James Andrew Broun-Ramsay, 1st Marquess of Dalhousie KT, PC (22 April 1812 19 December 1860), styled Lord Ramsay

y until 1838 and known as The Earl of Dalhousie between 1838 and 1849, was a Scottish statesman, and a colonial administrator in British India. He served as Governor-General of India from 1848 to 1856. To his supporters he stands out as the far-sighted Governor-General who consolidated East India Company rule in India, laid the foundations of its later administration, and by his sound policy enabled his successors to stem the tide of rebellion. To his critics, he stands out as the destroyer of both the East India Company's financial and military position through reckless policies. His critics also hold that he laid the foundations of the Indian Rebellion of 1857 and led the final transformation of profitable commercial operations in India into a money-losing colonial administration. His period of rule in India directly preceded the transformation into the Victorian Raj period of Indian administration. He was denounced by many in England and India on the eve of his death as having failed to notice the signs of the brewing Indian Rebellion of 1857, having aggravated the crisis by his overbearing self-confidence, centralizing activity, and expansive annexations. Lord Dalhousie was born in 1812 in Scotland Castle. His original name was James Andrew Broun Ramsay. Lord Dalhousie was educated at Christ Church and Harrow, Oxford. Lord Dalhousie was the start behind the city derivative its name. Lord Dalhousie was one of the major personalities. Because of the Mutiny of 1857 took place. Although beginning by the Sepoys for the Indian Army. It gave a chance for the discontent Indian rulers to express their dissatisfied. The Sepoy mutiny, the mutiny for peons was dismissed by Lord Dalhousie and the British. Lord Dalhousie was also known as a successful administrator. In India, many places have been named after Dalhousie to mark his great achievements. In 1857, the revolt was followed with many changes to include the shift of Indian administration as of East India Company to the dignity, honor, crown and territorial control of the local princes. In 1857, many revolts preceded reflecting the Indian opposition to the British domination. The annexation policy was a deadly weapon for conquest which increased the East India Company rule to the elevation of glory. The annexation policy was known as the Doctrine of Lapse. The Doctrine of Lapse was based on the forfeiture for the right rule in the nonappearance for a natural successor. By Doctrine Lapse policy the province of Satara was annexed in 1848, the state of Sambhalpur in 1849, the state of Jhansi in 1853 and the state of Nagpur in 1954 was also annexed.

The Doctrine of Lapse was an annexation policy purportedly devised (see below about Kittur) by Lord Dalhousie, who was the Governor General for the British in India between 1848 and 1856. According to the Doctrine, any princely state or territory under the direct influence (paramountcy) of the British East India Company (the dominant imperial power in the subcontinent), as a vassal state under the British Subsidiary System, would automatically be annexed if the ruler was either "manifestly incompetent or died without a direct heir".[1] The latter supplanted the long-established right of an Indian sovereign without an heir to choose a successor. In addition, the British decided whether potential rulers were competent enough. The doctrine and its application were widely regarded by Indians as illegitimate. At the time of its adoption, the Company had absolute, imperial administrative jurisdiction over many regions spread over the subcontinent. The company took over the princely states of Satara (1848), Jaipur and Sambalpur (1849), Nagpur and Jhansi (1854) and Awadh (Oudh) (1856) using

this doctrine. The Company added about four million pounds sterling to its annual revenue by use of this doctrine.[2] The British took over Awadh in 1856 with the reason that the ruler was not ruling properly. This led to a revolution. With the increasing power of the East India Company, discontent simmered amongst many sections of Indian society and the largely indigenous armed forces; these rallied behind the deposed dynasties during the Indian rebellion of 1857 also known as the Sepoy Mutiny of 1857 . Following the rebellion, in 1858, the new British Viceroy of India, whose rule replaced that of the British East India Company, renounced the doctrine
The Indian Rebellion of 1857 began as a mutiny of sepoys of the British East India Company's army on 10 May 1857, in the town of Meerut, and soon escalated into other mutinies and civilian rebellions largely in the upper Gangetic plain and central India, with the major hostilities confined to present-day Uttar Pradesh, Bihar, northern Madhya Pradesh, and the Delhi region.[3] The rebellion posed a considerable threat to Company power in that region,[4] and it was contained only with the fall of Gwalior on 20 June 1858.[3] The rebellion is also known as the 1857 War of Independence, India's First War of Independence, the Great Rebellion, the Indian Mutiny, the Revolt of 1857, the Uprising of 1857, the Sepoy Rebellion, and the Sepoy Mutiny.

Tallow-greased cartridges
The final spark was provided by the ammunition for new Pattern 1853 Enfield Rifle. These rifles had a tighter fit, and used paper cartridges that came pre-greased. To load the rifle, sepoys had to bite the cartridge open to release the powder.[19] The grease used on these cartridges included tallow,[20] which if derived from pork would be offensive to Muslims, and if derived from beef would be offensive to Hindus.

Civilian disquiet
The civilian rebellion was more multifarious in origin. The rebels consisted of three groups: the feudal nobility, rural landlords called taluqdars, and the peasants. The nobility, many of whom had lost titles and domains under the Doctrine of Lapse, which refused to recognize the adopted children of princes as legal heirs, felt that the Company had interfered with a traditional system of inheritance. Rebel leaders such as Nana Sahib and the Rani of Jhansi belonged to this group; the latter, for example, was prepared to accept East India Company supremacy if her adopted son was recognized as her late husband's heir.[26] In other areas of central India, such as Indore and Saugar, where such loss of privilege had not occurred, the princes remained loyal to the

Company even in areas where the sepoys had rebelled.[27] The second group, the taluqdars, had lost half their landed estates to peasant farmers as a result of the land reforms that came in the wake of annexation of Oudh. As the rebellion gained ground, the taluqdars quickly reoccupied the lands they had lost, and paradoxically, in part due to ties of kinship and feudal loyalty, did not experience significant opposition from the peasant farmers, many of whom joined the rebellion, to the great dismay of the British

1. Economic Causes:
The most important cause of popular discontent was the British policy of economically exploiting India. This hurt all sections of society. The peasants suffered due to high revenue demands and the strict revenue collection policy. Artisans and craftsmen were ruined by the large-scale influx of cheap British manufactured goods into India which, in turn, made their hand-made goods uneconomical to produce. People who made a living by following religious and cultural pursuits lost their source of livelihood due to the withdrawal of royal patronage caused by the displacement of the old ruling classes. A corrupt and unresponsive administration added to the miseries of the people.

2. Political Causes:
The British policy of territorial annexations led to the displacement of a large number of rulers and chiefs. The vigorous application of the policies of Subsidiary Alliance and Doctrine of Lapse angered the ruling sections of the society. Rani Lakshmi Bai and Nana Sahib became bitter enemies of the British and led to the revolt in their respective territories. The annexation of Awadh, on grounds of misgovernment, was greatly resented. The Nawabs of Awadh had always been loyal to the British. The annexation was widely seen as a blatant act of back-stabbing by the British. It deeply hurt the sentiments of the Companys sepoys because most of them came from Awadh. Moreover, even under the new regime, the people of Awadh got no relief from oppression. Peasants had to pay even higher revenue and additional taxes were imposed. The British provided no alternative source of employment to the people who lost their jobs due to the dissolution of the Nawabs administration.

3. Social Causes:
The social reforms introduced by the British were looked upon with suspicion by the conservative sections of the Indian society. Reforms such as abolition of sati, legalization of widow remarriage and extension of western education to women were looked upon as examples of interference in the social customs of the country. The social discrimination faced by the Indians due to the British attitude of racial superiority also led to much resentment. Educated Indians were denied promotions and appointments to high office. This turned them against the British.

4. Religious Causes:

A major cause of the outbreak of the revolt was the fear among the people that the British government was determined to destroy their religion and convert Indians to Christianity. The increasing activities of the Christian missionaries and the actual conversions made by them were taken as a proof of this fear. The policy of taxing lands belonging to temples and mosques lent further support to this idea. The belief that their religion was under threat, united all sections of society against a common enemy.

5. Military Causes:
Indian soldiers formed seven-eighth of the total British troops in India. As they were an integral part of the Indian society, they too suffered the consequences of the oppressive British rule. Besides, they had other grievances. The Indian sepoys were looked upon as inferior beings and treated with contempt by their British officers. They were paid much less than the British soldiers. All avenues of the promotion were closed to them as all the higher army posts were reserved for the British. There were other specific and more immediate causes for the discontent among the sepoys. The annexation of Awadh inflamed their strong feelings against foreign rule. They were also influenced by the general fear that their religion was in danger. The order that forbade the sepoys from wearing caste and sectarian marks hurt their sentiments deeply. So also the Act of 1816 which required the new recruits to travel overseas, if needed. The Hindu sepoys resented this as according to the popular Hindu belief, travel across the sea led to a loss of caste. Another cause of sepoy discontent was the withdrawal of the Foreign Service allowance (batta), which the sepoys were getting for fighting outside the country.

6. Immediate Cause:
Discontent and resentment against British rule had been growing among the Indians for a long time. By AD 1857, the stage was set for a massive revolt. Only a spark was needed to set the country ablaze. That spark was provided by as small a thing as a rifle cartridge. At this time, the Enfield rifle was introduced in the army. Its cartridges were covered with a greased paper cover. This greased cover had to be bitten off before the cartridge could be loaded into the rifle. The news spread that the grease was made of cow and pig fat. As the Hindus consider the cow sacred and the Muslims do not eat pits meat, both these communities were enraged at such a blatant attempt to harm their religion. This incident, popularly known as the Greased Cartridges Incident, became the immediate cause of the revolt. The first soldier to protest against using the greased cartridges was Mangal Pandey. He belonged to the 34th Infantry stationed at Barrackpore. He refused to use the cartridges and was subsequently hanged. On 24 April 1857, some soldiers stationed at Meerut also refused to use the cartridges. On 9 May 1857, they were severely punished for this. This incident sparked off a general mutiny among the sepoys of Meerut. On 10 May 1857, these rebel soldiers killed their British officers, released their imprisoned comrades and hoisted the flag of revolt. This was the official beginning of the Great Revolt. The soldiers then set off for Delhi. On 11 May 1857,

they reached Delhi. Here, they were joined by the local infantry. The rebels seized Delhi and declared the Mughal emperor, Bahadur Shah Zafar as the emperor of India. Bengal Army
The sepoys also gradually became dissatisfied with various other aspects of army life. Their pay was relatively low and after Awadh and the Punjab were annexed, the soldiers no longer received extra pay (batta or bhatta) for service there, because they were no longer considered "foreign missions". The junior European officers were increasingly estranged from their soldiers, in many cases treating them as their racial inferiors. Officers of an evangelical persuasion in the Company's Army (such as Herbert Edwardes and Colonel S.G. Wheler of the34th Bengal Infantry) had taken to preaching to their sepoys in [38] the hope of converting them to Christianity. In 1856, a new Enlistment Act was introduced by the Company, which in theory made every unit in the Bengal Army liable to service overseas. (Although it was intended to apply to new recruits only, the sepoys feared that the Act might be applied retroactively to them as well. It was argued that a high-caste Hindu who traveled in the cramped, squalid conditions of a troop ship would find it impossible to avoid losing caste through ritual pollution. Mangal Pandey On 29 March 1857 at the Barrackpore parade ground, near Calcutta (now Kolkata), 29-year-old Mangal Pandey of the 34th BNI, angered by the recent actions of the East India Company, declared that he would rebel against his commanders. Informed about Pandey's apparently drug induced behaviour SergeantMajor James Hewson went to investigate only to have Pandey shoot at him. Hewson raised the [40] alarm. When hisadjutant Lt. Henry Baugh came out to investigate the unrest, Pandey opened fire but [41] hit Baugh's horse instead. General John Hearsey came out to see him on the parade ground, and claimed later that Mangal Pandey was in some kind of "religious frenzy". He ordered the Indian commander of the quarter guard Jemadar Ishwari Prasad to arrest Mangal Pandey, but the Jemadar refused. The quarter guard and other sepoys present, with the single exception of a soldier called Shaikh Paltu, drew back from [41][42] restraining or arresting Mangal Pandey. Shaikh Paltu restrained Pandey from continuing his attack. After failing to incite his comrades into an open and active rebellion, Mangal Pandey tried to take his own life by placing his musket to his chest, and pulling the trigger with his toe. He only managed to wound himself, and was court-martialled on 6 April. He was hanged on 8 April.