"Jallianwala Bagh," 1919 - The Real Story by Kishwar Desai

Above: Jallianwala Bagh," 1919 - The Real Story - Kishwar Desai - 217 pages.

Desai's book points out many examples of seeming shocking treatment of colonials as British authorities tried to maintain control of a rapidly deteriorating situation in Amritsar.

I completed reading this book today. I read the book, purchased at the Partition Museum in Amritsar, to supplement my understanding of

Jallianwala Bagh, which Kessler, Drums, TIMDT and Mwah (sic) visited in Amritsar, Punjab, 03 December 2019 (see second image).
Jallianwala Bagh is a park in the center of Amritsar, near the Sikh Golden Temple. Hundreds of unarmed Indians were killed by fifty Punjabi and Gurkha troops under the command of General Reginald Dyer, who was putatively enforcing curfew and assembly violations by Indian citizens, 13 April 1919.

The Amritsar (Jallianwala Bagh) Massacre is widely viewed as a major catalyst that advanced the momentum of India gaining independence from Britain in 1947,

Post WWI. Indians agitated for independence. They had supplied two million troops to the British war effort in the recently completed WWI. Indian independence movement leaders, including Gandhi, recently come to India from South Africa, believed that India deserved its freedom from colonial rule.

Punjab was a hot spot. A majority of the returning soldiers from WWI were Punjabi. Organized Punjabi groups in cities throughout the Punjab, including Lahore and Amritsar, responded to Gandhi's cry for non violent resistance to pressure the British to move India towards independence.

Punjab Lieutenant Governor, Michael O'Dwyer took a tough stand towards the resisters, who had closed their businesses and gathered for non violent rallies. He jailed two of their leaders in Amritsar. Protestors to the jailing of the non violent demonstration leaders were attacked by British troops as martial law was announced. Things got out of hand, and, on 10 April 1919, four European non combatants, were killed in Amritsar by Indian protesters.

Local (Amritsar) Brits were astounded at the escalation of the protests. Was another Mutiny/Uprising in the offing? It had been only sixty one years since the Sepoy Uprising/Mutiny where soldiers in the Bengal British East India Company Army had rebelled against their British officers. It took eighteen months, and thousands of casualties on both sides, for the British East India Company administration to bring the uprising/mutiny under control.

So, Lieutenant Governor Michael O'Dwyer came down with a heavy hand. He couldn't cave to the wishes of the "rabble," could he? He didn't want another Mutiny on his hands did he? O'Dwyer, based in Lahore, lacking confidence in resident Amritsar British administrators to quell the rising tensions, sent Brigadier General Reginald Dyer a tough, no nonsense, play it by the book, commander and several hundred troops, including Punjabi, Gurkha, and British soldiers from Punjab capital Lahore to Amritsar on 10 April 1919.

General Dyer, didn't want to take any chances of allowing for insurrection. On 13 April 1919 Dyer opened fire on five thousand peaceful, unarmed protesters, putatively in violation of the curfew. There is discussion in the book about the haphazard way the curfew was announced specuating that many of the protestors at Jallianwala Bagh had no idea they were in violation of a curfew.

For what seemed to most to be overreach, Dyer was relieved of command but acquitted of wrong doing at The Hunter Commission court of inquiry in Lahore.

Dyer maintained the rightness of his action for the remainder of his life. He died in London in 1927 of a series of strokes during the last years of his life. Dyer's position that he was doing his duty seemed to be backed up by the sentiments a majority of his countrymen. He was even given an award, Companion of the Order of the Bath, by military officers who continued in strong support of maintaining the Raj after WWI.

The tragic event remains an open sore to this day with a now independent India periodically demanding a British apology and Britain, always expressing its regret, but never apologizing for the massacre.

Notably, Sir Michael O'Dwyer was assassinated in London in 1940, by Indian militant, Udham Singh, in retaliation for his role perpetrating the Amritsar Massacre.

Above image of Jallianwala Bagh shows the well (pink in distance) into which women and children were thrown to keep them out of the way of the bullets from the Lee Enfield rifles. Tragically, many of them were killed, crushed by those later thrown into the well. TIMDT and Drums are in crowd at right of image.

The movie "Gandhi," starring Ben Kingsley, has a scene representation of The Amritsar Massacre: https://youtu.be/345aojByoGk
"Jallianwala Bagh, 1919 - The Real Story," recently published, describes the Jallianwala Bagh Massacre from an Indian point of view. Most of the massive coverage of this event is written by British writers.

Author Desai notes that the final number of deaths in the massacre will never be known. Estimates of deaths range from the official British reported deaths of 379 to claims, from Indian sources, of over one thousand. Many injured were taken to their homes by their friends and relatives. No one dared to take the injured to a hospital, where, they believed, British authorities would take them captive. So, many injured demonstrators likely died of their wounds without receiving available care.

Desai writes that the Hunter Commission, the board charged by the Governor General to report on the massacre, castigated O'Dwyer for his insouciant attitude towards locating the injured, providing them help, recording their names etc. so as to get a proper record of the injured and dead Indians.

I enjoyed reading this book. It helped greatly in building my understanding of the emerging independence movement in India post World War I and how, as a war weakened Britain struggled to remain in control of its colonial possessions, rising resentment of British rule by Indians inevitably clashed with a paranoid British administrator's ham handed treatment of the "ingrate" colonials.

Apropos this.... though many British people treated their Indian employees, soldiers, servants, merchants, with compassion and concern, it is clear that broadly speaking, the treatment of the Indians by the British would be considered highly racist and condescending by today's standards.

Desai's book points out many examples of seeming shocking treatment of colonials as British authorities tried to maintain control of a rapidly deteriorating situation in Amritsar. For example, General Dyer mandated that locals crawl on their hands an knees through a street section where a British nurse had been accosted by demonstrators.

But, that was then, this is now. It is always dangerous to judge history by standards that have evolved. India today successfully progresses on the platform of numerous, successful British initiatives: A railroad, a common language, rule of law, democratic government, and a pucca military to name a few.

Gandhi, who had learned British ways, and had a great respect for British institutions, was the perfect catalyst to evolve a successful separation... messy as it was...of India from two hundred years of direct British rule.