1857 Indian Rebellion Been Elusive to Characterize

¶ … 1857 Indian Rebellion been elusive to characterize as "The first war of Indian independence?"

Lack of Strategy

Bad Generalship

Shortage of Military Skills

Unity in Communities

The first war of Indian independence in 1857 is also characterized in terms of mutiny and the movement of civil disobedience. A brief about the historic events taking place during 1957 revile that the movement started with a notion to refuse using the cartridges used by the British Military. The greased cartridges were provided to the native soldiers of the military. The solider MangalPanday of Barrackpur in Bengal refused to use these cartridges on 28th April 1957 and he also shot two of his superior officers of British military. He was caught and hanged for instigating a single-handed revolt on 8th April, 1957. He is also named as the first martyr of freedom movement. [2: .RaghunathRai. Themes in Indian History (New Delhi: VK Publications, 2011), 225.]

The struggle started and the whole regiment was disbanded and disarmed by their superiors in order to curtail the situation. The march of the soldiers towards Meerut lead to movement of initiating the refusal of using greased cartridges and as a result 85 soldiers in Meerut rejected to use the cartridges. They were captured and court marshaled. Next day the release of these soldiers and revolt was in full swing when the soldiers started their journey towards Delhi after killing their officers. The soldiers arrived in under the red fort of Delhi and chanted slogans in favor of the Bahadur Shah and told him that they have killed English army officers. The local soldiers also joined the group.

The locals, local soldiers, and infantry joined together to form a group and concurred the city of Delhi. Consequently they named Bahadur Shah as the emperor of India. The group ruthlessly killed English soldiers and as a result minimal resistance was posed by the English army. The local cultivators supplied required food and commodities to the rebel soldiers and locally they also captured the communication and supplies route of English army. They captured the headquarters of British army and turned it into the judgment hall. They thought that the British occupation is over and the locals have taken over the control of their state. However it was not the case at the moment.

In short numerous cities of India were under attack of the rebels and English forces continued the struggle to fight back. The cities of Kanpur and Lucknow were also under severe attack and the British army remained besieged for several days from July 1957 until February 1958. The outbreak of movement also spread in Banaras and Ahmadabad however British forces were more successful in capturing the city and massacred thousands of women and children. Jhansi and Gwalior became the epicenter of revolt in central India. The rebels fought with courage and defeated the foreign forces. The local rebels joined with the soldiers of army and community joined their hands against the British occupational forces and continued the struggle of freedom until 1958. [3: Rudrangshu Mukherjee. Awadh in revolt, 1857-1858: a study of popular resistance (New Delhi: Permanent Black, 2002), 65.]

Various cities and parts of India were under fierce attack by the rebels and revolts. The soldiers were killed on streets and battle fields. Punjab was also under attack yet faced a serious use of force by the British army and revolts were crushed with force. The south eastern Punjab was also folded in the revolts and the rebels with the help of local leaders attacked the forces. Some of these leaders were captured and hanged and some flee to Kabul and other safe places after seeing a forceful action of the British forces. The loss of lives was increasing and as a result the battle became directionless as it is observed in the work of various modern scholars.

There were a number of reasons for the events of the 1857 Indian rebellion been elusive to characterize as the first war of Indian independence. The issues of bad generalship, lack of strategy, shortage of military skills, and lack of national cause and interest. The lack of national leadership and national cause was also among the notable issues that lead to the underplaying of the 1957 events instead of a regard as national movement for first independence war. The account of history also reveals that revolt was started based on roamers and repulsion of the soldiers not to use the greased cartridges. The groups of soldiers were also joined by the disgruntled ordinary citizen.

Hence they were not trained to fight an organized war of independence. The localized motives and area based interests of local leadership also resulted into posing the first war for independence as a localized interest-based fight. The lack of education and awareness of the modern educational and historian background of the local scholars is also among the reasons for undermining the correct account of causes and effects of the 1957 events. The below review of secondary literature is focused to assess the issues of events in 1957 for lacking short of named as the first war of Indian Independence. [4: SailendraNathSen. History of Freedom Movement in India (1857-1947) (New Delhi: New Age, 2009), 12.]

Lack of Strategy:

The outbreak of the events was instantaneous and it was not a planned act of disobedience. The rumors of using pig and cow fat as grease covering the cartridges used by army were spread long before the act. According to historic accounts the spread of the news that pig and cow fat is used to grease the cartridges was spread by the Muslim and Hindu communities in order to incite violence and create repulsion among soldiers. However it is not backed by the empirical evidence or concrete basis to claim, therefore the argument cannot be furthered to support the claims. [5: BiswammyPati, eds. The Great Rebellion of 1857 in India: Exploring Transgressions, Content, and Direction, (New York: Rutledge, 2010).]

The usage of these cartridges also required touching from the mouth and as a result the roomer was supported. There was a role of rumors in instigating hearted and suppression in common public. The rumor that the British Army in involved in converting Muslim and Hindu soldiers to Christianity was also spread through the uneducated communities of India. The residents of villages and cities of India were mostly unaware of the western educational system. It resulted into a barrier for the British initiative to educate public. The residents and students of India perceived it to be an act of conversion and intentions of the occupation were questioned. The local scholars also played a significant role in claims that the British forces are designed a task of converting Indian people to Christianity. The result of the rumor can be observed in terms of a coherent effort of the communities to fight against the occupational forces. The soldiers and communities in the cities of India were not on aligned to formulate a strategy for fighting the freedom war. [6: Simon PaulMackenzie. Revolutionary armies in the modern era: a revisionist approach (New York: Rutledge, 1997).77]

The instantaneous response of the solider MangalPanday provided required inspiration to the comrades within the British army. The basis was provided through the rumors of using pig and cow fats as grease in cartridges required a first step towards not obeying orders that are contrary to the religious beliefs of local soldiers. The resultant act of killing his officers instigated the British officers to kill the rebel and as a result the long standing issue of religious belief turned into a movement of disobedience. The soldiers were disarmed and moved to other city which provided the route for required sharing of the tragedy. The outbreak of the instantaneous response of solders also gathered the sympathy of local communities. The repulsion of the locals was due to various reasons including the dissatisfactory living conditions and low average income was also among the reasons.

The lack of national elements was also one of the factors that the residents of the various areas initiated the revolt and failed to from a national momentum. There was a lack of national leadership and the people involved in the revolt were not organized. The local communities joined the rebel soldiers without having a clear aim and objective. Moreover the strategy to fight it as a war for independence was also not present to support the cause. The locals were sympathetic to the cause of freedom yet lacked the understanding of their objectives. It required a national response and strategy to fight war against the organized British force. In order to comply with the standards of a national fight there had to be a presence of national leadership and strategy to fight for the cause. Yet it is observed that the movement was merely a response to certain hatred-based elements including the social, moral, and religious reasons. [7: Samuel Matrin Burke and Salin al-din Quraishi.The British raj in India: A Historical Review (London: Oxford University Press, 1997). 63]

The strategy to fight the war of freedom in 1957 was not only missing but later it is also recorded that the local leadership including the landlords and holders of large land states were also among the rebels. They organized the rebels and supported their fight against the British forces for own reasons. The interests of the local communities to fight against the forces were diversified and so was the strategy to fight. The lack of formulating a strategy for fighting the war not only impacted the outcome but the effects of rebel wars were also diminished. The local forces and rebels remained localized and only small number of country cities was under the rebel fight and disobedience movement.

The shortcoming of national strategy to fight freedom war also played a significant role in determining the war efforts as not impacting the whole country. The strategy was formed in line with the local desires and capabilities of the local rebels. The attacks were also planned according to the perception of local power and symbol of the occupation. The targets were not set in accordance with the requirement to achieve a strategic objective. The least common objectives were mob driven and to repel the state rights, laws, and justice mechanism.

The soldiers and local rebels combined their efforts and gained the local support to fight for the cause as it deemed fit in the current circumstances. The national leadership could not develop an organized schema for the freedom fight. The national leadership was also reluctant to own the efforts of local rebels. It also resulted into lack of coordination and failed to derive a unified approach. The local communities, soldiers, and leadership including the landlords were also divided among themselves. [8: BipanChandra, eds. India's Struggle for Independence: 1857-1947. (New Delhi: Penguin Books India, 1989).]

The interest of the war leadership was main focus of attention and as a result it was easier for the organized British army to fight back. They could easily gather and acquire support of the opponent groups to gain their power back. However the instigation of the revolt movement provided enough evidence of the fact that the local community in India does not acknowledge the foreign occupation and there is room for developing the nationalized approach. The division of the communities and local leadership within their ranks provided a ground for weakening of the efforts.

The review of literature and analysis of historic accounts concludes that the spontaneous outbreak of turmoil in 1957 was not a planned act of strategy for instigating freedom war. However the later unfolding of events was marked by the sympathies of the local public. As a result the war out broke into a national spared however the lack of political and war strategy it could not create a remarkable impact on the national security and freedom from the occupation forces. The resentment in the local community against the British occupation through force came in the lime light and it was also understood that the Indian nation had the potential to pose problems for foreign occupational forces.

The national movement for liberation from British occupation missed out the necessary elements required to focus on a unified objective. The lack of strategy and underlying localized objectives of the landlords and rebel leaders also lead to a minimal affect in terms of the movement achievements. The munity was also several coordinated skills that provide basis for an objective achievement. The unified objective and coordination is necessary to formulate a strategy for the freedom war. The British forces were organized and had the support of a common agenda to fight against the rebels.

Bad Generalship:

The second most important issue is that the groups of rebels and community were divided into small numbers and a central leadership for war activities was also missing. The leadership emerging during the war times was also self-centered and focused on their goals. The British forces understood and reviewed the strength and weaknesses of the rabbles. They could easily identify that the usage mutiny movement is led by small groups and a national coordination and ability to fight a prolonged war is not present in the leadership of the local community. The lack of leadership and training to fight an organized war was not present among the groups of local community lead by local leaders. The ability to organize a national momentum of the war was required to fight against the leadership of an organized occupation and professional army. [9: Clare Anderson. The Indian Uprising of 1857-8: Prisons, Prisoners and Rebellion (New York: Anthem Press, 2007), 11.]

The account of history reveals that the Nana Sahib, Tantya Tope, KakshmiBai, and Kunwar Singh were among the local leaders of the rebels. However none of them could be of the caliber of their opponent army. The military leaders of British army were trained for the war and political scenarios. The English General Sir Henry Lawrence's statements are evident that the lack of generalship in the local rebel leaders was a major cause of their defeat. The ability of fighting a war and political foresight is also required to organize the rebel force to lead towards a sustainable fight for freedom. The British forces were not only trained and organized but they were also in possession of sophisticated arms and ammunition. The war materials and weapons were also in large numbers with the British forces. [10: Andrew Ward. Our Bones Are Scattered: The Cawnpore Massacres and Indian Mutiny of 1857 (London: John Murray Publishers, 1996), 53.]

The superiority of British forces supported them even after losing at the places of mutiny. The reinforcement of British forces allowed them to regain the occupation. The popular support for mutiny was also lacking along with the apathy of Indian rulers. The most of the Indian rulers sided along with British forces to regain the occupation and receive reinforcement. The notable among them were Nizan of Hyderabad and Sidha of Maratha to provide an active support for the British forces. Therefore the lack of notable leaders and required militancy generalship could not support the rebels. The loyalty of the notable landlords of various Indian states remained with the British providing them the comfortable grounds to fight back rebels. The British generals also accepted it later that the lords of the states and rulers of various areas providing them the required support otherwise the revolt could not have been suppressed. [11: Alison Blunt. "Embodying war: British women and domestic defilement in the Indian -- Mutiny --, 1857 -- 8." Journal of Historical Geography 26, no. 3 (2000): 403-428.]

The taluqdars of Avadh were also among the initial rebels however they were given assurance by the British Government that their occupied areas will be returned. It leads to the notion that they also backed out from the popular support of the rebels. The lack of high ideals and objectives lead to a low morale of the fighters and as a result the war of freedom 1957 could not gain the recognition that was required to be attained in order to achieve the named goals. The lack of patriotism was also one of the factors that lead to non-development of a single motive for war of freedom.

There are various views of historians about the war. Some of them categorize it as a war for the personal and regions reasons where as some present it as an anti-state revolt that was to reinstate the emperor of India and return of the ruling power to the emperor. However a balanced view of the history reveals that the localized and suppressed groups of soldiers expressed their anger and attacked the occupational forces. They were aware of the fact that their country was illegally and illegitimately run by the foreign forces. However a true sense of nationalism was not present in the rebels. The events of revolt unfolded with the spread of violence and information through communities. The lack of coordinated effort and the reaction in the whole state was missing. It is one of the major reason an active generalship was not present to lead the rebels into a unified objective. [12: George Bruce Mallesonand Colonel Malleson. Kay's and Malleson's History of the Indian Mutiny of 1857-8. Vol. 1 (London: Hesperides Press, 2006), 41.]

The wide spread of the mutiny and combination of Hindus and Muslims in the rebellious events forwarded the message that the nation is becoming united and the divide and rule principles are also diminishing. The nature of the acts was severe and the violence created through the rebel's activities created a concern for the British forces. The occupation was serious and organized as compared to the rebels and as a result they tried various methods to pacify public revolt. The single masters of India were under attack from various groups regardless of their religious beliefs.

The usage of divide and rule technique was over and the British forces also noticed that the unity in ordinary public only needs a national leadership in order to transform the rebel activities into fierce wars. This has not only instigated their efforts to keep national leadership at ease but at the same time they also tried to negotiate with the local leadership of rebel groups. Moreover the local war lords were also motived by their own interests. As a result the coordinated efforts, lack of war leadership, and single national freedom motivation was also lacking in the first war of freedom for India.

The soldiers required a leadership and a national response with a true motivation for far. The nationalism was at its least. The events provided enough room for the national leadership to assess the amount of anger and dissatisfaction present in the general public of India. It also created a harmony among Muslims and Hindus to stand united for a cause and develop a focused approach to fight against the occupation forces. The requirements of the national leadership and common cause were major issues faced by the nation instead of the unity in common public. The English forces would have been unable to retreat back in case they would not have the support from local rulers of states and notable people of India.

According to Mukherjee, Rudrangshu. Awadhthe leadership and warlords of those times were among the notable personalities. However they were focused to achieve their personal desires instead of the national causes. It has also lead to the bad generalship as the motives of all the solders and fighters were not synchronized with the national cause. The self-motivated fighters and rebels were also among the looters and destroyed the public property. The lack of generalship also laid a foundation stone for the British army to retaliate with the reinforcement and capture most of the acquired parts of states. The state rulers were also among the loyalists of British Empire and received heavy benefits in order to facilitate their holdings and further their interests. The interests of the local rulers were also a hurdle for them to take up to the rebellion efforts and try to pose a hindrance in British rule.

The hyped up emotions of the local community and soldiers were aroused due to certain dissatisfactory issues. The rouse in emotions of the local community stayed intact for a certain period of time and after there was no effort from the central leadership to own the war and coordinate its strategy the interest of locals also decreased. The middle to low level soldiers was unable to strategize for the long war and sustain their captured strategic assets. It also lacked a power to negotiate with the British forces to undo the rules for touching the greased cartridges with mouth. The local lords that lead the rebels and captured various parts of the states were also negligent of the fact that the war could take a longer turn and reinforcement of the British army could cause damage.

The British forces and their local aides had also created informers within the rebels to spy on their moves and strategy. It provided them the key information as revealed in the work of Mackenzie, Simon Paul. The local and self-imposed rulers after the rebellion acts tried to rule the states and created self-sustaining claims that the British Raj is over and they actually have gained independence. These claims were overruled when the forces attacked them with force and strategy along with the local support. The naive and suspicious claimers had either to flee from the area or they were captured and capitated by the forces.

The research Mackenzie, Simon Paul that it was commonly perceived that the captured lands could be sustained. However in actual there was a lack of coordination and compulsion to national duty. The war figures that became notable after the rebel achievement were also politically naive and failed miserably to go beyond mere rhetoric statements. The coordination and major plan of action was severely missing and it resulted into dire consequences. The claims to the loyalty of Mughal Emperor remained merely the statements without a substance. For instance, one of the prominent figures Nana Sahib was also making such claims however practically he also could not move his forces towards siege of Delhi for the emperor Bahadur Shah. It is observed that he had been in control of at-least four regiments of soldiers. The pessimistic stance of the war lords was evident that the claims they are making are just to gain support from locals and the serving their own interests of power and substance.

The strategic thinking and approach even at the difficult times after facing a forceful action of British forces also could not develop a coordinated effort. The war lords had to flee from the area and they were even defeated by the fractional force. The example of such defeat is elaborated as the Jhansi war where the British general deployed a war strategy to divide his 2000 men's army to siege and attack the Tatya Tope. The rebels were ten times more in numbers and could have easily defeated the British.

However the lack of generalship and war strategy they lost to the force that was one tenth of their size. The notable victory in Gwalior was also lost due to undue dedication of time and efforts to celebrate while paying minimal attention to the possible reinforced attack of British. The coordinated effort of forces lead by Rao Sahib and Rani of Jhansi went all discounted within two weeks' time. The forces could only put a half cooked effort while the British forces attacked the city also lead to flee of the leaders and most of their forces were killed and captured. [13: Simon Paul Mackenzie. Revolutionary armies in the modern era: a revisionist approach (New York: Routledge, 1997), 120.]

Along with all the failures of leadership and generalship there were a number of issues that arose in the ordinary soldiers. The soldiers were fighting and quarreling within and could hardly keep their focus on hierarchy and justice. The movement was more like anarchy than a freedom movement with the mishandling of situation at various points. The looting, extortion, and plundering with the property were a major focus of the soldiers and the ordinary people. The directionless soldiers were fighting among each other rather to seek command from the leadership and develop a chain of command for coordination. The issue that internally no warlord wanted to reinstate the emperor and desired to claim their leadership led to a conceivable disaster.

The fighters and villagers were seeking their ease and they entranced in the markets and rested alongside the river and canal banks. The scenes of direction and national cause were far from conception. The soldiers and fighters also made speeches against their leaders as they thought of a tangible reward and payment for their sacrifices. The situation was well observed and understood by the British informers which helped the forces organize and act according to their strategy. The resultant defeats lead to a disastrous situation both for the war leaders and soldiers. The killing and capturing and later execution of the rabbles created a worst scenario. The national leadership and notable people were also among the facilitators of British forces.

The issues rising at Chinhat lead to a bizarre conclusion as after the winning fight the soldiers and locals went wild on the streets looting the property, burning, and killing almost every random person. The difference between rebels and ordinary men was almost impossible. The spoiling of the local buildings and public owned property went on for a week followed by the most lethal instigation of the issue about the command of soldiers. The situation even after the naming of BegamHazratMahal could not be corrected and the soldiers were running the army administration.

The soldiers and the elected command of military leadership did not recognize the orders of BegamHazratMahal and as a result refused to attack British forces that were gathering outside the city. The looting and plundering along with denial of orders lead to a disaster for the rebels. The British forces faced individual action from rebel groups and even the ordinary citizen fought with courage and dignity instead of soldiers leading the way. The resistance faced by the British forces was also coming from the residents and commoners instead of a coordinated action form the military. The large number of rebels and military soldiers were fighting among each other for the pay and reward as well as to become the commanders of the force, instead of planning and strategizing for the military attack. The BegamHazarMahal was upset with the attitude of soldiers and reflected on the situation that the army is creating issues for the survival along with the British forces. The issue of not conformance with the orders also resulted into the impression that the soldiers are not under the command of their officials.

Shortage of Military Skills:

The shortage of military skills observed in the rebellion events of the first war of independence in 1857 comprised of various elements. These issues included the coordination of soldiers, following a proper chain of command in military operations, and strategic training for fighting a long war. The issues of non-coordination were due to the fact that interests of their commanders and leaders were different. The leaders and commanders of rebel army were focused to obtain personal gains through occupying the cities. The notable leaders also lacked the basic rules for fighting a national war to coordinate with the regional leaders and insisted on personal objectives.

The result of the non-coordinated war strategy also affected the skills for fighting against the forces. The soldiers and fighting skills of the forces were incomparable with the rebels. The technical and strategic level of skills was defining the successful retreat of the British forces. The generals of the British forces were planning and preparing along with the reinforcement and help of the local rulers enabled them to try and fight back.The rebels were also coupled with the local and untrained civilians and therefore the lack of military skills were evident. It could have overcome smoothly through a consistent policy and dedication of duties after first gaining success.

However the focus of the forces was to celebrate their victory rather consolidating on the achievement. The regular chain of command could not be established even after gaining the initial success and the duties were not designated. It was required that a comprehensive chain of command along with the dedication of tasks should be established and communicated to the army of rebels. The rebels were politically short sighted and also could not conceive the implications of the loosing after gaining the initial strength. They also could not maintain an effective lesion with the local rulers while an effective strategy should have been to align with the local rulers and seek their support against the British forces. Even after the news of retaliation the local rulers could have played a significant role in seeking a solution for the rebels. They had to flee the area or most of them were killed and captured leaving behind traces of ineffective coordination.

The motivation for rebels to fight the war was based on the dissatisfaction of the rebels, the leadership also failed to materialize and channelize their support through providing them a considerable reward. The selfless motivation for war was required to gain momentum. It also required the soldiers to conceive the drawbacks of their defeat and benefits of the coordination. The British forces after creating a lesion with the local rulers and notable landlords created informers in the rebels providing them the considerable information for develop an effective strategy to win back. The rebels possessed a minimum amount of arms and ammunition to support their resistance. They also listened to the roamers spread through the informer channels of the foreign and local rulers.

The lack of militancy skills also suppressed the usage of coordination with their leaders. The inconsistency in the hierarchy of rebels was developed soon after they captured possession of any notable city. The locals also motived with the relief to their dissatisfaction started non-military activities. The looting, plundering, and violence among their own ranks deteriorated their morale. The locals also stopped cooperating with the rebels and as a result the army of individuals and untrained military tuned into a gathering of self-centered rebel force allowing the enemies to easily destroy them in the second round of war.

The naivety and lack of political vision of their leaders was also one of the major causes in remaining unaware of the further strategy and leading the force towards remarking on the first war of independence. The political vision was required to take Muslim and Hindu leaders and politicians on board for providing a national vision and achievement of freedom is the motive of the movement. The wide spread of violence and not rising above their own interests was causes for gradual decrease in ability to maintain the acquired cities.

The war leaders of the events of the rebellion 1857 occurrence were utmost failure. The command of the rebels was in the hands of most politically naive leadership. The suicidal cats of the leadership resulted into sowing a divide in the fighters. The results of this divide also resulted into ineffective actions against enemies. The quarrels of the local command sent a divided message for the fighting locals and soldiers. The British officials were taken by surprise and they were not interpreting the rebellion acts of their soldiers. However the revolt also provided a message for the foreign rulers to either change the rules for governing their army or provide a consistent support to the locals for resolve of their problems. [14: BipanChandra, eds. India's Struggle for Independence: 1857-1947 (New Delhi: Penguin Books India, 1989).]

The acts of violence in the rebellion movement played a role in providing the British forces to repeal the most religious laws for soldiers. There are various issues that marked the failure of the war including the lack of national interest and motivation. The lack of coordinating with the local command of the forces along with the personal gains of the war leaders were major causes of the failure. However at the same time there was positive side of the events that should also be addressed in order to understand the moderate nature of the war. [15: Richard Collins. The Great Indian Mutiny: A dramatic account of the Sepoy Rebellion, (USA: Dutton & Co, 1964). 39.]

Unity in Communities:

The war started with a religious cause in the opinion of some researchers it was based on the roamers that the cartridges are greased with animal fats. Most of them believed that the greased cartridges are coated with the pig and cow fats. The British army consisted of army that included Muslims and Hindussoldiers. The large majority of these two religious communities in forces instigated the conspiracy and provided the room for wide spread of the news that the British officials want to convert the population into Christian religion. [16: SailendraNathSen. History of Freedom Movement in India (1857-1947)(New Delhi: New Age, 2009), 35.]

The religion of the Muslims does not allow the Pig meat and categorize it as abandoned food. The same case for cow as a notable goddess in Hindu religion and it is remarked as a holy cow in most of the Hindu religious followings. Hence the careful crafting of the roamer created required ground for disliking the grease of these animal fats on cartridges. Therefore it is evident that the revolt started with the religious reasons. The religious rebels overthrew the orders and command of their officials. [17: The Great Mutiny: India 1857. Christopher Hibbert; Viking Press, 1978.]

The religious war soon turned into a harmony and the long standing Hindu and Muslim differences were vanished. The rebels of both communities took part in the revolt events and it certainly became clear that the Hindus and Muslims are united. The union of both communities provided the national and political leadership for trying to come up with a unified agenda. The British officials including Aitcheson were also adamant of the fact that the Muslims and Hindus could not be divided in 1857 events. The unity of both communities and rebellion acts turning from the religious to national and localized are evident that the events were not only the cats of insurrection. [18: SailendraNathSen. History Of Freedom Movement In India (1857-1947)(New Delhi: New Age, 2009), 79.]