The Indian Muslim Salariat and The Moral and Political Economies of Usury Laws in Colonial India, 1855–1914

IF 1.8 1区 历史学 Q1 HISTORY Past & Present Pub Date : 2023-08-25 DOI:10.1093/pastj/gtad013
Michael O’Sullivan
{"title":"The Indian Muslim Salariat and The Moral and Political Economies of Usury Laws in Colonial India, 1855–1914","authors":"Michael O’Sullivan","doi":"10.1093/pastj/gtad013","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This article examines the long-term response of the Indian Muslim salariat to the lifting of usury laws in British India in 1855. The salariat were a group of urban professionals and landed gentry in north India who emerged after the uprising of 1857. They espoused a self-conscious brand of Islamic modernism, a central feature of which was a reinterpretation of Islamic traditions pertaining to ‘rent on money’ (interest/usury). Hitherto, Islamic legal rules authorizing interest/usury transactions had been context-dependent, but, motivated by the colonial state’s abrogation of usury caps and a critique of prevailing Islamic legal norms, the salariat articulated a context-free interpretation of interest/usury in which the two were made distinct. Henceforth, interest transactions among Muslims were acceptable, but ‘usurious’ moneylending, conflated with ‘Hindu’ moneylending, was condemned. This pro-interest, anti-usury programme frequently fused Islamic exegesis with readings from European political economy. In turn, the salariat crafted a vernacular political-cum-moral economy that they sought to propagate among the Muslim masses. Nevertheless, by 1914 the salariat had largely disavowed this programme, convinced that the colonial state’s revocation of usury laws had produced a Hindu–Muslim wealth gap. Now a new conception of an ‘Islamic’ economy, in which all interest was anathema, materialized.","PeriodicalId":47870,"journal":{"name":"Past & Present","volume":"32 7","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2023-08-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Past & Present","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/pastj/gtad013","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HISTORY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This article examines the long-term response of the Indian Muslim salariat to the lifting of usury laws in British India in 1855. The salariat were a group of urban professionals and landed gentry in north India who emerged after the uprising of 1857. They espoused a self-conscious brand of Islamic modernism, a central feature of which was a reinterpretation of Islamic traditions pertaining to ‘rent on money’ (interest/usury). Hitherto, Islamic legal rules authorizing interest/usury transactions had been context-dependent, but, motivated by the colonial state’s abrogation of usury caps and a critique of prevailing Islamic legal norms, the salariat articulated a context-free interpretation of interest/usury in which the two were made distinct. Henceforth, interest transactions among Muslims were acceptable, but ‘usurious’ moneylending, conflated with ‘Hindu’ moneylending, was condemned. This pro-interest, anti-usury programme frequently fused Islamic exegesis with readings from European political economy. In turn, the salariat crafted a vernacular political-cum-moral economy that they sought to propagate among the Muslim masses. Nevertheless, by 1914 the salariat had largely disavowed this programme, convinced that the colonial state’s revocation of usury laws had produced a Hindu–Muslim wealth gap. Now a new conception of an ‘Islamic’ economy, in which all interest was anathema, materialized.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
1855-1914年,印度穆斯林的工资和殖民地印度高利贷法的道德和政治经济
本文考察了印度穆斯林对1855年英属印度解除高利贷法的长期反应。“工薪族”是1857年印度北部起义后出现的一群城市专业人士和土地士绅。他们拥护一种自我意识的伊斯兰现代主义,其核心特征是重新解释伊斯兰教关于“以钱为租”(利息/高利贷)的传统。迄今为止,授权利息/高利贷交易的伊斯兰法律规则是根据具体情况而定的,但是,由于殖民国家废除高利贷上限和对现行伊斯兰法律规范的批评,《工资法》对利息/高利贷作出了与具体情况无关的解释,将两者区分开来。从此以后,穆斯林之间的利息交易是可以接受的,但“高利贷”,与“印度教”放贷混为一谈,是受到谴责的。这个支持利息、反高利贷的项目经常将伊斯兰训诂学与欧洲政治经济学的解读融合在一起。反过来,工薪阶层精心打造了一种当地的政治和道德经济,他们试图在穆斯林群众中传播这种经济。尽管如此,到了1914年,工人阶级在很大程度上否认了这一计划,他们确信,殖民地国家废除高利贷法造成了印度教徒和穆斯林的贫富差距。现在,一种“伊斯兰”经济的新概念出现了,在这种经济中,所有的利益都是被诅咒的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Past & Present
Past & Present Multiple-
CiteScore
2.80
自引率
5.60%
发文量
49
期刊介绍: Founded in 1952, Past & Present is widely acknowledged to be the liveliest and most stimulating historical journal in the English-speaking world. The journal offers: •A wide variety of scholarly and original articles on historical, social and cultural change in all parts of the world. •Four issues a year, each containing five or six major articles plus occasional debates and review essays. •Challenging work by young historians as well as seminal articles by internationally regarded scholars. •A range of articles that appeal to specialists and non-specialists, and communicate the results of the most recent historical research in a readable and lively form. •A forum for debate, encouraging productive controversy.
期刊最新文献
Failure to Drain: Expert Resistance and Environmental Thought in the Seventeenth-Century Dutch Republic Adrift in the Andaman Sea: 
Law, Archipelagos and the Making of Maritime Sovereignty An Interpolity Legal Regime in the eighteenth century: 
procedural law of prize Frauds on Navy Pay and the Men and Women of Maritime London, c.1620–1740 Jurisdiction and Afro-Brazilian Legal Politics from Colonialism to Early Independence
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1