Chapter III · Population—Costumes—Usages—Festivals
Ratanbai Ardeshir Vakil translation
I
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.
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 but little 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 Finally, in 1773, Bombay was placed in a state of dependence under the Governor-General of Bengal, who has since been replaced by the Viceroy of India.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 by the 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.
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 population has 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.
The following is a division, under seven heads, of the occupations of the Parsis, as shown in the census of 1881:—
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 same class. 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 two saris, 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 several saris, 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?
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 of Farvardin, and ends with the month of Spendarmad. At the end of three hundred and sixty days, five days, called the Gathas are 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 or Kabisa, 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 this Kabisa, whilst the Parsis had continued this intercalation during their residence in Khorassan. Hence the origin of the sects with which we have to deal.
The Shahanshahis maintained that the Zoroastrian 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 been one intercalation 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 the Avesta, 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 the Persian 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 the Kabisa.
II
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 the angarakha and the turban of the men, and of the saris of the women, with the dress of the Hindoos of Gujerat.
Unwin Brothers, Limited, The Gresham Press, Woking and London.