pk studies....

[Alchemist4lyf]

the question is 3(c) from May/June2006 session...
Was the introduction of Jinnah’s 14 Points in 1929 the most important factor in the
development of the Pakistan Movement between 1928 and 1935? Give reasons for your
answer.

According to ms, and er...
We are supposed to write about 14 points, nehru report, round table conferences and government of india act..

But they missed Allahabad address 1930 and Pakistan Scheme 1933...
so... wat do u guyz think??
Should the two be included??

 

[scouserlfc]

Look closely man i did this paper they have given it just written 1930 adress and they say that 14 points gave the idea of Pakistan and AI built on it.

there i copied this from MS/
The demands were also to
form the basis of the Muslims demands for a separate homeland. It also
convinced them that the Hindus and Muslims were two separate
nations which was to be further developed by Allama Iqbal in 1930

 

[Alchemist4lyf]

wat bout this...

Was the work of Shah Wali Ullah the most important factor in the revival of Islam in the subcontinent
during the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries? Give reasons for your answer.

If you look at the time period, 1600 - 1700..
Only the work of Shah WaliUllah fits in...
But the ms, has the works of all three.....
Though i also wrote about all three of the reformers, .... i wanna know if theres something i'm not seeing here..

 

[dannydan56]

(c) How successful were the British attempts to take control of lands in the sub-continent
between 1750 and 1856? ................



help me that from which book should i attempt this question....bcoz i cannot find the success of tipu sultan and the power of local nawabs in nigel smith or nigel kelly

 

[scouserlfc]

nopes u just write abt those three reformers Alchemist since the timeline indicates it and u tell in the end that Shah Wali ULlahs teaching inspired muslims for all times to come or something similar.

Well for @dannydan56 u have to use all books here i used Kelly,Smith and Bajwa.
Tell abt
1.Battle of Buxar
2.Plassey
3.Sikhs wars
4.Tipu Sultan
5.Annexation also comes i think so .

In all these u tell abt there success in resisting British like Ranjit singh was able to resist British and they didnt remove him but after his death other sikhs attacked british so they were defeated and british success.

 

[rafae]

Okay dude, i'll help you out on this Danny.

First we have to consider British successes then we have to consider British failures.

British Successes:
-Victory in Battle of Plassey 1757
-Victory in Battle of Buxar 1764
-Defeat of Tipu Sultan 1799
-Defeat of Nawab of Oudh, who was forced to grant large areas of territory in 1799.
-March in Delhi, forcing Mughal Emperor Shah Alam to accept he was ruling under British protection in 1803
-Defeat of Marathas in 1818
-Annexation of Sindh, Punjab and NWFP.


British Failures
-Defeat of EIC in 1684 by Aurangzeb
-Failure to beat Tipu Sultan uptil 1799
-Failure to beat Marathas uptill 1818
-Failure to annex Punjab up untill Ranjit Singh's death in 1839.

An explanation:

You asked for an explanation of Tipu Sultan, well here it is.
Tipu Sultan on a number of occasions defeated the British severely, and was a formidable opponent. He was well-equipped with modern weaponry provided by the French. Furthermore, he had disciplined infantry who made well use of the weaponry and severely ousted the British. It was only upto 1799 that they actually succeeded to defeat him, and further more gain control of Mysore- Tipu was the Sultan of Mysore.
Therefore, the numerous occasions on which Tipu Sultan proved to be victorious against the British clearly highlighted how the British were unable to deal with him, and it can thus be classified as a failure.

Okay, so meine thora stretch kar kay explain kar diya hai, but you won't have enough time to explain ALL of this stuff in the exam, so it's best you take like 3 important successes and 3 important failures.

And furthermore, add a conclusion.

My conclusion would go like: I think the British were successful in taking control of lands in the sub-continent. With their superior military strategies, modern weaponry, and highly efficient governor generals, the British easily gained access to major territories. Further proof of this can be highlighted by the fact how India was made an official colony of the British after the 1857 war.

You should not be worrying about minute successes such as the power of local nawabs etc. If you can form an answer explain atleast 5 suitable factors, and later a judgement, then you can get good marks.

Furthermore, can someone explain why the RTC's and Govt of India Act 1935 helped in the formation of the Pakistan Movement?

 

[scouserlfc]

Yaar @rafae see the timeline it doesnt suggest 1600s so no Aurangzeb comes leave him out while rest is awesome.

Well RTC led to the formation because British came to know that in any future states partition would be necessary as hindus and muslims constantly disagreed on almost every issue.

And govt of India Act 1935 did this by letting provincial govt to have powers with ministers controlling some subjects.And muslims wanted this as they wanted to protect their people rights

So is this any question. :?: