UP vs South India during 1857

In the 1857 battle of independence, U.P. was in the forefront. A few other states like Maharashtra also played a role in this historic fight. In contrast, South India was for the most part 'quiet'. Sure, there were sporadic incidents of violence, but by and large South India remained 'loyal' to the British Raj. The reason was that the rulers in South India--the Nizams, Nawabs of Arcot, Wodeyar kings in Karnataka were all loyal to the British. In contrast, the rulers in U.P. all sided with the revolutionaries which is why after the revolt was crushed the rulers of U.P. were deprived of their wealth and property and often of their lives.

A few misguided Tamilians sometimes give the example of a revolt that had taken place in Vellore around 50 years before the 1857 battle of independence. I will just point out that these kind of sporadic incidents of violence were taking place all over India. It is a fact that for the most, Tamil Nadu and Andhra Pradesh witnessed no anti-British struggle because the Nizams and the Nawabs of Arcot and other local rulers in these regions were pro-British. (In the case of the Nizams, they had turned anti-British for a very short while during the time of Tipu Sultan but then quickly reverted to being pro-British.)

The only South Indian state which deserves full credit for fighting a glorious anti-British fight is Karnataka. Here, Hyder Ali and his son Tipu Sultan fought heroically against the British for a long time until Tipu after some initial military victories against the British was finally defeated.