IAS 2019

HISTORY
TEST SERIES
By: PIYUSH KUMAR

TEST: 6

www.iasscore.in
 History Test Series 2019
TEST - 06

HISTORY
Time Allowed: 3 hrs. Max. Marks: 250

1. Identify the following places marked on the map supplied to you and write a short note of
about 30 words on each of them in your Question-cum" Booklet. Locational hints for each of
the places marked on the map are given below seriatim.
1. A Harappan Site
2. A Chalcolithic Site
3. An ancient Capital

E
4. A Neolithic Site
5. A site of Ashokan Inscription
6.
7.
A Rock cut cave site
A Port city
OR
8. An ancient temple site
9. A Paleolithic site
SC

10. An Ancient Education center

11. A Harappan site
12. A PGW site
13. A Buddhist site
14. A Jaina site
GS

15. A Prehistoric cave painting site

16. An ancient capital site
17. A cultural center
18. A Megalithic Site
19. A Medieval Temple city
20. A Mesolithic site
2. (a) To what extent you believe that Indigo rebellion in Bengal carried both old and new
characteristics of peasant movements?
(b) "Indian national Congress was just an outcome of the political developments of second half
of 19th century." Evaluate.
(c) How far do you agree that, Nagpur Congress symbolise the emergence of a centrist
leadership within the pluralist structure of political India. Explain.
(d) The revolutionary terrorism changed its attitude in the third decade in 20th Century.
Comment.
(e) "Planning commission could not taste great successes." Comment.
3. (a) "Indian nationalism which took birth in the course of anti-colonial Indian struggle, was not
a single nationalism but two parallel nationalism." Critically analyse.
(b) "Muslim league was result of changing politics and circumstances among Muslims."
Elaborate.
History [1]
Join TelegramGroups
To Boost Your Preparation
PDF4Exams One stop solution for study
Click Here materials of all competitiveexams

The Hindu ZoneOfficial

Newspapers & study Click Here
materials

TestSeries4Exam
All paid test series
Click Here availabblewithoutanycost

Pdfbasket
All e-Magazines
in your hand Click Here
Hindi Books
All study materials
Click Here
in Hindi

eSandesh (An Indian App)

For More download eSandesh App from play store

https://telegram.me/pdf4exams https://telegram.me/Pdf4Mains2019

(c) How far it is correct to say that the socialist parties in India could not materialize the labor
grievances in colonial India.
4. (a) How far do you agree that Muslim mobilisation under the banner of Khilafat generated a
sense of inferiority and insecurity among Hindus who now started counter mobilization.
(b) "In many aspects civil disobedience movement of Congress may be called as a limited
movement." In the light of given statement discuss the limitations of civil disobedience
movement.
(c) In the process of freedom struggle the politicisation of women failed to promote to any
significant extent social emancipation of women in India. Critically examine.
5. (a) The freedom of India was seized by the Indians or power was transferred voluntarily by
the British as an act of positive statesmanship. Give your analytical overview.
(b) Was it a spontaneous Revolution or premeditated? Evaluate the given statement with respect
to Quit India Movement Discuss the different phases of it.
(c) "India after independence retained continuity with its colonial past". Critically analyze.

E
OR
™™™™™
SC
GS

[ 2 ] History
https://telegram.me/pdf4exams https://telegram.me/Pdf4Mains2019

History Test Series 2019

www.iasscore.in

HISTORY
Answer Hints: T
Answ est No
Test No.. 6
1. Identify the following places marked on the map supplied to you and write a short note of
about 30 words on each of them in your Question-cum" Booklet. Locational hints for each
of the places marked on the map are given below seriatim.
1. A Harappan Site- Nausharo
2. A Chalcolithic Site-Kayatha

E
3. An ancient Capital-potali
4. A Neolithic Site-utnur
5.
6.
7.
OR
A site of Ashokan Inscription- dhauli
A Rock cut cave site- lakhudiyar
A Port city-sutkagan dor
8. An ancient temple site- khajuraho
SC

9. A Paleolithic site-hiran valley

10. An Ancient Education center- nalanda
11. A Harappan site- amari
12. A PGW site-Bhagwanpura
GS

13. A Buddhist site-karle

14. A Jaina site- vallabhi
15. A Prehistoric cave painting site- mirzapur
16. An ancient capital site-madurai
17. A cultural center -badami
18. A Megalithic Site-paiyampalli
19. A Medieval Temple city- martand
20. A Mesolithic site-tilwara
2. (a) To what extent you believe that Indigo rebellion in Bengal carried both old and new
characteristics of peasant movements?
2. (b) "Indian national Congress was just an outcome of the political developments of second
half of 19th century." Evaluate.
2. (c) How far do you agree that, Nagpur Congress symbolise the emergence of a centrist
leadership within the pluralist structure of political India. Explain.
Hints: History [1]
https://telegram.me/pdf4exams https://telegram.me/Pdf4Mains2019

By December, 1920, CR. Das who moved the main resolution on non-cooperation. The programme
of non-cooperation included within its ambit the surrender of titles and honours, boycott of
government affiliated schools and colleges, law courts, foreign cloth, and could be extended to
include resignation from government service and mass civil disobedience including the non-payment
of taxes. National schools and colleges were to be set up, panchayats were to be established for
settling disputes, hand-spinning and weaving was to be encouraged and people were asked to
maintain Hindu- Muslim unity, give up untouchability and observe strict non-violence.
Gandhiji promised that if the programme was fully implemented, Swaraj would be ushered in
within a year. The Nagpur session, thus, committed the Congress to a programme of extra-
constitutional mass action. Many groups of revolutionary terrorists, especially in Bengal, also pledged
support to the movement.
To enable the Congress to fulfil its new commitment, significant changes were introduced in its
creed as well as in its organizational structure. The goal of the Congress was changed from the
attainment of self-government by constitutional and means to the attainment of Swaraj by peaceful
and legitimate means. The new constitution of the Congress, the handiwork of Gandhiji, introduced

E
other important changes.
The Congress was now to have a Working Committee of fifteen members to look after its day-to-

OR
day affairs. This proposal, when first made by Tilak in 1916, had been shot down by the
Moderate opposition. Gandhiji, too, knew that the Congress could not guide a sustained movement
unless it had a compact body that worked round the year. Provincial Congress Committees were
now to be organized on a linguistic basis, so that they could keep in touch with the people by using
the local language. The India’s Struggle For Independence Congress organization was to reach
down to the village and the mohalla level by the formation of village and mohalla or ward committees.
SC

The membership fee was reduced to four annas per year to enable the poor to become members.
Mass involvement would also enable the Congress to have a regular source of income. In other
ways, too, the organization structure was both streamlined and democratized. The Congress was
to use Hindi as far as possible.
Now question arises that why the veteran Congress leaders accepted Gandhi and his proposal of
mass movement is a matter of controversy but despite these controversy. we have to accept that
GS

Gandhi’s potential as a political organiser had been established and he had access to new areas of
political support , which were bound the reach of older congress leaders. Gandhi’s support coming
from Muslims Khilafatists, from the backward regions and backward class.
A populist groundswell had been visible in different parts of India. Independent peasant movement
appeared in Bihar, UP and Gujarat. This was also the period of labour unrest and trde unionism.
With in this context, there was an unusually large attendance at the Nagpur session of the congress
and most of the delegates were the supporters of Gandhi. The established leaders were swayed by
this huge mass support and accepted the Gandhian creed, although with much hesitation and not
without resistance. On the other hand Gandhi too needed the congress leaders. So Gandhi’s goal
was to forge a grand coalition of various classes and communities and in this sense the Nagpur
Congress symbolised the emergence of a centrist leadership within the pluralist structure of political
India.
2. (c) The revolutionary terrorism changed its attitude in the third decade in 20th Century.
Comment.
2. (d) "Planning commission could not taste great successes." Comment.
3. (a) "Indian nationalism which took birth in the course of anti-colonial Indian struggle,
was not a single nationalism but two parallel nationalism." Critically analyse.
[2] Hints: History
https://telegram.me/pdf4exams https://telegram.me/Pdf4Mains2019

3. (b) "Muslim league was result of changing politics and circumstances among Muslims."
Elaborate.
3. (c) How far it is correct to say that the socialist parties in India could not materialize
the labor grievances in colonial India.
4. (a) How far do you agree that Muslim mobilisation under the banner of Khilafat generated
a sense of inferiority and insecurity among Hindus who now started counter
mobilization.
The period 1919-22 is understood as the heyday of Hindu-Muslim unity against the colonial rule.
This was the period when the leaderships of Congress and the Khilafat movement often overlapped.
This was in tune with Gandhi’s idea that British can be fought only with united Hindus and Muslims.
Strikes, demonstrations, and Satyagrahas took place around the country, while ‘Hindu-Musalman
ki Jai was the famous slogan.
But the above was just short-lived. After 1922 a series of differences between the Khilafat and Non-
Cooperation leaderships intersected with growing popular conflict between Hindu and Muslim

E
communities. The Khilafat leaders, for example, made appeals to religion and made full use of
fatwas (opinion or decision on a point of Islamic law given by a religious person of standing) and
other religious sanctions. Consequently, they strengthened the hold of orthodoxy and priesthood

OR
over the minds of men and women and encouraged the habit of looking at political questions from
the religious point of view. By doing so and by emphasizing the notion of Muslim solidarity, they
kept an opening for communal ideology and politics.
As a result of this, the old conflicts, based upon complaints like cow-slaughter and music before
mosque, were raised up and issues of disagreement such as Shuddhi Movement or tabligh and
sangathan or tanzim were added. The Hindu Mahasabha was revived in 1923 and openly began to
SC
cater to anti-Muslim sentiments. Its proclaimed objective became ‘the maintenance, protection and
promotion of Hindu race, Hindu culture and Hindu civilization for the advancement of Hindu
Rashtra.’ A large number of nationalists were not able to withstand communal pressure and
began to adopt communal or semi communal positions. The Swarajists were split by communalism.
A group known as ‘responsivists’ offered cooperation to the Government so that the so-called
Hindu interests might be safeguarded. Lajpat Rai, Madan Mohan Malaviya and N.C. Kelkar joined
GS

the Hindu Mahasabha and argued for Hindu communal solidarity. The less responsible ‘responsivists’
and Hindu Mahasabhaites carried on a virulent campaign against secular Congressmen.
The attitudes of the Khilafat leaders increasingly revealed that they had accepted the Gandhian
creed of non-violence more as a matter of convenience to take advantage of Gandhi’s charismatic
appeal, rather than as a matter of faith. By bringing in the ulama and by overtly using a religious
symbol, the movement evoked religious emotions among the Muslim masses. Violent tendencies
soon appeared in the Khilafat movement, as the masses lost self-discipline and the leaders failed to
control them. The worst-case scenario was the Moplah uprising in Malabar, where the poor Moplah
peasants, emboldened by the Khilafat spirit, rose against the Hindu moneylenders and the state. By
the end of 1921, with the outbreak of the Moplah uprising in Malabar, followed by other communal
riots in various parts of the subcontinent in 1922-23, there was a visible breach in the Hindu-
Muslim alliance.
In Bengal the Hindu-Muslim pact forged by C.R. Das in 1923 broke down, culminating in a fierce
riot in Calcutta in April 1926. It was followed by a series of other riots in eastern Bengal between
1926 and 1931, as “music before mosques” became an emotional issue for rival communal
mobilisation in the countryside.” In UP between 1923 and 1927 there were eighty-eight riots, leading
almost to a complete breakdown of Hindu-Muslim relations. In the election of 1925-26 religious
issues were freely exploited by Hindu orthodox groups led by Madan Mohan Malaviya, resulting in
the defeat of the secularist Motilal Nehru. As a corollary, Hindu nationalist organisations, like the
Hints: History [3]
https://telegram.me/pdf4exams https://telegram.me/Pdf4Mains2019

All India Hindu Mahasabha gained in strength in north and central India; its close and problematic
relationship with the Congress tarnished the latter’s secular image and led to further alienation of
the Muslims from mainstream nationalism.”
4. (b) "In many aspects civil disobedience movement of Congress may be called as a limited
movement." In the light of given statement discuss the limitations of civil disobedience
movement.
4. (c) In the process of freedom struggle the politicisation of women failed to promote to any
significant extent social emancipation of women in India. Critically examine.
Within the nationalist discourse, women’s rights were aligned with the movement in an ambiguous
and contradictory way. It was argued by nationalist leaders that women’s emancipation would
follow naturally from the political emancipation of India from colonial rule. A crucial feature of this
political liberation was women’s contribution and involvement in the national movement.
The Indian Nationalist Movement is unique in the annals of world history, not only for liberating
the country from three centuries of colonial rule but also for bringing Indian women out into the
public domain for the first time in the history of India. The historical period from early twentieth

E
century until India’s independence in 1947 witnessed the development of social reform activities by
men and women, the formation of national women’s organisations, proliferation of nationalist
writings by men and women, and, finally, the participation of the nation in the anti-colonial struggle.
OR
The nationalist movement was dependent on the participation of women in it and constructed
women in specific role models. The women used these role models to contribute to the movement
from both the domestic and public domains. Through alignment with the political movement from
within the domestic sphere, women also helped in the steady politicisation of the domestic sphere.
Women used specific role models and representations available to them in the domestic sphere. For
SC

example,
• Representations of “nurturer,” “good mother,” “helpmate,” and “companion” enabled women
to make political contributions from the domestic sphere, without creating any disharmony
within the sphere.
• On the other hand, representations of “mother of India” and “saviour of civilisation” facilitated
women’s entry in the public sphere and the blurring of the boundaries of the public and
GS

private domains helped women to associate with the nationalist cause.

Women’s involvement in the movement led to a gradual change in their consciousness. This change
of consciousness led to a slow and gradual change in their status, which became the legacy of their
daughters and granddaughters.
The trend that was set in the 1930s continued into the 1940s, as women’s active role in the public
space became accepted in society. It is not difficult to see why women responded to Gandhi’s
appeal, which made women’s service to nation a part of their religious duty. His insistence on non-
violence and emphasis on the maintenance of a respectable image of women satyagrahis did not
breach the accepted norms of feminine behaviour and as a result, men felt confident that their
women would be safe in Gandhi’s hands.
There was less resistance because, in the ultimate analysis, women participated because their male
guardians wanted them to. In most cases, women who joined the nationalist struggle came from
families where men were already involved in Gandhian movements. So in their case, their public
role was an extension of their domestic roles as wives, mothers, sisters or daughters.
Their politicisation therefore did not lead to any significant change in their domestic or family
relations. Most of these women came from Hindu middle class respectable families. Although in
some areas rural women did take part in the agitations, women’s participation remained
predominantly an urban phenomenon, and here too emphasis on respectable image kept the lower
class and marginal women like prostitutes out.
[4] Hints: History
https://telegram.me/pdf4exams https://telegram.me/Pdf4Mains2019

So far as Muslim women were concerned, many of them participated in the Khilafat Non-
cooperation movement in 1921. But if this helped towards weakening of the rigours of purdah, its
total abolition was out of question; because for Muslims, it was a symbol of their cultural
distinctiveness.
On the other hand, if a handful of women actually crossed the socially constituted boundary of
feminine modesty by involving in violent revolutionary action, they were heavily censored by a
disapproving society. Such “strong traditionalist moorings”, argues Tanika Sarkar, explains why
this politicisation was possible and why it failed to promote to any significant extent social
emancipation of women in india.
The Congress and its leaders were simply not interested in women’s issues and except for allowing
some symbolic presence, never included women in any decision making process. A frustrated Sarala
Debi Chaudhurani therefore had to lament that Congress wanted them to be “law-breakers only
and not law-makers”.
However, having said all this, we have to acknowledge as well that hundreds of women from
respectable families marching in files on the streets of India, going to jails, suffering indignity there,

E
and coming back to their families with no stigma attached, signified a remarkable change in Indian
social attitudes. And as for agency, as Sujata Patel has succinctly put it, “it is difficult to separate
analytically which proceeded first: women’s participation or Gandhi’s advocacy of this.” It may

OR
also be pointed out that without being openly deviant, some of these women were slowly pushing
the boundaries of their autonomy by manipulating available cultural metaphors, like for example,
the “extended family”.
Bi Amman, the elderly mother of Shaukat and Muhammad Ali, participated in the Khilafat-Non-
cooperation movement after a whole life behind purdah. At a mass meeting in Punjab, she lifted
her veil and addressed the crowd as her children. A mother did not require a veil in front of her
SC
children; the whole nation by implication was thus incorporated into her “extended fictive family”.
Her rhetoric did not subvert the ideology of purdah; her practice effectively extended its boundary.
On the other hand, it is highly unlikely that all those thousands of women who actually participated
in the Civil Disobedience movement had actually secured their guardians’ prior permission.
And even if they did, there are numerous historical examples to show that “once mobilised, women
moved on their own”. Time and again they disobeyed Gandhian injunctions that set limits to their
GS

activism. But did this activism and politicisation of women promote a feminist consciousness in
colonial India? So far as the wider society was concerned, the answer should be clearly no. But for
those women who actually participated in the nationalist struggle, and for their more enlightened
middle-class women leaders, life could perhaps never be the same again.
5. (a) The freedom of India was seized by the Indians or power was transferred voluntarily
by the British as an act of positive statesmanship. Give your analytical overview.
The historiography of decolonisation in India, as Howard Brasted and Carl Bridge point out, is
polarised on the question whether freedom was seized by the Indians or power was transferred
voluntarily by the British “as an act of positive statesmanship”. That British decision to quit was
partly based on the ungovernability of India in the 1940s is beyond doubt. It is difficult to argue that
there was a consistent policy of devolution of power, which came to its logical culmination in
August 1947 through the granting of self-government in India.
Britain’s imperial relations with India had also undergone profound changes in the meanwhile.
India performed three imperial functions:
• it provided a market for British exports,
• was a remitter of sterling and
• a source of military strength to protect the British empire.
Hints: History [5]
https://telegram.me/pdf4exams https://telegram.me/Pdf4Mains2019

But since the 1930s London had little control over Indian monetary and fiscal policies: protective
tariffs had already been imposed and wartime procurement policies led to an evaporation of India’s
sterling debt, replaced by Britain’s rupee debt to India. India’s relevance to imperial defence was
also coming under close scrutiny. India was traditionally considered to be a strategic asset for
maintaining control over Britain’s world empire, particularly in the Middle East and Southeast
Asia. But it was now doubtful as to how long that would be viable, as already there was stiff
opposition against the use of British Indian Army for post-war restoration of the Dutch and French
empires in Indonesia and Indochina.
Military expenditure had been another key issue. In 1938 it was found that the Indian army needed
modernisation, and the government of India was unable to bear the expenditure. So under an
agreement in November 1939 it was decided that the bulk of this expenditure would be borne by
the British government, which would also bear the cost of the Indian army fighting on foreign soil
outside India. As the war broke out, Indian army had to be deployed in the Southeast Asian front
and it became increasingly difficult to transfer cash during wartime; as a result, Britain’s debt to
India started piling up, so that by 1946 Britain owed India more than £1,300 million, almost one-
fifth of Britain’s GNP.

E
But this did not mean that Britain decided to leave because, as Tomlinson has surmised, India was
no longer considered to be one of her “imperial assets” and was regarded as “a potential or actual
source of weakness”. Even during the war there was optimism at the Whitehall that the sterling
OR
balances would be an advantage, rather than problem, for it would serve as pent up demand for
British export industries and could be used to supply capital goods to India, which would boost
employment during the crucial post-war reconstruction period in Britain.
One may further point out, that this financial situation arose because of the increasing nationalist
pressure for more resources and budgetary allocation for the development of their own country,
SC

rather than for servicing the empire. If the current situation could reveal anything at all to the
imperial managers, it was that India had now certainly become less manageable as a colony-that
henceforth it could only be kept under control at a heavy cost, both financial and military. Britain’s
interest in India could now best be safeguarded by treating it as an independent nation, through
informal rather than formal control. The massive Labour victory in July 1945 created a congenial
atmosphere for such a political change.
5. (b) Was it a spontaneous Revolution or premeditated? Evaluate the given statement with
GS

respect to Quit India Movement Discuss the different phases of it.

Quit India movement initially started as an urban revolt, marked by strikes, boycottand picketing,
which were quickly suppressed. In the middle of August, the focus shifted to the countryside,
which witnessed a major peasant rebellion, marked by destruction of communication systems,
such as railway tracks and stations, telegraph wires and poles, attacks on government buildings or
any other visible symbol of colonial authority and finally, the formation of “national governments”
in isolated pockets. This brought in severe government repression forcing the agitation to move
underground.Later on the movement was characterised by terrorist activities, which primarily
involved sabotaging of war efforts by dislocating communication systems and propaganda activities
by using various means, including a clandestine radio station run by hitherto unknown Usha Mehta
from “somewhere in India”. Not only the educated youth participated in such activities, but also
bands of ordinary peasants organised such subversive actions.
The history of the Quit India movement as revealed in recent studies shows that it was not just an
impulsive response of an unprepared populace, although the unprecedented scale of violence was
by no means premeditated by the Congress leadership, as was claimed by the government. First of
all, the last two decades of mass movement- which in the recent past had been conducted on a
much more radical tone under the leadership of the various associated and affiliated bodies of the
Congress, like the AITUC, CSP, AIKS and the Forward Block-had already prepared the ground for
such a conflagration.
[6] Hints: History
https://telegram.me/pdf4exams https://telegram.me/Pdf4Mains2019

The Congress leaders before 9 August had drafted a twelve point programme which not only
included the usual Gandhian methods of satyagraha, but a plan to promote industrial strikes, holding
up of railways and telegraphs, non-payment of taxes and setting up of parallel government. Several
versions of this programme were in circulation among Congress volunteers, including the one
prepared by the Andhra Provincial Congress Committee, which contained clear instructions for
such subversive action.
However, compared to what actually happened, even this was a cautious programme! But then, as
the movement progressed, the AJCC continued to issue “Instructions to peasants” which outlined
the course of action anticipating what was to eventuate in the later months of the movement. On
the question of non-violence, Gandhi this time was remarkably ambivalent. “I do not ask from you
my own non-violence. You can decide what you can do in this struggle”, said Gandhi on 5 August.
Three days later on the 8th, speaking on the AICC resolution, he urged: “I trust the whole of India
to-day to launch upon a nonviolent struggle.” But even if people deviated from this path of
nonviolence, he assured: “I shall not swerve. I shall not flinch”. In other words, the issue of non-
violence seemed to have been of lesser importance in 1942 than the call for “Do or Die” or the
invitation to make a final sacrifice for the liberation of the nation. The people accepted the challenge

E
and interpreted it in their own ways and these interpretations were to some extent influenced by
the lower level, often unknown, Congress leaders and students, who took over the leadership after

OR
the national and provincial leaders were all arrested between 9 and 11 August. There is no denying
that the Congress and Gandhi at this important historical juncture enjoyed unquestionable symbolic
legitimacy in popular mind-whatever happened, happened in their name. But Congress as an
organisation and Gandhi as a person had little control over these happenings. In the words of
Gyanendra Pandey, Gandhi was “the undisputed leader of a movement over which he had little
command. The element of spontaneity of 1942 was certainly larger than in the earlier movements,
though even in 1919-22, as well as in 1930-31 and 1932, the Congress leadership allowed considerable
SC
room for an initiative and spontaneity.
In fact, the whole pattern of the Gandhian mass movements was that the leadership chalked out a
broad programme of action and left its implementation at the local level to the initiative of the local
and grass roots level political activists and the masse. Even in the Civil Disobedience Movement of
1930, perhaps the most organized of the Gandhian mass movements, Gandhiji signalled the launching
of the struggle by the Dandi March and the breaking of the salt law, the leaders and the people at
GS

the local levels decided whether they were going to stop payment of land revenue and rent, or offer
Satyagrahi against forest Laws, or picket liquor shops, or follow any of the other items of the
programme.
Of course, in 1942, even the broad programme had not yet been spelt out clearly since the leadership
was yet to formally launch the movement. But, in a way, the degree of spontaneity and popular
initiative that was actually exercised had sanctioned by the leadership itself. The resolution passed
by the AICC on 8 August 1942 clearly stated: ‘A time may come when it may not be possible to
issue instruction or for instructions to reach our people, and when no Congress committees can
function. When this happens, every man and woman who is participating in this movement must
function for himself or herself within the four corners of the general instructions issued. Every
Indian who desires freedom and strives for it must be his own guide.”
Apart from this, the Congress had been ideologically, politically and organizationally preparing for
the struggle for a long time. From 1937 the onwards, the organization had been revamped to undo
the damage suffered during the repression of 1932-34. In political and ideological terms as well, the
Ministries had added considerably to Congress support and prestige. In East U.P. and Bihar, the
areas of the most intense activity in 1942 were precisely the ones in which considerable mobilization
and organizational work had been carried out from 1937 onwards.’ In Gujarat, Sardar Patel had
been touring Bardoli and other areas since June 1942 warning the people of an impending struggle
and suggesting that no- revenue campaigns could well be part of it. Congress Socialists in Poona
Hints: History [7]
https://telegram.me/pdf4exams https://telegram.me/Pdf4Mains2019

had been holding training camps for volunteers since June 1942. Gandhiji himself, through the
Individual Civil Disobedience campaign in 1940-41, and more directly since early 1942, had prepared
the people for the coming battle,, which he said would be ‘short and swift.’
In any case, in a primarily hegemonic struggle as the Indian national movement was, preparedness
for struggle cannot be measured by the volume of immediate organizational activity but by the
degree of hegemonic influence the movement has acquired over the people.
5. (c) "India after independence retained continuity with its colonial past". Critically analyze.
Soon after independence, the leaders of new nations set out to lay the foundations of a modern
India. They began by framing a new constitution for India. Constituent Assembly deliberated for
over 3 years before delivering the constitution.
Continuity
The new constitution drew heavily from various acts of colonial time. Constitution was derived
from an Anglo-American model. The biggest contributor was Government of India Act, 1935. As
much as 250 clauses were directly lifted from this act and put in the new constitution. Even

E
certain provisions of Acts of 1909 and 1919 were included. Only those provisions were incorporated
which concurred to realities on Indian politics. For example, principle of federalism, which was
part of 1935 Act, was retained. But it was tailored to suit the demands of the new nation where
OR
integration was more important than federalism. The emergency provisions acted as a tool to keep
threads of pluralism intact without jeopardizing the fragile unity of the nascent state.
The constituent assembly was concerned about the unity of the nation, need for social engineering
and ensuring India’s place in the world. These concerns formed the ideological principles –
nationalism, and democracy and sovereignty – on which the new nation would chart its course.
SC

These were also the ideological legacies of the nationalist movement.

Critical Analysis
Though India retained some continuity with its past, it did not compromise on the principles of
sovereignty, social goals and democratic ethos. The new constitution was based on the principles
of popular sovereignty that was envisaged and practiced during mass mobilization during the
British rule. Mass participation legitimized these guiding principles. India remained a member of
GS

the Commonwealth but only after London agreed to bend the rules to accommodate a “Sovereign
Democratic Republican India”.

™™™™™

[8] Hints: History