The Kanpur Massacres in India in the Revolt of 1857.pdf

The Past and Present Society

"Satan Let Loose upon Earth": The Kanpur Massacres in India in the Revolt of 1857 Author(s): Rudrangshu Mukherjee Source: Past & Present, No. 128 (Aug., 1990), pp. 92-116 Published by: Oxford University Press on behalf of The Past and Present Society Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/651010 . Accessed: 21/10/2011 12:27 Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

Oxford University Press and The Past and Present Society are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Past & Present.

http://www.jstor.org

"SATAN LET LOOSEUPON EARTH": THE KANPUR MASSACRESIN INDIA IN THE REVOLTOF 1857* In fact, the peculiaraggravationof the Cawnporemassacreswas this, that the deed was done by a subjectrace by blackmen who daredto shed the blood of theirmasters,and thatof poorhelplessladiesand children. Herewe had not only a servilewarand a sortof Jacqueriecombined,but we had a war of religion,a warof race, and a warof revenge,of hope, of nationalpromptingsto shakeoff the yokeof a stranger,andto re-establish the full powerof nativechiefs, and the full sway of nativereligions. . . Whateverthe causesof themutinyandthe revolt,it is clearenoughthatone of the modesby whichthe leaders,as if by commoninstinct,determinedto effecttheirend was, the destructionof everywhiteman, womanor child who fell into their hands.1

"Ourlearnedmen . . . told us thatthe Company'srulewouldcome to an end in 1857, since this was one hundred years after the Company'sfirstgreatbattle":so wrote Sitaram,the loyal sepoy, in narrativeof the uprisingof 1857.2The explosion his autobiographical that the astrologershad predicted a prophecythat was widely circulatedin northIndia did indeedcome, but not exactlyon the centenaryof Plassey. It began on 10 May 1857 in the cantonment town of Meerut,north-eastof Delhi.3 In the spaceof one monththe * This paperwas writtenwhen I was a fellowat the ShelbyCullomDavis Center for HistoricalStudies, PrincetonUniversity,in spring 1989. The first draft was presentedto the Davis CenterSeminaron "Powerand Responsesto Power".I am gratefulto the participantsof the seminarfor their enthusiasticresponse.Susan Amussen,ChrisBayly,PeterBrown,ParthaChatterjee,NatalieZemonDavis,Barun De, Greg Denning, John Dunbabin,John Elliott, AmitavGhosh, RanaiitGuha, ChristopherHill, HaroldJames,WilliamJordan,DonnaMerwick,GyanPrakash, Ted Rabb, Asok Sen, LawrenceStone and Sean Wilentzcriticized,approvedand forthe finalproductis, mademanysuggestionsforimprovements.The responsibility of course,mine. 1 W. H. Russell,My IndianMutinyDiaty, ed. M. Edwardes(New York, 1970), pp. 29-30. FromSepoytoSubedar,trans.CaptainNorgate,ed. JamesLunt(London, 2 Sitaram, of BahadurShah,dated25 August1857,notedthat 1970),p. 173.The proclamation the writingsof the "theancientworks,bothof the Hindoosand the Mahommedans, miracleworkers,and the calculationsof the astrologers,punditsand rammals,all agree in assertingthat the English will no longer have any footing in India or Strugglein Uttar elsewhere":quotedin S. A. RizviandM. Bhargava(eds.), Freedorn Pradesh,6 vols. (Lucknow,1960),i, pp. 453 ff. of the Meerutoutbreakis availablein J. A. B. Palmer, 3 A detailedreconstruction TheMutinyOutbreakat Meenztin 1857 (Cambridge,1966).

KANPUR MASSACRESOF 1857

93

uprising had engulfed the entire Gangeticplain, and British rule there, as one Briiish officer put it, had collapsed "like a house made of cards".4It took nearlytwo years for Britishrule to be reestablished.The uprising and the subsequentre-establishmentof Britishpowerwere markedby scenesof violencequite unparalleled in the historyof Britishrulein India.This articleattempts to analyse one such episode:the massacresof the Britishby the rebel Indians in Kanpur(Cawnpore). Violence, it must be emphasized,was an essentialcomponentof the British presence in India. It was violence that served as the ultimateimprimaturof colonialism."Therewas no powerin India", wrotePhilip Francis, "but the power of the sword, and that was the British sword, and no other". Francis'sfamousrival, Warren Hastings,also admittedthat the swordwas the most valid title the Britishhad to sovereigntyin India.5A dominantpower is always uneasywithviolencedirectedagainstit, sincenon-reciprocal is one of the necessaryconditionsof its reproduction. violence The right to violenceis, therefore,everywherea privilegethat authority enjoys andrefuses to share with those under it: power always insists on violenceas its exclusive monopoly. British rule in India, as an autocracy, hadmeticulouslyconstructeda monopolyof violence.The revoltof 1857shatteredthatmonopolyby matchingan official, alien violenceby an indigenousviolenceof the colonized. The violence associatedwith Britishpoweralso manifested itself incrudeforms,sinceBritishruleanddominationin India hada very physical aspect.It chosethe bodyas the siteto inscribeits superiority. Thebodiesof the Briiishacquiredcertaindignitiesin India thatwere predestined by birth and by the colour of their skin. This was the condition of their domination,of their superiority:rulersand ruled were arrangedhierarchically as superiorandinferiorraces,ascivilized anduncivilized.And this superioritymanifesteditselfby denyingto the Indiansa "humanness";by treatingthemandconceivingof them as animals.WilliamHowardRussell,the Timescorrespondent,noted inhis diarythat: to the intelligentBriton,they areas the beastsof the "ByJove!sir", exclaimsthe major,who has by this time got to thefield. walnutstage of the argument,to which he has arrivedby gradationsof sherry, port, ale and Madeira,-"By Jove!"he exclaims,thicklyandfiercely,with everyvein MartinGubbins,An Accountof theMutiniesin OutlhandtheSiege of theLucknow Residency (London,1858), p. 118. 5 R. Guha,A Ruleof PropertyforBengal (ParisandThe Hague,1963;repr.Calcutta, 1982), p. 146. 4

94

PAST AND PRESENT

NUMBER 128

in his foreheadswolnlikewhipcord,"thoseniggersare sucha confounded sensual lazy set, crammingthemselveswith ghee and sweetmeatsand smokingtheir cursedchillumjeesall day and all night, well think to train pigs. . ." The fact is, I fear thatthatyou mightas favouritesof heaven-the civilizersof the world la race blanche.the . . are naturally the most intolerantin the world.6

AnotherBritishresidentrecordedthat:

the sepoyis [regardedas]an inferiorcreature.He is sworn at. He is treated roughly.He is spokenas a "nigger".He is addressed as "suar"or pig, an epithetmost approbriousto a respectablenative. . . [the youngerBritish officers]seemto regardit as an excellentjoke,as an evidence of spiritand a praiseworthy senseof superiorityoverthesepoyto treathimas aninferior animal.7

It was an era of brutalfloggingsand of Indianwomen being forced to become mistressesof white men; of recalcitrant elementsbeing blownfrom cannonsso that their bodies were effaced and the onlookerscoveredwith blood and fragmentsof flesh. British rule thus visiblymanifesteditself by markingthe body of the Indian. This brutalityandviolenceis importantif we areto understandthe overall contextof the Kanpurmassacres.Imperialrule in India could only perpetuate itselfby a deploymentof terror,a terrorthatwouldstrike awein the minds of the ruled. The British had not only conqueredIndia but had also, in the processof consolidatingtheirpowerin the firsthalfof the nineteenth century,violatedall that was held sacredand dearby the peopleof India.Socialreformsbasedon the principlesof reason, land-revenue administration based on Ricardiantheoriesof rent, a legal system importedfrom England, the propagationof Christianity and the dispossession of kings, their successorsand landedmagnates,had together broughtabouta majorupheavalin northIndia. An entire wayof life was going under, and naturallythe people affectedfelt aggrieved. This way of life in the nineteenthcenturywas inevitably imbricated withreligion.The reformingzealof Britishadministrators wasthus often interpretedas an attemptto subvertthe religionof Hindus andMuslims.This createdan atmosphereof fearand distrust inwhich anything associatedwith Christianitywas an object of suspicion and hatred. In Sitapur,in Awadh, the very name of the commissionerMr. Christian becameidentifiedwiththe religion and increasedthe wrathof the rebels.8The uprisingof 1857 thus Russell, IndianMutinyDiaty, p. 8. Quoted in C. Hibbert, TheGreatMutiny:India, 18S7 (Harmondsworth, 1978), p. 56. 8 J. W. Kaye, Historyof the SepoyWarin Inzlia,1857-58,3 vols. (London; i, 9th edn., 1880; ii, 5th edn., 1881; iii, 4th edn., 1880), iii, p. 456. 6 7

KANPUR MASSACRESOF 1857

95

displayeda very strong religiousfervour.The rebels thoughtthat they were fightingin defenceof theirreligion.And in this therewas no differencebetweena Hindu and a Muslim.9A group of rebels setiing out why they had takento armsdeclared,"If the religionof a Hindoo or Mussalmanis lost, what remains in the world''?10 A rebel proclamationannouncedthat "The rebellionbegan with religiOn

11

There was amongthe people and the sepoys a deep-seatedbelief in the existenceof a deliberateBritishplot to overthrowcaste and religion.The interventionsof Britishadministrators in all aspectsof lifeonlyservedto aggravatetheseapprehensions.Suchanatmosphere facilitatedthe circulationof rumours.In northIndiain the summer of 1857, therewere rumoursaboutthe cartridgesof the new Enfield rifle being coatedwith the fat of cows and pigs; about flourbeing polluted by bone-dust;about forcible conversionsto Christianity; aboutthe intentionsof the Britishto disarmthe sepoys;and about theend of Britishruleat the centenaryof Plassey.All thesecirculaiing togetheraggregatedintoone giganticrumourabouttheevilintentions of the British. Untraceablein their origin and unverifiablein their import,the rumoursmovedin a powerfulcurrenttouchingon issues that were profoundlyclose to indigenous sentiments.What was importantin all this was not the objectivetruth,but whatthe people believedto be true. And it was this belief that bredfearand panic. Rumourspreadfrom village to village, from bazaarto bazaarand fromone sepoy line to another,bringingmen together,stokingtheir suspicionand hatredand therebyspurringthem to violentaction.12 The violence intrinsicto British rule in India, the violationby zealousBritishadministratorsof all that was sacredand cherished, and a perceivedthreatto religionthat manifesteditself in the circulationof rumours these are perspectivesthathave to be bornein mindforcomprehendingthe natureof the uprisingandthe massacres in Kanpur. * * * 9 The religiousfervourandunityarediscussedin R. Mukherjee,Awadhin Revolt, 1857-58:A Stutlyof PopularResistance(Delhi, 1984), pp. 147-54. 10NationalArchivesof India, Delhi, ForeignDept., PoliticalConsultations,13 May 1859, consultationno. 326, abstracttranslationof an arzi (proclamation) from the rebel camp on the part of all the rebel officersand sepoys to MaharajaJang Bahadur,n.d.: quotedin Rizvi and Bhargava(eds.), FreedOnStnzggle,ii, pp. 603-S. 11NationalArchivesof India,ForeignDept., PoliticalConsultations,17Dec. 1858 consultationno. 251, "Translationof a ProclamationIssued by the Begumin the Name of BirXisQadr". 12 For rumours,see Mukherjee,Awadhin Revolt,pp. 72-6; for a more general discussionon rumoursin peasantinsurgency,see R. Guha,Elernentary Aspectsof PeasantInsurgenczy in ColonialIndia(Delhi, 1983),pp. 251-77.

96

PAST AND PRESENT

NUMBER 128

The firstnews of disaffectionamongthe sepoysof the BengalArmy reachedKanpursome time in April 1857.13In May the news of the outbreakin Meerutand) followingthat, the fall of Delhi a few days later, had an electrifyingeffect on the troopsand the populationin Kanpuras well as all over northIndia. As one officerput it: the intelligencereceivedof the mutinyof the troopsat Meerutappearsto havelit the flameat Cawnpore,as well as at everyotherstationit reached. So daringan act of mutinywith murderof theirOfficersin the presence of anoverwhelmingEuropeanforce- therepetitionofthe sameat Delhithe seizureof thatCitywith the proclamation of a rebelking, encouraged and strengthenedthe handsof the disaffectedamongstthe nativetroops and otherclassesin the stationand neighbourhood.14

Troops in Kanpurvery soon began to show their hostility to the British.One sepoy told an employeeat the commissariat,"Youare serpents, and not one of you shall be spared''.15In the bazaara sergeant'swife was told by a sepoy out of regimentaldress, C'You will none of you come here much oftener;you will not be alive anotherweeks. 16 Therewas a generalsenseof alarmandexpectancy in the city, in whichtherealsoseemedto be moresepoysandvillagers thanusual.17 In the sepoylines,panchayats (ageneralassemblywhere things of importanceare discussedand decided collectively)were held everynight.18 A loyal sepoymadethe followingstatementafter the revolt: The foremostin this consultation[heldon 4 June]wereShumsh-ood-deen Khan, Sheikh Boolagee, SirdarBeg Raw Singh and others . . . The meetingswere held at Shumsh-ood-deen's house, and sometimesat the houseof TeekaRamSingh,a subadarof the cavalrr. . . On the4th June, all the trooperssent awaytheirfamiliesand propertyto the city.l9

The mutinybeganon the night of 4 June 1857in whatJ. W. Kaye describedas the "wonted fashion":firing of guns and extensive 13 Depositionof Sheo ChurrunDas, Sadhoof Cawnpoor, in Depositions Takenat Cawnpore undotheDirection ofLieutenant-Colonel G. W. Williams (hereafter Depositions at Cawnpore), printedwithNarrativeof theEventsin theNWP in 1857-58(Calcutta, n.d.), sectionon Kanpur(hereafterNarrative, Kanpur).SeealsoG. Williams,"Review of the EvidenceTakenat CawnporeRegardingthe Revoltat thatStationin Juneand July 1857"(hereafter"Reviewof the Evidence"),in Na7rative,Kanpur. 14 Williams,"Reviewof the Evidence". 15 W. J. Shepherd, A PersonalNarratiseof theOutbreak andMassacre at Cawnpore dunngtheSepoyRe?wolt of 1857 (Lucknow,1879),p. 11. 16 MowbrayThomson,TheStoty of Caumpore (London,1859),p. 29. 17 Nanak Chand'sdiary of events in Kanpur(hereafter Nanak Chand'sdiary), printedas "Translation of a Narrativeof Eventsat Cawnpore",in Narrative,Kanpur: 3 June 1857. 18 C, Ball, Historyof the IndianMutiny,2 vols. (London,n.d.), i, pp. 299-300. 9 Depositionof Ewuz Khan in Depositions at Cawnpore.

KANPUR MASSACRESOF 1857

97

burningof Britishproperty.20Then the sepoyssped in the direction of Delhi, stoppingfor the night at a placecalledKalyanpur,a little distancefrom Kanpur. Sincethe timeof the outbreakatMeerut,the Britishin Kanpurhad been makingpreparationsto protectthemselves.Sir HughWheeler, commanderof the KanpurDivision, a favouriteof the sepoys and convincedof the loyaltyof his troops,decidednone the less to take precautions.He was responsiblenot only for the safetyof the British troops and their families, but also of all Europeans.He decided, principallybecausehe did not wantto be too distantfromthe sepoy lines, not to use the magazineadjacentto the river and which, surroundedby a strong wall, was thereforethe best suited as a defensiveposition. Insteadhe chose a spot nearerthe sepoy lines, wheretherewere two single-storiedbarrackswith verandahsaround themandseveralouthouses.This site he beganto entrench,to foriify with artilleryand stock with provisions.As the alarmspreadin the city he orderedall Europeansinto the entrenchment,whichcameto be inhabitedby some nine hundredpersons.21This would be the spot where the Britishwould remainuntil 27 June. Surroundedon all sides by rebels who fired on them night and day, the British withstoodthe siege. Their sufferingand heroismare the stock-intradeof most popularaccountsof the Mutiny.22 FromKalyanpurthe rebelsturnedback, havingfirstmet up with Nana Sahiband his men. Nana Sahibwas the adoptedson of the last peshwa(prime minister), Baji Rao II, the leader of the Maratha confederacy,who had surrenderedto the Englishin June 1818. In retirementwith an annualpension of ?80,000 from the East India Company,the formerpeshwalived in Bithur,a little distanceaway fromKanpur.He adoptedthreesons;Nana Sahib,or DhondoPant, which was his real name, was the eldest. In his will BajiRao made NanaSahibthe sole heirto his property.WhenNanaSahibinherited the propertyafterBaiiRao'sdeathin 1851he wasin his thirties.The Company'sgovernment,however,refusedto recognizehis right to the pension that BaXiRao had received. "For thirty years", the governor-generalwrote, "the Peishwareceivedan annual stipend Kaye,Histotyof theSepoyWar,ii, p. 307. andMassacreat Cawnpore,p. 19. Shepherd,PersonalNarrativeofthe Outbreak 22 See, for example,Hibbert,GreatMutiny,ch. 9; S. N. Sen, 1857(Delhi, 1957). and accountsareShepherd,PersonalNarrativeof theOutbreak The best contemporary reconstrucA nineteenth-century Thomson,StotyofCawnpore. at Cawnpore; Massacre (firstpubd. 1865;repr. Brentwood, tion is availablein G. O. Trevelyan,Caumpore 1986);referencesare to the reprint. 20

21

98

PAST AND PRESENT

NUMBER 128

. . . Those who remainhaveno claimwhateveron the consideration of the BritishGovernment".The Nana Sahibappealedto the court of directorsand even sent his agent, Azimullah,to Londonto plead his case. His effortswerein vain. Yethe continuedto remainfriendly with the British, entertainingthem quite lavishlyin his palacein Bithur.23His relationshipwith themwas so closethathe wasinvited by the magistrateof Kanpurto guardthe treasury;Nana Sahibhad, in fact, put himself'4infrequentcommunicationwith the Magistrate . and profferedoffersof assistancein caseof an outbreak".24 The circumstancesthat led to Nana Sahib's joining the rebels will be discussedbelow. Sufficeto say at this point of the narraiivethatthe rebelsreturnedto Kanpurand the Nana informedGeneralWheeler on 7 June of his intentionto attackthe Britishentrenchment.The siege had begun. On 25 June the British pickets saw a woman approachingthe entrenchments.The identityof the womanis somewhatof a mystery: eyewitnessesidentify her as eitherMrs. Greenwayor Mrs. Jacobi. She carrieda letterwhich statedthat "All those who are in no way connectedwith the acts of Lord Dalhousie, and are willing to lay down theirarms,shallreceivea safe passageto Allahabad".25 It was not signed, but the handwritingwas recognizedas Azimullah's. Negotiationsbegan, terms of surrenderwere agreedupon and the treatysignedby Nana Sahib.The conditionsof surrender,according to MowbrayThomson,were"honourablesurrenderof our shattered barracksand free exit underarms,with sixtyroundsof ammunition perman;carriagesto be providedfortheconveyanceof thewounded, the women and children;boats furnishedwith flour to be readyat the ghaut[embankment]".26 On the morningof 27 Junethe British left the entrenchmentsto proceedto Satichaura Ghat,wheretheboats werekept. Accordingto one estimate,madeaftercomparingdifferent accounts,four hundredand fifty personscameout of the entrenchments.27As the Britishbeganto boardthe boats, guns openedfire 23 The best accountof Nana Sahibis in P. C. Gupta,NanaSahibandtheRisingat Cawnpore(Oxford,1963).The governor-general's letteris quotedon p. 20. 24 J. W. Sherer,"SomeAccountsof the Mutinyand Subsequent Eventsat Cawnpore",in Narrative,Kanpur.Zoe Yollandsuggestsin Traders andNabobs:TheBritish in Cawnpore, 1765-1857(Salisbury,1987),pp. 251, 318-19n. 38, thatthetrustreposed in Nana Sahibby the Britishwas a consequenceof the familyties betweenhim and GeneralWheeler's"unofficialwife, an Indianlady". 2S India Office Libraryand Records, London (hereafterI.O.L.R.), P^persof GeneralSir MowbrayThomson,PhotoEur 137. 26 Thomson,Stozyof Cawnpore, p. 153. 27 Shepherd,Personal Narrativeof theOutbreak andMassacreat Cawnpore,p. 74.

KANPUR MASSACRESOF 1857

99

from both banks and the thatchedawningsof the boats were set alight. All but one hundredand thirtywere slaughtered;twentyof the survivorsmanagedto escape, the rest were takenprisoner. To appreciatethe nature of this massacresome featuresof the outbreakin Kanpurhave to be highlighted.In Kanpur,as in most otherstationsof northIndia,when the sepoystookrecourseto direct aciionthe firsttargetsof destructionwerethe governmentbuildings, the telegraphwires, the post office,the court,the jailand the record rooms. All those buildingsthat representedthe presenceof British rule were burnt or demolished. Similarly,British-ownedbungalows buildingsunlikeanykindof Indianresidence wereobjects of the rebels'fury. More significantly,as the mutiniescommenced, the sepoys "divest[ed]themselvesof their uniform",tore off the regimentalcoloursand brokeout fromtheirlines.28As threesepoys giving evidence to the Britishsaid, "the men [sepoys]did as they In the momentof mutiny liked. No, theydid not dressin uniform".29 the sepoyscastoff the markerswithwhichan alienpowerhadsought to regimentthem and thus set them apartfrom the peasantryfrom whichthey wererecruited.Of coursethe one markertheywouldnot jettisonwas their arms. The "peasantin uniform"-as the sepoy was disownedhis uniformonly to becomethe peasantwith arms. In eschewingthe regimentaldisciplinethat the Britishofficershad drilledintothemtheyreclaimedtheirpeasantcharacter.Theymerged with the ordinarypeople. This merger is significantsince it signals the extension of the mutiniesto a generaluprising.The mutiniesstruckwith remarkable of Britishrule in northIndia. successresultingin the disappearance This breakdownallowedthe inhabitantsof Kanpur'sneighbouring villages, some of whom had been armingthemselvesprior to the mutiny, to pour into the city.30 Once this happenedit became meaninglessandimpossibleto distinguishthe rebelandthe mutineer. Insurgency,trueto its character,hadbecomea collectiveenterprise.31 Nanak Chand, a loyalistwho kept a diaryof the events in Kanpur Mutiny"(hereafter"Synopsis"),in 28 "Synopsisof the Evidenceof the Cawnpore and fromtheLetters,Despatches Narrative,Kanpur;see also G. W. Forrest,Selections ofIndia,18S7of theGovernment in theMilitaryDepartment otherStatePapersPreserved 58 (hereafterSelections),4 vols. (Calcutta,1893-1912),ii, introduction,pp. 156-8. 29 Depositionsof GobindSingh, SheikhElaheeBukshand GhouseMohomed,in at Caumpere Depositions 30 NanakChand'sdiary:29, 31 May, 3, 5 June, 1857. andcollectivityis analysedin greatdepthin Guha,ElementwyAspects 31 Insurgency of PeasantInssrgeng,passim,esp. ch. 4.

100

PAST AND PRESENT

NUMBER 128

andscrupulouslyrecordednameswheneverhe could)pointedto this, albeit unconsciously,when he wrote on 6 June, "Thereis a great crowd. It is impossibleto recordthe namesof all at such a time". And againwe readin the entryfor 8 June, "It would be impossible to mentionthe names of all evil-mindedmen who joinedthe standard".32Sheernumbersled the diaristto despair,but for historians the anonymity,the facelessnessof the thousandsinvolved,is indicative of the collectivenatureof the project. An emeutewithin the army had acquiredthe characterof an insurgencyalmostas soon as it occurred.The populace,seizedby a rebelconsciousness,set out to destroy,but not indiscriminately. The British,and all thatthey ownedor represented,werethe firsttarget. After this the destructionextendedto the wealthyand propertied in Kanpur;businessmen,especiallymoney-lenders,were the chief targets.33Suchdiscriminationand selectivityin destructionhas been singled out as one of the generalfeaturesof peasantinsurgencyin colonial India.34The destruciionin Kanpurwas carriedout by ordinarypeople,membersof the lowerordersof society.This is clear from Nanak Chand'sfrequentuse of words like "bad characters", budmashes, and "low-castemen"; there are also clear referencesto villagersandartisans.35 LalaBadriNath, the commissariat contractor in Kanpur,also testifiedthat "Thousandsof the lowerclassesfrom the city, cantonmentsand villageswent aboutwith them sharingin their excesses".36The uprisingin Kanpurbore the imprintof the subalternclasses:NanakChandwasemphaticaboutthisby declaring "not one of the respectablecitizens joined the Jehad".37Respectability,needlessto add, was definedin the eyes of NanakChand,as well as the British, by the ownershipof wealthand property.The menof propertysawthe rebellionas the workof the subalternclasses andthe lattermadeit theirownby theirveryactions.Twooverlapping structuresof domination overlappingbecausemost tradersand money-lendersin nineteenth-centuryIndia, who were the rebels' targets,earnedtheirprofitsby collaborating with the British were simultaneouslyattackedby the subordinated.In confrontingthe NanakChand's diary:6, 8 June1857. Ibid.:5, 6 June1857. Guha,Elementa7y Aspects ofPeasantInsurgeng, pp. 20 ff. NanakChand's diary:5, 6 lune 1857. Deposition of LalaBadriNath,in Depositions at Cawnpore. NanakChand's diary:7 June1857.By "Jehad" he is referring to theraisingof thegreenflag. 32 33 34 35 36 37

KANPUR MASSACRESOF 1857

101

structuresof dominationdirectlythe rebels definedtheir task as a projectof power. It was not just direct aciion that informedthe project. Other featuresof insurgency,like underminingthe presiigeof the dominatorsthroughverbal and other kinds of insult, accompaniedthe outbreak. Shepherdrecalled that while in captivityhe had been continouslyinsulted and that the rebels would not utter a word withoutan "abusiveepithet"to describethe British.38AmeliaHorne recordedthe "rude and rough"behaviourof the rebelswhen they enteredthe entrenchmentson the morningof 27 June.Britishofficers, she said, were severelybeaten,and when an officerobjectedto such behaviour"they abusedhim in so gross a mannerthat it made the earsof all tingle, threateningin the bargainto spit on his face".The Britishwere not accustomedto such behaviour;it frightened"us to death", wrote Amelia Horne.39The women who were taken as prisonersfromthe site of the massacrewereoftentakenout to grind corn; in his magisterialnarrativeof the "SepoyWar", Kaye, with greatdiscernment,observesthat: An educatedEnglishgentlewomanneedednot even a week'sresidencein Indiato teachher the meaningof this. As they sat thereon the ground, these Christiancaptivesmust have had some glimmeringrecollectionof their biblicalstudies, and rememberedhow in the East the grindingof cornwas ever regardedas a symbolof subjection.40

An act carriedout every day by a peasantwoman in India would indeed be the utmost humiliationwhen imposedupon a womanof the masterrace. ColonelEwart,beforebeing killed, was tauntedby the formersepoys of his regimentas the Britishwalkedout of the entrenchmentwith the words, "Is not this a fine paradeandis it not well dressed up?''.41The Britishwere certainlynot used to being tauntedor insulted;they expecteddeferenceand obedience.It was only in the circumstancesof rebellion,whenthe establishedrelationship of dominationand subordinationhad been broken, that the codes of behaviourcould be so grosslyviolated. 38

Shepherd,Personal Narrative oftheOutbreak andMassacre atCawnpore, pp.81-

4. 39 BritishLib., London(hereafter Brit. Lib.), Add. MS. 41488,Papersrelatingto the IndianMutiny,i, Amy Haine's[AmeliaHorne?]Narrative.The samenarrative with minoradditionsand alterationsis reprintedas AmeliaBennett[nee Horne?], "TenMonth'sCaptivityafterthe Massacreat Cawnpore",in TheNineteenth Century (Jan.-June1913),pp. 1212-34;ibid.(July-Dec.1913),pp. 78-91.Therewasno Amelia Bennettin theKanpurentrenchment so thisis in all probabilitythenarrative of Amelia Horne, who escapedthe massacre. 40 Kaye,Histoty of theSepoyWar,ii, p. 355. 41 ''synopsis>s-

102

PAST AND PRESENT

NUMBER 128

It wasnot the Britishalonewho hadsuchindignitiesinflictedupon them. The elites of Kanpur,who were knownto be friendsof the British, were similarlyinsulted. The Nuneh Nawab, or Mahomed Ali Khan, an influentialpersonin the town and a knownfriendof the British,hadhis horsetakenawayfromhim and"insteadof which I got a mere 'Tuttoo' [mare/mule]belongingto a servantof my brother"42 In a societywherethe typeof carriageinvariablyindicated status, to ask a Nawab to ride a mule and that belongingto a servant- was to destroyhis positionin society.The Nuneh Nawab was also "led throughthe streetsin ignominiousshow", the rebels "heapedabuseson me" and "threatenedto haveme tied to a tree".43 As the rebellion gathered momentumthe ranks of the rebels swelled. People came "to see the fun" of the dominatorsbeing attackedand humiliated,and such people were pressed into the rebellion.44The rebelsused their presencein largenumbersto win over the vacillatorand draw the onlooker into the folds of the rebellion.Numbersprovidedthe moralprestigeof solidarity:collectivityaffordeda sanctiollforthoselesswillingto join.45The collective natureof the enterprisepossiblycontributedto it beingseenas "fun": therewas feasiingandsharbat (sherbet)was distributed;46 the rebels held nautcheswith buffoons.47There was a sense of liberation,the joy of havingachievedthe impossible. What these featuresmake obvious is that the initiativefor the uprisingin Kanpurcamefromthe ordinarypeople.Havingrevolted and destroyed,they still had to dealwith Nana Sahib.Therearetwo versionsof the meeiingbetweenthe rebelsandthe Nana. According to one version, a deputationfrom the rebels met and told him, "Maharaj,a kingdomawaitsyou if you join our cause but deathif you side with our enemies".The Nana readilyreplied,"Whathave I to do with the British?I am altogetheryours". And in a royal gesturehe placedhis handson their headsand sworeto join them. The otherversionstatesthatwhen the Nana saw the entiresoldiery had completely thrown off their allegianceto the Company, he decidedto join and advisethem.48 42 I.O.L.R., Board'sCollection,no. 195724,translation of the diaryof the Nuneh Nawab. 43 Ibid.

NanakChand'sdiary:7 June 1857. "Pressing"a-san instrumentof solidarityis discussedin Guha,ElntawyAspects of PeasantInsurgeng,pp. 195-8. 46 NanakChand'sdiary:8 June 1857. 47 Depositionof John Fitchett,in Depositions at Cawnpore. 48 See Forrest,Selections, ii, introduction,pp. 158-9. 44

4S

KANPUR MASSACRESOF 1857

103

In a case like this there is no way of establishingthroughthe historian'sstandardmethodsof cross-checkingwhich is the correct version. But both the accountsconvey one importantaspect. The Nana did not have very much of a choice. In the one version, the absenceof choicewas direct:the rebelsmadeit clearthatdeathwas the alternaiive.In the other,the lackof choicewas not so direct.Yet, surroundedby an insurgentpopulationeagerto embarkon a career of destruction,the Nana could only havecourteddeathanddestruciion by opposingthe rebels. Havinghis own grievancesagainstthe British,he consideredit prudentto throwin his lot with the insurgents. At thatmoment,with Britishpowervirtuallynon-existentand an entirepopulaceup in arms,Nana Sahibhad no alternativebut to join the rebels. In short he was a prisonerof the circumstances. Perhapsthis was what TantiaTopi, a very close associateof Nana Sahib,wantedto indicatewhen, in his confessionto the British,he said that afterthe mutiny "the threeRegimentsof Infantryand 2nd LightCavalrysurroundedus andimprisonedtheNanaandmyselfu'.49 Thereis no evidencewhatsoeverof eitherNanaSahibor TaniiaTopi ever being held prisoner.The statementcan then only be readas a testimonyof helplessnessin the face of popularinsurgencypressing Nana Sahibinto the rebellion.Sucha situationwas not at all unique in 1857. Time and time again, in differentregions,deposedrulers and dispossessedlanded magnateswere forcedto rebel becauseof the mountingpressurearoundthem. The old and retiredMughal emperorwas forcedto acceptthe nominalleadershipof the rebellion by the sepoysfromMeerutand the populaceof Delhi; in Jhansi,the rani becamea rebel leaderbecauseall aroundher therewere rebels coercing her to join; in Bihar, in Jagdishpur,the eighty-year-old KunwarSingh had the mantleof rebel leaderthrustupon him; and in Awadhthe big landedmagnatesjoinedor stayedwiththe rebellion becauseof the militancyof theirpeasantry.50 It would, however,be an over-simplification to suggest that princesand magnatesjoined the rebellion only because they were forced to by pressurefrom 49 I.O.L.R., HomeMiscellaneous, no. 727A,translationofTantiaTopi's confession and orders. so See Sen, 1857,p. 278;for KunwarSingh,see K. K. Datta,Biography ofKunwar SinghandAmarSingh(Patna, 1957);for Awadh,Mukherjee,Awadhin Revolt,pp. 129, 168. In othercountriestoo, in situationsof popularinsurgency,the actionsof landedmagnatesand the gentryhavebeen constrainedby popularpressure:see, for example,M. James,"ObedienceandDissentin HenricianEngland:The Lincolnshire Rebellion,1536",in M. James,Society,PoliticsandCulture:Studiesin EarlyModenz England(Cambridge,1986),pp. 256-7.

104

AND PRESENT PAST

128 NUMBER

forbeing Manyof the olderrulingclasshadtheirown reasons their below. away taken had latter The towardsthe British. antagonistic conjuncture prestigeandland. The uprisingoffereda unique together. power, come could insurgency elite disaffectionand popular when rebelsneededa man The significantquestionis, of course,why the answerlies in the Nana Sahib or the Mughal emperor.The like to affirmitself in quest for legitimacy.The rebellionwanted rebels' they now wanted nameof a publicauthority.Havingdestroyed, in nineteenththe toreconstitutethe world. And that reconstitution was not India and in the contextof the rebelconsciousness century consciousness alas,outsidetheworldof hierarchy.Therebel possible, to a leader,a king. soughtto legitimizeits actionsby appealing thus the decliningMughal Itharkedbackedto an olderpoliticalsystem principalitof the eighteenthcentury,andthe variousregional empire it was because but ies not becauseit wasidyllicandlessoppressive, administration Britishconquestandtheimpositionof British familiar. grotesque:hostile, andwestern practiceswere seen as something people had been of the alienand inhuman. The familiarworld Hencethe "natural" restored. it wanted they and topsy-turvy turned in Delhi to the order: of the previous to the representatives affiliation in Jhansito Qadr, emperor,in Awadhto the boy-kingBirjis Mughal Nana confederacy, theraniandin Kanpurto the headof the Maratha Sahib,the heir to the peshwa. momentof negation OnecouldsayfollowingHegelthatin theinitial of destruction"; therebelconsciousnesswasseizedby the "fanaticism the feelingof "possess onlyby destroyingcould that consciousness destruction"leadsat that itselfas existents'.Yet the actualizationof fromthat fleeting transition onceto some sort of order".There is a The determinacy''.51 a of momentof destructionto the "positing to Or content. a of positing harking-backto the old orderwas the structures the when put it anotherway, that momentof liberation, akinto communitas, of dominationhadseemedto passinto something immediateand "direct, a la VictorTurner,when therehad been a not be sustainedfor could identities", totalconfrontationof human of structures,to old long; and there was a return to the domain hierarchies.52

mergingof the sepoy The precedinganalysishas emphasizedthe

trans.T. M. Knox (Oxford,1967), 51G. W. F. Hegel, ThePhilosophyof Right, para.5. (Cornell,1977), andAntiStructure Process:Structure S2 VictorTurner,TheRitual 132. p. from is quotation ch. 4, passim.The

KANPUR MASSACRESOF 1857

105

elementinto the commonpeopleand the strengthof popularinsurgency in the makingof the rebellionin Kanpur.Yet at this pointin the discussionthe specificcontribuiionof the sepoyelementprobably needs to be re-introduced.The sepoys,despitetheirpeasantorigins, werein a uniqueposition.Withinthe domainof popularinsurgency of which they were a definitepart, they were the only sectionwhich hadbeenproximateto statepower.As sonsof the peasantrytheyhad left the village, seen the world and now duringthe revolthad, as it were, broughtthe worldbackto the village.Thiswasa riteof passage throughwhich the peasantbecameinitiatedinto the mysteriesof the state: he graduatedfrom the knowledgeof mere officialdomto a knowledgeof the stateas the authenticobjectof hatred.53One sees the hatredwrit large in the selectionof the rebels' targets.Their proximityto statepowerhad, however,a duplexcharacter.It enabled them, on the one hand, to identifythe state as the enemy. On the otherhand, the same exposureand experience,especiallythe many battles they had fought on behalf of the British state in India, had made them realizethe importanceof leadership,disciplineand structuresof commandin the conductof war. Their returnto the ruralcommunityas an armedpeasantrywas thus informedby a new consciousness.The harking-backto traditionalleadershipcould be the productof that consciousness.It is significantthat peasantsin revolt usually sought legitimacyin colonial India by appointing somebody from among themselves a leader or a king,54 but in 1857dethronedkings or dispossessedprinces,thatis those thathad previouslyestablishedclaimsto leadership,werechosento lead and give the uprisinga legitimacy.An olderandlegitimatepoliticalorder had lost to the British in the late eighteenthand early nineteenth centuries;it was as if the sepoys in their quest for leadershipand commandwere revivingthat orderand fightinga war on its behalf anc ln ltS name. The desireto reinstatethe old orderwas evidentin the establishment of courts of law where justice was meted out accordingto "nativeideas";in the prohibitionof writingin English;in the revival .

.

53 Cf. AntonioGramsci "the 'people'is awarethat it has enemies, but only identifiesthem empiricallyas the so-calledSigttOtZi. Containedin the concept of signorethereis much of the old dislikeof countryfor town. Thereis also dislikeof officialdom the only formin which the Stateis perceived.The peasant. . . hates the civil servant;he does not hate the Statefor he does not understandit": Antonio Gramsci,Selectses from the PrisonNotebooks,ed. and trans. QuintinHoare and GeoffreyNowell Smith(New York, 1971),p. 272. S4 Guha,Elementary Aspectsof PeasantInsurgeng,pp. 112-15.

106

PAST AND PRESENT

NUMBER 128

of old offices;in the reappointmentof formerofficials;in the setting up of a councilof war; and in the restoraiionof old courtrituals.55 This is not to say that the sepoys and the ordinarypeople had completelysurrenderedtheirinitiaiiveto the Nana and his men. In the council of war the sepoys were stronglyrepresented:in fact it was Teeka Singh, a formersepoy, who was madea generaland put in charge of operations.Other sepoys took the ranks of major, coloneland so on, makingevidenttheirdesireto havea hierarchyof command.56There were also instanceswhen, despiteNana Sahib's disapproval,the rebelshumiliatedthe wealthycollaborators.57 Again the Nuneh Nawab recordedthat: One of the sepoys who had been in the entrenchment[with the British] andwasseizedandconfinedon 27 Junehada son in the2nd LightCavalry, who first went to Baba Bhut and menacingto kill him in case of noncompliancewith his request, he was referredto Nana, to whom he went and repeatedhis requestin the same threateningmanner.Nana immediatelyliberatedhis fatherand his comrades.58

Pushedto an extreme,an ordinaryrebelcouldevenbreachthe codes of deferenceto a leader, speak threateninglyto him and have him overlooksucha serious"crime"as loyaltyto the Briiish.The leaders, in theirturn, recognizingthe strengthandimportanceof the people, soughtto keep them happy. Thus we readin TaniiaTopi's "order book" instructionssuch as "Anyonewho takeswood etc. from the Godownor fromthe housesof the poor,shouldbe punishedby order of a Court";or again"all the commandingofficersare requestedto give strict order to their men . . . that if they are found extoriing money from the poor villagers or plunderingthem they will be severelypunished".59There is a deliberatecomingtogetherhere of the two domains, of the popularand that representedby a feudal leaderlike Nana Sahib and his men. It leads to the formaiionof a united front againsta commonenemywhose completeannihilation alone can lead to a stablereconstitutionof the old order.Azimullah representedthe position: 55 The settingup of courtsis described in Alilliams,"Reviewof the Evidence";the prohibitionof Engtishin Shepherd,PersonalNarrativeof theOutbreak andMassacre at Cawnpore,p. 41; for the restorationof formerofEcialsand ntuals, see Nanak Chand'sdiary,passim;"Synopsis".For the councilof war, see Lt.-Col Williams, "Memorandum", in Narrative,Kanpur. 56 "Synopsis"; also Rizvi and Bhargava(eds.), Freedorn Stggle, iv, p. 669. 57 I.O.L.R., Board'sCollection,no. 195724,translation of the diaryof the Nuneh Nawab. 58 Ibid. 59 I.O.L.R., HomeMiscellaneous, no. 727A,translation ofTantiaTopi'sconfession and orders.

KANPUR MASSACRESOF 1857

107

Whatfools,thenwe naiiveshavemadeof ourselves,so quietlyto surrender our countryto a handfulof tyrannicalforeigners,who aretryingin many ways to deprive us of our religion and our privileges!It behoves us, therefore and I call upon you all to join heartand hand to extirpate our enemies,root and branch,from the face of all India. Let not a soul escape,let not the nameof a Christianbe evernamedin Hindoostan.We are strongand numerousto keep our own.60

There is a statementhere of unity, strengthand confidence;the enemyis clearlyidentifiedand annihilationclearlyproclaimedas the purpose.Ishtahars (proclamations) were issuedin both Urdu and in Devnagiricalling upon "all Hindoos and Mahomedansto unite in defence of their religion and presentthemselvesfor service".6tA mutinyleadingto a collectiveattackon the dominatorshadnow been transformedinto an entire society'swar againsta commonenemy. An insurrection,by its collectivenature, by its acceptanceof a leadershipand by seeking its identity with a politicalorder, had acquiredlegitimacyfor itself. It was now public and open. Nana Sahibcould thus informGeneralWheelerin the entrenchmentthat the attackwas going to commence.62 From the extantevidenceit seems that the massacreon the river was a stratagemin the conductof the war. It was plannedin advance. The idea of luring the British out of the entrenchmentand then killing them en massewas probablysuggestedby a statementmade by W. J. Shepherd,who had left the entrenchmentdisguisedas a naiive and had been apprehended.To quote Shepherd, a man, havingthe appearanceof one in authorityn cameto me and asked if I could tell whetherthe officersand Europeanswere aous to leave the station,and if, in the event of an offer being made to that effect, it would be accepted.I repliedthat I could not exactlytell, but that the femaleswere certainlyanxiousto get awayby any means, and for their sakesno doubt such an offerwould be acceptedif madein a satisfactory manner.63

Shepherd,needlessto add, hadno ideaof whatthis statementwould lead to; he was tryingto free his countrymen,includinghis family, fromthe tormentthat they sufferedwithinthe entrenchment.A full councilmet, and decidedthat the best way to defeatthe Britishwas to get themout of the entrenchmentwiththe promiseof a safepassage down the riverand then kill them. It is significantthat this council 60Shepherd,PersonalNatrattseof theOutbreak andMassacreat Cammpore, p. 42. 61 ''synopsis9-

62"The next day June 7th Gen. Wheelerreceiveda note statingthat the Nana intendedto attackhim":I.O.L.R., Papersof GeneralSirMowbrayThomson,Photo

Eur137. 63 Shepherd, PersonalNatrativeof theOutbreak andMassaereat Caumpore, p. 69.

108

PAST AND PRESENT

NUMBER 128

was attendednot only by Nana Sahib, his men like Azimullahand rebelslike Teeka Singh, but also by MaulaviLiakatAli.64A Hindu princeand a maulavi(muslimreligiousteacher)sanctionedthe massacre. The decisionto slaughterin this manneralso seemedto have the sanctionof the qazi (judge):a witnessreported Two daysbeforethe boatsforthe Europeansweregotready,in theevening theKazi[Wasiuddin]withtwosirdarsof thecavalryregimentwhosenames I don't know, was concertingmeasuresat his own housefor theirdeath. At thattimeI arrifired at the houseandheardthatto murderthe Europeans havinggot them out of the entrenchmentwas lawful and proper.65

The massacrecould thus take on the natureof an execution,of an open and public affair.It was a spectaclewatchedby some ten to twelvethousandpeople.66And in the mannerof executionerssome of the rebels told a group of Englishmen,"now repentof all your misdeedsand ask pardonof God".67 The public and open characterof the massacreon the river is testifiedby all the eyewitnessaccountsthatthereareof the event. At the risk of being gory and prolixI quote fromthreeof these. Here is the massacreas seen by MowbrayThomson,who escapedon one of the two boats that got away, and down-riverswam to the shore and was rescuedby a landedmagnate: MajorVibartand his familywere the last to go on board,a partyof his Regiment,the 2nd cavalry)escortedhim downand insistedon his taking all thatbelongedto him on boardthe boatsbut when they saw him fairly embarkedand us tryingto get our boatsawayfromthe bank, they made signalto the boatmenwho immediatelyleft us, havingpreviouslyset fire into the thatchedcoveringof the boats, which brokeout instantlyin a blaze.Everyone whocouldwasobligedto jumpoverboard.The wounded andhelplesswho couldnot, perishedin the flames.The Cavalrymenwere firstto fireon-us and theirfiringappearedto be the signalforthe massacre to commence,for the instantafterwardsfour guns openedon the forty boatswhich had [been]providedfor us and about 10,000muskets.68

ElizaBradshawhadan incredibleescape.She stoodin the waterwith the blood-bathall aroundher and succeededin "secreiing"herself to a Muslimcemetery.She thus lived to describethe scene: At sunriseon the 27th, somehackeries,threeor fourelephants,andthree palkeeswere broughtinto the entrenchments. . . The Generaland some 64 ''SynOpSiS''-

Depositionof Hulas Singh, in Depositsnsat Cawnpore.Emphasisadded. Depositionof KhudaBux, ibid. All eyewitnessesconfirmthat therewas a big crowdat the ghat; for exampleGangaSinghin his narrativesaid, "Indeed,it was difficultto get there,as therewasan enormouscrowdof Soldiersas well as peopleof the Town lookingon": I.O.L.R., Board'sCollection,no. 195718. 67 Depositionof John Fitchett,in Depositions at Cawnpore. 68 I.O.L.R., Papersof GeneralSir Mowbray Thomson,PhotoEur 137. 65 66

MASSACRESOF 1857 KANPUR

109 in a palkee[palanquin]. . . wereon elephants,Mrs. Wheelerwas officers the . We were aboutthe centrewith Theladieswere on the hackeries. .sowars and sepoyswere on our right The families. their and drummers with the white railingsnear bridge the reached we andleft . . . When assembled,men fromthe crowd large a saw we ColonelWilliam'shouse, out thattheywere shouted ahead, were cityand villagers;the sowarswho down to the ghat, we then descended tostandaside, and none to comeleadingto the river.Whenwe got to our intothe dry nullah[watercourse] flooring. . . Suddenlywe heard boat,we found that it had no bamboo then the roarof cannonon both and firing,and the patteringof bullets,the boat was betweenus andshore.In sidesof the river.We jumpedout,nextboatwe sawthe Colonel'syoungest thewater,a few pacesoff, by the her with his bayonet.She said, "My kill daughter.A sepoywas going to " turnedaway,andjustthena villager fatherwasalwayskindto sepoys. He she fell into the water. . . we saw and struckher in the headwith a club, did not see him read it, for a sowar the clergymantake out a book, we with a blow on the neck; he then down him cut and water rodeinto the a missionary. . . A sepoykilled was who other, the killedthe Padre,and took a youngchild by the leg sepoy another . a child with his bayonet. . and threwit into the water.69

the massacreby Horne,who was takenawayfromthe site of Amelia later: years many asepoy as his "prize",as it were, recalled

to embarktheshorewaslinedwithspectators Whilewe wereendeavouring demons,as theyundoubtwho werelookingon andexultinglike so many tauntingand jeeringat us for condition, distressing our over were, edly blackdevilsgrinnedlike so many havingat lastfallenintotheirhands.The theirmonkeylanguage. in chatter apes, keepingup an incessant took abouttwo hoursto accomplish Afterall had embarked which orders these obeying crew the of the wordwas given to proceed.Instead and they all leapedinto the waterand a signalwas given from the shorefirst secretedburningcharcoalin the having after bank, waded to the a volley of bulletsassailedus, Immediately boats. thatchof most of the struckthe boats . . . In a few which grape followedby a hail of shot and Severalof the boats were seen to be minutes pandemoniumreigned. woundedwereburntto death.Some wrappedin flames,and the sick andto the oppositeshore,butwerepicked jumpedoverboardandtriedto swim guns continuedtheirvile work the . . . off by the bullets of the sepoys fromthe oppositebankwhich . . and grapeand musketrywere pouredhad.been placed there to intercept soon became alive with rebels who in pushingtheirboatsto thefurther refugeesto thatshore.A few succeeded slaughtered.The cavalrywadedinto. side of the riverandweremercilessly thosewho were still alive . . cut the riverwith drawnswordsand thedown smokefromthe firingof the cannon The waterwas redwith bloodand burning boats, lay like dense clouds the from fire the and and muskets and cheered,incitingeach laughed sepoys the . . . over and aroundus otherto greateracts of brutality!70

and the violence. The There was no attemptto concealthe hatred preventescape.The two gunsand troopswere strategicallyplacedto 69 70

at Cawnpore. Depositionof ElizaBradshaw,in Depositions i, Amy Haines'sNarrative. Brit. Lib., Papersrelatingto the IndianMutiny,

PAST AND PRESENT

110

NUMBER 128

boatsthatdid get awaywere chasedand shot down. The rebelstook up theirpositionsat nightandordersweregivento the neighbouring zamindars(land-holders)andvillagersto be presentat the ghat.And they were present, "armed",one witness reported,"with swords, and battle axes''.7l Things were so arrangedas to overpowerthe British:accordingto Shepherd,"The Englishwere entirelyin their power".72The massacrewas also executedin keepingwith a very definiteplan.The boatmensetfireto the thatchedawningsata signal, and the guns opened fire at the sound of a bugle. The rebels on horsebackwent into the waterto slashthe survivorson very definite ordersfrom TantiaTopi. The operationswere supervisedby Teeka Singh,JwalaPrasad(an associateof NanaSahibwho hadbeengiven the rankof brigadier),a cavalrytroopercalledNukkee, and Tantia Topi, all of whom sat on a speciallybuilt platform.73Everybody presentwas implicatedin the violence,eitherdirectlyor as a partof a crowd that watchedand exulted. The massacrewas a collective affair:an expressionof an entiresociety'shatredand rejectionof an alien order. It was a spectacleof rebel power. The massacrecould thus be celebratedas a great victory. Gun saluteswere firedto markthe occasion.Nana Sahibtookhis seaton a throneand the sacredmarkwas put on his forehead.The city was illuminatedfor the victory.74In the surroundingvillagestoo there was a certainatmosphere,for, NanakChandrecorded,C'Thedaring speechesof the villagersfrightenedme out of my wits".75A proclamationannouncedthe victoryandthe establishmentof a new power: As by the bounty of the gloriousAlmightyand the enemy-destroying fortuneof the Emperorthe yellow-facedand narrow-minded peoplehave been sent to hell, and Cawnporehas been conquered,it is necessarythat all the subjectsand landownersshould be as obedient to the present Governmentas they havebeen to the formerone; thatall the Government servantsshould promptlyand cheerfullyengage their whole mind in executingthe ordersof the Government;thatit is the incumbentduty of all the peasantsand landedproprietorsof every districtto rejoiceat the thoughtthat the Christianshave been sent to hell, and both the Hindoo and Mahomedanreligionshave been confirmed,and that they shouldas usualbe obedientto theauthoritiesofthe Government,andneversufferany complaintagainstthemselvesto reachto the earsof the higherauthority.76 Deposition of Peer Bux, in Depositions at Cawnpore. Shepherd, PersonalNarrativeof theOutbreak atulMassacreat Cawnpore,p. 73. 73 These details are stated in the depositions of Goordial, Lochun, Nundeedeen Aheer, Jagganath and Peer Bux, in Depositions at Caumpore. 71

72

74 ''SynopsisX75 76

Nanak Chand's diary: 27 June 1857. Quoted in Trevelyan, Cawnpore, p. 141.

KANPUR MASSACRESOF 1857

lll

The affirmationof rebel powerwith such brutalityand violence also has anothercontextrelatedto Briiishcounter-insurgency measures. As the British administraiionin Calcuttarecoveredfrom the shockof the uprisingthey took immediatemeasuresto quell it. The forces sent up to north India under Neill and Havelockhad three aims:the re-establishment of Britishauthority;punishingthe rebels; and relievingthe Britishgarrisonsin Kanpurand Lucknow.Neill arrivedin Allahabadon 11 June; this was to serve as his first base forthe takingof Kanpur.Butbeforehe couldmoveto Kanpur,he had to "settle"thetownof Allahabadandits surroundingcountryside.His methodswere simple. He orderedhis troopsto go into towns and villagesand to kill and burnindiscriminately; old men, womenand childrenwerenot spared.Hereis Kaye,a writernot knownfor being sympatheticto the revolt, writingaboutNeill's operations: Over the whole of the SepoyWar there is no darkercloud than that which gatheredover Allahabadin this terriblesummer. . . It is on the recordsof our BritishParliament,in paperssent home by the GovernorGeneralof India in Council, that "the aged, women and children,are sacrificed,as well as thoseguiltyof rebellion.' Theywerenot deliberately hanged, but burnt to death in their villages . . . Englishmendid not hesitateto boast, or to recordtheir boastingsin writing,that they had "sparedno one" and that "pepperingawayat niggers"was very pleasant pastime.77

WilliamHowardRussellwas in Indiain 1858, and he met an officer who was a partof the columnthatmovedup fromAllahabadtowards Kanpur.The officerreported,in Russell'swords,that "In two days forty-twomen were hangedon the roadside,and a batchof twelve men were executedbecausetheirfaceswere 'turnedthe wrongway' when they were met on the march.All the villagesin his frontwere burned".78Even boys who had playfullyflauntedrebelcoloursand beatena tom-tomwere killed.79 The motivesfor such butcherywere also clear. The Briiishwere unableto accept that a subjectpopulationhad taken arms against them,had daredto destroytheirpropertyand lives. As Kayeput it, 77 Kaye,History of theSepoyWar,ii, pp. 269-70.Neill'sorders,accordingto Kaye (p. 275), werethat"allthe men inhabitingthem[certainvillages,previouslymarked out]were to be slaughtered.All sepoys of mutinousregimentsnot giving a good accountof themselveswereto be hanged.The townof Futtehporewhichhadrevolted wasto be attacked,and the Pathanquartersdestroyed,with all theirinhabitants.All headsof insurgents,particularly at Futtehpore,to be hanged.If the DeputyCollector is taken,hang him, and have his headcut off and stuckup on one of the principal (Mahomedan) buildingsof the town". 78 Russell,IndianMutinyDiary, pp. 281-2. 79 Narrated in E. Thompson,TheOtherSideof theMedal(NewYork,1926),p. 72.

112

PAST AND PRESENT

NUMBER 128

So it happenedthat whilst the first bitternessof our degradation the degradation offeanngthosewhomwe hadtaughttofear us was still fresh upon our people, there came a suddenaccessionof stout Englishhearts and strongEnglishhands, readyat once to punishand to awe.80

John Lawrence,the governorof the Punjaband a very influential administrator,laid down the prioritiesof Britishpolicy:'COur object is to make an exampleand terrifyothers''.81 Whatis significantis thatthesekillingsby the Britishtroopswere carriedout beforethe massacrein Kanpur.82It is not far-fetchedto imaginethatthenewsof suchmassacresreachedtherebelstronghold. Theywantedto counterthis showof violenceby theirownexhibition of power. They "borrowed"from the British and replicatedthe violence. The terms of their violencewere thus derivedfrom that very structureof poweragainstwhich they had revolted.83 But was it merely "borrowing"?Or are we being too hasty in pointingto the derivativecharacterof the rebels'use of violence?Is there not somethingmore significantin this tremendousdisplayof force and power? Rebel power, in however tentativea fashion, constituteditself as an alternativeorder;as a sovereignpowerthat sought its identity in the pre-Britisheighteenth-centurypolitical system. The British presence was, therefore,an obstacle to the reconstitutionof that sovereignty.The massacrerestoredthe sovereigntyby manifestingit at its most spectacular.By a displayof terror not dissimilarto the terrorthe Britishdeployed,it soughtto create an awarenessof its unrestrainedand independentpresence. The spectaclereactivatedthe power that Britishrule had undermined. This was a powerthatembarkedon its career,as indeedrebelpower alwaysdoes, not by tryingto enforceits lawsbut by clearlymarking out its enemy. The intensityand ferocityof the violencewas also relatedto the imbricationof the revoltwith profoundreligiousfeelings.As Natalie Zemon Davis has noted, "religiousviolence is intense becauseit connectsintimatelywith the fundamentalvaluesand self-definition of a community".Like the crowdsof late sixteenth-century France, the rebels in Kanpurhad a sense that what they were doing was legitimate;theyfoughtanddestroyedin defenceof theirreligion,and Kaye,History of theSepoyWar,ii, p. 269. Emphasisadded. Quotedin Thompson,Other Sideof theMedal,p. 40. 82"These 'severities'could not have been justifiedby the Cawnporemassacre, becausethey tookplacebeforethatdiabolicalact":Russell,IndianMutiny Diawy, p. 282. 83 See Guha,EZementaty Aspects ofPeasant Insurgency, p. 75. 80 81

KANPUR MASSACRESOF 1857

113

theirviolencehada structure dramaiicandspectacular.Whatwas seenas grotesquewasdestroyedin a grotesqueway, by dehumanizing the victims.84Britishrule, as I haveemphasized,inscribedits domination on the body of the Indian. To eradicatethe marksof that domination,a rebel power had to, in its turn, destroythe body of the Briton. The violence embeddedin Britishrule was eradicated throughcounter-violence:Britishpowerhad to be disembodiedfor the rebel power to be completelysovereign. "The very excess of the violence employed"in the massacre,one could say following Foucault,was "one of the elementsof its glory".85 The glorywas all the greaterbecausethe massacrewas seenby the rebels as divine retribution.The English officerwho collectedthe evidenceon the massacreremarkedin his synopsisthat this was a period "when Satanmay truly be said to have been let loose upon earth".86A groupof capturedsepoys,minutesbeforetheirexecution, were asked individuallywhy they had killed their Britishmasters; each one of them replied that "the slaughterof the British was requiredby our religion".87Whatwas the workof God for one was the work of Satanfor the other. In that abstractcontrapositionis perhaps capturedthe configurationof two contestingsystems of power. The massacreat SatichauraGhat on 27 June 1857 was a dramaticmomentwhen a bodypoliticstruggledto recoverits totality by destroyingthe body of its dominantother. The narrativeof violence in Kanpur does not end here. The massacreon the riverwas followedby a secondmassacre,the nature of which was distinct from that of the first. This involved those who had survivedthe slaughterat SatichauraGhat. The men were separatedout fromthe survivorsand shot. It wasa straightshooting, as if in continuationof whathad happenedon the river.The women andchildrenwerekeptas prisonersin a room,knownastheBibighur. In the meantime,in the rebelcamp, preparationshad to be made to stop the Britishforces marchingup from Allahabad.The rebel forces were defeatedin two hard-foughtencounterson 15 July, in the villageof Aong andon the banksof PanduNadi. The rebelsnow 84 Natalie Zemon Davis, "The Rites of Violence",in N. Z. Davis, Societyand Culturein EarlyModernFrance(Oxford,1987edn.), pp. 181, 186-7,passim. 85 The above paragraph is based on my readingof M. Foucault,Disciplineand Punish:TheBirthof thePnson(Harmondsworth, 1979),esp. ch. 2; Guha,Elementaty Aspectsof PeasantInsurgency, pp. 164-6.The quotationis fromp. 32 of Disciplineand Punish. 86 ''synOpsiss87

Ball, Histowof theIndianMutiny,ii, p. 242.

114

PAST AND PRESENT

NUMBER 128

retreatedto Kanpur,facingthe prospectof a Britishtake-overof the city. It was then decided that the ladies and childrenwere to be killed. A personalservantof Nana Sahib, namedBegum, who was in chargeof the prisoners,broughtordersfrom the Nana for the sepoysto kill the womenandchildren.The sepoysrefusedto comply, and fired a few volleys aimed at the ceiling. At this four or five professionalexecutionerswere sent in armedwith swordsand long knives, and they cut up the prisoners.The bodies it was saidthat not all were dead were throwninto a well.88 In this episode there is clear evidence that the unity that had previouslybeen forgedbeganto breakdownwith the advanceof the Britishforcesandthe defeatssufferedby therebels.The rebelsclearly refusedto obey their leader. Defeat had led to a loss of legitimacy. The leadersnow had to fall back upon their personalservantsand on mercenaries.The men who were calledin to carryout the killing were paid.89This massacre,unlike the first one, was no longeran open affair.It was carriedout in a closedroom. The peoplearound could not see the killing. The massacreno longerhad the sanction and participationof an entire society which saw itself as defeated. Lieutenant-Colonel Williamsindicatedthis when he commentedin his synopsisof the evidence: Regardingthe numerousmassacresthat took place, the evidence. . . is clearlyand freely given, but on approachingthe last and most terrible scene, all seem instinciivelyto shrinkfromconfessingany knowledgeof so foul and barbarousa crimeas the indiscriminateslaughterof helpless womenand innocentchildren.Evidencethat runs clearand strongfrom 15thof May to 14thof July, suddenlyceaseson the fatalday of the 15th of that month.90

The very way in which the massacrewas carriedout eliminatedthe possibilityof any direct witnesses, since it was in a closed room. There were people outside, but they, as Williamsnoted, refusedto speakaboutwhattheyhadseenor heard.Do we detectin this silence, this reticence,disapproval?Peoplehad exultedin the firstmassacre; theydisownedthe secondby remainingsilent.Sepoyswhohadkilled on the river were unwilling to obey orders. Thus the first was a spectacle, the other carriedout indoors;one had been a show of power,the otheran act of retreat.The secondmassacrewas the work of a leadershipno longer sure of its power, its mass support,and thereforeof its victory. The leadershipwanted to kill becauseit 88 "SynOpSiS"89 Ibd 90 Ibid.

KANPUR 1WASSACRES OF 1857

115

wantedto removewitnessesof its own complicity.It was a massacre producedby fear. The massacreof Satichauraand the massacreat Bibighurwere basedon two differentcodesof violence.Contrasting crimewith insurgency,a historianof peasantinsurgencyin colonial India writes that "the criminalmay be said to stand in the same relationto the insurgentas does what is conspiratorial (or secretive) to whatis public(or open), or whatis individualistic(or smallgroup) to whatis communal(ormass)in character''.91 It wasindeedan irony thatunderpressurefromBritishcounter-insurgency measures,in the space of a fortnightthe power of the insurrectionhad transformed itselffromthe publicto the secretive:fromthe communalto only the leadership:what had previouslybeen seen as a work of God had become, one could say using the same terms, an act of Satan. A POSTSCRIPTON RAPE

It wouldhavebeen convenientif one couldleavethe analysisof rebel violenceand its natureat this point. To do so would be to leavethe narrativewithoutobservinga significantabsence.Herewas a society in openwarwith a foreignpower;at the timewhenthe rebelsseemed to be victoriousthey had Britishwomen at their mercy for about fifteen days. Yet there was no rape. Williamsconcludedafter his investigationsthat "the most searchingand earnestenquiriestotally disprovethe unfoundedassertionthatwasatfirstso frequentlymade, and so currentlybelieved,thatpersonalindignityanddishonourhad beenofferedto ourpoorsufferingcountrywomen".92Witnesseswho hadbeen veryclose to wherethe ladieshadbeenimprisonedtestified that nobody had molested the women.93In 1858 Lord Canning ordereda full inquiryon the dishonouringof Britishwomenby the rebels all over north India. The findingsof the inquirywere very definite: nothinghas come to my knowledgewhich would in the smallestdegree supportany of the talesof dishonourcurrentin our publicprints.Direct evidence,whereverprocurable,has been steadilyand consistentagainst them. The people,thosewho mustknowhadtherebeencasesof outraged honourandwouldhavetold us, uniformlydenythatsuchthingswereever perpetratedor thoughtof.94 91Guha,Elementaty Aspectsof PeasantInsurgency, p. 79. "synopsisX93 Depositionsof WilliamClarke,Eliza Bradshaw and Hingun, in Depositions at Canumpore. 94 I.O.L.R., Home Miscellaneous, no. 725, "Memorandum containingthe Result of Enquiriesmadeby Desireof the GovernorGeneralinto the Rumoursof European Femaleshavingbeen Dishonouredduringthe LateMutinies". 92

116

PAST AND PRESENT

NUMBER 128

Officerafterofficerfromthe districtswroteto saythattheyhadfound no evidenceof dishonourto women.95 Whatare we to makeof this absence?I wouldlike to suggesttwo possibleexplanations.The revoltof 1857visualizeditselfas a warof religion,a struggleto preservethe purityof casteandreligionagainst a perceivedattemptat contamination by theBritish.The maintenance of puritywent so far as to label all loyalistsas Christians.96 It was said that in conversationamong the rebels the Britishwere never mentionedfor "a man's mouth becameimpure[for] forty days by namingthe Kafirs".97In such a situationcontactof any kind with Britishwomenwouldobviouslybe consideredpolluting.The preservationof religiousand castepuritycould thus eliminaterape. The aim of the rebels, as I have tried to emphasize,was the destructionof all thingsBritish.As Muir,who conductedthe enquiry orderedby Lord Canningput it, "the objectof the mutineerswas . . . not so much to disgraceour name, as to wipe out all tracesof Europeans,and of everythingconnectedwith foreignrule".98Rape was probablyseen as an instrumentof defilement,a method of subordinationwhich pollutedthe blood and body of womenby the most intimateand forcefulcontact.This was not the agendaof the rebels.They weredrivenby the idea of annihilatingthe British;this is how they wantedto show and establishtheirpower. That power did not distinguishby way of genderor age. In that contextwhen the desire to destroywas overwhelming,rapebecameredundant. Universityof Calcutta

Rudrangshu MukheUee

95Ibid., enclosures. Depositionof KhodaBux, in Depositions at Cawnpore. Depositionof John Fitchett,ibid. 98I.O.L.R., HomezMiscellaneous, no. 725, "Memorandum containingthe Result of Enquiriesmadeby Desireof the GovernorGeneralinto the Rumoursof European Femaleshavingbeen Dishonouredduringthe LateMutinies". 96 97