People’s Resistance Against British Before 1857 – Different Revolts

Table of Contents

Introduction

Although the 1857 Revolt is commonly perceived as the initial significant display of opposition against the British, who governed India through the East India Company, prior events/revolts indicated mounting resentment towards the alien rule.

This displeasure materialized in numerous acts of defiance by various groups of people across India.
The term “people” encompasses many sectors of Indian society affected by the foreign governance, including peasants, artisans, tribals, ruling classes (active or dispossessed), military personnel (under the Company and former soldiers of ex-rulers), and religious leaders (Hindu and Muslim), who fought for their interests, sometimes separately and sometimes together.
For example, the protests in Benares in 1810 against a house tax enforced by the colonial government, the Surat riots in 1814 against the salt duty, and the Bareilly uprising in 1816 against police and municipal taxes are some examples of urban movements that brought together people from diverse backgrounds, such as artisans, petty shopkeepers, and the urban poor, with the prosperous urban gentry.
Although each group had varying grievances, they shared a common objective: to put an end to British rule.
According to Bipan Chandra, people’s resistance took three primary forms: civil rebellions, tribal uprisings, and peasant movements. Additionally, we consider military revolts as a form of people’s resistance, which involved Indians employed in the Company’s forces, to provide a comprehensive study of people’s resistance.

Genesis of People’s Resistance

Prior to colonialism in India, protests by the people against their rulers and officials were common, with factors such as high land revenue demands by the state, corrupt practices, and harsh attitudes of officials often serving as the impetus for such demonstrations.

However, the advent of colonial rule and its policies had a much more devastating effect on the Indian populace as a whole.
With no one to hear their grievances or attend to their problems, the Company was only interested in extracting revenue, leaving the people with no recourse but to take up arms and defend themselves.
The colonial legal system and judiciary protected the interests of the government and its collaborators, such as landlords, merchants, and moneylenders.
Consequently, people had no other option but to resort to violence.
Although the conditions of the tribal people were not distinct from those of the mainland inhabitants, the encroachment of outsiders into their autonomous tribal domains exacerbated their grievances, leading to more violent and aggressive forms of protest.

Factors to People’s Uprising

The main contributing factors to the people’s resentment and uprisings against the Company’s rule are as follows:

The imposition of colonial land revenue settlements, which led to the heavy burden of new taxes, eviction of peasants from their lands, and encroachments on tribal lands.
The exploitation of rural society and the growth of intermediary revenue collectors, tenants, and moneylenders.
The expansion of revenue administration over tribal lands, resulting in the loss of tribal people’s hold over agricultural and forest land.
The promotion of British manufactured goods and the imposition of heavy duties on Indian industries, particularly export duties, which devastated Indian handloom and handicraft industries.
The destruction of indigenous industry, which led to the migration of workers from industry to agriculture, thereby increasing the pressure on land and agriculture.

Major Causes of Civil Uprisings during Colonial Rule

There were several major causes for civil uprisings during the Company rule, including the following:

The rapid changes in the economy, administration, and land revenue system under colonial rule, which were often unfavorable to the people.
The personal grievances of several zamindars and poligars who had lost control over their land and its revenues due to the colonial rule.
The hurt pride of traditional zamindars and poligars, who were sidelined in rank by government officials and a new class comprising of merchants and moneylenders.
The ruin of Indian handicraft industries as a result of colonial policies, which impoverished millions of artisans. The disappearance of their traditional patrons and buyers, such as princes, chieftains, and zamindars, further compounded their misery.
The instigation of rebellion and hatred against alien rule by the priestly classes, including religious preachers, priests, pundits, and maulvis. These groups had traditionally been dependent on the landed and bureaucratic elite, and the fall of the zamindars and feudal lords directly affected their interests.
The foreign character of the British rulers, who always remained alien to the land, and their contemptuous treatment of the native people, which hurt the pride of the latter.

Important Civil Uprisings

Sanyasi Revolt (1763–1800)

Sanyasi Revolt was a rebellion against the British rule in Eastern India, led by a group of sanyasis, dispossessed small zamindars, disbanded soldiers, and rural poor, in response to the disastrous famine of 1770 and the harsh economic policies of the British.
- The sanyasis were originally peasants, some of whom were evicted from their lands.
- They raided Company factories and treasuries and fought against the Company’s forces.
- The uprisings were characterised by equal participation of Hindus and Muslims and were sometimes referred to as the Fakir Rebellion.
- Important leaders included Majnum Shah (or Majnu Shah), Chirag Ali, Musa Shah, Bhawani Pathak, and Debi Chaudhurani.
- Debi Chaudhurani’s participation recognised the role of women in early resistances against the British.
Anandamath, a semi-historical novel by Bankim Chandra Chattopadhyay, is based on the Sanyasi Revolt.
Bankim Chandra also wrote a novel, Devi Chaudhurani, highlighting the importance of women in taking up the struggle against an alien rule that posed a threat to traditional Indian values.

Revolt in Midnapore and Dhalbhum (1766–74)

The English captured Midnapore in 1760, and at that time, the 3,000 zamindars and talukdars had a good relationship with their ryots.
The introduction of a new land revenue system by the English in 1772 changed this.
According to the British governor Vansittart, the zamindars of Midnapore supported the ryots in conflicts with the English revenue-collecting officials.
The zamindars of Dhalbhum, Manbhum, Raipur, Panchet, Jhatibuni, Karnagarh, and Bagri lived in the vast tract of Jungle Mahals of west and north-west Midnapore and were ultimately dispossessed of their zamindaries by the 1800s.
The important leaders of the uprisings were Damodar Singh and Jagannath Dhal.

Revolt of Moamarias (1769–99)

The Moamaria revolt of 1769 in Assam was a significant challenge to the authority of the Ahom kings.
- The Moamarias were low-caste peasants who followed the teachings of Aniruddhadeva and their uprising resembled those of other low-caste groups in North India.
- The revolts weakened the Ahom kingdom and left it vulnerable to attacks from outside forces.
In 1792, the King of Darrang led a revolt against the Ahom rulers with the help of his band of burkandazes.
- Burkandazes were demobilized soldiers of Muslim armies and zamindars.
To quell these uprisings, the Ahom ruler had to seek assistance from the British.
The Moamarias established their headquarters at Bhatiapar, and the regions of Rangpur and Jorhat were the most affected.
Although the Ahom kingdom survived the rebellion, it was eventually weakened and succumbed to a Burmese invasion, after which it came under British rule.

Civil Uprisings in Gorakhpur, Basti, and Bahraich (1781)

In 1778, Warren Hastings, to raise funds for the war expenses against Marathas and Mysore, involved English officers as izaradars in Awadh.
Major Alexander Hannay was appointed as an izaradar for Gorakhpur and Bahraich and he secured the izara for one year, amounting to 22 lakh rupees.
However, Hannay’s oppression and excessive demand for revenue made the region panic-stricken, as it was already in a flourishing state under the Nawab.
As a result, the zamindars and cultivators rose against the unbearable exactions in 1781, and within weeks, Hannay’s subordinates were either killed or besieged by zamindari guerilla forces.
The rebellion was eventually suppressed, and Hannay was dismissed and his izara was forcibly removed.

Revolt of Raja of Vizianagaram (1794)

In 1758, the English and Ananda Gajapatiraju, ruler of Vizianagaram, formed a treaty to remove the French from the Northern Circars, which they successfully did.
However, the English did not honor the treaty’s terms, demanding a tribute of three lakh rupees from Vizayaramaraju, the succeeding Raja of Vizianagaram, to disband his troops.
The raja, supported by his subjects, rebelled as he believed there were no dues to pay to the Company.
The English captured the raja in 1793 and ordered him to go into exile with a pension, which he refused.
The raja died in a battle at Padmanabham in 1794, and Vizianagaram fell under the Company’s rule.
The Company later offered the estate to the raja’s son and reduced the demand for presents.

Revolt of Dhundia in Bednur (1799–1800)

In 1799, after the English conquered Mysore, they had to deal with several native leaders.
One of these was Dhundia Wagh, a local Maratha leader who had been imprisoned by Tipu Sultan for his misdeeds and had converted to Islam.
Upon his release following the fall of Seringapatam, Dhundia formed a force consisting of anti-British elements and established a small territory for himself.
However, he suffered a defeat at the hands of the English in August 1799 and was forced to seek refuge in the Maratha region.
From there, he instigated disappointed princes to fight against the English and took on a leadership role.
Dhundia was killed while fighting against the British forces led by Wellesley in September 1800.
Despite his failure, Dhundia became a revered leader among the masses.

Resistance of Kerala Varma Pazhassi Raja (1797; 1800–05)

Kerala Varma Pazhassi Raja, also known as Kerala Simham or ‘Pyche raja’, ruled over Kottayam (Cotiote) in the Malabar region and fought against the British during the period of 1793-1805.
He had previously resisted against Hyder Ali and Tipu Sultan.
However, during the Third Anglo-Mysore War (1790-92), the British violated an agreement made in 1790 that had recognized Kottayam’s independence, and appointed Vira Varma, Pazhassi Raja’s uncle, as the new Raja of Kottayam.
The new Raja, in an attempt to meet the revenue target set by the Company, imposed heavy taxes on the peasants, leading to a mass uprising by the peasants under the leadership of Pazhassi Raja in 1793.
After the guerilla warfare, a peace treaty was signed in 1797.
However, in 1800, a conflict over Wayanad reignited the war, and Pazhassi Raja formed a large force of Nairs supplemented by Mappilas and Pathans.
In November 1805, during a gunfight at Mavila Todu near the present-day Kerala-Karnataka border, Kerala Simham died.

Civil Rebellion in Awadh (1799)

Wazir Ali Khan became the fourth Nawab of Awadh in September 1797 with the help of the British.
However, his relationship with the British soon soured and he was replaced by his uncle, Saadat Ali Khan II.
Wazir Ali Khan was granted a pension in Benares, but in January 1799 he killed a British resident named George Frederick Cherry, who had invited him to lunch.
Wazir Ali’s guards also killed two other Europeans and attacked the Magistrate of Benares, leading to the incident being known as the Massacre of Benares.
Wazir Ali was able to assemble an army of several thousand men but was defeated by General Erskine.
He fled to Butwal and was granted asylum by the ruler of Jaipur.
Arthur Wellesley requested the Raja of Jaipur to extradite Wazir Ali, and he was extradited on the condition that he would not be hanged or put in fetters.
After surrendering in December 1799, Wazir Ali was placed in confinement at Fort William, Calcutta.

Uprisings in Ganjam and Gumsur (1800, 1835–37)

The Northern Circars, Ganjam and its surrounding areas, rebelled against British rule.
Strikara Bhanj, a zamindar of Gumsur in Ganjam district, refused to pay revenues in 1797.
In 1800, Strikara openly rebelled against the British and defied public authorities.
An oppressive and corrupt collector named Snodgrass was replaced with the purpose of suppressing the insurrection.
Strikara was joined by Jlani Deo of Vizianagar (Poddakimedi) and Jagannath Deo of Pratapgiri (Chinakimedi).
In 1804, Jagannath Deo was captured and sent to Masulipatnam, but the English had to assign certain districts to Strikara Bhanj.
In 1807-08, Strikara’s son, Dhananjaya Bhanj, forced his father to leave the estate.
Dhananjaya rebelled against the English but was forced to surrender in June 1815.
Strikara was reappointed as the zamindar of Gumsur after he returned to Ganjam in a compromise with the government.
He managed the estate between 1819 and 1830 but failed to liquidate the arrears, leading to his retirement in favour of his son Dhananjay.
Dhananjay Bhanj rebelled for the second time when the British forces occupied Gumsur and Kolaida in November 1835, unable to pay the enormous arrears.
The government’s authority was greatly reduced by the revolt, which continued after Dhananjay’s death in December 1835.
The government appointed Russell, with full discretionary powers, to deal with the situation.
The struggle lasted until February 1837, when Doora Bisayi, a formidable leader, was arrested.
The zamindari of Gumsur was forfeited.

Uprisings in Palamau (1800–02)

Palamau was beset by crises related to landlordism and the feudal system, which complicated its political situation.
In 1800, Bhukhan Singh, a Chero chief, led a rebellion in the region.
To quell the insurrection, Colonel Jones and his forces camped in Palamau and Sarguja for two years.
Despite their efforts, Bhukhan Singh died in 1802 and the rebellion eventually subsided.

Poligar’s Revolt (1795-1805)

Between 1795 and 1805, the British encountered strong resistance from the poligars (or palayakkarargal) of South India.
The centres of these uprisings were Tinneveli (or Thirunelveli), Ramanathapuram, Sivaganga, Sivagiri, Madurai, and North Arcot.
The conflict began in 1781 when the Nawab of Arcot granted Tinneveli and the Carnatic Provinces to the East India Company, which caused resentment among the poligars who saw themselves as independent sovereign authorities within their territories.
The first revolt was over taxation, but the English considered the poligars as enemies.
Kattabomman Nayakan, the poligar of Panjalankurichi, led the insurrection from 1795 to 1799.
After the Company forces were defeated by Veerapandiya Kattabomman, a bounty was placed on his head, leading to more rebellion by the poligars.
With reinforcements, the Company forces ultimately defeated Kattabomman, who fled into the Pudukottai forests.
Betrayal by Ettappan, the Raja of Pudukottai, led to Kattabomman’s capture and execution, along with Subramania Pillai and Soundara Pandian, other rebels.
The palayam of Panjalankurichi and estates of five other poligars were confiscated, and prominent poligars were executed or imprisoned.
The second phase, which was more violent than the previous one, started in February 1801 when the poligars imprisoned in the fort of Palamcotta were able to escape.
- The rebels took control of many forts and even captured Tuticorin.
- The British forces were soon reinforced from Malabar.
- The fugitives led by Oomathurai, brother of Kattabomman, who fled to Sivaganga in Ramnad joined the rebellion of the ‘Marudus’ led by Marathu Pandian which was suppressed in October 1801.
- The fort of Panjalankurichi was razed to the ground and the name of the place was expunged from all the documents of the district.
- Meanwhile, the nawab surrendered the civil and military administration of all the territories and dependencies of the Carnatic exclusively to the Company in perpetuity.
Between 1803 and 1805, the poligars of North Arcot rose in rebellion, when they were deprived of their right to collect the kaval fees.
- The region was in a lawless condition, particularly in the palayams of Chittur and Chandragiri.
- The poligar of Yedaragunta, who proved most daring and desperate among the insurgent chiefs, was joined by the dispossessed poligar of Charagallu.
- By February 1805, the rebels were suppressed.
- Several chiefs were ordered to reside in Madras, while some others were granted an allowance of 18 per cent upon revenues of their estates.
The poligar rebellion spread over a vast area of South India.
- The proclamations by the rebels, says A. Shunmugaiah, indicate that they believed in a mass movement against the alien rule, seeking independence of them.

Uprisings in Haryana Region (1803-10)

The British East India Company acquired the region of present-day Haryana along with other Scindia possessions via the Treaty of Surji-Arjungaon in 1803.
However, the people of the region opposed the new rule.
Sikh chiefs of Ambala, Karnal, and Thanesar strongly opposed Company rule, while in the western Haryana region, the Muslim Bhatti Rajputs under the leadership of Zabita Khan of Sirsa and Rania and Khan Bahadur Khan of Fatehabad organized an opposition to the British.
After a series of failed attempts to subdue the rebellion, the British sent a large contingent under Col. Adams in November 2009 to attack Fatehabad, Sirsa, and Rania, ultimately winning all the battles during the expedition.
The people of the Rohtak, Bhiwani, and the eastern part of Hisar regions continued to rebel against the Company and refused to accept the authority of the chosen rulers.
Governor General Lord Minto recommended military action against the rebels, and a significant force led by Gardiner was sent in March 1810 to subdue the Jats and Ranghars who were primarily rebelling.
Although the people of Bhiwani managed to delay the British advance for a brief period, the British breached the town walls with their heavy artillery and ultimately captured it after a fierce battle.
The fort of Hansi was converted into a military cantonment.

Diwan Velu Thampi’s Revolt (1808–09)

In 1805, the British East India Company and the state of Travancore agreed to a subsidiary alliance arrangement under Wellesley, but the East India Company imposed harsh conditions on Travancore, causing resentment in the region.
The ruler of Travancore was unable to pay the subsidy to the Company and the British resident of Travancore interfered in the internal affairs of the state, leading to dissatisfaction.
Prime Minister Velu Thampi, with the assistance of Nair troops, rose against the Company due to their high-handed attitude and meddling in the internal affairs of the state.
Velu Thampi addressed a gathering in Kundara and called for taking up arms against the British to oust them from the native soil. This was later known as the Kundara Proclamation and led to large-scale rebellion against the British.
To restore peace, a large military operation had to be undertaken, and the Maharaja of Travancore did not wholly support the rebellion and defected to the side of the Company.
Velu Thampi killed himself to avoid capture, and the rebellion eventually petered out.

Disturbances in Bundelkhand (1808–12)

After the British conquered the vast province of Bundelkhand during the Second Anglo-Maratha Wars (1803-05), they placed it under the Presidency of Bengal.
However, the Bundela chiefs resisted the new government for as long as they could, primarily from their nearly 150 forts.
The first significant resistance was led by Lakshaman Dawa, the killadar of Ajaygarh Fort, who was allowed to retain the fort temporarily until 1808.
However, Lakshman sought to continue his hold on the fort beyond the given time, which led to his surrender in February 1809 and subsequent transfer to Calcutta.
Another resistance came from Darya Singh, the Killadar of Kalanjar, which was suppressed in January 1812.
However, the most significant challenge came from Gopal Singh, a renowned military adventurer who had a dispute with his uncle, who was supported by the British.
For four years, Gopal Singh managed to evade British forces, despite their vigilance and military tactics.
To quell the disturbances in the region, the British had to adopt a policy of binding the hereditary chieftains of Bundelkhand by a series of contractual obligations known as Ikarnamahs.

Parlakimedi Outbreak (1813–34)

Parlakimedi, situated in the western border of Ganjam district (now in Odisha), witnessed resistance from the zamindars and rajas.
When the Company acquired Ganjam, Narayan Deo was the raja of Parlakimedi, whose resistance forced the British to dispatch an army under Colonel Peach.
Peach defeated Narayan Deo in 1768 and made Gajapathi Deo (son of Narayan) a zamindar.
But Narayan Deo, supported by his son and brothers, revolted again.
As the resistance failed to calm down, the Presidency of Madras appointed George Russell as commissioner of the region in 1832.
Russell, provided with full-fledged powers to suppress the revolt, pacified the region by 1834.

Kutch or Cutch Rebellion (1816–32)

In 1816, a treaty was signed between the British and Maharaja Bharamal II of Kutch which vested power in the throne.
However, there was a power struggle between the maharaja and a group of chieftains.
In 1819, Raja Bharmal II raised Arab and African troops to remove the British from his territory.
The chieftains sided with him.
The British defeated and deposed the Kutch ruler Rao Bharamal in favor of his infant son.
A British resident governed the areas with the help of a regency council.
The administrative innovations made by the regency council and excessive land assessment caused resentment.
Some of the chieftains continued their rebellion against alien rule.
The news of the British reverses in the Burma War emboldened the chiefs to demand the restoration of Bharamal II.
Extensive military operations failed to control the situation.
The Company’s authorities were compelled to follow a conciliatory policy.

Rising at Bareilly (1816)

The imposition of the police tax in Bareilly in 1816 aroused the burning indignation of citizens, leading to a religious issue when Mufti Muhammad Aiwaz gave a petition to the magistrate.
The situation worsened when the police injured a woman while collecting the tax, resulting in a scuffle between the Mufti’s followers and the police.
Within two days, armed Muslims from neighboring regions rose in rebellion for the defense of their faith and the Mufti.
In April, they even murdered the son of Leycester, a judge of the provincial court of Bareilly.
The uprising was suppressed only after a heavy deployment of military forces, resulting in the death of more than 300 rebels and many more wounded and imprisoned.
The upsurge seems to have been the product of discontent rather than actual grievance, with the elements of discontent lying in the nature of the alien administration.

Upsurge in Hathras (1817)

Dayaram, a talukdar of several villages in the district of Aligarh, had a strong base in the fort of Hathras.
The fort was considered among the strongest in India, similar to the ‘second Bharatpur’.
It had walls of great height and thickness, defended by a deep ditch and artillery mounted at the top.
The English had concluded the settlement of Hathras estate with Dayaram as a farmer.
Due to progressively increasing high revenues, Dayaram constantly failed to pay arrears and even committed acts of hostility by giving harbour to government fugitives.
In February 1817, the Company attacked Hathras with a large army.
Dayaram fought bravely for more than 15 days and escaped unharmed but ultimately was obliged to submit and settled down with a pension.
Another noted rebel, Bhagwant Singh, Raja of Mursan, was frightened to dismantle his fort and submitted to the government.

Paika Rebellion (1817)

The Paiks of Odisha were a traditional landed militia with rent-free land tenures for military service and policing functions on a hereditary basis.
The English Company’s conquest of Odisha in 1803 and the dethronement of the Raja of Khurda had reduced the power and prestige of the Paiks.
The Company’s extortionist land revenue policy caused resentment among zamindars and peasants, and the common masses were affected by the rise in prices of salt due to taxes imposed on it, abolition of cowrie currency, and the requirement of payment of taxes in silver, etc.
Bakshi Jagabandhu Bidyadhar was the commander of the army of the Raja of Khurda.
However, in 1814, the English East India Company took over his ancestral estate, leaving him in poverty.
The rebellion was sparked by the arrival of a group of Khonds from Gumsur in the Khurda territory in March 1817.
With the support of Mukunda Deva, the last Raja of Khurda, and other zamindars, Bakshi Jagabandhu Bidyadhar led a mixed army of Paikas, forcing the Company’s forces to retreat temporarily.
The uprising was called the Paika Bidroh (rebellion).
The initial success of the rebels led the entire province of Odisha to take up arms against the British government for a period.
Bakshi Jagabandhu Bidyadhar and other rebels were declared outlaws and sheltered by the Raja of Nayagarh.
Despite the fact that Dinabandhu Santra and his group surrendered in November 1818, Jagabandhu avoided the British’s watchful eye.
Despite rewards being offered, none of the province’s people betrayed their leaders.
Although Khurda was back under Company control by mid-1817, the Paika rebels resorted to guerilla tactics.
By 1818, the rebellion had been brutally suppressed.
Priests at the Puri temple who had sheltered Jagabandhu were caught and hanged, and the Paikas as a whole suffered greatly.
In 1825, Jagabandhu surrendered under negotiated terms (although some sources say he was captured and died in captivity in 1829).
The Paika Rebellion succeeded in obtaining significant remissions of arrears, reductions in assessments, the suspension of the sale of the estates of defaulters at discretion, a new settlement on fixed tenures, and other aspects of liberal governance.

Waghera Rising (1818-20)

The Waghera chiefs of Okha Mandal were compelled to take up arms due to their resentment against the alien rule, as well as the exactions imposed by the Gaekwad of Baroda with the support of the British government.
From 1818 to 1819, the Wagheras carried out raids into British territory.
Eventually, in November 1820, a peace treaty was signed.

Ahom Revolt (1828)

Following the First Burma War (1824-26), the British pledged to withdraw from Assam.
However, instead of fulfilling this promise, the British attempted to annex the Ahoms’ territories into their dominion.
This action led to a rebellion in 1828, which was spearheaded by Gomdhar Konwar, an Ahom prince, alongside other compatriots like Dhanjay Borgohain and Jairam Khargharia Phukan.
The rebels congregated near Jorhat and declared Gomdhar Konwar as their king. Eventually, the Company decided to adopt a conciliatory approach and handed over Upper Assam to Maharaja Purandar Singh Narendra, while restoring part of the kingdom to the Assamese king.

Surat Salt Agitations (1840s)

In 1844, due to the government’s decision to raise the salt duty from 50 paise to one rupee, the local population in Surat developed a strong anti-British sentiment, which resulted in attacks on Europeans.
In response to the popular movement, the government rescinded the additional salt levy.
In 1848, the government was again compelled to withdraw its plan to introduce Bengal Standard Weights and Measures due to the people’s determined efforts to boycott and engage in passive resistance.

Kolhapur and Savantvadi Revolts

The Gadkaris, a hereditary military class stationed in Maratha forts, were disbanded after administrative reorganization in the Kolhapur state in 1844.
In response to the looming threat of unemployment, the Gadkaris rebelled and seized control of the Samangarh and Bhudargarh forts.
Meanwhile, growing dissatisfaction led to a revolt in the Savantvadi areas, where the populace had already rebelled against the British in 1830, 1836, and 1838 due to the deposition of their ruler.
In an attempt to exert control over the region, the British authorities implemented various laws.

Wahabi Movement

The Wahabi Movement was an Islamic revivalist movement founded by Syed Ahmed of Rai Bareilly, inspired by the teachings of Abdul Wahab of Saudi Arabia and Shah Waliullah of Delhi.
- Syed Ahmed advocated for a return to pure Islam and society as it was during the time of the Prophet in Arabia, denouncing Western influences on Islam.
- He was hailed as the desired leader (Imam) and established a nationwide organization with a secret code of operations under spiritual vice-regents (Khalifas).
- The north-western tribal belt of Sithana served as their operational base, and Patna was an important center in India, with missions in Hyderabad, Madras, Bengal, United Provinces, and Bombay.
- The Wahabis declared a jihad against the Sikh kingdom of Punjab, seeking to convert Dar al-Harb (territory of war or chaos) into Dar al-Islam (land of Islam).
After the defeat of the Sikh ruler and the incorporation of Punjab into the East India Company’s dominion in 1849, the Wahabis directed their attacks towards the English dominion in India, playing a significant role in spreading anti-British sentiments.
The British responded with a series of military operations on the Wahabi base in Sithana in the 1860s and several court cases of sedition against the Wahabis.
- These actions weakened the Wahabi resistance, but sporadic confrontations with the authorities continued into the 1880s and 1890s.

Kuka Movement

The Kuka Movement was founded in 1840 by Bhagat Jawahar Mal (also called Sian Saheb) in western Punjab.
Baba Ram Singh became a major leader of the movement after Bhagat Jawahar Mal and founded the Namdhari Sikh sect.
After the British took over Punjab, the Kuka Movement shifted from being a religious campaign to a political one.
- The movement advocated for the abolition of caste-based discrimination among Sikhs, the discouragement of meat, alcohol, and drugs consumption, intermarriages, widow remarriage, and the empowerment of women.
- Politically, the Kukas aimed to expel the British and restore Sikh sovereignty over Punjab.
- They encouraged the use of hand-woven clothing and boycotted English laws, education, and products, promoting the concepts of Swadeshi and non-cooperation.
The Kuka Movement gained popularity, but the British took several steps to suppress it between 1863 and 1872.
In 1872, Baba Ram Singh was exiled to Rangoon.

Peasant Movements with Religious Overtones

Narkelberia Uprising

Mir Nithar Ali (1782-1831), also known as Titu Mir, played a significant role in inciting Muslim tenants in West Bengal to rebel against their landlords, who were primarily Hindu and had imposed a beard tax on the Faraizi sect, as well as British indigo planters.
The revolt, which is often considered the first armed peasant uprising against the British, initially focused on the issue of oppressive taxation but eventually took on a religious character.
The uprising eventually merged with the Wahabi Movement.

The Pagal Panthis

Karam Shah founded the Pagal Panthi, a semi-religious group primarily made up of the Hajong and Garo tribes in Mymensingh district (formerly in Bengal).
However, it was under the leadership of Karam Shah’s son, Tipu, that the tribal peasants organized themselves to resist the oppression of the zamindars.
Between 1825 and 1835, the Pagal Panthis refused to pay rent above a certain limit and launched attacks on the homes of zamindars.
While the government introduced a fair arrangement to protect these peasants, the movement was eventually crushed through violent means.

Faraizi Revolt

Haji Shariatullah of Faridpur in Eastern Bengal founded the Faraizi sect, a Muslim religious group that advocated for drastic religious, social, and political changes.
Shariatullah and his son, Muhsinuddin Ahmad (popularly known as Dudu Miyan), organized their followers to expel the British from Bengal while also supporting tenants in their struggles against oppressive zamindars.
The Faraizi movement persisted between 1838 and 1857, after which many of its members joined the Wahabi movement.

Moplah Uprisings

The Moplahs of Malabar experienced significant peasant unrest due to an increase in revenue demands, reductions in field size, and the oppression of officials.
Between 1836 and 1854, there were twenty-two uprisings among the Moplahs, but none of them were successful in achieving their objectives.
Subsequently, during the Non-Cooperation Movement, the Moplahs joined forces with the Congress and Khilafat supporters in a second uprising.
However, differences between Hindus and Muslims ultimately drove a wedge between the Congress and the Moplahs, and by 1921, the Moplahs had been quelled.

Tribal Movements: Period, Region, Causes at a Glance

The Pahariyas Rebellion

The Pahariyas were hill folk who lived around the Rajmahal hills.
They considered the entire region as their land and were hostile to the intrusion of outsiders.
The Paharias practised shifting cultivation and subsisted on forest produce.
Before the British arrived, the Paharias had always maintained their independence due to their geographical isolation.
However, in years of scarcity, the Paharias often raided the plains occupied by settled agriculturists to assert power over the settled communities.
Zamindars paid a regular tribute to the Pahariyas to buy peace, and traders paid the hill chiefs to be permitted to use the passes controlled by them.
With the expansion of settled agriculture, the area under forests and pastures reduced, increasing the conflict between hill folk and settled cultivators.
The Pahariyas rebellion of 1778 led by Raja Jagganath was notable.
In the 1780s, the British initiated a policy of pacification, giving Paharia chiefs an annual allowance in return for ensuring that their men conducted themselves properly.
However, not all Pahariyas were ready to accept this policy, and some withdrew deep into the mountains, continuing the war against the diku or “outsiders“.

The Revolt led by Tilka Manjhi

Tilka Majhi, a Santhal leader, led opposition and rebellion against the British in Santhal Pargana.
- He was against the British policy of divide and rule.
- He moved in the hills around Sultanganj, attacking boats of the East India Company moving along the Ganga and looting the British treasury.
- He shared the loot with the poor and organised guerrilla warfare, with many Santhal women also participating.
There were many encounters between Tilka Manjhi and his followers and British soldiers in the jungles of the Tarai region.
In 1778, Tilka took the Ramgarh Camp from the British after forming a joint front with the Paharia Sardars.
In 1784, Tilka led his followers to attack Bhagalpur and shot the British magistrate of Rajmahal, Augustus Cleveland.
The British made a concerted attack on Manjhi and his followers, finally capturing Manjhi and hanging him in 1785.
Manjhi is considered to be the first Adivasi leader to take up arms against the British.

Jungle Mahal Revolt or the Chuar Uprising

Jungle-Mahals is an indefinite administrative unit between Chota Nagpur and the plains of Bengal. Later, it came to be identified as some parganas in Birbhum, Bankura, and Midnapore.
- The area was split amongst neighboring districts in 1833 due to continued disturbances of the Bhumij.
The Chuars were Bhumij tribals belonging to the Mundari main stock.
- After moving away from the Chotanagpur plateau, they settled in large numbers in Midnapur, Bankura, and Purulia districts of Bengal.
- These people were primarily farmers and hunters, and some worked under local zamindars.
The Chuars were prominent in Manbhum and Barabhum, especially in the hills between Barabhum and Ghatsila.
- They held their lands under a kind of feudal tenure but were not strongly attached to the soil.
- They were always ready to change from farming to hunting at the bidding of their jungle chiefs or zamindars.
- Jungle zamindars used to hire paiks from among the Chuars to police the village. The head paiks were known as the sardars.
The Chuar uprisings occurred in phases, each with its own characteristics, leaders, and epicenter.
- The first Chuar rebellion broke out as a reaction to the increase of the revenue of the jungle zamindars.
- The revenue was difficult to raise as the jungle territory yielded little.
- In 1767, the British resident of Midnapur was instructed to demolish their mud forts, which offended the zamindars.
The Chuar uprisings occurred in different phases, each with its own leaders and characteristics.
In 1768, the zamindar of Ghatsila, Jagannath Singh, led thousands of Chuar followers to take up arms, and the Company government surrendered to their demands.
In 1771, Shyam Ganjan of Dhadka, Subla Singh of Kaliapal, and Dubraj rose in rebellion, but the British suppressed the revolt.
The most significant uprising was under Durjan Singh in 1798, and it involved the zamindars, paiks, and ordinary Chuars who joined hands in a rebellion against the revenue and administrative policies of the East India Company.
Durjan Singh was the zamindar of Raipur and was dispossessed due to the operations of Bengal Regulations, and in May 1798, his followers indulged in violent activities to halt the auction of the estate of Raipur.
The British brutally suppressed the revolt in 1799, and other leaders of the Chuars were Madhab Singh, Raja Mohan Singh, and Lachman Singh of Dulma.
The uprisings were essentially a clash of ways of life, with the rebels living in a closed agrarian society that was exposed to a new situation by the colonial forces, upsetting their way of life. The rebels were also not prepared to accept the outsiders or non-Adivasis.
Some historians consider the term “Chuar” derogatory and use “Revolt of the Jungle Mahal” instead.

Tamar Revolt

In 1798, the tribals of Tamar in Chotanagpur region rebelled under Bholanath Sahay (or Singh).
The revolt was a response to the British-imposed faulty and alien systems, and expressed anger against the “diku.”
The Munda tribals and their chiefs joined forces with Bholanath in the uprising.
The British-led expedition led by Lt. Cooper firmly suppressed the rebellion.
There were several other revolts by the tribals of Tamar.

Kol Mutiny (1831)

The Kols and other tribes reside in Chhotanagpur, which includes Ranchi, Singhbhum, Hazaribagh, Palamau, and western Manbhum.
Trouble erupted in 1831 due to:
- Large-scale transfers of land from Kol headmen to outsiders such as Hindu, Sikh, and Muslim farmers and moneylenders who were oppressive and demanded heavy taxes.
- Negative impacts of British judicial and revenue policies on traditional social conditions of the Kols.
The Kols resented these issues and, under the leadership of Buddho Bhagat, rebelled by killing or burning roughly a thousand outsiders.
Order was restored after extensive military operations.

Ho and Munda Uprisings (1820–37)

The Raja of Parahat rallied the Ho tribals to revolt against the occupation of Singhbhum (now in Jharkhand).
Despite being forced to submit in 1827, the Ho tribals launched another rebellion in 1831, joined by the Mundas of Chotanagpur.
Their goal was to protest against the newly introduced farming revenue policy and the influx of Bengalis into their region.
Although the revolt was suppressed in 1832, the Ho continued their operations until 1837, and the Mundas remained restless.

The Santhal Rebellions (1833; 1855–56)

The Santhals migrated into the Rajmahal area from Cuttack, Dhalbhum, Manbhum, Hazaribagh, and Midnapore in the late 1770s and early 1780s.
The British were interested in settling the Santhals in Rajmahal because they wanted more revenue from land and more crops for export.
The Santhals were persuaded to settle in the foothills of Rajmahal, but they had a feud with the Paharias who were forced to retreat into the higher hill tracts after a compromise was formed by the British between the two groups called Damin-i-koh in 1832-33.
Over time, the Santhals found that they were losing the land they had worked on and brought under cultivation due to the Permanent Settlement Act of 1793.
The Santhals rebelled against the zamindars and moneylenders in the 1850s, which turned into a movement against the British colonial state called the ‘hul‘ meaning a movement for liberation.
Under Sidhu and Kanhu Murmu, the Santhals proclaimed an end to Company rule and declared the area between Bhagalpur and Rajmahal as autonomous.
Phulo and Jhano Murmu, the sisters of Sidhu and Kanhu, participated in the rebellion and are said to have entered the enemy camp under cover and killed several soldiers before they themselves died.
The British suppressed the rebellion with a heavy hand by 1856, burning down villages or destroying them with the help of elephants, and killing thousands of Santhals.
The Santhal Pargana was created out of the districts of Bhagalpur and Birbhum after the Santhal Revolt of 1855-56, which was to have special laws within it.

Khond Uprisings (1837–56)

The Khonds of the hilly tracts extending from Odisha to the Srikakulam and Visakhapatnam districts of Andhra Pradesh revolted against Company rule from 1837 to 1856.
Chakra Bisoi, a young raja, led the Khonds, who were joined by the Ghumsar, Kalahandi, and other tribals to oppose the suppression of human sacrifice, new taxes, and the entry of zamindars into their areas.
The uprising came to an end with Chakra Bisoi’s disappearance.
In 1914, a later Khond rebellion in the Odisha region was triggered by the hope that foreign rule would end and they could gain an autonomous government.

Koya Revolts

The Koyas of the eastern Godavari track in modern Andhra along with Khonda Sara chiefs launched several rebellions during the 19th century.
The rebellions took place in 1803, 1840, 1845, 1858, 1861, 1862, 1879-80, and 1886.
The Koyas and Khonda Sara chiefs rebelled against various issues, including police and moneylender oppression, new regulations, and the denial of their customary rights over forest areas.
Tomma Sora led the 1879-80 rebellion, while Raja Anantayyar led the 1886 rebellion.
The rebellions were attempts to resist British colonial rule and protect their way of life.

Bhil Revolts

The Bhils, who inhabited the Western Ghats and controlled the mountain passes between the north and the Deccan, revolted against the British East India Company in 1817-1819.
They rebelled due to famine, economic hardship, and misgovernment.
The British used both force and conciliatory efforts to quell the uprising, but the Bhils rebelled again in 1825, 1831, and 1846.
Later, a reformer named Govind Guru helped the Bhils of south Rajasthan (Banswara, Sunth states) organize themselves to fight for a Bhil Raj by 1913.

Koli Risings

The Kolis, who lived near the Bhils, rebelled against the rule of the British East India Company during 1829, 1839, and 1844-48.
They were unhappy with the Company’s governance, which resulted in widespread unemployment and the destruction of their forts.

Ramosi Risings

The Ramosis, a hill tribe in the Western Ghats, were unhappy with British rule and administration, particularly the policy of annexation.
When the British annexed the Maratha territories, the Ramosis lost their livelihoods as they had been employed by the Maratha administration.
This led to their first uprising in 1822 under Chittur Singh, who plundered the area around Satara.
More unrest followed in 1825-1829 under Umaji Naik and Bapu Trimbakji Sawant, with further disturbances in 1839 and 1840-1841 over the deposition and banishment of Raja Pratap Singh of Satara.
Despite these uprisings, the British generally followed a pacifist policy towards the Ramosis, and even recruited some of them into the hill police.
Eventually, a superior British force was able to restore order in the area.

Tribal Movements of the North-East

Khasi Uprising

The East India Company aimed to construct a road that would link the Brahmaputra Valley with Sylhet, prompting them to occupy the hilly region between Garo and Jaintia Hills.
They brought in a significant number of outsiders, including Englishmen, Bengalis, and labourers from the plains.
The Khasis, Garos, Khamptis, and Singphos united under Tirath Singh’s leadership to expel the outsiders from the plains.
This uprising gradually transformed into a popular revolt against British rule in the area.
The English military finally suppressed the revolt by 1833 using their superior forces.

Singhpos Rebellion

Although the Singphos rebellion in Assam in the early 1830s was quickly suppressed, they continued to organize uprisings.
In 1839, an uprising resulted in the death of the British political agent, and in 1843, Chief Nirang Phidu led another uprising that included an attack on the British garrison and the deaths of many soldiers.
Other smaller rebellions included the Mishmis in 1836, the Khampti rebellion in Assam between 1839 and 1842, and the Lushais’ revolt in 1842 and 1844, during which they attacked villages in Manipur.

The Singphos staged a rebellion in Assam during the early 1830s, which was quickly suppressed. However, they persisted in organizing subsequent uprisings, including one in 1839 that led to the death of a British political agent. In 1843, Chief Nirang Phidu led another uprising, which involved an attack on a British garrison and resulted in the deaths of many soldiers.

Causes of Sepoy Mutinies

Reasons for the rising discontent of the sepoys against British rule:

Discrimination in payment and promotions.
Mistreatment of the sepoys by British officials.
Refusal of the government to pay foreign service allowance while fighting in remote regions.
Religious objections of high-caste Hindu sepoys to Lord Canning’s General Service Enlistment Act (1856), which ordered all recruits to be ready for service both within and outside India.

In addition, the sepoys shared all the discontent and grievances – social, religious, and economic – that afflicted the civilian population.

Important Mutinies

Mutiny of sepoys in Bengal in 1764.
Vellore mutiny of 1806, where sepoys protested against interference in their social and religious practices and raised a banner of revolt unfurling the flag of the ruler of Mysore.
Mutiny of sepoys of the 47th Native Infantry Unit in 1824.
Revolt of the Grenadier Company in Assam in 1825.
Mutiny of an Indian regiment at Sholapur in 1838.
Mutinies of the 34th Native Infantry (N.I.), the 22nd N.I., the 66th N.I., and the 37th N.I. in 1844, 1849, 1850, and 1852 respectively.

However, all these mutinies were local and were ruthlessly crushed by the British Indian government, often inflicting terrible violence, executing leaders, and disbanding the regiments. The legacy of these revolts proved to be of immense significance later.

For Daily Current Affairs Click Here

Join our Official Telegram Channel HERE
Subscribe to our YouTube Channel HERE
Follow our Instagram ID HERE

Post Views: 90