Author name: Prasanna

Detailed, Step-by-Step NCERT Solutions for Class 12 Sociology Chapter 4 The Market as a Social InstitutionQuestions and Answers were solved by Expert Teachers as per NCERT (CBSE) Book guidelines covering each topic in chapter to ensure complete preparation. https://mcq-questions.com/ncert-solutions-for-class-12-sociology-chapter-4/

The Market as a Social Institution NCERT Solutions for Class 12 Sociology Chapter 4

The Market as a Social Institution Questions and Answers Class 12 Sociology Chapter 4

Question 1.
What is meant by the phrase ‘Invisible Hand’? (C.B.S.E. 2010, 2013)
Answer:
Adam Smith was a famous early political economist who wrote a book called ‘The Wealth of Nations’. In this book, he tried to explain the market economy which was emerging at that time. Smith was of the view that the market economy is made up of many individual transactions or exchanges, which automatically creates a functioning and ordered system.

This happens even though none of the individual involved in the millions of transactions which had tried to create a system. Every person takes care of his own interest, but while pursuing his self interest, the interests of all and the society also needs to be looked after. In this way, it looks like that an unseen force is working, which converts what is good for every individual into what is good for whole of the society. This unseen force was given the name of the “Invisible Hand” by Adam Smith.

Question 2.
How does a sociological perspective on markets differ from an economic one? (C.B.S.E. 2013)
Or
Differentiate the sociological and economic perspective of market? (C.B.S.E. 2017 (D))
Answer:
From a sociological perspective, markets are social institutions which are constructed in culturally specific ways. For example, markets are generally organised or controlled by particular social groups or classes and have specific relations to other institutions, social processes and structures. But from an economic perspective, only economic activities and institutions are included in the markets. It means that only exchange and transactions take place in the market which are based on money.

Question 3.
In what ways is a market – such as a weekly village market – a social institution?
Answer:
In rural and even urban India, the weekly hat is a common sight. In hilly and forested areas (where adivasis five), where people live far away from each other, communication and roads are poor and the economy is underdeveloped, the weekly market is the major institution for the exchange of goods as well as for social interaction.

Local people come to these markets to sell their forest produce or agricultural things to traders, who take them to the towns for resale and they buy essential things like salt, agricultural implements and items of consumption like bangles and jewellery. But for a number of visitors, the main reason to come to the weekly market is social i.e. to meet kins, to arrange marriages, exchange gossips etc. In this way weekly village markets are social institutions.

Question 4.
How do caste and kin networks contribute to the success of a business? (C.B.S.E. 2012)
Or
Trade and commerce operated through caste and kinship networks in India. Discuss. (C.B.S.E. 2015)
Answer:
If we look at the ancient Indian society we can see that caste and kin networks contribute a lot to the success of a business. Some business and trading activities generally are carried out within caste and kinship. It is so because traders have more faith in their community members and kins instead of others.

That is why they like to do trade within their community. It led to monopoly of one particular community over some sectors of business and they earn more and more profit. In large business houses, kins of owner of company are there in Board of Directors who help him in the proper functioning of the company.

Question 5.
In what ways did the Indian economy change after the coming of Colonialism?
Or
Highlight the role of Colonialism in the Indian context. Why has it been a recurrent source of tension and violence? (C.B.S.E. 2011)
Or
How did the advent of Colonialism in India produce a major upheaval in the economy? (C.B.S.E. 2017 (D))
Answer:
Major upheaval was produced in the Indian economy with the advent of colonialism. It caused disruptions in the production, trade and agriculture. For example, demise of the handloom industry because the Indian markets were flooded with the cheap textiles from England. Yet, there was a complex monetised economy in pre¬colonial period in India but historians consider the colonial period as the turning point. Majorly two changes took place and these were:

(i) Link of the Indian economy with capitalist economy. India was fully linked to the world capitalist economy during colonial era. Before the advent of the British, India was one of the major suppliers of manufactured goods to many countries of the world market. After colonization, India became a source of raw material and agricultural products and a consumer of the British manufactured goods. Both of these processes were largely for the benefit of industrialising England.

At the same time the Europeans entered into trade and business, sometimes with the help of existing merchant communities and in some cases by forcing them out. Expansion of market economy in India provided new chances to some merchant communities to improve their position by reorienting themselves to changing economic circumstances.

(ii) Emergence of new communities. Due to colonialism, new communities were emerged to take advantage of the economic opportunities. They continued to hold economic power even after Independence. For example, Marwaris which are represented by leading industrial families like Birlas.

This community also includes small traders and shopkeepers in the bazaars of towns all over the country. During the colonial period, Marwaris became a successful business community as they took advantage of new opportunities in the colonial cities like Calcutta (now Kolkata). They settled all over the country to carry out trade and money lending. The success of Marwaris rested on their wide social network. This network created the relations of trust required to operate their trade and money lending system.

They acted as bankers and helped the commercial expansion of British in India. During late colonial period and even after Independence some of the Marwari families changed themselves into modem industrialists. Even today, they control more of Indian industry than any other community. This story of emergence of new business community during colonial period and its emergence from small migrant traders and merchant bankers and industrialists, shows the importance of social context in economic processes.

Question 6.
Explain the meaning of commoditisation with suitable examples. (C.B.S.E. 2013)
Or
Explain commodification as feature of capitalism. (C.B.S.E. 2015)
Answer:
Commoditisation occurs when things that were earlier not traded in the market become commodities. For example, skills or labour, now, can be bought and sold. Karl Marx and other critics of capitalism were of the view that the process of commodification has negative impact on society. For example, there is some controversy about the sale of kidney by the poor to the rich who wants to transplant his kidney.

Some people say that human organs should not be treated as commodities. During earlier times, humans themselves were bought and sold in the form of slaves but today, it is considered as inhuman or immoral because humans cannot be treated as commodities. Today, this is a universal idea that the labour of person can be bought or skills could be provided for the sake of money. Karl Marx was of the view that this type of situation is found only in capitalist societies. .

Question 7.
What is a Status Symbol? (C.B.S.E. 2013)
Answer:
The goods that people buy and use ase closely related to their status in the society. This is called status symbol to describe this relationship. This term was coined by Max Weber, one of the founders of sociology. Status symbol depend on consumption pattern, lifestyle, leisure activities, dressing pattern, cultural preference and other aspects of daily life.

Question 8.
What are some of the processes included under the label ‘Globalisation’?
Answer:
The term ‘Globalisation’ includes many types of trends, especially the increase in international movement of commodities, money, information and people, as well as the development of technology (like telecommunications, computers and transport) and other infrastructure to allow this movement.

Question 9.
What is meant by ‘liberalisation’?
Answer:
The term ‘liberalisation includes a number of policies like selling (privatisation) public sector enterprises to private companies; relaxation in government regulations on capital, labour and trade; reducing tariffs and import duties, to import foreign goods more easily and allowing easier access for foreign companies so that they could set up industries in India.

Question 10.
In your opinion, will the long-term benefits of liberalisation exceed its costs? Give reasons for your answer.
Or
How did liberalisation policy have an impact on the Indian markets? (C.B.S.E. 2017, (D))
Answer:
The globalisation of Indian economy started with the policy of liberalization which was started in the late 1980’s. The term liberalisation’ includes many policies like selling of P.S.U.’s (Public Sector Unit) to private companies, relaxation of the government regulations on capital, labour and trade, reducing tariffs and import duties for the easy availability of foreign goods and encouraging F.D.I. (Foreign Direct Investment) in India.

We can say all these changes as marketisation or the use of market-based processes (instead of government regulations) to solve economic, social or political problems. These include economic controls, privatisation of P.S.U.’s and removal of the government controls over prices and wages. Those who believe in marketisation are of the view that these steps will help in economic growth and prosperity because more efficiency is there in private industry as compared to government owned industry.

Many changes have been made under the programme of liberalisation and these changes have helped in economic growth. It has opened up Indian markets for foreign companies. For example, foreign goods are now easily available which were not available previously. Foreign investment has been increased and it has helped in economic growth and employment. The privatisation of public companies has increased the efficiency of companies and it has also reduced the government’s burden of running the P.S.U.’s.

However, there was a mixed impact of liberalisation. Many people are of the view that globalisation and liberalisation have a negative impact on India. It means these have more disadvantages than advantages. Some sectors like software, information technology, agriculture, etc. may have benefitted from access to a global market but many other sectors like electronics, automobiles, etc. will lose because they will not be able to compete with foreign companies.

As import of agricultural products is allowed, Indian farmers are now exposed to competition with farmers in other countries. In earlier times, Indian farmers were secured by government in the form of support prices and subsidies given to them by government. Minimum support price (MSP) ensures minimum income for farmers because government agrees to buy their produce at this price (MSP). The cost of farming was also reduced due to subsidies given to them by government (on fertilizers or diesel). Liberalization is totally against any type of government interference in the markets.

That is why subsidies and MSP’s are being withdrawn or reduced. It means that farmers with less land, have not been able to earn enough money for good living. In the same way small industrialists are also exposed to foreign manufactures which have entered the Indian market.

Privitisation of P.S.U.’s had led to loss of employment in some sectors and the growth of unorganized sector employment at the expense of the organized sector. It is not good for workers because organised sector, most of the times, gives better pay and more regular or permanent jobs.

Detailed, Step-by-Step NCERT Solutions for Class 12 History Chapter 11 Rebels and the Raj: The Revolt of 1857 and its Representations Questions and Answers were solved by Expert Teachers as per NCERT (CBSE) Book guidelines covering each topic in chapter to ensure complete preparation. https://mcq-questions.com/ncert-solutions-for-class-12-history-chapter-11/

Rebels and the Raj: The Revolt of 1857 and its Representations NCERT Solutions for Class 12 History Chapter 11

Rebels and the Raj: The Revolt of 1857 and its Representations Questions and Answers Class 12 History Chapter 11

Question 1.
Why did the mutinous sepoys in many places turn to erstwhile rulers to provide leadership to the revolt ?
Answer:
The rebels needed leadership and organisation to face the British. So they turned towards those who had been leaders before the arrival of the British.

(i) First of all, the rebels sought the blessings of Bahadur Shah Zafar, the last Mughal Emperor. They appealed to him to accept the leadership of the revolt. Initially, Bahadur Shah was hesitant. But at last he agreed to be the nominal leader of the rebellion. It motivated the sepoys and legitimised the rebellion as it was in the name of the Mughal Emperor.

(ii) In Kanpur, the sepoys and the people of the town implored on Nana Sahib, the successor of Peshwa Baji Rao II, to join the revolt and lead it.

(iii) There was also a great pressure on Rani of Jhansi to assume the leadership of the uprising. She was unable to resist the demand of the people of Jhansi who had a great regard for her. Later on poet Subhadra Kumari Chauhan wrote about Rani Jhansi’s role: “Khoob Lari Mardani Woh To Jhansi Wali Rani Thi”. In other words, she fought against the British rule with strong determination.

(iv) Similarly the people approached Kunwar Singh, a Zamindar in Arrah in Bihar and requested him to guide and lead them.

(v) The people of Awadh were not happy with the displacement of Nawab Wajid Ali Shah, who was very popular. So when the news about the fall of the British rule reached, they hailed Birjis Qadr, the young son of the Nawab and appointed him as their leader.

Question 2.
Discuss the evidence that indicates planning and coordination on the part of the rebels.
Or
“The Pattern of Mutinies by the sepoys in 1857 suggest some sort of planning and cooridnation.” Explain the above statement with examples. (C.B.S.E. 2019 (Comp.))
Answer:
The Revolt of 1857 was well-planned and well- coordinated. It is evident from the following points:
(i) There was coordination and harmony between sepoys and the ordinary people. Both wanted to target white people and their allies.

(ii) The revolt got a tinge of legitimacy as it was carried forward under the leadership of Bahadur Shah, the last Mughal Emperor in India.

(iii) The Hindus and the Muslims united and rose together against the white people.

(iv) There was continuous communication between the sepoy lines of various cantonments.

(v) Another example of good planning and organisation can be cited from Awadh where Captain Hearsey of Awadh Military Police was provided protection by his Indian subordinates during the mutiny. The 41st Native Infantry, which had killed all its white officers, insisted that the military police would either kill Captain Hearsey or hand over him as prisoner. But the military police refused to kill Captain Hearsey. At last they decided to settle the issue in a panchayat having native officers drawn from each regiment. In other words, many decisions during the rebellion were taken collectively.

Question 3.
Discuss the extent to which religious beliefs shaped the events of 1857.
Or
Discuss the religious causes for the Revolt of 1857.
Answer:
(i) The Christian missionaries were assuring material benefits to Indians to convert them to Christianity. So many people of India became antagonistic towards the British.

(ii) Lord William Bentinck, the Governor-General of India, initiated reforms in the Indian society. He abolished customs like Sati and permitted the remarriage of the Hindu widows. Many Hindus viewed these steps against the ideology of  Hinduism.

(iii) The British introduced western education, western ideas and western institutions in India. They set up English-medium educational institutions but many Hindus considered these steps as attempts to encourage religious conversion.

(iv) Many people felt that the British were destroying the sacred ideals that they had long cherished.

(v) Many Hindus were enraged when the Christian missionaries criticised their scriptures or religious books.

(vi) In accordance with the law passed in 1856, Hindus could be sent across the sea to fight a war. During those days? Hindus considered it a sin to cross the sea.

(vii) The sepoys were given cartridges coated with the fat of cows and pigs. At this, the Indian soldiers lost patience and revolted against the British.

Question 4.
What were the measures taken to ensure unity among the rebels ?
Or
How did the rebels in 1857 try to materialise their vision of unity ? Explain briefly. (C.B.S.E. 2010 (D))
Or
Highlight the measures taken to ensure unity among the rebels of 1857. (C.B.S.E. 2017 (D))
Or
Examine why were the religious divisions between Hindus and Muslims hardly noticable during the uprising of 1857. (C.B.S.E. 2017 (D))
Answer:
The following measures were taken to ensure unity among the rebels :
(i) In all their proclamations, the rebels repeatedly appealed to all sections of society. They did not take caste or creed into consideration.

(ii) Many proclamations were made by the Muslim princes. A few others were issued in their names. But all such proclamations took into consideration the sentiments of the Hindus.

(iii) The rebellion had an equal participation of both the Hindus and the Muslims. They had equally to lose or gain.

(iv) Many pamphlets were issued which glorified the co-existence of different communities under the Mughal Empire. Bahadur Shah Zafar; appealed to all the Muslims to fight in the name of Muhammad. He also exhorted the Hindus to rise against the white people in the name of Mahavir. There was a complete unity between the Hindus and the Muslims. a popular mass support. According to Forsyth, a British official, about 75% adult male population in Awadh was in rebellion.

(iii) Counter-Insurgency Operations : The British took up various anti-insurgency operations to suppress the rebellion. They followed protracted fighting. They did not care for the heavy losses that they faced to snatch Delhi from the rebels.

(iv) Diplomacy : The British were worried where the big landlords and peasants had offered united resistance. So they tried to break up this unity by adopting diplomatic means. They promised to return the estates of the landlords. They dispossessed the rebel landholders and rewarded the loyal landholders. Few of these landlords either died while fighting with Britishers or ran away to Nepal where they died due to starvation or illness.

Question 5.
What steps did the British take to quell the uprising ?
Or
Why did the British not have an easy time in putting down the rebellion of 1857 ? Give reasons. (C.B.S.E. 2014 (O.D))
Or
Examine the repressive measures adopted by the British to subdue the rebel of 1857. (C.B.S.E 2015 (O.D))
Answer:
It was not easy for the British to control and crush the Revolt of 1857. Even then, they took several steps to quell it. These can be studied as follows:
(i) Martial Law and Death Sentence : The British passed a series of laws to quell the insurgency in India. By the laws passed in May and June, 1857, the whole of North India was put under martial law. The military officers were also empowered to try and punish the rebel Indians. They ignored ordinary processes of the law and trail. They gave only one punishment to all the rebels and that was death. In other words, the British tried to suppress the revolt by all means.

(ii) Two-Pronged Military Action : The British knew the symbolic value of Delhi. Thus, they initiated a two-pronged attack. One force moved from Calcutta into North India. The other force started from Punjab to reconquer Delhi. At last the British captured Delhi in September, 1857. Similarly, the British forces went ahead village by village in the Gangetic plain. They recaptured, the lost ground step by step. In fact, the British knew that they were not merely dealing with a mutiny and rather were facing an uprising that had

Question 6.
Why was the revolt particularly widespread in Awadh ? What prompted the peasants, taluqdars and Zamindars to join the revolt ? (C.B.S.E. 2013 (O.D.))
Or
A chain of grievances in Awadh linked the prince, Taluqdar, Peasants and sepoys to join hands in the revolt of 1857 against the British. Examine the statement. (C.B.S.E. 2017 (O.D.))
Or
Criticaly examine the policies adopted by the British for the annexation of Awadh in 1857. (C.B.S.E. 2017 (O.D.))
Answer:
There was a widespread discontentment among the people of various regions and princely states because of the policies of Lord Dalhousie. The disgust and anger that prevailed in Awadh was no where to be seen in the whole of India. Here, Nawab Wajid Ali Shah was removed on the charges of misgovernance and was sent to Calcutta. In 1851, Governor General Lord Dalhousie had described the kingdom of Awadh as “a cherry that will drop into our mouth one day.”

In fact, the British had concluded that Wajid Ali Shah was not very popular among the people. But the reality was that he was the beloved of the local people. When the Nawab was leaving Awadh, a large number of people were weeping. They followed him till Kanpur. When the Nawab was removed, it brought an end to court and its culture.

This emotional upheaval was aggravated by immediate material losses. It rendered many musicians, dancers, poets, artisans, cooks and administrative officials jobless. All the people lost their means of livelihood because the Nawab, who patronised them, was dethroned. As a historian said at the loss of Awadh: “The life was gone out of the body and the body of this town had been left lifeless.”

The Role of Peasants, Taluqdar and Zamindar :

The Revolt of 1857 was an expression of popular resistance of foreign rule. All the peasants, taluqdars and Zamindars participated in it. It is evident from the following points:

(i) The annexation of Awadh to the British Empire not only displaced Nawab Wajid Ali Shah but also dispossessed the taluqdars of the region. Earlier, the taluqdars controlled land, forts and power in the countryside. They also enjoyed autonomy as long as they accepted the suzerainty of the Nawab and paid the due revenue. The big taluqdar had about twelve thousand foot soldiers but the small taluqdars had about two hundred foot-soldiers.

The British disarmed the taluqdars and destroyed their forts. They undermined their position and authority by adopting a new land revenue policy which was unfavourable to the taluqdars. For example, before the annexation of Awadh, the taluqdars held 67% villages of Awadh under their control. But after the introduction of the British Policy of Summary Settlement, this number had come down to 38%.

(ii) Most of the peasants were not happy as most of them were over-assessed. At some places, the increase in revenue was from 30 to 70%. It resulted in the breakdown of the entire social system.

(iii) Before the arrival of the British, the taluqdars were oppressors. They got a variety of dues from the peasants but they also posed themselves as if they were fatherly-figures. They seemed considerate in times of need. But under the British rule, the peasants were over-assessed regarding the payment of dues. They also had to follow inflexible methods of collection. As all the taluqdars and peasants were loyal to the Nawab, they fought against the British. So there was an intense and long-lasting revolt against the British in Awadh.

(iv) The grievances of the peasants also had an effect on the role of sepoys as most of the sepoys were from rural areas. They got very low salaries and faced difficulty in getting leaves. So they were also discontent and dissatisfied. This aggravated the already tense situation in Awadh.

(v) Whole of the social order was broken down with the dispossession of the taluqdars. The ties of patronage and loyalty were disrupted that had bound the peasants to the taluqdars. Before the Britishers, these taluqdars were oppressors but some of them were seemed to be generous fatherly figures. They extracted a number of dues from the peasants but they also helped them during their bad times.

Now, during the British rule, the peasants were directly exposed to over-assessment of revenue and non- flexible methods of revenue collection. Now there was no guarantee that the revenue demand of the state would be reduced or collection postponed in case of crop failure or in the times of hardship. Peasants also had no guarantee that they would get the loan and support in times of festivities which the taluqdars had earlier provided.

(vi) The resistance was intense and long lasting in the areas like Awadh during the revolt of 1857. Here the fighting was carried on for long by taluqdars and their peasants. Some of these taluqdars were loyal to the Nawab. That is why they joined the wife of the Nawab, Begum Hazrat Mahal. Few of them remained with her even in defeat.

Question 7.
What did the rebels want ? To what extent did the vision of different social groups differ ?
Answer:
Who were the Rebels ? According to the British officials, the rebels were a group of ungrateful and barbaric people. But in fact, they were patriots who loved their motherland and wanted that the alien rulers should be ousted. They included sepoys and ordinary people. They were not very educated and therefore propagated their ideas and programmes through ishtahars (notifications). They persuaded the people to join revolt against the foreign rulers.

What the Rebels Wanted ? From the official record of the British Government, it is not clear what the rebels wanted, but every Indian knows that the rebels wanted freedom from the foreign rule. They were against the tyranny and oppression of the infidel and treacherous English people. They thought of the well-being of the common people.

Vision of Different Social Groups : All the rebels of the 1857 uprising came from different social groups. They were queens, kings, nawabs, taluqdars, Zamindars, peasants, sepoys and other ordinary people. Therefore, their methods may have been different but the goal of all was the same, that is, the freedom from the alien rule. It is evident from the following points :

(i) The ordinary people joined hands with the sepoys and attacked the white people. They ransacked their bungalows and burnt their property. They also’destroyed and plundered all government buildings like the jail, court, treasury, post office and record office.

(ii) They attacked, looted and killed a large number of Europeans.

(iii) They legitimised their rebellion by seeking the blessings of Bahadur Shah Zafar, the last Mughal Emperor. They also declared him as the king of India.

(iv) The rebellion was extensive and targeted everything and everybody connected with the white men. They even burnt all government records. There was a general defiance of all kinds of authority and hierarchy.

(v) The Hindus and the Muslims united to exterminate the firangis, a derogatory term used to designate foreigners.

(vi) The ordinary people also joined the revolt. They attacked the rich moneylenders as they were seen as the local oppressors and the allies of the British.

(vii) The sepoys decided their own strategy. They were the makers of their own rebellion.

(viii) In Meerut, a faqir rode an elephant and conveyed messages to the sepoys who visited him frequently. Similarly in Lucknow, there were a few religious leaders and self styled prophets who preached the destruction of British rule.

(ix) At many places, the local leaders urged peasants, Zamindars and tribals to revolt against the British rule. For example, Shah Mai mobilised the villagers of Barout pargana in Uttar Pradesh. Similarly Gonoo, a tribal cultivator in Chotanagpur, became a rebel leader of the Kol tribals.

Question 8.
What do visual representations tell us about the Revolt of 1857 ? How do historians analyse these representations ?
Or
Examine the visual representation of the Revolt of 1857 that provobed a range of differefnt emotions and reactions. (C.B.S.E. 2017 (O.D.))
Answer:
One of the important record of the mutiny of 1857 is the pictorial images prepared by the British and Indians. Paintings, pencil drawings, posters, etchings, cartoons, bazaar prints, etc., about this revolt are available. The available information in these pictures and their description given by historians is given below :

I. Pictorials prepared by the British : British pictures offer a number of images which were prepared to provoke different emotions and reactions.

1. In some of the pictures made by the British, the British heroes were commemorate who saved the English and repressed the rebels. One of the painting “Relief of Lucknow” was painted by Thomas Jones Barker in 1859, is an example of this type. When the Lucknow was besieged by the rebel forces, the commissioner of Lucknow, Henry Lawrence, collected whole of the Christian population and took shelter in the heavily fortified residency.

Later on, Lawrence was killed but the residency remained protected under the command of Colonal Inglis. On September 25, Henry Havelock and James Outram reached over there and cut through the rebel forces. They even reinforced the British troops. After 20 days, a new commander of British forces in India, Colin Campbell, came over there with his forces and saved the besieged British forces.

The British historians described the siege of Lucknow and their survival as the ultimate victory of the British power. The painting of Barker shows the moment of Campbell’s entry. It created a sense that the troubled times and the rebellion was over. The British emerged victorious.

2. Joseph Noel Paton painted a picture “In Memorium” two years after the mutiny. In this picture, English women and children huddled in a circle. They are looking helpless and innocent, seemingly waiting for the inevitable-violence, dishonour and death. This painting stirs up the imagination of spectators. It also tries to provoke anger and fury. This painting also represents the rebels as violent and brutish.

3. In few other paintings and sketches, women are shown in a different light. Women in these pictures appear heroic, defending themselves against the attack of rebels. In a picture, Miss Wheeler stands firmly in the centre and is shown defending her honour, single handedly killing the attacking rebels. In all the British pictures, the rebels are represented as demons.

4. With the waves of shock and anger spread in England, demands of retribution grew very strongly. Pictures and news about the revolt created an atmosphere in which vengeance and violent repression was seen as necessary and just. It was as if demand of justice was a challenge to the British honour and power to meet ruthlessly.

An allegorical female figure of justice is shown with a sword in one of her hand and a shield in the other hand. Her face expresses rage and her desire to take the revenge. Under her feet, she is trampling sepoys which a crowd of Indian women and children watch with fear. Except these there were numerous pictures and cartoons in the British press which were giving stress on the need of brutal repression and violent revenge.

II. Indian Pictures : Indian artists presented the rebel leaders as those heroes who were leading the country into the battle. These leaders were rousing the people to righteous indignation against the imperialist rule. Rani Lakshmi Bai of Jhansi was represented, in a picture, as a masculine figure chasing the enemy, killing the soldiers and valiantly fighting till her last.

Children in different parts of country grow up reading the lines of Subhadra Kumari Ghauhan, “Khoob Lari Mardani Woh to Jhansi Wali Rani Thi.” In popular prints, Rani Lakshmi Bai is generally shown in battle armour. She is also shown with a sword in one of her hands and riding a horse with the other, a symbol of the determination to resist injustice and foreign rule.

Question 9.
Examine any two sources presented in the chapter, choosing one visual and one tent, and discuss how these represent the point of view of the victor and the vanquished.
Answer:
Do it yourself.

Detailed, Step-by-Step NCERT Solutions for Class 12 History Chapter 13 Mahatma Gandhi and the Nationalist Movement: Civil Disobedience and Beyond Questions and Answers were solved by Expert Teachers as per NCERT (CBSE) Book guidelines covering each topic in chapter to ensure complete preparation. https://mcq-questions.com/ncert-solutions-for-class-12-history-chapter-13/

Mahatma Gandhi and the Nationalist Movement: Civil Disobedience and Beyond NCERT Solutions for Class 12 History Chapter 13

Mahatma Gandhi and the Nationalist Movement: Civil Disobedience and Beyond Questions and Answers Class 12 History Chapter 13

Question 1.
How did Mahatma Gandhi seek to identify with the common people ?
Answer:
Mahatma Gandhi believed in simple living and high thinking. He did the following to identify himself with the common people of India:

• He did not behave like a professional or an intellectual. Rather he mixed with thousands of peasants, workers and artisans.
• He dressed himself like the common man. He also lived like them and spoke their language. He wore simple dhoti or loin-cloth and did not like to stand apart from the common people. He liked to mix with them, sit and talk with them.
• He worked on the Charkha (spinning wheel) everyday. He also encouraged other nationalists to do the same. In fact, he favoured synthesis between mental and manual labour.
• He did not believe in the traditional caste system.
• He often spoke in the mother tongue.

Question 2.
How was Mahatma Gandhi perceived by the peasants ?
Answer:
The peasants gave a lot of respect to Gandhiji. They referred to him as their Mahatma having miraculous powers. They believed that God had sent him to redress and solve their grievances. They found Gandhiji as a dominating person who could overrule all local officials. So they revered him as ‘Gandhi Baba’, ‘Gandhi Maharaj’ or as ‘Mahatma’.

They considered him as their saviour. They believed that Gandhi could save them from high taxes and oppressive officials. They were impressed by his ascetic lifestyle and his love of working with his hands. In the end, the peasants venerated Gandhiji as they believed that he could restore their dignity and add autonomy in their lives.

Question 3.
Why did the Salt Law become an important issue of struggle ?
Answer:
During the British rule, the Salt Law had given the state a monopoly to manufacture and sell salt. Most of the Indians abhorred these laws as salt was indispensable in every Indian household. But the British had forbidden the people from making salt even for their domestic use. They compelled all the people to buy salt from shops at a high rate. The people could not do anything as the state enjoyed monopoly over the manufacturing and sale of the salt.

Gandhi had a keen practical wisdom. He understood that the people disliked the Salt Law and targeted these laws. As the people were discontent against the British rule, they gathered around Mahatma Gandhi who mobilised their strength and energy to give boost to his struggle for complete independence of the country. So the salt laws had become an important issue in the freedom struggle of India.

Question 4.
Why are newspapers an important source for the study of the national movement ?
Answer:
Contemporary newspapers are an important source for the study of national movement. If we want to know more about our freedom struggle, we must consult both English newspapers as well as newspapers in different Indian languages.

• The contemporary newspapers wrote about all the movements launched by Mahatma Gandhi.
• They reported all the important activities, speeches and statements of Mahatma Gandhi.
• They also presented views about what ordinary Indians thought of him.
• However the newspapers must be read with care as the views expressed in them can be prejudiced.

Question 5.
Why was the Charkha chosen as a symbol of nationalism ?
Answer:
Gandhiji used to work on the Charkha every day. He made it a symbol of nationalism because of the following reasons:

(i) Charkha symbolised manual labour. Mahatma Gandhi always believed in the dignity of labour. He liked to work with his own hands. However he considered Charkha as an exquisite piece of machinery.

(ii) Gandhiji opposed machines as they enslaved human beings. He adopted Charkha as he wanted to glorify the dignity of manual labour and not of the machines and technology.

(iii) Gandhiji believed that Charkha could make a man self-reliant as it added to his income.

(iv) The act of spinning at Charkha (spinning wheel) enabled Gandhiji to break the boundaries of traditional caste system. In fact Gandhiji wanted to make Charkha as a symbol of nationalism. So he encouraged other nationalist leaders to spin the Charkha for sometime daily.

Question 6.
How was Non-Cooperation a form of protest ?
Or
Discuss the causes, programmes, progress tand significance of the Non Cooperation Movement.
Or
Examine the causes and the contribution of Non-Cooperation Movement to India’s freedom struggle. Why did Gandhiji couple Non-Cooperation Movement with Khilafat Movement? (C.B.S.E. 2011 (D))
Or
Describe how Gandhiji knitted Non-Cooperation Movement as a popular movement. (C.B.S.E. 2013 (O.D.))
Or
“The Non cooperation Moment was training for self rule.” Analyse the statement of American biographer Louis Fischer in the context of Indian Nationalism. (C.B.S.E. 2019 (D))
Answer:
The Non-Cooperation Movement was started in 1920 under the leadership of Mahatma Gandhi. It was a campaign of non-cooperation with the British rule. It was a mass-movement in which lakhs of people, belonging to all sections of society, participated. According to Louis Fischer, “It entailed denial, renunciation and self-discipline. It was training for self-rule.”

Causes and Conditions :
(i) The Indians had extended full cooperation to the British during the First World War but after this war, the British fully exploited all the people of India. So there was a feeling of discontent against the alien rule.

(ii) The plague had erupted and spread in many parts of India during the First World War but the British did not pay any attention to control it.

(iii) During the First World War, Gandhiji had helped the British with the hope that they would set the country free after the end of the war. But all the hopes of Gandhiji were dashed to the ground after the First World War.

(iv) In 1919, the British Government had passed the Rowlatt Act which imposed censorship on the press and permitted detention without trial. The people rose against this atrocious Black Law.

(v) Gandhiji called for a nation-wide campaign against the Rowlatt Act. A large meeting of the people was held at Jallianwala Bagh in Amritsar. But a British Brigadier ordered his troops to open fire on this peaceful meeting of the people. It killed more than four hundred people and wounded several others. So there was a entment against the Britishers-among the people.

(vi) In the session of Indian National Congress held in September, 1920, a resolution for non-cooperation with the British Government was passed.

Programme and Objectives of the Non-Cooperation Movement :
A detailed programme was chalked out to run this movement against the British rule. It included the following:

• The boycott of foreign goods and the use of goods and things manufactured in the country.
• To return Titles and Honours conferred by the British Government.
• Resignations by Indian members nominated in the local institutions.
• Not to send children to schools and colleges run by the British Government.
• Boycott of the lawyers from the civil courts.
• The soldiers, clerks and workers refused to render any service abroad.

Progress of the Movement and its End :

To widely spread the programme of the Non-Cooperation Movement, Mahatma Gandhi visited many parts of the country along with the Muslim leaders like Dr. Ansari, Maulana Abul Kalam Azad and Ali brothers. As a result, this movement shook the foundations of the British Raj for the first time since the Revolt of 1857.

The students did not attend their classes in the educational institutions rim by the British Government. Foreign garments were burnt at the crossroads. Rabindernath Tagore had relinquished his title of ‘Sir’. Similarly Mahatma Gandhi surrendered his title of‘Kesri Hind’. But in February, 1922, a group of peasants attacked a police station and set it on fire at Chauri Chaura, a village in Uttar Pradesh.

As several constables were burnt alive in this fire, Gandhiji was shocked at this violent incident and therefore called off his Non-Cooperation Movement.

Importance

• Because of Non-Cooperation Movement, Congress came in direct clash with the British Government.
• For the first time in the history of India, the people whole-heartedly participated in this movement.
• During the Non-Cooperation Movement, the word ‘Swadeshi’ became quite popular. As a result, the Indian industry flourished.
• This movement gave a new direction to the freedom-struggle of India.

Question 7.
Why were the dialogues at the Round Table Conference inconclusive ?
Answer:
The Dandi March of Mahatma Gandhi had made the British rulers realise that their reign was not forever. If they had to rule for long, they must involve the Indians in the administration and policy-making. So the British Government convened a series of Round Table Conferences in London.

(i) The First Round Table Conference was held in November 1930. It did not yield any concrete result as no important Indian leader participated in it. So Mahatma Gandhi was released in January, 1931 and the Round Table Conference was held in November, 1931. It was attended by Mahatma Gandhi. So it culminated in the Gandhi-Irwin Pact. Under this Pact, Mahatma Gandhi agreed to call off his Civil Disobedience Movement. The British agreed to release all the prisoners and also allowed the manufacture of salt along the sea-coast. Many leaders criticised this pact as it did not say anything about the complete independence of India.

(ii) The Second Round Table Conference was held in the later part of 1931 at London. Gandhiji attended it on behalf of the Congress. However his claim that Congress represented the whole of India was unacceptable to the Muslim League which claimed to represent the cause of all Muslims. The Princes also did not agree with Gandhi as they believed that the Congress had no stake in their territories. Dr. B.R. Ambedkar, a lawyer and thinker, also did not agree with Gandhiji. He stated that Congress did not represent the people belonging to lowest castes. So this conference remained inconclusive. Gandhiji felt disheartened and resumed his Civil Disobedience Movement.

Question 8.
In what way did Mahatma Gandhi transform the nature of the national movement ?
Or
How did Mahatma Gandhi turn the national movement into a mass movement ?
Or
Explain how Gandhiji transformed Indian Nationalism by 1922. (C.B.S.E. 2010 (D))
Or
“In the history of nationalism, Gandhji is often identified with the making of a nation.” Describe his role in the freedom struggle of India. (C.B.S.E. 2014 (D))
Answer:
Before the entry of Mahatma Gandhi into Indian politics, the freedom struggle was just a nominal movement. Only resolutions were passed by the leaders and sent to the government. Besides the national movement remained confined to only limited areas. It did not engulf the whole country. A few areas of India were under the influence of revolutionaries.

A few other areas were under the influence of the assertive nationalist. But after the emergence of Mahatma Gandhi, the national movement did not remain confined to a few leaders and led the participation of all the people. It became a mass movement because of the following reasons:

(i) Principles of Truth and Non-Violence. When Mahatma Gandhi entered the Indian politics, he adopted two cardinal principles of truth and non-violence. The truth meant an insistence on the righteous conduct and right path. Non-violence meant the government actions should be opposed peacefully. The people had seen that Mahatma Gandhi had sincerely helped the British during the First World War.

He also exhorted the people to cooperate with the British Government but when British showed their true colours after the war was over and passed the Rowlatt Act to crush the Indians, Gandhiji gave a call for strike in the whole country. It was a non-violent step taken to vindicate the cause of truth. All the Indians whole¬heartedly participated in this strike.

(ii) Satyagraha and Non-Cooperation Movement. Mahatma Gandhi had resorted to the path of Satyagraha for the first time against the white government in South Africa. He had compelled the white government to bow before him. When he launched Non-Cooperation Movement in India, Gandhiji adopted the policy of Satyagraha. He called upon the people not to cooperate with the British Government.

All the people of the country plunged into this national movement against the British rule. The students stayed away from their classes in the government educational institutions. The lawyers boycotted the law-courts. The officials left their jobs and the common people boycotted foreign goods. The people of India belonging to all castes, classes, religions and professions, filled all the jails by courting their arrests. The British rule was shaken to its foundations by the mammoth participation of the people in the Non-Cooperation Movement.

(iii) Breaking Salt Laws and Civil Disobedience Movement. Gandhiji led his world- famous Dandi March on 12 March, 1930. A large number of people joined the March which started from Sabarmati Ashram and culminated at Dandi on the sea-shore where Gandhiji broke one of the most widely disliked laws in British India, i.e., the Salt Law. Gandhi also exhorted all the people to break this drastic law in their own regions. He also advised them not to pay any tax to the British Government. This method of protesting against the British Government deeply impressed the local and foreign press. As a result, there was a mass upsurge against the colonial rule.

(iv) Opposition to Injustice. Mahatma Gandhi always opposed injustice. He kept fasts to favour and protect the untouchables. He forced the British Government to bow before the might of the common people. All the great leaders bowed before the miraculous charm of Gandhiji. In fact, Gandhiji was such a leader whom everybody in the country liked to follow.

(v) Encouragement to Swadeshi. Gandhiji encouraged the people of India to adopt swadeshi things or goods in life. He himself worked on the Charkha daily. Under his magnetic influence, many people burnt the foreign goods which inculcated national spirit among the people. They whole-heartedly participated in the national movement to attain complete independence from the colonial rule.

Question 9.
What do private letters and autobiographies tell us about an individual ? How are these sources different from official accounts ?
Or
Examine the different kinds of sources from which political career of Gandhiji and the history of the National Movement could be reconstructed ? (C.B.S.E. 2009, 2013 (D))
Answer:
The private letters and autobiographies are always an important source of information about the political leaders. The letters written to relatives or intimate friends give us a glimpse of the private thoughts of the writer.

These letters express an individual’s anger and pain, dismay and anxiety, hopes and frustrations. They bring out what is otherwise not openly expressed. For example, the letters written by Nehru and Gandhiji throw a lot of light on their ideas.

In the same way, autobiographies also give an account about the views and perceptions of a leader or any other person. However an autobiography is a retrospective account of one’s journey on this earth. It is often based on memory. So it must be read with care and caution.

However, an autobiography is still an important source to know a person. If anybody writes an autobiography, he, infact, frames a picture of himself for the outside world. The autobiography of Mahatma Gandhi “The Story of My Experiments With Truth’ became quite popular due to its straight forwardness and veracity.

Detailed, Step-by-Step NCERT Solutions for Class 12 History Chapter 14 Understanding Partition: Politics, Memories, Experiences Questions and Answers were solved by Expert Teachers as per NCERT (CBSE) Book guidelines covering each topic in chapter to ensure complete preparation. https://mcq-questions.com/ncert-solutions-for-class-12-history-chapter-14/

Understanding Partition: Politics, Memories, Experiences NCERT Solutions for Class 12 History Chapter 14

Understanding Partition: Politics, Memories, Experiences Questions and Answers Class 12 History Chapter 14

Question 1.
What did the Muslim League demand through its Resolution of 1940 ?
Answer:
The Muslim League passed an important resolution on 23 March, 1940. Through this resolution, the Muslim League demanded an autonomy for the Muslim-majority areas of the sub-continent. However, it did not mention either partition of the country or the creation of Pakistan. In fact, Sikandar Hayat Khan, the Punjab Premier and Leader of the Unionist Party, had drafted this resolution. Speaking in the Punjab Assembly on 1 March, 1941, he had opposed the creation of Pakistan. He was in favour of a loose confederation with a lot of autonomy for the units.

Question 2.
Why did some people think of partition as a very sudden development ?
Answer:
Many people considered the partition of India in 1947 as a very sudden development. Even the Muslims were not clear what the creation of Pakistan meant to them. They were also unaware how the creation of their own country might shape their lives in the future. Many people had migrated to the new country with the hope that they would soon come back as and when the peace prevailed in the region.

Many Muslim leaders were even not serious in their demand for Pakistan. Many-a-times Jinnah used the idea of Pakistan to seek favours from the British and to block concessions to the Congress. In other words, the partition of the country took place so suddenly that nobody realised what had happened within a few days.

Question 3.
How did the ordinary people view the partition ?
Answer:
People viewed the partition of India in 1947 in the following way:

• Many people had left their homes and migrated to other places. They still felt that it was a temporary phase and they would return to their homes as soon as peace prevailed.
• Many people considered partition as a holocaust. They referred to it as ‘Maashal-la’ (martial law), Mara- mari’ (Killings), ‘Raula’ (Disturbance or Tumult) and ‘Hullar’ (Uproar). In other words, they symbolised partition with destruction or slaughter on a mass-scale.
• Some people considered partition as a civil war in which concerted efforts were made to wipe out the entire communities.
• Some people viewed partition as a more or less orderly constitutional arrangement.

Question 4.
What were Mahatma Gandhi’s arguments against Partition ?
Or
Examine the views of Gandhiji against the Partition of India. (C.B.S.E. 2009 (D))
Answer:
Mahatma Gandhi believed in religious harmony. He was a supporter of unity among various communities of the country. So he was deadly against the partition of India. He did not want the separation of the Muslims from the Hindus who had been living together for centuries. He used to say that the country could be divided over his dead body. He gave the following arguments against the partition of India:

(i) He stated that the demand for Pakistan mooted by the Muslim League was un-Islamic and sinful. Islam stands for the unity and brotherhood of mankind. So it cannot disrupt the unity of human family.

(ii) According to Gandhiji, the protagonists of partition of the country were the enemies of both Islam and India.

(iii) He considered partition as wrong. He was ready to be cut into pieces. But he was not ready to accept the partition of the country.

(iv) He appealed to the Muslim League not to regard any Indian as its enemy. The Hindus and the Muslims belong to the same land. They have the same blood and eat the same food and drink the same water. They speak the same language and do everything with mutual consultation. So they cannot be separated from each other.

Question 5.
Why is partition viewed as an ‘extremely significant marker in South Asian history ?
Or
Briefly describe the social impacts , of the partition.Why is the partition of India viewed of an extremely significant marker in the history of India and Pakistan ? Explain. (C.B.S.E. 2013 (O.D.))
Answer:
Indian partition is viewed as an extremely significant marker in South Asian history because of the following reasons
(i) This partition took place on the name of communities or religions. History has not witnessed such type of partition.

(ii) First time in history, people of two countries moved across. Most of the Muslims of India crossed over to Pakistan and almost all the Hindus and Sikhs came to India from Pakistan.

(iii) Several hundred thousand people were killed. People began killing each other who used to live with each other with peace and harmony. Government machinery had no role in it.

(iv) People were rendered homeless, having suddenly lost all of their immovable and movable assets. They were separated from many of their relatives and friends as well.

Question 6.
Discuss the causes that brought the partition of India. Was this partition essential or could it be postponed ?
Or
Why was the British India partitioned ?
Or
Examine the events that were responsible for the partition of India. (C.B.S.E. 2019 (O.D.))
Answer:
In 1947, India was partitioned owing to the role of communal forces and the British policy of Divide and Rule. In fact, the British Policy had strengthened the hands of the communal forces. It spread hatred between people belonging to different religions. The role of the British prepared a ground for the partition of the country. It is evident from the following points:

(i) The policy of Divide and Rule : After the Revolt of 1857, the British were apprehensive about the Hindu-Muslim unity. So they adopted a new policy of dividing the religious minorities to strengthen and perpetuate their rule in India. They instigated one community against the other. They also instigated the Hindus against the Muslims and vice-versa. As a result, their was communal tension between Hindus and Muslims.

(ii) Attempts of the Muslim League : The Muslims formed their Muslim League in 1906. As a result, the Hindu-Muslim relations soured and the communal tension between the two communities increased. These differences increased so much that in its Declaration of 1940, the Muslim League demanded Pakistan for the Muslims.

(iii) Weak Policy of the Congress : The demands of the Muslim League were increasing day by day. The Congress was accepting them one by one. In 1916, it accepted the creation of separate electorate system. Making use of the weak policy of the Congress, the Muslim League started demanding the partition of the country.

(iv) Communal Riots : To press its demand for Pakistan, the Muslim League decided a ‘Direct Action Day’. It announced 16 August, 1946 as the Direct Action Day. On this day, many communal riots had broken out in cities like Calcutta. These riots had spread all over the country by 1947. They could be stopped only by the partition of the country.

(v) Failure of the Interim Government : An Interim Government was formed in 1946. Here the Congress and the Muslim League got a chance to work together. But the Muslim League put various hurdles in the way of Congress. Consequently, the Interim Government remained a failure. It became clear that the Hindus and the Muslims could not run the administration unitedly.

(vi) The British Declaration to Quit India :
On 20 February, 1947, Clement Attlee, the Prime Minister of England, declared to free India by June, 1948. The declaration also stated that the British would leave India after there is an agreement between Congress and the Muslim League. But Muslim League was not ready to accept freedom without getting Pakistan for the Muslims. As a result, the British Government started devising a plan to divide India into Pakistan and India.

(vii) Partition of India : With the purpose of
partitioning India, Lord Mountbatten was sent to India as the Viceroy. With his pragmatic approach, he brought both Nehru and Patel round to his point of view, that is, the partition of the country. When Nehru and Patel had agreed to accept the partition plan, at last India was divided into two parts in 1947.

Was the Partition of India essential ?
Or
Could the Partition of India be postponed ?
Answer:
Though the partition of India was painful yet it was essential. The Congress was forced to accept it in wake of the prevailing circumstances. In reality, this partition could be postponed. The following arguments can be given in this regard :

(i) The leaders of the Congress were exhausted due to long-drawn battle for independence. So they accepted the partition plan. But they should have thought that Jinnah, the main spokesperson for Pakistan, was suffering from cancer. He had become quite weak and had no power to fight any more. Had Congress kept its patience, it was possible that Jinnah could have left this demand for partition. He would have made some agreement with the Congress.

(ii) The Congress wanted to get maximum benefit from the Labour Government in England. It feared that it might lose freedom if ever the Conservative Party came to power. But it was just a fallacy of the Congress. The Conservative Government could not be formed in England before at least 1950. During these three years, it would not have been difficult to change the scenario by starting a big movement against the British and for Hindu-Muslim unity.

(iii) Congress was weary of the communal riots. It wanted to get rid of them. So it accepted Mountbatten’s plan for the partition of India. Rather than accepting the proposal of the Viceroy, the Congress should have pressurised him to crush those who spread communal violence and caused communal riots. If the British Government could repress NonCooperation Movement and Quit India Movement, why could it not crush merely a few hundred rioteers and fanatics. Having taken any of these steps, the partition of the country could have been definitely postponed.

Question 7.
How did women experience partition ?
Or
Explain some of the horrowing experiences of women in those violent days of partition. (C.B.S.E. 2009 (D))
Or
“Scholers have written about the harrowing experiences of women during the partition of India.” Explain the statement. (C.B.S.E. 2019 (O.D.))
Answer:
At the time of partition of the country, the women had horrible experiences. They were not only raped and abducted but also sold. They were compelled to settle down to a new life with strangers in unknown circumstances. They found the governments of both India and Pakistan insensitive to their problems.

It was very difficult for the women to protect their respect and honour. Some women were even killed by their family members so that their hounour is maintained and their respect and piousness is not violated by the enemy. Some women committed suicides to save themselves from falling into enemy hands. For example, in Thoa Khalsa, a village in Rawalpindi District, ninety women voluntrarily jumped into a well so that they may not be caught by enemies. They died as martyrs and cannot be termed as having committed suicides. The sacrifice and bravery of such women is still remembered.

Question 8.
How did the Congress come to change its views on partition ?
Answer:
Initially the Congress was against the partition of the country. But in March, 1947, the Congress high command agreed to divide Punjab into two halves. One part would constitute of the Muslim- majority areas. The other part would include areas having Hindu-Sikh majority.

Many Sikh leaders and Congressmen were convinced that partition of Punjab was a necessary evil. The Sikhs felt that if they did not accept the partition, they would be over-powered by the Muslim majorities. Then they would be dictated and controlled by Muslim leaders.

The similar principle was applied to Bengal. There was a section of Bhadralok Bengali Hindus. They wanted to retain political power with them. They were also apprehensive of the Muslims. As the Hindus were in minority in Bengal, they thought it prudent to divide the province. It would help them retain their political dominance. Thus, Congress changed its perception about the partition of the country after adopting a pragmatic approach.

Question 9.
Examine the strengths and limitations of oral history. How have oral history techniques furthered our understanding of partition ?
Or
Describe the strengths and weaknessess of oral history (C.B.S.E 2014 (O.D.))
Or
Analyse the distinctive aspects of the oral testimonies to understand the history of the partition of British India. (C.B.S.E 2016 (D))
Or
Examine the importance and eimitations of memories and oral testimonies in reconstructing the history of the partition of India. (C.B.S.E 2019 (O.D.))
Answer:
Oral history has a wider scope to acquaint us about any historic or general event. Besides there are narratives, memoirs, diaries and family histories. They also help us to understand and comprehend any event that occurred in the past.
The partition of India occurred due to compelling circumstances of those times. It was not just a political event and had a deeper meaning attached to it. Strengths of Oral History

• It helps us in grasping new experiences. It also adds new events to our memories.
• It is quite helpful for the historians as it enables them to describe an incident vividly and comprehensively.
• It provides information other than the government policy and official records.
• It broadens the scope of history.
• It enables the historians to explore the experiences of the ignored people.

Limitations of Oral History

• It lacks concreteness and authenticity.
• It is not chronological.
• It makes generalisation difficult as a large picture cannot be built from micro-evidence.
• One witness is no witness.
• It is difficult to counter-check the oral sources.
• Oral sources are not easily available. Sometimes people do not like to talk about their personal experiences.
• Sometimes meaningful data is not available due to weak memory of the person.

Detailed, Step-by-Step NCERT Solutions for Class 12 History Chapter 15 Framing the Constitution: The Beginning of a New Era Questions and Answers were solved by Expert Teachers as per NCERT (CBSE) Book guidelines covering each topic in chapter to ensure complete preparation. https://mcq-questions.com/ncert-solutions-for-class-12-history-chapter-15/

Framing the Constitution: The Beginning of a New Era NCERT Solutions for Class 12 History Chapter 15

Framing the Constitution: The Beginning of a New Era Questions and Answers Class 12 History Chapter 15

Question 1.
What were the ideals expressed in the Objectives Resolution ?
Or
Explain the ideals introduced by Jawaharlal Nehru in the ‘Objectives Resolution’ that were to be kept in mind while framing the Constitution of India. (C.B.S.E. 2009 (O.D.))
Answer:
The Objectives Resolution was presented in the Constituent Assembly on 13 December, 1946 by Jawaharlal Nehru. It outlined and defined the ideals and objectives of the constitution which are as follows:

• India was declared as an Independent Sovereign Republic.
• It assured justice, equality, liberty and fraternity to all its citizens.
• It provided adequate safeguards to minorities and also referred to the wall-being of the backward and depressed classes.
• India would combine the liberal ideas of democracy with the socialist idea of economic justice.
• India would adopt that form of government which would be acceptable to its people. No imposition from the British would be accepted by the Indian people.
• India would be a federation. India would work for world peace and human welfare.

Question 2.
How was the term minority defined by different groups ?
Answer:
Minority means that a particular community or a group of people is less as compared to the proportion of the total population. However, during the preparation of the Indian Constitution, all the members of the Constituent Assembly defined it in their own way.

(i) Pocker Bahadur from Madras stated that minorities existed in almost all the countries of the world. So he wanted a political framework in the country which might enable the minorities to live in harmony with others. In other words, the minorities should be well represented in the political system.

He considered Muslims as a minority and stated that they must have a meaningful role in the governance of the country. Their needs cannot be properly understood by the non-Muslims. Even non-Muslims cannot elect a true representative of the Muslims. In other words, a true representative of a community cannot be chosen by those who do not belong to that community.

(ii) N.G. Ranga stated that the real minorities were the common people of the country. He believed that the common people of the country were so depressed, oppressed and suppressed that they never enjoyed any civil rights. He particularly referred to the tribal people who were considered by the merchants as their bond slaves. Jaipal Singh also supported the views of N.G. Ranga.

(iii) Dr. B.R. Ambedkar considered the people belonging to the depressed castes as minority. However, Nagappa pointed out that numerically, depressed castes were not a minority as they were 20 to 25% of the total population.

(iv) Some members talked of religious minorities and sought special safeguards for them.

Question 3.
What were the arguments in favour of greater power to the provinces ?
Answer:
In the Constituent Assembly, the rights of the states were mostly defended by K. Santhanam, a member from Madras. He emphasised the need to strengthen the states.

(i) K. Santhanam was opposed to the centre being vested with more powers. He felt that an over-burdened centre would not be able to fulfil its responsibilities in an effective manner. The centre can become strong only if all the states are made stronger. He advocated that centre should be given less powers and states should be given more powers.

(ii) K. Santhanam was not happy with the proposed allocation of powers between the centre and the states. He felt that such a distribution of power would cripple the states. The fiscal powers would impoverish the states as most of the taxes have, been allocated to the centre. He feared that states would not be able to undertake any development project owing to lack of funds. No province can become strong without finances.

(iii) K. Santhanam was so opposed to the strong centre that he even went to the’extent of suggesting the abolition of federal system afid replacing it with the unitary system.

(iv) A member of the Constituent Assembly feared that an excessively centralised system would ultimately break. A few other members also expressed their apprehensions that if the states were kept weak, they would one day revolt against the centre.

Question 4.
Why did Mahatma Gandhi think Hindustani should be the national language ?
Answer:
In the 1930s, the Indian National Congress accepted the view that Hindustani should be the national language of India. Mahatma Gandhi felt that all the people should speak in a language which can well be understood by the common people. Hindustani which was a blend of Hindi and Urdu was a very popular language in India.

It was spoken by a large section of the people and was a composite language enriched by the interaction of diverse cultures. So Mahatma Gandhi was convinced that such a multi-cultural language would be the ideal language of communication between diverse communities. It would strengthen unity between the Hindus and the Muslims. It would also bring the people of the north closer to the people of the south. In other words, Mahatma Gandhi believed in the composite character of Hindustani.

Question 5.
What historical forces shaped the vision of the Constitution ?
Answer:
While addressing the meeting of the Constituent Assembly on 13 December, 1946, Jawaharlal Nehru spoke about the ideals of the new Indian Constitution. He discussed everything in a broad historical perspective. He referred to the historic efforts made in the past to achieve the goals of justice, liberty, equality, fraternity and fundamental rights. He linked the history of Constitutionmaking to a longer history of struggle for liberty and freedom. However, he also did not like to copy from the past.

The vision of the Indian Constitution was shaped by the aspirations of those who had participated in the freedom-struggle of India. So all the members of the Constituent Assembly cherished to imbibe the ideals of Democracy, Equality, Liberty, Justice and Fraternity. They pleaded social justice, opposed child marriage and permitted widow remarriage.

There was also a feeling that all religions must be just. Jyotiba Phizle while talking of the depressed castes in Maharashtra referred to social justice. In the same way, the communists and the socialists organised workers and peasants to press for economic justice. Our national movement was in fact a struggle for democracy, justice and rights.

Question 6.
Discuss the different arguments made in favour of protection of the oppressed groups.
Or
Describe the different arguments made in favour of protection of depressed classes in the Constituent Assembly.(C.B.S.E. 2017 (O.D.))
Answer:
(i) During the freedom struggle, Dr. B.R. Ambedkar demarided separate electorates for the depressed castes. But Mahatma Gandhi did not like this proposal. He refuted it saying that this would permanently alienate the depressed castes from the mainstream of the society.

(ii) Some members suggested protection and safeguards to resolve the problems of the untouchables. They felt that there must be a change in social norms and moral values of the caste society to ameliorate the condition of the down-trodden sections of society and the depressed castes.

(iii) J. Nagappa wanted to end the exploitation of depressed castes. He relented that people made use of their labour and services but kept them away from their social setup. People kept them away from themselves. They neither ate with them nor did they allow them to enter the temples.

Hence Nagappa propounded that the depressed castes must be educated and get their share in the administration. Because of these efforts and arguments, the Constituent Assembly at last recommended to abolish untouchability. It also recommended to open all the Hindu temples to all castes and reservation of seats in legislatures and jobs in government offices. It also put an end to social discrimination.

Question 7.
What connection did some of the members of the ‘Constituent Assembly make between the politibkl situation of the time and the need for a strong centre ?
Or
How did the Constituent Assembly of India protect the powers of the Central Government? Explain. (C.B.S.E. 2016 (O.D.))
Or
Why did Dr. B. R. Ambedkar argue for strong centre in the constituent assembly? Explain. (C.B.S.E. 2019 (D.))
Answer:
India attained its freedom on 15 August, 1947. But it was also divided on this day into two parts viz India and Pakistan. It was marred by communal frenzy and communal riots. So like Jawaharlal Nehru, Dr. B.R. Ambedkar too propounded a strong Central Government for India. He referred to the riots and violence that were ripping the nation apart. Most of the members of the Constituent Assembly felt that a strong centre was the need of the hour. If it was not done, it would be infurious to national interests. A weak central authority would not be able to ensure peace, prosperity and political stability.

It would fail to coordinate vital matters of common concern. That is why, Gopalaswami Ayyangar appealed to all the members of the Constituent Assembly that “the Centre should be made as strong as possible.” Similarly Balakrishna Sharma stated that only a strong and united centre could plan for the well-being of the country, mobilise all the available resource, ensure strong defence against any aggressor and establish a proper administration. Almost all the members realised that a strong central government was necessary to forestall chaos, stop communal riots and usher economic development of the country.

Question 8.
How did the Constituent .Assembly seek to resolve the language controversy? Explain. (C.B.S.E. 2013 (O.D.))
Or
“Within the constituent Assembly of India the language issue was intensely debated.” Examine the views put forward by the members of the Assembly on this issue. (C.B.S.E. 2016 (O.D.))
Answer:
India is a vast country having different regions where different languages are spoken. So it was quite natural that the Constituent Assembly discussed the intricate issue of language for the newly- independent country. The discussion about the language problem generated intense arguments. Hindustani: A choice of Congress and Gandhi.

Before the independence of the country, the Congress had made up its mind to adopt Hindustani as the national language of the country. Mahatma Gandhi had also approved this decision. He was convinced that everyone should speak in a language which is understood by most of the common people. Hindustani was not a new language.

It was a blend of Hindi and Urdu and was a popular language as it was spoken by most of the people of the country. It was a composite language because it was enriched by the interaction of diverse cultures. So it was well-understood by most of the people living in different regions of the country.

It was in fact a multi-cultural language. Mahatma Gandhi considered Hindustani as an ideal language of communication between diverse communities. It could be a symbol of unity between the Hindus and the Muslims. It could also unite the people of the north with the people living in the south. Hindi was the language of the Hindus and Urdu was the language of the Muslims. But Hindustani, being a blend of these two languages, had a composite character. That is why, Mahatma Gandhi preferred it to be the national language of India.

Arguments in Support of Hindi : The case for Hindi was mostly pleaded by R.V. Dhulekar, a Congressman from the United Provinces. He wanted that Hindi should be used as the language of constitution-making. When he was told that all the members of the Constituent Assembly did not know Hindi, he felt infuriated and stated that those who did not know Hindustani were not worthy to be the members of the Constituent Assembly. He told such members to quit the Assembly. There was a commotion in the Assembly over his remarks. However the peace and order were restored due to the intervention of Jawaharlal Nehru.

Report of the Language Committee : The Language Committee of the Constituent Assembly suggested a compromise formula in its report. In order to resolve the deadlock over the issue of language, it advocated that Hindi in Devanagri script should be the official language of the country. It also suggested that transition from English to Hindi would be gradual. It stated that during the first fifteen years since the enforcement of the new constitution, English would continue to be used for all official purposes. In provinces, the governments will be free to choose one of the regional languages for their official work within the province.

In other words, the Language Committee referred to Hindi as the official language and not the national language of India. However, Dhulekar wanted Hindi to be declared as the national language and not as an official language of the country. Apprehensions of

Members from the South : The members in the Constituent Assembly who hailed from the southern states considered Hindi as a threat to their provincial languages. Many suspicions were expressed by Mrs. G. Durgabai of Madras and Sh. Shankar Rao Dev from Bombay. T.A. Ramalingam Chettiar from Madras suggested that the issue of language should be handled with tact and caution. Hindi should not be aggressively thrust upon the southern people. In other words, the members from South India wanted that Hindi should not be forcefully imposed on them.