(July 9, 2012 at 8:46 pm)Moros Synackaon Wrote:(July 9, 2012 at 7:10 pm)JohnDG Wrote: By the way moros, it was a civil war. Unless you would like to call the American civil war a revolution also? Who's revolution would it be anyways? Probobly the south's they just didn't win but they were the rebels.
By calling it a "civil war", you've now conflated colonial revolts with warring states in an empire.
By that standard, isn't this ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/India%27s_F...%28term%29 ) a civil war for Britain as well instead of a series of disparate, partially organized revolts?
I'm not certain you'll find many historians who'd characterize it as a such.
They might characterize it as a civil war for Indians, but not for the British.
Civil War and Rebellion are used during a geographically isolated conflict. History will remember the same conflict as a Civil War or Revolution based on which faction retains or gains power after the conflict.
