Daniel Walker (1554)
What was the short term significance of World War One for Britain’s Empire in India?

The First World War (WW1) would prove to embody the climax of British colonial ideologies and strengthen India’s international profile as an evolving nation. The Indian contribution to the war was extraordinary and Gandhi’s conscription efforts for the British Army was based upon the premise of fighting for ‘the good and glory of human civilisation’ – a contrasting attitude to the one displayed in the initial stages of the Second World War (WW2) when he boycotted the recruitment drive. At the start of the war in 1914 Britain was the world’s dominant power however WW1, although concentrated in Europe, threatened global British diplomatic authority and it was John Buchan who stipulated that the war only ‘blew the dry winds toward the Indian border… where the parched grasses await the spark’. In context, his prognosis prophesises the effects the war would have on not only the British government but on Indians also, whose tide of nationalist thinking was to be fortified.

Word count: 292
Word count: 292
Word count: 558

Word count: 558

A sharp increase in anti-seditious government policy illustrates the embedded British fear of an Indian uprising as a result of the war, how it changed both the social and political landscape of India and enforced the Western ideals of democracy. The focus on the war effort in France, although with logical intentions, exposed the fragility of the British Empire and how easily its existence could be threatened - 1915 British Cabinet War Committee minutes detail how ‘the security of India must not weigh against the successful prosecution of the war at the decisive point in France’ which show how, for the first time, it was exposed how sparse Britain’s resources were given the demands of the empire meaning a weakened military home front left Britain exposed to international threats. The evident absence of coherent long-term imperial policy in the minutes indeed suggest a distraction and lack of focus on India which unintentionally aided in gathering momentum for the anti-imperialist temperament - complemented by, as Porter identifies, the ‘dwindling troop numbers, in fact 23,000 fewer than on the eve of the Mutiny’ - in effect, those seeking independence were given a taste of relaxed control and partial liberation, something they would not give up once the war ended where harsh control would inevitability return.

Word count: 618
Word count: 618
Contemporary author William Archer wrote in a Scottish broadsheet how ‘the moment Britain got into trouble elsewhere, India would burst into a blaze of rebellion’. After contextual analysis however this source cannot be totally relied on - throughout the duration of WW1 Archer wrote extensively on behalf of Britain’s War Propaganda Bureau, and printed his views also in the Scottish broadsheet where the source originates, inevitably exhibiting a degree of bias toward the Allied war effort. The quote therefore, although partially accurate and reflective of the political situation, cannot be regarded as wholly reputable as this propaganda focuses on producing a public fear that Britain would lose India as a colony so therefore winning the war in Europe was of vital importance and the war effort at home and in imperial colonies should be both focused and extended. The quote is also in direct correlation to reference 3, War Cabinet minutes, where the combined fear of Indian rebellion and defeat is also exhibited. Indeed, the focus Word count: 933
Word count: 933 for Britain was now winning the war in France and the distraction allowed nationalist ideologies to fester and mature, exemplified by the attempted pan-Indian Ghadr Revolution of 1915, giving the opportunity for leaders such as Gandhi and Tilak to emerge and establish a degree of legitimacy, so much so that even British authorities derogatorily referred to Tilak as ‘the father of the Indian unrest’. The acknowledgment by British authorities that an 'unrest' even existed in India models developing signs of weakness in the imperial movement – if the British were focused on victory in operating a universally monolithic system, the concept of Indian political and social development would’ve been, or arguably should’ve been, unthinkable to British forces. Therefore this quote can be relied upon to an extent to highlight the essential vitality of the independence leaders. It was WW1 and an imbalance of power and control which allowed such figures to emerge, and this acknowledgement by the British of Tilak’s importance stresses the impact he had on the regime – WW1 provided the opportunity to protest against the British and without it, may not have been provided and the development of British India may have been different.

Word count: 955
Word count: 955
Word count: 970
Word count: 970
Whilst a great cost to India, both militarily and financially, the Great War had strengthened the Indian economy through trade and the manufacturing of armament vital to the war effort. Such increasing British expectations of India to produce and supply for the war went ignorant to the rise of expectation that Indians were to be rewarded with liberation in exchange for their loyalty to the Crown. With a developing economy, an astute system of government was required and Edwin Montagu cautioned in 1919 that the ‘Government of India must be more responsive to Indian opinion... as an integral part of the British Empire’. The declaratory statement was made in Parliament and, at a time when Indian nationalism was feeding on the sacrifices made for the war effort, statements given by such an important figure as the viceroy suggest even doubts about the legitimacy of British rule in India were developing in Westminster. The demise of the Empire in India remarkably stems from Britain itself and criticisms about the regime such as those by secretary of state Edwin Montagu in Parliament (whose comments aided in securing the recommended provisions in the Government of India Act the same year) exhibits developing polarised attitudes toward the Empire. The aberration of war gave officials the chance to implement reforms against the weight of Westminster and therefore acted as a fundamental access point for idealists such as Montagu and Lord Chelmsford – the modifications however may have only overstretched civil liberties to a point where the idea of continued British rule became an unthinkable concept for many Indians. The bombardment of constitutional changes embodied in the Government of India Act and the Lucknow Pact for example - both within four years of each other - represent a modernised attitude toward the Empire as a result of the Great War and therefore acted as a significant turning point which aggrieved the stature of British India. Unwittingly, the pragmatic approach to British control in India produced a growing middle class of educated subjects whose ideologies of independence were to advance, yet the degree of respect these subjects were given can be brought into question through evaluation of the Imperial Legislative Councils views on the Rowlatt Act, which only served to exacerbate problems by imposing strict punishments for those suspected of seditious behaviour.

Word count: 1,247
Word count: 1,247 All 22 Indian members of the Imperial Legislative Council had opposed the Rowlatt Act and this exhibits the empty rhetoric of the 1919 Government of India Act that was meant to democratically include Indians in the highest realms of administration, yet had seemingly failed to eradicate the perpetual racist attitudes informing political decisions regarding the future and security of British India. The source below, a contemporary Indian newspaper extract, identifies how even after the 1919 Act and its attempts to widen democratic practice and include Indians in Government, the general disapproval of the Rowlatt Act in India both politically and socially, was to be dismissed and a British majority prevailed.
Word count: 1,521
Word count: 1,521
Whilst the full origins of the source are unclear, the extract is from one of the largest newspapers in India at the time, The Leader, which enjoyed high levels of readership across India and which also regularly printed Gandhi’s writings. With this in mind the source is likely to hold a slight bias towards anti-British sentiments and therefore, given its mass readership, the criticism in the source of the Executive Council for passing the bill (“I am afraid that the fault to a great extent will lie at our door”) can be interpreted as an attempt to stir the independence movement across India, with the incentive presented that defeat is imminent - and the passing of the Rowlatt Act by the Executive Council embodies this fear. It indeed undermines the ‘authority’ invested in council members through the 1919 Act, which only increased the divide in Anglo-Indian relations. As a result of the implications of WW1, it would be such deep opposition to the Rowlatt Act that led to the infamous Amritsar massacre in 1919 that galvanised the freedom movement. Whereas in 1914 Gandhi actively promoted cooperation with the British through conscription, the barbaric nature of the British in Amritsar dramatically altered his approach and he proceeded to fight for only full independence for India, overseeing three national campaigns that attracted the attention of the British toward the increasing bellicose animosity amongst its imperial subjects. Gandhi declared it a ‘sin to co-operate with the satanic government’ that was in place – losing the support and trust of such a mass influential figure like Gandhi was a major blow for the British and only weakened Anglo-Indian relations by breaking down a vital channel of communication for Indians. Given the heavy religious foundation of Indian society, the declaration of co-operation being a ‘sin’ would likely to have had significant impacts on the Indian population and acted as a convincing method to stimulate the independence movement. In this context, it was the Great War that initially brought the concept of Home Rule once again (after the 1857 mutiny) to the ideological battleground, led by Gandhi, and as a result accelerated the independence movement through WW2 and through to success in 1947.

Word count: 1,818
Word count: 1,818 It is clear that the nature of Anglo-Indian relations underwent a profound change in the wake of the First World War and whilst the primary sources in general address a negative British attitude toward India, the secondary sources, in hindsight, seek to evaluate the actions of the British as revolutionary, in recognition that traditional imperial rule no longer functioned amongst the progressive liberal attitudes of the 20th century. Compared to the initial stages after the outbreak of WW1, where India pledged support for the British, the declaration of war in 1939 followed a refusal to engage in a war fighting for ‘freedom and independence’ when they themselves were not free, highlighting a significant movement in social ideology and a growing hostility in Anglo-Indian relations. WW1 and the events following such as the inevitable economic instability which forced Indian industrialisation to prosper, as well as legislative reform and the Amritsar massacre all created further symptoms of disengagement from empire - they widened the ideological gap between the imperialists, the British, and their subjects in India. As a result, it became obvious that attempting to force a hold upon an antagonistic India was no longer a practical solution and India moved inexorably toward independence.
Word count: 1,880
6
6

Word count: 1,880
6
6

Bibliography
References
Ferguson, N. (2004). Empire.
London: Penguin Books
James, L. (1998). Raj: The Making of British India. London: Time Warner Books
Leadbeater, T. (2008). Access to History: Britain and India 1845-1947. London: Hodder Education
Paxman, J. (2012). Empire
London: Penguin Books

Porter, B. (2004). The Lions Share.
Edinburgh: Pearson

Princeton University History Department. http://libguides.princeton.edu/content.php?pid=4015&sid=24139 History Learning Site http://www.historylearningsite.co.uk/india_and_world_war_one.htm http://www.readex.com/sites/default/files/Leader%2001.28.1920%202.pdf

--------------------------------------------
[ 1 ]. Gandhi quote – Niall Ferguson, Empire – page 307
[ 2 ]. Niall Ferguson, Empire – page 301
[ 3 ]. British War Cabinet minute extract – Bernard Porter, The Lions Share – page 228
[ 4 ]. Bernard Porter, The Lions Share – page 231
[ 5 ]. William Archer, 1915 – History Learning Site: India and World War One
[ 6 ]. Princeton University Online, History Department
[ 7 ]. Edwin Montagu quote – Dr David Omissi - BBC History online, India and the Western Front
[ 8 ]. Extract from ‘The Leader’ Indian newspaper, 1920.
[ 9 ]. Gandhi quote