Business as Usual? Bazars and Communalism in Colonial Delhi, 1913–32

Abstract

This paper uncovers a hitherto unnoticed pattern of communal segregation among establishments located in some of Delhi’s most important bazars. It demonstrates that this pattern, emerging between 1913 and 1932, was driven by structural features of the ways in which Delhi’s trade and retail interacted with communal violence in the 1920s. Those features include the dislocating effects of communal violence on bazars. More strident political activity by merchants, however, was important fuel to this fire. Merchants did not, also, restrict themselves to repeating communal tropes developed elsewhere. Their self-organisation gave shape to a conception of ‘Hindu’ and ‘Muslim’ trades. Rather than see a communal ‘pre-Partition’ in the 1930s, this evidence suggests that communal segregation was already well on the rise in the 1920s. Business as usual, then, was a source of deepening communal antagonisms rather than, as is sometimes assumed, a source of everyday bonhomie.

Keywords:

• Commerce
• markets
• religion
• riots
• segregation
• trade

Acknowledgements

Kriti Budhiraja initiated the discovery which led to this paper. Harshita Calla, Aastha Kapur, Aarya Srivastava and Vedant Singh were student research assistants who made handling this information possible. Vrinda Marwah and Sharmila Rudrappa invited me to present at the University of Texas at Austin, where I received invaluable feedback on an early version. Kamran Asdar Ali, Megha Anwer, Parth Shil, Layli Uddin and Matt Birkinshaw offered useful comments along the way. Deepasri Baul, Steve Legg and Saeed Ahmed’s close readings improved this paper immeasurably. A special thanks to Niharika Yadav for last minute help. I’m grateful also to the two reviewers whose comments led to major clarifications and additions.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author.

Notes

1. ‘Delhi City-Fathers’ Plea for Communal Amity’, Hindustan Times, June 8, 1932, 1.

2. Ibid.

3. The formulation derives from historical geographer Stephen Legg’s provocative question about mohallas (neighbourhoods): Stephen Legg, ‘A Pre-Partitioned City? Anti-Colonial and Communal Mohallas in Inter-War Delhi’, South Asia: Journal of South Asian Studies 42, no. 1 (2019): 170–87.

4. For a sampling of such accounts, see H.K. Kaul, ed., Historic Delhi: An Anthology (Delhi: Oxford University Press, 2004 [1985]): 149–53.

5. Jim Masselos, The City in Action: Bombay Struggles for Power (New Delhi: Oxford University Press, 2007): 18–19.

6. Legg, ‘Pre-Partitioned City?’; Rotem Geva, Delhi Reborn: Partition and Nation Building in India's Capital (Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 2022); Nazima Parveen, Contested Homelands: Politics of Space and Identity (New Delhi: Bloomsbury India, 2021).

7. Rajat Kanta Ray, ‘The Bazaar: Changing Structural Characteristics of the Indigenous Section of the Indian Economy before and after the Great Depression’, Indian Economic Social History Review 25, no. 3 (1988): 263–318.

8. Merchants’ enmeshment in Hindu and Muslim revivalist projects is widely documented. For Hindu and Muslim revivalism among mercantile groups in Delhi, see the work of Kenneth Jones and Margrit Pernau, respectively: Kenneth W. Jones, ‘Organized Hinduism in Delhi and New Delhi’, in Delhi through the Ages: Selected Essays in Urban History, Culture and Society, ed. R.E. Frykenberg (Delhi: Oxford University Press, 1993); Margrit Pernau, Ashraf into Middle Classes: Muslims in Nineteenth-Century Delhi (New Delhi: Oxford University Press, 2013).

9. Ritu Birla’s work on the ways in which Marwari groups sponsored colonial legal innovations that reinvented tradition is a sparkling instance of this: Ritu Birla, Stages of Capital: Law, Culture, and Market Governance in Late Colonial India (Durham, NC: Duke University Press, 2009).

10. Narayani Gupta, Delhi between Two Empires, 1803–1931: Society, Government and Urban Growth (Delhi: Oxford University Press, 1981).

11. Parveen, Contested Homelands, 65.

12. Ibid., 66.

13. Both Parveen and Legg clarify that they offer a genealogy, and not a social history, of Delhi: Parveen, Contested Homelands, 12; Legg, ‘Pre-Partitioned City?’, 171. Geva follows Legg in identifying the late 1930s as the critical moment when the precursors of the segregated landscapes of Partition were set in motion by the RSS, Arya Samaj and Muslim League: Geva, Delhi Reborn, chap. 1.

14. Key travelogues have been those of Bholanath Chunder, Jean-Baptiste Tavernier, Francois Bernier, Ghulam Muhammad Khan and a variety of British officials: for example, see Shama Mitra Chenoy, Shahjahanabad: A City of Delhi, 1638–1857 (New Delhi: Munshiram Manoharlal, 1998): 53–58, 118–38; Gupta, Delhi between Two Empires, 39–69. Good examples of historical overviews include Saiyid Ahmed Khan’s mid nineteenth century and Mirza Sangin Beg’s early nineteenth century accounts, as well as Bashiruddin Ahmad’s Waqiat Dar-ul Hukumat e Dehli. See Pernau’s careful historiographical discussion of some of these sources and European travelogues. Crucially, Pernau doesn’t attempt to reconstruct commerce or religion in the bazars that are mentioned: Pernau, Ashrafs into Middle Classes, 153–77. Oral history is utilised in Gupta, Delhi between Two Empires, e.g. 55; Geva, Delhi Reborn.

15. For example, Ahmad’s Waqiat, published in 1919, has been used to reconstruct a picture of the eighteenth century bazars in Chenoy, Shahjahanabad, 123. So, too, has Syed Ahmad Khan’s mid nineteenth century work for seventeenth century Delhi in Hameeda Khatoon Naqvi, ‘Shahjahanabad, The Mughal Delhi, 1638–1803’, in Delhi through the Ages: Essays in Urban History, Culture, and Society, ed. R.E. Frykenberg (Delhi: Oxford University Press, 1993): 57–65; 59.

16. The practice is pervasive. See a richly cross-referenced use along these lines in Gupta, Delhi between Two Empires, 39–69. Maps are discussed as a source in Pernau, Ashrafs into Middle Classes, 153–77.

17. Parveen and Legg’s early work is based on exactly these kinds of (largely police) sources: Nazima Parveen, ‘The Making of Muslim Ilaqe’, Seminar 663 (2014): 44–50; Stephen Legg, Spaces of Colonialism: Delhi’s Urban Governmentalities (Malden, MA: Blackwell, 2007).

18. Wanted was published under the name ‘Medico Press’ and first appears c. December 1923. It had a circulation of 250 (DSA, CC Office, Home, F no. 15, 1923: Quarterly List of Newspapers published in Delhi Province). Bhargo Patrika is first listed as a new monthly publication in June 1931 with a circulation of 450 (Delhi State Archives, CC Office, Home, F no. 12, 1931: Quarterly list of Newspapers published in Delhi Province).

19. This is an even stronger qualification for the slimmer DD32. The 1913 directory, with almost 6000 entries, would have captured a significant section of Delhi’s commercial and retail activity. Back of the envelope calculations and Census data on the commercial population reinforce this conjecture.

20. Cloth Market, a private venture, was established in 1921. Burn Bastion Road and Naya Bazar were contiguous developments, both created as a result of urban improvements in the western part of the city carried out by the Delhi Municipal Committee from 1913 onwards, with plots being auctioned in 1916: Anish Vanaik, Possessing the City: Property and Politics in Delhi, 1911–1947 (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2020): 114.

21. The logic for the ‘new’ markets has been mentioned already: see footnote 20 above.

22. For Chandni Chowk divided, see Hindustan Times, ‘Serious Communal Riot in Delhi’, August 29, 1926, 1. Sadar Bazar was the location of most of the violent conflicts over cow slaughter during Bakrid, with the fighting specifically being centred on the alternation of Muslim and Hindu areas within Sadar Bazar: see, for example, Baul, ‘Redefining Cityscapes’; Hindustan Times, ‘Pahari under Military Occupation’, July 4, 1925, 1; Hindustan Times, ‘Today’s Situation’, June 13, 1927, 7. Paharganj registering as switching from ‘even’ to ‘Hindu’ is surprising. However, this might simply be an outcome of the very small sample size from DD32 for a very large area.

23. For speculation about some kind of polarisation, see the effort to assign three Hindus and three Muslims as chaudhuries for Chandni Chowk, in ‘Report by Zahiruddin Ahmad, Inspector of Shops and Commercial Establishments, 20/5/1944’, DSA, DC Office, F no. 27, 1918: ‘Appointment of Chaudhuries for Bazar Chandni Chowk’. One of the surprises is that a Muslim shopkeeper was selected by shopkeepers in the area to be the chaudhury for the Dariba Kalan side.

24. The large absolute number of entries in these cases suggests the robustness of the finding, even granting that the picture is not a comprehensive one.

25. Two of these—Khari Baoli and Katra Nil—are easily and consistently identified as Hindu markets. For example, in 1918, a list of 84 grain shops in Khari Baoli and Burn Bastion Road features only one firm that is not easily identifiable as Hindu: DSA, DC Records, F no. 2 1918: Appointment of Food Stuffs Commissioner and Enquiry Regarding Grain Stocks Held in Delhi and Suburbs.

26. For a description of Kashmere Gate as it functioned during the ‘season’ (winter each year) when the capital was situated in Delhi: ‘It is here that Delhi’s best shops are crowded together and the elite of the city come for having their shopping done. The Kashmir Gate firms are a wide-awake lot and the Americans even cannot teach them anything new in the realm of smart salesmanship and quick turnovers’: Hindustan Times, ‘The Business World of Delhi: Big Business Boom Anticipated’, November 7, 1928, 6.

27. There were fewer iron foundries and more brass and copper works in 1932.

28. There is a minor shift in emphasis with medical practitioners being more prominent in 1932. The 1921 Census indicates that trade in both shoes and bangles were dominated by Muslims in Delhi: ‘Table XX—Distribution by Religion of Workers and Dependents in Different Occupations’, in Census of India 1921, Vol. XV, Punjab and Delhi, Part II (Tables) (Lahore: Civil and Military Gazette Press, 1922): 375.

29. Kirana shops were local general stores. Kirana dealers were likely to have been wholesale suppliers to such shops.

30. At least in Delhi, the grain trade as well as financial and banking operations were almost entirely owned by Hindus, according to the Census: see the relevant tables in ‘Table XV—Occupation or Means of Livelihood Part D Distribution by Religion: Details for Cities’, in Census of India 1911, Vol. XIV, Punjab, Part II (Tables) (Lahore: Civil and Military Gazette Press, 1912): 397, and ‘Table XX—Distribution by Religion of Workers and Dependants in Different Occupations’, in Census of India 1921, Vol. XV, Punjab and Delhi, Part II (Tables) (Lahore: Civil and Military Gazette Press, 1922): 373.

31. Kandle Kashan melted gold and silver and stretched it into threads which were then wound around silk yarn to create silver and gold threads for embroidery: for a description, see Punjab District Gazetters Vol. V A Delhi District with Maps, 1912 (Lahore: Civil and Military Gazette Press, 1913): 152–53. The demise of the industry was already being predicted in the Census of 1911: see Census of India, Vol. XIV: Punjab, Part I (Report) (Lahore: Civil and Military Gazette Press, 1912): 509.

32. The pattern of shifting trades holds in Nai Sarak and Sirkiwalan too.

33. Ajmere Gate, while becoming more Hindu, had firms engaged in iron, coal and heavy machinery.

34. The Census of 1911 and 1921 confirm the pattern. In 1921, for instance, there were 9,820 Hindus (workers and dependents) in the textile trade and only 2,001 Muslims.

35. ‘Memorial from 123 Members of the Syndicate Known as the Delhi Cloth Market Company to the Chief Commissioner Delhi’, n.d. c.1920–21, DSA, DC Office, F no. 61, 1920.

36. Geva, Delhi Reborn, chap. 1.

37. Hindustan Times, ‘Serious Communal Riot in Delhi’, August 29, 1926, 1; see also DSA CC Confidential, Home, F no. 1 of 1926, ‘Fortnightly Report from CC to GoI 4 September 1926’.

38. Hindustan Times, ‘Sensation in Chowri Bazar’, April 24, 1932.

39. Hindustan Times, ‘Hindus Assaulted: Shops Looted: Mob Fury Let Loose’, November 16, 1927, 1. The description of Chaori as a Hindu market is striking.

40. ‘Report of the SSP, 18/4/1927’ DSA, CC Confidential, Home, F no. 18, 1927: Report on the Disturbances at Delhi on the Occasion of the Execution of Abdul Rashid.

41. Deepasri Baul, ‘Redefining Cityscapes: Spatial Reorganisation and Urban Experience in Colonial Delhi’ (unpublished PhD thesis, Jawaharlal Nehru University, 2018).

42. Hindustan Times, ‘Ram Naumi Procession’, April 12, 1927, 7; Hindustan Times, ‘Janamashtami Celebrations in Delhi: Processions and Meeting’, August 31, 1929; Hindustan Times, ‘Ramlila Celebrations: Processions and Stageshows’, October 6, 1929.

43. Deepasri Baul, ‘The Improbability of a Temple: Hindu Mobilization and Urban Space in the Delhi Shiv Mandir Agitation of 1938’, Studies in History 36, no. 2 (2020): 230–50.

44. Michael Mann, ‘Turbulent Delhi: Religious Strife, Social Tension and Political Conflicts, 1803–1857’, South Asia: Journal of South Asian Studies 28, no. 1 (2005): 5–34; Richard Heitler, ‘The Varanasi House Tax Hartal of 1810–11’, The Indian Economic & Social History Review 9, no. 3 (1972): 239–57.

45. Hindu nationalist hartals: Hindustan Times, ‘Complete Hartal’, July 3, 1925, 1; Hindustan Times, ‘Sensation in the City: Nanak Chand’s Funeral’, August 24, 1927, 2; Congress hartals: Hindustan Times, ‘Thirteen Ladies and Fifty Eight Men Arrested in Delhi: Spontaneous Hartal All Over City’, August 16, 1930, 1; Hindustan Times, ‘Complete Hartal in City: Huge Procession’, October 15, 1930, 6; D.W. Ferrell, ‘Localization of National Issues: Non-Cooperation and the Delhi Municipal Elections of 1922’, South Asia: Journal of South Asian Studies 5, no. 1 (1975): 20–31.

46. Hindustan Times, ‘Hartal in Bazaza’, July 2, 1925, 7.

47. This analysis is based on records of 23 distinct hartal calls between 1917 and 1932 in the Chief Commissioner’s Fortnightly Reports: see the following file numbers all from DSA CC Confidential, Home (1–1 of 1932, 1 of 1931, 1 of 1930, 1 of 1929, 1 of 1928, 2 of 1927, 1 of 1926, 2 of 1925, 1 of 1924, 1 of 1923, 3 of 1921, 3 of 1920, 4 of 1919, 4 of 1918, 4 of 1917). These are supplemented with any additional calls for hartal recorded in various issues of Hindustan Times.

48. Fortnightly Report of April 15, 1924. DSA, CC Confidential, Home, F no. 1, 1924. Chamar is a caste name for lower-caste workers, many of who were associated with leather work. On the role of the Arya Samaj in this community and the forms of assertion by chamars and other caste groups considered untouchable, see, for North India, Ramnarayan Rawat, Reconsidering Untouchability: Chamars and Dalit History in North India (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 2011); and, for Delhi, Vijay Prashad, Untouchable Freedom: A Social History of a Dalit Community (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2000).

49. Fortnightly Report of June 5 and Fortnightly Report of June 16. DSA, CC Confidential, Home, F no. 1 1924.

50. Fortnightly Reports of October 31, 1917, and November 17, 1917, in DSA, CC Confidential, Home F no. 4 of 1917. Already in 1917 (before the watershed Bakrid Riot of 1924), there had been a hartal called by Home Rule Leaguers over the issue of the route for the Ram Leela procession. From 1925 onwards, every year up until 1929 saw a hartal call observed by Hindu shopkeepers over the issue of cow slaughter.

51. The title ‘Lala’ indicates a mercantile vocation. The Gadodia Swadeshi stores were owned by L.N. Gadodia, one of the leading merchants of Delhi: Hindustan Times, ‘Delhi Hindu Sabha Annual Election’, December 1, 1927, 7.

52. Terminal tax was a variation of the more familiar octroi. Like the latter, it was a tax on the trade passing through the city.

53. Hindustan Times, ‘Increasing Municipal Revenue’, August 10, 1929, 14.

54. Ibid.

55. Hindustan Times, ‘Stormy Meeting in Delhi Municipality: 12 Members Walk Out’, October 7, 1929, 9.

56. Of over 230 firms, only seven members of HMA had identifiably Muslim names, with none on the managing committee of the organisation: ibid.

57. Secretary of HMA to Secretary of DMC, October 27, 1929; DSA CC Office, Education F no. 2, 1932: Amendments to the Terminal Tax Byelaws of the Municipal Committee, Delhi. In the 1940s, Gadodia would spearhead one of the major communal flashpoints of the city. The Fatehpuri mosque case is discussed in Geva, Delhi Reborn, chap. 1.

58. Secretary of HMA to Secretary of DMC, December 27, 1929; DSA CC Office, Education F no. 2, 1932: Amendments to the Terminal Tax Byelaws of the Municipal Committee, Delhi.

59. Khan Sahib Mohammed Yusuf Ahmed Paiwale, General Secretary of AWQP, to CC, December 30, 1929; DSA CC Office, Education F no. 2, 1932: Amendments to the Terminal Tax Byelaws of the Municipal Committee, Delhi.

60. The industries they championed (apart from hosiery and caps) were on a distinctly smaller scale than those propped up by the HMA—oilman stores, fireworks, hides and skins. Khan Sahib Mohammed Yusuf Ahmed Paiwale, General Secretary of AWQP, to CC, December 30, 1929; DSA CC Office, Education F no. 2, 1932: Amendments to the Terminal Tax Byelaws of the Municipal Committee, Delhi.

61. Khan Sahib Mohammed Yusuf Ahmed Paiwale, General Secretary of AWQP, to CC, December 30, 1929; DSA CC Office, Education F no. 2, 1932: Amendments to the Terminal Tax Byelaws of the Municipal Committee, Delhi.

62. Hindustan Times, ‘Revision of Terminal Tax Schedule: Hindu City Father’s decision’, July 7, 1932, 7, emphasis added.

63. Hindustan Times, ‘Sub Committee to Consider Terminal Tax Schedule: City Fathers Agree’, July 8, 1932, 7.