The History of Curry — The Food an Empire Made Up

There are over 1000 different dishes across India that involve spices cooked in some kind of sauce or gravy. They have different names, different ingredients, different techniques passed down through families and regions for generations. A fish curry from Kerala tastes nothing like a lamb dish from Rajasthan, which tastes nothing like a chickpea preparation from Punjab. Ask someone in Chennai what they are eating for dinner and they will tell you the name of the dish. But ask someone in London, someone in Tokyo, someone in Sydney and the answer is almost always the same word. Curry. One word for a thousand things. And that word did not come from the people who created those thousand things. It came from the people who colonized them. This is the story of how an empire invented a food, and how the rest of the world believed them. To understand where this story really begins, you have to go back a lot further than the British Empire, about 4,500 years further. Archaeologists working at Mohenjo-Daro, one of the largest cities of the ancient Indus Valley civilization in what is now Pakistan, found grinding stones and mortar and pestle sets alongside traces of cumin, mustard seed and fennel. These were not decorative objects sitting on a shelf. They showed signs of heavy use. People on the Indian subcontinent were grinding and combining spices into their cooking before the Egyptian pyramids were built, before the first stones of Stonehenge were laid. This was not some primitive practice happening in a backwater. The Indus Valley civilization supported cities of 40,000 people with planned street grids, indoor plumbing and public baths that would make some modern cities jealous. These were sophisticated societies, and their food reflected that sophistication. Over the next several thousand years, that spice knowledge deepened and branched into something extraordinary. Trade routes carried cardamom and black pepper across the subcontinent and beyond, connecting India to Persia, to the Roman Empire, to ancient China, to the spice markets of Southeast Asia. Indian pepper was so valuable to Roman traders that they called it black gold, and they spent fortunes importing it across the Indian Ocean. This was not some culinary sideshow. The spice trade was one of the economic engines of the ancient world, and India sat at the center of it. By the time the first European ships reached Indian shores, the subcontinent had developed one of the most complex and regionally diverse food cultures anywhere on the planet. The sheer scale of that diversity is hard to overstate. A coastal Keralan kitchen built its flavors around coconut, curry leaves and black pepper. A Rajasthani cook working in the desert used yogurt, dried berries and chilies because fresh vegetables were scarce. A Bengali household might center an entire meal around mustard oil and the sharp bitterness of nigella seeds. These were not minor variations on a theme. These were fundamentally different culinary traditions, shaped by geography, climate, religion and centuries of local innovation. In the South, cooks in Tamil-speaking regions prepared dishes using a technique they called kari, a word that meant sauce or gravy made with spices. That word is where all of this starts. Not because it describes every Indian dish, because it absolutely does not, but because it was the word that outsiders grabbed onto and stretched until it covered everything. The Portuguese were the first Europeans to arrive in force. Vasco da Gama landed on India's western coast in 1498 and by 1510, the Portuguese had established their colony in Goa. They did not just pass through. They stayed for over 450 years, making Goa one of the longest-lasting European colonies in Asia. And they did not just trade with India. They changed the food. Portuguese sailors had a practical problem. Meat rotted on long ocean voyages. So they developed a preservation method. They soaked pork in a marinade of wine, vinegar and garlic, which kept it edible for weeks at sea. They called this preparation carne de vinha d'alhos, which translates roughly to meat in wine and garlic. When Goan cooks got their hands on this recipe, they did what great cooks always do. They took someone else's idea and made it better. They swapped the wine vinegar for locally produced palm vinegar. They added black pepper, cardamom, tamarind and cinnamon. And then they added the ingredient that would define the dish forever. Chili peppers. Here is the part that most people never learn. Chili peppers are not originally from India. They are not from anywhere in Asia. They are from the Americas. The Portuguese brought them to India sometime around 1528 as part of the same global trade network that was reshaping cuisines on every continent. So the Goan cooks folded these New World chilies into a Portuguese preservation recipe, layered on Indian spice knowledge. And the result was something entirely new. Over time, locals started calling it vinda alho, which eventually became vindaloo. A dish that most people today think of as purely Indian is actually a collision of three continents, European technique, American ingredients and Indian spice craft. And it would not exist without colonialism. But the Portuguese were just the opening act. The real transformation of Indian food started when the British showed up. Because the British did not just change individual dishes, they changed how the entire world talked about Indian food. The British East India Company began trading with India in the 1600s. By the 1700s, British officers and administrators were living across the subcontinent, running trading posts and collecting revenues. They ate the food. They loved the food. And they had absolutely no interest in learning the names of the individual dishes they were eating. British officers were served Rogan Josh one night, and Dhopiaza the next, and Korma the night after that. Each dish with its own name, its own history, its own regional identity. But as historian Lizzie Collingham put it, the British lumped all these together under the heading of curry. They took the Tamil word Kari, already a simplification in itself, and made it even simpler. Every spiced dish became curry. Every sauce was curry. The entire culinary output of a civilization spanning thousands of miles and thousands of years got reduced to one word because that was easier for the British tongue and the British mind. The implications of that renaming are easy to miss if you are not paying attention. But they are enormous. Imagine someone visiting Italy, eating carbonara in Rome, and pesto in Genoa, and ragu in Bologna, and then going home and calling all three of them pasta sauce. That is essentially what the British did, except they did it to an entire subcontinent's worth of cooking. And they did not do it out of malice, necessarily. They did it out of laziness, out of the assumption that the distinctions did not matter, that what Indians cooked was all basically the same thing with different bits of meat thrown in. And then they did something even more audacious. They tried to recreate it back home. Officers returning to England from India were called Nabobs, a mangled version of the Indian word Nawab, meaning governor or viceroy. These Nabobs had developed a taste for the spiced food they ate overseas, and they wanted it in London drawing rooms. The problem was that recreating Indian food required skill, specific knowledge of individual spices and cooking techniques that most English kitchen staff simply did not have. A proper masala blend required toasting whole spices, grinding them fresh, combining them in exact proportions that varied from dish to dish. An English cook trained on boiled mutton and suet pudding was not equipped for that. So the British did what they always did with complicated foreign things. They simplified it into a product they could sell. In 1747, a woman named Hannah Glass published a cookbook called The Art of Cookery Made Plain and Easy. It was the first English cookbook to include a recipe for curry. Her version was a chicken dish cooked in a cream sauce with ginger, turmeric and pepper. It bore almost no resemblance to anything you would actually find in India. But it sold well, and it planted a seed in the British imagination that curry was something you could make at home if you had the right ingredients. Within a few decades, curry had become fashionable across London. By 1733, the Norris Street Coffee House in Haymarket was serving curry to its customers. By 1784, curry and rice had become featured items at restaurants around Piccadilly. Indian food, or rather the British idea of Indian food, was catching on with the upper classes. And in that same year, 1784, someone had an idea that would change the trajectory of this entire story. A business called Sawley's Perfumery Warehouse, located on Piccadilly, began selling the first commercially available curry powder in England. Think about that for a second. The first place you could buy curry powder was not a grocer or a spice merchant. It was a perfume shop. The advertisement promised the powder would help you make sumptuous sauces for East Indian dishes and also promoted good digestion, a vigorous mind and a strong libido. It was a spice blend sold with the pitch of a miracle tonic. But the real commercial juggernaut came from a company called Cross and Blackwell. The business started life as West & Wyatt back in 1706 and was eventually bought by two ambitious apprentices named Edmund Cross and Thomas Blackwell in 1830. They were aggressive businessmen who climbed the ladder fast, and they turned their company into one of the biggest food brands in England. They secured a royal warrant from Queen Victoria in 1837, the year she took the throne, and they mass-produced curry powder that spread across Europe and every corner of the British Empire. Between 1820 and 1840 alone, Britain's imports of turmeric, the primary ingredient in commercial curry powder, tripled. Here is the catch, and it is a big one. In India, spice blends are called masalas, and they are made fresh for each dish. Different dishes call for different combinations of spices, ground in different proportions, added at different stages of cooking. A garam masala from one household tastes different from the one next door. A cook in Hyderabad might toast cumin and coriander seeds before grinding them, while a cook in Lucknow might use them raw. Some masalas start in hot oil to release their fragrance. Others are stirred in dry at the very end. The point is not just flavour, it is craft. Each blend reflects a set of decisions made by a specific cook for a specific dish, informed by regional tradition and personal taste. Cross and Blackwell's curry powder erased all of that. It was a single yellow dust that tasted the same no matter what you put it on, whether chicken or lamb or vegetables or Tuesday's leftover roast. It was the culinary equivalent of painting every room in a house the same shade of beige and calling it interior design. Convenient? Absolutely. But something was lost in that convenience. Something that could not be put back into the jar. And yet, convenience won. It always does. And that powder travelled everywhere the Union Jack flew. In 1810, a Bengali entrepreneur named Saké Dean Mohamed did something nobody had done before. He opened the Hindostani Coffee House at 34 George Street in London, near Portman Square. It was the first dedicated Indian restaurant in Britain. Mohamed was a remarkable man by any measure. He was a former captain in the East India Company's Bengal Army. He had published a book of his travels in 1794, making him the first Indian person to write and publish a book in English. And now he was betting that London's appetite for curry was strong enough to support a proper sit-down restaurant. He took out an advertisement in the Morning Post in February of 1810, describing himself as a manufacturer of the real curry powder and announcing that his establishment offered genuine Hindostane dishes served in apartments fitted up in the Eastern style. He provided hookah smoking and, remarkably for 1810, home delivery of curries to customers' houses. The restaurant targeted the nabobs and their families, the people who had lived in India and missed the food. But London's broader public was not quite ready for Mohamed. The Hindostani Coffee House never found enough customers, and Mohamed declared bankruptcy just two years later. The restaurant limped along under new owners until 1833, then closed for good. Mohamed, never one to stay down for long, moved to Brighton and reinvented himself entirely. He opened a series of vapour baths, offering what he called shampooing treatments, a word he borrowed from the Hindi champi, meaning a therapeutic head massage. His baths became wildly popular with Brighton's fashionable set, and he eventually earned the title Shampooing Surgeon to both King George IV and King William IV. The man who opened London's first Indian restaurant ended his career, giving massages to British royalty. You could not make this up, but his restaurant had planted a flag. Indian food had established a permanent foothold in the British imagination, even if the public appetite would take another 150 years to truly catch fire. Now here is where the story takes a turn that almost nobody expects. Because while the British were building their version of curry at home, they were also, completely by accident, creating one of the most beloved foods in an entirely different country on the other side of the world, Japan. In 1868, Japan entered the Meiji era and began opening its borders after more than two centuries of near-total isolation. The Japanese government was modernizing everything at breakneck speed, and they studied Western powers as models. When it came to building a navy, they looked to the best in the world, the British Royal Navy. Japanese officers trained alongside British officers, adopted British systems and British tactics, and along the way, they adopted British food. At the same time, the Japanese military was facing a crisis that had nothing to do with foreign enemies. Thousands of sailors and soldiers were getting sick and dying from beriberi, a disease caused by a lack of vitamin B1. The root cause was simple but devastating. Japanese military rations were built around polished white rice. Eating refined white rice was seen as a mark of status and sophistication, and the Imperial Navy offered unlimited portions to attract new recruits. Many sailors ate almost nothing else. The vitamin deficiency was catastrophic. During the Russo-Japanese War of 1904-1905, beriberi laid low thousands of troops who never even saw the battlefield. A naval surgeon named Kanahiro Takaki identified diet as the culprit and started studying what other navies were feeding their people. The answer, of course, was curry. British naval curry was not Indian curry. It was a thick stew made with commercial curry powder, flour, butter, beef, and root vegetables. But the flour and the meat were rich in thiamine, which meant British sailors almost never developed beriberi. Takaki saw the solution right in front of him. The Japanese navy adopted British-style curry almost immediately. They served it over rice, thickened it with a flour and butter roux to keep it from sloshing around on pitching ships, and loaded it with the meat and vegetables their sailors desperately needed. The results were dramatic. Beriberi cases dropped sharply. Curry had literally saved the Japanese navy. In 1872, the first Japanese curry recipe was published. By 1877, restaurants in Tokyo had added it to their menus. In 1908, the official Navy Cooking Reference Book included a formal curry rice recipe that became the template for Japanese curry as we know it. And when sailors eventually retired and went home, they brought the recipe back to their towns and villages, spreading curry rice across the entire country. In the 1920s, domestically manufactured curry mixes and curry roux blocks finally brought the price down enough for ordinary Japanese families to cook it at home. And within a generation, curry rice had become one of the most popular home-cooked meals in the country. School cafeterias served it, office workers ate it for lunch, entire restaurant chains were built around it. Today, the Japanese Maritime Self-Defense Force still serves curry every Friday, partly out of tradition and partly because the weekly ritual helps crews keep track of the days when they have been at sea without a calendar or a horizon to mark the passing of time. But Japanese curry is not Indian curry. It is not even really British curry. It is a copy of a copy of a copy, three steps removed from the original source material. India's ancient and complex spice traditions were simplified by the British into a commercial powder. That powder was carried by British sailors to Japan, and Japanese cooks adapted it again into something sweeter, thicker, and milder than anything you would find in either Delhi or London. Meanwhile, back in Britain, curry was about to enter its golden age. After World War II, everything changed. A wave of immigration from South Asia, driven by labor shortages in post-war Britain, and the ongoing aftermath of the partition of India and Pakistan transformed the British food landscape permanently. Immigrants from Bangladesh, Pakistan, and India arrived in cities like London, Birmingham, Bradford, and Manchester, and many of them opened restaurants. In 1960, there were roughly 300 Indian restaurants in the entire United Kingdom. Most of them served a narrow range of dishes adjusted for British palates. Milder spicing, heavier on cream, with thick gravies. By 1980, that number had grown to 3,000. By 1990, 6,600. And by 2011, the count had nearly doubled again to around 12,000 restaurants, employing over 100,000 people and generating annual revenues of £4.2 billion. Most of these restaurants were not run by people from India. They were overwhelmingly run by Bangladeshi immigrants, many tracing their roots to the eastern city of Sylhet. Ironically, Sylhet is not even particularly famous for curries back home. These entrepreneurs cooked food designed for British customers, and some of the most iconic curry house dishes were invented on British soil. The ball tea, for example, a meat curry served in a wok-like pan that became massively popular in the 1980s, was invented in Birmingham, not Dhaka or Karachi. And then came the dish that captured the entire contradiction in a single plate. In Glasgow, in the early 1970s, a Pakistani-born chef named Ali Ahmed Aslam was running a restaurant called the Sheesh Mahal, which he had opened in 1964 at just 18 years old. One night, a customer complained that his chicken tikka was too dry and needed some kind of sauce. Aslam went back to his kitchen, grabbed a can of Campbell's Condensed Tomato Soup, something he kept on hand because he ate it to soothe a stomach ulcer, mixed it with yoghurt, cream and spices, and poured the result over the chicken. That improvised sauce became Chicken Tikka Masala. Whether Aslam was truly the first person to make it has been debated. Other restaurants and other chefs have claimed the idea, and some food historians argue the basic concept existed in South Asian kitchens long before it reached Scotland. But what nobody disputes is what happened next. Chicken Tikka Masala became the single most popular dish in British restaurants. By 2001, it had overtaken fish and chips as the country's number one meal. And in April of that year, Britain's Foreign Secretary Robin Cook stood before the Social Market Foundation and delivered a speech that would be quoted for decades. He declared Chicken Tikka Masala to be a true British national dish, not only because it is the most popular, but because it is a perfect illustration of the way Britain absorbs and adapts external influences. Chicken Tikka, he pointed out, is an Indian dish. The masala sauce was added to satisfy the desire of British people to have their meat served in gravy. That one sentence captures the entire 400-year history of curry in miniature, a complex Indian cooking technique, simplified, adapted, covered in gravy, and then claimed as a national achievement. Cook meant the speech as a celebration of multiculturalism, a statement that Britain's identity was built on absorbing and improving ideas from every corner of the world. But the timing was cruel. Just months later, the attacks of September 11 reshaped the political landscape, and the goodwill towards South Asian communities evaporated almost overnight. Anti-Muslim sentiment surged. South Asian immigrants who had been building curry empires and feeding British families for decades suddenly faced a wave of suspicion and hostility. British-Pakistani artist Kazim Rashid later observed that any chance of a true celebration of British South Asian identity effectively ended in those months after Cook's speech. And beyond the politics, there was a more practical irony. British people were celebrating a curry invented by a South Asian immigrant at the exact moment that immigration policies were making it harder for curry houses to recruit trained chefs from the subcontinent. The skills required to run a proper Indian kitchen, the knowledge of specific spice blends and cooking techniques, could not simply be picked up in a weekend course. Two curry restaurants were closing every week because they could not find qualified cooks. The country loved the food, but was not always so generous toward the people who made it possible. Today, the UK curry industry contributes more than £5 billion to the British economy annually. The country celebrates National Curry Week every October. Supermarket aisles are stacked with ready-made korma sauces and tikka masala meal kits. And the word curry is so embedded in the global vocabulary that most people never stop to wonder where it came from or what it replaced. Because that is the real story here. It is not just that the British invented a word for something they did not fully understand. It is that the word replaced the understanding. When you call a Rogan Josh a curry, and you call a Vindaloo a curry, and you call a dal a curry, you lose the ability to see each of those dishes for what it actually is. You lose the regional history, the family technique, the specific combination of spices that makes one grandmother's version different from the one cooked next door. You lose the fact that Vindaloo traces its lineage to a Portuguese ship and a barrel of pork soaked in wine. You lose the fact that the chilli peppers burning your mouth travelled from South America to Portugal to Goa before they ever touched an Indian kitchen. None of that means you should feel guilty the next time you order a curry. Food travels. Food changes. That is what food does. The point is not that curry is fake, or that enjoying it is wrong. The point is that the word itself carries a history, and that history is worth knowing. Because somewhere behind every jar of mass-produced curry powder and every Friday night takeaway order, there is a grandmother in Tamil Nadu grinding her own spice blend on a stone that her mother used before her, making a dish that has a name you have probably never heard, with a flavor that a single yellow powder could never replicate. 4,500 years of spice craft, reduced to a single word by people who could not pronounce the original ones. That is the food an empire made up, and the world is still eating it. If this story surprised you, hit subscribe and drop a comment telling us which part you did not know before. We put out videos like this every week, so tap that like button so you do not miss the next one.