revolutionary movement essay

Chapter 3 Introductory Essay: 1763-1789

Written by: Jonathan Den Hartog, Samford University

By the end of this section, you will:.

• Explain the context in which America gained independence and developed a sense of national identity

Introduction

The American Revolution remains an important milestone in American history. More than just a political and military event, the movement for independence and the founding of the United States also established the young nation’s political ideals and defined new governing structures to sustain them. These structures continue to shape a country based on political, religious, and economic liberty, and the principle of self-government under law. The “shot heard round the world” (as poet Ralph Waldo Emerson described the battles of Lexington and Concord) created a nation that came to inspire the democratic pursuit of liberty in other lands, bringing a “new order of the ages”.

This engraving of the 1775 battle of Lexington—detailed by American printmaker Amos Doolittle who volunteered to fight against the British—is the only contemporary American visual record of this event.

From Resistance to Revolution

As British subjects, the colonists felt flush with patriotism after the Anglo-American victory in the French and Indian War (1754–1763). They were proud of their king, George III, and of the “rights of Englishmen” that made them part of a free and prosperous world empire. Although Britain’s policies after the French and Indian War caused disputes and tensions between the crown and its North American colonies, independence for the colonies was not a foregone conclusion. Instead, the desire for independence emerged as a result of individual decisions and large-scale events that intensified the conflict with Great Britain and helped unite the diverse colonies.

As early as 1763, British responses to the end of the French and Indian War were arousing anger in the colonies. An immediate question concerned Britain’s relationship with American Indians in the interior. Many French-allied American Indians formed a confederation and continued to fight the British, especially under the leadership of the Odawa chief Pontiac and the Delaware prophet Neolin. Together, they hoped to reclaim lands exclusively for their tribes and to entice the French to return and once again challenge the English. Pontiac’s War led to American Indian seizure of western settlements such as Detroit and Fort Niagara. Rather than ending the dispute quickly, unsuccessful British attempts at diplomacy with France’s Indian allies dragged the war into 1766. (See the Pontiac’s Rebellion Narrative.)

Meanwhile, the British issued the Proclamation of 1763, which attempted to separate American Indian and white settlements by forbidding American colonists to cross the Appalachian Mountains. The hope was to prevent another costly war and crushing war debt. The British stationed troops and built forts on the American frontier to enforce the proclamation, but they were ignoring reality. Many colonists had already settled west of the Appalachians in search of new opportunities, and those who had fought the war specifically to acquire land believed their property rights were being violated by the British standing army.

The line drawn by the Royal Proclamation of 1763 from Lake Ontario to the Gulf of Mexico left much of the frontier “reserved for the Indians” and led to resentment from many colonists.

In 1764, the British began to raise revenue for the large army stationed on the colonial frontier and tightened their enforcement of trade regulations. This was a change from the relatively hands-off approach to governing they had previously embraced. The new ministry of George Grenville introduced the Sugar Act, which reduced the six-pence tax from the widely ignored Molasses Act (1733) by three pence per gallon. But British customs officials were ordered to enforce the Sugar Act by collecting the newly lowered tax and prosecuting smugglers in vice-admiralty courts without juries. Colonial merchants bristled against the changes in imperial policy, but worse changes were yet to come.

The introduction of the Stamp Act in 1765 caused the first significant constitutional dispute over Britain’s taxing the colonists without their consent. The Stamp Act was designed to raise revenue from the colonies (to help pay for the cost of troops on the frontier) by taxing legal forms and printed materials including newspapers; a stamp was placed on the document to indicate that the duty had been paid. Because the colonists had long raised money for the crown through their own elected legislatures, to which they gave their consent, and because they did not have direct representation in Parliament, they cried, “No taxation without representation,” claiming their rights as Englishmen. Although the colonists accepted the British Parliament’s right to use tariffs as a means to regulate their commerce within the imperial system, they asserted that the new taxes were aimed solely to raise revenue. In other words, the Stamp Act imposed a direct tax on the colonists, taking their property without their consent, and, as such, amounted to a new power being claimed by the British Parliament. (See the Stamp Act Resistance Narrative.)

Early voices of protest and resistance came from attorney and farmer Patrick Henry in the Virginia House of Burgesses and lawyer John Adams outside Boston. A group of clubs organized in Boston. Members ransacked the houses of Andrew Oliver, the appointed collector of the Stamp Tax, and Thomas Hutchinson, the colony’s lieutenant governor. Calls for active resistance came from the Sons of Liberty, a group of artisans, laborers, and sailors led by Samuel Adams (cousin of John and a business owner quickly emerging as a leader of the opposition). Petitions, protests, boycotts of articles bearing the stamp, and even violence spread to other cities, including New York, and demonstrated that the colonists’ resolve could keep the Stamp Tax from being collected.

This 1765 engraving entitled “Stamp Master in Effigy” depicts an angry mob in Portsmouth New Hampshire hanging a Crown-appointed stamp master in effigy. (credit: “New Hampshire—Stamp Master in Effigy ” courtesy of the New Hampshire Historical Society)

Meanwhile, delegates from nine colonies met in New York as the Stamp Act Congress to register a formal complaint in October 1765. The Congress was a show of increasing unity; it declared colonial rights and petitioned the British Parliament for relief.

The colonial boycott of British goods in response to the Stamp Act had its desired effect: British merchants affected by it petitioned the crown to revoke the taxes. In the face of this colonial resistance, a new government took leadership in Parliament and in 1766 repealed the Stamp Act. The colonists celebrated and thought the crisis was resolved. However, the British Parliament simultaneously passed the Declaratory Act, asserting its authority with the power to legislate for the colonies “in all cases whatsoever,” including taxing without consent. The stage was set to continue the conflict.

Like their British counterparts, many Americans adopted the custom of drinking tea. How does this teapot c. 1770 show the politicization of the cultural habit of tea drinking? (credit: “No Stamp Act Teapot ” Division of Cultural and Community Life National Museum of American History Smithsonian Institution)

Just one year later, Parliament began to pass the so-called Townshend Acts. The first of these was the Revenue Act, which taxed many goods imported by the colonies, including paint, glass, lead, paper, and tea. Despite the stationing of British troops in Boston to quell resistance, artisans and laborers protested the taxes, while in nonimportation agreements (boycotts), merchants and planters pledged not to import taxed goods. Women resisted the tax by rejecting the consumer goods of Great Britain, producing homespun clothing and brewing homemade concoctions rather than buying imported British cloth and tea. They organized into groups called the Daughters of Liberty to play their part in resisting what they viewed as British tyranny, and they formed the backbone of the nonconsumption movement not to use British goods. John Dickinson, a wealthy lawyer, penned the most significant protest, Letters from a Farmer in Pennsylvania. The tax “appears to me to be unconstitutional,” he wrote, and “destructive to the liberty of these colonies.” The key question was whether “the parliament can legally take money out of our pockets, without our consent.” The colonists’ boycott significantly hurt British trade and few taxes were collected, so Parliament revoked the Townshend Acts in 1770, leaving only the tax on tea. (See the John Dickinson Letters from a Farmer in Pennsylvania 1767-1768 Primary Source.)

British officials had stationed troops in urban areas, especially New York and Boston, to quell the growing opposition movements. Their presence led to numerous smaller incidents and eventually to the eruption of violence in Boston. In March 1770, soldiers guarding the Boston Customs House were pelted with rocks and ice chunks thrown by angry colonists. Feeling threatened, they fired into the crowd, killing six Bostonians. The soldiers claimed they had fired in self-defense, but colonists called it a cold-blooded slaughter. This was the interpretation put forward by the silversmith Paul Revere in his widely reproduced engraving of the event, now called the “Boston Massacre.” The soldiers soon faced trial, and John Adams—although no friend of British taxation—served as their defense attorney to prove that colonists respected the rule of law. Remarkably, he convinced the Boston jury of the soldiers’ innocence, but tensions continued to simmer. (See The Boston Massacre Narrative.)

Boston was ripe for resistance to British demands when Parliament issued the 1773 Tea Act. The intention was to save the British East India Company from bankruptcy by lowering the price of tea (to increase demand) while assessing a small tax along with it. Colonists saw this as a trap, using low prices to induce them to break their boycott by purchasing taxed tea from the East Indian monopoly. Before the three ships carrying the tea could be unloaded at Boston harbor, the Sons of Liberty organized a mass protest in which thousands participated. Men disguised themselves as American Indians (to symbolize their love of natural freedom), marched to the ships, and threw the tea into Boston Harbor—an event later called “the Boston Tea Party”. (See The Boston Tea Party Narrative.)

This portrayal of the Boston Tea Party dates from 1789 and reads “Americans throwing Cargoes of the Tea Ships into the River at Boston.” On the basis of the image and the artist’s caption do you think the artist was sympathetic to the Patriot or the British cause?

Parliament could not overlook this defiance of its laws and destruction of a significant amount of private property. In early 1774, it passed what it called the Coercive Acts to compel obedience to British rule. The Boston Port Act closed Boston Harbor, the main source of livelihood for many in the city. Other acts gained tighter control of the judiciary in the colony, dissolved the colonial legislature, shut down town meetings, and allowed Parliament to tear up the Massachusetts charter without due process or redress. The colonists called these laws the “Intolerable Acts.” Meeting in Philadelphia in September and October 1774, representatives of the colonies discussed how to respond. This First Continental Congress was an expression of intercolonial unity. The representatives agreed to send help to Boston, boycott British goods, and affirm their natural and constitutional rights. Few contemplated independence; most hoped to bring about a reconciliation and restoration of colonial rights. The representatives also agreed to meet again, in the spring of 1775. By that time, events had taken a very different course. (See the Acts of Parliament Lesson.)

From Lexington and Concord to Independence

Some Patriots in the colonies sought more radical solutions than reconciliation. Early in 1775, Patrick Henry tried to rouse the Virginia House of Burgesses to action:

The war is inevitable—and let it come! . . . Is life so dear or peace so sweet as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it Almighty God! I know not what course others may take; but as for me give me liberty or give me death!

Around the same time, Major General Thomas Gage, Britain’s military governor of Massachusetts, planned to seize colonial munitions held at Concord and capture several Patriot leaders, including Samuel Adams and John Hancock, along the way. On April 18, 1775, when it became clear the British were preparing to move, riders were dispatched to alert the countryside, most famously Paul Revere (in a trip immortalized by the poet Henry Wadsworth Longfellow). As a result, the following morning, the Lexington militia gathered on Lexington Green to stand in protest. As the British column advanced, its commander ordered the colonists to disperse. A shot rang out—no one knows from where. The British opened fire, and after the skirmish, seven Lexington men lay dead.

The British advanced to Concord, where by now the supplies had been safely hidden away. After witnessing British destruction in the town, the Concord militia counterattacked at the North Bridge. This was Emerson’s “shot heard round the world.” Militia units converged from all over eastern Massachusetts, pursued the British back to Boston, and besieged the city. One militiaman who survived was young Levi Preston. Years afterward, he reported that “what we meant in going for those Redcoats was this: we had always governed ourselves and we always meant to. They didn’t mean we should.”

On June 17, 1775, the Battle of Bunker Hill erupted when the colonial troops seized and fortified Breed’s Hill and repulsed three British attacks. Running low on ammunition, the colonists held their fire until the last moment under the command, “Don’t fire until you see the whites of their eyes.” The British captured their position—and suffered unexpectedly high casualties—but the battle galvanized the colonists. Although they were still divided, many came to believe that King George, instead of merely having bad advisors or making bad policies, was openly going to war with them. Arguments for independence began to gain traction. The build-up to the call for independence had been long, but now there seemed no other recourse. (See The Path to Independence Lesson.)

One key voice urging independence was that of Thomas Paine, a recent immigrant from England. In early 1776, Paine published Common Sense, a bestseller in which he attacked monarchy generally before suggesting the folly of an island (Britain) ruling a continent (America). Paine called on the colonists “to begin the world over again” and was one of the clearest voices pushing them toward independence. (See the Thomas Paine Common Sense 1776 Primary Source.)

(a) Thomas Paine’s Common Sense helped convince many colonists of the need for independence from Great Britain. (b) Paine shown here in a portrait by Laurent Dabos was a political activist and revolutionary best known for his writings on both the American and French Revolutions.

The Second Continental Congress debated the question of independence in 1776. The commander of the Continental Army, George Washington of Virginia, agreed with Henry Knox’s audacious plan to bring massive cannons three hundred miles through the winter snows from Fort Ticonderoga to Boston. When Knox succeeded, Washington used the guns to end the siege of Boston. At the congress, cousins Samuel and John Adams argued for independence and convinced a Virginia ally, Richard Henry Lee to offer this motion on June 7:

That these United Colonies are and of right ought to be free and independent States that they are absolved from all allegiance to the British Crown and that all political connection between them and the State of Great Britain is and ought to be totally dissolved.

Confronting its choices Congress also appointed a committee to prepare a Declaration of Independence. The committee consisted of John Adams, Benjamin Franklin, Roger Sherman, Robert R. Livingston, and Thomas Jefferson a 33-year-old Virginian who accepted the task of drafting the important document. (See Thomas Jefferson and the Declaration of Independence Narrative.)

No contemporary images of the Constitutional Congress survive. Robert Edge Pine worked on his painting Congress Voting Independence from 1784 to 1788. How has this artist conveyed the seriousness of the task the delegates faced?

When the votes were tallied for Lee’s resolution about a month later on July 2, twelve states had voted for independence; New York abstained until it received instructions from its legislature. John Adams later wrote that it was as if “thirteen clocks were made to strike together.” The next two days were spent revising the language of the official Declaration, which Congress approved on July 4, 1776.

The Declaration of Independence laid down several principles for the independent nation. The document made a universal assertion that all humans were created equal. According to the ideas of John Locke and the Enlightenment, people were equal in their natural rights, which included life, liberty, and the ability to pursue happiness. The document also stated that legitimate governments derived their power from the consent of the governed and existed to protect those inalienable rights. According to this “social compact,” the people had the right to overthrow a tyrannical government that violated their rights and to establish a new government. The Declaration of Independence, which also included a list of specific instances in which the crown had violated Americans’ rights, laid down the principles of republican government dedicated to the protection of individual political, religious, and economic liberties. (See the Signing the Declaration of Independence Decision Point.)

Congress had made and approved the Declaration, but whether the country could sustain the claim of independence was another matter. The struggle would have to be won on the battlefield.

War and Peace

For independence to be secured, the war had to be fought and won. British generals aimed to secure the port cities, expand British influence, and gradually win the population back to a position of loyalty. They commanded a professional army but had to subdue the entire eastern seaboard. General Washington, on the other hand, learned how to keep the Continental Army in the field and take calculated risks in the face of a British force superior in number, training, and supplies. The support of the individual states, and the congressional effort to secure allies, were essential to the war effort, but they were not guaranteed. The British sent an army of nearly thirty-two thousand redcoats and German mercenaries. They also enjoyed naval supremacy and expected that their more-experienced generals would win an easy victory over the provincials. The campaigns of 1776, thus, were about survival.

After securing Boston, Washington moved his army to New York City, the likely target of the next British attack. In the summer of 1776, the British fleet arrived under the command of Admiral Richard Howe. It carried an army led by his brother, General William Howe, and consisted not only of British troops but also of German mercenaries from Hesse (the Hessians). The first blow came on Long Island, where British attacks easily threw Washington’s army into disarray. Washington led his army in retreat to Manhattan, and then from New Jersey all the way into Pennsylvania. By the end of the year, his situation looked bleak. Many of Washington’s soldiers, about to come to the end of their enlistments, would be free to depart. If Washington could not keep his army in the field or show some success, the claim of independence might seem like an empty promise.

It was critical, therefore, to rally the troops to a decisive victory. Washington and his officers decided on the bold stroke of attacking Trenton. On Christmas evening, they crossed the Delaware River and marched through the night to arrive in Trenton at dawn on December 26. There, they surprised the Hessian outpost and captured the city. Washington then launched a quick strike on nearby Princeton. The success of this campaign gave the Americans enough hope to keep fighting. (See the Washington Crossing the Delaware Narrative and the Art Analysis: Washington Crossing the Delaware Primary Source.)

The campaigns of 1777 brought highs and lows for supporters of independence. On the positive side, the Continental Army successfully countered a British invasion from Canada. Searching for a new strategy after the New Jersey campaign, the British attacked southward from Canada with an army under the leadership of General John Burgoyne. Burgoyne’s goal was to cut through upstate New York and link up with British forces coming north along the Hudson River from New York City. A revolutionary force under Horatio Gates and Benedict Arnold swung north to meet the slow-moving Burgoyne, clashing at Saratoga, near Albany, in September and October. There, the Americans forced Burgoyne to surrender his entire army. (See The Battle of Saratoga and the French Alliance Narrative.)

The victory at Saratoga proved especially significant because it helped persuade the French to form an alliance with the United States. The treaty of alliance, brokered by Franklin and signed in early 1778, brought much-needed financial help from France to the war effort, along with the promise of military aid. But despite the important victory won by General Gates to the north, Washington continued to struggle against the main British army.

John Trumbull painted this wartime image of Washington on a promontory above the Hudson River. Washington’s enslaved valet William “Billy” Lee stands behind him and British warships fire on a U.S. fort in the background. Lee rode alongside Washington for the duration of the Revolutionary War.

For Washington, 1777 was dispiriting in that he failed to win any grand successes. The major battles came in the fall, when the British army sailed from New York and worked its way up the Chesapeake Bay, aiming to capture Philadelphia, the seat of American power where the Continental Congress met. Washington tried to stop the British, fighting at Brandywine Bridge and Germantown in September and October. He lost both battles, and the defeat at Germantown was especially severe. The British easily seized Philadelphia—a victory, even though Congress had long since left the capital and reconvened in nearby Lancaster and York. The demoralized Continentals straggled to a winter camp at Valley Forge, where few supplies reached them, and Washington grew frustrated that the states were not meeting congressional requisitions of provisions for the troops. Sickness incapacitated the undernourished soldiers. Many walked through the snow barefoot, leaving bloody footprints behind. (See the Joseph Plumb Martin The Adventures of a Revolutionary Soldier 1777 Primary Source.)

Here again, Washington provided significant leadership, keeping the army together through strength of character and his example in the face of numerous hardships. Warmer weather energized the army. So did Baron Friedrich von Steuben, newly arrived from Prussia, whom Washington had placed in charge of drilling the soldiers and preparing them for more combat. In June 1778, a more professional, better disciplined Continental Army battled the British to a draw at the Battle of Monmouth, as the imperial army withdrew from Philadelphia and returned to New York.

As the war raged, it affected different groups of Americans differently. Many Loyalists (also known as Tories) were shunned by their communities or forced to resettle under British protection. Women who sympathized with the revolution supported the war effort by creating homespun clothing, often working in groups at events in their homes called “spinning bees.” When men went to war, the women kept family farms, businesses, and artisan shops operating, producing supplies the army could use. While her husband, John, held important offices, Abigail Adams took much of the responsibility for the family’s farm in Braintree, Massachusetts. She even collected saltpeter for the making of gunpowder. Some colonial women followed their brothers and husbands to war, to support the Continental Army by cooking for the camp and nursing injured soldiers. Their engagement with the revolutionary cause brought new respect and contributed to the growth of an idea of “Republican Mothers” who raised patriotic and virtuous children for the new nation. Although women did not enjoy widespread equal civil rights, adult women of New Jersey exercised the right to vote in the early nineteenth century if, like their male counterparts, they served as heads of households meeting minimum property requirements. (See the Abigail Adams: “Remember the Ladies” Mini DBQ Lesson and the Judith Sargent Murray “On the Equality of the Sexes ” 1790 Primary Source)

To African American slaves in the South, the British appeared to offer better opportunities. In 1775, Lord Dunmore the royal governor of Virginia, offered men enslaved by Patriots their freedom if they would take up arms against the colonists. Many did, although few had gained their freedom by the conclusion of the war. Meanwhile, Dunmore’s proclamation made southern planters even more determined to oppose British rule. No such offer of freedom was forthcoming from the Patriots.

Dunmore’s 1775 proclamation of freedom for slaves who took the loyalists’ side was made for practical reasons more than moral ones: Dunmore hoped to bolster his own forces and scare slave-owning Patriots into abandoning their calls for revolution.

The Continental Congress removed harsh criticism of the slave trade and slavery from Jefferson’s draft of the Declaration of Independence, because it wrongly blamed the king for the slave trade and ignored American complicity. Later, John Laurens and Alexander Hamilton failed in their efforts to free and arm slaves in South Carolina. Despite some southern opposition, Washington eventually allowed free blacks to enlist in the Continental Army. Free black sailors such as Lemuel Haynes, who became a prominent minister after the war, served in the navy. Largely from the North, these men helped Washington’s army escape from Long Island and cross the Delaware River. In most cases, they served alongside white soldiers in integrated units. Rhode Island and Massachusetts also raised companies entirely of free black soldiers. The natural-rights principles of the Revolution inspired the push to eliminate slavery in the North, either immediately or gradually, during and after the war.

American Indians would have preferred to stay neutral in the Anglo-American conflict, but choices were often forced on them. Some tribes sided with the British, fearing the unchecked expansion of American settlers. Most members of the Iroquois League allied themselves with the British and, led by Joseph Brant, launched raids against Patriot communities in New York and Pennsylvania. Many other tribes along the frontier, including the Shawnee, Delaware, Mohawk, and Cherokee, also fought with the British. The need to deal with Indian raids was one reason for George Rogers Clark’s mission to seize western lands from the British. His victories at Kaskaskia and Vincennes, in present-day Illinois and Indiana, respectively, significantly reduced British strength in the Northwest Territory by 1779.

In contrast, many fewer tribes fought on the side of the Americans. By deciding to do so, the Oneida split the Iroquois League. Other American Indian groups living in long-settled areas also sided with the United States, including the Stockbridge Indians of Massachusetts and the Catawbas in the Carolinas. Many American frontiersmen treated Indian settlements with great violence, including a destructive march through Iroquois lands in New York in 1779 and the massacre of neutral American Indians at the Moravian village of Gnadenhutten in eastern Ohio a few years later. These conflicts deepened hostilities between American Indians and white settlers and helped whites justify the westward expansion of the frontier after the war.

After 1778, the British turned their attention to the South, where they hoped to rally Loyalist support. The major port of Charleston, South Carolina, easily fell to the British general Henry Clinton in May 1780. Pacifying the rest of the South fell to General Charles Cornwallis. He dueled across the Carolinas with the U.S. general Nathanael Greene. Encounters at King’s Mountain and Cowpens were indecisive or narrow American victories, but they effectively neutralized larger British forces in the South. After fighting at Guilford Courthouse, Cornwallis decided to head north into Virginia. He settled at Yorktown and built defenses with the expectation that the British navy would arrive to bring his army back to New York. However, in the Battle of the Capes (September 1781), the French navy defeated the British force sent to relieve Cornwallis. As a result, Cornwallis remained stuck at Yorktown.

Recognizing an opportunity, the French Marquis de Lafayette alerted Washington, who brought the main body of his army south with French forces under Rochambeau to confront Cornwallis. As the Americans strengthened their siege with the help of French engineers, command of several actions fell to Washington’s former aide, Alexander Hamilton. After separate forces of American and French troops captured two fortifications in the British outworks with a bayonet charge, Cornwallis realized he had no choice but to surrender.

John Trumbull’s 1819-1820 painting Surrender of Lord Cornwallis hangs in the rotunda of the U.S. Capitol in Washington DC. American General Benjamin Lincoln appears mounted on a white horse and accepts the sword of the British officer to his right; Cornwallis was not present at the surrender. Note the American troops to General Lincoln’s left and the French troops to his right under the white flag of the French Bourbon monarchy.

The war continued for two more years, but there were no more significant battles. By capturing Cornwallis’s army, the revolutionaries had neutralized the most significant British force in America and cleared the way for American diplomats to broker peace. In Paris, Franklin, John Adams, and John Jay won British recognition of American independence. In the end, which came in 1783, not only was independence recognized, but the new nation gained a western border at the Mississippi River, unleashing a wave of immigration to settle the land west of the Appalachians.

Confederation and Constitution

The 1780s witnessed tensions between those who wished to maintain a decentralized federation and others who believed the United States needed a new constitutional republic with a strengthened national government. The first framework of government, the Articles of Confederation, sufficed for winning the war and resolving states’ disputes over land west of the Appalachians. Yet many believed the government created by the Articles had almost lost the war because it did not adequately support the army, and after the war it had failed to govern the nation adequately. With the nation’s independence recognized, Americans had to build a stable government in the place of the British government they had thrown off. Important debates emerged about the size and shape of the nation, continuities and breaks with the colonial past, and the character of a new governing system for a free people. Debates took place not only in Philadelphia in the summer of 1787 but also in public discussions afterward in the states. Throughout the process, Americans considered various constitutional forms, but they agreed on the significance of constitutional government.

As they thought about these questions, they faced many immediate challenges in recovering from the war. Tens of thousands of Loyalists refused to continue living in the new republic and migrated to Great Britain, the Caribbean, and, most often, Canada. Many states allowed their citizens to confiscate Loyalist property and not pay their debts to British merchants, in violation of the 1783 Treaty of Paris. Economic depression resulted from a shortage of currency and lost British trade connections; businesses worked for several years to recover.

The United States did not even have complete control over its territory. Britain kept troops on the frontier, claiming it needed to ensure compliance with the peace treaty. Spain crippled the western U.S. economy by shutting down American navigation of the Mississippi River and access to the Gulf of Mexico. Individual states failed to fulfill their agreements to creditors and to other states. They passed tariffs on each other and nearly went to war over trade disputes.

In the face of these challenges, the first framework of government to be adopted was the Articles of Confederation. Although Congress began the process of drafting it shortly after independence and adopted the document in 1777, it approved a final version only in 1781. First, the title is significant: The Articles of Confederation and Perpetual Union. The Articles set up a Confederation, or a league of friendship, not a nation. The states maintained their separate sovereignties and agreed to work together on foreign affairs but little else. As a result, the central government was intentionally weak and made up of a unicameral Congress that had few powers. It did not have the power to tax, so funds for the Confederation were supposed to come from requests made to the states. There was no independent executive or judiciary. Important decisions required a supermajority of nine of the thirteen states. Significantly, the adoption of amendments or changes to the document had to be unanimous. Several attempts at reforming the Articles, such as granting Congress the power to tax imports, failed by votes of twelve to one. As a result, government was adrift, and many statesmen such as Madison, Hamilton, and Washington began thinking about stronger, more national solutions. (See The Articles of Confederation 1781 Primary Source and the Constitutional Convention Lesson.)

Watch this BRI Homework Help video on the Articles of Confederation to review their weaknesses and why statesmen desired a stronger central government.

Nationalists such as Madison were also concerned about tyrannical majorities’ violations of minority rights in the states. For example, in Virginia, Madison helped promote freedom of conscience or religious liberty. He successfully won passage of Jefferson’s Virginia Statute for Religious Freedom, which formally disestablished the official church and protected religious liberty as a natural right. The Virginia Statute for Religious Freedom later provided a precedent for the First Amendment. Protecting political and religious liberties became key components in the creation of a stronger constitutional government. (See the Virginia Statute for Religious Freedom Narrative.)

Even with all its problems, the Confederation Congress did achieve great success with the settlement of the West. It created the Ordinance of 1784, which provided for the entrance of new states on an equal footing with existing ones, and for their republican government. Jefferson’s proposal to forever ban slavery in the West failed by one vote. The Northwest Ordinance, enacted a few years later in 1787, was a thoughtful response to the question of how to treat a territory held by the national government. Each territory, as it gained population, would elect a territorial legislature, draft a republican constitution, and gain the status of a state. Through this process, the Old Northwest eventually became the states of Ohio, Indiana, Michigan, Illinois, and Wisconsin. At the same time, the Northwest Ordinance’s final articles established the protection of the rights of residents, including the rights of  habeas corpus and the right to a trial by jury. It provided for public education to advance knowledge and virtue. Also, very significantly, the ordinance permanently outlawed slavery north of the Ohio River. Not only did this decision keep those future states free, it also demonstrated the principle that the national government could make decisions about slavery in new territories. (See The Northwest Ordinance 1787 Primary Source.)

The first steps leading to a new Constitutional Convention were small. Concerns about trade and the navigation of the Chesapeake led to a 1785 meeting, hosted by Washington at Mount Vernon, between delegates from Virginia and Maryland. That meeting prompted more ambitious designs. Madison, a young Virginia lawyer and landowner, urged Congress to call for a new convention to be held in Annapolis, Maryland, in 1786. Nationally minded leaders from several states attended, including Madison, Hamilton from New York, and Dickinson from Delaware. Because of the late invitation, however, five other states sent delegates who arrived only after the meeting had disbanded, so a quorum was never reached. The one accomplishment of the Annapolis Convention was to ask Congress to call for another convention to be held in 1787 in Philadelphia. This was the Constitutional Convention. (See The Constitutional Convention Narrative and The Annapolis Convention Decision Point.)

As states prepared for the new convention in Philadelphia, word came of a popular uprising in Massachusetts. To pay off its Revolutionary War debts, the Massachusetts legislature had increased taxes. This move was met with active resistance in the western part of the state, where many farmers feared losing their land because they could not make the payments due to a credit crunch, recession, and high taxes. The insurgents wanted to cut taxes, print money, abolish the state senate, and revise the state constitution. Under the leadership of Daniel Shays, a farmer and former revolutionary soldier, they closed the courts in Springfield to prevent property foreclosures and defied the state government. By January 1787, Shays’ Rebellion had dissipated—the state legislature had raised an army to put down the uprising, and its leaders had fled. Still, officials feared disorder would spread if the government were not strengthened. Henry Knox strongly advocated for reform, and the idea was accepted by many revolutionary leaders, including Knox’s friend and fellow nationalist, George Washington. (See the Shays’ Rebellion Narrative.)

As a result, when the delegates assembled in Philadelphia, in the same hall where Congress had declared independence, they did so with a sense of urgency. They opted for secrecy to ensure free deliberation, allow delegates to change their minds, and prevent outside pressures from swaying the debates. They even ordered the windows nailed shut—quite a discomfort through the summer months. One important first step was to name someone to preside over the convention, and this honor fell to Washington. His presence lent moral seriousness and credibility to the whole endeavor. Members of the assembled convention soon concluded that the Articles of Confederation were beyond saving, and a new frame of government would be required, even though this goal surpassed their mandate to revise the Articles. At this point, Edmund Randolph of Virginia stepped forward with the proposal for a new plan of government conceived by fellow Virginian Madison (who was also keeping extensive notes of the convention, despite a rule against doing so).

Madison’s Virginia Plan favored large states by opting for a bicameral Congress with representation in both houses to be determined by population size alone. This irked the smaller states, which responded with the New Jersey Plan, adhering to the existing practice of allowing all states equal representation in an assembly. With two opposing visions, there seemed no clear path forward, and some delegates feared the convention would falter. From this conflict, however, a third plan emerged, shaped by Sherman and other delegates from Connecticut. This Connecticut Compromise or “Great Compromise” delineated the bicameral Congress we have today, with separate houses each offering a different means of representation: proportional to population in the House of Representatives and equal in the Senate, where each state would elect two senators. The crisis had been averted. (See Argumentation: The Process of Compromise Lesson.)

The convention then moved on to other matters. For instance, delegates considered the nature of the executive—a potentially delicate topic given that the presumed first executive was Washington. Hamilton argued for a very strong executive, possibly even one elected for life. However, although the convention created the presidency, it also hemmed it in, to be checked by the other branches. The Electoral College, in which each state’s votes were equal to the sum of its two senators plus its number of representatives in the House, was instituted as another part of the federal system. Significantly, the delegates spent minimal time on the federal judiciary, leaving the responsibility of defining its role to the new government.

The framers also faced the dilemma of how to address the institution of slavery. Delegates from the Deep South threatened to walk out of the convention if a new constitution endangered it. As a result, the convention’s treatment of slavery was ambiguous. The Constitution never mentions “slaves” or “slavery.” Even so, practical considerations made it impossible to ignore. Whereas delegates from the North did not think slaves should count toward the population totals establishing representation in Congress but should count for taxation, southern delegates disagreed, arguing the opposite. The “Three-Fifths Compromise” resolved that, although free people would be counted in full, only three-fifths of the number of “all other Persons” would be applied to state population totals for purposes of congressional apportionment and taxation. A precedent set by the Articles of Confederation also guided the compromise. In addition, after the convention voted down a southern proposal to prevent congressional interference with the international slave trade, the national government gained the power, after 1808, to choose to prohibit the “Importation of such Persons as any of the States now existing shall think proper to admit.” (See the Is the Constitution a Proslavery Document? Point-Counterpoint.)

After most of the debates were finished, the convention’s ideas were put into words by a Committee of Style, including Gouverneur Morris of New York. By September 1787, the proposed constitution was ready to be sent to the Confederation Congress and then to the state legislatures to be submitted to popular ratifying conventions consisting of the people’s representatives. One of the most important provisions at this point stated that only nine of thirteen states had to ratify the document for it to go into effect in the states where it had been approved.

Watch this BRI Homework Help video on the Constitution for a comprehensive review of the philosophies behind the Constitution.

With the Constitution now public, citizens across the country could make it a topic of scrutiny and debate. This was one of the convention’s goals: The Preamble was rooted in popular sovereignty when it claimed to express the will of “We, the People of the United States.” The Constitution was to be considered at special state conventions and not by state legislatures, for instance, because the framers anticipated state politicians would resist the Constitution’s diminishing of the power of the states. In these conventions, nationalists who supported the Constitution seized the name “Federalists,” alluding to federalism or the sharing of powers between the nation’s and states’ governments. Already well organized, Federalists coordinated their efforts in the various states. They could call on many polished writers for support. John Dickinson, for instance, wrote a series of essays called The Letters of Fabius. Even more famously, Hamilton, Jay, and Madison united to write the Federalist Papers, signing their collected efforts with the Latin pseudonym “Publius.”

The Federalist Papers made practical and theoretical arguments in favor of strengthening the nation’s government through the proposed constitution. Although many other voices also supported the Constitution at that time, people still look to The Federalist Papers for important insights into the thoughts of the framers of the Constitution. The people labeled “Anti-Federalists,” however, were suspicious of the Constitution and its grant of power to a national government. Considering themselves defenders of the Articles of Confederation and its own federal system, they worried that, like the British government in the 1760s and 1770s, the distant new authority proposed by the Constitution would usurp the powers of their states and violate citizens’ individual rights. Many of them also wrote pseudonymously, taking names like Brutus—the Roman assassin of power-grasping Caesar—or Federal Farmer. Many also had Revolutionary credentials, such as Patrick Henry and Samuel Adams. They worried Americans would relinquish the liberty they had just fought so hard to attain. As their name suggests, the Anti-Federalists came to be identified as an opposition voice, warning about the growth of a strong national government with great powers over taxation and the ability to raise standing armies that would endanger citizens’ rights.

(See the Federalist/Anti-Federalist Debate on Congress’s Powers of Taxation DBQ Lesson.)

As debates raged in newspapers and public houses, state conventions took up the Constitution. On December 7, 1787, Delaware became the first state to ratify it. The next four states—Pennsylvania, New Jersey, Georgia, and Connecticut—followed quickly. Pennsylvania’s Federalists so accelerated approval that Anti-Federalists had little chance to mount a real opposition. The others were small states that believed the Constitution would help them. Massachusetts came next, and there, because of Shays’ Rebellion, opinion was more divided. Still, Federalists rallied important Revolutionary leaders like Revere, Hancock, and Samuel Adams to achieve ratification. Maryland and South Carolina followed. (See The Ratification Debate on the Constitution Narrative.)

When New Hampshire voted “yes” in June 1788, Federalists rejoiced that nine states had ratified. However, two of the most populous states, Virginia and New York, still had to consider the Constitution. Federalists feared that failing to gain the support of either would threaten the legitimacy of the Constitution and the viability of the nine-state union already established. Madison and other Federalists battled Patrick Henry in an epic debate in Virginia, narrowly winning ratification. Hamilton and Jay similarly faced a powerful contingent of Anti-Federalists in New York, but this state also ratified the Constitution in the end. In both states, as had been the case in Massachusetts, Anti-Federalists gained Madison’s promise that the new government would quickly draft a Bill of Rights for the Constitution. The new government under the Constitution could move forward (temporarily without North Carolina and Rhode Island, which remained outside the new union for more than a year.)

The final result was that American citizens and their representatives, through a public debate, had agreed on a new form of government. They had passed the test Hamilton had set for them in Federalist Paper No. 1, determining that self-government was possible and that citizens could establish a government through “reflection and choice” rather than having it imposed by “accident and force.” Madison kept his word, and in the new Congress, he authored the ten amendments of the Bill of Rights and shepherded them to approval. The Anti-Federalists stayed engaged in politics and kept a wary eye on the new national government. The process, although often improvisational and hinging on the contingency, had been orderly and deliberative. In the American Revolution, statesmen and citizens had avoided military dictatorship and mass civilian bloodshed, creating a lasting system of government in which power was organized for the protection and promotion of liberty.

In the relatively short span of time between 1763 and 1789 the thirteen colonies went from loyal subjects of the British crown to open rebellion to an independent republic guided by the U.S. Constitution.

Additional Chapter Resources

• Mercy Otis Warren Narrative
• George Washington at Newburgh Decision Point
• Loyalist vs. Patriot Decision Point
• Were the Anti-Federalists Unduly Suspicious or Insightful Political Thinkers? Point-Counterpoint
• Quaker Anti-Slavery Petition 1783 Primary Source
• Belinda Sutton Petition to the Commonwealth of Massachusetts 1783 Primary Source
• Junípero Serra’s Baja California Diary Primary Source
• State Constitution Comparison Lesson
• Argumentation: Self-Interest or Republicanism? Lesson

Review Questions

1. Which of the following best describes the fiscal consequences of the French and Indian War?

• The French and Indian War caused the Northwest Territories to be absorbed into the British colonial government leading to an increase in British resources.
• The French and Indian War exploded the British national debt and tax burden leading to Parliament’s decision to tax the colonies to pay the war’s cost.
• The French and Indian War caused the colonies to realize their economic self-sufficiency and allowed colonial governments to impose taxes upon their citizens.
• The French and Indian War resulted in a British loss which left the British economically indebted to France and forced them to use the colonies to pay this debt.

2. Which act marked the first serious constitutional dispute over Parliament’s taxing the colonists without their consent?

• Declaratory Act
• Boston Port Act

3. At the conclusion of the French and Indian War what was the political status of the territory west of the Appalachian Mountains?

• Colonial settlers were forbidden to cross the Appalachian Mountains.
• The British government acquired this territory and governed it under the Northwest Ordinance.
• Colonial rebels were banished to these territories which were held by the British but very loosely governed.
• The French governed this territory as a colony until it was purchased by Jefferson in 1803.

4. What was the main purpose of the Stamp Act Congress?

• To declare independence from the British government
• To develop a new Constitution to govern the colonies
• To establish the Stamp Act and other tax legislation
• To formalize the colonial complaints against Parliament

5. What legislation was imposed on Massachusetts as a punishment for rebellious behavior during the “Tea Party” in December 1773?

• Coercive Acts
• Townshend Acts

6. How did the British use the institution of slavery as a tool against the colonists in the Revolutionary War?

• Southern slaveholders forced slaves to fight on their behalf.
• By promising freedom, in exchange for slaves’ support, the British encouraged Patriots’ slaves to rebel against their owners.
• Slaves were captured and forced to haul goods and supplies for the British army.
• The British saw slavery as evil and motivated slaves to fight to abolish the institution in the colonies.

7. Which of the following best describes the role of American Indian tribes in the Revolutionary War?

• American Indians mostly moved into the Northwest Territories to escape the conflict.
• American Indians often sided with the British although some fought alongside the colonists.
• American Indians unanimously supported the British cause in return for protection.
• American Indians generally supported the colonists believing that the colonists’ commitment to freedom and independence would make it more likely that Indians’ property rights would be protected.

8. Which of the following best describes the motives of the French military during the Revolutionary War?

• The French military supported the British because the French feared for the security of their own colonial holdings.
• The French military supported the American patriots against France’s rival the British to raise France’s own global political and economic standing.
• The French military was hired by Congress to fight on behalf of the rebels because the colonial population was much too small to successfully overthrow the British.
• The French military provided financial support to the Americans but remained physically uninvolved in the conflict.

9. What purpose did the Articles of Confederation serve?

• The Articles of Confederation served as the structure for the first government of the new United States.
• The Articles of Confederation listed Americans’ grievances against King George III.
• The Articles of Confederation were the first ten amendments to the Constitution which limited the federal government’s power.
• The Articles of Confederation created a new united nation with an effective national government.

10. Which of the following best describes the evolution of American colonists desiring independence?

• Immediately after the French and Indian War American colonists realized they would be better served economically and politically by full independence and advocated for it.
• After the British government passed the first direct tax American colonists created a delegation to discuss and legislate independence.
• After the Declaration of Independence was agreed upon by committee members all American colonists thoroughly supported the War for Independence.
• Incremental shifts toward independence were not complete even during the Revolution because tens of thousands of American colonists remained loyal to Britain.

11. Which of the following did not contribute to the call for a Second Continental Congress in 1776?

• The British attacks on Lexington and Concord and the violence at Bunker Hill
• The popularity of a pro-independence pamphlet written by Thomas Paine
• The need for a central entity to wage the resistance effort
• The successful alliance between American colonists and France to wage war against the British

12. Which of the following best describes George Washington’s leadership of the Continental Army?

• Fierce fighter who had an iron grip on the infantry units and who would use his war experience to influence the colonial legislature
• Long-term strategist willing to use new tactics to gain victories and boost morale
• Lackluster commander unable to successfully achieve the task of independence
• Extremely competitive personality who betrayed the revolutionary cause by siding with the British

13. Which battle is significant because it resulted in the creation of a successful alliance with the French?

• Battle of Lexington and Concord
• Battle of Trenton
• Battle of Saratoga
• Battle of Yorktown

14. A change in perception about American white women was the idea of Republican Motherhood which

• articulated that a woman’s ideal role was a mother with as many children as possible
• emphasized the importance of raising patriotic children to participate in the newly formed republic
• implemented a public education program that taught children how to be Republican
• identified women as equal to their male counterparts and entitled to access to the finances of the household

15. The Articles of Confederation were designed to

• maintain state sovereignty preventing the usurpation of power by a central government while allowing the states to function as a unit in military and diplomatic matters
• create a strong federal government that could unify the states as a nation
• mimic the powers of the British Crown without the ability to tax
• give a voice to each citizen of the United States regardless of race and gender

16. Which of the following constitutional issues most definitively highlighted the divide between Northern and Southern delegates at the Constitutional Convention?

• The Great Compromise
• The Electoral College
• The Three-Fifths Compromise
• An independent judiciary

17. Shays’ Rebellion is most similar to which earlier event in American history?

• Bacon’s Rebellion
• Pueblo Revolt of 1680
• Passage of the Proclamation of 1763
• Stono Rebellion

18. Which political faction was suspicious of the new Constitution and wary of the stronger authority of the federal government?

• Anti-Federalist

19. After ratification of the Constitution the Bill of Rights was designed to

• calm Anti-Federalist fears and protect individual freedoms from a stronger federal government
• promote the Federalist idea that the Constitution was an effective defense for inalienable rights
• establish the process for western territories to enter the union as states
• list the grievances perceived by Americans and share them with the world as a justification for rebellion

Free Response Questions

• Explain how a debate over liberty and self-government influenced the Continental Congress’s decision to declare independence in 1776.
• Describe the role of women during the American Revolution.
• Explain how the debates over individual rights and liberties continued to shape political debates after the American Revolution.
• Describe the changes and continuities in North American attitudes toward executive power between 1763 and 1789.

AP Practice Questions

“Their jurisprudence was marked with wisdom and dignity and their simplicity and piety were displayed equally in the regulation of their police the nature of their contracts and the punctuality of observance. The old Plymouth colony remained for some time a distinct government. They chose their own magistrates independent of all foreign control; but a few years involved them with the Massachusetts [colony] of which Boston more recently settled than Plymouth was the capital. From the local situation of a country separated by an ocean of a thousand leagues from the parent state and surrounded by a world of savages an immediate compact with the King of Great Britain was thought necessary. Thus a charter was early granted stipulating on the part of the crown that the Massachusetts [colony] should have a legislative body within itself composed of three branches and subject to no control except his majesty’s negative within a limited term to any laws formed by their assembly that might be thought to militate with the general interest of the realm of England. The governor was appointed by the crown the representative body annually chosen by the people and the council elected by the representatives from the people at large.”

Mercy Otis Warren History of the Rise Progress and Termination of the American Revolution 1805

1. This passage from Mercy Otis Warren’s history of the American Revolution alludes to which factor leading to colonists’ discontent after the French and Indian War?

• The relative independence the British granted the North American colonies before the 1760s
• The unjust appointment of governors by the king of Great Britain
• The right of the British to tax colonists
• The population pressures caused by mass migration to cities

2. Which of the following statements best describes how colonists justified their opinion that taxation by Parliament was unfair?

• They argued that they had no direct representation in Parliament and thus Parliament had no power to enforce taxes.
• They argued that as self-sufficient colonies they wielded more economic power than Parliament.
• They argued that they were loyal only to the British Crown not to the British Parliament.
• They argued that the monarch traditionally taxed the colonies and was the only one who could issue a tax.

“After an unequivocal experience of the inefficiency of the subsisting federal government, you are called upon to deliberate on a new Constitution for the United States of America. The subject speaks its own importance; comprehending in its consequences nothing less than the existence of the UNION the safety and welfare of the parts of which it is composed the fate of an empire in many respects the most interesting in the world. It has been frequently remarked that it seems to have been reserved to the people of this country by their conduct and example to decide the important question whether societies of men are really capable or not of establishing good government from reflection and choice or whether they are forever destined to depend for their political constitutions on accident and force.”

Publius Federalist Paper: No. 1 1787

3. On the basis of the information in the excerpt provided the author would agree with all the following statements except

• The debate over ratification is a referendum on whether republican self-government is possible.
• This new federal constitution was written after considerable careful thought and debate.
• The question of ratification is central to the survival of the United States.
• The survival of the Union is of secondary concern compared with the safety and welfare of the people.

4. Which of the following best describes the author’s approach to the challenge facing the states after the Constitutional Convention?

• George Washington assumed the role of de facto executive and thus changes needed to be made to the Articles of Confederation.
• Many political leaders believed the governing structure established by the Articles of Confederation was not strong enough and more structure was needed.
• The Revolutionary War had just ended and a document was needed to establish the newly founded government.
• British troops had accidentally fired on rebel militia thus forcing the colonies to sever their relationship with the British government.

“I was eleven years of age and my sisters Rachel and Susannah were older. We all heard the alarm and were up and ready to help fit out father and brother who made an early start for Concord. We were set to work making cartridges and assisting mother in cooking for the army. We sent off a large quantity of food for the soldiers who had left home so early that they had but little breakfast. We were frightened by hearing the noise of guns at Concord; our home was near the river and the sound was conducted by the water. I suppose it was a dreadful day in our home and sad indeed; for our brother so dearly loved never came home.”

Alice Stearns Abbott Citizen of Bedford Massachusetts on the Beginning of Fighting Concord 1775

5. In the excerpt provided the violent conflict described in 1775 most directly contributed to which of the following events?

• Colonial governments writing a petition for peace with a diplomatic solution to conclude the bloodshed
• Immediate Colonial call to arms and declaration of war against the British
• Calls for military and political action which resulted in the meeting of the Second Continental Congress
• An alliance with the French who would provide needed financial and military support

6. The context surrounding the event in the excerpt provided may best be described as

• intercolonial unity in the face of British attack
• strategically planned offensive in the wake of British hostilities
• incremental buildup of tension throughout Massachusetts over British occupation and legislation
• defiance of the Proclamation Line of 1763 and the subsequent conflict over land between American Indians British and colonists

7. Which of the following ideas would be best supported by historians using the excerpt provided as evidence?

• That children wrote unbiased accounts during wartime
• That women and families supported the troops during the Revolution
• That new and advanced technology allowed for more accurate gunfire
• That most New England families felt loyalty and support for the British Crown

“To defeat such treasonable purposes and that all such traitors and their abetters may be brought to justice and that the peace and good order of this colony may be again restored which the ordinary course of the civil law is unable to effect I have thought fit to issue this my proclamation hereby declaring that until the aforesaid good purposes can be obtained I do in virtue of the power and authority to me given by his Majesty determine to execute martial law and cause the same to be executed throughout this colony; and to the end that peace and good order may the sooner be restored I do require every person capable of bearing arms to resort to his Majesty’s STANDARD or be looked upon as traitors to his Majesty’s crown and government and thereby become liable to the penalty the law inflicts upon such offences such as forfeiture of life confiscation of lands &c. &c. And I do hereby farther declare all indented servants Negroes or others (appertaining to rebels) free that are able and willing to bear arms they joining his Majesty’s troops as soon as may be for the more speedily reducing this colony to a proper sense of their duty to his Majesty’s crown and dignity.”

Lord Dunmore’s Proclamation 1775

8. Lord Dunmore’s intent as indicated in the excerpt provided is best described as

• a genuine feeling that the abolition of slavery must be accomplished in the empire
• a desire to undermine the colonial revolt against the crown and acquire more loyalists to fight in the colonies
• a need to prevent imperial rivals from becoming involved in the conflict
• the desire to demonstrate a positive alliance with American Indians to ensure their assistance

9. The excerpt from Dunmore’s Proclamation highlights which of the following about the early years of the American Revolution?

• The variety of reasons people chose to identify as a loyalist or patriot
• The pivotal role of slaves in the winning of most early battles
• The early decision of most colonists about which side to take during the revolution
• The dynamic actions taken by women to support the troops at war

Primary Sources

Adams John. “Letter to Hezekiah Niles.” February 13 1818. http://teachingamericanhistory.org/library/document/letter-to-hezekiah-niles-on-the-american-revolution/

Declaratory Act. http://www.constitution.org/bcp/decl_act.htm

Gilder Lehrman Institute of American History. Paul Revere’s engraving of the Boston Massacre 1770.” https://gilderlehrman.org/history-by-era/road-revolution/resources/paul-revere%E2%80%99s-engraving-boston-massacre-1770

Hamilton Alexander John Jay and James Madison. The Federalist Papers . https://avalon.law.yale.edu/subject_menus/fed.as

Hamilton Alexander. The Federalist Papers : No. 1. http://avalon.law.yale.edu/18th_century/fed01.asp

Longfellow Henry Wadsworth. “Paul Revere’s Ride.” https://www.poets.org/poetsorg/poem/paul-reveres-ride

United States Constitution. https://www.archives.gov/founding-docs/constitution-transcript

Suggested Resources

Bailyn Bernard. The Ideological Origins of the American Revolution . Cambridge: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press 1992.

Beeman Richard. Plain Honest Men: The Making of the American Constitution . New York: Random House 2009.

Berkin Carol . A Brilliant Solution: Inventing the American Constitution . New York: Mariner Books 2002.

Berkin Carol. Revolutionary Mothers: Women in the Struggle for America’s Independence . New York: Vintage 2005.

Brookhiser Richard . Alexander Hamilton: American . New York: Simon and Schuster 2000.

Calloway Colin. The American Revolution in Indian Country: Crisis and Diversity in Native American Communities . Cambridge: Cambridge University Press 1995.

Chernow Ron. Alexander Hamilton . New York: Penguin 2004.

Dowd Gregory Evans. A Spirited Resistance: The North American Indian Struggle for Unity 1745-1815 . Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press 1992.

Ellis Joseph. His Excellency: George Washington . New York: Alfred A. Knopf 2004.

Emerson Ralph Waldo. “Concord Hymn.” 1837. https://www.poetryfoundation.org/poems-and-poets/poems/detail/45870

Fischer David Hackett. Paul Revere’s Ride . New York: Oxford University Press 1994.

Fischer David Hackett. Washington’s Crossing . New York: Oxford University Press 2004.

Kerber Linda. Women of the Republic: Intellect and Ideology in Revolutionary America . Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press 1980.

Kidd Thomas. God of Liberty: A Religious History of the American Revolution . NY: Basic Books 2010.

Maier Pauline. American Scripture: Making the Declaration of Independence . New York: Alfred A. Knopf 1997.

Maier Pauline. From Resistance to Revolution: Colonial Radicals and the Development of American Opposition to Britain 1765-1776 . New York: Alfred A. Knopf 1972.

Maier Pauline. Ratification: The People Debate the Constitution 1787-1788 . New York: Simon & Schuster 2010.

McCullough David. John Adams . NY: Simon & Schuster 2001.

McDonald Forrest. Novus Ordo Seclorum: The Intellectual Origins of the Constitution . Lawrence: University of Kansas Press 1985.

Middlekauff Robert. The Glorious Cause: The American Revolution 1763-1789 revised ed. New York: Oxford University Press 2005.

Morgan Edmund and Helen Morgan. The Stamp Act Crisis: Prologue to Revolution . Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press 1953.

Morgan Edmund. Inventing the People: The Rise of Popular Sovereignty in England and America . New York: W.W. Norton 1989.

Morgan Edmund. The Birth of the Republic 1763-1789 4th ed. Chicago: University of Chicago Press 2013.

Morris Richard. The Peacemakers: The Great Powers and American Independence . New York: Harper & Row 1965.

Norton Mary Beth. Founding Mothers and Fathers: Gendered Power and the Forming of American Society . New York: Alfred A. Knopf 1996.

Norton Mary Beth. Liberty’s Daughters: The Revolutionary Experience of American Women 1750-1800 . Boston: Little Brown 1980.

Norton Mary Beth. Liberty’s Daughters: The Revolutionary Experience of American Women 1750-1800 . Ithaca: Cornell University Press 1996.

Paine Thomas. Common Sense in Common Sense and Related Writings ed. Thomas Slaughter. Boston: Bedford St. Martins 2001.

Rakove Jack. James Madison and the Creation of the American Republic . New York: Pearson/Longman 2007.

Saillant John. Black Puritan Black Republican: The Life and Thought of Lemuel Haynes 1753-1833 . New York: Oxford University Press 2003.

Storing Herbert ed. The Anti-Federalist: Writings by the Opponents of the Constitution . Chicago: University of Chicago Press 1985.

Storing Herbert. What the Anti-Federalists Were For: The Political Thought of the Opponents of the Constitution . Chicago: University of Chicago Press 1981.

Taylor Alan. American Revolutions: A Continental History 1750-1804 . New York: W.W. Norton 2016.

Wood Gordon. The Creation of the American Republic 1776-1787 . Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press 1998.

Related Content

Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness

In our resource history is presented through a series of narratives, primary sources, and point-counterpoint debates that invites students to participate in the ongoing conversation about the American experiment.

General Studies

All Programmes

Study Material

Revolutionary Movements in India - Factors, Ideology, Movements

Quest for upsc cse panels.

Sub-Categories:

GS-I: Modern History

Prelims : History of India and the Indian National Movement

Mains : The Freedom Struggle — its various stages and important contributors/contributions from different parts of the country.

The revolutionary movement in India emerged in the early 20th Century as a radical aspect of India’s struggle for freedom. The revolutionary movement in India can be divided into two phases, namely, the early revolutionary movements ( before World War I) and the later revolutionary movements ( after World War I). With the aim to overthrow the alien British rule and to establish self-government, the early revolutionary activists were inspired by the unification of Italy and the militant nationalism of Extremists in Congress. They adopted the path of violence through individual heroic actions to strike fear among the British officers. 

Discontent with the withdrawal of the Non-Cooperation Movement and Gandhian method, there was a rise of a new type of revolutionary movement in the 1920s. Those later revolutionary activists were inspired by the socialist and marxist ideology.

Early Revolutionary Movements in India

Due to the Bengal Partition and the Swadeshi Movement in the early 20th century, Bengal emerged as the primary centre of political activities. Knowing the true nature of British rule, and inspired by many events inside and outside of India, the younger generation of nationalists became frustrated with the methods of Congress and formed their own secret societies like Anushilan Samiti and Jugantar . They recruited and trained many young men to adopt violent methods of individual actions. 

Later Revolutionary Movements

After the World War I , the younger generations of nationalists initially joined with the mass movement of Swaraj led by Gandhiji. But his methods and sudden withdrawal of the NCM frustrated these nationalists , and led them to start a new phase of revolutionary activities, ideologically based on socialist ideas with a secular outlook. 

Two broad strands of revolutionary activities developed in this phase: One in Punjab, U.P., Bihar and Central Provinces and the other in Bengal. Both strands came under the influence of new social and ideological forces such as socialism and Marxism . 

Factors Responsible for the Rise of later Revolutionary Movements 

There were several factors for the resurgence of such activities in the 1920s, some of which are given below: 

• The revolutionaries were significantly influenced by new ideas focusing on Marxism, socialism, and the proletariat.
• Journals such as Atmasakti, Sarathi, and Bijoli published memoirs and articles extolling the self-sacrifice of revolutionaries.
• Growth of socialist ideas and groups all over India: The Bolshevik revolution in the 1920s significantly influenced India's political landscape, drawing young leaders and intellectuals. For example, Communist movement in the 1920s.
• Rise of a militant trade union movement: The trade union movement in the later years of the 1920s was metamorphosing into militant ideology, which was also a factor for evolutionary activities in these years.
• Discontent with the withdrawal of the Non-Cooperation Movement: The sudden withdrawal of the Non-Cooperation Movement by Mahatma Gandhi created confusion as well as discontent amongst the younger generation of nationalists, which were urged by Gandhi earlier to join their movement.
• They embraced the violent revolutionary path, believing in "ends justify means" instead of Gandhi's "means justify ends."

Revolutionary Movements in Punjab, UP, Bihar and Central Provinces

There was a rise in the new class of trade union workers after the First World War . The revolutionaries saw the revolutionary potentialities of the new class and desired to harness it into the nationalist revolution . With this objective, the revolutionaries of the U.P. and Punjab set in motion an organisation called the Hindustan Republican Association in 1924.

Revolutionary Movements in Bengal

In the early 1930s, Bengal became the centre of violent armed struggle, despite not having any proper organisation. These unrests ultimately met with brutal British repression.

Decline of Revolutionary Movements

In the 1930s, the revolutionary nationalist movement gradually faded. This was for several reasons. 

• The mainstream of the national movement, led by Gandhi , was opposed to violence .
• The revolutionary movement in northern India came to an end with the death of Chandrashekar Azad .
• Surya Sen’s martyrdom marked the virtual collapse of revolutionary nationalism in Bengal . 
• Revolutionaries in jail or on the Andaman Islands began a serious rethinking of their politics. Many of them converted to Marxism , as Bhagat Singh and many of his comrades had done in the 1920s. 
• Convergence in Mainstream politics: Many people joined the Communist Party , Congress Socialist Party , Revolutionary Socialist Party , and other left-wing parties and organisations. Others joined the Congress' Gandhian wing.

Significance of Revolutionary Movements

• Awakening of youth: It was instrumental in generating a surge of youth awareness, which was constructively harnessed by mass movements led by the Mahatma.
• The radical ideas, tactics, and ideologies espoused by the revolutionaries continued to influence future movements and leaders. 
• New Ideas: They promoted the new ideas of Socialism, Marxism, and secular philosophy. 
• Figures like Bhagat Singh, Chandrasekhar Azad, and Surya Sen became iconic and immortalised in the collective memory of the freedom struggle. 
• Their courage, sacrifice, and determination elevated their status to that of national heroes, serving as symbols of resistance and inspiring subsequent generations. 

PYQs on the Revolutionary Movement in India

Question 1: Consider the following freedom fighters: (UPSC Prelims 2022) 

• Barindra Kumar Ghosh
• Jogesh Chandra Chatterjee
• Rash Behari Bose

Who of the above was/were actively associated with the Ghadar Party?

Answer: (d)

Question 2: The Ghadr (Ghadar) was a (UPSC Prelims 2014) 

a) revolutionary association of Indians with headquarters at San Francisco

b) nationalist organization operating from Singapore

c) militant organization with headquarters at Berlin

d) communist movement for India’s freedom with headquarters at Tashkent

Answer: (a)

FAQs on Revolutionary Movement in India

Q) what is the "revolutionary movement".

It is defined as a war using violence or weapons to bring about a change in the current structure of society for the benefit of the masses. Various revolutionary movements occurred in India during the nineteenth and first half of the twentieth centuries.

Q) Who was known as the father of revolutionary thoughts?

Bipin Chandra Pal, known as the ‘Father of Revolutionary Thoughts’. He was a member of the Brahmo Samaj and encouraged widow remarriages and female education. 

Q) Which was the first revolutionary organisation in Bengal?

Anushilan Samiti was one of the secret revolutionary organisations operating in Bengal in the first quarter of the 20th century. It was bent on overthrowing the British colonial rule. 

Q) What were the causes of the decline of revolutionary movements?

Stern repression facilitated by a series of draconian laws and the lack of a popular response led to the gradual decline of this wave of revolutionary nationalism. 

Q) What triggered the rise of militant nationalism in India?

The rise of militant nationalism in India was triggered by factors like the recognition of the exploitative nature of British rule, catastrophic famines, dissatisfaction with moderate leadership, confidence and self-respect, and international influences. 

Q) Who were some prominent leaders associated with militant nationalism?

Bal Gangadhar Tilak, Aurobindo Ghosh , Bipin Chandra Pal, Vinayak Damodar Savarkar, and Lala Hardyal played significant roles in promoting militant nationalist ideologies and revolutionary activities.

© 2024 Vajiram & Ravi. All rights reserved

• IAS Preparation
• NCERT Notes for UPSC
• NCERT Notes Revolutionaries In Indian Freedom Movement

NCERT Notes: Revolutionary Movement In India [Modern Indian History For UPSC]

NCERT notes on important topics for the UPSC Civil Services Exam preparation. These notes will also be useful for other competitive exams like banking PO, SSC, state civil services exams and so on.

Though the Indian freedom struggle post-1857 was largely free of violence, there was a revolutionary movement also aimed at winning India independence involving a lot of young Indian men and women. They believed that only an armed struggle against the government would deliver India from British rule.

They employed violent means. They were mainly crushed by the British authorities but they were successful in inspiring many Indians towards the freedom struggle. Their stories of heroism and sacrifice for the motherland motivated and continues to motivate people to live and die for the country.

The revolutionary movement in India is an important topic for the IAS Exam . Candidates can download the notes PDF from the link given below.

Revolutionary Movement In India (UPSC Notes):- Download PDF Here

The revolutionary movement in India for the freedom struggle

• The first political assassination of a British officer in India post- 1857 Revolt .
• Brothers Damodar, Balkrishna and Vasudeo Chapekar shot at WC Rand, ICS, Chairman of the Special Plague Committee in 1897.
• Rand’s military escort Lieutenant Ayerst died on the spot whereas Rand died a few days later due to wounds.
• The brothers were against the atrocities committed by the British authorities under Rand during the plague epidemic in Pune.
• The government in order to curb the spread of the epidemic ended up harassing Indians and employing extreme measures.
• All the three brothers were hanged for the assassination.
• Also called Muraripukur conspiracy or Manicktolla bomb conspiracy.
• Douglas Kingsford was an unpopular British Chief Magistrate who was the target of the bomb thrown at Muzaffarpur (Northern Bihar).
• Unfortunately, the carriage at which the bomb was targeted contained two English ladies and not Kingsford. The two women died in the attack.
• Revolutionaries who threw the bomb were Prafulla Chaki and Khudiram Bose.
• Chaki committed suicide while Bose, then only 18 years of age, was caught and sentenced to death by hanging.
• The other people who were tried in the case were Aurobindo Ghosh and his brother Barin Ghosh, Kanailal Dutt, Satyendranath Bose and more than 30 others.
• They were all members of the Anushilan Samiti in Calcutta.
• Aurobindo Ghosh was acquitted due to lack of evidence and others served varying life-terms in prison.
• The India House was an organisation in London involved in the freedom struggle of India mainly engaging Indian students in the UK as its participants.
• Patrons of this organisation included Shyamji Krishna Varma and Bhikaiji Cama.
• India House became the centre of revolutionary activities for Indian independence outside India.
• The organisation was liquidated after the assassination of an army officer Curzon Wyllie by its member Madan Lal Dhingra in 1909.
• Also known as Howrah-Sibpur Conspiracy case.
• In this case, 47 revolutionaries associated with the Anushilan Samiti were arrested and tried for the murder of Inspector Shamsul Alam.
• Alam was investigating the revolutionary activities of the Samiti and was trying to link and consolidate the murders and robberies into a single case.
• The case brought to light the work of revolutionary Jatindranath Mukherjee.
• Despite attempts, the case could not establish the links, mainly due to the decentralised nature of the Samiti.
• Of all the accused, only Jatindranath Mukherjee and Narendranath Bhattacharjee were sentenced to one-year imprisonment.
• Also known as the Delhi Conspiracy Case.
• This was an assassination attempt on Lord Hardinge, the then Viceroy of India.
• The revolutionaries were led by Rashbehari Bose.
• A homemade bomb was thrown into the viceroy’s howdah (elephant-carriage) during a ceremonial procession in Delhi. The occasion was the transfer of the British capital from Calcutta to Delhi.
• Lord Hardinge was injured while an Indian attendant was killed.
• Bose escaped being caught whereas a few others were convicted for their roles in the conspiracy.
• This was a case of a train robbery that occurred near Kakori in Uttar Pradesh.
• The attack was led by the youth of the Hindustan Republican Association (later renamed Hindustan Socialist Republican Association) including Ram Prasad Bismil, Ashfaqulla Khan, Chandrashekhar Azad, Rajendra Lahiri, Thakur Roshan Singh and others.
• It was believed that the train carried money bags belonging to the British government.
• One person was killed during the robbery.
• The revolutionaries were arrested and tried in court.
• Bismil, Khan, Lahiri and Roshan Singh were sentenced to death. Others were sentenced to deportation or imprisonment.
• Also known as Chittagong Uprising.
• This was an attempt by revolutionaries to raid the police armoury and the auxiliary forces armoury from Chittagong (now in Bangladesh).
• They were led by Surya Sen. Others involved were Ganesh Ghosh, Lokenath Bal, Pritilata Waddedar, Kalpana Dutta, Ambika Chakraborty, Subodh Roy, etc.
• The raiders were not able to locate any arms but were able to cut telephone and telegraph wires.
• After the raid, Sen hoisted the Indian flag at the police armoury.
• Many of the revolutionaries involved escaped but some were caught and tried.
• The government came down heavily on the revolutionaries. Many were sentenced to imprisonment, deported to the Andaman, and Surya Sen was sentenced to death by hanging. Sen was brutally tortured by the police before he was hanged.
• Revolutionaries Bhagat Singh and Batukeshwar Dutt sought to draw attention to their revolution by throwing a bomb along with leaflets in the Assembly House at Delhi.
• They did not attempt to escape and were arrested and jailed for the act.
• Their intention was not to hurt anyone but to popularise their revolutionary activities and philosophy.
• Bhagat Singh was re-arrested in connection with the murder of a British police officer, JP Saunders. This case was called the Lahore Conspiracy Case.
• Saunders was killed mistakenly as the real target was another police officer, James Scott, who was responsible for the lathi charge that killed Lala Lajpat Rai .
• Others involved in this killing were Sukhdev, Rajguru and Chandrashekhar Azad.
• They were all members of the Hindustan Socialist Republican Association ( HSRA ).
• While in prison, Bhagat Singh, Rajguru and Sukhdev along with other political prisoners went on a hunger strike to demand better conditions of prisoners in the jails.
• After the trial, all three were sentenced and executed by hanging in March 1931. Azad was martyred the same year in February in a gun battle with the police in a park in Allahabad.

Frequently Asked Questions related to Revolutionary Movement in India

Who initiated the revolutionary movement in india, who is regarded as the ‘father of revolutionary thoughts’of india.

UPSC Preparation

Leave a Comment Cancel reply

Your Mobile number and Email id will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Request OTP on Voice Call

Post My Comment

IAS 2024 - Your dream can come true!

Download the ultimate guide to upsc cse preparation, register with byju's & download free pdfs, register with byju's & watch live videos.

• OUR CENTERS Bangalore Delhi Lucknow Mysuru Srinagar Dharwad Hyderabad

Call us @ 08069405205

Search Here

• An Introduction to the CSE Exam
• Personality Test
• Annual Calendar by UPSC-2024
• Common Myths about the Exam
• About Insights IAS
• Our Mission, Vision & Values
• Director's Desk
• Meet Our Team
• Our Branches
• Careers at Insights IAS
• Daily Current Affairs+PIB Summary
• Insights into Editorials
• Insta Revision Modules for Prelims
• Current Affairs Quiz
• Static Quiz
• Current Affairs RTM
• Insta-DART(CSAT)
• Insta 75 Days Revision Tests for Prelims 2024
• Secure (Mains Answer writing)
• Secure Synopsis
• Ethics Case Studies
• Insta Ethics
• Weekly Essay Challenge
• Insta Revision Modules-Mains
• Insta 75 Days Revision Tests for Mains
• Secure (Archive)
• Anthropology
• Law Optional
• Kannada Literature
• Public Administration
• English Literature
• Medical Science
• Mathematics
• Commerce & Accountancy
• Monthly Magazine: CURRENT AFFAIRS 30
• Content for Mains Enrichment (CME)
• InstaMaps: Important Places in News
• Weekly CA Magazine
• The PRIME Magazine
• Insta Revision Modules-Prelims
• Insta-DART(CSAT) Quiz
• Insta 75 days Revision Tests for Prelims 2022
• Insights SECURE(Mains Answer Writing)
• Interview Transcripts
• Previous Years' Question Papers-Prelims
• Answer Keys for Prelims PYQs
• Solve Prelims PYQs
• Previous Years' Question Papers-Mains
• UPSC CSE Syllabus
• Toppers from Insights IAS
• Testimonials
• Felicitation
• UPSC Results
• Indian Heritage & Culture
• Ancient Indian History
• Medieval Indian History
• Modern Indian History
• World History
• World Geography
• Indian Geography
• Indian Society
• Social Justice
• International Relations
• Agriculture
• Environment & Ecology
• Disaster Management
• Science & Technology
• Security Issues
• Ethics, Integrity and Aptitude

• Indian Heritage & Culture
• Enivornment & Ecology

• How to Study Art & Culture?
• What is Art and Culture? What is the difference between the two?
• Indus Civilization
• Evolution of rock-cut architecture in India
• Important rock-cut caves
• The contribution of Pallavas to Rock-cut architecture
• Comparision of art form found at Ellora and Mahabalipuram
• Buddhist Architecture
• Early Temples in India
• Basic form of Hindu temple
• Dravida style of temple architecture
• Nagara Style or North India Temple style
• Vesara style of temple architecture
• Characteristic features of Indo-Islamic form of architecture
• Styles of Islamic architecture in the Indian subcontinent
• Types of buildings in Islamic architecture in the Indian subcontinent
• Evolution of this form of architecture during the medieval period
• Modern Architecture
• Post-Independence architecture
• Indus Civilization Sculpture
• Bharhut Sculptures
• Sanchi Sculptures
• Gandhara School of Sculpture
• Mathura School of Sculpture
• Amaravati School of Sculpture
• Gupta Sculpture
• Medieval School of Sculpture
• Modern Indian Sculpture
• Pre Historic Painting
• Mural Paintings & Cave Paintings
• Pala School
• Mughal Paintings
• Bundi School of Painting
• Malwa School
• Mewar School
• Basohli School
• Kangra School
• Decanni School of Painting
• Madhubani Paintings or Mithila paintings
• Pattachitra
• Kalighat Painting
• Modern Indian Paintings
• Personalities Associated to Paintings
• Christianity
• Zoroastrianism
• Six Schools of Philosophy
• Lokayata / Charvaka
• Hindustani Music
• Carnatic Music
• Folk Music Tradition
• Modern Music
• Personalities associated with Music
• Bharatanatyam
• Mohiniattam
• Folk Dances
• Modern Dance in India
• Sanskrit Theatre
• Folk Theatre
• Modern Theatre
• Personalities associated with Theatre
• History of Puppetry
• String Puppetry
• Shadow Puppetry
• Rod Puppetry
• Glove Puppetry
• Indian Cinema and Circus
• Shankaracharya
• Ramanujacharya (1017-1137AD)
• Madhvacharya
• Vallabhacharya
• Kabir (1440-1510 AD)
• Guru Nanak (1469-1538 AD)
• Chaitanya Mahaprabhu
• Shankar Dev
• Purandaradasa
• Samard Ramdas
• Classical Languages
• Scheduled Languages
• Literature in Ancient India
• Buddhist and Jain Literature
• Tamil (Sangam) Literature
• Malayalam Literature
• Telugu Literature
• Medieval Literature
• Modern Literature
• Important characteristics of Fairs and Festivals of India
• Some of the major festivals that are celebrated in India
• Art & Crafts
• Ancient Science & Technology
• Medieval Science & Technology
• Famous Personalities in Science & Technology
• Tangible Cultural Heritage
• Intangible Cultural Heritage
• Cultural Heritage Sites
• Natural Heritage Sites
• Important Institutions
• Important programmes related to promotion and preservation of Indian heritage
• Ochre Colored Pottery (OCP)
• Black and Red Ware (BRW)
• Painted Grey-Ware (PGW)
• Northern Black Polished Ware (NBPW)
• Origin of Martial arts in India
• Various forms of Martial arts in India
• Fall of Mughals
• Coming of Europeans
• Struggle among Europeans
• Rise of East India Company
• India under East India Company’s Rule
• Administration
• Regulating Act of 1773
• Pitt’s India Act 1784
• Charter acts of 1784, 1793, 1813,1833, 1853
• Doctrine of lapse
• Subordinate alliance
• Agricultural policies
• Famine policy
• Foreign Policies
• Charter Act of 1813
• Orientalist-Anglicism Controversy
• Wood’s Dispatch (1854) Hunter Education Commission (1882-83)
• Indian Universities Act, 1904
• Government Resolution on Education Policy,1913
• Saddler University Commission (1917-19)
• Hartog Committee,1929
• Wardha Scheme,1937
• Sergeant Plan of Education
• Kothari Education Commission (1964-66)
• Development of Vernacular Education
• Development of Technical Education
• Religious policies
• Hindu Reform Movements
• Muslim Reform Movements
• Parsi Reform Movements
• Sikh Reform Movements
• Famous Personalities of Reform Movements
• Changes in Indian Administration after 1858
• Growth of Political Ideas and Political Organisations (up to 1885)
• Foundation of the Indian National Congress
• Early Phase Indian National Congress
• The Moderate Congress (1885-1905)
• Terrorist Movements

The Revolutionary Movement

• Revolutionary Activities in Maharashtra
• Revolutionary Activities in Bengal
• Revival of Revolutionary Nationalism
• Revolutionary Activities Outside India
• The Indian Independence Committee in Berlin
• Differences between the Moderates and the Extremists
• Partition of Bengal,1905
• Swadeshi Movement
• Muslim League, 1906
• Surat Session of INC, 1907
• Indian Council Act (Morley-Minto Act) 1909
• Ghadar Party, 1913
• Komagata Maru Incident, 1914
• The Lucknow Pact, 1916
• Home Rule Movement (1915–1916)
• August Declaration, 1917
• Champaran Satyagraha, 1917
• Ahmadabad Mill Strike, 1918
• Kheda Satyagraha,1918
• Montague-Chelmsford Reforms or the Government of India act, 1919
• Rowlatt Act and Jallianwala Bagh Massacre (1919)
• Khilafat Movement
• The Non-Cooperation Movement (1920-22)
• The Left Movement
• Bardoli Resolution
• Nagpur Session of Congress
• Swaraj Party
• Simon Commission,1927
• Bardoli Satyagraha, 1928
• Nehru Report, 1928
• Jinnah’s Fourteen Points
• Lahore Session, 1929
• Civil Disobedience Movement (1930-1931)
• First Round Table Conference, 1930
• Gandhi-Irwin Pact, 1931
• Karachi session,1931
• Second Round Table Conference, 1931
• Second Phase of Civil Disobedience Movement
• Third Round Table Conference, 1932
• Communal Award
• Poona Pact, 1932
• Government of India Act, 1935
• Provincial Elections and Formation of popular Ministries in Provinces, 1937
• World War II and Indian Nationalism
• Resignation of Congress Ministers ,1939
• Poona Resolution and Conditional Support to Britain ,1941
• August Offer, 1940
• The Individual Civil Disobedience
• Two-Nation Theory
• Demand for Pakistan,1942
• Quit India Movement
• Azad Hind Fauj
• Indian National Army
• I.N.A. Trials
• I.N. Rebellion
• Rajagopalachari Formula, 1945
• Desai – Liaqat Plan
• Wavell Plan and Simla Conference 1945
• General Elections in India, 1945
• Naval Mutiny, 1946
• Cabinet Mission,1946
• Jinnah’s Direct-Action Resolution
• Mountbatten Plan of June 1947
• Indian Independence Act 1947
• Bhil Uprising
• Kol Uprising
• Santhal Rebellion
• Jaintia and Garo Rebellion
• Rampa Rebellion
• Munda Rebellion
• Khonda Dora Uprisings
• Tana Bhagat Movement
• Champaran Satyagraha
• Kheda Peasant Struggle
• Bardoli Movement
• Moplah Rebellion
• Tebhaga Movement
• Telangana Movement
• Dalit Movements
• Women movement
• Role of Press and Publications
• Role of Business groups
• Reforms / Acts / Committee

Home » Modern Indian History » National Movement (1885 – 1919) » The Extremist (1905-1920) » The Revolutionary Movement

The emergence of revolutionary ideology in India during the late nineteenth and early twentieth century was the result of several internal and external influences working on the minds of the youth.

Early phase of revolutionary movement in India was in Bengal, Maharashtra, Punjab, U.P., Orissa, Bihar and Madras provinces, but it predominantly operated in Bengal, Maharashtra and Punjab as these regions were more politically active than other parts of the country.

The reasons behind rise of revolutionary terrorism 

• Nationalism among youth: Most vital factor which contributed to amplify the spirit of nationalism among the countrymen was the ‘economic exploitation’ of Indians by the British Government and the Partition of Bengal.
• Failure of Moderate and extremist congress: Younger element was not ready to retreat after the decline of national militancy phase. Fallout of Swadeshi and Boycott Movement was the immediate reason.
• Leadership’s failure to tap revolutionary energies of the youth.
• Government repression left no peaceful avenues open for the protest.
• Inspired from the individual heroic action on the lines of Irish nationalistsor Russian nihilists.
• Ideological appeal of ideas: Freedom through revolution, heroic action, supreme sacrifice, Assassinate unpopular British officials, strike terror in hearts of rulers and arouse people to expel the British with force attracted the new nationalists.

Impacts of revolutionary terrorism

• The era of revolutionary terrorism began and very soon secret societies of the revolutionaries came up all over the country. The Anusilan Samiti, the most famous and long lasting secret society, with its headquarters at Calcutta created revolutionary centres all over India.
• Their activities took two forms- the assassination of oppressive officials, traitors and informers, and dacoities to raise funds for the purchase of arms, etc.
• It had its impact on the Congress strategy to involve the youths in the short term programme of rural reconstruction.
• Their sacrifices aroused the emotions of the Indian people and thus helped the building up of the national consciousness which certainly contributed to gaining independence.
• It could not mobilize the masses. In fact, it had no base among the people. They believed in individual heroism.
• This movement failed to achieve its object of independence. With the death of Chandrasekhar Azad in a shooting encounter in a public park at Allahabad in February 1931, the revolutionary movement virtually came to an end in Punjab, U.P. and Bihar.
• Surya Sen’s martyrdom also marked an end to the terrorist activity in Bengal. A process of rethinking on the part of the revolutionaries lodged in jails and in Andaman began. A large number of revolutionaries turned to Marxism.

Decline of Revolutionaries post 1930’s

• Despite gaining popularity and a dedicated following, both the terrorist and the revolutionary movements could not achieve their objectives of freeing India from the British. This was because
• There was no central, all-India level organization which could control the activities in an organised manner;
• These movements appealed to the youngsters who had faced the hostilities of the British rule, but the mass following in the rural belt was unavailable;
• Germany, which promised arms and funds to be used against Britain could not deliver;
• The US entry and its subsequent dominance in the world war demoralised Germany and the allies to be of help to the Indian cause;
• Montagu’s package of self-governance for the Indians took the fizz out of the revolutionary activists;
• The congress party and other upper middle class politicians and leaders always disapproved of the ways of these movements; and
• Gandhi’s entry into the political scene of India marked a revolution in the form of satyagraha, which contributed to the decline of the revolutionary and terrorist activities.

Conclusion:

Although they had failed to attain set objectives of attaining independence through armed revolt, they were successful in arousing people and remove the fear of authority from their minds and strike terror in the heart of the rulers

• Our Mission, Vision & Values
• Director’s Desk
• Commerce & Accountancy
• Previous Years’ Question Papers-Prelims
• Previous Years’ Question Papers-Mains
• Environment & Ecology
• Science & Technology

Revolutionary Movement in India

Table of Contents

The First Phase of the Revolutionary Movement in India (1907-17)

With the decline of the mass phase of the Swadeshi movement and the lack of political activity, a new kind of political action emerged in the national movement. In this aspect, the highly motivated youth adopted the following methods:

• They adopted revolutionary activities as the means to achieve their goal.
• They adopted the methods followed by the Russian Nihilist and Irish Nationalists , which involved individual heroic actions and the assassination of unpopular officers.

Reasons for the Revolutionary Trends

Various reasons play a role in the growth of revolutionary trends:

• The realization of the futility of the constitutional methods: The extremist’s critique of the moderates had convinced the revolutionaries of the futility of the attempt to convince the Britishers by prayers and petitions.
• Disappointment with the Extremist leadership : The revolutionaries were disappointed and impatient with the inability of the extremists to organize full-scale mass mobilization and not secure the reversal of the partition of Bengal.
• The brutal repression of the Swadeshi movement further helped the growth of revolutionary trends. Surat split had enhanced the ability of the government to repress since it had reduced the risk of alienating moderates in the event of the repression of the extremists.
• The policy of Carrot and Stick: Luring the moderates with the promise of constitutional reforms, the government launched an all-out repression of the extremists. Tilak was exiled to Burma for six years, and Aurobindo Ghosh was arrested in a conspiracy case.

Earlier Activities

Though the revolutionary trends in a real sense started only around 1907-08, there had been earlier instances as well as follows:

• In 1897 , the Chapekar brothers of Poona, Damodar, and Balkrishna murdered the Plague Commissioner of Poona, Rand .
• In Maharashtra again, VD Savarkar and his brother had organised a secret society named Mitra Mela in 1899, which later merged with Abhinav Bharat (after Mazzini’s Young Italy) in 1904.

Major Activities in Bengal

Bengal became the main centre of revolutionary activities, and many secret societies emerged during this period. The organisation of revolutionary activities was led by the Anushilan and Jugantar societies:

• Anushilan Group:
• In 1902, the first revolutionary groups were formed in Midnapore (By Jnenendranath Basu ), and the Anushilan Samiti in Calcutta, founded by Promotha Mitter and the other members were Jatindranath Banarjee , Barindra Kumar Ghosh , etc. But these societies remained dormant till 1907-08.
• In 1906, a group of Anushilan members led by Barindra Kumar Ghosh and Bhupendranath Dutta started a weekly called Yugantar to advocate revolutionary activities.
• Rashbehari Bose and Sachin Sanyal organised a secret society that expanded its operations in Punjab, Delhi, and the United Provinces.
• The first big event of the revolutionary trend was in April 1908, when Prafulla Chaki and Khudiram threw a bomb on a carriage where Kingsford , the unpopular district judge of Muzaffarpur , was supposed to be travelling. But unfortunately, the carriage was carrying two British ladies who were thus inadvertently killed. Prafulla Chaki shot himself dead rather than be arrested, but Khudiram Bose was arrested and later hanged.
• Alipore Conspiracy Case: The Government used the opportunity to crackdown on the Anushilan group, and all of its members were arrested, including Aurobindo Ghosh and his brother Barindra in the Alipore conspiracy case in which Aurobindo himself was acquitted, but his brother and many others were sentenced to deportation and harsh prison terms.
• In 1908, Barrah dacoity was organised by Dacca Anushilan Samiti, under Pulin Das , to raise funds for revolutionary activities.
• Delhi Conspiracy Case: In 1912, a bomb attack was attempted on Viceroy Lord Hardinge when he was entering the new capital of Delhi in a ceremonial procession through Chandni Chowk. However, the Viceroy and Lady Hardinge escaped with injuries. While most of the accused were tried and executed in the Delhi conspiracy case, Rasbehari Bose managed to escape.
• Jugantar Group:
• The western Anushilan Samiti, under the leadership of Jatindranath Mukherjee or Bagha Jatin, emerged as Yugantar (Jugantar).
• During the First World War, the Yugantar party was involved in an Indo-German conspiracy , or the Zimmerman Plan , to overthrow the British rule in India. However, the plan failed due to betrayal, and Bhagha Jatin was shot dead in Balasore, Orissa, in 1915.

Major Activities in Punjab

In Punjab, the extremism was fuelled by the rise of land revenue, frequent famines, the practice of Begar labour by Zamindars, and also what was happening in Bengal. Various leaders played important roles in the Punjab as follows:

• The most active leaders here were Ajit Singh and Lala Lajpat Rai , who brought out ‘Punjabee’ . The duo organised Anjuman-i-Mohisban-i-Watan with its journal Bharat Mata .
• In 1907, after the government’s ban on political activities, Ajit Singh, along with Lala Hardayal and others, turned towards revolutionary activities.

Revolutionary activities outside India

Not only were the revolutionary activities prevalent in India but also various revolutionary activities outside India. To evade arrests and censorship of the Press by the British and the quest for arms brought Indian revolutionaries abroad. Some important revolutionary activities outside India are as follows:

• In 1905 , Shyamji Krishna Verma started the Indian Home Rule Society or India House , as a centre to promote nationalistic views and work. However, it soon became a major centre of revolutionary activities outside India. VD Savarkar and Hardayal were members of this house. The centre brought a journal, The Indian Sociologist, to spread anti-colonial views.
• In 1909, Madan Lal Dhingra , who was associated with India House, killed Curzon Wylie , an Indian Office official in London.
• Madam Bhikaji Cama , a Parsi revolutionary, operated from Paris and brought out Bande Mataram . She had developed contacts with French socialists.
• Ajit Singh travelled across Europe in his quest to support revolutionary activities. In 1918, he came into contact with the Ghadar Party in San Francisco.
• Virendranath Chattopadhyay made Berlin his base after the deterioration of relations between Britain and Germany. He was involved in the Zimmerman Plan , an Indo-German plot to overthrow British rule in India.

The Ghadr Movement

The Ghadr Party was a revolutionary group set up by Indian expatriates to overthrow British rule in India. The pre-Ghadr activities were carried out by Lala Hardayal and Taraknath Das, among others, organising Indian students and Immigrants for the nationalistic cause. Various aspects of the Ghadr movement are as follows:

• The movement was based on the west coast of Canada and the USA, with its headquarters in San Francisco . It brought out a weekly newspaper, “ The Ghadr” .
• The movement was mandated to organise assassinations of unpopular officials, publish revolutionary and anti-imperialist literature, procure arms, work among Indian soldiers stationed abroad and coordinate with revolutionaries in other British colonies.
• The important leaders of this movement were Lala Hardayal , Barkatullah , Bhai Parmanad, Kartar Singh Saraba, Ramchandra and Bhagwan Singh .
• The start of the First World War and Komagata Maru determined the subsequent course of the movement.

• Komagatu Mara was a ship carrying Indian immigrants from Singapore to Vancouver, Canada. On arrival, the ship was not allowed into the port and was rope in by the police.
• Despite the efforts by several of Ghadr’s leaders, they were turned back by the Canadian authorities.
• After the ship reached Calcutta, the hostile attitude of the police led to a clash, which resulted in the death of 18 passengers.
• Infuriated by the Komagata Maru incident and sensing opportunity at the outbreak of the First World War, the leaders of the movement decided to start an uprising against the British rule in India.
• Ghadr leaders Kartar Singh Saraba and Raghubar Dayal Gupta left for India, and Sachin Sanyal and Rasbehari Bose were asked to lead the movement. Political dacoities (Swadeshi dacoities) were committed to fund the movement.
• However, the lack of support from the people of Punjab for a violent rebellion made the leaders spread their message among the soldiers and engineer a mutiny, but due to the lack of proper organisation and centralised leadership, the revolt failed.
• The next attempt was made in February 1915 under the leadership of Rasbehari Bose . But the government, armed with Defense of India rules,1915 , managed to infiltrate the movement and foiled it. The movement was effectively crushed. Rasbehari Bose managed to escape to Japan, while Sachin Sanyal was sentenced to life in Cellular Jail in Andaman and Nicobar Islands.
• Evaluation of The Gadr Movement:
• The Ghadr movement was successful in popularising the nationalist ideology, which involved the critique of British colonial rule and its consequences.
• Their ideology had a secular , democratic and egalitarian Essentially a Punjabi Sikh movement, they had Lala Hardayal , a Hindu, Barkatullah , a Muslim and Rasbehari Bose , a Bengali Hindu, as their leaders.
• One of Lala Hardayal’s contributions was giving an international outlook to the movement. He used to give references to Irish, Russian and Mexican revolutionaries in his articles and speeches.
• However, one of the major weaknesses of the movement was its over-estimation of the readiness of the revolt and under-estimation of the British might and ideological foundation of their rule.
• Another weakness of the movement was the almost non-existent organizational structure , and perhaps Lala Hardayal was not suited for the job of leading the organization.

The Decline of The Revolutionary Activities

• Severe repression by the use of stringent laws and lack of mass support led to the gradual decline of revolutionary activities.
• The release of prisoners held under the draconian defense of Indian rules and Montagu’s August 1917 statement regarding constitutional reforms cooled down the revolutionaries temporarily.
• The advent of Gandhi, with his non-violent, non-cooperation movement , gave new hope to people.

Evaluation of the Revolutionary Activities

• Individual heroic actions by the revolutionaries earned them great admiration and sympathy . Revolutionaries like Khudiram Bose and Prafulla Chaki became folk heroes.
• Despite their small number and eventual failure, they made a remarkable contribution to the growth of patriotic zeal and a sense of self-confidence in the country.
• However, their kind of political action could only be followed by a few individuals and not by a mass of people, due to which they lacked a mass base and could not withstand the suppression by the mighty British empire.
• Their method of using violence as a political tool gave justification to the British to commit even more violence .

At 99Notes, each study and article is meticulously crafted through the collaborative expertise of seasoned professionals, ensuring the production of highly comprehensive and pertinent study materials tailored specifically for IAS aspirants. Our commitment to excellence in collective efforts results in an unparalleled resource for those seeking top-notch preparation.

Related Posts

Civil Disobedience Movement: Cause, Limitations, And Impact

Administrative unification under the british empire, annexation of sindh & punjab by british- complete notes for upsc.

Our UPSC/IAS Coaching Institutes in India

Important upsc links.

• UPSC Previous Year Question Papers
• IAS Eligibility
• NCERT Notes for UPSC 

GS 1 Topper Notes

• History Notes
• Society Notes
• Geography Notes

Our Authors

UPSC Courses

IAS Scholarship

UPSC Current Affairs

• Daily Mains Answer Writing
• Daily Facts

GS 2 Topper Notes

• Polity Notes
• Governance Notes
• IR(International Relations) Notes

Indian Constitution

• Article 1 of Indian Constitution
• Article 2 of Indian Constitution
• Article 3 of Indian Constitution
• Article 4 of Indian Constitution

UPSC Syllabus Updated

• Download UPSC Prelims Syllabus
• Download UPSC Mains Syllabus
• Download UPSC Optional Syllabus

GS 3 Topper Notes

• Indian Economy Notes
• Agriculture Notes
• Science & Technology Notes
• Environment Notes
• Internal Security Notes

Best IAS Coaching in Delhi

• Best IAS Coaching in Mukherjee Nagar
• Best IAS Coaching in Faridabad
• Best IAS Coaching in Gurgaon
• Best IAS Coaching in Noida
• Best IAS Coaching in Ghaziabad

Daily/Yearly Current Affairs

• Forest Report

GS 4 Topper Notes

• Attitude Notes
• Aptitude For Civil Services Notes
• Emotional Intelligence Notes
• Civil Service Values Notes
• Ethical Issues In International Relations Notes
• Corporate Governance Notes
• Probity In Governance Notes
• Case Study On Above Issues Notes
• [email protected]
• 011-61381450

© Copyright  99Notes.in   All Rights Reserved

Head Office :- Office No-2 & 3 ,LGF,Apsara Arcade,Adjacent Karol bagh Metro,Old Rajinder Nagar ,New Delhi-110060

2nd Office:- Metro station, 2nd floor, 5B, Pusa Rd, opp. to Metro Pillar no. 110, near Karol Bagh, Block B, Karol Bagh, New Delhi, Delhi 110005

Type above and press Enter to search. Press Esc to cancel.

Your Full Name (required)

Your Email (required)

Revolutionary Movements and Wars of Rebellion Essay

Revolutions are radical changes in political power brought about by people’s dissatisfaction with the regime prevailing in the country. One of the most popular beliefs about the origins of revolutions is that “misery breeds revolt.” 1 This idea presupposes that people are likely to rise against their rulers if the latter makes the life of the former unbearable. While this argument is a viable explanation of revolutions, it is still not sufficient since revolts occur in some countries but do not happen in others.

Several circumstances can affect the development of revolutions, such as the level of impoverishment in a society, the degree of inequality, and the division along with ethnic connections. Other factors include officials’ corruption, military forces’ dedication to the people, the level of armament, the country’s traditional ways of protesting against social injustice, and the likelihood of other states interfering with the country’s revolutionary movements. 2 However, as DeFronzo remarks, despite the existence of a variety of circumstances, there are five principal factors most likely to cause the correct climate for a revolution.

The first of such crucial elements are the mass frustration of the people that leads to popular uprisings in rural or urban locations. In this case, many citizens become dissatisfied with the authorities’ methods, which results in rebellions and protests against the government. 3 Historical evidence indicates that peasant rebellions play an important role in agricultural societies that are not well-developed in terms of technology. 4 The second factor is dissident political movements in which elites are engaged. Due to the emergence of divisions among different elite groups, some of their members become opposed to the government. 5 The third decisive element is represented by “unifying motivations.” 6 Under these circumstances, compelling catalysts for revolution “cut across” major social classes of the country and bring together the majority of the population under the pretext of the revolution’s aims.

The fourth prominent factor serving as a ground for revolution is a severe political crisis, which weakens the country’s coercive and administrative potential. When such a crisis takes place, the state is highly likely to experience a revolution. 7 The character of a crisis may be of various origins, including such possibilities as experiencing natural disasters, being defeated in a war, suffering from economic depression, or losing significant support from other states. 8 If a country encounters any of these hardships or a combination of a few, it is no longer able to perform its functions effectively, which causes an opposition revolutionary action. Finally, the fifth factor likely to bring about a revolution is associated with a “permissive or tolerant world context.” 9 This issue comes into action when other countries’ governments do not take any intervening measures to hinder the development and success of a revolutionary movement.

An example of recent revolutionary activities is the Egyptian eighteen-day revolution of 2011. During only a few weeks, the young people of Egypt managed to express their dissatisfaction with the president’s rule quite firmly. The revolutionaries protested the injustice and demanded “a new country.” 10 The events happening in Egypt served as “a shining example” of how people could support their right to freedom and to a leader whose decisions and government style they would respect. 11 With the help of numerous demonstrations, strikes, and non-violent civil resistance, protesters gained much more in just eighteen days than their predecessors in several decades. As a result, the country’s president for nearly twenty years, Hosni Mubarak, resigned. Hence, the people of Egypt were able to pursue new goals in the spheres of police treatment, political freedom, state-of-emergency laws, employment, and others. 12 The example of Egypt’s revolution demonstrates how organized action involving many civil individuals can be more effective than military campaigns in terms of reaching the goals and settling the conflicts.

Based on the differences between wars of rebellion and revolutionary wars, it is possible to contrast their origins, maturation, and resolution. What concerns origins, a revolution presupposes an overthrow of the country’s government or the emergence of a new system of social order. Rebellion, in its turn, is initiated when a certain group of people refuses to obey some political order or starts an uprising.

The maturation of a revolution is reflected in the refusal of protesters to support the current government to such an extent that it leads to abundant mass protests. In this process, the prominent place belongs to the person organizing the revolution. 13 History knows cases when the weaker opponent was able to overthrow the stronger one due to the carefully selected strategy and support from the people. The difference between the maturation of a revolution and a rebellion is in the two processes’ goals. Whereas a revolution pursues the politics of hope, a rebellion follows the principles of the politics of hatred. 14

Finally, the resolution of the two actions is quite different, which is logical, taking into consideration their origin and maturation. Rebels’ final aim is the cancellation of some governmental policy that makes people dissatisfied. Meanwhile, revolutionaries’ goal is to change the dissatisfactory system or government into a new one that will be favored by the majority of people. Therefore, while revolutions and rebellions have some points in common, their nature is quite different in terms of origin, maturation, and resolution.

Bibliography

Anatomy of a Revolution . 2010. Web.

DeFronzo, James. Revolutions and Revolutionary Movements . 5th ed. Boulder, CO: Westview Press, 2014.

Goldstone, Jack A. Revolutions: Theoretical, Comparative, and Historical Studies . 3rd ed. Belmont, CA: Cengage, 2003.

Moyers & Company: How People Power Generates Change . 2013. Web.

• Jack A. Goldstone, Revolutions: Theoretical, Comparative, and Historical Studies , 3rd ed. (Belmont, CA: Cengage, 2003), 1.
• James DeFronzo, Revolutions, and Revolutionary Movements , 5th ed. (Boulder, CO: Westview Press, 2014), 12.
• DeFronzo, Revolutions and Revolutionary Movements , 12.
• DeFronzo, 12.
• Anatomy of a Revolution , 2010, Web.
• Anatomy of a Revolution.
• Moyers & Company: How People Power Generates Change , 2013, Web.
• Moyers & Company: How People Power Generates Change .
• Overthrows through the History
• Harrison Bergeron and Malcolm X as Revolutionaries
• The Police in the 2005 Urban Uprising in Toledo
• Difficulties in Using Kent as a Historical Source
• Unintended Consequences of New Order
• Rise of Modern Europe at an Age of Expansionism From 1000 to 1600 AD
• European Immigrants to North America in the 17th Century
• Historical Legacy of the Twentieth Century
• Chicago (A-D)
• Chicago (N-B)

IvyPanda. (2021, September 14). Revolutionary Movements and Wars of Rebellion. https://ivypanda.com/essays/revolutionary-movements-and-wars-of-rebellion/

"Revolutionary Movements and Wars of Rebellion." IvyPanda , 14 Sept. 2021, ivypanda.com/essays/revolutionary-movements-and-wars-of-rebellion/.

IvyPanda . (2021) 'Revolutionary Movements and Wars of Rebellion'. 14 September.

IvyPanda . 2021. "Revolutionary Movements and Wars of Rebellion." September 14, 2021. https://ivypanda.com/essays/revolutionary-movements-and-wars-of-rebellion/.

1. IvyPanda . "Revolutionary Movements and Wars of Rebellion." September 14, 2021. https://ivypanda.com/essays/revolutionary-movements-and-wars-of-rebellion/.

IvyPanda . "Revolutionary Movements and Wars of Rebellion." September 14, 2021. https://ivypanda.com/essays/revolutionary-movements-and-wars-of-rebellion/.

David Graeber

• Link to youtube

Anarchism, Or The Revolutionary Movement Of The Twenty-first Century

View / Download (.pdf)

It is becoming increasingly clear that the age of revolutions is not over. It’s becoming equally clear that the global revolutionary movement in the twenty-first century, will be one that traces its origins less to the tradition of Marxism, or even of socialism narrowly defined, but of anarchism.

Everywhere from Eastern Europe to Argentina, from Seattle to Bombay, anarchist ideas and principles are generating new radical dreams and visions. Often their exponents do not call themselves “anarchists”. There are a host of other names: autonomism, anti-authoritarianism, horizontality, Zapatismo, direct democracy… Still, everywhere one finds the same core principles: decentralization, voluntary association, mutual aid, the network model, and above all, the rejection of any idea that the end justifies the means, let alone that the business of a revolutionary is to seize state power and then begin imposing one’s vision at the point of a gun. Above all, anarchism, as ethics of practice — the idea of building a new society “within the shell of the old” — has become the basic inspiration of the “movement of movements” (of which the authors are a part), which has from the start been less about seizing state power than about exposing, delegitimizing and dismantling mechanisms of rule while winning ever-larger spaces of autonomy and participatory management within it.

There are some obvious reasons for the appeal of anarchist ideas at the beginning of the 21st century: most obviously, the failures and catastrophes resulting from so many efforts to overcome capitalism by seizing control of the apparatus of government in the 20th. Increasing numbers of revolutionaries have begun to recognize that “the revolution” is not going to come as some great apocalyptic moment, the storming of some global equivalent of the Winter Palace, but a very long process that has been going on for most of human history (even if it has like most things come to accelerate of late) full of strategies of flight and evasion as much as dramatic confrontations, and which will never — indeed, most anarchists feel, should never — come to a definitive conclusion. It’s a little disconcerting, but it offers one enormous consolation: we do not have to wait until “after the revolution” to begin to get a glimpse of what genuine freedom might be like. As the Crimethinc Collective, the greatest propagandists of contemporary American anarchism put it: “Freedom only exists in the moment of revolution. And those moments are not as rare as you think.” For an anarchist, in fact, to try to create non-alienated experiences, true democracy, is an ethical imperative; only by making one’s form of organization in the present at least a rough approximation of how a free society would actually operate, how everyone, someday, should be able to live, can one guarantee that we will not cascade back into disaster. Grim joyless revolutionaries who sacrifice all pleasure to the cause can only produce grim joyless societies.

These changes have been difficult to document because so far anarchist ideas have received almost no attention in the academy. There are still thousands of academic Marxists, but almost no academic anarchists. This lag is somewhat difficult to interpret. In part, no doubt, it’s because Marxism has always had a certain affinity with the academy which anarchism obviously lacked: Marxism was, after all, the only great social movement that was invented by a Ph.D. Most ac- counts of the history of anarchism assume it was basically similar to Marxism: anarchism is presented as the brainchild of certain 19th-century thinkers (Proudhon, Bakunin, Kropotkin…) that then went on to inspire working-class organizations, became enmeshed in political struggles, divided into sects…

Anarchism, in the standard accounts, usually comes out as Marxism’s poorer cousin, theoretically a bit flat-footed but making up for brains, perhaps, with passion and sincerity. Really the analogy is strained. The “founders” of anarchism did not think of themselves as having invented anything particularly new. They saw its basic principles — mutual aid, voluntary association, egalitarian decision-making — as old as humanity. The same goes for the rejection of the state and of all forms of structural violence, inequality, or domination (anarchism literally means “without rulers”) — even the assumption that all these forms are somehow related and reinforce each other. None of it was seen as some startling new doctrine, but a longstanding tendency in the history of human thought, and one that cannot be encompassed by any general theory of ideology.[1]

On one level it is a kind of faith: a belief that most forms of irresponsibility that seem to make power necessary are in fact the effects of power itself. In practice, though it is constant questioning, an effort to identify every compulsory or hierarchical relation in human life, and challenge them to justify themselves, and if they cannot — which usually turns out to be the case — an effort to limit their power and thus widen the scope of human liberty. Just as a Sufi might say that Sufism is the core of truth behind all religions, an anarchist might argue that anarchism is the urge for freedom behind all political ideologies.

Schools of Marxism always have founders. Just as Marxism sprang from the mind of Marx, so we have Leninists, Maoists, Althusserians… (Note how the list starts with heads of state and grades almost seamlessly into French professors — who, in turn, can spawn their own sects: Lacanians, Foucauldians…)

Schools of anarchism, in contrast, almost invariably emerge from some kind of organizational principle or form of practice: Anarcho-Syndicalists and Anarcho-Communists, Insurrectionists and Platformists, Cooperativists, Councilists, Individualists, and so on.

Anarchists are distinguished by what they do, and how they organize themselves to go about doing it. And indeed this has always been what anarchists have spent most of their time think- ing and arguing about. They have never been much interested in the kinds of broad strategic or philosophical questions that preoccupy Marxists such as Are the peasants a potentially revolutionary class? (anarchists consider this something for peasants to decide) or what is the nature of the commodity form? Rather, they tend to argue about what is the truly democratic way to go about a meeting, at what point organization stops empowering people and starts squelching individual freedom. Is “leadership” necessarily a bad thing? Or, alternately, about the ethics of opposing power: What is direct action? Should one condemn someone who assassinates a head of state? When is it okay to throw a brick?

Marxism, then, has tended to be a theoretical or analytical discourse about revolutionary strategy. Anarchism has tended to be an ethical discourse about revolutionary practice. As a result, where Marxism has produced brilliant theories of praxis, it’s mostly been anarchists who have been working on the praxis itself.

At the moment, there’s something of a rupture between generations of anarchism: between those whose political formation took place in the 60s and 70s — and who often still have not shaken the sectarian habits of the last century — or simply still operate in those terms, and younger activists much more informed, among other elements, by indigenous, feminist, ecological and cultural-critical ideas. The former organize mainly through highly visible Anarchist Federations like the IWA, NEFAC or IWW. The latter work most prominently in the networks of the global social movement, networks like Peoples Global Action, which unites anarchist collectives in Europe and elsewhere with groups ranging from Maori activists in New Zealand, fisherfolk in Indonesia, or the Canadian postal workers’ union[2]. The latter — what might be loosely referred to as the “small-a anarchists”, are by now by far the majority. But it is sometimes hard to tell, since so many of them do not trumpet their affinities very loudly. There are many, in fact, who take anarchist principles of anti-sectarianism and open-endedness so seriously that they refuse to refer to themselves as ‘anarchists’ for that very reason[3].

But the three essentials that run throughout all manifestations of anarchist ideology are definitely there — anti-statism, anti-capitalism and prefigurative politics (i.e. modes of organization that consciously resemble the world you want to create. Or, as an anarchist historian of the revolution in Spain has formulated “an effort to think of not only the ideas but the facts of the future itself”.[4] This is present in anything from jamming collectives and on to Indy media, all of which can be called anarchist in the newer sense.[5] In some countries, there is only a very limited degree of confluence between the two coexisting generations, mostly taking the form of following what each other is doing — but not much more.

One reason is that the new generation is much more interested in developing new forms of practice than arguing about the finer points of ideology. The most dramatic among these have been the development of new forms of decision-making process, the beginnings, at least, of an alternate culture of democracy. The famous North American spokescouncils, where thousands of activists coordinate large-scale events by consensus, with no formal leadership structure, are only the most spectacular.

Actually, even calling these forms “new” is a little bit deceptive. One of the main inspirations for the new generation of anarchists are the Zapatista autonomous municipalities of Chiapas, based in Tzeltal or Tojolobal — speaking communities who have been using consensus process for thousands of years — only now adopted by revolutionaries to ensure that women and younger people have an equal voice. In North America, “consensus process” emerged more than anything else from the feminist movement in the ’70s, as part of a broad backlash against the macho style of leadership typical of the ’60s New Left. The idea of consensus itself was borrowed from the Quakers, who again, claim to have been inspired by the Six Nations and other Native American practices.

Consensus is often misunderstood. One often hears critics claim it would cause stifling conformity but almost never by anyone who has actually observed consensus in action, at least, as guided by trained, experienced facilitators (some recent experiments in Europe, where there is little tradition of such things, have been somewhat crude). In fact, the operating assumption is that no one could really convert another completely to their point of view, or probably should. Instead, the point of consensus process is to allow a group to decide on a common course of action. Instead of voting proposals up and down, proposals are worked and reworked, scotched or reinvented, there is a process of compromise and synthesis, until one ends up with something everyone can live with. When it comes to the final stage, actually “finding consensus”, there are two levels of possible objection: one can “stand aside”, which is to say “I don’t like this and won’t participate but I wouldn’t stop anyone else from doing it”, or “block”, which has the effect of a veto. One can only block if one feels a proposal is in violation of the fundamental principles or reasons for being of a group. One might say that the function which in the US constitution is relegated to the courts, of striking down legislative decisions that violate constitutional principles, is here relegated with anyone with the courage to actually stand up against the combined will of the group (though of course there are also ways of challenging unprincipled blocks).

One could go on at length about the elaborate and surprisingly sophisticated methods that have been developed to ensure all this works; of forms of modified consensus required for very large groups; of the way consensus itself reinforces the principle of decentralization by ensuring one doesn’t really want to bring proposals before very large groups unless one has to, of means of ensuring gender equity and resolving conflict… The point is this is a form of direct democracy which is very different than the kind we usually associate with the term — or, for that matter, with the kind of majority-vote system usually employed by European or North American anarchists of earlier generations, or still employed, say, in middle class urban Argentine asambleas (though not, significantly, among the more radical piqueteros, the organized unemployed, who tend to operate by consensus.) With increasing contact between different movements internationally, the inclusion of indigenous groups and movements from Africa, Asia, and Oceania with radically different traditions, we are seeing the beginnings of a new global reconception of what “democracy” should even mean, one as far as possible from the neoliberal parlaimentarianism currently promoted by the existing powers of the world.

Again, it is difficult to follow this new spirit of synthesis by reading most existing anarchist literature, because those who spend most of their energy on questions of theory, rather than emerging forms of practice, are the most likely to maintain the old sectarian dichotomizing logic. Modern anarchism is imbued with countless contradictions. While small-a anarchists are slowly incorporating ideas and practices learned from indigenous allies into their modes of organizing or alternative communities, the main trace in the written literature has been the emergence of a sect of Primitivists, a notoriously contentious crew who call for the complete abolition of industrial civilization, and, in some cases, even agriculture.[6] Still, it is only a matter of time before this older, either/or logic begins to give way to something more resembling the practice of consensus-based groups.

What would this new synthesis look like? Some of the outlines can already be discerned within the movement. It will insist on constantly expanding the focus of anti-authoritarianism, moving away from class reductionism by trying to grasp the “totality of domination”, that is, to highlight not only the state but also gender relations, and not only the economy but also cultural relations and ecology, sexuality, and freedom in every form it can be sought, and each not only through the sole prism of authority relations, but also informed by richer and more diverse concepts.

This approach does not call for an endless expansion of material production, or hold that technologies are neutral, but it also doesn’t decry technology per se. Instead, it becomes familiar with and employs diverse types of technology as appropriate. It not only doesn’t decry institutions per se, or political forms per se, it tries to conceive new institutions and new political forms for activism and for a new society, including new ways of meeting, new ways of decision making, new ways of coordinating, along the same lines as it already has with revitalized affinity groups and spokes structures. And it not only doesn’t decry reforms per se, but struggles to define and win non-reformist reforms, attentive to people’s immediate needs and bettering their lives in the here-and-now at the same time as moving toward further gains, and eventually, wholesale transformation.[7]

And of course theory will have to catch up with practice. To be fully effective, modern anarchism will have to include at least three levels: activists, people’s organizations, and researchers. The problem at the moment is that anarchist intellectuals who want to get past old-fashioned, vanguardist habits — the Marxist sectarian hangover that still haunts so much of the radical intellectual world — are not quite sure what their role is supposed to be. Anarchism needs to become reflexive. But how? On one level the answer seems obvious. One should not lecture, not dictate, not even necessarily think of oneself as a teacher, but must listen, explore and discover. To tease out and make explicit the tacit logic already underlying new forms of radical practice. To put oneself at the service of activists by providing information, or exposing the interests of the dominant elite carefully hidden behind supposedly objective, authoritative discourses, rather than trying to impose a new version of the same thing. But at the same time most recognize that intellectual struggle needs to reaffirm its place. Many are beginning to point out that one of the basic weaknesses of the anarchist movement today is, with respect to the time of, say, Kropotkin or Reclus, or Herbert Read, exactly the neglecting of the symbolic, the visionary, and overlooking of the effectiveness of theory. How to move from ethnography to utopian visions — ideally, as many utopian visions as possible? It is hardly a coincidence that some of the greatest recruiters for anarchism in countries like the United States have been feminist science fiction writers like Starhawk or Ursula K. LeGuin[8].

One way this is beginning to happen is as anarchists begin to recuperate the experience of other social movements with a more developed body of theory, ideas that come from circles close to, indeed inspired by anarchism. Let’s take for example the idea of participatory economy, which represents an anarchist economist vision par excellence and which supplements and rectifies anarchist economic tradition. Parecon theorists argue for the existence of not just two, but three major classes in advanced capitalism: not only a proletariat and bourgeoisie but a “coordinator class” whose role is to manage and control the labor of the working class. This is the class that includes the management hierarchy and the professional consultants and advisors central to their system of control — as lawyers, key engineers and accountants, and so on. They maintain their class position because of their relative monopolization over knowledge, skills, and connections. As a result, economists and others working in this tradition have been trying to create models of an economy which would systematically eliminate divisions between physical and intellectual labor. Now that anarchism has so clearly become the center of revolutionary creativity, proponents of such models have increasingly been, if not rallying to the flag, exactly, then at least, emphasizing the degree to which their ideas are compatible with an anarchist vision.[9]

Similar things are starting to happen with the development of anarchist political visions. Now, this is an area where classical anarchism already had a leg up over classical Marxism, which never developed a theory of political organization at all. Different schools of anarchism have often advocated very specific forms of social organization, albeit often markedly at variance with one another. Still, anarchism as a whole has tended to advance what liberals like to call ‘negative freedoms,’ ‘freedoms from,’ rather than substantive ‘freedoms to.’ Often it has celebrated this very commitment as evidence of anarchism’s pluralism, ideological tolerance, or creativity. But as a result, there has been a reluctance to go beyond developing small-scale forms of organization, and a faith that larger, more complicated structures can be improvised later in the same spirit.

There have been exceptions. Pierre Joseph Proudhon tried to come up with a total vision of how a libertarian society might operate.[10] It’s generally considered to have been a failure, but it pointed the way to more developed visions, such as the North American Social Ecologists’s “libertarian municipalism”. There’s a lively developing, for instance, on how to balance principles of worker’s control — emphasized by the Parecon folk — and direct democracy, emphasized by the Social Ecologists.[11]

Still, there are a lot of details still to be filled in: what are the anarchist’s full sets of positive institutional alternatives to contemporary legislatures, courts, police, and diverse executive agencies? How to offer a political vision that encompasses legislation, implementation, adjudication, and enforcement and that shows how each would be effectively accomplished in a non-authoritarian way — not only provide long-term hope, but to inform immediate responses to today’s electoral, law-making, law enforcement, and court system, and thus, many strategic choices. Obviously, there could never be an anarchist party line on this, the general feeling among the small-a anarchists at least is that we’ll need many concrete visions. Still, between actual social experiments within expanding self-managing communities in places like Chiapas and Argentina, and efforts by anarchist scholar/activists like the newly formed Planetary Alternatives Network or the Life After Capitalism forums to begin locating and compiling successful examples of economic and political forms, the work is beginning[12]. It is clearly a long-term process. But then, the anarchist century has only just begun.

• This doesn’t mean anarchists have to be against theory. It might not need High Theory, in the sense familiar today. Certainly it will not need one single, Anarchist High Theory. That would be completely inimical to its spirit. Much better, we think, something more in the spirit of anarchist decision-making processes: applied to theory, this would mean accepting the need for a diversity of high theoretical perspectives, united only by certain shared commitments and understandings. Rather than based on the need to prove others’ fundamental assumptions wrong, it seeks to find particular projects on which they reinforce each other. Just because theories are incommensurable in certain respects does not mean they cannot exist or even reinforce each other, any more than the fact that individuals have unique and incommensurable views of the world means they cannot become friends, or lovers, or work on common projects. Even more than High Theory, what anarchism needs is what might be called low theory: a way of grappling with those real, immediate questions that emerge from a transformative project.
• Fore more information about the exciting history of Peoples Global Action we suggest the book We are Everywhere: The Irresistible Rise of Global Anti-capitalism, edited by Notes from Nowhere, London: Verso 2003. See also the PGA web site: www.agp.org
• Cf. David Graeber, “New Anarchists”, New left Review 13, January — February 2002
• See Diego Abad de Santillan, After the Revolution , New York: Greenberg Publishers 1937
• For more information on global indymedia project go to: www.indymedia.org
• Cf. Jason McQuinn, “Why I am not a Primitivist”, Anarchy: a journal of desire armed , printemps/été 2001.Cf. le site anarchiste www.anarchymag.org . Cf. John Zerzan, Future Primitive & Other Essays, Autonomedia, 1994.
• Cf. Andrej Grubacic, Towards an Another Anarchism , in: Sen, Jai, Anita Anand, Arturo Escobar and Peter Waterman, The World Social Forum: Against all Empires, New Delhi: Viveka 2004.
• Cf. Starhawk, Webs of Power: Notes from Global Uprising , San Francisco 2002. See also: www.starhawk.org
• Albert, Michael, Participatory Economics , Verso, 2003. See also: www.parecon.org
• Avineri, Shlomo. The Social and Political Thought of Karl Marx . London: Cambridge University Press, 1968
• See The Murray Bookchin Reader , edited by Janet Biehl, London: Cassell 1997. See also the web site of the Institute for Social Ecology: www.social-ecology.org
• For more information on Life After Capitalism forums go to : www.zmag.org

• UPSC IAS Exam Pattern
• UPSC IAS Prelims
• UPSC IAS Mains
• UPSC IAS Interview
• UPSC IAS Optionals
• UPSC Notification
• UPSC Eligibility Criteria
• UPSC Online
• UPSC Admit Card
• UPSC Results
• UPSC Cut-Off
• UPSC Calendar
• Documents Required for UPSC IAS Exam
• UPSC IAS Prelims Syllabus
• General Studies 1
• General Studies 2
• General Studies 3
• General Studies 4
• UPSC IAS Interview Syllabus
• UPSC IAS Optional Syllabus

Reasons for the Emergence of Revolutionary Activities – UPSC Modern History Notes

The emergence of revolutionary activities in modern history can be attributed to a confluence of social, economic, and political factors that have fueled discontent and a desire for change. One prominent catalyst is widespread inequality both in terms of wealth distribution and access to basic resources. As marginalized groups experience oppression and disparities, the seeds of revolution are sown. Additionally, political repression and the denial of basic human rights often serve as a spark, igniting the flames of resistance. The advent of new ideas and ideologies, coupled with the dissemination of information through modern communication channels, further empowers individuals to question existing power structures. Economic instability, fueled by factors such as corruption and mismanagement, also contributes to the volatile environment that fosters revolutionary sentiments. In essence, the reasons for the emergence of revolutionary activities in modern history are complex and multifaceted, reflecting a quest for justice, equality, and a more equitable society.

• Militant Nationalism : Revolutionary activities were a by-product of the growth of militant nationalism in India. The sentiment of nationalism was fuelled by factors such as the Swadeshi and Boycott movement, which advocated self-sufficiency and resistance against foreign goods, and the Non-cooperation Movement, which aimed at boycotting British institutions.
• Frustration with Moderate Politics: The failure of moderate politics and the perceived futility of prayer and petition to the British government led some nationalists to adopt more radical and militant approaches. Extremists criticized the moderate leaders of the Indian National Congress for their perceived political mendicancy and advocated for a more assertive and direct approach.
• Influence of Extremist Ideas: The extremist leaders, such as Bal Gangadhar Tilak, Lajpat Rai, and Bipin Chandra Pal, played a crucial role in advocating militant methods. They emphasized the need for boycotts, passive resistance, and self-sacrifice as means to achieve nationalist goals.
• Lack of Effective Organization: While the extremist leaders propagated revolutionary ideas, they were unable to provide a practical and organized platform to channel the revolutionary energies of the youth. This lack of organization hindered the effective implementation of their ideas.
• Repression and Government Attacks: The brutal repression of the Swadeshi and Boycott movement by the British government further fueled the frustration among the youth. The government’s crackdown on the extremists and the split within the Indian National Congress in 1907 provided an impetus for radical activities.
• Belief in Physical Expulsion of British Rule: The youth who were disillusioned with peaceful political protests and faced government repression believed that achieving independence required physically expelling the British from India. They saw revolutionary terrorism as a means to achieve their nationalist goals.
• Overall, the emergence of revolutionary activities in India was a result of the convergence of various factors, including the failure of moderate politics, the influence of extremist ideas, government repression, and the desire for more assertive methods to achieve independence. These revolutionary activities played a significant role in shaping the course of the Indian independence movement.

Table of Contents

Revolutionary Activities – Ideology

• Religious Bias: Many of the revolutionaries had a strong religious bias in their activities, writings, and speeches. They believed in the spiritual preparation of the people and saw their cause as something beyond mere political propaganda. However, it is important to highlight that their religious beliefs were not necessarily aligned with the majority religion in India.
• Romanticism and Emotionalism: The revolutionaries were influenced by romantic ideals and emotionalism. They were driven by a sense of passion, idealism, and sacrifice for the cause of independence. Their actions and rhetoric aimed to evoke strong emotions among the populace and inspire patriotism.
• Armed Struggle as Supreme Goal: The staunch revolutionaries considered the emancipation of India through armed struggle as the ultimate objective. They believed that revolutionary actions, including assassinations, dacoities (robberies), and military conspiracies, were necessary to instill fear in the rulers, mobilize the people, and remove the fear of authority.
• Appeal to Patriotism and Youth: The revolutionaries sought to inspire the populace, especially the idealistic youth, by appealing to patriotism. They aimed to create a sense of nationalistic pride and motivate the younger generation to play an active role in driving the British out of India.
• Lessons from History: The revolutionaries drew lessons from India’s history as well as the histories of other countries’ revolutions. They studied the tactics and strategies employed in previous liberation movements to shape their revolutionary ideology and program.
• Opposition to Obstacles: The revolutionaries revolted against anything that obstructed the progress of the revolutionary movement. They aimed to break down time-honored customs and challenge social and political barriers that hindered the path toward independence.
• It is important to acknowledge that the early revolutionaries’ ideology had its flaws, including a narrow religious focus and reliance on violence. However, their commitment to the cause of independence and their efforts to awaken national consciousness played a significant role in shaping the course of the independence movement in India.

Revolutionary Activities in Maharashtra

• The state of Maharashtra played a significant role in the revolutionary activities during the struggle for Indian independence. Here are some notable instances:

Vasudev Balwant Phadke and the Ramosi Peasant Force (1879):

• Vasudev Balwant Phadke organized the Ramosi Peasant Force, which aimed to disrupt British communication lines and instigate an armed revolt to free the country from British rule. The movement sought to address the grievances of peasants and challenge colonial authority.

Bal Gangadhar Tilak and Militant Nationalism (1890s):

• Bal Gangadhar Tilak, a prominent leader from Maharashtra, spread the spirit of militant nationalism through various means. He used festivals like Ganpati and Shivaji to inspire nationalist sentiments, and his journals Kesari and Mahratta disseminated his nationalist ideas. Tilak emphasized the use of violence as a means to fight against British oppression.

Chapekar Brothers and the Assassination of British Officials (1897):

• Two disciples of Bal Gangadhar Tilak, the Chapekar brothers (Damodar and Balkrishna), assassinated the Poona Plague Commissioner, Rand, and Lt. Ayerst. This act of violence was a response to the oppressive measures taken by the British during the plague outbreak and symbolized the revolutionary spirit in Maharashtra.

Abhinav Bharat Society and the Savarkar Brothers (1904):

• Vinayak Damodar Savarkar and his brother Ganesh Damodar Savarkar founded the Abhinav Bharat Society, also known as the Young India Society. It aimed to mobilize revolutionaries and political activists in Maharashtra and other parts of India. The society grew in influence and had branches across the country, with Vinayak Savarkar extending its reach to London during his law studies.

Assassinations and the Nasik Conspiracy Case (1909):

• Madanlal Dhingra, associated with the revolutionary movement, assassinated Lt. Col. William Curzon-Wyllie, a British official, in London. In India, Anant Laxman Kanhare assassinated AMT Jackson, the district magistrate of Nasik, as part of the Nasik Conspiracy Case. These acts of violence aimed to strike at the heart of British authority and inspire the broader independence movement.
• These events highlight the active participation of Maharashtra in revolutionary activities during the struggle for Indian independence. The revolutionaries from Maharashtra played a significant role in challenging British rule and inspiring nationalist sentiments among the people.

Revolutionary Activities in Punjab

• Socioeconomic Factors and Extremism: Punjab experienced frequent famines and faced an increase in land revenue and irrigation tax, which created discontent among the people. The practice of ‘begar,’ a form of unpaid labor demanded by zamindars, also added to the grievances. These issues contributed to the growth of extremist sentiments in the region.
• Lala Lajpat Rai and Ajit Singh: Lala Lajpat Rai, a prominent leader and writer, played a significant role in Punjab’s revolutionary activities. He used his Punjabi journal to spread nationalist ideas and promote the cause of independence. Ajit Singh, who was Bhagat Singh’s uncle, organized the extremist Anjuman-i-Mohisban-i-Watan in Lahore and published the journal, Bharat Mata. Both Lala Lajpat Rai and Ajit Singh were active in promoting extremist ideologies in Punjab.
• Suppression and Impact on Extremism: The Punjab government took strict measures against revolutionary activities. In May 1907, political meetings were banned, and Lala Lajpat Rai and Ajit Singh were deported. These actions led to a temporary decline in extremist activities in Punjab.
• Transformation into Revolutionaries: Following the suppression of political activities, Ajit Singh and some of his associates, including Sufi Ambaprasad, Lalchand, Bhai Parmanand, and Lala Hardayal, evolved into full-scale revolutionaries. They were influenced by the events and ideology of the time and began advocating for armed struggle and revolutionary methods to achieve independence.
• These factors contributed to the growth and transformation of revolutionary activities in Punjab. Lala Lajpat Rai and Ajit Singh played significant roles in promoting extremist ideas, while subsequent suppression by the government led to the emergence of a more militant approach among revolutionaries in Punjab.

Revolutionary Activities in Bengal

• The physical culture movement and the establishment of akharas or gymnasiums played a role in the development of revolutionary terrorism in Punjab, particularly during the late 19th and early 20th centuries. The physical culture movement emphasized physical fitness, strength, and endurance as essential qualities for individuals aspiring for national liberation and independence.
• Swami Vivekananda, a renowned spiritual leader and a key figure in the Indian independence movement, emphasized the importance of physical strength alongside spiritual and intellectual development. He believed that a strong physique and resilient nerves were necessary for individuals to effectively contribute to the nationalist cause.
• The establishment of akharas and gymnasiums provided a platform for young revolutionaries to engage in physical training, martial arts, and combat skills. These spaces not only served as training grounds but also became centers for fostering a sense of camaraderie, discipline, and readiness for armed struggle.
• The emphasis on physical fitness and the cultivation of strength and resilience helped revolutionaries in Punjab prepare themselves for the challenges they faced in their struggle against colonial rule. It instilled a spirit of self-sacrifice, courage, and determination among the youth who sought to free their country from British imperialism.
• The physical culture movement, coupled with the growing nationalist sentiments and the socio-political context of Punjab, contributed to the development of revolutionary terrorism, as individuals sought to channel their physical and mental strength into acts of resistance against the colonial authorities.
• The revolutionary activities in Bengal during the early 20th century were characterized by the formation of revolutionary organizations, acts of violence, and the dissemination of revolutionary ideas through newspapers and journals. Here is an overview of the revolutionary activities in Bengal:
• Formation of Revolutionary Organizations: The first revolutionary organizations in Bengal were formed in 1902 in Midnapore and Calcutta. The prominent organizations included Anushilan Samiti and Jugantar. These organizations aimed to overthrow British rule in India through revolutionary means.
• Revolutionary Publications: Newspapers and journals played a crucial role in advocating revolutionary violence and spreading revolutionary ideas. Yugantar and Sandhya were among the influential publications in Bengal that promoted revolutionary activity.
• Assassination Attempts: The revolutionaries in Bengal carried out several assassination attempts against British officials. In 1906, an unsuccessful attempt was made on the life of Sir Fuller, the Lieutenant Governor of Eastern Bengal and Assam. In 1908, Prafulla Chaki and Khudiram Bose targeted a British judge, Kingsford, but ended up accidentally killing two British ladies.
• Alipore Conspiracy Case: The arrest of the Ghosh brothers, Aurobindo and Barindra, along with other members of Anushilan Samiti, led to the Alipore conspiracy case. The case was a significant trial that exposed the revolutionary activities and ideologies of the accused.
• Barrah Dacoity: Barrah Dacoity, led by Pulin Das, was a revolutionary group founded in 1908. The group aimed to raise funds for revolutionary activities through dacoities (robberies).
• Delhi Bomb Attack: In December 1912, Rashbehari Bose and Sachin Sanyal orchestrated a bomb attack on Viceroy Hardinge during his official entry into Delhi. The attack aimed to challenge British authority and gain attention for the revolutionary cause.
• German Plot: During World War I, the Jugantar party, under the leadership of Jatindranath Mukherjee (Bagha Jatin), established connections with sympathizers and revolutionaries in other countries. They arranged for the import of German arms and ammunition to support their revolutionary activities. Jatin also planned an all-India insurgency, known as the ‘German Plot’ or ‘Zimmerman Plan.’
• These revolutionary activities in Bengal reflected the determination of the revolutionaries to free India from British colonial rule. They used acts of violence, publications, and international connections to advance their cause and inspire a larger independence movement.

Revolutionary activities in Delhi  

• Bombing and assassinations: The revolutionaries carried out several bombing attacks on British targets in Delhi, including the Viceroy’s House and the Legislative Assembly. They also assassinated several British officials, including Sir William Hutton, the Chief Commissioner of Delhi.
• Sabotage: The revolutionaries also engaged in sabotage activities, such as cutting telegraph wires and derailing trains. They also attempted to smuggle weapons and ammunition into India.
• Propaganda: The revolutionaries also engaged in propaganda activities, such as distributing leaflets and pamphlets that promoted their cause. They also set up secret presses to print revolutionary literature.
• Recruitment: The revolutionaries also engaged in recruitment activities, trying to attract young people to their cause. They set up secret cells in schools and colleges, and they also held public meetings to spread their message.
• The revolutionary activities in Delhi had a significant impact on the British Raj. They helped to undermine the British government’s authority and to spread the message of Indian independence. The revolutionaries also inspired other parts of India to take up the cause of the armed struggle.

Some of the most famous revolutionaries from Delhi include:

• Ashfaqulla Khan: Khan was a member of the HRA and was executed for his role in the bombing of the Viceroy’s House.
• Rash Behari Bose: Bose was a member of the Ghadar Party and was exiled to Japan, where he set up a revolutionary government in exile.
• Chandra Shekhar Azad: Azad was a leading figure in the HRA and was killed in a shootout with the British police.
• Surya Sen: Sen was the leader of the Chittagong Armoury Raid and was hanged by the British for his role in the attack.
• The revolutionary activities in Delhi were a significant part of the Indian independence movement. They helped to inspire the people of India to fight for their freedom, and they played a key role in the eventual overthrow of British rule.

Delhi Conspiracy

• The Delhi Conspiracy was an attempt made in 1912 to assassinate the then Viceroy of India, Lord Hardinge by throwing a local self-made bomb, on the occasion of transferring the capital of British India from Calcutta to New Delhi.
• The conspiracy was hatched by a group of revolutionaries led by Rash Behari Bose. The plan was to throw a bomb at Hardinge’s carriage as he was riding through Delhi on December 23, 1912. The bomb was thrown, but it missed Hardinge and only injured two of his attendants.
• The British government launched a massive manhunt for the conspirators, and several of them were arrested. In 1914, five of the conspirators, including Lala Hanumant Sahai, Basanta Kumar Biswas, Bhai Balmukund, Amir Chand, and Awadh Behari, were sentenced to death for their roles in the conspiracy.
• Rash Behari Bose managed to evade capture and fled to Japan. He later became involved in the Ghadar Conspiracy, a plan to overthrow British rule in India.
• The Delhi Conspiracy was a major setback for the Indian independence movement, but it also showed that the British were not invincible. The conspiracy helped to inspire other revolutionaries to continue the fight for India’s freedom.
• Here are some of the key figures involved in the Delhi Conspiracy:
• Rash Behari Bose: The leader of the conspiracy. He was a Bengali revolutionary who had been involved in several other attempts to assassinate British officials.
• Lala Hanumant Sahai: A Punjabi revolutionary who was one of the conspirators who threw the bomb at Hardinge’s carriage. He was sentenced to life imprisonment in the Andaman Islands.
• Basanta Kumar Biswas: A Bengali revolutionary who was one of the conspirators who threw the bomb at Hardinge’s carriage. He was sentenced to death.
• Bhai Balmukund: A Punjabi revolutionary who was one of the conspirators who threw the bomb at Hardinge’s carriage. He was sentenced to death.
• Amir Chand: A Punjabi revolutionary who was one of the conspirators who threw the bomb at Hardinge’s carriage. He was sentenced to death.
• Awadh Behari: A Punjabi revolutionary who was one of the conspirators who threw the bomb at Hardinge’s carriage. He was sentenced to death.
• The Delhi Conspiracy was a significant event in the Indian independence movement. It showed that the British were not invincible, and it helped to inspire other revolutionaries to continue the fight for India’s freedom.

Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs)

Q: what are the primary social factors contributing to the emergence of revolutionary activities.

A: Social factors such as widespread inequality, discrimination, and oppression play a pivotal role in fueling revolutionary sentiments. When marginalized groups experience systemic injustices, it often becomes a catalyst for collective action and resistance.

Q: How does political repression contribute to the rise of revolutionary activities?

A: Political repression, characterized by the denial of basic rights and freedoms, creates an atmosphere of discontent among the populace. When individuals feel silenced or oppressed, it fosters a desire for change and often leads to the mobilization of revolutionary movements seeking political transformation.

Q: Can economic instability be a driving force behind revolutionary activities?

A: Yes, economic instability is a significant contributor to revolutionary activities. Corruption, mismanagement, and unequal distribution of resources can create a sense of injustice, prompting people to challenge existing economic structures and advocate for a fairer system.

Q: How do new ideas and ideologies play a role in the emergence of revolution?

A: The dissemination of new ideas and ideologies, facilitated by advancements in communication, empowers individuals to critically assess existing societal norms. The adoption of progressive ideologies often becomes a unifying force, inspiring movements that seek to challenge and transform established power structures.

Q: Is the availability of information through modern communication channels a factor in the rise of revolutionary activities?

A: Absolutely. Modern communication channels, such as the Internet and social media, enable the rapid spread of information and ideas. This accessibility enhances awareness of social injustices, mobilizes like-minded individuals, and facilitates the coordination of revolutionary activities on a larger scale.

In case you still have your doubts, contact us on 9811333901.  

For UPSC Prelims Resources, Click here

For Daily Updates and Study Material:

Join our Telegram Channel – Edukemy for IAS

• 1. Learn through Videos – here
• 2. Be Exam Ready by Practicing Daily MCQs – here
• 3. Daily Newsletter – Get all your Current Affairs Covered – here
• 4. Mains Answer Writing Practice – here

Visit our YouTube Channel – here

• Champaran Satyagraha (1917) – UPSC Modern History Notes
• Socio-Economic Conditions – Agriculture, Society & Culture, Education & Trade (India on the Eve of British Conquest) – UPSC Modern History Notes
• The decline of the Mughal Empire – UPSC Modern History Notes

Annulment of the Partition – UPSC Modern History Notes

Edukemy Team

Reforms in eastern india (personalities and organisation) – modern history..., muslim socio-religious reform movements – modern history notes, constitutional development (1861-1919) – modern history notes, tebhaga movement – upsc modern history notes, the socialist phase of indian freedom struggle (1928-1947) – upsc..., role of intelligentsia in socio-religious reforms in india – upsc..., anglo-tibetan relations – upsc modern history notes, the rise and growth of nationalism – modern history notes, hindu-muslim unity factor – upsc modern history notes, leave a comment cancel reply.

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

Our website uses cookies to improve your experience. By using our services, you agree to our use of cookies Got it

Keep me signed in until I sign out

Forgot your password?

A new password will be emailed to you.

Have received a new password? Login here

Home — Essay Samples — Life — History of Taekwondo — The Black Panther Party: A Revolutionary Movement

The Black Panther Party: a Revolutionary Movement

• Categories: African American Culture Civil Rights Movement History of Taekwondo

About this sample

Words: 657 |

Published: Mar 16, 2024

Words: 657 | Page: 1 | 4 min read

Table of contents

Origins and ideology, impact and controversies, legacy and relevance.

Cite this Essay

Let us write you an essay from scratch

• 450+ experts on 30 subjects ready to help
• Custom essay delivered in as few as 3 hours

Get high-quality help

Verified writer

• Expert in: Arts & Culture History Life

+ 120 experts online

By clicking “Check Writers’ Offers”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy policy . We’ll occasionally send you promo and account related email

No need to pay just yet!

Related Essays

1 pages / 666 words

1 pages / 647 words

2 pages / 710 words

1 pages / 507 words

Remember! This is just a sample.

You can get your custom paper by one of our expert writers.

121 writers online

Still can’t find what you need?

Browse our vast selection of original essay samples, each expertly formatted and styled

Related Essays on History of Taekwondo

Greek mythology is a vast and intricate system of beliefs that has captivated people for centuries. The stories of the Greek gods and goddesses have been passed down through generations, shaping the way we view the world and our [...]

All Shook Up by Glenn C. Altschuler is a book that provides an in-depth look at the impact of rock and roll on American society in the 1950s. The book explores the cultural, political, and social implications of the rise of rock [...]

As students of history, it is essential to develop critical thinking skills that allow us to analyze and interpret primary sources. The AP United States History Document-Based Question (DBQ) is a valuable tool that helps [...]

Feudalism in ancient China was a complex and multifaceted system that played a crucial role in shaping the social, economic, and political landscape of the region for centuries. This hierarchical system, characterized by the [...]

Taekwondo is a martial art form that was founded on April 11, 1955, by the South Korean army general Choi Hong Hee. In Korean Tae (Tae) means kicking, Quon means fist or hand kicks, Do is the way. So there are two components of [...]

The use of substances by athletes to improve performance has been a feature of competition since the ancient times. Athletes took these substances to improve strength and overcome fatigue, with this practice continuing to this [...]

Related Topics

By clicking “Send”, you agree to our Terms of service and Privacy statement . We will occasionally send you account related emails.

Where do you want us to send this sample?

By clicking “Continue”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy policy.

Be careful. This essay is not unique

This essay was donated by a student and is likely to have been used and submitted before

Download this Sample

Free samples may contain mistakes and not unique parts

Sorry, we could not paraphrase this essay. Our professional writers can rewrite it and get you a unique paper.

Please check your inbox.

We can write you a custom essay that will follow your exact instructions and meet the deadlines. Let's fix your grades together!

Get Your Personalized Essay in 3 Hours or Less!

We use cookies to personalyze your web-site experience. By continuing we’ll assume you board with our cookie policy .

• Instructions Followed To The Letter
• Deadlines Met At Every Stage
• Unique And Plagiarism Free

Sam Walton: the Visionary Behind Walmart’s Success

This essay about Sam Walton chronicles his rise from a small-town store owner to the visionary founder of Walmart. It highlights his dedication to customer service, innovative pricing strategies, and revolutionary supply chain management. Walton’s commitment to employee satisfaction and his relentless drive for success transformed Walmart into a global retail giant. His enduring legacy is marked by the significant impact he had on the retail industry and the lives of countless individuals.

How it works

In the heart of the American Midwest, amidst the rolling hills of Arkansas, a retail revolution was quietly taking shape. This transformation wasn’t solely about selling goods; it was about fundamentally altering how people shopped and lived. Leading this movement was a man with a gleam in his eye and an unrelenting drive for success: Sam Walton, the visionary architect behind the Walmart empire.

Sam Walton’s story does not begin in the boardrooms of corporate giants but on the dusty shelves of his father’s modest farm store in Kingfisher, Oklahoma.

From an early age, Walton absorbed the value of hard work and stellar customer service, principles that would later become the bedrock of his retail dynasty. It was only when he plunged into the retail industry himself that Walton’s brilliance truly began to emerge.

After serving his country in World War II, Walton returned with a fierce determination to succeed. In 1945, he acquired a small Ben Franklin franchise in Newport, Arkansas, marking the start of his retail journey. With perseverance, determination, and a dash of Midwestern charm, Walton transformed the struggling store into a flourishing business, setting the stage for the creation of Walmart.

However, Walton’s ambitions extended far beyond a single successful store. He dreamt of building a retail empire that would stretch across the nation. In 1962, he made a bold move and opened the first Walmart store in Rogers, Arkansas. From the outset, Walton aimed to disrupt the retail industry by offering low prices and unparalleled convenience.

What distinguished Walton from his competitors was his unwavering commitment to his customers. He believed in prioritizing customer needs above all else, even if it meant sacrificing short-term profits. Walton introduced the concept of everyday low prices, a philosophy that would become the cornerstone of Walmart’s success.

Walton’s brilliance wasn’t limited to pricing strategies. He was also a logistics mastermind, revolutionizing the transportation and distribution of goods. Walton implemented cutting-edge supply chain management techniques, such as cross-docking and satellite communication systems, to streamline operations and cut costs. This allowed Walmart to offer lower prices to customers while maintaining healthy profit margins.

Perhaps Walton’s greatest innovation was his approach to employee management. He recognized that satisfied employees were crucial to happy customers and went to great lengths to ensure his staff felt valued and appreciated. Walton cultivated a culture of teamwork and collaboration, where every employee had a voice and a stake in the company’s success.

Despite facing numerous challenges and setbacks, Walton never wavered in his vision. He was driven by an insatiable thirst for success, always seeking new ways to innovate and stay ahead of the competition. Under his leadership, Walmart grew from a single store into a global retail powerhouse.

However, Walton’s most enduring legacy is not the billions of dollars his company earned, but the countless lives he impacted. He was a man of integrity, generosity, and unwavering optimism, qualities that endeared him to employees and customers alike. Although Sam Walton is no longer with us, his spirit continues to inspire every aspect of the Walmart brand, a testament to what can be achieved with hard work, determination, and a touch of Midwestern charm.

Cite this page

Sam Walton: The Visionary Behind Walmart's Success. (2024, May 28). Retrieved from https://papersowl.com/examples/sam-walton-the-visionary-behind-walmarts-success/

"Sam Walton: The Visionary Behind Walmart's Success." PapersOwl.com , 28 May 2024, https://papersowl.com/examples/sam-walton-the-visionary-behind-walmarts-success/

PapersOwl.com. (2024). Sam Walton: The Visionary Behind Walmart's Success . [Online]. Available at: https://papersowl.com/examples/sam-walton-the-visionary-behind-walmarts-success/ [Accessed: 29 May. 2024]

"Sam Walton: The Visionary Behind Walmart's Success." PapersOwl.com, May 28, 2024. Accessed May 29, 2024. https://papersowl.com/examples/sam-walton-the-visionary-behind-walmarts-success/

"Sam Walton: The Visionary Behind Walmart's Success," PapersOwl.com , 28-May-2024. [Online]. Available: https://papersowl.com/examples/sam-walton-the-visionary-behind-walmarts-success/. [Accessed: 29-May-2024]

PapersOwl.com. (2024). Sam Walton: The Visionary Behind Walmart's Success . [Online]. Available at: https://papersowl.com/examples/sam-walton-the-visionary-behind-walmarts-success/ [Accessed: 29-May-2024]

Don't let plagiarism ruin your grade

Hire a writer to get a unique paper crafted to your needs.

Our writers will help you fix any mistakes and get an A+!

Please check your inbox.

You can order an original essay written according to your instructions.

Trusted by over 1 million students worldwide

1. Tell Us Your Requirements

2. Pick your perfect writer

3. Get Your Paper and Pay

Hi! I'm Amy, your personal assistant!

Don't know where to start? Give me your paper requirements and I connect you to an academic expert.

short deadlines

100% Plagiarism-Free

Certified writers