NCERT Solutions for Class 10 History Chapter 2 Nationalism in India help students to score good marks in the exams. These NCERT Solutions are prepared by expert teachers and based on the latest pattern and edition NCERT book. Here we have provided answers to all the questions in a very easy language.
Class 10 History Chapter 2 Nationalism in India free PDF
| Board | CBSE |
| Class | 10 |
| Book | NCERT Class 10 History |
| Chapter 2 | Nationalism in India |
| Category | NCERT Solutions |
Write in Brief
Question 1: Explain:
(a) Why growth of nationalism in the colonies is linked to an anti-colonial movement.
(b) How the First World War helped in the growth of the National Movement in India.
(c) Why Indians were outraged by the Rowlatt Act.
(d) Why Gandhi ji decided to withdraw the Non-Cooperation Movement.
Answer: (a) Growth of Nationalism and Anti-Colonial Movement: Nationalism in the colonies is linked to anti-colonial movements because it stemmed from the desire to be free from foreign rule. Colonized people, facing exploitation, cultural domination, and racial discrimination, developed a sense of national identity and unity in their struggle against the colonial powers. This collective identity was pivotal in mobilizing masses against colonial rule, leading to the growth of nationalist movements aimed at achieving independence and self-governance.
(b) First World War and Indian National Movement: The First World War helped in the growth of the National Movement in India in several ways. The war created economic hardships in India due to increased taxes and rising prices. Indian soldiers participated in the war, leading to heightened expectations of political concessions from the British in return. The end of the war also coincided with the global rise of anti-imperialist sentiments. All these factors combined to stimulate a stronger demand for independence and fueled the national movement.
(c) Outrage Over the Rowlatt Act: Indians were outraged by the Rowlatt Act because it represented a severe curtailing of civil liberties. Enacted in 1919 by the British, it allowed the government to imprison anyone suspected of anti-British activities without trial. This law was seen as a direct attack on the rights and dignity of Indian citizens, leading to widespread anger and protests. It was perceived as a continuation of oppressive colonial policies, even after Indians’ significant contributions during World War I.
(d) Withdrawal of the Non-Cooperation Movement: Gandhiji decided to withdraw the Non-Cooperation Movement in 1922 following the Chauri Chaura incident, where a violent clash led to the death of police officers. Gandhi, a staunch advocate of non-violence, believed that the movement had deviated from its path of peaceful resistance. He felt that the Indian people were not yet ready for a mass movement that required strict adherence to non-violence. The withdrawal was a strategic decision to prevent further violence and to maintain the moral high ground of the independence struggle.
Question 2: What is meant by the idea of satyagraha?
Answer: Satyagraha, a term coined by Mahatma Gandhi, is a peaceful way of protesting. It means insisting on the truth without using violence. People practising Satyagraha protest against unfair things by being peaceful and honest, even if they face problems themselves. The goal is to change unfair situations by showing how powerful it is to be peaceful and truthful, instead of fighting or hurting others. Gandhi used this way of protesting to stand up against British control in India.
Question 3: Write a newspaper report on:
(a) The Jallianwala Bagh massacre
(b) The Simon Commission
Answer:
(a) Jallianwala Bagh Massacre: Tragedy Strikes in Amritsar
[Amritsar, April 13, 1919] – In a horrifying turn of events, the Jallianwala Bagh public garden in Amritsar, Punjab, became the site of a brutal massacre. British troops, under the command of General Dyer, opened fire on a peaceful gathering, including women and children, who had assembled to protest against the Rowlatt Act. The act, widely criticized for curtailing civil liberties, had intensified discontent among Indians.
Eyewitnesses report that the troops blocked the only exit and fired continuously for several minutes. Official figures place the death toll at around 379, with over a thousand injured, but local estimates suggest the numbers are much higher. The incident has caused widespread outrage across the nation, with leaders condemning the act as a brutal misuse of power.
(b) Simon Commission Meets with Protests Across India
[India, 1928] – The Simon Commission, formed to discuss constitutional reforms in India, has been met with nationwide protests. The commission, led by Sir John Simon, consists solely of British members, with no Indian representation. This exclusion has been perceived as a direct affront to the Indian populace, who are demanding greater participation in their own governance.
Protests erupted in various cities, marked by the slogan “Simon Go Back.” The commission’s visit to Lahore turned particularly violent, resulting in the death of Lala Lajpat Rai from police brutality. Rai’s death has intensified the protests, with many calling for immediate reforms and a boycott of the commission’s recommendations. The commission’s visit has further galvanized the Indian independence movement, highlighting the growing disconnect between the British authorities and the Indian people.
Question 4: Compare the images of Bharat Mata in this chapter with the image of Germania in Chapter 1.
Answer: The image of Bharat Mata as painted by Abanindranath Tagore shows her as bestowing learning, food and clothing. She bears aesthetic quality as denoted by the mala held by her. This is similar to the image of Germania as painted by Philip Veit, where she holds a sword, but looks more feminine. The other painting of Bharat Mata is more manly in its representation. In it, she is shown as bearing power and authority as denoted by the lion and elephant beside her. The latter image is more akin to the image of Germania by Lorenz Clasen, where she wields a sword and shield, and looks ready to fight.
DISCUSS
Question 1: List all the different social groups which joined the Non-Cooperation Movement of 1921. Then choose any three and write about their hopes and struggles to show why they joined the movement.
Answer: The Non-Cooperation Movement of 1921 saw participation from diverse social groups in India, each with its own set of hopes and grievances:
- Peasants: They suffered due to high taxes and poor crop prices. Hopes of reduced taxation and relief from oppressive landlords motivated them.
- Tribal Communities: Affected by restrictions on forest rights, they joined to regain control over their resources and land.
- Plantation Workers: They faced harsh working conditions and low wages. They hoped for better treatment and the freedom to move freely.
- Urban Middle Class: Comprising lawyers, teachers, and other professionals, they faced unemployment and economic hardships. They sought better employment opportunities and a role in governance.
- Students: Young students were driven by nationalist fervor, aspiring for an independent India.
- Women: They participated hoping for greater social freedom and a role in the national movement.
- Merchants and Traders: Affected by foreign competition and economic policies, they hoped for protection of Indian industries.
- Religious Leaders: Sought to promote Hindu-Muslim unity and moral reform.
Each group’s involvement in the Non-Cooperation Movement was motivated by a combination of nationalist sentiments and specific socio-economic grievances, making the movement a mass agitation cutting across different sections of Indian society.
Question 2: Discuss the Salt March to make clear why it was an effective symbol of resistance against colonialism.
Answer: The Salt March, led by Gandhi in 1930, was a powerful symbol against colonialism because:
- Relatable Issue: It focused on the salt tax, affecting everyone in India, making it a common cause for all Indians against British rule.
- Direct Challenge: Gandhi’s act of making salt directly defied the British monopoly, symbolizing resistance to British control.
- Non-Violent Protest: The simplicity and non-violent nature of the march embodied Gandhi’s principles, making it accessible and appealing to a broad population.
- Unity and Mass Participation: The march brought together people from different backgrounds, showing national unity in the independence struggle.
- Global Attention: It drew international attention to India’s fight against British colonialism, highlighting the injustice of British policies.
Overall, the Salt March effectively combined a universal issue with non-violent protest, fostering unity and drawing global support for India’s independence movement.
Question 3: Imagine you are a woman participating in the Civil Disobedience Movement. Explain what the experience meant to your life.
Answer: As a woman in the Civil Disobedience Movement, it was a life-changing experience. Stepping out of traditional roles, I actively participated in protests, boycotted foreign goods, and even faced arrest. This was empowering, as it was the first time many of us women were directly involved in political action. We felt united, working alongside others from different backgrounds, fighting for our nation’s independence. It was not just about defying colonial rule; it was about asserting our strength and capabilities. This movement gave us a voice and laid the groundwork for our future fight for rights and equality in a free India. It redefined our role in society, far beyond just the confines of our homes.
Question 4: Why did political leaders differ sharply over the question of separate electorates?
Answer: Political leaders in India sharply disagreed over separate electorates due to differing views on representation and national unity. Some leaders, like Dr. B.R. Ambedkar, supported separate electorates for minorities to ensure their adequate representation in the legislature. They believed this was necessary to prevent the marginalization of minorities. On the other hand, leaders like Mahatma Gandhi opposed separate electorates, arguing they would deepen divisions in Indian society along religious and caste lines, and hinder the development of a unified national identity. This debate was crucial in shaping the nature of democratic representation and communal relations in India’s political system.
More study materials for CBSE Class 10
| NCERT Solutions for Class 10 | CBSE Notes for Class 10 |
| CBSE Sample Papers for Class 10 | Important Questions for Class 10 |
| RS Aggarwal Solutions For Class 10 | RD Sharma Solutions For Class 10 |