19th Century Indian Uprisings: Key Rebellions Against British Colonial Rule

In the late 18th and early 19th centuries, various uprisings erupted across India, fueled by resistance to British rule and local grievances. From the rebellions in Ganjam and Gumsur to the Poligars’ revolt in South India and Diwan Velu Thampi’s revolt in Travancore, these conflicts significantly challenged British authority, reshaping the region’s political landscape. Urban movements in Benaras (1810), Surat (1814), and Bareilly (1816) saw collaboration between different strata against British rule. Before colonial rule, protests against rulers were common, but colonial authorities’ focus on revenue extraction and a biased legal system intensified grievances, leading to armed resistance. 

Uprisings in Ganjam and Gumsur (1800, 1835-37)

Cause: The uprising in the Northern Circars, specifically in Ganjam and adjacent areas, was triggered by the refusal to pay revenues initiated by Zamindar Strikara Bhanj of Gumsur in 1797. 

• By 1800, he openly rebelled, challenging public authorities, and leading to discontent against British rule.
• Course: Support from leaders like Jlani Deo and Jagannath Deo fueled the rebellion. In 1804, Jagannath Deo’s capture resulted in the English allocating certain districts to Strikara Bhanj.
• • In 1807-08, Strikara’s son, Dhananjaya Bhanj, rebelled and was coerced into surrendering in June 1815. 
  • A compromise saw Strikara’s return as Zamindar. Dhananjay managed the estate until 1830 but, unable to clear arrears, rebelled again in 1835. 
  • The revolt significantly diminished government authority, persisting until February 1837, when leader Doora Bisayi was apprehended.
• Consequence: The rebellion’s consequence was the forfeiture of the zamindari of Gumsur in the Northern Circars. 
  • The struggle, marked by resistance and leadership changes, ultimately led to a loss of government authority and a shift in the governance of the region.

Uprisings in Palamau (1800-1802)

Reason: Between 1800 and 1802, the region of Palamau witnessed a complex political scenario marked by issues related to agrarian landlordism and the feudal system. During this period, Bhukhan Singh, a Chero chief, led a rebellion. 

• Course: In response, Colonel Jones established a camp in Palamau and Sarguja, where he spent two years working to suppress the uprising. 
  • The rebellion gradually subsided after Bhukhan Singh died in 1802.

The Poligars’ Revolt (1795-1805) in South India

Significance and major centres: It was a significant resistance movement against British rule. The major centres of these uprisings were Tinneveli, Ramanathapuram, Sivaganga, Sivagiri, Madurai, and North Arcot. 

• Reason: The conflict originated in 1781 when the Nawab of Arcot handed over the control of Tinneveli and the Carnatic Provinces to the East India Company, causing resentment among the poligars who considered themselves independent authorities.
• First Phase: The initial revolt was primarily over taxation but held a broader political dimension, as the English treated the poligars as adversaries. 
  • Kattabomman Nayakan, the poligar of Panjalankurichi, led the insurrection between 1795 and 1799. 
  • After a fierce battle where Veerapandiya Kattabomman’s forces defeated the Company, a price was placed on his head, leading to a broader rebellion by the poligars.
  • With reinforcements, the Company eventually defeated Kattabomman. He fled into the Pudukottai forests but was betrayed by Ettappan, the Raja of Pudukottai, resulting in his capture and subsequent execution. 
  • This marked the confiscation of the palayam of Panjalankurichi and the estates of five other poligars involved in the rebellion.
• Second Phase: It was more violent than the first, and began in February 1801 when imprisoned poligars in the fort of Palamcotta managed to escape. 
  • Rebels seized control of numerous forts and even captured Tuticorin. 
  • British forces were reinforced from Malabar, suppressing the rebellion led by Oomathurai, Kattabomman’s brother, who joined the uprising of the ‘Marudus’ led by Marathu Pandian, which was quelled in October 1801.
• In the following years, the poligars of North Arcot rebelled in response to being deprived of their right to collect kaval fees (an ancient village police institution). 
• Consequence: By February 1805, the rebellion was suppressed. Some rebel leaders were ordered to reside in Madras, while others were granted allowances.

The Poligar rebellion spanned a vast area of South India and was characterised by proclamations advocating for a mass movement against foreign rule, seeking independence.

Uprising in Bhiwani (1809)

Bhiwani- A Stronghold in the 1809 Jat Uprising: In 1809, the Jats of Haryana staged a rebellion, taking refuge in Bhiwani and putting up a formidable resistance. 

• The British had to deploy a brigade comprising various military units, along with a potent battering ram, to finally quell the uprising.

Diwan Velu Thampi’s Revolt (1808-1809)

Causes: It was prompted by the harsh conditions imposed on the state of Travancore by the East India Company. Both parties had entered into a subsidiary alliance under Wellesley in 1805. 

• Company’s stringent terms led to widespread discontent in the region, with the ruler unable to meet the subsidy payments, falling into arrears. 
• A British resident of Travancore was interfering in the state’s internal affairs.
• Course: Faced with the overbearing attitude of the Company, Prime Minister Velu Thampi, aided by Nair troops, decided to rebel against the British. 
• • Velu Thampi made a significant proclamation in Kundara, openly advocating for taking up arms to expel the British from their native land, later known as the Kundara Proclamation. 
  • This declaration sparked a widespread rebellion against the British, necessitating a large-scale military operation to restore order. 
  • While the Maharaja of Travancore did not wholeheartedly support the rebellion and switched allegiance to the Company, Velu Thampi chose to end his own life to avoid capture. Ultimately, the rebellion gradually faded away.

Disturbances in Bundelkhand (1808-12)

Background: Between 1808 and 1812, Bundelkhand, a large province under British control following the Second Anglo-Maratha Wars (1803-05), witnessed significant disturbances. 

• Start of the Resistance: The Bundela chiefs resisted the new government from their nearly one hundred and fifty forts. 
  • The first major resistance arose from Lakshaman Dawa, the fort commander of Ajaygarh fort, who wanted to extend his hold on the fort beyond the agreed two-year term ending in 1808. 
  • He surrendered in February 1809 and was taken to Calcutta.
  • The next challenge came from Darya Singh, the fort commander of Kalanjar, which was quelled in January 1812. 
  • However, the most formidable threat emerged from a renowned military adventurer named Gopal Singh, who was in dispute with his uncle, supported by the British. Gopal Singh managed to evade British forces for four years.
• British Response: To curb these disturbances, the British implemented a policy of binding the hereditary chieftains of Bundelkhand through a series of contractual obligations known as “Ikarnamahs.” 
  • This approach aimed to establish a more stable and controlled governance in the region.

Parlakimedi Outbreak (1813-34)

Background: From 1813 to 1834, the region of Parlakimedi, located in the western border of Ganjam district (now in Odisha), saw resistance from its zamindars and rajas. 

• When the East India Company took control of Ganjam, Narayan Deo was the reigning raja of Parlakimedi. His opposition compelled the British to send an army led by Colonel Peach. 
• In 1768, Peach defeated Narayan Deo and appointed Gajapathi Deo, Narayan’s son, as the proclaimed zamindar.
• Narayan’s Response: However, Narayan Deo, with support from his son and brothers, launched another rebellion. 
• British Response: As the resistance persisted, the Madras Presidency appointed George Russell as the commissioner of the region in 1832. 
  • Russell was granted extensive powers to quell the uprising, and by 1834, he had successfully pacified the area.

Kutch or Cutch Rebellion (1816-1832)

Background: From 1816 to 1832, Kutch (or Cutch) experienced a period of rebellion and internal strife. Initially, a treaty in 1816 vested power in Maharaja Bharamal II. 

• However, conflicts arose between the Maharaja and a group of chieftains, leading to British intervention in Kutch’s internal affairs. 
• In 1819, Maharaja Bharmal II attempted to remove the British from his territory by raising Arab and African troops, garnering support from the chieftains.
• British responded by defeating and deposing Raja Rao Bharamal II, placing his infant son on the throne. 
  • A British resident effectively governed the region alongside a regency council. 
• Causes: The council’s administrative changes, coupled with high land assessments, sparked discontent.
• Course: As news of British setbacks in the Burma War circulated, the chieftains seized the opportunity to rebel and demanded the reinstatement of Bharamal II. 
• Consequence: Despite extensive military efforts, the Company’s authorities were eventually compelled to adopt a more conciliatory approach to manage the situation.

Rising at Bareilly (1816)

Reason: In 1816, a rebellion erupted in Bareilly, triggered by the imposition of a police tax that deeply angered the citizens. 

• The situation took on a religious dimension when Mufti Muhammad Aiwaz, a highly respected figure, submitted a petition to the town’s magistrate in March 1816. 
• Course: Tensions escalated when the police, in the process of collecting the tax, harmed a woman. This incident led to a violent clash between the Mufti’s followers and the police.
• • Within two days of this event, armed Muslims from Pilibhit, Shahjahanpur, and Rampur joined the rebellion to defend their faith and the Mufti. 
  • In April 1816, insurgents went so far as to kill Leycester’s son (who was a judge in the provincial court of Bareilly). 
• British Response: The rebellion was eventually quelled, but it required a substantial deployment of military forces, resulting in over 300 rebels being killed, and many more wounded and imprisoned. 
• Nature of the Uprising: The uprising appeared to stem more from general discontent with the alien administration than from specific grievances.

Upsurge in Hathras (1817)

Background: In 1817, an uprising occurred in Hathras, spearheaded by Dayaram, a talukdar who held control over several villages in the Aligarh district. 

• Dayaram’s stronghold was the formidable fort of Hathras, often likened to a second Bharatpur due to its towering walls, substantial thickness, and defences including a deep ditch and mounted artillery.
• Revenue Burden on Dayaram: The East India Company had initially settled the Hathras estate with Dayaram as a farmer. 
• • However, as the burden of high revenues continued to grow, Dayaram consistently struggled to meet his financial obligations. 
    • He also engaged in various acts of hostility by harbouring government fugitives. 
  • Use of Force by British: In response, the Company launched a large-scale military attack on Hathras in February 1817.
  • Retaliation: Dayaram valiantly defended the fort for over 15 days and managed to escape unharmed. 
• Consequence: Ultimately, he was compelled to return under the condition of submission and accepted a settlement that included a pension. 
  • Another notable rebel, Bhagwant Singh, the Raja of Mursan, opted to surrender to the government rather than dismantle his fort.

Paika Rebellion (1817)

Reason: It was in Odisha and was sparked by the oppressive policies of the East India Company, which had conquered the region in 1803. 

• The Paiks, who were the traditional landed militia, faced a decline in power and prestige due to the Company’s actions, including the dethronement of the Raja of Khurda.
• The Company’s extortionate land revenue policies, along with measures such as increased salt taxes, the abolition of cowrie currency, and the demand for taxes in silver, caused widespread discontent among zamindars and peasants. 
• Leadership: Bakshi Jagabandhu Bidyadhar, who had served as the military chief under the Raja of Khurda, led the rebellion. His ancestral estate was confiscated by the Company in 1814, leaving him in dire straits.
• Course: The rebellion gained momentum with the arrival of Khonds from Gumsur in Khurda territory in March 1817. 
• • With support from Mukunda Deva, the last Raja of Khurda, and other local zamindars, Jagabandhu and a diverse army of Paikas forced the Company forces to temporarily retreat. 
  • This uprising came to be known as the Paika Bidroh (rebellion).
  • The rebellion employed guerilla tactics, persisting until it was brutally suppressed by 1818. The priests at the Puri temple, who had sheltered Jagabandhu, were apprehended and executed.
• British Response: Although the initial success emboldened the rebels and triggered a wider armed resistance in Odisha, the Company eventually regained control. 
• Consequence: Jagabandhu and other rebels found refuge with the Raja of Nayagarh. While some rebels, including Dinabandhu Santra, surrendered in November 1818, Jagabandhu managed to evade British capture.
  • The Paiks endured significant hardships. In 1825, Jagabandhu surrendered under negotiated terms, though some sources suggest he was captured and died in captivity in 1829. 
  • The Paika Rebellion ultimately secured substantial concessions, including remissions of arrears, reduced assessments, fixed tenures, and other reforms towards a more lenient governance.

Waghera Rising (1818-1820)

Reason: The Waghera Rising took place from 1818 to 1820 and was fueled by discontent towards the foreign administration, as well as the oppressive policies of the Gaekwad of Baroda, who was backed by the British government. 

• Course: The Waghera chiefs, located in Okha Mandal, resorted to armed resistance. They conducted incursions into British territory during 1818-19. 
• Result: Eventually, a peace treaty was negotiated and signed in November 1820, marking the end of the uprising.

Ahom Revolt (1828)

Cause: It was a rebellion against the British who had initially promised to withdraw from Assam after the First Burma War (1824-26). Instead of leaving, the British sought to integrate the Ahom territories into their dominion. 

• This led to a rebellion in 1828, led by Gomdhar Konwar, an Ahom prince, along with allies like Dhanjoy Bongohain and Jairam Khargharia Phukan. 
• Course: They gathered near Jorhat and officially declared Gomdhar Konwar as the king. 
• British Response: Eventually, the Company opted for a conciliatory approach, ceding Upper Assam to Maharaja Purandar Singh Narendra and returning part of the kingdom to the Assamese king.

Surat Salt Agitations (1840s)

Increase in Salt Duty as Cause: The Surat Salt Agitations in the 1840s were marked by strong anti-British sentiments. In 1844, locals in Surat attacked Europeans in protest against the government’s decision to increase salt duty. 

• Government Response: Faced with widespread resistance, the government withdrew the additional levy. In 1848, another attempt to introduce Bengal Standard Weights and Measures was met with determined opposition through boycotts and passive resistance, forcing the government to withdraw the measure.

Kolhapur and Savantvadi Revolts

Gadhkaris Removal as Fort Administrators: The Kolhapur and Savantvadi Revolts were fueled by discontent arising from the disbandment of the Gadkaris, a hereditary military class stationed in Maratha forts, as part of administrative reorganisation in Kolhapur state after 1844. 

• Course: Fearing unemployment, the Gadkari rebelled and occupied forts like Samangarh and Bhudargarh. In Savantvadi, simmering discontent led to revolts. 
  • The people had previously risen against the British in 1830, 1836, and 1838, particularly in response to the deposition of their ruler
• British Respons: To establish control, the British authorities enacted various laws in the region.

Wahabi Movement

Nature and Leader: The Wahabi Movement, led by Syed Ahmed of Rai Bareilly, was a revivalist Islamic movement inspired by the teachings of Abdul Wahab of Saudi Arabia and Shah Waliullah of Delhi. 

• Main Idea: Syed Ahmed advocated a return to the pure form of Islam practised in the time of the Prophet and rejected Western influence on the religion. 
• Course: He assumed the role of the desired leader (Imam) and established a countrywide organisation with a secret code of operation under spiritual vice-regents (Khalifas), using Sithana in the northwestern tribal belt as its base.
  • The Wahabis declared a jihad against the Sikh kingdom of Punjab after which they directed their efforts against the British dominion in India, viewing it as Dar-ul-Harb (the land of non-Muslims) that needed to be converted into Dar-ul-Islam (the land of Islam).
  • Following the defeat of the Sikh ruler and the incorporation of Punjab into the British East India Company’s dominion in 1849, the British became the primary target of Wahabi attacks.
• Centres: The movement had significant centres in places like Patna, with missions spread across Hyderabad, Madras, Bengal, United Provinces, and Bombay.
• Significance and British Response: The movement played a crucial role in spreading anti-British sentiments.
  • However, a series of military operations by the British in the 1860s on the Wahabi base in Sithana, along with sedition cases against the Wahabis, weakened their resistance. 
  • Despite this, sporadic encounters with the authorities continued into the 1880s and 1890s.

Kuka Movement(1840)

Leaders: The Kuka Movement, founded by Bhagat Jawahar Mal (Sian Saheb) in 1840 in western Punjab, was later led by Baba Ram Singh, who also established the Namdhari Sikh sect. 

• Initially focused on religious purification, the movement evolved into a political campaign following the British takeover of Punjab.
• Main Ideas: The Kukas advocated the abolition of caste-based discrimination among Sikhs, discouraged the consumption of meat, alcohol, and drugs, promoted intermarriages and widow remarriage, and encouraged women to break free from seclusion. 
• • On the political front, they aimed to oust the British and restore Sikh rule in Punjab. They also urged people to wear hand-woven clothes, and boycott English laws, education, and products, thus championing the ideas of Swadeshi and non-cooperation.
• British Response: As the movement gained momentum, the British took measures to suppress it between 1863 and 1872. 
  • In 1872, Ram Singh was deported to Rangoon, marking a significant blow to the movement.

Conclusion

The 19th-century uprisings across India vividly illustrate the widespread resistance against British colonial rule, driven by local grievances and broader nationalist sentiments. From the rebellions in Ganjam and Gumsur to the Paika Rebellion and the Wahabi Movement, these conflicts showcased the diverse and dynamic nature of resistance. While the British ultimately quelled these uprisings, the legacy of these movements contributed to the growing sense of unity and resistance that would shape India’s struggle for independence.

DOWNLOAD PDF