| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| SgtMunro |
Posted - November 28 2003 : 11:06:57 AM
Any thoughts on the Sepoy Rebellion or 'Indian mutiny' of 1857? Particularly the cause(s) of the revolt? Was it just the lubricant on the issued .577 cartridges for the P-1853 Enfield Rifle, or was that just the final igniting 'spark'?
Your Most Humble Servant,
|
| 12 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| SgtMunro |
Posted - February 17 2004 : 10:51:15 PM
quote:
I believe the Campbell/Lucknow book arose from research he was doing for another book (Sieges), that was published a couple of years later.
Well, I figured that it was a research document of some type, it fits the format.
quote:
Sarge, I'm a little surprised you'd recommend Watson's book to someone who wants to take a first bite out of the Mutiny.
Actually I found it to be a light read, but it did cover some of the important aspects of the forces present, as well as the political climate. The second part of the book, which is the siege narrative, I found to be very well written.
quote:
In any event, his focus is fairly narrow in that the seige of the residency at Lucknow and its eventual relief by forces under Campbell gets most of his attention.
The title actually alludes to that...
quote:
It's not worth it unless you're a pretty serious student of British colonial history...
Which is why some of us hang out in this forum.
quote:
This one seemed like you were more into dropping names than anything else.
What? Huh?
Your Most Humble Servant,
|
| Bo Jest |
Posted - February 17 2004 : 11:33:11 AM
Sarge, I'm a little surprised you'd recommend Watson's book to someone who wants to take a first bite out of the Mutiny. For one thing, I'm pretty positive this book didn't spin off from his doctoral thesis. Watson's a retired professor of art history, who's turned to writing military history in more recent years. I believe the Campbell/Lucknow book arose from research he was doing for another book (Sieges), that was published a couple of years later. In any event, his focus is fairly narrow in that the seige of the residency at Lucknow and its eventual relief by forces under Campbell gets most of his attention. Also, he largely rejects a more readable narrative style for a comparative analysis that better serves his purpose. And the book is not very hard at all to find, but its cost makes it even less worthy of a recommendation. You can buy it through numerous internet sources for somewhere in the neighborhood of $60.00 (for 166 pages!), unless you can find a cheap used copy. It's not worth it unless you're a pretty serious student of British colonial history, and even then, Watson has little new to add to the subject. You can find Kinsley's They Fight Like Devils for anywhere from $5.00 to $20.00 and get a much more readable treatment of the seige at Lucknow.
Your first recommendation was a good one. This one seemed like you were more into dropping names than anything else. You want to drop names? Christopher Hibbert. His (The Great Mutiny) was the first book I read on the subject, and it provided me a solid base from which to delve further. He's taken his licks for that book, but I think, overall, it's nevertheless among the best on the subject. That's it. Stick a fork in me. I'm done. |
| SgtMunro |
Posted - February 09 2004 : 10:30:26 AM
Welcome aboard Bo Jest, another good work to look at is the following:
WATSON, Bruce; The Great Indian Mutiny, Colin Campbell and the Campaign at Lucknow Praeger 1991.
A relatively compact work, methinks it is an expanded version of his doctoral thesis, it is a very pleasant read. Mr. Watson certainly has done his homework, a quick look at the bibliography will tell anyone that. This book is a wee bit difficult to locate, but it is worth the effort.
Your Most Humble Servant,
|
| Bo Jest |
Posted - February 08 2004 : 11:57:01 PM
Thanks for the clarification, susquesus. I can endure that newbie tag for awhile. |
| susquesus |
Posted - February 08 2004 : 8:42:46 PM
"...and what's with this "Lost in the Wilderness" label? I'll put my land navigation skills up against those of anyone here. Is this just some automatic label assigned new posters? If so, it's not a very good way to welcome newcomers."- Bo Jest
No slight of your orienteering abilities, until you post 10 times you will bear the title "Lost in the Wilderness". Before long you move along to pathfinder, colonial settler, etc... Thanks for the book tips. |
| Bo Jest |
Posted - February 08 2004 : 12:12:49 PM
...and what's with this "Lost in the Wilderness" label? I'll put my land navigation skills up against those of anyone here. Is this just some automatic label assigned new posters? If so, it's not a very good way to welcome newcomers. |
| Bo Jest |
Posted - February 08 2004 : 04:33:00 AM
Another fine book on the subject is Crisis of the Raj: The Revolt of 1857 Through British Lieutenants' Eyes by Wayne G. Broehl, Jr.
One of the lieutenants he uses as a primary reference was Bengal Horse Artillery Lieutenant Frederick ("Bobs") Roberts (later, Field-Marshal Earl Roberts of 2nd Afghan War and Boer War fame, as well), the unwitting author of Letters Written During The Indian Mutiny. He was there throughout the Mutiny, serving at one point as Deputy Assistant Quartermaster-General of the Delhi Field Force, and the latter work is a compilation of his letters home to England during and after that bloody, but fascinating chapter in British colonial history. That book, copyrighted in 1924, would be hard to find (I happened across it in a library in Rajasthan!), but, again, Broehl's book draws heavily from it.
Better yet, a fun little primer on British colonial military exploits throughout the reign of Queen Victoria is Queen Victoria's Little Wars by Byron Farwell. For the price of one, you get a compilation of highly entertaining summaries of just about every shot fired in anger by the British from 1837 through the end of the Second Boer War. In addition to a concise, but thorough (Is that possible?) telling of the Sepoy Rebellion and the Boer Wars, you'll get the stories of the Zulu uprising, the Sikh wars, the Afghan wars, the campaigns in the Sudan, and a bunch of other little wars you've never heard of. Farwell's written some gems on the Gurkhas (The Gurkhas) and prominent British generals (Eminent Victorian Soldiers), too.
|
| SgtMunro |
Posted - December 19 2003 : 10:33:24 AM
quote:
If it is accurate the Brits seemed to be pretty pushy about their land grab.
A fairly accurate assesment, if you ask me. Economic, trade and naval supremacy governed as to where the British Empire coveted land. Not exactly the most noble of reasons, but it does make for fascinating study.
quote:
I'm rootin' for the Indians on this one.
It would've been easier to support their struggle, if the Indian Mutineers would have treated their civilian detainees in a more civilized fashion (Oh no! The Sarge is trying to put western Judeo-Christian values into the head of an eastern enemy. Quick, activate the "Insensitivty Alarm"!) Even though I would find the excecution of lawfully surendered combatants as distasteful, it pales in comparison to murdering innocent women and children (particularly chopping them up and throwing the pieces down a well, as in Cawnpore). Soldiers know the risk, especially when fighting a non-western opponent (Look at what the Japanese did to our guys from Corrigador? Remember the 'Bataan Death March', that was "normal" treatment of POW's, courtesy of the "honorable" soliders of Japan. Compare that to the "inhumane" conditions at Git-Mo. Oh yeah, we're really puttin' the screws to them; clothes, bedding, hygiene/medical/dental services, prayer mats, three ethinicly correct meals a day, time for prayer, suppling Iman's to perform religous service and counseling.) But this is the subject for another thread...back to the Indian Mutiny of 1857.
As evil and barbaric the treatment of European/Christian Indian women and children were, it did not give license to the wholesale ransacking of Northern India at the end of the uprising. That was wrong, taking vengence on the civilian population caused a 'black-eye' for the otherwise righteous Soldiers of the Queen.
Now, I do believe that giving no quarter to combatants was most certainly called for (If you want to act like an animal, you should be treated as one), and the order "At them with the bayonet" must as made many a vengeful British Soldier rightfully pleased, after seeing or hearing of the poor victims at Cawnpore. I even agree with the trials and sentences handed out to the mutiny ringleaders and most viscious war criminals (amazing how witinessing mutineers being blown to bits at the muzzle of a cannon helped keep the peace in that region).
All of the bloodshed in that war could be laid at the feet of Nana Sahib. It was his operatives that spead the rumor about the pig/cow (depending on their audience) fat that lubricated the .577 cartridges for the P-1853 Enfield Rifle. The cartridge supply sent to India was lubricated with fish oil and beeswax, and contrary to some contemporary accounts this was done from the outset because of the religous beliefs of both the Hindus and the Musslims. The mutineers themselves, at least the ones who were sworn and paid soldiers of the East India Company, also should shoulder some of the blame for violating the trust vested in the profession of being a soldier.
One cannot simply say that is was the fault of white europeans oppessing a native people, a good portion of the Indian population at that time liked having the Brits there. This was primarily for the economic boom that came with being a part of the Victorian Era British Empire. A large portion of the Sikh population hated Nana Sahib more than they ever hated the British, and they had fought two wars against the Brits less than ten years earlier (an intersting sidenote, next to the Gurkhas of Nepal, the Sikh Soldiers had the reputation of being s |
| susquesus |
Posted - December 17 2003 : 8:00:01 PM
I just read a summary at:
www.emory.edu/ENGLISH/Bahri/Mutiny.html
If it is accurate the Brits seemed to be pretty pushy about their land grab. I'm rootin' for the Indians on this one. I have an underdog complex, been watching the Minnesota Twins for too long. |
| Fitz Williams |
Posted - December 17 2003 : 02:36:30 AM
quote:
How long were the Brits there?
Robert Clive founded the British presence in India during the F&I War, and it continued until shortly after WWII (1947). The last Viceroy of India was Lord Louis Mountbatten, who was killed by the IRA in 1979. Beginning with Victoria, the British regent was known as the Emperor, or Empress, of India. Benjamin Disraeli was responsible for that. |
| SgtMunro |
Posted - December 16 2003 : 7:03:10 PM
The best work I can think of, which is a good overview of the Sepoy Rebellion of 1857, is the following:
WARD, Andrew: 'Our Bones are Scattered; The Cawnpore Massacares and the Great Indian Mutiny of 1857'
I do believe it is still available through Amazon or Barnes and Noble.
Your Most Humble Servant,
|
| susquesus |
Posted - December 16 2003 : 5:14:11 PM
Can you recommend anyplace to get an overview of "The Great Indian Mutiny of 1857"? Sounds interesting, never heard about it. How long were the Brits there? How many uprisings were there before the Brits hoofed it out completely? |
|
![The Mohican Board! [Bumppo's Redux!]](images/wwwboard.gif "The Mohican Board! [Bumppo's Redux!]")
