Jump to content

Talk:Rani of Jhansi

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

REBELLION OR WAR OF INDEPENDENCE

[edit]


The whole world including UK believes that British Occupation of India was unjust and wrong I wonder why the 1857 war is referred to as rebellion. Seven Independent countries proudly claim it to be a War of Independence two of which are Nuclear Powers, these countries are respected and recognised in the world, what right does any body have to refer to their freedom struggle as Rebellion.

You clearly have no understanding of "Neutral Point of View". We don't use words like "unjust" or "wrong" on wikipedia. It's an encyclopedia, not a soapbox. This entire article has a POV bias as it is. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.232.253.222 (talk) 06:48, 13 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Because it was a rebellion. Only a small part of India was involved, and most of the Indian states sided with the British. The idea that it was a war of independence is a retrospective nationalist fantasy. It would be more impressive if Indians could begin to look at the event objectively, as Britons now do. Greg Grahame (talk) 16:00, 27 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Have you all gone mad? What the hell is neutrality? If you call a war just a small game. Millions died both sides and it's a revolution because this lead to growth of Nationalism. Most Indian leaders like Subhash Chandra Bose were inspired by the event and took weapons... --Rawal of Jaisalmer (talk) 15:57, 4 April 2011 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Leodescal (talk • contribs) 15:54, 4 April 2011 (UTC) There should be no doubt that it was the very first attempt by Indians to overthrow the British Company Raj. It should be positively called as "War of Indipendance" as 'Mutiny' or 'Rebel' refers to activities by people against their own government. And in no way Company government can be referred as own government by Indians. Only a small part of India was involved was due to lack of planning of participants, lack of proper ways of communication. And most of Indian states sided with British was due to political immaturity. They didn't take active part as their own state was safe at that time unlike Avadh, Jhasi and Pune. Had it been also at stake, they might not have sided Britishers. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Santoshat (talk • contribs) 06:00, 31 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not attack other contributors, and don't make assumptions about the connotations of English words without checking carefully first. There is nothing wrong with the word 'rebellion' - it may sound pejorative to some ears, but in general it refers to any revolt (just or unjust) against the established authority (just or unjust). It is a fact of history that the British (the East India Company and, in practice by that stage already, the British government too to a great extent) ruled most of India. It is not the place of an encyclopaedia to state whether this was fair or not, and of course it wasn't - but the war was still a rebellion. Even those large swathes of the media very biased towards the Libyan rebels of 2011, for example, still call them 'rebels', without any negative connotation. Harsimaja (talk) 18:36, 13 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

can anyone tell me....that whether Laxmi Bai fought with Orcha.....or not....? In the serial...which is shown....on Zee TV...it is showing a war with orcha....but i have never heard or read anywhere about that war...? I m in confusion...i want answer to my question....but this net is helpless...and wikipedia is also not telling about different wars fought by Lakshmi Bai...Pliease anyoe help me...! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 117.197.4.136 (talk) 07:10, 8 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Jhansi was invaded by the troops of the nearby states of Orchha and Datia about the same time that rebel sepoys were attempting to depose the Rani. This is now set out in the article.--Felix Folio Secundus (talk) 10:45, 22 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I have no idea... 41.217.44.113 (talk) 21:20, 25 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

There is every doubt that the Indian Mutiny was a war of independence! It involved very few players, most of whom were mutineers. The concept of a war of independence in the Indian context is flawed in any case. India was not a single country. It had had various rulers from outside over the centuries. Is every local rebellion against these rulers an "Indian war of independence"? The events in Jhansi were actually unrelated to the Indian Mutiny. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.197.15.138 (talk) 19:33, 10 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Plus, the phrase 'First War of Indian Independence' implies that there was a second one, but there was no such subsequent 'war'. A neutral term would be 'Mutiny-Rebellion' as it was a munity that was the spark that ignited a broader rebellion. 194.143.178.6 (talk) 17:14, 7 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Dates of Birth and Death

[edit]

I've found several sources saying that she died on the 17th of June, several saying she died on the 18th, and several saying no one is sure. The article as it stands contradicts itself more than once on this very issue. I'll put in a neutral version. Harsimaja (talk) 18:41, 13 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Now there are contradictions in this article on her birth date, with reason - I'm told most historians think it was 1828, some think it was 1827, one prominent historian has put forward 1835 and I've also seen 1834. For some reason they all agree on the day of the year - just not the year. I don't think I'm the one to disentangle this, but certainly there should be a discussion of this confusion in the article. Harsimaja (talk) 18:41, 13 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Date of Birth should be corrected

[edit]

Almost all unanimously agree that she could not have been six and half years old during her marriage in 1842. Hence she could not have been born in 1835. Her approximate year of birth should be considered as 1827. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jsbhavsar (talk • contribs) 14:43, 11 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Wish to contribute a photograph (clicked by me) of statue of Maharani Laxmibai [on horseback], located at Swarn Jayanti park, Ghaziabad, UP. Please help me to upload the file — Preceding unsigned comment added by Samit.mathur (talk • contribs) 12:57, 25 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Please see guide to uploading images.--Felix Folio Secundus (talk) 16:35, 9 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Edit request on 9 September 2012

[edit]

YEAR OF BIRTH WAS 1828 AND NOT 1835 59.180.149.55 (talk) 07:22, 9 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: You're referring to the first sentence of the Childhood section. The first source does say 1835, but this is inconsistent with the text in the lede and the infobox, which say 1828, and I don't believe that source is reliable. (In fact, it looks as if there are several unreliable sources used as refs in this article.) The snippet from the second source implies 1830. The third source (actually just a footnote) suggests there's uncertainty. If no one can provide a good source giving a firm date, I suggest the article should note that the year is uncertain. Rivertorch (talk) 11:10, 9 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Further:- Her marriage occurred in 1842: if 1835 was the real date she would be only six years old.--Felix Folio Secundus (talk) 09:39, 12 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Though getting married at 6 years of age would not have been uncommon for that era and culture. Vikram Vincent 05:51, 28 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
There would have been marriages at that age at that time but there is better evidence for the earlier date of birth.--Johnsoniensis (talk) 10:09, 29 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Move page to Rani Lakshmi Bai

[edit]

Rani of Jhansi is a British invented name and not that of the true rani which is Manikarnika or Lakshmi. I see many names are wrong here in Wikipedia like this, Sardar Vallabhai Patelji, Tatya Tope ji, Kunwarji. Ji is respect title, So its not needed but should be Sardar Vallabhai Patel, Tatya Tope, Veer Kunwar Singh.BeanTennyson (talk)

Requested move 16 September 2017

[edit]
The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: Withdrawn, as all opposing per common name. (non-admin closure) BeanTennyson (talk) 11:29, 17 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Rani of Jhansi → Rani Lakshmi Bai – Rani of Jhansi is English British invented name, I want to restore to original name. BeanTennyson (talk) 17:24, 16 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Deletion of Jadunath Sarkar by Adamgerber80 (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Adamgerber80 (talk · contribs) is deleting Jadunath Sarkar, the world renowed historian, from the article. His book on Rani is also well known. Please discuss.

He is known for his work on the Mughal Dynasty. You have been plugging multiple of his books and other random books across multiple pages. What is your rational here? Adamgerber80 (talk) 01:02, 26 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Disputed

[edit]

An explanation is needed for the addition of a "disputed" tag.--Johnsoniensis (talk) 20:53, 31 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Historical Writings about Rani

[edit]

>>The Queen's Desire: This novel written by Hume Nisbet in 1893 focuses on the Rani's sexuality. However, she does not want to use her sexuality to manipulate the British, but she cannot resist a British officer and consequently falls in love with him.[51]<<

What is the basis for this novelist on such allegation? Was the writer born in Jhansi or in India, did research on Rani's affairs? It was given a link in the sentence [51], what is that link saying? is that proving anything? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ramarajubhaskar (talk • contribs) 16:22, 1 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Battle of Kotah ki Serai

[edit]

"On 17 June in Kotah-ki-Serai near the Phool Bagh of Gwalior, a squadron of the 8th (King's Royal Irish) Hussars, under Captain Heneage, fought the large Indian force commanded by Rani Lakshmibai and were defeated. But on the following day, the 8th Hussars charged into the Indian force, slaughtering 5,000 Indian soldiers, including any Indian "over the age of 16". This version may not be correct: 17 June is when the Rani was mortally wounded; whether she died on the same day or the next is unknow, But here there are engagements between the Hussars and the Rani's forces on two successive days. Where is the reliable source for this?--Johnsoniensis (talk) 19:07, 13 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Please see 8th King's Royal Irish Hussars#Indian Rebellion of 1857.--Johnsoniensis (talk) 00:54, 14 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Title should be "Lakshmibai" instead of "Rani of Jhansi"

[edit]

"Rani of Jhansi" is her royal title. The article should have her name of "Lakshmibai" as the title. Rabbabodrool (talk) 04:40, 13 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Please see "Requested move 16 September 2017" above.--Johnsoniensis (talk) 09:35, 13 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted image

[edit]
The Rani of Jhansi smoking a hookah

The image was deleted today without explanation; however as it is quite unrealistic it is best not to put it back in the article.--Johnsoniensis (talk) 14:58, 17 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

It has now been put back but it is a unrealistic European representation so is of doubtful value.--Johnsoniensis (talk) 20:06, 9 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Tagging

[edit]

"This article contains wording that promotes the subject in a subjective manner without imparting real information": please be more specific about the reason for adding this.--Johnsoniensis (talk) 20:03, 9 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Revolt was in 1857

[edit]

By historians by investigating 2409:4041:6E1E:141C:19F9:2DB:DBE6:546A (talk) 08:05, 5 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Birth year revisited

[edit]

I think we should reconsider why we are stating Lakshmibai was born in 1828 with such certainty. Most accounts of her early life are anecdotal and many sources report various years. Even the reliable sources linked in this article seem to disagree. Here's a few different takes:

  • Meyer, Karl E. & Brysac, Shareen Blair (1999) Tournament of Shadows says: "Known to history as Lakshmi Bai, she was possibly only twelve in 1842 when she married the aging and infirm Rajah of Jhansi ..."
  • Encyclopædia Britannica says c. November 19, 1835
  • A 2019 article in the New York Times says that she is "widely believed to have been born in 1827 in Varanasi"
  • In the 2020 article "India’s Rebel Queen: Rani Lakshmi Bai and the 1857 Uprising", Harleen Singh notes that "Most Indian sources give her date of birth as 1835, which would make her seven at the time of her marriage and twenty-two in 1857. However, various British records place her birth in 1827 and refer to the Rani as a woman in her thirties."

Johnsoniensis, I see that you placed warning notes in the article in 2014 saying "Please do not add birth year 1835 as historians no longer accept it as correct; see cited sources and discussion on Talk page". Which historians said that 1935 is incorrect? I'm not seeing consensus on this talk page for using 1828. Rivertorch suggested noting the year is uncertain while Harsimaja noted that sources have used 1827, 1828, 1834, and 1835. Courtesy pings for those involved in previous discussions: @Felix Folio Secundus: @Vincentvikram: gobonobo + c 18:32, 18 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

When expanding the article in 2014 1 chose 1828 on the basis of this source. I was not able to consult any scholarly biography of the Rani but it would be useful if you were able to do so. I used to be Felix Folio Secundus.--Johnsoniensis (talk) 18:46, 18 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Johnsoniensis: Thank you for the link. I see that Allen Copsey, that site's author, also wrote above that while the birth date is unknown, there's evidence for 1828 but not really for 1835. And while his site probably doesn't qualify as a reliable source (he says right there he's not any sort of authority), I do think some of his reasons for preferring 1828 are compelling. I can look for more scholarly sources that weigh in on the issue. Would you be open to using {{circa}} for mentions of the birth year and expanding the "certain historians disagree" footnote with a few references? gobonobo + c 19:56, 18 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, These are likely to be good sources: (1) Jerosch, Rainer (2008). The Rani of Jhansi: Rebel Against Will, Delhi: Aakar Books; 1st edition, ISBN 978-8189833145 (2) Lebra-Chapman, Joyce (1986) The Rani of Jhansi. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press (3) The Queen of Jhansi, by Mahasweta Devi (translated by Sagaree and Mandira Sengupta). I am not sure about using c. but adding reliably sourced information would be useful. Johnsoniensis (talk) 20:10, 18 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, those look like good sources. This is from Lebra-Chapman's The Rani of Jhansi:

"Most Indian sources report Lakshmi's birthdate as 19 Nov. 1835, as does Yamuna Sheorey of Nagpur, who claims to be the granddaughter of the Rani's half-brother, Chintaman Rao Tambe. This date is used by Hardikar, Parasnis, and the Jhansi novelist Verma. Astrologers in Varanasi assert she was born on 13 Nov. 1835. Tahmankar and Sinha, on the other hand, suggest she may have been born in 1827. Most of this account of the childhood and marriage of the Rani depends on Indian written sources and on the Sohrab Modi film (in Hindi) on the Rani. Since accounts of the early events of her life are unsupported by any English documentation, the Rani's early life, as presented here, at times verges on legend. Mrs. Sheorey relates that Moropant, the Rani's father, had two children by a second wife he married in Jhansi after his daughter's marriage."

I haven't yet seen that film (Jhansi Ki Rani). I'll keep looking for sources. gobonobo + c 20:54, 18 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Here's the only mention I found in Rainer Jerosch's The Rani of Jhansi, Rebel Against Will:

"Incidentally, it should be mentioned that Sir Robert Hamilton's life history already had a point of tangency with that of the Rani at an early stage. He began his actual professional career rather unspectacularly at the court in Benares in 1827, where his father was also working in the service of the British Government. The Rani was born at the same place during this time. He was roughly 25 years older than the Rani."

That would support 1827. Sir Robert Hamilton, 6th Baronet was born on 7 April 1802.
Mahasweta Devi in Queen of Jhansi, p. 18 (translated) says:

"A daughter was born to Moropant Tambe and Bhagirathi Bai on 21 November, 1835 in the Assi Ghat house. The mother named her Manikarnika, or Manu for short."

I did a rough survey of the sources and we have:
1827: Rainer Jerosch, D.V. Tahmankar (ca.), New York Times ("widely believed"), Harleen Singh, Adrian Shubert (ca.)
1828: Heather Streets (Oxford Encyclopedia of the Modern World)
1835: Dattatray Balwant Parasnis, Mahasweta Devi, Siriniwas Balajee Hardikar, Yamuna Sheorey (relative), Encyclopedia Britannica, Chandar S. Sundaram (Berkshire Encyclopedia of World History), Surjit Mansingh (ca.; Historical Dictionary of India), the memorial in Gwalior
Lots of 1835s in there, but I favour Copsey's analysis, that "1827 or 1828" fits. Still, almost all of the sources using the earlier year are saying 1827 or "around 1827" and not 1828, so I think c. 1827 might better reflect the sourcing and better convey that the sourcing is less than consistent. gobonobo + c 01:17, 19 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Re: battle of Morar

[edit]

It is described here: Central Indian campaign of 1858#The recapture of Gwalior Johnsoniensis (talk) 18:55, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Queen regent

[edit]

please mention as Queen regent not regent 125.62.199.30 (talk) 11:50, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Rani_of_Jhansi&oldid=1271543842"