What were the consequences of the 1857 Sepoy Mutiny?

Question

Can someone please tell me ALL the consequences and after-effects of the 1857 Mutiny of Indian Sepoys against the British. ( I need a lot of material, so list atleast 5 consequences)

Please someone give me proper answers, not dumb ones like the one about the movie. also, i already know about the Company's rule ending, the restructuring of the army, and adoption of the divide and rule policy. if you know any other consequences, please tell me immediately. thanks in advance for helping me.

Answer 1

First consequence:
Ketan Mehta produced "Mangal Pandey" starring Aamir Khan and Rani Mukharjee. It was flop on box office although being a superb movie.

I am not sure about other consequences.

Answer 2

Consequences Of The Revolt Of 1857

Answer 3

The consequences of the Indian Sepoy's were-

i)The revolt started due to the indiscriminate policies of the British government which affected the economic life of the people.
ii) There were several mutinies against the British The most powerful mutinies by the sepoys of the company were the Vellore Mutiny in 1806 and the Barrackpore mutiny in 1824.
iii)These mutinies were powerful but they were suppressed by the British.
iv)The local people were inspired by these mutinies.
v)The Indian rulers decided to fight the British after these mutinies.

The after effects of the 1857 Mutiny were-:
i)There was end of interference in religious activities.The Indian people were promised full religious freedom.
ii)This revolt sowed the seeds of complete independence for India.
iii)The Indian rulers were given the right of adoption.
iv)The native rulers were given a promise that their territories will not be annexed.
v)The condition of the people became worst. Most of the people were unemployed.Many farmers were forced to grow commercial crops.
Indian rulers

Answer 4

It is very difficult to tell all the consequences of Sepoy Mutiny but some of them are as follows.

1. It ended the East India Company rule in India. The British Crown became the ruler of India.
2. It also ended the 300 year old Mughal empire in India. The Mughal emperor was exiled in Burma ( now Myanmar).
3. It created an political awareness among masses and taught them that unity is strength. They also realised that British rule is not infallible.
4. It started an unprecedented expansion spree of railway and road networks in India. Though British did it for quick movement of troops and armaments, it also gave masses a chance to come together.
5. The British also realised that only brute force will not help in smooth running of this large country. So they brought in some political reforms by including Indians in the lowest level of administration.

Answer 5

The important thing here is probably that the East India Company had to surrender control to the British Empire, and Victoria became Empress of India.

Answer 6

India came under the direct control of British Empire or Govt. Now, it was the Queen who ruled. East India Co. lost its power.

Answer 7

Very little consequence. It accomplished nothing except getting a lot of Indian mutineers tied to the barrel of cannons and blown in half.

Answer 8

there was a rumor about the bullets used by the soldiers ,it touched their believes of the sepoys .and they were suffering a lot from the british officals.

Answer 9

Destruction ,more destruction to Indian lives and property .
Force of Freedom struggle got pushed backward by 50 years.

Answer 10

The rebellion was a major turning point in the history of modern India. In May 1858, the British exiled Emperor Bahadur Shah Zafar II (r. 1837–57) to Rangoon, Burma (now Yangon, Myanmar), after executing most of his family, thus formally liquidating the Mughal Empire. Bahadur Shah Zafar, known as the Poet King, contributed some of Urdu's most beautiful poetry, with the underlying theme of the freedom struggle. The Emperor was not allowed to return and died in solitary confinement in 1862. The Emperor's three sons, also involved in the War of Independence, were arrested and shot in Delhi by Major William Stephen Raikes Hodson of the British Indian Army.

Cultural and religious centres were closed down, properties and estates were confiscated. At the same time, the British abolished the British East India Company and replaced it with direct rule under the British Crown. In proclaiming the new direct-rule policy to "the Princes, Chiefs, and Peoples of India", Queen Victoria (upon whom the British Parliament conferred the graciously accepted title "Empress of India" in 1877) promised equal treatment under British law, but Indian mistrust of British rule had become a legacy of the 1857 rebellion.

Many existing economic and revenue policies remained virtually unchanged in the post-1857 period, but several administrative modifications were introduced, beginning with the creation in London of a cabinet post, the Secretary of State for India. The governor-general (called viceroy when acting as representative to the nominally sovereign "princely states" or "native states"), headquartered in Calcutta, ran the administration in India, assisted by executive and legislative councils. Beneath the governor-general were the governors of Provinces of India, who held power over the division and district officials, who formed the lower rungs of the Indian Civil Service. For decades the Indian Civil Service was the exclusive preserve of the British-born, as were the superior ranks in such other professions as law and medicine. This continued until the 1910s when a small but steadily growing number of native-born Indians, educated in British schools on the Subcontinent or in Britain, were able to assume such positions.


Map of the Madras Presidency, 1909The Viceroy of India announced in 1858 that the government would honour former treaties with princely states and renounced the "Doctrine of Lapse", whereby the East India Company had annexed territories of rulers who died without male heirs. About 40 percent of Indian territory and 20–25 percent of the population remained under the control of 562 princes notable for their religious (Islamic, Hindu, Sikh and other) and ethnic diversity. Their propensity for pomp and ceremony became proverbial, while their domains, varying in size and wealth, lagged behind socio-political transformations that took place elsewhere in British-controlled India. A more thorough re-organisation was effected in the constitution of army and government finances. Shocked by the extent of solidarity among Indian soldiers during the rebellion, the government separated the army into the three presidencies. The Indian Councils Act of 1861 restored legislative powers to the presidencies, which had been given exclusively to the governor-general by the Charter Act of 1833.
1857 had led to the seizure and conversion of local farmland to foreign-owned plantations, restrictions on internal trade, inflationary measures that increased the price of food, and substantial exports of staple crops from India to the United Kingdom (Dutt, 1900 and 1902; Srivastava, 1968; Sen, 1982; Bhatia, 1985). Some British citizens such as William Digby agitated for policy reforms and better famine relief, but Lord Lytton, son of the poet Edward Bulwer-Lytton and the governing British viceroy in India, opposed such changes in the belief that they would stimulate shirking by Indian workers. Native industries in India were also decimated in the aftermath of the 1857 rebellion, particularly during the three decades from 1870 to 1900 (with the notable exception of the jute industry, which benefited from the global industrial revolution), as the mercantilist policies of the Raj flooded India with imports while minimising native production and exports.