The Oraons of Chhotanagpur: A journey through colonial ethnography

IF 1 2区 社会学 Q2 AREA STUDIES
Sangeeta Dasgupta
{"title":"The Oraons of Chhotanagpur: A journey through colonial ethnography","authors":"Sangeeta Dasgupta","doi":"10.1017/S0026749X21000597","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract This article explores nineteenth-century colonial representations of the Oraons of Chhotanagpur. Described in administrative reports of early nineteenth-century Chhotanagpur as mlecchha and dhangar, or as part of a ‘village community’ of Coles/Kols, these Oraons, by the late nineteenth century, were referred to as a ‘tribe’. To trace the categories through which the Oraons journeyed across colonial records, I discuss texts and reports which later became part of bureaucratic memory. The shifts within official understanding, I argue, were related to the working of official minds, changing assumptions, and differing languages; the tensions within the discipline of anthropology and its application in the colony; the variations within ideologies of governance and the imperatives of rule; and interactions with ‘native’ informants and correspondents, along with personal observations of local practices. There remained, however, an uneasy tension between wider intellectual trends in Europe and their reverberations in the colony, and the experiences of governance: colonial knowledge was not always produced with arrogance and assurance but also with doses of uncertainty, hesitation, disquiet, and often despair. In the shifting representations of the tribe across the nineteenth century, there is, I suggest, a pattern. In the pre-1850s, local nomenclature was adopted and voices of dissent—expressed through agrarian protests in Chhotanagpur—were addressed. By the 1850s, the utilitarian agenda structured colonial imaginaries and interventions. The 1860s witnessed the interplay of ethnological concerns, missionary beliefs, and Arcadian principles. From the 1890s, the idea of tribe was overwhelmingly structured by the supremacy of disciplinary knowledge systems that increasingly supplanted the role of the ‘native’ informant.","PeriodicalId":51574,"journal":{"name":"Modern Asian Studies","volume":"56 1","pages":"1375 - 1415"},"PeriodicalIF":1.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Modern Asian Studies","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/S0026749X21000597","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"AREA STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Abstract This article explores nineteenth-century colonial representations of the Oraons of Chhotanagpur. Described in administrative reports of early nineteenth-century Chhotanagpur as mlecchha and dhangar, or as part of a ‘village community’ of Coles/Kols, these Oraons, by the late nineteenth century, were referred to as a ‘tribe’. To trace the categories through which the Oraons journeyed across colonial records, I discuss texts and reports which later became part of bureaucratic memory. The shifts within official understanding, I argue, were related to the working of official minds, changing assumptions, and differing languages; the tensions within the discipline of anthropology and its application in the colony; the variations within ideologies of governance and the imperatives of rule; and interactions with ‘native’ informants and correspondents, along with personal observations of local practices. There remained, however, an uneasy tension between wider intellectual trends in Europe and their reverberations in the colony, and the experiences of governance: colonial knowledge was not always produced with arrogance and assurance but also with doses of uncertainty, hesitation, disquiet, and often despair. In the shifting representations of the tribe across the nineteenth century, there is, I suggest, a pattern. In the pre-1850s, local nomenclature was adopted and voices of dissent—expressed through agrarian protests in Chhotanagpur—were addressed. By the 1850s, the utilitarian agenda structured colonial imaginaries and interventions. The 1860s witnessed the interplay of ethnological concerns, missionary beliefs, and Arcadian principles. From the 1890s, the idea of tribe was overwhelmingly structured by the supremacy of disciplinary knowledge systems that increasingly supplanted the role of the ‘native’ informant.
乔塔纳格布尔的奥朗斯:一次殖民民族志之旅
这篇文章探讨了19世纪殖民时期的古塔那格布尔奥朗家族。在19世纪早期的Chhotanagpur行政报告中,这些Oraons被描述为mlecchha和dhangar,或者作为Coles/Kols“村庄社区”的一部分,到19世纪后期,这些Oraons被称为“部落”。为了追溯奥朗夫妇在殖民记录中所经历的类别,我讨论了后来成为官僚记忆一部分的文本和报告。我认为,官方理解的转变与官方思维的运作、不断变化的假设和不同的语言有关;人类学学科内部的张力及其在殖民地的应用治理意识形态的变化和统治的必要性;以及与“本地”线人和通讯员的互动,以及对当地做法的个人观察。然而,在欧洲更广泛的知识趋势及其对殖民地的影响和治理经验之间,仍然存在一种令人不安的紧张关系:殖民知识并不总是伴随着傲慢和自信,而是伴随着不确定性、犹豫、不安和经常绝望。我认为,在整个19世纪对部落的不断变化的表述中,有一种模式。在19世纪50年代之前,当地的命名法被采用,反对的声音——通过在乔塔纳格尔的土地抗议活动表达出来——得到了解决。到19世纪50年代,功利主义议程构建了殖民想象和干预。19世纪60年代见证了民族学关注、传教信仰和田园牧歌原则的相互作用。从19世纪90年代开始,部落的概念在很大程度上是由学科知识系统的霸权所构成的,这些知识系统日益取代了“本土”信息提供者的角色。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Modern Asian Studies
Modern Asian Studies AREA STUDIES-
CiteScore
1.60
自引率
11.10%
发文量
63
期刊介绍: Modern Asian Studies promotes original, innovative and rigorous research on the history, sociology, economics and culture of modern Asia. Covering South Asia, South-East Asia, China, Japan and Korea, the journal is published in six parts each year. It welcomes articles which deploy inter-disciplinary and comparative research methods. Modern Asian Studies specialises in the publication of longer monographic essays based on path-breaking new research; it also carries substantial synoptic essays which illuminate the state of the broad field in fresh ways. It contains a book review section which offers detailed analysis of important new publications in the field.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信