1.

Introduction
The Revolt of 1857, widely recognized as India's First War of Independence, stands as a pivotal
moment in the subcontinent's colonial narrative. Traditionally depicted merely as a sepoy
mutiny or a nationalist uprising, contemporary scholarship has shifted focus to reveal the
complexity of the region's diverse landscape, its socioeconomic foundations, and the various
manifestations of violence that emerged. This thesis seeks to delve deeper into the intricacies
of violence during the revolt, contrasting its forms in urban versus rural settings, with a
concentrated examination of present-day Uttar Pradesh and its neighboring regions, Bihar and
Bundelkhand.
Urban centers such as Delhi, Lucknow, and Kanpur became the epicenters of fierce and
organized confrontations between British forces and rebel sepoys, who were often bolstered by
disillusioned elites and artisans. These cities transformed into battlegrounds marked by
relentless sieges, heavy bombardments, horrific massacres, and brutal reprisals. In stark
contrast, the countryside erupted in decentralized, spontaneous uprisings led by frustrated
peasants, zamindars, and tribal chieftains. Rural violence was characterized by strategic
ambushes, the deliberate destruction of colonial records, targeted attacks on revenue officials,
and the fiery torching of British outposts. Both forms of resistance powerfully illustrated the
deep-seated grievances rooted in local sociopolitical structures, rigid caste hierarchies, and
significant economic disruptions.
This thesis compellingly argues that the nature and intensity of violence during 1857 were
profoundly shaped by factors such as geography, local leadership, caste and class dynamics,
and the colonial state's structures. Urban revolts exemplified military organization and
ideological symbolism, while rural resistance arose from deep-seated anti-colonial sentiments
driven by land alienation, oppressive taxation, and an ongoing agrarian crisis. The British
response was strikingly inconsistent; in urban centers, they deployed swift and strategic
military campaigns, whereas rural regions endured relentless scorched-earth tactics and severe
collective punishment.1

To thoroughly investigate these dynamics, this thesis adopts a comparative historical

methodology, leveraging a rich array of primary and secondary sources. This comprehensive
approach includes colonial dispatches, firsthand eyewitness accounts, vernacular newspapers,
rebel proclamations, folk ballads, and contemporary historiographical analyses. Notably, the
study draws extensively on the six-volume series *Freedom Struggle in Uttar Pradesh, edited
by S.A.A. Rizvi and M.L. Bhargava, which provides an in-depth, district-by-district
exploration of the uprising's profound local impact. This multi-faceted source base not only
enriches the analysis but also underscores the significance of local narratives in understanding
the broader historical context.
This study significantly enriches the ongoing discourse surrounding the Revolt of 1857 by
delving into the intricate structure and enduring memory of violence, decisively moving

1
S.A.A. Rizvi and M.L. Bhargava, eds., Freedom Struggle in Uttar Pradesh, vol. 1–6 (Lucknow: Publication
Bureau Information Department, Government of Uttar Pradesh, 1957–1961).

1
beyond elite political narratives. It aims to bring to light subaltern perspectives,
particularly those enshrined in oral traditions and folk culture, which vividly
illustrate the rural suffering and resistance that mainstream historiography has
long neglected. Moreover, this study not only maps the spatial patterns of
violence but also critically examines how colonial power, indigenous agency, and
local institutions intricately shaped the rebellion's trajectory in both urban and
rural contexts.
2.Literature Review
The historiography of the 1857 Revolt has evolved dramatically, reflecting profound shifts in
ideological perspectives, methodologies, and sources. Initially, colonial interpretations
characterized the event narrowly as a mere military "mutiny," driven solely by discontent
within the army. However,
Indian nationalist historians later redefined it as a powerful and patriotic struggle for
independence. Recently, scholarship has transcended these simplistic binaries, illuminating the
complex regional and social dynamics that shaped the revolt, particularly the striking contrasts
between urban and rural violence. This evolving understanding underscores the revolt's
significance as a multifaceted and national response to colonial rule.
The six-volume work, "Freedom Struggle in Uttar Pradesh," edited by S.A.A. Rizvi and M.L.
Bhargava, is a significant contribution to the field of historical study. These texts provide
detailed accounts of uprisings and British responses at the district level, particularly focusing
on regions like Lucknow and Bundelkhand. Although rich in administrative data, they
primarily emphasize political developments rather than social dynamics.
Marxist scholars, such as P.C. Joshi, introduced a new perspective by framing the revolt in
terms of class struggle, especially in rural areas. His book, "Rebellion 1857: A Symposium,"
2
highlighted agrarian unrest as a form of organized resistance against colonial exploitation,
thereby facilitating more nuanced analyses of peasant involvement in the struggle.
Recent studies have increasingly shed light on the complex interpretations and lasting
memories of the revolt. In *The Indian Mutiny and the British Imagination*, Gautam
Chakravarty reveals how colonial narratives surrounding Indian violence served to legitimize
brutal British reprisals, particularly in key cities like Delhi.3 Both Barbara English and Nancy
Paxton critically challenge these British representations, with English delving into the
mythologizing of the Kanpur massacres and Paxton examining the ways in which colonial
literature perpetuated gendered stereotypes.
While the rural dimensions of the revolt have traditionally been overlooked, scholars like
Rudrangshu Mukherjee and Clare Anderson are working to correct this oversight. Mukherjee’s
The Other Side of 1857 passionately explores the grievances and fierce resistance of rural
peasants, whereas Anderson highlights the persistent threat that rebellious dacoits posed to
colonial authority in central India. These efforts not only enrich our understanding of the revolt

2
P.C. Joshi, ed., Rebellion 1857: A Symposium (Delhi: People's Publishing House, 1957).
3
Gautam Chakravarty, The Indian Mutiny and the British Imagination (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,
2005).

2
but also underscore the diverse experiences and perspectives that shaped this pivotal moment
in history.
Kim Wagner's Specters of Violence compellingly explores how cities like Amritsar became
battlegrounds of colonial terror, underscoring the profound symbolic significance that urban
centers held within British culture. Similarly, Biswamoy Pati's regional studies illuminate the
complex and varied motivations driving participation in the revolt, shaped by the intertwined
dynamics of caste, religion, and economic realities.
James Evelegh's provocative work argues that British reprisals in certain rural areas escalated
to levels that could be deemed genocidal violence. In a critical counterpoint, Eric Stokes and
Dashan Perusek examine the powerful role of caste-based mobilization, bringing forward
subaltern perspectives that challenge dominant narratives. Additionally, oral histories, such as
Vishnu Bhatt Godshe's memoir, offer invaluable insights into the personal experiences of
ordinary Indians as they witnessed and remembered the harrowing violence around them.4

Kim Wagner's "Specters of Violence" examines how cities like Amritsar were transformed into
sites of colonial terror, highlighting the symbolic significance of urban centers in British
culture. In a similar vein, Biswamoy Pati's regional studies reveal the diverse motivations
behind participation in the revolt, influenced by factors such as caste, religion, and economic
concerns5.

James Evelegh's controversial work suggests that British reprisals in certain rural areas
approached genocidal violence. Meanwhile, Eric Stokes and Dashan Perusek focus their
research on caste-based mobilization and subaltern perspectives. Oral histories, including
Vishnu Bhatt Godshe's memoir, offer unique insights into how ordinary Indians experienced
and remembered the violence.

3.Methodology
This study adopts a robust multidisciplinary and regionally comparative approach to deeply
investigate the nature and forms of violence during the 1857 Revolt. By integrating political,
subaltern, cultural, and spatial analyses, it sheds light on the diverse urban and rural
manifestations of the uprising across North India, especially in present-day Uttar Pradesh and
Bihar. Through a careful examination of both primary and secondary sources, the study
rigorously assesses the motivations, key actors, and far-reaching consequences of violence
within a variety of geographic and social contexts, offering a compelling narrative of this
critical historical event.

3.1.Comparative Regional Framework

The study's central feature is its comparative approach to urban and rural regions, which
contrasts cities like Delhi and Lucknow with rural areas like Awadh, Bundelkhand, and Bihar.
This comparative lens reveals significant differences in the nature of violence: urban violence
was frequently militarized and symbolic, whereas rural unrest was motivated more directly

4
Barbara English, "The Kanpur Massacres in India in the Revolt of 1857," Past & Present 142 (1994): 169–178 5
Kim Wagner, Specters of Violence in a Colonial Context: Amritsar and the 1857 Revolt (New Delhi: Roli Books,
2010).

3
by agrarian distress and socioeconomic tensions.5 District-level documentation, particularly
the Freedom Struggle in Uttar Pradesh edited by Rizvi and Bhargava, provides critical
administrative data that is analyzed alongside vernacular and scholarly narratives to create a
nuanced, spatially aware account.

3.2.Primary Source Base

The research utilizes a variety of primary sources, including district reports and government
documents related to rebellion, civilian resistance, and state reprisals. Vernacular memoirs,
such as Vishnu Bhatt Godse's 1857: The True Story of the Great Uprising, offer valuable
grassroots perspectives. British dispatches, newspapers, and personal accounts are read with an
awareness of their inherent biases. Additionally, oral histories, folk songs, and regional legends
from Awadh and Bundelkhand are examined for their subaltern content and cultural
significance.6 These sources are cross-referenced to develop a nuanced understanding of the
violence associated with the revolt across different regions and identities.

3.4.Historiographical Foundations
The study draws on a range of historical traditions. While it discusses nationalist narratives that
view the events of 1857 as India's first major anti-colonial struggle, it also highlights their
limitations in addressing localized conflicts. The study is informed by Marxist and subaltern
approaches, particularly those of scholars like P.C. Joshi and Rudrangshu Mukherjee, which
focus on rural resistance. Additionally, the postcolonial and cultural interpretations offered by
Chakravarty and Wagner help to understand urban violence as symbolic and psychological
rather than purely physical.7

3.5.Themes and Typologies of Violence

Violence is classified as military, civilian, symbolic, and colonial counter-violence, allowing
for a systematic comparison of urban and rural incidents. Identity markers such as caste, class,
and religion are critical for understanding patterns of participation and victimization.

3.6.Chronological Scope and Constraints

The study examines the period from 1857 to 1859, focusing on the initial outbreaks and
subsequent rural campaigns. It addresses issues such as colonial bias, incomplete rural data,
and the marginalization of women and Dalits. These concerns are tackled through critical
analysis and source triangulation.

5
Biswamoy Pati, The Great Rebellion of 1857 in India: Exploring Transgressions, Contests, and Diversities
(London: Routledge, 2010), 13–15.
6
S.A.A. Rizvi and M.L. Bhargava, eds., Freedom Struggle in Uttar Pradesh, Vols. 1–6 (Lucknow: Publication
Bureau Information Department, 1957–1961).
7
Eric Stokes, “Rural Revolt in the Great Rebellion of 1857 in India: A Study of the Saharanpur and
Muzaffarnagar Districts,” The Historical Journal 12, no. 4 (1969): 610–12.

4
3.7.Language and Translation
Where vernacular sources are used, reliable translations have been consulted, with a focus on
capturing context and cultural nuance rather than literal meaning.

4.Historical Context of the 1857 Mutiny

The 1857 revolt, often called the Sepoy Mutiny or the First War of Indian Independence, was
a significant uprising driven by a complex interplay of political, social, economic, and cultural
factors. To fully grasp the patterns of violence—especially the stark contrasts between urban
and rural experiences—it is crucial to delve into the broader historical circumstances that fueled
this rebellion, particularly in the pivotal regions of present-day Uttar Pradesh and Bihar.
Understanding these elements not only sheds light on the origins of the revolt but also
emphasizes its lasting impact on the quest for independence.

4.1Political Conditions and Annexation Policies

By the mid-1800s, British expansion through annexation and military dominance had
significantly altered India's political landscape. The Doctrine of Lapse, particularly under Lord
Dalhousie, deposed several princely states. The annexation of Awadh in 1856, ostensibly due
to administrative failure, was particularly provocative, alienating local nobility, soldiers, and
peasants. Awadh had a rich cultural and political heritage, and its forced integration into British
territory was viewed as both a strategic betrayal and an insult to regional pride.8

4.2Economic Strain and Rural Displacement

British land revenue systems, including the Permanent Settlement and Mahalwari, dramatically
disrupted agrarian hierarchies. Many traditional landowners, such as zamindars and taluqdars,9
lost their influence, while peasants were increasingly burdened by debt and dispossession.
These marginalized groups formed the backbone of the rural insurgency in Awadh. Urban areas
also faced economic challenges, as artisan livelihoods declined with the influx of colonial
imports that supplanted local crafts. Furthermore, the weakening of traditional patronage in
cities like Delhi and Lucknow resulted in rising unemployment among artisans, including
weavers, some of whom later participated in the revolt.

4.3Sepoy Discontent and the Military Trigger

The Bengal Army, which primarily drew its personnel from the Ganges plains, played a pivotal
role in the uprising. The sepoys articulated their concerns regarding various issues, including
perceived discriminatory practices, religious constraints, disparities in pay, and limited
pathways for career advancement. The introduction of the Enfield rifle, which was

8
Vishnu Bhatt Godshe Versaikar, 1857: The Real Story of the Great Uprising, trans. Mridula Mukherjee (New
Delhi: HarperCollins, 2016), 182–85.

9
S.A.A. Rizvi and M.L. Bhargava, eds., Freedom Struggle in Uttar Pradesh, Vol. 2 (Lucknow: Publication Bureau,
1958), 134–38.

5
believed to have cartridges greased with cow and pig fat, unfortunately provoked considerable
religious discomfort. It's important to note that these grievances were part of a larger context
of longstanding cultural alienation and distrust. The soldiers' deep connections to rural
communities facilitated the expansion of the mutiny into the countryside, ultimately evolving
into a broader rebellion.

4.4.Religious and Cultural Factors

The Bengal Army, primarily from the Ganges plains, played a key role in the uprising due to
grievances such as discriminatory practices, religious restrictions, unequal pay, and limited
career advancement. The introduction of the Enfield rifle, with cartridges allegedly greased
with cow and pig fat, intensified religious anger. 10These issues were rooted in broader cultural
alienation and distrust, and the soldiers' strong connections to rural society contributed to the
mutiny's expansion into a widespread rebellion.

5.Urban-Rural Contrast and Regional Spread

Urban areas became centers of British administration and military presence, often alienating
local populations. In contrast, rural areas suffered under exploitative land policies. 11These
differences influenced the nature of violence: it was concentrated and symbolic in cities, while
in villages, it was more diffuse and rooted in land disputes. From Meerut to Bihar, regional
leaders like Rani Laxmibai and Kunwar Singh mobilized localized resistance, resulting in a
diverse array of interconnected yet regionally distinct revolts.

5.1.Urban Violence: Patterns and Actors

Urban areas became centers of British administration and military presence, which often
alienated local populations. In contrast, rural areas suffered the most from exploitative land
policies. These differences shaped the nature of violence: 12it was concentrated and symbolic
in cities, while in villages, it was more diffuse and rooted in land disputes. From Meerut to
Bihar, regional leaders like Rani Laxmibai and Kunwar Singh organized localized resistance,
resulting in a mosaic of interconnected yet regionally distinct revolts.

5.2.Patterns and Characteristics of Urban Violence

Mutinous sepoys typically initiated urban rebellions by taking control of cantonments, killing
British officers, and securing key administrative and military positions. On May 11, the arrival
of sepoys from Meerut in Delhi ignited a revolt. They proclaimed Bahadur Shah Zafar as
emperor, transforming Delhi into the symbolic heart of the rebellion. Violence erupted swiftly,
targeting European civilians, government property, and military depots. Although the revolt
began spontaneously, the takeover of Delhi came to represent the broader anti-colonial
movement.13

10
Barbara English, “The Kanpur Massacres in India in the Revolt of 1857,” Past & Present 142 (1994): 170.
11
Chakravarty, The Indian Mutiny, 115.
12
Rizvi and Bhargava, Freedom Struggle in Uttar Pradesh, Vol. 3 (1959), 78–80.
13
Gautam Chakravarty, The Indian Mutiny and the British Imagination (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,
2005), 47.

6
Kanpur became the site of one of history's most notorious atrocities: the Bibighar killings,
where British women and children were mercilessly executed under Nana Sahib's command.
This brutal act ignited a firestorm of outrage in Britain and provided a chilling rationale for
harsh retribution. Simultaneously, Lucknow was engulfed in fierce fighting, culminating in a
grueling months-long siege of the British Residency, marked by relentless bombardments and
daring counterattacks.

5.3.Actors Involved in Urban Violence

The main participants in the rebellion were Indian sepoys, primarily high-caste Hindus and
Muslims from North Indian regions such as Awadh and Bihar. They were dissatisfied due to
several military grievances, including unequal pay, limited promotion opportunities, cultural
insensitivity, and the use of cartridges greased with animal fat. This dissatisfaction was further
fueled by a sense of betrayal following the annexation of Awadh.
The urban unrest attracted various groups, including artisans, petty traders, unemployed royal
retainers, and former soldiers. In Delhi, remnants of the Mughal nobility and Islamic clerics
provided both ideological and logistical support for the rebellion. Similarly, in Lucknow,
former officials and disbanded soldiers joined the fight, often acting independently of the
sepoys.14

Nana Sahib in Kanpur and Begum Hazrat Mahal in Lucknow emerged as pivotal figures during
this era. They passionately articulated political visions aimed at reclaiming traditional
authority. For example, Hazrat Mahal boldly resisted British rule and championed her son’s
rightful claim to the throne of Awadh. This form of leadership powerfully demonstrates that
urban violence was not simply a reaction, but a deeply political assertion of identity and
autonomy.

5.4.British Reaction and Retaliation

The British responded to the urban uprisings with a blend of horror and racial contempt. Their
retaliatory measures were shockingly brutal, involving public hangings, executions, and the
complete destruction of entire neighborhoods. When they retook control of Delhi in September
1857, they not only demolished Mughal-era areas but also executed the emperor's sons in a
display of raw power. In Kanpur, the reaction was even more savage, fueled by intense outrage
over the Bibighar massacre. Rebels faced mass executions—either by hanging, shooting, or
being blown from cannons. 15

As Kim Wagner notes, colonial violence was intentionally staged as a public spectacle, aimed
at asserting imperial dominance. These acts not only solidified existing racial hierarchies but
also provided a justification for the expanded imposition of direct British rule in the
aftermath.16

14
Kaushik Roy, “The Beginning of 'People’s War' in India,” Economic and Political Weekly 42, no. 19 (2007):
1722.
15
Biswamoy Pati, The Great Rebellion of 1857 in India: Exploring Transgressions, Contests, and Diversities
(London: Routledge, 2010), 29.
16
G.C. Narang, “Ghalib and the Rebellion of 1857,” Indian Literature 15, no. 1 (1972): 10–15.

7
5.5.Social and Religious Undercurrents
Urban violence during this period was deeply rooted in sectarian tensions. Disturbing rumors
of forced conversions and assaults on religious sites stoked mistrust between Hindus and
Muslims, a dynamic that British authorities actively capitalized on. Moreover, the rebels' fury
was directed not only at the British but also at Indians perceived as traitors—those loyal to the
British, including Christian converts and Company employees. This brutal targeting added a
chilling element of internal purging to the violence, intensifying the conflict and deepening the
divide within society.17
5.6.Rural Violence: Patterns and Actors
During the 1857 Uprising, urban areas experienced intense military confrontations, while the
rural rebellion was more dispersed, informal, and rooted in local socioeconomic issues. Rural
violence did not follow a unified strategy or symbolic agenda; instead, it reflected specific
grievances against colonial policies, land dispossession, and traditional hierarchies. Various
communities, including disbanded soldiers, peasants, tribal groups, and local elites,
participated in the uprising, driven by a mix of resistance, desire for retribution, and the need
for survival.

5.7.Nature and Forms of Rural Violence

Rural uprisings were often characterized by a lack of centralized leadership and a cohesive
ideology. Rather than targeting significant administrative centers, these rebels focused on local
symbols of British authority: revenue officials, landlords perceived as collaborators, police
officers, and missionaries. Inspired by the sepoy mutinies, entire villages spontaneously
revolted, attacking treasuries, uprooting telegraph poles, and razing indigo plantations. This
violence emerged as a powerful and immediate response, fueled by deepseated resentment
toward the exploitative systems imposed by both the British and their local allies.
In Awadh, British land reforms and the dismantling of the taluqdari system led to rebellion
among dispossessed landlords, giving rise to semi-feudal violence in rural areas. In other
regions, the violence took on the characteristics of a grassroots peasant revolt, targeting
landlords, upper castes, and colonial structures.

6.Regional Variations
Rumors of British defeats in urban areas ignited widespread tax resistance and attacks on
colonial officials in the Doab region. According to Eric Stokes, the rebellions in places like
Saharanpur and Muzaffarnagar reflected a desire to restore older forms of village autonomy
that had been disrupted by colonial revenue systems.
In eastern Uttar Pradesh, peasant-led revolts, particularly in Gorakhpur and Azamgarh, were
often driven by caste tensions, with lower-caste groups launching attacks against Britishaligned
landlords. The Bundelkhand rebellion was more militarized, featuring guerrilla raids conducted
by tribal warriors and ex-soldiers who utilized forest cover to evade British forces. Even in
tribal areas like the Chotanagpur plateau, uprisings occurred, especially among communities

17
Kim Wagner, Specters of Violence in a Colonial Context: Amritsar and the 1857 Revolt (New Delhi: Roli Books,
2010), 58–60.

8
such as the Santhals, who resisted land grabs and missionary activities, despite not being
formally connected to the larger revolt.

6.1.British Repression and Aftermath

Rural suppression was devastating, yet distinct from urban reprisals. Rather than resorting to
public executions, British forces implemented brutal collective punishment, which involved
burning villages, seizing livestock, and destroying crops. In Awadh, they specifically targeted
elite fortresses, and the reassessment and redistribution of land to loyalists deepened existing
grievances and fostered resentment.
The social consequences of this repression were equally dire. The British reliance on native
informants and irregular troops fractured village communities, sowing seeds of distrust that
would linger for generations. This led not only to significant physical devastation but also to a
profound breakdown of rural solidarity—a legacy that endured long after the rebellion had
come to an end.18

7.Case Study I: Delhi – Symbolism, Struggle, and Ruin

During the 1857 Uprising, Delhi held both strategic and symbolic importance. The capture of
the city by rebel sepoys from Meerut on May 11 marked a pivotal moment, as they aimed to
legitimize their cause by declaring Mughal emperor Bahadur Shah Zafar as the symbol of the
rebellion. This decision briefly elevated Delhi to the status of the capital of the insurrection,
even though the rebellion was characterized by complex layers of violence, internal dissent,
and devastating retribution.

7.1.The Rebel Occupation

The takeover of Delhi was rapid and chaotic. Rebel soldiers entered through the Kashmere
Gate, quickly overwhelming both the British military and the civilian population. It is estimated
that between 50 and 100 Europeans—men, women, and children—were killed during the
assault. The rebels were motivated by a desire to rally around Mughal authority, which made
the attack feel spontaneous. Although Bahadur Shah Zafar was initially hesitant, he was
ultimately compelled to give his symbolic approval, which positioned Delhi as the epicenter of
the rebels' hopes.

7.2.Internal Tensions and Urban Fragmentation

Despite their successes, the rebels faced significant internal divisions. The sepoys, who were
drawn from various regiments of the Bengal Army, lacked unified leadership and frequently
battled over authority and resources. Civilians found themselves caught between the fear of
British retaliation and distrust of the rebels, particularly as food shortages and economic
collapse worsened.19

18
Clare Anderson, “A Most Inconvenient Warfare,” in Mutiny at the Margins, vol. 3, ed. Crispin Bates (New
Delhi: SAGE, 2013), 135–38.
19
S. Mahto, “Chotanagpur Mission During the Indian Rebellion (1857–58),” Proceedings of the Indian History
Congress 31 (1969): 377–79.

9
Within Delhi, different segments of society reacted in various ways. Some Muslim elites sided
with the rebels, while others chose to remain silent. Attacks on Christian converts and Indian
Christians highlighted existing religious tensions. Meanwhile, wealthier Indians suspected of
sympathizing with the British were also targeted. Looting, especially in commercial areas,
deepened the sense of chaos and fear throughout the city.20

7.3.The Siege and British Retaliation

Beginning in June, British forces led by General Wilson initiated a prolonged siege from the
northern Ridge. After months of skirmishes and outbreaks of disease, they launched a final
assault on September 14. Intense urban combat ensued, and on September 20, Delhi fell to the
British.
The recapture of Delhi triggered brutal repercussions. Colonial troops carried out widespread
executions, looting, and acts of punitive violence, driven by anger over British casualties and
a perceived betrayal by the people of Delhi. Bahadur Shah Zafar was captured, his sons were
executed at Khooni Darwaza, and significant rebel areas, such as Chandni Chowk and the
Muslim quarters of the walled city, were destroyed21

7.4Aftermath and Urban Transformation

The social and cultural consequences of the siege were significant. Muslims were
disproportionately blamed, leading to widespread expulsions and property seizures. The old
Mughal elite was dismantled, and with the exile of Zafar, Delhi lost its final connection to
Mughal sovereignty.22

British efforts to reshape the city demonstrated a desire to prevent future uprisings.
Surveillance was intensified, a larger cantonment was constructed, and returning populations
were closely monitored. The cosmopolitan, Indo-Persian culture of pre-1857 Delhi, which had
centered around poetry, courtly etiquette, and a blend of religious traditions, was irrevocably
destroyed.
Once a thriving cultural hub and imperial center, Delhi became a symbol of colonial vengeance
and imperial dominance, with its urban space reorganized to prioritize control over coexistence.

8.Case Study II: Lucknow – Resistance, Siege, and Colonial Retribution

During the 1857 uprising, Lucknow, the former capital of Awadh, emerged as a significant
center of defiance. Political betrayal, social displacement, and intense urban combat all
contributed to the city’s rebellion. The annexation of Awadh in 1856 had already disrupted
established structures of authority and patronage, paving the way for widespread unrest. The
rebellion in Lucknow turned into a prolonged siege, culminating in one of the most destructive
episodes of British retribution.

20
P.C. Joshi, ed., Rebellion 1857: A Symposium (Delhi: People's Publishing House, 1957), 78–79.
21
James Evelegh, “Colonial Genocide in 1857?” The South Asianist 3, no. 1 (2014): 222–24.
22
Barbara English, “The Kanpur Massacres in India in the Revolt of 1857,” Past & Present, no. 142 (1994): 170.

10
8.1Annexation and Growing Discontent
The British annexation of Awadh under the guise of "misrule" destabilized the Nawabi elite,
displaced thousands who relied on court patronage, and alienated local landowners. The
removal and exile of Nawab Wajid Ali Shah represented a larger assault on Awadhi identity
and sovereignty. The resulting resentment was felt across social classes, from taluqdars to
artisans, and many sepoys who later rebelled had direct ties to the disrupted region.

8.2The Outbreak and Siege

Rebellion broke out in late May 1857, when sepoys in Lucknow mutinied. Sir Henry Lawrence,
the British Resident, attempted to quell the unrest but died in early July during a skirmish. The
siege of the Residency lasted more than four months. Approximately 3,000 people, including
British troops, civilians, and Indian loyalists, were subjected to bombardment, starvation, and
disease while surrounded by rebel forces. 24

8.3Urban Resistance and Leadership

The Lucknow rebellion was significant for its wide-ranging participation. The rebels included
disgruntled soldiers, clerks, artisans, and religious leaders. Women also played crucial roles,
particularly Begum Hazrat Mahal, who took charge during the Nawab's absence. She organized
forces, oversaw administration, and issued proclamations that challenged British rule.23

The city's architecture, characterized by winding alleys, walled compounds, and palace
complexes, aided the rebels' defense strategies. Locations like Kaiserbagh and Imambara
became strongholds. Urban warfare was intense, with street fighting and sniper attacks
hindering British progress. The rebels even attempted to establish a basic governance structure;
however, internal divisions and shifting loyalties undermined its effectiveness.

8.4British Counterattack and Reprisals

In September 1857, Havelock and Outram made an attempt to relieve the Residency but only
achieved partial success. Sir Colin Campbell led a complete reconquest of the area in March
1858, after several weeks of intense artillery fire and street battles. The aftermath was marked
by devastating reprisals, resulting in the destruction of entire neighborhoods, the deaths of
civilians, and the looting of key buildings, such as Kaiserbagh.
Hazrat Mahal fled to Nepal, while many rebel leaders were arrested or executed. The British
not only regained control of the city but also enforced punitive urban reforms to reinforce their
dominance through destruction and displacement of the local population.

23
Rudrangshu Mukherjee, The Other Side of 1857: Rural Resistance in North India (New Delhi: Permanent
Black, 2007), 22.

11
8.5. Memory and Aftermath
The Siege of Lucknow has become a watershed moment in British imperial history, with figures
such as Henry Lawrence being revered as martyrs. Colonial narratives portrayed the city's
inhabitants as treacherous, reinforcing negative stereotypes about urban disorder in India.
For the locals, the defeat in the rebellion meant the loss of political autonomy and cultural
heritage. The architectural landscape of the city was permanently changed. Post-rebellion
reforms included increased surveillance, the establishment of expanded military cantonments,
and social engineering efforts aimed at preventing future uprisings. Therefore, the fall of
Lucknow exemplifies both the potential and the limitations of urban rebellion in colonial India.

9.Case Study III: Awadh and Bundelkhand – Rural Revolt and Regional
Resistance
The 1857 rebellion in Awadh and Bundelkhand showed how anti-colonial violence manifested
itself in a variety of regional and social settings. While Awadh's revolt was fueled by
aristocratic backlash and widespread rural discontent, Bundelkhand saw fragmented but fierce
resistance led by iconic figures like Rani Lakshmi Bai. In both regions, local political cultures
and terrain influenced the intensity and nature of rebellion. 24

9.1.Awadh: Taluqdari Revolt and Popular Backing

Awadh was annexed in 1856 under the pretext of poor governance, despite already experiencing
significant British interference in its land revenue systems. The displacement of taluqdars
(hereditary landlords) and the loss of traditional authority led to widespread rural resistance.
When the uprising began, these landlords, along with armed retainers and village peasants,
reclaimed their estates and drove colonial officials away.25

The revolt in Awadh was both widespread and prolonged, with villages in Rae Bareli,
Sultanpur, and Barabanki becoming key battlegrounds. The taluqdars garnered support that
extended beyond mere feudal loyalty; it also reflected the peasants' outrage over high taxes,
land confiscation, and the disruption of agrarian life caused by colonial policies.

9.2.Social Composition and Violence

The rebellion united a diverse array of groups across both regions, including Brahmins, Muslim
elites, peasants, artisans, and even criminal gangs. However, the cohesion among these groups
was fragile. In Awadh, taluqdars often focused on restoring their own authority, while caste
divisions in Bundelkhand sometimes hindered unified action. Despite these challenges, the
widespread participation signaled a broad rejection of British rule as both exploitative and
illegitimate.
In Awadh, the violence was sustained and territorial, aimed at reclaiming land and disrupting
British control. In contrast, the conflict in Bundelkhand was more mobile and guerrilla-like due

24
Crispin Bates, ed., Mutiny at the Margins, vol. 3 (New Delhi: SAGE, 2013), 128–130.
25
Clare Anderson, “‘A Most Inconvenient Warfare,’” in Mutiny at the Margins, vol. 3, ed. Crispin Bates (New
Delhi: SAGE, 2013), 139.

12
to the difficult terrain. Both regions experienced urban sieges, rural ambushes, reprisals, and
mass executions during the struggles.

9.3.Cultural Memory and Legacy

Folk traditions in Awadh celebrate Hazrat Mahal and the taluqdars as defenders of land and
dharma. In Bundelkhand, Rani Lakshmibai remains a symbol of martial valor and defiance.
Oral histories, songs, and regional identity continue to frame these resistances as heroic battles
against colonial oppression.

9.4.Caste, Class, and Social Faultlines in the 1857 Rebellion

The 1857 uprising was not just a political or military revolt—it was also shaped by deep social
stratifications, particularly caste and class dynamics. Rural and urban areas each witnessed
distinctive forms of participation and exclusion rooted in these hierarchies.

9.5.Rural Caste Coalitions and Tensions

In rural areas like Awadh, Rohilkhand, and Bundelkhand, the rebellion united dispossessed
taluqdars—primarily upper-caste Rajputs and Muslim ashraf—with peasant castes such as
Kurmis, Ahirs, Koeris, and Lodhis. The taluqdars aimed to reclaim their lost authority after
British land reforms had weakened their fiscal control. At the same time, peasants were
responding to grievances such as excessive taxation, forced cultivation, and land alienation.26

However, this coalition was uneven. Dalits and marginalized castes, such as Chamars and
Bhangis, rarely participated in large numbers. In fact, some even acted as informants or
auxiliaries for the British, indicating that those with the least interest in restoring pre-colonial
feudalism had little incentive to rebel. Their relative silence highlights the limited appeal of the
elite-led movement.27

9.6.Urban Uprisings and Occupational Alliances

In cities such as Delhi, Lucknow, and Kanpur, various social groups were mobilized during the
rebellion. While the majority of the violence was carried out by sepoys, significant support
came from urban artisans, small traders, Mughal-era bureaucrats, and even musicians. In Delhi,
kharkhana workers and Kashmiri Muslims contributed manpower and logistics, while in
Lucknow, Shia elites, Kayasths, and urban Brahmins, impacted by the annexation of Awadh,
also took part in the uprising.
Interestingly, merchant castes like Banias and Marwaris largely remained neutral or even allied
with the British forces. Their desire to protect trade and property outweighed any sense of caste
solidarity with the rebels, demonstrating how class interests often influenced political decisions
more than traditional caste affiliations.

26
Peter Robb, “On the Rebellion of 1857: A Brief History of an Idea,” Economic and Political Weekly 42, no. 19
(2007): 1701.

27
Pati, Great Rebellion, 58–59.

13
9.7.Sepoys: The Peasant-Soldier Nexus
Many sepoys came from rural Brahmin and Rajput communities in eastern Uttar Pradesh and
Bihar. Their dissatisfaction stemmed from both military grievances (e.g., lack of promotion,
greased cartridges) and a close connection to village-level discontent. According to historian
Rudrangshu Mukherjee, the sepoy served as a "peasant in uniform"—he returned home and
frequently led uprisings in his community, combining military revolt and peasant rebellion.

9.8.Contradictions Within Rebel Ranks

Despite a broad anticolonial alliance, internal conflicts continued to arise. In Awadh, elite
taluqdars occasionally turned against peasant rebels in an effort to restore feudal rule.
Additionally, caste tensions between Brahmin officers and lower-caste soldiers strained unity
in Bundelkhand. Without a unifying ideology, the rebellion often ended up reinforcing the very
social hierarchies it aimed to challenge.28

10.Historiographical Reflections
Scholars like Ranajit Guha and Eric Stokes have debated whether the 1857 revolt was a
subaltern uprising or a reactionary movement led by elites. The truth lies somewhere in
between: while lower castes and tribal groups participated in localized ways—often captured
only in oral traditions—the broader rebellion was influenced by restoration politics rather than
transformative change.
The 1857 revolt is remembered as a complex moment in history—a large-scale, multi-caste
mobilization against colonial rule that simultaneously reinforced existing social inequalities. It
highlights how caste and class not only shaped participation in resistance but also influenced
the potential and limitations for revolutionary change in nineteenth-century India.

11.British Reprisals and the Colonial Imagination

The British response to the 1857 rebellion went far beyond military suppression; it was a
deliberate, ideologically charged campaign to punish, reestablish dominance, and reshape the
colonial worldview. Violence served as both retribution and performance, shaped by racial
anxieties and the trauma of imperial vulnerability.

11.1.Scale and Character of Repression

Following the uprising, brutal reprisals erupted across rebel territory. In Delhi, entire
neighborhoods, particularly Muslim ones, were demolished, looted, and depopulated. In
Kanpur, where the Bibighar massacre sparked public outrage in Britain, punishments were
particularly harsh: rebels were shot with cannons, civilians were subjected to collective

28
S. Mahto, “Chotanagpur Mission During the Indian Rebellion (1857–58),” Proceedings of the Indian History
Congress 31 (1969): 378.

14
punishment, and entire communities were terrorized. Similar "cleansing" actions were carried
out in Lucknow and rural Awadh, with villages burned and residents executed indiscriminately.

This violence was more than just retaliation; it was intended to terrorize the population into
submission and restore imperial authority.

11.2.Racial and Ideological Justifications

The British portrayed the uprising not as a political revolt, but as a racial betrayal by
"barbarous natives." Colonial narratives portrayed violence as necessary to restore
"civilization." The concept of collective guilt enabled entire communities to be targeted,
reinforcing the belief that Indians could only be ruled through fear, not trust. Some scholars,
such as James Evelegh, have argued that these reprisals amounted to colonial genocide, with
the goal of erasing threatening identities.

11.3.Violence as Spectacle
Punishment was deliberately designed to be theatrical. Executions were conducted in public,
employing horrifying methods like cannon dismemberment to maximize psychological impact.
This brutal display of power aimed to restore British prestige, which had been profoundly
tarnished by the recent rebellion. Simultaneously, the reliance on native collaborators and
informants deepened social fragmentation and exacerbated divisions, particularly along Hindu-
Muslim lines, which the British skillfully manipulated to maintain control.

11.4.Gendered Narratives and Moral Vindication

The colonial imagination employed gendered themes to justify acts of violence. The portrayal
of British women being attacked by Indian men, particularly during the events in Kanpur,
served as a powerful narrative tool. Although many of these claims were exaggerated or
fabricated, they allowed the British to rationalize their repression as acts of moral vengeance.
Scholars like Nancy Paxton have shown that novels and reports depicted the imperial project
as a defense of female honor, thereby reinforcing notions of British racial and moral superiority.
29

11.5.Institutional and Legal Aftermath

The legal framework of British India experienced significant changes after the rebellion.
Emergency laws were enacted that allowed for summary executions and the suspension of due
process, paving the way for future authoritarian rule. The military was restructured to decrease

29
Michael Adas, “Twentieth Century Approaches to the Indian Mutiny of 1857–58,” Journal of Asian History 5,
no. 1 (1971): 4.

15
the presence of Indians, particularly in sensitive areas such as artillery. Land and wealth were
redistributed to loyalists, while "rebel territories," like Awadh, faced heightened surveillance.30

11.6.Textual Memory and Imperial Redemption

British officials and writers launched a massive textual project to recast the rebellion in imperial
memory. Histories, memoirs, and novels framed 1857 as both a cautionary tale and a triumph
of British heroism. This re-narration aimed to justify empire by portraying Indians as
uncivilized and the British as saviors.

12.A Comparative View of Urban and Rural Violence during the 1857
Rebellion
Urban violence (in Delhi, Kanpur, Lucknow) was marked by symbolic punishment, racial
vengeance, and spectacles of authority. In contrast, rural areas experienced more collective
reprisals, with entire villages depopulated or destroyed. Urban spaces symbolized lost imperial
prestige and required moral reassertion; rural zones were treated as rebellious landscapes to be
restructured through fear, land redistribution, and legal control.

12.1.Contrasting Terrains: Urban and Rural Violence during the 1857

Rebellion
The 1857 uprising unfolded across two distinct spatial and political terrains—urban centers and
rural hinterlands—each with its own dynamics of violence, social participation, and colonial
response. Understanding these contrasts is vital for grasping the full scale of resistance and
imperial retaliation.

12.2.Political Stakes and Spatial Symbolism

Cities like Delhi, Kanpur, and Lucknow held strategic and symbolic value: administrative
power, military garrisons, royal palaces, and nationalist sentiment converged here. Their
seizure represented the rebellion’s dramatic peak. Conversely, rural areas such as Awadh and
Bundelkhand saw more fragmented yet sustained uprisings, driven by local grievances like
land dispossession, revenue oppression, and caste discrimination. These rural resistances
persisted even after the urban centers fell.

12.3.Forms and Intensity of Violence

Urban violence manifested in intense sieges, massacres, and high-profile battles. In Delhi,
street-by-street combat devastated the city and its civilians. In Kanpur, the killing of British
civilians ignited highly publicized British reprisals. Such violence was documented and
dramatized, shaping imperial memory.
In contrast, rural violence was guerrilla-style: ambushes, sabotage, and retaliatory raids on
colonial outposts and collaborators. Leaders like Kunwar Singh in Bihar led highly mobile and

30
Ranajit Guha, “The Prose of Counter-Insurgency,” in Subaltern Studies I, ed. Guha (Delhi: Oxford University
Press, 1982), 10–12.

16
locally rooted campaigns. Rural uprisings often attacked symbols of colonial rule such as
tahsildars, landlords, and moneylenders—highlighting socio-economic rage alongside political
rebellion.

12.4.Agents of Resistance
Urban rebellions were typically led by sepoys, supported by urban classes like artisans and
traders. While Delhi saw participation from both Muslim elites and Hindu merchants,
leadership often fractured due to conflicting interests, especially after key figures like Begum
Hazrat Mahal’s advisors were lost.31

In rural areas, the rebellion drew strength from taluqdars, peasants, and tribal communities,
who framed resistance in terms of land rights, honor, and survival. Dalits and lower castes
participated in opportunistic looting but were also instrumentalized by both sides, reflecting
the complexity of caste politics in rebellion and suppression.

12.5.Gendered Dimensions
Urban violence foregrounded women in symbolic narratives. British media obsessively detailed
alleged rapes and murders of British women, which became moral fuel for revenge. At the same
time, Indian women—courtesans, widows, informants—played active roles in sustaining the
resistance in cities like Lucknow.
Rural gendered violence was under-recorded but remembered in oral traditions, where women
appear as both victims and community leaders, often mobilizing resistance or preserving
culture amid devastation.

12.6.Colonial Strategies and Memory Politics

Urban revolts prompted swift, militarized suppression. British reoccupation of cities involved
mass executions, forced displacement, and the targeting of Muslims in particular, as in
postrebellion Delhi. These events were heavily archived and mythologized.
Rural uprisings, however, were met with scorched earth policies, village burnings, and agrarian
restructuring. The British enlisted loyalists and deepened inter-caste divisions. Yet rural
violence was typically dismissed in official records as banditry, its political depth obscured.

12.7.Representation and Long-Term Effects

Urban rebellion became central to the colonial imagination, with cities portrayed as fallen
strongholds of civilization. Meanwhile, rural resistance—though often more radical in its
demands—was ideologically marginalized. Urban centers like Delhi were later re-engineered
into sanitized imperial capitals, while rural zones were reshaped through new land tenure

31
S. Mahto, “Chotanagpur Mission During the Indian Rebellion (1857–58),” Proceedings of the Indian History
Congress 31 (1969): 380.

17
systems and surveillance regimes. Despite their marginalization, rural regions nurtured longer-
term anti-colonial movements, rooted in memories of both betrayal and defiance.32
The 1857 rebellion must be seen as a spatially diverse movement: urban violence was dramatic
and symbolic, while rural rebellion was prolonged and socially transformative. Together, they
represent complementary fronts in India’s first major anti-colonial war, revealing how space,
class, caste, and memory intersected in the making of colonial violence and resistance.33

13.Folk Memory and Subaltern Perspectives: Reclaiming the Hidden Voices

of 1857
Beyond official records and elite narratives, the 1857 uprising lives on in the folk memory of
peasants, women, lower castes, and tribal groups—communities often marginalized in formal
historiography. Through oral traditions, regional literature, and ritual practices, these subaltern
perspectives offer alternative ways of remembering resistance, rooted in lived experience,
cultural symbolism, and local justice.

13.1.Oral Traditions and Vernacular Memory

In regions like Awadh, Bundelkhand, and eastern U.P., the memory of 1857 survives in folk
songs, bhajans, biraha poetry, and village tales. These performances elevate both famous and
unnamed rebels—like Kunwar Singh or Rani Lakshmibai—as heroes of honor and dharma, not
just political actors. Often mythologized, these figures serve as moral archetypes in the popular
imagination.

13.2.Regional Languages and Subaltern Literature

Languages such as Awadhi, Bhojpuri, Bundeli, and Maithili host a rich archive of
rebellioncentered poetry, satire, and devotional songs. These texts reject elite or colonial
interpretations by framing the revolt as a popular uprising against exploitation and betrayal.
Collaborators are mocked or vilified, while peasants and women emerge as moral protagonists,
offering a grassroots view of insurgency.

13.3.Gendered Memory and Women's Roles

Folk accounts also spotlight the roles of ordinary women—widows, courtesans, mothers— who
sheltered rebels, relayed messages, or resisted violence. These acts, though undocumented in
formal histories, reflect both suffering and agency. Mourning songs (vilap geet) convey the
trauma of war through metaphors of broken homes and shattered communities, revealing the
deeply gendered nature of memory.

13.4.Religious Cosmologies and Symbolic Rebellion

Folk narratives frequently embed the revolt in religious and cosmic frameworks—as
dharmayuddha (righteous war), divine punishment, or spiritual duty. Hindus saw desecration
of temples or cow sanctity as triggers for revolt; many Muslims interpreted the uprising as jihad

32
Crispin Bates, ed., Mutiny at the Margins: New Perspectives on the Indian Uprising of 1857, vol. 3 (London:
SAGE, 2013), 147.
33
Nancy L. Paxton, “Mobilizing Chivalry: Rape in British Novels about the Indian Uprising of 1857,” Victorian
Studies 36, no. 1 (1992): 5–30.

18
against injustice. These symbolic readings infused rebellion with moral urgency, blending faith
with resistance.

13.5.Marginal Castes and Tribal Memory

Dalit and Adivasi communities reflect on the events of 1857 with a mix of ambivalence and
survival. Many individuals from these groups, who were often forced into service, took the
opportunity to challenge existing caste hierarchies and resist both colonial and feudal
authorities. Songs sung by Chamar and Balmiki communities recount themes of loss and
resilience. In tribal regions such as Chotanagpur, the revolt is remembered as part of localized
struggles against zamindars and missionaries.34

13.6."Subaltern Memory and Elite Histories: Contesting the Narrative of

1857"
Mainstream historiography has often dismissed folk memory as unreliable or mythical.
However, scholars like Ranajit Guha argue that these narratives contain a "hidden transcript"
of resistance, showcasing how oppressed people remember, interpret, and derive meaning from
violence. While elite accounts focus on diplomacy and military tactics, folk memory highlights
themes of honor, land, betrayal, and collective justice.

13.7.Memorials, Rituals, and Silences

While cities commemorate the events of 1857 with statues and plaques, rural India preserves
its memory through the names of wells, sacred groves, annual fairs, and ritual prohibitions.
Even without official recognition, these micro-histories create a spiritual landscape of
remembrance. Silences persist, often imposed by caste shame, communal fear, or political
neglect, reminding us that what remains unsaid also shapes our memory.37

Subaltern and folk memories are not marginal; they are essential for an honest reckoning with
1857. These narratives offer an intimate and multifaceted history rooted in everyday suffering
and heroism. By amplifying these voices, we can address the erasures of both colonial and
nationalist accounts, reclaiming the emotional and moral dimensions of rebellion as
remembered by those who experienced its consequences firsthand.

34
P.C. Joshi, ed., Rebellion 1857: A Symposium (Delhi: People’s Publishing House, 1957), 84. 37
Harlod E. Raugh Jr., “The Battle of the Books,” JSAHR 95, no. 381 (2017): 42.

19
Conclusion
The Revolt of 1857 stands as a defining moment in the annals of colonial India's history, serving
not only as a failed military uprising but as a rich tapestry of resistance, rebellion, and
retaliation woven across diverse regions and social classes. This thesis delves into the varied
experiences of this monumental uprising, highlighting how factors such as geography, caste,
class, political actors, and local histories shaped its course, with a particular emphasis on the
striking patterns of violence in urban and rural landscapes.

In pivotal cities like Delhi, Lucknow, and Kanpur, the violence escalated into a more structured
and militarized form. These urban environments transformed into battlegrounds of strategic
control, defiant symbolism, and state-sponsored terror. Within this dynamic, both rebels and
colonial authorities orchestrated dramatic displays of violence, targeting individuals and groups
in an intense struggle for power and identity.35

British civilians often faced violence, either through mass executions or reprisals carried out
by the colonial army. Urban violence was shaped by formal institutions, the presence of British
residents, military cantonments, and the role of cities as centers of imperial authority.
In contrast, rural violence in regions like Awadh, Bundelkhand, and parts of Bihar stemmed
from agrarian grievances, oppressive tax demands, and cultural dispossession. This type of
violence was often spontaneous and dispersed, driven by peasant mobilization or support from
local elites. Although rural rebellions were less visible and lacked coordinated leadership, they
were nonetheless intense and impactful. The destruction of indigo factories, the assassination
of local moneylenders, and challenges to zamindars reflected significant grassroots power
shifts within these communities.
This comparative analysis elucidates that urban and rural violence arose from fundamentally
distinct political motivations rather than being mere reflections of the same impulse. Urban
centers sought to restore their symbolic sovereignty, while rural communities expressed
profound outrage regarding daily exploitation and the decline of traditional authority.
The revolt involved a diverse coalition of key participants, including sepoys, talukdars, artisans,
peasants, religious leaders, and women, each operating from varying positions of power or
subjugation. Some individuals aimed to reinstate previous monarchies or religious hierarchies,
while others were focused on ending land alienation, addressing caste oppression, or resolving
personal grievances. Ultimately, this uprising represented not only a struggle for basic
sustenance but also a quest for honor and dignity.36

35
Rudrangshu Mukherjee, Awadh in Revolt: 1857–1858: A Study of Popular Resistance (Delhi: Permanent
Black, 2001), 89.
36
Crispin Bates, ed., Mutiny at the Margins: New Perspectives on the Indian Uprising of 1857, Vol. 1 (Delhi:
SAGE, 2013), 47.

20
This study highlights the significance of folk memory and subaltern narratives, demonstrating
how communities outside of elite historiography have preserved, transformed, and
reinterpreted the events of the rebellion. From the biraha songs of Bihar to women’s mourning
chants in Awadh, these voices convey an emotive, diverse, and politically charged history of
1857. They challenge the colonial depiction of rebels as criminals or fanatics, instead
portraying them as moral agents actively defending their communities.
Furthermore, the British reprisals that followed the revolt's suppression were not only punitive,
but also indicative of a new imperial order—one that used the memory of violence to justify
racial hierarchy, military expansion, and administrative control. The colonial imagination
portrayed 1857 as a "mutiny," effectively silencing its popular dimensions and regional
diversity. However, as this thesis demonstrated, the 1857 rebellion was not limited to barracks
and cantonments. It must be studied in villages, courtyards, alleyways, and shrines, where the
muted drums of dissent still ring out in memory.37

To summarize, the violence during the 1857 Mutiny was not uniform; it varied widely and was
deeply rooted in people's lived experiences. Urban and rural areas provided different avenues
for expression, yet both shared the human costs, symbolic meanings, and political
consequences of the revolt. 38Understanding these complexities is essential not only for
reconstructing the events of 1857 but also for grasping the dynamics of colonial power and
resistance in India.

37
Gautam Chakravarty, The Indian Mutiny and the British Imagination (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,
2005), 101.

38
Ranajit Guha, Elementary Aspects of Peasant Insurgency in Colonial India (Delhi: Oxford University Press,
1983), 191.

21
References

1.Rizvi, S. A. A and M. L. Bhargava (edited). "Freedom struggle in Uttar Pradesh", vol. 1,

Uttar Pradesh: Publication Bureau information Department, 1957.
2.Rizvi, S.A.A and M.L. Bhargava (edited). "Freedom struggle in Uttar Pradesh", vol. 2, Uttar
Pradesh: publication Bureau information Department, 1958.
3.Rizvi, S.A.A and M.L. Bhargava (edited). "Freedom struggle in Uttar Pradesh", vol. 3, Uttar
Pradesh: publication Bureau information Department, 1959.
4.Rizvi, S. A. A (edited). "Freedom struggle in Uttar Pradesh", vol. 4, Uttar Pradesh:
Publication Bureau information Department, 1959.
5.Rizvi, S. A. A (edited). "Freedom struggle in Uttar Pradesh", vol. 5, Uttar Pradesh:
Publication Bureau information Department, 1960.
6.Rizvi, S. A. A (edited). "Freedom struggle in Uttar Pradesh", vol. 6, Uttar Pradesh:
Publication Bureau information Department, 1961.
7.Roy, Kaushik. The Indian Rebellion 1857-1859: A Military History in the Global Context.
New York: Routledge, 2025.
8.Roy, Kaushik. "The Beginning of 'people's war' in India" In Economic and political weekly,
vol. 42, no. 19, pp- 1720- 1728, Economic and political weekly,2007.
9.Chakravarty, Gautam. The Indian Mutiny and the British Imagination. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press, 2005.
10. Joshi, P.C., ed. Rebellion 1857: A Symposium. Delhi: People's Publishing House, 1957.
11. Pati, Biswamoy. The Great Rebellion of 1857 in India: Exploring Transgressions, Contests,
and Diversities. London: Routledge, 2010.
12. Bates, Crispin, ed. Mutiny at the Margins: New Perspectives on the Indian Uprising of
1857. Vols. 3– 4. London: SAGE, 2013–14.
13. Mukherjee, Rudrangshu. The Other Side of 1857: Rural Resistance in North India. New
Delhi: Permanent Black, 2007.
14. Wagner, Kim. Specters of Violence in a Colonial Context: Amritsar and the 1857 Revolt.
New Delhi: Roli Books, 2010.
15. Versaikar, Vishnu Bhatt Godshe. 1857: The Real Story of the Great Uprising. Translated
by Mridula Mukherjee. New Delhi: HarperCollins, 2016.
16.Anderson, Clare. “‘A Most Inconvenient Warfare’: The Impact of Rebel-Dacoits on Rural
Central India After 1857.” In Mutiny at the Margins: New Perspectives on the Indian Uprising
of 1857, Volume 3, edited by Crispin Bates, 135–155. New Delhi: SAGE Publications, 2013.
17.Chatterjee, Niladri. “Nationalist Discourse in the Colonial World: The Indian Uprising of
1857 Vis-à-Vis the Ambivalent Middle-Class Intelligentsia of Bengal.” Forum for Development
Studies 51, no.4, pp.439-462, 2024.

22
18.Evelegh, James. “To What Extent Was 1857 an Example of Colonial Genocide? A Study of
Colonial Violence During the Indian Uprising of 1857-59.” The South Asianist 3, no. 1, pp.
209-238, 2014
19.Stokes, Eric. “Rural Revolt in the Great Rebellion of 1857 in India: A Study of the
Saharanpur and Muzaffarnagar Districts.” The Historical Journal 12, no. 4, pp.606–627, 1969
20.Baker, David." Colonial beginnings and the Indian Response: The Revolt of 1857- 58 in
Madhya Pradesh"In Modern Asian Studies vol .25, no. 3, pp.511-543, Cambridge University
press, 1991.
21.Robb, peter. "On the Rebellion of 1857: A Brief History of Idea " In Economic and political
weekly, vol. 42 no. 19, pp. 1696- 1702, Economic and political weekly, 2007
22.Perusek, Dashan. " Subaltern consciousness and the Historiography of the Indian Rebellion
of 1857" In Novel: A Forum on fiction vol. 25 no. 3, pp. 286-301, Duke University press, 1992.
23.L. Paxton, Nancy. " Mobilizing chivaly: Rape in British Novels about the Indian uprising of
1857." In Victorian studies vol.36, no.1, pp. 5-30, Indiana University press, 1992
24.English, Barbara. "The Kanpur Massacres in India in the Revolt of 1857." In past & present
vol. no.142, pp.169-178, Oxford University press, 1994.
25.Randall, Don." Autumn 1857: The making of the Indian 'Mutiny'." In Victorian Literature
and culture, vol.31, no.1, pp. 3-17, Cambridge University press,2003.
26.Adas, Michael. "Twentieth century Approaches to the Indian Mutiny of 1857-58" In
Journal of Asian History, vol.5 no.1, pp.1-19, Harrassowith verlag,1971
27. E Raugh Jr, Harlod. "The battle of the books: An Indian Mutiny Historiography" In
Journal of the society for Army Historical Research, vol.95, no.381, pp. 34-51, Society for
Army Historical research, 2017
28.Narang, G. C. " Ghalib and the Rebellion of 1857" In Indian Literature, vol.15 no. 1, pp. 5-
20, Sahitya Academy,1972.
29.Mahto, S." Chotanagpur mission During the Indian Rebellion (1857-58) proceedings of the
Indian History Congress, Vol.31, pp. 375-381, 1969.

23