British India | BAGICHA

As we completed the Census 2021 in the UK today, it made me think back to the first Census that was undertaken in British India in 1881. Actually, the first full census was supposed to take place in 1861 but due to the rebellion of 1857-9 and “due to the sensitivity which the British had developed to what, at least in North India, might be constructed as undue interference in the life of the people, the census was postponed until 1871-2” (Cohn, 324). In 1987, Bernard Cohn was perhaps one of the first to put forward the argument that the colonial census played an important role in constructing identities, thinking about their own numerical strength and the possibilities that this presented in a competitive imperial state.

“The actual taking of the census was a two-step affair. Enumerators were appointed by circle supervisors, who were usually government officials. Supervisors were patwaris, zamindars, schoolteachers, or anyone who was literate. They were given a form with columns on which was to be entered information about every member of a household. The information to be collected was name, religion (e.g., Hindu, Muslim), sect, caste, subdivision of caste, sex, age, marital status, language, birthplace, means of subsistence, education, language in which literate, and infirmities. There was a one-month period before the actual date of the census in which the enumerator was to fill in the forms, and then on the day of the census he was to check the information with the head of the household. As an aid to achieving standardization in the recording of information on caste and subcaste, lists were prepared as early as the 1881 census which gave standard names with variations for the castes. The supervisors were supposed to instruct the enumerators in how to classify responses. The lists of castes were alphabetically arranged giving information on where they were to be found and containing very brief notes” (Cohn, 329).

Cohn notes that the most “complex” and problematic question for the census takers was on the issue of caste. He references the work of Srinivas and Ghurye who raised important questions about the relationship between the census and caste, putting forward the question, why did the British officials record the caste of individuals? Was it perhaps curiosity or part of a design by the British? That is, as some nationalist Indians believed, “to keep alive, if not to exacerbate, the numerous divisions already present in Indian society” (Cohn, 327). The second question is to what extent did the census effect people’s notion of who they were? There arguments and connection have subsequently been advanced by many others about the importance of the census in creating and essentialising identities at a time when communalism was taking root. This period of enormous socio-economic change, and politicisation of identities is further entrenched with the enumeration of people and which religion they belong to. Kenneth Jones, in his work on the socio-religious reform movements in British India, highlights that fact that

“Traditionally, Hinduism lacked a conversion ritual. After the introduction of a decennial census in 1871, religious leaders began to focus their attention on the issue of numerical strength. For Hindus the census reports pictured their community as one in decline, its numbers falling in proportion to those of other religions. Christian success in converting the lower and untouchable castes furthered Hindu fears and led the militant Aryas to develop their own ritual of conversion, shuddhi. Initially shuddhi was employed to purify and readmit Hindus who had converted to Islam or Christianity” (Jones, 100).

Indeed, Gopal Krishan, in his study on the demography of the Punjab, highlights that

“The most fascinating demographic feature of the colonial Punjab was the religious composition of its population. While it represented an evolution of a cultural diversity in history, it became a new and divisive force in polity over time. It was on the basis of religion that the British India was partitioned; and more pertinently the partition was specific to only two provinces, Punjab and Bengal. These two provinces were marked by not only a sensitive composition of the Muslims and non-Muslims (essentially Hindus and Sikhs in the case of Punjab) but also by regional segregation of the two religious’ groups, by and large. In Bengal, the Muslims were in overwhelming majority in the eastern segment and the non-Muslims in its western counterpart; in Punjab, the picture was in reverse, with the Muslims in a large majority in the western wing and the non-Muslims in the eastern” (Krishna, 83).

When it finally came to the Partition in 1947, Sir Cyril Radcliffe was using what are considered to be out-dated figures from the Census conducted during World War Two in 1941. However, the lines between two countries were drawn based on this information.

Bhagat Ram B. ‘Census enumeration, religious identity and communal polarization in India.’ Asian Ethnicity, 2013, 14:4, 434-448, DOI: 10.1080/14631369.2012.710079

Bhagat, Ram B. ‘Census and the Construction of Communalism in India.’ Economic and Political Weekly (2001): 4352-4356.

Bhagat, Ram B. ‘Caste Census: Looking Back, Looking Forward.’ Economic and Political Weekly 42, no. 21 (2007): 1902-905. Accessed March 21, 2021. http://www.jstor.org/stable/4419628.

Cohn, Bernard. ‘The Census, Social Structure and Objectification in South Asia’, in Sarkar, Sumit, and Tanika Sarkar. Caste in Modern India (Orient Blackswan, 2018).

Jones, Kenneth W. Socio-religious reform movements in British India. Vol. 1. Cambridge University Press, 1989.

Krishan, Gopal. ‘Demography of the Punjab (1849-1947).’ Journal of Punjab Studies, 11, no. 1 (2004): 77-89

Singh, Joginder. ‘The Sikhs in the British Census Reports, Punjab.’ Proceedings of the Indian History Congress 46 (1985): 502-06. Accessed March 21, 2021. http://www.jstor.org/stable/44141395.

Yengde, Suraj. ‘Adivasis are not Hindus. Lazy colonial census gave them the label.’ The Print, 9 March 2021.

The 1881 Census is digitized and available via: The Government of India or Digital South Asia Library.

Ghanta Ghar is one of the most iconic landmarks of Ludhiana city. It stands tall amongst the hap-hazard development of the industrial city. Previously it was the pride and the centre piece of the historic area of Chaura Bazaar, which was the hub of economic and political activity in the city. Located at the entrance of the commercial centre, the Clock Tower was and still remains a landmark in the city’s landscape. The railway station is conveniently located a short (walking) distance away from the Clock Tower, allowing for trade activity to flourish easily in the area. Apart from commercial activity Ghanta Ghar also attracts political activities, as it is a convenient location to hold political party protests and dharanas. Today the Clock Tower has receded into the background as a flyover dominates the urban landscape. Although, Ludhiana as a city has grown manifold since the Ghanta Ghar was built, and much of the commercial activity has moved to The Mall Road or Ferozepur Road, Chaura Bazaar still remains popular amongst old and new inhabitants. There is the old charm of the traditional sub-continental bazaar with its nooks and crannies. The narrow lanes, tucked away behind the wide and partial Chaura Bazaar, remain hidden gems for jewellery – gold, silver or artificial. And then there are the scrumptious aloo tikkis, gol guppas and chaats to satisfy the hungry shopper. It is a shame that the Ludhiana Municipal Corporation has not invested more in the city’s historic sites and made more of these places. But, this is part of a wider problem with preservation of heritage and history in the sub-continent.

The history of the Clock Tower, of course, evokes the British colonial heritage: Ghanta Ghar/Clock Tower was designed by the then-Municipal Chief Engineer of Amritsar, John Gordon. The design reflects the traditional European Gothic style and uses an interesting red brick, which is striking even amongst the colourful and vibrant Chaura Bazaar. Although the construction began in 1862, it was not officially inaugurated until 1906 by Sir Charles Montgomery, who was the Lieutenant Governor of Punjab, along with Diwan Tek Chand, Deputy Commissioner of Ludhiana.

Ludhiana actually came under British rule in 1835, when Rajah Sangat Singh died. The Gazetteer of Ludhiana District (Punjab Government, 1888) notes that it was under Sir Claude Wade (1823-38) and his successors that the town increased in its size and importance. Trade expanded, and Ludhiana became a centre for trade in grain, sugar, cloth. The small presence of Kashmiri weavers (approximately 8-10 families) expanded after the famine in 1833 to around 1,500-2,000 Kashmiris, who settled in the town. Following the Sutlej campaign (1845-1847), Ludhiana district was formed, and the civil offices were removed to the cantonment side of the city. In 1854-55, the Grand Trunk Road was metalled and realigned to its present position.

The opening of the Railway from Delhi to Lahore in 1870 undoubtedly gave a great stimulus to trade and commercial activity in Ludhiana. In addition, the number of shops and sarais along the Grand Trunk Road, facing the station were also growing. According to the Gazetteer, the new town to the south of Chaura Bazaar had all the hallmarks of being modern. The streets were wide and straight, and the houses and shops were uniformly designed, giving them a modern appearance. ‘The principal streets, the Chaura Bazaar and the Hazuri Sarak, were designed by Sir Claude Wade himself; and, one of his projects, the Iqbal Ganj, is a standing proof that he was rather too sanguine about the speedy development of the two for which he did so much’ (p. 216).

The population of town was modest compared to the 1.6 million people living in the city today. In 1868 Ludhiana had 39,983 (Males 21,701 and Females 18,282) and in 1881 this rose to, 44,163 (Males 24,685 and Females 19,478)

CENSUS REPORT 1881

Total Population – 44,168

Hindus – 12,969; Sikhs – 1,077; Jains – 752; Muslims – 29,045; and Others – 320

The population of Ludhiana started to grow, most likely with opening of the railway and consequently the establishment of the town a collecting centre for the grain traffic. But in 1878, there was a huge loss of life due to malaria fever following the monsoon season. It was estimated that around 6-7 per cent of the population died especially, ‘half-starved Kashmiris and others of the lower classes not having sufficient stamina’ (p. 217). According to the 1881 census, the town was overwhelming Muslim and indeed even in 1947, Ludhiana was a Muslim majority town. The city today is dominated by the Sikhs but there are still some remnants of a former history scattered around the city, like the Ghanta Ghar and Chaura Bazaar.