In memoriam, Henry Havelock

from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
In memoriam, Henry Havelock

In memoriam, Henry Havelock is a painting by the Scottish painter Sir Joseph Noel Paton . He created it in 1857/1858 under the influence of the news about the Indian uprising , which reached the British public from June 1857. The British public was particularly shocked by the news of the siege of Kanpur , the numerous murders of civilians in the rebellious Delhi and the massacre of defenseless women and children in Bibighar . For the British public, the massacres in Kanpur in particular were an event of traumatic proportions, which preoccupied the British public more than the Crimean War , which was significantly more casualty . Contemporaries such as the historian George Trevelyan described the siege as " the most terrible tragedy of our age " or " the greatest disaster for our race ".

The painting shows a group of frightened children and women huddled together in a room. The original version of the picture showed one of the rebellious sepoys in the open door . When the painting was exhibited at the Royal Academy that summer, the British public reacted very strongly to the painting. Given the extensive coverage in the UK media, it was obvious to viewers that the painting showed the group in the foreground before their imminent assassination. Joseph Noel Paton then withdrew the painting and painted over it. Instead of the rebellious sepoy, it now shows an approaching Scottish regiment in the background. The title In Memoriam, Henry Havelock also indicates a happy ending for the group in the foreground. Henry Havelock († 1857) was one of the officers whose troops in India played a key role in recapturing besieged garrison towns such as Kanpur for the British.

supporting documents

  1. see the detailed studies by Christopher Herbert: War of no Pity. The Indian Mutiny and Victorian Trauma , Princeton University Press, Princeton 2008, ISBN 978-0-691-13332-4
  2. Both quotations come from George Trevelyan: Cawnpore , 1865 - quoted from Herbert, p. 183
  3. James, p. 286