This chapter explores the khuntkatti question as a potential lens through which to examine the political and social history of the Adivasi people in Kolhan. My argument is that the khuntkatti question is not only tied to resolving administrative challenges in the Adivasi-dominated regions of Bihar since the 1870s and in the Kolhan Government Estate (KGE) of the former Singhbhum district during 1913–1918, but also to the contemporary history of Adivasi assertions for identity and rights. The essay is divided into four sections. The first section provides a brief historiographical review. The second examines the Khuntkatti proceedings and the associated administrative and social debates. The third section investigates how the conflicts arising from these proceedings were leveraged by various stakeholders to establish a shared realm. A critical and enduring issue that emerged during the proceedings was the divergent ways in which Adivasiyat (Adivasihood or indigeneity) was represented, both administratively and socially. While the first two sections primarily engage with colonial perspectives, the fourth section focuses on the Ho community’s counter-representations of themselves. The chapter concludes by linking the colonial-era politicization of Khuntkatti to the broader identity movements in contemporary India.

错误:搜索内容不能为空,请输入英文关键词
错误:关键词超出字数限制,请精简
高级检索

Khuntkatti Question: Polity, Society, and History in Kolhan—1913–1918 and Beyond

  • Asoka Kumar Sen

摘要

This chapter explores the khuntkatti question as a potential lens through which to examine the political and social history of the Adivasi people in Kolhan. My argument is that the khuntkatti question is not only tied to resolving administrative challenges in the Adivasi-dominated regions of Bihar since the 1870s and in the Kolhan Government Estate (KGE) of the former Singhbhum district during 1913–1918, but also to the contemporary history of Adivasi assertions for identity and rights. The essay is divided into four sections. The first section provides a brief historiographical review. The second examines the Khuntkatti proceedings and the associated administrative and social debates. The third section investigates how the conflicts arising from these proceedings were leveraged by various stakeholders to establish a shared realm. A critical and enduring issue that emerged during the proceedings was the divergent ways in which Adivasiyat (Adivasihood or indigeneity) was represented, both administratively and socially. While the first two sections primarily engage with colonial perspectives, the fourth section focuses on the Ho community’s counter-representations of themselves. The chapter concludes by linking the colonial-era politicization of Khuntkatti to the broader identity movements in contemporary India.