Being Bhil: The politics of becoming indigenous in India and Pakistan

Abstract

ABSTRACTThis article, based on ethnographic fieldwork and archival data, examines the limits of indigeneity and the role of the nation state in unintentionally fostering or discouraging identity formations of certain kinds. It focuses on Bhils, the largest ‘tribal’ group in South Asia with a population of around 17 million, to ask why they are seen as ‘indigenous’ in India though not in Pakistan. It shows how the colonial category of ‘tribes’ for the Bhils has been sustained and strengthened in postcolonial India due to institutional and bureaucratic practices, vernacular publications, upper-caste and transnational activism while a different set of actions by the state of Pakistan have resulted in absence of such ‘regimes of discipline.’ This divergent scenario is contrasted with a field view of the rural countryside by describing the complexity of self-identity and claims-making of the Bhils around the Narmada Valley, India and Tharparkar, Sindh province, Pakistan. The identity claims of the Bhils in both the countries, ranging from Kshatriya (upper-caste warriors) to Dalits (formerly ‘untouchable’ castes) show striking similarities, though also differ at times and is mostly at odds with the global indigeneity discourse and the administrative categories.KEYWORDS: Indigeneityscheduled tribeBhilsIndiaPakistan Disclosure statementNo potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).Notes1 Names of all persons and villages have been anonymized except those well-established in public domain. All Bengali, Bhili, Hindi and Marathi translations are by Thakur for India. For Pakistan, all Sindhi and Urdu translations are by Khan. Fieldwork was conducted without the use of translators. Archival records are from British Library, London (BL) and Nandurbar District Record Room (NDRR). Both authors wish to express their gratitude to Ezra Rashkow, K. Sivaramakrishnan, Edward Simpson, Richard Axelby, Jayaseelan Raj, Sohini Chattopadhyay and the two anonymous reviewers of History and Anthropology for their comments on the various drafts. Khan is grateful to Chethan Bhil, Mahesh Bhil, Vikram Das, Irfan Khan and Dominic Stephen, as well as other friends and activists, including officials of the Bhil Intellectual Forum in Tharparkar. Fieldwork was supported by the European Research Council (ERC) under the European Union (EU). Thakur is grateful to Chunnilal Brahmane, Vanita Brahmane, Janarth Adivasi Vikas Sanstha of Shahada, Comrade Kishore Dhamale, Pratibha Shinde, Sanjay Mahajan, Lok Sangharsh Morcha, Narmada Bachao Andolan, Amarjit Bargal, Dipak Kulkarni, Nandurbar District Collector’s Office, British Library, London, and the hundreds of Bhil friends from dozens of villages, too many to be named individually, for their support over the years. Fieldwork was supported by grants from the Yale Agrarian Studies, Yale MacMillan Center, American Institute of Indian Studies, the EU’s ERC, the UK Economic and Social Research Council and University of Delaware’s Center for Global and Area Studies.2 See Thakur (Citation2019) for a review of the academic works on the Bhils and the Narmada dam.3 But, for Taiwan and Japan, see Barnes, Gray, and Kingsbury (Citation1995).4 But see Baird (Citation2016, 502) for the changing stand of some Asian states recently. The Native Americans can arguably contest the label of “New World” having lived there at-least since the end of the Pleistocene (Waters Citation2019) for 12,000 years.5 See Thakur (Citation2019) on Shinde, karbhari and the political mobilization of the Bhils.6 For a history of Bhosle and Maratha rulers including the rulers of Nagpur (1735–1818) see Wink Citation1986.7 He was referring to the erstwhile ruling family of Paradke clan, referred as Rana of Akrani in the Gazetteer of Bombay Presidency-Khandesh, GBP-K henceforth, (Citation1880, 423–424) whose state was taken over by the British Government after 1818. Also see Guha (Citation1999).8 For a list of the sub-groups see the Dhule Census Handbook (Citation1991, 14). Nandurbar was bifurcated from Dhule in 1997 to carve a separate district with a majority of ST groups.9 See Thakur (Citation2014) and Thakur (Citation2021) for a brief description of these Mewasi rulers including Padwi, Vadwi, Vasava. The colonial records also describe Tadvi rulers in the region (GBP-K 1880, 63).10 For example, NDRR, a Court of Wards file, Papers of Mafi Land [tax-free land], dated 1931, Maharashtra Revenue Department file 16, states “[T]here are 58 cases in which the land is free of assessment … 34 [of these] are nearest relatives.” Also see Skaria Citation1999.11 For a critique of the Aryan invasion theory see Jha (Citation1999). See Banerjee (Citation2006) on the linking of the Aryan invasion theory by the upper-caste intellectuals of Bengal to explain India’s colonization.12 See Dasgupta (Citation2022, 24–28) for a discussion on the various usage of this term.13 See its website: http://www.bajss.org/about.php. Accessed July 26; 2021.14 See Thakur (Citation2021) for the various social movements in Nandurbar district.15 See Leslie (Citation2005, 66–67).16 For news coverage, see the daily Hindustan Times, July 28, 2014: https://www.hindustantimes.com/india/maharashtra-dhangars-want-st-tag-govt-in-fix/story-4NCcmPiNoXYjpfJXaf9rQI.html. Accessed July 26, 2022.17 For a list of their annual conferences till 2014 see Adivasi Ekta Parishad Declaration (Citation2014); book in Marathi.18 To get a sense of the lives of marginalized rural Bhil women and their struggle to find a voice, see the autobiography of Gavit (1999). Hers is probably the first such writing in Marathi language.19 The term mir is used the describe the Talpur rulers of Sindh, who preceded the British conquest in 1843.20 The village of Singharo was headquarters of the union council, the lowest-tier of local government in Pakistan. The Thar Coalfield are largely located in the Singharo Union Council.21 Mahatma Gandhi coined the term “Harijan” (God’s children) for the “untouchable” castes, later rejected by them.22 Dalit was coined in place of Harijan by B.R. Ambedkar (1891–1956), a leader of the community who also drafted India’s Constitution.23 Districts in Sindh are subdivided into talukas and further divided into union councils, the lowest tier of local government.24 Cf. Skaria’s (Citation1999) use of Sinha’s (Citation1995) concept of Rajputization where “tribal” groups would employ Brahman priests for creating dubious genealogies implying that there were “authentic” Rajputs. See Guha (Citation2021) for a brief though perceptive longue durée study of the oft transient nature of “tribe” and its links to state formation processes in Asia across 2500 years.25 A term of respect for an elderly in Sindhi.26 Mahabharat is a Hindu mythology where the forest-dwelling Eklavya got cheated by his Brahman teacher for being a better archer than his other students who were Kshatriya princes.27 https://mainstreamweekly.net/article1537.html . See Devy (Citation2011, 70–89) on the increasing dominance of languages with a script such as Hindi even as those without a script, often used by mobile groups and rural population, are disappearing. See Parmar (Citation2015, 4) on how Jaipal Singh Munda (1903–1970), educated by Christian missionaries and a leader of “tribal” group from present-day Jharkhand, wanted the word “Adivasi” instead of ST in the Indian Constitution. For a recent use of advocating indigenous status by Jharkhand elites at international platforms, see Ghosh (Citation2006).28 Birsa Munda, though popular among the Indian Bhil elites and intellectuals, is an unknown entity among the Tharparkar Bhils. They make references to Rooplo Kolhi, a Koli ethnic leader who fought against the British in the mid-nineteenth century and was executed.29 For a critique of Singh, see Chatterjee (Citation2004, 37); cf. Sundar (Citation2016).30 Devi credits Singh’s study as her source in the novel.31 We are grateful to Dr. Arpita Basu and Sikha Chattopadhyay for providing the dates of their tenure.32 Notable exceptions are essays on the Himalayan north-eastern part that is marked as ST territory in its entirety. See for example Dubey (Citation1982).33 But see Bhukya (Citation2017), that subscribes to colonial constructs of Arya non-Arya divide and Gonds being separated from the rest of the society that he terms “mainland India”.34 See Fuchs (Citation1992) for the occurrence of messianic movements among every religious group in India, not just ST groups, during the colonial and early postcolonial period.35 For a study of his writing see Jadhavar (Citation2010).URL link: http://hdl.handle.net/10603/96318 (thesis in Marathi; accessed 20 July 2022).Additional informationFundingThis work was supported by European Union’s Seventh Framework Programme (FP/2007-2013) [ERC Grant Agreement n. 616393 for Mustafa Khan]; Yale Agrarian Studies, Yale MacMillan Center, American Institute of Indian Studies during 2008-12, Social Science Research Council and European Research Council during 2014-16 [Dr. Vikramaditya Thakur received funding from them].