Get here Question and Answers of the Chapter “Nationalism in India” given NCERT History Textbook CBSE Class 10. Click here to see Notes of this chapter.
Write in Brief
1. Explain:
a) Why growth of nationalism in the colonies is linked to an anti-colonial movement.
Ans. The growth of nationalism in the colonies is intrinsically linked to anti-colonial movements because colonial rule was inherently exploitative and oppressive. The sense of shared suffering and exploitation under foreign domination fostered a collective identity among the colonized people. This collective identity and shared grievances against colonial rule catalyzed the rise of nationalist movements aimed at achieving political freedom, economic self-sufficiency, and cultural rejuvenation.
b) How the First World War helped in the growth of the National Movement in India.
Ans. The First World War played a significant role in the growth of the National Movement in India in several ways:
- Economic Hardships: The war caused severe economic difficulties, including increased taxes and inflation, which affected all sections of Indian society.
- Political Awareness: The war exposed Indians to international ideas of self-determination and democracy.
- Expectations of Reform: Indians were led to believe that their support for the British war effort would be rewarded with political reforms, leading to increased demands for self-rule.
- Mobilization of Resources: The British recruitment efforts and the mobilization of resources highlighted the extent of British control and exploitation, spurring nationalist sentiments.
c) Why Indians were outraged by the Rowlatt Act.
Ans. Indians were outraged by the Rowlatt Act of 1919 because it:
- Suppressed Civil Liberties: The Act allowed the government to imprison anyone suspected of terrorism without trial for up to two years.
- Denied Basic Rights: It denied basic civil liberties, including freedom of speech and expression, which were fundamental to a democratic society.
- Extended Wartime Repression: The Act extended wartime repressive measures into peacetime, signaling that the British had no intention of loosening their grip on India despite the end of World War I.
d) Why Gandhiji decided to withdraw the Non-Cooperation Movement?
Ans. Gandhiji decided to withdraw the Non-Cooperation Movement in 1922 because of the violent incident at Chauri Chaura, where a mob of protestors killed 22 policemen by setting a police station on fire. Gandhi believed in non-violence (ahimsa) as the core principle of the movement and felt that such incidents undermined the ethical foundation of the struggle.
He withdrew the movement to prevent further violence and to maintain the moral high ground of the nationalist cause.
2. What is meant by the idea of satyagraha?
Ans. The idea of satyagraha, introduced by Mahatma Gandhi, means “insistence on truth” or “soul force.” It is a philosophy and practice of non-violent resistance and civil disobedience. Satyagraha advocates for the power of truth and the need to seek justice through peaceful means. It involves:
- Non-violence: Adherence to non-violence (ahimsa) in thought, word, and deed.
- Truth: Commitment to truth (satya) as the ultimate guiding principle.
- Self-suffering: Willingness to endure suffering without retaliation to bring about social and political change.
3. Write a newspaper report on:
a) The Jallianwala Bagh Massacre
Ans. Headline: Massacre at Jallianwala Bagh: Hundreds Killed in Cold Blood
Amritsar, April 13, 1919: In a horrific turn of events, hundreds of unarmed civilians, including women and children, were killed yesterday at Jallianwala Bagh by troops under the command of Brigadier General Reginald Dyer. The peaceful gathering, assembled to protest against the repressive Rowlatt Act, was fired upon without warning.
Eyewitnesses report that General Dyer ordered his troops to block the narrow exits before opening fire, resulting in chaos and a stampede. Official reports confirm over a thousand casualties, with many more injured. The massacre has sent shockwaves across the nation, igniting a wave of anger and calls for justice. The brutal act marks a turning point in the Indian struggle for independence, as leaders and common people alike vow to intensify their efforts against British colonial rule.
b) The Simon Commission
Ans. Headline: Simon Commission Faces Widespread Protests Across India
New Delhi, February 3, 1928: The arrival of the Simon Commission, appointed to review the working of the Government of India Act 1919, has been met with widespread protests and boycotts across the nation. The commission, which notably lacks any Indian members, is seen as a blatant disregard for Indian aspirations and a reinforcement of British dominance.
In cities like Bombay, Calcutta, and Lahore, massive demonstrations greeted the commission members, with protestors chanting slogans like “Simon Go Back.” The lack of Indian representation has been criticized by leaders of the Indian National Congress and other political groups, who demand a greater role in determining their country’s future. The Simon Commission’s tour has only served to unite Indians in their quest for self-governance and deepen the resolve to fight for independence.
4. Compare the images of Bharat Mata in this chapter with the image of Germania in Chapter 1.
Ans. The images of Bharat Mata and Germania serve as powerful national symbols for India and Germany, respectively, but they represent different cultural and political ideals.
Bharat Mata:
- Cultural Symbolism: Bharat Mata is depicted as an ascetic and divine mother figure, symbolizing the nation of India. She is often shown calm, composed, and spiritual, embodying the cultural and spiritual heritage of India.
- Role in Nationalism: Bharat Mata became a rallying symbol during the Indian freedom struggle, inspiring devotion and patriotism. The image was popularized by figures like Bankim Chandra Chattopadhyay and Abanindranath Tagore, reflecting the collective aspirations of the Indian people for freedom and self-rule.
- Iconography: The image of Bharat Mata often includes elements like the tricolor flag, lotus, and symbols of Indian culture, emphasizing unity in diversity.
Germania:
- Political Symbolism: Germania is depicted as a robust and warrior-like figure, symbolizing the nation of Germany. She represents strength, unity, and freedom, often depicted with armor, a sword, and the imperial crown, highlighting Germany’s military and political aspirations.
- Role in Nationalism: Germania became a symbol of the German unification movement in the 19th century. She embodied the collective desire for a unified German state, free from foreign domination and internal division.
- Iconography: The image of Germania includes elements like the oak leaf crown, shield, and flag of Germany, emphasizing national pride and sovereignty.
In summary, while both Bharat Mata and Germania served as inspirational symbols in their respective nationalist movements, Bharat Mata focused on cultural and spiritual unity, and Germania emphasized political strength and unity.
Discuss
1. List all the different social groups which joined the Non-Cooperation Movement of 1921. Then choose any three and write about their hopes and struggles to show why they joined the movement.
List of Social Groups:
- Peasants
- Tribal communities
- Plantation workers
- Students
- Urban middle-class professionals (lawyers, teachers, etc.)
- Business classes
- Artisans
- Industrial workers
Three Chosen Groups and Their Hopes and Struggles:
a) Peasants:
- Hopes: Peasants hoped to achieve relief from oppressive taxes and rents imposed by landlords and the colonial government. They sought the reduction of land revenue and the abolition of the exploitative zamindari system.
- Struggles: Peasants faced harsh economic conditions due to high rents, debts, and lack of ownership rights. They participated in the Non-Cooperation Movement by refusing to pay taxes, boycotting British goods, and organizing mass protests. They saw the movement as a way to gain land reforms and improve their socio-economic conditions.
b) Tribal Communities:
- Hopes: Tribal communities aimed to regain control over their forests and lands that were increasingly being taken over by the British government for commercial exploitation. They wanted to preserve their traditional rights and livelihoods.
- Struggles: Tribals were subjected to repressive forest laws that restricted their access to forests for grazing, hunting, and gathering. Their participation in the Non-Cooperation Movement included boycotting British goods, resisting forest officials, and reclaiming forest areas. They hoped the movement would lead to the restoration of their traditional rights and autonomy.
c) Urban Middle-Class Professionals (Lawyers, Teachers, etc.):
- Hopes: This group sought to attain greater political representation, self-governance, and an end to discriminatory practices in government jobs and education. They were inspired by the ideals of swaraj (self-rule) and justice.
- Struggles: Urban professionals faced limited opportunities for advancement under British rule due to racial discrimination and favoritism towards Europeans. They joined the Non-Cooperation Movement by resigning from government jobs, boycotting British institutions, and participating in the boycott of foreign goods. They aimed to pressure the British government to recognize Indian aspirations for self-governance and equality.
2. Discuss the Salt March to make clear why it was an effective symbol of resistance against colonialism.
Answer: The Salt March, also known as the Dandi March, was a pivotal event in the Indian independence movement led by Mahatma Gandhi in 1930. It involved a 240-mile march from Sabarmati Ashram to the coastal village of Dandi, where Gandhi and his followers made salt from seawater, defying the British monopoly on salt production and sales.
Why It Was an Effective Symbol of Resistance:
- Mass Mobilization: The Salt March drew widespread participation from people across different regions, social classes, and communities, demonstrating the unity and strength of the nationalist movement.
- Simplicity and Universality: Salt was a basic necessity for all Indians, and the British salt tax affected everyone, making the issue relatable and unifying.
- Non-Violent Defiance: The act of making salt was a peaceful yet powerful form of civil disobedience. It highlighted the principles of satyagraha (non-violent resistance) and drew international attention to the Indian struggle for independence.
- Moral High Ground: Gandhi’s leadership and the peaceful nature of the protest garnered sympathy and support both within India and globally, putting moral pressure on the British authorities.
- Economic Impact: By defying the salt laws, the movement directly challenged the economic interests of the British colonial administration, disrupting their revenue from the salt tax.
3. Imagine you are a woman participating in the Civil Disobedience Movement. Explain what the experience meant to your life.
Answer: A sample of an asnwer is given below.
An Imaginary Account of A Woman:
As a woman participating in the Civil Disobedience Movement, my life underwent significant transformation. Initially confined to domestic roles, the movement provided me with a platform to actively contribute to the struggle for freedom. Alongside other women, I joined the protests against the salt tax, picketed foreign goods stores, and participated in peaceful demonstrations.
This involvement gave me a sense of empowerment and solidarity with fellow Indians. Despite the societal constraints and the risk of arrest, our collective determination to achieve independence was unwavering. The experience broadened my horizons, allowing me to challenge traditional gender roles and assert my rights as an equal participant in the national movement.
Through my participation, I witnessed the strength and resilience of women from diverse backgrounds, united in our quest for freedom. The movement instilled in me a deep sense of pride and purpose, forever altering my perception of my role in society and my contribution to the nation’s future.
4. Why did political leaders differ sharply over the question of separate electorates?
Answer: Political leaders differed sharply over the question of separate electorates due to differing visions for India’s future and concerns about representation and unity.
Proponents of Separate Electorates:
- Minority Rights: Leaders from minority communities, especially Muslims, argued that separate electorates were necessary to ensure adequate political representation and protect their interests in a predominantly Hindu society.
- Security and Identity: They believed that separate electorates would safeguard their cultural and religious identity, preventing domination by the majority community.
Opponents of Separate Electorates:
- National Unity: Leaders like Mahatma Gandhi opposed separate electorates, fearing that it would perpetuate divisions and hinder the development of a unified national identity.
- Inclusive Representation: They argued for joint electorates with reserved seats for minorities, promoting inclusive representation and fostering communal harmony.
- Undermining Nationalism: Opponents believed that separate electorates would strengthen communalism, weaken the nationalist movement, and play into the hands of the British policy of divide and rule.
The debate over separate electorates highlighted the complex dynamics of India’s diverse society and the challenges of balancing minority rights with the goal of national unity.
