By M Reyaz, TwoCircles.net,
Dr Mohammad Sajjad is an Assistant Professor of History at the Aligarh Muslim University where he teaches late-colonial and Post-Independence Indian History. He recently published two books Muslim Politics in Bihar: Changing Contours and Contesting Colonialism and Separatism: Muslims of Muzaffarpur since 1857. His articles and columns have appeared in several newspapers, magazines and journals.
In the aftermath of the recent communal clashes in Azizpur-Bahilwara, TCN spoke to Dr Sajjad on the politics of Bihar, particularly Muzaffarpur and the changing socio-political debate vis-à-vis the Muslims.
Q. 1. Your book, Contesting Colonialism and Separatism (Primus, 2014), on the Muslims of Muzaffarpur in north Bihar came out just before the general elections 2014. Does it have something to do with the immediacy of politics?
Unlike journalists, academics don’t have any such urgency. It is just a coincidence that it has come out at a time when elections are round the corner. This book was under the process of writing since very long time and the manuscript was submitted to the publisher in early 2011. Anonymous academic peer-reviewing, followed by re-working on it, copy-editing, type-setting, and all the processes do take some time.
Moreover, it is not a book solely on contemporary politics. Its period extends from 1857 to early 21st century, of course fore-grounded in historical continuity.
Q. 2. In your chapters dealing with the late 20th and early 21st centuries, your account of Muzaffarpur’s Muslims seems to be a less favourable narrative about Laloo-Rabri regime (1990-2005), whereas Laloo’s social engineering of Muslim-Yadav combine had attained extraordinary fame.
I think this is a difference between journalistic and academic pursuits. Laloo-Rabri regime may have handled religious strife almost firmly, but its willful neglect of governance and development contributed towards discrediting secularism and towards communalizing the society and polity, a point hardly ever taken note of even by the best of journalists. The point is simple. If the political formations (not overtly communal, who are called secular) fail on governance and development and fail to contain crime and corruption then non-minority groups will have absolutely no stake in them, and they would search for alternatives. Laloo’s anti-middle class politics, particularly after 1995-97, alienated the relevant sections and this was overtaken by the communal political forces. Otherwise, before 1989-90, the oppositional political spaces in Bihar, has mostly been the forte of the Socialists and Communists, rather than the Jan Sangh/BJP.
The Muslim-Yadav political coalition was made a strongly popular electoral notion, a part of common sense. To question this hype one needed certain empirical details which are there in my book making it more clearly evident through a long narrative about a Muslim inhabited village in Chapter Eleven. This village account, among many other things, attempts to explain the gradual manner in which Laloo-Rabri regime eroded even its Muslim support.
Q. 3. What made you choose to explore this micro-history of a sub-region?
This is not a micro-history; rather this is a history of a small unexplored region located in macro-context. The urban centre of Muzaffarpur in Tirhut (northern Bihar) emerged in 18th century and became important trading centre. The historic Vaishali (home to economic and religious revolution in 6th century B. C., but now reduced to an ordinary village, some 30 kilometres away from the town of Muzaffarpur, and equally away from the town of Hajipur) forms a part of Tirhut. But more significantly this was a major storm-centre of the anti-British movements in 1857; subsequently it became equally important centre of movement for modern education, lead being taken mostly by Muslim elites in collaboration with their Hindu counterparts.
As I have argued in the Introduction, a first colonially induced Hindi-Urdu divide, cleverly making it Hindu-Muslim divide was uttered in Muzaffarpur, in November 1871, when the then Lt. Governor Campbell had come to inaugurate a Collegiate School of the Bihar Scientific Society. Yet, Muzaffarpur was a place where Hindi-Urdu Sahityik Sabha functioned during 1914-40, which had sole purpose of uniting the two linguistic/religious communities.
In 20th century, the Muslims took lead in all kinds of anti-colonial struggle. Shafi Daudi (1875-1949), Maghfur Aijazi (1900-66), and Manzur Aijazi (1898-1969), among many other Muslims, mostly advocates, took lead in founding the local units of the Congress. In 1920s-30s, there were instances of Muslim disenchantment with the Congress on the question of share in the structures of power, yet their firm opposition to colonial exploitation as well as to the separatist politics of the Muslim League attracted my attention more decisively. They remained vociferous against the Muslim League besides enthusiastic participation and sacrifices in the Civil Disobedience (193-34) and Quit India Movements (1942). Even though from mid 1920s onwards, within the structure of the Congress, the Bhumihars and Rajputs started gaining ascendance and Muslims started feeling marginalized, elections after elections, be it in the legislatures or in the local bodies.
This book therefore calls into question many assumptions about Partition historiography, and elaborates upon the fact that Muslims resisted communal separatist politics quite vociferously.
After independence, Muslim representation, even in politics and legislature, started becoming less and less visible, despite their socially inclusive mass politics, more specifically under the leadership of Maghfur Aijazi (1900-1966). This was contrary to general assumption about Muslims confining their political concerns to emotive religious issues.
Dr Mohammad Sajjad
Q. 4. Your book seems to argue that the district of Muzaffarpur demonstrated its anti-Congress politics soon after independence.
From the 1930s, peasant movement was becoming stronger in Tirhut. Kisan-Zamindar conflict started becoming sharper. Consequently, from 1957 onwards, elections for various Lok Sabha and Assembly constituencies of Tirhut reflected growing strength of Socialists against the Congress. In a bye-election (December 1957) for the first Lok Sabha, a prominent Socialist, Acharya J. B. Kripalani (1888-1982), and in the second Lok Sabha (1957), another Socialist stalwart Asoka Mehta(1911-84) won elections from Sitamarhi and Muzaffarpur respectively. In late 1960s and 1970s, the university campus in Muzaffarpur, and its colleges spread across north Bihar, remained embroiled in student upsurges, mostly along upper and lower caste divides. The new rural elites, quite a lot of them from lower social orders, were resisting the price rise, unemployment, caste-based oppressions, etc. In 1970s, Naxalism also emerged, and then, arguably on its debris, George Fernandes made Muzaffarpur his karmabhumi injecting much of hope among the people about industrial and related economic developments, and playing upon those issues, he raised people’s hopes and aspirations. The erstwhile “Socialist” represented Muzaffarpur in the Lok Sabha many times from 1977 onwards. The CPI was also a popular political force in various Assembly seats of Muzaffarpur till mid-1980s, either as winners or as close runners in elections. After all a chowk in the town is named after Lenin as well!
Q. 5. The town of Muzaffarpur has had two conspicuous features: lorded by notorious upper caste gangsters, and almost no communal riots till few weeks back. Could you find something on this?
On the first aspect I couldn’t get into, even though I do feel tempted to take up. There are instances of gangsters turning into entrepreneurs in transport and many other economic sectors; at the same time erecting educational institutions, and then becoming legislatures/ministers too. This is an issue worth exploring. Another important issue to explore is the functioning or non-functioning of the municipal institution in last 150 years of its creation. This exploration may take us into social history of the town and its countryside. For some constraints I couldn’t get into it despite my inclination to do so.
As regards communal riots in the town of Muzaffarpur, we do find some of such skirmishes in 1920s, but not thereafter. A probable reason could be that this town had fair proportion of Muslim educated and service elites, but had no trading groups, till 1947. Post-independence, trade remained almost monopolized by the Hindu trading castes of Marwaris, Khatris, Banias, etc.
In independent India, one finds a pattern: those towns have been more prone to communal riots where business rivalries are to be found along the lines of Hindu-Muslim divides. For example, Bhagalpur has been more prone to this because of such competition/rivalry in silk trade. Sitamarhi subdivision (now district) has undergone many communal riots where few Assembly seats came to be represented by Muslims. It may suggest a pattern of conflict along the lines of economic rivalry and political power-sharing.
A lot of the Muzaffarpur Marwari traders had to migrate in late 1990s when demands of extortion, kidnappings for extortion, by the local musclemen-turned politicians started wreaking greater havoc. Giving devil its due, this phenomenon was there before the 1990s as well. Muzaffarpur is said to be a major centre of Bhumihar landlords. Many Marwaris per force take loans from the Bhumihars on an average rate of interest being 5% per mensem. This could possibly be called a Marwari way of buying “social harmony” with the Bhumihar-Rajput hegemons by parting with a share of their profit. Again, this is an aspect which needs a comprehensive academic exploration which I could not undertake. I think a separate account of urban history of Muzaffarpur may be a good subject to work on. Crime and social space is a subject which has attracted scholar’s attention mainly of the big cities like Mumbai. Small towns are yet to get scholar’s attention on significant scale.
Q. 6. I know you have written detailed article giving background to the recent communal clashes in Azizpur-Bahilwara, but could you briefly sum up what has changed now for such a clash to happen?
In the chapters 10 and 11 of my book (Contesting Colonialism and Separatism) I have explained how things have changed. Both Congress and post Congress regimes did not pay attention to flood control, and agro-based industrialization. This ‘development of underdevelopment’ and willful institutional degenerations led to huge migration of field-workers, students, and even white-collar professionals. This migration has left the villages and town mohallas only with males below 15 or above 70. This absence of elderly males resulted into vanishing of social monitoring and the few handful of above 20 adult males who are left in these places are lumpens, criminals doubling as brokers for the Panchayat fund.
Moreover, the ‘subaltern’ assertion is simultaneously discomfiture to increasingly impoverished historically advantaged/dominant segments of Bihar population. Consequently, this is giving rise to criminalization as well as communalization. Moreover, with ‘backward’ castes getting political ascendance, communal cleavages within the ‘backward’ castes of Hindus and Muslims is also becoming a menacing reality. It is this political economy which may explain resurgence of communalism in today’s Bihar. The willful negligence of and mocking at the issues of governance and development by the protagonists of secularism and social justice have further worsened the scenario.
Ever since 2001 when the Panchayati funds have started pouring in, the rise of lumpens-criminals, have become bigger realities across castes and communities. The clashes between such elements are often portrayed as or degenerate into communal tension.
Rest of the community rally behind these elements, demonstrating their primordial loyalty. These lumpens-criminals also become role models and heroes of their respective castes/communities, who in turn become legislatures riding on their huge popularity.
Now coming to the specific issue of growing Mallah-Pasmanda tension. You see, Mallah is one of the rarest communities in Bihar which has least of male migration. They are now, legally, and illegally controlling the ponds and pond-lets for catching and selling fishes, they are extracting ‘levies’ from the brick manufacturers out of the balck soils of the low lying lands called chaurs, as the proprietors of these lands are absentee-landowners, who are from marginal peasants to small to big landowners. Thus huge male presence among the Mallahs has made them more assertive politically and otherwise. In the Muzaffarpur and Vaishali Lok sabha constituencies they have got relatively larger numerical strength. This is what makes them strong enough to elect their own caste-men into legislative houses.
Q. 7. What kind of problems did you face in writing history of recent periods?
The problems were of finding archival evidences testified by official correspondences of relevant government officials. However, newspapers and memoirs (mostly vernaculars), and oral accounts and memories of cross sections of people have been of great help in reconstructing history. The contradicting and corroborative versions coming from across these sources themselves became helpful in making the account historically reliable and sustainable.
Related: