Was the Rebellion of 1857-58 the First Indian War of Independence?

Résumé du document

In 2007, India celebrated the 150th anniversary of "India's First War of Independence" event which is called by the British the "Sepoy Mutiny" These two different denominations reflect a deep opposition regarding the Rebellion and emphasize the political character of the Rebellion. Considered logically as a mere mutiny by the Europeans in favor of the colonization, it became a war for freedom for politicians, poets and writers who were committed in India's fight for independence or against colonization. Nowadays, this interpretation is part of India's official history. Indeed, the issue of the interpretation of the Rebellion, which is the first great movement against a colonial authority in the world is highly important and can be a tool for political and historical legitimization for the first independence's militant and for Indian State.

Extraits

[...] That is why although the latter belongs to a Muslim dynasty, he is the legitimate head of the Indians because he is the symbol of the unity and the sovereignty of India. The Rebellion crossed the barriers of religion but also these of casts and social groups and was widespread all over North India in spite of the lack of a national unity and of a real national sentiment. Although the rebels had different interests and reasons for uprising, the majority gathered around the person of the Emperor. [...]

[...] Indeed, the rebellion was put down thanks to other Indian soldiers from southern states and Sikh regiments in particular. The huge majority of the British forces were Indian. Thus, it is clear that the Rebellion was not alliance of the Indian people against British domination as it is told by Indian State's official history. The lack of nationalist consciousness did not grant the Rebellion an ideological support from part of the people. Affiliation to the Rebellion was a consequence of anger and discontent from those whose interests were in conflict with British policies and British power. [...]

[...] Although Rajanikanta Gupta with its History of the Sepoy war in India already tried to give an Indian point of view from the British one over the Sepoy Revolt, his different interpretation stays very close to the classic one. What is remarkable for Savarkar in the Sepoy Revolt is the unity of the rebels in spite of the fundamental differences between them as their communities, religions or regions. He denied the term mutiny used by the British and compared the revolt to the American's Independence War. One of the main issues is to know the motivations and the aims of the rebels. [...]

[...] The Sepoy Revolt really assumed a national character as the first war of independence for Indians much latter, under the leadership of Gandhi and then under Nehru. It was in fact the first step on India's path to independence and the birth of Indian nationalism. This is Sen's view he expresses in its book Eighteen Fifty Seven but Majumdar and Munshi also share the view. There was no national spirit in the rebellion of 1857 but its aftermath was the rise of an Indian nationalism against the English who put the revolt down. [...]

[...] In another hand, some landlords and local aristocrats had lost a wide part of their power under British rule and some of them planned to organize a revolt to recover their former wealth and power, motivated by their own interests. Although these motivations, mainly discontent from a part of the people seems to have nothing to do with a fight for freedom and independence. However the French and the American revolutions began for close reasons and then turned themselves into ideological struggles for freedom. [...]