How far do these sources suggest that British rule was accepted in India at the beginning of the twentieth century? Explain your answer, using the evidence of Sources 1, 2 and 3.

Source 1 is a letter, written by the influence of Queen Victoria to the Prime Minister towards the end of the 19th century. To an extent, this source does not suggest that the Raj was accepted within the natives in India. One reason for this is that Queen Victoria is saying what the viceroy needs to do in order for the acceptance of the natives. This suggests that this is not the case already at the time when the letter was written – that the natives do not “like and love” the Raj. The British were seen as ‘alien-rulers’ by the Indians, which could therefore mean that this opinion and view may be hard to change. The Raj had a dominant, oppressive rule on the Indians. They had subservient roles, such as Ayahs, compared to the British who put themselves on top of the Caste system (of which they did not understand well) and were hierarchy towards them. One could argue, however, that Queen, is trying to make things better for the relationship between the natives of India and the British rulers in the source, and so it could show a good attitude – one that the Indians could respect and understand.
Another reason for this is that from this source, there is no evidence to suggest that British rule was accepted towards the beginning of the twentieth century, because the letter was written in the nineteenth century. All the source shows is a letter in advance of what could have happened. Conversely, one could argue that the situation with the people of India could well have changed as a result of this letter (at the beginning of the twentieth century) because it was written by such a big influence in decision making within India at the time – Queen Victoria. So it would have been extremely likely that the situation of the treatment of the natives in India would have changed as a result of this. However, because there is no real evidence that this did happen, Source 1 does not suggest that British rule was accepted in India at the beginning of the 20th century to an extent, although it does imply it.
Source 2, a letter to a Kesari newspaper in 1900, implies that yet again, British rule, to an extent was not accepted by the British. A reason for why the source does suggest that the British rule was accepted was because it says that they accept the fact that the country’s condition would be no better if they were ruled by any other nation. This therefore means that they must recognize that things could be far worse for India, and so they must accept the Raj to an extent. Furthermore, Source 2 expresses that they are going to act “in a conciliatory manner with the British”, which suggests that they are willing to abide and respect their rules, and accept their reign, and so they must acknowledge and accept them to an extent. However, on the other hand, the Indians, from the information expressed in this source, are only going along with the British reign in order to gain independence. This strongly suggests that they are doing this without wanting to, but their freedom is most important to them, and so does not suggest that they accept the British rule. Moreover, source 2 effectively states that the Indians would fight with the British in order to gain independence if they could, but the situation means that they cannot because of the lesson learnt from the travesty of the Indian Mutiny in 1857, which made things far worse for them ultimately. The Indian Rebellion resulted in the emphasizing of atrocities, particularly toward women and children, committed by the rebels. Overall the Mutiny resulted in a change of attitude (both by the Indians and the British) towards to the British rule of India because the situation was extremely insensitively handled. The Indians knew that this would not solve their predicament, however the fact that the attitude toward the Raj results in the urge to fight them strongly suggests that the Indians do not accept the rule. Taken as a whole, it can be assumed that Source 2 does not suggest that the British rule was accepted because of the reasons for why they are going to work for the Raj for the time being; the Indians know that they cannot get independence any other way. Source 3 is a photograph of part of the great procession in 1903. It was organized by Lord Curzon, and the festivities were incredible. It was a dazzling display of pomp, power and split second timing. Towards the end of 1902, an area of deserted land was transformed into an elaborate tented city, with temporary light railway to bring crowds of visitors out from Delhi, a post office with its own stamp, telephone, a variety of stores, a Police force with a different, special uniform, a hospital, magistrate’s court, drainage and electric light installations. Souvenir guide books were sold and maps of the camping ground were given out. Marketing opportunities were craftily used. There were special firework displays, exhibitions and many glamorous dances held. This is all shown in Source 3, and goes to show how Lord Curzon wanted to show the British that the Indians acknowledged Edward VII’s coronation. It also shows that Lord Curzon put in a great effort to portray a traditional Indian culture within the event. However the organization of the event could imply that whoever was in control is not working with the Indians; has an opposing rule, because it was all for the British, rather than the Indians, therefore implying that the Indians did not accept the British rule. On the other hand, one could argue that the turn-out of the event could suggest that the Indian public supported the Raj, and wanted to show this with the great procession. It could also be argued however that this does not mean that the Indians actually supported the British, but only came to the event for the entertainment and the show. Sources 1, 2 and 3 show both a British and an Indian attitude towards eachother. For the British, a mostly dominant, oppressive rule on the Indians, which therefore result in a scale of resistance of the Indians, suggesting a somewhat scale of acceptance towards the British rule.