Where are the Tribes

Tribes, more often than not, are in the news mainly for the crimes committed against them. Most of us just glance through the news as if they are aliens to us. Unless we are particular about it, most of us even don’t know who amongst us are tribals; or whether tribes exist at all. The exhaustive definition of ‘tribe’ given in ‘merriam-webster.com reads as:

Definition of tribe

1a: a social group comprising numerous families, clans, or generations together with slaves, dependents, or adopted strangers

b: a political division of the Roman people originally representing one of the three original tribes of ancient Rome

c: PHYLE

2: a group of persons having a common character, occupation, or interest

3: a category of taxonomic classification ranking below a subfamily

also: a natural group irrespective of taxonomic rank

The synonyms of ‘tribe’ are: blood clan, family, folks, house, kin, kindred, kin(s)folk, line, lineage, people, race, stock. In that sense any social group with a particular characteristic can be termed tribe. This was the sense in which British used the term for the first time. [The British used the word ‘tribe’ to define Indians. According to the Oxford Dictionary, 1900AD Edition, ‘Indian’ refers to the offsprings of unmarried tribal women. As per their law only the marriages performed according to Christian traditions only were legal, all others were not. That is how, we can trace the origin of the term ‘American Indians’ too) However, gradually, the meaning of ‘tribe’ became more and more clear along with the intention of British to coin the terms for Indian communities.

The Census, 1901 identified animistic communities as tribes. Subsequently, many more characteristics were added. Today, anthropologists, generally, identify the following characteristics of a tribe: remote and isolated, primitive economy and technology, primitive political organization, primitive religion, low population density, harmonious relationship with nature, etc. 

Tribe vs Scheduled Tribe

No community in India (other than Sentinelese and Shompen, which have not been studied by anyone) exhibits all the characteristics. So, none of them qualifies to be called a ‘Tribe’. That is why, we don’t talk of tribes but ‘scheduled tribes’. The President of India, as directed in Art 366(25), can declare any community or a part of it as tribe. Such communities are known as scheduled tribes. The number of Scheduled Tribes, since the enforcement of our Constitution, has increased to more than triple. Today, they number more than 700, including 75 labelled PvTGs (Particularly Vulnerable Tribal Groups). Therefore, the term ‘scheduled tribe’ is a constitutional category, ‘tribe’ is not. More and more communities are being added to ST category in every decade and by every government. Yet, a large number are yet to be given the status of ST.

Tribe or Caste?

Thus, ‘tribe’ is a ‘gift’ to India by the British. Understanding why they did so is not difficult. As they had decided to fragmentize Indian people, they first divided it on the basis of religion (the term Hindu was not in vogue till 18th century, the British popularized it), then declaring some castes as ‘warrior castes’, like Maratha, Sikh etc., to create a sense of superiority among them. ‘Tribe’ was one such construct. Many such communities have been referred to as Varanas in various ancient texts (labelled Hindu texts by the British and Hinduites feel proud in it. In Vedic Period, divisions of our society were Varanas, not Jatis, and there is no reference to Hindu religion in our ancient texts, these represent our common heritage). The term ‘Caste’ has its origin in a 15th century Portuguese word, ‘Casta’. Today, caste is considered a synonym of Jati, which it is not. The doyen of Indian Anthropology Prof. DN Majumdar, more often, used the term Jati for them in his researches.

Besides, British designs become more clear when we realize that many communities, who never accepted the sovereignty of the British and looted them whenever they got chance, were declared Criminal Tribes. Ironically, after independence, they were declared ex-Criminal Tribes and finally, Denotified Tribes. They, even today, devoid of any rights, facilities and benefits, face all the problems they faced during British times. As most of them are nomadic or semi-nomadic, they can not avail facilities provided by the government in the absence of any permanent address.

Identity Lost

As the British did not understand Indian social system, they also didn’t know the names of the communities too. So, the tribes were named abruptly. Baiga, for example is a highly respected practitioner of rituals in many communities of Chhotanagpur. The name was assigned to a community today we know as Baiga tribe. Similarly, the communities of Andaman & Nicobar Islands were named after the island they inhabited. Even the name to these islands were given by the British. Interestingly, five communities of Uttarakhand namely Rang and Johari of Pithoragarh, Tolcha and Marchha of Chamoli as also Jaad of Uttarkashi were given the generic name Bhotia. Thus, most of the ‘tribal’ communities have lost their original identity.

FRA, 2006

Full name of the Act is “Scheduled Tribes & Other Traditional Forest Dwellers (Recognition of Forest Rights) Act, 2006”. Under the Act same rights have been accorded to STs and ‘Other Forest Dwellers’ (OFDs) but terms of their inclusion are different. OFDs have to prove their residence in the forest at least for three generations or for 75 years; while the STs have to furnish the proof of their residence only from the day the bill was introduced in the Parliament. It has never been made clear regarding:

1. Are there any socio-economic differences between STs and OFDs? If not (and most probably there is none) why stringent terms for inclusion of OFDs?

2. What if today’s OFDs are accorded the status of ST in future? Nothing has been specified in the Act.

The reality is, half the STs are not forest dwellers and an equal number are OFDs but not included in the ST category. Then why to discriminate?

To conclude, even after Independence, these communities have not received their due as also the attention they deserve. Not only that, the STs, who secure a government job as 7.5% jobs are reserved for them, are looked down upon by ‘others’ as inferior. They have to face social disconnect to. Otherwise too, as we realize that the state policy on reservations has not yielded desired results, this is high time we look for alternatives to integrate them into nation mainstream and give them the life of dignity. The first step in this regard can be to restore their original names and identity.

(NK Vaid is a Delhi-based Practicing Anthropologist and the author of “Who Cares for Tribal Development”.)

Address: AC-177B, Shalimar Bagh, Delhi – 110088

Ph. 9311337737

E-mail: nareshkrvaid@gmail.com