Narendra Modi began his election rally in Meerut on Sunday by saying that successive Congress governments had done little to spread awareness about the First War of Independence of 1857, which began in that city in western Uttar Pradesh.
The Congress, which heads the ruling coalition and which was founded in 1885, has ignored the uprising because it played no role in it, claimed Gujarat's chief minister, who is the opposition Bharatiya Janata Party's prime ministerial candidate.
"If people of the country hear about the saga of 1857, they will not believe the saga of the Congress anymore," he said. "They do not want to accept the sacrifice of other people. Is this not an insult to the martyrs, an insult to the 1857 War of Independence?"
Modi added, "Some time back, 150 years of the 1857 War of Independence was celebrated. But the Indian government did not do enough to make the youth aware about the struggle...The UPA government missed the chance."
The 1857 war was, of course, a hugely complex event, about which there are two broad narratives. British historians have viewed it as the Sepoy Mutiny, a localised rebellion of the lowest-ranked soldiers. Indian historians have looked at it as a more broad-based uprising against foreign rule. Within the Indian perspective, too, there are many competing interpretations of the event.
Given this, Modi's allegation against the Congress may not be entirely fair. Besides, there's little information about how exactly the BJP understands the 1857 uprising. For example, would Modi and the BJP celebrate the fact that in 1857, Hindus and Muslims in north India joined hands to attempt to throw out a foreign ruler and reinstate the Mughal king, Bahadur Shah Zafar?
"Modi is not even right" about the Congress, said Rudrangshu Mukherjee, who edits The Telegraph's editorial page and has written five books on 1857. During the centenary of the 1857 revolt, in a speech at the Ramlila Maidan in Delhi, Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru hailed the uprising as India's First War of Independence and praised the unity displayed by those who fought it.
"Both Hindus and Muslims participated in the movement, and in victory as well as in defeat, they marched shoulder to shoulder," Nehru said. "This is something noteworthy...As far as the revolt of 1857 was concerned, though there were grave shortcomings, like the absence of one central leadership, the lack of proper arrangements or resources, there was no disunity. We as an independent nation are much more prone to give in to this weakness. Perhaps we have become complacent after getting freedom and feel that we can behave as we like."
It wasn't just rhetoric. Nehru's government funded the publication of a slew of works on the 1857 war, including one by SN Sen, a historian at Calcutta University, that has been the standard reference for historians, Mukherjee said.
During the 150th anniversary of the uprising, in 2007, the United Progressive Alliance government funded a year-long commemoration, which included seminars and a broader dissemination of knowledge about the war, said Mukherjee.
While this could certainly be deemed to be inadequate, the BJP's relationship with 1857 is also open to scrutiny. "It is not just the Congress but also Modi’s party that does not seem to be comfortable with the struggles of common people and their histories," said Biswamoy Pati, a historian at Delhi University who has edited two books on the 1857 war.
Pati said that we have only seen "the tip of what was undoubtedly the most powerful anti-imperialist struggle of the 19th century". He observed, "Even today, historians seriously debate the 1789 French Revolution and there cannot be any question of an end to debating any historical phenomenon. However, the task should be left to historians, not the Congress and the BJP."
The BJP and Modi might not be particularly inclined to highlight the religious amity that characterised 1857, as evident in the many statements from the time, including the Azamgarh proclamation. "A more important question to pose about 1857 was how Hindus and Muslims fought together," said Mukherjee. "The leaders constantly talked about the unity of the two communities. Will Modi accept this and uphold it in the same manner?"
Said Pati, "The uprising saw not just different communities being involved, but also the large-scale participation of the tribals, low castes and outcastes."
We welcome your comments at
letters@scroll.in.
The Congress, which heads the ruling coalition and which was founded in 1885, has ignored the uprising because it played no role in it, claimed Gujarat's chief minister, who is the opposition Bharatiya Janata Party's prime ministerial candidate.
"If people of the country hear about the saga of 1857, they will not believe the saga of the Congress anymore," he said. "They do not want to accept the sacrifice of other people. Is this not an insult to the martyrs, an insult to the 1857 War of Independence?"
Modi added, "Some time back, 150 years of the 1857 War of Independence was celebrated. But the Indian government did not do enough to make the youth aware about the struggle...The UPA government missed the chance."
The 1857 war was, of course, a hugely complex event, about which there are two broad narratives. British historians have viewed it as the Sepoy Mutiny, a localised rebellion of the lowest-ranked soldiers. Indian historians have looked at it as a more broad-based uprising against foreign rule. Within the Indian perspective, too, there are many competing interpretations of the event.
Given this, Modi's allegation against the Congress may not be entirely fair. Besides, there's little information about how exactly the BJP understands the 1857 uprising. For example, would Modi and the BJP celebrate the fact that in 1857, Hindus and Muslims in north India joined hands to attempt to throw out a foreign ruler and reinstate the Mughal king, Bahadur Shah Zafar?
"Modi is not even right" about the Congress, said Rudrangshu Mukherjee, who edits The Telegraph's editorial page and has written five books on 1857. During the centenary of the 1857 revolt, in a speech at the Ramlila Maidan in Delhi, Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru hailed the uprising as India's First War of Independence and praised the unity displayed by those who fought it.
"Both Hindus and Muslims participated in the movement, and in victory as well as in defeat, they marched shoulder to shoulder," Nehru said. "This is something noteworthy...As far as the revolt of 1857 was concerned, though there were grave shortcomings, like the absence of one central leadership, the lack of proper arrangements or resources, there was no disunity. We as an independent nation are much more prone to give in to this weakness. Perhaps we have become complacent after getting freedom and feel that we can behave as we like."
It wasn't just rhetoric. Nehru's government funded the publication of a slew of works on the 1857 war, including one by SN Sen, a historian at Calcutta University, that has been the standard reference for historians, Mukherjee said.
During the 150th anniversary of the uprising, in 2007, the United Progressive Alliance government funded a year-long commemoration, which included seminars and a broader dissemination of knowledge about the war, said Mukherjee.
While this could certainly be deemed to be inadequate, the BJP's relationship with 1857 is also open to scrutiny. "It is not just the Congress but also Modi’s party that does not seem to be comfortable with the struggles of common people and their histories," said Biswamoy Pati, a historian at Delhi University who has edited two books on the 1857 war.
Pati said that we have only seen "the tip of what was undoubtedly the most powerful anti-imperialist struggle of the 19th century". He observed, "Even today, historians seriously debate the 1789 French Revolution and there cannot be any question of an end to debating any historical phenomenon. However, the task should be left to historians, not the Congress and the BJP."
The BJP and Modi might not be particularly inclined to highlight the religious amity that characterised 1857, as evident in the many statements from the time, including the Azamgarh proclamation. "A more important question to pose about 1857 was how Hindus and Muslims fought together," said Mukherjee. "The leaders constantly talked about the unity of the two communities. Will Modi accept this and uphold it in the same manner?"
Said Pati, "The uprising saw not just different communities being involved, but also the large-scale participation of the tribals, low castes and outcastes."
