Abstract
Tribes in pre-colonial India had created their respective spaces in their social and natural ambience. The space also was interactive at various levels ranging from reciprocal silent contact with neighbours like the Rajis; to contact, conflict and distancing as among Andaman tribes and to contact, conflict and conciliation with neighbouring communities and the state like the Bhils or Bhuyans. In this mode of relationship, the tribes did not compromise with their community autonomy, but lived within the informal domain of their traditions, customs, faiths and beliefs and so on. Unfortunately, colonial administration reordered tribal space by introducing formal laws and institutions. On the other hand, tribes themselves organized to fight back the colonial system; to achieve freedom or establish self-rule. Reordering from both the sides led to tribal mobilization in one way or the other. In view of this, the present essay examines the nature, extent and context of emerging space and mobilization among the tribes during colonial period along with their implications by reviewing papers included in the volume.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
- 1.
Several new communities consequent upon declaration of scheduled areas have been included in the category. For our purpose, ‘tribe’ includes Scheduled Tribes (ST), non-ST (communities displaying features of ST but not included in the Constitution), and several new groups like the tea community in Assam, constructed from workers and their families belonging to different social categories, are claiming the ST status; and some designated tribes during colonial period, like the Badaga, the Banjaras who have been included in other social categories like SC, OBC.
Colonial construct of socio-administrative space, called ‘Criminal Tribes’, is carrying ‘ex-criminal’ tag in their present version of denotified, nomadic and semi-nomadic tribe (DNSNT) identity though incorporated into SC, ST and other social categories that are also included in the category of ‘tribe’ for our study.
- 2.
It should be mentioned that the nomenclature tribe was officially accepted in 1941 census, though it was used in government documents and colonial writings of nineteenth century. Each community had its name before categorized as tribe. Though the construct of tribe was a later import and we have discussed issues prior to its coinage in India, we have used the word ‘tribe’ to refer to those communities who are tribes in one or the other way (see Footnote 1 of this volume).
- 3.
‘Tribal’ mobilization during colonial period by either the British or rebel leaders was a new emerging space, because tribes had independent village autonomy. Tribal mobilization precedes construct of communities as tribes (officially in 1941 census) by colonial administration on the claim of their isolation, backwardness, community sense, etc. The construct on the basis of the above criteria, therefore, does not have any rationality. Though construct of tribe was a later import, we use it to mean those communities who later have been designated as tribes for the convenience of presentation. Even during British period, pastorals, nomads had interaction with people of a large spatial spread including kings. Christianity intruded into the community sense of a tribe by partitioning it along religious divide, but interestingly, the construct of tribe has given stress on the characteristic of belonging to the community ignoring religious divide. In this sense, the homogeneity about tribe as a cultural construct lacks justification as faith and associated practices stand diametrically opposite.
- 4.
Village councils and scope of their power and function define village autonomy of tribal villages. See Elwin (2007) for the tribes of Arunachal Pradesh, Haokip (2020) for Kuki-Chin group of tribes, Tod (1920) for the Bhil village system of governance. The Khamptis of Arunachal Pradesh have a tribe chief called Chau Pha. Even then, each village is autonomous under the village head called Chau Maan. Chau Pha does not interfere unless it is an inter-village dispute to settle (see Behera, 1994: 58–60).
- 5.
People of Nafra region were known as Lamai during pre- and early British period. Mijis are also known as Sajolang and Damai. Lamai is perhaps abortive pronunciation of Damai.
- 6.
The Bhil revolt under the leadership of Govind Guru underlays the aim of reestablishing Bhil Raj (Vashishtha, 1997: 39).
- 7.
Sundar (2011) has brilliantly articulated citizenship problems and struggles over it within the frame of rule of law with reference to tribes of post-colonial central India.
- 8.
- 9.
Amos Sutton’s letter to editors of the Calcutta Christian Observer on 10 May 1839 on the topic Asylum for Native Children at Cuttack.
- 10.
See Sah and Kumary (2021) for a critical understanding of the process of colonization of body and mind.
- 11.
In fact it was the census operation that constructed a distinct identity of tea garden labours in Assam. Census documents of 1911 and 1921 reported them under Depressed Classes. In 1931, they were enumerated as Garden Cooly Caste and in 1941 Garden Tribes (Constituent Assembly Debates on 24 August 1949, Part-7, indiankanoon.org). Subsequently, Tea Tribe identity has been constructed.
- 12.
Resistances of tribes have been distinguished on the basis of the core of the movement of a period. See Singh (1978: 1229–1230) for a discussion on phase-wise classification of movements.
References
Behera, M. C. (1994). Planning and socio-economic development of the tribals. Commonwealth.
Behera, M. C., & Basar, J. (2014). Introduction. In M. C. Behera & J. Basar (Eds.), Resources, tribes and development (pp. 21–46). Rawat.
Bhuyan, R. (2016). Suppression of Meriah sacrifice among Khond tribe in Kandhamal: A study. In Shrinkhla Ek Shodhparak Vaicharik Patrika (Vol. III, No. VIII, pp. 65–70).
Caldwell, R. (1881). A political and general history of the district of Tinnevelly, in the presidency of Madras: From the earliest period to its cession to the English government in A.D 1801. E.Keys Government Press.
Cassels, N. G. (1988). Social legislation under the Company Raj: The abolition of Alavery Act V 1843. South Asia: Journal of South Asian Studies, 11(1), 59–87. https://doi.org/10.1080/00856408808723108
Chowdhury, B. (1988). Dharma O’ Purba Bharater Krishak Andolan. In G. Chattopadhyay (Ed.), Itihas Anusandhan (Vol. II, pp. 628–637). K. P. Bagchi and Company.
Christian Ministers of Various Denominations (CMVD). (Ed.). (1837). The Calcutta Christian Observer (Vol. VI). Calcutta: Printed at Baptist Mission Press
Christian Ministers of Various Denominations (CMVD). (Ed.). (1839). The Calcutta Christian observer (Vol. VIII). Printed at Baptist Mission Press.
Darwin, C. (1859). The origin of species. John Murray.
Darwin, C. (1871). The descent of man, and selection in relation to sex. John Murray.
Elwin, V. (2007). Democracy in NEFA. Director of Research, Government of Arunachal Pradesh. First published in 1965.
Gait, E. A. (1906). A history of Assam. Thacker, Spink & Company.
Gangte, L. K. (2017). Human sacrifice among the Khonds of Orissa C.1836–1861: A study. Mizoram University Journal of Humanities & Social Sciences, III(1), 114–125.
Haokip, D. L. (2020). Bible translation in Kuki-Chin of Indo-Myanmar and Bangladesh: A historical analysis. In M. C. Behera (Ed.), Tribal studies in India: Perspectives of history, archaeology and culture (pp. 127–146). Springer Nature.
Hodivala, S. H. (1920). Studies in Parsi history. Author (Printed at J. N. Pretit Parsi Orphanage Captain Printing Work, Lal Baugh, Parel, Bombay).
Joshi, A. K. (2021). Engaging with tribes of Eastern Kumaun in colonial era. In M. C. Behera (Ed.), Trajectory of tribe-British relations in India: A multi-disciplinary approach to tribal studies. Springer.
Kailash. (2000). Peaceful coexistence: Lessons from Andamans. Economic and Political Weekly, 35(32), 2859–2865.
Macpherson, D. (1812). The history of the European commerce in India. Longman, Hurst, Rees, Orme, and Brown.
Mahalik, N. (2004). Maritime trade of ancient Orissa. Orissa Review (Government of Orissa), XLVII(2), 39–45.
Mallick, P. (2021). The Raz, the Rajas and the Bhuiyans: Revisiting the Kenonjhar Rebellion of 1867 and its impact on Bonai. In M. C. Behera (Ed.), Tribe-British relations in India: Revisiting text, perspective and approach. Springer Nature.
Michael, F. (1985). Survival of a culture: Tibetan refugees in India. Asian Survey, 25(7), 737–744.
Mill, J. (1840–1848). The history of British India. J. Madden.
Mishra, S. S., & Ekka, W. (1996). Mudma Jatara-Ek Parichaya (Mudma Jatra: An introduction). Ashok Prakashan.
Mukherjee, D. P., Gupta, P., & Das, N. K. (1982). The Zeliangrong or Haomei movement. In K. S. Singh (Ed.), Tribal movements in India (Vol. I, pp. 67–95). Manohar Publications.
Nandy, A. (1983). The intimate enemy: Loss and recovery of self under colonialism. Oxford University Press.
Nathan, D., & Xaxa, V. (2012). Introduction and overview. In D. Nathan & V. Xaxa (Eds.), Social exclusion and adverse inclusion—Development and deprivation of Adivasi in India (pp. 1–15). Oxford.
Padel, F. (2009). Sacrificing people: Invasions of a tribal landscape. Orient Blackswan. First Published in 1995 under the title of The sacrifice of human being: British rule and the Khonds of Orissa. Oxford.
Pathy, J. (1995). Colonial ethnography of the Kandha: ‘White Man’s Burden’ or political expediency? Economic and Political Weekly, 30(4), 220–228.
Pati, B. (1983). Peasants, tribals and the national movement in Orissa (1921–1936). Social Scientist, 11(7), 25–49.
Pati, B. (2013). The diversities of tribal resistance in colonial Orissa, 1840s–1890s: Survival, interrogation and contests. Economic and Political Weekly, 48(37), 49–58.
Reddy, I. V. B. (1993). Impact of industrialisation on tribal life. Social Change, 23(2 & 3), 63–67.
Richards, J. F. (1993). The Mughal empire. Cambridge University Press.
Risley, H. H. (1891a). The study of ethnology in India. The Journal of the Anthropological Institute of Great Britain and Ireland, 20, 235–263.
Risley, H. H. (1891b). The tribes and castes in Bengal (Vol. II). Bengal Secretariat Press.
Sah, B., & Kumary, L. (2021). Indira Goswami’s The bronze sword of Thengphakhari Tehsildar: A critique of the British colonialism and resistance against it. In M. C. Behera (Ed.), Tribe-British relations in India: Revisiting text, perspective and approach. Springer Nature.
Showers, H. L. (1891). The Meywar Bhil corps. Journal of the United Service Institution of India, XX, 87–95.
Singh, K. S. (1978). Colonial transformation of tribal society in middle India. Economic and Political Weekly, 13(30), 1221–1232.
Skoda, U. (2019). Rajas, Adibasis and their goddess(es). In M. C. Behera (Ed.), Shifting perspectives in tribal studies: From an anthropological approach to interdisciplinarity and consilience (pp. 89–104). Springer Nature.
Stokes, E. (1959). The English utilitarians and India. Oxford University Press.
Sundar, N. (2011). The rule of law and citizenship in central India: Post-colonial dilemmas. Citizenship Studies, 15(3–4), 419–432. http://doi.org/10.1080/13621025.2011.564804
Temperley, H. (2000). The delegalization of slavery in British India. Slavery and Abolition, 21(2), 169–187. http://doi.org/10.1080/01440390008575311
Thiong’o, N. (1986). Decolonising the mind: The politics of language in African literature. Zimbabwe Publishing House.
Tiasunep, & Solo, N. (2020). Yangpi Morung: An expression of ideals and identity. In M. C. Behera (Ed.), Tribal studies in India: Perspectives of history, archaeology and culture (pp. 265–278). Springer.
Tod, J. (1920). Annals and antiquities of Rajasthan (Vol. I). Oxford University Press.
Vashishtha, V. K. (1997). Bhagat movement. Shruti Publications.
Verma, D. N. (2020). Vulnerability of autochthon Paharias of Santal Parganas: Revealing continuity of colonial legacy. In M. C. Behera (Ed.), Tribal studies in India: Perspectives of history, archaeology and culture (pp. 113–125). Springer Nature.
Xaxa, V. (2018). Exploring ideas of autonomy through tribal movements in Eastern India. In M. C. Behera (Ed.), Revisiting tribal studies—A glimpse after hundred years (pp. 61–69). Rawat.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2022 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd.
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Behera, M.C. (2022). Tribe, Space and Mobilization: Colonial and Post-colonial Interface in Tribal Studies. In: Behera, M.C. (eds) Tribe, Space and Mobilisation. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-19-0059-4_1
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-19-0059-4_1
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Singapore
Print ISBN: 978-981-19-0058-7
Online ISBN: 978-981-19-0059-4
eBook Packages: HistoryHistory (R0)