The Revolt of 1857[1] was one of the most
crucial events during the period of British colonial rule in India. Although
the revolt was not success in its ultimate goal and was suppressed very soon by
the British power, it had far reaching effects on both Indian and British sides.
Among many other
causes or background which culminated in the outbreak of the revolt, religious causes
connected with social cause are the most deeply rooted discontentment. It
touches the very body, mind and soul of the native Indians that really hurts
their thoughts and feelings. Other causes appeared to be common discontentment
against the colonial rule which were also experienced by almost all colonial
countries over the world. The Indians suspected that the ultimate aim of the
British was to destroy their original religion and convert them to Christianity
in one way or the other. The Indians then externally protest against
Christianity when the colonial rule or law compelled them to go outside their
religious boundaries. The forcible use of greased cartridges[2] added fuel to fire and
serve as the ignition of the revolt.
There
was a long process of history, an offshoot of Christian’s revivalist movement
in Europe, a theory on colonialism and mission, a theology of mission that
influenced Christian colonial countries of Europe.
Mission and Colonialism – a reminiscence
The idea of colonialism is
intimately linked to the global expansion of western Christian nations. The origin
of the term mission accepts the ambience of west’s colonization of overseas territories
and its subjugation of their inhabitants. Therefore, since the 16th
century, if one said mission, one in a sense also said colonialism. Modern
missions originated in the context of modern western colonialism. During the 15th
to the 17th century, it was taken for granted that the conquered
nations would also have to submit to the western ruler’s religion. They
missionized as they colonized. Their mission was not only to subdue the
indigenous population, but also to evangelize them. In the 17th century,
there was a shift in most cases; it was the mercantile companies rather than
the governments of the respective European nations which took the initiative in
acquiring overseas possessions. Some of the trading companies usually refused
to allow any missionaries in the territories under their jurisdiction since
they saw them as a threat to their commercial interest.
In the 19th century, as
stated by David J. Bosch, colonial
expansion acquires religious overtones and also be linked with mission. The authorities
enthusiastically welcomed missionaries into their territories. From the point
of view of the colonial government, the missionaries were indeed ideal allies.
What better agents of its cultural, political and economic influence could a western
government hope to have than missionaries? The missionaries then, whether like it
or not, became a pioneer of western imperialistic expansion. It was
particularly during the Victorian era that there was a growing consciousness
among colonial officials of the value and significance mission work had for the
empire.[3]
Bosch further stated that the
missionaries sometimes petitioned the government of their home country to
extend its protectorate to areas where they were working. They became advocates
for colonial expansion; they genuinely believed that their own country’s rule
would be more beneficent. By and large, they tended to welcome the expansion of
colonial rule. This could give the impression that mission served the interests
of empire rather than that colonialism served the cause of mission.[4]
Colonialism and Christian missions
went hand-in-hand since the arrival of Portuguese in India according to Jacob S. Dharmaraj[5] towards the end of 15th
century. So, we can say that India, in the light of the above reminiscence, was
colonized with the intentions of Christianizing the natives. The Christian
missionaries, by means of direct and indirect evangelism with tooth and nails,
planting the Church, spread the faiths and teachings of Christianity. In their
mission to extend the Reign of God, they were backed and supported by the
colonial authority with the spirit of colonialism. It seems that they hurt the
very sentiments of other religious group. And when the opportunity comes in
1857, this religious discontentment that was hidden inside them over a long
period of time took the form of an armed rebellion. It resulted in the killing
of many Western missionaries and the native Christians.
Paradigm
shift in the theology of mission
There was a constant paradigm shift
in the theology of mission which incepted from the period of geographical
explorations, and continued till the end of the Second World War. During this
period of colonialism, almost all colonial powers in Europe followed colonial
ecclesial paradigm in which all colonial powers came into colonial countries
with missionaries, in other words, it can be said that sword and cross go side
by side with each other. The missionaries and the ruler came together and
compelled people in their colonial country to embraced Christianity by any
means, saying that there was no salvation outside the Christian church. They
even have to kill other people in order to save their soul. The main foundation
of this paradigm is taken from Luke 14:23 “Then
the master said to the slave, 'Go out into the roads and lanes, and compel people to come in, so that my
house may be filled.” The colonial powers were well
aware of the contribution missionaries could make in their overseas
territories. German Chancellor von
Caprivi once stated publicly, “We
should begin by establishing a few stations in the interior, from which both
the merchant and the missionary can operate; gun and Bible should go hand in
hand.”[6]
The
illustration of this paradigm, during the British colonial rule in India, can
be seen from the speech of Mr. Mangles,
Chairman of the Directors of the East India Company in the House of Commons: “Providence has entrusted the extensive
empire of Hindustan to England in order that the banner of Christ should wave
triumphant from one end of India to the other. Everyone must exert all his
strength that there may be no dilatoriness on any account in continuing in the
country the grand work of making all Indians Christians.” Similarly, Major Edwards declared that “Christianization of India was to be
ultimate end of our continued possession of it.” [7] The facilities extended to the Christian
missionaries, the privileges and patronization of their missionary activities
by the colonial authority, further confirmed the fears of the Hindus and the
Muslims that the ultimate goal of the British was their conversion to
Christianity.
The
role of English East India Company and the Charter Act of 1813
The
English East India Company, a trading company started its mercantile activities
in India from the beginning of the 17th century. The British
gradually win over the existing other European trading companies and native
Indian ruler by means of trade pact, alliances, war and annexation etc. By
1757, the British authority in India had been firmly established with a solid
foundation. At the initial stages, the company refused to allow any Christian
missionaries in the territories under their jurisdiction because of the fear
that the missionaries would be a thread to their commercial interest.
However, the British public
including many prominent persons from the company itself feel that if the
British was to rule India, the religious and spiritual welfare of the Indian
public would be given a serious thought to. They attempted to include
missionary enterprise in the Charter of the company. This idea received
much support and it gained momentum. As a result, the Charter Act of 1813[8] permitted missionary
activities in India. Based on these provisions, the missionary societies based
in U.K. began their missionary enterprise in India.
The influx of Christian
missionaries and its consequences
The
19th century witnessed Christian missionaries’ movement from Europe,
Canada and Unites States into India. R. Fitzgerald indicates in
his book that by 1850, more than one quarter of the world wide Protestant
missionary force was stationed in India.[9] As remarked by B.N. Luniya, inspired and impelled by
the great revival of Christianity, carried their faith to India and at a number
of points in education, medicine and various other forms of philanthropy as
well as religion, touched the culture of the country. Along with new western knowledge
came the fierce attacks on Hinduism and Hindu society. They not only imported
the new secular knowledge but also taught systematically Christianity as the
only true religion. As a result of this, a thorough-going skepticism or a
partial leaning towards Christianity for the time being was produced in the
minds of the educated middle class. Many were drifting towards Christianity.
The Christian missionaries were educators as well as crusaders in India.[10]
Hindu revivalism – the first form
of protest against Christianity
The Activities of the missionaries
and their vehement criticism of Hindu religion and society served to rouse Hinduism
form its slumber. The innate vitality of Hinduism began to assert itself. A
spirit of revival commenced and everything savoring of the past was supported,
welcomed and honored. It was a defensive mechanism against a reaction of
Christianity. The revival aimed at revitalization of Indian religious and
social life, Luniya further stated.[11] As a result, Hinduism
with its past began to assert itself and Hindu revivalist movement from this
period assumed Hindu nationalism. Innumerable socio-religious movements like
Arya Samaj, Brahmo Samaj, Prarthana Samaj, Radha Swami Satsang, Ramakrishna
Mission, etc. appeared on the scene. With the efforts of these movements, Hindu
social system underwent a transformation. It promoted the growth of wider
social and religious outlook and stimulated the development of individual and
organized efforts for social reforms. The movements commence with the social
reforms, reorganization or reconstitution of social practices underwent drastic
change. As Christianity preached equality and common brotherhood, with no
complicated and expensive rituals, no pressure from social system; the Hindu
religion revived itself in this way, in order to stand firmly against
Christianity.
The causes of the revolt –
discontentment lingering
The introduction of various measures of
social reforms by the British was resented by the orthodox Indian people who
regarded these reforms as unnecessary interference in their social and
religious life. For example, according to Raychoudhary,
“the abolition of Sati was interpreted by
the orthodox sections of the Hindu society as an antagonism to their social and
religious practices. Similarly, the dispatch of sepoys to Afghanistan during
the First Afghan War was greatly resented by the Indians because the crossing
of borders was contrary to the caste rules of the Hindus. A large number of
Hindu soldiers on their return from the war were treated as outcastes and the
members of the Hindu society refused to mix or dine with them.”[12]
In 1856, Lord Dalhousie passed the Religious Disability Act which greatly
modified the Hindu customs. Under this act, it was provided that the change of
religion would not debar a son from inheriting the property of his father. The
Indians interpreted this law as clearing the deck for the conversion of the
Indians to Christianity. The law was described as a “deliberate blow at the Hindu right of inheritance and law of property”
and created greater alarm against the Hindus and, even the Muslims were
also alarmed by the law. No wonder in the context of all this, Hindus saw in
the introduction of railways telegraphs, roads and steamships as a clever
devices for their conversion. Even the introduction of new educational system
at the cost of the indigenous education was interpreted as a conspiracy by the
English to convert the people of India to Christianity.[13]
The impact of
the western reforms and innovations was the most potent cause of the mutiny.
These alarmed both the Hindus and the Muslims. They suspected that the ultimate
aim of the British was to destroy their religion. The abolition of Sati,
promotion of western education at the expense of oriental learning,
legalization of widow remarriage, permission given to converts from Hinduism to
inherit property. So deep seated was the suspicion that the orthodox Hindus
believed that introduction of railways were designed to destroy the castes of
the people of different castes of people by compelling people of different
castes to travel together in the same carriage. In the colonial army, there
were a very large number of high caste men – Brahmins and Rajputs. Such
soldiers were orthodox and they were forced to go to Afghanistan and Burma.
Going abroad, to them meant loss of caste. Religious sentiments of the Muslims
were also wounded. With the abolition of Persian as the court language, the
Maulavis lost their favoured position. Introduction of western education made
the Muslim angry, as thereby the study of Arabic would suffer. Activities of
the Christian missionaries made the Maulavis uneasy. Oudh was the centre of
Shia culture. So the Shias were outraged by its fall. The Sunnis were
distressed to see the steady denigration of the Mughal emperor.[14]
A.C. Banerjee opined that the
orthodox Hindus had not really been able to reconcile themselves to such
measures as the banning of Sati, the legislation on re-marriage of Hindu
widows, the grant of rights of inheritance to converts to other religions, the
spread of western education and introduction of female education. Many were
convinced that the English were out to subvert the Hindus religion and replace
it with Christianity.[15] According
to Vincent A. Smith,
Railways, telegraphs, and other material and educational improvements, now
matters of course, were in those days’ unorthodox, disturbing novelties, which
contributed largely to unsettle the minds of the people and support the
delusion that their religions were in danger.[16]
Dr. Ishwari Prasad says, “The English…attempted to introduced western
notions of inheritance, marriage and succession and thereby consciously and
unconsciously trampled, upon the most sensitive portion of Hindu’s life…It is
the imperialist policy that to degrade the conquered, to disrupt their social
system, to make them forget their past, to impoverish them and then to lure them
to the religion of the conqueror is a better guarantee of stability than mere
military strength.” [17]
As we have
seen, Hindu society was being affected by the introduction of western ideas.
Missionaries were challenging the religious beliefs of the Hindus. The
humanitarian movement led to reforms that went deeper than the political
superstructure. Lord Dalhousie had
made efforts for the emancipation of women and had introduced a bill to remove
all legal obstacles to the remarriage of Hindu widows. Converts to Christianity
were to share with their Hindu brethren in the property of the family estate.
There was a widespread belief that the British aimed at breaking down the caste
system. The introduction of western methods of education was a direct challenge
to orthodoxy, both Hindu and Muslim. To these problems may be added the growing
discontent of the Brahmins, many of whom had been dispossessed of their
revenues or had lost lucrative positions.
A
major cause of the outbreak of the revolt was the fear among the people that
the British government was determined to destroy their religion and convert
Indians to Christianity. The increasing activities of the Christian
missionaries and the actual conversions made by them were taken as a proof of
this fear. The policy of taxing lands belonging to temples and mosques lent
further support to this idea. The belief that their religion was under threat,
united all sections of society against a common enemy.
The caste
Hindus thought that their dearest symbols were destroyed and emptied of
meaning. Since some of their sacred religious concepts were either being
destroyed or distorted, the Hindus began to wonder whether they would ever be
able to think religiously and live peacefully. To them it seemed certain that
they would never again be able to establish their religious supremacy. The
missionaries were openly sympathetic to Christianity as teachers in school, as
inspector of schools, and as magistrates in the courts. The main goal was to
gain more converts and earn the confidence of the native population so as to
permanently establish the British Raj in India.[18] So, we can say that the
mutiny then takes the form of the struggle of a nearly doomed Indian religious
culture which channeled its anger through discontented sepoys.
Influenced by
colonial ecclesiastical paradigm of the Christian mission, The Christian
missionaries and the British authorities adopted the policy of propagating
Christianity. Many people belonging to any community in India were lured to
accept conversion to Christianity. In these activities, the missionaries
enjoyed the support of the British colonizers. It is said that the Governor-General himself[19] tried to become a pioneer
in spreading Christian principles and converting the people. The British
claimed that Christianity was the only true religion, and they had a deep
conviction that every dark skinned person ought to be converted.[20] They felt that they were
out to civilize the Indians and all that they were doing was for the benefit of
the inhabitants and conversion was also an important aspect in the process of
civilizing the Indians. These shocked the Indians and led to the growth of
discontentment against the British.
In
some cantonments, missionaries were permitted to preach openly and their
criticism against other religion angered the sepoys. The rumors that the mixing
of bone dust in atta and used of cow and pig fat as grease for the newly
introduced rifle ignited the fire. The native soldiers, with these entire
discontentments, determined to rise and overthrow the British whom they
regarded as the enemies of their faith.
The
aftermath and persecution
According to L.E.R. Reese, “the revolt was
a war of fanatic religionists against Christians.”[21] During the course of the
revolt, Christian missionaries were attacked by the rebels. Indians Christian
also suffered because of their connection with Europeans. In their case, exert
by C.B. Firth, there was sometimes
an element of religious persecution as well, in that those who fell into the
hands of the rebels were pressed to abjure the faith and ill treated or killed
if they refused. The Christian communities in North India had their martyrs and
confessors. About 20 mission workers (with wives and children included) are
known to have lost their lives in the mutiny; how many Indian Christians
suffered is impossible to say. Of missionaries, chaplains and members of their
families, the number is given as 37.[22] Together with the
missionaries and their families, the native Christians, especially those who
had taken a leading position as teachers or preachers were in the gravest
peril; popular indignation ran high against them as deserter from their people.
South India where most Indian Christians lived was not much affected by the
revolt. However, to some extent, the rapid growth of Christian mission in India
was halted by the revolt.
From 1858, India came under the direct
control of the British crown. Although the evangelicals in England wanted the
government to commit itself to a policy of encouraging Christian propaganda, they
asserted that evangelizing India would make Indians loyal to the crown. The
British Prime Minister, Lord Palmerston
and few other officers were in favor of the promotion of Christianity in India.
He was supported by the Secretary of the State, Sir Charleswood, when he said;
“every additional Christian is an additional bond of union with this country
and an additional source of strength to the empire.” [23] But the Queen and the government professed itself
neutral as between the different religions of India. But somehow made a very
favorable environment for Christian missions to develop in. The activities of
missions increased greatly in the second half of the 19th century;
it was indeed a century of foreign missions, and new missionary societies came
in.
Fortunately
for the British, as the rebellion was limited almost to North India. The
military posts in Madras, Bombay and Punjab did not participate in the
rebellion. The British contained mutineers within a year and the colonial
authority was restored. But the mutiny had shaken the British colonial rule over
India to the depths; it had also powerfully affected English Christendom, and
had kindled its sense of responsibility for the peoples of India. And thus to
give Christianity and Christian culture to the people of India was the sacred
purpose of the English Churches even after the anxiety and heartbreak of the
Mutiny.
Although there
was much of the protest from the Indian orthodox side, throughout the 19th
century, there continued to be a movement towards Christianity even among the
educated class. Many notable citizens come to the conviction that it was the
true faith and accepted Christianity. The Hindu society itself was much
affected by Christianity and there was an interchange of religious practices between
the two. After all, the country moves towards mutual understanding, respect for
each other and religious secularism which can be seen from the proceeding
socio-political scene that reflects in the making of the constitution.
Appendix
The
following list of missionaries, chaplains and Indian Christian workers killed
during the Rebellion of 1857 was compiled by M.A. Sherring and published in 1859 in The Indian Church in the Great Rebellion. Reproduced in M.K. Kuriakose, History of Christianity in India: Source Materials (Delhi: ISPCK,
1982), 176-178.
Missionaries
and chaplains
Rev.
M.J. Jennings, Chaplain of Delhi and Ms. Jennings.
Rev.
A.R. Hubbard, Propagation of the Gospel Society, Delhi.
Rev.
John Mackay, Baptist Missionary Society, Delhi.
Rev.
David Corrie Sandys, Propagation Society, Calcutta.
Mr.
Cock and Mr. Louis Koch, Propagation Society, Delhi.
Mrs.
Thompson and her two adult daughters, Baptist Missionary, Delhi.
Rev.
Thomas Hunter and Mrs. Hunter and their infant child, Missionary of the Church
of Scotland, Sialkot.
Rev.
John M’Callum, Officiating Chaplain of Shahjahanpur.
Rev.
J.E. Freeman and Mrs. Freeman, American Presbyterian Board of Missions, Fatehgarh.
Rev.
D.E. Campbell, Mrs. Campbell and their two children, American Presby. Board of
Missions, Fatehgarh.
Rev.
A.O. John and Mrs. John, American Presbyterian Board of Missions, Fatehgarh.
Rev.
R. M’Mullen and Mrs. M’Mullen, American Presbyterian Board of Missions, Fatehgarh.
Rev.
F. Fisher, Chaplain of Fatehgarh, and Mrs. Fisher and their child.
Rev.
E.T.R. Moncrieff, Chaplain of Kanpur, and Mrs. Moncrieff and their child.
Rev.
W.H. Heycock and his mother Mrs. Heycock, Propagation Society, Kanpur.
Rev.
H.E. Cockey, Propagation Society, Kanpur.
Rev.
G.W. Copeland, Chaplain of Gwalior.
Rev.
H.I. Polohampton, Chaplain of Lucknow.
Rev.
W. Glen and his infant child, London Missionary Society, Mirzapur.
Mrs. Buyers, London Missionary
Society, Benares.
Indian
Christians
Willayat
Ali, Catechist of the Baptist Mission, Delhi.
Thankoor,
Catechist of the Propagation Society’s Mission, Delhi.
Dhokul
Parashad, Head-teacher of the Fatehgarh Mission School, his wife and four
children.
Paramand,
Catechist of the Baptist Mission, Muttra.
Solomon,
Catechist of the Propagation Society’s Mission, Kanpur.
Ram
Chandra Mitter, Head-master of the American Presbyterian Mission School, Fatehgarh.
Jiwan
Masih, Catechist, Delamow.
Sri
Nath Bhose, formerly Catechist and teacher, his wife and children, Oudh.
Raphael,
Catechist of the Church Mission, Kharagpur.
Chaman
Lal, Sub-Assistant Surgeon of Delhi.
Rev.
Gopinath Nundi, his wife and child, Allahabad.
[1] There were a lot of debates
and many historians have expressed divergent views about the character or
nature of the revolt. The Imperialist writers opined that the revolt was a mere
simple rebellion or a sepoy mutiny, a selfish conspiracy against civilization. On
the other hand, the Nationalist writers regarded the revolt as the first war of
Indian independence. Even in its failure, according to them, serve as a source
of inspiration for the national liberation movement. While the Marxist writers
were on the idea that the revolt was a peasant democratic combine against
foreign as well as their feudal bondage (land system).
[2] The British authority
introduced a new Enfield rifle in the army. In order to load the cartridges
into the rifle, the soldiers have to bite the end of the cartridges. There
developed rumors among the soldiers that the greased cartridges were made from
the fat of Cow and Pig, which was very offensive to both the Hindus and the
Muslims. And, that the Indian soldiers take it as a force attempt to convert them
into Christianity.
[3] David J.
Bosch, Transforming Mission. Paradigm
Shift in Theology of Mission, Indian Edition (Bangalore:
Centre For Contemporary Christianity, 2006), 381.
[4] David J.
Bosch, Transforming Mission…382.
[5]
Jacob S. Dharmaraj, Colonialism and Christian Mission:
Postcolonial Reflections (Delhi: ISPCK, 1993), 14.
[6] Cited in David J. Bosch, Transforming Mission…381.
[7] S.C.
Raychoudhary, History of India: A detailed Study of
Political, Economic, Social and Cultural aspects. From 1526 to present times (Delhi:
Surjeet Publications, 1995), 264.
[8] The sections of Charter Act
of 1813 which concerned missionary work were XXXIII – XXXIX and XLI and XLII.
Section XXXIII began: “And whereas it is the duty of this Country to promote
the interest and Happiness of the Native Inhabitants of the British Dominions
in India and such measure ought to be adopted as may tend to the Introduction
among them of useful knowledge and of religious Improvement…so as the…Principle
of the British Government, on which the Natives of India have hitherto relied,
for the free Exercise of their Religion be inviolably maintained and whereas it
is expending to make provision for granting permission to person desirous of
going to or remaining in India for the above purpose…” Cited in D. Arthur Jayakumar, History
of Christianity in India. Selected Themes, Revised & Enlarged Edition
(Madurai: D. Arthur Jayakumar, 2007), 29.
[9] R. Fitzgerald, A Peculiar and Exceptional Measure: The Call
for Women Medical Missionaries for India in the Later 19th Century
cited in J.C. Ingleby, Missionaries,
Education and India. Issues in Protestant Missionary Education in the Long 19th
Century (Delhi: ISPCK, 2000), 33.
[10]
B.N. Luniya, Evolution of Indian Culture, 16th
Edition (Agra: Lakhmi Narain Agarwal, 1999) 434.
[11]
B.N. Luniya, Evolution of Indian Culture…435.
[14]
Debabrata Dutta, History of India, 3rd Edition
(Calcutta: Sribhumi Publishing co., 1985), 363-364.
[15]
Anil Chandra Banerjee, An Outline of Indian History, 2nd
Edition (Calcutta: AMC Pvt. Ltd., 1971), 322-323.
[16]
Vincent A. Smith, The Oxford
Student’s History of India, 15th Edition (London: Oxford University
Press, 1951), 330.
[18]
Jacob S. Dharmaraj, Colonialism and Christian Mission…84-85.
[19] In 1856, the tenure of Lord
Dalhousie as the Governor-General of India came to an end and he was succeeded
by Lord Canning. It was during the tenure of Lord Canning that the Revolt of
1857 took place.
[20]
B.R. Parineetha, History of
India from 700 to 1707 A.D., 2nd Edition (Mangalore: United
Publishers, 2006),
[21]B.R. Parineetha,
History of India...235.
[22]
C.B. Firth, An introduction to Indian Church History, Revised
Edition (Delhi: ISPCK, 1976), 189-182.
See
appendix for the list of missionaries and Indian Christians who lost their life
during the rebellion.
[23]
Jacob S. Dharmaraj, Colonialism and Christian Mission…93.
Comments