The Second Creature, 1949

The Second Creature, 64 photographs by Sunil Janah. Published by Dilip Kumar Gupta, The Signet Press, designed by Satyajit Ray, assisted by Sibram Das, printed by Lalchand Roy. Engraved by Bengal Autotype Company (213 Cornwallis Street) and The Statesman Ltd (Chowringhee). March 1949 edition, priced at twelve rupees.
But a small remembrance of this wonderful work, on International Women’s Day 2014.

India in 2015 – 63 million-plus cities

The 27 cities shown on this map are no different from many others like them in India today, and the selection of these 27 is based solely on a single numerical milestone which I am fairly sure few of each city’s citizens (or administrations for that matter) will have marked.

On some day during the months since March 2011, the population of each of these 27 cities has crossed 150,000 – this is the criterion. March 2011 is the month to which the Census 2011 has fixed its population count, for the country, for a state, a district, a town.

And so these 27 cities share one criterion – which they be quite unaware of – which is that when their inhabitants were enumerated for the 2011 census, their populations were under 150,000 whereas in the four years since that mark has been crossed.

[You will find more on the theme of population, the Census of India 2011 and urban and rural population growth here: ‘So very many of us’, ‘To localise and humanise India’s urban project’, ‘The slowing motion of India’s quick mobility’, ‘The urbanised middle class symphony’. Thematic and state-wise links to direct data files can be found at: ‘India’s 2011 census, a population turning point’ and ‘India’s 2011 census, the states and their prime numbers’.]

When the provisional results of the Census of India 2011 were released, through the year 2011, the number of cities with populations of a million and over was 53.

The number of cities with over a million inhabitants, from 53 in 2013 to 63 in 2015. Cities with names in red type will reach a million in 2015.

That was the tally almost two years ago. Between the 2011 census and the 2001 census the growth rate of the urban population was 31.8% which, turned into a simple annual rate for those ten years, is just under 3.2% per year.

At this rate, in mid-2013, six more cities will have joined the list of those with a population of over a million.

These six cities are: Mysore (in Karnataka, estimated population of 1,046,469), Bareilly (in Uttar Pradesh, 1,042,257), Guwahati (in Assam, 1,030,149), Tiruppur (in Tamil Nadu, 1,024,228), Sholapur (in Maharashtra, 1,011,609) and Hubli-Dharwad (in Karnataka, 1,003,886).

Within the next few months, India will have 59 cities with populations of over a million.

By mid-2015 (the final year of the Millennium Development Goals, or MDGs), there will be another four cities with populations of over a million: Salem (in Tamil Nadu, estimated population of 1,036,066), Aligarh (in Uttar Pradesh, 1,025,255), Gurgaon (in Haryana, 1,016,698) and Moradabad (in Uttar Pradesh, 1,002,994).

That year, Bhopal (Madhya Pradesh), Thrissur (Kerala) and Vadodara (Gujarat) will have populations of over two million; the populations of Kanpur and Lucknow (both Uttar Pradesh) will cross three million and that of Surat (Gujarat) will cross five million. India will have 63 (ten more than in 2011) cities with populations of at least a million.

These are projections that have not taken into account the state-wise variations of rural and urban growth rates. Also not accounted for is migration, as the migration data from Census 2011 has yet to be released.

Quiet numbers tell district tales – rural and urban India, part 3

A roadside stall on the outskirts of Kanpur, Uttar Pradesh, selling chewing tobacco

Having dealt with one basis for comparison, the 1911 report then provided a sociological overview of the transformation of the time: “It is true that a new type of town is springing up in the neighbourhood of important railway stations with stores and provision shops and a considerable coolie population, and that these in many cases have not yet reached the prescribed standard of population. But the total number of such places is still small, and their exclusion has had no material effect on the statistics.”

Then too, the 1911 Census thought fit to remind the administration of the variety of administrative divisions in what was British India, which included Baluchistan, Burma and the subcontinent that spanned these two provinces. “There are great local variations in density. In nearly two-thirds of the districts and states the number of persons to the square mile is less than 200, and in about a quarter it ranges from 200 to 500. The units with less than 100 persons to the square mile cover two-fifths of the total area but contain only one-eleventh of the population, while those with more than 500, though their area is only one-eleventh of the whole, contain one-third of the population.”

Skyscrapers under construction in central Mumbai (Bombay). These will contain luxury apartments, in contrast to the old humble labour accommodation provided for mill workers. These enormous towers have been erected on lands once occupied by the textile mills.

One hundred years ago, an aspect of the changing demographies of British India which exercised the census officials of the time was the ratio between females and males in cities and towns. It remains a concern, a century later, although more widespread now and not confined to urban settlements, as is explained briefly anon. “As usual in Indian towns females are in marked defect,” the 1911 report remarked on Bengal. “Their proportion is highest in the minor towns which are often merely overgrown villages; it is much smaller in the main centres of trade and industry, and smallest of all in Calcutta, where only one person in three is a female.”

Nor did Bombay prove different, for the 1911 report observed: “As in the other large cities of India females are in a great minority, there being only 530 to every thousand males. This proportion is the smallest yet recorded. In 1881 it was 661; it fell to 586 at the next census owing to the immigration of males to meet the rapidly growing demand for labour, and again rose to 617 in 1901, when plague had driven out more of the temporary settlers than of the permanent residents.”

While not as severe as the ratios of that era, the gender ratios for the rural populations of districts in 2011 will, as more data is released by the Census authorities and as the verification cycles for the smaller administration units are completed, help explain the movement of labour, the patterns of migration (with which they will be read) and no doubt support the studies on the feminisation of agriculture we are witness to in India. The 2011 data show that in 122 districts, the female to male ratio of the rural population is 1 or more (the range is 1.00 to 1.18).

Children line up in an 'anganwadi', a child care centre, in a slum in northern Mumbai. Their parents scour the nearby city refuse dumps for recyclable material, and make their living selling their finds to scrap merchants.

Of the 30 districts which have the highest female to male ratios of the rural population, there are 11 in Kerala, 7 in Uttarakhand, 4 in Orissa, 2 in Maharashtra and one each in Tamil Nadu, Puducherry, Karnataka, Himachal Pradesh, Chhattisgarh and Andhra Pradesh. Thereafter, in 112 districts the female to male ratios of the rural population are less than 0.90 (the range is 0.90 to 0.67). The district with the lowest ratio is Tawang (Arunachal Pradesh), followed by Chandigarh, South Delhi, North District (Sikkim), Dibang Valley and West Kameng (both Arunachal Pradesh RP), Kargil (Jammu and Kashmir), Daman, Nicobars and Anjaw (Arunachal Pradesh).

A crowded main lane in Dharavi, the slum in central Mumbai renowned for years as being Asia's largest. A hive of small business and scrap recycling, Dharavi is a magnet for migrants to the giant city.

Carrying with it the potential to cause a demographic imbalance whose full import, a generation from today, we can only surmise is the gender ratio of the population between 0-6 years, that is, the children of these districts. There are 34 districts in which, amongst the rural population, the numbers of children between 0 and 6 years are 500,000 and above. That all these districts are in either Bihar (15) or in Uttar Pradesh (14) or West Bengal (5) is another outcome, over the decades since the early-20th century, of the population patterns observed in the final 50 years of colonial India. The 2011 data has shown that whether in the 34 districts with 0-6 year populations of 0.5 million, or in the top 10% of all districts (640), the rural population that is between 0-6 years old is about 90% of the district’s total child population in that category.

[This is the third of a small series of postings on rural and urban India, which reproduces material from my analysis of Census 2011 data on India’s rural and urban populations, published by Infochange India. See the first in the series here, and see the second in the series here.]

British Bombay’s furious 1911 growth rate

In 1911 the population of Bombay was recorded as being 979,000 and the city had recorded an astonishing growth in population, adding 203,000 inhabitants (more than 20% in the decade) from the time of the previous Census, that of 1901.

Detail of Bombay map from 'Indien: Handbuch Für Reisende', published by Verlag von Karl Baedeker in Leipzig, 1914

“British India contains more than 250 Districts,” explained the Imperial Gazeteer of India, 1909. “The average area of a District is 4,430 square miles, and the average population 93,000. The average District is thus about three-fourths of the size of Yorkshire, and its inhabitants number considerably more than half the population of that county. The actual Districts vary greatly in size and density of population. For instance, the Upper Chindwin District of Burma has an area of 19,000 square miles and a population of 153,000; Mymensingh, in Bengal, has an area of over 6,ooo square miles and a population of nearly 4,000,000; and Vizagapatam, in Madras, has an area of more than 17,000 square miles and a population of nearly 3,000,000. Among the major Provinces the Districts are largest in Burma and Madras, and smallest in the United Provinces.”

“Burma is about the size of Sweden, with nearly twice its population, and contains great tracts of forest and jungle. The territories administered by the Lieutenant-Governor of Bengal, though smaller in extent than Burma, contain more than eight times the number of inhabitants and form the most onerous of the Provincial charges. This Province nearly doubles the population of France, though only three-quarters of its size. The United Provinces of Agra and Oudh are almost as densely populated as Bengal, and contain more people than Austria-Hungary in an area less than that of Austria alone. The population of Madras and the area of Bombay approximate to the population and area of the United Kingdom.”

The Gazeteer explained in detail the role of the principal administrators, none of whom seemed more indeispensible than the District Collector: “The ordinary day’s work of the Collector-Magistrate entails many other miscellaneous duties, which vary in accordance with circumstances and of which it would be difficult to give a complete list. The Government looks to him for information on all important occurrences which take place in his District, he is called on to advise on general schemes which may be under consideration, and he is expected to explain to the people any new orders of the Government which they may not readily understand.”

“In times of stress and difficulty his duties and responsibilities are increased tenfold. If a collision is apprehended between Hindus and Muhammadans, or if an agrarian difficulty is likely to result in outrage, it is to his tact and firmness that the Government looks to prevent violence, and, if necessary, to quell disorder. Should the District be attacked by famine he is responsible for the lives of the people; he must watch minutely, and keep the Government informed of, the progress of events, and must organize and carry out measures of relief. For the proper discharge of his many duties he must be accessible to and intimately acquainted with the inhabitants. This acquaintance cannot be gained at the desk or on the bench, and accordingly the Collector-Magistrate spends several months of the year in camp. During his tours he inspects the working of the various departments with which he is concerned, satisfies himself as to the manner in which his subordinate officers are carrying out their duties, and advises and encourages them in their work. At the same time he gets to know the people of all parts of the District, and they have a ready opportunity of discussing their affairs with him. The local magnates will visit his tent with some ceremony; the village elders will come and chat with him about the prospect of their crops, the assessment of their lands, the opening of a new school, some local quarrel regarding a right of way, the dacoity which occurred in the village during the preceding summer…”

Population of Principal Towns (Census of 1911)
				Population		Comparison
	Town	Province/Agency	District/State	in 1911		with 1901
1.	Calcutta with Suburbs and Howrah.	Bengal		1,222,313		+	115,575
	Calcutta and Fort		Calcutta	896,067		+	48,271
	Cossipore and Chitpore		24 Parganas	48,178		+	7,428
	Manicktola		24 Parganas	53,767		+	21,380
	Garden Reach		24 Parganas	45,275		+	17,084
	Howrah		Howrah	179,006		+	21,412
2.	Bombay	Bombay	Bombay	979,445		+	203,439
3.	Madras and Cantonment	Madras	Madras	518,660		+	9,314
4.	Hyderabad and Cantonment	Hyderabad	Hyderabad	500,623		+	52,157
5.	Rangoon and Cantonment	Burma	Rangoon	293,316		+	47,886
6.	Lucknow and Cantonment	United Provinces	Lucknow	259,798		–	4,251
7.	Delhi and Cantonment	Delhi		232,837		+	24,262
8.	Lahore and Cantonment	Punjab	Lahore	228,687		+	25,723
9.	Ahmedabad and Cantonment	Bombay	Ahmedabad	216,777		+	30,888
10.	Benares and Cantonment	United Provinces	Benares	203,804		–	9,275
11.	Agra and Cantonment	United Provinces	Agra	185,449		–	2,573
12.	Cawnpore and Cantonment	United Provinces	Cawnpore	178,557		–	24,240
13.	Allahabad and Cantonment	United Provinces	Allahabad	171,697		–	335
14.	Poona and Cantonment	Bombay	Poona	158,856		+	5,536
15.	Amritsar and Cantonment	Punjab	Amritsar	152,756		–	9,673
16.	Karachi and Cantonment	Bombay	Karachi	151,903		+	35,240
17.	Mandalay and Cantonment	Burma	Mandalay	138,299		–	45,517
18.	Jaipur	Rajputana	Jaipur	137,098		–	23,069
19.	Patna	Bihar and Orissa	Patna	136,153		+	1,368
20.	Madura	Madras	Madura	134,130		+	28,146

ncipal Towns (Census of 1911)
				Population	Comparison
	Town	Province/Agency	District/State	in 1911	with 1901
1.	Calcutta with Suburbs and Howrah.	Bengal		1,222,313	+	115,575
	Calcutta and Fort		Calcutta	896,067	+	48,271
	Cossipore and Chitpore		24 Parganas	48,178	+	7,428
	Manicktola		24 Parganas	53,767	+	21,380
	Garden Reach		24 Parganas	45,275	+	17,084
	Howrah		Howrah	179,006	+	21,412
2.	Bombay	Bombay	Bombay	979,445	+	203,439
3.	Madras and Cantonment	Madras	Madras	518,660	+	9,314
4.	Hyderabad and Cantonment	Hyderabad	Hyderabad	500,623	+	52,157
5.	Rangoon and Cantonment	Burma	Rangoon	293,316	+	47,886
6.	Lucknow and Cantonment	United Provinces	Lucknow	259,798	–	4,251
7.	Delhi and Cantonment	Delhi		232,837	+	24,262
8.	Lahore and Cantonment	Punjab	Lahore	228,687	+	25,723
9.	Ahmedabad and Cantonment	Bombay	Ahmedabad	216,777	+	30,888
10.	Benares and Cantonment	United Provinces	Benares	203,804	–	9,275
11.	Agra and Cantonment	United Provinces	Agra	185,449	–	2,573
12.	Cawnpore and Cantonment	United Provinces	Cawnpore	178,557	–	24,240
13.	Allahabad and Cantonment	United Provinces	Allahabad	171,697	–	335
14.	Poona and Cantonment	Bombay	Poona	158,856	+	5,536
15.	Amritsar and Cantonment	Punjab	Amritsar	152,756	–	9,673
16.	Karachi and Cantonment	Bombay	Karachi	151,903	+	35,240
17.	Mandalay and Cantonment	Burma	Mandalay	138,299	–	45,517
18.	Jaipur	Rajputana	Jaipur	137,098	–	23,069
19.	Patna	Bihar and Orissa	Patna	136,153	+	1,368
20.	Madura	Madras	Madura	134,130	+	28,146

One frozen moment in 1911

It was nearing an hour before noon as I approached the Bombay Gymkhana, having cadged a lift from a driver of a provisions carriage who was proceeding towards the Arsenal castle via Crawford Market. Although frowned upon by our editors – starchy old blokes – this was common for us reporters, impatient in our hurry to criss-cross the great city.

From Census of India 1911 report

Today I had to hurry so as not to keep Mr Edward A Gait waiting. The Census Commissioner of India – his credentials were most impressive; C.S.I., C.I.E., I.C.S., Fellow of the Royal Statistical Society – had commanded the entire country to wait on the night of 10th March 1911 so that they should be counted. And that was the tale my editor wished to print in the pages of our thriving weekly newspaper. Punctual even for a lowly reporter, the great man was there already, and as I hurriedly made my way to his table, I saw that he had in his company three others, making the party two British and two Indian.

“Nimbu-pani is best for Indian summers, young man,” said Mr Gait with a ready smile as a signalled to a bearer, “It is part of our prescription to our field staff – that, quinine and hygiene. Now then, you want to know what happened on the night of the 10th of March, 1911, or so your editor tells me. Pay attention for an hour, for thereafter we must take our train.”

“An Indian census is beset with special difficulties owing to the long lines of railway,” said Mr Gait, “the big rivers on which boats travel, sometimes for days without coming to the bank, the forests to which wood-cutters resort, often for weeks at a time, and the numerous sacred places which, on occasion, attract many thousands of pilgrims. It would be tedious to describe the arrangements which were made in these cases, but they were all carefully provided for. Take the case of railways, for instance, all persons travelling by rail who took tickets after 7 pm on the night of the census were enumerated, on the platform if there was time, and if not, in their train.”

“What? Do you mean sir that you had enumerators even on our trains on that night?” I broke in, astounded by the degree of planning and detail this required.

“Certainly,” replied the Census head, “Those alighting at any station during the night were enumerated right there, unless they could produce a pass showing that they had already been counted. All trains were stopped, and every carriage visited, about 6 am on the following morning, in order to include any travellers who up till then had escaped notice. At one large junction alone, 60 special enumerators were engaged for the census of travellers by rail.”

So it was true then, the reports that had come to us from civic officials, who had told us in great excitement how extraordinary it was that every single passenger train on every railway line had been counted, every major crossroads watched and traffic to and from every coach station in our cities had been halted. We had at first taken this as fanciful. How on earth could a country be stopped in order to count its people?

Here, sitting at the same table, were the men who had done it.

From Census of India 1911 report

“On the morning of 11th March the Enumerators of all the blocks in a circle met the Supervisor at a place previously arranged,” continued Mr Gait, “and filled in a form showing the number of occupied houses and of persons (males and females) in each block. The Supervisor, after testing these figures, prepared from them a summary for his circle, which he transmitted to his Superintendent. The summaries were added up at the district headquarters, and the result was telegraphed to the local Provincial Superintendent and to me, the Census Commissioner for India.”

“But how could you know, so quickly and so accurately, if your figures were correct?” I asked.

“Perhaps you’d like to explain, Mr Mallik,” said Mr Gait. “Young man, this able gentleman is Babu Anukul Chandra Mallik, Head Clerk of the Census Commission.”

“The organisation was so thorough that the results for the whole of India were received complete on the 19th March, within nine days of the Census,” Mr Mallik replied. “They were issued in print next day with an explanatory note and details of the variations since 1901, not only for Provinces and Agencies, but also for the individual districts and States and the principal towns.”

Babu Anukul took a sip of nimbu-pani. “Within four days of the census, the figures had already been reported for a population of 131 million, while on the sixth day they had been ascertained for 238 million, or nearly four-fifths of the total population. The record was broken by the States of Rampur and Sarangarh where, by dint of working all night, the local officers were able, with the aid of mounted messengers and other means of conveyance, to get the figures for all parts of the State to headquarters in time for the telegram reporting the result to reach me in Calcutta by 8 am on the following morning. The extreme celerity and accuracy with which this work was accomplished” – here he glanced at Mr Gait and Mr Meikle, who both nodded – “is not approached even in the smallest European States.”

“Remarkable,” I said, quite taken aback. Not even the most celebrated military campaign could have boasted such detailed organisation. “How many toiled for this work, and at what cost?”

“Let us start with the smallest. Superintendents prepared their local instructions, and we provided for the division of the whole country into blocks, each of which contained from 30 to 50 houses and was in charge of an Enumerator. The total strength of the census staff was about two millions. The actual cost of the census operations to the Government was 2,03,000 rupees – or rather less than in 1901. This is not unsatisfactory for there has been a marked rise in prices and wages during the decade, and that the population dealt with has increased by over 20 millions.”

With that, the four gentlemen rose – Mr Gait, Mr Meikle (Superintendent of Government Printing, India), Mr Mallik and Rai Manmohan Roy Bahadur (Special Assistant to the Census Commissioner). They climbed into a waiting victoria which smartly set off towards the station. This was the quiet team that had planned and carried out a great count that had reached almost 300 million Indians. How different might it be, I wondered, a hundred years hence.

(This account is of course fictional. I have no way of finding out whether these four gentlemen ever got together, and if so then where. I set this imaginary encounter in Bombay 1911. What is entirely true are the events and work described by Mr Gait, for these details are taken direct from the report in volume one of the 1911 Census of India. Forgotten today, but incredible. The Khaleej Times has published this little cameo.)