[8][full citation needed][9] The Santals lived in a territory that stretched from Hazaribagh to Medinipur, spanning the Subarnarekha River, along with other Munda ethnolinguistic tribals, and they engaged on agriculture.

[10][11] In 1832, the EIC demarcated the Damin-i-koh region in present-day Jharkhand and encouraged the pre-existed Paharia tribe of the Rajmahal hills to clear forests and practice agriculture.

Due to promises of land and economic amenities a large numbers of Santals came to settle from Dhalbhum, Manbhum, Hazaribagh, Midnapore, and other surrounding areas.

[12] The wave of migration started in the late 1790s and continued till the beginning of the rebellion,[12] as The Illustrated London News reported on 23 February 1856 that around 120,000 Santals had settled in the area.

Subsequently, Mahajans and Zamindars, acting as money lenders, tax collectors, and other intermediaries employed by the EIC, came to dominate the local economy, governance, and administration.

One was Bir Singh Manjhi, a Santal who led a gang of robbers and who claimed to have received support from a god who had whispered a secret mantra into his ear.

[15] Simultaneously, a chieftain called Margo Raja began cultivating a network of secret disciples throughout the Damin-i-koh, aiming to unite all Santals into a single body.

On 9 July, a non-Santal witness under oath estimated their force at 7,000 men, while a later report suggested they commanded 30,000 rebels, with 12,000 set to attack Rajmahal and the rest moving along the railway line to Jangipur and Murshidabad.

The Santals then routed a company of Paharia Rangers and inflicted a humiliating defeat on EIC troops at Narayanpur, killing several Indian officers and 25 sepoys.

They aimed to establish a fairer land system, charging lower rents for Bhumij and Bengali peasants, contrasting with the exploitative EIC policies.

The Governor’s Council authorized full-scale military action, deploying troops from Barrackpore to Raniganj and reinforcing key positions such as railway stations and the Grand Trunk Road.

Despite recommendations from the Divisional Commissioner of Burdwan to send 1,500 troops, the Lieutenant Governor refused, considering the uprising a local insurrection that did not require excessive reinforcements.

[15] The turning point of the rebellion came on 24 July, when 50 EIC troops under Commissioner Toogood, supported by 200 soldiers from the Nawab of Murshidabad and 30 elephants, confronted 5,000 Santals near Maheshpur.

The ECI brought in Major General G. W. A. Lloyd from Dinajpur district, who took control of the troops from Bidwell, and gathered even more forces for the full suppression of the rebellion.

At the time his command was established, he had 5 regiments of local infantry, Hill Rangers, some European troops, and cavalry, in addition to the various soldiers sent by the many Zamindars who were aiding the EIC.

[15] During the period of guerrilla attacks by the Santals, the East India Company (EIC) debated whether to impose martial law to suppress the rebellion.

On 23 August 1855, the Bhagalpur Commissioner issued an Urdu proclamation permitting the killing of Santals found in armed groups but prohibiting harm to women and children.

On 23 July, Bidwell argued that capturing prisoners and avoiding the plunder of insurgents was impractical, urging the government to permit executions and village burnings.

[15] To dismantle the rebellion, the Bhagalpur Commissioner initially offered large bounties for the capture of Sidhu and Kanhu Murmu, but the rewards were later revoked.

As the uprising weakened, the British promised rent annulments and grace periods to those who surrendered, provided they gave up weapons and rebel leaders.

Kanhu, Chand, and Bhairab initially hid in the hills but were reported to have thousands of armed followers south of the Mor River in November 1855.

[19][20][6]: 745 English author Charles Dickens, in Household Words, wrote the following passage on the rebellion: There seems also to be a sentiment of honor among them; for it is said that they use poisoned arrows in hunting, but never against their foes.

If this be the case and we hear nothing of the poisoned arrows in the recent conflicts, they are infinitely more respectable than our civilized enemy, the Russians, who would most likely consider such forbearance as foolish, and declare that is not war.