Towards ModernisationClass 11 History NCERT Solutions
6 Solutions
Generated by KedovoAI
Solution 1 of 6
Q1Exercises
Comment on any points of difference between the native peoples of South and North America.
Solution
There were several significant differences between the native peoples of South and North America at the time of European contact.
-
Social and Political Organisation: In Central and South America, empires like the Aztecs and Incas had developed. These were large, hierarchical societies with complex administrative systems, cities, and monumental architecture, supported by surplus agriculture. In contrast, the native peoples of North America generally lived in smaller, more decentralized groups such as bands or tribes. They did not produce large agricultural surpluses and therefore did not develop kingdoms or empires on the scale seen further south.
-
Economy: The economies in South and Central America were based on intensive, settled agriculture (e.g., maize, potatoes), which supported large populations. In North America, while some tribes practiced agriculture, many relied on a combination of hunting (especially bison), fishing, and gathering. Their relationship with the land was based on subsistence rather than producing commodities for a market.
-
Relationship with Land: While all native peoples had a deep connection to the land, the concept of private ownership was absent. However, in North America, control of land was not a major source of conflict between tribes, who were content with the resources the land provided. In the more densely populated south, empires controlled vast territories and exacted tribute.
Q2Exercises
Other than the use of English, what other features of English economic and social life do you notice in nineteenth-century USA?
Solution
Beyond the English language, several features of English economic and social life were prominent in the nineteenth-century USA.
-
Economic Life:
- Private Property: The concept of individual ownership of land, a cornerstone of English society, was central to the American identity. Settlers, particularly younger sons from Britain who would not inherit property, were eager to own farms. This contrasted sharply with the native peoples' communal view of land.
- Agriculture for Profit: The English model of commercial farming was adopted. Land was cleared to grow cash crops like cotton and rice, not just for subsistence but for sale and profit in European markets.
- Industrialisation: Although developing for different reasons (e.g., manufacturing railway equipment), the growth of factories and industrial towns in the USA mirrored the Industrial Revolution that began in England.
-
Social and Political Life:
- Legal System: The US Constitution, particularly the inclusion of the individual's 'right to property', was heavily influenced by English legal traditions and philosophers.
- Religion: Many European settlers were Protestants who left Europe to escape persecution in Catholic countries. They brought their religious beliefs and social structures, which shaped the new society.
- View of 'Civilisation': The European definition of a 'civilised' person, based on literacy, organised religion, and urbanism, was used to judge and marginalise the native peoples, justifying their displacement.
Q3Exercises
What did the 'frontier' mean to the Americans?
Solution
To the European Americans of the nineteenth century, the 'frontier' was a powerful and multi-faceted concept. It was not just a geographical location but also an idea that defined their experience and identity.
-
A Shifting Boundary: The frontier was the westernmost line of European settlement, constantly pushing westward into native territories. It was seen as the dividing line between 'civilisation' and 'wilderness'.
-
Symbol of Opportunity: For settlers and immigrants, the frontier represented limitless opportunity. It was a place where one could acquire land cheaply, achieve economic independence, and build a new life, free from the social hierarchies of the Old World. The Gold Rush in California is a prime example of the frontier being seen as a place to make a quick fortune.
-
Justification for Expansion: The idea of the frontier was used to justify the displacement of native peoples. Americans argued that they were taming the wilderness and putting the land to productive use, which they claimed the natives failed to do. The frontier was thus the battleground where 'progress' and 'civilisation' triumphed over what they considered 'savagery'. As the historian Frederick Jackson Turner later argued, the experience of the frontier was seen as essential in shaping the American character, fostering individualism and democracy.
Q4Exercises
Why was the history of the Australian native peoples left out of history books?
Solution
The history of the Australian native peoples was largely excluded from official history books for a long time due to a combination of colonial attitudes, government policy, and historical perspective.
-
Eurocentric Narrative: Early Australian history was written from the perspective of the European colonisers. The narrative focused on the 'discovery' of the continent by Captain Cook and the subsequent settlement by the British. In this story, Australia's history was seen as beginning in 1770, effectively erasing the 40,000-plus years of aboriginal history that came before.
-
The 'Great Australian Silence': As described by anthropologist W.E.H. Stanner, there was a deliberate and widespread silence among historians about the aborigines. They were either ignored or portrayed as hostile, primitive curiosities, not as people with their own complex societies, cultures, and histories.
-
Doctrine of Terra Nullius: The British government and settlers justified their takeover of the land by classifying Australia as terra nullius, meaning 'land belonging to nobody'. This legal fiction denied the natives' ownership and connection to the land, and by extension, it denied their history and presence. If the land was officially empty, then the people who lived there had no role in its history.
It was not until the 1970s that a significant shift occurred, and historians began to challenge this exclusion and work towards including the perspectives and histories of the aboriginal peoples in the national story.
Q5Exercises
How satisfactory is a museum gallery display in explaining the culture of a people? Give examples from your own experience of a museum.
Solution
A museum gallery display can be a valuable but often limited tool for explaining the culture of a people. Its satisfactoriness depends heavily on how the culture is represented and who is controlling the narrative.
Strengths:
- Preservation and Access: Museums can preserve important cultural artefacts like tools, textiles, and art, making them accessible to a wide audience. For example, seeing a display of intricately woven baskets can provide a tangible sense of a community's skill and artistic traditions.
- Educational Value: A well-curated exhibit can offer historical context, explain traditions, and showcase the beauty of a culture. The text notes that some museums now have special galleries for 'native art' and imaginatively designed rooms explaining the aboriginal way of life.
Limitations:
- Decontextualisation: Removing objects from their original context can strip them of their meaning. A sacred object in a glass case is fundamentally different from one used in a living ceremony. The text mentions a native lodge being moved to a museum, which preserves its structure but removes it from its natural and social environment.
- Static Representation: Museums can present cultures as static or belonging only to the past. This can reinforce the idea that indigenous cultures are relics, rather than living, evolving communities.
- Curatorial Bias: The story told by a display is shaped by the curator. Historically, this has often been from an outsider's perspective, viewing native peoples as 'anthropological curiosities'. The text highlights a positive change in this regard, mentioning that the National Museum of the American Indian was curated by American Indians themselves, which allows for a more authentic and satisfactory representation.
From my own experience, visiting a museum with a gallery on ancient Egypt, the sarcophagi and hieroglyphs were fascinating. However, the display focused on burial rituals and gods, giving little sense of the daily lives, thoughts, and feelings of ordinary people. It explained a part of the culture but could not convey its full richness and complexity.
Q6Exercises
Imagine an encounter in California in about 1880 between four people: a former African slave, a Chinese labourer, a German who had come out in the Gold Rush, and a native of the Hopi tribe, and narrate their conversation.
Solution
The four men sat around a small fire near a half-finished railway line in the California hills. The air was thick with dust and the scent of pine.
Hans, the German, his face weathered from years of prospecting, spoke first. "This is the country of opportunity! I came with nothing, but I have a small claim now. With hard work, a man can build a life, own his own land. It is not like the old country, with its dukes and landlords."
Li, the Chinese labourer, looked up from his bowl of rice, his hands calloused from laying steel tracks. "You speak of opportunity," he said softly, in careful English. "I was told there was opportunity. But I work from sunup to sundown for wages that barely feed me. My people built this railway, but we are not welcome in the towns. They call us names and tell us to go back. Is this the opportunity you speak of?"
Samuel, a former slave from Georgia, nodded slowly. He had made his way west after emancipation, seeking a freedom he had yet to find. "I know what he means," Samuel said, his voice deep and steady. "I was told I was free. But freedom is not just the absence of chains. It is the right to be treated as a man. I cannot own land in most places, I cannot vote. I am free, but I am not equal. Your opportunity, Hans, is built on land that was not empty, with labour from men who are not free."
Tala, the Hopi native, had been silent, observing the others. He had been forced onto a reservation miles from his ancestral home. He pointed towards the mountains, now scarred by mines and railway tracks. "You all speak of owning the land," he said, his voice filled with a quiet sorrow. "How can you own the warmth of the sun or the freshness of the air? My people have lived here for generations. We do not own the land; we are a part of it. You dig into the earth for yellow metal, you cut down the trees, you kill the bison until they are almost gone. You say you are building. To me, it looks like you are destroying everything that is sacred."
Hans looked uncomfortable, unable to understand Tala's perspective. Li and Samuel exchanged a look of shared understanding, recognizing the different, yet similar, injustices they all faced. The fire crackled, and for a long moment, the only sound was the wind whispering through a land that meant something profoundly different to each of them.