Latest History NCERT Notes, Solutions and Extra Q & A (Class 8th to 12th)
8th				9th				10th				11th				12th

Class 8th Chapters
1. Introduction: How, When And Where	2. From Trade To Territory The Company Establishes Power	3. Ruling The Countryside
4. Tribals, Dikus And The Vision Of A Golden Age	5. When People Revolt 1857 And After	6. Civilising The “Native”, Educating The Nation
7. Women, Caste And Reform	8. The Making Of The National Movement: 1870s-–1947

Chapter 6 Civilising The “Native”, Educating The Nation

Previous chapters illustrated how British rule impacted various groups in India, including rulers, peasants, and tribal communities. This chapter focuses on the implications of British policies for the **education and lives of students**.

The British goal in India extended beyond territorial conquest and revenue collection. They also believed they had a **"cultural mission"**: to "**civilise the natives**" by changing Indian customs, values, and cultural practices.

However, the British were divided on how best to achieve this goal. Questions arose about what changes were needed, how Indians should be educated and "civilised," and how to make them into "good subjects" from the British perspective. These debates over educational policy continued for many decades.

How The British Saw Education

Understanding the evolution of educational ideas in British India requires examining the perspectives and actions of British officials and how Indians responded to these ideas.

The Tradition Of Orientalism

In 1783, **William Jones**, a skilled linguist and a junior judge appointed to the Supreme Court in Calcutta by the Company, arrived in India. Already proficient in languages like Greek, Latin, French, English, and Persian, Jones began studying **Sanskrit language, grammar, and poetry** with Indian scholars (pandits).

Jones's interest extended to ancient Indian texts covering various subjects, including law, philosophy, religion, politics, morality, mathematics, medicine, and science. He found that other British officials in Calcutta, like **Henry Thomas Colebrooke** and **Nathaniel Halhed**, shared his enthusiasm for exploring India's ancient heritage. They actively studied Indian languages and translated significant Sanskrit and Persian works into English.

Together, Jones, Colebrooke, and others formed the **Asiatic Society of Bengal** and launched a journal called **Asiatick Researches**. These individuals represented the **Orientalist** perspective, which held a deep respect for the ancient cultures of both India and the West.

Orientalists believed that Indian civilization had achieved great glory in its distant past but had since declined. To understand India truly, they felt it was essential to study the ancient **sacred and legal texts**. They argued that these texts contained the authentic ideas and laws of Hindus and Muslims and should form the basis for future development in India.

Their project involved discovering, understanding, and translating these ancient texts and disseminating their findings. The Orientalists believed this effort would benefit both the British (by learning about Indian culture) and Indians (by helping them rediscover their lost heritage and past glories). In their view, the British would act as guardians of Indian culture while also asserting their mastery.

Influenced by these ideas, many Company officials advocated for promoting **Indian learning** over Western subjects. They supported establishing institutions dedicated to the study of ancient Indian texts and teaching Sanskrit and Persian literature. They felt that educating Indians in subjects familiar and valuable to them would help the British gain acceptance and respect from the "natives."

Following this approach:

A **Madrasa** was established in Calcutta in 1781 to promote the study of Arabic, Persian, and Islamic law.
The **Hindu College** was founded in Benaras in 1791 to encourage the study of ancient Sanskrit texts relevant to administration.

Fig. 1 depicts William Jones engaged in learning Persian. As a prominent Orientalist and linguist, Jones devoted himself to studying Eastern languages and texts, laying the groundwork for understanding Indian legal and cultural traditions from a scholarly perspective, albeit with the ultimate aim of facilitating British administration.

Fig. 2 shows Henry Thomas Colebrooke, another key figure in the Orientalist tradition. He was a respected scholar of Sanskrit and ancient Hindu religious writings. His work contributed significantly to the British understanding and translation of classical Indian texts, aligning with the Orientalist belief in the value of India's ancient heritage.

Monument to Warren Hastings, by Richard Westmacott, 1830, showing Hastings between a pandit and a munshi.

Fig. 3 shows a monument to Warren Hastings, the first Governor-General of Bengal, who supported Orientalist views. The sculpture places Hastings between an Indian pandit (scholar of Sanskrit) and a munshi (scholar of Persian). This visual representation signifies the Orientalist perspective that British power relied on understanding Indian languages, customs, and laws, often through the help of native scholars, reinforcing the idea of British officials as guardians or patrons of Indian learning, alongside their role as rulers.

“Grave Errors Of The East”

The Orientalist view was not universally accepted among British officials. From the early 19th century, many began to **sharply criticise** the Orientalist approach to education and knowledge.

Critics argued that Eastern knowledge was flawed, containing errors and unscientific concepts. They dismissed Eastern literature as lacking seriousness and depth. Therefore, they believed it was misguided for the British to invest resources in promoting the study of Arabic and Sanskrit languages and literature.

**James Mill** was a prominent critic of the Orientalists. He contended that the purpose of British education in India should not be to cater to native preferences or traditions merely to gain favour. Instead, the focus should be on teaching what was **useful and practical**. Mill argued that Indians should be educated in the **scientific and technical advancements of the West**, rather than the poetry or sacred texts of the East.

The criticism intensified by the 1830s, with **Thomas Babington Macaulay** emerging as one of the most vocal and influential opponents of Orientalism. Macaulay held a deeply negative view of India, considering it an **uncivilised country** desperately needing to be civilised by the British. He famously claimed that the entire body of Indian and Arabic literature was inferior to "**a single shelf of a good European library**." He strongly urged the British government in India to cease funding Oriental learning, deeming it impractical and worthless.

Source 1 contains a quote from Macaulay's influential Minute of 2 February 1835 on Indian Education. In this passage, he dismisses the local languages (vernaculars) as lacking in literary or scientific content and being too limited to translate valuable works. This viewpoint underpinned his argument for replacing Oriental learning with English education, reflecting a condescending attitude towards Indian intellectual traditions and languages.

Macaulay passionately advocated for the teaching of the **English language**. He believed that English education would grant Indians access to the world's finest literature and expose them to Western science and philosophy. For Macaulay, teaching English was a means of **civilising Indians**, transforming their tastes, values, and culture.

Macaulay's recommendations led to the implementation of the **English Education Act of 1835**. This legislation declared **English as the medium of instruction for higher education** and mandated the discontinuation of state support for Oriental institutions like the Calcutta Madrasa and Benaras Sanskrit College, which Macaulay described as "temples of darkness." Consequently, English textbooks began to be produced for use in schools.

Portrait of Thomas Babington Macaulay in his study.

Fig. 4 is a portrait of Thomas Babington Macaulay. As a fierce critic of Orientalism and a strong proponent of English education, Macaulay played a decisive role in shaping British educational policy in India. His views on the superiority of Western knowledge and the need to civilise Indians through English became highly influential.

Education For Commerce

In 1854, the governing body of the East India Company in London, the Court of Directors, issued a significant educational despatch to the Governor-General in India. This document, known as **Wood’s Despatch** (named after Charles Wood, the President of the Board of Control), outlined the British educational policy for India and reiterated the emphasis on the practical advantages of European learning over Oriental knowledge.

One key argument in Wood's Despatch was the **economic benefit** of European education. It proposed that teaching European subjects would help Indians understand the advantages of expanding **trade and commerce** and recognise the importance of developing India's resources. Furthermore, exposing Indians to European lifestyles and tastes would create a **demand for British manufactured goods**, as Indians would develop an appreciation for and willingness to purchase items produced in Europe.

Source 2 quotes Wood's Despatch of 1854, explicitly stating the British goal: to spread "European knowledge," encompassing arts, sciences, philosophy, and literature. This marked a formal declaration of the triumph of the Anglophile perspective over Orientalist views in British educational policy for India.

Beyond economic considerations, Wood's Despatch also argued that European education would improve the **moral character** of Indians, making them more truthful and honest. This was intended to provide the Company with a pool of reliable **civil servants** capable of administering the vast territory. The Despatch dismissed Eastern literature as not only flawed but also incapable of instilling a sense of duty, commitment to work, or the administrative skills needed by the British.

Following the 1854 Despatch, the British introduced several measures:

**Education Departments** were established in the government to oversee educational matters.
Steps were taken to set up a system of **university education**. Notably, universities were established in Calcutta, Madras, and Bombay in 1857, even as the Sepoy Mutiny was underway.
Efforts were also made to reform the existing system of **school education**.

Bombay University building in the nineteenth century.

Fig. 5 shows the building of Bombay University in the nineteenth century. The establishment of universities in major cities like Bombay, Calcutta, and Madras in 1857 was a direct consequence of Wood's Despatch, aiming to create a Western-style system of higher education in India.

The Demand For Moral Education

Christian missionaries in India also played a role in the educational landscape, often criticising the purely practical focus advocated by some British officials.

Missionaries strongly believed that education should primarily aim to improve the **moral character** of the population. They argued that this moral improvement could only be achieved through **Christian education**.

Initially, the East India Company was hesitant to support missionary activities directly until 1813. They feared that promoting Christianity might provoke backlash among the local population and make them suspicious of British intentions. Due to this opposition, missionaries established their operations outside British-controlled territories, such as setting up a mission at **Serampore**, which was under the control of the Danish East India Company. Here, they established a printing press in 1800 and a college in 1818.

Over the 19th century, missionary schools proliferated across India. However, after the Revolt of 1857, the British government became more cautious. They were reluctant to provide direct support to missionary education, fearing that aggressive attempts to change local customs, practices, beliefs, and religious ideas might incite further discontent among the Indian population.

William Carey, a Scottish missionary who helped establish the Serampore Mission.

Fig. 6 shows William Carey, a Scottish missionary instrumental in establishing the Serampore Mission. Located outside direct British control, the Serampore Mission became an important early centre for missionary education and printing in India when the East India Company was officially hesitant to support such activities within its territories.

Serampore College on the banks of the Hooghly river near Calcutta.

Fig. 7 depicts Serampore College. Established by missionaries in 1818 near Calcutta, it represents the missionary effort to provide education, which they saw as linked to moral improvement and the spread of Christianity, operating independently when the Company was reluctant to endorse missionary activities directly.

Children playing in a missionary school in Coimbatore, early twentieth century.

Fig. 12 shows children playing at a missionary school in Coimbatore in the early 20th century. By the mid-19th century, alongside Christian missionaries, Indian reform organisations also began setting up schools for girls, indicating the growing efforts to expand formal education to previously underserved sections of society.

What Happened To The Local Schools?

Before the arrival of the British, a system of local education existed in India. Children attended institutions known as **pathshalas**.

The Report Of William Adam

To understand the state of these indigenous schools, the Company commissioned **William Adam**, a Scottish missionary, to survey the vernacular education system in Bengal and Bihar in the 1830s. Adam's report provided interesting insights.

Adam's findings:

There were over **1 lakh pathshalas** in Bengal and Bihar.
These were generally small, with typically fewer than 20 students each.
However, collectively, they educated a large number of children – over **20 lakh**.
Pathshalas were founded by wealthy individuals, local communities, or the teachers themselves (**gurus**).

The traditional system of education in these pathshalas was remarkably **flexible**:

There were **no fixed fees**; the amount paid often depended on the parents' income, with richer families paying more.
There were **no printed books**.
There was **no separate school building**; classes were held in various locations like under a banyan tree, in a village shop, a temple corner, or the guru's home.
There were **no benches, chairs, or blackboards**.
There was **no system of separate classes based on age or ability**.
There were **no roll-call registers, annual examinations, or strict, regular timetables**.

Teaching was primarily **oral**. The guru decided the curriculum based on the students' needs. All students sat together, and the guru interacted individually with smaller groups of children according to their different levels of learning.

Adam found this flexible system well-suited to local rural life. For example, classes were suspended during **harvest season**, allowing children from peasant families to help in the fields. Classes resumed after the crops were harvested and stored. This flexibility made education accessible even to children from poor agricultural backgrounds.

A painting by Francois Solvyn depicting a village pathshala in India.

Fig. 8 is a painting by the Dutch artist Francois Solvyn from the late 18th century, illustrating a village pathshala. The painting shows the informal setting, likely outdoors or in a simple structure, with students of various ages sitting together around the teacher (guru), reflecting the flexible and non-formal nature of traditional Indian schooling before extensive British intervention.

New Routines, New Rules

Until the mid-19th century, the East India Company's primary focus was on higher education, leading to relatively little interference with the local pathshalas. However, after 1854, the Company decided to "**improve**" the system of vernacular education.

The Company believed that improvement meant introducing **order, imposing routines, establishing rules, and ensuring regular inspections**. They implemented several measures to standardise and control the pathshalas:

They appointed **government pandits**, each responsible for supervising four to five schools.
These pandits were tasked with visiting pathshalas and attempting to enhance teaching standards.
Gurus were required to submit **periodic reports** and follow a **regular timetable**.
Teaching methods were expected to shift towards using **textbooks**, and learning was to be assessed through **annual examinations**.
Students were mandated to pay a **regular fee**, attend classes consistently, sit in fixed locations, and comply with new rules of discipline.

Pathshalas that adopted these new regulations received **government grants and support**. Those that were unwilling or unable to comply did not receive funding and struggled to compete with the government-regulated schools.

This imposition of new routines and rules had a significant negative consequence, particularly for poorer families. The earlier flexible timetable allowed children from poor peasant families to attend school around agricultural work. The demand for **regular attendance** in the new system meant that children had to be in school even during harvest time, when their labour was needed in the fields. Inability to attend regularly was now perceived as a lack of discipline or motivation to learn, effectively excluding many poor children from the new formal schooling system.

The Agenda For A National Education

The debate about education in India was not confined to British officials. From the early 19th century, Indian thinkers and reformers also began discussing the need for wider educational access.

Some Indians, impressed by Western advancements, believed that **Western education** was crucial for India's modernisation. They actively urged the British to invest more in education and establish more schools, colleges, and universities. You will learn more about these efforts by Indian reformers in a later chapter.

However, other prominent Indians were critical of or reacted against the emphasis on Western education. **Mahatma Gandhi** and **Rabindranath Tagore** were two key figures who held different views on the nature and purpose of education for India.

“English Education Has Enslaved Us”

**Mahatma Gandhi** was a strong critic of colonial education, particularly English education. He argued that it instilled a sense of **inferiority** in Indians, making them perceive Western civilization as superior and eroding the **pride** they had in their own culture.

Gandhi described this education as containing "poison," considering it sinful and enslaving because it cast a harmful spell on Indians. He believed that being educated in colonial institutions led Indians to become enamoured with the West, appreciating Western ways and even admiring British rule. Mahatma Gandhi advocated for an education system that would help Indians regain their **dignity and self-respect**.

During the National Movement, he famously called upon students to **boycott and leave colonial educational institutions** as a form of protest, demonstrating that Indians were no longer willing to be subjugated.

Gandhi firmly believed that **education should be imparted in Indian languages**, not English. He felt that education in English "crippled" Indians, isolating them from their own social environment and making them feel like "strangers in their own lands." He argued that those educated in English, often despising local culture, were unable to connect with the broader Indian population (the masses).

According to Gandhi, Western education placed too much emphasis on reading and writing and abstract knowledge, neglecting **oral tradition, lived experience, and practical skills**. He believed that true education should develop a person's mind and soul. Mere literacy (the ability to read and write) was not sufficient. He stressed the importance of learning through **working with one's hands** and acquiring a **craft**. This hands-on approach, he argued, would develop the mind and enhance the capacity for understanding.

Source 3 presents Mahatma Gandhi's definition of education: "an all-round drawing out of the best in child and man - body, mind and spirit." He explicitly states that literacy is not the goal but merely a means. He advocated starting a child's education by teaching a useful handicraft, enabling them to be productive from the start. Gandhi believed this system was key to developing the mind and soul, provided the craft was taught scientifically, with understanding of the "why and wherefore" of each process, not just mechanically.

As nationalist feelings grew, other thinkers also began formulating ideas for a **national education system** that would be distinct from the one established by the British.

Mahatma Gandhi with Kasturba Gandhi, Rabindranath Tagore, and a group of girls at Santiniketan, 1940.

Fig. 10 shows Mahatma Gandhi and Kasturba Gandhi alongside Rabindranath Tagore and students at Santiniketan in 1940. This meeting of two towering figures of Indian nationalism, both deeply concerned with education and national identity, highlights the importance of educational philosophy in the context of the freedom struggle.

Tagore’s “Abode Of Peace”

Many people are familiar with **Santiniketan**, an institution founded by **Rabindranath Tagore** in **1901**. Tagore's vision for Santiniketan was deeply influenced by his own unhappy childhood experiences in formal schooling in Calcutta, which he found "suffocating and oppressive," feeling like a "prison" that stifled his creativity.

Tagore wanted to create a school environment where children could be **happy, free, and creative**, encouraged to explore their own thoughts and desires. He believed that childhood should be a time for **self-learning**, away from the rigid discipline of the British schooling system. Teachers, in his view, needed to be imaginative and capable of understanding and nurturing a child's natural curiosity. Tagore felt that the existing schools suppressed children's natural desire to be creative and their innate sense of wonder.

Tagore was convinced that creative learning flourished best in a **natural environment**. Therefore, he chose a rural setting, about 100 kilometres from Calcutta, to establish his school. He named it **Santiniketan**, meaning the "**abode of peace**," where children could live in harmony with nature and cultivate their inherent creativity.

While both Tagore and Mahatma Gandhi shared similar criticisms of the rigid, Western-imposed education system and emphasised freedom and creativity, they had some differences. Gandhi was highly critical of Western civilization, particularly its focus on machines and technology. Tagore, however, sought to blend the best aspects of **modern Western civilization** with what he valued most in **Indian tradition**. At Santiniketan, he included the teaching of **science and technology** alongside arts, music, and dance, reflecting his belief in a holistic education that integrated global knowledge.

Thus, numerous Indian thinkers and individuals contributed to the discourse on shaping a **national education system**. Some aimed to reform and expand the existing British framework to include more people, while others advocated for entirely new, alternative systems rooted in Indian culture. The question of what truly constituted "national education" remained a subject of debate and continued to be discussed even after India gained independence.

A class in progress in Santiniketan in the 1930s, showing students outdoors among trees.

Fig. 11 shows a class being conducted outdoors among trees at Santiniketan in the 1930s. This image perfectly captures Tagore's educational philosophy, which emphasized learning in harmony with nature and providing children with open spaces, a stark contrast to the formal, rigid classroom settings of the colonial education system.

Chapter 5 When People Revolt 1857 And After

Policies And The People

The East India Company's policies had a cumulative impact on various sections of Indian society, leading to widespread discontent. Over the years, rules and reforms introduced by the British affected different groups in negative ways.

Nawabs and rajas saw their power and authority diminish as territories were annexed under policies like the Doctrine of Lapse or subsidiary alliances. Peasants faced high revenue demands and rigid collection systems, often leading to debt and loss of land. Tribal groups were impacted by forest laws and restrictions on their traditional practices, along with exploitation by traders and moneylenders.

Additionally, the Sepoys (Indian soldiers in the Company's army) became increasingly resentful due to issues like pay, allowances, rules, and perceived insults to their religious beliefs and customs.

These grievances created a fertile ground for protest, uniting diverse groups against Company rule, although their specific reasons and understanding of the situation might have differed.

Through The Eyes Of The People

Understanding the events of 1857 requires examining the perspectives of those who lived through it, particularly the Indian population whose lives were most directly affected by Company rule. Their letters, diaries, and public pronouncements reveal the growing resentment and fears.

People perceived the Company's policies as a direct attack on their traditional way of life, their religion, their customs, and their dignity. They saw the continuous annexation of territories, the imposition of new laws, and the economic exploitation as deliberate attempts to destroy their world.

Specific grievances, such as the treatment of the Mughal emperor, the annexation of Awadh, the effects of revenue systems, and the actions of missionaries, contributed to a widespread feeling that the British were fundamentally altering Indian society against the will of its people.

The revolt, therefore, was not just a military mutiny but stemmed from deep-seated popular discontent that had been brewing due to decades of accumulated grievances against the Company's rule and its intrusive policies.

A Mutiny Becomes A Popular Uprising

While the initial trigger for the Revolt of 1857 was a **mutiny** by Sepoys against the East India Company's army, it quickly transformed into a widespread **popular uprising** across northern India.

The Sepoys had their own specific grievances, notably the controversial new Enfield rifle cartridges which were rumoured to be greased with animal fat offensive to both Hindu and Muslim soldiers (cow and pig fat). This sparked outrage and led to acts of defiance.

The mutiny began on May 10, 1857, in **Meerut**, where Sepoys marched to Delhi, proclaimed the elderly Mughal Emperor **Bahadur Shah Zafar** as their leader, and called upon him to lead the rebellion against the British. This act gave the mutiny a symbolic political head and legitimacy beyond a mere soldiers' revolt.

Inspired by the Sepoys and fueled by their own accumulated resentments, various sections of the civilian population joined the rebellion. Peasants, artisans, zamindars, and local leaders rose up, attacking Company offices, treasuries, record rooms, and symbols of British authority.

The rebellion spread rapidly across a vast area, including Delhi, Lucknow, Kanpur, Bareilly, Jhansi, and other regions. Local leaders like Nana Saheb, Rani Lakshmibai, Begum Hazrat Mahal, and Kunwar Singh emerged to lead the fight in their respective areas. The widespread participation of diverse groups transformed the initial military mutiny into a large-scale popular revolt against British rule.

The Company Fights Back

The East India Company was initially caught off guard by the scale and intensity of the 1857 revolt. However, they quickly mobilised their resources to suppress the uprising.

The Company brought in **reinforcements** from England and from other parts of India that had not joined the rebellion. They imposed **martial law** across the affected areas, giving military officers broad powers to try and punish rebels.

The British strategy involved regaining control of key centres. Delhi was recaptured in September 1857 after a protracted siege. Bahadur Shah Zafar was arrested, put on trial, and exiled to Rangoon (Myanmar), effectively ending the Mughal dynasty.

Kanpur was also retaken, and Nana Saheb was defeated. Lucknow was recaptured in March 1858. Rani Lakshmibai fought bravely but was defeated and killed in June 1858. Resistance continued in various pockets, but by 1859, the British had largely managed to suppress the rebellion across the country.

The British used brutal force to put down the revolt, carrying out widespread executions and punishments against suspected rebels and civilians perceived to have supported the uprising.

Aftermath

The suppression of the 1857 Revolt had significant and lasting consequences for India and British rule.

Key changes included:

The **East India Company's rule was ended**. The responsibility of governing India was directly transferred to the **British Crown** through the British Parliament in 1858. A Secretary of State for India was appointed in Britain, with a Council, to oversee Indian affairs.
The **Governor-General of India was given the title of Viceroy**, becoming the personal representative of the Crown.
The British government announced that it would **not annex Indian territories** in the future.
Indian rulers were assured that their kingdoms would **not be annexed**, and they were allowed to pass on their kingdoms to their heirs, including adopted sons. However, they were made subordinate allies under the British Crown.
The **proportion of Indian soldiers (Sepoys) in the army was reduced**, and the number of European soldiers was increased. Troops were strategically placed in different regions.
The British decided to recruit soldiers more from communities considered 'martial races,' such as Gurkhas, Sikhs, and Pathans, and less from areas like Awadh, Bihar, central India, and south India, which had participated extensively in the revolt.
Steps were taken to protect the property rights of **landlords and zamindars** who had remained loyal to the British during the revolt.
The British also decided to respect the **customary religious and social practices** of Indians, promising non-interference in these matters.

These measures were aimed at preventing future rebellions, securing British control, and reshaping the administration and army based on the lessons learned from 1857. While promising an end to annexation and non-interference in religion, British policy after 1857 was primarily focused on consolidating control and maintaining stability, leading to a more direct and often more racially segregated form of rule.

The Khurda Uprising – A Case Study

While the 1857 Revolt was a major event, resistance against British rule occurred in various parts of India both before and after it. The **Khurda Uprising** in Odisha (then Orissa) is presented as an example of such local resistance.

The Khurda region in the late 18th century had a strong local administration under the Raja of Khurda and a system of military service known as the **Paik system**, where a landed militia served the state in times of war and were granted rent-free lands (nishkar jagirs) in return.

When the East India Company conquered Odisha in 1803, they disrupted this traditional system. They took over the administration of Khurda, and the Raja's authority was reduced. The Paiks were particularly affected as their rent-free lands were assessed and subjected to heavy taxation by the Company. This, along with other grievances like high revenue demands, corrupt officials, and the introduction of salt monopoly, caused widespread discontent among the Paiks and the local population.

In 1817, led by **Baxi Jagabandhu Bidyadhar**, the dispossessed commander of the Raja's forces, the Paiks and other aggrieved sections of society rose in rebellion against the British. The uprising saw attacks on British property, offices, and collaborators. It gained significant popular support and spread rapidly.

The British responded with military force to suppress the revolt. Although the Khurda Uprising was eventually put down by 1818, it was a significant instance of armed resistance against early British colonial rule and is considered an important precursor to the larger Revolt of 1857 in demonstrating the depth of popular resentment against Company policies.