¹ Bennigsen, Alexandre A. and Wimbush, S. Enders, Muslim National Communism in the Soviet Union: A Revolutionary Strategy for the Colonial World (Chicago University Press, 1979), pp. 6, 223.Google Scholar

² Ricklefs, M. C., A History of Modern Indonesia (Macmillan, 1981), p. 166.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

³ Keddie, Nikki R., An Islamic response to Imperialism: Political and Religious Writings of Saiyid Jamal ad-Din “al-Afghani” (University of California Press, 1968), pp. 39–41.Google Scholar In 1883, Saiyid Husain Bilgrami, a noted Indian Muslim intellectual even called al-Afghani ‘a socialist’, ibid., p. 23. For treatment of al-Afghani's career, see Keddie, Nikki R., Saiyid Jamai ad-Din ‘al-Afghani’: A Political Biography (University of California Press, 1972).Google Scholar

⁴ Maulvi ‘Abd al-Haq of Calcutta and Delhi issued a fatwa declaring that the present war was political and not religious. The fatwa was circulated to all leading maulvis, the great majority of whom approved and signed it, see Weekly Report of the Director Intelligence Bureau (hereafter referred to as WRDIB) week ending 2 Feb 1915, p. 7. The 'ulama of Dar al-Ulum Nadwat al-'Ulama, Lucknow, also issued a proclamation announcing their allegiance to the British Government, see WRDIB, week ending 29 Dec 1914, p. 7.

⁵ Fatwa no. 2 of Shaikh al-Islam of Constantinople, see WRDIB, week ending 12 Jan 1915.

⁶ ‘Malihabadi, Abd al-Razzaq, Azad Ki Kahani Khud Azad Ki Zobani (Delhi, 1958)Google Scholar, quoted in Haq, Mushir U., Muslim Politics in Modern India: 1857–1947 (Delhi, 1970), pp. 91–2.Google Scholar

⁷ Azad, Abul Kalam, India Wins Freedom (New Delhi, 1978) p. 8.Google Scholar

⁸ Miyan, Maulana Muhammad (ed.), Tahrik-i Shaikh al-Hind (Mehuz Rekard Ka Urdu Tarjuma) (New Delhi, n.d.), pp. 197–200.Google Scholar For the complete record of the Silk Letter Conspiracy Case, see L/P&S/10/633 IOR.

⁹ See Miyan, Maulana Muhammad (ed.), Tahrik-i Shaikh al-Hind, pp. 61–7, 190–7Google Scholar; Madani, Maulana Husain Ahmad, Naqsh-i Hayat (Deoband, 1953–1955), vol. II, p. 3Google Scholar; Bamford, P. C., Histories of ihe Non-Cooperation and the Khilafat Movements (Delhi, 1925), pp. 110–13Google Scholar; Sindhi, Maulana 'Ubaid-Allah, Kabul Men Sat Sal: 1915–1922 (Lahore, 1976).Google Scholar

¹⁰ Kidwai, Mushir Hosain, Islam and Socialism (London, 1913), pp. v, 59, 63Google Scholar; see also his Pan-Islamism and Bolshevism (London, 1937), p. 3.Google Scholar For activities of others, see Home Political A, Feb. 1921, nos 341–54.

¹¹ Adhikari, G. (ed.), Documents of the History of the Communist Party of India (hereafter referred to as Documents), vol. I (Delhi, 1971), pp. 13–14, 94Google Scholar; WRDIB, week ending 15 July 1916, 1 Dec. 1917, 2 Feb. 1918, 13 July 1918.

¹² Ker, James Cambell, Political Trouble in India: 1907–1917 (Delhi, 1973), pp. 308–9Google Scholar; Aibak, Zafar Hasan, Ap Biti (Lahore, 1966), pp. 22–3.Google Scholar

¹³ See Aibak, Zafar Hasan, Ap Biti, p. 21.Google Scholar On Maulana ‘Ubaid-Allah Sindhi's life and works, see Sarwar, Muhammad, Maulana 'Ubaid-Allah Sindhi: Jalat-i Zindagi, Talimat Aur Siyasi Afkar (Lahore, 1943)Google Scholar; Sindhi, Maulana 'Ubaid-Allah, Kabul Men Sat Sal, pp. 143–60.Google Scholar For his reinterpretation of Shah Wali-Allah's thought, see Sindhi, Maulana 'Ubaid-Allah, Shah Wali-Allah Aur Unka Falsafa (Lahore, 1944)Google Scholar, and Sindhi, Maulana 'Ubaid-Allah, Shah Walt-Allah Aur Unki Siyasi Tahrik (Lahore, 1942)Google Scholar; Baljon, J. M. S., ‘A Comparison between the Koranic Views of 'Ubaid-Allah Sindhi and Shah Wali-Allah’, in Khuhro, Hamida (ed.), Sind Through the Centuries (O.U.P., 1981), pp.183–90Google Scholar; Khalid, Detlev, ‘Ubayd-Allah Sindhi: Modern Interpretation of Muslim Universalism’, Islamic Studies, 06 1969, pp. 97–114.Google Scholar

¹⁴ See Miyan, Maulana Muhammad (ed.), Tahrik-iShaikh al-Hind, pp. 196Google Scholar; according to Ubaid-Allah Sindhi, the foundation of Nizarat al-M'uarif was laid by Mahmud al- Hasan, Hakim Ajmal Khan and Nawab Wiqar al-Mulk, see Sindhi, , Kabul Men Sat Sal, p. 154.Google Scholar

¹⁵ Bamford, , Histories, p. 122Google Scholar; Aibak, Zafar Hasan, Ap Biti pp. 92–6Google Scholar; Sindhi, , Kabul Men Sat Sal, pp. 56–60.Google Scholar

¹⁶ Ker, , Political Trouble in India, pp. 301–2Google Scholar; Aibak, Zafar Hasan, Ap Biti, pp. 91–2Google Scholar; Sindhi, , Kabul Men Sat Sal, pp. 53–5.Google Scholar

¹⁷ For a detailed biography of Maulana Barkat-Allah, see 'Irfan, M., Barkat-Allah Bhopali (Bhopal, 1969).Google Scholar

¹⁸ For a full account of the activities of the German-Turkish mission, see Adamec, Ludwig W., Afghanistan, 1890–1923: A Diplomatic History (University of California Press, 1967)Google Scholar; also see Aibak, Zafar Hasan, Ap Biti, pp. 98–100.Google Scholar

¹⁹ Ker, , Political Trouble in India, p. 305Google Scholar; Aibak, Zafar Hasan, Ap. Biti, pp. 100–1.Google Scholar

²⁰ Bolshevik Activities and Implications of Afghans in Anti-British Intrigues, Diary N.W.F.P. I.B., weeks ending 26 May 1919, 2 June 1919; L/P&S/11/201 IOR, p. 37; Rowlatt Sedition Committee Report (Calcutta, 1918), p. 178.Google Scholar

²¹ Ker, , Political Trouble in India, p. 313Google Scholar; Aibak, Zafar Hasan, Ap Biti, pp. 110–12Google Scholar; Miyan, Muhammad (ed.), Tahrik-i Shaikh al-Hind, pp. 269–75.Google Scholar

²² Bamford, , Histories, p. 125Google Scholar; Ghalibnama, the letters issued by Ghalib Pasha, are reproduced in full in Miyan, Muhammad (ed.), Tahrik-i Shaikh al-Hind, pp. 283–4.Google Scholar

²³ Sarwar, M., 'Ubaid-Allah Sindhi, p. 30Google Scholar; according to Sindhi, he had left India as a Pan-Islamist but when he met the Amir of Afghanistan, the latter advised him to work as a nationalist, see Sindhi, , Kabul Men Sat Sal, pp. 18–19Google Scholar; also 'Usmani, Shaukat, Autobiography, MSS, p. 40Google Scholar, CPI Library, New Delhi.

²⁴ For biographical information on 'Abd al-Rab Peshawari, see Ahmad, Muzaffar, Myself and the Communist Party of India: 1920–1929 (Calcutta, 1970), pp. 50–1Google Scholar; see also Bolshevik activities in Afghanistan, Home Political A, March 1921, no. 154, and Bolshevik intrigues in Afghanistan, Home political A, Feb. 1921, nos 34–54.

²⁵ Qidwai, , Pan-Islamism and Bolshevism, p. 63.Google Scholar

²⁶ The two policy declarations ‘To All Muslim Toilers of Russia and the East’ and ‘Declaration of the Rights of Toiling and Exploited Peoples’ tore up the secret treaties agreeing to Tsarist annexation of Constantinople, partition of Persia and the dismemberment of Turkey, see Secretary of State for India to Viceroy, Telegram no. 9683, 13 Dec. 1917, Chelmsford Papers, MSS Eur E 264/8 IOR. See also Milestones of Soviet Foreign Policy: 1917–1967 (Moscow, 1967), pp. 34–5Google Scholar; Rappard, William E., Harper, S. E. et al. (eds), Source Book on European Governments (New York, 1937), p. 65Google Scholar; Diary N.W.F.P. I.B. week ending 22 April 1920, L/P&S/10/813 IOR; Political and Secret Memoranda no. A, 184, p. 19; Lenin, V. I., ‘Inflammable Material in World Polities’, in Lenin, V. I., The National Liberation Movement in the East (Moscow, 1957), p. 15.Google Scholar

²⁷ Documents, vol. I, pp. 97–100.Google Scholar

²⁸ Ibid., pp. 101–2.

²⁹ See exchange of letters between Aman-Allah and Lenin in Bailey Papers, IOR; also Sareen, Tilak Raj, Russian Revolution and India: 1917–1921 (New Delhi, 1977), pp. 58–61.Google Scholar

³⁰ 'Irfan, M., Barkat-Allah Bhopali, pp. 91–4.Google Scholar

³¹ Documents, vol. I, pp. 118, 120.Google Scholar

³² ibid., p. 126. The full text of the pamphlet is available in L/P&S/10/836, pp. 52–63 IOR.

³³ Documents, vol. I, p. 119.Google Scholar

³⁴ Bolshevik Intrigues in Afghanistan, Home Political A, Feb. 1921, nos 341–54. The propaganda material included Programme of the Communists, Civil War and Red Terror, The Constitution of the Russian Socialist Federal Republic and Capitalist England versus Socialist Russia, see Report, General Staff Branch, March 1920.

³⁵ Diary N.W.F.P. I.B., no. 12 and no. 19, weeks ending 19 March 1920 and 6 May 1920, L/P&S/10/813 IOR. The membership form included a pledge of hatred for and hostility towards the British and designated A. Rab as the President of the League of Revolutionaries, see Diary N.W.F.P. I.B. no. 17, week ending 27 April 1920, L/P&S/10/813 IOR. The text of the constitution of the ‘Indian Revolutionary Association KABUL’ has been reproduced as Appendix A in P.O. 371/8170, pp. 20–4 PRO.

³⁶ There were reports at the time which indicated that in this dispute, Amir Aman-Allah favoured 'Ubaid-Allah Sindhi and showed his displeasure with Rab by telling him to leave Afghanistan along with his comrades, see Home Political A, Feb. 1921, nos 341- 54; see also Bolshevik Intrigues in Afghanistan, ibid., p. 13. See Diary N.W.F.P. I.B. No. 24, week ending 10 June 1920. Muhammad Shafiq, who was at the time inclined towards 'Ubaid-Allah Sindhi, mentioned ‘selfish matters’ as the reason for discord between Rab and Sindhi, see L/P&S/11/212 IOR.

³⁷ Documents, vol. I, pp. 54, 135–7Google Scholar; Kaushik, Davindra, Central Asia in Modern Times (Moscow, 1970), p. 113Google Scholar; F.O. 371/9291, p. 74 PROGoogle Scholar; Roy, M. N., Memoirs (New Delhi, 1964), p. 395.Google Scholar For information on Zamindar, see L/P&J/6/1884 IOR. British Intelligence reports stated that Azad Hindustan was a weekly in Urdu, see Political and Secret Memoranda no. C. 203. The British admitted that many soldiers deserted in Turkestan, see Home Political A, Dec. 1920, nos 317–8, p. 87. They also accepted that many of these deserters had caught ‘infection’, see L/P&S/1 1/201 IOR. For specific examples, see L/P&S/11/212 IOR.

³⁸ Qureshi, M. Naeem, ‘The ‘Ulama’ of British India and the Hijrat of 1920’, Modem Asian Studies, 13, 1 (1979), pp. 45, 50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar For a detailed treatment, see Qureshi, M. Naeem, ‘The Khilafat Movement in India, 1919–1924’ (Unpublished Ph.D. Thesis, University of London, 1973).Google Scholar See also Copy of Instructions to the Muhajirin, which stated that ‘People, who on entering Afghanistan, accept Afghan nationality, will get 6 jaribs of land per head. A married man will get 8 jaribs. Land will also be given for the children and unmarried daughters’, see Enclosure no. 1 to Diary N.W.F.P. I.B. no. 21, week ending 20 May 1920, L/P&S/10/813, p. 83 IOR.

³⁹ For accounts of the Hijrat, see Home Political A, Nov. 1920, nos 41–56; Briggs, F. J., ‘The Indian Hijrat of 1920’, Moslem World, vol. XX, no. 2, 04 1930, p. 165Google Scholar; Viceroy to Secretary of State for India, Telegram P. no. 661, 13 Aug. 1920, MSS Eur E 264/13 IOR; Niemeijer, A. C., The Khilafat Movement: 1919–1924 (The Hague, 1972), p. 104.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

⁴⁰ See K. H. Ansari, The Emergence of Muslim Socialists Appendix I. See the demi-official letter of Shaikh Asghar 'Ali, C.I.E., dated 11 Aug, 1920, which stated that ‘the majority of Punjab Muhajirs … included goldsmiths, weavers, shopkeepers, school masters, students … Altogether an estimate of 2000 from Punjab is not excessive’, see Home Political A, nos 41–56, Nov. 1920, pp. 5–6. See also, Niemeijer, , The Khilafat Movement, pp. 104–5.Google Scholar

⁴¹ Ahmad, Muzaffar, The Communist Party of India and its Formation Aboard (Calcutta, 1962), p. 16Google Scholar; Yusufi, Allah Bakhsh, Sarhad Aur Jad-wa Jahad-i Azadi (Lahore, n.c.), p. 220Google Scholar; Usmani, Shaukat, Autobiography, p. 17Google Scholar; Usmani, Shaukat, Historic Trips of a Revolutionary (New Delhi, 1977), p. 1.Google Scholar

⁴² Nearly two-thirds of the fathers were petty functionaries in the British India Government or employed in occupations which depended on British authority. Over one-third were artisans or petty zamindars. See Ansari, , The Emergence of Muslim Socialists Appendix I.Google Scholar

⁴³ Ibid.

⁴⁴ Ibid.

⁴⁵ The poetry of 'Allama Iqbal on the Balkan Wars, ‘the articles in Muhammad 'Ali Juhar Marhum's weekly Comrade and Maulana Abu'l Kalam Azad's and Marhum's weeklies Al-Hilal and Al-Balagh were very influential in creating pro-Turkish sympathies amongst us. These writings also incited us against the British and they also produced the nationalist sentiment amongst us’, see Aibak, Zafar Hasan, Ap Biti, pp. 14–15Google Scholar; see also Usmani, Shaukat, Autobiography, pp. 20–2.Google Scholar

⁴⁶ The Muhajir students of Lahore were conscious of the racially discriminating policy of the British, for instance regarding recruitment to the army. No Indian could rise above the non-commissioned ranks. Aibak recalled that when he was advised by his English professor to join the army, he replied that he was prepared to do so if he was awarded a commission. When the professor insisted that he should join for patriotic reasons, Aibak flatly rejected the idea, ‘This is not my country’, he replied, ‘because its government is not my government’, Aibak, Zafar Hasan, Ap Biti, p. 19.Google Scholar

⁴⁷ These young Muslims found examples of British ridicule of the Ottoman Caliphate and Islam intolerable. For instance, The Graphic (London) published a cartoon of the Shaikh al-lslam proclaiming the fatwa of jihad. In this picture, the Kalima was ridiculed: ‘God is great and the Kaiser is his Prophet’. Underneath was the sentence: ‘India, Egypt, Afghanistan refuse to accept the fatwa’, see L/P&S/10/633, p. 52Google Scholar IOR. Aibak also refers to this cartoon as the ultimate insult which made the Lahore students decide to leave India, see Aibak, Zafar Hasan, Ap Biti, pp. 19–20.Google Scholar

⁴⁸ British insistence that Aman-Allah should ‘break’ with the Bolsheviks prior to the ‘resumption of friendly relations’, was conveyed to the Amir as early as October 1919, see Secreary of State for India to Viceroy, Telegram no. 682, 28 Nov. 1919; Viceroy to Secretary of State for India, Telegram no. 742, 3 Dec. 1919, Chelmsford Papers MSS Eur E 264/11 IOR. For the twists and turns of Anglo-Afghan and Afghan-Soviet relations, see Poullada, Leon B., Reform and Rebellion in Afghanistan, 1919–1929 (Cornell University Press, 1973).Google Scholar

⁴⁹ For the Muhajirin's view of Aman-Allah's measures, see Aibak, Zafar Hasan, Ap Biti, p. 204Google Scholar; Ahmad, Muzaffar, The Communist Party of India, pp. 16–17Google Scholar; Usmani, Shaukat, Historic Trips, pp. 10–26Google Scholar; Roy, M. N., Memoirs, p. 456.Google Scholar

⁵⁰ In Autumn 1919, British intelligence reported that the Bolsheviks were trying to prove that Bolshevism was not ‘contrary to the teachings of the Koran’, see WRDIB, week ending 29 Sept. 1919. They were also ‘making great efforts to arouse Pan-Islamic feeling in Central Asia’, see WRDIB, week ending 4 Aug. 1919. For more general discussions of Soviet policy towards Muslim peoples, see Carr, E. H., A History of Soviet Russia—the Boshevik Revolution, 1947–1923, vol. III (London, 1961), p. 263 n. 3Google Scholar; Spector, I., The Soviet Union and the Muslim World (Washington, 1958), pp. 182–8.Google Scholar See also L/P&S/10/836, p. 187 IOR.Google Scholar

⁵¹ Roy, M. N., Memoirs, pp. 417, 419–20, 492.Google Scholar As early as November 1919, the Secretary of State for India had written to the Viceroy that he might try to ‘outbid the Bolsheviks’, see Secretary of State for India to Viceroy, Telegram no. 682, 28 Nov. 1919, Chelmsford Papers MSS Eur E 264/11 IOR.

⁵² Roy, M. N., Memoirs, pp. 421–2.Google Scholar

⁵³ Ahmad, Muzaffar, The Communist Party of India, p. 21Google Scholar; Usmani, Shaukat, Historic Trips, pp. 27–35.Google Scholar

⁵⁴ Ibid., pp. 28–9.

⁵⁵ Ibid., p. 37; Ahmad, Muzaffar, The Communist Party of India, pp. 26–8.Google Scholar

⁵⁶ Ibid., p. 30; Roy, M. N., Memoirs, p. 441.Google Scholar

⁵⁷ Documents, vol. I, p. 52Google Scholar; Roy, M. N., Memoirs, p. 469.Google Scholar

⁵⁸ Ibid., p. 420.

⁵⁹ Ibid., p. 468. See also Ahmad, Muzaffar, The Communist Party of India, pp. 30,32.Google Scholar The agreement signed at the end of March 1921 stipulated that the Soviet Government would refrain from any attempt by military or diplomatic means or any other form of action or propaganda to encourage any of the peoples of Asia in any form of hostile action against the British Empire, especially in India, see L/P&S/10/912, p. 363 IOR.Google Scholar Also, British Note to the Soviet Government, dated 7 Sept. 1921, pp. 276–7, and Telegram from Home to Krassin, dated 16 March 1921, L/P&S/10/912, p. 359.Google Scholar

⁶⁰ Roy, M. N., Memoirs, p. 457.Google Scholar

⁶¹ Ibid., p. 461.

⁶² ‘Eighteen of the one hundred emigrants living in Tashkent about the end of 1920 left to advance the revolutionary cause in India or work among the independent tribes on the country's border. Five went to Iran for propaganda work among Indians serving in the British Army there’, Persits, M., ‘Indian National Revolutionaries' Road to Marxism’, Soviet Review, 4 07 1974, p. 14.Google Scholar For specific examples of those who returned from Tashkent, see Agitators to India from Tashkent, D.I.B. weekly report, week ending 22 June 1921, Home Political A, no. 287, File no. 5522, June 1921; and L/P&S/11/1040/212/1922 and L/P&S/10/837, pp. 87, 322, 329 IOR.Google Scholar

⁶³ Roy, M. N., Memoirs, pp. 411–12, 464.Google Scholar

⁶⁴ Ibid., p. 464.

⁶⁵ Ansari, , The Emergence of Muslim Socialists. Appendix I.Google Scholar

⁶⁶ Persits, M., ‘Transition of Indian National Revolutionaries to Marxism-Leninism’, Soviet Review, 16 05 1974, p. 30.Google Scholar

⁶⁷ Idem.

⁶⁸ Ibid., p. 27.

⁶⁹ Roy, M. N., Memoirs, p. 464.Google Scholar

⁷⁰ Idem.

⁷¹ ibid., p. 465.

⁷² Ibid., p. 464. See also Persits, M., ‘Formation of the Indian Revolutionary Committee’, Soviet Review, 16 05 1974, p. 26.Google Scholar

⁷³ Roy, M. N., Memoirs, p. 465.Google Scholar See also Persits, M., ‘Transition’, p. 29.Google Scholar

⁷⁴ Roy, M. N., Memoirs, p. 465.Google Scholar According to Habib Ahmad Nasim, one of the Muhajirin at Tashkent, Shafiq, Masud 'Ali Shah, Shaukat 'Usmani, Mahmud 'Ali and Rahmat 'Ali Zakaria were special favourites of Roy, see L/P&S/11/212/1040/1922, p. 7 IOR.Google Scholar

⁷⁵ Minutes of the Meetings held on 17 October 1920 and 15 December 1920 at Tashkent, see Documents, vol. I, p. 231.Google Scholar

⁷⁶ Roy, M. N., Memoirs, p. 466.Google Scholar Fida ‘Ali Zahid, in his later statement to the British court, described the kind of communist ‘cell’ structure which they were told to use in organizational work in India: Our instructions on returning to India were that each of us should enrol five men. We were to get hold of five individuals separately who should remain unknown to each other. To each of these we were to pass on the communist teaching we had received, and they were to go out and pass it on similarly to others-peasants, industrial workers and so on. The five, though unknown to each other, were to keep in touch with their leader …’, see L/P&S/11/1040/212/1922, p. 26 IOR.Google Scholar

⁷⁷ Ahmad, Muzaffar, Myself, pp. 55–6.Google Scholar For a list of 'Abd al-Rab's ‘Party’, see F.O. 371/9291, p. 74 PRO.Google Scholar For the names of those who sided with Roy, see ibid., pp. 66–8. See also Documents, vol. I, pp. 248–9.Google Scholar

⁷⁸ F.O. 371/8170, p. 17 PRO.Google Scholar

⁷⁹ Documents, vol. I, pp. 237–49Google Scholar; Evans, Ernestine, ‘Looking East From Moscow’, Asia (New York), vol. XXII (1922), pp. 972–6, 1011–2Google Scholar; Khan, Abdul Qadir, ‘Pupil of the Soviet’, The Times (London), 25, 26 and 27 02 1930, p. 15Google Scholar; F.O. 371/9291 p. 64Google Scholar and F.O. 371/6845, pp. 45–6 PRO.Google Scholar

⁸⁰ Freeman, A. C., ‘Russia's University of Oriental Communists’, Soviet Russia Pictorial, April 1923Google Scholar; see extracts in Documents, vol. I, p. 244.Google Scholar

⁸¹ Qurban, Fazl-i Ilahi, ‘The Eastern University in Moscow’, The Vanguard of Indian Independence, vol. II, no. 4, 1 02 1923Google Scholar; Documents, vol. I, p. 245.Google Scholar Of those registered at the University in July 1921, 60% were ‘of peasant origin’ and 13% were ‘of the labour class’. Thirty-two nationalities were represented, see F.O. 371/9291, p. 45 PRO.Google Scholar

⁸² Documents, vol. I, pp. 243–4.Google Scholar

⁸³ The list of subjects varies slightly from account to account. The selection given has been taken from the following sources: Documents, vol. I, pp. 245–6Google Scholar; Evans, Ernestine, ‘Looking East from Moscow’, p. 972Google Scholar; Khan, Abdul Qadir, ‘Pupil of the Soviet’, p. 15Google Scholar; F.O. 371/9291, p. 64 PRO.Google Scholar

⁸⁴ Khan, Abdul Qadir, ‘Pupil of the Soviet’, p. 15.Google Scholar

⁸⁵ Ibid., p. 16.

⁸⁶ Documents, vol. I, p. 244.Google Scholar

⁸⁷ Evans, Ernestine, ‘Looking East from Moscow’, p. 974.Google Scholar

⁸⁸ Documents, vol. I, p. 246.Google Scholar

⁸⁹ Khan, Abdul Qadir, ‘Pupil of the Soviet’, p. 15.Google Scholar

⁹⁰ Documents, vol. I, pp. 246–7.Google Scholar

⁹¹ Of the 522 students at the University in July 1921, 72 were women, aged from 18 to 23, see F.O. 371/6845, p. 45 PRO.Google Scholar

⁹² Documents, vol. I, p. 245.Google Scholar

⁹³ Evans, Ernestine, ‘Looking East from Moscow’, p. 973.Google Scholar

⁹⁴ Rafiq Ahmad, one of the Muhajirin gave the names of those who joined the Communist Party of India ‘on reaching Moscow’—they were Shaukat 'Usmani, Ghaus (real name Gauhar) Rahman, Sultan Muhammad, Mian Muhammad Akbar Shah, Mir 'Abd al-Majid, Feroz al-din Mansur, Fida 'Ali Zahid, Rafiq Ahmad, Habib Ahmad Salini (real name Nasim), Fazal-i Ilahi Qurban and 'Abd-Allah Safdar; Rahmat 'Ali Zakaria had become a member earlier, see Ahmad, Rafiq, ‘An unforgettable Journey’ (unpublished) quoted in Documents, vol. I, p. 241.Google Scholar

⁹⁵ Sajjad Zahir, a leading Muslim communist in the 1930s and 1940s, later recalled: ‘All Indians of my generation, who were schoolboys at the time of the Non-Cooperation and Khilafat Movements … had heard and were thrilled by the valour and the burning spirit of patriotism shown by those young Indians who migrated from their homeland, and facing innumerable difficulties and hardships trekked through Afghanistan to Soviet Central Asia, with the sole purpose of getting themselves trained and equipped for waging an armed struggle against the British Imperialists in India’, see Mehdi, S. M., The Story Behind ‘Moscow’, Tashkent Conspiracy Case (Delhi, 1967), n. 4.Google Scholar

⁹⁶ Khan, Abdul Qadir, ‘Pupil of the Soviet’, 27 02 1930, p. 16.Google Scholar