Chapter III

Chapter IIIPopulation—Costumes—Usages—FestivalsIIt is on the western coast of India, in the Bombay Presidency, that we find the most compact gathering of the members of the Parsi community. Since their exodus from Persia the refugees here have maintained themselves successfully, and have gradually acquired wealth and the intellectual superiority which distinguishes them from the other natives of India.The Bombay Presidency, or, to be more exact, the province of Bombay,1comprises twenty-fourBritish districts, and nineteen Native States (Agencies) under the protection of the English Government. Its boundaries are: To the north, the State of Balouchistan, the Panjaub, and the native States of Rajputana; to the east, the Mahratta State of Indore, the Central Provinces, Western Berar and the States of the Nizam of Hyderabad; to the south, the Madras Presidency and the State of Mysore; and to the west, the Arabian Sea. It is divided into four great divisions, made according to the local dialects. On the north lies Sindh or the lower valley and delta of the Indus, a region essentially Mahomedan both historically and as regards the population; then more to the south, Gujerat, containing, on the contrary, the most diverse and mixed elements, and comprising all the districts of the northern coast, the Mahratta country, and the interior districts of the Deccan; and, finally, the provinces where the Canarese language is spoken, divided in their turn into four British districts and eight Native States.2This territory has been formed little by little round the Island of Bombay, ceded to England by the King of Portugal as the dowry of the Infanta Catherine of Braganza. The Portuguese were the first to occupy these parts; in 1498 they arrived at Calicut with Vasco de Gama, and five years later, thanks to the bravery of Albuquerque, they took possession of Goa. Bombay came into their possession in 1532, and for a hundred years they managed to maintain themselves at the head of commerce and traffic. Two rival factories, one English and the other Dutch, were established in Surat in 1613 and 1618. It must be stated that the acquisition of the island of Bombay gave butlittle pleasure to the English, for in 1668, on account of great difficulties, the King transferred it to the East India Company, and in 1686 the control of all the possessions of the Company was transferred from Surat to Bombay, which was made into an independent Presidency (1708) at the time of the amalgamation of the two English Companies. Finally, in 1773, Bombay was placed in a state of dependence under the Governor-General of Bengal, who has since been replaced by the Viceroy of India.It is from Bombay that the English have spread their influence at present so firmly established in these territories. Simply merchants at first, they gradually supplanted their rivals from the Portuguese and Dutch settlements. Soon they aspired to a more solid power, and came into direct conflict with the natives—the Mahrattas—whom they hastened to drive from Colaba, finding their nearness troublesome. After the first Mahratta war, which arose from the contested succession of the Peishwa (1774), the treaty of Salbai permitted the English to settle in Salsette, Elephanta, Karanja, Hog Island, &c. (1782). The fort of Surat was in their hands from 1759, and in 1800 the administration of this town was made over to them bythe Nawab, whose descendants contented themselves with the vain title till 1842.The second Mahratta war had its origin in the treaty of Bassein (1802), by which the Peishwa accepted the subsidiary system—a system since adopted by the English. It resulted in an accession of territory in Gujerat and an increase of moral influence in the Court of the Peishwas and of the Gaekwars. The interval of peace was employed in repressing the invasions of the pirates who were infesting the Gulfs of Cambay and Cutch.In 1807 the States of Kathiawar were placed under the British protectorate, and in 1809 the Rao of Cutch was forced to sign a treaty by which he bound himself to help in the destruction of the pirates; whilst, on the other hand, scarcely had the Peishwa Baji Rao been placed on the throne by an English army when he began plotting for the expulsion of the English from the Deccan. In 1817 he attacked the Resident himself, Mountstuart Elphinstone, who withdrew to Kirkee, where with a few troops he succeeded in routing the entire army of the Peishwa. Soon after the prince submitted to Sir John Malcolm. A pension of £80,000 was secured to the Prince, but he was deprived ofhis States, and Bombay gained in this manner the districts of Poona, Ahmadnagar, Nasik, Kolahpoor, Belgaum, Kaladji, Dharwar, Ahmedabad, and the Konkan. At the same time Holkar abandoned his rights over the districts of Kandesh, and Satara fell into the hands of the English in 1848 on the death of the last descendant of the Mahratta Shivaji. In 1860 the Non-Regulation Districts3of the Panch Mahals were ceded by Scindhia, and in 1861 the southern limits of the Presidency were still further extended by the annexation of the northern district of Canara taken from Madras. From this time the history of the Bombay Presidency is free of incidents; peace reigned, even at the time of the mutiny of 1857. The local army has, however, rendered important services in Afghanistan, Persia, Burmah, China, Aden, and Abyssinia. Entirely occupied in administrative reforms and the welfare of the country, the Government has attained a state of complete prosperity under such men as Mountstuart Elphinstone, Malcolm, and Lord Reay.4According to the general census of 18915the number of Parsis in India rose to 89,904; that is, an increase of 491 over that of the 17th of February, 1881, which gave a total of 85,397. On the 26th of February, 1891, the entire population of the Bombay Presidency, including the Native States and Aden, formed a total of 26,960,421 inhabitants,6of whom 76,774 were Parsis (39,285 males and 37,489 females). The surplus is divided between Madras, Bengal, and the districts of the Gaekwar of Baroda, where is to be seen among other flourishing settlements the ancient community of Naosari. To this number must be added the Parsis ofChina, and of some foreign localities, and the Iranians, 9,269 in number. The exact number of Zoroastrians scattered over the globe we thus find to be a hundred thousand at the most!We refer to theZoroastrian Calendarfor all information concerning statistics, and in a special chapter (pp. 119et seq.) we find a detailed list of the population of the city and the Presidency of Bombay.7We take from it the following table (see next page), which gives the assessment of the population in the different centres. Occupying the first rank we find Bombay with its 47,458 Parsis, and Surat with 12,757; then Broach, Thana, Poona, Karachi, down to the least of the localities, some of which stand for only a simple unit.Table of the Parsi Population in the Bombay Presidency.8Names of Towns and Districts.Not Married.Married.9Widowers and Widows.Total.M.W.M.W.M.W.Bombay140911015398049258810334247458Ahmedabad2301752031751240835Kheda49313927...7153Panch-Mahal4315401333108Bharooch754623702865702593273Surat2990253525973212266115712757Thana1001802845860783343920Colaba3929513279167Ratnagiri6342......15Kanara1...8...1...10Khandeish1197319999108508Nasik1277710875614407Ahmednagar51454137510188Poona62247640238642982026Sohlapore6759544138232Satara3240292418134Belgaum17322151361Dharwar3723404122135Bijapoor84541224Karachi42430131028226651408Hyderabad1710118......46Shikarpoor20927121271Thar and Parkar......1.........1Upper Sindh2...321...8207381548615545154591346537173945Native States606480761495551142511Aden88371384087318214321600316444159941409549276774Considering the importance of Bombay, we will quote from a paper on it, read by Mr. B. B. Patel before theAnthropological Society of Bombay.10We find there the lists of births, deaths and marriages in the city of Bombay from 1881 to 1890. During that period of time the average of births has risen per year to 1,450, and that of married women bearing children to 13.293 per cent. The average of deaths has reached 1,135 (575 of the male sex, 500 of the female sex), and 92 still-born (52 of the male sex and 40 of the female sex). The annual average of mortality among children below the age of five years has been 469 (236 of the male sex and 233 of the female sex); between the ages of five and ten, 27 (13 of the male sex and 14 of the female sex); between the ages of eleven and twenty, 47 (20 of the male sex and 27 of the female sex); between the ages of twenty-one and thirty, 65, in the proportion of 27 to 38 for the two sexes; between the ages of thirty-one and forty, 62, in equal proportions for the two sexes; between the ages of forty-one and sixty, 177 (67 males and 90 females). Above the age of eighty the average reaches 37, of whom 13 are males and 24 females.During these ten years, four persons have died at the age of 100, two at the ages of 101 and 105, and lastly one at the age of 110 years. These centenarians have been all women. The principal cause of mortality among Parsis is fever (Table D); thus of 1,135 deaths, 293 may be attributed to it, 150 to nervous disorders, 91 to affections of the respiratory organs, 70 to dysentery, 38 to phthisis, one hundred to old age, and the rest to diverse other causes, such as measles, pleurisy, diarrhœa, &c., &c. According to the table drawn up by Mr. Patel (Table E), the highest rate of mortality in Bombay is in the Fort, and next to it in Dhobitalao, Baherkote, Khetwady, &c., in proportion to the population of these localities.After the crisis of 1865 a serious decrease of the population in Bombay had been apprehended for a time; but it was an exaggerated fear which disappeared with the census of 1881. It has been proved, on the contrary, that the conditions of life among the Parsis, both as regards mortality and hygiene, have reduced the average of mortality among the individuals, grown-up men, women and children. These latter, well-tended and carefully brought up, supply a splendid race, susceptible of culture, and endowed with perfect health. Accordingly, from 1872 to 1881, the Parsi populationhas increased nearly ten per cent. This increase has continued, and, as we have said, the highest increase has been estimated in 1891 to be 4.91.It is in vain that communities of Parsis have been sought for outside those regions which we have indicated.11About sixty years ago a Mahomedan traveller did try to persuade others of the existence of a Parsi colony at Khoten, a country situated to the south-east of Kaschgar; but Sir Alexander Burnes, in a communication to Mr. Naoroji Fardunji, dissipated this illusion.12We cannot attach any more importance to an assertion recently put forward, and according to which the members of the tribe of the Shiaposch Kafirs, inhabiting the country to the north-east of Cabul, are descendants of the same race, because certain of their usages, as for example their manner of exposing their dead, are similar to those of the Zoroastrians. Sir Alexander Burnes13in narrating his travels in Cabul in 1836–37–38, relates that the most curious of all the visitors to the country of the Kafirs14was a man who came from Cabul towards the year 1829. He gave himself out as a Guebre (fire-worshipper), and an Ibrahumi (follower of Abraham), who had quitted Persia to find some traces of his ancestors. During his sojourn in Cabul he willingly mixed with the Armenians and used to get himself called Sheryar, a name common enough among the modern Parsis. They tried, but in vain, to dissuade him from risking himself amongst the Kafirs; he went to Jalalabad and Lughman,where he left his baggage, and as a simple beggar entered Kafristan by way of Nujjeet. He was absent several months, and on his return was assassinated by the Huzaras of the tribe of Ali-Purast. Malik-Usman, furious at the conduct of his countrymen, exacted a fine of Rs. 2,000 as compensation for the blood shed by them. All these details were given by the Armenians of Cabul to Sir Alexander Burnes, but he could not discover whether the unfortunate Sheryar was a Parsi of Bombay or a Guebre of Kirman. However, a document found in the possession of the traveller, and coming from the Shah of Persia, leads us to believe that the latter hypothesis is the true one.The Census of 1881 enables us to state some interesting facts, which give us an idea of the occupations of the Parsis of Bombay, and of the kind of life led by them. Thus there were at that time 855 priests and persons devoted to religion, 141 teachers, 34 school-mistresses, 33 engineers, 1,384 clerks, and 115employees. Naval construction seemed to be one of their favourite occupations, for out of 46 ship-builders 26 were Parsis. As for the Dubashes or ship-brokers, out of a total of 159, 146 were Parsis. All professions and manual trades were largely represented, withthe exception of that of tailor, which was exercised by only one member of the community. At one time, out of 9,584 beggars in the town of Bombay, there were only five Parsis and one Parsi woman. As to the class of the unfortunate victims of vice and debauchery, a Parsi has not hesitated to affirm thatnot oneof his co-religionists could have been accused of living on the wages of shame.15Travellers have made the same remarks. Thus, according to Mandelslo, adultery and lewdness were considered by the Parsis as the greatest sins they could commit, and which they would doubtless have punished with death if they themselves had the administration of justice (seeVoyages, &c., trans. Wicquefort, p. 184). We may state in this connection that Anquetil gives a precise account of a summary execution under the sanction of the Punchayet, and with the approbation of the Mahomedan governor of Bharooch (seeZend-Avesta, vol. ii. p. 606); and Stavorinus, at the end of the century, makes mention of Parsi women who had been preserved in the right path by the fear of punishment (seeVoyages, &c., vol. I, ch. xxviii. p. 363).The following is a division, under seven heads, of the occupations of the Parsis, as shown in the census of 1881:—Men.Women.Professions1,94059Servants162,079416Merchants3,3172Agriculturists672Manufacturers3,61087Not classified565139Sundry13,73722,579There is some reason for not wondering at the disinclination of the Parsis for agriculture and the profession of arms. Agriculture had been very flourishing in the hands of the first colonists; but tastes changed, and from men of the field they became men of the town. At the beginning of the century some of them were still in possession of vast tracts of land, and spent much money in improving them. But these gradually passed into other hands, a circumstance in any case greatly to be regretted.17As to their apparent repugnance for military service we will see what an enlightened Parsi, who has in this case made himself the spokesman of his co-religionists, has to say. As a matter of fact, the Persians in olden times had distinguished themselves amongst all by their valour and courage. In the inscription engraved on his tomb at Nakch-i-Roustam, King Darius might well say, with a just feeling of pride, that they had only to look at the images of those who supported his throne to know into what distant places the Persian soldier had carried his arms! The famous struggles maintained by the Ardeshirs, the Shapoors, and the Noshirvans show that this warlike temper had not subsided. Why thenshould the descendants of such heroes abstain from taking part in military exercises and in defending the country18?Mr. Dosabhai Framji Karaka gives the following explanation of this aversion.19In the first place he indignantly repudiates the theory put forward by certain European authors that it proceeds purely from religious motives, on account of the worship they are supposed to pay to fire, which would prevent them from handling a cannon or shouldering a gun. Nothing at all in fact prevents them from making use of fire in the handling of offensive and defensive weapons. At the time of certain riots in Bombay, gunsmiths’ shops were seen to be rapidly emptied by the Parsis, and thirty-five years back they were enthusiastic in joining the first volunteer movement; but in 1877 only Europeans were invited to join. Still, protests Mr. D. F. Karaka, there are certainly no natives more eager than the Parsis to share in the defence of British interests. In several places they have joined the volunteersand have obtained much-envied distinctions.20They are able to attain a high degree of skill in the handling of firearms; for example, Mr. Dorabji Padamji, son of the late Khan Bahadur Padamji Pestonji, is one of the best shots in India.21The most serious consideration which prevents a Parsi from enrolling himself in the army seems therefore, to us, to be the insufficiency of the pay. We only repeat it: it is a Parsee who says this. We have no desire either to weaken their motives or to exaggerate their grievances. We are well aware that these are very delicate questions, and require to be treated with care and skill, since they concern the relations of devoted subjects with a government of which they are proud. Onthe other hand, when we take into consideration the moral worth and intelligent co-operation which the Parsis bring to the service of this same government, we are not at all surprised at the conclusion which we see so clearly formulated.22Native soldiers, whether Hindoos or Mussulmans, are paid at the rate of seven rupees a month, about fourteen shillings (17 fr. 50 c.), including rations, while a Parsi filling the most modest employment of a cook or a servant earns double that sum. During certain disturbances when Bombay was deprived of its European troops, many Parsis would willingly have enrolled themselves in the army if they had been given the pay of European soldiers. It is a matter of regret to them, perhaps a sort of degradation of which they feel the keenness, at being obliged to put forward pecuniary considerations; but their mode of life, even that of the poorest among them, cannot be compared with that of Hindoos and Mussalmans of the sameclass. These can live on seven rupees a month; Hindoos and Mahomedans of the same family are content with one room, a thing which the humblest Parsi would never allow. The Hindoo or Mussulman woman hardly requires more than one or twosaris, costing about three rupees, to clothe herself, and her children can go naked till the age of ten years. But as for the Parsi woman she requires severalsaris, trousers, shirts and slippers, besides suitable clothing for her children. How can a Parsi soldier then manage to live and bring up his family on seven rupees a month?Mr. Karaka ends his long and eloquent appeal with a sentence which sounds the true keynote of the regret felt by the Parsis at being merely compared with the natives when they felt themselves to be morally and intellectually their superiors. Why are they not provided with commissions in the army like the Germans and other Europeans?23Then only will they feel completely identified with the British nation.24The Parsis in India are divided into two sects, the Shahanshahis and the Kadmis.25When Anquetil Duperron visited India this division already existed, and he found them “more excited against each other than the Mahomedan sects of Omar and Ali.” The Parsis, however, do not admit this. This division has nothing to do with their faith, and has nothing in common with the division between the Shiahs and the Sunnis. The schism26has arisen simply out of a difference of opinion concerning the exact date of computation of the era of Yezdezard, the last king of the ancient Persian monarchy. This division does not exist amongst the Zoroastrians who have remained behind in their own country.The Parsis reckon their year on a calculation of three hundred and sixty-five days, each month consisting of thirty days. Their year commences with the month ofFarvardin, and ends with the month ofSpendarmad. At the end of three hundred and sixty days, five days, called theGathasare added. The period of five hours and fifty-four seconds does not enter into their computation. The old Persians, therefore, in order to make their calculation agree with the solar year, had made at the end of every hundred and twenty years an intercalation orKabisa, that is to say, they added one month to that period. The Persian Zoroastrians, after the loss of their independence, either through ignorance or simple forgetfulness, had ceased to practise thisKabisa, whilst the Parsis had continued this intercalation during their residence in Khorassan. Hence the origin of the sects with which we have to deal.In 172027Jamasp Vilayati, a learned Zoroastrianfrom Persia, settled in Surat to advise the Mobeds, and it was he who discovered that his co-religionists of India were one month behind their Iranian brethren. Little importance howeverwas attached to this fact. But in 1746 another Iranian, Jamshed, and some Mobeds adopted the date accepted by the Persian Zoroastrians, and took the name of Kadmis.The rest of the community were called Shahanshahis, and preserved the ancient system. Little by little the number of the adherents of Jamshed increased. Now it should be noticed that it was in Surat that this schism among the Parsis first took place, and for some time the harmonious relations between the two did not suffer by it. But two respectable men, Mancherji Kharshedji Seth, of the Shahanshahi sect, and Dhanjisha Manjisha, of the Kadmi sect, managed literally to ignite the powder in spite of their benevolent intentions. In order to get some enlightenment Dhanjisha Manjisha sent to Persia at his own expense a priest from Bharooch, Kavas Rustam Jalal. Born at Bharooch in 1733, this man was well versed in the Arabic and Persian languages. For twelve years he remained in Persia and Turkey, visited Yezd, Ispahan, Shiraz, and Constantinople, and returned to Surat in 1780. During his sojourn in Persia he had obtained an audience with Kerim Khan. Some months before his return Dhanjisha Manjisha had come to Bombay, and had there founded the Kadmi sect under the auspices of Dadiseth, one of the most influential men of the time. Mulla Kavas followed his patron to Bombay and was appointed Dastoor of the Atash-Behram erectedby Dadiseth himself (Dadibhai Nasarwanji) for the Kadmi sect, which he consecrated on the 29th of September, 1783. The following year he quitted Bombay and settled in Hyderabad, in the Deccan, where he was honoured with the friendship of the Nizam. He remained there till his death, which took place in 1802 (Parsee Prâkâsh, p. 92).The Kadmi sect continued to flourish in Bombay, when, at the commencement of the century, rose the great dispute of theKabisa, that is to say, the famous month by which the Kadmis were in advance of the Shahanshahis (Parsee Prâkâsh, pp. 62, 198, 863, 867, &c.). Mulla Firoz,29son of Mulla Kavas, and another distinguishedpriest, Fardunji Marazbanji, constituted themselves the champions of the Kadmi sect, while the mass of the people, guided by Kharshedji Manockji Shroff, grouped themselves under the patronage of the pious Dastoor of the Shahanshahis, Edulji Dorabji Sanjana,30and clung to the date observed by the Parsis since their arrival in India. Meetings were organised to which learned Moguls were invited, in order to offer explanations, and, if possible, to terminate the discussion. The newspapers were full of virulent articles, pamphlets appeared in great numbers, and the people in some cases seemed disposed to settle the question by the right of might, an irrefutable argument.The Shahanshahis maintained that theZoroastrian religion admitted a month’s intercalation at the end of a period of 120 years, and that at the time of the fall of the Persian Empire there had indeed beenoneintercalation during their sojourn in Khorassan, but once they were in India this usage had been abandoned; hence the backwardness by one month from the computation of the Kadmis. The latter declared on the other hand that the intercalation was forbidden in the Zoroastrian calendar, that it was only meant for political emergencies, and that this mode of calculation had never been practised in Khorassan.Modern learning has brought this vexed question within its true limits. Mr. Kharshedji Rustamji Kama, of the Kadmi sect, known by his study of the Zoroastrian religion, has proved, or rather has attempted to prove, in a work on the computation of Yezdezard, that the Shahanshahis and the Kadmis were both in error (1870). The Kadmis were wrong in denying that the Parsee new year commenced on the 21st of March, for from a more exact knowledge of the language of theAvesta, and the deciphering of Pehlvi coins, it is demonstrated that the Zoroastrian religion admitted the intercalation; and the Shahanshahis were equally wrong, for, since the downfall of thePersian Empire, there had been no intercalation as they affirmed. The opinion of the Kadmis, in accordance with the date accepted by the Zoroastrians of Persia, which proves that there had been no intercalation after the fall of the national dynasty, is absolutely correct; but as the intercalation was not ordered by the Zoroastrian religion, it appears that both sides were wrong in the controversy of theKabisa.The greatest disputes had arisen from this religious quarrel; scenes of surprising violence had resulted from it. For instance, in Bharooch (1782–1783) a certain Homaji Jamshedji had struck a pregnant woman and been condemned to death; others got off with mere fines. In the heat of the disputes families became divided; marriages between Kadmis and Shahanshahis were very rare.31At present most of the difficulties have been smoothed down. It happens sometimes that the husband and wife belong to different sects; in that case the children invariably belong to the father’s sect. There areno appreciable differences, the pronunciation alone being at times not quite the same. ThusAhu, Vohu, is pronouncedAhî, Vohîamong the Kadmis. There is also some difference in certain religious ceremonies, and in certain liturgical formulas. But the greatest divergence is in the mention of the month and the date of the day when the worshipper is reciting his prayers. All the feasts are observed by both the sects, but at different dates.The Shahanshahis are greatly superior in numbers to the Kadmis.32The latter can hardly count more than ten to fifteen thousand adherents. Many of them occupy the highest position. Mr. F. N. Patel, the members of the Cama, Dadiseth, and Banaji families, &c., are among them. The Shahanshahis are represented by Sir Jamshedji Jijibhoy, Sir Dinsha Manockji Petit, and many other not less respectable names.IIThe Parsis, at the time of their arrival in India, had made some changes in their national costume with a view to please the princes who had received them. Thus we note the resemblance of theangarakhaand the turban of the men, and of thesarisof the women, with the dress of the Hindoos of Gujerat.Unwin Brothers, Limited, The Gresham Press, Woking and London.1Originally the affairs of the three establishments of the East India Company, in Bengal, Madras, and Bombay, were administered separately, each with a president and a council formed of agents of the Company. The name of Presidency was applied to the whole territory subject to this authority. This expression has no longer its real signification; however, it is still employed in official acts. British India is no longer divided into presidencies, but into provinces, eight of which are very extensive countries, having separate governments. The presidencies of Bombay and Madras are to-day only the provinces of those names.2Its territory extends from latitude 28° 47′ to 13° 53′ N., and from latitude 60° 43′ to 76° 30′ E. British districts, including Sind, contain a total superficial area of 124,465 square miles, and a population, according to the census of 1872, of 16,349,206 souls. The Native States cover a surface of nearly 71,769 square miles, with a population of 8,831,730 inhabitants, which gives, for the surface, a total of 196,234 square miles, and for the population a total of 25,180,936 inhabitants. The State of Baroda is no longer under the direct administration of Bombay, but under that of the Supreme Government; we may, however, consider it from the geographical point of view as forming a part of Bombay. The Portuguese possessions of Goa, Damman, and Diu, with a superficial area of 1,146 square miles and a population of nearly 428,955 souls, are equally comprised in the limits of the Presidency. SeeImp. Gazetteer of India, vol. ii. p. 172 (Ed. of 1881).3See for the explanation of this word, Sir John Strachey,India, pref. and trans. of J. Harmand, chap. vi. p. 145, Paris, 1892.4See Sir William Wilson Hunter, K.C.S.I.,Bombay 1885 to 1890, a study in Indian Administration. London, 1892.5The whole population of India comes to 287,223,431: Brahmins, 207,731,727; aboriginal tribes, 9,280,467; Sikhs, 190,783; Jains, 1,416,633; Zoroastrians, 89,904; Buddhists, 7,131,361; Jews, 17,194; Christians, 2,284,380; Mussulmans, 58,321,164; diverse races, 42,763. SeeStatistical Abstract relating to British India from 1883–84 to 1892–93, 28th November, London, 1894.Distribution of Population according to Religion, Sex and Civil Condition, &c., p. 26, No. 14.6Parsis, 76,774; Hindoos, 21,440,957; Mussulmans, 4,390,995; Christians, 170,009; Jains, 555,209; Jews, 13,547; aboriginal tribes, 292,023; Buddhists, 674; Sikhs, 912; Brahmo-Samaj, 34; diverse races, 51. In no part of India are religions and sects so mixed up as in the Presidency of Bombay. SeeEthnology of Indiaby Mr. Justice Campbell, in theJournal of the Asiatic Society.Supplementary number, vol. xxxv. pt. ii. pp. 140, &c., &c.7The Zoroastrian Calendar for the year of Yezdezard 1262, 16th September, 1892, to 15th September, 1893;printed and published at the Bombay Vartman Press, by Muncherji Hosunji Jagosh, 1892 (Gujerati). The tables are very carefully done; an inquisitive reader will find there the enumeration of the Parsi population of Bombay according to the different districts, comparisons with the previous census and remarks on the community.8SeeZoroastrian Calendar, p. 126.9The disproportion between the two sexes is explained by the general custom, which does not allow the Parsi servants to bring their wives to the cities where they are employed.10Statistics of births, deaths, and marriages amongst the Parsis of Bombay, during the last ten years, in theJournal of the Anthropological Society of Bombay, ii., November 1, pp. 55–65.11We refer to theParsee Prâkâsh, for all those interesting details, those of our readers who can read and understand Gujerati.12“If I have not yet replied to your letter of the 19th November,” he writes, “it is because I desired to make special researches concerning the strange rumour which has been spread by the Syed on the subject of a tribe of Parsis established at Khoten, remaining faithful to the Zoroastrian customs, and still governed by its own kings. I can tell you that it is a legend devoid of foundation, and that Major Rawlinson, so learned in these matters, partakes of my view. I suppose that the Syed, seeing the prosperous condition of his co-religionists in Bombay, imagined that in flattering your vanity he would act on your purse. Besides, the country of Khoten is not theterra incognitawhich he has depicted. I have been in touch with the people who have sojourned there; it is a dependency of China, inhabited by Mussulman subjects of the Empire: the only Chinese who are there form part of the garrison. According to all that has been said to me of Khoten and the adjacent countries, the only difficulty I have had is to define who are the Christian traders who frequent those markets. I think that they are Russians or Nestorian Christians.”13SeeCabool: being a Narrative of a Journey to, and Residence in that City in the years 1836–7–8. By the late Lieut.-Col. Sir Alexander Burnes. London, 1842.14Vivien Saint Martin,New Dictionary of Universal Geography, vol. iii. p. 9. Paris, 1887.15“Returned herself as living on the wages of shame” (see Dosabhai Framji Karaka,Hist. of Parsis, vol. i. chap. iii. p. 99).16The Parsis have never followed certain occupations, as those of a day labourer, palanquin bearer, barber, bleacher, &c., &c.17Let us note the efforts of Sir Richard Temple, Governor of Bombay (1877–80), who, on his way to Naosari, reminded the Parsis of certain verses of theVendidadrelating specially to agricultural or pastoral occupations, and exhorted them to continue such traditions. Since then a rich Parsi of Bharooch, Mr. Rastamji Maneckji, has taken on lease from the chief of Rajpipla, a great stretch of land in the Panch-Mahals, and has cultivated it with success. He has been outstripped by Kavasji Framji Banaji in his beautiful domain of Pawai. Lord Mayo has highly recognised the great importance of agricultural studies, and in 1870 he declared that the progress of India in riches and in civilisation depended on the progress of agriculture. See Strachey,India, trans. Harmand, chap. ix.; Hunter,Bombay, &c., about the question of agricultural education (chap. vi. pp. 158, 159–166), and about the foundation of a Chair of Agriculture at Baroda under the auspices of the Gaekwar, at the suggestion of Lord Reay, (p. 168.)18See for the army in India, Strachey,India, trans. Harmand, chap. iii. pp. 52et seq.; Hunter,Bombay, &c., chap. xiv. pp. 448et seq.19Dosabhai Framji Karaka,Hist. of the Parsis, vol. i. pp. 101et seq.20The enrolment of the Parsis as volunteers, to the exclusion of the other nationalities, has reappeared since the publication of the work of Mr. D. F. Karaka. At Quetta, at Karachi, at Poona the Parsis are admitted freely into the corps of the European Volunteers, and lastly (June, 1894) Mr. Dinsha Dosabhai Khambatta is enrolled as a lieutenant in the “Poona Volunteers”; he is now a lieutenant in the “Quetta Corps.”21Padamji Pestanji is the chief of the Parsi community of Poona; since the last riots, he obtained as a reward of his services the title of Khan Bahadur; he is a member of the Legislative Council and has the rank of a Sirdar of the First Class in the Dekkan.22“We have not the slightest hesitation in saying that the Parsis would be found to be as good and brave soldiers as the Anglo-Saxons, while their loyalty and attachment to the Government they are called upon to serve would always be above suspicion” (seeHist. of the Parsis, vol. i. chap. iii. p. 103).23“For if a German or a European of another nationality can secure a commission in the British Army, why should not a Parsee, who is the born subject of the Queen-Empress?” (SeeHist. of the Parsis, vol. i. chap. iii. p. 104.)24Opinions are divided amongst the Parsis themselves on the subject of their nationality and position in India. The Hon. Mr. P. M. Mehta considers them as natives to the backbone. Mr. Dadabhai Naoroji, M.P., is of the same opinion, whilst a certain number decline to recognise this.25The name of Shahanshahi means “imperial,” and that of Kadmi is drawn fromqadim, “ancient.” The Shahanshahis are also calledRasmis, fromRasm, “custom,” that is to say, that which is followed in India.26On this schism, see Anquetil Duperron,Zend-Avesta, Disc. Prel.p. ccccxxvi.; Wilson,The Parsi Religion, pp. 35, 36; Haug,Essays, pp. 57, 58. Aspandiarji Kamdin resumed the controversy of theKabisain a book appearing in Surat, in 1826:A Historical Account of the Ancient Leap-Year of the Parsis(Gujerati). Mr. K. R. Kama held, in 1869, a series of conferences on the ancient computation of time, and has publishedThe Era of Yezdezard(Gujerati).27This is how Anquetil Duperron relates the incidents of this memorable struggle:28“About forty-six years ago there came from Kirman a very clever Dastoor named Djamasp. He had been sent to re-unite the Parsis divided on the question of thePenom, a double piece of cloth with which the Parsis, on certain occasions, cover a part of the face. Some wished that it should be placed on the dead, others did not like this. Djamasp decided in favour of the latter, according to the custom of Kirman. If this Dastoor had not made the voyage to India, this frivolous contest would have caused streams of blood to flow.“Djamasp is believed to have examined theVendidad, which was current in Gujerat. He found the Pehlvi translation of it too long and not correct in several places. Ignorance was the predominating vice of the Parsis of India. In order to remedy it, the Dastoor of Kirman formed some disciples, Darab at Surat, Djamasp at Naosari, and a third at Bharooch, to whom he taught Zend and Pehlvi. Some time after, tired of the contradictions which he had to endure, he returned to Kirman. The books which this Dastoor has left in India are an exact copy of the Zend and PehlviVendidad, theFeroueschi, the translation of theVadjerguerd, and theNerenguestan. These two works are in Persian, mixed with Zend, and purely on ceremonials.“Darab, the first disciple of Djamasp, and a Dastoor Mobed perfect in the knowledge of Zend and Pehlvi, wished to correct the Pehlvi translation of theVendidadand rectify some portions of the Zend Text, which appeared to him either to have been transposed or to present useless repetitions. He began explaining to young Parsi theologians the works of Zoroaster, which the Mobeds read every day without understanding them. An enslaved people who for a long time practised a thousand ceremonies, the sense and reason of which they were ignorant of, would naturally fall into innumerable abuses. This was what Darab, more learned than the others, observed. The purifications were multiplied; the Zend text was inundated with Pehlvi commentaries, often very inconsistent. Darab at first attempted the way of instruction. But he found a powerful adversary in the person of Manscherdji, the chief of the party who did not like reform, and himself the son of a Mobed.“Another subject of division animated them again, one against the other. Darab had for his father Kaous, of whom I have spoken before, who had received from Dastoor Djamasp the first smatterings of astronomy, according to the principles of Oulough Beg. This Dastoor Mobed having been perfected since then under another Parsi come from Kirman about thirty-six years ago, showed by the Tables of Oulough Beg that theNao rouz(the first day of the year) ought to be advanced by a month, and that consequently there had been an error till then. A letter of the Dastoors of Yezd, dated the 22nd of the month Aban, of the year 1111 of Yezdezard (1742,A.D.) and brought by the Parsi Espendiar, confirmed the discovery of Kaous, but did not tend to protect him from the hatred of his compatriots. It went so far that Darab, sixteen or seventeen years ago, was obliged to withdraw to Damann amongst the Portuguese, and Kaous to Cambay among the English. When I arrived at Surat, almost all the Parsis of India followed the party of Manscherdji because he was rich and powerful; Darab, whose knowledge was recognised even by his adversaries, had some disciples who, in the sequel, showed themselves more freely when the authority of Manscherdji had been lowered at Surat with that of the Dutch, whose agent he was.”28Disc. Prel.pp. cccxxvi.et seq.29Mulla Firoz succeeded his father Mulla Kavas as Dastoor of the Kadmis (1802); when hardly eight years old he had accompanied Mulla Kavas to Persia and had learned Persian and Arabic. In 1786 he wrote in Persian a curious recital of his voyage,Derich Kherde Manjumi. In 1830 he published theAvijéh Dinto refute the arguments of Dastoor Edalji Dorabji Sanjana. The governor of Bombay, Mr. Jonathan Duncan, engaged him to teach Persian, and to translate theDesatir. Mr. Duncan having died, Mulla Firoz continued his work in concert with Mr. William Erskine, and finished it in 1819. He died in 1830 (Parsee Prâkâsh, p. 229) and bequeathed his collection of books in Zend, Pehlvi, &c., to the Kadmi community; the library which contains them is situate in “Fort,” and bears his name. We owe to Mulla Firoz a poem on the conquest of India by the English, theGeorge Namah, which was terminated and published in 1837 by his nephew and successor, Dastoor Rastamji Kaikobadji. On the death of the latter (1854) (Parsee Prâkâsh, p. 635), the Kadmis combined to found amadressawhich they calledMulla Firoz(Parsee Prâkâsh, p. 647).30Edalji Dorabji Sanjana was esteemed for his piety and merits. He was in his time one of the firstsavantsin Zend and Pehlvi; he was equally perfect in Sanscrit. We owe to him several works on the Mazdiene religion, amongst others a book entitledKhorehe Vehijak, which brought forth in reply theAvijéh Dinof Mulla Firoz. He died in 1847 (Parsee Prâkâsh, p. 495).31Most offensive epithets were interchanged between Kadmis and Shahanshahis, such as that of churigar (“churi,” bracelets, bangles; and “gar,” workman) a term of contempt carrying with it an idea of weakness; the children of the two sects pursued one another in the streets, insulting one another. This was hardly fifty years ago.32The sect of the Shahanshahis possesses in Bombay two High Priests—Dastoor Jamaspji Minocherji and Shams ul ulma Dastoor Peshotan Behramji Sanjana; at Poona there is only one, Dastoor Hoshangji Jamaspji. The sect of the Kadmis has also High Priests—Dastoor Kharshedji Phirozji Mulla Firoz, elected by the whole community, who is attached to the Dadiseth Atash-Behram, and Dastoor Kharshedji Bezonji, attached to the Framji Kavasji Banaji Atash-Behram.

Chapter IIIPopulation—Costumes—Usages—FestivalsIIt is on the western coast of India, in the Bombay Presidency, that we find the most compact gathering of the members of the Parsi community. Since their exodus from Persia the refugees here have maintained themselves successfully, and have gradually acquired wealth and the intellectual superiority which distinguishes them from the other natives of India.The Bombay Presidency, or, to be more exact, the province of Bombay,1comprises twenty-fourBritish districts, and nineteen Native States (Agencies) under the protection of the English Government. Its boundaries are: To the north, the State of Balouchistan, the Panjaub, and the native States of Rajputana; to the east, the Mahratta State of Indore, the Central Provinces, Western Berar and the States of the Nizam of Hyderabad; to the south, the Madras Presidency and the State of Mysore; and to the west, the Arabian Sea. It is divided into four great divisions, made according to the local dialects. On the north lies Sindh or the lower valley and delta of the Indus, a region essentially Mahomedan both historically and as regards the population; then more to the south, Gujerat, containing, on the contrary, the most diverse and mixed elements, and comprising all the districts of the northern coast, the Mahratta country, and the interior districts of the Deccan; and, finally, the provinces where the Canarese language is spoken, divided in their turn into four British districts and eight Native States.2This territory has been formed little by little round the Island of Bombay, ceded to England by the King of Portugal as the dowry of the Infanta Catherine of Braganza. The Portuguese were the first to occupy these parts; in 1498 they arrived at Calicut with Vasco de Gama, and five years later, thanks to the bravery of Albuquerque, they took possession of Goa. Bombay came into their possession in 1532, and for a hundred years they managed to maintain themselves at the head of commerce and traffic. Two rival factories, one English and the other Dutch, were established in Surat in 1613 and 1618. It must be stated that the acquisition of the island of Bombay gave butlittle pleasure to the English, for in 1668, on account of great difficulties, the King transferred it to the East India Company, and in 1686 the control of all the possessions of the Company was transferred from Surat to Bombay, which was made into an independent Presidency (1708) at the time of the amalgamation of the two English Companies. Finally, in 1773, Bombay was placed in a state of dependence under the Governor-General of Bengal, who has since been replaced by the Viceroy of India.It is from Bombay that the English have spread their influence at present so firmly established in these territories. Simply merchants at first, they gradually supplanted their rivals from the Portuguese and Dutch settlements. Soon they aspired to a more solid power, and came into direct conflict with the natives—the Mahrattas—whom they hastened to drive from Colaba, finding their nearness troublesome. After the first Mahratta war, which arose from the contested succession of the Peishwa (1774), the treaty of Salbai permitted the English to settle in Salsette, Elephanta, Karanja, Hog Island, &c. (1782). The fort of Surat was in their hands from 1759, and in 1800 the administration of this town was made over to them bythe Nawab, whose descendants contented themselves with the vain title till 1842.The second Mahratta war had its origin in the treaty of Bassein (1802), by which the Peishwa accepted the subsidiary system—a system since adopted by the English. It resulted in an accession of territory in Gujerat and an increase of moral influence in the Court of the Peishwas and of the Gaekwars. The interval of peace was employed in repressing the invasions of the pirates who were infesting the Gulfs of Cambay and Cutch.In 1807 the States of Kathiawar were placed under the British protectorate, and in 1809 the Rao of Cutch was forced to sign a treaty by which he bound himself to help in the destruction of the pirates; whilst, on the other hand, scarcely had the Peishwa Baji Rao been placed on the throne by an English army when he began plotting for the expulsion of the English from the Deccan. In 1817 he attacked the Resident himself, Mountstuart Elphinstone, who withdrew to Kirkee, where with a few troops he succeeded in routing the entire army of the Peishwa. Soon after the prince submitted to Sir John Malcolm. A pension of £80,000 was secured to the Prince, but he was deprived ofhis States, and Bombay gained in this manner the districts of Poona, Ahmadnagar, Nasik, Kolahpoor, Belgaum, Kaladji, Dharwar, Ahmedabad, and the Konkan. At the same time Holkar abandoned his rights over the districts of Kandesh, and Satara fell into the hands of the English in 1848 on the death of the last descendant of the Mahratta Shivaji. In 1860 the Non-Regulation Districts3of the Panch Mahals were ceded by Scindhia, and in 1861 the southern limits of the Presidency were still further extended by the annexation of the northern district of Canara taken from Madras. From this time the history of the Bombay Presidency is free of incidents; peace reigned, even at the time of the mutiny of 1857. The local army has, however, rendered important services in Afghanistan, Persia, Burmah, China, Aden, and Abyssinia. Entirely occupied in administrative reforms and the welfare of the country, the Government has attained a state of complete prosperity under such men as Mountstuart Elphinstone, Malcolm, and Lord Reay.4According to the general census of 18915the number of Parsis in India rose to 89,904; that is, an increase of 491 over that of the 17th of February, 1881, which gave a total of 85,397. On the 26th of February, 1891, the entire population of the Bombay Presidency, including the Native States and Aden, formed a total of 26,960,421 inhabitants,6of whom 76,774 were Parsis (39,285 males and 37,489 females). The surplus is divided between Madras, Bengal, and the districts of the Gaekwar of Baroda, where is to be seen among other flourishing settlements the ancient community of Naosari. To this number must be added the Parsis ofChina, and of some foreign localities, and the Iranians, 9,269 in number. The exact number of Zoroastrians scattered over the globe we thus find to be a hundred thousand at the most!We refer to theZoroastrian Calendarfor all information concerning statistics, and in a special chapter (pp. 119et seq.) we find a detailed list of the population of the city and the Presidency of Bombay.7We take from it the following table (see next page), which gives the assessment of the population in the different centres. Occupying the first rank we find Bombay with its 47,458 Parsis, and Surat with 12,757; then Broach, Thana, Poona, Karachi, down to the least of the localities, some of which stand for only a simple unit.Table of the Parsi Population in the Bombay Presidency.8Names of Towns and Districts.Not Married.Married.9Widowers and Widows.Total.M.W.M.W.M.W.Bombay140911015398049258810334247458Ahmedabad2301752031751240835Kheda49313927...7153Panch-Mahal4315401333108Bharooch754623702865702593273Surat2990253525973212266115712757Thana1001802845860783343920Colaba3929513279167Ratnagiri6342......15Kanara1...8...1...10Khandeish1197319999108508Nasik1277710875614407Ahmednagar51454137510188Poona62247640238642982026Sohlapore6759544138232Satara3240292418134Belgaum17322151361Dharwar3723404122135Bijapoor84541224Karachi42430131028226651408Hyderabad1710118......46Shikarpoor20927121271Thar and Parkar......1.........1Upper Sindh2...321...8207381548615545154591346537173945Native States606480761495551142511Aden88371384087318214321600316444159941409549276774Considering the importance of Bombay, we will quote from a paper on it, read by Mr. B. B. Patel before theAnthropological Society of Bombay.10We find there the lists of births, deaths and marriages in the city of Bombay from 1881 to 1890. During that period of time the average of births has risen per year to 1,450, and that of married women bearing children to 13.293 per cent. The average of deaths has reached 1,135 (575 of the male sex, 500 of the female sex), and 92 still-born (52 of the male sex and 40 of the female sex). The annual average of mortality among children below the age of five years has been 469 (236 of the male sex and 233 of the female sex); between the ages of five and ten, 27 (13 of the male sex and 14 of the female sex); between the ages of eleven and twenty, 47 (20 of the male sex and 27 of the female sex); between the ages of twenty-one and thirty, 65, in the proportion of 27 to 38 for the two sexes; between the ages of thirty-one and forty, 62, in equal proportions for the two sexes; between the ages of forty-one and sixty, 177 (67 males and 90 females). Above the age of eighty the average reaches 37, of whom 13 are males and 24 females.During these ten years, four persons have died at the age of 100, two at the ages of 101 and 105, and lastly one at the age of 110 years. These centenarians have been all women. The principal cause of mortality among Parsis is fever (Table D); thus of 1,135 deaths, 293 may be attributed to it, 150 to nervous disorders, 91 to affections of the respiratory organs, 70 to dysentery, 38 to phthisis, one hundred to old age, and the rest to diverse other causes, such as measles, pleurisy, diarrhœa, &c., &c. According to the table drawn up by Mr. Patel (Table E), the highest rate of mortality in Bombay is in the Fort, and next to it in Dhobitalao, Baherkote, Khetwady, &c., in proportion to the population of these localities.After the crisis of 1865 a serious decrease of the population in Bombay had been apprehended for a time; but it was an exaggerated fear which disappeared with the census of 1881. It has been proved, on the contrary, that the conditions of life among the Parsis, both as regards mortality and hygiene, have reduced the average of mortality among the individuals, grown-up men, women and children. These latter, well-tended and carefully brought up, supply a splendid race, susceptible of culture, and endowed with perfect health. Accordingly, from 1872 to 1881, the Parsi populationhas increased nearly ten per cent. This increase has continued, and, as we have said, the highest increase has been estimated in 1891 to be 4.91.It is in vain that communities of Parsis have been sought for outside those regions which we have indicated.11About sixty years ago a Mahomedan traveller did try to persuade others of the existence of a Parsi colony at Khoten, a country situated to the south-east of Kaschgar; but Sir Alexander Burnes, in a communication to Mr. Naoroji Fardunji, dissipated this illusion.12We cannot attach any more importance to an assertion recently put forward, and according to which the members of the tribe of the Shiaposch Kafirs, inhabiting the country to the north-east of Cabul, are descendants of the same race, because certain of their usages, as for example their manner of exposing their dead, are similar to those of the Zoroastrians. Sir Alexander Burnes13in narrating his travels in Cabul in 1836–37–38, relates that the most curious of all the visitors to the country of the Kafirs14was a man who came from Cabul towards the year 1829. He gave himself out as a Guebre (fire-worshipper), and an Ibrahumi (follower of Abraham), who had quitted Persia to find some traces of his ancestors. During his sojourn in Cabul he willingly mixed with the Armenians and used to get himself called Sheryar, a name common enough among the modern Parsis. They tried, but in vain, to dissuade him from risking himself amongst the Kafirs; he went to Jalalabad and Lughman,where he left his baggage, and as a simple beggar entered Kafristan by way of Nujjeet. He was absent several months, and on his return was assassinated by the Huzaras of the tribe of Ali-Purast. Malik-Usman, furious at the conduct of his countrymen, exacted a fine of Rs. 2,000 as compensation for the blood shed by them. All these details were given by the Armenians of Cabul to Sir Alexander Burnes, but he could not discover whether the unfortunate Sheryar was a Parsi of Bombay or a Guebre of Kirman. However, a document found in the possession of the traveller, and coming from the Shah of Persia, leads us to believe that the latter hypothesis is the true one.The Census of 1881 enables us to state some interesting facts, which give us an idea of the occupations of the Parsis of Bombay, and of the kind of life led by them. Thus there were at that time 855 priests and persons devoted to religion, 141 teachers, 34 school-mistresses, 33 engineers, 1,384 clerks, and 115employees. Naval construction seemed to be one of their favourite occupations, for out of 46 ship-builders 26 were Parsis. As for the Dubashes or ship-brokers, out of a total of 159, 146 were Parsis. All professions and manual trades were largely represented, withthe exception of that of tailor, which was exercised by only one member of the community. At one time, out of 9,584 beggars in the town of Bombay, there were only five Parsis and one Parsi woman. As to the class of the unfortunate victims of vice and debauchery, a Parsi has not hesitated to affirm thatnot oneof his co-religionists could have been accused of living on the wages of shame.15Travellers have made the same remarks. Thus, according to Mandelslo, adultery and lewdness were considered by the Parsis as the greatest sins they could commit, and which they would doubtless have punished with death if they themselves had the administration of justice (seeVoyages, &c., trans. Wicquefort, p. 184). We may state in this connection that Anquetil gives a precise account of a summary execution under the sanction of the Punchayet, and with the approbation of the Mahomedan governor of Bharooch (seeZend-Avesta, vol. ii. p. 606); and Stavorinus, at the end of the century, makes mention of Parsi women who had been preserved in the right path by the fear of punishment (seeVoyages, &c., vol. I, ch. xxviii. p. 363).The following is a division, under seven heads, of the occupations of the Parsis, as shown in the census of 1881:—Men.Women.Professions1,94059Servants162,079416Merchants3,3172Agriculturists672Manufacturers3,61087Not classified565139Sundry13,73722,579There is some reason for not wondering at the disinclination of the Parsis for agriculture and the profession of arms. Agriculture had been very flourishing in the hands of the first colonists; but tastes changed, and from men of the field they became men of the town. At the beginning of the century some of them were still in possession of vast tracts of land, and spent much money in improving them. But these gradually passed into other hands, a circumstance in any case greatly to be regretted.17As to their apparent repugnance for military service we will see what an enlightened Parsi, who has in this case made himself the spokesman of his co-religionists, has to say. As a matter of fact, the Persians in olden times had distinguished themselves amongst all by their valour and courage. In the inscription engraved on his tomb at Nakch-i-Roustam, King Darius might well say, with a just feeling of pride, that they had only to look at the images of those who supported his throne to know into what distant places the Persian soldier had carried his arms! The famous struggles maintained by the Ardeshirs, the Shapoors, and the Noshirvans show that this warlike temper had not subsided. Why thenshould the descendants of such heroes abstain from taking part in military exercises and in defending the country18?Mr. Dosabhai Framji Karaka gives the following explanation of this aversion.19In the first place he indignantly repudiates the theory put forward by certain European authors that it proceeds purely from religious motives, on account of the worship they are supposed to pay to fire, which would prevent them from handling a cannon or shouldering a gun. Nothing at all in fact prevents them from making use of fire in the handling of offensive and defensive weapons. At the time of certain riots in Bombay, gunsmiths’ shops were seen to be rapidly emptied by the Parsis, and thirty-five years back they were enthusiastic in joining the first volunteer movement; but in 1877 only Europeans were invited to join. Still, protests Mr. D. F. Karaka, there are certainly no natives more eager than the Parsis to share in the defence of British interests. In several places they have joined the volunteersand have obtained much-envied distinctions.20They are able to attain a high degree of skill in the handling of firearms; for example, Mr. Dorabji Padamji, son of the late Khan Bahadur Padamji Pestonji, is one of the best shots in India.21The most serious consideration which prevents a Parsi from enrolling himself in the army seems therefore, to us, to be the insufficiency of the pay. We only repeat it: it is a Parsee who says this. We have no desire either to weaken their motives or to exaggerate their grievances. We are well aware that these are very delicate questions, and require to be treated with care and skill, since they concern the relations of devoted subjects with a government of which they are proud. Onthe other hand, when we take into consideration the moral worth and intelligent co-operation which the Parsis bring to the service of this same government, we are not at all surprised at the conclusion which we see so clearly formulated.22Native soldiers, whether Hindoos or Mussulmans, are paid at the rate of seven rupees a month, about fourteen shillings (17 fr. 50 c.), including rations, while a Parsi filling the most modest employment of a cook or a servant earns double that sum. During certain disturbances when Bombay was deprived of its European troops, many Parsis would willingly have enrolled themselves in the army if they had been given the pay of European soldiers. It is a matter of regret to them, perhaps a sort of degradation of which they feel the keenness, at being obliged to put forward pecuniary considerations; but their mode of life, even that of the poorest among them, cannot be compared with that of Hindoos and Mussalmans of the sameclass. These can live on seven rupees a month; Hindoos and Mahomedans of the same family are content with one room, a thing which the humblest Parsi would never allow. The Hindoo or Mussulman woman hardly requires more than one or twosaris, costing about three rupees, to clothe herself, and her children can go naked till the age of ten years. But as for the Parsi woman she requires severalsaris, trousers, shirts and slippers, besides suitable clothing for her children. How can a Parsi soldier then manage to live and bring up his family on seven rupees a month?Mr. Karaka ends his long and eloquent appeal with a sentence which sounds the true keynote of the regret felt by the Parsis at being merely compared with the natives when they felt themselves to be morally and intellectually their superiors. Why are they not provided with commissions in the army like the Germans and other Europeans?23Then only will they feel completely identified with the British nation.24The Parsis in India are divided into two sects, the Shahanshahis and the Kadmis.25When Anquetil Duperron visited India this division already existed, and he found them “more excited against each other than the Mahomedan sects of Omar and Ali.” The Parsis, however, do not admit this. This division has nothing to do with their faith, and has nothing in common with the division between the Shiahs and the Sunnis. The schism26has arisen simply out of a difference of opinion concerning the exact date of computation of the era of Yezdezard, the last king of the ancient Persian monarchy. This division does not exist amongst the Zoroastrians who have remained behind in their own country.The Parsis reckon their year on a calculation of three hundred and sixty-five days, each month consisting of thirty days. Their year commences with the month ofFarvardin, and ends with the month ofSpendarmad. At the end of three hundred and sixty days, five days, called theGathasare added. The period of five hours and fifty-four seconds does not enter into their computation. The old Persians, therefore, in order to make their calculation agree with the solar year, had made at the end of every hundred and twenty years an intercalation orKabisa, that is to say, they added one month to that period. The Persian Zoroastrians, after the loss of their independence, either through ignorance or simple forgetfulness, had ceased to practise thisKabisa, whilst the Parsis had continued this intercalation during their residence in Khorassan. Hence the origin of the sects with which we have to deal.In 172027Jamasp Vilayati, a learned Zoroastrianfrom Persia, settled in Surat to advise the Mobeds, and it was he who discovered that his co-religionists of India were one month behind their Iranian brethren. Little importance howeverwas attached to this fact. But in 1746 another Iranian, Jamshed, and some Mobeds adopted the date accepted by the Persian Zoroastrians, and took the name of Kadmis.The rest of the community were called Shahanshahis, and preserved the ancient system. Little by little the number of the adherents of Jamshed increased. Now it should be noticed that it was in Surat that this schism among the Parsis first took place, and for some time the harmonious relations between the two did not suffer by it. But two respectable men, Mancherji Kharshedji Seth, of the Shahanshahi sect, and Dhanjisha Manjisha, of the Kadmi sect, managed literally to ignite the powder in spite of their benevolent intentions. In order to get some enlightenment Dhanjisha Manjisha sent to Persia at his own expense a priest from Bharooch, Kavas Rustam Jalal. Born at Bharooch in 1733, this man was well versed in the Arabic and Persian languages. For twelve years he remained in Persia and Turkey, visited Yezd, Ispahan, Shiraz, and Constantinople, and returned to Surat in 1780. During his sojourn in Persia he had obtained an audience with Kerim Khan. Some months before his return Dhanjisha Manjisha had come to Bombay, and had there founded the Kadmi sect under the auspices of Dadiseth, one of the most influential men of the time. Mulla Kavas followed his patron to Bombay and was appointed Dastoor of the Atash-Behram erectedby Dadiseth himself (Dadibhai Nasarwanji) for the Kadmi sect, which he consecrated on the 29th of September, 1783. The following year he quitted Bombay and settled in Hyderabad, in the Deccan, where he was honoured with the friendship of the Nizam. He remained there till his death, which took place in 1802 (Parsee Prâkâsh, p. 92).The Kadmi sect continued to flourish in Bombay, when, at the commencement of the century, rose the great dispute of theKabisa, that is to say, the famous month by which the Kadmis were in advance of the Shahanshahis (Parsee Prâkâsh, pp. 62, 198, 863, 867, &c.). Mulla Firoz,29son of Mulla Kavas, and another distinguishedpriest, Fardunji Marazbanji, constituted themselves the champions of the Kadmi sect, while the mass of the people, guided by Kharshedji Manockji Shroff, grouped themselves under the patronage of the pious Dastoor of the Shahanshahis, Edulji Dorabji Sanjana,30and clung to the date observed by the Parsis since their arrival in India. Meetings were organised to which learned Moguls were invited, in order to offer explanations, and, if possible, to terminate the discussion. The newspapers were full of virulent articles, pamphlets appeared in great numbers, and the people in some cases seemed disposed to settle the question by the right of might, an irrefutable argument.The Shahanshahis maintained that theZoroastrian religion admitted a month’s intercalation at the end of a period of 120 years, and that at the time of the fall of the Persian Empire there had indeed beenoneintercalation during their sojourn in Khorassan, but once they were in India this usage had been abandoned; hence the backwardness by one month from the computation of the Kadmis. The latter declared on the other hand that the intercalation was forbidden in the Zoroastrian calendar, that it was only meant for political emergencies, and that this mode of calculation had never been practised in Khorassan.Modern learning has brought this vexed question within its true limits. Mr. Kharshedji Rustamji Kama, of the Kadmi sect, known by his study of the Zoroastrian religion, has proved, or rather has attempted to prove, in a work on the computation of Yezdezard, that the Shahanshahis and the Kadmis were both in error (1870). The Kadmis were wrong in denying that the Parsee new year commenced on the 21st of March, for from a more exact knowledge of the language of theAvesta, and the deciphering of Pehlvi coins, it is demonstrated that the Zoroastrian religion admitted the intercalation; and the Shahanshahis were equally wrong, for, since the downfall of thePersian Empire, there had been no intercalation as they affirmed. The opinion of the Kadmis, in accordance with the date accepted by the Zoroastrians of Persia, which proves that there had been no intercalation after the fall of the national dynasty, is absolutely correct; but as the intercalation was not ordered by the Zoroastrian religion, it appears that both sides were wrong in the controversy of theKabisa.The greatest disputes had arisen from this religious quarrel; scenes of surprising violence had resulted from it. For instance, in Bharooch (1782–1783) a certain Homaji Jamshedji had struck a pregnant woman and been condemned to death; others got off with mere fines. In the heat of the disputes families became divided; marriages between Kadmis and Shahanshahis were very rare.31At present most of the difficulties have been smoothed down. It happens sometimes that the husband and wife belong to different sects; in that case the children invariably belong to the father’s sect. There areno appreciable differences, the pronunciation alone being at times not quite the same. ThusAhu, Vohu, is pronouncedAhî, Vohîamong the Kadmis. There is also some difference in certain religious ceremonies, and in certain liturgical formulas. But the greatest divergence is in the mention of the month and the date of the day when the worshipper is reciting his prayers. All the feasts are observed by both the sects, but at different dates.The Shahanshahis are greatly superior in numbers to the Kadmis.32The latter can hardly count more than ten to fifteen thousand adherents. Many of them occupy the highest position. Mr. F. N. Patel, the members of the Cama, Dadiseth, and Banaji families, &c., are among them. The Shahanshahis are represented by Sir Jamshedji Jijibhoy, Sir Dinsha Manockji Petit, and many other not less respectable names.IIThe Parsis, at the time of their arrival in India, had made some changes in their national costume with a view to please the princes who had received them. Thus we note the resemblance of theangarakhaand the turban of the men, and of thesarisof the women, with the dress of the Hindoos of Gujerat.Unwin Brothers, Limited, The Gresham Press, Woking and London.1Originally the affairs of the three establishments of the East India Company, in Bengal, Madras, and Bombay, were administered separately, each with a president and a council formed of agents of the Company. The name of Presidency was applied to the whole territory subject to this authority. This expression has no longer its real signification; however, it is still employed in official acts. British India is no longer divided into presidencies, but into provinces, eight of which are very extensive countries, having separate governments. The presidencies of Bombay and Madras are to-day only the provinces of those names.2Its territory extends from latitude 28° 47′ to 13° 53′ N., and from latitude 60° 43′ to 76° 30′ E. British districts, including Sind, contain a total superficial area of 124,465 square miles, and a population, according to the census of 1872, of 16,349,206 souls. The Native States cover a surface of nearly 71,769 square miles, with a population of 8,831,730 inhabitants, which gives, for the surface, a total of 196,234 square miles, and for the population a total of 25,180,936 inhabitants. The State of Baroda is no longer under the direct administration of Bombay, but under that of the Supreme Government; we may, however, consider it from the geographical point of view as forming a part of Bombay. The Portuguese possessions of Goa, Damman, and Diu, with a superficial area of 1,146 square miles and a population of nearly 428,955 souls, are equally comprised in the limits of the Presidency. SeeImp. Gazetteer of India, vol. ii. p. 172 (Ed. of 1881).3See for the explanation of this word, Sir John Strachey,India, pref. and trans. of J. Harmand, chap. vi. p. 145, Paris, 1892.4See Sir William Wilson Hunter, K.C.S.I.,Bombay 1885 to 1890, a study in Indian Administration. London, 1892.5The whole population of India comes to 287,223,431: Brahmins, 207,731,727; aboriginal tribes, 9,280,467; Sikhs, 190,783; Jains, 1,416,633; Zoroastrians, 89,904; Buddhists, 7,131,361; Jews, 17,194; Christians, 2,284,380; Mussulmans, 58,321,164; diverse races, 42,763. SeeStatistical Abstract relating to British India from 1883–84 to 1892–93, 28th November, London, 1894.Distribution of Population according to Religion, Sex and Civil Condition, &c., p. 26, No. 14.6Parsis, 76,774; Hindoos, 21,440,957; Mussulmans, 4,390,995; Christians, 170,009; Jains, 555,209; Jews, 13,547; aboriginal tribes, 292,023; Buddhists, 674; Sikhs, 912; Brahmo-Samaj, 34; diverse races, 51. In no part of India are religions and sects so mixed up as in the Presidency of Bombay. SeeEthnology of Indiaby Mr. Justice Campbell, in theJournal of the Asiatic Society.Supplementary number, vol. xxxv. pt. ii. pp. 140, &c., &c.7The Zoroastrian Calendar for the year of Yezdezard 1262, 16th September, 1892, to 15th September, 1893;printed and published at the Bombay Vartman Press, by Muncherji Hosunji Jagosh, 1892 (Gujerati). The tables are very carefully done; an inquisitive reader will find there the enumeration of the Parsi population of Bombay according to the different districts, comparisons with the previous census and remarks on the community.8SeeZoroastrian Calendar, p. 126.9The disproportion between the two sexes is explained by the general custom, which does not allow the Parsi servants to bring their wives to the cities where they are employed.10Statistics of births, deaths, and marriages amongst the Parsis of Bombay, during the last ten years, in theJournal of the Anthropological Society of Bombay, ii., November 1, pp. 55–65.11We refer to theParsee Prâkâsh, for all those interesting details, those of our readers who can read and understand Gujerati.12“If I have not yet replied to your letter of the 19th November,” he writes, “it is because I desired to make special researches concerning the strange rumour which has been spread by the Syed on the subject of a tribe of Parsis established at Khoten, remaining faithful to the Zoroastrian customs, and still governed by its own kings. I can tell you that it is a legend devoid of foundation, and that Major Rawlinson, so learned in these matters, partakes of my view. I suppose that the Syed, seeing the prosperous condition of his co-religionists in Bombay, imagined that in flattering your vanity he would act on your purse. Besides, the country of Khoten is not theterra incognitawhich he has depicted. I have been in touch with the people who have sojourned there; it is a dependency of China, inhabited by Mussulman subjects of the Empire: the only Chinese who are there form part of the garrison. According to all that has been said to me of Khoten and the adjacent countries, the only difficulty I have had is to define who are the Christian traders who frequent those markets. I think that they are Russians or Nestorian Christians.”13SeeCabool: being a Narrative of a Journey to, and Residence in that City in the years 1836–7–8. By the late Lieut.-Col. Sir Alexander Burnes. London, 1842.14Vivien Saint Martin,New Dictionary of Universal Geography, vol. iii. p. 9. Paris, 1887.15“Returned herself as living on the wages of shame” (see Dosabhai Framji Karaka,Hist. of Parsis, vol. i. chap. iii. p. 99).16The Parsis have never followed certain occupations, as those of a day labourer, palanquin bearer, barber, bleacher, &c., &c.17Let us note the efforts of Sir Richard Temple, Governor of Bombay (1877–80), who, on his way to Naosari, reminded the Parsis of certain verses of theVendidadrelating specially to agricultural or pastoral occupations, and exhorted them to continue such traditions. Since then a rich Parsi of Bharooch, Mr. Rastamji Maneckji, has taken on lease from the chief of Rajpipla, a great stretch of land in the Panch-Mahals, and has cultivated it with success. He has been outstripped by Kavasji Framji Banaji in his beautiful domain of Pawai. Lord Mayo has highly recognised the great importance of agricultural studies, and in 1870 he declared that the progress of India in riches and in civilisation depended on the progress of agriculture. See Strachey,India, trans. Harmand, chap. ix.; Hunter,Bombay, &c., about the question of agricultural education (chap. vi. pp. 158, 159–166), and about the foundation of a Chair of Agriculture at Baroda under the auspices of the Gaekwar, at the suggestion of Lord Reay, (p. 168.)18See for the army in India, Strachey,India, trans. Harmand, chap. iii. pp. 52et seq.; Hunter,Bombay, &c., chap. xiv. pp. 448et seq.19Dosabhai Framji Karaka,Hist. of the Parsis, vol. i. pp. 101et seq.20The enrolment of the Parsis as volunteers, to the exclusion of the other nationalities, has reappeared since the publication of the work of Mr. D. F. Karaka. At Quetta, at Karachi, at Poona the Parsis are admitted freely into the corps of the European Volunteers, and lastly (June, 1894) Mr. Dinsha Dosabhai Khambatta is enrolled as a lieutenant in the “Poona Volunteers”; he is now a lieutenant in the “Quetta Corps.”21Padamji Pestanji is the chief of the Parsi community of Poona; since the last riots, he obtained as a reward of his services the title of Khan Bahadur; he is a member of the Legislative Council and has the rank of a Sirdar of the First Class in the Dekkan.22“We have not the slightest hesitation in saying that the Parsis would be found to be as good and brave soldiers as the Anglo-Saxons, while their loyalty and attachment to the Government they are called upon to serve would always be above suspicion” (seeHist. of the Parsis, vol. i. chap. iii. p. 103).23“For if a German or a European of another nationality can secure a commission in the British Army, why should not a Parsee, who is the born subject of the Queen-Empress?” (SeeHist. of the Parsis, vol. i. chap. iii. p. 104.)24Opinions are divided amongst the Parsis themselves on the subject of their nationality and position in India. The Hon. Mr. P. M. Mehta considers them as natives to the backbone. Mr. Dadabhai Naoroji, M.P., is of the same opinion, whilst a certain number decline to recognise this.25The name of Shahanshahi means “imperial,” and that of Kadmi is drawn fromqadim, “ancient.” The Shahanshahis are also calledRasmis, fromRasm, “custom,” that is to say, that which is followed in India.26On this schism, see Anquetil Duperron,Zend-Avesta, Disc. Prel.p. ccccxxvi.; Wilson,The Parsi Religion, pp. 35, 36; Haug,Essays, pp. 57, 58. Aspandiarji Kamdin resumed the controversy of theKabisain a book appearing in Surat, in 1826:A Historical Account of the Ancient Leap-Year of the Parsis(Gujerati). Mr. K. R. Kama held, in 1869, a series of conferences on the ancient computation of time, and has publishedThe Era of Yezdezard(Gujerati).27This is how Anquetil Duperron relates the incidents of this memorable struggle:28“About forty-six years ago there came from Kirman a very clever Dastoor named Djamasp. He had been sent to re-unite the Parsis divided on the question of thePenom, a double piece of cloth with which the Parsis, on certain occasions, cover a part of the face. Some wished that it should be placed on the dead, others did not like this. Djamasp decided in favour of the latter, according to the custom of Kirman. If this Dastoor had not made the voyage to India, this frivolous contest would have caused streams of blood to flow.“Djamasp is believed to have examined theVendidad, which was current in Gujerat. He found the Pehlvi translation of it too long and not correct in several places. Ignorance was the predominating vice of the Parsis of India. In order to remedy it, the Dastoor of Kirman formed some disciples, Darab at Surat, Djamasp at Naosari, and a third at Bharooch, to whom he taught Zend and Pehlvi. Some time after, tired of the contradictions which he had to endure, he returned to Kirman. The books which this Dastoor has left in India are an exact copy of the Zend and PehlviVendidad, theFeroueschi, the translation of theVadjerguerd, and theNerenguestan. These two works are in Persian, mixed with Zend, and purely on ceremonials.“Darab, the first disciple of Djamasp, and a Dastoor Mobed perfect in the knowledge of Zend and Pehlvi, wished to correct the Pehlvi translation of theVendidadand rectify some portions of the Zend Text, which appeared to him either to have been transposed or to present useless repetitions. He began explaining to young Parsi theologians the works of Zoroaster, which the Mobeds read every day without understanding them. An enslaved people who for a long time practised a thousand ceremonies, the sense and reason of which they were ignorant of, would naturally fall into innumerable abuses. This was what Darab, more learned than the others, observed. The purifications were multiplied; the Zend text was inundated with Pehlvi commentaries, often very inconsistent. Darab at first attempted the way of instruction. But he found a powerful adversary in the person of Manscherdji, the chief of the party who did not like reform, and himself the son of a Mobed.“Another subject of division animated them again, one against the other. Darab had for his father Kaous, of whom I have spoken before, who had received from Dastoor Djamasp the first smatterings of astronomy, according to the principles of Oulough Beg. This Dastoor Mobed having been perfected since then under another Parsi come from Kirman about thirty-six years ago, showed by the Tables of Oulough Beg that theNao rouz(the first day of the year) ought to be advanced by a month, and that consequently there had been an error till then. A letter of the Dastoors of Yezd, dated the 22nd of the month Aban, of the year 1111 of Yezdezard (1742,A.D.) and brought by the Parsi Espendiar, confirmed the discovery of Kaous, but did not tend to protect him from the hatred of his compatriots. It went so far that Darab, sixteen or seventeen years ago, was obliged to withdraw to Damann amongst the Portuguese, and Kaous to Cambay among the English. When I arrived at Surat, almost all the Parsis of India followed the party of Manscherdji because he was rich and powerful; Darab, whose knowledge was recognised even by his adversaries, had some disciples who, in the sequel, showed themselves more freely when the authority of Manscherdji had been lowered at Surat with that of the Dutch, whose agent he was.”28Disc. Prel.pp. cccxxvi.et seq.29Mulla Firoz succeeded his father Mulla Kavas as Dastoor of the Kadmis (1802); when hardly eight years old he had accompanied Mulla Kavas to Persia and had learned Persian and Arabic. In 1786 he wrote in Persian a curious recital of his voyage,Derich Kherde Manjumi. In 1830 he published theAvijéh Dinto refute the arguments of Dastoor Edalji Dorabji Sanjana. The governor of Bombay, Mr. Jonathan Duncan, engaged him to teach Persian, and to translate theDesatir. Mr. Duncan having died, Mulla Firoz continued his work in concert with Mr. William Erskine, and finished it in 1819. He died in 1830 (Parsee Prâkâsh, p. 229) and bequeathed his collection of books in Zend, Pehlvi, &c., to the Kadmi community; the library which contains them is situate in “Fort,” and bears his name. We owe to Mulla Firoz a poem on the conquest of India by the English, theGeorge Namah, which was terminated and published in 1837 by his nephew and successor, Dastoor Rastamji Kaikobadji. On the death of the latter (1854) (Parsee Prâkâsh, p. 635), the Kadmis combined to found amadressawhich they calledMulla Firoz(Parsee Prâkâsh, p. 647).30Edalji Dorabji Sanjana was esteemed for his piety and merits. He was in his time one of the firstsavantsin Zend and Pehlvi; he was equally perfect in Sanscrit. We owe to him several works on the Mazdiene religion, amongst others a book entitledKhorehe Vehijak, which brought forth in reply theAvijéh Dinof Mulla Firoz. He died in 1847 (Parsee Prâkâsh, p. 495).31Most offensive epithets were interchanged between Kadmis and Shahanshahis, such as that of churigar (“churi,” bracelets, bangles; and “gar,” workman) a term of contempt carrying with it an idea of weakness; the children of the two sects pursued one another in the streets, insulting one another. This was hardly fifty years ago.32The sect of the Shahanshahis possesses in Bombay two High Priests—Dastoor Jamaspji Minocherji and Shams ul ulma Dastoor Peshotan Behramji Sanjana; at Poona there is only one, Dastoor Hoshangji Jamaspji. The sect of the Kadmis has also High Priests—Dastoor Kharshedji Phirozji Mulla Firoz, elected by the whole community, who is attached to the Dadiseth Atash-Behram, and Dastoor Kharshedji Bezonji, attached to the Framji Kavasji Banaji Atash-Behram.

IIt is on the western coast of India, in the Bombay Presidency, that we find the most compact gathering of the members of the Parsi community. Since their exodus from Persia the refugees here have maintained themselves successfully, and have gradually acquired wealth and the intellectual superiority which distinguishes them from the other natives of India.The Bombay Presidency, or, to be more exact, the province of Bombay,1comprises twenty-fourBritish districts, and nineteen Native States (Agencies) under the protection of the English Government. Its boundaries are: To the north, the State of Balouchistan, the Panjaub, and the native States of Rajputana; to the east, the Mahratta State of Indore, the Central Provinces, Western Berar and the States of the Nizam of Hyderabad; to the south, the Madras Presidency and the State of Mysore; and to the west, the Arabian Sea. It is divided into four great divisions, made according to the local dialects. On the north lies Sindh or the lower valley and delta of the Indus, a region essentially Mahomedan both historically and as regards the population; then more to the south, Gujerat, containing, on the contrary, the most diverse and mixed elements, and comprising all the districts of the northern coast, the Mahratta country, and the interior districts of the Deccan; and, finally, the provinces where the Canarese language is spoken, divided in their turn into four British districts and eight Native States.2This territory has been formed little by little round the Island of Bombay, ceded to England by the King of Portugal as the dowry of the Infanta Catherine of Braganza. The Portuguese were the first to occupy these parts; in 1498 they arrived at Calicut with Vasco de Gama, and five years later, thanks to the bravery of Albuquerque, they took possession of Goa. Bombay came into their possession in 1532, and for a hundred years they managed to maintain themselves at the head of commerce and traffic. Two rival factories, one English and the other Dutch, were established in Surat in 1613 and 1618. It must be stated that the acquisition of the island of Bombay gave butlittle pleasure to the English, for in 1668, on account of great difficulties, the King transferred it to the East India Company, and in 1686 the control of all the possessions of the Company was transferred from Surat to Bombay, which was made into an independent Presidency (1708) at the time of the amalgamation of the two English Companies. Finally, in 1773, Bombay was placed in a state of dependence under the Governor-General of Bengal, who has since been replaced by the Viceroy of India.It is from Bombay that the English have spread their influence at present so firmly established in these territories. Simply merchants at first, they gradually supplanted their rivals from the Portuguese and Dutch settlements. Soon they aspired to a more solid power, and came into direct conflict with the natives—the Mahrattas—whom they hastened to drive from Colaba, finding their nearness troublesome. After the first Mahratta war, which arose from the contested succession of the Peishwa (1774), the treaty of Salbai permitted the English to settle in Salsette, Elephanta, Karanja, Hog Island, &c. (1782). The fort of Surat was in their hands from 1759, and in 1800 the administration of this town was made over to them bythe Nawab, whose descendants contented themselves with the vain title till 1842.The second Mahratta war had its origin in the treaty of Bassein (1802), by which the Peishwa accepted the subsidiary system—a system since adopted by the English. It resulted in an accession of territory in Gujerat and an increase of moral influence in the Court of the Peishwas and of the Gaekwars. The interval of peace was employed in repressing the invasions of the pirates who were infesting the Gulfs of Cambay and Cutch.In 1807 the States of Kathiawar were placed under the British protectorate, and in 1809 the Rao of Cutch was forced to sign a treaty by which he bound himself to help in the destruction of the pirates; whilst, on the other hand, scarcely had the Peishwa Baji Rao been placed on the throne by an English army when he began plotting for the expulsion of the English from the Deccan. In 1817 he attacked the Resident himself, Mountstuart Elphinstone, who withdrew to Kirkee, where with a few troops he succeeded in routing the entire army of the Peishwa. Soon after the prince submitted to Sir John Malcolm. A pension of £80,000 was secured to the Prince, but he was deprived ofhis States, and Bombay gained in this manner the districts of Poona, Ahmadnagar, Nasik, Kolahpoor, Belgaum, Kaladji, Dharwar, Ahmedabad, and the Konkan. At the same time Holkar abandoned his rights over the districts of Kandesh, and Satara fell into the hands of the English in 1848 on the death of the last descendant of the Mahratta Shivaji. In 1860 the Non-Regulation Districts3of the Panch Mahals were ceded by Scindhia, and in 1861 the southern limits of the Presidency were still further extended by the annexation of the northern district of Canara taken from Madras. From this time the history of the Bombay Presidency is free of incidents; peace reigned, even at the time of the mutiny of 1857. The local army has, however, rendered important services in Afghanistan, Persia, Burmah, China, Aden, and Abyssinia. Entirely occupied in administrative reforms and the welfare of the country, the Government has attained a state of complete prosperity under such men as Mountstuart Elphinstone, Malcolm, and Lord Reay.4According to the general census of 18915the number of Parsis in India rose to 89,904; that is, an increase of 491 over that of the 17th of February, 1881, which gave a total of 85,397. On the 26th of February, 1891, the entire population of the Bombay Presidency, including the Native States and Aden, formed a total of 26,960,421 inhabitants,6of whom 76,774 were Parsis (39,285 males and 37,489 females). The surplus is divided between Madras, Bengal, and the districts of the Gaekwar of Baroda, where is to be seen among other flourishing settlements the ancient community of Naosari. To this number must be added the Parsis ofChina, and of some foreign localities, and the Iranians, 9,269 in number. The exact number of Zoroastrians scattered over the globe we thus find to be a hundred thousand at the most!We refer to theZoroastrian Calendarfor all information concerning statistics, and in a special chapter (pp. 119et seq.) we find a detailed list of the population of the city and the Presidency of Bombay.7We take from it the following table (see next page), which gives the assessment of the population in the different centres. Occupying the first rank we find Bombay with its 47,458 Parsis, and Surat with 12,757; then Broach, Thana, Poona, Karachi, down to the least of the localities, some of which stand for only a simple unit.Table of the Parsi Population in the Bombay Presidency.8Names of Towns and Districts.Not Married.Married.9Widowers and Widows.Total.M.W.M.W.M.W.Bombay140911015398049258810334247458Ahmedabad2301752031751240835Kheda49313927...7153Panch-Mahal4315401333108Bharooch754623702865702593273Surat2990253525973212266115712757Thana1001802845860783343920Colaba3929513279167Ratnagiri6342......15Kanara1...8...1...10Khandeish1197319999108508Nasik1277710875614407Ahmednagar51454137510188Poona62247640238642982026Sohlapore6759544138232Satara3240292418134Belgaum17322151361Dharwar3723404122135Bijapoor84541224Karachi42430131028226651408Hyderabad1710118......46Shikarpoor20927121271Thar and Parkar......1.........1Upper Sindh2...321...8207381548615545154591346537173945Native States606480761495551142511Aden88371384087318214321600316444159941409549276774Considering the importance of Bombay, we will quote from a paper on it, read by Mr. B. B. Patel before theAnthropological Society of Bombay.10We find there the lists of births, deaths and marriages in the city of Bombay from 1881 to 1890. During that period of time the average of births has risen per year to 1,450, and that of married women bearing children to 13.293 per cent. The average of deaths has reached 1,135 (575 of the male sex, 500 of the female sex), and 92 still-born (52 of the male sex and 40 of the female sex). The annual average of mortality among children below the age of five years has been 469 (236 of the male sex and 233 of the female sex); between the ages of five and ten, 27 (13 of the male sex and 14 of the female sex); between the ages of eleven and twenty, 47 (20 of the male sex and 27 of the female sex); between the ages of twenty-one and thirty, 65, in the proportion of 27 to 38 for the two sexes; between the ages of thirty-one and forty, 62, in equal proportions for the two sexes; between the ages of forty-one and sixty, 177 (67 males and 90 females). Above the age of eighty the average reaches 37, of whom 13 are males and 24 females.During these ten years, four persons have died at the age of 100, two at the ages of 101 and 105, and lastly one at the age of 110 years. These centenarians have been all women. The principal cause of mortality among Parsis is fever (Table D); thus of 1,135 deaths, 293 may be attributed to it, 150 to nervous disorders, 91 to affections of the respiratory organs, 70 to dysentery, 38 to phthisis, one hundred to old age, and the rest to diverse other causes, such as measles, pleurisy, diarrhœa, &c., &c. According to the table drawn up by Mr. Patel (Table E), the highest rate of mortality in Bombay is in the Fort, and next to it in Dhobitalao, Baherkote, Khetwady, &c., in proportion to the population of these localities.After the crisis of 1865 a serious decrease of the population in Bombay had been apprehended for a time; but it was an exaggerated fear which disappeared with the census of 1881. It has been proved, on the contrary, that the conditions of life among the Parsis, both as regards mortality and hygiene, have reduced the average of mortality among the individuals, grown-up men, women and children. These latter, well-tended and carefully brought up, supply a splendid race, susceptible of culture, and endowed with perfect health. Accordingly, from 1872 to 1881, the Parsi populationhas increased nearly ten per cent. This increase has continued, and, as we have said, the highest increase has been estimated in 1891 to be 4.91.It is in vain that communities of Parsis have been sought for outside those regions which we have indicated.11About sixty years ago a Mahomedan traveller did try to persuade others of the existence of a Parsi colony at Khoten, a country situated to the south-east of Kaschgar; but Sir Alexander Burnes, in a communication to Mr. Naoroji Fardunji, dissipated this illusion.12We cannot attach any more importance to an assertion recently put forward, and according to which the members of the tribe of the Shiaposch Kafirs, inhabiting the country to the north-east of Cabul, are descendants of the same race, because certain of their usages, as for example their manner of exposing their dead, are similar to those of the Zoroastrians. Sir Alexander Burnes13in narrating his travels in Cabul in 1836–37–38, relates that the most curious of all the visitors to the country of the Kafirs14was a man who came from Cabul towards the year 1829. He gave himself out as a Guebre (fire-worshipper), and an Ibrahumi (follower of Abraham), who had quitted Persia to find some traces of his ancestors. During his sojourn in Cabul he willingly mixed with the Armenians and used to get himself called Sheryar, a name common enough among the modern Parsis. They tried, but in vain, to dissuade him from risking himself amongst the Kafirs; he went to Jalalabad and Lughman,where he left his baggage, and as a simple beggar entered Kafristan by way of Nujjeet. He was absent several months, and on his return was assassinated by the Huzaras of the tribe of Ali-Purast. Malik-Usman, furious at the conduct of his countrymen, exacted a fine of Rs. 2,000 as compensation for the blood shed by them. All these details were given by the Armenians of Cabul to Sir Alexander Burnes, but he could not discover whether the unfortunate Sheryar was a Parsi of Bombay or a Guebre of Kirman. However, a document found in the possession of the traveller, and coming from the Shah of Persia, leads us to believe that the latter hypothesis is the true one.The Census of 1881 enables us to state some interesting facts, which give us an idea of the occupations of the Parsis of Bombay, and of the kind of life led by them. Thus there were at that time 855 priests and persons devoted to religion, 141 teachers, 34 school-mistresses, 33 engineers, 1,384 clerks, and 115employees. Naval construction seemed to be one of their favourite occupations, for out of 46 ship-builders 26 were Parsis. As for the Dubashes or ship-brokers, out of a total of 159, 146 were Parsis. All professions and manual trades were largely represented, withthe exception of that of tailor, which was exercised by only one member of the community. At one time, out of 9,584 beggars in the town of Bombay, there were only five Parsis and one Parsi woman. As to the class of the unfortunate victims of vice and debauchery, a Parsi has not hesitated to affirm thatnot oneof his co-religionists could have been accused of living on the wages of shame.15Travellers have made the same remarks. Thus, according to Mandelslo, adultery and lewdness were considered by the Parsis as the greatest sins they could commit, and which they would doubtless have punished with death if they themselves had the administration of justice (seeVoyages, &c., trans. Wicquefort, p. 184). We may state in this connection that Anquetil gives a precise account of a summary execution under the sanction of the Punchayet, and with the approbation of the Mahomedan governor of Bharooch (seeZend-Avesta, vol. ii. p. 606); and Stavorinus, at the end of the century, makes mention of Parsi women who had been preserved in the right path by the fear of punishment (seeVoyages, &c., vol. I, ch. xxviii. p. 363).The following is a division, under seven heads, of the occupations of the Parsis, as shown in the census of 1881:—Men.Women.Professions1,94059Servants162,079416Merchants3,3172Agriculturists672Manufacturers3,61087Not classified565139Sundry13,73722,579There is some reason for not wondering at the disinclination of the Parsis for agriculture and the profession of arms. Agriculture had been very flourishing in the hands of the first colonists; but tastes changed, and from men of the field they became men of the town. At the beginning of the century some of them were still in possession of vast tracts of land, and spent much money in improving them. But these gradually passed into other hands, a circumstance in any case greatly to be regretted.17As to their apparent repugnance for military service we will see what an enlightened Parsi, who has in this case made himself the spokesman of his co-religionists, has to say. As a matter of fact, the Persians in olden times had distinguished themselves amongst all by their valour and courage. In the inscription engraved on his tomb at Nakch-i-Roustam, King Darius might well say, with a just feeling of pride, that they had only to look at the images of those who supported his throne to know into what distant places the Persian soldier had carried his arms! The famous struggles maintained by the Ardeshirs, the Shapoors, and the Noshirvans show that this warlike temper had not subsided. Why thenshould the descendants of such heroes abstain from taking part in military exercises and in defending the country18?Mr. Dosabhai Framji Karaka gives the following explanation of this aversion.19In the first place he indignantly repudiates the theory put forward by certain European authors that it proceeds purely from religious motives, on account of the worship they are supposed to pay to fire, which would prevent them from handling a cannon or shouldering a gun. Nothing at all in fact prevents them from making use of fire in the handling of offensive and defensive weapons. At the time of certain riots in Bombay, gunsmiths’ shops were seen to be rapidly emptied by the Parsis, and thirty-five years back they were enthusiastic in joining the first volunteer movement; but in 1877 only Europeans were invited to join. Still, protests Mr. D. F. Karaka, there are certainly no natives more eager than the Parsis to share in the defence of British interests. In several places they have joined the volunteersand have obtained much-envied distinctions.20They are able to attain a high degree of skill in the handling of firearms; for example, Mr. Dorabji Padamji, son of the late Khan Bahadur Padamji Pestonji, is one of the best shots in India.21The most serious consideration which prevents a Parsi from enrolling himself in the army seems therefore, to us, to be the insufficiency of the pay. We only repeat it: it is a Parsee who says this. We have no desire either to weaken their motives or to exaggerate their grievances. We are well aware that these are very delicate questions, and require to be treated with care and skill, since they concern the relations of devoted subjects with a government of which they are proud. Onthe other hand, when we take into consideration the moral worth and intelligent co-operation which the Parsis bring to the service of this same government, we are not at all surprised at the conclusion which we see so clearly formulated.22Native soldiers, whether Hindoos or Mussulmans, are paid at the rate of seven rupees a month, about fourteen shillings (17 fr. 50 c.), including rations, while a Parsi filling the most modest employment of a cook or a servant earns double that sum. During certain disturbances when Bombay was deprived of its European troops, many Parsis would willingly have enrolled themselves in the army if they had been given the pay of European soldiers. It is a matter of regret to them, perhaps a sort of degradation of which they feel the keenness, at being obliged to put forward pecuniary considerations; but their mode of life, even that of the poorest among them, cannot be compared with that of Hindoos and Mussalmans of the sameclass. These can live on seven rupees a month; Hindoos and Mahomedans of the same family are content with one room, a thing which the humblest Parsi would never allow. The Hindoo or Mussulman woman hardly requires more than one or twosaris, costing about three rupees, to clothe herself, and her children can go naked till the age of ten years. But as for the Parsi woman she requires severalsaris, trousers, shirts and slippers, besides suitable clothing for her children. How can a Parsi soldier then manage to live and bring up his family on seven rupees a month?Mr. Karaka ends his long and eloquent appeal with a sentence which sounds the true keynote of the regret felt by the Parsis at being merely compared with the natives when they felt themselves to be morally and intellectually their superiors. Why are they not provided with commissions in the army like the Germans and other Europeans?23Then only will they feel completely identified with the British nation.24The Parsis in India are divided into two sects, the Shahanshahis and the Kadmis.25When Anquetil Duperron visited India this division already existed, and he found them “more excited against each other than the Mahomedan sects of Omar and Ali.” The Parsis, however, do not admit this. This division has nothing to do with their faith, and has nothing in common with the division between the Shiahs and the Sunnis. The schism26has arisen simply out of a difference of opinion concerning the exact date of computation of the era of Yezdezard, the last king of the ancient Persian monarchy. This division does not exist amongst the Zoroastrians who have remained behind in their own country.The Parsis reckon their year on a calculation of three hundred and sixty-five days, each month consisting of thirty days. Their year commences with the month ofFarvardin, and ends with the month ofSpendarmad. At the end of three hundred and sixty days, five days, called theGathasare added. The period of five hours and fifty-four seconds does not enter into their computation. The old Persians, therefore, in order to make their calculation agree with the solar year, had made at the end of every hundred and twenty years an intercalation orKabisa, that is to say, they added one month to that period. The Persian Zoroastrians, after the loss of their independence, either through ignorance or simple forgetfulness, had ceased to practise thisKabisa, whilst the Parsis had continued this intercalation during their residence in Khorassan. Hence the origin of the sects with which we have to deal.In 172027Jamasp Vilayati, a learned Zoroastrianfrom Persia, settled in Surat to advise the Mobeds, and it was he who discovered that his co-religionists of India were one month behind their Iranian brethren. Little importance howeverwas attached to this fact. But in 1746 another Iranian, Jamshed, and some Mobeds adopted the date accepted by the Persian Zoroastrians, and took the name of Kadmis.The rest of the community were called Shahanshahis, and preserved the ancient system. Little by little the number of the adherents of Jamshed increased. Now it should be noticed that it was in Surat that this schism among the Parsis first took place, and for some time the harmonious relations between the two did not suffer by it. But two respectable men, Mancherji Kharshedji Seth, of the Shahanshahi sect, and Dhanjisha Manjisha, of the Kadmi sect, managed literally to ignite the powder in spite of their benevolent intentions. In order to get some enlightenment Dhanjisha Manjisha sent to Persia at his own expense a priest from Bharooch, Kavas Rustam Jalal. Born at Bharooch in 1733, this man was well versed in the Arabic and Persian languages. For twelve years he remained in Persia and Turkey, visited Yezd, Ispahan, Shiraz, and Constantinople, and returned to Surat in 1780. During his sojourn in Persia he had obtained an audience with Kerim Khan. Some months before his return Dhanjisha Manjisha had come to Bombay, and had there founded the Kadmi sect under the auspices of Dadiseth, one of the most influential men of the time. Mulla Kavas followed his patron to Bombay and was appointed Dastoor of the Atash-Behram erectedby Dadiseth himself (Dadibhai Nasarwanji) for the Kadmi sect, which he consecrated on the 29th of September, 1783. The following year he quitted Bombay and settled in Hyderabad, in the Deccan, where he was honoured with the friendship of the Nizam. He remained there till his death, which took place in 1802 (Parsee Prâkâsh, p. 92).The Kadmi sect continued to flourish in Bombay, when, at the commencement of the century, rose the great dispute of theKabisa, that is to say, the famous month by which the Kadmis were in advance of the Shahanshahis (Parsee Prâkâsh, pp. 62, 198, 863, 867, &c.). Mulla Firoz,29son of Mulla Kavas, and another distinguishedpriest, Fardunji Marazbanji, constituted themselves the champions of the Kadmi sect, while the mass of the people, guided by Kharshedji Manockji Shroff, grouped themselves under the patronage of the pious Dastoor of the Shahanshahis, Edulji Dorabji Sanjana,30and clung to the date observed by the Parsis since their arrival in India. Meetings were organised to which learned Moguls were invited, in order to offer explanations, and, if possible, to terminate the discussion. The newspapers were full of virulent articles, pamphlets appeared in great numbers, and the people in some cases seemed disposed to settle the question by the right of might, an irrefutable argument.The Shahanshahis maintained that theZoroastrian religion admitted a month’s intercalation at the end of a period of 120 years, and that at the time of the fall of the Persian Empire there had indeed beenoneintercalation during their sojourn in Khorassan, but once they were in India this usage had been abandoned; hence the backwardness by one month from the computation of the Kadmis. The latter declared on the other hand that the intercalation was forbidden in the Zoroastrian calendar, that it was only meant for political emergencies, and that this mode of calculation had never been practised in Khorassan.Modern learning has brought this vexed question within its true limits. Mr. Kharshedji Rustamji Kama, of the Kadmi sect, known by his study of the Zoroastrian religion, has proved, or rather has attempted to prove, in a work on the computation of Yezdezard, that the Shahanshahis and the Kadmis were both in error (1870). The Kadmis were wrong in denying that the Parsee new year commenced on the 21st of March, for from a more exact knowledge of the language of theAvesta, and the deciphering of Pehlvi coins, it is demonstrated that the Zoroastrian religion admitted the intercalation; and the Shahanshahis were equally wrong, for, since the downfall of thePersian Empire, there had been no intercalation as they affirmed. The opinion of the Kadmis, in accordance with the date accepted by the Zoroastrians of Persia, which proves that there had been no intercalation after the fall of the national dynasty, is absolutely correct; but as the intercalation was not ordered by the Zoroastrian religion, it appears that both sides were wrong in the controversy of theKabisa.The greatest disputes had arisen from this religious quarrel; scenes of surprising violence had resulted from it. For instance, in Bharooch (1782–1783) a certain Homaji Jamshedji had struck a pregnant woman and been condemned to death; others got off with mere fines. In the heat of the disputes families became divided; marriages between Kadmis and Shahanshahis were very rare.31At present most of the difficulties have been smoothed down. It happens sometimes that the husband and wife belong to different sects; in that case the children invariably belong to the father’s sect. There areno appreciable differences, the pronunciation alone being at times not quite the same. ThusAhu, Vohu, is pronouncedAhî, Vohîamong the Kadmis. There is also some difference in certain religious ceremonies, and in certain liturgical formulas. But the greatest divergence is in the mention of the month and the date of the day when the worshipper is reciting his prayers. All the feasts are observed by both the sects, but at different dates.The Shahanshahis are greatly superior in numbers to the Kadmis.32The latter can hardly count more than ten to fifteen thousand adherents. Many of them occupy the highest position. Mr. F. N. Patel, the members of the Cama, Dadiseth, and Banaji families, &c., are among them. The Shahanshahis are represented by Sir Jamshedji Jijibhoy, Sir Dinsha Manockji Petit, and many other not less respectable names.

It is on the western coast of India, in the Bombay Presidency, that we find the most compact gathering of the members of the Parsi community. Since their exodus from Persia the refugees here have maintained themselves successfully, and have gradually acquired wealth and the intellectual superiority which distinguishes them from the other natives of India.

The Bombay Presidency, or, to be more exact, the province of Bombay,1comprises twenty-fourBritish districts, and nineteen Native States (Agencies) under the protection of the English Government. Its boundaries are: To the north, the State of Balouchistan, the Panjaub, and the native States of Rajputana; to the east, the Mahratta State of Indore, the Central Provinces, Western Berar and the States of the Nizam of Hyderabad; to the south, the Madras Presidency and the State of Mysore; and to the west, the Arabian Sea. It is divided into four great divisions, made according to the local dialects. On the north lies Sindh or the lower valley and delta of the Indus, a region essentially Mahomedan both historically and as regards the population; then more to the south, Gujerat, containing, on the contrary, the most diverse and mixed elements, and comprising all the districts of the northern coast, the Mahratta country, and the interior districts of the Deccan; and, finally, the provinces where the Canarese language is spoken, divided in their turn into four British districts and eight Native States.2

This territory has been formed little by little round the Island of Bombay, ceded to England by the King of Portugal as the dowry of the Infanta Catherine of Braganza. The Portuguese were the first to occupy these parts; in 1498 they arrived at Calicut with Vasco de Gama, and five years later, thanks to the bravery of Albuquerque, they took possession of Goa. Bombay came into their possession in 1532, and for a hundred years they managed to maintain themselves at the head of commerce and traffic. Two rival factories, one English and the other Dutch, were established in Surat in 1613 and 1618. It must be stated that the acquisition of the island of Bombay gave butlittle pleasure to the English, for in 1668, on account of great difficulties, the King transferred it to the East India Company, and in 1686 the control of all the possessions of the Company was transferred from Surat to Bombay, which was made into an independent Presidency (1708) at the time of the amalgamation of the two English Companies. Finally, in 1773, Bombay was placed in a state of dependence under the Governor-General of Bengal, who has since been replaced by the Viceroy of India.

It is from Bombay that the English have spread their influence at present so firmly established in these territories. Simply merchants at first, they gradually supplanted their rivals from the Portuguese and Dutch settlements. Soon they aspired to a more solid power, and came into direct conflict with the natives—the Mahrattas—whom they hastened to drive from Colaba, finding their nearness troublesome. After the first Mahratta war, which arose from the contested succession of the Peishwa (1774), the treaty of Salbai permitted the English to settle in Salsette, Elephanta, Karanja, Hog Island, &c. (1782). The fort of Surat was in their hands from 1759, and in 1800 the administration of this town was made over to them bythe Nawab, whose descendants contented themselves with the vain title till 1842.

The second Mahratta war had its origin in the treaty of Bassein (1802), by which the Peishwa accepted the subsidiary system—a system since adopted by the English. It resulted in an accession of territory in Gujerat and an increase of moral influence in the Court of the Peishwas and of the Gaekwars. The interval of peace was employed in repressing the invasions of the pirates who were infesting the Gulfs of Cambay and Cutch.

In 1807 the States of Kathiawar were placed under the British protectorate, and in 1809 the Rao of Cutch was forced to sign a treaty by which he bound himself to help in the destruction of the pirates; whilst, on the other hand, scarcely had the Peishwa Baji Rao been placed on the throne by an English army when he began plotting for the expulsion of the English from the Deccan. In 1817 he attacked the Resident himself, Mountstuart Elphinstone, who withdrew to Kirkee, where with a few troops he succeeded in routing the entire army of the Peishwa. Soon after the prince submitted to Sir John Malcolm. A pension of £80,000 was secured to the Prince, but he was deprived ofhis States, and Bombay gained in this manner the districts of Poona, Ahmadnagar, Nasik, Kolahpoor, Belgaum, Kaladji, Dharwar, Ahmedabad, and the Konkan. At the same time Holkar abandoned his rights over the districts of Kandesh, and Satara fell into the hands of the English in 1848 on the death of the last descendant of the Mahratta Shivaji. In 1860 the Non-Regulation Districts3of the Panch Mahals were ceded by Scindhia, and in 1861 the southern limits of the Presidency were still further extended by the annexation of the northern district of Canara taken from Madras. From this time the history of the Bombay Presidency is free of incidents; peace reigned, even at the time of the mutiny of 1857. The local army has, however, rendered important services in Afghanistan, Persia, Burmah, China, Aden, and Abyssinia. Entirely occupied in administrative reforms and the welfare of the country, the Government has attained a state of complete prosperity under such men as Mountstuart Elphinstone, Malcolm, and Lord Reay.4

According to the general census of 18915the number of Parsis in India rose to 89,904; that is, an increase of 491 over that of the 17th of February, 1881, which gave a total of 85,397. On the 26th of February, 1891, the entire population of the Bombay Presidency, including the Native States and Aden, formed a total of 26,960,421 inhabitants,6of whom 76,774 were Parsis (39,285 males and 37,489 females). The surplus is divided between Madras, Bengal, and the districts of the Gaekwar of Baroda, where is to be seen among other flourishing settlements the ancient community of Naosari. To this number must be added the Parsis ofChina, and of some foreign localities, and the Iranians, 9,269 in number. The exact number of Zoroastrians scattered over the globe we thus find to be a hundred thousand at the most!

We refer to theZoroastrian Calendarfor all information concerning statistics, and in a special chapter (pp. 119et seq.) we find a detailed list of the population of the city and the Presidency of Bombay.7We take from it the following table (see next page), which gives the assessment of the population in the different centres. Occupying the first rank we find Bombay with its 47,458 Parsis, and Surat with 12,757; then Broach, Thana, Poona, Karachi, down to the least of the localities, some of which stand for only a simple unit.

Table of the Parsi Population in the Bombay Presidency.8Names of Towns and Districts.Not Married.Married.9Widowers and Widows.Total.M.W.M.W.M.W.Bombay140911015398049258810334247458Ahmedabad2301752031751240835Kheda49313927...7153Panch-Mahal4315401333108Bharooch754623702865702593273Surat2990253525973212266115712757Thana1001802845860783343920Colaba3929513279167Ratnagiri6342......15Kanara1...8...1...10Khandeish1197319999108508Nasik1277710875614407Ahmednagar51454137510188Poona62247640238642982026Sohlapore6759544138232Satara3240292418134Belgaum17322151361Dharwar3723404122135Bijapoor84541224Karachi42430131028226651408Hyderabad1710118......46Shikarpoor20927121271Thar and Parkar......1.........1Upper Sindh2...321...8207381548615545154591346537173945Native States606480761495551142511Aden88371384087318214321600316444159941409549276774

Considering the importance of Bombay, we will quote from a paper on it, read by Mr. B. B. Patel before theAnthropological Society of Bombay.10We find there the lists of births, deaths and marriages in the city of Bombay from 1881 to 1890. During that period of time the average of births has risen per year to 1,450, and that of married women bearing children to 13.293 per cent. The average of deaths has reached 1,135 (575 of the male sex, 500 of the female sex), and 92 still-born (52 of the male sex and 40 of the female sex). The annual average of mortality among children below the age of five years has been 469 (236 of the male sex and 233 of the female sex); between the ages of five and ten, 27 (13 of the male sex and 14 of the female sex); between the ages of eleven and twenty, 47 (20 of the male sex and 27 of the female sex); between the ages of twenty-one and thirty, 65, in the proportion of 27 to 38 for the two sexes; between the ages of thirty-one and forty, 62, in equal proportions for the two sexes; between the ages of forty-one and sixty, 177 (67 males and 90 females). Above the age of eighty the average reaches 37, of whom 13 are males and 24 females.

During these ten years, four persons have died at the age of 100, two at the ages of 101 and 105, and lastly one at the age of 110 years. These centenarians have been all women. The principal cause of mortality among Parsis is fever (Table D); thus of 1,135 deaths, 293 may be attributed to it, 150 to nervous disorders, 91 to affections of the respiratory organs, 70 to dysentery, 38 to phthisis, one hundred to old age, and the rest to diverse other causes, such as measles, pleurisy, diarrhœa, &c., &c. According to the table drawn up by Mr. Patel (Table E), the highest rate of mortality in Bombay is in the Fort, and next to it in Dhobitalao, Baherkote, Khetwady, &c., in proportion to the population of these localities.

After the crisis of 1865 a serious decrease of the population in Bombay had been apprehended for a time; but it was an exaggerated fear which disappeared with the census of 1881. It has been proved, on the contrary, that the conditions of life among the Parsis, both as regards mortality and hygiene, have reduced the average of mortality among the individuals, grown-up men, women and children. These latter, well-tended and carefully brought up, supply a splendid race, susceptible of culture, and endowed with perfect health. Accordingly, from 1872 to 1881, the Parsi populationhas increased nearly ten per cent. This increase has continued, and, as we have said, the highest increase has been estimated in 1891 to be 4.91.

It is in vain that communities of Parsis have been sought for outside those regions which we have indicated.11About sixty years ago a Mahomedan traveller did try to persuade others of the existence of a Parsi colony at Khoten, a country situated to the south-east of Kaschgar; but Sir Alexander Burnes, in a communication to Mr. Naoroji Fardunji, dissipated this illusion.12

We cannot attach any more importance to an assertion recently put forward, and according to which the members of the tribe of the Shiaposch Kafirs, inhabiting the country to the north-east of Cabul, are descendants of the same race, because certain of their usages, as for example their manner of exposing their dead, are similar to those of the Zoroastrians. Sir Alexander Burnes13in narrating his travels in Cabul in 1836–37–38, relates that the most curious of all the visitors to the country of the Kafirs14was a man who came from Cabul towards the year 1829. He gave himself out as a Guebre (fire-worshipper), and an Ibrahumi (follower of Abraham), who had quitted Persia to find some traces of his ancestors. During his sojourn in Cabul he willingly mixed with the Armenians and used to get himself called Sheryar, a name common enough among the modern Parsis. They tried, but in vain, to dissuade him from risking himself amongst the Kafirs; he went to Jalalabad and Lughman,where he left his baggage, and as a simple beggar entered Kafristan by way of Nujjeet. He was absent several months, and on his return was assassinated by the Huzaras of the tribe of Ali-Purast. Malik-Usman, furious at the conduct of his countrymen, exacted a fine of Rs. 2,000 as compensation for the blood shed by them. All these details were given by the Armenians of Cabul to Sir Alexander Burnes, but he could not discover whether the unfortunate Sheryar was a Parsi of Bombay or a Guebre of Kirman. However, a document found in the possession of the traveller, and coming from the Shah of Persia, leads us to believe that the latter hypothesis is the true one.

The Census of 1881 enables us to state some interesting facts, which give us an idea of the occupations of the Parsis of Bombay, and of the kind of life led by them. Thus there were at that time 855 priests and persons devoted to religion, 141 teachers, 34 school-mistresses, 33 engineers, 1,384 clerks, and 115employees. Naval construction seemed to be one of their favourite occupations, for out of 46 ship-builders 26 were Parsis. As for the Dubashes or ship-brokers, out of a total of 159, 146 were Parsis. All professions and manual trades were largely represented, withthe exception of that of tailor, which was exercised by only one member of the community. At one time, out of 9,584 beggars in the town of Bombay, there were only five Parsis and one Parsi woman. As to the class of the unfortunate victims of vice and debauchery, a Parsi has not hesitated to affirm thatnot oneof his co-religionists could have been accused of living on the wages of shame.15Travellers have made the same remarks. Thus, according to Mandelslo, adultery and lewdness were considered by the Parsis as the greatest sins they could commit, and which they would doubtless have punished with death if they themselves had the administration of justice (seeVoyages, &c., trans. Wicquefort, p. 184). We may state in this connection that Anquetil gives a precise account of a summary execution under the sanction of the Punchayet, and with the approbation of the Mahomedan governor of Bharooch (seeZend-Avesta, vol. ii. p. 606); and Stavorinus, at the end of the century, makes mention of Parsi women who had been preserved in the right path by the fear of punishment (seeVoyages, &c., vol. I, ch. xxviii. p. 363).

The following is a division, under seven heads, of the occupations of the Parsis, as shown in the census of 1881:—

Men.Women.Professions1,94059Servants162,079416Merchants3,3172Agriculturists672Manufacturers3,61087Not classified565139Sundry13,73722,579

There is some reason for not wondering at the disinclination of the Parsis for agriculture and the profession of arms. Agriculture had been very flourishing in the hands of the first colonists; but tastes changed, and from men of the field they became men of the town. At the beginning of the century some of them were still in possession of vast tracts of land, and spent much money in improving them. But these gradually passed into other hands, a circumstance in any case greatly to be regretted.17

As to their apparent repugnance for military service we will see what an enlightened Parsi, who has in this case made himself the spokesman of his co-religionists, has to say. As a matter of fact, the Persians in olden times had distinguished themselves amongst all by their valour and courage. In the inscription engraved on his tomb at Nakch-i-Roustam, King Darius might well say, with a just feeling of pride, that they had only to look at the images of those who supported his throne to know into what distant places the Persian soldier had carried his arms! The famous struggles maintained by the Ardeshirs, the Shapoors, and the Noshirvans show that this warlike temper had not subsided. Why thenshould the descendants of such heroes abstain from taking part in military exercises and in defending the country18?

Mr. Dosabhai Framji Karaka gives the following explanation of this aversion.19In the first place he indignantly repudiates the theory put forward by certain European authors that it proceeds purely from religious motives, on account of the worship they are supposed to pay to fire, which would prevent them from handling a cannon or shouldering a gun. Nothing at all in fact prevents them from making use of fire in the handling of offensive and defensive weapons. At the time of certain riots in Bombay, gunsmiths’ shops were seen to be rapidly emptied by the Parsis, and thirty-five years back they were enthusiastic in joining the first volunteer movement; but in 1877 only Europeans were invited to join. Still, protests Mr. D. F. Karaka, there are certainly no natives more eager than the Parsis to share in the defence of British interests. In several places they have joined the volunteersand have obtained much-envied distinctions.20They are able to attain a high degree of skill in the handling of firearms; for example, Mr. Dorabji Padamji, son of the late Khan Bahadur Padamji Pestonji, is one of the best shots in India.21

The most serious consideration which prevents a Parsi from enrolling himself in the army seems therefore, to us, to be the insufficiency of the pay. We only repeat it: it is a Parsee who says this. We have no desire either to weaken their motives or to exaggerate their grievances. We are well aware that these are very delicate questions, and require to be treated with care and skill, since they concern the relations of devoted subjects with a government of which they are proud. Onthe other hand, when we take into consideration the moral worth and intelligent co-operation which the Parsis bring to the service of this same government, we are not at all surprised at the conclusion which we see so clearly formulated.22

Native soldiers, whether Hindoos or Mussulmans, are paid at the rate of seven rupees a month, about fourteen shillings (17 fr. 50 c.), including rations, while a Parsi filling the most modest employment of a cook or a servant earns double that sum. During certain disturbances when Bombay was deprived of its European troops, many Parsis would willingly have enrolled themselves in the army if they had been given the pay of European soldiers. It is a matter of regret to them, perhaps a sort of degradation of which they feel the keenness, at being obliged to put forward pecuniary considerations; but their mode of life, even that of the poorest among them, cannot be compared with that of Hindoos and Mussalmans of the sameclass. These can live on seven rupees a month; Hindoos and Mahomedans of the same family are content with one room, a thing which the humblest Parsi would never allow. The Hindoo or Mussulman woman hardly requires more than one or twosaris, costing about three rupees, to clothe herself, and her children can go naked till the age of ten years. But as for the Parsi woman she requires severalsaris, trousers, shirts and slippers, besides suitable clothing for her children. How can a Parsi soldier then manage to live and bring up his family on seven rupees a month?

Mr. Karaka ends his long and eloquent appeal with a sentence which sounds the true keynote of the regret felt by the Parsis at being merely compared with the natives when they felt themselves to be morally and intellectually their superiors. Why are they not provided with commissions in the army like the Germans and other Europeans?23Then only will they feel completely identified with the British nation.24

The Parsis in India are divided into two sects, the Shahanshahis and the Kadmis.25When Anquetil Duperron visited India this division already existed, and he found them “more excited against each other than the Mahomedan sects of Omar and Ali.” The Parsis, however, do not admit this. This division has nothing to do with their faith, and has nothing in common with the division between the Shiahs and the Sunnis. The schism26has arisen simply out of a difference of opinion concerning the exact date of computation of the era of Yezdezard, the last king of the ancient Persian monarchy. This division does not exist amongst the Zoroastrians who have remained behind in their own country.

The Parsis reckon their year on a calculation of three hundred and sixty-five days, each month consisting of thirty days. Their year commences with the month ofFarvardin, and ends with the month ofSpendarmad. At the end of three hundred and sixty days, five days, called theGathasare added. The period of five hours and fifty-four seconds does not enter into their computation. The old Persians, therefore, in order to make their calculation agree with the solar year, had made at the end of every hundred and twenty years an intercalation orKabisa, that is to say, they added one month to that period. The Persian Zoroastrians, after the loss of their independence, either through ignorance or simple forgetfulness, had ceased to practise thisKabisa, whilst the Parsis had continued this intercalation during their residence in Khorassan. Hence the origin of the sects with which we have to deal.

In 172027Jamasp Vilayati, a learned Zoroastrianfrom Persia, settled in Surat to advise the Mobeds, and it was he who discovered that his co-religionists of India were one month behind their Iranian brethren. Little importance howeverwas attached to this fact. But in 1746 another Iranian, Jamshed, and some Mobeds adopted the date accepted by the Persian Zoroastrians, and took the name of Kadmis.The rest of the community were called Shahanshahis, and preserved the ancient system. Little by little the number of the adherents of Jamshed increased. Now it should be noticed that it was in Surat that this schism among the Parsis first took place, and for some time the harmonious relations between the two did not suffer by it. But two respectable men, Mancherji Kharshedji Seth, of the Shahanshahi sect, and Dhanjisha Manjisha, of the Kadmi sect, managed literally to ignite the powder in spite of their benevolent intentions. In order to get some enlightenment Dhanjisha Manjisha sent to Persia at his own expense a priest from Bharooch, Kavas Rustam Jalal. Born at Bharooch in 1733, this man was well versed in the Arabic and Persian languages. For twelve years he remained in Persia and Turkey, visited Yezd, Ispahan, Shiraz, and Constantinople, and returned to Surat in 1780. During his sojourn in Persia he had obtained an audience with Kerim Khan. Some months before his return Dhanjisha Manjisha had come to Bombay, and had there founded the Kadmi sect under the auspices of Dadiseth, one of the most influential men of the time. Mulla Kavas followed his patron to Bombay and was appointed Dastoor of the Atash-Behram erectedby Dadiseth himself (Dadibhai Nasarwanji) for the Kadmi sect, which he consecrated on the 29th of September, 1783. The following year he quitted Bombay and settled in Hyderabad, in the Deccan, where he was honoured with the friendship of the Nizam. He remained there till his death, which took place in 1802 (Parsee Prâkâsh, p. 92).

The Kadmi sect continued to flourish in Bombay, when, at the commencement of the century, rose the great dispute of theKabisa, that is to say, the famous month by which the Kadmis were in advance of the Shahanshahis (Parsee Prâkâsh, pp. 62, 198, 863, 867, &c.). Mulla Firoz,29son of Mulla Kavas, and another distinguishedpriest, Fardunji Marazbanji, constituted themselves the champions of the Kadmi sect, while the mass of the people, guided by Kharshedji Manockji Shroff, grouped themselves under the patronage of the pious Dastoor of the Shahanshahis, Edulji Dorabji Sanjana,30and clung to the date observed by the Parsis since their arrival in India. Meetings were organised to which learned Moguls were invited, in order to offer explanations, and, if possible, to terminate the discussion. The newspapers were full of virulent articles, pamphlets appeared in great numbers, and the people in some cases seemed disposed to settle the question by the right of might, an irrefutable argument.

The Shahanshahis maintained that theZoroastrian religion admitted a month’s intercalation at the end of a period of 120 years, and that at the time of the fall of the Persian Empire there had indeed beenoneintercalation during their sojourn in Khorassan, but once they were in India this usage had been abandoned; hence the backwardness by one month from the computation of the Kadmis. The latter declared on the other hand that the intercalation was forbidden in the Zoroastrian calendar, that it was only meant for political emergencies, and that this mode of calculation had never been practised in Khorassan.

Modern learning has brought this vexed question within its true limits. Mr. Kharshedji Rustamji Kama, of the Kadmi sect, known by his study of the Zoroastrian religion, has proved, or rather has attempted to prove, in a work on the computation of Yezdezard, that the Shahanshahis and the Kadmis were both in error (1870). The Kadmis were wrong in denying that the Parsee new year commenced on the 21st of March, for from a more exact knowledge of the language of theAvesta, and the deciphering of Pehlvi coins, it is demonstrated that the Zoroastrian religion admitted the intercalation; and the Shahanshahis were equally wrong, for, since the downfall of thePersian Empire, there had been no intercalation as they affirmed. The opinion of the Kadmis, in accordance with the date accepted by the Zoroastrians of Persia, which proves that there had been no intercalation after the fall of the national dynasty, is absolutely correct; but as the intercalation was not ordered by the Zoroastrian religion, it appears that both sides were wrong in the controversy of theKabisa.

The greatest disputes had arisen from this religious quarrel; scenes of surprising violence had resulted from it. For instance, in Bharooch (1782–1783) a certain Homaji Jamshedji had struck a pregnant woman and been condemned to death; others got off with mere fines. In the heat of the disputes families became divided; marriages between Kadmis and Shahanshahis were very rare.31At present most of the difficulties have been smoothed down. It happens sometimes that the husband and wife belong to different sects; in that case the children invariably belong to the father’s sect. There areno appreciable differences, the pronunciation alone being at times not quite the same. ThusAhu, Vohu, is pronouncedAhî, Vohîamong the Kadmis. There is also some difference in certain religious ceremonies, and in certain liturgical formulas. But the greatest divergence is in the mention of the month and the date of the day when the worshipper is reciting his prayers. All the feasts are observed by both the sects, but at different dates.

The Shahanshahis are greatly superior in numbers to the Kadmis.32The latter can hardly count more than ten to fifteen thousand adherents. Many of them occupy the highest position. Mr. F. N. Patel, the members of the Cama, Dadiseth, and Banaji families, &c., are among them. The Shahanshahis are represented by Sir Jamshedji Jijibhoy, Sir Dinsha Manockji Petit, and many other not less respectable names.

IIThe Parsis, at the time of their arrival in India, had made some changes in their national costume with a view to please the princes who had received them. Thus we note the resemblance of theangarakhaand the turban of the men, and of thesarisof the women, with the dress of the Hindoos of Gujerat.Unwin Brothers, Limited, The Gresham Press, Woking and London.

The Parsis, at the time of their arrival in India, had made some changes in their national costume with a view to please the princes who had received them. Thus we note the resemblance of theangarakhaand the turban of the men, and of thesarisof the women, with the dress of the Hindoos of Gujerat.

Unwin Brothers, Limited, The Gresham Press, Woking and London.

1Originally the affairs of the three establishments of the East India Company, in Bengal, Madras, and Bombay, were administered separately, each with a president and a council formed of agents of the Company. The name of Presidency was applied to the whole territory subject to this authority. This expression has no longer its real signification; however, it is still employed in official acts. British India is no longer divided into presidencies, but into provinces, eight of which are very extensive countries, having separate governments. The presidencies of Bombay and Madras are to-day only the provinces of those names.2Its territory extends from latitude 28° 47′ to 13° 53′ N., and from latitude 60° 43′ to 76° 30′ E. British districts, including Sind, contain a total superficial area of 124,465 square miles, and a population, according to the census of 1872, of 16,349,206 souls. The Native States cover a surface of nearly 71,769 square miles, with a population of 8,831,730 inhabitants, which gives, for the surface, a total of 196,234 square miles, and for the population a total of 25,180,936 inhabitants. The State of Baroda is no longer under the direct administration of Bombay, but under that of the Supreme Government; we may, however, consider it from the geographical point of view as forming a part of Bombay. The Portuguese possessions of Goa, Damman, and Diu, with a superficial area of 1,146 square miles and a population of nearly 428,955 souls, are equally comprised in the limits of the Presidency. SeeImp. Gazetteer of India, vol. ii. p. 172 (Ed. of 1881).3See for the explanation of this word, Sir John Strachey,India, pref. and trans. of J. Harmand, chap. vi. p. 145, Paris, 1892.4See Sir William Wilson Hunter, K.C.S.I.,Bombay 1885 to 1890, a study in Indian Administration. London, 1892.5The whole population of India comes to 287,223,431: Brahmins, 207,731,727; aboriginal tribes, 9,280,467; Sikhs, 190,783; Jains, 1,416,633; Zoroastrians, 89,904; Buddhists, 7,131,361; Jews, 17,194; Christians, 2,284,380; Mussulmans, 58,321,164; diverse races, 42,763. SeeStatistical Abstract relating to British India from 1883–84 to 1892–93, 28th November, London, 1894.Distribution of Population according to Religion, Sex and Civil Condition, &c., p. 26, No. 14.6Parsis, 76,774; Hindoos, 21,440,957; Mussulmans, 4,390,995; Christians, 170,009; Jains, 555,209; Jews, 13,547; aboriginal tribes, 292,023; Buddhists, 674; Sikhs, 912; Brahmo-Samaj, 34; diverse races, 51. In no part of India are religions and sects so mixed up as in the Presidency of Bombay. SeeEthnology of Indiaby Mr. Justice Campbell, in theJournal of the Asiatic Society.Supplementary number, vol. xxxv. pt. ii. pp. 140, &c., &c.7The Zoroastrian Calendar for the year of Yezdezard 1262, 16th September, 1892, to 15th September, 1893;printed and published at the Bombay Vartman Press, by Muncherji Hosunji Jagosh, 1892 (Gujerati). The tables are very carefully done; an inquisitive reader will find there the enumeration of the Parsi population of Bombay according to the different districts, comparisons with the previous census and remarks on the community.8SeeZoroastrian Calendar, p. 126.9The disproportion between the two sexes is explained by the general custom, which does not allow the Parsi servants to bring their wives to the cities where they are employed.10Statistics of births, deaths, and marriages amongst the Parsis of Bombay, during the last ten years, in theJournal of the Anthropological Society of Bombay, ii., November 1, pp. 55–65.11We refer to theParsee Prâkâsh, for all those interesting details, those of our readers who can read and understand Gujerati.12“If I have not yet replied to your letter of the 19th November,” he writes, “it is because I desired to make special researches concerning the strange rumour which has been spread by the Syed on the subject of a tribe of Parsis established at Khoten, remaining faithful to the Zoroastrian customs, and still governed by its own kings. I can tell you that it is a legend devoid of foundation, and that Major Rawlinson, so learned in these matters, partakes of my view. I suppose that the Syed, seeing the prosperous condition of his co-religionists in Bombay, imagined that in flattering your vanity he would act on your purse. Besides, the country of Khoten is not theterra incognitawhich he has depicted. I have been in touch with the people who have sojourned there; it is a dependency of China, inhabited by Mussulman subjects of the Empire: the only Chinese who are there form part of the garrison. According to all that has been said to me of Khoten and the adjacent countries, the only difficulty I have had is to define who are the Christian traders who frequent those markets. I think that they are Russians or Nestorian Christians.”13SeeCabool: being a Narrative of a Journey to, and Residence in that City in the years 1836–7–8. By the late Lieut.-Col. Sir Alexander Burnes. London, 1842.14Vivien Saint Martin,New Dictionary of Universal Geography, vol. iii. p. 9. Paris, 1887.15“Returned herself as living on the wages of shame” (see Dosabhai Framji Karaka,Hist. of Parsis, vol. i. chap. iii. p. 99).16The Parsis have never followed certain occupations, as those of a day labourer, palanquin bearer, barber, bleacher, &c., &c.17Let us note the efforts of Sir Richard Temple, Governor of Bombay (1877–80), who, on his way to Naosari, reminded the Parsis of certain verses of theVendidadrelating specially to agricultural or pastoral occupations, and exhorted them to continue such traditions. Since then a rich Parsi of Bharooch, Mr. Rastamji Maneckji, has taken on lease from the chief of Rajpipla, a great stretch of land in the Panch-Mahals, and has cultivated it with success. He has been outstripped by Kavasji Framji Banaji in his beautiful domain of Pawai. Lord Mayo has highly recognised the great importance of agricultural studies, and in 1870 he declared that the progress of India in riches and in civilisation depended on the progress of agriculture. See Strachey,India, trans. Harmand, chap. ix.; Hunter,Bombay, &c., about the question of agricultural education (chap. vi. pp. 158, 159–166), and about the foundation of a Chair of Agriculture at Baroda under the auspices of the Gaekwar, at the suggestion of Lord Reay, (p. 168.)18See for the army in India, Strachey,India, trans. Harmand, chap. iii. pp. 52et seq.; Hunter,Bombay, &c., chap. xiv. pp. 448et seq.19Dosabhai Framji Karaka,Hist. of the Parsis, vol. i. pp. 101et seq.20The enrolment of the Parsis as volunteers, to the exclusion of the other nationalities, has reappeared since the publication of the work of Mr. D. F. Karaka. At Quetta, at Karachi, at Poona the Parsis are admitted freely into the corps of the European Volunteers, and lastly (June, 1894) Mr. Dinsha Dosabhai Khambatta is enrolled as a lieutenant in the “Poona Volunteers”; he is now a lieutenant in the “Quetta Corps.”21Padamji Pestanji is the chief of the Parsi community of Poona; since the last riots, he obtained as a reward of his services the title of Khan Bahadur; he is a member of the Legislative Council and has the rank of a Sirdar of the First Class in the Dekkan.22“We have not the slightest hesitation in saying that the Parsis would be found to be as good and brave soldiers as the Anglo-Saxons, while their loyalty and attachment to the Government they are called upon to serve would always be above suspicion” (seeHist. of the Parsis, vol. i. chap. iii. p. 103).23“For if a German or a European of another nationality can secure a commission in the British Army, why should not a Parsee, who is the born subject of the Queen-Empress?” (SeeHist. of the Parsis, vol. i. chap. iii. p. 104.)24Opinions are divided amongst the Parsis themselves on the subject of their nationality and position in India. The Hon. Mr. P. M. Mehta considers them as natives to the backbone. Mr. Dadabhai Naoroji, M.P., is of the same opinion, whilst a certain number decline to recognise this.25The name of Shahanshahi means “imperial,” and that of Kadmi is drawn fromqadim, “ancient.” The Shahanshahis are also calledRasmis, fromRasm, “custom,” that is to say, that which is followed in India.26On this schism, see Anquetil Duperron,Zend-Avesta, Disc. Prel.p. ccccxxvi.; Wilson,The Parsi Religion, pp. 35, 36; Haug,Essays, pp. 57, 58. Aspandiarji Kamdin resumed the controversy of theKabisain a book appearing in Surat, in 1826:A Historical Account of the Ancient Leap-Year of the Parsis(Gujerati). Mr. K. R. Kama held, in 1869, a series of conferences on the ancient computation of time, and has publishedThe Era of Yezdezard(Gujerati).27This is how Anquetil Duperron relates the incidents of this memorable struggle:28“About forty-six years ago there came from Kirman a very clever Dastoor named Djamasp. He had been sent to re-unite the Parsis divided on the question of thePenom, a double piece of cloth with which the Parsis, on certain occasions, cover a part of the face. Some wished that it should be placed on the dead, others did not like this. Djamasp decided in favour of the latter, according to the custom of Kirman. If this Dastoor had not made the voyage to India, this frivolous contest would have caused streams of blood to flow.“Djamasp is believed to have examined theVendidad, which was current in Gujerat. He found the Pehlvi translation of it too long and not correct in several places. Ignorance was the predominating vice of the Parsis of India. In order to remedy it, the Dastoor of Kirman formed some disciples, Darab at Surat, Djamasp at Naosari, and a third at Bharooch, to whom he taught Zend and Pehlvi. Some time after, tired of the contradictions which he had to endure, he returned to Kirman. The books which this Dastoor has left in India are an exact copy of the Zend and PehlviVendidad, theFeroueschi, the translation of theVadjerguerd, and theNerenguestan. These two works are in Persian, mixed with Zend, and purely on ceremonials.“Darab, the first disciple of Djamasp, and a Dastoor Mobed perfect in the knowledge of Zend and Pehlvi, wished to correct the Pehlvi translation of theVendidadand rectify some portions of the Zend Text, which appeared to him either to have been transposed or to present useless repetitions. He began explaining to young Parsi theologians the works of Zoroaster, which the Mobeds read every day without understanding them. An enslaved people who for a long time practised a thousand ceremonies, the sense and reason of which they were ignorant of, would naturally fall into innumerable abuses. This was what Darab, more learned than the others, observed. The purifications were multiplied; the Zend text was inundated with Pehlvi commentaries, often very inconsistent. Darab at first attempted the way of instruction. But he found a powerful adversary in the person of Manscherdji, the chief of the party who did not like reform, and himself the son of a Mobed.“Another subject of division animated them again, one against the other. Darab had for his father Kaous, of whom I have spoken before, who had received from Dastoor Djamasp the first smatterings of astronomy, according to the principles of Oulough Beg. This Dastoor Mobed having been perfected since then under another Parsi come from Kirman about thirty-six years ago, showed by the Tables of Oulough Beg that theNao rouz(the first day of the year) ought to be advanced by a month, and that consequently there had been an error till then. A letter of the Dastoors of Yezd, dated the 22nd of the month Aban, of the year 1111 of Yezdezard (1742,A.D.) and brought by the Parsi Espendiar, confirmed the discovery of Kaous, but did not tend to protect him from the hatred of his compatriots. It went so far that Darab, sixteen or seventeen years ago, was obliged to withdraw to Damann amongst the Portuguese, and Kaous to Cambay among the English. When I arrived at Surat, almost all the Parsis of India followed the party of Manscherdji because he was rich and powerful; Darab, whose knowledge was recognised even by his adversaries, had some disciples who, in the sequel, showed themselves more freely when the authority of Manscherdji had been lowered at Surat with that of the Dutch, whose agent he was.”28Disc. Prel.pp. cccxxvi.et seq.29Mulla Firoz succeeded his father Mulla Kavas as Dastoor of the Kadmis (1802); when hardly eight years old he had accompanied Mulla Kavas to Persia and had learned Persian and Arabic. In 1786 he wrote in Persian a curious recital of his voyage,Derich Kherde Manjumi. In 1830 he published theAvijéh Dinto refute the arguments of Dastoor Edalji Dorabji Sanjana. The governor of Bombay, Mr. Jonathan Duncan, engaged him to teach Persian, and to translate theDesatir. Mr. Duncan having died, Mulla Firoz continued his work in concert with Mr. William Erskine, and finished it in 1819. He died in 1830 (Parsee Prâkâsh, p. 229) and bequeathed his collection of books in Zend, Pehlvi, &c., to the Kadmi community; the library which contains them is situate in “Fort,” and bears his name. We owe to Mulla Firoz a poem on the conquest of India by the English, theGeorge Namah, which was terminated and published in 1837 by his nephew and successor, Dastoor Rastamji Kaikobadji. On the death of the latter (1854) (Parsee Prâkâsh, p. 635), the Kadmis combined to found amadressawhich they calledMulla Firoz(Parsee Prâkâsh, p. 647).30Edalji Dorabji Sanjana was esteemed for his piety and merits. He was in his time one of the firstsavantsin Zend and Pehlvi; he was equally perfect in Sanscrit. We owe to him several works on the Mazdiene religion, amongst others a book entitledKhorehe Vehijak, which brought forth in reply theAvijéh Dinof Mulla Firoz. He died in 1847 (Parsee Prâkâsh, p. 495).31Most offensive epithets were interchanged between Kadmis and Shahanshahis, such as that of churigar (“churi,” bracelets, bangles; and “gar,” workman) a term of contempt carrying with it an idea of weakness; the children of the two sects pursued one another in the streets, insulting one another. This was hardly fifty years ago.32The sect of the Shahanshahis possesses in Bombay two High Priests—Dastoor Jamaspji Minocherji and Shams ul ulma Dastoor Peshotan Behramji Sanjana; at Poona there is only one, Dastoor Hoshangji Jamaspji. The sect of the Kadmis has also High Priests—Dastoor Kharshedji Phirozji Mulla Firoz, elected by the whole community, who is attached to the Dadiseth Atash-Behram, and Dastoor Kharshedji Bezonji, attached to the Framji Kavasji Banaji Atash-Behram.

1Originally the affairs of the three establishments of the East India Company, in Bengal, Madras, and Bombay, were administered separately, each with a president and a council formed of agents of the Company. The name of Presidency was applied to the whole territory subject to this authority. This expression has no longer its real signification; however, it is still employed in official acts. British India is no longer divided into presidencies, but into provinces, eight of which are very extensive countries, having separate governments. The presidencies of Bombay and Madras are to-day only the provinces of those names.

2Its territory extends from latitude 28° 47′ to 13° 53′ N., and from latitude 60° 43′ to 76° 30′ E. British districts, including Sind, contain a total superficial area of 124,465 square miles, and a population, according to the census of 1872, of 16,349,206 souls. The Native States cover a surface of nearly 71,769 square miles, with a population of 8,831,730 inhabitants, which gives, for the surface, a total of 196,234 square miles, and for the population a total of 25,180,936 inhabitants. The State of Baroda is no longer under the direct administration of Bombay, but under that of the Supreme Government; we may, however, consider it from the geographical point of view as forming a part of Bombay. The Portuguese possessions of Goa, Damman, and Diu, with a superficial area of 1,146 square miles and a population of nearly 428,955 souls, are equally comprised in the limits of the Presidency. SeeImp. Gazetteer of India, vol. ii. p. 172 (Ed. of 1881).

3See for the explanation of this word, Sir John Strachey,India, pref. and trans. of J. Harmand, chap. vi. p. 145, Paris, 1892.

4See Sir William Wilson Hunter, K.C.S.I.,Bombay 1885 to 1890, a study in Indian Administration. London, 1892.

5The whole population of India comes to 287,223,431: Brahmins, 207,731,727; aboriginal tribes, 9,280,467; Sikhs, 190,783; Jains, 1,416,633; Zoroastrians, 89,904; Buddhists, 7,131,361; Jews, 17,194; Christians, 2,284,380; Mussulmans, 58,321,164; diverse races, 42,763. SeeStatistical Abstract relating to British India from 1883–84 to 1892–93, 28th November, London, 1894.Distribution of Population according to Religion, Sex and Civil Condition, &c., p. 26, No. 14.

6Parsis, 76,774; Hindoos, 21,440,957; Mussulmans, 4,390,995; Christians, 170,009; Jains, 555,209; Jews, 13,547; aboriginal tribes, 292,023; Buddhists, 674; Sikhs, 912; Brahmo-Samaj, 34; diverse races, 51. In no part of India are religions and sects so mixed up as in the Presidency of Bombay. SeeEthnology of Indiaby Mr. Justice Campbell, in theJournal of the Asiatic Society.Supplementary number, vol. xxxv. pt. ii. pp. 140, &c., &c.

7The Zoroastrian Calendar for the year of Yezdezard 1262, 16th September, 1892, to 15th September, 1893;printed and published at the Bombay Vartman Press, by Muncherji Hosunji Jagosh, 1892 (Gujerati). The tables are very carefully done; an inquisitive reader will find there the enumeration of the Parsi population of Bombay according to the different districts, comparisons with the previous census and remarks on the community.

8SeeZoroastrian Calendar, p. 126.

9The disproportion between the two sexes is explained by the general custom, which does not allow the Parsi servants to bring their wives to the cities where they are employed.

10Statistics of births, deaths, and marriages amongst the Parsis of Bombay, during the last ten years, in theJournal of the Anthropological Society of Bombay, ii., November 1, pp. 55–65.

11We refer to theParsee Prâkâsh, for all those interesting details, those of our readers who can read and understand Gujerati.

12“If I have not yet replied to your letter of the 19th November,” he writes, “it is because I desired to make special researches concerning the strange rumour which has been spread by the Syed on the subject of a tribe of Parsis established at Khoten, remaining faithful to the Zoroastrian customs, and still governed by its own kings. I can tell you that it is a legend devoid of foundation, and that Major Rawlinson, so learned in these matters, partakes of my view. I suppose that the Syed, seeing the prosperous condition of his co-religionists in Bombay, imagined that in flattering your vanity he would act on your purse. Besides, the country of Khoten is not theterra incognitawhich he has depicted. I have been in touch with the people who have sojourned there; it is a dependency of China, inhabited by Mussulman subjects of the Empire: the only Chinese who are there form part of the garrison. According to all that has been said to me of Khoten and the adjacent countries, the only difficulty I have had is to define who are the Christian traders who frequent those markets. I think that they are Russians or Nestorian Christians.”

13SeeCabool: being a Narrative of a Journey to, and Residence in that City in the years 1836–7–8. By the late Lieut.-Col. Sir Alexander Burnes. London, 1842.

14Vivien Saint Martin,New Dictionary of Universal Geography, vol. iii. p. 9. Paris, 1887.

15“Returned herself as living on the wages of shame” (see Dosabhai Framji Karaka,Hist. of Parsis, vol. i. chap. iii. p. 99).

16The Parsis have never followed certain occupations, as those of a day labourer, palanquin bearer, barber, bleacher, &c., &c.

17Let us note the efforts of Sir Richard Temple, Governor of Bombay (1877–80), who, on his way to Naosari, reminded the Parsis of certain verses of theVendidadrelating specially to agricultural or pastoral occupations, and exhorted them to continue such traditions. Since then a rich Parsi of Bharooch, Mr. Rastamji Maneckji, has taken on lease from the chief of Rajpipla, a great stretch of land in the Panch-Mahals, and has cultivated it with success. He has been outstripped by Kavasji Framji Banaji in his beautiful domain of Pawai. Lord Mayo has highly recognised the great importance of agricultural studies, and in 1870 he declared that the progress of India in riches and in civilisation depended on the progress of agriculture. See Strachey,India, trans. Harmand, chap. ix.; Hunter,Bombay, &c., about the question of agricultural education (chap. vi. pp. 158, 159–166), and about the foundation of a Chair of Agriculture at Baroda under the auspices of the Gaekwar, at the suggestion of Lord Reay, (p. 168.)

18See for the army in India, Strachey,India, trans. Harmand, chap. iii. pp. 52et seq.; Hunter,Bombay, &c., chap. xiv. pp. 448et seq.

19Dosabhai Framji Karaka,Hist. of the Parsis, vol. i. pp. 101et seq.

20The enrolment of the Parsis as volunteers, to the exclusion of the other nationalities, has reappeared since the publication of the work of Mr. D. F. Karaka. At Quetta, at Karachi, at Poona the Parsis are admitted freely into the corps of the European Volunteers, and lastly (June, 1894) Mr. Dinsha Dosabhai Khambatta is enrolled as a lieutenant in the “Poona Volunteers”; he is now a lieutenant in the “Quetta Corps.”

21Padamji Pestanji is the chief of the Parsi community of Poona; since the last riots, he obtained as a reward of his services the title of Khan Bahadur; he is a member of the Legislative Council and has the rank of a Sirdar of the First Class in the Dekkan.

22“We have not the slightest hesitation in saying that the Parsis would be found to be as good and brave soldiers as the Anglo-Saxons, while their loyalty and attachment to the Government they are called upon to serve would always be above suspicion” (seeHist. of the Parsis, vol. i. chap. iii. p. 103).

23“For if a German or a European of another nationality can secure a commission in the British Army, why should not a Parsee, who is the born subject of the Queen-Empress?” (SeeHist. of the Parsis, vol. i. chap. iii. p. 104.)

24Opinions are divided amongst the Parsis themselves on the subject of their nationality and position in India. The Hon. Mr. P. M. Mehta considers them as natives to the backbone. Mr. Dadabhai Naoroji, M.P., is of the same opinion, whilst a certain number decline to recognise this.

25The name of Shahanshahi means “imperial,” and that of Kadmi is drawn fromqadim, “ancient.” The Shahanshahis are also calledRasmis, fromRasm, “custom,” that is to say, that which is followed in India.

26On this schism, see Anquetil Duperron,Zend-Avesta, Disc. Prel.p. ccccxxvi.; Wilson,The Parsi Religion, pp. 35, 36; Haug,Essays, pp. 57, 58. Aspandiarji Kamdin resumed the controversy of theKabisain a book appearing in Surat, in 1826:A Historical Account of the Ancient Leap-Year of the Parsis(Gujerati). Mr. K. R. Kama held, in 1869, a series of conferences on the ancient computation of time, and has publishedThe Era of Yezdezard(Gujerati).

27This is how Anquetil Duperron relates the incidents of this memorable struggle:28“About forty-six years ago there came from Kirman a very clever Dastoor named Djamasp. He had been sent to re-unite the Parsis divided on the question of thePenom, a double piece of cloth with which the Parsis, on certain occasions, cover a part of the face. Some wished that it should be placed on the dead, others did not like this. Djamasp decided in favour of the latter, according to the custom of Kirman. If this Dastoor had not made the voyage to India, this frivolous contest would have caused streams of blood to flow.

“Djamasp is believed to have examined theVendidad, which was current in Gujerat. He found the Pehlvi translation of it too long and not correct in several places. Ignorance was the predominating vice of the Parsis of India. In order to remedy it, the Dastoor of Kirman formed some disciples, Darab at Surat, Djamasp at Naosari, and a third at Bharooch, to whom he taught Zend and Pehlvi. Some time after, tired of the contradictions which he had to endure, he returned to Kirman. The books which this Dastoor has left in India are an exact copy of the Zend and PehlviVendidad, theFeroueschi, the translation of theVadjerguerd, and theNerenguestan. These two works are in Persian, mixed with Zend, and purely on ceremonials.

“Darab, the first disciple of Djamasp, and a Dastoor Mobed perfect in the knowledge of Zend and Pehlvi, wished to correct the Pehlvi translation of theVendidadand rectify some portions of the Zend Text, which appeared to him either to have been transposed or to present useless repetitions. He began explaining to young Parsi theologians the works of Zoroaster, which the Mobeds read every day without understanding them. An enslaved people who for a long time practised a thousand ceremonies, the sense and reason of which they were ignorant of, would naturally fall into innumerable abuses. This was what Darab, more learned than the others, observed. The purifications were multiplied; the Zend text was inundated with Pehlvi commentaries, often very inconsistent. Darab at first attempted the way of instruction. But he found a powerful adversary in the person of Manscherdji, the chief of the party who did not like reform, and himself the son of a Mobed.

“Another subject of division animated them again, one against the other. Darab had for his father Kaous, of whom I have spoken before, who had received from Dastoor Djamasp the first smatterings of astronomy, according to the principles of Oulough Beg. This Dastoor Mobed having been perfected since then under another Parsi come from Kirman about thirty-six years ago, showed by the Tables of Oulough Beg that theNao rouz(the first day of the year) ought to be advanced by a month, and that consequently there had been an error till then. A letter of the Dastoors of Yezd, dated the 22nd of the month Aban, of the year 1111 of Yezdezard (1742,A.D.) and brought by the Parsi Espendiar, confirmed the discovery of Kaous, but did not tend to protect him from the hatred of his compatriots. It went so far that Darab, sixteen or seventeen years ago, was obliged to withdraw to Damann amongst the Portuguese, and Kaous to Cambay among the English. When I arrived at Surat, almost all the Parsis of India followed the party of Manscherdji because he was rich and powerful; Darab, whose knowledge was recognised even by his adversaries, had some disciples who, in the sequel, showed themselves more freely when the authority of Manscherdji had been lowered at Surat with that of the Dutch, whose agent he was.”

28Disc. Prel.pp. cccxxvi.et seq.

29Mulla Firoz succeeded his father Mulla Kavas as Dastoor of the Kadmis (1802); when hardly eight years old he had accompanied Mulla Kavas to Persia and had learned Persian and Arabic. In 1786 he wrote in Persian a curious recital of his voyage,Derich Kherde Manjumi. In 1830 he published theAvijéh Dinto refute the arguments of Dastoor Edalji Dorabji Sanjana. The governor of Bombay, Mr. Jonathan Duncan, engaged him to teach Persian, and to translate theDesatir. Mr. Duncan having died, Mulla Firoz continued his work in concert with Mr. William Erskine, and finished it in 1819. He died in 1830 (Parsee Prâkâsh, p. 229) and bequeathed his collection of books in Zend, Pehlvi, &c., to the Kadmi community; the library which contains them is situate in “Fort,” and bears his name. We owe to Mulla Firoz a poem on the conquest of India by the English, theGeorge Namah, which was terminated and published in 1837 by his nephew and successor, Dastoor Rastamji Kaikobadji. On the death of the latter (1854) (Parsee Prâkâsh, p. 635), the Kadmis combined to found amadressawhich they calledMulla Firoz(Parsee Prâkâsh, p. 647).

30Edalji Dorabji Sanjana was esteemed for his piety and merits. He was in his time one of the firstsavantsin Zend and Pehlvi; he was equally perfect in Sanscrit. We owe to him several works on the Mazdiene religion, amongst others a book entitledKhorehe Vehijak, which brought forth in reply theAvijéh Dinof Mulla Firoz. He died in 1847 (Parsee Prâkâsh, p. 495).

31Most offensive epithets were interchanged between Kadmis and Shahanshahis, such as that of churigar (“churi,” bracelets, bangles; and “gar,” workman) a term of contempt carrying with it an idea of weakness; the children of the two sects pursued one another in the streets, insulting one another. This was hardly fifty years ago.

32The sect of the Shahanshahis possesses in Bombay two High Priests—Dastoor Jamaspji Minocherji and Shams ul ulma Dastoor Peshotan Behramji Sanjana; at Poona there is only one, Dastoor Hoshangji Jamaspji. The sect of the Kadmis has also High Priests—Dastoor Kharshedji Phirozji Mulla Firoz, elected by the whole community, who is attached to the Dadiseth Atash-Behram, and Dastoor Kharshedji Bezonji, attached to the Framji Kavasji Banaji Atash-Behram.

Back to IndexNext