Home History 1. Rogue-Colonial Individualism: General Dyer, Colonial Masculinity, Intentionality, and the Amritsar Massacre
Chapter
Licensed
Unlicensed Requires Authentication

1. Rogue-Colonial Individualism: General Dyer, Colonial Masculinity, Intentionality, and the Amritsar Massacre

View more publications by Duke University Press
To Publisher Page
Organizing Empire
This chapter is in the book Organizing Empire
rogue-colonial individualism: generaldyer, colonial masculinity, intentionality,and the amritsar massacre∞On April 13, 1919, in the Indian city of Amritsar, General Reginald Ed-ward Harry Dyer ordered his Gurkha and Baluchi soldiers to fire upon anunarmed crowd, estimated at between ten and twenty thousand, assem-bled in an enclosed compound, the Jallianwala Bagh, to protest theRowlatt Act, which allowed for detention without trial. The crowd hadgathered in defiance of his proclamation earlier that morning:No person residing in the city is permitted or allowed to leave the cityin his own private or hired conveyance or on foot without a pass. Noperson residing in Amritsar city is permitted to leave his house after8. Any persons found in the streets after 8 are liable to be shot. Noprocession of any kind is permitted to parade the streets in the city, orany part of the city, or outside of it, at any time. Any such processionsor any gathering of four men would be looked upon and treated asan unlawful assembly and dispersed by force of arms if necessary.(United Kingdom, Parliament, Report of the Committee 28)Dyer’s troops opened fire, without warning, on the peaceful gathering inthe Jallianwala Bagh, discharging some 1,650 rounds, killing 379 peopleand wounding 1,137 (29). After his troops had fired for ten minutes, Dyerordered them to retreat without making any medical provisions for theinjured. Because of the 8 p.m. curfew in the region, it was extremely dif-ficult for the friends and families of the victims to retrieve their corpsesand to tend to the wounded.∞ As a well-documented use of lethal forceagainst a colonized population, the Jallianwala Bagh massacre madeclear that British colonialism, in spite of its claims to be a project inliberal humanism, articulated in the political idiom of the ‘‘improve-
© 2020 Duke University Press, Durham, USA

rogue-colonial individualism: generaldyer, colonial masculinity, intentionality,and the amritsar massacre∞On April 13, 1919, in the Indian city of Amritsar, General Reginald Ed-ward Harry Dyer ordered his Gurkha and Baluchi soldiers to fire upon anunarmed crowd, estimated at between ten and twenty thousand, assem-bled in an enclosed compound, the Jallianwala Bagh, to protest theRowlatt Act, which allowed for detention without trial. The crowd hadgathered in defiance of his proclamation earlier that morning:No person residing in the city is permitted or allowed to leave the cityin his own private or hired conveyance or on foot without a pass. Noperson residing in Amritsar city is permitted to leave his house after8. Any persons found in the streets after 8 are liable to be shot. Noprocession of any kind is permitted to parade the streets in the city, orany part of the city, or outside of it, at any time. Any such processionsor any gathering of four men would be looked upon and treated asan unlawful assembly and dispersed by force of arms if necessary.(United Kingdom, Parliament, Report of the Committee 28)Dyer’s troops opened fire, without warning, on the peaceful gathering inthe Jallianwala Bagh, discharging some 1,650 rounds, killing 379 peopleand wounding 1,137 (29). After his troops had fired for ten minutes, Dyerordered them to retreat without making any medical provisions for theinjured. Because of the 8 p.m. curfew in the region, it was extremely dif-ficult for the friends and families of the victims to retrieve their corpsesand to tend to the wounded.∞ As a well-documented use of lethal forceagainst a colonized population, the Jallianwala Bagh massacre madeclear that British colonialism, in spite of its claims to be a project inliberal humanism, articulated in the political idiom of the ‘‘improve-
© 2020 Duke University Press, Durham, USA

Chapters in this book

  1. Frontmatter i
  2. Contents vii
  3. Acknowledgments, ix
  4. Introduction 1
  5. 1. Rogue-Colonial Individualism: General Dyer, Colonial Masculinity, Intentionality, and the Amritsar Massacre 29
  6. 2. Feminist-Nationalist Individualism: Margaret Cousins, Activism, and Witnessing 74
  7. 3. Heroic-Nationalist Individualism: Kalpana Dutt, Gender, and the Bengali ‘‘Terrorist’’ Movement 128
  8. 4. Heroic-Colonial Individualism: Raj Nostalgia and the Recuperation of Colonial History 169
  9. Notes 223
  10. Bibliography 251
  11. Index 265
Readers are also interested in:
https://doi.org/10.1515/9780822384885-003

Chapters in this book

  1. Frontmatter i
  2. Contents vii
  3. Acknowledgments, ix
  4. Introduction 1
  5. 1. Rogue-Colonial Individualism: General Dyer, Colonial Masculinity, Intentionality, and the Amritsar Massacre 29
  6. 2. Feminist-Nationalist Individualism: Margaret Cousins, Activism, and Witnessing 74
  7. 3. Heroic-Nationalist Individualism: Kalpana Dutt, Gender, and the Bengali ‘‘Terrorist’’ Movement 128
  8. 4. Heroic-Colonial Individualism: Raj Nostalgia and the Recuperation of Colonial History 169
  9. Notes 223
  10. Bibliography 251
  11. Index 265
Sign up now to receive a 20% welcome discount
Institutional Access
How does access work?
Have an idea on how to improve our website?
Please write us.
© 2025 De Gruyter Brill
Downloaded on 21.9.2025 from https://www.degruyterbrill.com/document/doi/10.1515/9780822384885-003/html?licenseType=restricted&srsltid=AfmBOoo92UoUFd1jycLCYIRz6k9O9VuPSwlgvUxyyqglFeIPIqvqqYPa
Scroll to top button