The framework for the governance of ‘Scheduled Areas introduced in 1935: Those regions inhabited predominantly by Adivasis (India’s Indigenous and ‘tribal’ peoples)

Posted on 01/05/2020 by website administrator
Irish Journal of Anthropology (cover) Vol 19(2) 2016 - visit the website: https://anthropologyireland.org/ija/
Irish Journal of Anthropology (cover) Vol 19(2) 2016 – visit the website:
https://anthropologyireland.org/ija

Abstract | To read the full paper (pp. 46), click here >>

The Government of India Act was formalized in 1935 as a means of transferring administrative power from the British Raj to the Indian National Congress. It introduced a new framework for the governance of ‘Scheduled Areas,’ i.e. those regions inhabited predominantly by Adivasis (literally ‘original inhabitants’), or India’s Indigenous and ‘tribal’ peoples, such as ‘the Mundas.’ Codifying the histories of these areas according to their occupation by Adivasi societies, the Act prompted contemporary anthropological research that questioned colonial categories of racial difference. Contingent and regionally nuanced concepts emerged, such as ‘racial’ minorities, Adivasi rights, and social solidarity that refocused public and administrative attention on Adivasi history and heritage. These concepts are easily forgotten in polarized debates on the workings of assimilationist vs. protectionist ideologies in respect of Adivasi peoples and lands. Yet such shifts prompted a revision of wider temporal and cultural relations between majority (mainstream) and minority (tribal) communities. The paper [“Anthropological Archives …”] aims to explore such interfaces through the metaphor of the archive and the prospect of ‘holism’, and with close reference to the medium of portraiture. In particular, images of Birsa Munda – an Adivasi freedom-fighter from the Ranchi district of Jharkhand – are foregrounded as a means to interpret the emergent relationship of Indian anthropology to ‘the Mundas’ and to ‘the nation.’ Signified in different ways by Birsa Munda, his followers, and those interested in making the posthumous prophet-rebel visible again within the political and cultural parameters of modern India, these relations became acquired dynamism through their temporal complexity and embodiment.

Source: Abstract: ANTHROPOLOGICAL ARCHIVES AND ‘CHIASMIC’ TIME IN MODERN INDIA BY DANIEL RYCROFT
URL: https://anthropologyireland.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/IJA_19_2_2016.pdf
Date visited: 4 April 2020

[Bold typeface added above for emphasis]

Learn more about Birsa Munda,
“the charismatic tribal leader who shook the British Empire” >>

Learn more about

Dr Rycroft is Lecturer in the Arts and Cultures of Asia at the School of World Art Studies, UEA. He specialises in South Asian art and anthropological history. He took up this post in 2006, and has since co-founded the journal World Art. He works on numerous individual and collaborative research projects. Previously Dr Rycroft held a Leverhulme Early Career Fellowship, focusing on ‘Subalternity and Visual Representation in India’ at the University of Sussex from 2003-2005. He was then also a Senior Research Associate of the Centre for World Environmental History, and organized a conference there on ‘Reinterpreting Adivasi Movements in South Asia’ in March 2005. Since joining the School of World Art Studies Dr Rycroft has been awarded a Teaching Fellowship to develop an image archive covering core aspects of South Asian art. He is currently Director of Postgraduate Taught Programmes. He also convenes the MA programmes in Cultural Heritage and facilitates a research network on Indian anthropology. He is an editorial board member of Art History, and co-founder of the South Asian Arts Group.

Source: Biography https://people.uea.ac.uk/d_rycroft

More by and about Daniel Rycroft >>

“Adivasi and “tribal” are not interchangeable as explained by Dr. Ivy Hansdak:

“Tribal” is a very broad term in the English language, as we all know, and includes all the different indigenous groups of India.
“Adivasi” – which is derived from Sanskrit – is applied to the dark-skinned or Austro-Asiatic indigenous groups of India (usually those from Eastern India). It is a commonly-used term in Jharkhand, Bihar, West Bengal and Odisha. It is also used by the local Mongoloid tribes of North Eastern India for the migrant workers who were brought in as indentured labourers to work in tea plantations during the colonial period. 

Source: personal message (email dated 27 March 2020)

See also

Research the above issues with the help of Shodhganga: A reservoir of theses from universities all over India, made available under Open Access >>

Related posts

About website administrator

Secretary of the foundation
This entry was posted in Adivasi, Adverse inclusion, Assimilation, Colonial policies, ePub, History, Literature and bibliographies, Resources, Rights of Indigenous Peoples, Tribal identity. Bookmark the permalink.