OUR OWN ENGLISH HIGH SCHOOL, SHARJAH

GRADE: XII UNDERSTANDING PARTITION

1. What did the Muslim League demand through its resolution of 1940? (pg386-387)

The Pakistan demand was formalized gradually. The demands put forth by the Muslim League through its
resolution are as follows:
1. Autonomy: On 23rd March 1940, the Muslim League moved a resolution demanding a measure of
autonomy for the Muslim majority areas of the sub-continent. This ambiguous resolution never mentioned
partition or Pakistan.
2. Mohammed Iqbal: The origins of the Pakistan demand have also been traced back to the Urdu poet
Mohammed Iqbal. However he was not visualizing the emergence of a new country, but a re-organisation of
Muslim-majority areas in north-western India into an autonomous unit within a single, loosely structured
Indian federation.
3. Time Gap: In 1940, the League itself was vague about its demand. The time gap of 7 years between the
first demand by the League for a measure of autonomy and Partition was very short. No one had any idea of
what the creation of Pakistan meant and how it might shape peoples lives in the future.
-Many who migrated from their homelands in 1947 thought they would return as soon as peace prevailed.
4. Bargaining Counter: Even when Jinnah raised the demand for Pakistan as a sovereign state, it was only
as a bargaining counter useful for blocking possible British concessions to the Congress and gaining
additional favours for the Muslims.

2- Why did some people think of partition as a very sudden development? (Pg387) (Points taken from
3.4)
Partition was an outcome of several factors and cannot be attributed to one single cause. However, the
events after 1937 played a significant role in the suddenness of Partition.
1. In 1940, the League itself was vague about its demand. The time gap of 7 years between the first
demand by the League for a measure of autonomy and Partition was very short.
2. No one knew what the creation of Pakistan meant, and how it might shape peoples lives in future.
Many who migrated from their homelands in 1947 thought they would return as soon as peace
prevailed again.
3. The Muslim leaders did not seriously raise the demand for Pakistan as a sovereign state. Even when
Jinnah did raise the demand for Pakistan, it was only as a bargaining counter useful for blocking
possible British concessions to the Congress and gaining additional favours for the Muslims.
4. The pressure of the Second World War on the British delayed negotiations for independence for
some time. It was the massive Quit India Movement which started in 1942, and persisted despite
intense repression, that brought the British Raj to its knees and compelled its officials to open a
dialogue with Indian parties regarding a possible transfer of power

As a result, negotiations began again at the end of the war in 1945. The British agreed to create an entirely
Indian central Executive Council, except for the Viceroy and the Commander-in-Chief of the armed forces
as a starting point towards full independence.

3. How did ordinary people view partition? (2.1 and 2.2) (pg 380-382)
For most people partition was a sudden development. No one knew what the creation of Pakistan meant.
Many who migrated from their hometowns 1n 1947 thought they would return as soon as peace prevailed.
Several hundred thousand people were killed and innumerable women raped and abducted. Millions were
uprooted, transformed into refugees in alien lands.
- The survivors themselves have often spoken of 1947 through other words: maashal-la (martial
law), mara-mari (killings), and raula, or hullar (disturbance, tumult, uproar).
- India stereotyped Muslims as cruel, bigoted, unclean, descendants of invaders, while Hindus are
kind, liberal, pure, children of the invaded. On the other hand Pakistanis felt that Muslims are fair,
brave, monotheists and meat-eaters, while Hindus are dark, cowardly, polytheists and vegetarians.
- It generated in the minds of the common people memories, hatred, stereotypes and identities that still
continue to shape the history of the people on both the sides of the border.
- Stories of partition violence are recounted by communal groups to deepen the divide between
communities: creating in peoples minds feelings of suspicion and distrust, consolidating the power
of communal stereotypes, creating deeply problematic notions that thee Hindus, Sikhs and Muslims
are communities with sharply defined boundaries, and fundamentally opposed interests.
- It was an unexpected alteration is life where people were rendered homeless, having suddenly lost all
their immovable property and most of their movable assets.
- They viewed it as a psychological, emotional and social trauma. Many were separated from their
relatives and friends as well, torn asunder from their moorings, their houses, fields and fortunes and
their childhood memories. Thus stripped off from their local or regional cultures, they were forced to
begin picking up their life from scratch.

4. What were Mahatma Gandhis arguments against Partition?

-Mahatma Gandhi was opposed to the idea of Partition till his death. He did not believe in the two nation
theory and rejected the idea of religion determining a nation. He still believed that India is a land of many
religions and many races and must remain so.
-He believed that Hindus and Muslims shared a common culture and constituted a single nation. It was also
said that whatever be the situation in Pakistan, India would be a democratic state where all citizens would
enjoy full rights and are equally entitled to the protection of the State, irrespective of the religion to which
they belong.
-He stressed that the demand for Pakistan put forward by the Muslim league was un-Islamic as Islam stood
for unity and brotherhood and not for disrupting unity.
- Even when Partition actually happened he was not a part of the festivities of Independence in Delhi, he
was touring the riot stricken areas with the message of peace and non-violence.
- Gandhiji fought the mentality of those who wished to drive out every Muslim from the city, seeing them as
Pakistani.

5. Why is partition viewed as an extremely significant marker in South Asian history?

(To write on your own)

6. Why was British India partitioned?

Partition was a qualitatively different phenomenon from earlier communal politics and to understand it we
need to look carefully at the events of the last decade of British rule.
1. Separate electorates- Some scholars suggest that separate electorates for Muslims created by the
colonial government 1909 critically shaped the nature of communal politics.
-Separate electorates meant that Muslims could now elect their own representatives in designated
constituencies.
- This created a temptation for politicians working within this system to use sectarian slogans and
distributing favours to their own religious groups
2. Election of 1937 - In 1937, elections to the provincial legislatures were held for the first time. Only about
10-12 % of the population enjoyed the right to vote.
- The congress did well in the elections, winning an absolute majority in five out of eleven provinces and
forming governments in seven of them.
-The Muslim League failed to win a single seat in the North West Frontier Province and could capture only
two out of 84 reserved constituencies in the Punjab and three out of 33 in Sind.
3. Rejection by Congress- -In the United Provinces, the Muslim League wanted to form a joint government
with the Congress. The Congress had won an absolute majority in the province, so it rejected the offer.
-Some scholars argue that this rejection convinced the League that if India remained united, then Muslims
would find it difficult to gain political power because they would remain a minority.
-The League assumed that only a Muslim part could represent Muslim interests and that the Congress was
essentially a Hindu party.
4. Widening Rift- -The Congress ministries also contributed to the widening rift. In the United Provinces,
the party had rejected the Muslim League proposal for a coalition government partly because the League
tended to support landlordism which the Congress wished to abolish.
-The Congress did not achieve any substantial gains in the Muslim mass contact programme it launched.
5. Need for secularism- -While the leading Congress leaders in the late 1930s insisted on the need for
secularism, these ideas were by no means universally shared lower down in the party hierarchy or even by
the Congress ministers. -Maulana Azad, an important Congress leader, pointed out in 1937 that members of
the Congress were not allowed to join the League.
6. Post World War-II - During the Second World the British had to delay negotiations for independence for
some time. At the end of the war when negotiations began again in 1945, the British agreed to create an
entirely Indian central Executive Council, except for the Viceroy and the Commander-in-Chief of the armed
forces as a starting point towards full independence.
7. Jinnahs extraordinary demand- Discussion about the transfer of power broke down due to Jinnahs
unrelenting demand for the League have an absolute right to choose all the Muslim members of the
Executive Council and that there should be a kind of communal veto in the council with decision opposed
by the Muslims needing a 2/3rds majority. This was an extraordinary demand. The British too did not want
to disappoint the Unionist who controlled Punjab which was loyal to the British.
8. Provincial elections 1946- In this election the Congress swept the non-Muslim vote and the league too
was successful in the seats reserved for Muslims. It was only in 1946 that the Muslim league was able to
establish itself as a dominant party among Muslim voters.
9.Cabinet Mission Proposal In March 1946 the British government sent a three member mission to
examine the Leagues demand and to suggest a suitable political framework for a free India. It
recommended a lose 3-tier confederation.
-India was to remain united and have a weak central government controlling only foreign affairs, defence
and communication
-The existing provincial assemblies being grouped into 3 sections (Section A- for Hindu majority Section B
and C for the Muslim-majority provinces of the north-west and the north-east)
10. Disagreement to the Cabinet Missions proposal - Initially all major parties accepted the proposal but
later there was disagreement.
-The league wanted the grouping of B and C developing into strong entities with the right to secede from the
Union in future
-On the other hand the Congress wanted that the provinces be given the right to join a group.
-Ultimately both did not agree with the Cabinet missions proposal. With this the partition became more or
less inevitable with most of the Congress leaders agreeing to it, seeing it as tragic but unavoidable only
Gandhiji and Khan Abdul Ghaffar Khan strongly opposed partition.
11.Direct Action Day The Muslim league announced 16th August as Direct Action Day for winning its
Pakistan demand. In March 1947 Congress decided to divide Punjab into two halves separating Muslim and
Hindu/Sikh majority and the same was applied to Bengal. This was a necessary evil or else they would be
swamped by Muslim leaders and Muslim majorities would dictate terms.

7. How did women experience Partition? (Pg394-396)

The experiences of the women during partition is the most horrific one. They became the prime suspects of
persecution and their bodies were considered as territory to be conquered.
INJUSTICES AGAINST WOMEN: During the partition, women were raped, abducted, sold and
many times were forced to settle down to a new life with strangers in unknown circumstances.
INSENSITIVE - Governments both Indian and Pakistani were insensitive to the feelings of women
and the complexities of human relationships. Believing them to be on the wrong side of the border,
women were torn away from their new relatives. According to one estimate, 30,000 women were
"recovered" overall, 22,000 Muslim women India and 800 Hindu and Sikh women in Pakistan.
POLICE AND LOCAL AUTHORITIES -At places the police officers, who were appointed to
protect the women, themselves committed the worst crime. On account of the fear of disturbance, the
local authorities purposely avoided taking any action against the Pathans who had abducted the girls.
PRESERVING HONOUR -Dishonouring women of a community was seen as dishonouring the
community itself and ad as a mode of revenge. Many women were killed under the notion of saving
honour of the community.
-Scholars have also shown how ideas of preserving community honour came into play in this period
of extreme physical and psychological danger. Hence when the men feared that their women (wife,
sister, and daughter) would be violated by the enemy they killed the women themselves.

Q8. How did the congress come to change its view on partition? (pg 387-389)
The Congress stood for a United India throughout the National struggle which consisted both Hindu and
Muslim leaders. Congresss acceptance of Partition has to be viewed in the light of the political situation
they were facing due to the post War developments and the Provincial Elections of 1946.
A. Post World War-II - During the Second World the British had to delay negotiations for
independence for some time. At the end of the war when negotiations began again in 1945, the
British agreed to create an entirely Indian central Executive Council, except for the Viceroy and the
Commander-in-Chief of the armed forces as a starting point towards full independence.
B. Jinnahs extraordinary demand- Discussion about the transfer of power broke down due to
Jinnahs unrelenting demand for the League have an absolute right to choose all the Muslim
members of the Executive Council and that there should be a kind of communal veto in the council
with decision opposed by the Muslims needing a 2/3rds majority. This was an extraordinary
demand. The British too did not want to disappoint the Unionist who controlled Punjab which was
loyal to the British.
 C. Provincial elections 1946- In this election the Congress swept the non-Muslim vote and the league
too was successful in the seats reserved for Muslims. It was only in 1946 that the Muslim league
was able to establish itself as a dominant party among Muslim voters. We should remember that the
right to vote was enjoyed only by 10-12% of the population.
D. Cabinet Mission Proposal In March 1946 the British government sent a three member mission to
examine the Leagues demand and to suggest a suitable political framework for a free India. It
recommended a loose 3-tier confederation.
-India was to remain united and have a weak central government controlling only foreign affairs,
defence and communication
-The existing provincial assemblies being grouped into 3 sections (Section A- for Hindu majority
Section B and C for the Muslim-majority provinces of the north-west and the north-east)
E. Disagreement to the Cabinet Missions proposal - Initially all major parties accepted the proposal
but later there was disagreement
-The league wanted the grouping of B and C developing into strong entities with the right to secede
from the Union in future
-On the other hand the Congress wanted that the provinces be given the right to join a group.
-Ultimately both did not agree with the Cabinet missions proposal. With this the partition became
more or less inevitable with most of the Congress leaders agreeing to it, seeing it as tragic but
unavoidable only Gandhiji and Khan Abdul Ghaffar Khan strongly opposed partition.

All these developments ultimately contributed to the Congress changing its view on partition and agreeing
for the same.

Q9. Examine the strengths and limitations of oral history. How have oral history techniques furthered
our understanding of Partition? (pg400-401)

The history of partition has been reconstructed with the help of oral narratives, memoirs, diaries and family
histories.

Strengths:

1. Personal Reminiscence: A type of oral history that helps us grasp experiences and memories in detail. It
enables historians to write richly textured, vivid accounts of what happened to people during events such as
Partition. It is impossible to extract such information from government documents. The latter deals with
policy and party matters and various state-sponsored schemes.

2. Broadening the boundaries: Oral history also allows historians to broaden the boundaries of their
discipline by rescuing from oblivion the lived experiences of the poor and the powerless: those of, say,
Abdul Latif's father; the women of Thoa Khalasa; the refugee who retailed wheat at wholesale prices etc.

3. Success of oral history: The oral history of Partition has succeeded in exploring the experiences of those
men and women whose existence has hitherto been ignored, taken for granted, or mentioned only in passing
in mainstream history.

Limitations:
1. Lack of Concreteness: Many historians still remain sceptical of oral history. They dismiss it because oral
data seem to lack concreteness and the chronology they yield may be imprecise.

2. Making generalisation difficult: Historians argue that the uniqueness of personal experience makes
generalisation difficult: a large picture cannot be built from such micro- evidence, and one witness is no
witness.

3. Unfolding a larger process: They also think oral accounts are concerned with tangential issues, and that
the small individual experiences which remain in memory are irrelevant to the unfolding of larger processes
of history.

4. Interviews: One of the difficulties of obtaining information through interview is that protagonists may not
want to talk about intensely personal experiences and what people may remember or forget about an event a
few decades later during an interview will depend on their experiences during the intervening years.
5. The oral historians should be able to combine tact with empathy and he or she faces the daunting task of
having to sift the actual experiences of Partition from the web of constructed memories.

Oral history techniques have furthered our understanding of Partition in the following ways:

1. They have enabled to give a vivid account of actual experiences of the people of that time. Helps is to
understand day to day experiences of those affected by government decision to divide the country.
2. It helps the historians to grasp the personal experience and memories in detail. The unexpected alteration
in life and the psychological, emotional and social adjustments that people on both sides of the border had to
undergo.
3. Since there is no dearth of testimony about different forms of distress, there is ample evidence to figure
out trends.
4. It allows historians to broaden the boundaries of their discipline. Historians by comparing and
corroborating with evidence from other sources have realised the experiences that oral history relates are not
tangential matters but central to the story while government reports tell us about the number of women
recovered or exchanged it is women who tell about the suffering.
5. Oral history helps to get the views and experience of the masses.

With regard to events such as Partition in India and the Holocaust in Germany, there is no dearth of
testimony

SOURCE BOXES
Source 1 (page 377) I am simply returning my fathers karz, his debt

1. What does this passage reveal about the attitudes of the men who were talking to each other?
-It reveals that the attitudes of Abdul Latif and the Researcher were positive.

2. What does it reveal about memories that people carried about Partition?
-Some people did extend helping hands to each other and memories were positive.
-Speaks of the genuine desire to repay debt or karz.
3. How did the men identify themselves with one another?
-The men identified themselves with land and not region or Partition.

4. How did the Librarian help the researcher and why?

-Providing him with relevant research material.
-By meticulously keeping photocopies requested by the researcher ready before his arrival.
He helped because:
-A Hindu lady mai had helped his father escape to Sialkot at the time when the Hindu mobs were
massacring the Muslim population.
-He wanted to repay his fathers karz (debt).

5. Why did the researcher find the attitude of the librarian extraordinary?
- He found it extraordinary because the librarian was going well beyond the call of duty to provide him with
relevant material.

Source 3 page 379

1. Why did the man like the researcher?

-The man liked the researcher because he mistook him to be a Pakistani studying abroad.

2. Why did he change?

-He changed because the researcher told him was an Indian
-he realised the researcher was not from his quam (nation) ie Pakistan.

3. What does it show about the attitude of the men who were talking to each other?
It shows:
-Lahore in 1992 was rigid and intolerant of Indians-
-This was a Muslim stereotype against Indians who had wiped out their villages during partition

4. What does it reveal about the memories that people carried about Partition?
It reveals:
-Hatred and violence
-Suspicion and distrust
-that Hindus and Muslims are communities with sharply defined boundaries and fundamentally opposed
interest

5. How did men identify themselves and one another?

-the men identified themselves and one another as people of different land due to Partition and in a negative
way

6. What did the person advice the researcher who met him in Lahore in 1992? Why did he say like
this?
-The person advised the researcher to go back after finishing his studies and serve the nation (quam)
-He said like this because he mistook the researcher to be a Pakistani pursuing his studies abroad.

7. How did the person react on knowing that the researcher was an Indian?
-In a rigid manner and intolerant of Indians.
-He reacted in a way that was suspicious and distrusting of Indians.

8. What did the Indian try to explain?

-The Indian tried to explain that he did not view himself as Hindu or Indian but as a South Asian
-He did not identify himself in terms of community or the land, but in the larger context.

9. Who was right and why? Explain.

-The researcher was right because he unlike the man was not stereotyped and did not carry biases.
-He did not view himself in terms of community, religion or nation but in a broader way was region
specific
-He was not subjective and his rationality was not marred by preconceived notion and perceptions.

SOURCE 4 page 387

1. Mention three things that this resolution wanted

-It demanded a measure of autonomy for the Muslim majority areas of the sub-contintent
-They wanted the North Western and Eastern zones of India to be made independent states
-Therese areas should be made autonomous and sovereign

2. Did this resolution mention about partition or creation of Pakistan?

- The term Pakistan or Partition was not used because this is the first time that the Muslim League formally
and officially demanded a separate state.

3. What did the poet Iqbal visualise?

-He visualised the reorganization of Muslim majority areas in North West Indian into an autonomous unit
within a single loosely structured Indian federation.

4. Would the cabinet mission idea of a loose confederation have helped avoid partition? Give 2
reasons.
-No the cabinet missions proposals could not have prevented partition because:
-The Muslim League would in time have demanded more concessions
-It would have taken advantage of a weak central government to press for more concessions eventually
leading to partition.

SOURCE 5 page 390

1. What were Gandhis arguments against Partition?

Gandhijis arguments against Partition were:
-He rejected religion as determining a nation
-He believed Hindus and Muslims shared a common culture and constituted a single nation
-Pakistan demand as put forwards by the Muslim League was un-Islamic
-Islam stood for unity and brotherhood of mankind and not for disrupting the oneness of the human family.
2. Name two people who were firmly opposed to Partition?
-Mahatma Gandhi and Khan Abdul Ghaffar AKhan

3. While opposing Partition how did Gandhi try to heal the wounds?
-While the festivities of independence were going on, Gandhiji toured riot stricken areas of East Bengal and
Bihar and slums of Calcutta
-He carried the message of peace and non-violence

SOURCE 6 page 392

1. To which event does this source refer to? Describe what the mobs were doing?
-This source refers to the riots which took place in Amritsar in March 1947. The mobs were indulging in
arson and killings

2. Why did Amritsar become the scene of bloodshed later in 1947?

-because there was complete breakdown of authority in the city
-The British could not handle the situation and were unwilling to intervene as they were busy preparing to
quit India.
-The top leadership of political parties barring Gandhi were involved in negotiations regarding
independence.
-Indian civil servants were busy trying to save their own lives and property
-The people did not know whom to appeal to and turn for help, they were left struggling with their own fate.

3. What was the attitude of the soldiers and policemen towards the mob?
-The Indian soldiers and policemen did not act as a secular force but began to identify with their co-
religionists, be it Hindu, Muslim or Sikh.
-As communal tensions mounted, they not only helped people of their own faith but also attached member
of other communities.

4. Give one example to show how Gandhi tried to bring about communal harmony.
-He toured the riot torn area in an attempt to stop communal riots.
He visited the area on foot and persuaded the local Muslims to guarantee the safety of Hindus.
**********