Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-rdxmf Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-29T12:00:45.188Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

A Reply to Mr. F. W. Buckler's The Political Theory of the Indian Mutiny

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 February 2009

Douglas Dewar  and
H. L. Garrett
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Mr. F. W. Buckler has put forth a theory to account for the Indian Mutiny, or, rather, has unearthed and elevated to the dignity of an hypothesis an assertion made by some of the mutineers at the time of the Mutiny, namely, that the East India Company rebelled against the King of Delhi and that the native soldiers were in duty bound to rally round him against the rebel Company.

Type
Research Article
Information
Transactions of the Royal Historical Society , Volume 7 , December 1924 , pp. 131 - 165
Copyright
Copyright © Royal Historical Society 1924

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

page 163 note 1 I have dealt at length both with the political theory of Mughal kingship and with the position of Bairām Khān in a paper entitled “A fresh interpretation of Akbar's ‘Infallibility’ Decree of 1579,” J.R.A.S., October, 1924, pp. 591–605.

page 163 note 2 I.O., Home Misc. 629, p. 288. The italics are mine. Clive made quite clear the difference between “allowance” and “tribute,” also the Company's share.

page 163 note 3 Ib., p. 561. Letter from Select Committee at Bengal, 31 January, 1766, para. 24.

page 163 note 4 Thorn, pp. 43–4. Elphinstone (ed. Cowell), p. 702.

page 164 note 1 I.O., Home Misc. 556, pp. 101–2.

page 165 note 1 For a fuller statement, v. The Cambridge History of British Foreign Policy, Vol. II, c. IX, where I have quoted my authorities in full.