Reasons why Britain retained control Flashcards
How did the different grievances of the rebels affect their effectiveness? (Talukdars/Peasants?)
What problem regarding leadership affected the centres of conflict; Delhi, Lucknow and Cawnpore?
Which province came closest to a coherent challenge on all social levels?
Which presidential armies remained loyal to Britain?
Which province of Sepoys had a grudge against the Bengali?
What were the competing rebel blocks unable to do?
What did many Indians accept British rule out of?
-The rebels were not a cohesive force, each with different grievances (e.g. talukdars revolted for different reasons to peasants).
-The centres of the revolt in Delhi, Lucknow and Cawnpore each had their own leaders and there was no central organisation.
-Awadh came closest to a coherent challenge from all social levels.
-The other presidential armies (Madras and Bombay) remained loyal to Britain.
-The Punjabi sepoys had a grudge against the Bengalis.
-The competing rebel power blocs were unable to come together to drive Britain out.
-many Indians accepted British rule out of indifference or preference to the alternative.
What happened to entire villages in Meerut?
What is this form of justice by the British also known as?
What were Mutineers in Cawnporre forced to do before being hanged?
How many rebels were executed in Cawnpore?
Who did the British gov’t blame for the rebellion?
-Entire villages were massacred.
-This is known as retribution.
-Mutineers in Cawnpore were forced to lick the blood from buildings before eating pork and being hanged.
-484 Rebels in Cawnpore were hunted and executed.
-Britain drew the lesson that the Company was to blame and reorganised its rule in the country.
What was the ratio of British troops to Sepoys reduced from?
What faction of Indians did the British recruit from instead?
What did army planning of regiments aim to keep apart?
What were troops allowed to do regarding arsenal type which previously conflicted with religious beliefs?
What was introduced that also ended previous contentious regarding this?
-The ratio of sepoys to British troops was reduced from 9:1 to 3:1
-Recruitment was switched from high Hindu castes to the Sikhs and Muslims from the north west who had remained loyal.
-Army planning aimed to keep regiments of the same ethnic background apart to prevent the spread of rebellion.
-Troops were allowed to use whatever grease they preferred for their rifles.
-the introduction of the breech- loading rifle in 1867 made this type of cartridge obsolete anyway.
When did Britain place India under direct control of government through a viceroy?
Who was the viceroy accountable to?
What else was created (Council?)(Secretary of ?)
What proclamation was issued? (What did it promise?)
-The government of India Act 1858 placed British India under the direct control of Britain through a viceroy.
-The viceroy was accountable to parliament and there was a
-Secretary of State for India and an Indian Council.
-A proclamation was issued in India promising rights for Indians like religious tolerations and the rights of native rulers.
-
What happened to the annexation of princley states following the rebellion? What did Britain do instead?
Did Britain continue with land reform? Tackling feudalism?
What was done to recompensate for the costs of suppressing the rebellion?
How did the rebellion affect engagement of whites in Indian society? What opinions were they resistant to?
-Annexation of the princely states ended.
-Instead of seeking to take control of the princely states, the British now assiduously cultivated the princes as bastions of conservatism and collaborators.
-NO. Serious land reform was ended and feudal structures left alone.
-Taxes were put up as suppressing the rebellion was expensive.
-White British people withdrew even more into a tight clique, resistant to Indian opinion and more liberal British policies.
What year was the age for marriage moved from 10-12?
How many more missionaries were sent to India within the next two years? What is this evident of?
What did imperialists believe would happen if British rule had been removed from India?
-It was only in 1891 that the age of consent for girls for marriage was raised from 10-12.
-The London Missionary society resolved to send an additional 20 missionaries to India within the next two years.
-This shows that the missionaries were unrepentant of their role in the rebellion.
-Imperialists believed that the removal of British rule would result in famine and chaos in the subcontinent and applied themselves to the task of rule for the benefit of Indians by improving their material state.
What did Britain accept about the modernising agendas of those such as Bentinck?
What did Britain want India for? What was there far less desire to do?
What was British interests turned to in India?
Why were expressions of nationalism from educated Indians ignored by the British?
-Britain accepted that modernising agendas like those of Bentinck had been misjudged.
-Britain wanted India for its wealth and strategic value but there was far less desire to ‘develop’ Indian society.
-Britain turned to telegraphs and railways which were far less controversial.
-Expressions of nationalism from educated Indians were ignored as they were not in tune with the rural poor.
