Artisans, Sufis, Shrines

Colonial Architecture in Nineteenth-Century Punjab

Hussain Ahmad Khan

• Publisher: I.B. Tauris
• Year: 2014
• ISBN:
  9780857736697
• Edition: 1
• Topic: Politics & International Relations
• Subtopic: Colonialism & Post-Colonialism
• Index: Politics & International Relations

In nineteenth-century Punjab, a cultural tug-of-war ensued as both Sufi mystics and British officials aimed to engage the local artisans as a means of realizing their ideological ambitions. When it came to influence and impact, the Sufi shrines had a huge advantage over the colonial art institutions, such as the Mayo School of Arts in Lahore. The mystically-inspired shrines, built as a statement of Muslim ruling ambitions, were better suited to the task of appealing to local art traditions. By contrast the colonial institutions, rooted in the Positivist Romanticism of the Victorian West, found assimilation to be more of a challenge. In questioning their relative success and failures at influencing local culture, the book explores the extent to which political control translates into cultural influence. Folktales, Sufi shrines, colonial architecture, institutional education methods and museum exhibitions all provide a wealth of sources for revealing the complex dynamic between the Punjabi artisans, the Sufi community and the colonial British.
In this unique look at a little-explored aspect of India's history, Hussain Ahmad Khan explores this evidence in order to illuminate this web of cultural influences. Examining the Sufi-artisan relationship within the various contexts of political revolt, the decline of the Mughals and the struggle of the Sufis to establish an Islamic state, this book argues that Sufi shrines were initially constructed with the aim of affirming a distinct 'Muslim' identity. At the same time, art institutions established by colonial officials attempted to promote eclectic architecture representing the 'British Indian empire', as well as to revive the pre-colonial traditions with which they had previously seemed out of touch. This important book sheds new light on the dynamics of power and culture in the British Empire.

CHAPTER 1

FOLKTALES AND THE SUFI–ARTISAN RELATIONSHIP IN PUNJAB (C.1300–1800)

Folktales, an important genre of popular culture in pre-colonial and colonial Punjab, express the artisans' mentalité in relation to their historical experiences. This is not to suggest that the meanings attached to folktales remained the same throughout the mediaeval period; in fact, people in Punjab understood these stories according to their own contexts and in narrating and re-narrating these stories changed their meanings. As the social conditions of narrator and listener changed over time, my reading does not necessarily typify artisanal or Sufi culture in pre-colonial Punjab. While studying French folktales, Robert Darnton found opacity in the now notorious act of a massacre of cats by Parisian typographers, which symbolizes not only entertainment but also resistance and protest. In Punjabi folktales, we also find some opacities such as the reluctance of artisans to accompany the hero, and the prayer by the Sufis or the giving away of some object (cloth or stick) with supernatural or blessing power which, if read vis-à-vis the social history of mediaeval Punjab, give insight into the Sufi–artisan relationship based on baraka.

Artisans in Punjab (c.1300–1800)

In the story of Raja Risalu¹ the hero, Risalu, plans to leave his palace because his father, Raja Sahalban, believes that his son will die if he meets his son before the latter reaches the age of 12. Risalu goes to the jungle with his three companions: a carpenter's son, a goldsmith's son and a parrot. During their stay, a serpent attacks them but the carpenter's son kills it. After some time, Risalu kills another serpent, which is larger than the previous one. Next day when they show each other the serpents they killed the night before, the carpenter's and goldsmith's sons become afraid of the large serpent killed by Risalu and tell him, ‘you are raja, you can fight with such things, we are common men. If we live with you, we will be definitely killed.’ They thus convince Risalu to let them go. When another goldsmith's son comes to rescue his father who had been imprisoned by Raja Hari Chend for making jewellery, Risalu manipulates the situation and marries the daughter of Hari Chend with the goldsmith's son. The goldsmith's family, during the whole episode, is represented as being afraid of the raja and reluctant to act on Risalu's advice. Such an image of marginality is also represented in other Punjabi folktales.² Why are artisan families shown to be a docile and marginal and unable to manage their lives without the help of some powerful agent? Can we relate such representation with the social history of artisans in mediaeval Punjab?

Tapan Raychaudhuri and Irfan Habib suggest that throughout the mediaeval period (thirteenth to eighteenth centuries) the mechanisms of the Indian economy largely kept artisans marginal (despite varied socioeconomic positions).³ Artisans' socioeconomic positions depended on their location, craft, the social status of their community and their personal links to the elite.⁴ The steps taken by the Turkish sultans and the Mughals for consolidating their empire directly affected artisans.⁵ These steps included centralization of military power, new methods for revenue assessment and the introduction of the iqta-jagir system, munsabdari system, building of new towns and cities, introduction of technology (such as spinning and Persian wheels) and creation of new water channels.

Largely dominated by agricultural communities and representatives of the sultan, the social hierarchy in the mediaeval villages of Punjab served the interests of the state for collecting revenue and suppressing revolts between the thirteenth and the fifteenth centuries. The khot or muqaddam (headman), large landholder and elders, rais and ranas of villages were collectively responsible for consigning all village taxes to the representative of government, ziauddin. They also maintained an army that could assist the king to create order. The rais and rana remained adamant on centralization and revenue assessment strategies, and resisted the taxation whenever possible.⁶ In the fourteenth century, each sidi (a group of 100 villages) was controlled by a local representative, chaudheri, and a muasarrif (the appointee of the sultan), who were responsible for collecting taxes. In the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, chaudheri became hereditary zamindar.⁷ Below the category of village elites were balahar, small peasants, who had to pay taxes on cultivation, cattle and houses. They were not allowed to leave the villages without the permission of village elders, as it could affect cultivation and revenue.

In this social structure, artisans occupied the lower level. The average population of villages would probably be between 200 and 300,⁸ which means that artisans were not only associated with their own profession but also assisted in agricultural activities. Regardless of their low position, they must have been very important as they catered to the basic needs of villagers, such as clothing, housing, pottery, masonry wells and agricultural tools. Artisans depended on agriculture because in exchange for their services, they received payment in kind. Perhaps, artisans, like small peasants, were restricted within their own locality unless they were imprisoned by invading armies or compelled to participate in royal projects. As the state collected 50 per cent of the produce against taxes from peasants, artisans had a very nominal share in return for their services.

Artisans suffered because of the ambitious policies of various sultans. For instance, Sultan Alauddin Khalji (r.1296–1316), who belonged to the Turkic-Afghan tribe of Khalji, implemented a price-control policy by fixing the prices of each item, and imposed severe punishments on violators.⁹ It affected artisans in many ways: they were either forced by village elders to give more taxes or their share of seasonal crops was reduced. By fixing rates, commodities became cheaper, thereby reducing trade. Throughout his rule, prices remained the same and traders and artisans were afraid of increasing prices even during bad harvests. Khalji also took strong action against dallal (middleman), which made it even more difficult for the artisans to access the markets.¹⁰ Another sultan, Muhammad Tughlaq (r.1325–51), shifted his capital from Delhi to Daulatabad (Deogir, now in Andhra Pradesh) to oversee his campaigns in Deccan and forced a large number of artisans from Punjab to migrate to his new capital.¹¹ Later he abandoned his plans and returned to Delhi, but it caused numerous deaths during the journey. A large number of artisans were dispersed to other parts of India to avoid any such plan in the future. Artisans who went back to Delhi lost their markets because of fewer trading activities and an exodus of the local population.

Artisans' sufferings increased during revolts and invasions. They had to help their village elders in mutinies, which broke out due to high taxes or severe punishments by the state representatives. Mediaeval accounts give details of a number of mutinies in which artisans were involved. Ziauddin Barani provides details about one such uprising. When peasants (many of whom were artisans) ran into jungles to save their lives, Sultan Muhammad Tughlaq killed everyone who came in his way. Whole villages were burnt and the rebels were blinded and killed.¹²

In most cases invaders captured previously imprisoned artisans for their royal projects (construction, weaving, etc.) either in India or Central Asia.¹³ As Finbarr Flood argues, ‘the modes of circulation’ such as trade, plunder and gifts led to the mobility of artisans and artefacts and subsequently redefined the contours between eighth- and thirteenth-century India.¹⁴ Buddhist rulers wore Turko-Persian dress, old coins show the inscription of Arabic sacred texts in Sanskrit, Indian artisans worked in Afghanistan and Central Asia, and early Turkish mosques in the subcontinent that are stylistically similar to Jain and Hindu religious buildings all suggest the involvement of Indian craftesmen.

The administrative and urban centres in pre-Mughal Punjab were Delhi, Multan and Lahore; for some time Ucch, Dipalpur and Shorkot also remained important cities.¹⁵ One of the important trade routes in the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries connected Delhi to Afghanistan through Multan and Lahore. Markets were set up close to this route. In the administrative centres, the sultans established karkhana (craft establishments, sometimes translated as factories), which provided them with products according to their own taste and status and catered to the needs of the nobility and military. A large number of artisans were hired and trained in these craft establishments.¹⁶ Despite extensive construction works, which substantially increased artisanal and trading activities,¹⁷ we find hardly any evidence that suggests significant improvement in the lives of artisans during the Sultanate period.

Economic activities significantly increased with the establishment of Mughal rule in sixteenth-century India, which determined the construction of new towns and urban centres, such as Agra, Fatehpur Sikri and Shahjahanabad; expensive production of crafts for elites; mass production of crafts for export; and the development of trade routes, which also increased the mutual dependence of various regions. Behind these developments in Mughal India, according to Raychaudhuri, there was

the uncomplicated desire of a small ruling class for more and more material resources […] way beyond doubt the primary condition on which the empire established itself […] their economism was simple, straightforward and almost palpable. And there was no containing it until it collapsed under the weight of its own contradictions.¹⁸

The Mughals' economic policy considerably increased craft production; however, the social and economic conditions of the artisans did not improve much.

The Mughal emperor Akbar introduced the musabdari system in the second half of the seventeenth century. Nobles were allotted lands (jagirs) and were expected to maintain a specified number of troops.¹⁹ These munsabdar had no local ties, they had the power to expel local peasants or elites who had lived in villages for centuries, and they were supposed to achieve the specified targets for tax collection. Consequently, the assessment process of cultivation land and methods of tax collection remained strict and sometimes brutal. The munsabdari system increased the exploitation of peasants and artisans.

In the Mughal administrative capitals and royal karkhana, however, artisans enjoyed royal patronage. In the sixteenth century, the Mughals declared Lahore one of their three administrative capitals. By that time, two important routes that connected Lahore to Afghanistan were used for trading.²⁰ Artisans living in the cities along these trade routes (Multan, Lahore and Delhi) benefitted from the expanding markets. The margin of profits in Delhi was higher than in other parts of India. If a Mughal noble went to a market in Delhi, he usually purchased articles worth hundreds of rupees, as noted by a European traveller, Francois Bernier (1625–88).²¹ In Delhi, shopkeepers kept products from Iran, Central Asia and China, which included carpets, pottery, arms and decorative pieces; the local artisans competed with them and made good profits out of it.

The Mughal karkhana were more extensive establishments compared to their counterparts in the Sultanate period.²² They included administrative departments (management, quality control, purchase of raw products), and stores and factories for various artisanal products such as pottery, jewellery, arms, carpets, textiles, etc. The karkhana, owned by courtiers and nobles, had a professional hierarchy which managed the operations. It included karkhanadar (supervisor), ustad (artisan-master) and shagird (disciple or subordinate artisan). The state purchased raw materials for manufacturing, while finished products were used for royal gifts or the personal use of the emperor and the military, and thus were rarely marketed. Bernier's account suggests that karkhana relied completely on the state for expenses and did not generate any revenue.²³

A large number of artisans from Central Asia, Iran and Afghanistan immigrated to Punjab as the Mughals hired them on high wages for the royal karkhana.²⁴ The karkhana served as a quality stamp for Indian artisanal products. According to Abul Fazl, court-writer of the Mughal emperor Akbar, the quality of carpet weaving in Lahore was far ahead of products in Iran and Central Asia. Mughal emperor Shah Jahan (1592-1666) encouraged Persian craftsmen to settle in Punjab and construct gardens, palaces and shrines.²⁵ Artisans from Punjab and other parts of India also went to Central Asia, either through slave trade or as a royal gift.²⁶

In the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries, Punjabi artisans suffered because of constant wars between the Sikhs and the Mughals. By the nineteenth century, the Sikhs formed 11 per cent of the total population, while Hindus and Muslims were 32 and 55 per cent, respectively. To make themselves strong, Sikhs in the villages displaced the existing hierarchies and distributed lands to either Sikhs or Hindus, or those Muslims who forged alliances with them. A...

Table of contents

• Front Cover
• Title Page
• Copyright
• Dedication
• Contents
• Acknowledgements
• A Note on Transliteration
• List of Abbreviations
• List of Maps
• List of Tables
• List of Illustrations
• Introduction
• 1. Folktales and the Sufi–Artisan Relationship in Punjab (c.1300–1800)
• 2. Muslim Identity and Sufi Shrines in Nineteenth-Century Punjab
• 3. Artisans, Colonial Art Education and Architecture
• 4. Discordant Voices: Colonial Exhibitions and the Lahore Museum
• Conclusion
• Appendix
• Notes
• Bibliography