The 1915 Singapore mutiny is a well-documented event that has somehow escaped the attention of most historians: an issue which Heather Streets-Salter attempts to rectify in an article discussing the global implications of this local event. Divided into two parts, Streets-Salter details both the Causes and Responses that were mostly left out of official accounts.
On the 15th of February in 1915, 850 soldiers in the 5th Light Infantry, consisting of Indians brought to Singapore by the British, mutinied against the authorities in Singapore. The uprising was suppressed after two days, and 203 sepoys from the 5th infantry were tried in court leading to several executions, transportations and prison sentences [p.540]. Although it was a well documented event at the time in order for the British to understand the reasons for the mutiny, it has barely been studied since there were other big events in 1915 such as Germany’s declaration of a submarine blockade on Britain. What is interesting about this case is that British authorities quickly provided a public version of events that was very different from the case presented in court. Whereas officials publically dismissed the mutiny as little more than a suppressed riot, evidence demonstrates extensive involvement of several different countries to control what must have been perceived as a real threat to British control in Singapore. P.547 The official version has, however, affected later interpretations, thus highlighting the issue of representation in history as well as by historians.
Streets-Salter also brings attention to the issue of global influences that led to the mutiny, as well as the global response in suppressing it. The Indian men of the 5th regiment were free to move around Singapore when not on duty, and were likely exposed to contact with Ghadar (mutiny) Indian activists who were campaigning for the end of the British Raj in India. This, alongside general anti-British sentiment, led to action, and the mutiny can thus not be dismissed merely as a local event. Moreover, when news of the unrest spread, armed help came from several other nations before the British forces themselves arrived. In this case, a number of consuls of different nationalities stepped in to suppress the unrest, one of the most proactive being the Japanese consul who organised raising forces to patrol the roads leading into the city, stressing the importance of considering the role of consuls in the history of empire [p.565]. In fact, the significance of France, Russia and Japan offering assistance in this matter is a direct example of the recently developed global alliances in the lead up to the war [p. 567]. Each force that had helped was recognised by the Singapore authorities and awarded with a parade before they left the island. However, the very fact that the authorities stopped the news of the mutiny spreading indicates that rather than being a small scale local riot it was, in fact, a significant event with both global influences and consequences [p. 575].
This is only one case study, but Streets-Salter argues her points well: the local can, and should, sometimes be considered on a global scale. Official accounts can hide the truth almost better than they tell it. Ultimately, “in many ways it is a question of the size of the historical lens” [p.544].

Heather Streets-Salter, The Local Was Global:
The Singapore Mutiny of 1915, Journal of World History 24 (2013).

The size of the historical lens: Singapore 1915