¹ Autobiographical opening sentences from, respectively. on, Prakash Tand. Punjabi Century (Berkeley. 1968)Google Scholar and Karve, D. D.. The New Brahmans (Berkeley. 1963).Google Scholar

² This emphasis on group identity formation. focusing as it does on the internal dynamics, sheds important light on the competition which took place within what the rulers oftenassumed was a monolithic community. This fruitful approach has been followed in mydissertation “Religious Rites and Riots: Communalism and Community Identity in NorthIndia. 1870–1940“ (in preparation for the Department of History, University of California, Berkeley)Google Scholar in order to disentangle what has been characterized as “Hindu-Muslim” conflict.It looks instead at the connection between cultural and religious developments, changes insocial mobility, and related definitions of “community” and the political arena (in whichmany of these labels acquired currency) without unduly weighting the considerations of anyone characteristic. The general orientation owes much to the work of George Rudé, E. P. Thompson, Eric Hobsbawm and especially (because so closely relevant) Natalie Z. Davis, See Yang, Anand A., “Sacred Symbol and Sacred Space in Rural India: CommunityMobilization in the ‘Anti–Cow Killing‘ Riot of 1893, “ in this volume, for citations relating tothis general literature and to the study of communalism in South Asia.Google Scholar

³ For a discussion of the earlier experiments among Hindu groups, see Freitag, Sand ria, “Community and Competition in Religious Festivals: The North Indian Prelude,” paper presented to the Social Science Research Council Conference on Intermediate PoliticalLinkages held inBerkeley, California,March 1978.Google Scholar

⁴ For a description of this process among Muslims, see chapter 4 of my dissertation, “Religious Rites and Riots.”Google Scholar

⁵ Though I am aware that recent scholarship has worked to expand the use of “political”to include a wide range of activities in the social and governmental spheres, I use it here inthe old. more narrowly defined sense of pertaining to administrative and governmentalstructures and related arenas of activity and patronage. The reason for this is explained inthe dissertation.Google Scholar

⁶ For a fuller discussion of an urban model which applies Victor Turner's concepts of“communitas” and “structure” (see note 12), see Freitag, , “Community and Competition.”Google Scholar

⁷ “U. P.” will be the term most often used for that general area in north India, now knownas Uttar Pradesh, which underwent several name and boundary changes in this period. Itwas known variously as the two separate provinces of North-Western Provinces (NWP) and Oudh. the combined province of NWP & O, and finally the United Provinces (U.P.) of Agraand Oudh. The names have been retained as used in the source citations. Though“communalism” in the South Asian context is generally defined as the use of religion as thedominant orm of identification, scholars seem to presume a politicized character to thatidentification. The word is therefore inappropriate for this period and will be avoided in thisarticle.

⁸ Geertz, Clifford. The Interpretation of Cultures: Selected Essays, (New York. 1973), p. 89.Google Scholar

⁹ Freitag, . “Community and Competition.“Google Scholar

¹⁰ See for instance Bayly, C. A., Local Roots of Indian Politics: Allahabad 1880–1920 (Oxford, 1975), pp. 43–45, for a dynamic example of mohalla organization to 1869.Google Scholar

¹¹ Though most of this evidence is drawn from recent village studies, Lewis, Oscar hasargued convincingly that the “essential structure” of the festival cycle has remained“unchanged” and “remarkably stable” for several centuries. Those significant changes—usually reflecting alterations in the social structure—which he isolates all occurred in theearly twentieth century, after the period we are discussing here. In any event, for ourpurposes— that is, the contrast between urban and rural styles—the contrasts are notoverdrawn. Village Life in Northern India New York, 1958, especially pp. 243–46Google Scholar

¹² Turner, Victor, Drama Fields and Metaphors: Symbolic Action in Human Society (Ithaca, 1974), for a discussion of “communitas.”Google Scholar

¹³ Examples given by Lewis, are legion. See Village Life, pp. 239–40, for a summary.Google Scholar

¹⁴ Drake-Brockman, D. L., District Gazetteers of the United Provinces of Agra and Oudh, vol. 33, Azamgarh (Allahabad: U.P. Government Press, 1911), p. 77 (hereafter cited as Azamgarh Gazetteer),Google Scholar and Lewis, , Village Life, p. 198.Google Scholar

¹⁵ Marriott, McKim, ed., Village India, American Anthropological Association Memoir 83 (06 1955), p. 175;Google Scholar quoted in Lewis, , Village Life, p. 237.Google Scholar

¹⁶ Lewis' catalogue of the decline of the Brahmin in Rampur makes clear his earlierdomination. See Ibid. pp. 241–45.1‘

¹⁷ Azafngarh, Gazetteer, pp. 105–06.Google Scholar

¹⁸ A story related by the Wisers, from 1930 illustrates this well. See Behind Mud Walls, 1930–60 (Berkeley, 1971), pp. 18–19, for the story of the beating of Kacchis by villageBrahmins. They had told with relish the story of Rawan having been conceived; the storyrepeatedly ridiculed Brahmins.Google Scholar

¹⁹ The local focus of festivals is discussed in Lewis, , Village Life, p. 234; see especially the comparison of information from the Wisers and Marriott with Lewis‘ own findings.Google Scholar

²⁰ Ibid. pp. 215–17. The story has several fascinating implictions both for the influence ofwomen and for intercaste relations, since Sanjhi was a Chamar.

²¹ Ibid., p. 235.

²² See Wisers, , Behind Mud Walls, pp. 16–17;Google Scholar and Lewis, . Village India, p. 236.Google Scholar

²³ Freitag, , “Community and Competition, ” develops this.Google Scholar

²⁴ See McLane, John R., Indian Nationalism and the Early Congress (Princeton, 1977), for discussion of this connection, though it may place too much emphasis on the early political role of religious community identity.Google Scholar

²⁵ These Muslim efforts are discussed in chapters 5 and 6 of my dissertation.Google Scholar

²⁶ Discussed briefly below, the interaction is detailed in “Community and Competition.”

²⁷ See Farquhar, J. N., Modern Religious Movements in India (New York, 1918),Google Scholar and Jones, Kenneth W., Arya Dharm (Berkeley. 1976). for detailed discussions of the AryaSamaj.Google Scholar

²⁸ Freitag, “Community and Competition.”

²⁹ Swami Dayanand Saraswati gave a series of lectures in 1880, and a lodge was founded the following year. In the early 1890s the number of Aryas in the district was under 1, 000 butin the following decade the numbers almost trebled. Nevill, H. R., District Gazetteers of theU.P., volume 8, Agra (Allahabad. 1905), p. 72.Google Scholar

³⁰ See the excellent section in Bayly, , Local Roots, analyzing the place of several of theseorganizations in the late nineteenth-century urban context (pp. 104–17).Google Scholar

³¹ Ibid, p. 115, where he argues that neither the Sanatan Dharm Sabha nor the BharatDharm Mahamand al became new ascriptive organizations (ike the Arya Samaj.

³² See the report of the [second?] annual meeting held at Delhi, 1890, in the Bharat Jiwan for November 24, 1890, in Selections from the Vernacular Newspapers [hereafter cited asSVN] published in the … North-Western Provinces, Oudh … for the year 1890, p. 794.Google Scholar

³³ Farquhar, , Modern Religious Movements, p. 320,Google Scholar quoting the Indian Social Reformer, vol. 22, p. 121. Farquhar's dates for the Mahamand al, as for the Santan Dharm Sabha, areclearly incorrect.Google Scholar

³⁴ See Ibid., for the story of its refounding in 1902 with a stronger organizational format

³⁵ For further details, see Bayly, , Local Roots of Indian Politics, pp. 107–8.Google Scholar

³⁶ Farquhar, , Modern Religious Movements, p. 111.Google Scholar

³⁷ See, for instance, discussion of the cow as sacred symbol in Yang, “Sacred Symbol and Sacred Space.”

³⁸ India Office Records (hereafter IOR). L/Public and Judicial/6/376, file 298 for 1894, ”Note on Agitation Against Cow Killing.“ p. 4, footnote. Although there was an earlierjudgment, this is the one which seems to have galvanized the movement.

³⁹ For a sustained analysis of the importance of religion in ideology in the cities, see Gilmartin, David. “Tribe, Land and Religion in the Punjab: Muslim Politics and the Making of Pakistan“ (Ph.D. dissertation. University of California, Berkeley, 1979).Google Scholar

⁴⁰ The Dinkar Prakash for June in SVN, 1888, 419–20.

⁴¹ IOR. L/P/6/365, file 55 for 1894, “Report on Azamgarh, ” by H.E.L.P. Dupernex, Officiating Magistrate of Azamgarh, to Commissioner, Gorakhpur Division, 9.

⁴² Ibid., file 84 for 1894, “Note [by Hoey] on the Cow-protection Agitation in the Gorakhpur District, ” pp. 2–4.

⁴³ Several Congress delegations addressed the Sabha, which met in the Congress pavi-lion. Ibid., “Note on Agitation Against Cow killing.” p. 8.

⁴⁴ Samachar, Khkhri for Nov. 22 in SVN, 1890. p. 813.Google Scholar See also “Note on Agitation, ” p. 7, and Singh, Oday Pertap, the Raja of Bhinga, “The Cow Agitation, or the Mutiny-Plasm in India, ” Nineteenth Century, 04 1894, pp. 667–72. Discounting for the obvious paranoiaof the Special Branch, and the self-serving nature of the Raja‘s argument, it is doubtful thatthese efforts were particularly successful.Google Scholar

⁴⁵ IOR. L/P/365, file 84 for 1894, “Note on the Cow-Protection Agitation.” p. 3.

⁴⁶ Ibid.

⁴⁷ Culled from Ibid. and SVN, 1887–93. Conspicuously absent from this roster of sites arethe towns of Rohilkhund in the far north of the province; exceptions were Bareilly, Hardwar(as a pilgrimage site it was one of the organizing centers for the Cow Protection movement)and nearby Dehara Dun.

⁴⁸ The following details are based, except as noted, on the description for Azamgarh in“Report” by Dupernex.

⁴⁹ “Note on Gorakhpur, ” p. 1.

⁵⁰ See, for instance, descriptions of meetings in Pratabgarh, and Darbhanga, in SVN, 1888, Bharat Jiwan for 28 05 and 10 Sept., respectively, pp. 346 and 614. The Darbhangameeting, as an example, was organized by the Marwaris there, and presided over by theMaharaja. Pand it Jagat Narayan of Benares spoke.Google Scholar

⁵¹ Gorakhpur rules specified that each household was to put aside a chutki of rice equal toone paisa per member.

⁵² See lists of agents, “Report” by Dupernex, pp. 14–18.

⁵³ The Nagpur Society even organized classes to instruct these lecturers. “Note onAgitation against Cow Killing, ” p. 10.

⁵⁴ Evidently she did not pay the full price and managed to compel the sale, for thedifference had to be made up by local butchers. “Note on Gorakhpur.” p. 5. The cattle werethen distributed free to Ahirs and others on her estate.

⁵⁵ See, for instance, the boycott in Aligarh as discussed in various vernacular newspapersduring 1890. The agreements are discussed in “Sir Charles Crosthwaite's Speech inAzamgarh” (reprinted in full in an appendix to “An Appeal to the English Public on Behalfof the Hindus of the North-Western Provinces and Oudh …” by Pand it Bishan Narayand ar (Lucknow, 1893), p. 10. Included in IOR. L/P/6, vol. 368 for 1894, file 328, and inDupernex‘s “Report, “ p. 9.

⁵⁶ The British administrator Dupernex used the fact that Azamgarh Cow Protectionistsdid not distinguish between cows and bullocks as proof that the movement had ulteriormotives. See below for quote.

⁵⁷ Dupernex's “Report” on Azamgarh, p. 10.

⁵⁸ Confidential letter to Advocate General, from D. J. Lyall, Secretary to theGovernment of India, Home Dept., IOR. L/P/6, vol. 367 for 1894, file 298. As noted inmy “Religious Rites and Riots, ” ch. 2, evidence of this kind of self-sufficiency amongcland estine organizations was viewed as especially threatening by the British administration.

⁵⁹ Taswir, Alam-i for 6 04 in SVN, 1888, 250–51.Google Scholar

⁶⁰ The list includes a halwai, teli, agarwalas, marwaris, etc. Dupernex's “Report, ” p. 5.

⁶¹ For example, on 5 July and 8 Nov. 1890, in SVN, 1890. pp. 459, 744-45.

⁶² Stories in Public Service Gazette for 8 and 16 Nov., and Khichri Samachar of 8 and 15 11. in SVN, 1890. pp. 744–45. 765–67.Google Scholar

⁶³ IOR. L/P/6/367, file 298 for 1894. “Note on Agitation Against Cow Killing.” p. 10.

⁶⁴ Hindustan for 17 and 19 Oct., SVN. 1890. p. 680.

⁶⁵ The “Note on Agitation, ” states that three Deputy Commissioners in Oudh werereported to have presided at Cow Protection meetings during 1888.

⁶⁶ Jiwan, Bharat for 28 05, SVN. 1888. p. 346.Google Scholar

⁶⁷ See detailed discussion of this concept of leadership and its ramifications for Britishpolicies of social control in my “Religious Rites and Riots.” ch. 2.

⁶⁸ “Note on Agitation.” pp. 4–5. In November of 1888. however. Benares cut off supportof the cattle pound.

⁶⁹ Dupernex's “Report“ on Azamgarh. pp. 12 and 14.

⁷⁰ Ibid., pp.2.9, 11, 12, 15 and 16.

⁷¹ A Madrassi previously known as Desika Chari, Sriman Swami. had a checkeredbackground. The British, who obviously did not accept him as a legitimate leader, mademuch of the fact that he was an ex-convict. He briefly dropped from sight in 1891, promptingdisgruntled questions from the vernacular press, but reemerged in 1892. “Note onAgitation.” 8-10, and culled from SVN, 1888–1893.

⁷² “Note on Agitation, ” p. 4.

⁷³ “Note on Gorakhpur, ” pp. 1 and 5.

⁷⁴ Dupernex's “Report“ on Azamgarh. pp. 9 and 12.

⁷⁵ Information culled from Ibid., pp. 2. 5, 9, 10. and 12.

⁷⁶ Ibid., p. 12.

⁷⁷ Ibid., p. 11, and “Note on Gorakhpur, ” p. 5. Access to printing presses suggesturban-based assistance in these organizational efforts.

⁷⁸ It is possible that this shift in forces may have meant a move from larger to lessermarketing enters.

⁷⁹ See, for instance, Yang, Anand A., “The Agrarian Origins of Crime: A Study of Riotsin Saran District, India, 1866–1920, ” Journal of Social History vol. 13 (winter 1979):289–306.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

⁸⁰ Dupernex‘s “Report“ on Azamgarh, pp. 4–5.

⁸¹ Report of the Administration of the North-Western Provinces for the Year ending 31 March 1894, vol. 21, p. 18.Google Scholar

⁸² Davies, James C., “Towards a Theory of Revolutions, ” in Feierabend, Ivo K., et al., Anger, Violence and Politics: Theories and Research (Englewoods Cliff, N.J., 1972), pp.67–84.Google Scholar

⁸³ Nevill, H. R., District Gazetteers of the United Provinces of Agra and Oudh, vol. 29, Ghazipur, p. 118 (hereafter cited as Ghazipur Gazetteer).Google Scholar

⁸⁴ Azamgarh Gazetteer, p. 118.

⁸⁵ Stokes, Eric (in papers 3 and especially 10) uses this distinction to intriguingly explain why in this area the “institutional descent from land lord status failed to generate ananswering entrepreneurial drive in the newer role of farmer.“ See his The Peasant and the Raj(Cambridge. 1978), quote from pp. 241–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

⁸⁶ Azamgarh Gazetteer, p. 115.

⁸⁷ Stokes, , The Peasant and the Raj, p. 240.Google Scholar

⁸⁸ Ibid., pp. 238–39, 79.

⁸⁹ Roberts, D. T., settlement officer in Ballia, divisional report in Report to the Board ofRevenue on the Revenue Administration of the North-Western Provinces, 1882–1883, p. 26.Google Scholar cited in Stokes, , The Peasant and the Raj, p. 219.Google Scholar

⁹⁰ Ahirs gained 42 percent more land. Azamgarh Gazetteer, 106–07. As Stokes suggests, patterns of land change were largely established by 1857. However, the early gains byBanias and Khattris (up to 70 percent) quickly tapered off. Service castes, such as Kayasths, had lost much of their land (down 20 percent).

⁹¹ Whitcomb, Elizabeth, Agrarian Conditions in Northern India, vol. 1, The U.P. under British Rule 1860–1900 (Berkeley, 1972), p. 150.Google Scholar

⁹² “Government Resolution on the Cow Disturbances in the Azamgarh District, ” dated Nairn Tal, 29 Aug. 1893, para. 5. Printed in fti//as an appendix to “An Appeal to the EnglishPublic.” p. 16. para. 11.

⁹³ Ibid., pp. 12–18.

⁹⁴ Dupernex's “Report“ on Azamgarh, pp. 11 and 1.

⁹⁵ Ibid., p. 5.

⁹⁶ Ibid., p. 7.

⁹⁷ See Yang, . “Sacred Symbol and Sacred Space, ” for a discussion of attacks on space identified by rioters and administrators alike as specifically British.Google Scholar

⁹⁸ Dupemex's “Report“ on Azamgarh, p. 7.

⁹⁹ The one exception is the Rani of Majhauli. Her continued participation seems to havebeen possible because as a woman she was shielded from direct British pressure by herintermediaries.

¹⁰⁰ “Minute” in response to Wedderburn question in Parliament. IOR. L/P/6/370, file557 for 1894.

¹⁰¹ The few visible exceptions to this—i.e., the Rani of Majhauli and the “elephant-riding” leaders noted below—may have been special cases. As for the latter, they seem tohave been leaders of large, joint zamindaris and thus operated much as their fellowzamindars would have done.

¹⁰² Dupernex's “Report“ on Azamgarh, p. 11.

¹⁰³ Ibid.

¹⁰⁴ Ibid., pp. 11–12.

¹⁰⁵ Ibid., p. 1.

¹⁰⁶ Ibid., p. 5–6.

¹⁰⁷ “Note on Gorakhpur, ” pp. 5–6; see especially the table of villages held by Majhauli estate and other Bisens.

¹⁰⁸ This may well substantiate Gyan Pand ey's theory that such movements operated on atleast two separate levels of value systems and supporters: those for an elite culture and thosefor a popular level. Oral presentation on peasant movements, given in Berkeley, January1979.

¹⁰⁹ “Note on Gorakhpur, “ p. 6.

¹¹⁰ Dupernex's “Report” on Azamgarh, p. 9. For Muslim reactions, see my “Religious Rites and Riots, ” ch. 5.

¹¹¹ “Note on Gorakhpur, ” rules 6 and 20, pp. 2, 4.

¹¹² See Mark Juergensmeyer's forthcoming work on the Ad Dharm movement among north Indian Untouchables.

¹¹³ This is developed fully in a discussion of Javanese practices in Geertz, . Interpretations of Culture.Google Scholar

¹¹⁴ Pandey, Gyanendra, “A Rural Base for Congress: The United Provinces 1920–40, ” in Low, D. A., ed., Congress and the Raj (Columbia, Missouri, 1977), p. 214. Pand ey cites as well conclusions of C. A. Bayly and Lance Brennan.Google Scholar

¹¹⁵ See Yang, , “Sacred Symbol and Sacred Space, “ for a well-documented discussion ofthe connection.Google Scholar

¹¹⁶ Too often the events of 1893 are divorced from trends obvious at least from the 1870sand 1880s, if not earlier. Though the events stand out from preceding occasions for their dramatic intensity, they are certainly no more than the culmination of earlier processes(except insofar as they united ideologically the town and the countryside).

¹¹⁷ For a discussion of the British pressure, see my “‘Natural Leaders‘, Administratorsand Social Control: Communal Riots in the United Provinces. 1870–1925, “ South Asia vol. 1, no. 2. pp. 27–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

¹¹⁸ Azmatgarh Gazetteer, p. 76.