Crooke, Chaube, and Colonial Folkloristics, 1868-1914 In 1871, when Crooke came to India, the first collection of Indian Folktales in English, Mary Frere’s Of Dewan Days, was three years old and selling well in England (Frere 1868), The second half of ehe nineteenth century was not only ‘when folklore collection in India began, but also when it peaked. Pandit Chaube and William Crooke produced their works only in the century’ ast decade, when the collection of folktore by colonial British officers their wives and daughters, and missionaries had already registered sell as a phenomenon, Ut is wish reference to these that the uniqueness and che contribution of Chanbe and Crooke gains sean. ‘Writing on the history of Indian folklore research has been predominantly hvonological. Works on Indian folklore have contained this chronology in pret aces, describing, in varying degrees of det, the sequence of Folklore publications, Theoretical commentary has also been derived from the writings and claims of the Brith collectors. Theoretical analyses hy Dorson (1968), Rumangian (1993) an Jason (1983) ate in the context of nineteenth-century European flkoriatcs The diffecne between the two stecamschrondlogical andl theoretietlhas been the following while the former as shown thatthe collection and publication of Indian fatklore became hectic and widespreid soon after the first collection appease the Tatter has shoven how these materials attracted the ateotion of major European folkorists, anchropologists, and orientalists,espectally indologists, and alo pub Tishers Both the streams are bused on the claims of the eolletors themselves and the responses of their European contemporaries. Questious about the role of the often mentioned “Indian assistants” have aot heen posed: In a certain sense, the history of Indian folklore esearch has remained colonial, even a the ene of the twentieth fentury. thas done so because it has not questioned the colonial perspective and methodology. In this scheme of thing the association of Pande Ram Ghat Chauke andl Willis Crooke and thee contribution tothe stl of Fan fklore and popularieligion cannot be placed. We need to real the history of colonial British scholarship on Indian follore anew, with « special eye om the processes of collection and translation Its not within the seope of this work co research other collectors, and therefore I present here only some observations derivable trom the colonial folklore collections. This will help us to understand William Croake in relation to other British colectons 1 propose the followingCrvoke, Chaube, and Colonial Faltloriics, 1868-1904 1. thar che history of late-nineteenth-century Indian folklore research should context of colonial India and the ideological paradigas, political exigencies, and cultural representations generated there; 2. that the major collections of Indian folklore by British men and women should be seen in distinction from each other, thereby placing William Crooke's folllorstic plan in is own right; 3. that the collections of Indian folklore compiled by British administrators, their family members, ane! missionaries represent a model of folklore research be seen in arhose methodology and influence remain unidentified. Bernacd 8, Cohn, in his seminal essay “Command of Language and Language of Command” (1997, 16-56), divides the period 1780-1830 into three stages in the British study of Indian languages and literatures. The first, epitomized by William Jones, concentrated on learning the classical languages—Sanskrit and Persian—and their literatures. On the one hand, this study led to the codification of law for the Indians, and on the other, i made this literature available to English readers. During this period, the British believed that they.could gain power by discovering the knowledge system of the ruling Indian elite. The second stage re- flects the need to learn the “popular” languages. As British military power was called into action more often in the first half of the nineteenth century and em= bodied mainly by the Indian, sepoy, the British felt it acutely necessary to learn the commonly spoken languages. From this grew the third stage, epitomized by the prostuction of HobsonJobion: A Glestary of Anglo-Indian Celloguial Words and Phrases, and of Kindred Terms: Exymolegical, Historical, Geographical and Discursive, by Henry Yule and A. C, Burnell in 1886—a linguistic code rrarual intended to aid in commanding Indian troops, workers, and domestic servants. To me Hobson Jobson is. document of a new language—that of the British Raj in India and ‘beyond. It was a mixture of English, Indian, South Fast Asian, African, and other languages of the British Empire, Remarkably, even the phrases "Hobson Jobson and "British Raj" are expressions of this emergent language Popular culture in the second half of the nineteenth century falls outside the chronological scope of Colin’ brilliant analysis, The collection and translation of oral narratives in popelar languages, or what isles scientifically and more poeti~ cally called “folklore,” stands at the beginning of the late-ninetcenth-century eth~ nographic projects (mentioned by Cohn) that culminated in the census report Folklore scholarship cached far Further than so-called “official” scholatship— folklore collections were aimed at European scholars and the general public, Fot- lowing on Cohn’ identification of three stages of this project, I consider thatthe collection of folklore was the fourth stage in the much langer project of “trans~ forming Indian knowledge into European information” (Cohn 1997, $1). Further, [would argue thar this fourth stage—the phenomenon of folklore collection—is incellectually asociated with one aspect of che Revolt of 1857. : The British began to collect Tadian folklore in the post-1857 phase of colonialTHE QUEST history. There i still very little known about che organizational aspects of this revolt, which was termed a mutiny by the British because they could suppress it and “the first war of independence” by Indians because it nearly toppled! British supremacy in India. One aspect known from the records of the time is that ofa and symbolic discourse was the organizational backbone of the revolt Tesnple Col- lection, MSS Eur A59/1, 9-10), The sepoys, who were in clase proximity to the British and actively supported by the peasantry, spearheaded the action, and se: cretly planned and organiaed it over avast territory by sending, and receiving mes sages in the form of tales and abjects, The tales, which are our concer here, were not only in the so-called “popular languages” but also coded i the laws of story telling, Thus, even if the language were deciphered, the meaning would not be, Since the few such tales that are known were recorded by the British themselves, it is possible thatthe narratives did reach the officers of the sepoys before the revolt ‘but eould not be decoded to reveal the “mind of the people.” The: oral narratives ‘were important not only in the organization of the revolt, but also in the later reconstruction of events and identification of herves an villains. Whatever infor mation could be: gathered by the British was destroyed), yet the hervisma of the revolts leaders lived on in the oral nasratives of the Indian populace, and their Deutaity ia the lore of the British “The folklorist R.C. Temple ever published the following as a folk narrative tnat didnot forget to mention it in his post-retirement lecture (Temple 1904) a the anthropology departinent of Cambridge University. The nawab of Lohara, who ‘was instromental in the conspiracy to murder Frazer in 1857 in Dethi, was later subliely hanged by the British, and his lifeless body swung to the west. Mecca is west of Delhi and the swinging of Lohar’s body in that direction was interpreted by the witnesses a8 proof of his innocence. The incident, complete with the infer ence of divine justice, had circulated as narrative, and Temple ealled i “al klore in ascendauice." In the process of ascendance, however, it was the judgment of the people's court coded in linguistic and cultural “tale,” In 1857 the British also took Alirect control of India’s interinr and rural areas, and now found it necessary to take inceeased interest in the stories being, told. It is said thatthe specter of 1857 never left the British residents of India, and they knew that administering such a vast aiea required knowledge of “why particular peoples are mentally what they are found to be" (Temple 1962-63, L:vii) and of their “weret messages anc! syrubols (Crooke 1919). The Indians "had been revealed by their actions in 185 treacherous and unchangeable. Outwardly they may conform to the sahibs expec tation, but they could never be teusted. At any time their deep-seated irrational superstitions could break forth in violence” (Cohn 1997, 124), ‘The collection of falklore, especially folktales, in the post-1857 phase is prycho-historically com- British perception of 59 to be nected to the memories of the Revolt of 1857 and to the Indian society, “The first collection of dian folktaks was Mary Fiere’s Old Devour Days Hindoo Fairy Legends Current in Southern India (1868), Mary Frere was the young Bartle Frere, governor of the Bonihay presdeney. In 1865-66 she daughter of SirCreake, Chaube and Colonial Paristie, 868-1914 accompanied him on a long tour of the "Mahratta country” in the pleasant winter season, The only female company for her in the entourage of “about six hundred Js" (Frere 1881, ix) was her ayah, Anna Liberata de Souza (more a companion than a governess. De Souza was a Christian convert and had worked in many English houscholds, including that of Sir Charles Napier. She could thus speak a kin of English typical of people in her kind of service.’ It was from her that Mary Frere demanded the narration of “traditional tales.” De Soura at first refused, but went on to narrate ewenty-four tales, many of which became important in subetan- tiating the claims of Max Muller's mythological school (Frere 1881, xis Dorson 1968, 334; Narayan 2002). Although this was Freres only folktale work and she later became a scholar of Hebrew! the most important part of her work remained without imitators, Mary Feeve included the story of de Souza’ ie in the first see tion of her book, the “Narrator’s Narrative,” asa first-person narration. This nar rative was the contemporary history of « Lingayat family through major battles, religious conversion, and new employment opportunities. De Sowea’s parents’ fix mnily had passed through not only vast territories but also major historical transfor mations, and de Souza, che backbone of her own nuclear of thirty-five who had borne every kind of personal traged ‘work! Later scholars have noted that de Souza was a Christ of Hindu society and belie's. Another contrast, however, has escaped attention: that dd Soura's ales were “traditional” but her autobiographical narrative contemporary in form and content. Moreover, many of the tales she chose to narrate center an peopl in situations like her own. This rather uncdueated narrator too was split— her worldview was derived from her traditional tales and ber life was subject not ‘only t forces of change but also to different worldview. And yet, she was “privi- leged” to have her life story also recorded no other collector gave that kind of space to his or her nar Mary Freze ended her introduction by detailing the mine of folklore materials in India and asking, "Wor't somebody go to the digging?” There were many who did, and in fit the metaphor of India being a "gold mine” of folklore was repeated again and ajgin in the last chee decades of the nineseenth century: And in the period from 1868 to 1914 rise the peaks of colonial British scholarship of Indian folklore. Frere’s collection was followed by the even younger Maive Stokes’ Indian Fairy Tales (1880). Maive was a child who, itis sti, collected chese tales from three doanestie ser vants—two female ayahs and a male cook, Interestingly, even for a child folklore collector, the caste and religion of “native” narrators were notewor thy factors. It is obvious that the collection and publication of the stories was a ily, was an old worsan ana yet was hard at ‘while her tales were family project, wherein “Mother” and “Father had as much importance as Maive “The book's intvouction (Stokes 1880, vi-xxx) was written by W. R. S. Ralston; 1 This Fc has fs overlooked hile Hits fies created Hebron Jobson deal with native servants snl suboninats the servants ala developed an equivalent coc tocommaniate with the haves. This lencnn ws not the writen Bat these feaion, abe proved ay ens ean Jen tn dtd icuson of Mary se Nanya 2002THE QUEST ir discussed the origin of folk: narratives, and it diverted artention from the tales wast as anuch as did the one written by Mary Frere’s father Sir Bacthe Frere to Old in Days By the 1880s there were two Kinds of “Yolkborists” in the fie those who worked for pleasure or because they gained such knowledge as part of their every- day experience, and who therefore did not claim scientific expertise in collection and aimed thei works at lay readers; and those who organized their materials scientifically and aimed them at scholars, In che Vietorian divide, to the first cate gory belong the women and the missionaries, and to the second military and act ministrative officers. 1 will discuss them separately After Frere and Stokes, there were other women who collected and pub lished Indian folklore. They were wives of administrators: Flora Anne Steel, Alice Elizabeth Dracott, and Georgiana Kingscote. Stel, the most famous woman collec tor, was associated sith Richard Carnac Temple in the eailiest phase of his follore collection, While Stee] wrote the tale texts, Temple supplied notes and annotations— 1 scientific stream (Steel and ‘Temple 1884), Steel’ style and tone were vastly different from lemple’. She prepared the texts for Victorian English nurseries, Her target audience was children and she romanticized India for them in her prefaces and tales, ‘Alice E. Dracott—the least known of al collectors—published one booklet in Lodi, Folklore fom Central India and Rajputana (1897) and one book in England, Simla Vilage Tales (1906). She didnot pretend to be knowledgeable about either India or folklore scholarship, but published the book “to place them [tales] upon the world shelf” (1906, x). Her booklet, which bears only her initials and no intro nd remarkable document. ‘Tales be~ ‘moment in Dracott’s everyday life duction, is, however, an extrem ‘gin not as tales but 2s descriptions of a domes “Blane” stood under the shadow of the purple impor creeper in the werandish of ay lite bungalow at Goons, and made a picturesque enough figure in his flowy, deess and hig Punjabi turbas, He had arrived at an opportune rament, jis 8 Rarnchand? the Otee had finished telling me » tle, so he added is cn Touts i the Beletee Hindustani which any subaltern wv had passed his Lower andar might undetstiea, “Mem Sabi, Burm bee do aca at jana,” And 0 ny txqully high-flow, “ascha, bol" he replied: “These is far away inthe Punjab bg —very big~-siver” (5897, 1-2) tell tales eeeoeded from her nd others who Fe “This is the opening of her booklet, which goes am £0 dhobi (washerman), ber mali (gardener), her daughter's sponded to her comments or te situation, Damestic servants, her husband’ lower staf, and others enter her nacrative with « tale and leave, often after hearing the 197, 12). Interestingly she does not translate her conver: erstand or find the incomprehensibility 5 the smal misttes*s curt comment ( sations but assumes English readers will w pleasantly exotic. Her assumptions could not have been very wrong, was probably meiint tor Fellow British residents of India. 110 see glimpses of Dracotts life as wife of a civil hooklet, printed in Along with the tales we gi eeGroake, Chaube, and Colonial Poltoritc, 1868-1914 / servant, her Hobson-Jobson Hine, and importantly, the context of narration. Her portrayals are convincing hecause she does not hide her biases. In the preface of her book, printed in London in 1906, she seems to have just recovered from the nerv- tous breakdown she suffered after “the terrible earthquake which visited the Pan- jub in April 1905" (1906, ix) and sounds very sad. Unfortunately she has never been counted amongst the himinaries of the colonial folkiorists and thus there is no research to tell us more about her. I chanced upon her booklet in the libeary of the Folklore Society and consider it to be ao unusual narrative for its ethnographic simpliciry Mrs. Kingscote published a collection with Pandit Natesa Sastri that is stil well known: Tiles of the Sun (1890), She lauded Sastri in her preface, yet his voice is not distinguishable in the book. He is said to have supplied her with a lot of Hindu mythological tales instead of folktales or folk versions of mythological tales Mrs, Kingscote took up cudgels against ‘Theodor Benfey's (1859) proposition that India was the Urheimat. or original home, ofall foc narrative in her introduction, {Kingscote and Sastri 1890, ixmai). 1 shall discuss this further later Large amounts of materials were contributed by missionaries such as]. Hinton Knowles (1888) and Charles Swynnerton (1892, 1903), who collected in Kashmir and Punjab, and E, M. Gordon (1909), who did so amongst the tribes of central India. Their aims were clear—first, “to spread the religion of Christ” (Gordon 1909, vi), and second, to help the British officers administer their territories. They produced the texts for lay adule English readers, ancl hoped thar scholars would find ‘he materials useful. They saw the narrators as heathen, in need of reform, an their tales, though interesting, as expressions of Hind superstition andl irrational ways of thinking. Both the women and the missionaries admitted to not being “experts,” yet often commented on contemporary debates in European folkloristies about the ot gin of folktales. The German indologist Theodor Benfey's theory that India was the original home of folk narrative (Benfey 1864) did not find many supporters in England. Most of the above-mentioned collectors decried it with all their might. Benley’s propositions were diffusionist explanations for similarities in Indian and European folktales, The counter-arguments were of two Kinds: that similariey was a coincidence, or thut it was dve to the similarities in human nature. Kingscote, for ‘example, found it absurd thar anybody could come to this (Benfey') conclusion, because in her opinion parents everywhere invent tales for their offspriiy (King seote and Sastri 1890, xx). Ralston, in his introduction to Maive Stokes's book, discussed the solar mythological theory of Max Mueller, which reached eonelu- sions similar to Benfey’s by another route: Far more dificult isi to believe in sucha triumph of independent development, than co place reliance upon a statement tothe effect that the wave of story-telling, its way westward, (Stokes 1980, xxx) as well as of empire, has we Te was the collections made by administrators that were “planned”: according toa theoretical model, ora particular genre or tradition of nagrative ofa particularTHE QUEST community, or on a regional basis. The administrators not only were educated i related disciplines, but ako portrayed their collections as the tesults of scientific inquiry: They wrote about the way they went about collecting and translating the materials and what conclusions they hoped to derive from the collected texts Richard Camae Temple, for example, hoped that folklorists would become like ‘Physiologists" and folklore would reveal the mind of the people just as “exami tion of skulls or teth or hair" could differentiate or connect the various races of ‘mankind (1962-63, Lili). He interpreted tales historically seing them as eeveal- ing the history of their tellers In 1890 William Croke took over ‘Temple’ journal, Punjab Notes and Que- ries.) Croke rechristened it North Indian Notes and Queries and started publishing it from Allahabad, From here on we see the emergence and growth of that brand of ethnography for which Crooke should be better known and in which he differs from most other colonial ethnographers ‘The plan and perspective which find their first expression in the “Introduetory" ro the fest volume of North Indian Nores and Queries reach their maturity in Iadreduction to rhe Popular Religion and Fathlore of Northern India (1894) and in The Tribes ana Cases ofthe North Western Provinces ‘and Oudh (1896).' The three publications—the journal Nordh Indian Notes and Queries, the two volumes of Popular Religion and Foor, andl the fous volumes of ‘Tribes and Castes of the North Western Provinwes—are effectively sinltareous. A petiod of just six years for all these is phenomenally short, and could have esta lished anyone as an ethnologist and folklorist par excellence. Added to these works is, of course, the unpublished collection of folle narratives, as well as materials published in other journals, including the Indian Anciguary. In the following, 1 shall discuss both Crookes school of ethnography and what can be seen of Chaube's contribution to it through North Indian Notes and Queries, Pepubar R gion and Folklore, andl Tribes and Cases of the North Western Provinces North Indian Notes and Queries was published from 1891 tll Crookes retie- ment in 1896, Punjab Notes and Querie, which it continued, was largely “miscl lanist” in nature and published a variety of information from anywhere in South ‘Asia as long as it was not “eritcal of the government” (Morrison 1984, 151). Norcb Indian Notes and Queries, however, started on a different note: "The title has been for the present extended so as to includ, roughly speaking, that portion of Inia where the language of the people is of the Aryan type. We shall, however, insert occasionally notes and queries in connection with the Dravidian, Kolarian and Tibeto-Burman races" (North fndian Notes and Querie, April 1891, inside front over). Crooke was defining his own focus within the larger paradigen of colonial anthropology. The journal's fieMls of interest were given as “Religion, Sociology, Antiquities and Local History, Folklore, Ethnography, Language and Philology, Anglo-lndian Local History, Bibliography, Numismatics, Arts and Marifactures, 3. Tape ad bee easel Bui ad was ae stn the ra 4. With ere this won, Docu sy in fle ween Mh with etbaologsa in pace of pio analyses” 98 8)Crooke, Choube, and Colonial Folkers, 8681914 and Agriculture.” ‘The subjects were not very different from those of the Jndian Antiquary 0: Punjah Notes and Queries, but the perception of ther differed in North Indian Notes and Queries, Under “Religion” the journal was concerned with twaters of the ‘popular faith of the people” as distinct from scriptural matters; “Antiquities and Local History” those antiquities were to be reported which had "not as yet come urider examination by the Archaeological Survey." This was & clear shift from the established and developing trends in indological studies, which concentrated on signs and symbols of ancient Ton, Noveb Indian Notes and Querist differed in is approach and methodology of writing and professed to be concerned with the populir culture of existing Indian society Few resides in this country, and in particular the lange oficial cas, have ime 2nd leisure to collect information and coral articles and papers of the nature of those published in the Proceng fhe diate Salty or the Indian Anrguay, ba there are few men of culture aud olnervation who de not record in their note ‘books the rimerons facts of imerese which come under their notice ding toes and in the course of their daly intercourse with people. All this value Knowledge is to often lost because there is ao medium by which it «an be recorded, and no publication exists which aims a bringing into communi- cation the scholuss and observers who se scatered over the country. This wart ‘aur new periodical wil attempt to supp, (orth Indian Notes and Queren, Api 189, ice front coves) i the camping censor Cooke was, of course, addressing the British residents, However, it was Indians ‘who were to become the main contributors to North Indian Notes and Querier*Phe journal soon became more sharply focused, with only four sectiqns: Popular Reli -gion, Anthropology, Folktales, and Miscellanea. The four sections, clearly divided, carried contributions of varying lengths and no editorials. Very few contributions bore an addivional note by the editor, and such notes only pointed out reference sources, especially his own Popular Retigion and Folklore. Pandit Ram Gharib Chaube joined Crooke in 1892 and his contributions made up almost one-thind of every issue after that. That was more than Crooke himself contributed, Articles credited! to Pandit Chaube concern various istes of popular religion and culture. sores of religion and folklore had been defined by Crooke within the larger colonial paradigm of portraying India. This portrayal was delib- rately chosen; that is, even though the editors knowledge was wide, he was deter- tnined to publish only some aspects of it, For instance, notes published in the Popu- Jar Religion section had co meet the following criterion: “Here itis proposed to publish notes and queries on all the religions professed by the natives of Hindustan, excluding Chrisianity* (North Indian Nore and Queries, April 1891, inside front cover) Clealy, the contemporaneity of the popular religions, as well as of the contributors to the journal, was to be restrained. All contributions had to fall 5. ora dried dseusion, see my intoduetion to Hot ftom Never India (Crooke and Chabe 2002} 1, Eps aedTHE QUEST within this framework. An individual like Ram Ghavib Chaube wrote in this larger paradigm but by sifting out a selection from his store of “traditional” knowl. eclge. Thus the selection of sotes, nominally the editor's prerogative, was dependent fn the selective information given by the narrator. Ram Gharib Chanbe's notes, in that sense, reveal aspects not only of colonial ethnology but alsaot himself Phe question is, i it possible to see him as different from William Crooke, on, more importantly, as himself? The answer to this question ean be affirmative for only fone reason—the invlomitable individuality of Chaube, which expresses itself de. spite a fixed paradigm of knowledge. Chaube’ historical anonymity maker it all the more imperative that he be wen through his writings have eater in this commentary argued that Ram Gharib Chaube' contem= Porancity lay in his education and in the knowledge system it generated. Fle was Surely not merely carrying out a mechanical act of translation but aware of his role a atranslator of culture, and that too for a readership composed mainly of foreign: «rs, While the majority of his contributions fulfil the agenda of the editor of North Indian Notes and Queries, supplying, notes on superstitions, charens, ghosts, rituals, fesrivn Surdas, a famous folk poet of north India, he begins, ind so on, yet he manages to insert himself in the text. In a note on As Kali Das i popularly styled the Homer of India, so Sur Dns i regarded asthe Prine of pews? (North indian Note: and Queries, May 1895, 19) e-course of This cultural adaptation with literary references is expressed again io th explaining the custom of holding a steaw in the mouth while selling one's son into slavery ‘Phe most familiar instance of this i ehe story of Raja Harish China, who in it V, Scene of the drama disposed of his son in this way (Nort Pliny Neto sind Queries, Sep, 1895, 107) Which “drama” he is citing a8 reference is not determinable. Quite obviously, either it is an English translation ot he is adapting the terminology of European dramaturgy. This consciousness th rs pervades even the exphation of a common practice of *touching gold and silver at the New Moon.” (Chaube begins his note thus: is writing for foreign ‘The rule in Kutope of couching money at the new mon is very general, (Mores Indian Novs ard Queries, Oct 1895, 113), He does not stop here, but goes on to cite: Henderson's Noges on the Folens of the Northern Counties of England and the Borders. Puvit Ram Gharils Chiube is Known to have-been a voracious reader, ane! it scems that he was reading ut Croke’ library too, Iris noteworthy that he was inscribing Indian anil British data fon the same map, comparing ore with the other, not exoticizing folkloristics, It seems unlikely that Crooke could have added this sentence to Chaube’s text, for 7, Emphasis xedtwo reasons. Crooke wrote his notes separately, and such comparisons are common in Chaube's notes and seem to be his style. Chaube’ style of cultural and Titerary adaptation, however, is at is peak in one of the few tales credited to him in North Indian Notes and Queries Ics intriguingly titled "Adam and the Prince." The tale is about a princess who refuses to marry according, to her father’s wishes and is consequently turned out of the palace. She makes a hut in the jungle and lives there. One day a prince eornes along, and they fallin Jove and marry. After some time a son is born whom the king, his grandfather, has killed while the mother is away. ‘When the mother came home and found the child dead she was half mad with {erie Just then Adar and Eve were Ang through the air and heard her eres, They asked hee the eause of her grief. ‘Then Aslam cut his sig inger and let two «lrops of blood Fal into the mouth of the chik! which immediately revived. Then ‘Adam and Eve flew asray. (orc Indian Notes and Query, Oct. 1895, 123: see also Croke and Chaube 2002), Adam and Eve behave just like the archetypal divine Hindu couple Parvati and Shiva, who turn up inn many narratives in exactly the same fashion, Cultural translation is not only ane-way—Chaube not only found parallels and references in European eultuce for his own, bur also integrated foreign elements into his own, ‘Although Crooke had debarted the native Christians from being the subject of North Indian Notes ard Queries, Christian mythological figures could be brought in, witheut Crooke being. able to exclude ther! Ram Gharib Chaube’ style also involved revealing silt details about him= self. Thus in the course of informing the readers about "A curious way of cakulat ing age, in which “long and pendent” earlobes are believed to be signs of long if, he adds AA respectable friend of mine is so ceruin about this that he once began to shed tears ar the sight of my ears, which have wafortunately small ens, (Néreh Pian Notes and Queries, May 1895, 35) Simultaneously his tise of the word “curious” in the title shows his own distance from the belief, which according to him was held by “Muhammadans, as well as Hindus.” Ar another place, while discussing the “regard for” squirrels, he tells us how be was given a “sound slap" by his teacher for artempting, to eatch ane (North Indian Notes and Queries, Aug, 1895, 89). At one level these insertions make the discourse live, and at another level they show the mental world of Ram Gharib Chaibe. He afew notes about his village of Gopalpur, and many other notes are by his brother Ram Baksh Chaube. Howweves, its these personal notes that today reveal serious aspects of Cooke's missing discourse and Chaube and Cooke's scholarly association, Crooke not only placed information but also fixed Chaube’s pice within it Chatbe’s name appears copiously in two sections of the journal: popular religion ‘nd miscellanea. Its sucprising that the writer of the present 158 narratives hus Croeke, Cube, and Colonial Pelvis, 68-1904‘THE Quest just a few folktales to his credie in the journal between 1892 and 1896, and another one listed as “recorded by” him, Many of the narrators named in the journal, fom ‘whom the published tales were collected, appear again in the unpublished manu scripts, which obviously means eithes that they sent multiple narratives, of which some were selected for publication, or that these narrators were associated with CCrooke or Chaube over a long period of time. However, if the manuseript versions of their tales were transated by Chae, i is unlikely chat those published in. North Indian Notes and Queries were not."Vhe manuscripts were constructed in the same years in which Norch Indian Notes and Queries was published. Yet Chaube’ place- ment exclusively in sections on popula religion and miseellanea does not reveal this and would be unknown, had! the unpublished manuscripts not revealed his identity and capability. A scholar is reduced to being an “informant” about his own culture, and his work is thus granted litle intellectual value Iti the editor who seems to be the sole force behind a sustained journal like North Indian Notes end Queries, especially its Folktales section. Chaube is the missing discourse, and, as argued earlier, missing discourse concerns not just the manipulation of ceality and omission of detail, but also che ascription of idlentry The importance of North Indian Notes and Queries for our understanding of Ram Gharib Chaube and William Crooke lies primarily in how its approach cit fered from that of most other journals presenting Indian knowledge. Its contribu tors too differed, in that they were largely Indian, This was no the usal paradigan of colonial production of knowledge, even though North Indian Notes and Queries stuck to the wider tenets of colonial ethnography, portraying India as a treasury of survivals of another time. It was different from other journals in that it allowed a discourse to emerge which was largely within the colonial paradigm but expressed through the direct participation ofthe “native.” ‘We do not have proof that the contributors were themselves completely won over by the colonial chetorie of “loss of tradition” ane reported their material ae~ cording to this rhetoric. We must admit that we do not exactly know what moti- vated them to narrate, to put on record nota vague ank! romantic “loss of tradition but the historical and cultural transition within a colonized society. The British scholars called the change “the onward march of civilization,” but inthe discourse of the "native" the change was a process in whieh i... pre-British, ways of life were giving way to the “new” oF Briish-generated values. The teems “olden” and "new" referred not to any mythical division between past and present but to the historical division between the pre-colonial and the contemporary ic, late ninereenth-century, Indian society and culture. Moreover, any so-called "inform ant knew that he was narrating toa British administrator, who would communi cate his information further; he liad nor taken to writing about his culture but was “asked” to help the administrator do so, In its basics this situation of intelectual interaction was common to all “informants” and “assistants,” and we hive no reason to assume that they were not cognizant of i. Reporting “change” in this situation has other complex dynamics because the “change” is being reported to the one whoCrook, Chand and Colonial Patkoristin, 1868-1914 represents the forces of this change. We must ask: is the loss of tradition being Famenred or i the ch ‘A journal like North Indian Notes and Queries gave space and expression to this particular perspeetive on change, OF course, not all contributors to Nortb Indian Notes and Queries or other “informants” can be assured to have the degree of his- torical consciousness 1am proposing, yet the overall nature of North Indian Notes and Queries is essentially different from that of other publications, because almost all entries were hy Indians, even if reformulated by Crooke and Chau. And “that boeing eritially portrayed? storehonse of raw material for the advancement of Indian learning, was partly financed by him [Croke] until, owing to the prevailing, apathy and utter lack of official suppor, its publication had to be discontinued on his retirement” (Rose 1924, 383). This effort may have been enough to displease the Secretariat and it seems likely to have been one of the reasoos why Crooke was sidelined by the colonial government. When T asked Crooke’ grandson Patrick if he considered William Crooke radical for his times, Patrick rejected the possibility, saying, “His criticisms of the colonial goverumeat were those of a bureaucrat. He would not have rocked the boat.” That is probably close to truth, but does not diminish the fact that Crooke aeted like himself in that world of British colonial bureaucracy that Rudyard Kipling so loathed Tn the second (1896) edition of Popular Religion and Folklore, published in London, William Crook confessed that the success of the fist edition had sur- prised him. Tes suevess was indeed phenomenal the two volumes were sold out within a fow months of their publication. In its own way this was the first docu- ment of its kind, recording, not the official missionary and vedic Hinduism but the innumerable gods and godlings worshipped across rueal northern India. These were cult figures, often clouding the relatively small pantheon of vedic divinities, an constituted one of the most complex aspects of Hinduism—that it existed as x plurality and not a monolith. That plurality comprised many more ideas than those expressed in vedas, and the localized ideas were far more influential in deter mining people's behavior than those expresed by the high and mighty of Hind= ism, The politcal implications of this plurality stand in opposition to forces of homogenization, such as the British colonial state and administration in nineteenth: century India and the rightist, Hindo Fundamentalist forces in India today. Lm- plicily, Pepular Religion and Folklore was a counter to the established school of Geran and British indology, which was obsessed with seriptures, palm-leaf ‘manuscripts and their translation, and the exact age of Indian civilization, Also countering thei were the so-called Settlement Reports, which contained contem- porary information, but these were official government documents meant for ad ministrative purposes, uninteresting and inaccessible to most readers. Popular fotl~ lore collections didnot share the inaccessibility of indology and the Sevtlement Reports, but they trivialized the oral narratives and turned them into childrens stories Popular Religion and Folklore, like North Indian Notes and Queries, sought to fill gap (Crooke 1896) in European intellectual kaowledge of India, by docu:THE QUEST ‘menting living teaditions in a serious and accessible manner, Croke conformed t0 fhe colonial progam but gave it « new interpretation, Stylistically, Popular Religion and Folklore veflecteel eertainy neutrality and was devoid of crassly negative value jucigments, andl itincided a few “contempo- ary" narratives, portraying British men ae women. “These narratives revealed and confirmed the importance, extent, and influence of orality in Indiaa society "“Monvia-wala Sahib" and “Danapar-wala Sahib” (Cooke 1896a, 177, 179) are ‘most obviously contemporary nartatives in traditional forms; the first is about an Englishman who kidnaps boys to distill medicine from theie bodies, and the see- ond is about another Englishman who beheads natives ancl sends their heads to an English museum, They could also he seen as reflective of the state of mind which could cause the uprising of 1857, Ar another level, they are proof of the historical nwareness of the popular consciousness. Popular consciousness may be ridiculed because of its linguistic and cultural coding (*Momia-wala Sabi” is narrated as a ghost story) but the documented effects of this story show its power to determine social behavior "Danapur-wala Sahib" goes a step further, evealing not only his torical awareness but also information that allows us to understand historical phe romena correctly. The exaggerations in the narratives belong eo che sphere af nar ative freedon, as well as being, one of the 1ols of storytelling, developed over an indeterminable rime in a particular eultsre vane, Years after the publication and success of Pepalar Religion and Falllore, in which there was no mention of Pandit Ram Gharib Chauhe-—not even as one of the persons whose help Crooke scknowledyed—Panlit Chaube was helping George Grietson in the construction of Bidar Peasant Lift The experience of having been expunged from the Folktales section of Novth nian Notes ant Quevice ancl wn mentioned in Popular Religion and FolAfoe may have been the reason that Chaube’s style of personal insertions took a new cum, Now he gave personal details as part of the ethnographic information he provided: “I have givea the names [heard from my grand-mother, who is, as it were, a living dictionary of all popular beliefs anxd superstitions,” he tells Grierson, and goes on to acd details which have no obvious relationship to the “information” being sought. “My: Former master's (ie. Cronk’) Introduction to the Popular Religion and Folklore of Northern Luis owes a good deal to that old mother” (quoted in Amin 1989, xxix; see also the Grierson Papers) Is seems that the pandit was trying once again to subvert the anoaymity imposed con him, Every bit of information on Ram Gharib Chaube in the period 1890-96 points to an intense association wich Willian Crooke, Colonial processes of the production of knewledge hael gulped his labor without much trace, There was 0 mention of him in Crooke's book, and his grandmother does nat ever cone inte * the question. “That old mother” was, however, a source of scientific ethnography. Had i not been for her grandson, she would have been completely lost to history. ‘The pain is brimming over in Chaube's note to Grierson: “With her will die away in my family all the superstitions.” These words are not from Chaube's dary bust trom his scientifically informative notes to George Grierson, a senior civil servany,Cveoke, Chaube, and Colonia! Faktorite, 888-1914 like Crooke, And, a if to cover up the chayge that he had just leveled at Crooke, he diverts the discourse into the present forthe yoonger women have become so intelligent through the gece of learning imparted tous inthe schools and colleges setup all over the country tha even the ‘women tho enme in cur contact do not escape enlightenment we have received through the blessings place! in our reach by Queen Vietora, Ibid.) In Griersonis manuscript, unlike the ones published in this volume (which were weitten cafier), Pandit Ram Gharib Chaube was using his intellect as a strategic tool—he did not put his signature at the end but inserted it in the text as an eth- hographie example, In a situation where he was being effaced, his omate language sees ke an ironie quest far fi play ‘The four volumes of The Thies and Castes ofthe North Western Provinces were published in 1896 in Caleutta. Chaube’ name appears just twice, in two Footnotes: Based oainty on a note by Pandit Ramgharib Chaube, (Crovke 1896, 1:26) Peincipally based on notes by Paudlts Ram Gharib Chauhe and Bhan Pratap TTivan. (Crooke 1896, 1:143) That is all the credit Chaube receives for his work, which has been described as intense by Chandrashekhar Shukl, the biographer of the Flindi litteratcur Ram (Chandra Shukl. Shukl describes Pandit Chaube not only asa formidable intllec~ tual” but also as “being busy with Tribes and Caster of the North Western Provinces for the District Collector William Croke,” and adds, “While Chaube was going places collecting information, Crooke used to sometimes delve into collecting, tit bits” (Shulel 1952, 98). Only one and a half entries are credited to Chaube, and one to his brother in Gopalpar, but many cary the footviote “Based on inquiries made at Mirzapui:” Who was making, these enquiries? In the prefice to Tribes and Castes of the North Western Provinces, however, there is no mention of Ram Gharib Chaube, noc even a word! Colonial falklorstics is also charseterized by a missing discourse (Naithani 1997, 13-14). R. C. Temple, for example, not only curtails the portrayal of his bards—the mivavi—by calling them “rascals” and “people of disrepute” but also remains silent about the widespread role of the airass in Punjab society from bieth to death cesemonies and, most importantly, in settling land disputes. "Temple also tloes not mention that the mirais as the traditional keepers of land records, helped the British construct new land settlement records after the annexation of the Pun- Jab in 1856. We thus have not only a custailed representation of mira (only singers and performers of versifed legends) but also n complete neyation of the historical identity. The missing discourse isnot just a manipulation—ideological ot éempirical—of the representation of the colonized “other.” It isthe ereation af a now identity ‘What Iam proposing here is not only that the writings of the colonial folklore collectors need to be critically ead and their ideological leanings analyzed, but that these writings need to be questioned and theie silences noted. Doing so may define‘THE QUEST (ot redefine the colonial writings and help another diseoxirse to emerge, a discourse that moves beyond critique—negative or positive—and into those realms of eolo nial folklore scholarship about which there is silence. One of the favorite phases ‘of colonial fellelote collectors was that “there is a veil lying heavily over Inds past” (Elliot 1869, ix; Naithani 2001, 67) ironically, this is true of their own achol arship, And this vel lies especially over the subject about which the collectors talk the most—their methodology of collection. ‘This is what needs to be identified, as i is the basis from which both analyses—of tales and of their collectors—c proceed Pn flkore sts the nature of fiver inflynces the nau of elected materials because the identity of che collector who converts orality into writ ten word hecomes an integral part of those materials. Our knowledge of Chaube lets us see how the line of communication—the prerequisite (or folk nareative collection—between the British collector and the narrator was established. In other colonial folklore collections link is missing—that which connected the ea leetors to their narrators. When the collector is wornn, the nacrators are domes tie servants and a familiarity due to regulie contact can be assumed and under stood as the basis of the narrative situation, When the collectors are missionaries, they eluitn to base their collection on regular personal contact, which ean ag assumed, though we cannot be sure thar the collector teally understood the kare guage in which the narrative was tld, Missionaries often acknowledge the help of British civil servants, just as administrators, as folklore collectors, profusely a Knowledge the help and cooperation of colleagues. In both these cases our qucs- tions apply at every stage The writers minimally acknowledge the help of one or two *lndian or “native assistants.” This acknowledgment is never specific and the image generated is, at best, ofa clerk who knows alittle English, and who assisted in the administrator's folklore collection as an extension of his office work. There is no evidence about his scholarly capabilites, motivations, or perceptions. Like the narrator, he too is torical identity, Not all assistants could have been similae, nor could yet in the writings of the so-called scholar-administrators tiated From the others. In the later reseaeches, too they are seen a8. eategory of people, who primarily carried out orders an beyond that, simply agreed with the views of the collector of both folklore and reventi This harmony is implausible because it assumes that the assistant was totally mentally passive, These relationships cannot be uniderstood so simplisically The role of this personage—the assistant—is spread all across the colonial writings, yet is completely clouded. Neither were all officers like each other, and every associt- tion must have had its own nuances. This isan aspect of colonial folklore scholar ship that can substantially affect our understanding of i, ‘The assistant had a his torieal role to play—of establishing communication between the administeator and the narrator: [tis he on whom both the eolletor and the narrator were dependent, and it is he whom the administrator so often suspected of changing the text. Per fostning this complex role could at best establish hen as an excellent public relCrooke, Chanbe, and Colonial Pldorsis 868-191 tions man; it s his further role in determining che nature of intellectual activity and production that now comes tothe fore My fourth proposition is tt colonial folklore scholarship is a model of re search that has its own pastivitar characteristics. It is intrinsically related to devel ‘opments in European folklore theory, but its motivations and methodology in col leering and compiling ate enttely different. Studies of colonial folklore collections have until now proceeded from the identity of the British collectors, placing them in the Eutopean debates ofthe ate nineteenth century, In current folkeorstics, too, the colonial model of folklore research does not have a separate identity. The influence of the German romantcists on European folklore scholarship in the nineteenth century was immense. The German romanticist movement of the carly nineteenth century brought the colletion of oral narratives and song into the mainstream of literary activity. Responding to the sociocultural dynamics of a Germany that was nor yet « nation and to the threat of Napoleonic aggression, the romuanticists created the image of « homogenized German Volk. This image was based on the similarity of oral expression across the politically divided German states and strengthened the idea of Germany as a Kidturnatien, We offered German romantcist « two-pronged nationalist argument: folllore was the binding thread cof che German people, and inthe face of French cultural imperialism i epreseited German cultural roots und ilentity: The process of homogenization was also a process of nation building, The works of the Beothers Grimm inspired! génerations throughout the nineteenth century to collect oral narratives and songs, and many of these collectors were “nationalists” in their own countries and contexts, Since its inception, folklorstes has been politicized discipline, and in many coun tries the collection of flkore has been closely associated with nationalist and sub- nationalist politcal movements. The process of defining “folklore” is a process of defining *folk," and this definition has differed over time and space, The influence ‘of nationalist politics on the folklore colleétions of the Grimms has been discussed by Heinz Rolleke (1985) and Jack Zipes (1999), ye it cannot be denied that the brothers’ collection of folktales set in motion the emergence of a discipline even while it helped instill pride in German folk culture, The political interests of the collectors and the narrators-could be reconciled in their common identity a8 citi zens of a nation, Colonial Bri in modern Tach h collectors are considered the inititors of folklore collection like the Grimms in Germany. They di initiate the process, but this fact can only be the beginning of research on the colonial model of folklore scholarship. Beyond i ie their motivations, sheie method, ard the resultant schol arship, ‘The context of colonial scholarship of Indian folklore is eseentially inter- ‘ational, intercultural, and mtitingual, unlike German and other Furopean folk lore scholarship, which was langely based in localized nationalist contexts, The primary difference between the German romantic model and the cefonial model of folklore collection les in the litter’s relatively international character Though the Grimms’ collections went beyond the boundavies of Genmany, and their method inspired folklore collections in many countries, yet the international character ofTHE QUEST the colonial model is far different. T 4 narrators belonged to differ cent nations, spoke different languages, and lived by very different beliefs. Colonial folklore research was based not only on different sociopolitical motivations but also oon the mutual opposition between the nationalism(s) of the folllore collectors and the folk, Its internationalism is not x consequence of the folklore collections, but their very pre-condition Homogenization of the culturally diverse and varied India suited the British polity on the subcontinent, as it made governance less complicated, but the roman ticization of the folk did not. Most British collectors—whether women, mission- aries, or officers—offered similar images of the culturally varied subcontinent, but these images were usually unromantic. ‘Temple, for example, defined his profes- sional bards as “rascals” (Temple 196263, 1vii), Kingscote derided the “national Hindoo characteristic” of belie in “supernatural phenomena” (Kingscote and Sas- ti 1890, x), and Aneew Lang in London rejected a clan that Cinderella was of Indian origin, saying, “A naked and shoeless race could not have exeated Cinder ell” (Dorson 1968, 307). If folklore collectors did begin with a romantic fascin tion with India, their attitude underwent fundamental changes in the colonial situation, as did their portrayal of colonized peoples. Within Europe, Britain accumulated the largest folklore collections, as mate- tals were gathered in colonies across Asia andl Africa. The Folklore Society, Lo don, formed in 1878, isthe oldest folklore society and was the platform of m Jate-nineteenth- and carly-ewentieth-eentury debates in folkloristies. In the lat two decades ofthe nineteenth century the battle lines were drawn between follow ers of George Laurence Gomme, Andrew Laing, and Moses Gaster; between "dif- fusionists,” “survivalist,” and believers in the “historical method,” respectively. Both diffusioists and those who relied on historical method believed tales to have dispersed from one common source, which most held co have been India, while survivalists believed that folktales were essentially anthropological material that indicated their society's stage of development~-or, rather, primitivism. Dorson (1968, 266-276) has described the dramatic debaces of the 1891 congress of the Folklore Society. The debate was not merely theoretical and academic, but had im :mense historical implications. Both the streams of thought were ways of defining, different peoples of the British Empire. How was Indian civilization to be seen in relation to the European? Was Africa to be considered “civilized” at all? What would make or mar the Empire? In his 1900 presidential address to the Folklore Society, E. Sidney Hartland said forthrightly that British folklorists were in the service of the Empire: We are helping to macadamize the world for the bene of modern commerce Tewill cereinly destroy much that can never be replaced, rch thas picturesque, vo tat is eapable ightly construed... To have missed an opportunity like the present of aculating lange body a evidence within and heyond.... our ew possessions, will then be sen to have incurred responsibility and reproach which ede seckirg to spare ou coutey and our govement. (Hartland 1901, 97)Crooke, Chaube, and Colonial Folklorstis, 868-1914 Similar emotions are expressed by almost all colonial collectors, including women collectors. [nthe last two decades of the nineteenth century the Folklore Society was the battleground of British folklorist, where the cultural identity of many diverse peoples was 10 be decided, Those people were represented nat by any of their ‘own, but by British colonial administrators, military officers, and mistionaties, “This model differs not only in its approach and methodology, but also in the resultant state of folklorstcs in India, Eminent folklorist Heda Jason speaks i sightfully of late-nincteenth-century folklore research in Inia This is the very period daring which the collecting of popular antiquities and folklore biossomed in Engl! and on the Continent borne by the wave of ro ‘mantic and nationalistic tents and tovements, While, however, the ride of 19th ‘century nationalism broxght with tthe development of the miain social and aca ‘emi tools and institutions (associations, atchives, museums, publishing, enter prises, university chairs) for folklore research in Europe, India did not join in (Uasons 1983, 105) India did nor simply “not join in” but could not, posibly on the same logic of colonialism on which India “di! not join in” in the industrial revolution, Or seen in another way, India did join in, by providing materials to late-nineteenth-century European positvistic scholarship. The aims of the colonial British collectors dif fered vastly from those of their European counterparts, and therefore institutions of study were not developed within India and it seems India did not “join in” In tality, she emule not have escaped the position she found herself in even if she had wanted to, because colonialism created one of the first global networks of not only trade but also cultural communication, Colonial folklore collectors—British and Indians—were all part of it, but the colonized could not make theie own voice heard. ‘This intense phase of colonial folklore research—the second half of the nine- teenth century produced many collections of Tian oral fll narratives. Though these collections came from various parts of the vuried subcontinent, they were surprisingly similar in theig portrayal of Indi, Indians, and Indian folllore. India ‘was beautiful bur difficu; Indians were superstitious, primitive, and ignorant, but Possessed folklore which was the storehouse of wisdom; Indian folklore was cich and ancient, but about to disappear: The collector was the one who coutd reach India, rule Indians, and rescue, preserve, und decode thei lore. The colonial folk lorits created a new folktale—a folktale called India (Naithani 2001, 66), which Portrayed India as an ideal place ro collec folklore hut ror as a center ofits study, becuuse the Indians themselves were incapable of both the creation of mew talee tnd scientific abstraction. A colony wis a colony, whether for trade or for folklore studies: it had to supply the raw materials to be processed elsewhere, The the answer to Jason’ question of why India “did not join in in the creation of institutions of folklore study. Those who were considered the scholars of In folklore in the nineteenth century did establish such institutions, but not in Talia