The rebellion of 1857 has been understood as First war of Indian Independence across the political spectrum today. With 2007 being the 150th year there has been a flood of literature commemorating the occasion. “Bharatada Prathama Svatantrya Sangrama - Ondu Charitrika Hinnota” written by K.S. Parthasarathy becomes the authentic source material to understand that part of Indian History in a proper perspective.

Why does one re-interpret the history? Now it is almost truism to State that pages of history are opened to interpret it for the contemporary political and cultural needs. This is more established in the interpretation of 1857 rebellion.

The Right wants to revive the memories of the rebellion to use it as the cannon fodder for its present war for Hindu Rashtra by valorising the Hindu rulers and portraying it as the war for the Hindu Rashtra and Hindu dharma. Hence its construction of the 1857 history is always problematic.

It is here that Parthasarathy’s book assumes significance. As declared by the author right from the beginning he adopts the methodology of historical materialism. This approach, apart from helping him in successfully countering the communal construction of 1857, enables him to unravel some historical enigmas around 1857.

There are several questions answered in the book. Could the 1857 be classified as first war of Indian independence? Parthasarathy takes pain to deep dwell into the history only to prove that the rebellion had nationalist character and also a nation-wide reach. Another important question around this is whether it is justified to call it as people’s rebellion considering the leadership of princes and feudal elements.

One of the most important features of the book is its exclusive chapter on rightist interpretations of the History especially by Savarkar. Mr. Parthasarathy exhibits high level of political maturity in exposing the dangers of Savarakar’s version of 1857 today, duly recognising its impact on nationalist discourse then.

One more aspect the book deals with is the reason for the failure of this rebellion. Unlike finding reasons in the immediate circumstances, the author convincingly cites the historical immaturity of the new revolutionary forces to defeat the decadent colonial and feudal forces as one of the prime reason for being conquered.

Having said all this one cannot ignore contradictions and moments of catnap by the author in some places. There is an over emphasis on the religious aspect of the rebellion.

Author uses the word Hindu as a homogeneous category right from the beginning. This is the reason why the author, who so successful narrates the differences in the attitude of different classes to the rebellion fails to give the complete picture of indifference or participation of different communities, considering the upper caste feudal domination in the rebellion. Despite limitations, the book is a very important one.

SHIVASUNDAR

Printer friendly page  
Send this article to Friends by E-Mail