Islam and identity politics among British-Bangladeshis

A leap of faith

Ali Riaz

• Publisher: Manchester University Press
• Year: 2016
• ISBN:
  9781526111326
• Edition: 1
• Topic: Literature
• Subtopic: Literary Criticism of Shakespeare
• Index: Literature

This book probes the causes of and conditions for the preference of the members of the British-Bangladeshi community for a religion-based identity vis-à-vis ethnicity-based identity, and the influence of Islamists in shaping the discourse. The first book-length study to examine identity politics among the Bangladeshi diaspora delves into the micro-level dynamics, the internal and external factors and the role of the state and locates these within the broad framework of Muslim identity and Islamism, citizenship and the future of multiculturalism in Europe. Empirically grounded but enriched with in-depth analysis, and written in an accessible language this study is an invaluable reference for academics, policy makers and community activists. Students and researchers of British politics, ethnic/migration/diaspora studies, cultural studies, and political Islam will find the book extremely useful.

1

The Bangladeshi diaspora in the UK

Although migration of South Asians to Britain is intrinsically linked to the colonial history of the British Empire in India, it long predates the Raj. The first contact between South Asia and Britain can be traced back to the arrival of the East India Company (EIC) in India in 1612 when they established a trading post in the western coastal town of Surat. Throughout the seventeenth century, the company expanded its presence in the eastern part of the Mughal Empire, especially in Bengal, Bihar and Orissa, secured permission from the Emperor to establish trading posts, founded forts and engaged in a number of military expeditions against their trading rivals (notably the Portuguese, Dutch and later the French East India Companies) and local rulers. The Battle of Plassey in 1757, between the East India Company and the Nawab of Bengal and his French allies, not only established Company rule in South Asia for the next hundred years but inaugurated colonial rule in India. The transfer of power from the Company to the British Queen in 1858 formalized state control over what would be considered the ‘jewel’ of the Empire.¹ Trade and commerce between India and Britain necessarily included a flow of migrants between the two territories, although for a long time it was primarily one way – more British making their way to South Asia than South Asians travelling to the faraway islands called Great Britain.

South Asians arriving in Britain in the early colonial period were likely to be merchants undertaking business trips, or Indian Nawabs and Rajas and their emissaries travelling for pleasure or seeking to draw the attention of the Imperial authority to legal matters. Some scholars came to Britain to teach Persian and Hindustani languages and, as the elaborate colonial bureaucracy developed and English became the language of the administration, students came to study law and to take the Indian Civil Service examination to secure jobs in the expanding civil administration. By the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, Indian politicians began to make their presence felt, especially when they arrived to make arguments for Indian independence. These were the elites of South Asia, whose visits were voluntary and with definite objectives.

But there were others who did not come entirely of their own free will and certainly not under their own means. Ayahs (nannies) employed by the officials of the East India Company and the British colonial administration in India were often brought to England. Many later found themselves in a destitute condition having been abandoned.² According to one account, ‘There is evidence in art and literature of the arrival of Bengali children as servants in London in the mid-17th century.’³

If these two groups of people, elites and virtually indentured Ayahs,⁴ are situated at two ends of a continuum, the Indian seamen (known as Lascars) are located in the middle. Large-scale employment of Indian seamen on British ships began in the eighteenth century.

The East India Company’s crew lists and agreement documents from the eighteenth century suggest that initially it employed Indo-Portuguese seamen from Bengal and Madras. These seamen had been called ‘Lascarim’ by the Portuguese. The British initially described these men as ‘Black Portuguese’, but later adopted the Portuguese name, changing it to ‘Lascar’. They called all Asian seamen Lascars. One shipping document from 1746 lists 21 Indians from Calcutta on an East India Company ship. All of them had Portuguese names.⁵

While the number of Lascars may be of significance, the phenomenon is not. Indian seamen began travelling to England as early as the seventeenth century. For example, EIC records of 1614 show that three Indian seamen in London were negotiating their terms of employment for the return voyage home.⁶

A number of factors prompted the employment of Indian seamen: one interesting and little-explored aspect of the need for these seamen as crew on British merchant ships is that it was necessitated by the illegal acts of ‘jumping ship’ by the European, particularly English and Scottish sailors, in India during the early days of East India Company trade. If eighteenth-century India, particularly Bengal, drew merchants and traders from England due to its abundant resources, after 1857, the colonial administration attracted members of the upper echelons of British society to be a part of the local administration. Soon entire British families were being raised in India and the volume of shipping rose as contacts between home and colony increased. The high rate of death of European seamen from both the harsh conditions aboard ship and tropical diseases on arrival, has been noted by historian Michael Fish, who adds, ‘The Royal Navy (whose own ships also lost seamen in the Indian Ocean) also conscripted prime European seamen from merchant ships there, at rates occasionally into one-third of the entire crew.’⁷ On their return journey these ships therefore needed more sailors. This opened up job opportunities for local people.⁸

Indian seamen were employed both on East India Company and private ships, and were often left for months at a time in the UK, possibly awaiting a return passage, or recovering from sickness. With few resources, a number abandoned their employment and settled in London. As a result, a mixed community of temporary and more permanent Lascars of Indian origin grew up around the London docks from the eighteenth century onwards.

For many Lascars the early experiences of life in Britain were distressing, to say the least. They were not treated well at sea or when they arrived. ‘On the ships they lived in cramped, overcrowded conditions, without exercise, fresh air or fresh food and without suitable clothing or bedding for cold climates.’⁹ In short, ‘Life on board these relatively tiny and fragile vessels was hellish.’¹⁰ Many died during their journey, due to sickness and overwork. When they arrived in England, often ending up in East London, not far from where their ships docked, they faced an ‘even worse’ situation: many died uncared for on the streets. Their plight, especially of being cheated, robbed and made destitute by unscrupulous individuals, drew some attention in the 1840s and some initiatives were taken to provide shelter. But overall they were neglected by the community at large and the merchants who were making fortunes on the backs of their toil.¹¹

Migration of Muslims, especially South Asians, has been subject to academic inquiry for quite some time. Most studies have attempted to trace a timeline and distinctive features of various phases of migration. Lewis argues that the migration has taken place in four phases: pioneers, unskilled male workers, family and the emergence of the British-born generation.¹² Brah has identified four phases of migration since the decolonization of South Asia: the 1950s and early 1960s (‘Coming to Vilayat’), the 1960s and early 1970s (‘A home away from home’), the mid-1970s and early 1980s (‘Here to stay’), and the 1990s onwards (‘1990s – the new millennium’).¹³ Ansari, whose study primarily focuses on South Asian migration, describes large-scale Muslim settlement in Britain as occurring in two broad phases: firstly 1945 to the early 1970s; and then the second phase from 1973 to the present.¹⁴

Amongst South Asians, Sylhetis, from the north-eastern region of Bangladesh, were the first to establish a significant presence in Britain. The connection between Britain and Sylhet began as soon as the British East India Company started trading in the Bengal region. Sylhet, then known as Srihatta (Sanskrit word, meaning a prosperous centre of trading), officially came under the control of the EIC in 1765 but it took almost two decades for them to establish their dominance. By the late eighteenth century, there was a significant presence of British merchants in what is now known as Sylhet. The autobiography of Robert Lindsay, who served as an administrator (‘resident collector’) of Sylhet between 1778 and 1790, elaborately documents this connection.¹⁵ Lindsay, a trader and an administrator, was deeply involved in commercial activities and made a personal fortune in a short span of time before retiring. One of the sources of his personal gain was building boats: ‘We became also in great repute as elegant boat-builders; in this department we particularly excelled, and it had the effect of leading me to the building ships of burthen.’¹⁶ Boatbuilding had a long tradition in Sylhet, because of its geographical location (surrounded by waterways, particularly during the monsoon season), due to its close proximity to the trade route (between Assam and Calcutta, and between the seaports of the Bengal delta) and due to the need to transport the most precious commodity of the region (limestone locally known as chunam). However, Lindsay oversaw significant improvements in the processes and materials used for building the boats. The familiarity with and to a great extent expertise of boatbuilding among local people has been passed on for generations.

This long historical connection played a role in attracting people from Sylhet to England, but the employment of Sylhetis on British ships made the journey possible. Among the array of factors that prompted Sylhetis to be employed by the British ships in large numbers, three deserve highlighting: firstly, their involvement with trade via rivers for centuries and concomitant expertise in navigation and boatbuilding. As Hossain remarks,

Until the introduction of the railway in the last decade of nineteenth century and its expansion in the early twentieth, Sylhet had waterway communications with Calcutta and the rest of Bengal that were cheap and easy. So a short-cut waterway from Assam to Bengal ran through the heart of Sylhet … Training as a boat-builder was a pre-requisite for becoming a boatman so most of the crew on the boats trading up and down the Surma valley river system were drawn from Sylhet.¹⁷

The second factor was the introduction of new modes of transport. By the early nineteenth century, dramatic changes were taking place in the transport sector due to the introduction of steamships and the railway. Many out-of-work boatmen moved to Calcutta port in search of jobs. With their expertise in boatbuilding and experience of waterway trading, Sylhetis easily found jobs as seamen on British ships docked in Calcutta port, particularly after 1842 when Calcutta became the Indian terminus of the P&O line. The process further accelerated when Calcutta became the headquarters of the British India Steam Navigation Company (BISNC) in1856.¹⁸

The third factor was related to political-economic developments in the Sylhet region. The annexation of Sylhet was not an easy task for the EIC. Although initial resistance was quelled over two decades, discontent continued to simmer. The famine in 1781 resulting from a devastating flood paved the way for an uprising. The death of almost one-third of the population was blamed on the policies of the EIC, particularly the local administrator Lindsay, although his request to Fort William (the EIC headquarters) for a tax exemption was declined. The 1782 uprising was led by two brothers, Syed Hadi and Syed Mahdi. Both were killed and local myth insists that they were killed by Lindsay.¹⁹ This and other similar local resistance movements stimulated further migration. The commercialization of tea plantations under Company rule, especially after 1834 when the EIC lost its monopoly over the tea trade from China, was another factor. Many locals refused to work in the plantations and thus explored other avenues of employment.

It is difficult to point to a definite time when people from what is now known as Bangladesh began to settle in England, but some records indicate that in the early years of the seventeenth century, ‘East Indian(s) from the Bay of Bengal’ were being baptized in churches in London.²⁰ A report in 1760 of the burial of a Portuguese Lascar from Bengal shows that there were Bengalis in England at that time.²¹ The presence of Bengali-speaking seamen was noticed by visitors from India in 1765, as one wrote: ‘The Engli...

Table of contents

• Cover
• Half Title Page
• Title Page
• Copyright Page
• Deidication
• Contents
• Tables
• Acknowledgements
• Abbreviations and acronyms
• Introduction
• 1 The Bangladeshi diaspora in the UK
• 2 A tale of two long summers
• 3 Identity, Islamism and politics: the internal factors
• 4 Identity, Islamism and politics: the state as actor
• 5 Beyond the present
• Bibliography
• Index