the French

 

[Alternative]

the britishers even exploited sectarian tensions in Northern Kurram, near Afghan border.....tried to get Turris to fight the Waziris and Mehsuds --who by nature were very difficult to ''tame''

britishers number-1 talent was divide and conquer.......despite the fact that i am a very patriotic Pakistani who believes in 2 nation theory till the day i turn to dust -- i still sometimes ask what would have happened if all people in the region stood firm and fought the britishers like what Algerian did to the French

Sorry to burst your bubble, there was no concept of a nation or state as such in those time. Sub-continent, so big an area, was home to too many races, tribe, cultures, languages, etc etc, to stood have firm against anyone whether British or anyone else.
Rajputs along with Mughals fighting with other Rajputs and other 'Hindus' powers.
Why Nizam of Hyderabad fought against Hyder Ali/Tipu Sultan and colluded with British; Why Maratha decimated the Mughal Empire and were fighting every other power and then fighting each other and sought help from the Britsh.
British did't need to divide, as sub-continent was already divided and at each others throats. Their(British) No.1 talent was something else.
Consider Sub-continent as of Europe, a geographical identity, housed different nationalities, cultures, religions etc.

British are the one who made Indian nationality,....... that we comprehend today, by identifing, by saying, oh you Indian, oh you bloody Indian..... to all and every.....that nationality that was not owned by any.

 

[Avisheik]

India has always been divided. In this mordern day, india can be compared to Europe. Both india and europe have many states of their own which have different language, food and cultures. The difference is that european states are independent while indian states are glued together to form a country

 

[justanobserver]

India has always been divided. In this mordern day, india can be compared to Europe. Both india and europe have many states of their own which have different language, food and cultures. The difference is that european states are independent while indian states are glued together to form a country

But Europe does have a common civilizational heritage, when it was united i.e Roman Empire. For India it would be Mauryan, Gupta, Pala and Mughal empires.

As a civilizational state India is more united (culturally) than Europe, but less united than say China.

 

[notsuperstitious]

Yaar it wouldn't surprise me Sikhs have always served others. Whether it be British, Hindus, and any other group. Many Indians actually helped the British East Indian company and worked with them to defeat and overthrow Mughal rulers.

Must you parade your ignorance that actually stems from your blind beliefs and hatred?

The Mughals were not destroyed by the british, as you are probably indoctrinated, no doubt with the help of the brahmins i'm sure How predictable.

The Mughals were defeated and destroyed by marathas, sikhs and infighting. And that they were replaced in large parts by the sikhs, who were a young religion then shows that the sikhs were serving their own interests, not somebody elses.

 

[Abu Zolfiqar]

@ Alternative

there was no ''bubble'' to burst, if you look at my other posts on this subject (many of which exist) i've basically said all what you said as well.