The Indian National Movement (1885-1916) | ICSE Class 8 History & Civics Notes

This note covers the background to Indian nationalism, the formation of the Indian National Congress, Moderate demands and methods, Radical politics, Bengal’s partition, Swadeshi and boycott, the Muslim League, the Congress split, Home Rule, the Lucknow Pact and the development of the national movement up to 1916.

What was the colonial background to the national movement?

Colonial rule means control of a country by a foreign power. In India, British control over resources and people’s lives encouraged a growing question: who should the country belong to, and who should decide how it was governed?

Nationalism developed around the idea that India belonged to all its people, irrespective of class, colour, caste, creed, language or gender. Its resources and institutions were meant for everyone. Ending British control was therefore connected with making India a country for Indians.

What did popular sovereignty mean?

People should be sovereign, meaning able to act independently without outside interference. In political terms, Indians should be empowered to decide their own affairs. This linked national feeling with a claim to participate in government, rather than simply sharing a geographical home.

Political associations formed after 1850, especially during the 1870s and 1880s, expressed these ideas. Most were led by English-educated professionals such as lawyers. An association was an organised group working towards shared aims; these associations brought political concerns into public discussion.

Important examples included the Poona Sarvajanik Sabha, Indian Association, Madras Mahajan Sabha and Bombay Presidency Association. Sarvajanik means “of or for all the people”. Although many associations worked in particular regions, they presented their goals as the interests of India’s people as a whole.

This distinction between regional activity and national aims matters. An organisation did not have to operate everywhere before it could express a national idea. The developing aim was to connect local grievances, meaning complaints about injustice, with the wider question of British power.

Why did dissatisfaction with British rule grow before 1885?

Political restrictions and racial discrimination, meaning unequal treatment on grounds of race, deepened dissatisfaction during the 1870s and 1880s. Measures affecting weapons, newspapers and the courts made British claims to fairness increasingly difficult for politically active Indians to accept.

How did laws restrict Indians?

The Arms Act of 1878 disallowed Indians from possessing arms, or weapons. The Vernacular Press Act of 1878 sought to silence newspapers critical of the government. “Vernacular” refers here to Indian languages used by these newspapers.

The press law allowed the government to confiscate, or seize, newspaper assets, including printing presses, when material was judged objectionable. Thus, criticism could threaten the equipment and resources needed to publish a newspaper, not merely the publication of one article.

Why did the Ilbert Bill controversy matter?

The Ilbert Bill controversy of 1883 concerned a proposal allowing Indian judges to try British or European persons. A bill is a proposed law. The proposal sought equality between Indian and British judges, but white opposition forced the government to retreat.

The controversy exposed racial attitudes within British rule. It also strengthened the desire for an organisation bringing educated Indians together across the country, a need already felt since 1880. The founding of Congress in 1885 developed against this background of political dissatisfaction.

Note: The Ilbert Bill controversy concerned judicial equality and racial opposition. It was not a proposal to establish an independent Indian government. Connect each grievance with the particular right or inequality involved.

How did the Indian National Congress begin in 1885?

The Indian National Congress, usually called Congress, was established when 72 delegates met at Bombay in December 1885. Delegates are people attending a meeting as representatives. They came from across the country, giving organisational form to the desire for an all-India political body.

Who helped build the organisation?

Its early leadership included Dadabhai Naoroji, Pherozeshah Mehta, Badruddin Tyabji, W.C. Bonnerji, Surendranath Banerji, Romesh Chandra Dutt and S. Subramania Iyer. The leadership was largely from Bombay and Calcutta; this qualification should not be changed into a claim that every leader came from those cities.

Naoroji was a businessman and publicist, someone who spreads ideas through information, writing and public speaking. Settled in London and for a time a member of the British Parliament, he guided younger nationalists. A.O. Hume, a retired British official, also helped bring Indians from different regions together.

What did Congress seek to represent?

Congress aimed to speak for all Indian people. This was a claim about its political purpose, not proof that every social group attended its first meeting. In 1887, Congress President Badruddin Tyabji described the organisation as representing different communities rather than one class or community.

The organisation connected educated political workers and provided a shared setting for demands about government, administration and economic conditions. Its formation in 1885 marked an organised political movement that could present concerns as Indian concerns, rather than treating each region’s problems as entirely separate.

Remember the difference between the organisation’s social leadership and its stated aims: educated people led it, while its demands also addressed hardships beyond the professions from which many leaders came.

What political and economic changes did the Moderates demand?

It has often been said that Congress during its first twenty years was moderate in its objectives and methods. The Moderates were leaders who sought changes by presenting demands, criticising injustice and persuading the British government through public opinion.

What were their political demands?

They demanded a greater Indian voice in government. Legislative Councils, bodies involved in law-making, should become more representative, receive greater powers and be introduced in provinces where none existed. Representation meant giving Indians a stronger part in institutions making decisions about them.

They called for Indianisation, or placing more Indians in important administrative positions. Civil service examinations, used to recruit government officials, should be held in India as well as London. This demand challenged racial exclusion from positions of responsibility.

Indianisation also had an economic purpose. British officials sent a major part of their large salaries home. Increasing Indian employment, it was hoped, would reduce the drain of wealth, the transfer of India’s wealth to England. An expected benefit should not be described as an already achieved result.

Why did economic questions matter?

Congress argued that British rule produced poverty and famines. It connected increased land revenue with the impoverishment of peasants and zamindars, or landholders, and grain exports to Europe with food shortages. It also raised the salt tax, Indian labourers’ treatment abroad and forest dwellers’ suffering.

These concerns show why Moderate politics cannot be reduced to a demand for jobs for educated Indians. Its programme connected political representation, equality before government and relief from economic hardship, even though educated elites, meaning socially influential groups, led the organisation.

How did Moderate and Radical methods differ?

The Moderates sought to make the public aware of the unjust character of British rule. They published newspapers, wrote articles, delivered speeches and sent representatives to different parts of India. Their aim was to mobilise public opinion, meaning organise people’s views in support of political demands.

They believed the British respected freedom and justice and would accept Indians’ just demands once these were clearly expressed. This was the leaders’ belief about how change could occur. It should not be confused with a conclusion that British policies were in fact consistently fair.

Why did criticism grow?

By the 1890s, leaders such as Bepin Chandra Pal, Bal Gangadhar Tilak and Lala Lajpat Rai questioned this approach. Called Radicals, they favoured more forceful objectives and methods, emphasising self-reliance, constructive work and people’s own strength rather than the government’s good intentions.

Swaraj means self-rule. The Radicals argued that people must fight for it. Tilak expressed this determination in the slogan, “Freedom is my birthright and I shall have it!” The central difference concerned how political demands could be made effective.

The shared opposition in 1905 did not remove disagreements over methods. These differences contributed to the Congress split in 1907. Avoid treating the two groups as if one cared about India and the other did not: their disagreement concerned political strategy and the means of change.

Why did Bengal’s partition in 1905 provoke opposition?

In 1905, Viceroy Curzon, the British Crown’s representative heading the government in India, partitioned Bengal. Partition means division of a territory. Bengal was then British India’s biggest province and included Bihar and parts of Orissa, the name used for that region at the time.

What reasons were offered?

The British argued that division would make administration more convenient. However, instead of removing the non-Bengali areas, the government separated East Bengal and joined it with Assam. Administrative convenience was closely connected with the interests of British officials and businessmen.

Perhaps the main British motives were to curtail Bengali politicians’ influence and split the Bengali people. The word “perhaps” matters: it presents an interpretation of the main motives and must not be turned into an unqualified statement about a single proved intention.

How did Indians respond?

The partition angered people across India. Both Moderates and Radicals opposed it. Large public meetings and demonstrations, meaning public gatherings expressing a political demand, developed into new methods of protest. The resulting struggle became known as the Swadeshi movement, encouraging Indian production and self-help.

Opposition was strongest in Bengal, but had echoes elsewhere. In deltaic Andhra, the river-delta region of Andhra, it was known as the Vandemataram Movement. Its reach therefore extended beyond the province directly divided, while its strongest centre remained Bengal.

The response to the 1905 partition created common ground between Congress groups that disagreed about methods. By 1907, however, disagreement over boycott had become part of a wider organisational division. Shared anger at one government decision did not guarantee lasting agreement over how to oppose British rule.

How did Swadeshi and boycott turn protest into action?

Swadeshi encouraged Indian enterprise and the use of Indian goods. Boycott meant deliberately refusing to use or support selected goods and institutions. These were connected approaches: one encouraged Indian activity, while the other withdrew support from British goods and institutions.

What did the movement encourage?

The Swadeshi movement opposed British rule through self-help, Indian enterprise, national education and Indian languages. Enterprise means organised productive or business activity. National education meant education encouraged as part of the national effort, connecting learning with the movement’s wider aims.

This was a constructive programme as well as a protest. People were encouraged to develop their own capacities instead of relying on British approval. The emphasis on Indian languages also connected the movement with forms of expression beyond English-speaking political circles.

How did the approaches connect?

1. Opposition to Bengal’s partition brought people together in public meetings and demonstrations.
2. Swadeshi encouraged self-help and support for Indian enterprise and education.
3. Boycott withdrew support from British goods and institutions as a means of political pressure.
4. Radicals connected these activities with mass mobilisation, meaning bringing large numbers of people into political action, to pursue swaraj.

Some individuals also suggested revolutionary violence, meaning violence intended to bring about a radical change in society, to overthrow British rule. This does not mean that every participant in Swadeshi supported violence. Keep the distinction between a broad movement and one approach proposed within it.

Swadeshi and boycott are therefore related but not interchangeable terms. Explaining them separately shows how the movement combined building Indian capacity with refusing cooperation in selected areas. It also explains why disagreements over boycott could continue despite shared opposition to the partition.

Which social groups participated or had their concerns represented?

Educated professionals and early political organisers

Most early political associations were led by English-educated professionals such as lawyers. They helped organise public discussion, express demands and connect political activity across regions. Congress was a body of the educated elite, but this describes its leadership rather than the full range of issues it raised.

Peasants, landholders, labourers and forest dwellers

Early Congress demands addressed peasants and zamindars harmed by high land revenue. Resolutions also discussed Indian labourers abroad and forest dwellers affected by government interference. Having a group’s concerns represented is different from showing that the group participated in large numbers.

This distinction prevents a misleading picture of the early movement. The economic programme reached beyond professionals, yet that does not establish equal participation by all Indians. A political organisation can raise problems affecting people who are not equally present in its meetings or leadership.

Swadeshi demonstrators and regional participation

Public demonstrations drew thousands during the Swadeshi movement. Bengal was its strongest centre, with echoes in other regions such as deltaic Andhra. This widened the forms of political action beyond the presentation of formal demands, without proving that every region participated to the same degree.

Photograph: “Thousands joined the demonstrations during the Swadeshi movement”. The photograph shows a dense crowd filling a street, with buildings alongside and placards held above people’s heads. It illustrates a public demonstration; it does not identify every participant’s occupation or views.

See Fig. 4 in your NCERT textbook

In 1916, Mahatma Gandhi’s speech at Banaras drew attention to peasants and workers absent from a prestigious public gathering. The problem of bringing a wider population into national politics remained important. Claims to represent all Indians and evidence of actual participation must therefore be considered separately.

What changed between the Muslim League’s formation and the Lucknow Pact?

A group of Muslim landlords and nawabs, or rulers bearing that title, founded the All India Muslim League at Dacca in 1906. The League supported Bengal’s partition. Its position therefore differed from the opposition expressed by both Moderate and Radical Congress leaders.

What were separate electorates?

The League wanted separate electorates for Muslims. The government accepted this demand in 1909: some council seats were reserved for Muslims and their representatives were elected by Muslim voters. An electorate is the body of voters entitled to elect representatives.

This arrangement encouraged politicians to gather support by distributing favours to their own religious groups. Distinguish the reserved seats from the voting arrangement: the particular feature here was that Muslim voters elected the representatives for those Muslim seats.

How did Congress divide and reunite?

The Surat split was the division of Congress at Surat in 1907. Moderates opposed boycott because they believed it involved force. After the split, Moderates dominated Congress, while Tilak’s followers worked outside it. The two groups reunited in December 1915.

In 1916, Congress and the Muslim League signed the Lucknow Pact, an agreement to work together for representative government. Representative government means a system in which representatives take part in governing on behalf of the people.

Two different developments must be kept separate: reunion between Congress groups in 1915 and agreement between Congress and the League in 1916. The first repaired an internal organisational division; the second created cooperation between two organisations. Neither event means that every political disagreement had disappeared.

What were the aims of Home Rule and the significance of 1916?

Home Rule meant self-government for India within the British Empire, the territories under British rule. The Home Rule movement sought greater Indian control over the country’s affairs. Its objective should be distinguished from a demand for immediate complete separation from the empire.

Who led the Home Rule movement?

Bal Gangadhar Tilak and Annie Besant established separate Home Rule leagues in 1916. A league is an association formed to advance a shared cause. Both leagues campaigned for self-government, giving that demand an organised political form.

The important connection is between the leaders, the organisations and the aim. Tilak and Besant led the Home Rule effort; their leagues sought self-government. The leagues were separate organisations pursuing a shared objective, rather than a single league founded jointly by both leaders.

Why is this a significant endpoint?

The year 1916 also brought the Lucknow Pact between Congress and the Muslim League, following the Congress groups’ reunion in December 1915. Organised demands for self-government and cooperation between political organisations thus belong together in an account of this period’s closing developments.

These developments followed earlier stages: Congress formation, demands for representation and administrative reform, criticism of Moderate methods, and Swadeshi protest. The movement’s methods and organisation had changed, while the question of Indians’ authority over their own affairs remained central.

At the same time, political unity should not be confused with complete social participation. Gandhi’s Banaras speech in 1916 highlighted the absence of peasants and workers from an elite gathering. The national movement still faced the task of connecting organised political leadership with a wider population.

What timeline connects the main events up to 1916?

A timeline places events in chronological order, meaning the order in which they occurred. Read this one as a sequence of grievances, organisation, debate, protest, division and cooperation. The entries before 1885 provide background to Congress formation rather than extending the main period of study.

Chronology helps distinguish cause from consequence. The Muslim League’s formation preceded separate electorates; Congress reunion preceded the Lucknow Pact. Events sharing a period should not be treated as the same event or assigned one another’s participants and objectives.

Dates also need their associated actions. Remembering “1905” becomes useful when it is linked to Bengal’s partition and the resulting protest. Remembering “1916” requires distinguishing the Home Rule campaign from the agreement between Congress and the Muslim League.

What do historical sources reveal about the movement’s aims and limits?

Historical sources are records or materials used to investigate the past. Newspaper comments, speeches, letters and photographs offer different kinds of evidence. Their value depends on what they actually show or say, rather than what a reader wishes them to prove.

What did public statements claim?

In January 1886, The Indian Mirror welcomed the first Congress as the beginning of a possible future representative institution. This reveals an expectation about Congress’s future, not proof that Congress already possessed the powers of a parliament.

In 1887, Badruddin Tyabji’s presidential address presented Congress as representing different communities. It provides evidence of an inclusive political aim. By itself, however, a statement of purpose cannot demonstrate equal participation by every class and community.

What concerns appeared within nationalist politics?

In an 1887 letter to Naoroji, Moderate leader Dinshaw Wacha complained that some leaders were occupied with personal business. His comment raises a problem of commitment and available time. It cannot fairly be turned into a claim that every early Congress leader ignored public work.

Gandhi’s February 1916 speech at Banaras, at the opening of the Banaras Hindu University, contrasted wealthy invitees with the labouring poor. He stressed the importance of peasants and workers to India’s future. The speech identifies a concern about nationalism’s social reach.

Together, these records show both aspirations and limitations: representative hopes, a claim to speak across communities, difficulties in sustained political work and concern for wider participation. Reading them carefully means distinguishing an aim from an achievement, and a criticism of some people from a judgement about everyone.

Glossary

• Nationalism — The idea that India belongs to all its people, who should have authority over their shared affairs.
• Sovereign — Able to act independently and decide affairs without interference from an outside authority.
• Publicist — A person who spreads ideas through information, written reports and speeches at public meetings.
• Moderates — Early nationalist leaders who sought reform through persuasion, public criticism and the expression of demands.
• Indianisation — Placing more Indians in important government positions instead of concentrating those positions in British hands.
• Drain of wealth — The transfer of wealth from India to England, including money sent home by British officials.
• Repeal — Officially ending the validity of a law so that it no longer remains in force.
• Radicals — Nationalists who stressed self-reliance, constructive work and people’s own strength in the struggle for swaraj.
• Swadeshi — Support for Indian goods and enterprise as part of a wider programme of national self-help.
• Boycott — Deliberate refusal to use or support selected goods or institutions as a form of protest.
• Separate electorates — An electoral arrangement in which members of a religious community elect representatives for that community’s reserved seats.
• Home Rule — Self-government for India within the British Empire, pursued through leagues associated with Tilak and Annie Besant.
• Lucknow Pact — The 1916 agreement between Congress and the Muslim League to work together for representative government.

Common errors and misconceptions

• Misconception: Early Congress discussed only jobs for educated Indians. Correct: It also raised land revenue, military spending, irrigation, the salt tax, labourers’ treatment and forest dwellers’ suffering.
• Misconception: Moderates did nothing to criticise British rule. Correct: They used newspapers, articles, speeches and representatives to expose injustice and mobilise public opinion.
• Misconception: A single, certain motive explains Bengal’s partition. Correct: Administrative convenience was the official argument; perhaps the main motives were weakening Bengali politicians and dividing Bengali people.
• Misconception: Swadeshi and boycott mean exactly the same thing. Correct: Swadeshi supported Indian activity; boycott refused support to British goods and institutions.
• Misconception: Every Swadeshi participant supported revolutionary violence. Correct: Some individuals advocated it; the wider movement also encouraged self-help, enterprise, education and Indian languages.
• Misconception: Congress reunion and the Lucknow Pact were one event. Correct: Congress groups reunited in December 1915; Congress and the Muslim League reached their agreement in 1916.
• Misconception: A claim to represent all Indians proves equal participation. Correct: It expresses a political aim; the early leadership was drawn from educated elites, and wider participation remained a concern.

Exam-style questions with model answers

Q1. In December 1885, 72 delegates from across India met at Bombay and established Congress. Identify its place and date of foundation in two points. [2 marks]

1. The Indian National Congress was established at Bombay, where delegates from different parts of India gathered.
2. The meeting establishing the organisation took place in December 1885 and brought together 72 delegates.

Q2. Congress demanded stronger representative councils, civil service examinations in India as well as London, and separation of courts from administrative officials. Explain these three demands using the information given. [3 marks]

1. Stronger representative councils would give Indians a greater voice within institutions taking part in government and making decisions about public affairs.
2. Holding civil service examinations in India as well as London would help more Indians enter high government positions, advancing Indianisation and challenging racial exclusion from positions of responsibility.
3. Separating courts from administrative officials meant distinguishing the work of the judiciary, which deals with justice, from the executive’s work of administration.

Q3. Moderates trusted British ideals of justice, used articles and speeches, and opposed boycott because they believed it involved force. Radicals stressed people’s strength, constructive work, mass mobilisation and boycott. Both groups opposed Bengal’s partition in 1905. Compare their main reliance, political work, attitude to boycott and response to partition in four points. [4 marks]

1. Moderates relied on persuading a government they believed respected freedom and justice; Radicals relied on people’s own strength and self-reliance.
2. Moderates used articles and speeches to express demands and mobilise public opinion; Radicals emphasised constructive work and mass mobilisation for swaraj.
3. Moderates opposed boycott because they believed it involved force; Radicals advocated boycotting British goods and institutions.
4. Both Moderates and Radicals opposed Bengal’s partition in 1905, despite their disagreements over methods.

Q4. In 1905 Curzon partitioned Bengal, officially for administrative convenience. East Bengal was joined to Assam. Perhaps the main motives were weakening Bengali politicians and dividing Bengali people. Both Congress groups opposed partition through meetings and demonstrations; Swadeshi was strongest in Bengal, with echoes elsewhere. Explain the decision and response in five points, preserving the qualification about motives. [5 marks]

1. Curzon partitioned Bengal in 1905, presenting administrative convenience as the official reason for dividing the province under British rule.
2. The territorial arrangement separated East Bengal and joined it to Assam, showing what the partition actually did to the province.
3. Perhaps the main motives were to weaken Bengali politicians and divide Bengali people; this explanation must retain its stated qualification.
4. Both Congress groups opposed partition, and public meetings and demonstrations became important forms of political protest against the government’s decision.
5. The resulting Swadeshi movement was strongest in Bengal but had echoes elsewhere, so its political response extended beyond the province itself.

Q5. Swadeshi promoted self-help, Indian enterprise, national education and Indian languages. Radicals advocated boycott of British goods and institutions for swaraj. Some individuals suggested revolutionary violence. Explain five features of this programme, without treating all participants as supporters of violence. [5 marks]

1. Self-help encouraged people to develop their own abilities and resources, connecting political action with reliance on their own efforts and strength.
2. Support for Indian enterprise encouraged productive activity within India and made the development of Indian capacities part of the movement’s programme.
3. National education and Indian languages linked learning and expression with the movement, alongside its concerns about goods and economic activity.
4. Boycott meant refusing support to British goods and institutions; Radicals connected this withdrawal of support with the struggle for swaraj, or self-rule.
5. Some individuals proposed revolutionary violence, but this describes one suggested approach and does not establish that every participant supported violent methods.

Q6. In 1909, some council seats were reserved for Muslims, and Muslim voters elected the representatives for those seats. Define separate electorates in two points covering reserved seats and eligible voters. [2 marks]

1. The arrangement reserved some council seats for Muslims, setting aside places in the representative body for members of that religious community.
2. Muslim voters elected the representatives for those reserved seats, making membership of the community relevant to participation in that election.

Q7. Congress groups reunited in December 1915. Tilak and Annie Besant established separate Home Rule leagues in 1916 seeking self-government within the British Empire. Congress and the Muslim League signed the Lucknow Pact in 1916 to work for representative government. Distinguish these developments in four points. [4 marks]

1. The December 1915 reunion concerned groups within Congress, bringing its previously separated political groupings back into the same organisation.
2. The Home Rule leagues were separate associations established by Tilak and Annie Besant in 1916 to advance a shared political cause.
3. Their objective was self-government within the British Empire, which identifies the particular form of political change sought by Home Rule.
4. The Lucknow Pact was an agreement between Congress and the Muslim League in 1916 to work together for representative government.

Q8. In January 1886, The Indian Mirror expressed hope that Congress could develop into a future representative institution. Explain what this statement shows and what it does not prove. [2 marks]

1. It shows that the newspaper expressed hopes about Congress’s future contribution to representative political life.
2. It does not prove that Congress already possessed the powers of a parliament when the comment appeared.

Key takeaways

• Indian nationalism developed around the idea that India belonged to all its people, who should decide their own affairs.
• Congress began at Bombay in December 1885, bringing 72 delegates together to form an all-India political organisation.
• Moderates linked demands for representation and Indianisation with economic concerns affecting peasants, labourers, landholders and forest dwellers.
• Radicals stressed self-reliance and people’s strength, challenging Moderate expectations that persuasion would secure acceptance of just demands.
• Bengal’s partition in 1905 provoked opposition from both Congress groups and helped bring Swadeshi protest into public life.
• Swadeshi encouraged Indian activity, while boycott withdrew support from British goods and institutions as a means of political pressure.
• Congress groups reunited in December 1915; the Lucknow Pact brought Congress and the Muslim League together in 1916.
• Home Rule sought self-government within the British Empire, while the movement continued to face questions about wider social participation.

Test yourself

What does it mean for people to be sovereign?

They can act independently without outside interference and decide matters concerning their own affairs.

Why should Indianisation be connected with the drain of wealth?

British officials sent a major part of their large salaries home. Indianisation, it was hoped, would reduce this transfer of wealth.

Which belief shaped Moderate methods of persuasion?

Moderates believed the British respected freedom and justice and would accept Indians’ just demands once these were clearly expressed.

What qualification belongs in an explanation of the main motives behind Bengal’s partition?

Perhaps the main British motives were to curtail Bengali politicians’ influence and split the Bengali people.

How do Swadeshi and boycott differ?

Swadeshi encouraged Indian enterprise and goods; boycott meant deliberately refusing support to British goods and institutions.

How did the League initially respond to Bengal’s partition?

The Muslim League supported the partition, whereas both Moderate and Radical Congress leaders opposed it.

What is the difference between the 1915 reunion and the 1916 Lucknow Pact?

The reunion brought Congress groups together. The Lucknow Pact was an agreement between Congress and the Muslim League for representative government.

Why does a claim to represent everyone need to be read carefully?

It states a political aim, but does not by itself prove that all social groups participated equally in an organisation.