02_palsetia_055071 (jk-t) 15/6/05 11:43 am Page 197

Merchant Charity and Public Identity Formation in Colonial India:

The Case of Jamsetjee Jejeebhoy

Jesse S. Palsetia
University of Guelph, Canada

ABSTRACT

This article examines the place of public philanthropy in enhancing the role of the Indian
merchant in Bombay, India, during the first half of the 19th century. It supplements works
that have stressed the indigenous elite’s attempts to contest and negotiate a significant place
within the public culture of colonial India. Specifically, it emphasizes the opportunities and
difficulties associated with Indian attempts to shape a colonial civic culture conducive to
Indian requirements, by example of the establishment of the Jamsetjee Jejeebhoy Hospital
in Bombay.

Keywords: Bombay; colonial response; imperial ideologies; India; Indian notables;

Jamsetjee Jejeebhoy

Introduction

Philanthropy and charitable activity as a means of public-identity formation

composes a significant focus of South Asian historiography. A large and distin-
guished corpus of scholarship on ‘gifting’ in India has sought to explore the
moral, social, political, and economic linkages of gifting and authority formation
and legitimacy, as well as the relationship between donor and recipient. Among
historians, gifting and resource allocation has been seen as a precondition for
political organization, legitimacy, and the binding of patron and those patron-
ized. Studies of charity in the pre-colonial setting have noted how through
charity and the patronage of traditional Indian causes, such as temples and rites,
Indian donors gained abru or reputation, commercial advantages, and legitimacy
within local society (Appadurai and Breckenridge, 1976; Appadurai, 1977, 1981;
Shulman, 1980; C.A. Bayly, 1983; S. Bayly, 1989; Price, 1989).
The analysis of public philanthropy in colonial times has explored the
power shifts inaugurated among Indians with the introduction of new imperial
idioms, including western forms of humanitarian charity. These works also
maintain the significance of charity as a factor in the formation of individual
reputation, authority, and the definition of community, while tracing the
qualitative differences and evolution in the nature of gifting and charity from

Copyright © 2005 SAGE Publications www.sagepublications.com

(London, Thousand Oaks, and New Delhi)
Vol 40(3): 197–217. DOI: 10.1177/0021909605055071

Downloaded from jas.sagepub.com at PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIV on May 17, 2016

02_palsetia_055071 (jk-t) 15/6/05 11:43 am Page 198

198 Journal of Asian and African Studies 40(3)

pre-colonial to colonial times. They note the transition from gifting as a means
of alleviating distress or placating local political authorities through tribute, to
charity and philanthropy as a means of the creation of public roles for colonials
and the formation of new types of public culture (C.A. Bayly, 1973; Hinnells,
1985; Berry, 1987; Haynes, 1987, 1991; Rudner, 1987; Freitag, 1989; Mines and
Gourishankar, 1990; White, 1991; Luhrmann, 1996; Caplan, 1998). This analysis
has largely emphasized imperial-driven efforts to stimulate Indian charitable
efforts, and portrays such charitable activity as essentially reactionary invest-
ments in good colonial–imperial relations. Philanthropy becomes one of a set of
political semiotics and attributes alongside loyalty, gallantry, honesty, and trust-
worthiness, distinguishing select Indians as colonial players.
Significant exceptions to this view, to varying degrees, have stressed the
indigenous elite’s role in both redefining the nature of the British–Indian
relationship and reshaping the public culture of Indian urban centers by appro-
priating imperial norms in the interests of Indians (Haynes, 1987, 1991; White,
1991, 1995; Raychaudhuri, 2001). Biographical analyses of prominent business-
men and their use of philanthropy as a means of identity promotion, in particu-
lar, offer unique insight into the motivations of Indians in engaging in charitable
and other activities in the pre-colonial and colonial periods. These works often
compose valuable contributions within regional studies of urban centers or
passing references in the study of mercantile communities (Timberg, 1978;
Mines, 1984, 1994; Rudner, 1987; Raychaudhuri, 1991). Such studies offer a
counterpoint to seeing Indian philanthropy purely as a response to the British
value placed on philanthropic acts, and increasingly are highlighting the import-
ant role of colonials in culture production.
In the 18th and 19th centuries the use of public philanthropy by the
Indian mercantile elite, in deference to imperial standards and idioms, forged
new roles for urban leaders and influenced the development of civic society.
Inevitably, this process also contributed to the ‘socializing’ of the Indian elite to
imperial control. A critical example of this process is the role of Jamsetjee
Jejeebhoy in Bombay.1 Jamsetjee Jejeebhoy (1783–1859) was a leading
merchant, influential citizen, and philanthropist in Bombay during the first half
of the 19th century. He was a member of the prosperous Parsi community of
India: the descendants of Iranian Zoroastrians who migrated to India, by Parsi
tradition in the 8th century (Kulke, 1974: 1; Palsetia, 2001: 1). Jejeebhoy came
to be the chief representative of the Parsi community and spokesman for the
greater Indian community of Bombay. He exemplified the new socio-political
relationship that formed between primarily leading merchants and the British
in Bombay and in western India. In 1842 Jejeebhoy became the first Indian
knight and in 1857 the first Indian baronet, in recognition by the British of his
many acts of charity. Furthermore, the important role Jejeebhoy assumed in
Bombay during the first half of the 19th century was the result of his efforts to
shape an image as a great philanthropist and eminent citizen.

Downloaded from jas.sagepub.com at PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIV on May 17, 2016

02_palsetia_055071 (jk-t) 15/6/05 11:43 am Page 199

Palsetia: Merchant Charity and Public Identity Formation 199

This article examines the place of public philanthropy in enhancing the

role of the Indian merchant in the urban center during the first half of the 19th
century. It supplements works that have stressed the indigenous elite’s attempts
to contest and negotiate a significant place within the public culture of colonial
India. Specifically, it emphasizes the opportunities and difficulties associated
with Indian attempts to shape a colonial civic culture conducive to Indian
requirements by example of the establishment of the Jamsetjee Jejeebhoy
Hospital in Bombay: Jejeebhoy’s first major and largest non-denominational
charity.
The article argues that significant political calculations, as well as a
progressive civic outlook, entered into the construction of Jejeebhoy’s public
charities. Jejeebhoy’s charitable impulse foremost sprang from the compulsion
to promote his position and that of his family and class in Bombay colonial
society. At the same time, Jejeebhoy was one of the first Indians to exploit new
opportunities for socio-political British–Indian interaction in benefit of Indian
welfare that new forms of western-style public charity made possible. Jejeeb-
hoy’s charity would seriously shape the character of charity as much in advance
of changes in British standards of public service as in deference to them, ulti-
mately contributing to the formation of an emergent civic culture in Bombay
during the 19th century.
The important place the merchant-prince had assumed in Bombay
society in the first half of the 19th century was evident in the public eulogies
following the death of Jamsetjee Jejeebhoy on 15 April 1859. The community
Daftar, or record book, of the Parsi Panchayet of Bombay maintained that
Zoroastrians and non-Zoroastrians throughout the world were saddened by his
death, but were proud of the international response accorded him, including that
of the Queen. Through his charity, Jejeebhoy had made Indians respected
throughout the world (Parsi Panchayet Daftar, 1859: 1–5). Jejeebhoy’s charity
encompassed many diverse concerns and had begun in 1822 with him remitting
the debts of the poor in civil jail to the sum of Rs. 3000 (Nazir, 1866: 31). Jejeeb-
hoy’s munificence was the hallmark of his public image. Invariably the initial
public fascination revolved around the sums expended. Some years prior to his
death a fairly detailed account of the charities recorded the sum of £234,272
(Ramsay, 1855: 30–2). Following his death the total of his charities was noted to
be Rs. 24 59 736 or in excess of £245,000, not including private bequests (Mody,
1959).2
Beyond the value of the endowments, the sheer scale of Jejeebhoy’s
largesse engendered a fascination for the impulse behind it on the part of
contemporaries. The Rast Goftar newspaper of 17 April 1859 noted:

But the profusion and cosmopolitan turn of his charities are not more to be
admired than the definitiveness of object and singleness of purpose with which
those charities were directed. His hospitals, rest houses, water works, causeways,

Downloaded from jas.sagepub.com at PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIV on May 17, 2016

02_palsetia_055071 (jk-t) 15/6/05 11:43 am Page 200

200 Journal of Asian and African Studies 40(3)

bridges, the numerous religious and educational institutions and endowments

will point to posterity the man whom Providence selected for the dispensation
of substantial good to a large portion of the human race. (p. 382)

While the Bombay Times of 16 April 1859 had noted:

To write a history of Sir Jamsetjee’s benefactions, would be to write a book, and

not the obituary notice of a journal. We know enough however to be in doubt,
whether to wonder more at the princely fortune that sustained them, or the
princely heart which bestowed them. (p. 724)

The sum of the charities was the most conspicuous aspect of a socio-political
outlook Jejeebhoy came to espouse and quietly articulate through his charities.
The construction and dispersal of Jejeebhoy’s charities had owed much to the
experiences – including the religious, social, and business aspects – of his early
life, prior to ever having made an endowment. At the same time, it was in the
establishment of charities that the full significance of the role Jejeebhoy and
other Indian merchant-princes were assuming in colonial society was made
evident. The rise of Jamsetjee Jejeebhoy paralleled the rise of Bombay and that
of the new Indian merchant class of the early 19th century eager to establish its
place in colonial society.

Commercial and Socio-political Background

The British commercial presence in India wholly depended on Indian cooper-
ation from its inception and the role of the petty merchant was an important
component of that relationship. Indian merchants in contact with the British
from the 18th century performed many functions as hawkers and traders, inter-
preters, supply agents in various provisions and goods, contractors and middle-
men, guarantee brokers, and shipbuilders, which greatly facilitated the British
commercial presence in western India (Nightingale, 1970; Dobbin, 1972: 2–3,
8–13; Das Gupta, 1979; Pearson, 1988: 455–72; Bulley, 2000: pt. 3). In turn, the
security and protection of the growing British presence in western India permit-
ted many Indian communities to construct the moral and material foundations
of their society in Bombay on the commercial foundations of Indian–British ties.
Parsi and British contact formed the latest of commercial interactions between
Indians and Europeans in western India during the 18th century (White, 1987:
184). By the 19th century, individual Parsis and members of prominent families
comprised some of Bombay’s largest landowners, and came to control a substan-
tial commercial and industrial empire centered in Bombay and western India
(Karaka, 1884: 1, 38, 40, 45, 53–6, 65, 70–1, 77, 253–9; Wacha, 1920: 211–12,
279–80, 626–7; Kennedy, 1962–3: 11–20; Desai, 1968: 312–17; White, 1995;
Dobbin, 1996: 87–94). From his contacts with the British, Jejeebhoy emerged as
one of the wealthiest and most celebrated Parsis.

Downloaded from jas.sagepub.com at PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIV on May 17, 2016

02_palsetia_055071 (jk-t) 15/6/05 11:43 am Page 201

Palsetia: Merchant Charity and Public Identity Formation 201

Jejeebhoy’s charity had its genesis in his early business world. The
successful rewards of his business suggested to him the individual prestige and
collective social benefits a partnership of charitable interests might also afford.
Jejeebhoy began on the road to self-made status by selling empty bottles, thus
earning him the appellation or surname ‘Batliwala’ (dealer in bottles). In 1799
Jejeebhoy joined the family trade from Bengal to China (Natesan, 1930: 3;
Karanjia, 1998: 4). Much of his initial wealth was made in the cotton trade during
the Napoleonic War. His principal aim, however, was to secure financing and
partnerships worthy of large-scale commerce. In 1818 the firm of Jamsetjee
Jejeebhoy & Co. took shape, with businessmen of various Indian backgrounds
joining together to form a consortium that saw a network of trade supplying
resources from the interior of India – particularly cotton and, at its height, opium
– to the ports of Karachi, Daman, Bombay, Calcutta, and Madras for shipment
overseas (Jamsetjee Jejeebhoy Manuscripts, 1831–56 [hereafter cited as J.J.
MSS], Vol. 349: 52; Ramsay, 1855: 18; Mody, 1959: 33–4; Siddiqi, 1982: 196–200).
The China and opium trades tied Britain, India, and China into an
economic triangle, securing Asia in the imperial capitalist system and establish-
ing the parameters of British–Indian collaboration. From the beginning of the
19th century opium replaced cotton as the most profitable export commodity,
and largely financed Britain’s tea imports from China (Greenberg, 1951: 1–13;
Dobbin, 1996: 84–5; Bulley, 2000: 151 ff). Substantial Indian fortunes were made
from the opium trade. Jejeebhoy started his shipping empire in 1814, and his
opium trade to China put him in contact with the major British trading houses
that handled the transaction of consignments. Jejeebhoy and friends emerged
as the principal Indian China merchants in contact with British, American, and
Chinese traders (Ramsay, 1855: 8; Natesan, 1930: 7–8; Mody, 1959: 32–3; Siddiqi,
1982: 196–200). Jejeebhoy’s most important business relationship was with the
British firm of Jardine Matheson & Co. of Canton. Jejeebhoy continued the
opium trade with China into the 1850s, and like other merchants of the time
regarded it as an advantageous enterprise. Jejeebhoy’s chief concern was the
welfare of his goods and the prompt remittance of his payment (J.J. MSS, Vol.
375: 131–2). No evidence suggests that worries about the health of his soul and
the need to ease one’s conscience as a result of his business activities entered
Jejeebhoy’s charitable calculations.
The aptly named age of enterprise that was born of oligopoly commerce
was also reflective of a broader socio-political relationship that developed
between the Indian and British mercantile classes at centers across India in the
first half of the 19th century (Kling, 1976; Kling and Pearson, 1979; Siddiqi, 1982:
306; Basu, 1984). The British had gained the loyalty and support of wealthy new
commercial groups, and recognized the Indian shetias, or urban notables, as the
leaders of their respective caste communities and important members of civic
society (Blue Pamphlets of 1843, 1843: 51; Dobbin, 1970: 149–64). Jamsetjee
Jejeebhoy became the most enthusiastic advocate of the new relationship of

Downloaded from jas.sagepub.com at PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIV on May 17, 2016

02_palsetia_055071 (jk-t) 15/6/05 11:43 am Page 202

202 Journal of Asian and African Studies 40(3)

collaboration in promotion of his charities and position in society; he was

deemed the prince of hospitality in Bombay (Wacha, 1920: 685; Mody, 1959:
74–9).

The Pattern of Charity

The pattern of ‘gifting’ and providing charity to the community was one Jejeeb-
hoy was familiar with. Pre-colonial Indian charitable traditions maintained
support for ethical and social codes, cultural values that distinguished the nature
of charity and personal conduct, and included the desire for religious merit and
propitiation, and the maintenance of individual and family reputation within the
community (Madan, 1965; Bayly, 1973, 1983; Lewandowski, 1985; Khare, 1986;
Parry, 1986; Haynes, 1987; Raheja, 1988; Mines, 1994). Parsi charity, moreover,
was central to the preservation of Parsi identity, and shaped the standing of the
minority community within the larger social environment. The practice of
charity had developed into an important and complex system of support for
community and identity among the Parsis, and was practised long before their
arrival in Bombay. A 17th century European traveler’s account noted the
universal kindness of the Parsis, and their intent to leave no individual destitute
of relief, nor suffer to beg (Ovington, 1929: 218; see also, Paymaster, 1954; Firby,
1988). Parsi charity had aided the settlement of Parsis across western India,
providing the essential material and moral supports of community life, includ-
ing the building of community housing colonies, fire-temples, and dakhmas, or
Towers of Silence (ossuaries). This was particularly the case from the 18th
century, as the new commercial wealth of Parsis permitted for greater and
regular charity. Individual Parsis and great families provided copious charity
that built the physical infrastructure of the Parsi community, established
patron–recipient bonds, and provided the basis of Parsi internal government as
merchant-princes assumed community leadership (Dobbin, 1970; White, 1991:
312–20; Palsetia, 2001: 42–5).
Parsi charity also was essential in maintaining Parsi standing and
goodwill within the larger social environment. Parsi relief charity in times of
famine and drought and the building of rest houses, water tanks, and wells,
placed their charity within the culturally relevant forms of charity of the Indian
setting, and signaled the Parsis’ accommodation and significance within the
social environment. This was particularly the case as Parsis migrated to Bombay
and had to both establish the boundaries of ties within their community, and
also function in relation to the many communities around them in the new urban
setting. This Parsi practice to tailor charity to societal requirements informed
and benefited Parsi merchants like Jejeebhoy under imperialism.
The growth of British imperialism in western India witnessed a change
in the nature and patterns of charitable activity. Charity diversified, as in
addition to donating to Indian concerns (such as religious and communal rites),

Downloaded from jas.sagepub.com at PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIV on May 17, 2016

02_palsetia_055071 (jk-t) 15/6/05 11:43 am Page 203

Palsetia: Merchant Charity and Public Identity Formation 203

Indian merchant charity was shaped in deference to British cultural values (such
as public projects and medical and educational causes), along the lines more
associated with western humanitarian service. This evolution of charity reflected
not so much the abandonment of older charitable conceptions and forms as an
acknowledgement by merchants to adjust to and exploit the opportunities for
individual economic benefit, greater political influence, and public welfare
(Haynes, 1987, 1991; White, 1991). The Parsis’ economic wealth and cultural
affinity to the British particularly advantaged them in exploiting avenues for
socio-political advancement within this new political culture of charity. During
the 19th century, Parsi charity extended itself in support to British concerns
inside and outside India (Hinnells, 1985: 317–25). In general, Indian charitable
engagement would form an expression of the aspiration to enhance Indian
socio-political influence in Bombay and western India and fulfil British requi-
sites for leadership, including good governance, loyalty, and charitableness, as
much as fulfil pious ambitions. As Haynes (1991: 108) notes in his examination
of the civic culture of Surat in the second half of the 19th century, Indian
merchant charity and other forms of civic ritual aimed to appease, shape, and
fashion stable moral bonds with the British in the interests of trade, family
prestige, and social and religious life. Furthermore, Jejeebhoy would innovate
the standard of charity in Bombay. Jejeebhoy was the first Indian to propose
large-scale charitable projects in Bombay in collaboration with the British. His
charitable engagement marked a major attempt to advance Indian interests and
potentially shape a new civic vision.

The Jamsetjee Jejeebhoy Hospital

The idea for the Jamsetjee Jejeebhoy Hospital emerged from Jejeebhoy’s desire
to build a ‘partnership’ with the government on behalf of medical care in
Bombay. This project was exquisitely conceived to serve the dual purpose of
promoting the leadership potential of Jejeebhoy and his class to the British, and
also to benefit the community. The very practical nature of his proposal aimed
to tailor Indian charity to British standards of philanthropy and leadership,
which regarded individual philanthropy as evidence of public service and excep-
tional voluntary action (Haynes, 1987: 350; Caplan, 1998: 413). Jejeebhoy’s
proposal for a hospital emerged following a meeting on 19 March 1838 of the
subscribers of the Bombay Native Dispensary, founded in 1834. In correspon-
dence with the committee of the Native Dispensary, Jejeebhoy noted the great
importance attached to the establishment of a hospital on a large scale: ‘Nothing
has been so strongly or more forcibly impressed on my mind than the necessity
that exists for providing for the medical wants of the great body of the poorer
classes of inhabitants’ (J.J. MSS, Vol. 357: 1). According to Jamsetjee, a medical
system existed in which insufficiently trained doctors could neither provide
proper treatment nor gain Indian confidence. His own experience with

Downloaded from jas.sagepub.com at PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIV on May 17, 2016

02_palsetia_055071 (jk-t) 15/6/05 11:43 am Page 204

204 Journal of Asian and African Studies 40(3)

European doctors suggested the benefits a cadre of well-trained doctors and a

proper medical institution could offer Indians (p. 2). Jejeebhoy’s assessment of
medicine in Bombay was part of a larger and consistent advocacy of the value
of western knowledge in combination with Indian experience he assimilated
from his colonial past (cf. Bayly, 1996: 281–3).
Jejeebhoy and his class accepted the British as the new masters of India
with whom Indians had to politically interrelate. Indeed, they believed
the exercise of requisite British power in India was beneficial to Indians. In 1832
the Indian notables of Bombay had stated as much in a ‘humble petition’ to the
governor:
With every feeling of respect and loyalty [our] uniform endeavor and highest
ambition it has always been to approve ourselves subjects the most faithful the
most obedient to the laws, and the most firmly attached to the British Rule.
(General Department [hereafter cited as G.D.], 1832, 16/261: 247–9)

At the same time, the hospital scheme suggested that the effective exercise of
British power in India depended upon a proper understanding of the needs of
Indians by the British. That understanding could best be ascertained through the
participation and input of Indians knowledgeable about India, such as Jejeebhoy.
The urgency for improved medical care in Bombay offered Jejeebhoy
the opportunity to promote British–Indian cooperation. He advocated a coordi-
nated and permanent policy on the part of government, the medical community,
and private individuals on behalf of medicine in Bombay. He was not averse to
employ the language of deference in pursuit of his objective:
I am fully sensible how many benefits the government has already bestowed on
the public, and of its anxiety still to promote the welfare of the subject, and
therefore am assured that the evils have only to be pointed out to secure
remedial measures, or at least the warmest sympathy. (J.J. MSS, Vol. 357: 1–2)

Jejeebhoy largely offered his financial resources in benefit of the hospital and
his role in the project. He proposed to immediately pay into the treasury of the
Government of Bombay Rs. 50 000 held in trust at 6 per cent interest per annum,
provided the government contributed an equal share to the hospital. He was
also prepared to raise the amount to Rs. 1 00 000, if financially necessary
(pp. 4–5). On the suggestion of his friend James Farish, on 28 April 1838 Jejeeb-
hoy wrote to J.H. Crawford, the Chairman of the Bombay Native Dispensary,
formally offering a lakh of rupees as measure of his commitment, and further
resolved to provide Rs. 10 000 for the erection of the hospital. He also asked
the committee to act as intermediary in negotiations with the government
(pp. 5–9). Whereas a generation earlier Indian merchants commended their
cooperation with Europeans based on the raw economic benefits available to
both sides, Jejeebhoy exploited an opportunity for British–Indian collaboration
based on coopting British humanitarian charitable standards. Characterizing his

Downloaded from jas.sagepub.com at PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIV on May 17, 2016

02_palsetia_055071 (jk-t) 15/6/05 11:43 am Page 205

Palsetia: Merchant Charity and Public Identity Formation 205

actions to be in ‘the best interests of humanity’ and without motive to benefit

personally from his offer, Jejeebhoy redefined himself and the role of his class
within a symbolic medium meaningful to the new rulers. The proposal of Jejeeb-
hoy set a precedent in the relationship between private Indian interests, local
institutional interests, and government at all levels. In presenting his charitable
scheme Jejeebhoy had utilized personal friendships and presumed on the
broader collaborative relationship in Bombay, and to some extent across India,
between the British and Indians. It was, however, in the negotiations of the
hospital project that the nature of charitable cooperation and the political
relationship between rulers and ruled emerged.
The hospital committee welcomed Jejeebhoy’s proposal and recom-
mended it to the Government of Bombay on 30 April 1838, and asked
the government to grant Jejeebhoy’s interest request, which had departed from
the official practice to permit only 4 per cent interest per annum on funds in the
treasury (pp. 11–15). The offer commenced a round of correspondence between
Jejeebhoy, the committee, and the government at different levels. The unprece-
dented nature of the charitable proposal by an Indian warranted the attention
of higher levels of power. The Government of Bombay on 30 June 1838, through
the committee, thanked Jejeebhoy for the offer and recommended the proposal
to the attention of the Government of India and the Court of Directors of the
East India Company (pp. 15–16). Jejeebhoy, on 30 August 1838, communicated
directly with the Court, praising it for its patronage of many excellent insti-
tutions in the past, yet reminding it of the need to attend to the medical wants
of the people (pp. 18–20). Through his offer Jejeebhoy began to wheedle his way
into British–Indian decision making. The decision to participate in public
philanthropy evinced initiative and guile on the part of a colonial subject
desirous to assume a leadership profile, essentially unprompted by British offi-
cials, and without assurance of direct political or commercial benefit. In directly
addressing the government on his charitable scheme, Jejeebhoy had begun to
promote both his authority and his view of leadership in India directly to the
rulers of India.
The collaboration on charitable projects proposed by Jejeebhoy
reflected the timely opportunity Indian merchants sensed in associating them-
selves with the public life of Bombay. The Indian urban notables’ adjustment to
civic leadership, to some degree, drew on traditions of leadership within their
respective castes and religious communities. Indian merchant charity had
confided a right to community leadership, and placed a claim on the consider-
ations of others. The moral authority that derived from elite charity among
Indians favored the ties of leadership between benefactor and beneficiary. By
the 19th century, the merchant mæcenas of Bombay had all assumed the leader-
ship of caste and community councils (mahajans and panchāyets) in Bombay
(Dobbin, 1972: 21–5). Jamsetjee Jejeebhoy was a member of the Parsi Panchayet
of Bombay, or internal government of the Parsis, from 1823 (Jejeebhoy, 1843;

Downloaded from jas.sagepub.com at PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIV on May 17, 2016

02_palsetia_055071 (jk-t) 15/6/05 11:43 am Page 206

206 Journal of Asian and African Studies 40(3)

Cursetjee, 1860; Davar, 1949). Jejeebhoy’s charitable gambit aimed to expand

the capacities of leading Indians to operate in colonial society and promote
Indian welfare. This process also increased Jejeebhoy and other Indian
merchant elites’ moral authority among Indians beyond that which derived from
the automatic prestige associated with giving alone, albeit generously. This
model of gaining political influence and public acclaim mutually fed merchant
motivations in committing to public philanthropy.
Jejeebhoy’s memorial to the Court of Directors reflects the dual role
Indian elites were assuming in Bombay society. The Indian shetias stood as inter-
mediaries between British and Indian communities under imperialism. The
cosmopolitan and non-denominational nature of Jejeebhoy’s endowments over
his lifetime, as well as his desire to entrust many of them to British support,
reveals an expansive if somewhat elitist civic outlook, one which distinguished
colonial relations at Bombay. Jejeebhoy led the Indian response to view British
and Indian elite as part of a common political community. The offer of a lakh
of rupees impressed the British, not least of all for having come from an Indian
gentleman. The Government of Bombay wrote to Jejeebhoy on 21 October 1839
to express the appreciation of the Court of Directors for the ‘truly benevolent
purpose’ behind the offer, and made Jejeebhoy a member of the committee that
was established to oversee the arrangements for the new hospital (J.J. MSS, Vol.
357: 23–5).
The obstacles to early Indian participation in civic leadership, however,
remained formidable. As Khilnani (1997) notes, the colonial state represents a
particular form of authoritarianism. British recognition of the importance of the
shetia class in Bombay was a protracted process. As early as the 1830s some
government officials speculated on administering loyalty oaths to the shetias
(G.D., 1832, 16/261: 108–9, 112–14). In the first half of the 19th century the role
of Indian collaborators remained that of assistants, not partners, to the British.
The legal rights that Indian communities at Bombay gained emerged from
imperial commercial objectives to promote trade and capitalist land rights
(Conlon, 1985: 181–208; Dwivedi and Mehrotra, 1995: 18; Hazareesingh, 2000:
798–9). Public positions of honor for Indians were few, and it was left to Indians
to agitate for admittance to such positions. In 1834 the British appointed Jejeeb-
hoy and 12 other Indians Justices of the Peace, after a decade of Indians peti-
tioning to sit as Grand Jurors in Supreme Court cases (Banaji, 1892: 23–4;
Dobbin, 1972: 24–5). Any opening for political collaboration was enthusiasti-
cally welcome by Indian elites. On 23 October 1832, Jejeebhoy eagerly accepted
the position of member of the new hospital committee (J.J. MSS, Vol. 357: 30).
His active input in the hospital scheme, however, faced opposition from the
existing cultural and institutional interests. The extent of the differences in
cultural outlook was clear from the hospital draft report of 21 April 1840. The
draft report regarded Jejeebhoy’s proposal to build a new hospital incompati-
ble with the government’s scheme to fund a much-needed college, proposed by

Downloaded from jas.sagepub.com at PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIV on May 17, 2016

02_palsetia_055071 (jk-t) 15/6/05 11:43 am Page 207

Palsetia: Merchant Charity and Public Identity Formation 207

Sir Robert Grant in February 1838. The draft report also foresaw a dominant
role for government within the institution. The Board of Education was to have
control of the Grant Medical College, while a superintending surgeon and a
medical board were to manage the hospital (pp. 43–57).
Many of the provisions of the hospital committee report parted from
the basic vision Jejeebhoy had in mind when making his offer to help finance
the hospital. In a letter to the hospital committee on 14 May 1840 Jejeebhoy
noted his plan for a new hospital was not linked to the existing government-run
Native General Hospital. A basic difference of cultural outlook also emerged
between the two parties (pp. 59–65). Jejeebhoy envisioned an institution that
catered to the needs of a cross-section of Indian society by segregating indi-
viduals along class and caste lines, so as to placate caste concerns among Indians
staying in hospital. The hospital committee as of 8 February 1840 intended not
to segregate individuals along class or caste lines (pp. 31–42). The committee
had overlooked many of Jejeebhoy’s concerns, and reduced him to a more
nominal role than he expected, as an honorary manager.
Jejeebhoy’s dissatisfaction with the hospital committee report reflected
the frustration of both his ambition and the opportunity being lost in providing
proper medical care in Bombay. His charitable scheme was intended to enhance
his reputation as the leading Indian in Bombay society:
I am free to confess that I have been used to look for some more useful share
in the management of the new hospital . . . and to indulge a hope that I might
be associated with European friends. (pp. 59–65)

Jejeebhoy’s personal motivations in the hospital project become clearer in

private documents composed some decades later. Between 1853 and 1857, the
Jejeebhoy family embarked on a clandestine campaign to gain Jejeebhoy a
hereditary baronetcy by promoting his charitable image (Palsetia, 2003). The
baronetcy scheme memorialized Jejeebhoy’s charity in the interests of the
Jejeebhoy family’s social promotion. At the same time, the memoir captures the
contemporary significance of Jejeebhoy’s charity. In addition to promoting his
public profile, the hospital scheme aimed at a larger humanitarian goal. The
instrument of large-scale public charity offered the opportunity to improve the
standard of public welfare in Bombay. The memoir notes that the British could
not conceive the value of such works in India. In a country that could provide
no legal, legislative, or corporate charity for the promotion of the public good
and relief, it was left to ‘some single mind of unusual energy, much in advance
of current impressions and customs, and with great means at command, that the
remedy in such cases can be affected’ (Ramsay, 1855: 21). The desire for a part-
nership, of a sort, over the hospital scheme undoubtedly stemmed from the
lessons of Jejeebhoy’s business experiences, where cooperative commercial
ventures produced great individual and collective rewards. The vision of cooper-
ation in the charitable works, moreover, exceeded the lessons offered in

Downloaded from jas.sagepub.com at PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIV on May 17, 2016

02_palsetia_055071 (jk-t) 15/6/05 11:43 am Page 208

208 Journal of Asian and African Studies 40(3)

business. The new hospital held the promise of composing new traditions of
Indian and British, private and governmental cooperation: at its best as a vali-
dation of the imperial experience in Bombay.
The majority of members on the hospital committee, however, funda-
mentally disagreed with Jejeebhoy and his supporters, J.H. Crawford and Dr.
John Mackie, as to the state of medical care to be adopted in the new hospital,
and reiterated their opposition on 5 June 1840 (Vol. 357: 96–114). The hospital
committee reflected the prevailing philosophical and methodological approach
of European medicine in India (cf. Pearson, 1995; Bayly, 1996: 264–83;
Masselos, 1999). The history of European medical science in India was held as
proof of the success of the existing system. European medicine was able to
proceed precisely because it ignored differences of caste, in the interests of
what may be described as a system of universality of care. In addition, the
committee sought to put the offer in perspective to the task at hand. While
Jejeebhoy’s financial assistance provided for the support of some 40 patients,
the contribution of the government to the hospital would provide for 270
patients on a permanent basis. The committee’s rebuff struck at the very heart
of the socio-political relationship Jejeebhoy aimed for over public charity, and
put into doubt the ability of Indian wealth to establish status and power under
imperialism. The British reacted against Indian charity influencing ideas for
Indian welfare in British India. Dr. McLennan noted: ‘This exclusive philan-
thropy is very foreign to English taste singularly out of keeping with the spirit
of all our Institutions and very much opposed both to policy and practice in
India’ (Vol. 357: 113).
Jejeebhoy’s entire proposal was re-evaluated by the committee, as was
evident in a letter of 25 July 1840. The original idea for the hospital scheme was
attributed to Sir Robert Grant, and the offer of a lakh of rupees was represented
to be complimentary to the original proposal (pp. 130–41). Moreover, it was felt
that a great deal of time and disagreeable discussion would have been avoided
had Jejeebhoy’s sentiments not been brought before the committee (pp. 42–3).
Whereas the draft report had reduced Jejeebhoy to an honorary committee
member, the committee’s remarks now reduced him to mere subscriber. The
committee report reflected in microcosm how imperial forms of knowledge
effectively trumped Indian opinion (Cohn, 1996: Chapter 2).
The limitation of Indian prospects led Jejeebhoy to revert to a tactic that
the great shetias of Bombay were familiar with when facing difficulties: directly
petitioning the highest authorities. Jejeebhoy and other shetias enjoyed the
friendship of governors and high officials (Karaka, 1884: 113). This form of influ-
ence and access to high officials, however, masked British designs to maintain
colonials as supplicants to their rulers. In a letter to G.W. Anderson, the
Governor of Bombay, on 3 August 1840, Jejeebhoy held personality conflicts and
petty interests on the committee as responsible for frustrating the self-evident
urgency for improved medical care in Bombay, and recommended his assistance:

Downloaded from jas.sagepub.com at PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIV on May 17, 2016

02_palsetia_055071 (jk-t) 15/6/05 11:43 am Page 209

Palsetia: Merchant Charity and Public Identity Formation 209

I know nothing of the usages and customs of your European committees and I
think it was very hard upon me refusing to listen to my reasonable request . . .
and I can assure you that I felt much hurt and annoyed by the whole proceed-
ing, which was hasty and in my opinion not warranted. (Vol. 357: 125–9)

The frustration Jejeebhoy felt at the progress of the hospital scheme reflected
the degree to which the Indian merchant was unfamiliar with the true nature of
the British–Indian relationship. A partnership of interests was sought, based on
a limited understanding of British–Indian cooperation. British imperialism in
India in its ‘enduring ideology’ defined Indians to be ‘different’ and solely fit to
be subjects (Metcalf, 1995: 24). The efforts of merchants to realign their values
and partake of imperial cultural idioms in expectation of merit encountered
barriers and revealed the one-way nature of the process. The perseverance of
Indians, such as Jejeebhoy, in face of imperial inertia is measure of their deter-
mination to breach the barriers to participation in colonial society. Significantly,
the evolution of Jejeebhoy’s charitable vision, as with the Indian response time
and again under imperialism, advances as much as a result of the tension
between Indians and British interests as their cooperation.
On 11 November 1840 the government of Bombay decided to proceed
with the plans for the hospital, and asked Jejeebhoy to join a new committee to
oversee the physical erection of the building. A new hospital capable of accom-
modating 300 patients was to be built in the vicinity of the new Grant Medical
College. The government would classify and separate the sick according to caste
and gender. As a token of goodwill the government named the new hospital
after Jamsetjee Jejeebhoy, assigned special wards for patients eligible on his
recommendation, and made him an honorary member of the three-man board
of managers. In the basic thrust of its decision, however, the government had
come to view the hospital project in terms of the committee report. It reinter-
preted the offer made by Jejeebhoy to be ‘exclusively of a pecuniary nature’ and
re-emphasized its role as the predominant paymaster. Jejeebhoy’s assent to the
scheme was taken for granted. The government had coopted the Indian in a plan
tailored to its requirements by reminding Jejeebhoy of the important goal his
offer originally made possible (Vol. 357: 146–51).
Jejeebhoy accepted the government scheme, highlighting that the corol-
lary to British–Indian collaboration was the latter’s acquiescence to the rules of
the rulers. Indian elites working within imperial mediums and associating them-
selves with the British, whether in pursuit of individual rewards or collective
benefits for Indians, inevitably contributed to consolidating the place of
imperialism in Indian daily affairs. Jejeebhoy and his class participated in the
arena of imperial civic society through traditional expressions of unwavering
loyalty and support for British rule. Indian mercantile philanthropy, it may be
said, responded to both changing imperial ideologies in promotion of
humanitarian service and existing imperial constraints. In two letters to the

Downloaded from jas.sagepub.com at PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIV on May 17, 2016

02_palsetia_055071 (jk-t) 15/6/05 11:43 am Page 210

210 Journal of Asian and African Studies 40(3)

government of Bombay on 16 and 25 November 1840, Jejeebhoy resolved to

support the decision. Government had provided the rationale for continued
involvement by accommodating Jejeebhoy’s concern over the character of the
wards in the new hospital (pp. 162–4). The priority was the need to both acqui-
esce to the government’s will and proceed expeditiously with the scheme. With
the commitment of the government assured, Jejeebhoy resolved that his greatest
contribution to the successful completion of the hospital lay in providing the
energy and wherewithal. In lieu of a suitable site for the new hospital on the
Esplanade, Jejeebhoy offered a large plot of land in Byculla he owned, valued
at Rs. 28 125. The committee accepted the site at a cost of Rs. 4000. In addition,
Jejeebhoy carried out his promise to provide Rs. 10 000 for the erection of the
hospital and further defrayed the costs by Rs. 14 000. By January 1841, ready
access to the site was ensured with the purchase of any properties left on the
plot. Jejeebhoy’s commitment to the hospital scheme reached its zenith with him
raising the amount for the erection of the hospital to Rs. 50 000 (pp. 162–6, 193,
205–6).
The rewards for Indians committed to early public philanthropy were
selective and incremental. The merchant commitment to public philanthropy
had to proceed without guarantee of direct exchange of political benefit and
with a view to gradual recognition by the British. While frustrated in the
proposal of a full ‘partnership’ with government, Jejeebhoy was unwilling to
forsake his moral and material investment. In the end, Jejeebhoy’s efforts did
bring him back in cooperation with the British over the details of the hospital
project and the Grant Medical College. With the completion of the project, the
government acknowledged the generous contribution of Jejeebhoy, in what
would come to be a standard motif of official recognition for service: the public
ceremony and dedication. On 3 January 1843 Sir George Arthur, the Governor
of Bombay, escorted the then Sir Jamsetjee Jejeebhoy to the new site to lay the
foundation stone for the hospital, in a ceremony performed with full Masonic
honors. On 15 May 1845 opening ceremonies took place, with ‘The Jamsetjee
Jejeebhoy Hospital’ opening to patients less than a fortnight later (pp. 225, 235,
244). In June 1852, Jejeebhoy completed his part in the hospital contributing
Rs. 30 000 in money and land to a subscription fund valued at Rs. 15 346 towards
the building of a new obstetric institution (p. 360 appendix C). The hospital,
college, and obstetric institution comprised Jejeebhoy’s single largest charitable
donation devoted to a non-Parsi object, equivalent to Rs. 2 00 000 or £21,000
(Ramsay, 1855: 22, 30–1; Mody, 1959: 121).

Charitable Legacies
Jejeebhoy’s charitable project marked the beginning of an evolution in the civic
culture of Bombay. The hospital project had activated the philanthropic
impulses of the Indian elite, which was desirous to expand its political influence

Downloaded from jas.sagepub.com at PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIV on May 17, 2016

02_palsetia_055071 (jk-t) 15/6/05 11:43 am Page 211

Palsetia: Merchant Charity and Public Identity Formation 211

in Bombay. The bureaucratic and philosophical difficulties Jejeebhoy faced in

proposing his scheme exposed the difficulties for Indians desirous of gaining
political influence from the British on Indian terms. Albeit, financial contri-
butions to large-scale public projects provided the Indian elite class an entrée
to British officialdom. The British also increasingly welcomed the charitable
contributions of Indians, as they formed both a valuable material enrichment of
the civic scene and a means of socializing Indians to British authority with a
minimum of political payment (Haynes, 1991: 121–6). By mid-century public
charity assumed epic proportions in Bombay. Medical and educational projects
were particularly important charities among Indian elites (Ballhatchet, 1957;
Dobbin, 1972; Masselos, 1974). In 1852, 154 Indians contributed to building the
obstetric institute at the Jamsetjee Jejeebhoy Hospital, eager to highlight the
civic pride of Bombay in competition with other urban centers (Vol. 357:
328–30). Furthermore, Indian elites competed in their conspicuous charity. The
Times of India on 23 October 1863 noted the Parsi Cowasjee Jehangir Ready-
money contributed Rs. 1 00 000 to the erection of new buildings for the
University of Bombay, only to be later matched and raised in his contribution
by the Jain Premchand Roychund, who offered Rs. 2 00 000 (Wacha, 1913:
144–5). Among the Parsis alone, over 400 schools, libraries, hospitals, and
medical facilities were built and endowed from the second half of the 19th
century to the 1930s. Post-1945 marked another period of strong charitable
activity, at which time Parsi business elites’ political influence relative to the past
was non-existent, though their social standing remained high (Hinnells, 1985:
290–320; Palsetia, 2001: 62–3). As the political influence of Indian elites within
their communities diminished with the rise of a new generation of educated
Indian reformers competing for political power from the second half of the 19th
century, the charity of the elite remained the noticeable expression of their
relevance in Indian society. Jejeebhoy’s commercial empire had effectively
ended by 1855, yet his reputation continued to grow as he became exemplar of
Indian philanthropist.
The hospital scheme had advanced the reputation of Jamsetjee Jejeeb-
hoy with the imperium. In 1842 Jejeebhoy became the first Indian to be
knighted. The attainment of imperial honors and titles was one of the ‘incremen-
tal’, if prestigious, rewards for public service public philanthropy offered to the
Indian elite. Indians regarded Jejeebhoy’s knighthood as a milestone in British
recognition of their loyalty and service (Nazir, 1866: 83–8; Palsetia, 2003: 58).
The unprecedented public acclaim Jejeebhoy garnered was also evidence that
Indian-driven public philanthropy had added a new and tangible contribution
to the quality of life, fulfilling an important demand from below (Vol. 372: 1–2).
The care of the inhabitants of Bombay, the consciousness of the community to
the benefits of medical knowledge, and the nascent cooperation of British and
Indian interests for civic betterment were given impetus by the hospital
project. The Bombay Times on 6 September 1856 appreciated the significance

Downloaded from jas.sagepub.com at PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIV on May 17, 2016

02_palsetia_055071 (jk-t) 15/6/05 11:43 am Page 212

212 Journal of Asian and African Studies 40(3)

of Jejeebhoy’s achievement when it reported on progress to build a marble

statue to him to be housed in the Town Hall; the first major public tribute to an
Indian by the citizens of Bombay:
There is something more remarkable in such liberality than its munificence. It
is of the most enlightened character, and places this Parsee knight not merely
among the foremost men in India, but among the best of the British Empire.
Nor do his benefactions evince only very large sympathy; they exhibit the most
advanced thought. . . . [Sir Jamsetjee Jejeebhoy’s] abounding charity proves
how truly he appreciates every element of civilization, and how keenly alive he
is to the usefulness of schemes which have scarcely as yet been developed
among ourselves (p. 1713).3

Conclusion

This article has argued that the participation of the Indian merchant and
business class in public philanthropy under imperialism produced both oppor-
tunities and difficulties in promoting public status and identity, as well as in
shaping a civic culture conducive to Indian interests. The transition to British
power compelled and motivated the Indian merchant to adjust charitable
activity to forms favorable to imperial values, predominantly in the interest of
socio-political elevation. The Indian merchant class of western India accepted
the role of the British as the supreme authority in India, and welcomed the
stability and security British rule offered. The successful lessons of
British–Indian commercial dealings and social interaction suggested to the more
insightful and crafty of merchants, like Jejeebhoy, the personal and collective
benefits of British–Indian linkage.
Jamsetjee Jejeebhoy was a product of the collaborative system in India.
In particular, he was a product of the first half of the 19th century, when the
collaborative relationship remained flexible and the negotiation of advanta-
geous status appeared promising for Indians. This atmosphere produced other
similar individuals to Jejeebhoy, not least of all the famous Dwarkanath Tagore,
the Bengali Brahmin civic leader of Calcutta. Like Jejeebhoy, Tagore sought to
lay the foundations for ‘an all-encompassing interracial partnership’ of British
and Indians (Kling, 1976: 1). Men like Jejeebhoy and Tagore were of a genera-
tion of Indians that worked and associated with the British on a regular basis,
were from progressive and adaptive communities, were possessed of unbounded
ambition, and reaped many benefits under imperialism. Whereas Tagore’s
energies gravitated outside the urban center, Jejeebhoy’s remained firmly fixed
in Bombay – the locus of his social and political standing.
Indian elite charity aimed to create a significant place for Indians in
colonial society. Jejeebhoy, through his large public charities, fostered a vision
of a new society, as well as his ambitious place in it; one in which the needs of

Downloaded from jas.sagepub.com at PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIV on May 17, 2016

02_palsetia_055071 (jk-t) 15/6/05 11:43 am Page 213

Palsetia: Merchant Charity and Public Identity Formation 213

the many were met by the leadership of a few, and that included British and
Indian as part of one political community. Jejeebhoy and the Indian merchant
class, while essentially conservative in nature, through their public philanthropy
evinced considerable adaptability, agency, and ingenuity in adjusting to the shifts
in political power during the 19th century, and their philanthropy served as a
transmission of modernization among Indians in the areas of health, education,
and urban renewal. They accepted western-style philanthropy as a means of
socio-political advancement and, furthermore, aimed to tailor this new medium
and British commitment to it to the remedy of specific Indian social concerns.
Inevitably, the corollary to the system of collaboration was the political
socialization and even subordination of the Indian elite under British imperial-
ism. In conforming to imperial forms, standards, and values, Indian elites perpet-
uated the political and cultural hegemony of the British in India. The latter
process confirmed the charitable vision and actions of Jejeebhoy and elite
members of society to be the hallmark of a particular generation of Indian
leaders. At the same time, the struggles of Jamsetjee Jejeebhoy and his class to
augment their social status in colonial society may be said to have eased the
struggles of Indians for political rights and social citizenship, beginning with the
establishment of municipal government in Bombay post-1865, and civic partici-
pation in other centers (Gordon, 1978; Haynes, 1991; Hazareesingh, 2000;
Raychaudhuri, 2001).

NOTES
1. I refer to Jamsetjee Jejeebhoy (pronounced ‘Jŭm-shate-jee Jee-jee-boy’) by his
surname in the text of the article.

2. One lakh or lac is Rs. 1 00 000 and presented as 1 00 000 in rupees.

3. From 24 June to 31 August 1856, the Sir Jamsetjee Jejeebhoy Statue Committee
recorded subscriptions coming from India, Britain and China to be Rs. 47 705
(G.D., 1857, 86/379: 47–64).

REFERENCES
Appadurai, Arun (1977) ‘Kings, Sects, and Temples in South India, 1350–1700 A.D.’,
Indian Economic and Social History Review 14(1): 47–74.
Appadurai, Arun (1981) Worship and Conflict Under Colonial Rule: A South Indian
Case. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Appadurai, A. and C.A. Breckenridge (1976) ‘The South Indian Temple: Authority,
Honour, and Redistribution’, Contributions to Indian Sociology 10(2): 187–211.
Ballhatchet, Kenneth (1957) Social Policy and Social Change in Western India,
1817–1830. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Downloaded from jas.sagepub.com at PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIV on May 17, 2016

02_palsetia_055071 (jk-t) 15/6/05 11:43 am Page 214

214 Journal of Asian and African Studies 40(3)

Banaji, K.N. (1892) Memoirs of the Late Framji Cowasji Banaji. Bombay.
Basu, Susan Nield (1984) ‘The Dubashes of Madras’, Modern Asian Studies 18(1): 1–31.
Bayly, C.A. (1973) ‘Patrons and Politics in Northern India’, Modern Asian Studies 7(3):
349–88.
Bayly, C.A. (1983) Rulers, Townsmen, and Bazaars: North Indian Society in the Age of
British Expansion, 1770–1870. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Bayly, C.A. (1996) Empire and Information: Intelligence Gathering and Social Communi-
cation in India, 1780–1870. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Bayly, Susan (1989) Saints, Goddesses and Kings: Muslim and Christians in South Indian
Society, 1700–1900. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Berry, M.E. (1987) ‘Introduction: Giving in Asia’, Journal of Asian Studies 46(2): 305–8.
Blue Pamphlets of 1843 (1843) Bombay: Government of Bombay Press.
Bombay Times (1856) 6 September.
Bombay Times (1859) 16 April.
Bulley, Anne (2000) The Bombay Country Ships, 1790–1833. Richmond: Curzon Press.
Caplan, Lionel (1998) ‘Gifting and Receiving: Anglo-Indian Charity and its Beneficia-
ries in Madras’, Contributions to Indian Sociology. Special Issue: Tradition, Pluralism
and Identity: In Honour of T.N. Madan 32(2): 409–31.
Cohn, Bernard (1996) Colonialism and its Forms of Knowledge. Princeton, NJ: Prince-
ton University Press.
Conlon, Frank F. (1985) ‘Caste, Community, and Colonialism: The Elements of Popu-
lation Recruitment and Urban Rule in British Bombay, 1665–1830’, Journal of Urban
History 11(2): 181–208.
Cursetjee, Manockjee (1860) The Parsi Panchayat, Its Rise, Its Fall and the Causes That
Led to the Same: Being a Series of Letters in the Bombay Times of 1844–45, Under the
Signature of Q. in the Corner. Bombay: D’Souaz Press.
Das Gupta, Ashin (1979) Indian Merchants and the Decline of Surat, c. 1700–1750. Wies-
baden: Franz Steiner Verlag.
Davar, S.P. (1949) The History of the Parsi Punchayet of Bombay. Bombay: New Book
Co. Ltd.
Desai, Ashok V. (1968) ‘The Origins of Parsi Enterprise’, Indian Economic and Social
History Review 5(4): 307–17.
Dobbin, Christine (1970) ‘The Parsi Punchayet in Bombay City in the Nineteenth
Century’, Modern Asian Studies 4(2): 149–64.
Dobbin, Christine (1972) Urban Leadership in Western India. Oxford: Oxford University
Press.
Dobbin, Christine (1996) ‘Bombay: Parsi-British Affinity 1661–1940’, in C. Dobbin (ed.)
Asian Entrepreneurial Minorities: Conjoint Communities in the Making of the World-
Economy, 1570–1940, pp. 77–108. Richmond: Curzon Press.
Dwivedi, Sharada and Rahul Mehrotra (1995) Bombay: The Cities Within. Bombay:
India Book House Pvt. Ltd.
Firby, N.K. (1988) European Travellers and Their Perceptions of Zoroastrians in the 17th
and 18th Centuries. Berlin: Von Dietrich Reimer.

Downloaded from jas.sagepub.com at PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIV on May 17, 2016

02_palsetia_055071 (jk-t) 15/6/05 11:43 am Page 215

Palsetia: Merchant Charity and Public Identity Formation 215

Freitag, Sandria (ed.) (1989) Collective Action and Community: Public Arenas and the
Emergence of Communalism in North India. Berkeley: University of California Press.
General Department (G.D.), Department of Archives, Government of Maharashtra,
Bombay.
Gordon, A.D.D. (1978) Businessmen and Politics: Rising Nationalism and a Modernising
Economy in Bombay, 1918–1933. Delhi: Manohar.
Greenberg, Michael (1951) British Trade and the Opening of China, 1800–42. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.
Haynes, Douglas E. (1987) ‘From Tribute to Philanthropy: The Politics of Gift Giving in
a Western Indian City’, Journal of Asian Studies 46(2): 339–60.
Haynes, Douglas E. (1991) Rhetoric and Ritual in a Colonial City: The Shaping of Public
Culture in Surat City, 1852–1928. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Hazareesingh, Sandip (2000) ‘The Quest for Urban Citizenship: Civic Rights, Public
Opinion, and Colonial Resistance in Early Twentieth Century Bombay’, Modern
Asian Studies 34(4): 797–829.
Hinnells, John R. (1985) ‘The Flowering of Zoroastrian Benevolence’, in H. Bailey,
A.D.H. Bivar, J. Duchesne-Guillemin and J. Hinnells (eds) Papers in Honour of
Professor Mary Boyce, Hommages et Opera Minora, vol. 10, pp. 261–326. Leiden:
Brill.
Jejeebhoy, Jamsetjee (1831–56) Manuscripts. Vols. 349, 357, 369, 372, 375. University of
Bombay Library.
Jejeebhoy, Jamsetjee (1843) Kholaseh-i-Panchayat. Bombay: Jam-e-Jamshed Press (in
Gujarati).
Karaka, D.F. (1884) History of the Parsis, 2 vols. London: Macmillan and Co.
Karanjia, B.K. (1998) Give Me a Bombay Merchant Anytime! The Life of Sir Jamsetjee
Jejeebhoy, Bt., 1783–1859. Bombay: University of Mumbai.
Kennedy, Robert E. (1962–3) ‘The Protestant Ethic and the Parsis’, The American
Journal of Sociology 68(1): 11–20.
Khare, R.S. (1986) ‘Hospitality, Charity and Rationing: Three Channels of Food Distri-
bution in India’, in R.S. Khare and M.S.A. Rao (eds) Aspects of South Asian Food
Systems: Food, Society and Culture, pp. 277–96. Durham, NC: Carolina University
Press.
Khilnani, Sunil (1997) The Idea of India. London: Penguin Books.
Kling, Blair B. (1976) Partner in Empire: Dwarkanath Tagore and the Age of Enterprise
in Eastern India. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Kling, Blair B. and M.N. Pearson (eds) (1979) The Age of Partnership: Europeans in Asia
Before Domination. Honolulu: The University Press of Hawaii.
Kulke, E. (1974) The Parsees in India: A Minority as Agents of Social Change. Munich:
Weltforum Verlag.
Lewandowski, Susan (1985) ‘Merchants and Kingship: An Interpretation of Indian
Urban History’, Journal of Urban History 11(2): 151–80.
Luhrmann, T.M. (1996) The Good Parsi: The Fate of a Colonial Elite in a Postcolonial
Society. Boston, MA: Harvard University Press.

Downloaded from jas.sagepub.com at PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIV on May 17, 2016

02_palsetia_055071 (jk-t) 15/6/05 11:43 am Page 216

216 Journal of Asian and African Studies 40(3)

Madan, T.N. (1965) Family and Kinship: A Study of the Pandits of Rural Kashmir.
Bombay: Asia Publishing House.
Masselos, J. (1974) Towards Nationalism. Bombay: Popular Prakashan Press.
Masselos, J. (1999) ‘The Discourse from the Other Side: Perceptions of Science and Tech-
nology in Western India in the Nineteenth Century’, in N.K. Wagle (ed.) Writers,
Editors and Reformers: Social and Political Transformations of Maharashtra,
1830–1930, pp. 114–27. New Delhi: Manohar.
Metcalf, Thomas R. (1995) Ideologies of the Raj. The New Cambridge History of India,
Part III., Vol. 4. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Mines, Mattison (1984) The Warrior Merchants: Textiles, Trade, and Territory in South
India. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Mines, Mattison (1994) Public Faces, Private Voices: Community and Individuality in
South Asia. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Mines M. and V. Gourishankar (1990) ‘Leadership and Individuality in South Asia: The
Case of the South Indian Big-Man’, Journal of Asian Studies 49(3): 761–86.
Mody, Jehangir R.P. (1959) Jamsetjee Jejeebhoy: The First Indian Knight and Baronet
(1783–1859). Bombay: R.M.D.C. Press.
Natesan, G.A. (1930) Famous Parsis: Biographical and Critical Sketches. Madras:
Natesan & Co.
Nazir, C.S. (1866) The First Parsee Baronet. Bombay: Union Press.
Nightingale, Pamela (1970) Trade and Empire in Western India, 1794–1806. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.
Ovington, James (1929) A Voyage to Suratt in the Year 1689. London: Oxford University
Press.
Palsetia, Jesse S. (2001) The Parsis of India: Preservation of Identity in Bombay City.
Leiden: Brill.
Palsetia, Jesse S. (2003) ‘“Honourable Machinations”: The Jamsetjee Jejeebhoy
Baronetcy and the Indian Response to the Honours System in India’, South Asia
Research 23(1): 55–76.
Parry, J. (1986) ‘The Gift, the Indian Gift and the “Indian Gift”’, Man 21(3): 453–73.
Parsi Panchayet Daftar (1859–1916) All Parsi Zarthosti Anjuman Meeting Minutes, No.1
(in Gujarati). Parsi Panchayet of Bombay.
Paymaster, R.B. (1954) Early History of the Parsees in India. Bombay: Zartoshti Mandli.
Pearson, M.N. (1988) ‘Brokers in Western Indian Port Cities: Their Role in Servicing
Foreign Merchants’, Modern Asian Studies 22(3): 455–72.
Pearson, M.N. (1995) ‘The Thin End of the Wedge: Medical Relativities as a Paradigm
of Early Modern Indian-European Relations’, Modern Asian Studies 29(1): 141–70.
Price, P.G. (1989) ‘Kingly Models in Indian Political Behavior’, Asian Survey 29(6):
559–72.
Raheja, G. (1988) The Poison in the Gift: Ritual, Prestation and the Dominant Caste in a
North Indian Village. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Ramsay, Williamson (1855) Memorandum of the Life and Public Charities of Sir Jamset-
jee Jejeebhoy. London (published anonymously).

Downloaded from jas.sagepub.com at PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIV on May 17, 2016

02_palsetia_055071 (jk-t) 15/6/05 11:43 am Page 217

Palsetia: Merchant Charity and Public Identity Formation 217

Rast Goftar (1859) 17 April.

Raychaudhuri, Siddhartha (2001) ‘Colonialism, Indigenous Elites and the Transform-
ation of Cities in the Non-Western World: Ahmedabad (Western India), 1890–1947’,
Modern Asian Studies 35(3): 677–726.
Raychaudhuri, Tapan (1991) ‘The Commercial Entrepreneur in Pre-Colonial India:
Aspirations and Expectations: A Note’, in R. Ptak and D. Rothermund (eds)
Emporia, Commodities and Entrepreneurs in Asian Maritime Trade, c. 1400–1700,
pp. 339–52. Stuttgart: Franz Steiner Verlag.
Rudner, David (1987) ’Religious Gifting and Inland Commerce in Seventeenth Century
South India’, Journal of Asian Studies 46(2): 361–79.
Shulman, D. (1980) ‘On South Indian Bandits and Kings’, Indian Economic and Social
History Review 17(3): 283–306.
Siddiqi, Asiya (1982) ‘The Business World of Jamsetjee Jejeebhoy’, Indian Economic
and Social History Review 19(3/4): 301–24.
Timberg, T.A. (1978) The Marwaris: From Traders to Industrialists. New Delhi: Vikas
Publishing House Pvt. Ltd.
Wacha, D.E. (1913) Premchand Roychund: His Early Life and Career. Bombay: D.E.
Wacha (printed by the Times Press).
Wacha, D.E. (1920) Shells from the Sands of Bombay: Being My Recollections and Remi-
niscences, 1860–75. Bombay: K.T. Anklesaria.
White, David L. (1987) ‘Parsis in the Commercial World of Western India, 1700–1750’,
Indian Economic and Social History Review 24(2): 183–203.
White, David L. (1991) ‘From Crisis to Community Definition: The Dynamics of
Eighteenth Century Parsi Philanthropy’, Modern Asian Studies 25(2): 303–20.
White, David L. (1995) Competition and Collaboration: Parsi Merchants and the British
East India Company in Eighteenth-Century India. Delhi: Manohar.

Jesse S. Palsetia is Assistant Professor of History at the University of Guelph,

Canada. His research focuses on the Parsis of India, imperial ideologies and the
Indian response under imperialism, and the social and intellectual environment
of Bombay in the 19th century. He has written on the Parsis, British imperial-
ism in India, and the history of Bombay and western India. He is currently
working on a historical biography of Sir Jamsetjee Jejeebhoy.
Address: Department of History, University of Guelph, Guelph, Ontario N1G
2W1, Canada. (palsetia@uoguelph.ca)

Downloaded from jas.sagepub.com at PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIV on May 17, 2016