â¢ystem), In-laws through their wives here, memben ol the Chadar party. ..... case of Sikhs and Hindus, it was cremation, with a dinner some time later; in the case ...
1'i. :r;1j.1. Pt'S~ltL · ~~ -N G/llCJJ,J ~ '-
V~ ~
D.~: :Af~ltu~ -
1-18:
--- ~'-
s. As;.. J'J.f)cJ,"'48;;,' "' 5 KAREN LEONARD
Pioneer Voices from California Reflections on Race, Religion, & Ethnicity
It has become common to talk of the Sikh diaspora. but there is some question whether or not "Sikh·· is the moet appropriate category for analysis of these emigrants from South Asia. While the overwhelming mapity ol the Punjabi pioneers in early twentieth century California were indM Sikhs, my rele.n:h indicates that religion wu less ulient than other characteristics for these men. It was in fact a Punjabi diaspora, and to go back and emphasiu Sikhs and Sikhism does violence to the historical experiences of the immigrants and theirdetcendants. Most research on the Punjabi immigrants has fOCUled on their publk! life. It is clear that these pioneers in the American West contended with racial, religious, and ethnic pejudices all their lives in the U.S. They battled for dlii.enshap and lost; losing that, they fell prey to the Alien Land Laws of California and Arizona and could continue fanning only in ways that put them al lhe mercy of non-Indians; theirGhadar party activities and conflicls with each other were magnified and misinterpreted in the press. Scholars have recently clarified, corrected, and enlarged upon the early materials about the public life of the men from the Punjab (Barrier, this volume; Jacoby, 1978; Puri, 1980).
02Q Pionttr Voices from C.Olifomia
121
It is equally important to look at the immigrants' private U~ at family life, where US. immigration prohibitions and CaUfornia miscegenation laws dictated an overwhelmmgty nonPunjabi and, indeed, an Hisplmc origin for the women with whom most Punjabi men formed familiell.1 Men and wanmt applying to the County Oerk for a marriage licenle Md lo be of the same race, had to look alike, and molt often It wu Hllpenlc women who satisfied that requirement. Many • liceMe •pplication luls "brown" and "brown" in the blanbfor"ratl!," IO we know how both the Punjabi and Mexican immigranll loolEed to the Anglo county clerks in the early twentieth century. . · But how did Punjabi pioneers see themselves, and how did their wives, children, and neighbors see them. pirticularly wilh respect to race, religion, and ethnidty7 M09t ol the mrly immigrants are dead now, but we can look to the few 1Urvivon, and to the widows and children from lhe families founded in California, for pioneer reflections on rantemporary IOUrces tell us, the men were tem\ed Hindus and initt.I prejudice against them was atrong. The Sikhs' turbans, in ,,.rticular, drew derogatory c:omm-
I Attpo
• INo •
Ila
I
Indian
I Amertc:an I Talll
........
No• INo •INo
-i
•IND•
Yube
Sul••
45 5G.6l 2S 21.1 I t 10.1
I
9.0 I 2
1
2.0 I o
o
oIo
2.3
I It ZJ.6
s.c:n..-1o S.n)oequln
,._ 1\alare
The chart below lhow1 the regionll aJneentntion ol family life and the ethnicity of spouses for the Punjlbl lmmlgqnts. In aouthem C..lifomla, where the pat majority ol married Punjlbis 1ettled, 93.. of the wives were of Hispanic origin, and the percentage of Hisptnlc wives elsewhere In the ltllte, while lower, was always above SOS; only 74 of the 378 wives were nonHispanic In origin. The Rnt ret'Olded marriage I found was In lmA81al County In 1916; most Punjabi-Hltpanlc marriaga took ~in the 1920'L 11lere wu a uples mnstituted a distinctive biethnlc mmmunlty in the Imperial Valley.
123
31 76.0l 11 22.0
Io
o I
o I 50
13.2
IClnp
llnperlal
l
LmAn. . . 221
9UI 12
s.o I 6 U
o
1239 63.2
San Diego
10TA15
JCN I0.414112.7 115
u
t
U
I 2
.5 1371
ICIO
5ouRw: ICll... ..._,d, ,...., ............... ' " - GUiiy . . . . (wtlll .......la. dvll •lld whh ...........
at.-..,..., ..... ....,,,....
ents and provoked inddents. Thus a novel about the Imperial Valley dftaibes the hot 1euon: "It begi• when lhe flnt raghead is found laying face-down In mculvert. A heat-euidde,, the paper'll say, bul likely the poor slob only walked down lhe street in a squeaky pair of shoes. At a hundred and twenty, he could even have been knocked off for not squeaking..." (Sanford, 1953:41). The prevalence of lhe term raghead led almoll all ol the early immigrants to take off their turtMns;I also, many wives preferred them turbanless (Sekhon, 1983; Garew•I, 1982; Shine, 1983). Only one Anglo informant referred to lhe old
. '.I,
,,
124
The Sikh Dillsporo practice of wearing "rags on lheir heads" (Wheal, 1981), bu1 lhe lenn Hindu conlinues lo be used in the Imperial Valley. Now, lhe anecdoles recounled lend lo be fond ones, noting, for example, lhe mens' linguistic abilities. Thus the head of the Chevrolet agency from which m.ny ol the men bought trucks said ''Those Hindus le.med-one ol them llood there and talked Hindu to his brother, Mexican lo hll wife, and Englilh lo me-I liked thar' (Womack, 1981). The men wese also noted fOI' their hard work and generally good farming, although their lack of conce. 11 with the •ppea111nce ol field ad yard led lo local expreu1ons like "Hindu farming'' and ''WeU, I'd call that a Hindu jOb; do It over'' (Anderholt, 1982; S.vage, 1982). The point here is that no Anglo informant ever used the term Sikh lo describe the immigranls.'
The oldtimers l interviewed acc:epted the term Hindu-at least they certainly used it for themselves. They t.alked about the world they came into in tenns ol white, c:olored, Hindu, and Mexican; less oflen they talked ol the Japanese, lhe "Odna people," the Filippinos, Swiss, and Germans. One man said, "the Singhs came here, they're all one." When talking about legal problems and court cues some men used the lerm Aryan; one man, lets well educated, •Id "India people, Hindus, Punjab, come from the white nice." Some labels •roused oppoeition-one man talked about the need to reject the ..bel "Oriental" when people tried lo apply it to the Hindus. But none ol the "old Hindu'' whom I Interviewed talked specifically Moat Sikha; IOme ol them did differentiate Muslims flOlft the "other'' Hindus.' It •striking that almost all ol the ~tionthip. developed by the Punjlbi men In California croued religious lines. The significant relalionships were: vlllapma1es, lhipmates, partners (In farming In the U.S.), alfffJMllra (godfathers to each other's children In the Calhollc~ •ystem), In-laws through their wives here, memben ol the Chadar party. None of these relationships were determined by religion. In many Instances Sikhs, Muslims, and Hindusweseco-membenol one of the above groupings.• Similarly with Institutions-the Sikh temple at Stockton, the Hindu store. In Califomla'1 rural towns, and the Hindu labor camps •round the st.ate were used by all
"°"""',.,.
Pion«r Voices From C.lifamita
125
Punjabls regardless ol religion. (It may be true that work gangs, with one cook each, were usually mmposed ol members ol one religion). The Stockton Sikh temple, undoubtedly lhe cenll1ll lnslitution fiw the Punjlbls in California, just u undoubtedly featured political, social, and religioul events attended bySlkhl, Muslims, and Hindus (Wood 1966: 96). Mexican-Hindu and other wives and children also attended events at the Stoc:klon temple.' Even a Hispanic woman divorced from a Sikh wu welcome to llay and eat at the temple, her daughter (Lucy Singh Abdulla, 1984) remembers. 1bcre wasa Hindustani Welfare and RefOl'm Astodatlon In the Imperial Valley with Sikh, Muslim.and Hindu members.11 1.ess formally, all Hindus met In the lale afternoon in places like the Holtville Park or the curbside in Calipatria to rest and t.alk. Many Anglos remember the excited voices and high energy ol these Hindu group meetings. Most of the relationships above were new; some resulted from coincidence (shipmates) or farming arrangements in California (partners). TheGhadar party was founded in California and drew In mostmenascontributon. Theyalsosentmoneybac:k to their 'Villages for schools but not, In my data, for religious Institutions. Other new relationships were a ~ ol family life. Most of the wives were Mexican Immigrants or Mexican-Americana, and many were lets of lileers or related . women. Hence Punjabi men became relatives by marriage; hU9bends attached lo female, Splnlsh-speeklng kin groups. The language ol lhe home, ol lhe women and children. was Spanish; only the older bop who worked In the fields with Hindu crews 1!9med aome Punjabi (and aome of these bop were Mexican stepeona).11 The childrens' n1mes, on birth certificalel and certainly their nicknames. were Hispanic with few exceptions.u Punjabi men aometimes had Hispanic names themselves, for example Andreu for lnderSingh,and Miguel for MaghyarSlngh. MOit ol the women the Punjabis married were Catholic. The ~ s*rticipated In thec:omJM4raio(rltual kinship) system ol the Cattdlc chun:h-this meant appearance in a chun:h and lion In Its official books on the ocxaiion of the child's ba or marriage. Since these godparent relationshipe linked n-Hindu couples almost entirely to each other (only a few
*
126
The Sikh C>Uuporo
Mexican couples were called upon, usually relatives ol the wife), and men of one religion stood as godfather to the children of men of another religion, these relationships are best understood as hclpingtoconstitutethePunjabl-Hispankcommunity.11 11.eydid nol integrate Punjabi men into the C.thollc church any more than attendance at the Stockton templeewen11 Integrated non-Sikhs into Sikhism; in both cases, an OllenllWe rellgloua institution was being used by and for the mmmunlty." Few if any men converted to Catholicism; in the one ase where conversion Is claimed, the man "also remained a Sikh and wuc:remated when he died" (Sanga, 1981). But Sikhs, Muslims. and Hindus who stayed in marriages with Catholic women frequendy coneentect to a Catholic wedding (usually ye119 after their lnltlal dvil marriage). 11.e wives, with a single exception, did not convert lo the religions of their husbands.'' The children were encouraged by their fathers to take an interest in Sikhism, Islam, or Hlndulm\ but few fathers were able.to teach systematially or well about their religions. Most of the men were not well educated; there were few, perhaps no, religious specialists among them. Al*>, they worked long hours, had littletlmetoinstruc:ttheirchildren In Punjabi or in religious matters, and left religious b'aining up to their wives. Almost all of the ~n allowed or actively encouraged their children lo be brought up as Christtans, and they viewed this very positively. As Susanna Mesa Rodriguez Singh •id, "Well, Cod gives a lot of different languages, you know, but I don't think so many Gods," and her husband Moola Singh affirmed, ''Only one Cod." Moola Singh expounded on this when ulred Jf he hadn't wanted his children brought up In his religion: "No, I didn't, I don't care. The church here may be C.tholic. that's OIC; the story of Jesus Christ is OK; you go your churc:h, I go my church; one God. To make their living, people make different churches, different ways. Not different religions. Make different names... believe God, only one God" (1982). · The interviews with wives and children of the Punjabis let us see how these family members identified the Immigrant men. Was Sikhism (or Islam or Hinduism) a major feature of the immigrants' identity? Here we need to distinguish among the
Pionctr Voices from C.lifomitl
127
couples on thebuis olresldenceand thewife'1ethnldty,beca111e where the Mexican-Hindu wives were las concentrated there wu greater emphuis on the men's religious heritages. In the northern and C2nb'al valleys, where Anglo and Black wiYa diluted the Hlsp9nlc dOIMlllc wlture charaderillk ol family life In the Imperial Valley, and wherethefewrallndlanwiva Uftd. one he.rd lllghdy more about Indian bellefaand pndceL "And In the Imperial Valley, too, thole few pioneers who married while women or who later brought over wlva from India (after 19", when the Jaw changed) looked down on thole who married Hlsp9nlc women and on their children; they differentiated thenllelva from the Mexlcan-Hlndua In many ways, Including an emphasis on the men'• religious affiliation." But despite such stratifbllon, there are generalizations about the men which one heerd from all of the wives and children. The men were di9custed primarily In terms ol the relationships that crossed religion and In termaol penonal characteristics thought to apply to all Punjabis-the children pve them nicknames in Spanish, English, or Punjabi emphasizi111g these Punjabi characteristics.11 That 11, the women these men married learned more about village, ship and p1rtnenhlp groupings than they did about Indian rellgtons orc:asta, and this Is true for the children as well. The one eueptlon to this generallution, and It Is an Important exception, mma with the end of the life cycle, when the old men died (this will be dl9cuued at the end). Molt wives and wklowa talked knowledgeably about thar husblnds' vlllagn. ney could name the other men who came from thole village; and, from ot.rvatton ol thete groupe ol men, they opined that some villages were noted for cleanliness, othen forgoodcooldng,andsoon(Shlne•Raendez, 1982). They could name their husbands' shipmates; they could ~ partnerships over the years. The aons and daughters knew the9e things too. Thnegroupingslncluded Muslims and Hinduauwell as Sikhs, and such Inclusion ocaisloned nocomment; but when the godparent and In-law relationships came up, Inclusion of men of different religions was sometimes remarked upon.
The women and children were certainly conscious of religious, caste, and regional differences stemming from the Punjab
-
128
------ ~ --~~~~~~~~~~~~----~~~~~~~~~~~~--~------------------
Tiie Sikh Diospo"'
and spoke about them. Often. however, I had to elicit such information by direct questions; and they could not name people In those categories readily. Most wives seemed to know less •bout Punjabi society than did the children. Many wives, securely based in female kin groups here, had UltlecuriOllty about the Punjab; the knowledge they gained w.. •pedldal and often came from other wives or their hubllnda' Mchelor Some statements from wives follow to lllultl'ate thle: "When we opened the door and saw him in that turban, we thought he wua Turk, but we asked him in anyway" (Lala C.rewal, 1981). "My husband was a member of theSinghreligion ...hewu20-21 yanolderthan mebut thisracedoesnotlookold .... Myhulblnd'spartnertold me that if a Muslim came to the door. the Hindu would not let him in but would talk to him outside" (TeresaCarewal, 1981). "Oh, yes. we ate beef. but there was another kind of Hindu, called Mohammedan. and they didn't eat pork" (Lucy Sekhon, 1982). "Her three husbands were all Mohameds, though I'm not sure. one couldn't eat beef and another pork..... (Emma Smiley fi Verdie Abdullia Montgomery. 1982). "My husband told me the Hindus and the Pakistanis do not like each other in India, but here they are all united" (Sophia Din, 1981). And finally, one mother trying lo help her daughter marry another Mexican-Hindu to whom the father objected: ''We're all Americans heR, what Is this caste thingr• (Elizabeth Deen Hernandez quodng her mother, 1981). This last was a theme voicedbymanywi'ft!9and widows. their role as sodalizen of their husbands In America. " 1bey deliberately downplayed what they did knowof PunJabl IOdety since they tudged It dysfunctional (a view lhued by IOme husbands).
.-r1nera.
In contrast to their mothen, molt IOftS and daughlen were intensely curious about their Indian heritage and mnember vividly what their fathers told them. And they learned things in a negative way In the course of growing up; that is, u they socialized with other children, and particularly u they began dating. their fal hers' opinions about those of different caste and religious background were loudly voked. Some statements from children about distinctions among the Punjabi men follow : "lbe Rams and Singhs were different castes" (Ram, 1983). "The Kathris (Khalris) were the most educated and wealthy, there were some
Piontitr VoictS From C.li/ornitl
'I
129
called Bohmans (Brahmans), and most were Wol'ken, low-clau Juts (Jats)" (Puri, 1984). "Our Dad wu liberal, he wu one who usodated with Mohanunedans, and we did too, and with Medcaftl; (another Mexican-Hindu) m.de our Ufe mllerable, lhe bpt telling us we were Hindus and lhouldn't aSIOdate with Mexicans" (Resendez, 1982). '-0.d didn't mre whu we married IO long u they were working men" (Sidhu Villuenor, 1982). ''Did didn't really care who married, but when my sister Carmelita picked him, he said, 'Why a Khan?.. (Sidhu, 1982) "Did didn't want me to marry him, we were Rajputs and his family were Rae. (Arain)" (Hernandez. 19'1). "Deel didn't want me to many a Do.INI but ldld anyway" (Ral, 1981). "l'here were two who were Chuhns, you know, unk>uchable, and they mme to the puk too but the other men made fun of them" (C.rewal CHI, 1981). ''My Dad was a Hindu" (Din, 1981). ''When there were too many people to get on the bus, usdarkieshad togetoff,and I went home with Sarah Mohamed, there I saw a hookah for the first lime, only the Mohammedans had them" (C.rewal Gill, 1982). "And there were other Muslims. villager or Olde typetwecalledChachls,and those Khans from the frontier" (Mallobox, 1982)...We were Pathan; there were Rajlput (Rajput) Muslims and other converts" (Abdulla, 1983). ''My Did turned Mexican. He brought us up, six or aevew•boys and one girl, after mother died. He didn't teach us much about India, when he •ld things we all just laughed at him. lix or 1even boya. not much chance..." (Francisco Singh, 1983). ''Oh yes, the Stockton temple- lhars where we met the Khan kids eftry year, coming over from Phoenix to pick peaches" (~ma. 1983). As thele quota show, there wu certainly some aocial distance between the Sikh, Muslim. and Hindu men and their families, • but I found equally or more significant divisions by class within the Mexican-Hindu community,11 which some of the! quotes above also indicate. Most of the remarks above about Indian categories had to be elidted by direct questions, but the wives, widows, and children spoke freely and frequently of characteristics they felt were shared_ by all Punjabis. HarJ work was something all Punjabisdid: the men "worked all the lime," "they worked loo hard." "People were poor then, we had no money; the Hindus worked hard, they made good husbands;" "the Hindus were farming cotton there,
t
l t
130
Piorwr Voices from California
77ae Sikh DU&sporri
and when Lupe's parents saw that, saw that they were bossmen, they didn't object lo the 1n11TUge after thal" Hindus "worled harder than Mexican men and didn't go out drinking; they drank at home, at least they were home." ''l'hey bought dolhes and shoes for their stepchildren, unlike Mnkan men who wouldn't take care of those children:• Dmpile lhls lut statement, most testified that the men lpenl money nluctantly. They kept lhe household money and doled tt out a1 they NW flt. Some called them frugal, many called them ltlngy and wone: "tightwads," "mean bastards." "X starved his family, kept them poor;" "Y gave his wife and kids a hard time, lcept them down,-'' ''Z wanted to use his money for land, Mom had lo wait until he went tolleep and then she went through his pockea lo get UI money for schoolbooks." One woman "got fed up and left;" another "got tired of cabbage and left him;" and IOon, The men allO had Ibid ideasaboutahc proper behavior of their wives and 1n1ny women descrtl'd or divon:OO because of restrictionl on their drae, their attendance at dances, or visits to reletivea and frtenda. Lest we think that the men failed to share any rea"eetional activitiee with their wives, one should note that 1n1ny bought Vlclroluorgramophoncs; one widow fondly recalled tac:hlng her leCOIMI Sikh husband to dance, just the two of them at home (Sekhon, 1982). But it was generally agreed that the mens' favorite reaeettons were politics and drinking. and most engaged in plenty of both. They also fought (chiefly with each other, anything from litigation to murder), though it ls hard to1ep1raletheirvtolence from that around them in California's farm towns. One woman, twice marril'd to Sikhs and twice widowed (and not from fights), moved from the Imperial Valley rather than mnany again there because "I was always afraid." The Punjabi men got mixed reviews u fathers, bu1 even affoctionate children who inherited property made remarks like "he was hard, he didn't talk a lot to me," or "he was a grouch, all Punjabis are grouchy." The childrens' views of their parents are complicatl'd--much of the interview material shows the ways the children of runjabis changed their views of their ethnic identity over the life cycle, their "ambiguous ethnidty" (Benson, 1981: 134-144; Leonard, 1988). But that is another topic; here the focus must be kept on the men.
131
As the men aged, their religious Identities received added emphasis. This occurred pardy because of important changes in the political context (Brass. 1985) and pardy because of life cycle changes
:
i i
j! ;, •
a.•
'i
w
1·
.~
a.
I a."
I
:.
..
ii
;• rI
l i ( i [ { f if j{i If J ! '* ~· 1 'J !• t• ~J t• ,j !• I; •_~; i; ~• ii ~J Ii l11.I t
'••
I"'
~
i ·.
'
I ~
~I
~
I
J,..
c
• (
Ji
-
II II I I
f ~
~·
.,,
Q
aI
-
Q
..;;; Cl
~
s·
t l I! I I ( i I I i·1 Ill I Ii fi I I Ii i ~ l I' II •
,,,,.,,
I
i
l . ~ 1 §~.:I •i f • \ !, !••~ I:. . ~.-JI I !i'"i •;,. . l '• -: • • • .: I
/
Iii
•
• •
.
J
~
.
