For this project I researched the Rowlatt Acts and the Jallianwala Bagh Massacre in India. I analyzed three poems, did an argumentative piece, and painted with gouache.
Thinking Skill - Reasoning
History: I did research on the British control of India in 1919, specifically the Rowlatt Acts and the massacre in Jallianwala Bagh that resulted. I compiled all of my research into a research paper, and I also did an argumentative essay on how the massacre was a turning point of the British and Indian relations. The reasoning done in the argumentative paper helped me to practice formulating arguments and it also let me argue my views.
LA: I did an analysis of three poems regarding the massacre and took a look at three different ways the massacre was portrayed. I reasoned how each poem takes a different look on the massacre and how each makes a statement on the subject.
Art: For art, I researched the art styles and symbolism from the artists of ancient India, and evaluated how the symbolism is used in their artworks. I used symbolism important to India to create a piece depicting a metaphor for the Massacre of Jallianwala Bagh.
Language Arts
Poem Analyses
“Spring in Jallianwala Bagh” by Subhadra Kumari Chauhan
The poem titled “Spring in Jallianwala Bagh” was written by Subhadra Kumari Chauhan and it is about the massacre that happened in Jallianwala Bagh on April 13, 1919. The massacre that happened was when the British General Dyer ordered his troops to shoot at a group of over 10,000 unarmed Indians in the place known as Jallianwala Bagh in Amritsar. While some sources say over a thousand Indians died, according to an official report, 379 Indians were killed and 192 more were wounded (“Report; Disorders Inquiry Committee 1919-1920: India”). Subhadra Kumari Chauhan, who was alive during the date of the shooting, wrote the poem to take place after the massacre and described the animals and plants of Jallianwala Bagh in a sullen tone. This is important to note because Jallianwala Bagh was a public garden at the time of the massacre, and so the poet used the creatures and plants home to it to show how sullen things became afterward. While the poem is not directed towards any specific person, it does, however, encourage other Indians to mourn the deaths of the massacre with them. An example of the poem’s purpose is from one stanza: “Bring along flowers, but let hues be not too bright; The fragrance be mild, somewhat wet with dew; But do not carry them with a gifting intention; Shed just a few for the prayers in memory.” This entire stanza tells the reader to bring flowers in memory of those who were killed in the massacre. Another example is the first two lines of the second to the last stanza: “So make offerings of a few half blooms here; Recalling memories of them let the dew of tears flow.” The poet is again telling the reader to offer flowers, but to also mourn their deaths. The poet wants the reader to feel the gloomy stillness that overcame India following the deaths from the massacre. The poem also tells the reader that it is a time for one to mourn and pay respects to the innocents who were killed. One example of the gloomy stillness in the poem is when the poet was describing Spring: “Let the breeze blow, but only mild; So it blows away not, the sorrowful sighs; Nightingale may sing, but only a dirgeful tune; Buzzing beetles here be telling a tale so rough.” The words suggest for the things usually associated with being boisterous like wind blowing, birds singing, and buzzing beetles to be mild and sorrowful instead. A strong example of telling the reader to mourn is the following stanza: “Bring along flowers, but let hues be not too bright; The fragrance be mild, somewhat wet with dew; But do not carry them with a gifting intention; Shed just a few for the prayers in memory.” This stanza tells the reader to bring flowers to lay down in remembrance of those who lost their lives during the massacre. Since the poet was alive during the time of the Amritsar Massacre, they may have been personally affected by it which would help form their personal voice that was used to write the poem. If they weren’t affected personally, we can assume that they heard about the massacre from friends and family, and understood the pain and anger that everyone was going through as a result of the killings. The poem uses heavy words that paint a serious and sullen tone. Two lines from the poem that support this tone are: “The buds too in half-bloom, meet with thorns here; Those plants, those flowers, are dry or scorched.” As the poem speaks about the garden Jallianwala Bagh, rather than focusing on the beauty of the plants, the poet instead chooses to write about the things that hurt or are hurt. The flowers not being in full-bloom, the emphasis on the thorns of the plants, and the death of the plants all point towards a serious and sullen tone. Another example later in the poem is the stanza: “So make offerings of a few half blooms here; Recalling memories of them let the dew of tears flow; The elderly have died a suffering death of bullets; Let drop a few dry flowers over there.” This stanza talks about offering flowers to the deceased and speaks of how the elderly died from being shot in the massacre. The flowers were described as being in half-bloom and dry which tells the reader that the reason for the flowers isn’t a happy one. It also talks of the tears that were shed for those killed in the massacre which helps to cement the sullen tone of the poem. One more example of the tone is the last two lines which were repeated from an earlier stanza in the poem: “Do all of this, but do come quietly; This is a mourning-place, so cause no commotion.” This tells the reader to lay down the flowers in memory of and to pay respects towards the deceased but to do so without causing a ruckus. This gives off both the sullen and serious tone. I decided to analyze this poem’s depiction of the event because I liked how descriptive it was of the Spring animals and plants while holding a sullen and meaningful tone within. I think this is a good depiction of the event as it shows the massacre in the tone intended by the poet and illustrates to both Indians and foreigners alike how it affected the people of India and India as a nation.
This poem “Hae Bideshia” by Radhe Kishun of Jharia is about the Jallianwala Bagh Massacre, but instead of focusing on the garden itself and the mourning of those who were killed, it instead criticizes the British for their actions regarding the massacre. The poet did not ground the writing into any specific time other than the poem itself being written after the massacre happened. The poet most likely wrote it due to their strong feelings about the massacre and that the British should be held accountable for the deaths that resulted because of it. This is seen throughout the writing as the poet makes many accusations against the British with the start of every two lines beginning with: “Alas O Foreigner,” addressing them, and telling them of their wrongdoings in India. One example of the poet wanting the British to understand the bad deeds they’ve done comes from the following two lines: “Alas O Foreigner, our heart bursts. You got the heads of little children cut.” This line is repeated later in the story and references the sorrow India felt after the deaths of their loved ones during the massacre, including those of children. It also addresses the British accusing them of killing kids. Another example is the entire last stanza: “Alas O Foreigner you did not feel pity O Rustic. You made a bustle in the Baisakhi Fair; Alas O Foreigner, you uprooted the garden. You thought the brave Punjabis to be birds. Alas O Foreigner, Dyer became a bird killer. You took the lives of innocent persons. Alas O Foreigner you played a good game (Shikar) in India.” The first two lines talk about how the British don’t care about what they did and the poet calls them “Rustic” which could mean them being unsophisticated. The next five lines are a metaphor for the massacre relating Dyer’s killings of the people to be the killings of birds during Shikar which means hunting as a sport. This metaphor suggests that the poet felt that the British gained delight from the massacre, and helps solidify the poet’s accusation about the British’s wrongdoings. There is no info on the poet except for the fact that they were alive during the massacre and felt strongly enough about it to write a poem regarding the event even with the restrictions on writings in India during the time it was written. The tone of the poem is very serious and regardful of the British, and can be seen in the first two lines: “Alas O Foreigner, we became alert. When we remember the Punjab incident.” The poet addresses the British and tells them that “we” or India became wary of the British’s actions as a result of the Jallianwala Bagh Massacre. Another example comes from the next four lines: “Alas O Foreigner, our heart bursts. You got the heads of little children cut. Alas O Foreigner, the whole world is the witness. How alert we became.” The poet makes sure the reader understands who was killed and how it affected India explaining that it is not a matter to take lightly. The last two lines from the example again explain that Britain is under the scrutiny of India, but also from the rest of the world. I decided to analyze this poem because there was a lot of repetition inside the poem with the first few words of: “Alas O Foreigner”, and I liked the writing structure. I believe this poem voices a strong opinion from an Indian and is very indicative of what many others felt at that time.
“Nabin Rashtrayagan Dyer Ki Holi” by Babu Janki Prasad Gattani of Bilaspur
“Nabin Rashtrayagan Dyer Ki Holi” written by Babu Janki Prasad Gattani of Bilaspur regards the Jallianwala Bagh Massacre, speaking sarcastically about General Dyer, the person who gave the orders to shoot in Jallianwala Bagh. The poem is told at two different times; originally starting after the massacre, then shifting to explain the events during it before once again shifting to reflect upon what happened. The poem is one of many other creative writings which were being spread around by inspired Indians and activists during a time of large media censorship. The poet appears to not be directing their writings towards any specific person or group of people, as it doesn’t address anyone in particular throughout the poem. The poet wants the reader to understand that Dyer and his actions at Jallianwala Bagh were abhorrent by comparing the massacre to the Hindu festival Holi: “What a nice Holi Dyer celebrated? Fire bullets heavily in Jallianwala Bagh, Amritsar. Neither young nor old were spared, caused a stream of blood to flow. What a nice Holi…” In the metaphorical comparison of the colorful and enjoyable festival to Dyer’s killings, it drives home the poet’s depiction of Dyer being a twisted individual. In the metaphor, the colors of the festival equate to the colors of the blood spilled, and Dyer is the one celebrating the “festival.” Another example from the poem comes from three later lines: “He surrounded (people) and exhibited butchery as he liked. It out did Nadirshahi. What a nice Holi…” By using the word “butchery” to explain Dyer’s killings, it shows that Dyer showed no remorse and helps to cement the poet’s depiction of Dyer and his actions. The poet’s comparison of the massacre to Nader Shah’s attack on Delhi also helps with having Dyer and his actions be shown as abhorrent. Although there is no information on the poet themselves, the poem was released in a pamphlet alongside many other pamphlets with the writings form Indians’ during a time where there was a lot of censorship on free speech. The tone of this poem is sarcastic and grave and is the same throughout. One example comes again from the beginning four lines: “What a nice Holi Dyer celebrated? Fire bullets heavily in Jallianwala Bagh, Amritsar. Neither young nor old were spared, caused a stream of blood to flow. What a nice Holi…” The poet sarcastically asks how nice the “Holi” Dyer celebrated was, but intermittent is the descriptions of the massacre in a very grave and dark tone. Another example comes from three lines later in the poem: “Giving a good example of British Justice, he wielded the sword of power; Made the poor and humble Indians utter miserable. People are Jubilant! What a nice Holi…” The poet explains how the massacre was a form of “British Justice” which caused a lot of pain to the Indians in a very grave tone before again reflecting on the sarcastic metaphor of the massacre being Dyer’s “Holi.” I picked this poem because I was originally drawn in by the almost lighthearted tone when they sarcastically spoke about Dyer’s “Holi” and then shifted in tone to explaining what actually happened at the massacre. I think this poem was a good depiction of the event through the eyes of an Indian as it mocks the British’s acceptance of Dyer’s actions by contrasting it with grisly descriptions of the massacre itself.
Because this poem will be out after this project is due, I can’t do an analysis on it, but it is still an interesting piece of perspective for those who are interested to check out once it’s released.
Rathi, Nandini. “On Jallianwala Bagh Anniversary, This Poem by Subhadra Kumari Chauhan Is a Must Read.” The Indian Express, 13 Apr. 2017, indianexpress.com/article/india/on-jallianwala-bagh-anniversary-this-poem-by-subhadra- kumari-chauhan-is-a-must-read-4611814/. “Report; Disorders Inquiry Committee 1919-1920: India. Committee on Disturbances in Bombay, Delhi, and the Punjab” Internet Archive, Calcutta, Superintendent Government Printing, India, 1 Jan. 1970, archive.org/details/ape9901.0001.001.umich.edu.
Social Studies
Informative Essay
While the East India Company started in 1600, India wasn’t officially placed under the rule of the British Empire until 1858 until they achieved independence in 1947. During Britain’s rule, Queen Victoria was made Empress of India and there was a major British military presence in the country. The nationals of India did not have a say in how they were governed, even locally, and their input on policies and decision making were minimal (Trueman). In 1915, Britain created the Defense of India Act in which gave special powers to the government in British India for suppressing revolutionary and German threats from World War I. A special legal court of justice was created for dealing with the cases and they didn’t require an appeal or prior commitment (“Defence of India Act.”). The act also gave a wide scope of powers for preventive detention including internment without trial, along with restrictions put on writing, speech, and movement (Rahman). Being a wartime act, it was supposed to expire six months after the hostilities ended, but was extended by the Rowlatt Acts in February 1919 (“Defence of India Act.”). These new acts allowed specific political cases to be tried without a jury and allowed for the internment of suspects without a trial. The purpose of the Rowlatt Acts was to replace the Defense of India Act with a permanent law (“Rowlatt Acts.”). The Rowlatt Acts were very disliked by the Indian public and were voted against by all of the nonofficial Indian members of the council (“Rowlatt Acts.”).
On April 13, 1919, British troops opened fire on a big group of unarmed Indians in a massacre that killed a few hundred people and injured hundreds more. This was a turning point in modern history in India, scarred Indo-British relations, and acted as the prelude to Gandhi's full commitment towards Indian nationalism and independence from Britain. When news came out in Amritsar about prominent Indian leaders being arrested and banished from the city, violent protests were sparked on April 10 where soldiers shot civilians, buildings were looted and burned, and angry mobs killed multiple foreign nationals. Brigadier General Reginald Edward Harry Dyer commanded several dozen troops and was tasked with restoring order. One measure taken was to ban public gatherings (“Jallianwala Bagh Massacre.”). On April 13, more than 10,000 men, women, and children had gathered in Jallainwala Bagh, an area which was surrounded by walls and only had one exit. Some were protesting the ban while others were from out of town and were there to celebrate the Sikh Baisakhi festival, many unaware of the ban on public gatherings (“The Amritsar Massacre.”). It is unsure how many people were there to protest and how many were there to celebrate the Spring festival. Brigadier General Dyer had closed the exit and without any warning, opened fire on the unarmed Indians, reportingly shooting until they were out of ammunition. While the number of people who were killed varies from source, an official report estimated that 379 people died with around 1,200 people having been injured. After they stopped firing, Brigadier General Dyer and his troops vacated the area leaving the dead and injured behind (“Jallianwala Bagh Massacre.” & “The Amritsar Massacre.”). Following the shooting, martial law was declared in Punjab under the control of General Dyer and it included public flogging and other kinds of humiliation. Britain’s reaction towards Dyer’s actions was mixed with many condemning Dyer’s actions including Sir Winston Churchill, however, the House of Lords praised Dyer and gave him a sword with the engraved motto, “Saviour of Punjab”. Those who believed Dyer did well, raised funds for him. In Amritsar now, the Jallainwala Bagh area is a national monument. The Indian government ordered an investigation to be done about the incident (the Hunter Commission) and in 1920, General Dyer was censured and ordered to resign from the military (“Jallianwala Bagh Massacre.”). As the news of the shooting and the subsequent actions from the British spread, so did Indian outrage. Rabindranath Tagore, a Bengali poet, and Nobel laureate ceded the knighthood that he had received in 1915. Although Gandhi was initially hesitant, he started to organize his first big non-violent protest or satyagraha campaign known as the noncooperation movement. This movement pushed him into prominence in the Indian nationalist struggle (“Jallianwala Bagh Massacre.” & “The Amritsar Massacre.”).
The Noncooperation Movement from 1920-1922 was an unsuccessful attempt at getting India self-government or Swaraj and was Gandhi's first acts in satyagraha or civil-disobedience. The movement was done in response to the Massacre of Jallianwala Bagh and later aggravated by many Indian’s believing that Dyer, the Brigadier General who ordered the soldiers in the massacre, was not properly reprimanded for his actions. The movement originally was supposed to be nonviolent and consisted of acts like boycotting government education institutions, government service, the courts, elections, foreign foods, and later refusing to pay taxes. In 192, the British government was visibly shaken as it wasn’t ever faced by a united Indian front before, but due to a revolt caused by Muslim Mophlats in southern India, and other violent outbreaks from the August of 1921, gave way to a moderate opinion. On February 1922, in the village of Chauri Chaura, an angry mob murdered a group of police officers which led to Gandhi himself calling off the movement, and a month later, he was arrested without hostility. The movement marked India’s shift of nationalism from middle-class to massive support (“Noncooperation Movement.”).
Argumentative Essay
Ever since the 1600s, Indian and British relations were contentious. For 150 years, Britain ruled over India before they achieved independence in 1947, but what exactly was the most pivotal event in their relations that led to India’s independence? The Jallianwala Bagh Massacre and events that prompted it was pivotal in the British and Indian relations because it was the first act of violence by the British following the passage of the Rowlatt Acts; Indians were both angry at the event and motivated to express Indian nationalism; and it caused Britain to institute laws in order to assert their authority over India.
The massacre was the first act of violence by the British against India after the passage of the Rowlatt Acts and a climax of the British and Indian contentions. Preceding the massacre was the passage of the Rowlatt Acts, implemented in 1919 which extended the wartime Defense of India Act from 1914. The Defense of India Acts gave the government of British India special powers to deal with both revolutionary and German threats from World War 1 (“Defence of India Act.”). The act also gave the British powers for preventative detention which included internment without trial and restrictions being placed on writing, speech, and movement (“The Amritsar Massacre.”). The purpose of the Rowlatt Acts was to replace the Defense of India Act with a permanent law (“Rowlatt Acts.”). The Rowlatt Acts were disliked by the Indian public and were voted against by all of the nonofficial Indian members in the council. The acts caused widespread anger and discontent in Indians especially to those in the Punjab region (Pletcher) This led to the Jallianwala Bagh Massacre on April 13 of 1919 where 379 unarmed Indians were killed by British troops under the command of Brigadier-General Dyer (Pletcher & “The Amritsar Massacre.”). Due to the British wanting to suppress Indian revolutionary ideas and continue their reign over India, they extended the Defense of India Act, but by trying to cut down on free speech, it ironically caused an influx of protests from the Indian public. In early April, Gandhi called for a one-day general strike throughout the country, and violent protests occurred on April 10 after hearing about the arrest of prominent Indian leaders (Pletcher). Brigadier-General Dyer was given the task to reclaim control in the area which then came to a head with the Jallianwala Bagh Massacre, a turning point in the relationship of Britain and India (Pletcher). According to Dyer’s official response in the Hunter Commission Report, he stated the following: “I think it quite possible that I could have dispersed the crowd without firing but they would have come back again and laughed, and I would have made, what I consider, a fool of myself" (“General Dyer Was Hardly Remorseful.”). Dyer believed that by shooting the crowd, only then would the show of power be strong enough to stop the Indians from continuing to protest. The massacre itself was a turning point in the relationship between Britain and India because it was the British’s first act of violence and it strengthened the Indians aversion to them which subsequently increased the Indians’ activism for self-government.
In response to the massacre, Indians were motivated to express nationalism and support for a self-governed India. The Indian government ordered an investigation to be done on Dyer, and he was discharged from the army, but many Indians felt that Dyer was let go too easily, and as a result, they grew aggravated. Gandhi was able to incite his fellow Indians to turn their rage into non-violent action against the British, with a movement that visibly shook the British government. While unsuccessful in getting a self-governed India, it still acted as a catalyst towards the breakup of British ruling and towards the independence of India. He organized his first large non-violent protest known as the Noncooperation Movement in response to the massacre and Dyer’s lack of consequence. The movement included boycotting government education institutions, government service, the courts, elections, foreign foods, and later even refusing to pay taxes, however, not all Indians shared the same sentimentality of a non-violent protest, and after an angry mob killed a group of police officers in Chauri Chaura, Gandhi called off the movement. The movement marked India’s shift of nationalism from the middle-class towards having massive support (“Noncooperation Movement.”). Although the protests may not have all been without violence, the cause for them were the same: justice for the massacre and a self-governed India.
Not only did the massacre influence the Indian public’s opinion on Britain and encourage them to act, but it also caused Britain to institute laws in order to assert their authority over India. After the massacre occurred, martial law was called in the Punjab region under the control of Brigadier-General Dyer and included public flogging and other kinds of humiliation. A famous example of the humiliation that the Indians received was the “crawling order” where Indians had to crawl past the spot where an Indian woman had been attacked (Pletcher). Britain’s rule of India was slipping as a result of the protests caused from the massacre so they tightened their rule through martial law and public humiliations in the hopes that they would discourage the Indians from continuing their protests and allow Britain to remain in control however as with the massacre, it just caused Indians to get further agitated. The Jallianwala Bagh Massacre and the events that caused it were pivotal in the British and Indian relations because it was the first act of violence by the British following the passage of the Rowlatt Acts; Indians were both angry at the event and motivated to express Indian nationalism; and it caused Britain to institute laws in order to assert their authority over India.
Art
About The Piece
I researched symbolism in Indian art and decided to do a piece in gouache depicting a tiger mourning those who were killed in the massacre. The end result was alright, but I felt like I didn't stylize the tiger as much as I had wanted to.
The Process
First I sketched out an idea for the tiger and used a mix of reference photos for the pose, but I later changed the composition. Then I decided to do some drawings of tigers from photos in order to study the animal and figure out how it works. The tiger's face gave me some trouble because I hardly draw cats or big cats, but it turned out to be very informational. Afterwards I decided to flesh out the sketch and then redraw it on the board I would be painting on.
Final Piece
The background is kind of bad, but overall I think it's okay
I feel like I could make the water darker in the areas where it meets the lily pads and lotuses and I could make the colors of the plants brighter in the foreground. Other than those complaints, I'm fine with the outcome.
Annotated Bibliography
Britannica, The Editors of Encyclopaedia. “Defence of India Act.” Encyclopædia Britannica, Encyclopædia Britannica, Inc., 21 Jan. 2014, www.britannica.com/topic/Defence-of-India-Act. The information from this article gives a small overview of what the Defense of India Acts are, and with this information, I was able to understand what the Rowlatt Acts were extending and why the Indians took issue with them it. Britannica, The Editors of Encyclopaedia. “Noncooperation Movement.” Encyclopædia Britannica, Encyclopædia Britannica, Inc., 15 Dec. 2015, www.britannica.com/event/noncooperation-movement. This article is about the Noncooperation Movement that was formed by Gandhi in an attempt to get India independence from Britain. While I didn’t use this information explicitly, it did give me background information on a big example of the Indians’ response towards the Amritsar Massacre. Britannica, The Editors of Encyclopaedia. “Rowlatt Acts.” Encyclopædia Britannica, Encyclopædia Britannica, Inc., 26 Jan. 2014, www.britannica.com/event/Rowlatt-Acts. This article gave me the details of the Rowlatt Acts and how people reacted to their implementation. Pletcher, Kenneth. “Jallianwala Bagh Massacre.” Encyclopædia Britannica, Encyclopædia Britannica, Inc., 2 Apr. 2019, www.britannica.com/event/Jallianwala-Bagh-Massacre#ref61694. This article is on the Jallianwala Bagh Massacre which talks about what happened during the event and explains some about what caused it and how people reacted to it. While this source gave me most of my information about the Jallianwala Bagh Massacre, the small informational snippets from Britannica regarding the Defense of India Act, the Rowlatt Acts, and the Noncooperation Movement helped to explain things in a little more detail. Purdue Writing Lab. “Argumentative Essays // Purdue Writing Lab.” Purdue Writing Lab, owl.purdue.edu/owl/general_writing/academic_writing/essay_writing/argumentative_essa ys.html. This resource gave me some information on how to write an argumentative essay. It gave me the details on how I can organize the essay and what I can do to make it flow better. Rahman. “Preventive Detention an Anachronism.” The Hindu : Preventive Detention an Anachronism, 7 Sept. 2004, www.thehindu.com/op/2004/09/07/stories/2004090700101500.htm. This site gave me more information on the preventative detention of Indians caused by Rowlatt Acts and gave me some more modern history on preventative detention in India, but ultimately, this was a minor source. “The Amritsar Massacre.” History.com, A&E Television Networks, 3 Mar. 2010, www.history.com/this-day-in-history/the-amritsar-massacre. This article gave a nice overview of what the Amritsar Massacre was and why it occurred. I used this to check the facts from Britannica and it also gave some extra details here and there. Trueman. “India 1900 to 1947.” History Learning Site, History Learning Site, 17 Mar. 2015, www.historylearningsite.co.uk/modern-world-history-1918-to-1980/india-1900-to-1947/ The information on this site summarizes Indian history from 1900-1947 when India achieved freedom from the British. I used this source in order to get background information on what was happening in India and it also taught me how India was able to get freedom.