2025/05/16 by P.G. Murphy · 1 voice
Social Sciences · Arts and Humanities · #Caribbean history, culture, and politics #Travel Writing and Literature #Caribbean and African Literature and Culture
paper · doi:10.1080/03086534.2025.2503949
During the 1880s, authorities were adamant about extinguishing the Canboulay and Hosay processions in Trinidad’s major towns. Indian indentured immigrants, during Hosay, paraded through San Fernando in honour of the Muslim martyrs Hassan and Husayn. While marching, revellers held aloft representations of religious tombs as they moved from the countryside to the city. Similarly, Canboulay displayed a marked black presence as revellers reenacted cane burnings reminiscent of enslavement. While marching through Port of Spain, Canboulay processionists carried torches as they engaged in brawls, be it among themselves or with the police. Regarding Hosay, in 1884 the British established a containment policy to keep processionists from entering San Fernando. This was possible since most Indians were rooted in the countryside and, in the cities, lacked widespread support from media outlets or the upper-classes. Canboulay’s revellers, however, inhabited Port of Spain, and to segregate processionists was not an option – hence the prohibition, in 1880, of torch-bearing. Holding the processional form in common, the populational distribution of working-class groups was a foundational element in helping to determine imperial policy concerning both festivities. The outcomes were bloody riots which, in their aftermath, saw the continuation of Carnival without Canboulay in the cities and the perpetuation of Hosay solely in the countryside in what amounted to a tacit, albeit violent, negotiation between the island’s relevant societal forces.