Other Strands of the National Movement

Contents Factors for the emergence of Revolutionary extremism........................................................................2 Practice Question................................................................................................................................3 Q. Discuss the factors responsible for the emergence of revolutionary extremism in India after the failure of the Swadeshi movement...........................................................................................3 Important Revolutionary activities and groups......................................................................................4 Bengal .................................................................................................................................................4  Dacca Anushilan Samiti led by Pulin Das ................................................................................4  Yugantar group- Barindra Kumar Ghosh, Aurobindo Ghosh, Jatindranath Mukherjee .........4 Punjab.................................................................................................................................................5 Maharashtra........................................................................................................................................5 Abroad.....................................................................................................................................................5 London................................................................................................................................................5 Geneva and Paris ................................................................................................................................6 Berlin...................................................................................................................................................6 USA (San Francisco).............................................................................................................................6 Reasons for the decline of Revolutionary extremism.............................................................................6  End of World War 1.....................................................................................................................6  British also took certain steps to restore relations with Indians................................................6  Home Rule League Movement ...................................................................................................7  Entry of Mahatma Gandhi into Indian Politics............................................................................7 Significance of Revolutionary Extremism ...............................................................................................7 Critical Evaluation of their achievements and failures...........................................................................8

In the context of Indian history, revolutionaries were those nationalists who were ready to use violence to liberate India from British rule through assassinations, dacoities, military conspiracies and creating an international network of revolutionaries against British rule.

While the use of political violence against the British rule was not new, it emerged as the major trend following the failure of the Swadeshi movement.

Factors for the emergence of Revolutionary extremism  Failure of mainstream politics filled the younger patriots with a sense of disillusionment.

Both the moderates and extremists had failed to make any meaningful progress. This pushed the highly patriotic younger nationalists towards the path of revolution.

 While the extremists had succeeded in inspiring the patriotism of the younger nationalists, they failed to clearly distinguish between revolution based on the activity of the masses and acts of individual heroism.

• As a result, following the failure of the Swadeshi movement, the younger nationalists felt it was their duty to continue the struggle individually.  The biggest cause for the emergence of revolutionary extremism was definitely British misrule, their atrocities and their autocracy.

• The British had been exploiting India for over a century resulting in the upwelling of anger and discontent.

• Their ruthless suppression of previous uprisings had fuelled unfulfilled nationalist aspirations.

• The nationalists had organized peaceful Swadeshi movement but the British suppressed it like all previous revolts.

• This convinced the younger nationalists that the British are not interested in compromise thus preparing the way for direct confrontation.

• In other words, by making peaceful change impossible, the British had made the use of violence inevitable.  The early revolutionaries also lacked a clear understanding of the true nature of British rule.

Justice and righteousness are the atmosphere of political morality and the sword of the warrior is necessary to its fulfillment- Sri Aurobindo Ghosh.

• They felt that assassination of a few unpopular British officials would terrify the British enough to grant Swaraj or to leave India.

• They also felt that this could provide relief to ordinary Indians suffering under British misrule.

• They failed to perceive the systemic nature of the colonial regime in which individual officials were no more than replaceable parts in complex machinery.

 The younger revolutionaries were also inspired by the activities and achievements of foreign revolutionaries such as the IRA that had been battling the British in Ireland and the Nihilists which had been opposing the Czarist regime in Russia.

• Instead they wanted to use the Western hammer (Political violence) to shatter Western rule in India.

• In the recent decades, there had been a major cultural shift in Indian nationalism. The younger nationalists had been ideologically trained to view India as their divine motherland.

• The spirit of sacrifice was infused in their psychological makeup. They considered it their sacred duty to defend their motherland against a foreign invader.

• For this, the use of all means including violence was acceptable.
• Therefore, the use of revolutionary methods came as a natural choice for this group of young nationalists. Practice Question Q. Discuss the factors responsible for the emergence of revolutionary extremism in India after the failure of the Swadeshi movement.

The Swadeshi movement had raised both the hope and awareness of the people but its insignificant end led the agitated youth to move towards revolutionary tactics as the divergence with British rule had been finalized by then.

Factors responsible for the emergence of revolutionary extremism in India were-

 Failure of Swadeshi movement without any concrete result proved the young nationalists that British rule is completely apathetic to Indian demands.

 Failure of mainstream leaders- Moderates had already failed earlier but even extremists could not build a momentum. Surat split had further weakened the organisational strength.

 British misrule- just like violent uprisings, British had also suppressed the peaceful Swadeshi movement. Extremist leaders like BG Tilak and Aurobindo Ghosh were detained and harsh legal power was unleashed disproportionately.

 Cultural change in India started by late 19 th century when revolutionary thoughts were manifested in openings of Akharas (Gymnasiums), groups such as Mitra mela by Savarkar brothers etc. started emphasizing 'masculinity'.

 International influence- newly educated middle class was inspired by IRA of Ireland and Nihilists of Russia and were eager to undergo individual heroism or dacoit, murder involving small secret groups.

 International support- As World War 1 began in 1914 in which Germany's anti-British alliance found resonance with Indian revolutionaries known as Zimmerman Plan.

These were the factors which motivated the youth to sacrifice their life for their motherland and they were not comfortable in compromising with the peaceful protests considered as a 'weakness' by these revolutionaries.

Important Revolutionary activities and groups Indian revolutionaries, in its first phase, were active in both India as well as abroad. In India, there were three major centres of revolutionary groups- Bengal, Punjab and Maharashtra.

Bengal- in Bengal political awareness was very high since a long time. During Swadeshi movement, various volunteer organisations and Samitis had already come up in Bengal.

Some important organisations were-

 Dacca Anushilan Samiti led by Pulin Das- Its chief activities were-

• Barrah dacoity (1908) - The cash at Kutchery of Barrah was looted for further revolutionary activities.

• Barisal conspiracy (1912) - it was aimed at looting British armoury but remained unsuccessful and Pulin Das was deported for life.  Yugantar group- Barindra Kumar Ghosh, Aurobindo Ghosh, Jatindranath Mukherjee- Its important acts were-

• Muzaffarpur blast (1908) carried out by Khudi Ram Bose and Prafulla Chaki with the objective of killing an unpopular and sadistic judge Kingsford who was the district judge of Muzaffarpur. Unfortunately, the bomb accidentally killed two British women going in a carriage. Chaki was arrested and hanged while Bose committed suicide.

• Further investigations led to the arrest of Ghosh brothers. While Barindra Kumar was deported for life whereas Aurobindo retired from active politics in what came to be own as Alipore conspiracy case.

• However, Yugantar group continued to survive and even allied with other groups throughout the nation.

• The group played important role in the attack on Viceroy Hardinge in 1912 in Delhi. Sachin Sanyal and Rashbehari Bose were the two revolutionaries involved.

• Although Hardinge survived the attack but both revolutionaries were able to escape considering it as partially successful.

• Zimmerman Plan (1915) was a German plot to ally with Indian revolutionaries by supplying them weapons to raise armed struggle against the British. The weapons' consignment was about to reach Balasore (Odisha) but the plan got leaked and Jatindranath was killed by British.

Punjab- Revolutionaries activities were organized by Ajit Singh and Lala Lajpat Rai even during Swadeshi movement.

• However, both these leaders were arrested and forced to exile.
• After that, Punjab observed a trend of exile of revolutionaries to abroad mainly to Canada and USA.

• This led to the formation of Ghadar party under the leadership of Lala Hardayal, Madan Lal Dhingra, and Bhai Parmanand etc.

Maharashtra- revolutionary fervour was already present in Maharashtra even before the beginning of Swadeshi movement. Chapekar brothers had assassinated Justice Rand and Tilak was also sentenced for defending them in his newspaper.

 VD Savarkar and GD Savarkar founded Mitra Mela and then Abhinav Bharat and emerged as prominent organisers of the revolutionaries.

• AL Kanhere assassinated the District Collector Jackson of Nasik.
• Chapekar brothers were also linked with their platform. Abroad- London, Geneva, Paris, Berlin and USA (San Francisco) emerged as the major centre for Indian revolutionaries.

London- Shyamji Krishna Verma established India House (1905) as support house for revolutionaries.

• Madan Lal Dhingra had assassinated a British official in London.
• After that, members of Indian House League had to shift to Berlin following British repression.

Geneva and Paris- Madam Bhikaji Cama formed common alliance with French socialists.

Berlin- during First World War, Virendranath Chattopadhyay established Berlin Committee for Indian independence and began conspiring with the German authorities to overthrow British rule in India.

• It played an important role in forming Zimmerman Plan. USA (San Francisco) - it emerged as an important hub for the activities of Punjabi revolutionaries who created Ghadar Party in 1913.

• The objective was to incite revolution, overthrow British rule in India, hatching conspiracy against British by befriending common enemies and other like-minded organisations.

• Their chief act was the Ghadar conspiracy in which they got in contact with the

Yugantar group to incite a popular rebellion by inciting a mass mutiny of British

Indian soldiers in Punjab. However, the plan got leaked and the conspiracy failed.

Reasons for the decline of Revolutionary extremism  End of World War 1- With the end of World War 1, British also ended several wartime restrictions such as the restrictions placed by Defence of India rules, restrictions on Press etc.

• The economic misery brought by the war such as inflation, war time shortages etc. also started easing by this time.

• As the anger of the people started declining, the support for the revolutionary activities also declined.  British also took certain steps to restore relations with Indians

• British freed all the political prisoners arrested under the Defence of India rules which allowed British to detain anyone for two years without any charge sheet.

• August declaration (1917) - British promised Constitutional reforms through the declaration. Revolutionaries as well as mainstream leaders did not want to derail this potentially progressive step.

• Montford Report (1918) - It gave further hopes for Constitutional reforms. By accepting the flaws of Morley-Minto reforms, this report gave hope of significant reforms.

 Home Rule League Movement

• Re-entry of BG Tilak in politics after completing his sentence and efforts of Annie Besant led to formation of two Home Rule Leagues which again provided a platform for masses to participate in open politics.

 Entry of Mahatma Gandhi into Indian Politics

• The revolutionaries wanted to give an opportunity to the new strategy of non-violent Satyagraha to succeed.

Owing to these happenings, the revolutionary activities started declining sharply by 1918

19.

Significance of Revolutionary Extremism Although revolutionaries were unable to liberate India but their significant contribution is far reaching-

 They kept nationalism alive at a time when the mainstream movement had been flattened.

• Because of this reason, they even became heroes and role models of ordinary Indians.

 They prepared the way for resurgence of mainstream nationalism by linking the spirit of patriotism with displays of individual bravery.

 They were able to redefine the parameters of Indian nationalism because the use of violent means became a viable means of releasing anti-colonial anger for the first time.

 They succeeded in creating a national and international network of allies against British imperialism thus also increasing Indian national movement's awareness of and interaction with global anti-colonial trends.

 Revolutionaries directly contributed to the further radicalization of the mainstream movement. Leaders such as VD Savarkar and Lala Lajpat Rai had come into contact with the revolutionaries and been influenced by their passion and energy.

 It was partly due to the pressure exerted by the revolutionaries that the British had to respond positively in the form of general amnesty, Montford report, Act of 1919.

Critical Evaluation of their achievements and failures  Failed to liberate India due to a flawed understanding of the true nature of British rule.

However, they were not solely responsible for this as even moderates and extremists had failed to guide the younger nationalists.

 Colonial historians have alleged that revolutionaries derailed and delayed the process of liberal political reform. However, it has been pointed out that the British were never actually interested in introducing meaningful reforms-

• Indian nationalists have been demanding such reforms since atleast the mid-90 s. in fact, sine he foundation of the Congress, two major political changes had emerged and vanished mainly moderate politics and extremism.

• The British had responded to the moderates with apathy and to the extremists with hostility.

• In light of this, the colonial allegation regarding the disruptive role of the revolutionaries rings hollow.

• On the other hand, the argument may be made that the revolutionaries in fact ended the British complacency resulting in a visible urgency for reform within the government from 1917-18.

 While the extremists failed to end British rule by instigating a mass revolt against them, this detail can be contextualized in the backdrop of certain facts

• Revolutionary approach towards the masses never actually envisaged a mass revolt. All they wanted was to lead the masses by example and keep the spirit of patriotism alive among them especially at a time the mainstream movement had faltered.

• Judging by this parameter the revolutionaries achieved resounding success.  While revolutionary activities experienced sharp decline in 1918-19 but this does not mean that their role ended in the Indian national movement.

• They inspired future revolutionaries with their courage and sacrifice.
• Early revolutionaries remained active and directly participated in the later phases of the revolutionary activities. For example Sachin Sanyal who played a leading role in

both the HRA and HSRA. Similarly, Rashbehari Bose who escaped to Japan following the failure of the Ghadar policy and played a leading role in raising the Indian National Army in Singapore in the second World war.

 The Indian revolutionary movement evolved especially under the influence of socialism.

This resulted in the emergence of new opportunities and alliances not only between the revolutionaries and working classes but also with other international collaborators.

Many historians tend to write-off revolutionary phase as a minor footnote in the national movement, in recent decades, new understanding has emerged. The role of the revolutionaries in shaping the class composition, energy and leanings of the national movement has been recognized along with their contributions in development of India's foreign relations.

Contents Home Rule Movement............................................................................................................................2

1. World War 1....................................................................................................................................2
2. Failure of the Indian Councils Act, 1909.........................................................................................3
3. Role of prominent leaders ..............................................................................................................3

Leaders and their objectives...........................................................................................................3 Approach of the Home Rule Movement towards the masses............................................................4 Approach towards the British.............................................................................................................5 British response to the Home Rule Movement..................................................................................5 Significance of the Home Rule Movement.............................................................................................6 Practice Question................................................................................................................................7 Q Discuss the factors responsible for the Home Rule movement. Is it fair to consider Mahatma Gandhi as its greatest beneficiary?.................................................................................................7 Lucknow Session of the Congress (1916)................................................................................................8 Re-entry of Extremists into the Congress...........................................................................................8 Significance of the Lucknow session...................................................................................................9 Lucknow Pact between INC and Muslim League..................................................................................10 Factors that facilitated Lucknow Pact...............................................................................................10 Significance of the Lucknow Pact......................................................................................................11 Q. The Lucknow Pact of 1916 acted as a double edged sword for the national struggle. Discuss.

......................................................................................................................................................11 August Declaration/ Montague's Declaration/ Montague's Statement (1917)...................................13 Content of the statement.................................................................................................................13 Significance.......................................................................................................................................13 Limitations ........................................................................................................................................13 Practice Question..............................................................................................................................14 Q. Critically evaluate the August declaration made by Lord Montague in 1917. Did it represent a serious British commitment to the idea of self-rule in India?......................................................14

“Swaraj is my birthright, and I shall have it!" Bal Gangadhar Tilak”

During First World War, colonies faced the direct burden on their economy, society as well as the very soul. In India, the seeds of nationalism had already been sown in the nineteenth century. However, following the Surat split, there was no single political platform which could give voice to the nationalists. On the other hand, revolutionary extremism had its own limitations which could not become a popular mode of resistance. In such a scenario, the nationalist movement saw three major incidents -

 The Home Rule Movement  Lucknow Session of the Congress  Lucknow Pact Home Rule Movement The Home Rule Movement was started by Annie Besant and Bal Gangadhar Tilak with the objective of convincing the British to grant home rule or Swaraj to Indians through a mass constitutional struggle. It was inspired by the Irish Home Rule League movement.

Factors responsible for the Home Rule Movement:-

1. World War 1- Popular unrest was widespread due to shortage of essential goods

caused by the war.

 The few civil liberties enjoyed by Indians had been crushed as part of the British war time restrictions through a series of draconian acts such as

• Indian Newspapers (incitement to offences) Act, 1908
• Indian Press Act, 1910
• Defence of India Act, 1915  In the backdrop of the war, conscription had been introduced in several areas. Young men and boys were being forcibly drafted into military service causing resentment.

• Further, Indian conscripts were routinely mistreated and discriminated against.
• The death toll among Indian soldiers was alarming and those who returned did so with deep wounds both physical and psychological.  Indians were also appalled at the level of British hypocrisy.

• While the war was being waged in the name of defending freedom, the British were openly crushing Indian freedom.  Indian industrialists also supported the idea of Home Rule

• They were concerned that following the end of the war, the British would move to undermine Indian industries in order to revive British manufacturing which had collapsed during the war.

• Indian industries would lose all the gains made during the war and progress would be permanently derailed.

1. Failure of the Indian Councils Act, 1909

 It had failed to satisfy both the moderates and the extremists.

• The Act had enlarged the scope of Constitutional autocracy by institutionalizing communalism. Thus, the nationalists were convinced of the need to overturn it.

1. Role of prominent leaders

 Tilak and Annie Besant played an active role in starting the Home Rule Movement.

 Tilak was released in 1914 and adopted a strategic position of loyalty towards the British in order to secure their goodwill. He also made an open appeal to the moderates for the common action.

 Annie Besant emerged as a link between the moderates and extremists by adopting a position and methods that were acceptable to both.

Leaders and their objectives  In 1914, both Tilak and Besant started working towards the twin objectives-

• Securing re-entry of extremists into the Congress;
• Convincing the Congress to launch the Home Rule League movement.  However, their attempts were frustrated due to the opposition of the moderate old guard mainly Pherozshah Mehta and Gopal Krishna Gokhale.

 In 1915, once again the two leaders tried to influence the Congress. By this time, both Pherozshah Mehta and Gokhale had passed away and resistance against the extremists was lower.

• Thus, the Congress resolved to re-admit the extremists at its next session.
• However, it did not agree to support the Home Rule Movement because-  Swaraj was not an acceptable demand for moderates who wanted incremental reforms to introduce responsible government.

 They considered it immoral to launch a mass movement against the British at a time when they were fighting for their survival.

 In 1916, Tilak and Annie Besant launched their separate Home Rule Leagues to demand Swaraj.

• Tilak's League was launched in April, 1916 with its headquarters established in Poona. It had six branches that were organized and managed directly by Tilak. They were active in Maharashtra (except Bombay), Karnataka, the Central Provinces and Berar. It had three objectives-

 Attainment of Swaraj  Linguistic reorganization of Provinces  Spread of education among Indians in vernacular language.

 In a few months, the league was able to create a grassroot network of around thirty thousand volunteers.

• Annie Besant established her league in September, 1916 with its headquarters at Adyar in Madras. It was a loosely organized League with more than two hundred branches. Her League covered the rest of India not covered by Tilak's league. It had only one objective-

 Attainment of Home rule which was defined as Dominion status within British rule as enjoyed by the white colonies of Ireland, Canada and Australia.

 Her league attracted twenty seven thousand grassroot volunteers.

 Even if the leaders had convinced the Congress to endorse the Home Rule Movement, it would have had little practical affect since the Congress completely lacked grassroots organisation or a volunteer network. In other words, it did not have any direct links with the masses.

Approach of the Home Rule Movement towards the masses  It adopted a unique approach towards the masses which represented a combination of extremist and moderate methods.

• Like the extremists, the Home Rule leaders wanted to involve the masses in a major way but like the moderates, they wanted to educate the masses instead of political activism.

 While Tilak refrained from the old tactics of using religious symbols for mass mobilization, Annie Besant and other theosophists did so.

 Both the leaders and the Leagues committed themselves to the use of constitutional methods only.

• The message of Home rule was popularised through the creation of a vast library movement, political meetings and rallies, newspapers including Tilak's Maratha and Kesari and Besant's New India and Commonweal and volunteers who travelled to the

interiors to spread the message of Swaraj and educate people about its independence.

 The leaders wanted to convince British that Swaraj was not simply the demand of a small minority of political elites rather it was the desire of ordinary Indians across the country.

Approach towards the British  The Home Rule Leagues desired the support of the moderates. Thus, they made the strategic decision not to uproot British rule outright.

 While working towards the ultimate objective of Swaraj, the movement adopted a pro-

British attitude with figures such as Tilak repeatedly professing loyalty to the British crown appealing to the youth to join the army.

 Unlike the Swadeshi movement, there were no calls for boycott, promotion of Swadeshi, or non-cooperation with British rule. Instead, the Home Rule Leaguers wanted to convince the British to grant home rule as it would be in their interests. They argued that a self-governed India guided by Indian leaders would support the British war effort whole heartedly and would thus be a much more effective ally.

• Thus, the movement never tried to disrupt the functioning of the British government of India.

• It simply tried to generate educated public opinion in favour of Swaraj and the British war effort simultaneously.

• This tells us that the Home rule leaguers were serious about their commitments to the British.

British response to the Home Rule Movement  Despite every attempt being made by the leaders not to disrupt the British Raj, India's colonial administrators moved to ruthlessly suppress the home rule movement.

 Even though the movement remained purely non-violent and constitutional, the demand of Swaraj remained inconceivable to the British.

 They utilized war time restrictions on civil liberties to suppress the movement including the Indian Press Act, Defence of India Act, the sedition law, the Unlawful Assemblies Prevention law.

 Many prominent leaders were arrested-

• Tilak was charged with sedition
• Annie Besant was arrested at Madras. However, her arrest galvanised the nationalists into action and the mood turned radical. Fearing the beginning of a major program of boycott, the British were forced to release her.

 British continued to suppress the home rule movement in the name of protecting internal security. Peaceful assemblies were broken up with lathicharge and mass arrests.

The military was also kept on standby to suppress the movement in order to have a chilling effect upon it.

 However, the Home Rule Movement succeeded in reigniting the dormant nationalism of the Indian masses. It remains an important step in India's march towards independence.

Significance of the Home Rule Movement While the Home rule movement did not succeed in fulfilling its ultimate objective of Swaraj, it should not be considered a complete failure. In fact, home rule movement was immensely successful in many other respects  It played a significant role in reviving mass politics in India. Since the Surat split, there had been no mass movement till the launching of the Home Rule movement.

 The Surat split had given a body blow to the national movement as a whole. In this context, the Home rule movement acted as a huge shock which reignited India's dormant nationalism.

 The movement popularised the idea of Swaraj and instilled it to the national consciousness. Swaraj became the enduring objective of all Indian nationalists and would remain the ultimate demand for the remainder of the national movement.

 Home rule leagues performed the important task of spreading political awareness among the masses through their newspapers, meetings, speeches and volunteers.

They educated the masses about ideas such as Home rule, Swaraj, responsible government, constitutionalism, critical organization and civil liberties. By doing this, they succeeded in modernizing the Indian political consciousness to a significant degree.

 The Home rule movement also succeeded in exerting significant pressure upon the British forcing them to respond positively to the national movement.

 It played a direct role in the proclamation of the August declaration (1917), Montford reforms (1919).

 Home rule movement also paved the way for future nationalists. Not only did it revive the idea of Swaraj and mass national consciousness, it also materially benefitted next generation of nationalists specially Mahatma Gandhi.

 It prepared the framework for greater national unity involving moderates as well as extremists, Hindus as well as Muslims, Congress as well as Muslim league leaders and urban as well as rural masses. Mahatma Gandhi directly inherited a more unified India from the home rule movement.

• The vast volunteer networks created by the Home rule movement remained in place even after its end. Mahatma Gandhi later enlisted these organisations to his own mass movements including the Rowlatt Satyagraha and the Khilafat non-

cooperation movement.

 The movement played a significant role in reviving the fortunes of the Congress by facilitating both the re-entry of the extremists and the Lucknow pact. Mahatma Gandhi could later use the strengthened Congress platform for much of his political acts.

 Lastly, the Home Rule movement provided a new stratagem to Mahatma Gandhi. It was not important to launch any mass movement from the Congress platform exclusively. Rather specific organisations may be created to organize mass movements. The Congress along with other parties would be forced to follow. This strategy had the added advantage of bringing different political outfits onto a common platform without necessarily rising internal friction. In other words, it could prove useful in creating a national coalition of diverse critical opinions united by a single objective.

Practice Question Q Discuss the factors responsible for the Home Rule movement. Is it fair to consider Mahatma Gandhi as its greatest beneficiary?

Home Rule movement was started by Bal Gangadhar Tilak and Annie Besant with the objective of gaining Swaraj for India. It became the logical demand after the nationalists had received the first taste of anti-British popular struggle during Swadeshi movement in which the idea of Swaraj had gained currency.

Factors responsible for the Home rule movement

 World War One had brought great degree of hardships for India-

• Civil liberties had been crushed during the war time through draconian measures such as Indian Newspapers (incitement to offences) Act, 1908; Indian Press Act, 1910 and Defence of India Act, 1915.

• In the backdrop of the war, conscription had been introduced in several areas bringing huge amount of discontentment among people.

• Indians realised that while British were fighting for liberty and freedom, the same is being taken away from Indians. When soldiers coming back from the war saw it, they were further appalled.

• Indian business community also supported the idea as they were concerned as the British would reinstate discriminatory business policies once the war time constraints would be over.

 Failure of the Indian Councils Act, 1909 to satisfy the demands of both moderates and extremists.

 Role of prominent leaders such as Tilak and Besant also needs to be acknowledged. They created a huge cadre of volunteers thus spreading the idea of Swaraj among masses.

The Home rule movement is credited for various reasons, one among which is its contribution to the rise of Mahatma Gandhi-

 It provided Mahatma Gandhi with a more unified India and a conscious cadre of volunteers ready to work for national struggle.

 It taught Mahatma Gandhi that the Congress platform is not necessary to launch any popular movement. He used this strategy in Non-cooperation- Khilafat movement.

 The movement paved the way for the revival of the Congress which ultimately helped Mahatma Gandhi.

The role of Home rule movement is immense in building momentum for the national movement at a time when any organizational structure was not upto the mark. This also prepared a fertile ground for Mahatma Gandhi but his own charisma and political uniqueness also deserves its own credit.

Lucknow Session of the Congress (1916)

Lucknow session of the INC was a remarkable step in the national movement as it brought the Congress out of its disarray and back into the movement after Surat split. The session is renowned for two major happenings-

 Re-entry of extremists into the INC  Lucknow Pact Re-entry of Extremists into the Congress At the Lucknow session in 1916, under the Presidency of Ambika Charan Majumdar, the Congress passed a resolution amending its constitution to pave the way for the re-entry of

extremists who had been earlier expelled from the Congress in the Surat split. Following factors were responsible for that-

 Role of prominent leaders such as Annie Besant and Bal Gangadhar Tilak should be recognized. Both had been campaigning rigorously for the re-entry of the extremist since

1. They wanted unified Congress to launch the Home Rule Movement. While they

were unsuccessful in convincing the Congress to support the Home rule movement, they did act as a bridge between moderates and extremists.

 Surat split had taken place in the backdrop of the Swadeshi movement as ideological differences regarding methods and objectives had erupted between the moderates and extremists. Almost a decade has passed since the old controversies become meaningless thus paving the way for reunification.

 Among the moderates, the biggest critiques of the extremists, Pherozeshah Mehta and GK Gokhale, passed away in 1915 thus removing the biggest roadblock thus facilitating the re-entry of extremists. Other moderate leaders such as Tej Bahadur Sapru and Surendranath Banerjee were open to the idea and realized the importance of the extremists in reviving link between the masses and the Congress.

 The Home rule movement had also demonstrated the ability that moderates and extremists were towards common constitutional objectives in a constructive way. It played an important role in convincing the moderates that it is possible for the two groups to cooperate on a more permanent basis.

 Both sides realized the Surat split had done immense damage to the national movement. The effectiveness of the Congress depended upon the common action of both groups and thus was time to repair the relationship.

Significance of the Lucknow session  The Surat split had resulted in the demise of the Swadeshi movement. However, re-

entry of extremists into the Congress strengthened the Home rule movement.

 The re-entry of extremists also revived the fortunes of the Congress which had been languishing in inactivity since the Surat split. Further, it also triggered the reawakening of Indian nationalism as a whole as it was followed by a series of mass movements  It also filled the British with a sense of trepidation forcing them to proclaim the August declaration and introduce the Montford reforms.

 The re-entry of extremists into the Congress also permanently ended domination of moderate within it. The Congress from this point forward became increasingly radical and aligned with extremists and later Gandhian movement.

 This development also paved the way for more direct confrontation with the colonial regime. As a result, the frequency and scale of such mass movements increased substantially following the re-entry of extremists.

 The re-entry of extremists also prepared the stage for the rise of Mahatma Gandhi and the democratization of the Congress.

• Mahatma Gandhi's mass appeal and spiritual charisma would not have appealed to the moderate but was highly attractive for the extremists. Thus, by preparing the way for extremist donation within the Congress, developments at Lucknow in 1916 had prepared the ground for rise of Mahatma Gandhi as well.

• The extremists wanted to engage masse at a deeper level. The logical conclusion of this agenda was the transformation of the Congress into a mass movement unto

itself. This was finally done in the Nagpur session of 1920 when Congress adopted a new policy which democratized and decentralized India. Such a development could not have been possible under the moderates.

 The extremists also evolved due to closer contact with moderates. To a certain degree, they shed their religious exclusivism and social conservatism adopting more inclusive and secular program which was visible during the home rule movement, Rowlatt Satyagraha and Khilafat-non-cooperation movement.

Lucknow Pact between INC and Muslim League At the joint session of the Congress and the Muslim League in Lucknow in 1916, the two parties signed the Lucknow Pact preparing the way cooperation between them. The important provisions of this pact were as follows-

 Both would hold their annual sessions jointly  Both will work jointly towards the common objective of Swaraj  Both would work to promote communal harmony  The Congress would not oppose the system of separate electorates  One-third seats in the Central legislature would be reserved for Muslims  If a bill affecting the cultural interests of a minority community was opposed by three-

fourth of that communities' representatives in the legislature, Congress and Muslim League would oppose it as well. This came to be known as minority veto.

Factors that facilitated Lucknow Pact  Within both Congress and the League, the change in leadership had brought the two parties together-

• The-entry of extremists into the Congress signaled the revival of anti-colonial all India secular mass struggle.

• On the other hand, younger league leaders such as Jinnah, Hakim Ajmal Khan, Maulana Abdul Bari, Maulana Hasrat Mohani and the Ali brothers espoused the values of modernity, nationalism and secularism in both social relations and politics.

Thus, they were naturally aligned with the Congress.

 The First World War brought immense misery to Indians. Both Hindus and Muslims were adversely affected. The apathy of the British towards Indian suffering enraged both communities and convinced them of the need to overcome internal differences and provide a unified front to the British.

 Home Rule Movement- it did not utilize any communal rhetoric to mobilise the masses.

Its inclusive appeal attracted members of both communities.

• It also demonstrated that it was possible for Hindus and Muslims to work together.
• Further, movement had witnessed participation from leaders of both the Congress as well as League.

 Lastly, the movement succeeded in modernizing vast political consciousness atleast to some degree. Its program of political education succeeded in convincing bulk of both communities about the importance of prioritizing the national interest over the communal interest.

 These developments prepared the framework for greater national unity of which the Lucknow pact was a shining example.

Significance of the Lucknow Pact Q. The Lucknow Pact of 1916 acted as a double edged sword for the national struggle. Discuss.

Lucknow Pact between the Congress and the Muslim League was an important development in the history of India's nationalist struggle. In the short term it boosted the nationalist consciousness and pressurized the British. However, the long term consequences of the Lucknow Pact were decidedly negative. This paradox may be appreciated while looking at strengths and limitations of the Lucknow pact separately.

Strengths of the Lucknow Pact  The Lucknow pact strengthened national movement by forging political unity and creating a secular coalition of Indians against British rule.

 It resulted in visible religious harmony and neutralized divide and rule politics atleast in the short term.

 The communal harmony engendered through the Lucknow pact broadened the social base of the national movement. Muslims had largely remained aloof from nationalist mass politics. They participated in large numbers during the Home rule movement, Rowlatt Satyagraha and Khilafat non-cooperation.

 Subsequently, the British came under intense pressure forcing them to respond in the form of August declaration and Montford reforms.

Limitations  In the larger scheme of things, the pact proved to be short sighted. The Muslim League's illegitimate position on dangerous issues such as separate electorates and minority veto were accepted and legitimized by the Congress. In the future, the Congress would not be able to clearly walk back from its position.

 As communal harmony broke down, the Congress-League relationship also suffered.

Thus, in effect, that was a short lived affair.

 The pact also provided legitimacy to the Muslim League as he representative of the Muslim League. The Congress had entered the pact with the league as equals. More disturbing was the fact that the pact presented not simply political agreement between the two political parties but social pact between the Hindus and Muslims. Therefore, Congress had unwittingly succeeded in painting itself as the representative of the Hindus.

 The Pact essentially legitimized the principle of communal politics and representation by virtually accepting the league as an advocate of Muslim interests. In the future, new leaders and parties would emerge to represent the interests of other communities. It would fracture the social and political fabric of India leading to permanent divisions. This division was fully exploited by the British through their divide and rule policy to preserve British rule and stunt the growth of the Indian nation.

 Mutual differences between Congress and Muslim league on core issues such as separate electorate, minority veto would lead to constant political friction causing communal tension and disharmony.

Conclusion The first visible breach in Congress and Muslim League occurred in 1928 over disagreement over the provisions of the Nehru report. Following the end of the Quit India movement, these differences took the shape of a constitutional deadlock that could not be resolved politically. Constant friction emerging from the breakdown of the Lucknow Pact strengthened the two-nation theory creating the legacy of violence suffering and partition.

August Declaration/ Montague's Declaration/ Montague's Statement (1917)

It was a statement made by Lord Montague (Secretary of State for India) in August 1917 from the floor of the British House of Commons regarding Britain's future policy with respect to India.

Content of the statement  The ultimate objective of the ongoing set of Constitutional reforms of India was to prepare Indians for responsible self-government in the future.

Significance  It was the victory for the nationalist demand for Swaraj as it was accepted in principle by the Government.

 It represented the success of the Home Rule Movement, Revolutionary pressure and Lucknow session.

 The demand of Swaraj became a form of protected speech as it could no longer be termed as seditious because the government had itself accepted it.

 Nationalists could hold the government accountable for not making sufficient progress towards Swaraj or for derailing it.

 August declaration also shifted the political discourse from simply demanding Swaraj to now defining it. Gradually, as the national movement evolved, demand for Swaraj became more comprehensive evolving ultimately to

• Poorna Swaraj
• Socio-economic freedom
• Cultural decolonization
• Legal, political and social equality
• Individual rights
• Civic freedoms
• Minority and cultural rights  The future constitutional reforms would be scrutinized on the basis of the evolving idea of Swaraj. Thus, constant program for reform could be sustained.

Limitations August declaration was a proclamation that the British never intended to uphold. It is also reflected in the contents of the declaration itself because of the following reasons-

 It lacked specific details and definitions regarding the idea of self-rule.

 The British also did not make any concrete moves to introduce Swaraj.

 There was no clarity on the methods or principles on which Swaraj was to be granted.

 No clear deadline or roadmap was given towards the grant of the Swaraj.

All this shows that the declaration was only a lip service to the Indians and British were never serious about devolution of powers.

Moreover, British attitude towards Indians in the near future such as Rowlatt Satyagraha, Jallianwallah Bagh Massacre, Khilafat issue, and Dyarchy saga show their reactionary and anti-India approach. They wanted to preserve their rule; considered Indians unfit for rule; and wanted to frustrate, delay and derail the national movement at all stages.

This led to distrust among Indians regarding British intentions and led to continuous national resistance. Any such offer during the Second World War was looked at with skepticism by the nationalist leaders.

Practice Question Q. Critically evaluate the August declaration made by Lord Montague in

1. Did it represent a serious British commitment to the idea of self-rule in

India?

August declaration was made by Lord Montague, the Secretary of State for India in August 1917 from the floor of British House of Commons with the objective of implementing such constitutional reforms in India which would prepare it for responsible self-government in the future.

Significance of the declaration  It was the victory for demand of Swaraj made by the nationalists. Revolutionary extremists and Home rule movement had created an atmosphere forcing the government to accept the demand for self-rule in principle.

 Now since the British had themselves mentioned the word 'self-rule', the demand for Swaraj could no longer be treated as sedition furthering the intensification of the demand.

 Now the discourse shifted from simply demanding a vague self-rule to defining its various dimensions such as socio-economic freedom, cultural decolonization, civic rights etc.

 The future constitutional reforms would be judged from the benchmark of 'self-

government' and thus the sustained resistance began gradually around the issue of 'Poorna Swaraj'.

However, in spite of some progressive features, the declaration represented the lack of seriousness among the British-

 It lacked specific details and definitions regarding the idea of self-rule.

 The British also did not make any concrete moves to introduce Swaraj.

 There was no clarity on the methods or principles on which Swaraj was to be granted.

 No clear deadline or roadmap was given towards the grant of the Swaraj.

This lackadaisical attitude of the British shows that the declaration was merely a lip service to the Indians and British were never serious about their commitments.

Although, the immediate British response was reactionary and contrary to the stated demand, nonetheless nationalist demand entered the mainstream of both Indian and British politics and a sustained resistance began against the British rule.