¹ This work stems from the pioneering Comparative Study of Élites by Lasswell, Harold D., Lerner, Daniel, and Rothwell, C. Easton (Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1952)Google Scholar. Some of my categories are taken also from Matthews, Donald R., The Social Background of Political Decision-Makers (Garden City: Doubleday & Co., 1954)Google Scholar and Marvick, Dwaine, ed., Political Decision Makers (Glencoe: The Free Press, 1961)Google Scholar. Jean Meynaud in his introduction to the UNESCO study of “The Parliamentary Profession,” International Social Science Journal, XIII (1961), 513–543Google Scholar, cautions social scientists against too readily assuming that a mere description of the sociological characteristics of parliamentarians automatically provides an explanation for their legislative behavior, but adds diat perfectionist standards for such inferences may be equally dangerous since sociological factors are often all that the expert can reasonably take into consideration. I shall not attempt in this article to undertake the much broader task of explaining the voting or other political activity of Muslim politicians in India.

² Morris-Jones, W. H., Parliament in India (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1957), pp. 114–128Google Scholar; Weiner, Myron, “Changing Patterns of Political Leadership in West Bengal,” Pacific Affairs, XXXII (Sept. 1959), 277–287.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

³ Eg., Naoroji, Dadabhai (1825–1917)Google Scholar, a Parsi, and Tyabji, Badruddin (1844–1909)Google Scholar, a Sulaimani Bohra Muslim. See Titus, Murray, Islam in India and Pakistan, (Calcutta: YMCA Publishing House, 1959), p. 106.Google Scholar

⁴ Gopal, Ram, Indian Muslims, a Political History (1858–1947) (Bombay: Asia Publishing House, 1959), p. 18.Google Scholar

⁵ Mamoria, C. B., “Religious Composition of Population of India,” Modern Review (Calcutta), C (Sept. 1956), 189–198Google Scholar. The lower figure does not include the Muslim population of Kashmir.

⁶ In a later work, I intend to compare post-independence Muslim legislators with those elected before 1947 as well as with those who went to Pakistan.

⁷ The Times of India, Directory and Year Book including Who's Who (Volumes for 1947–62)Google Scholar; Sarkar, S. C., ed. Hindustan Yearbook, (Volumes for 1947–62)Google Scholar; Sarkar, P. C., ed. The New Yearbook; India at a Glance, 1954Google Scholar; Parliament of India Who's Who 1950, (Delhi: Manager of Government of India Publications, 1950)Google Scholar; Singh, Trilochan, ed. Indian Parliament 1952–1957Google Scholar, (New Delhi: Arunam & Sheel, n.d.); Parliament of India, Council of States, Who's Who, 1952, (New Delhi: Council of States Secretariat, 1953)Google Scholar; Parliament of India, House of the People, Who's Who, 1952, (Parliament Secretariat, 1952)Google Scholar; Chhabra, Hari Sharan, ed., Opposition in the Parliament, (Delhi: New Publishers, 1952)Google Scholar; Sud, S. P. Singh & Sud, Ajit Singh, Indian Elections and Legislators, (Ludhiana: All-India Publications, 1953)Google Scholar; Lok. Sabha Who's Who, Supplement, (New Delhi: Lok Sabha Secretariat, 1959)Google Scholar; Rajya Sabha, Who's Who, 1962, (Rajya Sabha Secretariat, 1962)Google Scholar; Parliament of India, Third Lok. Sabha, Who's Who, 1962, (Lok Sabha Secretariat, 1962)Google Scholar, Assam Legislative Assembly, Who's Who, 1956, (Shillong: Assembly Secretariat); Directory of the Bombay Legislature, 1946–47, (Bombay Legislature Congress Party); Taleyarkhan, Homi J. H., ed., Bombay Legislative Directory, 1953Google Scholar, (Bombay Legislative Congress Party); Bombay Legislative Congress Party Directory, 1958; Koya, N. A., ed., The Yearbook and Who's Who in Kerala, 1958; Who's Who in the Legislative Assembly, 1962Google Scholar, (Trivandrum: Director of Public Relations); Directory of the Madras Legislature, 1950, (Madras Legislature Congress Party); Madras Legislative Council, Who's Who, 1961; Madras Legislative Assembly, Third, Who's Who, 1962, (Legislative Assembly Department); Almanac for Mysore and Who's Who, 1958; Mysore, Legislative Assembly, Who's Who, 1959, (Bangalore: Director of Printing); Mysore, Legislative Assembly, Who's Who, (Bangalore, 1963)Google Scholar; Punjab, Vidhan Sabha, Who's Who, 1960; Uttar Pradesh, Legislative Assembly Who's Who, (UP Legislative Assembly Secretariat, Lucknow, 1959)Google Scholar; Uttar Pradesh, Legislative Council Who's Who, 1959, (UP Legislative Council Secretariat); Uttar Pradesh, Who's Who in the Legislative Council, 1961; West Bengal Legislative Assembly, Who's Who, 1957, (Calcutta: West Bengal Legislative Assembly Secretariat, 1957).Google Scholar

⁸ See Smith, Wilfred Cantwell, Islam in Modern History (New York: Mentor, 1959), p. 235Google Scholar; Sayeed, Khalid B., “The Jamaat-i-Islami Movement in Pakistan,” Pacific Affairs, XXX (03 1957), 59–68Google Scholar; Abbott, Freeland, “The Jamaat-i-Islami of Pakistan,” Middle East Journal, XI (Winter 1957), 39–51.Google Scholar

⁹ Thus 63 per cent of our sample are Congress adherents, whereas in fact 80–81 per cent of the MLA's and 78–90 per cent of the MP's elected in 1952 and 1957 fit into that category. However this apparent contradiction to my earlier statement about a Congress bias in the sample is resolved if we add the heavily Muslim League delegations in the 1946–52 legislatures, which would make the sample approximately correct.

¹⁰ Before independence there were reserved seats in legislatures and separate electorates for Muslims and other minorities in British India. Naturally the more communally extreme candidates of the Muslim League won most of them in the tense 1946 election. Gopal, Ram, p. 304.Google Scholar

¹¹ The Republican Party is the former Scheduled Castes Federation which made a bid for Muslim support in the 1962 election. Suri, Surinder, 1962 Elections, A Political Analysis (New Delhi: Sudha Publications, 1962), p. 152Google Scholar. I have taken a Muslim name as my criterion for selecting the legislators to be analyzed without regard to how “Muslim” in a religious sense they may be. This explains why Communists appear in the list even though this group has presumably disavowed the Islamic faith. I have chosen this procedure both because no alternative criterion seemed feasible and because even atheists of Muslim ancestry may share some of the attitudes and characteristics of the whole community.

¹² The only woman state cabinet member recently, Masuma Begum of Andhra Pradesh, was defeated in the 1962 election by Sultan Salahuddin Owaisi, son of the leader of the Majlis Ittihad-ul-Muslimin of Hyderabad and the only candidate of that party to win. This may be evidence of a persisting negative attitude of Muslims toward women in politics. See Wright, Theodore P. Jr., “The Revival of the Majlis Ittihad-ul-Muslimin of Hyderabad,” Muslim World, LIII (07, 1963) 234–243.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

¹³ Prior to the Constitution of 1950, there were some 13 women who held seats reserved for Muslims or by nomination and these were almost all Muslim League members. One of them, Begum Aizaz Rasul, was a member of the Muslim League until the 1951 election, when she joined Congress.

¹⁴ Weiner, , p. 280.Google Scholar

¹⁵ Hyderabad, the next largest city, provides several of our Muslim legislators because it is the capital of what was the premier Muslim princely state.

¹⁶ Gupta, Sisir K., “Moslems in Indian Politics, 1947–60,” India Quarterly, (Oct.–Dec. 1962), pp. 371–373.Google Scholar

¹⁷ I arrived at this figure by adding the Muslim totals for Travancore-Cochin and the Malabar section of Madras in the 1951 census, which overlooks other additions to Kerala in the north and a subtraction in the south. Republic of India Census Commission, Census of India 1951, Vol. III, Part IIB, Tables, p. 145Google Scholar and Vol. XIII, Part II, Tables.

¹⁸ See Bhagat, K. P., The Kerala Mid Term Election of 1960 (Bombay: Popular Book Depot, 1962)Google Scholar. Meynaud, , p. 519Google Scholar, observes that “the stability of a party always means that the average age of its parliamentary representatives will show a gradual rise.”

¹⁹ Gopal, Ram, p. 101.Google Scholar

²⁰ Hollister, John N., The Shia of India (London: Luzac, 1953), p. 187Google Scholar; Massignon, Louis, ed., Annuaire du Monde Musulman 1954 (Paris, 1955), p. 137Google Scholar; Smith, Wilfred Cantwell, Modern Islam in India, a Social Analysis (London: Victor Gollancz Ltd, 1946), pp. 228–229Google Scholar; Regarding Muslim castes see Ansari, Ghouse, “Muslim Caste in Uttar Pradesh,” The Eastern Anthropologist, XIII (Dec. 1959–Feb. 1960), 1–83Google Scholar, which was brought to my attention by J. Adrian Straley, a student at the University of Chicago.

²¹ Qureshi, Ishtiaq Hussain, The Muslim Community of the Indo-Pakistan Subcontinent (610–1947) (The Hague: Mouton, 1962), p. 222.Google Scholar

²² Morris-Jones, , p. 116.Google Scholar

²³ Morris-Jones, , p. 128.Google Scholar

²⁴ Morris-Jones found that about 4 per cent of the legislators had a religious education, compared to our 16 per cent.

²⁵ Of course, Gandhi and Jinnah were also educated in Britain.

²⁶ See Malik, Hafeez, “Abu'l Kalam Azad's Theory of Nationalism,” The Muslim World, LIII (Jan. 1963). 33–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

²⁷ Binder, Leonard, Religion and Politics in Pakistan (Los Angeles: University of California Press, 1961), pp. 7, 21, 28, 35, 50, 56Google Scholar; also Sayeed, Khalid Bin, Pakistan, the Formative Phase, (Karachi: Pakistan Publishing House, 1960), pp. 36, 52, 86Google Scholar; Faruqi, Ziya-ul-Hasan, The Deoband School and the Demand for Pakistan (Bombay: Asia Publishing House, 1963).Google Scholar

²⁸ The long-run disadvantages of Congress depending on the traditionalist ulema for leadership of the Muslim minority arc implicit in Smith's, Donald E.India As A Secular State, (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1963), p. 40CrossRefGoogle Scholar, in which he rates Islam lowest of the major Asian religions in compatibility with the secular state.

²⁹ Binder, , p. 39.Google Scholar

³⁰ Gopal, Ram, p. 34.Google Scholar

³¹ Sayeed, Bin, Pakistan, p. 93.Google Scholar

³² Link, Indian Newsmagazine, IV (Oct. 8, 1961), 6Google Scholar; also the New York Times, Oct. 4, 1961, p. 3.Google Scholar

³³ Shils, Edward, “The Intellectuals in the Political Development of the New States,” World Politics, XII (04 1960), 335.Google Scholar

³⁴ Shils, Edward, “Intellectuals, Public Opinion, and Economic Development,” World Politics, X (Jan. 1958). 248.Google Scholar

³⁵ Harrison, Selig S., India the Most Dangerous Decades (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1960), p. 80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

³⁶ Eg., Syed AH Zaheer, Indian Ambassador to Iran 1947–51, to Iraq 1949–51; Dr. Syed Mahmud, Ambassador to Iran, 1953, to Saudi Arabia 1954; Dr. A. A. A. Fyzee, Ambassador to Egypt 1949–51. Maulvi Samiuddin Ansari records that he visited the Arab countries in 1950 to “propagate the Congress gospel and wash away the blots of the communal riots.”

³⁷ Fuchs, Lawrence H., “Minority Groups and Foreign Policy” Political Science Quarterly, LXXIV (06, 1959), 161–175.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

³⁸ Weiner, , p. 284Google Scholar, and Morris-Jones, , p. 120Google Scholar, who uses the Bombay Legislative Assembly; Meynaud, , p. 521Google Scholar, warns of die pitfalls in uncritical acceptance of a legislator's own description of his “occupation” which is frequendy only the picture of the activities he would like to put before the public; it may in fact be his original profession, long unpracticed, or a secondary but politically respectable occupation rather than his main source of income.

³⁹ Lubell, Samuel, The Future of American Politics (New York: Harper, 1952), p. 76.Google Scholar

⁴⁰ Ram Gopal, Chap. XI; Nehru, Jawaharlal, The Discovery of India (London: Meridian Books, 1946), pp. 344–357.Google Scholar

⁴¹ The biography of Abdus Sattar, ex-Labor Minister (Congress) in West Bengal, states: “Undivided Bengal was one of those provinces where Muslims were in a majority. Generally they sided with the Muslim League. Only brave, heroic and courageous souls had the guts to join the Indian National Congress. Mr. Abdus Sattar was one of those few zealous nationalist Muslims who sided with the Congress in the teeth of the bitterest opposition from their community.”

⁴² Three, Shaikh Abdullah and Mirza Mohammed Afzal Beg of Kashmir and a Communist, have been under “preventive detention” by the Indian Government at various times since independence. See also next footnote.

⁴³ One of the latter, V. P. Cherukoya Thangal, boldly admits that he was arrested under the Preventive Detention Act at the time of the “police action” against Hyderabad in 1948.

⁴⁴ For an admirably clear statement of the meaning of secularism in India, see Donald E. Smith, op. cit.

⁴⁵ Link, Indian Newsmagazine, 1961Google Scholar, passim; Indian Affairs Record VII (Dec. 1961), 248.Google Scholar

⁴⁶ Evidence that Muslims did seize this opportunity to demonstrate their loyalty can be found in Siraat, the Fortnightly of the Indian Minorities, (New Delhi) IV (12 1, 1962), 5.Google Scholar

⁴⁷ Lipset, Seymour, Political Man, the Social Bases of Politics (Garden City: Doubleday & Co., 1959), pp. 86–88.Google Scholar

⁴⁸ Binder's category of “fundamentalists” is probably not represented in our sample.

⁴⁹ Weiner, , p. 279.Google Scholar

⁵⁰ A similar account is given by Gupta, , op. cit., p. 371Google Scholar, about Sir Mohammed Saadulla of Assam.

⁵¹ The Muslim legislators show considerably higher percentages of previous legislative experience than Morris-Jones, found, p. 117Google Scholar, for the entire Provisional Parliament, Lok Sabha, Rajya Sabha, and Bombay Legislative Assembly, but this is no doubt simply a reflection of our use of a selection including the better known and therefore more experienced Muslims. The only category in which fewer Muslims had previous experience is MP's who had been in the Provisional Parliament. Probably this is a result of the introduction of joint electorates in 1951 to replace the old communal electorates by which members of the Provisional Parliament had been elected since 1946.

⁵² Meynaud, , p. 518Google Scholar, says “Social science has … revealed … that the average parliamentary assembly is not socially representative of the community by which it is elected, since voters show a tendency to prefer candidates of higher level than themselves.”