१८५७ का स्वातन्त्र्य समर (वीर विनायक दामोदर सावरकर - अंग्रेजों द्वारा छपने से पूर्व प्रतिबन्धित महाग्रन्थ)

PART I
The Volcano.
CHAPTER I
SWADHARMA & SWARAJ
IT is a simple truism patent even to the unedu-
cated that the most tiny house cannot be built
without a foundation strong enough to support
its weight. When writers who profess to write
the history of the Revolution that was enacted
in India in 1857 ignore this common sense
principle and do not try to discuss the real causes that
led to it and impudently maintain that the vast edifice of
the Revolution was built on a blade of straw, they must
either be fools or, what is more probable, knaves. Any-
way, it is certain that they are unfit for the holy work of
the historian.
1

THE VOLCANO
In all great religious and political revolutions, it is
almost impossible to connect together links apparently
inconsistent, without thoroughly understanding the
principles which are at their root. On seeing a great work
of machinery composed of innumerable screws and wheels
doing work of tremendous magnitude if we do not under-
stand how the power is produced, we may feel bewilder-
ing astonishment, but never the inner pleasure due to
knowledge. When writers describe such stirring events
as the French Revolution or the religious revolution of
Holland, the very splendour and magnitude of the crises
they paint, often, dazzle and confuse their mind's eye and
they rarely gather sufficient coolness and courage to go
deep into the underlying principles. But without an ex-
position of the hidden causes and the mysterious forces
that worked beneath, the essence of a revolution can never
be made plain. And therefore it is that history attaches
more importance to the exposition of principles than to
mere narrative.
While searching after principles, historians often com-
mit another mistake. For every act, there are various
causes, direct and indirect, general and particular, acci-
dental and necessary. In their proper classification lies
the true skill of the historian. In this process of classi-
fication many historians get mixed up and make the acci-
dental into a necessary cause. These make themselves as
ridiculous as the judge in the story who, in a case of
arson, put all the responsibility on the match instead of
the man who struck it. The real importance of any event
can never be understood by this confusion of causes. Not
merely that, but mankind begins positively to curse the
memory of men who are represented as having started,
with a light heart and private selfish motives, a Revolution
in the course of which countless lives are lost and im-
mense expanses of country devastated. And therefore, in
writing the history of any event in general, and of revo-
lutionary movements in particular, a writer cannot give a
2

SWADHARMA & SWARAJ
true idea of them by means of simple description, or even
by tracing them backwards to accidental causes. An up-
right and impartial historian must try to discover the
foundations on which the revolutionary structure was
erected. He must try to discover and discuss funda-
mental causes.
Mazzini, in a critical article on Carlyle's French
Revolution, has said that every revolution must have had
a fundamental principle. Revolution is a complete re-
arrangement in the life of historic man. A revolutionary
movement cannot be based on a flimsy and momentary
grievance. It is always due to some all-moving principle
for which hundreds and thousands of men fight, before
which thrones totter, crowns are destroyed and created,
existing ideals are shattered and new ideals break forth,
and for the sake of which vast masses of people think
lightly of shedding sacred human blood. The moving
spirits of revolutions are deemed holy or unholy in pro-
portion as the principle underlying them is beneficial or
wicked. As in private life, so also in history, the deeds
of an individual or a nation are judged by the character
of the motive. If we forget this test, we cannot appreciate
the vast difference between the empire-building wars of
Alexander the Great and Italy's fight for liberty under
Garibaldi. Just as to decide about the merits of these two
different events one has to consider the prime motive of
the chief actors in those wars, so also to write a full history
of a revolution means necessarily the tracing of all the
events of that revolution back to their source,—the motive,
the innermost desire of those who brought it about. This
is the telescope which will show clearly the lights and
shadows obscured by the blurred presentation of partial
and prejudiced historians. When a beginning is made in
this manner, order appears in the apparent chaos of in-
consistent facts, crooked lines become straight, and straight
lines appear crooked, light appears where darkness is, and
darkness spreads over light, what appeared ugly becomes
3

THE VOLCANO
fair and what looked beautiful is seen to be deformed.
And expectedly, or unexpectedly, but in a clear form, the
Revolution comes into the light of real history.
The history of the tremendous Revolution that was
enacted in India in the year 1857 has never been written
in this scientific spirit by any author, Indian or foreign.
And hence there are current throughout the world most
extraordinary, misleading, and unjust ideas about that
Revolutionary War. English authors have committed, in
this respect, all the faults noted above. Some of them
have not made any attempt beyond merely describing the
events, but most of them have written the history in a
wicked and partial spirit. Their prejudiced eye could not
or would not see the root principle of that Revolution. Is
it possible, can any sane man maintain, that that all-
embracing Revolution could have taken place without a
principle to move it? Could that vast tidal wave from
Peshawar to Calcutta have risen in flood without a fixed
intention of drowning something by means of its force?
Could it be possible that the sieges of Delhi, the mas-
sacres of Cawnpore, the banner of the Empire, heroes
dying for it, could it ever be possible that such noble and
inspiring deeds have happened without a noble and ins-
piring end? Even a small village market does not take
place without an end, a motive ; how, then, can we believe
that that great market opened and closed without any
purpose—the great market whose shops were on every
battle field from Peshawar to Calcutta, where kingdoms
and empires were being exchanged, and where the only
current coin was blood? No, no. The market was neither
opened nor closed without a purpose. English historians
have always ignored this point, not because it is difficult
to ascertain it, but because it is against their interests to
admit the truth.
Even more deceptive than this indifference, and one
which changes or distorts the whole spirit of the Revolu-
4

SWADHARMA & SWARAJ
tion of 1857 is the other device of English historians copied
by their Indian sycophants,—the device, namely, of
describing the rumour as to the greased cartridges as the
moving cause of the Revolution. An Indian writer¹
drawing inspiration from English history and English
money says, “Foolish people went mad simply at the
rumour that cartridges were greased with cows’ and pigs’
fat. Did anyone inquire as to whether the report was true?
One man said and another believed; because the second
became disaffected, a third joined him, and so like a pro-
cession of blind men, a company of inconsiderate fools
arose, and rebellion broke out.” We propose to discuss
later on whether people blindly believed the rumour about
cartridges. But it will be plain to anyone who has read
even the English historians closely and thought about the
matter, that a great attempt has been made to father all
the responsibility of the Revolution on this rumour. It
is not surprising that to one, who thinks that a mighty
rising like that of '57 can be produced by such trifles, it
was only ‘a company of inconsiderate fools.’ If the
Revolution had been due only to the cartridges, why did
Nana Sahib, the Emperor of Delhi, the Queen of Jhansi,
and Khan Bahadur Khan of Rohilkhand join it? These
were not surely going to serve in the English army, nor
were they compelled to break the cartridges with their
teeth! If the rising were due wholly or chiefly to the
cartridges, it would have stopped suddenly as soon as the
English Governor-General issued a proclamation that they
should not be used any more! He gave them permission
to make cartridges with their own hand. But instead of
doing so, or ending the whole by leaving the Company’s
service altogether, the sepoys rose to fight in battle. Not
only the sepoys but thousands of peaceful citizens and
Rajas and Maharajas also rose, who had no direct or
indirect connection with the army. It is therefore clear
that it was not these accidental things that roused the

1. वि. कों. ओक “शिपायांचें बंड”.
   5

THE VOLCANO
spirit of the sepoy and the civilian, king and pauper,
Hindu and Mahommedan.
Equally misleading is the theory that the rising was
due to the annexation of Oudh. How many were fighting,
taking their lives in their hands, that had no interest
whatsoever in the fortunes of the Oudh dynasty? Then,
what was their motive in fighting? The Nabob of Oudh
himself was imprisoned in the fort of Calcutta; and
according to the English historians, his subjects were very
much disaffected under his regime. Then, why did
Talukdars, soldiers, and almost every one of his subjects
unsheath their swords for him? A 'Hindu' of Bengal
wrote an essay in England at that time about the Revo-
lution. In it the 'Hindu' says, 'You have no idea how
many simple and kind-hearted people who had never seen
the Nabob, nor were ever again likely to see, wept in their
huts when the sorrows of the Nabob were being related
before them. And you do not also know how many
soldiers were daily taking an oath, after the tears had
flown, to avenge this insult on Wajid Ali Shah, as if a
calamity had fallen on themselves in person.' Why did
the Sepoys feel this sympathy with the Nabob and why
did eyes which had never seen the Nabob glisten with
tears? It is plain, therefore, that the Revolution did not
break out simply on account of the annexation of Oudh.
The fear of greased cartridges and the annexation of
Oudh were only temporary and accidental causes. To
turn these into real causes would never help us in under-
standing the real spirit of the Revolution. If we were to
take them as the real moving causes, it would mean that,
without these, the Revolution would not have taken place
—that without the rumour of greased cartridges and with-
out the annexation of Oudh, the Revolution would not
have been there. It would be impossible to find a theory
more foolish and more deceptive. If there had been no
fear of the cartridges, the principle underlying that fear
Published by Asian Educational Services, New Delhi, 2014.
6

SWADHARMA & SWARAJ
would have cropped up in some other form and produced
a Revolution just the same. Even if Oudh had not been
annexed, the principle of annexation would have mani-
fested itself in the destruction of some other kingdom.
The real causes of the French Revolution were not simply
the high prices of grain, the Bastille, the King's leaving
Paris, or the feasts. These might explain some incidents
of the Revolution but not the Revolution as a whole. The
kidnapping of Sita was only the incidental cause of the
fight between Rama and Ravana. The real causes were
deeper and more inward.
What, then, were the real causes and motives of this
Revolution? What were they that they could make
thousands of heroes unsheath their swords and flash them
on the battlefield? What were they that they had the
power to brighten up pale and rusty crowns and raise
from the dust abased flags? What were they that for
them men by the thousand willingly poured their blood
year after year? What were they that Moulvies preached
them, learned Brahmins blessed them, that for their success
prayers went up to Heaven from the mosques of Delhi
and the temples of Benares?
These great principles were Swadharma and Swaraj.
In the thundering roar of ‘Din, Din,’ which rose to
protect religion, when there were evident signs of a cun-
ning, dangerous, and destructive attack on religion dearer
than life, and in the terrific blows dealt at the chain of
slavery with the holy desire of acquiring Swaraj, when it
was evident that chains of political slavery had been put
round them and their God-given liberty wrested away by
subtle tricks—in these two, lies the root-principle of the
Revolutionary War. In what other history is the
principle of love of one's religion and love of one's country
manifested more nobly than in ours? However much
foreign and partial historians might have tried to paint
7

THE VOLCANO
our glorious land in dark colours, so long as the name of
Chitore has not been erased from the pages of our history,
so long as the names of Pratâpâditya and Guru Govind
Singh are there, so long the principles of Swadharma and
Swaraj will be embedded in the bone and marrow of all
the sons of Hindusthan ! They might be darkened for a
time by the mist of slavery—even the sun has its clouds
—but very soon the strong light of these self-same
principles pierces through the mist and chases it away.
Never before were there such a number of causes for the
universal spreading of these traditional and noble princi-
ples as there were in 1857. These particular reasons
revived most wonderfully the slightly unconscious feelings
of Hindusthan, and the people began to prepare for the
fight for Swadharma and Swaraj. In his Proclamation of
the establishment of Swaraj, the Emperor of Delhi says,
‘ Oh, you sons of Hindusthan, if we make up our mind we
can destroy the enemy in no time ! We will destroy the
enemy and will release from dread our religion and our
country, dearer to us than life itself ’ ² What is holier in
in this world than such a Revolutionary War, a war for
the noble principles propounded in this sentence, ‘ release
from dead our religion and our country, dearer to us than
life itself ’ ? The seed of the Revolution of 1857 is in this
holy and inspiring idea, clear and explicit, propounded
from the throne of Delhi, THE PROTECTION OF RELIGION
AND COUNTRY. In the Proclamation issued at Bareilly, he
says “ Hindus and Mahomedans of India ! Arise ! Breth-
ren, arise ! Of all the gifts of God, the most gracious is
that of Swaraj. Will the oppressive Demon who has
robbed us of it by deceit be able to keep it away from us
for ever ? Can such an act against the will of God stand
for ever ? No, no. The English have committed so many
atrocities that the cup of their sins is already full. To add
to it, they have got now the wicked desire to destroy our
holy religion ! Are you going to remain idle even now ?
2. Leckey’s Fictions Exposed and Urdu works.
8

SWADHARMA & SWARAJ
God does not wish that you should remain so ; for he has
inspired in the hearts of Hindus and Mahomedans the
desire to turn the English out of our country. And by the
grace of God, and your valour, they will soon be so com-
pletely defeated that in this our Hindusthan there will not
remain even the least trace of them ! In this our army,
the differences of small and great shall be forgotten, and
equality shall be the rule ; for, all who draw the sword in
this holy war for the defence of religion are equally glori-
ous. They are brethren, there is no rank among them.
Therefore, I again say to all my Hindi brethren, ' Arise
and jump into the battlefield for this divinely ordained
and supreme duty ! ' " The man who, after seeing such
magnificent utterances by the Revolutionary leaders, does
not understand its principles is, as we said, either a fool
or a knave. What stronger evidence is needed to prove
that Indian warriors drew their swords at the time for
Swadharma and Swaraj, feeling it the duty of every man
to fight for the rights given to man by God ? These Pro-
clamations issued at different times and places dur-
ing the war make it unnecessary to dilate more
on its principles. These Proclamations were not issued
by nonentities ; but they were orders issued from
adorable and powerful thrones. They were burning
expressions of the agitated feelings of the time. In
these the real heart of the Nation had spoken out,
when at the time of war, there was no occasion to conceal
real sentiments through pressure or fear. This tremendous,
heroic shout, ' Swadharma and Swaraj,' proclaims to the
world the character of the Revolution in which 'all who
draw the sword are equally glorious.'
But were these two principles understood as different
and exclusive of each other ? At least, orientals have
never had the idea that Swadharma and Swaraj have no
connection with each other. The Eastern mind has main-
tained a full and traditional belief, as is also said by
Mazzini, that there is no vast barrier between Heaven
9

THE VOLCANO
and earth but that the two are ends of one and the same
thing. Our idea of Swadharma, too, is not contradictory
to that of Swaraj. The two are connected as means and
end. Swaraj without Swadharma is despicable and Swa-
dharma without Swaraj is powerless. The sword of
material power, Swaraj, should always be ready drawn
for our object, our safety is the other world, Swadharma.
This trend of the Eastern mind will be often found in its
history. The reason why, in the East, all revolutions take
a religious form, nay more, the reason why Eastern history
knows of no revolutions unconnected with religion, lies in
the all-embracing meaning that the word ‘Dharma’ has.
That this dual principle of Swadharma and Swaraj, always
seen in the history of India, appeared also in the Revo-
lution of 1857, should be a matter of no surprise. We
have already referred to the first Proclamation of the
Emperor of Delhi. Afterwards when Delhi was besieged
by the English and the war was at its height, the Emperor
issued another Proclamation addressing all Indians thus :
‘ Why has God given us wealth, land, power ? They are
not for individual pleasure, but they are given for the
holy object of defence of our religion ’. But where are now
the means to attain this holy end ? As said in the Pro-
clamation given above, where is the gift of Swaraj, the
greatest of all the gifts of God ?
Where is wealth ? Where is land ? Where is power ?
In the plague of slavery, all this divine independence is
all but dead. In the above Proclamation, in order to show
how the plague of slavery was destroying India, full des-
criptions are given as to how the Kingdoms of Nagpur,
Ayodhya, and Jhansi were trampled down into dust. And
it awakens the people to the fact that they are guilty of
the sin of destroying religion in the house of God, having
lost these means of defending religion. The command of
God is, Obtain Swaraj, for that is the chief key to the pro-
tection of Dharma. He who does not attempt to acquire
Swaraj, he who sits silent in slavery, he is an atheist and
10

SWADHARMA & SWARAJ
hater of Religion. Therefore, rise for Swadharma and
acquire Swaraj !
" Rise for Swadharma and acquire Swaraj ! " What
divine events in the history of India are due to the reali-
sation of this principle ! The poet-saint Ramdas gave the
same dictum to the Mahrattas 250 years ago. " Die for
your Dharma, kill the enemies of your Dharma while you
are dying ; in this way fight and kill, and take back
your kingdom ! " ³
This alone is the principle in the Revolutionary War
of 1857. This is its mental science. The true and only
telescope which will show it in its true and clear form, is
the above verse of Ramdas.
Seeing at it through this telescope, what a spectacle
comes into view ! The war fought for Swadharma and
Swaraj does not lose its lustre by defeat. The splendour
of Guru Govind Singh's life is none the less, because his
efforts did not immediately succeed at the time. Nor do
we think the less of the rising of 1848 in Italy, because
the Revolution failed completely at that time.
Justin McCarthy says : " The fact was that through-
out the greater part of the northern and north-western
provinces of the Indian peninsula, there was a rebellion
of the native races against the English power. It was
not alone the Sepoy who rose in revolt—it was not by any
means a merely military mutiny. It was a combination of
military grievance, national hatred, and religious fanatic-
ism against the English occupation of India. The native
princes and the native soldiers were in it. The Maho-
medan and the Hindu forgot their old religious anti-
pathies to join against the Christian. Hatred and panic
3. धर्मासाठीं मरावें । मरोनि अवघ्यांस मारावें ।
मारितां मारितां घ्यावें । राज्य आपुलें
11

THE VOLCANO
were the stimulants of that great rebellious movement.
The quarrel about the greased cartridges was but the
chance spark flung in among all the combustible material.
If that spark had not lighted it, some other would have
done the work .... The Meerut Sepoys found, in a
moment, a leader, a flag, and a cause, and the mutiny was
transformed into a revolutionary war. When they reached
the Jumna, glittering in the morning light, they had all
unconsciously seized one of the great critical moments of
history and converted a military mutiny into a national
and religious war!" ⁴
Charles Ball writes: "At length, the torrent overflowed
the banks, and saturated the moral soil of India.
It was then expected that those waves would overwhelm
and destroy the entire European element and that, when
the torrent of rebellion should again confine itself within
bounds, patriotic India, freed from its alien rulers, would
bow only to the independent sceptre of a native prince.
The movement, now, assumed a more important aspect.
It became the rebellion of a whole people incited to out-
rage by resentment for imaginary wrongs and sustained
in their delusions by hatred and fanaticism." ⁵
White writes in his Complete History of the Great
Sepoy War :—" I should be wanting in faithfulness as an
historian if I failed to record with admiration the courage
displayed by the Oudhians. The great fault of the Oudh
Talukdars from a moral point of view was their having
made a common cause with the murderous mutineers.
But for this, they might have been regarded as noble
patriots, fighting in a good cause, pro rege et pro patria,
for the King and the Motherland"—for Swaraj
and Swadesh!
4. History of Our Own Times, Vol. III.
5. Indian Mutiny, Vol. I, page 644.
12

CHAPTER II
THE CHAIN OF CAUSES
IF it is true that the question whether India,
bounded by the Himalayas on the north and
the Ocean on the south, should be completely
independent or not, was being solved on the
battlefields of the war of 1857, then the chain
of causes begins from that day in 1757 when the
question was first raised. On the 23rd of June in 1757,
the question whether India should belong to the Indians
or to the English was openly discussed, for the first time,
on the field of Plassey. On that very day and on that very
field, where it was first discussed, were sown the seeds of
the Revolution. If Plassey had not been there, the War
13

THE VOLCANO
of 1857 also would not have taken place. Though a cen-
tury had rolled by, the memory of that day was fresh in
the heart of Hindusthan. In proof of this, witness the
terrible scene on the 23rd day of June 1857, in Northern
India. In the vast country from the Panjab up to Calcutta,
wherever there was an open field, thousands of Revolu-
tionaries were fighting the English simultaneously in
different places, from morning till evening, after openly
challenging them saying : "To-day we are going to
avenge Plassey!"
When, on the battlefield of Plassey, India had sworn
to fight a war of freedom, England was, as it were, anxi-
ous to hasten the day of its fulfilment as much as pos-
sible. For, Englishmen did not rest with sowing the seeds
of the Revolutionary War at Plassey, but they made
enormous efforts to encourage the growth of the plant
all over India. Warren Hastings tended the plant in
Benares, Rohilkhand, and Bengal. Wellesley did the
same in the fertile fields of Mysore, Assai, Poona, Satara,
and Northern India. This was not done without strong
efforts, for the ground had to be ploughed not with ordi-
nary ploughs but with swords and guns! What would
ordinary ploughs avail against Shanwar Palace, the
heights of Sahyadri, the forts of Agra, and the throne of
Delhi? When these rocky portions had been broken and
crushed, the smaller pieces left out by mistake were also
next broken. The smaller princes fell under the strokes
of English perfidy, oppression, and tyranny.
The English did not even feed well or pat on the back
the brutes by whose strength they effected all these
conquests. For a hundred years, they had been oppressing
and maltreating the sepoys in their army. When the
soldiers of the Mahrattas or the Nizam won important
victories, they used to get Jahgirs and rewards. But the
Company gave nothing but 'sweet words' of praise. The
sepoys, whose swords won India for the English, were so
14

THE CHAIN OF CAUSES
barbarously treated that General Arthur Wellesley would
drive the wounded sepoys to the mouth of guns instead of
sending them to the hospital !
While the English had thus been sowing the seeds of dis-
content and hatred in almost all parts of Hindusthan,
the time soon came when it appeared that their efforts
would soon be crowned with success. The danger to the
independence of India was first perceived by Nana
Farnavis of Poona and Hyder Sahib of Mysore. From
that day onwards the presence of this danger began to be
seen, faintly at least, by the princes of India ; and its
effect was markedly seen in the “mutiny” at Vellore.
This rising at Vellore was a rehearsal of the great rising
of 1857. Just as in a theatre, before the actual perform-
ance, several rehearsals have to be gone through, so in
history, before the actual and final attainment of freedom,
in order to harmonise the whole performance, several
rehearsals in the shape of risings are necessary. In Italy,
the rehearsals started as early as 1821, and only in 1861
was the play successful. The Rising at Vellore in 1806
was such a rehearsal on a small scale. In this rising, the
sepoys had been won over by the princes and people. At
markets, preachers disguised as Fakirs were preaching.
To indicate the time of rising, chapatees even had been
distributed. Hindus and Mahomedans together had risen
in the name of religion and liberty. But this being the
first rehearsal, they fell even as they were rising. Never
mind ! Before the final performance, how many rehear-
sals have to be gone through ! Only the actors should
boldly stick to their tasks and never cease their rehearsals.
And for producing this drama, both England and India
were working day and night without rest. And those that
were making ready to take part in the play were not
common, poor, or ignorant folk. The Gadi of Tanjore,
the Masnad of Mysore, the Raigarh of Sahyadri, the
Dewan-i-Khas of Delhi were among the select actors. And
to crown all, Lord Dalhousie landed on the shores of
15

THE VOLCANO
Hindusthan in 1846. There is not now much time left
for commencing the task which was sworn to on the
battlefield of Plassey.
From the above chain of causes, it will be clearly seen
that, before Dalhousie landed in India, the seeds of dis-
content had gone deep, very deep, all over Hindusthan.
Rajas and Maharajas, deprived of their kingdoms by the
English, were burning in their hearts. The fact that the
centenary of Plassey was approaching inspired a strange
feeling of hope among the people ; and in the very armies
of the English, the sepoys were secretly chafing with rage
and hatred. Even if India had had at this time a Viceroy
who would strive to allay this secret discontent, it is very
doubtful how far his efforts would have been successful.
The question now was not whether the Company's rule
should be good or bad ; but the only question that used to
be asked all over the country was whether the rule should
exist at all. The one other force that was necessary for
making an attempt to solve definitely this question was
supplied when Dalhousie became viceroy ; for he gave up
the policy of coating poison pills with sugar before ad-
ministering them to the victim, and began a system of
open and direct oppression which did not fail to burn its
way into the hearts of the masses.
Lord Dalhousie is described, by English historians, as
one of the founders of the English Empire. This fact
alone is sufficient to form an estimate of his capacity and
character. In a country where unjust wars of conquest
and oppression of foreign nationalities and races are
universally popular, it is no wonder that those who have
committed the greatest injustice and oppression are the
most honoured. Thus, he who is most unjust is deemed
the most capable, and one has no better way of proving
himself a great man in such a country than by committing
a climax of injustice. In such an Empire, where there is
such an emulation of injustice and oppression, Lord
16

THE CHAIN OF CAUSES
Dalhousie was given the significant title of a 'founder';
it is impossible to find a more suitable word to describe
his character. With the result of a hundred years of
wicked English policy behind him, obstinate by nature,
possessed of boundless self-confidence, his flesh and blood
permeated by the glory and pride of an unjust Empire,
this bold, if not clever, man landed on the shores of our
land saying openly, "I will level the land of Hindusthan."
As soon as Dalhousie landed, he saw at once that so long
as Ranjit Singh's lions lived in the Panjab, it was
impossible to achieve the object dear to his heart of
levelling Hindusthan. He, therefore, determined to throw
somehow or other the lion of the Panjab in the cage of
Slavery. But the Panjab lion had no ordinary claws.
Seeing his cave threatened, he rushed out of the lair at
Chillianwalla and, with a terrible stroke of his paw,
mauled the enemy and made him bleed. But, alas ! While
the lion was standing at the mouth of the cave at Chillian-
walla, a traitor broke open the back-wall at Guzerat and
the lion was surprised and captured. Soon the cave of
the lion became his cage ! Ranjit's Queen, Chand Kuvar,
died rotting in London ! And the lion's cub, Dhulip
Singh, ate the beggar's bread at the hands of the
Feringhi enemy !
After the annexation of the Panjab, Lord Dalhousie
wrote in his despatch, the proud sentence that the extent
of the British Empire was now continuous from the
Himalayas to Cape Comorin. But now that the British
frontiers had been pushed to the Himalayas on the north
and to the seas on the south, it was inevitable that he
should have an ambition to create an eastern and a west-
ern frontier suitable to these northern and southern ones.
Then why delay ? Send a 'peace' mission to Burma
and the work is done. This peace mission so tightly
embraced the peace of Burma that its ribs were broken
and it expired ! This very loving task was soon over and
17
2

THE VOLCANO
Burma was also annexed. Now, at last, the whole of
Hindusthan—from the Himalayas to Rameshwar and
from the Sindhu to the Iravady became red—but, oh !
Dalhousie, do you not fear that it will soon be redder still ?
Do we realise what is meant by the annexation of the
Panjab and Burma ? We cannot form an idea of it
from mere names. The Panjab alone is a territory of
50,000 sq. miles and a population of four millions ! It is
the land watered by the five sacred rivers of the Vedas, on
the banks of which the Rishis in ancient times had recit-
ed sacred mantras ! To conquer such a region Alexander
came from Greece, to defend such a region King Porus
fought. After taking such a country, the ambition even
of Ravana would have been satisfied ; but the land-hunger
of Dalhousie was not satisfied even after swallowing not
only the Panjab but also the extensive dominion
of Burma. Though the frontiers of India were extended,
there still remained the graves of ancient kingdoms within.
Dalhousie therefore began to root these out and level
everything. Not only did they occupy too much valuable
space, but there was the fear that from these graves might
one day rise the future avengers of India's wrongs.
In the grave at Satara was buried a magnificent Hindu
Empire. And it is no wonder that Dalhousie, who
was a believer in the Resurrection of Jesus was afraid
that out of Satara might rise a future Hindu Emperor who
would confound the foreigner and establish Swaraj. In
April 1848, Appa Sahib, the Maharaja of Satara, died.
At this news, Dalhousie decided to annex that State. And
what was the reason ? The King had no direct heirs !
Even the cottage of the village labourer who has no direct
heir is not confiscated but is given to his adopted son or
to his near relatives. And Satara was not a peasant’s
cottage but an ‘ally’ of the English Government. In the
year 1839, Pratap Singh Chhatrapati had been charged
with having engaged in a conspiracy with the object of
18

THE CHAIN OF CAUSES
overthrowing the British Government, was dethroned, and
in his place Chhatrapati Appa Sahib was appointed by
the English Sirkar to succeed him.¹ Mr. Arnold, in his
book Dalhousie’s Administration, says “ It is not pleasant
to dwell, on the circumstances of the dethronement—so
discreditable they were.” After such shamelessly discre-
ditable dethronement, the English established on the Gadi
of Satara the brother, on account of the failure of legiti-
mate sons. By this, the English practically acknowledg-
ed the right of other relations—as is the invariable law
laid down by the Hindu Shastras—to succeed to the
throne. The only truth about this whole affair is that
Dalhousie, with the habitual treachery of his nation,
overrode this open acknowledgment knowingly and deli-
berately, because it was profitable to do so.
No one could under any pretext say that the English,
in any of the various treaties concluded with the various
Rajas, had refused to acknowledge the right of adopted
children to succeed to their adoptive parents’ thrones. In
1825, the Company, while acknowledging the right of the
adopted child of the Raja of Kota to succeed, openly
declared :—“ The Prince of Kota must be considered to
possess the right, in common with all other Hindus, of
adopting a son and successor in conformity with the rules
of the Shastras.” ²
Again, in 1837, when the Raja of Oorcha adopted a
successor, the English acknowledged him and promised :—

1. The first article in the treaty entered into by the Sirkar
   with the Chhatrapati, when he was placed on the throne of Satara,
   runs as follows :—“ The valiant English Government on its part
   agrees to give the country or territory specified, to the Government
   or State of His Highness the Maharaja Chhatrapati (the Raja of
   Satara); His Highness the Maharaja Chhatrapati and His Highness’s
   sons and heirs and successors are perpetually, that is from generation
   to generation, to reign in sovereignty over the said territory.”
2. Parliamentary Papers, 15th February, 1850, page 153.
   19

THE VOLCANO
“ Hindu sovereigns have a right to adopt, to the exclusion
of collateral heirs, and the British Government is bound
to acknowledge the adoption, provided it is regular
and not in violation of the Hindu law.” ³ It may
be safely asserted that nowhere else but in English politics
could be found the audacity of denying the very existence
of those promises which were given most definitely and
which are contained in their own documents. Not only
by these declarations but on innumerable other occasions,
the English have acknowledged the right of the native
princes to adopt in accordance with the Hindu Shastras.
Suffice it to say that, within the short period of two years
(1846-47), the English Government had consented to the
succession to the Gadi of innumerable adopted sons, and
acknowledged their rights.
Indeed, to try to seek, in the language of promises and
treaties, the root cause of annexing these states, is to
work in a wrong direction altogether. The real truth of
the matter is that Dalhousie had come to reduce all India
to a dead level and the grave of the Hindu Empire at
Satara was trying to raise its head. Obviously, therefore,
though Pratap Singh and Appa Sahib had both adopted
in accordance with the Hindu Shastras, the English
annexed the Raj under the pretex of failure of legitimate
heirs. The Gadi of Satara ! The same Gadi on which
Shivaji was crowned by the hand of Gaga Bhatt ! The
same Gadi to which Baji Rao I. dedicated all his triumph,
before which he bowed low ! O Maharashtra ! behold that
same Gadi, on which Shivaji sat, and to which homage
was paid by Santaji, Dhanaji, Niraji, and Baji, has been
broken to pieces by Dalhousie ! Go on, if you will, with
your petitions and deputations. What if Dalhousie does
not listen to these ? In England at least, you think, the
Directors will listen to you ? Dalhousie is apparently a
mere man ; but, who knows, perhaps the Directors in
3. Parliamentary Papers, 15th February, 1850, page 141.
20