Consequences and Significance of the Revolt

At a Glance

• What it is The changes in British policy and Indian history after 1857
• Constitutional Act of 1858; Crown rule; Secretary of State; Viceroy
• Policy Queen’s Proclamation: no more annexations; religious freedom
• Army and society Reorganised army, divide and rule, racial hatred
• Exam link UPSC Prelims, Modern History: The Revolt of 1857

Where Does It Fit?

This is the eighth and last topic of the category on the Revolt of 1857. The previous topics told its causes, course, failure and interpretations. This topic describes the changes it brought and its significance. The next category begins the study of social and religious reform in the nineteenth century. Previous topic: Nature of the Revolt of 1857: Historiographical Views.

What Constitutional Change Followed?

The Revolt of 1857 marks a turning point in the history of India and led to far-reaching changes in the system of administration and the policies of the British government.

Even before the revolt was fully suppressed, the British Parliament on 2 August 1858 passed an Act for the Better Government of India, known as the Government of India Act 1858. The Act declared Queen Victoria the sovereign of British India and provided for the appointment of a Secretary of State for India, a member of the British cabinet. The direct responsibility for the administration passed to the British Crown, and Company rule was abolished. The Company’s expansion, which had been told from Battle of Plassey, 1757 onwards, thus ended under the Crown.

What Did the Queen’s Proclamation Promise?

The assumption of the Government of India by the sovereign of Great Britain was announced by Lord Canning at a durbar at Allahabad in the Queen’s Proclamation issued on 1 November 1858. By this proclamation the Governor-General acquired the additional title of Viceroy. Many promises in the proclamation appeared positive to Indians.

The end of annexation reversed policies described in Doctrine of Lapse and Annexation of Awadh. Bernard Cohn described the effect: the British, who started their rule as outsiders, became insiders by vesting the sovereignty of India in their monarch.

How Was the Army Reorganised?

The army, which was at the forefront of the outbreak, was thoroughly reorganised, and British military policy came to be dominated by the idea of divide and counterpoise. The British could no longer depend on Indian loyalty, so the number of Indian soldiers was drastically reduced while the number of European soldiers was increased. The concept of divide and rule was adopted, with separate units created on the basis of caste, community and region. Recruits were to be drawn from the martial races of Punjab, Nepal and the north-western frontier, who had proved loyal during the revolt. Efforts were made to keep the army away from the civilian population.

• Army Amalgamation Scheme, 1861 The Company’s European troops moved to the service of the Crown
• Linked battalions European troops in India were constantly refreshed by periodical visits to England
• Artillery All Indian artillery units, except a few mountain batteries, were made defunct
• Higher posts All higher posts in the army and artillery departments were reserved for Europeans
• Officers Till the first decade of the twentieth century, no Indian was thought fit for the king’s commission

The White Mutiny was a related unrest. After the transfer of power from the Company to the Crown, some European forces employed under the Company resented the transfer of allegiance to the Queen. Their batta (extra allowance) stopped, and Canning’s legalistic interpretation of the law angered them. Finally the demand for release with free passage home was accepted, and men opted to return.

How Did Policy and Attitudes Change?

The earlier reformist zeal of a self-confident Victorian liberalism evaporated as many liberals in Britain began to believe that Indians were beyond reform. This new approach, called by Thomas Metcalf a conservative brand of liberalism, had the solid support of the conservative and aristocratic classes of England, who favoured complete non-interference in the traditional structure of Indian society. Thus the era of reforms ended.

The conservative reaction made the British Empire in India more autocratic, and it began to deny the aspirations of educated Indians for sharing power. In the long term this proved counter-productive, since it caused frustration among the educated Indian middle classes and soon gave rise to modern nationalism.

The policy of divide and rule started in earnest after the revolt. The British used one class or community against another unscrupulously, and socially there was irremediable deterioration. While British territorial conquest was at an end, a period of systematic economic loot began. In line with the Queen’s Proclamation, the Indian Civil Services Act of 1861 gave an impression that under the Queen all were equal, but the detailed rules for the civil service examination in practice kept the higher services a close preserve of the colonisers.

What Was the Worst Legacy?

Racial hatred and suspicion between Indians and the English were probably the worst legacy of the revolt. British newspapers and journals pictured Indians as subhuman creatures who could be kept in check only by superior force. Supporters of imperialism dubbed the entire Indian population unworthy of trust and subjected them to insults and contempt. The complete structure of government was remodelled on the notion of a master race, justifying the philosophy of the white man’s burden. This widened the gulf between rulers and ruled and caused political controversies, demonstrations and acts of violence in the coming period.

What Was the Significance of the Revolt?

For the British the revolt showed up the glaring shortcomings of the Company’s administration and army, which they promptly rectified. These defects would never have been revealed to the world had the revolt not happened.

For Indians, the revolt had a major influence on the course of the freedom struggle. It brought grievances of the people and the sepoys into the open, and they were seen to be genuine. It was also obvious that the primitive arms of the Indians were no match for British weapons. The senseless atrocities by both sides shocked Indian intellectuals, who became more convinced that violence should be avoided in any struggle for freedom. The growing educated middle class did not believe in violence and preferred an orderly approach. But the revolt did establish local traditions of resistance to British rule, which helped the later national struggle.

As an analytical point, the consequences point in two directions. The Proclamation promised equality, but the army, civil service and social attitudes after 1858 hardened the divide. That gap between promise and practice became a standing argument for the nationalists. The social and ideological ferment that followed is the subject of Factors Giving Rise to the Desire for Reform.

Why Is This Topic Important?

• Most-asked consequences The 1858 Act, the Proclamation and army changes appear in Prelims and Mains
• Turning point It marks the change from Company rule to Crown rule
• Link to later nationalism Frustration and the divide-and-rule policy shaped what followed

What Came Next?

The next category begins with social and religious reform in the nineteenth century. Next topic: Factors Giving Rise to the Desire for Reform.

Key People and Terms

• Queen’s Proclamation The 1 November 1858 announcement of Crown rule and its promises
• Secretary of State for India A British cabinet member responsible for India after 1858
• Viceroy The title of the Governor-General after the proclamation
• Divide and counterpoise A military policy of balancing units drawn from different groups
• Martial races Groups the British believed to be fit and loyal for the army
• White Mutiny Unrest among European troops over the transfer from the Company to the Crown

Exam Corner

Mains Angle

Questions ask for the effects of 1857 on policy and administration. These points add depth.

• Constitutional change Crown rule and the Secretary of State
• Policy of division Army units by caste and region
• Promise and practice Equality promised but denied in service and army