India Partition Activity WebQuest Study Notes

Origin: Adapted from the Stanford History Education Group.
Instructions:
- Make a copy of this Google Doc, adding your name to it.
- Respond to activity questions in a different-colored font.
- Check thoroughly for spelling errors and typos before submission.
Central Historical Question: Was the partition of India a good plan given what people knew at the time?

Timeline Questions:
1. When was the idea of a separate homeland for Muslims first introduced?
- 1950s
1. Who was one of the biggest proponents of a separate Muslim state?
- Muhammad Ali Jinnah
1. Why did some Muslim leaders want a separate Muslim state? What worried them about a united India?
- Concerns arose that as Muslims they would become a minority and that their religion would be suppressed.
1. Why might some blame the British for the violence that resulted from Partition?
- Blame may be assigned due to the British's rushed withdrawal from India, potentially exacerbating tensions.

(Sourcing) Who gave this speech and who was his audience?
- Speaker: Muhammad Ali Jinnah
- Audience: Muslims in India
(Close reading) Why does Jinnah support the creation of a separate state for Muslims?
- Jinnah argues for a separate state because he believes Muslims and Hindus are distinct nations that cannot coexist as one.

(Sourcing) Who wrote this document? What do you suppose his purpose was in writing a book about India at this time?
- Author: Jawaharlal Nehru
- Purpose: To communicate his views on the future governance and integrity of India, advocating for unity against the backdrop of nationalistic movements.
(Close reading) What are two reasons the speaker opposes the creation of a separate state for Muslims?
- Nehru likely argues against the division on emotional and pragmatic grounds, suggesting that division leads to conflict and undermines India’s potential as a unified state.
(Close reading) What does Nehru mean when he accuses the supporters of a separate Pakistan of moving on the “emotional plane”?
- Nehru suggests that proponents of a separate Pakistan base their arguments on emotional appeals rather than rational, logical considerations, indicating a lack of foresight about the implications of partition.

Contextualization Question:
- Both Jinnah and Nehru are positioned before Great Britain grants India independence. This timeline is significant as both figures’ arguments reflect their positions and strategies within the larger struggle for independence, influencing their perspectives on unity versus division.

Based on Document A (Jinnah) and Document B (Nehru):
- Assess whether India’s Partition Plan was a good decision using evidence from both documents to support your view.
- Claim: Was the Partition Plan justified based on the knowledge available at the time?

(Sourcing) Who is speaking in this document?
- An account or explanation by Lord Mountbatten, the last Viceroy of India.
(Sourcing) What type of document is this?
- This may be a speech, letter, or official report discussing the partition process.
(Sourcing) When was this document written? Why is this important?
- Understanding the timing of this document is crucial as it reflects the immediate context surrounding the partition discussions and decisions.
(Close reading) According to Mountbatten, what role did Jinnah play in the decision to split India rather than keep it unified?
- He profiles Jinnah as a central figure in advocating for partition, indicating how his leadership and vision framed the eventual outcomes.
(Close reading) According to Mountbatten, why was it “almost criminal” that he didn’t know that Jinnah was dying?
- Mountbatten reflects on the lack of knowledge about Jinnah’s health as indicative of the rushed political processes at play, underscoring the tight timelines and pressures involved in partition negotiations.

(Sourcing) What type of document is this?
- An analysis or an expert opinion that reviews the partition’s outcomes.
(Sourcing) How does this source differ from all the others? Do you think it’s more or less reliable? Explain.
- This document may provide a retrospective view, suggesting a difference in perspective compared to contemporary accounts, possibly leading to increased reliability due to historical hindsight.
(Close reading) According to Wolpert, who was responsible for the failure of partition? Explain.
- Wolpert attributes failure to specific parties involved, potentially highlighting miscalculations or failures in leadership at critical junctures during the negotiation process.

Based on Document C (Mountbatten) and Document D (Wolpert):
- Assess whether India’s Partition Plan was a good decision, utilizing evidence from both documents.
FINAL Claim: Was India’s Partition Plan justified based on the knowledge available at the time?
- Elaborate on how political changes from around 1900 to the present led to territorial, demographic, and nationalist developments that influenced the partition.