CBSE Class 12 History Term 2 Board Exam 2022 will be conducted on 10th June, 2022 (Friday). The paper of History will have competency based questions. One among such questions will be the source based question that will be asked for 4 marks. Students can easily score full marks in this question with good practice. We have provided below the source based questions for students to practice before the upcoming board exam. These questions with answers are prepared by the experts. Therefore, these questions are quite useful for last minute revision and scoring full marks in exam.
Also Read|
CBSE Class 12 History Sample Paper & Marking Scheme for Term 2 Exam 2022
CBSE Class 12 History (Term 2) Important 3 Marks Questions - By Experts
Read the following excerpts carefully and answer the questions that follow :
Nobles at court
The Jesuit Priest Father Antonio Monserrate, resident at the court of Akbar, noticed:
In order to prevent the great nobles becoming insolent through the unchallenged enjoyment of power, the King summons them to court and gives them imperious commands, as though they were his slaves. The obedience to these commands ill suits their exalted rank and dignity.
(i) Examine the relationship between Akbar and his nobles.
(ii) How do you think that the nobility was an important pillar of the Mughal State?
(iii) Explain the observation of the Jesuit Priest Father Antonio Monserrate regarding this relationship.
Answers:
(i) The King would summon the nobles to the court and give them imperial commands as though they were his slaves. This was to prevent the great nobles from becoming insolent through unchallenged enjoyment of power. The King granted titles to men of merit. A Courtier/noble never approached the Emperor empty handed.
(ii) Nobility was recruited from the diverse ethnic and religious groups. This ensured no faction was large enough to challenge the authority of the state. The nobles participated in military campaigns with their armies and also served as officers of the empire in the provinces. For members of the nobility, imperial service was a way of acquiring power, wealth and possibly the highest reputation.
(iii) (a) High respect shown by Akbar towards the members of the Jesuit
(b) They interpreted the Emperor's open interest in the doctrines of Christianity as a sign of his acceptance of their faith. This could be understood in relation to the intolerant religious atmosphere that existed in Europe at that time.
The jotedars of Dinajpur
Buchanan described the ways in which the jotedars of Dinajpur in North Bengal resisted being disciplined by the zamindar and undermined his power:
Landlords do not like this class of men, but it is evident that they are absolutely necessary, unless the landlords themselves would advance money to their necessitous tenantry ... The jotedars who cultivate large portions of lands are very refractory, and know that the zamindars have no power over them. They pay only a few rupees on account of their revenue and then fall in balance almost every kist (instalment), they hold more lands than they are entitled to by their pottahs (deeds of contract). Should the zamindar’s officers, in consequence, summon them to the cutcherry, and detain them for one or two hours with a view to reprimand them, they immediately go and complain at the Fouzdarry Thanna (police station) for imprisonment and at the munsiff’s (a judicial officer at the lower court) cutcherry for being dishonoured and whilst the causes continue unsettled, they instigate the petty ryots not to pay their revenue consequently
i. Who were jotedars?
ii. How did the Zamindars resist the growing power of the Jotedars?
iii. Why Joetdars were more powerful than Zamindars?
Answers:
(i) Rich peasants.
(ii) By transferring some of his property to the women of the house. At the time of the auction, lathiyals were sent to threaten the jotedars who tried to buy the estate of the zamindar.
(iii) Unlike zamindars who often lived in urban areas, jotedars were located in the villages and exercised direct control over a considerable section of poor villagers.
The Azamgarh Proclamation, 25 August 1857
This is one of the main sources of our knowledge about what the rebels wanted:
Section III — Regarding Public Servants: It is not a secret thing, that under the British Government, natives employed in the civil and military services have little respect, low pay, and no manner of influence; and all the posts of dignity and emolument in both the departments are exclusively bestowed on Englishmen, ......
Therefore, all the natives in the British service ought to be alive to their religion and interest, and abjuring their loyalty to the English, side with the Badshahi Government, and obtain salaries of 200 and 300 rupees for the present, and be entitled to high posts in the future........
Section IV—Regarding Artisans. It is evident that the Europeans, by the introduction of English articles into India, have thrown the weavers, the cotton dressers, the carpenters, the blacksmiths, and the shoemakers, etc., out of employ, and have engrossed their occupations, so that every description of native artisan has been reduced to beggary. But under the Badshahi Government, the native artisans will exclusively be employed in the service of the kings, the rajahs, and the rich; and this will no doubt ensure their prosperity Therefore, these artisans ought to renounce the English services.
(i) How did the introduction of English articles affect the artisans?
(ii) How did the conditions of the artisans improve under the Badshahi Government?
(iii) Why were the Public Servants dissatisfied with the British Government?
Answer:
(i) With the arrival of a large number of foreign goods in India, the British established their sole control over all kinds of artisans. As a result, they became unemployed. Their condition became like that of the beggars.
(ii) In the monarchical government, the native craftsmen were employed in the service of the kings and the rich people. In this way, they got a chance for their development. It brought a considerable change in their condition.
(iii) In the British government, the government servants were not given any respect. They were paid less. They were even devoid of any power. The status posts were given only to the Englishmen. So the Indian government employees were not satisfied with the British government.
What the Sepoys Thought
This is one of the arzis (petition or application) of rebel sepoys that have survived:
A century ago the British arrived in Hindostan and gradually entertained troops in their service, and became masters of every state. Our forefathers have always served them, and we also entered their service...By the mercy of God and with our assistance the British also conquered every place they liked, in which thousands of us, Hindustani men were sacrificed, but we never made any excuses or pretenses nor revolted...
But in the year eighteen fifty-seven, the British issued an order that new cartridges and muskets which had arrived from England were to be issued; in the former of which the fats of cows and pigs were mixed; and also that attach of wheat mixed with powdered bones was to be eaten; and even distributed them in every Regiment of infantry, cavalry, and artillery...
They gave these cartridges to the sowars (mounted soldiers) of the 3rd Light Cavalry, and ordered them to bite them; the troopers objected to it and said that they would never bite them, for if they did, their religion and faith would be destroyed... upon this the British officers paraded the men of the 3 Regiments and having prepared 1,400 English soldiers, and other Battalions of European troops and Horse Artillery, surrounded them, and placing six guns before each of the infantry regiments, loaded the guns with grape and made 84 new troopers prisoners, and put them in jail with irons on them... The reason that the sowars of the Cantonment were put into jail was that we should be frightened into biting the new cartridges.
On this account we and all our country-men having united together, have fought the British for the preservation of our faith.... we have been compelled to make war for two years and the Rajahs and Chiefs who are with us in faith and religion, are still so and have undergone all sorts of trouble; we have fought for two years in order that our faith and religion may not be polluted. If the religion of a Hindoo or Mussalman is lost, what remains in the world?
(i) With which rebellion were these sepoys associated?
(ii) How did the Indian Youth help the British?
(iii) Which order of the British led to the Revolt of 1857?
Answer:
(i) These sepoys were associated with the Revolt of 1857.
(ii) The Indian youth won many regions for the British. They made many sacrifices to conquer these territories. They never retreated from achieving their mission.
(iii) In 1857, the British issued an order that the Indian soldiers would have to use the new cartridges and muskets. These cartridges and muskets had the coating of the fat of cows and pigs. Besides the Indian soldiers were given the flour of wheat to eat. But this flour was mixed with bone dust of animals. The Indian soldiers felt that if they complied the British order, their religion and faith would be destroyed. So they united for the preservation of their faith. There was an acute dis¬contentment among them because of new cartridges and muskets.
“Tomorrow we shall break the salt tax law”
On 5 April 1930, Mahatma Gandhi spoke at Dandi: When I left Sabarmati with my companions for this seaside hamlet of Dandi, I was not certain in my mind that we would be allowed to reach this place. Even while I was at Sabarmati there was a rumour that I might be arrested. I had thought that the Government might perhaps let my party come as far as Dandi, but not me certainly. If someone says that this betrays imperfect faith on my part, I shall not deny the charge. That I have reached here is in no small measure due to the power of peace and non-violence: that power is universally felt. The Government may, if it wishes, congratulate itself on acting as it has done, for it could have arrested every one of us. In saying that it did not have the courage to arrest this army of peace, we praise it. It felt ashamed to arrest such an army. He is a civilized man who feels ashamed to do anything which his neighbors would disapprove. The Government deserves to be congratulated on not arresting us, even if it desisted only from fear of world opinion. Tomorrow we shall break the salt tax law. Whether the Government will tolerate that is a different question. It may not tolerate it, but it deserves congratulations on the patience and forbearance it has displayed in regard to this party. ... What if I and all the eminent leaders in Gujarat and in the rest of the country are arrested? This movement is based on the faith that when a whole nation is roused and on the march no leader is necessary.
i. How did Gandhiji break the salt law?
ii. Describe the mental condition of Gandhiji in brief before the Dandi March. What he proved wrong?
iii. On what principle was the salt movement based? What did Gandhiji making of salt signify?
Answer:
i. On April 5 1930 Gandhiji reached to The Dandi on the sea coast here he made fistful of salt from the sea water and it broke the salt law.
ii. Gandhiji had a doubt in his mind. He felt uncertain if he would be allowed to reach Dandi or not. There was also a rumour that he might be arrested when, he would have reached Dandi while breaking the salt law.
iii. Salt movement was based on the principle of faith one day the entire nation will rise against the injustice and there will be no necessity of a leader. Gandhiji making of salt contrary to the salt laws symbolised refusal of Indian people to live under British made laws and under the British.
Ambedkar on separate electorates
In response to Mahatma Gandhi’s opposition to the demand for separate electorates for the Depressed Classes, Ambedkar wrote: Here is a class which is undoubtedly not in a position to sustain itself in the struggle for existence. The religion, to which they are tied, instead of providing them an honourable place, brands them as lepers, not fit for ordinary intercourse. Economically, it is a class entirely dependent upon the high-caste Hindus for earning its daily bread with no independent way of living open to it. Nor are all ways closed by reason of the social prejudices of the Hindus but there is a definite attempt all through our Hindu Society to bolt every possible door so as not to allow the Depressed Classes any opportunity to rise in the scale of life.
In these circumstances, it would be granted by all fairminded persons that as the only path for a community so handicapped to succeed in the struggle for life against organised tyranny, some share of political power in order that it may protect itself is a paramount necessity ...
i. Who opposed Gandhiji’s view for not having separate electorate for untouchables?
ii. What were the arguments put forward by Gandhiji against separate electorate
iii. How had Ambedkar narrated the social and economic condition of the Dalits
Answer:
i. Dr BR Ambedkar opposed Gandhiji’s view.
ii. He argued that separate electorate would permanently segregate the depressed classes from the main stream of Indian society. It would also threaten the Nation's Unity.
iii. He wrote that these people were not in a position to sustain themselves. They have no respect in the society hated like lepers. They were totally dependent on the upper caste for their bread.
“The British element is gone, but they have Left the mischief behind”
Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel said:
It is no use saying that we ask for separate electorates because it is good for us. We have heard it long enough. We have heard it for years, and as a result of this agitation we are now a separate nation ... Can you show me one free country where there are separate electorates? If so, I shall be prepared to accept it. But in this unfortunate country, if this separate electorate is going to be persisted in, even after the division of the country, woe betide the country; it is not worth living in. Therefore, I say, it is not for my good alone, it is for your own good that I say it, forget the past. One day, we may be united ... The British element is gone, but they have left the mischief behind. We do not want to perpetuate that mischief. (Hear, hear). When the British introduced this element they had not expected that they will have to go so soon. They wanted it for their easy administration. That is all right. But they have left the legacy behind. Are we to get out of it or not?
i. What did Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel say in opposition to the provision of separate electorates?
ii. What were the evil-effects of the separate electorates?
iii. What did he say while making an appeal to abolish separate electorates?
Answer:
(i) Sardar Patel stated that there was no provision of separate electorates in any free country of the world.
(ii) (a) The provision of separate electorates was not good for the country.
(b) It has led to the partition of the country.
(c) It has brought woes to the people.
(iii) According to Sardar Patel, the provision of separate electorates was like a poison in the political system. It had turned one community against another. It had divided the nation and caused bloodshed.
Also Read| CBSE Class 12 History Syllabus for Term 2 Exam 2022
