This article was downloaded by: [Rahman, Tariq] On: 11 July 2009 Access details: Access Details: [subscription number 913070499] Publisher Routledge Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK South Asia: Journal of South Asian Studies Publication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information: http://www.informaworld.com/smpp/title~content=t713445348 The Events of 1857 in Contemporary Writings in Urdu Tariq Rahman a a National Institute of Pakistan Studies, Quaid-i-Azam University, Islamabad Online Publication Date: 01 August 2009 To cite this Article Rahman, Tariq(2009)'The Events of 1857 in Contemporary Writings in Urdu',South Asia: Journal of South Asian Studies,32:2,212 — 229 To link to this Article: DOI: 10.1080/00856400903049481 URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00856400903049481 PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE Full terms and conditions of use: http://www.informaworld.com/terms-and-conditions-of-access.pdf This article may be used for research, teaching and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematic reproduction, re-distribution, re-selling, loan or sub-licensing, systematic supply or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. The publisher does not give any warranty express or implied or make any representation that the contents will be complete or accurate or up to date. The accuracy of any instructions, formulae and drug doses should be independently verified with primary sources. The publisher shall not be liable for any loss, actions, claims, proceedings, demand or costs or damages whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with or arising out of the use of this material. South Asia: Journal of South Asian Studies, n.s., Vol.XXXII, no.2, August 2009 The Events of 1857 in Contemporary Writings in Urdu Tariq Rahman Downloaded By: [Rahman, Tariq] At: 11:14 11 July 2009 National Institute of Pakistan Studies, Quaid-i-Azam University, Islamabad Introduction The year 2007 marked the 150th anniversary of the climactic events of 1857. 1857 has been variously described as a ‘revolt’, a ‘war of independence’ (in the nationalist historiography of both India and Pakistan) and as a ‘mutiny’ by early British historians.1 Today in India it is seen generally as a predominantly secular, joint Hindu–Muslim project;2 but in Pakistan the Muslim role is emphasised while the Hindu one is ignored. And the debate as to whether it was a ‘mutiny’ or a ‘war of independence’ goes on.3 Urdu-speaking literary critics— Ibadat Barelvi, Ahmad Nadeem Qasmi, Hasan Askari, and Izhar Kazmi for instance—all agree with the war of independence thesis, on the grounds that it was more organised and widespread among ordinary people than would have been the case had it been a mere mutiny of the soldiery.4 However, Kazmi is a’ bır en aware that his use of the term ghadar (mutiny) in the title Ghadar ki T (Interpretations of the Mutiny) may be seen as being a national insult a century after the event.5 My objective in this article is to assess what contemporary authors writing in Urdu made of the uprising. Among the sources which I 1 K.C. Yadav, ‘Interpreting 1857. A Case Study’, in Sabyasachi Bhattacharya (ed.), Rethinking 1857 (Delhi: Orient Longman, 2007), pp.3–21. 2 Ibid., p.15. 3 R.P. Singh, ‘Re-assessing Writings on the Rebellion: Savarkar to Sarendra Nath Sen’, in Sabyasachi Bhattacharya (ed.), Rethinking 1857 (Delhi: Orient Longman, 2007), pp.44–57. 4 Nasir Kazmi and Intizar Hussain (eds), 1857 Khial Number (Lahore: Sang-e-Meel, [1957], rpr. 2007), pp.17–44. 5 Ibid., p.40. ISSN 0085-6401 print; 1479-0270 online/09/020212-18 Ó 2009 South Asian Studies Association of Australia DOI: 10.1080/00856400903049481 THE EVENTS OF 1857 IN CONTEMPORARY WRITINGS IN URDU 213 Downloaded By: [Rahman, Tariq] At: 11:14 11 July 2009 discuss, most were written contemporaneously, but some were also written later. Works in the last category are included where they shed light on how perceptions of 1857 changed. The Emergence of Urdu as a Language for Non-Creative Discourse Though used in poetry for a long time—as Gujarati from the fourteenth century and Dakkani from the fifteenth—Urdu did not become a language for non-creative discourse till the early nineteenth century. The first Hindustani newspaper, the Bengal Gazette, began publication in 1816. However, the first real Urdu newspaper, the J am-e-Jah an Num a, dates from 1822.6 By the 1850s the North Western Provinces (NWP) were home to 37 ‘native’ or vernacular newspapers with a combined circulation of 1839.7 The majority of them were in Urdu, which by this time had replaced Persian as the language of written communication for educated people, both Muslims and Hindus, in North India—i.e. in the area where the soldiers of the East India Company rose against its rule. The Argument The argument advanced in this article is that the ‘rebels’ of 1857 mostly justified their stance with reference to categories borrowed from religious discourse; they legitimised their actions with reference to an alleged British attempt to destroy their religious identity. The ‘non-rebels’, on the other hand, tended to see the resistance movement as a symptom of ‘disorder’ or catastrophe. Although the latter agreed that the British were guilty of mistakes and bad governance, they did not believe the colonial government had lost political legitimacy. Therefore they deemed armed resistance against it a ‘mutiny’ (ghadar). Eventually, the ‘rebel’ argument was completely overwhelmed and supplanted by the discourse favoured by the ‘non-rebels’ and, of course, the British. We know this because, whereas the contemporary narratives are fairly evenly distributed between the two positions, all the later writings in Urdu categorise the events of 1857 as a ‘mutiny’ and the ‘rebels’ as b aghı. This colonial discourse was, in turn, supplanted with the internalisation of nationalism as a principle of 6 Tahir Masood, Urd u Sah afat Unnıswın Sadı Mein (Urdu Journalism in the Nineteenth Century) (Karachi: Fazli Sons (Pvt.) Ltd., 2002), p.130. 7 Report on the Native Presses in the North Western Provinces 1853, IOR v/23/118 Pt. 19 Art .26, Acc No. 11479, National Documentation Centre, Islamabad. 214 SOUTH ASIA Downloaded By: [Rahman, Tariq] At: 11:14 11 July 2009 categorisation of social reality in the first quarter of the twentieth century. The new vocabulary, calling 1857 a ‘national war of independence’, is misleading in so far as neither the ‘rebels’ nor the ‘non-rebels’ thought of these events in nationalistic terms. Moreover, the assumption that the ‘nation’ can be constructed of unitary space (the whole of India) or a unified people (transcending religious, ethnic and other categories) is also inapplicable to the events of 1857 since the uprising was not spread all over India—the areas now in Pakistan experienced very little of it—nor did the anti-British fighters transcend their religious identities. Methodologically, the study draws on the work of linguist Anna Wierzbicka which shows how an analysis of the key words used by people in their writing can provide an insight into their political ideas.8 Thus, we can understand (1) how the ‘Other’—in this case the British or the ‘rebels’—were seen by the writers of Urdu, (2) how certain discourses, backed by the power of the colonial state, became hegemonic after 1857, and (3) how these in turn were eclipsed and replaced by others, judged more serviceable. The Writings of Non-Rebels Memoirs, Histories and Letters The major apologist of the British, but the only one who took great pains to explain the Indian position to the British at some personal risk, was (Sir) Syed Ahmed Khan (1817–98). Syed probably started writing ‘Asbab Sarkashı-e-Hindust an k a Jaw ab-e-Mazm un’ (‘An Essay on the Causes of the Indian Revolt’) (1858) in Muradabad in Urdu and then had it translated into English. However, he was in such a hurry to send it to members of parliament in Britain that he sent the Urdu version initially. The first edition was of 500 copies and most of them went to London. A translation into English followed—using the title given above—but such was the paranoia of the time that the foreign secretary initially tried to prevent its publication.9 Syed begins by defining the term ‘sar kashı’ (lit. taking out or raising one’s head). He defines it as fighting against, or defying, government. He also deploys 8 Anna Wierzbicka, Understanding Cultures through their Key Words: English, Russian, Polish, German and Japanese (New York: Oxford University Press, 1997). 9 Saleem Uddin Qureshi, ‘Risala Asbab-e-Baghawat-ı Hind’, in Mohammad Ikram Chughtai (comp.), 1857: R ozn amche, Mu ‘ asir Taehrır en, Y add asht en (Diaries, Memoirs and Contemporary Writings) (Lahore: Sang-eMeel, 2007), p.805. THE EVENTS OF 1857 IN CONTEMPORARY WRITINGS IN URDU 215 Downloaded By: [Rahman, Tariq] At: 11:14 11 July 2009 the term ‘bagh awat’ to describe acts of violent insurrection or mutiny.10 From his point of view, many ordinary people in 1857 were guilty of sar kashı, but awat. Secondly, Syed makes the point—a courageous only the soldiers of bagh one for those days—that the British had brought the insurrection upon themselves by various acts of commission and omission towards their Indian subjects. Against that, Syed clearly regards the East India Company’s rule as legal and violent opposition to it, therefore, as unacceptable. an Gh alib (1797–1869) is usually regarded as the greatest poet of Asadull ah Kh Urdu and was certainly the greatest man of letters of his day. His Persianlanguage work Dastanb u (Bouquet) (1858) was specifically written to appease the British.11 It is a journal purporting to describe ‘from the beginning to the end those things that I [Ghalib] myself experienced or those which I personally ud k e heard’ (‘sar t a sar ın nig arish y a anst k e bar man hamıravad ya an khuahid b 12 shunıda mı shavad’) from May 1857 to 31 July 1858. It was published in 1858 although the date 1860 is also given in some accounts.13 The first edition was of 500 copies and copies were sent to high British officials in the hope of getting financial and other benefits. It may have been ‘suitably revised to meet the requirements of the situation’, but there is no evidence either for or against this conjecture. Ghalib begins with a conventional paean of praise (qasıd a) for the monarch—in ez b ej a this case Queen Victoria. Using negative terms such as rastkh (unwarranted revolt), he goes on to make the claim that 1857 was morally and legally unjustified—a position which, as we have seen, echoed that of Syed. However not everything in the book is favourable to the Raj. He calls Delhi a jail (zind an)14 and points out that the Muslims suffered shortages of basic necessities such as candles—‘so that their houses were dark at night’ (‘shab an a kh an a hai ın mardum b e chir agh ast’).15 He was also among the first commentators to accuse the rulers of adopting a discriminatory attitude towards Muslims. The Muslims, he says, were not allowed to bury their dead while the Hindus could ‘take them to the river and burn them’ (‘Hind u hamı 10 Syed Ahmed Khan, ‘Asbab Sarkashı-e-Hindustan ka Jawab-e-Mazm un’, in Mohammad Ikram Chughtai (comp.), 1857: R ozn amche, Mu ‘ asir Taehrır en, Y add asht en (Diaries, Memoirs and Contemporary Writings) (Lahore: Sang-e-Meel 2007), p.10. 11 Asadullah Khan Ghalib, Dastanb u (Persian: Bouquet) (Lahore: Matbu’at-e-Majlis-e-yadgar-e-Ghelib, 1969). 12 Ibid., p.21. 13 The book was published in the Maktaba Mufid-ul-Khalaiq in Agra by Munshi Hargopal Tafta who gives the date of 1858. The date of 1860 is given by the chronogram rast kh ez b ej a in Ghalib, Dastanb u, pp.83 & 38. 14 Ibid., p.70. 15 Ibid, p.78. 216 SOUTH ASIA Downloaded By: [Rahman, Tariq] At: 11:14 11 July 2009 taw anad ke murd a r a ba dariy a burd ‘o bar lab- e- ab dar atish soz and’).16 However, despite mentioning these grievances, Ghalib’s lexicon confirms the legality of British rule since the sepoys and their rebellion are called sh orish ah (soldiers seeking malice) and k ur namak an (evil, mutiny), sip ah kına khu (blind to their salt, unfaithful). Even in his letters, where he could have been more frank, Ghalib does not challenge the legality of British rule—although he freely laments the devastation of the city and, above all, of his own class by the chaos unleashed by the uprising. For instance he says he was afraid (dart a h un);17 in several letters he uses the words fas ad (destruction), fitn a (evil, conflict), etc. At one place he suggests that the name of a new magazine about 1857 to be brought e-Sip ah (Chaos of the Soldiers), Fitn a- eout by his friends should be Ghogha- Mehshar (Evil of the Doomsday) or Rastk ez- e-Hind (Doomsday of India).18 He did have English friends and lamented the death of one, Major John Jacobs, at the hands of the ‘dark-faced blacks’ (‘r u si ah k alon’).19 In another letter Ghalib says that Delhi was attacked by five forces: the rebels (b aghi); the British army (kh aki); and so on.20 In short, it seems that Ghalib regarded the uprising of the sepoys and the events which succeeded it as a breach of order. His references to the sepoys as k al e (blacks) and r u si ah (dark-faced)—racist terms both— indicate that he regarded their power in Delhi as something of an anarchy. The British troops (g or e) were no better than the native soldiers but, though guilty of individual excesses, were part of a legitimate order which Ghalib trusted to keep anarchy at bay. There is remarkably also a European account in Urdu. Its author, George Puech Shore (1823–1894), was born of a French family who had come over during the eighteenth century to fight for the Marhattas. They had settled in Gwalior, and then in Aligarh district. There Shore acquired land and picked up the habits of the zamindars of Delhi. He even wrote poetry in Urdu which Ram Babu Saksena has referred to in his book on the European poets of Persian and Urdu.21 He was one of the last of Dalrymple’s ‘white Mughals’.22 16 Ibid, p.62. Letter from Ghalib to Mirza Shahabuddin Saqib, 8 February 1858, in Ghulam Rasul Mehr (ed.), Khutut-eGhalib (Lahore: Sheikh Ghulam Ali and Sons, 1982), p.92. 18 Letter from Ghalib to Munshi Shiv Naraen, 12 June 1859, in ibid., p.212. 19 Letter from Ghalib to Hargopal Tafta, July 1858, in ibid., p.130. 20 Letter from Ghalib to Anwar ud Daula Shafaq, 1860, in ibid., p.305. 21 Ram Babu Saksena, European and Indo-European Poets of Urdu and Persian (Lahore: Book Traders, rpr. 1943), pp.228–47. 22 William Dalrymple, White Mughals: Love and Betrayal in Eighteenth-Century India (London: HarperCollins Publishers Ltd., 2003). 17 THE EVENTS OF 1857 IN CONTEMPORARY WRITINGS IN URDU 217 Downloaded By: [Rahman, Tariq] At: 11:14 11 July 2009 Shore penned W aqa e’ Hairat Afz a’ (Astounding Incidents) in 1862.23 It is written in ornate prose on the model of Rajab Ali Beg Suroor’s Fas an a- e-Ajaib (Tale of Wonderful Things) (1824), as well as in verse. He and his family, being Europeans, suffered in the 1857 uprising. Not surprisingly, he describes it as a ghadar. He also uses labels like fitn a and fas ad and describes the rebels as marauders. Like other Indian poets, Shore also wrote verse (musaddas) lamenting the ruin of Delhi.24 As for the histories, Kunahiya Lal’s famous narrative is called Mah araba- eAzım (The Great War).25 But despite its title, the book uses the same awat, fas ad, etc.—which other works do. Similarly, Maulvi terminology—bagh an uses the term hang am a- e-bagh awat (the Zaka Ullah’s T arıkh-e-Hindust upheaval of the mutiny) for the event and b aghı (rebels) for those who fought the British.26 Poetry There is also a good deal of writing in verse about 1857. Its major theme is the ruin and devastation of Delhi and other urban centres of North India; its sensibility one of agony and despair over the cruel deaths of contemporaries. Another response was that of resentment at the government’s handling of the crisis, but it is muted out of fear of reprisals. Yet a third, though very rare, was sympathy for the insurgency born out of a sense that the East India Company had exploited India. Thus the poet Shaikh Ghulam Hamadanı Mushafi (1750–1824), who experienced the rule of the Company before 1857, thought that the infidel (k afir) British had snatched away the wealth of India by fraud a b azi).27 Yet despite these political sallies, it is not clear if any of these (dagh poets actually took part in the uprising. In fact, in some poems the victims are blamed because of their alleged ‘sins’. For instance the poet Mubın, a minor poet of the period, says: Zulm g or on n e kiy a aur n a sitam k al on n e Hum k o barb ad ki a apn e hı am al on n e. 23 Saksena, European and Indo-European Poets of Urdu and Persian, pp.243–5. Ibid., p.239. 25 Kunahiya Lal, T arıkh- e-Bagh awat-e-Hind (History of the Mutiny of India) (Lahore: Sang-e-Meel, 2007) (based on the 1916 edition). 26 Munshi Zakullah, T arıkh- e-Hindustan: Saltanat- e-Isl ami a k a Bi an (Narrative of the Kingdom of Muslim Rulers), Vol.9 (Lahore: Sang-e-Meel, 1998), pp.347–8. 27 Quoted from Syed Ehtesham Hussain, ‘Urdu Adab aur Inqilab 1857’ (‘Urdu Literature and the Revolution of 1857’), in Mohammad Ikram Chughtai (comp.), 1857 Tarıkhı, ‘ilmı aur adabı paehlu (1857: Historical, Scholarly and Literary Aspects) (Lahore: Sang-e-Meel Publications, 2007), p.563. 24 218 SOUTH ASIA (Neither the whites nor the blacks were cruel to us Rather we were ruined by our own bad deeds.)28 Downloaded By: [Rahman, Tariq] At: 11:14 11 July 2009 Mufti Sadruddin Khan Azurda, the muftı (interpreter of Islamic law) of Delhi, wrote a poem in which he calls the soldiers purbiy e (dwellers in the East)—a a k a qaher (God’s pejorative term for mercenary soldiers—as well as khud 29 wrath). Mirza Dagh Dehlavi (1831–1905) says that they who chant dın, dın (religion, religion) do not know what religion is.30 Fiction One of the most famous novelists of the period was Deputy Nazır Ahmad (1830–1916).31 Ahmad’s novel Ibn ul Waqt (1888) refers to the events of 1857. The protagonist, an Indian Muslim gentleman named Ibn ul Waqt, saves the life an Englishman, Mr. Noble, whom he finds lying wounded near Delhi. Ibn ul Waqt gives him the hospitality of his house for three months. After the British prevail, and Noble is once again installed in a position of power, he rewards Ibn ul Waqt by making him a subordinate official. At the same time he encourages him to move to the European part of the city and adopt Western ways. However, the newly-Anglicised Ibn ul Waqt is not accepted by the English and also loses the respect of his compatriots. In the end one of his relatives, Hujjat ul Islam, convinces him that he should stop trying to be a Westerner. Hujjat ul Islam’s argument is not that British rule is wrong or should be resisted. He considers it a blessing. Rather his argument against Westernisation is that it can lead to Indians considering themselves equal to their rulers and this, he feels, is insulting to the imperial state: ‘aur h akim o maehk um m en mus aw at k a h on a z of- e-huk umat nahın t o aur ky a hai?’ (‘and equality between the ruler and the ruled, if it is not the weakness of rule, then what is it?’).32 Elsewhere he calls the uprising an evil conspiracy (mufsid an a sh orish) and makes fun of what he sees as the cowardice and incompetence of the Mughal princes. 28 Syed Mohammad Abdullah, ‘Dillı Marh um ka Marsiya’ (‘Elegy for Dead Delhi’), in Mohammad Ikram Chughtai (comp.), 1857 Tarıkhı, ‘ilmı aur adabı paehlu (1857: Historical, Scholarly and Literary Aspects) (Lahore: Sang-e-Meel Publications, 2007), p.593. 29 Quoted from Mohammad Ikram Chughtai (comp.), 1857 Majmu a’ Khw aj a Hasan Niz amı (Lahore: Sang-eMeel, 2007), p.526. 30 Ibid. 31 For Ahmad’s biography see Iftikhar Ahmad Siddiqui, Maulvı Nazır Ahmad Dehlavi: Aehv al-o-As ar (Biography of Nazır Ahmad) (Lahore: Majlis Taraqqı Adab, 1971). 32 Nazır Ahmad, Ibn ul Waqt (Lahore: Kashmır Kitab Ghar, 1984), p.319. THE EVENTS OF 1857 IN CONTEMPORARY WRITINGS IN URDU 219 Among these later works one of the most important is Khwaja Hasan Nizami’s (1878–1955) prose accounts of the fate of the Mughal royal family.33 Basically, the theme can be summed up as ‘how the mighty are fallen’. Most of the stories start by recalling what life was like at the Mughal court prior to 1857. Then the focus shifts to the eventful day of 11 May when the rebel troops entered the Red Fort. It is a catalyst for chaos. Eventually, Nizami’s princely characters flee to the villages and jungles despairing for their lives. Downloaded By: [Rahman, Tariq] At: 11:14 11 July 2009 Although written after 1919, at a time when nationalism was in full swing, the word Nizami uses for the 1857 event is still ghadar. The rebel soldiers are called b aghı. And at various points the Mughal princes and princesses accuse the rebel soldiers of perpetrating all sorts of cruelties on the British (although British cruelties, of which the narrators are victims, are also reported graphically).34 Rashid ul Khairi’s narratives of the woes of the Mughal princesses are very similar.35 In his story about Maulvi Abdul Qadir’s heroic rescue of a wounded British woman from certain death, the Indian soldiers are called not only rebels alim). In another story 1857 is said to be a terrible (b aghı) but also cruel (z affliction or misfortune (musıbat).36 The Writings of the ‘Rebels’ These fall into two categories: the writings of those who wrote after the war was over; and those who wrote during the upheaval. These former knew that their work would be seen by the British and, very often, wrote under the patronage of British officers. As such their work is not very different in tone to that of the non-rebels. The writings of those who fought and were prepared to die for the cause are another matter entirely. Writings of Former Rebels The poet Syed Zahır Uddın Dehlavi (1825–1911) was a student of the Mughal ahım Zauq (1789–1854) and an official at court’s poet Shaikh Muhammad Ibr the court of Bahadur Shah II. During 1857 he and his brother travelled to 33 Khwaja Hasan Nizami, ‘Begmat ke Ans u’ (‘The Tears of the Ladies’), in Mohammad Ikram Chughtai aj a Hasan Niz amı (Lahore: Sang-e-Meel, 2007), pp.13–136. (comp.), 1857 Majmu a’ Khw 34 Ibid. 35 Rashid ul Khairi, ‘Dillı kı Akhrı Bahar’ (‘The Last Spring of Delhi’), in Mohammad Ikram Chughtai (comp.), Majmu a’ Khw aj a Hasan Niz amı (Lahore: Sang-e-Meel, 2007), pp.870–80. 36 Rashid ul Khairi, ‘Agle L og on kı ek Jhalak’ (‘A Glimpse of Traditional People’), in Mohammad Ikram Chughtai (comp.), Majmu a’ Khw aj a Hasan Niz amı (Lahore: Sang-e-Meel, 2007), p.876. 220 SOUTH ASIA Downloaded By: [Rahman, Tariq] At: 11:14 11 July 2009 Jhajar, Sonipat, Najeebabad, Bareilly and Rampur. In 1864, after the hue and cry had died down, he returned to Delhi; but then went to Alwar and became a police official, spending 16 or 17 years in British service in Tonk. Later he went to Hyderabad where he died in 1911. It is not known when his book D ast an- eGhadar (The Story of the Mutiny)37 was written but some scholars believe it must have been at the end of his life after he had settled in Hyderabad.38 He begins by giving an account of the sepoys who had intruded upon the Red am (untrue to their salt, unfaithful) and Fort. He calls them b aghı, namak har bal a- e-Asm an (a bolt from the blue). The soldiers tell the Mughal courtiers that they were driven to mutiny by the insistence of their British officers that they should cut greased cartridges with their teeth—but now, having taken that awful step, they are resolved to ‘spread mutiny in the whole of India’ (‘tam am Hindust an m ein ghadar mach a d o’).39 The king though insists that he is powerless to intervene, and offers to ask the Resident at Delhi, Sir Theophilus Metcalfe, to mediate between the rebel soldiers and the government. And later, when he talks to the Resident about his proposal he uses the terms fitn a, fas ad, mazhab k a jhigr a (religious quarrel), etc. His language is quite unsympathetic. He blames the ‘rebels’ for disturbing the peace of the city, and goes on to say: N a r oz-e-hashr s e kam thı az ab kı s urat Khud a dikh ae na is inqil ab kı s urat. (The misery and torture was not less than that of the Doomsday May God not make anyone experience such a revolution.)40 Occasionally Dehlavi uses the word inqil ab (revolution) to describe what is happening in Delhi. Yet this is a modern interpolation, and not meant approvingly, as the author’s use of the word in the context of chaos, evil and anarchy, makes clear. Dehlavi does not, it is true, attempt to conceal the brutalities handed out by the British after their re-conquest of the city. He describes how British soldiers, g or e (whites), entered the homes of residents, and robbed and sometimes killed them. However, while he condemns these excesses, he remains convinced that 37 Syed Zahır Uddın Dehlavi, D ast an- e-Ghadar (The Story of the Mutiny) (Lahore: Sang-e-Meel, 2007). See Asghar Hussain Khan Ludhianwi and Salahudin Ahmad, ‘Dastan-e-Ghadar’ (‘Story of the Mutiny’) (1955), reprinted in Mohammad Ikram Chughtai (comp.), 1857: R ozn amche, Mu ‘ asir Taehrır en, Y add asht en (1857: Diaries, Memoirs and Contemporary Writings) (Lahore: Sang-e-Meel, 2007), p.864. 39 Dehlavi, D ast an- e-Ghadar, p.47. 40 Ibid., p.90. 38 THE EVENTS OF 1857 IN CONTEMPORARY WRITINGS IN URDU 221 the uprising was morally reprehensible, illegal and wrong. In short, he too supports the legality of British rule. Downloaded By: [Rahman, Tariq] At: 11:14 11 July 2009 Moinuddın Hasan Khan’s family had rallied to the British after Lord Lake’s conquest of the NWP in 1803 and was rewarded with estates, titles and pensions. The author himself, though, rose to be the chief of police (k otw al) in the service of Bahadur Shah. On 11 May when the rebel soldiers arrived at Delhi, he was on duty at the Paharganj Police Station. Over the following turbulent days he used his position to save the life of Sir Theophilus Metcalfe— whereupon his own house was raided and robbed by the rebels. After the British victory he went to Bombay and then on to Arabia. Upon his return he was arrested as a ‘rebel’ but was subsequently absolved of all charges on the intercession of Metcalfe. e-Ghadar (The Arrow of the Mutiny), was written Moinuddın’s book, Khadang- in 1878,41 but published only after the author’s death in 1885. Moinuddın was not willing, in his lifetime, to risk jeopardising his freedom and possibly too the reputation of his patron Metcalfe. Such was the fear and paranoia that gripped the country in the wake of the British re-conquest. Yet the book was very moderate in its criticisms. It makes it clear that the ordinary people of India, including women and men of the working classes, supported the rebel cause at least in the areas around Delhi and Lucknow.42 However his evidence does not point to an organised uprising even in these areas. Of course, in other parts of British India the common people remained quite indifferent to the rebel cause, in part because they never received more than scanty and belated information about it. Moreover it is quite scathing in its treatment of the insurgents. The revolt is variously described as Sh orish- e-Mufassid a (an evil upheaval), ghadar, awat.43 The soldiers balw a (chaos), sh or (upheaval), shar (evil), fas ad and bagh am, mufsid (evil people) and badm ash (hoodlums).44 are called b aghı, namak har His account also confirms that the rebel soldiers forced the king to acquiesce in their plans and that he tried to save the lives of English women and children. The overall impression which emerges from the book, however, is that there was anarchy in the city—wrought by people of ‘inferior’ breeding. For instance 41 Moinuddın Hasan Khan, Khadang- e-Ghadar’ (The Arrow of the Mutiny), in Mohammad Ikram Chughtai (comp.), 1857: R ozn amche, Mu ‘ asir Taehrır en, Y add asht en (1857: Diaries, Memoirs and Contemporary Writings) (Lahore: Sang-e-Meel 2007), pp.217–369. It was translated into English by Charles Theophilus Metcalfe in 1898. 42 For an analysis of Khan’s Khadang- e-Ghadar see Khwaja Ahmad Faruqi, ‘Khadang-e-Ghadar’, in Mohammad Ikram Chughtai (comp.), 1857: R ozn amche, Mu ‘ asir Taehrır en, Y add asht en (1857: Diaries, Memoirs and Contemporary Writings) (Lahore: Sang-e-Meel 2007), p.872. 43 Khan, Khadang- e-Ghadar, p.223. 44 Ibid., p.222. 222 SOUTH ASIA Downloaded By: [Rahman, Tariq] At: 11:14 11 July 2009 Moinuddın writes disparagingly that a certain Mir Mohammad Hasan Khan (no relation of the author) had even inducted weavers, spinners of cloth, sellers of oil, and sellers of betel leaf (dhun e, jul ah e, t elı, tanb olı) into the rebel army. This is a view from above—by an author of the Muslim gentlemanly class (ashr af).45 ‘Rebels’ Who Wrote During the Struggle The most effective means to disseminate anti-British feelings, however, was the press. One of the most important outlets of the type was the newspaper Dillı ar, of which copies survive from 1840.46 Maulvi Muhammad Baqir, Urd u Akhb father of the Urdu man of letters Muhammad Husain Azad, was its editor during the crucial year of 1857. After the British conquest of Delhi he was hanged for sedition.47 Baqir used Islamic terminology to legitimate the uprising. His columns from May 1857 thank God for punishing the foreign infidels (k afir) who had conspired to wipe out the true religion.48 He rejoiced in the British reverses and considered the revolt a war for faith. His son, not to be left behind, supplemented this rhetoric with a poem: O Azad, learn this lesson: For all their wisdom and vision, The Christian rulers have been erased Without leaving a trace in this world.49 The newspaper even published a fatw a authorising Muslims to rise up against British rule. However as Shireen Moosvi observes, . . . from 14 June both the vocabulary and attitude change. Now the sipah-i-diler (the brave army) the Tilangan-I nar sher (the lionlike Tilangis) are being enjoined, if Muslims, to take the name of 45 Ibid., p.293. Margrit Pernau, ‘The Delhi Urdu Akhbar: Between Persian Akhbarat and English Newspapers’, in Annual of Urdu Studies, Vol.18 (2003), pp.105–31. Also see Masood, Urd u Sah afat Unnıswın Sadı Mein, pp.320–75. 47 According to Shireen Moosvi 16 issues of this paper from 1857 are preserved in the National Archives of India, New Delhi. As I have not had access to these archives, all quotations and references to this and other newspapers are from secondary sources. See Shireen Moosvi, ‘Rebel Journalism: Delhi Urdu Akhbar. May–September 1857’ in People’s Democracy, Vol.XXXI, no.17 (29 April 2007), pp.1–6 [http:// www.cpim.org/ps/2007/0429/04292007_1857.htm, accessed 6 May 2008]. 48 Dillı Urd u Akhb ar (17 May 1857) in William Darlymple, ‘Religious Rhetoric in the Delhi Uprising of 1857’, in Sabyasachi Bhattacharya (ed.), Rethinking 1857 (Delhi: Orient Longman, 2007), p.25. 49 Dillı Urd u Akhb ar (24 May 1857) in ibid. 46 THE EVENTS OF 1857 IN CONTEMPORARY WRITINGS IN URDU 223 God and the Prophet, and, if Hindus, to pray to Parmeshar and Narain.50 This more inclusive stance was justified to the paper’s readers by the assertion that Hindus shared with Muslims a belief in one god (Adı Purush).51 Downloaded By: [Rahman, Tariq] At: 11:14 11 July 2009 Another prominent Urdu newspaper, the S adiq-ul-Akhb ar, was published by Saiyad Jamıluddın Khan of Delhi.52 Although its circulation was only about 200, it was passed from reader to reader and also read out aloud many times so that many people heard what it had to say. The paper was cited during the trial of Bahadur Shah Zafar as evidence against the king. In the issue of 19 March 1857 there is a story of a person called Sadiq Khan who had come from Persia. Sadiq is reported as saying that the Shah of Persia wants to conquer India. The editor wonders what kind of happiness will the rule of the Shah give to the people of India?53 Still, the paper anxiously anticipates the arrival of Persian troops. When they do not arrive, the S adiq-ulAkhb ar is disappointed. By 13 September it is forced to concede that the Persians are not likely to come soon, though they would arrive one day.54 The very next day, 14 September, the city was re-conquered by the British. The Urdu newspapers sympathised with the plight of the ruling family after the British victory. Reporting Bahadur Shah’s death, on 7 November 1862, the Kashf ul Akhb ar laments that the empire of Taimur has ended; that ‘the lamp of Delhi is put off’.55 Shireen Moosvi thinks that . . . the Delhi Akhbar mirrors the feelings of much of the Delhi populace, especially its educated section—its elite—and it is singular how from the early feeling of estrangement towards the 50 Moosvi, ‘Rebel Journalism: Delhi Urdu Akhbar. May–September 1857’, p.3. Dillı Urd u Akhb ar (14 June 1857), in ibid. 52 Faruqui Anjum Taban, ‘The Coming of the Revolt in Awadh: The Evidence of Urdu Newspapers’, in Social Scientist, Vol.26, no.1/4 (Jan.–Apr. 1998), p.23. 53 ‘Iqtis ab at S adiq ul Akhbar’ (‘Excerpts from the S adiq ul Akhb ar’), in Mohammad Ikram Chughtai (comp.), aj a Hasan Niz amı (Lahore: Sang-e-Meel, 2007), pp.431–40. Majmu a’ Khw 54 Ibid., p.440. 55 Kashf ul Akhb ar (27 November 1862), in Ghulam Rasul Mehr, ‘1857 Mutafarriqat’ (‘1857 Miscellaneous Items’), Aaj Kal (Delhi) (Sept. 1957), reprinted in Mohammad Ikram Chughtai (comp.), 1857 Tarıkhı, ‘ilmı aur adabı paehlu (1857: Historical, Scholarly and Literary Aspects) (Lahore: Sang-e-Meel Publications, 2007), p.163. 51 224 SOUTH ASIA sepoys, they become in its pages, much before the fall of Delhi, the object of admiration, and then begin to be viewed as the valiant defenders and protectors of the city.56 Downloaded By: [Rahman, Tariq] At: 11:14 11 July 2009 But it is not clear whether the Dillı Urd u Akhb ar does, indeed, ‘mirror’ the feelings of much of the Delhi populace or even those of its ‘elite’. Certainly Ghalib’s letters do not confirm this (though it could be argued that the poet, like almost everybody else who wrote after the event, was so frightened of British reprisals that even in personal letters he was too cautious to express his real views).57 Let us now turn to the categories of social affiliation in mid nineteenth-century India. These could be personal or ‘feudal’ (expressed by terms like namak hal alı, i.e. being true to one’s salt) or ethnic affiliations. However the wider category of religious identity was also available. The ‘non-rebels’ often accused the ‘rebels’ of being namak har am (betrayers of their salt). For their part, the ‘rebels’ used the idiom of religion to legitimate their struggle against the British. For instance Tapti Roy refers to a 124-page pamphlet written, or finished, on 15 September 1852 in the handwriting of Sheikh Saied Rungin Rakam. It acknowledges that the British had pledged good governance and by and large kept their word, but goes on to point out that recently they had broken faith by imposing indiscriminate taxation and pushing Indians to become Christians. There are also anecdotes and stories about alleged British lust and drinking.58 Another pamphlet, ‘Fateh Isl am’ (‘Victory of Islam’) written sometime in July 1857, also appealed to Muslim religious sensitivities as well as to ashr af snobbery. The British, the pamphlet alleged, appeared to recognise no distinction between the Muslim upper classes and the lower ones—which, of course, was unendurable.59 Another rebel leader was Maulvi Ahmadullah Shah. A poetic Urdu biography of him was written in 1863 by F.M. Taib called Taw arıkh–i Ahmadı. Taib was an aristocrat of Lucknow and a disciple of Ahmadullah Shah. The biography glamorises the anti-British exploits of Ahmadullah Shah who is presented as a hero, for whose actions no apology is needed.60 56 Moosvi, ’Rebel Journalism: Delhi Urdu Akhbar. May–September 1857’, p.6. There were, however, Urdu newspapers like the K oh N ur of Lahore which supported the British against the mutineers. See Masood, Urdu Sah afat Unnıs wın Sadı Mein, pp.386–9. 58 Tapti Roy, ‘Rereading the Texts: Rebel Writings in 1857–58’, in Sabyasachi Bhattacharya (ed.), Rethinking 1857 (Delhi: Orient Longman, 2007), pp.226–32. 59 Ibid., p.233. 60 Saiyid Zaheer Husain Jafri, ‘Indigenous Discourse and Modern Historiography of 1857. The Case Study of Maulavi Ahmadullah Shah’, in Sabyasachi Bhattacharya (ed.), Rethinking 1857 (Delhi: Orient Longman, 2007), pp.243–52. 57 Downloaded By: [Rahman, Tariq] At: 11:14 11 July 2009 THE EVENTS OF 1857 IN CONTEMPORARY WRITINGS IN URDU 225 Another well-known ‘rebel’ was Maulana Fazlul Haq Khairabadi (1798–1861). Charged with signing a religious decree (fatw a) supporting armed struggle (jih ad) against the Company government he was condemned by a British court to imprisonment and exiled to the Andamans in 1859. During his time in jail he wrote a book in Arabic called Al-Th urat al-Hindiy a (The Agitation of India) which was later translated into Urdu. However despite the title the Maulana’s point of view is religious, not nationalistic. He talks of martyrdom (shah adat) but it is obvious that he refers only to Muslim rebels, not to non-Muslims who also died opposing the British. And as for the Muslim non-rebels, he stigmatises esh (of evil belief) and even goes them as bad bakht (of evil fortune) and bad ka so far as to dub them murtid (apostates). The British are called Christians (Nas ar a) throughout and the Hindus are accused of having helped them. However, these are Hindus of the West (Gharbı Hindus).61 In short, for the Maulana, the mutiny was a religious war, a jih ad, which could only be won in the name of Islam. The British were usurpers for him but so was the majority community. The Maulana remained, in the mid nineteenth century, a firm believer in a theocratic form of rule. The fatw a attributed to Maulana Khairabadi by the British does not, however, arul contain either his name or his signature. It was first published in the Akhb ar on 26 July 1857. Since the Maulana Zafar of Delhi, then in the S adiq-ul-Akhb did not reach Delhi until August he cannot have been its author.62 However his book makes it clear that he thought jih ad was ‘a religious duty for the people of Delhi in proportion to their capability’ (‘farz- e-a en hai upar tam am is shaher k e l og on k e aur ist a’ at zur ur ha e is kı farziat k e w ast e’).63 On the other hand, Syed Ahmad Khan says that he actually saw a fatw a saying that this was not jih ad.64 Moreover, Syed argues that this particular fatw a was fake. It even carried the 65 seal and signatures of certain dead ulema. Ironically, though, support for the concept of the revolt as a jih ad was patchy even in the areas—sometimes called Hindustan proper—where most of the action in 1857 took place. In the areas with Muslim majorities—the present-day 61 Fazlul Haq Khairabadi, Al-Th urat al-Hindiy a (The Agitation of India) (trans. from Arabic into Urdu) in Mohammad Ikram Chughtai (comp.), 1857: R ozn amche, Mu ‘ asir Taehrır en, Y add asht en (Diaries, Memoirs and Contemporary Writings) (Lahore: Sang-e-Meel 2007), pp.513–31. 62 Imtiaz Ali Khan Arshi Rampuri, ‘Maulana Fazl-e-Haq Khairabadi aur 1857 ka Fatwa-e-Jihad’ (‘Khairabadi and the Decree of Jihad of 1857’), in Mohammad Ikram Chughtai (comp.), 1857: R ozn amche, Mu ‘ asir Taehrır en, Y add asht en (Diaries, Memoirs and Contemporary Writings) (Lahore: Sange-Meel 2007), p.877. 63 Ibid., p.878. 64 Ibid., p.883. 65 Ibid. 226 SOUTH ASIA Pakistani Punjab, North West Frontier Province, Sind, Baluchistan and Bangladesh—the idea did not gain either credence or currency. Downloaded By: [Rahman, Tariq] At: 11:14 11 July 2009 Contrary to the romantic view that he gave evidence against himself, inviting punishment, Maulana Khairabadi tried his best to get off.66 In a letter to Yusuf Ali Khan, the Nawab of Rampur, he implored the nawab to intercede on his behalf with the British authorities. Dated 18 February 1859, the letter protests that ‘he has been imprisoned by them without any crime’ (‘fidwı r a mahez b e jurm muqayyad kard a und’).67 Apparently he wrote two earlier letters to the nawab but this is the only one to have survived. The Maulana’s main argument seems to be that another person, one Mir Fazle Haq of Shahjahanpur, was actually responsible for the crimes he was supposed to have committed.68 Although rebel writings did try to de-legitimise British rule, they were more critical of recent mis-governance and, especially, of interference with traditional belief systems, rather than a call to any pan-Indian sentiment. Thus the identities which the rebels’ works invoke are mainly religious and, therefore, potentially divisive. I take up this point in the next section. Mobilisation of Religious Identities William Dalrymple, in an insightful article, points out that religion ‘might not have been the only force at work [in 1857], nor perhaps the primary one; but to ignore its power and importance, at least in the rhetoric used to justify the uprising, seems to go against the huge weight of emphasis on this factor given in the rebels’ own documents’.69 The above analysis of the language of the rebels who wrote during the uprising supports this conclusion. Although it has focussed on the deployment of the Muslim religious idiom—terms such azı (fighter for Islam), etc.—as this is as jih ad, d ar ul Isl am (land of Islam), gh what infused Urdu writings, it is noteworthy here that Muhammad Baqir, the ar, also drew upon the language of Hindu editor of the Dillı Urd u Akhb mythology in an attempt to mobilise the Hindus against the British.70 The Hindus, he argued, also need to save their faith (dharm a) from British colonial corruption. 66 Ibid., pp.880–1. Ibid., p.881. 68 Ibid. 69 Dalrymple, ‘Religious Rhetoric in the Delhi Uprising of 1857’, p.38. 70 Dillı Urd u Akhb ar (14 June 1857), in Dalrymple, ‘Religious Rhetoric in the Delhi Uprising of 1857’, p.32. 67 THE EVENTS OF 1857 IN CONTEMPORARY WRITINGS IN URDU 227 Downloaded By: [Rahman, Tariq] At: 11:14 11 July 2009 However, even if the Hindus are asked to join forces against the British for the sake of expediency, it is clear that the idiom of religion is potentially divisive and backward-looking. Thus Taib’s account notes that when the sepoys chose Prince Birjis Qadar, the son of Zeenat Mahal and the former ruler of Awadh, Wajid Ali Shah, as their leader, Ahmadullah Shah opposed this on the grounds that the jih ad could only be conducted under the guidance of an im am. Since the prince was a Shi’a, he could not be allowed to lead the muj ahidın who were dominantly Sunni.71 Moreover, Ahmadullah Shah went on to destroy the Hindu temples of Hanumangarhi which had allegedly been built ‘at the site of a destroyed mosque’.72 In short, religious identity, once invoked, had the potential to polarise the people along sectarian lines. That said, we do find in the Urdu sources some references to motherland (watan), country (Hindust an) and freedom ( az adi). However, it is not clear whether they refer to present-day UP (Hindustan proper) or what came to be called British India.73 It appears from the use of such terms in other contexts that probably the former was meant. In any case, these references are few and far between. This is not surprising. In the mid nineteenth century religious identity was really the only type of identity available to Indians which transcended those of kinship (bir adari), occupation (z at) or ethnicity. Nationalism was yet to be born, so the evocation of an ‘Indian’ identity was not an option. Conclusion While it is possible that many people shared the rebels’ anti-British sentiments in the general area of present day UP and parts of the Punjab, the Urdu writings which we find today are predominantly by those who thought that the upheaval of 1857 was a mutiny. It is very much possible that the fear of the government post-1857 was so great that people dissembled their true feelings— but this remains a hypothesis yet to be proved. aghı, fitn a, etc. foreshadowed an Still, the widespread use of the words ghadar, b embryonic anti-colonial discourse. Passed down to the next generation, and 71 F.M. Taib, Tawarikh-i Ahmadi (The History of Ahmad) (Lucknow: 1863), cited in Saiyid Zaheer Husain Jafri, ‘Indigenous Discourse and Modern Historiography of 1857. The Case Study of Maulavi Ahmadullah Shah’, in Sabyasachi Bhattacharya (ed.), Rethinking 1857 (Delhi: Orient Longman, 2007), p.249. 72 Ibid., p.247. 73 ‘Revolt of 1857–Flag Song’, South Asian Research Centre for Advertisements, Journalism and Cartoons [https://www.sarcajc.com/Revolt_ of_1857_Flag_Song.html, accessed 8 May 2008]. 228 SOUTH ASIA Downloaded By: [Rahman, Tariq] At: 11:14 11 July 2009 thence into the corpus of the received wisdom about the country’s history, this became indeed the hegemonic discourse of the period 1858 until about 1930. Only in the twentieth century, when nationalistic histories came to be written, did an alternative discourse emerge. And until it did, these hegemonic Indian narratives served to confer legitimacy upon the British. The rebels’ own vocabulary of resistance was quickly marginalised. Indeed as late as 1930 when Khwaja Hasan Nizami published his book on the revolt, he insisted on calling it a mutiny (ghadar). Significantly, when this book was reissued in 1946, it was renamed Dillı kı Saz a (The Punishment of Delhi). Thus only in the 1940s did the idea that 1857 might have been a ‘war of independence’ rather than a ‘mutiny’ gain acceptance, at least within the genre of Urdu historical writing. Now of course, it has become so entrenched that it is presented as fact in Pakistani school textbooks. This makes it very difficult for Pakistani historians to explain how the Punjab and the North West Frontier Province actually supplied soldiers for the British conquest of India. That is probably why isolated incidents of resistance, such as that of Ahmed Khan Khural, are still magnified and glorified in recent Pakistani historiography about 1857.74 Glossary ashr af bad bakht bad ka esh badm ash bagh awat b aghı balw a d ar ul Isl am dhun e fas ad fitn a ghadar gh azı elite, the gentlemanly class of evil fortune of evil belief hoodlum, bad character, rough rebellion, mutiny rebel chaos, insurrection, rebellion, mutiny (synonyms: fas ad, sar kashı, bagh awat) land of peace, land of Islam weavers destruction, evil, opposition conflict, fight, evil rebellion, mutiny a Muslim who fights in the way of God, a warrior for Islam (continued) 74 Ahmed Saleem, Az adı aur Aw am (Freedom and the People) (Lahore: Nigarshat, 1990), pp.33–54. THE EVENTS Downloaded By: [Rahman, Tariq] At: 11:14 11 July 2009 g or e inqil ab jih ad jul ah e k al e kh aki k ur namak an mufsid musaddas namak har am r u siah sar kashı shah adat shar sh or sh orish-e-mufassid a sh orish sipah kına khu ah tanb olı t elı OF 1857 IN CONTEMPORARY WRITINGS IN URDU 229 whites (i.e. British) revolution armed struggle, religious war spinners of cotton blacks, native soldiers one who wear clothing the colour of mud (i.e. the British army) blind to one’s salt, unfaithful troublemaker, evil person a sub-genre of Urdu poetry untrue to one’s salt, unfaithful dark faced (lit.) taking out or raising one’s head, rebelling martyrdom evil loud noise, upheaval evil upheaval evil, mutiny soldiers seeking malice sellers of betel leaves sellers of oil