The First World War, the Lucknow Pact, the 1919 reforms and the Khilafat Movement

Last time

Before we start: last time, in The Delhi Proposals, the Simon Commission, the Nehru Report and the 14 Points, you learned these points. Here they are again on one card. Keep them in mind, because today builds on them.

War and unrest

The First World War changed the subcontinent. Indians fought for Britain and expected rewards; instead came harsh laws, a massacre, and a crisis over the Caliph. This lesson covers the Lucknow Pact, the Rowlatt Act, the 1919 reforms, and the Khilafat and Hijrat movements.

The First World War

More than a million Indians served in the British army during the war, hoping for self-government afterwards. Muslims were troubled, because Britain was fighting the Ottoman Empire, whose sultan was the Caliph, the head of the Muslim world. This made many Muslims more willing to cooperate with Congress against the British.

The Lucknow Pact

In 1916, Congress and the Muslim League agreed the Lucknow Pact, with Jinnah playing a leading part. Congress accepted separate electorates for Muslims, and one-third of the seats in the central legislature for Muslims. Both demanded self-government. It was the high point of Hindu–Muslim unity, and Jinnah was called the ambassador of Hindu–Muslim unity.

The Rowlatt Act and Amritsar

Instead of reward, the Rowlatt Act of 1919 allowed the British to arrest and imprison suspects without trial. Protests followed. On 13 April 1919, at Jallianwala Bagh in Amritsar, General Dyer's troops fired on an unarmed crowd, killing hundreds. The massacre turned many moderate Indians against British rule.

The Montagu–Chelmsford Reforms

The Government of India Act 1919 introduced dyarchy in the provinces: some subjects, such as education and health, were given to Indian ministers. Important subjects, such as finance and law and order, stayed with the British governor. Separate electorates were kept. Many Indians felt the reforms gave too little, too late.

The Khilafat Movement

After the war, Muslims feared the Allies would break up the Ottoman Empire and remove the Caliph, and that the holy places would be under non-Muslim control. The Ali brothers, Muhammad Ali Jauhar and Shaukat Ali, led the Khilafat Movement to protect the Caliphate. Gandhi supported it, and Congress and the Khilafat leaders launched the non-cooperation movement together.

The Hijrat

Some religious leaders declared India Dar-ul-Harb, a land of war, and urged Muslims to migrate to Afghanistan, a Muslim country. Thousands sold their land and property cheaply and set off. Afghanistan could not cope, and closed its border. Many died on the journey; those who returned had lost everything.

Why the movements failed

In 1922, after violence at Chauri Chaura in which policemen were killed, Gandhi called off non-cooperation, without consulting the Khilafat leaders. In 1924 Mustafa Kemal of Turkey abolished the Caliphate himself, so the movement had nothing left to defend. The Hijrat failed because Afghanistan could not take the migrants, and it brought no pressure on the British.

What the Khilafat movement achieved

It showed that Muslims could organise a mass movement, and brought many ordinary Muslims into politics. But the end of Hindu–Muslim cooperation after 1922 led to communal riots, and Muslims felt Congress could not be trusted. So it pushed Muslims towards separate politics.

Mistakes that lose marks

Mistake one: saying the Lucknow Pact was signed by the British. It was between Congress and the League. Mistake two: confusing the Rowlatt Act with the Montagu–Chelmsford Reforms. Mistake three: describing the Hijrat without explaining why it failed to help the Khilafat. The fix: who, when, and why it mattered.

The full-marks tip

The full-marks tip: for 1916 to 1924, keep each event's date and its effect on Hindu–Muslim relations clear. Explain failure with causes: Chauri Chaura, Turkey's own decision, and Afghanistan closing its border.

On one card

So, on one card: 1914 to 1924. Keep it for revision.