Article contents
Reproducing Inequality: Spirit Cults and Labor Relations in Colonial Eastern India
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 28 November 2008
Extract
Understanding how unequal relations are reproduced over time is as significant as comprehending inequality itself. For unequal relations exist only in human practices that reproduce them. More than a play on words, the coupling of production with reproduction in recent anthropological studies highlights processes that provide the basis for production. The necessity of reconstructing practices that reproduce social relations is perhaps nowhere more neglected than in the study of South Asian history. When it comes to explaining how unequal relations between social groups were maintained, the caste system is the perennial favorite. This is particularly so where relations between landlords and landless laborers are concerned. Thus, even Jan Breman's sophisticated and rich study of dependent laborers in South Gujarat points to the jajmani system, the institutional form of caste relations in the agrarian context, as the basis for relations between laborers and landlords in the past. While his study illuminates how bonded labor relations can be understood in the light of the jajmani model, it fails to explain how these relations were reproduced. Are we to assume that the transactional norms of the caste system, once in place, simply drove laborers and landlords into actions that reproduced bondage?
- Type
- Articles
- Information
- Copyright
- Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1986
References
1 Claude Meillasoux, in particular, has stressed the pivotal role of reproduction in production. See his ‘From reproduction to production,’ Economy and Society, 1, 1 (1972). Goody's, JackProduction and Reproduction: A Comparative Study of the Domestic Domain (Cambridge, 1976)Google Scholar draws correlations between the organization of domestic units and mode of agriculture without drawing the tight relationship that Meillasoux develops between the social reproduction of the production unit and the production organization. While these anthropologists tend to deal with those strategies of reproduction that relate to kin relations, this essay is concerned with the reproduction of relations between classes.
2 Breman, Jan, Patronage and Exploitation: Emerging Agrarian Relations in South Gujarat (Berkeley and Los Angeles, 1974).Google Scholar
3 Scholars have too easily accepted the legal fiction that attributed long-term bondage of laborers to ‘loans’ that they had received from the landholders. For a critique of this view and an alternative interpretation, see Prakash, Gyan, ‘Production and the Reproduction of Bondage,’ pp. 243–62.Google Scholar
4 For a sophisticated comparative treatment of bondage from a supply and demand standpoint, see Niboer, H. J., Slavey as an Industrial System, 2nd edn (1900; The Hague, 1910).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
5 Bourdieu, Pierre, Outline of a Theory of Practice (Cambridge, 1977), pp. 22–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
6 The oral and written data used in this essay refer to the period roughly between the 1850s and the 1930s. In addition to using references in the oral data itself, I used the vivid memories the people in the region had of the revenue settlement operations in 1914–15 and the earthquake in 1934 to date the occurrences referred to by informants in their testimonies.
7 For a recent discussion on this point, see Habib, Irfan, ‘Agrarian Economy,’ in Raychaudhuri, Tapan and Habib, Irfan (eds), The Cambridge Economic History of India, I (Cambridge, 1982), p. 57.Google Scholar
8 Bihar State Archives (BSA), Patna Commissioner's Records; vol. 21 (1839) letter from the Officiating Superintendent of Khas Mahals, dated 10 January 1839, to the Officiating Commissioner of Revenue, Patna Division. Also see, Buchanan, Francis, An Account of the Districts of Bihar and Patna in 1811–12, II (Patna, 1936), p. 564.Google Scholar
9 This conclusion is drawn from the oral history fieldwork that I conducted in 1981–82, and from the summary information on the caste composition of most though not all the villages in Gaya District contained in ‘Village Notes,’ Gaya Collectorate Record Room (GCRR), compiled during the revenue settlement operations in 1911–18.
10 For a discussion of oral and written evidence on this point, see Prakash, ‘Production and the Reproduction of Bondage,’ Chs II and III.
11 Ibid., pp. 145–51.
12 This is developed in ibid., ch. IV.
13 For Bodh Gaya monastery's expanding land control through legal titles, see Government of Bengal, A Brief History of Bodh Gaya Math, District Gaya, compiled by Rai Ram Anugrah Narayan Singh Bahadur under the orders of Grierson, G. A. (Calcutta, 1893), PP. 16–18.Google Scholar
14 O'Malley, L. S. S., Bengal District Gazetteers: Gaya (Calcutta, 1906), p. 74 (GDG).Google Scholar
15 GDG, p. 77. The term bhut means ghost, and dak stands for a sorcerer. But the two terms are used by people as a pair in referring to spirits. When dak is used separately, it is almost always to refer to the spirit of a dead sorcerer.
16 This belief is in the following statement made by Karu Manjhi who as a young boy moved from his parental village Kajri to his wife's home in Sheorajpur sometime before 1914–15. ‘My father died a long time ago (sometime before 1934). He died in Kajri. Since I had come to Sheorajpur, I made a pinda [shrine] for him here. Although his kriya- karma [mortuary rite] was done in Kajri and his body merged with the soil there, his preta would have wandered around in Kajri causing problems if I had not made a pinda for him.’ Karu Manjhi's oral account, Sheorajpur, 6 February 1982.
17 Referring to the earthquake, Karu Manjhi remembered asking his father's preta to protect him. ‘He could do so because he was a preta. He could see everything that we could not. He warned me once that the dayan [witch] would cause my roof to fall if I did not propitiate the daks. I did so and nothing happened.’ (Karu Manjhi's oral testimony, Sheorajpur, 6 February 1982). Interestingly, in proverbs dealing with agriculture, foresight was attributed to dak and dakin (a female ghost). This is evident in aphorisms noted by George Grierson in the late nineteenth century. ‘If Aradra [the lunar asterism corresponding with the end of June and the beginning of July] does not rain at the commencement, and Hathiya [the lunar asterism corresponding with the first fortnight of October] at its end, saith Dak, hear, O Bhillari, the cultivator is crushed.’ See Grierson's, GeorgeBihar Peasant Life (Calcutta, 1885; rpt Delhi, 1975), p. 276.Google Scholar Another similar proverb recorded by Grierson was the following. ‘“When the clouds fly like the wings of the partridge, and when a widow smiles,” saith Dak, “hear, Dakini, O., the one is going to rain and the other to marry”’, (p. 280). Attribution of foreknowledge to ghosts accords well with the belief that spirits could see things that the living could not.Google Scholar
18 GDG, p. 78.
19 I did not come across any account of spirit affliction by heroic ancestors such as Tulsibir or any of the other birs.
20 See GDG, p. 77. In general, I found that the names of such spirits mostly ended with dak or dano. Although the meaning of these suffixes in their apparently Sanskrit roots is demon, spirits by these names were not regarded as evil at all times. In describing these spirits, the informants frequently used the term balwan (powerful) and khatarnak (dangerous). The attribution of potentially beneficial prescience to ghosts in proverbs dealing with agriculture (see note 5) suggests that daks were not thought of as evil at all times.
21 Karu Manjhi's oral account, Sheorajpur, 6 February 1982.
22 Karu Manjhi's oral account, Sheorajpur, 6 Feburary 1982. Ramjani, according to my informants, died soon after the revenue survey and settlement operations and before the earthquake in 1934, making the between period 1914 (when survey operations in the village occurred) and 1934 when he became a spirit. Although called malik devata, Ramjani Dak was different from ghosts in the landlords’ service who were also known by the name malik devata. The ancestral malik devalas were simply powerful ancestral ghosts but their writ did not run beyond the house.
23 GDG, p. 78.
24 Most accounts of spirit affliction concerned ghosts rather than ancestors who had died natural deaths. In speaking of cases of spirit affliction by powerful spirits, informants mentioned daks and dano rather than ancestral spirits. The few cases of harm caused by ancestors that I came across involved insufficient propitiation of ancestors. For instance, Keso Bhuinya's father was once afflicted by his ancestors when he slighted them with insufficient offering. Keso concluded this account by remarking that ancestors were ‘quiet spirits. They sit and watch over you, they protect you.’ (Keso Bhuinya's oral testimony, Bakraur, 12 February 1982).
25 Bloch, Maurice and Parry, Jonathan, ‘Introduction,’ in Death and Regeneration of Life (Cambridge, 1982), p. 15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
26 Keso Bhuinya's oral testimony, Bakraur, 12 February 1982. No doubt this reflects the present belief. But there is no reason to think that it was any different in the past. In fact, Keso Bhuinya said that his father told him the same thing when his grandfather died.
27 GDG, p. 77.
28 Oral testimony of Chandra Shekhar Lall, Bakraur, 4 September 1982.
29 Much of the above is based on O'Malley's description. See GDG, pp. 62–72, passim.
30 Throughout southern Gaya, the Bhuinyas were regarded as ritual specialists in spirit cults. S. C. Roy reported in 1932 that throughout Chotanagpur the descendants of the earliest settlers acted invariably as ritual specialists in spirit worship. See his ‘Report of Anthropological Work in 1930–31: Chotanagpur, the Chutias and the Bhuiyas’, Journal of Bihar and Orissa Research Society, 18 (1932), pp. 51–78.Google Scholar
31 What follows is based on the oral testimony of Karu Manjhi, Sheorajpur, 6 February 1982.
32 Bourdieu, , Outline, p. 109.Google Scholar
33 Oral testimony of Panchu Bhuinya, Sheorajpur, 3 September 1982.
34 Memories of these ghosts and of incidents associated with them were widespread in Gaya. But these were different from malik devatas which reigned within the house.
35 GDG, p. 76.
36 Oral testimony of Karu Manjhi, Sheorajpur, 16 February 1982.
37 ‘A peculiar feature of the power of ojhas over bhuts is found in the actual purchase and sale of them, which is said to be practiced by some low castes in the jungle-covered tracts to the south of the district. The bhut, when under proper control, is a valuable possession and becomes a marketable commodity. When the sale has been arranged, the ojha hands over a corked bamboo cylinder which is supposed to contain the bhut: this is then taken to the place, usually under a truee, at which it is intended that the bhut should in future reside.’ GDG, p. 76.
38 GDG, p. 76.
39 BSA; Gaya Collectorate Records, vol. 4a (Issue side), letter from the Deputy Magistrate of Nawada, dated 10 May 1852.
40 GCRR; ‘Village Notes’, Barachatti thana no: 266, village Charaili.
41 GCRR; ‘Village Notes’, Barachatti thana no: 266. village Charaili.
42 GDG, p. 76.
43 Karu Manjhi's oral testimony, Sheorajpur. 16 February 1982. According to Karu Manjhi, he learnt of this incident from Sodhar Bhuinya who, in turn, had been told about it by his grandfather, Pancham Bhuinya. Apparently it had happened during the life of Pancham Bhuinya. As Karu was a small boy at the time of the survey operations in 1914–15, and since, according to him, Sodhar Bhuinya was older than he (he was already working in agriculture as a kamia when Karu was a young boy), the date of this incident which occurred during Pancham Bhuinya's life can be placed well into the nineteenth century.
44 Keso Bhuinya's oral testimony, Bakraur, 13 February 1982. Since Bithal Bhuinya died before Pyare Lall whose death, according to his family records, occurred in 1926, this incident can be placed in the early part of this century.
45 This is what Keso was told by his grandfather.
46 Oral testimony of Bangali Manjhi, Bakraur, 16 February 1982. According to him, this happened after the survey operations in 1914–15, but I was unable to determine a more precise date.
47 Karu Manjhi's oral testimony, Sheorajpur, 3 March 1982.
48 Ibid.
49 Deoki Bhuinya's oral testimony, Bakraur, 16 March 1982.
50 This was the explanation given by informants. The arrival of malik devala was of course known only if some misfortune occurred. Otherwise, presumably the ghost was not known to have travelled to the woman's married home. This practice raises an interesting speculation. Does this indicate that maliks exercised a tight control over the kamias’ progeny in the past, that by virtue of their authority and power even over villages and lands that they did not hold directly, they controlled the marriage circles of their kamias? Control over males through a variety of transactions and domination over the progeny of women through the tight control of marriage and through ghosts would have given them a mastery over reproduction and production. Once, however, the malik's power became defined strictly by land control, as it did in the colonial period, such a strategy of domination over the progeny of women who lived on lands not held by him directly could not work.
51 Memories of incidents of setting spirits upon one's enemies were many. One that I recorded concerned a peasant, Prasad Mahto, setting Bhainsasur(who had come to Bakraur as a chalani devata) on his own brother-in-law because he had taken a corn cob from Prasad Mahto's field without his permission. Soon afterwards, the brother-in-law died. Bangali Manjhi's oral testimony, Bakraur, , 16 02 1982.Google Scholar
52 See Taussig's, Michael T.The Devil and Commodity Fetishism in South America (Chapel Hill, 1980), pt III.Google Scholar
- 6
- Cited by