History isn’t just about dates and events—it’s about the stories of people, their struggles, and the dreams that shaped the world we live in today. For Class 10 students studying the CBSE syllabus, Chapter 2 of the NCERT History textbook, "Nationalism in India," is a fascinating journey into how India fought for its freedom and how ordinary people became extraordinary heroes. This chapter connects the dots between global events and local movements, showing how nationalism wasn’t just an idea but a force that united millions. In this article, we’ll dive deep into the chapter, breaking it down into digestible sections, exploring key events, figures, and concepts, and making it relatable for students and curious readers alike. Whether you’re preparing for exams or just want to understand India’s past, these notes are crafted to help you grasp the essence of this transformative period.
The First World War and Its Impact on India
The story of nationalism in India doesn’t begin in a vacuum—it’s tied to the tremors of the First World War (1914-1918). Imagine a world thrown into chaos, with empires clashing and millions caught in the crossfire. India, then a British colony, wasn’t fighting on the battlefields of Europe, but it felt the war’s ripples deeply. The British dragged India into this global conflict, demanding resources, money, and men. Over a million Indian soldiers were sent to fight, often in harsh conditions, while back home, taxes soared, and food prices skyrocketed. Villages emptied as young men left, never to return, and families struggled to survive. This wasn’t just a distant war—it was a burden that pressed down on every Indian household.
The war shook the economy too. Prices doubled, and shortages became common. For a farmer in Punjab or a weaver in Bengal, this meant hunger and despair. The British promised political reforms in return for India’s support, but when the war ended, those promises felt hollow. Instead, they introduced the Rowlatt Act in 1919, a law that allowed them to arrest anyone without trial. It was a slap in the face to Indians who had hoped for freedom. This betrayal lit a spark—people began to question why they were suffering for a war that wasn’t theirs. The stage was set for a new kind of resistance, one that wasn’t just about grievances but about a shared dream of independence.
Mahatma Gandhi and the Idea of Satyagraha
Enter Mahatma Gandhi, a man who turned simple ideas into a powerful weapon. When Gandhi returned to India from South Africa in 1915, he brought with him a philosophy called Satyagraha—truth and non-violent resistance. Picture this: instead of fighting with guns or fists, Gandhi urged people to fight with their hearts, to stand up peacefully but firmly against injustice. It was a radical idea in a world used to violence, and it caught on like wildfire.
Gandhi didn’t jump straight into a national movement. He started small, addressing local issues to show people what Satyagraha could do. In 1917, he went to Champaran in Bihar, where indigo farmers were forced to grow a crop that barely fed their families while British planters grew rich. Gandhi listened, organized protests, and pressured the authorities until they agreed to investigate. The farmers won some relief, but more importantly, they saw a new way to fight. Then came Kheda in Gujarat, where floods and famine had crushed farmers, yet the British demanded taxes. Gandhi rallied them to refuse payment peacefully, and again, the government backed down. In Ahmedabad, he supported mill workers striking for better wages, proving Satyagraha worked for urban workers too.
These early victories weren’t just wins—they were lessons. Gandhi showed that unity and non-violence could shake the mighty British Empire. By 1919, with the Rowlatt Act fueling outrage, Gandhi was ready to take Satyagraha nationwide. He called for a hartal—a day of strike and prayer—on April 6, 1919. Shops closed, workers stopped, and streets filled with protesters. It wasn’t perfect—violence broke out in some places—but it was a sign that Indians were waking up. Gandhi’s vision of a united, fearless India was taking root.
The Jallianwala Bagh Massacre: A Turning Point
If there’s one event that scarred India’s soul and fanned the flames of nationalism, it’s the Jallianwala Bagh massacre. On April 13, 1919, in Amritsar, a peaceful crowd gathered in a walled garden to protest the Rowlatt Act. It was Baisakhi, a harvest festival, and families mingled with activists, unaware of the horror to come. General Dyer, a British officer, arrived with armed soldiers, blocked the only exit, and ordered them to fire. For ten minutes, bullets rained down. Hundreds died—men, women, children—trapped with nowhere to run. The official count said 379, but the real number was likely higher. Piles of bodies lay in the dust, a brutal reminder of colonial cruelty.
The massacre wasn’t just a tragedy; it was a wake-up call. People who’d trusted the British lost faith overnight. Poets like Rabindranath Tagore renounced their knighthoods, and ordinary Indians felt a surge of anger and unity. Gandhi called off the hartal, fearing more violence, but the damage was done. Jallianwala Bagh became a symbol of why India needed freedom—not just from laws, but from a system that saw them as less than human. Students, you’ll see this event in every exam question on nationalism, because it marks the moment when hesitation turned to determination.
The Non-Cooperation Movement: A Nation Says No
By 1920, Gandhi had a bold plan: Non-Cooperation. Imagine telling an entire country to stop helping the people who ruled them. It sounds impossible, but that’s exactly what happened. The Non-Cooperation Movement, launched in 1920, asked Indians to boycott British goods, schools, courts, and jobs. Gandhi believed that if Indians refused to cooperate, the British system would collapse. It was a simple idea, but it demanded courage—leaving a government job or burning foreign cloth meant risking everything.
The movement started strong. Lawyers like Motilal Nehru and C.R. Das gave up lucrative practices. Students walked out of British schools, and bonfires of foreign cloth lit up towns and villages. Hand-spun khadi became a symbol of pride, a way to say, “We don’t need you.” In the countryside, peasants joined in, tying their local struggles—like high rents or forced labor—to the national cause. Even the Congress, once a club for elite debates, became a mass organization under Gandhi’s leadership.
But it wasn’t all smooth. In February 1922, at Chauri Chaura in Uttar Pradesh, a protest turned ugly. Angry villagers attacked a police station and set it on fire, killing 22 policemen. Gandhi, shocked by the violence, called off the movement. Some criticized him—why stop when the British were on the ropes? But for Gandhi, non-violence wasn’t negotiable. The movement ended, but it left a mark. Millions had tasted defiance, and the British knew India wouldn’t stay quiet for long.
The Dandi Salt March and Civil Disobedience
Fast forward to 1930, and Gandhi was back with an even bigger idea: Civil Disobedience. This time, he didn’t just want non-cooperation—he wanted Indians to break unjust laws openly and fearlessly. The spark was salt, something so ordinary yet so powerful. The British had a monopoly on salt production and taxed it heavily, making it a burden for the poorest. Gandhi decided to challenge this with a 240-mile march from Sabarmati to Dandi, starting March 12, 1930. Picture him, a frail man in a dhoti, walking with followers, picking up more people each day—farmers, women, students—all heading to the sea.
On April 6, 1930, Gandhi reached Dandi and scooped up a handful of salt from the shore. It was illegal, a direct defiance of British law, and it set off a chain reaction. Across India, people made salt, sold it, and refused to pay the tax. The British arrested thousands, including Gandhi, but the movement grew. Women like Sarojini Naidu led protests, and in cities like Bombay and Calcutta, pickets shut down liquor shops and cloth stores. The Civil Disobedience Movement was messier than Non-Cooperation—violence flared in places like Peshawar—but it showed the world that India’s spirit couldn’t be crushed.
The British eventually released Gandhi and negotiated the Gandhi-Irwin Pact in 1931, agreeing to free prisoners if the movement paused. It wasn’t full victory, but it proved civil disobedience worked. For students, this is a key moment—exams love questions on the Salt March because it’s Gandhi at his most iconic, turning a pinch of salt into a global symbol of resistance.
Diverse Voices in the Freedom Struggle
Nationalism in India wasn’t just Gandhi’s story—it was a chorus of voices, each adding its own tune. While Gandhi led with non-violence, others took different paths. The Swaraj Party, formed by Motilal Nehru and C.R. Das, believed in working within British councils to push for self-rule. They won seats and stirred debates, showing that even inside the system, Indians could fight back. Then there were the revolutionaries—think Bhagat Singh, Chandrashekhar Azad—young firebrands who bombed buildings and faced the gallows with songs on their lips. Their courage inspired millions, even if their methods clashed with Gandhi’s.
Muslims played a huge role too. The Khilafat Movement (1919-1924), led by brothers Muhammad Ali and Shaukat Ali, protested the British treatment of the Ottoman Caliph after World War I. Gandhi saw a chance to unite Hindus and Muslims, merging Khilafat with Non-Cooperation. It worked for a while—communities stood shoulder to shoulder—but tensions later grew, especially as the British fanned communal divides. Meanwhile, workers and peasants formed unions and kisan sabhas, demanding rights alongside freedom. In Awadh, Baba Ramchandra led farmers against landlords, blending local grievances with the national struggle.
This diversity made nationalism messy but real. It wasn’t one leader or one idea—it was a nation finding its voice, step by step.
Limits and Challenges of Nationalism
Nationalism united India, but it wasn’t perfect. Not everyone jumped on board. Big businessmen like the Tatas initially supported Non-Cooperation but hesitated during Civil Disobedience, worried about profits. Landlords and rich peasants sometimes clashed with poorer farmers, whose demands for lower rents threatened their wealth. Muslims grew wary too—after the Khilafat Movement faded, many felt Congress leaned Hindu, a fear the Muslim League later amplified.
The “Depressed Classes” (now Dalits) faced their own struggle. Leaders like B.R. Ambedkar pushed for their rights, clashing with Gandhi over how to uplift them. At the Round Table Conferences in London (1930-1932), these tensions boiled over—Ambedkar wanted separate electorates for Dalits, while Gandhi saw it as dividing India. The Poona Pact of 1932 compromised with reserved seats, but the rift lingered. Nationalism, for all its power, couldn’t erase caste, class, or religious divides overnight.
The Quit India Movement: The Final Push
By 1942, with World War II raging, Gandhi launched the Quit India Movement—the last big blow against British rule. The British had pulled India into another war, and patience was gone. On August 8, 1942, Gandhi gave his “Do or Die” speech in Bombay, urging total disobedience. The response was explosive—strikes, protests, and sabotage swept the country. Young leaders like Aruna Asaf Ali and Jayaprakash Narayan kept it alive underground as the British jailed Gandhi and Congress leaders.
The British hit back hard, arresting over 100,000 and killing hundreds. But Quit India wasn’t silenced—it showed a nation ready to rule itself. By 1947, weakened by war and rebellion, the British left. For students, this movement is the dramatic finale of Chapter 2, a testament to how nationalism evolved from small protests to an unstoppable tide.
Key Dates and Events in Nationalism in India
Here’s a quick reference table for exam prep:
| Year | Event | Significance |
|---|---|---|
| 1914-1918 | First World War | Strained India’s resources, sparked unrest |
| 1919 | Rowlatt Act & Jallianwala Bagh Massacre | Fueled nationwide anger against British rule |
| 1920-1922 | Non-Cooperation Movement | Mass boycott of British systems |
| 1930 | Dandi Salt March | Launched Civil Disobedience Movement |
| 1942 | Quit India Movement | Final push for independence |
Why Nationalism in India Matters Today
Studying this chapter isn’t just about passing Class 10—it’s about understanding who we are. Nationalism in India wasn’t a straight line or a single hero’s tale. It was farmers refusing taxes, women breaking salt laws, revolutionaries dying young, and millions finding courage in unity. It’s a reminder that freedom isn’t given—it’s fought for, often with nothing but grit and hope. Today, when we talk about rights or justice, we’re echoing those voices from a century ago. For students, these notes aren’t just history—they’re a mirror to see India’s soul.
FAQs on Class 10 History Chapter 2
What was the main aim of the Non-Cooperation Movement?
The Non-Cooperation Movement aimed to cripple British rule by refusing to participate in their institutions—schools, courts, jobs—and boycotting their goods, pushing for self-reliance and swaraj (self-rule).
Why did Gandhi choose salt for the Dandi March?
Salt was a basic need taxed unfairly by the British, affecting everyone, especially the poor. Gandhi used it to symbolize how colonial laws exploited Indians, making it a rallying point for defiance.
How did the Jallianwala Bagh massacre affect the freedom struggle?
It turned public opinion sharply against the British, uniting people across regions and religions in anger and fueling the demand for complete independence.
What was the significance of the Quit India Movement?
It was the final mass movement against British rule, showing their control was crumbling and paving the way for independence in 1947.
Why did some groups not fully support nationalism?
Businessmen feared economic losses, Muslims worried about Hindu dominance, and Dalits sought separate rights, highlighting the diverse needs within India’s fight for freedom.