Thug: The True Story Of India's Murderous Cult

by Mike Dash

  Insects Newcombe, op. cit. pp. 100, 103.

  Thermantidotes Vernede, op. cit. p. 74.

  Nursingpore RV Russell, Central Provinces District Gazetteers: Narshingpur District pp. 2–5, 27, 30, 70–83, 223–4; Crispin Bates, ‘Class and economic change in central India: the Narmada Valley, 1820–1930’, in CJ Dewey (ed.), Arrested Development in India: The Historical Perspective pp. 241–2.

  ‘disastrous failure’ Russell, op. cit. p. 28.

  ‘by far the most laborious …’ George Bruce, The Stranglers p. 36.

  Thugs arrested in the Nerbudda valley These were the members of the Lucknadown gang, responsible for the death of Bunda Ali, and betrayed by a particularly unpleasant informant by the name of Motee. It is a complicated story, too convoluted to unravel here, and although a prompt trial of the Lucknadown gang in 1823–4 might conceivably have led the British authorities to take earlier action against the gangs, in the end the arrests led nowhere. Molony died before the case could be brought before the courts, his successor lasted no more than a few months, and in the general confusion the Lucknadown Thugs were forgotten until 1830–31. ‘Disposal of several ring leaders of Thug gangs in Bundelcund’, BC F/4/984 (27697) fos. 2–3; Consultation No. 27 of 25 July 1831, BPC P/126/26; ‘Evidence of Motee’, BC F/4/1309 (52131) fos. 296–300; Ravenshaw and Marjoribanks (Directors of the East India Company) to Bentinck (Governor General), 28 Nov. 1832, BC F/4/1483 (55514) fos. 19–26.

  Thugs in Nursingpore Sleeman, Ramaseeana I, 32–3.

  9 ‘A Very Good Remuneration for Murdering a Man’

  Killing of stone-cutters at Baroda ‘Deposition of Amanoolah Phansygur’, n.d. [1829] and ‘Deposition of Kaimraj Phansygur’, n.d. [1829], Sel.Rec. 15–27.

  Thugs’ spend on weddings Sleeman, Ramaseeana, I, 173–4.

  Baroda gang’s loot ‘Deposition of Amanoolah Phansygur’, n.d. [1829], Sel.Rec. 15–26.

  … a Thug who carefully listed … ‘Deposition of Sheikh Dawood Newly’, 24 Nov. 1834, T&D D2 No. 1, NAI.

  Thug expenses ‘Examination of Thug approver Rama Jemadar No. 1’, 1832, Sel.Rec. 136. ‘In general,’ Rama concluded, ‘with regard to booty acquired by myself and others, we used on our return from any excursion to dispose of it to bunnyahs or to give it to them in liquidation of debts.’ Ibid. p. 137. From this it would appear that some Thug expeditions actually ran at a loss. It was, in any case, relatively rare for the members of the gangs to put much money aside. ‘Their life,’ considered FC Smith, ‘is a life of pleasure; but their prosperity is evanescent. They are in a great degree during their expeditions free from the trammels of caste, and live on the fat of the land; but their wealth seldom remains with them long, being either, consumed on the spot, or expended in bribing the Jumeendars, under whose protection they reside or the authorities who connive at their atrocities or in purchasing their relief from bondage.’ FC Smith, ‘Report on the Sessions of 1831–32’, 20 June 1832, Sel.Rec. p. 120. ‘Thugs,’ added Sleeman, ‘were known to spend what they got freely, and never to have money by them.’ Rambles and Recollections I, 108.

  Loitering at customs posts See Reynolds, ‘Notes on the T’hags’ p. 207.

  Those with no money would sometimes be spared Cf. Ramaseeana I, 233.

  Mutilation of corpses Edward Thornton, Illustrations of the History and Practices of the Thugs p. 10.

  ‘trifling’ and ‘paltry’ ‘Examination of Thug approver Mana No. 4’, 1832, Sel.Rec. 153; Thornton, op. cit. p. 218.

  … eight annas … ‘two pice’ Deposition of Shumsheera before the Zillah court at Benares, June–July 1833, cited by Thornton, op. cit. p. 125. ‘The chance is that every man has a rupee or two about him in money or cloths,’ the magistrate of Chittoor, William Wright, had noted in 1812, ‘and with them the most trifling sum is a sufficient inducement to commit murder.’ Wright to Secretary of Government, 1 July 1812, Ramaseeana II, 308–9. In 1810, Thomas Perry had interrogated a Thug named Shuhadul, who confessed to murdering one man for a share amounting to only 12 annas. This, he added, was an unusually low amount – but certainly not hugely so:

  Q Did you ever receive less than 12 annas for a murder?

  A Never. I have generally received 4 or 8 annas more.

  [in other words, a share of Rs.1 to Rs.1–4–0]. ‘Translation of the examination of Shuhadul taken before the acting magistrate on the 16th of May 1810’, Perry papers, Add.Mss. 5375 fos. 138–42, CUL. A quarter of a century later, the approvers Aliyer and Dhoosoo, two of Paton’s informants, were questioned along the same lines:

  Q If a gang of four Thugs met a traveller at a convenient place, but knew that he had only one roopee on him, would they strangle him for that roopee?

  A We never would murder for a roopee.

  A If we expected eight annas each, we would murder him.

  … the enormous sum of 200,000 rupees … Sleeman, Ramaseeana I, 189.

  Jhora Naek Ibid. I, 99. The servant’s name is sometimes given as Koduk Bunwaree; see James Sleeman, Thug p. 35.

  Rae Singh’s deceit Ramaseeana I, 224–6.

  … one other group of Thugs … This incident occurred in the Deccan in 1816. John Malcolm, A Memoir of Central India II, 189.

  Sixty Soul Affair Sleeman, Ramaseeana I, 164–5, James Sleeman, Thug pp. 83–5.

  Murder of Forty The actual number of victims was 39, as a little girl was preserved and married to a nephew of the jemadar of Thugs. Her story was particularly wrenching, and may stand for those of all the children spared and brought up by the stranglers. The child’s known relatives were all killed in the affair, and it was not until 1834 that Sleeman’s men traced her, now a woman in her late 20s, still living among the Thugs. ‘My mother and father resided in some town in the Deccan,’ she deposed. ‘Their names I do not recollect as I was only three or four years of age when my uncle and mother took me with them on a journey towards the Ganges. On the road, my mother and uncle were killed, by Thugs, with many other travellers. Kasal Singh Putuck Jemadar preserved my life and took me with him to Pahlun in Gwalior, where he brought me up; and when I became of age he married me to his son, Hunce Rao, who is now dead. As long as he lived, I lived with him; but he has been dead several years, and I have since lived with his mother, and earned my subsistence by my labour. Your sepahees found me out, and have brought me into Saugor. I had two sons by Hunce Rao; the first died when 15 months old; the other is eight or nine years of age and … is in Khyrawa in Jhansee with his grandmother. I was the only member of the party saved. There is now no Thug left in the family of Hunce Rao who can provide for me. If you will maintain me, I shall be glad to remain here; but I have never heard whether my parents had any surviving relations or not.’ Cited by Thornton, op. cit. pp. 178–84.

  Economic depression DEU Baker, Colonialism in an Indian Hinterland pp. 51, 55.

  History of the Indian opium trade Janin, The India–China Opium Trade in the Nineteenth Century pp. 5–41; Farooqui, Smuggling as Subversion pp. 3–24, 60–3.

  Opium-eating Thomas de Quincey (1785–1859), an essayist and a friend of Coleridge, became addicted to opium at Oxford University. His Confessions of an English Opium-Eater first appeared in 1821 and was a considerable success.

  Malwa opium Farooqui, op. cit. pp. 41, 95, 115–20, 142–8, 153. Malwa opium was considered superior to the Bengali product, as it yielded smokers at least eight per cent more extract from balls of identical weight. Ibid. p. 72.

  Thugs steal opium ‘Deposition of Kaimraj Phansygur …’, 1829, Sel.Rec. p. 23.

  Indian banking LC Jain, Indigenous Banking in India pp. 5–45; NK Sinha, The Economic History of Bengal, I, 74–6, 80, 86. The quotations from Tavenier are cited by Jain, op. cit. pp. 11–14.

  ‘this bank …’ Anna Leonowens, Life and Travel in India pp. 225–6.

  … invariably family concerns … Karen Leonard, ‘Banking firms in nineteenth-century Hyderabad politics’, Modern Asian Studies 15 (1981) pp. 180–1.

  Hoondees Leonowens, op. cit. p. 226.


  Thugs burn hoondees Cf. deposition of Amannoolah Phansygur, 1829, Sel.Rec. p. 17; Thornton, op. cit. p. 343.

  Cash transfers and the opium trade FC Smith, ‘Report on the sessions of 1831–32’, 20 June 1832, Sel.Rec. 104–26, para 9; Farooqui, op. cit. p. 41; WH Carey, The Good Old Days of John Company, II, 249. There does not seem to be any evidence to support recent contentions that the anti-Thug campaign was actually motivated by the Company’s desire to protect its lucrative opium trade; indeed, in so far as the Thugs’ main victims were bankers and dealers operating in defiance of British attempts to impose a monopoly on the drug, it could be argued that the gangs’ activities actually benefited the Bombay Presidency.

  Increasing quantities Sleeman also notes the bankers’ habit of sending ‘remittances in precious metals and jewels’ all over India ‘whenever the exchange rate makes it in the smallest degree profitable’. Ramaseeana I, iv.

  Favourable exchange rates Iftikhar Ahmad, Thugs, Dacoits and the Modern World-System in Nineteenth-Century India p. 96.

  Dependability of treasure-bearers Sleeman, Ramaseeana I, 5.

  ‘nothing but naked bodies …’ Sleeman, Rambles & Recollections I, 98.

  Jhansee Ghat ‘18th, Jhansi Ghat case’, BC F/4/1405 (55519); ‘21st, or Basaini Case’, BC F/4/1406 (55520); Ramaseeana II, 138.

  … a group of Deccan Thugs … This crime was committed by the notorious Arcottee Thugs, and is set out by Sleeman in Depredations pp. xi, xii.

  The case of the filthy fakir Ibid. pp. 23–4.

  Gomashtas are ‘invested …’ Cited in Jain, op. cit. p. 36.

  10 The Devil’s Banker

  Tapti river affair Statements of Dhunraj Seth, n.d.? 1831, cited by Thornton, Illustrations of the History and Practices of the Thugs pp. 134, 135–6; ‘5th or Chaupura affair’, BC F/4/1685 (67999), with a summary on fos. 94–5; for Budloo Jemadar, see BC F/4/1404 (55516) fo. 71. A second treasure party fell foul of the Thugs in the same year, this time in the Deccan, where 20,000 rupees’ worth of cash and gold was seized by a gang of 30 Thugs, hand-picked from among the most practised killers of several different gangs, who had pursued their quarry across 36 miles of country. ‘Deposition of Amanoolah Phansygur …’ n.d. [1829], Sel.Rec. 18–19.

  Malagow affair The treasure in this case consisted of ‘13 seers of gold, with several golden necklaces, 900 golden coins, 17 gold mohurs and several bars of gold’. The cotton-cleaners had a further three rupees, and the messenger a pair of silver armlets valued at 14 rupees. Feringeea’s depositions, which include these details, can be found in BC F/4/1403 (55515) fos. 169–71 and BC F/4/1404 (55516) fos. 63–4. These two files give the same case different names – it is variously referred to as the ‘6th Dhulia Malagow’ case and the ‘7th, Dhoree Cote’ affair, but although the witnesses tell the story from different perspectives, and the total of loot taken varies by Rs.10,000, it is clear from the similarities in their evidence – notably the detail that two cotton-cleaners and a dawk carrier were among the victims – that the affairs are identical. The difference in the quantity of loot mentioned can also be accounted for; one party counted the Rs.10,000 of jewels found on the bearers, the other only the gold. Yet another account of what must be the same affair, told from a third perspective, can be found in Wellesley to Swinton, 8 Sept. 1830, Sel.Rec. 5–7 and statements by Dhunraj Seth, n.d.? 1831, cited by Thornton, op. cit. pp. 134, 135–6. See also Thornton, op. cit. pp. 149–53; Ramaseeana I, 192–4; ‘Trial No. 14 of 1832: Dhulia Malagow case’, BC F/4/1490 (58672) fos. 436–538 contains the evidence in two subsidiary trials of men rounded up after the first cases had been concluded. For the correct date of this affair – January 1828 – see Smith to Macnaghten, 4 Sept. 1833, BC F/4/1490 (58672) fos. 433–6. For the arrest of seven of the murderers, see ‘Proceedings of Mr Fraser, Acting Agent in the Saugor and Nurbudda Territories’, 4 Nov. 1829, in Sleeman correspondence, SB.

  Description of Nasik and Candeish Anon., Gazetteer of the Bombay Presidency XII, 1–5, 207, 310–14; XVI, 345–6, 349.

  Burwaha Ghat affair ‘8th Barwaha Gat Case’, BC F/4/1404 (55516); ‘Trial No. 9 of 1832,’ BC F/4/1490 (58671) fos. 405ff; Thornton, op. cit. pp. 127–48; Ramaseeana II, 54–69.

  … more like a highway robbery … See also Sleeman’s comments on the Sujaina affair of 1814 in Rambles and Recollections I, 96–7.

  ‘khomusna’ See Sleeman’s Thug vocabulary in Ramaseeana I, 67–140.

  ‘by regular stages’ Deposition of Moklal, n.d., cited by Thornton, op. cit. p. 145.

  The Indian police system Radhika Singha, A Despotism of Law pp. 1–25; N Majumdar, Justice and Police in Bengal, 1765–1793 pp. 306–13; BB Misra, The Central Administration of the East India Company, 1773–1834 pp. 300–308, 332; Chakrabarti, Authority and Violence pp. 1–6. The Empire’s Muslims were governed by Islamic law, its Hindus by their own code when it came to civil matters and – after the arrival of the Company in Bengal – by their conquerors’ law only in criminal cases.

  Thanahs The number of thanahs in a district varied widely over time. Misra, op. cit. p. 303, estimated that in the Mughal period most controlled parcels of land perhaps 4 to 10 square miles in extent – equivalent in size to an English parish. But Chakrabarti, op. cit. p. 33, shows that in two Bengal districts, in 1824, there were a mere 31 thanahs scattered among 9,500 villages controlling a total population of more than 3.2 million people – an average of one thanah to more than 300 villages.

  Village watchmen Misra, op. cit. p. 304. A second class of village policeman also existed in some communities. These men, who were known as pashans, divided their time between collecting taxes and guarding the local fields.

  Zamindars’ breaches of the law Cf. Chattopadhyay, Crime and Control pp. 104–8.

  The darogah and the Company’s new system of justice Ibid. pp. xiii–xiv, 37, 52–3, 67–8, 78, 87, 89–90, 125, 128–9, 141, 165, 175; Chakrabarti, op. cit. pp. 7, 24–33, 35–46, 59, 61–2, 67, 71, 76, 79, 87–8; Misra, op. cit. pp. 332, 344–50; Basudev Chatterji, ‘The darogah and the countryside: the imposition of police control in Bengal and its impact (1793–1837)’, IESHR 18/1 (1981) pp. 19–42.

  Darogah’s low pay A further disincentive was the requirement that new darogahs post a security of 1,000 rupees as a guarantee of good behaviour – a sum that was forfeit in the event of dismissal. Chattopadhyay, op. cit. p. 190.

  Darogahs’ income, nominal and actual Ibid. pp. 165–6.

  Can have no local knowledge G Thompson report, October 1806, BCJC 9 Oct. 1806; cited by Chatterji, op. cit. p. 36.

  Abuses of this sort … Plainly, in these circumstances, the worst catastrophe that could befall any darogah was to police a district where there was little in the way of crime or violence. See Chatterji, op. cit. pp. 26, 33.

  Would go to almost any lengths Few robberies ever reached the ears of the local magistrate, Bengal’s Superintendent of Police conceded in 1814, because it was ‘infinitely preferable to abide by the first loss than to be subjected to the inconvenience and expense attending to a prosecution’. Chatterji, op. cit. p. 35. ‘The police invariably settled things with the highest bidder and remained loyal to the richest,’ notes Chakrabarti, op. cit. p. 71.

  Villagers conceal bodies Chakrabarti, op. cit. pp. 83, 175.

  ‘The police is as dangerous …’ Kedarnath Datta in Sachitra Gulzarnagar (1833), cited by Chattopadhyay, op. cit. p. 163.

  Few cases heard Anon., Gazetteer of the Bombay Presidency XII pp. 310–12; Singha, op. cit. pp. 173–4, 207.

  Dhunraj Seth’s bank FC Smith (Agent for Saugor & Nerbudda), ‘Report on the sessions of 1831–32’, 20 June 1832, Sel.Rec. 104–26, paras 25–29; Statements of Dhunraj Seth, n.d.? 1831, cited by Thornton, op. cit. pp. 134, 135–6.

  Sindhia’s treasury Farooqui, Smuggling as Subversion p. 41.

  ‘Some of the bodies …’ Thornton, op. cit. p. 151.

  Deposition of Oda Patel Sleeman, Ramaseeana II, 71.

  Cubits An ancient measurem
ent, normally said to be based on the length of a man’s forearm, but varying, in practice, between 18 and 22 inches.

  Recovery of the bodies at Burwaha Ghat Deposition of Narooha Kumusdar, 5 Nov. 1831, cited by Thornton, op. cit. pp. 127–9.

  Beharee Lal’s involvement with the Thugs This is a rather condensed account of an incident that, in reality, involved a great deal of to-ing and fro-ing between Beharee Lal, Sleeman in Jubbulpore, the Company’s Resident at Indore and Agent in Bundelcund, and Holkar. The full story can be found in Sleeman to Fraser (Acting Agent, Bundulcund) 7 Jan. 1830, BC F/4/1251 (50480/2) fo. 597; Sleeman to Smith, 5 Apr. 1830, ibid. fo. 601; deposition of Sleeman’s spy, n.d., ibid. fo. 603; Cartwright (Acting Resident, Indore) to Smith, 29 Apr. 1830, ibid. fos. 605–7, who expresses doubts concerning the seth’s culpability; and a statement received from the authorities at Indore, n.d., ibid. fos. 607–11; Sleeman to Smith, 13 May 1830, ibid. fos. 422–43. It is not certain whether this Beharee Lal was the same man as the ‘rich banker’ of that name living in Lucknow in 1819 whose home was attacked by two dacoit gangs, 200 strong, which relieved the seth of treasure valued at 8,000 rupees. See James Hutton, A Popular Account of the Thugs and Dacoits pp. 108–9.

  … 60 per cent … FC Smith, ‘Report on the Sessions of 1831–32’, para 27, 20 June 1832, Sel.Rec. 111.

  Beharee Lal’s Thug tribunal Ibid. See also Smith to Macnaghten, 29 May 1832, ibid. p. 82 for the Agent’s views on the unreliability of Indian courts.

  ‘King of Thugs’ This was the description applied to Beharee by FC Smith in a letter to EC Revenshaw, Officiating Resident at Hyderabad, 4 Oct. 1830, Appa Sahib & Thuggee papers, SB.

  ‘He got a good deal …’ Testimony of Moklal, Ramaseeana I, 190–1. ‘He moves about in state,’ Sleeman charged, ‘with a few of the Leaders, and whenever one of his numerous Gang is arrested he contrives to get him released under the pretence that he was employed by him to search for his property, and wherever anyone refuses to share with him his plunder, he manages to get some native chief or public functionary to arrest him.’ Sleeman to Smith, 13 May 1830, BC F/4/1251(50480/2) fo.435.