Unit 2F.1 - India, c1914-48: the road to independence
Instelling
PEARSON (PEARSON)
Boek
Edexcel AS/A Level History, Paper 1&2
Summarises theme 1 to theme 3. It doesn't cover any content removed from the 2022 exam, it only covers topics from the advance information, which you will need for the 2022 exam. I used these to get an A*
Edexcel History Paper 2 Option 2F.1 A level India: the road to independence Notes
Edexcel History Paper 1 Option F: In Search for the American Dream: USA
A* Edexcel A -Level History Notes Paper 2F South Africa (Cambridge Student)
Alles voor dit studieboek
(34)
Geschreven voor
A/AS Level
PEARSON (PEARSON)
History 2015
Unit 2F.1 - India, c1914-48: the road to independence
Alle documenten voor dit vak (11)
1
beoordeling
Door: e_anoble • 2 jaar geleden
Door: StudiousOwl • 2 jaar geleden
Thank you for providing feedback, I hope you found the notes useful!
Verkoper
Volgen
StudiousOwl
Ontvangen beoordelingen
Voorbeeld van de inhoud
Key question 1: India in 1914: Loyal to the Raj of Ripe for Rebellion?
THE FIRST WORLD WAR AND ITS IMPACTS ON BRITISH INDIA, 1914-20
Effects of war on British rule
Impact on the Raj
● Dilemma faced by British government, could not ignore sacrifices made by Indian people
in WW1
● Indian people wanted democracy and self-determination
● Raj needed to reach a rapprochement with India that would satisfy both parties
Montagu Declaration, August 1917 - Key Features
● Edwin Montagu - Secretary of State for India (Liberal)
● Worked closely with Viceroy - Lord Chelmsford, Montagu declaration formulated and
agreed to by British government
● Montagu declaration implicitly committed British government to granting some sort of
self-governance to India
● No timescale given - British government in no hurry to do this
● Montagu Declaration ended by stating that Montagu would visit India to take soundings
● Received well by the Princes in India
● Montagu was alarmed to find that the British administration of India was slow and
complex, with a tendency to stifle innovation and oppose radical reform
○ Afraid that viceroy Chelmsford would succumb to the reactionaries among his
administration
● Montagu was critical of Michael O’Dwyer, governor of the Punjab, who was opposed to
more Indian participation in the government
Defence of India Act
● In 1915, India had been placed under Defence of India Act. Temporary measure for
duration of war and six months afterwards. Intended to put a stop to
anti-war/revolutionary activities. Protest was forbidden. The Act gave the viceroy the
power to issue regulations to secure public safety and to ensure India was appropriately
defended. Most Indians expected the Defence of India Act to be repealed early in 1919
but the British government had other ideas.
Rowlatt Commission and Rowlatt Acts
● In 1917, Governor of India appointed Scottish judge, Mr S.T. Rowlatt, to head a
commission to investigate revolutionary conspiracies. In July 1918, the commission
reported, isolated Bengal, Bombay, and the Punjab as centres of revolutionary activity
○ Recommended that old wartime controls should be continued in order to control
the situation - included imprisonment without trial, trial by judges sitting without a
jury, censorship and house arrest of suspects
1
, ● Commission’s proposals were incorporated into the Anarchical and Revolutionary
Crimes Act, commonly known as the Rowlatt Act
● Montagu sanctioned the Act with extreme reluctance, he made it clear to the viceroy that
in his view the act was extremely offensive. Nevertheless, Viceroy Chelmsford went
ahead.
● Every single one of the 22 Indian members of the Indian Legislative Council opposed the
measure but were out-voted by the appointed officials and the Act became law in March
1919.
○ Muslim leader, Muhammad Ali Jinnah and several of his colleagues resigned
from the council. Jinnah wrote a furious letter to Chelsmford, accused
administration of the Raj of being neither responsible to the people nor in touch
with Indian public opinion
● New powers were not needed and the Act was repealed in 1922 but the damage had
been done. Raj was seen as being duplicitous: supporting the Montagu Declaration on
one hand but on the other reacting to potential trouble the only way they knew how - by
repression.
● Opposition to the Rowlatt Act flared up throughout India but was strongest in Punjab and
its administrative capital, Amritsar. Hartals were organised in 1919, resulting in an
impressive display of Hindu-Muslim solidarity and no serious unrest
● Arrest of two organisers, Dr Kitchlew and Dr Satya Pal triggered rioting, initially in their
support but quickly becoming a general anti-Raj protest
Amritsar Massacre - Key Events
● Riots triggered by the arrests of Dr Kitchlew and Dr Satya Pal
● Marcia Sherwood, a mission doctor, was brutally beaten and saved from certain death by
Hindus who found and treated her
● By 11 April, over 100 terrified and exhausted women had taken refuge in the Gobindgarh
Fort, trying to find a place of safety. British had lost control of Amritsar.
● Governor of the Punjab, Michael O’Dwyer, was convinced that the rioting in Amritsar was
part of a carefully planned uprising luring Indian soldiers into a mutiny - sent in troops
● Brigadier - General Rex Dyer led a force of 1000 soldiers (⅓ British) on 12 April. Dyer
convinced that a coordinated uprising was underway
● 13 April, Baisakhi Day
(finish amritsar massacre page 182)
Impact in Britain
Hunter Commission
● 11 November 1919, Lord Hunter (former solicitor-general for Scotland) and his
colleagues arrived in Lahore to ask questions, listen to evidence and reach a conclusion
about the events of 11 April
● Dyer admitted that he would have used machine guns if he could have got armoured
cars into the Jallianwala Bagh; that he had not issued a warning before firing; that he
2
, had wanted to punish the Punjabis because they were disobedient; and that he had
considered razing Amritsar to the ground
● Hunter Commission’s report concluded that they could find no evidence of a conspiracy
to overthrow the Raj; Dyer was roundly censured, but O’Dwyer was only gently
reprimanded. The three Indian members of the Commission condemned the actions of
both men.
Impact in India
● Punjab sub-committee of the Indian National Congress set up its own inquiry. Heard
evidence in advance of the Hunter Committee and completed its report sometime earlier.
Examined 1700 witnesses and published 650 verified statements.
○ Final report, which included graphic photos, amounted to a savage indictment of
the way in which India was governed and was calculated to arouse deep feelings
of anger and resentment among the Indian subjects of the Raj.
Significance of 1919 for British rule: the Montagu-Chelmsford Report and the Government of
India Act 1919
Edwin Montagu (secretary of state for India) and Viceroy Lord Chelmsford had been working on
a report that fleshed out the Montagu Declaration of 1917. Their proposals were published in
July 1918 and became law as the Government of India Act in December 1919. The Act created
a dyarchy, a division of power, albeit an unequal one, between Indians and British. The dyarchy
worked like this:
● Viceroy to be advised by council of six civilians, three had to be Indians, and the
commander-in-chief of the British Army in India. Viceroy could enforce laws even if
legislative councils rejected them and he could choose his own officials
● Provincial and central legislative councils were enlarged
● Provincial councils given control over Indian education, agriculture, health, local
self-government and public works
● British retained control of military matters, foreign affairs, currency, communications and
criminal law
● Franchise was extended, although still linked to tax payments. After 1918, about ten
percent of the adult male population was enfranchised
● Provincial assemblies could enfranchise women if they wished, even so the number of
women voters was less than one perfect of the adult female population
● Reserved seats in all provincial legislatures for different religious groups and special
interest groups, such as landowners and university graduates
Intention of the GOIA was to shift more decision-making from the centre to the provinces and
involve more Indians in the government of their own country. However, there were problems:
● Montagu saw GOIA as a welcome step towards Indian self-government, horrified critics.
In the House of Commons, India became a contentious issue. Right-wing members of
parliament (MPs) were convinced government was losing its nerve and would soon lose
India
● Left-wing MPs protested that reforms had not gone far enough
● Members of Indian Civil Service felt their strength and influence was slipping away
3
Voordelen van het kopen van samenvattingen bij Stuvia op een rij:
Verzekerd van kwaliteit door reviews
Stuvia-klanten hebben meer dan 700.000 samenvattingen beoordeeld. Zo weet je zeker dat je de beste documenten koopt!
Snel en makkelijk kopen
Je betaalt supersnel en eenmalig met iDeal, creditcard of Stuvia-tegoed voor de samenvatting. Zonder lidmaatschap.
Focus op de essentie
Samenvattingen worden geschreven voor en door anderen. Daarom zijn de samenvattingen altijd betrouwbaar en actueel. Zo kom je snel tot de kern!
Veelgestelde vragen
Wat krijg ik als ik dit document koop?
Je krijgt een PDF, die direct beschikbaar is na je aankoop. Het gekochte document is altijd, overal en oneindig toegankelijk via je profiel.
Tevredenheidsgarantie: hoe werkt dat?
Onze tevredenheidsgarantie zorgt ervoor dat je altijd een studiedocument vindt dat goed bij je past. Je vult een formulier in en onze klantenservice regelt de rest.
Van wie koop ik deze samenvatting?
Stuvia is een marktplaats, je koop dit document dus niet van ons, maar van verkoper StudiousOwl. Stuvia faciliteert de betaling aan de verkoper.
Zit ik meteen vast aan een abonnement?
Nee, je koopt alleen deze samenvatting voor $11.84. Je zit daarna nergens aan vast.
