Victoria's Little Wars: Best/Favorite Commanders (4 Viewers)

[swalterh]

Shane,

You raise some very interesting points about the Sepoy Mutiny (I stress the Sepoy mutiny, as had the entire Indian People 200 million strong rose up against the Raj, the Raj would have been over). Here are a few more:

The majority of the "Princes" - the hereditary rulers of nominally independent states under British "protection" stayed loyal to the Empire, and helped put down the mutiny. I've always wondered why? Perhaps they feared that one of them would seize control, and they preferred British dominance to dominance by one of their piers?

The Gurkhas and the Sikhs remained loyal, and indeed, the King of the Gurkhas sent an army to assist the British in putting down the mutiny. Did religious and/or ethnic rivalries/prejudices play a role in helping to put down the mutiny, and keep British control of the sub continent (I of course absolutely believe they did)?

Why the unspeakable brutality against the British women and children? The image I get (from contemporary accounts and images [paintings/prints]) of the relationship between the British officers and the Sepoys throughout the early 19th Century is one of respect, perhaps even affection. How did the relationship sour to the point where, in rising up, the Sepoys on many occasions massacred the wives and children of these very officers? Did the conduct of the "memsahibs" (the wives of the British Officer/Politicians/wealthy merchants) play a role in this (i.e. did the women have a different, less cordial relationship with the Indian native troops)?

I would love for people with more knowledge (mine comes principally from reading history books written by British and American historians, as well as the fictional accounts of three of my favorite authors, Rudyard Kipling, George MacDonald Fraser and M.M. Kaye) of the relationships between the British ruling class and the native Indians to discuss, and possibly provide answers to, some of the above questions.

Louis

I agree with the majority of your thoughts and inquiries regarding the Sepoy Uprising. I, like yourself, am limited in my scope on this topic to the accounts I have read from similar sources. It is my view that this “Sepoy” mutiny constitutes a complete and utter breakdown of the East India Company system.

I find it interesting that no effort was made by the representatives of Sir John Company to introduce the new Enfield rifle in such a way so as not to raise alarm amongst the soldiers serving in the Presidency forces. It seems to me that the officers of these units should have been more aware of the cultural customs and limitation of their men and should have raised these issues to higher authority. If such actions were undertaken and the information ignored at higher levels, then the East India Trading Company fully deserved to experience the reduction of its formal authority over their armed forces when the final vestiges of the revolt were put down.

In any event, the result was that elements of the native contingents were obviously distraught enough to take up arms against their overseers. As you have mentioned there existed many religious, cultural, political and economic motivations behind many of the other elements of the native forces maintaining their loyalty to the British throughout this embarrassing debacle. From this episode of disobedience and malcontent amongst the revolting units of the armies of the Raj, the British Government was fully within its right and vested interests to requisition the responsibilities for the defense of its most prized possession.

As you have mentioned, I would be greatly appreciative if some of the other members who have more of a vested interest in the time period and topic would kindly offer some of their insightful commentary.

 

[Poppo]

And what about the 2 "opium wars" against the Chinese dying empire? This is a subject that interests me a lot.