This series will cover the history of modern Pakistan, from the earliest political and intellectual developments that eventually contributed to the idea of a separate Muslim homeland, through to the creation of Pakistan and the events that shaped the country thereafter.

To understand how Pakistan came into existence, we need to go back to a time when Pakistan did not exist, and neither did the idea of Pakistan as we know it today.

In the eighteenth century, the Mughal Empire was weakening. Its authority had declined considerably, and powerful regional states had emerged across the subcontinent. At the same time, the British East India Company was expanding its influence.

The East India Company had originally come to India as a trading company. Over time, however, it became a military and political power. It acquired territory, collected taxes, maintained armies and entered into alliances with Indian rulers. Through a combination of military victories, political agreements, annexations and economic power, the British gradually took control of large parts of the subcontinent.

India was not governed entirely in the same way. Some territories became part of British India and were governed directly by the British. Others remained under Indian princes who continued to rule their states, but under British supremacy. These became known as the princely states.

The British system was ultimately built around British imperial interests. Indian revenue helped finance the colonial administration and military, while Indian resources and markets became part of a wider imperial economy. British expansion was not simply a peaceful administrative process. It involved wars, annexations, political pressure and the deliberate use of rivalries between Indian rulers.

By the middle of the nineteenth century, the British had become the dominant power across most of the subcontinent.

Then, in 1857, that power was seriously challenged.

1857 – 1927

1857 War of Independence

In 1857, a major uprising broke out against British rule.

It is known by different names. In Pakistan it is commonly called the War of Independence of 1857. It has also been called the Indian Mutiny, the Great Rebellion and the Revolt of 1857.

The disagreement over its name reflects a wider disagreement over how the event should be understood. Was it primarily a military mutiny, a collection of local rebellions, or the first major attempt by Indians to throw off British rule?

The reality was complicated. It began among Indian soldiers in the East India Company’s army, but it quickly developed into a much wider uprising involving soldiers, rulers, landowners, peasants, religious figures and ordinary civilians in large parts of northern and central India.

There had been deep resentment towards British rule for years.

The East India Company had expanded aggressively, removing rulers from power and annexing territories. Lord Dalhousie’s Doctrine of Lapse allowed the British to annex certain states where a ruler died without a biological heir recognised by the British. The annexation of Awadh in 1856 was particularly controversial and created widespread resentment among soldiers and landholders.

There were also economic grievances. Changes to land revenue systems disrupted established arrangements, while traditional elites lost influence and wealth. British economic policies also transformed Indian industries and trade, increasingly tying the Indian economy to the needs of the British Empire.

For Indian soldiers, or sepoys, there were grievances about pay, service conditions and treatment by British officers. There was also a growing fear that the British intended to interfere with Indian religious practices and eventually convert the population to Christianity.

That fear was not simply invented. British missionaries were active in India, and some colonial officials openly supported Christian missionary activity. At the same time, reforms introduced by the British were sometimes interpreted as attacks on established religious and social customs.

Then came the immediate trigger.

The British introduced the new Enfield rifle, which required soldiers to bite open cartridges before loading them. Rumours spread that the cartridges had been greased with cow and pig fat. The cow was sacred to Hindus, while pork was forbidden to Muslims.

For Hindu and Muslim soldiers alike, the rumour was deeply offensive.

The first major outbreak occurred at Meerut in May 1857. The rebels marched to Delhi, where they called upon the ageing Mughal emperor, Bahadur Shah Zafar, to become the symbolic leader of the uprising.

Delhi therefore became the symbolic centre of the rebellion.

The uprising spread rapidly. In different regions, figures such as Nana Sahib, Rani Lakshmibai, Tantia Tope and Kunwar Singh became prominent leaders. Muslims and Hindus fought alongside one another in many areas, united by opposition to British rule.

But the rebellion was not a single, centrally organised national movement.

There was no unified command, no single strategy and no common political programme shared by everyone involved. Some regions remained quiet, while some Indian rulers and communities supported the British. The British also retained significant military resources and were able to bring reinforcements from Britain and elsewhere.

The rebellion was eventually crushed.

The British response was extremely harsh. There were mass executions, reprisals and destruction of communities suspected of supporting the rebellion. Delhi was devastated and the Mughal political order was effectively finished.

Bahadur Shah Zafar was captured, tried and exiled to Rangoon. He would die there in 1862.

The consequences of 1857 were enormous.

The British government no longer trusted the East India Company to rule India. The Government of India Act 1858 ended the Company’s rule and transferred authority directly to the British Crown.

India was now ruled in the name of Queen Victoria.

The Governor-General became the Viceroy, representing the Crown in India. The British government also reorganised the army and became much more careful about the religious and political sensitivities of the population.

The uprising had failed militarily, but it had changed India forever.

For Muslims, the consequences were particularly significant.

The Mughal Empire had already been reduced to little more than a shadow of its former power. After 1857, the last symbolic connection to Mughal sovereignty disappeared completely.

Many British officials also viewed Muslims with particular suspicion because of the association between the rebellion and the old Mughal political order. Muslim elites in northern India suffered heavy political and economic losses, while the destruction of Delhi had a devastating effect on Muslim intellectual and cultural life.

The Muslim community therefore faced a new reality.

The old political order was gone.

The British were now firmly in control.

The question was how Muslims were going to survive, rebuild and progress in this new system.

Different Muslims would answer that question in very different ways.

Aligarh Movement

One of the most important responses came from Sir Syed Ahmad Khan.

Sir Syed had worked for the British administration and had witnessed the events of 1857. He later wrote about the causes of the uprising, arguing that the British had failed to understand the concerns of the Indian population and that the lack of Indian participation in government had contributed to the crisis.

Sir Syed did not believe another military uprising was the answer.

Instead, he believed Muslims needed to educate themselves.

The political world had changed. The British controlled India, and the skills that had once allowed Muslims to hold political and administrative positions were no longer sufficient.

Sir Syed therefore encouraged Muslims to study English, science, mathematics and modern subjects while maintaining their Islamic identity.

He established the Scientific Society in 1864 to promote the translation and study of modern knowledge. He later founded the journal Tahzib al-Akhlaq, which encouraged social and intellectual reform among Muslims.

His greatest achievement came in 1875 with the establishment of the Muhammadan Anglo-Oriental College at Aligarh.

The college combined modern Western education with an Islamic environment and eventually developed into Aligarh Muslim University.

Sir Syed believed that Muslims needed to become educated, economically stronger and capable of participating in the new political system.

His approach was controversial among some Muslim scholars.

Some feared that adopting Western education and ideas would weaken Islamic belief and culture. Others believed that Sir Syed’s approach was precisely what Muslims needed if they were going to survive under British rule.

This disagreement would shape Muslim thought for decades.

Should Muslims primarily preserve their traditional Islamic education?

Should they embrace modern Western education?

Could the two be combined?

Different movements would provide different answers.

Indian Councils Act 1861

Following the events of 1857, the British introduced a number of political changes.

The Indian Councils Act 1861 allowed the Viceroy to nominate Indians to his legislative council. This was a very limited form of political participation. The British still held the real power and Indian representatives could not simply determine the direction of government.

Nevertheless, it was an important beginning.

Indians were now gradually being brought into the political system.

Over the next several decades, Indian political leaders would increasingly demand a greater say in how the country was governed.

This created another important question.

If Indians were expected to live under British laws and pay British taxes, why should they not have a greater role in making those laws?

Dar uloom Deoband School founded 1866

In 1866, another major Muslim response to the post-1857 world emerged.

Darul Uloom Deoband was established in the town of Deoband.

Its founders believed that the traditional Islamic sciences needed to be preserved at a time when Muslim political power had disappeared and Western influence was expanding rapidly.

The institution focused on Qur’an, Hadith, Islamic law, Arabic and the traditional Islamic scholarly curriculum.

Deoband would become one of the most influential centres of Islamic scholarship in South Asia.

The Deobandi approach differed considerably from the Aligarh approach.

Aligarh placed a strong emphasis on modern Western education and participation in the new political and administrative system.

Deoband focused on preserving and transmitting the traditional Islamic scholarly tradition.

Both were responding to the same historical problem, but they believed different things were needed to protect the Muslim community.

This distinction is important because Muslim political thought in India was never represented by a single movement.

There were modernists, traditional scholars, reformers, nationalists, constitutionalists and later advocates of Muslim separatism.

The story of Pakistan developed out of this much wider debate.

Indian National Congress 1885

By the 1880s, Indian political activity was becoming increasingly organised.

In 1885, the Indian National Congress was established. It brought together educated Indian political figures who wanted greater Indian participation in government and constitutional reform.

Congress was initially an elite organisation. It was not yet the mass movement that it would become under Gandhi.

Its membership included Hindus, Muslims, Parsis, Christians and others.

At this stage, many Muslims were willing to participate in a wider Indian political movement.

But there was an issue that would become increasingly important.

India was not made up of one community.

Hindus formed the majority, while Muslims represented a very large minority, alongside Sikhs, Christians and many other communities.

If India eventually became a representative democracy, political power could potentially be decided by population.

This created a problem for Muslim political leaders.

If every constituency simply followed a one-person, one-vote principle based on local majorities, Muslims could be politically secure in some provinces but permanently outnumbered in others.

This concern would become one of the central issues of Indian politics.

Indian Councils Act 1892

The British introduced another constitutional reform through the Indian Councils Act 1892.

The number of council members was increased and Indians were given a greater opportunity to participate in legislative discussion.

However, this was still very far from representative government.

The British retained ultimate authority.

Indian political leaders increasingly wanted more than the ability to advise the government. They wanted meaningful political representation.

For Muslims, however, representation raised a further question.

How could a minority community protect its political interests in a system where the majority could simply outvote it?

Nadwat ul Ulema 1892

During the same period, another important Muslim educational movement developed.

Nadwatul Ulama emerged in the early 1890s and sought to reform Muslim education.

Its scholars believed that traditional Islamic education needed to respond to the changing conditions of the modern world. They wanted Muslim scholars to be better equipped to deal with contemporary intellectual and social challenges while remaining firmly rooted in Islam.

Nadwa also attempted to reduce some of the divisions between Muslim scholarly groups.

By the end of the nineteenth century, therefore, Indian Muslims had developed several major educational and intellectual responses to their changing circumstances.

Aligarh emphasised modern education.

Deoband emphasised traditional Islamic scholarship.

Nadwa sought reform within the traditional scholarly system.

All three would influence Muslim society in different ways.

But education alone could not answer the political question.

That question would become increasingly urgent as constitutional reform continued.

Partition of Bengal in 1905

In 1905, the British divided Bengal.

Bengal was enormous and difficult to administer, and the British argued that the province needed to be divided for administrative reasons.

The new province of Eastern Bengal and Assam had a Muslim majority, while western Bengal had a Hindu majority.

For many Muslims in eastern Bengal, this was a significant development.

For generations, many Muslims in Bengal had been economically and politically disadvantaged in comparison with the more influential Hindu landowning and educated classes. The new province gave Muslims greater political and administrative opportunities because they formed the majority of its population.

Many Hindu political leaders, particularly in western Bengal, strongly opposed the partition.

The opposition became a major political movement. British goods were boycotted and the Swadeshi movement grew.

The British eventually reversed the partition in 1911.

The episode nevertheless left a lasting impression on Muslim political thinking.

It had demonstrated the importance of Muslim-majority provinces and the political advantages that could come from having Muslims form a majority within a defined territory.

It also showed that Hindu and Muslim political interests could sometimes diverge even while both communities remained opposed to British rule.

Six years later, in 1911, this partition was over turned.

Simla Deputation 1906

The events surrounding Bengal helped accelerate Muslim political organisation.

In October 1906, a delegation of prominent Muslim leaders travelled to Simla to meet the Viceroy, Lord Minto.

This became known as the Simla Deputation.

The Muslim leaders argued that Muslims should be recognised as a distinct political community.

Their concern was straightforward.

If representative government expanded and elections were based entirely on population, Muslims could be permanently disadvantaged in areas where they were a minority.

They therefore asked for political safeguards, including separate electorates.

Under a separate electorate, Muslim voters would elect Muslim representatives rather than having all voters choose from the same pool of candidates.

The deputation also argued that Muslim representation should take account of the community’s historical and political importance and not simply be determined by population.

Lord Minto received the deputation sympathetically.

Three years later, the principle of separate Muslim electorates was formally introduced through the Indian Councils Act 1909, commonly known as the Morley-Minto Reforms.

This was a major turning point.

The British had now formally recognised Muslims as a distinct political constituency within India’s constitutional system.

The question was no longer simply whether Indians should have representation.

It was also becoming a question of which Indians should be represented, and how.

All India Muslim League 1906

Later that same year, Muslim political leaders established the All-India Muslim League at Dhaka.

The Muslim League was created to protect and advance the political interests of Indian Muslims.

It was not created to demand Pakistan.

That distinction is important.

At this stage, most Muslim political leaders were not arguing that India needed to be divided into separate countries.

They were asking for Muslims to be protected within whatever constitutional system eventually replaced direct British rule.

The League’s early objectives included promoting loyalty towards the British government, protecting Muslim political rights and interests, and preventing hostility between Muslims and other communities.

The League gradually became more politically active.

In 1913, it adopted self-government for India as one of its objectives.

The political journey was therefore changing.

The Muslim League was no longer simply asking the British to protect Muslims.

It was increasingly participating in the wider struggle over India’s future.

One of the men who would become central to that struggle was Muhammad Ali Jinnah.

Muhammad Ali Jinnah

Jinnah was a lawyer and constitutional politician who had initially been closely associated with the Indian National Congress.

He was known for his belief in constitutional methods and cooperation between India’s different communities.

He joined the Muslim League in 1913.

At this stage, Jinnah was not campaigning for a separate Muslim state.

In fact, he became famous for his efforts to bring Congress and the Muslim League together.

This is important because it shows how much the political situation would change over the next thirty years.

The man who would eventually become the founder of Pakistan initially believed that Hindus and Muslims could work together within a united India.

The question was whether that political cooperation could survive the growing disagreement over how power would be shared.

WW1 1914

In 1914, the First World War began.

India became an important part of the British war effort. More than a million Indian personnel served during the war, fighting in Europe, the Middle East and other theatres.

Indian political leaders expected that India’s contribution would strengthen the case for political reform after the war.

But the war created another major issue for Indian Muslims.

The Ottoman Empire entered the war on the side of Germany and its allies.

For many Indian Muslims, the Ottoman Sultan was also the Caliph, the symbolic leader of the wider Muslim world.

The future of the Ottoman Empire therefore became a matter of deep religious and political concern.

Lucknow pact 1916

In 1916, Congress and the Muslim League reached an agreement known as the Lucknow Pact.

This was one of the most important examples of Hindu-Muslim political cooperation before independence.

Congress agreed to the principle of separate electorates for Muslims and accepted arrangements designed to give Muslims meaningful representation in the provincial legislatures.

The two organisations also jointly demanded greater Indian participation in government.

For a period, it appeared that Hindus and Muslims could work together to secure self-government.

Muhammad Ali Jinnah played an important role in bringing the two sides together and was praised by some contemporaries as an ambassador of Hindu-Muslim unity.

But the agreement also revealed the underlying problem.

The two communities were increasingly negotiating with one another over how political power would be divided.

They could cooperate, but they were already recognising that they had different political interests that needed constitutional protection.

Khilafat Movement 1918

The end of the First World War brought the issue of the Ottoman Empire to the forefront.

Indian Muslim leaders feared that Britain and its allies would dismantle the Ottoman Empire and destroy the political authority of the Caliph.

The British government had made statements during the war that many Indian Muslims interpreted as assurances that the interests of the Ottoman Empire and the Caliph would be respected.

After the war, however, the Ottoman Empire was severely weakened and its territories were divided.

Indian Muslim leaders responded by launching the Khilafat Movement.

Among its leading figures were Maulana Muhammad Ali, Shaukat Ali, Maulana Abul Kalam Azad and others.

The movement called upon Britain to preserve the position of the Caliph and protect the remaining Ottoman territories.

Mahatma Gandhi supported the Khilafat cause and linked it with his Non-Cooperation Movement against British rule.

For a short period, this created an extraordinary alliance.

Large numbers of Hindus and Muslims participated together in boycotts of British goods and institutions.

The movement demonstrated the political strength of Indian Muslims and the possibility of mass Hindu-Muslim cooperation.

But the alliance would not last.

The Turkish nationalist movement under Mustafa Kemal eventually abolished the Ottoman Sultanate and later the Caliphate itself.

The Khilafat Movement therefore lost its central cause.

Montford Reforms 1919 (Indian Govt Act 1919)

Meanwhile, Britain introduced another major constitutional reform.

The Montagu-Chelmsford Reforms resulted in the Government of India Act 1919.

The Act expanded Indian participation in government and introduced a system known as dyarchy in the provinces.

Under dyarchy, some departments were transferred to Indian ministers, including areas such as education, public health and local government.

Other important areas, including finance, police and law and order, remained under British control.

The reforms represented another step towards Indian self-government, but the British still retained ultimate authority.

The direction of Indian politics was becoming increasingly clear.

The British could not indefinitely avoid the question of Indian self-government.

But the more representative the system became, the more important another question became.

Who would control India once the British left?

Hijrat Movement 1920

The collapse of the Ottoman political order had a profound effect on some Indian Muslims.

Some Muslim scholars argued that British India could no longer be regarded as a suitable homeland for Muslims under non-Muslim rule and encouraged Muslims to migrate to Afghanistan.

This became known as the Hijrat Movement.

Thousands of Muslims attempted to leave India and travel to Afghanistan.

The journey was extremely difficult. Many migrants sold their possessions to finance the journey, only to encounter severe hardship once they reached the frontier. The Afghan government was unable to accommodate such large numbers, and many migrants eventually returned to India.

The movement failed in practical terms, but it demonstrated the intensity of Muslim feeling at the time.

For some Muslims, British rule was no longer merely a political issue.

It had become connected to questions of Islam, Muslim identity and the wider condition of Muslims across the world.

1920s

By the beginning of the 1920s, the political landscape of India had changed dramatically from what it had been in 1857.

The British still ruled India, but their authority was increasingly being challenged.

Congress had developed from a small organisation of educated elites into a mass political movement under Gandhi.

The Muslim League had developed from a body primarily concerned with Muslim political safeguards into an organisation participating in the wider struggle for self-government.

Muslim religious scholars had mobilised through movements such as Khilafat.

Muslim educational movements had created new generations of scholars, professionals and political thinkers.

And the British had introduced limited constitutional reforms while carefully retaining control over the most important areas of government.

The central issue was changing.

In 1857, the question had largely been how British rule could be challenged.

By the 1920s, the question was becoming much more difficult.

What would India look like after British rule ended?

Could Hindus and Muslims share power in one country?

Could constitutional safeguards protect Muslims as a large but politically vulnerable minority?

Could Congress genuinely represent all Indians?

Could the Muslim League secure Muslim interests within a united India?

Or would the interests of the two largest communities eventually prove too difficult to reconcile?

At this point, there was still no settled answer.

There was certainly no Pakistan movement in the form that would emerge later.

But the foundations of the future political struggle were now in place.

The Muslims of India had gone from being the population of a declining Muslim empire, to subjects of the East India Company, to subjects of the British Crown. They had experienced military defeat, political dispossession and profound social change. In response, they had built educational institutions, religious seminaries, political organisations and movements for reform.

They had also begun to think seriously about their position as a distinct Muslim community within a future democratic India.

Over the next decade, the relationship between Congress and the Muslim League would deteriorate. Constitutional negotiations would become increasingly difficult, and new Muslim political ideas would emerge.

The question would slowly change from how Muslims could be protected in India to the much more fundamental question of whether Muslims and Hindus could share a single political state at all.

That is where the next chapter begins.

Over the course of the next 25 years, Muslims discussed the idea of a separate Muslim nation. You can read post covering 1927- 1939 here: A History of Modern Pakistan #2 1927 – 1939

Summary

Indian natives revolt big cause the colonials have gone too far. The colonials in return give the Indians a voice. The Indians council has a majority of Hindus. Hindus looking after Hindu rights. The Muslims in the Bengal region rise to this. In Unity, the Hindus and Muslims work towards independence from the colonial British, but amongst themselves they differ heavily. As the Hindus are the majority, they have the upper hand, but the Muslims will not stop fighting. Eventually the Muslims are pushed to seek their own state to protect their identity. After 50 years of lobbying the Muslims finally get Pakistan.