Hostname: page-component-89b8bd64d-nlwjb Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-05-07T04:31:43.582Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

British Rule and Tribal Revolts in India: The curious case of Bastar*

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  19 August 2015

AJAY VERGHESE
AJAY VERGHESE*
Affiliation:
University of California, Riverside, United States of America Email: ajayv@ucr.edu
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

British colonial rule in India precipitated a period of intense rebellion among the country's indigenous groups. Most tribal conflicts occurred in the British provinces, and many historians have documented how a host of colonial policies gave rise to widespread rural unrest and violence. In the post-independence period, many of the colonial-era policies that had caused revolt were not reformed, and tribal conflict continued in the form of the Naxalite insurgency. This article considers why the princely state of Bastar has continuously been a major centre of tribal conflict in India. Why has this small and remote kingdom, which never came under direct British rule, suffered so much bloodshed? Using extensive archival material, this article highlights two key findings: first, that Bastar experienced high levels of British intervention during the colonial period, which constituted the primary cause of tribal violence in the state; and second, that the post-independence Indian government has not reformed colonial policies in this region, ensuring a continuation and escalation of tribal conflict through the modern Naxalite movement.

Information

Type
Research Article
Information
Modern Asian Studies , Volume 50 , Issue 5 , September 2016 , pp. 1619 - 1644
Check for updates
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2015 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

Footnotes

*

I would like to thank Henry Farrell, Henry Hale, Emmanuel Teitelbaum, the staffs of the National Archives of India, British Library, and Deshbandhu Press Library, and two anonymous reviewers from Modern Asian Studies. Funding for this research was generously provided by The Sigur Center for Asian Studies and the Konosuke Matsushita Memorial Foundation.

References

1 B. P. Standen, Chief Secretary to the Chief Commissioner, Central Provinces to the Secretary to the Government of India, Foreign Department, 16 December 1910, National Archives of India [hereafter NAI], Foreign Department, Secret-1, 1911, #34–40, p. 4.

2 The term adivasi means ‘original inhabitant’; I use the terms tribal and adivasi interchangeably.

3 The Naxalites are Maoist revolutionaries who are attempting to overthrow the Indian state. They are mainly drawn from Scheduled Tribes and, to a lesser extent, Scheduled Castes. For good overviews of the Naxalite movement, see Dasgupta, B. (1974). The Naxalite Movement, Allied Publishers, New Delhi Google Scholar; Louis, P. (2002). People Power: The Naxalite Movement in Central Bihar, Wordsmiths, New Delhi Google Scholar; and Ray, R. (2002). The Naxalites and Their Ideology, Oxford University Press, Oxford Google Scholar.

4 For excellent overviews see Gough, K. (1974). Indian Peasant Uprisings, Economic and Political Weekly 9:32, pp. 1391–1412 Google Scholar; Stokes, E. (1978). The Peasant and the Raj, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge Google Scholar; Guha, Ranajit (1999). Elementary Aspects of Peasant Insurgency in Colonial India, Duke University Press, Durham, North Carolina Google Scholar. Specifically on tribal revolts, see Simhadra, V. C. (1979). Ex-Criminal Tribes of India, National Publishing House, New Delhi Google Scholar; Mathur, L. P. (2004). Tribal Revolts in India Under British ‘Raj’, Aavishkar Publishers, New Delhi Google Scholar; and Hasnain, N. (2007). Tribal India, New Royal Book Co., Lucknow Google Scholar.

5 Gough, Indian Peasant Uprisings, p. 1392.

6 Guha, Elementary Aspects of Peasant Insurgency, p. 1.

7 Stokes, The Peasant and the Raj, p. 245.

8 Guha, Ramachandra (1983). Forestry in British and Post-British India: A Historical Analysis, Economic and Political Weekly 18:45/46, pp. 1940–1947 Google Scholar; and Kulkarni, S. (1983). Towards a Social Forest Policy, Economic and Political Weekly 18: 6, pp. 191–196 Google Scholar.

9 Bastar is not the only former princely state that experiences tribal conflict—the Naxalites are also active in Orissa and Telangana. But the districts that comprise Bastar are unique in that they have the highest levels of Naxalite conflict in India, as I detail.

10 Fisher, M. (1991). Indirect Rule in India: Residents and the Residency System, 1764–1858, Oxford University Press, Oxford Google Scholar; and Metcalf, T. R. (2007). Imperial Connections: India in the Indian Ocean Arena, 1860–1920, University of California, Berkeley Google Scholar.

11 Sivaramakrishnan, K. (1999). Modern Forests: Statemaking and Environmental Change in Colonial Eastern India, Stanford University Press, Palo Alto Google Scholar; Skaria, A. (1999). Hybrid Histories: Forests, Frontiers, and Wildness in Western India, Oxford University Press, New Delhi Google Scholar; and Bhukya, B. (2013). The Subordination of the Sovereigns: Colonialism and the Gond Rajas in Central India, 1818–1948, Modern Asian Studies 47:1, pp. 288–317 Google Scholar.

12 Abraham, S. (1999). Steal or I’ll Call You a Thief: ‘Criminal’ Tribes of India, Economic and Political Weekly 34:27, pp. 1751–1753 Google Scholar; D’Souza, D. (1999). De-Notified Tribes: Still ‘Criminal’?, Economic and Political Weekly 34:51, pp. 3576–3578 Google Scholar; and Radhakrishna, M. (2001). Dishonoured by History: Criminal Tribes and British Colonial Policy, Orient Longman, New Delhi Google Scholar.

13 Guha, Forestry in British and Post-British India.

14 Christoph von Fürer-Haimendorf, Austrian tribal ethnologist and one time director of the nizam (ruler; the term is generally used to refer to Hyderabad State) of Hyderabad's tribal policies, notes: ‘Now and then the campaign of a Mughal Army extending for a short spell into the wilds of tribal country would bring the inhabitants briefly to the notice of princes and chroniclers, but for long periods the hillmen and forest dwellers were left undisturbed. Under British rule, however, a new situation arose. The extension of a centralized administration over areas which had previously lain outside the effective control of princely rulers deprived many of the aboriginal tribes of their autonomy.’ Von Fürer-Haimendorf, C. (1983). Tribes of India: The Struggle for Survival, University of California Press, Berkeley, p. 34 Google Scholar.

15 Guha, Ramachandra, and Gadgil, M. (1989). State Forestry and Social Conflict in British India, Economic and Political Weekly 123:1, pp. 141–177 Google Scholar; Sivaramakrishnan, Modern Forests; and Guha, Ramachandra (2000). The Unquiet Woods: Ecological Change and Peasant Resistance in the Himalaya, University of California Press, Berkeley Google Scholar.

16 Mathur, Tribal Revolts in India; and Gandhi, M. (2008). Denotified Tribes: Dimensions of Change, Kanishka, New Delhi Google Scholar.

17 Guha, Elementary Aspects of Peasant Insurgency. Note, not all peasant revolts involved tribal groups, although Guha's work discusses many tribal revolts specifically.

18 Gough, Indian Peasant Uprisings—see p. 1392 specifically for a discussion of pre-British peasant revolts. Data on these conflicts is, unfortunately, limited.

19 Ramusack, B. (2004). The Indian Princes and Their States, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, p. 201 Google Scholar.

20 Mohanty, P. K. (2006). Encyclopaedia of Scheduled Tribes in India, Gyan Publishing, New Delhi, p. 178 Google Scholar.

21 Tandor, R. (2005). A Case for Conservation of Tribal Heritage and Environment of Tribal Areas, INTACH Press, New Delhi, p. 24 Google Scholar.

22 Edmunds, D. and Wollenberg, E. (2003). Local Forest Management: The Impacts of Devolution Policies, Earthscan Publications, London, p. 184 Google Scholar.

23 Guha, Ramachandra (2006). Savaging the Civilised: Verrier Elwin and the Tribal Question in Late Colonial India, Economic and Political Weekly 31:35/37, pp. 2375–2389, p. 2379Google Scholar.

24 Guha, Forestry in British and Post-British India, p. 1940, emphasis added.

25 Haeuber, R. (1993). Indian Forestry Policy in Two Eras: Continuity or Change?, Environmental History Review 17:1, pp. 49–76, pp. 49–50CrossRefGoogle Scholar, emphasis added.

26 For example, the Hindustan Times piece ‘Naxalites meet to analyse tribal revolt against them’ of 25 June 2005 noted that tribal groups are ‘considered the backbone of the ultra-left movement’—Deshbandhu Press Library [hereafter DPL], 24, IB, 210.

27 This is not the case everywhere; for instance, in Jharkhand, many Naxalites come from the rural elite. See Shah, A. (2010). Alcoholics Anonymous: The Maoist Movement in Jharkhand, India, Modern Asian Studies 45:5, pp. 1095–1117 CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

28 ‘Maoists looking at armed overthrow of state’, Times of India, 6 March 2010; available at: http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/2010-03-06/india/28119932_1_maoists-indian-state-forest-land, [accessed 25 June 2015].

29 ‘India's secret war’, Time, 29 May 2008; available at: http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1810169-1,00.html, [accessed 25 June 2015].

30 ‘India is “losing Maoist battle”’, BBC News, 15 September 2009; available at: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/8256692.stm, [accessed 25 June 2015].

31 Gupta, D. (2007). The Naxalites and the Maoist Movement in India: Birth, Demise and Reincarnation, Democracy and Security 3, pp. 157–188, p. 158CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

32 For an excellent overview from a journalist who camped and travelled with the Naxalites, see Roy, A. (2010). ‘Walking with the Comrades’, Outlook India, 29 March, available at: http://www.outlookindia.com/article.aspx?264738, [accessed 25 June 2015].

33 Deputy Superintendent of Census, Central Provinces to Census Commissioner of India, 31 January 1881, NAI, Home Department, Census Part B, March 1881, #7.

34 Information available at: http://www.state.gov/j/ct/rls/crt/2011/195555.htm, [accessed 25 June 2015].

35 Gell, A. (1997). Exalting the King and Obstructing the State: A Political Interpretation of Royal Ritual in Bastar District, Central India, The Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute 3:3, pp. 433–450 CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

36 Quoted in Shukla, H. L. (1988). Tribal History: A New Interpretation, with Special Reference to Bastar, Allied Publishers, New Delhi, p. 13 Google Scholar.

37 Report of Captain J. Mac, 10 March 1885, NAI, Home Department, Public, April 1855, #47.

38 Sundar, N. (1997). Subalterns and Sovereigns: An Anthropological History of Bastar, Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp. 8–9 Google Scholar.

39 In the period before British rule Bastar was not immune to tribal conflict. There were, in fact, several violent episodes in and around the area—for example, the Halba Rebellion in 1774 and the Paralkot Rebellion in 1825. However, even these conflicts can be partially attributed to burgeoning British influence in the region, although colonial administrators did not yet control Bastar. For instance, D. Banerjea notes about the Halba Rebellion: ‘The presence of Maratha forces and the terror caused by the East India Company . . . precipitated the rebellion.’ About the Paralkot Rebellion, he similarly writes: ‘The presence of the Marathas and the British threatened the identity of the Abujmaria [tribe] and they resisted this through organising the rebellion.’ Though local tribes in the region had a long history of resistance to any outside influence, large-scale rebellions in Bastar seem to have coincided with the rise of the British in India. Quotations taken from: Banerjea, D. (2002). Criminal Justice India Series, Volume 19: Chhattisgarh, Vikas Publishing House, New Delhi, p. 12 Google Scholar.

40 Memo by the Chief Commissioner W. B. Jones, 28 September 1883, NAI, Foreign Department, A-Political-I, January 1884, #117–125, pp. 6–7.

41 Ibid., p. 13.

42 Ibid., pp. 6–7.

43 Ibid., p. 16.

44 B. P. Standen, Chief Secretary to the Chief Commissioner, Central Provinces to the Secretary to the Government of India, Foreign Department, 16 December 1910, NAI, Foreign Department, Secret—1, 1911, #34–40, p. 3.

45 Reverend W. Ward. ‘A Missionary's Experience’, Undated, BL, IOR/R/1/1/415: 1910.

46 Report from the Chief Commissioner of the Central Provinces, 16 December 1910, NAI, Foreign Department, Secret–1, 1911, #34–40, emphasis added.

47 Confidential Report by E. A. De Brett, Officer on Special Duty, Bastar State to the Commissioner, Chhattisgarh Division, Raipur, Central Provinces, 23 June 1910, NAI, Foreign Department, Secret–1, 1911, #34–40.

48 Sundar, N. (2001). Debating Dussehra and Reinterpreting Rebellion in Bastar District, Central India, The Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute 7:1, pp. 19–35, p. 24CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

49 Gell, Exalting the King, p. 435.

50 Sundar, Debating Dussehra, p. 24.

51 Report by Chief Commissioner L. W. Reynolds, 19 April 1910, BL, IOR/R/1/1/415, 1910, p. 15.

52 Sundar, Subalterns and Sovereigns, p. 98.

53 ‘Bastar Mining’, 16 May 1923, NAI, Foreign and Political Department, Internal, 1932, #1424-I.

54 Administrator, Bastar State to Political Agent, Chhattisgarh States, 20 February 1940, NAI, Eastern States Agency, F. Files, 1940, #F-6–19/40(M), emphasis added.

55 Office Memorandum to Mr. Ghondu Singh, 14 March 1922, NAI, Foreign and Political Secretary, Internal, 1922, #319-I.

56 E. S. Hyde, Administrator of Bastar State to G. H. Emerson, Secretary to the Agent to the Governor General, Eastern States, 25 March 1936, NAI, Eastern States Agency, D. Files, 1936, #D-51-C136.

57 Confidential Note by R. L. Wingate, Joint Secretary to Government of India, Foreign and Political Department, 12 January 1935, BL, IOR/R/1/1/2703: 1935, p. 4.

58 Ibid., p. 2.

59 E. S. Hyde to Colonel A. S. Meek, Agent to the Governor General, Eastern States, 28 April 1936, NAI, Eastern States Agency, D. Files, 1936, #D-51-C136.

60 ‘To seek life of a recluse’, The Statesman, 9 February 1937.

61 Letter from Eastern States Agency to C. L. Cornfield, Secretary to the Crown Representative in Simla, Undated, BL, IOR/R/1/1/2973: 1937.

62 ‘Bastar Affairs’, Undated, BL, IOR/R/1/1/2805: 1936.

63 E. A. De Brett, Officer on Special Duty, Bastar State to The Commissioner, Chhattisgarh Division, Raipur, Central Provinces, 23 June 1910, NAI, Foreign Department, Secret—1, 1911, #34–40.

64 Curzon House to Sir John Wood, Secretary to the Government of India, Foreign and Political Department, 15 January 1919, BL, IOR/R/1/1/922: 1919.

65 Sundar, Subalterns and Sovereigns, p. 198.

66 Nath, D. (1972). Of Logs and Men, in New Challenges in Administration, Committee on Case Studies, Indian Institute of Public Administration, New Delhi, p. 1 Google Scholar.

67 Ernst, W. and Pati, B. (eds) (2007). India's Princely States: People, Princes and Colonialism, Routledge, London, p. 103; emphasis addedGoogle Scholar.

68 ‘Mal-administration of the Bastar State’, Undated, NAI, Foreign and Political Department, Deposit-Internal, 1920, #54.

69 E. S. Hyde, Administrator of Bastar State to G. H. Emerson, Secretary to the Agent to the Governor General, Eastern States, 25 March 1936, NAI, Eastern States Agency, D. Files, 1936, #D-51-C136.

70 Prafulla Chandra Bhanj Deo to Government of India, 23 October 1952, NAI, Ministry of States, Political (B) Section, 1951, F.26(23)-PB/51.

71 G. B. Pant, Home Minister to Dr. K. N. Katju, Chief Minister of Madhya Pradesh, 27 November 1960, NAI, Ministry of Home Affairs, Political III, 1961, #5/5/61-Pol. III., Vol 1, p. 315.

72 Note from Secretary, Ministry of States, 14 May 1953, NAI, Ministry of States, Political Branch, 1953, #18(4)-PB/53 (Secret).

73 Note from Secretary, Ministry of States, 1 July 1953, NAI, Ministry of States, Political Branch, 1953, #18(4)-PB/53 (Secret).

74 Ibid.

75 H. S. Kamath, I.C.S., Chief Secretary to Government, Madhya Pradesh to The Secretary to the Government of India, Ministry of Home Affairs, 16 February 1962, Ministry of Home Affairs, Political III Branch, 1961, #5/5/61-Poll-III., Vol. 1.

76 G. B. Pant, Home Minister to Dr. K. N. Katju, Chief Minister of Madhya Pradesh, 27 November 1960, NAI, Ministry of Home Affairs, Political III Branch, 1961, #5/5/61-Poll-III., Vol. 1, p. 315.

77 Sundar, Subalterns and Sovereigns, pp. 218–219.

78 See, for example, the Amrit Sandesh article ‘Ambassador of the Revolution and Martyr Pravirchandra Bhanjdev Spilled His Blood in Sacrifice for Bastar’ in which the author suggests that ‘the total number of deaths to this day remains a mystery, as several people claim that hundreds or even thousands died’ (in Hindi, my translation). Sandesh, A. (2007). ‘Ambassador of the Revolution and Martyr Pravirchandra Bhanjdev Spilled His Blood in Sacrifice for Bastar’, 25 March, DPL, 24, 1B, un-numbered.

79 ‘Maharajah Pravirchandra Bhanjdev, Messiah of Tribals’ (Hindi, my translation), Highway Channel, March 2009, DPL, 24, 1B, un-numbered.

80 Navlakha, G. (2010). Days and Nights in the Maoist Heartland, Economic and Political Weekly 45:16, pp. 38–47, p. 43Google Scholar.

81 Sundar, Debating Dussehra, p. 24.

82 Sundar, Subalterns and Sovereigns, pp. 8–9.

83 (1989). Bastar: Development and Democracy, Economic and Political Weekly 24: 40, pp. 2237–2241.

84 Navlakha, Days and Nights in the Maoist Heartland, p. 43.

85 Bastar: Development and Democracy, p. 2241.

86 Bhukya, B. (2010). Subjugated Nomads: The Lambadas under the Rule of the Nizams, Orient Blackswan, Hyderabad Google Scholar.

87 Taylor, R. H. (2009). The State in Myanmar, National University of Singapore, Singapore Google Scholar.

88 Emerson, R. (1937). Malaysia: A Study in Direct and Indirect Rule, Palgrave MacMillan, New York Google Scholar.

89 Brown, D. (1994). The State and Ethnic Politics in Southeast Asia, Routledge, New York CrossRefGoogle Scholar.