11-29-2006, 05:24 PM
<!--QuoteBegin-Ravish+Nov 29 2006, 02:53 PM-->QUOTE(Ravish @ Nov 29 2006, 02:53 PM)<!--QuoteEBegin-->Yes I agree with your observations. In fact, to term the Sepoy mutiny as the First War of Indipendence is perhaps an after thought. If you follow the chronology of the mutiny you will observe that initially the mutiny at Kolkata was fermented by certain instigators and naturally the sepoyes had no plans beforehand.Once it started a majority of Units followed the revolt. However, it is laos true that a substantial part of the Company's Indian Forces remained loyal to the British and this is the main cause for the ultimate failure of the revolt.Otherwise, it would not have been possible for a handful of British forces to subjugate the entire Indian forces of the East India Company.
[right][snapback]61501[/snapback][/right]
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Let me get some data on the number of British forces. They were definitely more than the usual. But I think it is also not right to term it as just another mutiny. There were revolts and mutinies earlier too, but this one also had popular support. It was a general mass uprising.
But I will still stick to my original theory about whether the British won or the Indians lost. I don't think the British could have won inspite of their Indian support, inspite of their generals, if our sepoys had better coordination and an overall strategy.
[right][snapback]61501[/snapback][/right]
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Let me get some data on the number of British forces. They were definitely more than the usual. But I think it is also not right to term it as just another mutiny. There were revolts and mutinies earlier too, but this one also had popular support. It was a general mass uprising.
But I will still stick to my original theory about whether the British won or the Indians lost. I don't think the British could have won inspite of their Indian support, inspite of their generals, if our sepoys had better coordination and an overall strategy.