Community directories are important archives. They record the demographic history of a people at a particular time and place, their areas of residence, the evolving means of communications (telegram, telexes, fax machines, landlines, emails, mobiles, etc). For an aging, shrinking community like the Parsis, these listings are of paramount importance. The census bureau and other government bodies do not always disclose vital population details. For example, the census bureau has not made public the 2011 figures for the Parsi population of Bombay. The statistics for 2001 showed 46,557. Our guess is the Bombay figure today, 19 years later, must be between 35,000 and 37,000. But there is no way of scientifically establishing this assumption.
Since the last four years (2016 onwards) the birth figures for Parsis in Bombay have not been disclosed by the Bombay Municipal Corporation. The figures are sent to and stored in the Central Government Civil Registration System in Delhi and follow-ups by the Bombay Parsi Punchayet (BPP) and even the National Commission for Minorities have drawn a blank. How are local bodies to plan when they do not even have the required, crucial, basic data? Granted that emotions rather than ground realities dictate much of Bombay Parsi policies, still statistics do serve an essential purpose.
Hence the publication of the 192-page Directory of the Zoroastrian residents of Surat, 2019 by the Zoroastrian Women’s Assembly of Surat (ZWAS) this August New Year’s eve (see "Surat population down five percent," page 28) is a welcome addition to the directories published on and off by various anjumans and associations both in India and abroad. This January, the WZO (World Zoroastrian Organisation) Trust Funds published an equally impressive 204-page Directory of Parsi Zoroastrian Residents of Navsari, 2019 (see "Navsari’s numbers," Events and Personalities, Parsiana, March 21, 2019).
The Surat demographic data collected up to July 2019 present a distressing picture, one common to the Parsis almost globally: a declining and aging community. Since publication of their last directory in 2014, the south Gujarat city has witnessed a five percent decrease in the Parsi population, from 3,696 five years ago to 3,510 this year. The number of those over 60 has increased from 27% to 31%. The Navsari statistics also paint a grim picture though the influx of Parsis from the surrounding villages mitigated the decline.
Aside from data about population and age, a list of Surat blood donors is mentioned, of which the O+ type are the highest, 35% of a total of 1,017. The next largest group is B+, 28%. For Navsari the listings show the O+ number as 374 out of 1,065 or 35% while for A+ the figure is 238 (22%). The Navsari Parsi population is listed as 2,136.
One can imagine the painstaking and time-consuming efforts involved in compiling such directories. Data has to be collected, compiled, figures checked and rechecked, tedious proof reading of names, addresses and phone numbers, listings, contacting advertisers (the Surat Directory has around 45 pages of advertisements) and so on. A list of 48 Parsi-run businesses with contact details are also provided.
In 2014-15, the Nagpur Parsi Gymkhana (NPG) also brought out a similar, 244-page directory of its residents. "It is useful," notes former NPG president Shiraz Gimi, "it gives information about the family, age, birth dates, addresses, blood groups, etc." Calcutta published a directory in 2014 and a new one is reportedly in the making.
The Federation of Zoroastrian Associations of North America (FEZANA) followed up on their printed 370-page, 1998, Zarathushtis in North America: Directory and Yellow Pages with an online version, which sadly was discontinued. "We abandoned the project sometime in 2013. The directory became too cumbersome to keep up-to-date," wrote FEZANA vice president Arzan Wadia in an email dated October 10, 2019 in response to Parsiana’s queries. Since the US census does not include the religion of the people surveyed, the directories provided a fairly authentic approximation of the North American population. Some names are bound to be missed and some may not want to be listed. A combination of online and printed versions would be advantageous. Wadia also spoke of privacy concerns. Perhaps smaller directories published by local Zoroastrian associations would be easier to manage.
Yazdi Tantra’s online The Parsi Directory is also a useful tool for analysis; but of the 83,166 listings, many may be duplications or may have expired.
The 172-page Zoroastrians of Pakistan a&t Directory published in 2015 by the Karachi Zarthosti Banu Mandal (KZBM) reflected an even grimmer reality, a 23% drop in population for the Parsis in that country in six years! Aside from utilizing mailing lists to garner information, over 20 individuals went from "home to home," noted KZBM president Toxy Cowasjee. Since censuses are rare and sporadic in Pakistan due to the political turmoil in that Islamic state, the directory of Pakistan Parsis, the eighth one, is invaluable.
In the UK, the Zoroastrian Trust Funds of Europe brought out a 108-page Directory of Zoroastrians of UK and Europe in 2011. Hong Kong and Singapore also publish directories.
Many of these directories have been published by trusts independent or aligned with the local anjuman/punchayet. In the case of Pakistan and Surat the initiative was undertaken by women’s groups; in Nagpur, the Gymkhana trust and in Navsari, the WZO Trust did the needful.
Bombay, which has never published a directory of residents, has a plethora of voluntary organizations and trusts. They, rather than the BPP, could undertake the project. The BPP trustees and staff as it is are pressured with other matters including a cash flow crunch.
Perhaps the newly formed consultative committee can assist the BPP by liaising with other trusts/groups that might compile and finance a Bombay directory. If the BPP is directly involved, most nongovernmental organizations (NGO), advertisers and donors will shy away. Some BPP trustee or the other will question why a directory is required, who will be included and why (Nagpur had a separate listing for the interfaith married women). If some independent organization is preparing the directory, they can decide the nitty-gritty and methodology to be followed; the BPP trustees can then share the credit and shift the blame, if any, elsewhere.
In Bombay, the 216-page Muncherji Joshi Colony Directory was last published by the Dadar based Muncherji Edulji Joshi Memorial Trust in 2014. The Godrej Baug Residents Welfare Association is in the process of updating its directory published in 2011-12. If other baugs would undertake to complete directories of their residents, then almost half the Bombay Parsi population would be covered. That would only leave those residing elsewhere.
The directory project should be time-bound as demographic data, especially in a fast shrinking community, alters rapidly. The number of Parsis residing in trust buildings, private residences, their location, the average number of people in a family would all help rationalize how assistance by various NGOs is to be directed. A proviso could be added that the information compiled may not be used for any legal proceedings.
Directories are daunting projects, but if an organization sets its mind on the project and makes it a priority, the returns would be substantial.