The journey of an anthropologist in Chhotanagpur

Indian Economic and Social History Review

Volumn 41, Issue 2, 2004, Pages 165-198

  Dasgupta, Sangeeta ^a  

^a VISVA BHARATI UNIVERSITY   (India)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 3142681570     PISSN: 00194646     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/001946460404100203     Document Type: Review

References (206)

1. Sarat Chandra Roy's daughter, Ms Meera Roy, mentioned this to me when I was working at the Man in India Office at Ranchi. This information is also to be found in Anonymous, 'Sarat Chandra Roy (1871-1942)', Man in India (hereafter MII), Vol. 51(4), 1971, pp. 263-66. The author, Nirmal Kumar Bose, refers in this article to a 'confession' that Roy had made 'a few months before he passed away that if he were given the chance of living his life over again, he would disregard all the ethnographic accounts which he had written in the past. Instead, he would bury himself in a single village or a small region, and study in microscopic detail how the life of the community was built up as well as its culture'. Ibid., p. 266.
2. Sarat Chandra Roy's daughter, Ms Meera Roy, mentioned this to me when I was working at the Man in India Office at Ranchi. This information is also to be found in Anonymous, 'Sarat Chandra Roy (1871-1942)', Man in India (hereafter MII), Vol. 51(4), 1971, pp. 263-66. The author, Nirmal Kumar Bose, refers in this article to a 'confession' that Roy had made 'a few months before he passed away that if he were given the chance of living his life over again, he would disregard all the ethnographic accounts which he had written in the past. Instead, he would bury himself in a single village or a small region, and study in microscopic detail how the life of the community was built up as well as its culture'. Ibid., p. 266.
3. Some of the significant works in this context are Talal Asad, ed., Anthropology and the Colonial Encounter, London, 1973; James Boon, Other Tribes, Other Scribes, Ithaca, New York, 1982; George W. Stocking, ed., Observers Observed: Essays on Ethnographic Fieldwork, Madison Wisconsin, 1983; James Clifford and George E. Marcus, eds, Writing Culture; The Poetics and Politics of Ethnography, Berkeley, 1986; John and Jean Comaroff, Ethnography and the Historical Imagination, Colorado and Oxford, 1992; Peter Pels and Oscar Salemink, eds, Colonial Subjects: Essays on the Practical History of Anthropology, Ann Arbor, 1999; and Henrika Kuklick, The Savage Within: The Social History of British Anthropology, 1885-1945, Cambridge, 1999.
4. Some of the significant works in this context are Talal Asad, ed., Anthropology and the Colonial Encounter, London, 1973; James Boon, Other Tribes, Other Scribes, Ithaca, New York, 1982; George W. Stocking, ed., Observers Observed: Essays on Ethnographic Fieldwork, Madison Wisconsin, 1983; James Clifford and George E. Marcus, eds, Writing Culture; The Poetics and Politics of Ethnography, Berkeley, 1986; John and Jean Comaroff, Ethnography and the Historical Imagination, Colorado and Oxford, 1992; Peter Pels and Oscar Salemink, eds, Colonial Subjects: Essays on the Practical History of Anthropology, Ann Arbor, 1999; and Henrika Kuklick, The Savage Within: The Social History of British Anthropology, 1885-1945, Cambridge, 1999.
5. Some of the significant works in this context are Talal Asad, ed., Anthropology and the Colonial Encounter, London, 1973; James Boon, Other Tribes, Other Scribes, Ithaca, New York, 1982; George W. Stocking, ed., Observers Observed: Essays on Ethnographic Fieldwork, Madison Wisconsin, 1983; James Clifford and George E. Marcus, eds, Writing Culture; The Poetics and Politics of Ethnography, Berkeley, 1986; John and Jean Comaroff, Ethnography and the Historical Imagination, Colorado and Oxford, 1992; Peter Pels and Oscar Salemink, eds, Colonial Subjects: Essays on the Practical History of Anthropology, Ann Arbor, 1999; and Henrika Kuklick, The Savage Within: The Social History of British Anthropology, 1885-1945, Cambridge, 1999.
6. Some of the significant works in this context are Talal Asad, ed., Anthropology and the Colonial Encounter, London, 1973; James Boon, Other Tribes, Other Scribes, Ithaca, New York, 1982; George W. Stocking, ed., Observers Observed: Essays on Ethnographic Fieldwork, Madison Wisconsin, 1983; James Clifford and George E. Marcus, eds, Writing Culture; The Poetics and Politics of Ethnography, Berkeley, 1986; John and Jean Comaroff, Ethnography and the Historical Imagination, Colorado and Oxford, 1992; Peter Pels and Oscar Salemink, eds, Colonial Subjects: Essays on the Practical History of Anthropology, Ann Arbor, 1999; and Henrika Kuklick, The Savage Within: The Social History of British Anthropology, 1885-1945, Cambridge, 1999.
7. Some of the significant works in this context are Talal Asad, ed., Anthropology and the Colonial Encounter, London, 1973; James Boon, Other Tribes, Other Scribes, Ithaca, New York, 1982; George W. Stocking, ed., Observers Observed: Essays on Ethnographic Fieldwork, Madison Wisconsin, 1983; James Clifford and George E. Marcus, eds, Writing Culture; The Poetics and Politics of Ethnography, Berkeley, 1986; John and Jean Comaroff, Ethnography and the Historical Imagination, Colorado and Oxford, 1992; Peter Pels and Oscar Salemink, eds, Colonial Subjects: Essays on the Practical History of Anthropology, Ann Arbor, 1999; and Henrika Kuklick, The Savage Within: The Social History of British Anthropology, 1885-1945, Cambridge, 1999.
8. Some of the significant works in this context are Talal Asad, ed., Anthropology and the Colonial Encounter, London, 1973; James Boon, Other Tribes, Other Scribes, Ithaca, New York, 1982; George W. Stocking, ed., Observers Observed: Essays on Ethnographic Fieldwork, Madison Wisconsin, 1983; James Clifford and George E. Marcus, eds, Writing Culture; The Poetics and Politics of Ethnography, Berkeley, 1986; John and Jean Comaroff, Ethnography and the Historical Imagination, Colorado and Oxford, 1992; Peter Pels and Oscar Salemink, eds, Colonial Subjects: Essays on the Practical History of Anthropology, Ann Arbor, 1999; and Henrika Kuklick, The Savage Within: The Social History of British Anthropology, 1885-1945, Cambridge, 1999.
9. Some of the significant works in this context are Talal Asad, ed., Anthropology and the Colonial Encounter, London, 1973; James Boon, Other Tribes, Other Scribes, Ithaca, New York, 1982; George W. Stocking, ed., Observers Observed: Essays on Ethnographic Fieldwork, Madison Wisconsin, 1983; James Clifford and George E. Marcus, eds, Writing Culture; The Poetics and Politics of Ethnography, Berkeley, 1986; John and Jean Comaroff, Ethnography and the Historical Imagination, Colorado and Oxford, 1992; Peter Pels and Oscar Salemink, eds, Colonial Subjects: Essays on the Practical History of Anthropology, Ann Arbor, 1999; and Henrika Kuklick, The Savage Within: The Social History of British Anthropology, 1885-1945, Cambridge, 1999.
10. For significant works that deal with the historicisation of the 'tribe', refer to Nandini Sundar, Subalterns and Sovereigns: An Anthropological History of Bastar, 1854-1996, Delhi, 1997; Sumit Guha, Environment and Ethnicity in India, 1200-1991, Cambridge, 1999; Ajay Skaria, Hybrid Histories: Forests, Frontiers and Wildness in Western India, Delhi, 1999; and Meena Radhakrishna, Dishonoured by History: 'Criminal Tribes' and British Colonial Policy, Hyderabad, 2001.
11. For significant works that deal with the historicisation of the 'tribe', refer to Nandini Sundar, Subalterns and Sovereigns: An Anthropological History of Bastar, 1854-1996, Delhi, 1997; Sumit Guha, Environment and Ethnicity in India, 1200-1991, Cambridge, 1999; Ajay Skaria, Hybrid Histories: Forests, Frontiers and Wildness in Western India, Delhi, 1999; and Meena Radhakrishna, Dishonoured by History: 'Criminal Tribes' and British Colonial Policy, Hyderabad, 2001.
12. For significant works that deal with the historicisation of the 'tribe', refer to Nandini Sundar, Subalterns and Sovereigns: An Anthropological History of Bastar, 1854-1996, Delhi, 1997; Sumit Guha, Environment and Ethnicity in India, 1200-1991, Cambridge, 1999; Ajay Skaria, Hybrid Histories: Forests, Frontiers and Wildness in Western India, Delhi, 1999; and Meena Radhakrishna, Dishonoured by History: 'Criminal Tribes' and British Colonial Policy, Hyderabad, 2001.
13. For significant works that deal with the historicisation of the 'tribe', refer to Nandini Sundar, Subalterns and Sovereigns: An Anthropological History of Bastar, 1854-1996, Delhi, 1997; Sumit Guha, Environment and Ethnicity in India, 1200-1991, Cambridge, 1999; Ajay Skaria, Hybrid Histories: Forests, Frontiers and Wildness in Western India, Delhi, 1999; and Meena Radhakrishna, Dishonoured by History: 'Criminal Tribes' and British Colonial Policy, Hyderabad, 2001.
14. The writings of early British ethnographers and anthropologists, as well as that of their Indian counterparts, have been much discussed in recent academic writing. It is paradoxical that Roy, one of the most prolific of anthropologists in the early decades of the twentieth century, and whose name found mention in anthropological journals and writings, and missionary and colonial records, has been ignored by academicians today. Yet, in even as late as 1971, at the seven-day S.C. Roy International Centenary Celebrations held under the general presidentship of Professor C. Von Purer Haimendorf from the University of London, it was recommended that an S.C. Roy chair be created for eminent archaeologists and anthropologists at the Department of Anthropology, Ranchi University, and a foundation be created in his name, the funding for which was to come from the University Grants Commission. See 'Miscellaneous Notes, S.C. Roy International Centenary Celebration', MII, Vol. 52(1), pp. 87-90.
15. Verrier Elwin, The Aboriginals, Oxford Pamphlets on Indian Affairs, No. 14, Oxford, 1943, p. 6.
16. Roy refers to two such incidents: one was at a meeting-place of the Parha Council of the Mundas held some 40 miles away from Ranchi in 1921 during the non-cooperation movement; the other was before the annual jatra or the 'inter-tribal dancing-meet' when the Sub-Divisional Magistrate had expected trouble on the issue of the 'emblem' that was to appear on the flag to be carried to this meet. See Sarat Chandra Roy, The Importance of Anthropological Studies in India', New Review, 1938, reprinted in Sarat Chandra Roy (edited with an Introduction by Nirmal Kumar Bose), Studies in Indian Anthropology, Indian Studies: Past and Present, Calcutta, 1966, pp. 27-30.
17. Roy refers to two such incidents: one was at a meeting-place of the Parha Council of the Mundas held some 40 miles away from Ranchi in 1921 during the non-cooperation movement; the other was before the annual jatra or the 'inter-tribal dancing-meet' when the Sub-Divisional Magistrate had expected trouble on the issue of the 'emblem' that was to appear on the flag to be carried to this meet. See Sarat Chandra Roy, The Importance of Anthropological Studies in India', New Review, 1938, reprinted in Sarat Chandra Roy (edited with an Introduction by Nirmal Kumar Bose), Studies in Indian Anthropology, Indian Studies: Past and Present, Calcutta, 1966, pp. 27-30.
18. For details of the case, refer to The All India Reporter, 1941, Patna Section, published by D.V. Chitaley, Advocate, Nagpur, 1941, pp. 146-47. Reference to this case also appears in the Archer Papers, 'Tribal Justice', European Manuscripts (MSS Eur F 236/51), Oriental and India Office Collections, London. For a reference to his book, The Mundas and their Country, in the context of understanding 'the customary rules of succession and inheritance amongst the aboriginal tribes', refer to Letter No. 2093-A., dated Ranchi, 27 March 1913, from the Hon'ble Mr H. McPherson, Secretary to the Government, Bihar and Orissa, Appointment Department, to The Secretary of the Government of India, Home Department, in Papers Relating to the Survey and Settlement Operations in the District of Ranchi, G.P. (D.L.R.) No. 112-60-19.11.1927 - V.M.M., Unpublished, pp. 71-72. Even in as late as 1971 and 1972, Roy's text was used in the cases between Bhaiya Ram Munda vs Anurudh Patar (Case reported in The All India Reporter, 1971) and N.B. Horo vs Smt. Jahan Ara Jaipal Singh (Case reported in The All India Reporter, 1972). Refer to Appendix V, The Legalistic Aspect of "The Mundas and their Country'", in Sarat Chandra Roy, The Mundas and their Country, Ranchi, 1912, reprinted 1995, pp. lxiii-lxiv.
19. For details of the case, refer to The All India Reporter, 1941, Patna Section, published by D.V. Chitaley, Advocate, Nagpur, 1941, pp. 146-47. Reference to this case also appears in the Archer Papers, 'Tribal Justice', European Manuscripts (MSS Eur F 236/51), Oriental and India Office Collections, London. For a reference to his book, The Mundas and their Country, in the context of understanding 'the customary rules of succession and inheritance amongst the aboriginal tribes', refer to Letter No. 2093-A., dated Ranchi, 27 March 1913, from the Hon'ble Mr H. McPherson, Secretary to the Government, Bihar and Orissa, Appointment Department, to The Secretary of the Government of India, Home Department, in Papers Relating to the Survey and Settlement Operations in the District of Ranchi, G.P. (D.L.R.) No. 112-60-19.11.1927 - V.M.M., Unpublished, pp. 71-72. Even in as late as 1971 and 1972, Roy's text was used in the cases between Bhaiya Ram Munda vs Anurudh Patar (Case reported in The All India Reporter, 1971) and N.B. Horo vs Smt. Jahan Ara Jaipal Singh (Case reported in The All India Reporter, 1972). Refer to Appendix V, The Legalistic Aspect of "The Mundas and their Country'", in Sarat Chandra Roy, The Mundas and their Country, Ranchi, 1912, reprinted 1995, pp. lxiii-lxiv.
20. For details of the case, refer to The All India Reporter, 1941, Patna Section, published by D.V. Chitaley, Advocate, Nagpur, 1941, pp. 146-47. Reference to this case also appears in the Archer Papers, 'Tribal Justice', European Manuscripts (MSS Eur F 236/51), Oriental and India Office Collections, London. For a reference to his book, The Mundas and their Country, in the context of understanding 'the customary rules of succession and inheritance amongst the aboriginal tribes', refer to Letter No. 2093-A., dated Ranchi, 27 March 1913, from the Hon'ble Mr H. McPherson, Secretary to the Government, Bihar and Orissa, Appointment Department, to The Secretary of the Government of India, Home Department, in Papers Relating to the Survey and Settlement Operations in the District of Ranchi, G.P. (D.L.R.) No. 112-60-19.11.1927 - V.M.M., Unpublished, pp. 71-72. Even in as late as 1971 and 1972, Roy's text was used in the cases between Bhaiya Ram Munda vs Anurudh Patar (Case reported in The All India Reporter, 1971) and N.B. Horo vs Smt. Jahan Ara Jaipal Singh (Case reported in The All India Reporter, 1972). Refer to Appendix V, The Legalistic Aspect of "The Mundas and their Country'", in Sarat Chandra Roy, The Mundas and their Country, Ranchi, 1912, reprinted 1995, pp. lxiii-lxiv.
21. For details of the case, refer to The All India Reporter, 1941, Patna Section, published by D.V. Chitaley, Advocate, Nagpur, 1941, pp. 146-47. Reference to this case also appears in the Archer Papers, 'Tribal Justice', European Manuscripts (MSS Eur F 236/51), Oriental and India Office Collections, London. For a reference to his book, The Mundas and their Country, in the context of understanding 'the customary rules of succession and inheritance amongst the aboriginal tribes', refer to Letter No. 2093-A., dated Ranchi, 27 March 1913, from the Hon'ble Mr H. McPherson, Secretary to the Government, Bihar and Orissa, Appointment Department, to The Secretary of the Government of India, Home Department, in Papers Relating to the Survey and Settlement Operations in the District of Ranchi, G.P. (D.L.R.) No. 112-60-19.11.1927 - V.M.M., Unpublished, pp. 71-72. Even in as late as 1971 and 1972, Roy's text was used in the cases between Bhaiya Ram Munda vs Anurudh Patar (Case reported in The All India Reporter, 1971) and N.B. Horo vs Smt. Jahan Ara Jaipal Singh (Case reported in The All India Reporter, 1972). Refer to Appendix V, The Legalistic Aspect of "The Mundas and their Country'", in Sarat Chandra Roy, The Mundas and their Country, Ranchi, 1912, reprinted 1995, pp. lxiii-lxiv.
22. 'Correspondence', MII, Vol. 1(2),.p. i.
23. Sarat Chandra Roy, 'The Effect on the Aborigines of Chotanagpur of their Contact with Western Civilization', Journal of the Bihar and Orissa Research Society, Vol. 17(4), p. 359.
24. Ibid., p. 377.
25. Ibid., p. 376.
26. Ibid., p. 377.
27. Indeed, the complicity of colonialism and anthropology lay in the nature of the discipline itself, a point widely accepted in recent writings in critical anthropology. 'It is not a matter of dispute,' writes Talal Asad, 'that social anthropology emerged as a distinct discipline at the beginning of the colonial era, that it became a flourishing academic profession towards its close, or that throughout this period its efforts were devoted to a description and analysis - carried out by Europeans, for a European audience - of non-European societies dominated by European power.' See Asad, ed., Anthropology and the Colonial Encounter, pp. 14-15.
28. Roy had begun to write at a time when the discipline of anthropology was in its infancy in Europe. As Kuklick has pointed out, even if anthropology had a 'recognizable identity' by 1805 when the first published use of the word 'anthropologist' appeared in the Edinburgh Review, not until 1884, however, was the field accorded recognition. In that year, the first university position in anthropology in Britain was created for E.B. Tylor; in the same year, the British Association for the Advancement of Science conceded that the field was entitled to a section of its own in their journal. Yet even in the 1930s, the professional community was so small that anthropology's audience was composed largely of amateurs. See Kuklick, The Savage Within, pp. 6-8.
29. The first departments of anthropology and sociology were set up in Bombay in 1919, and in Calcutta in 1920. See Sundar, Subalterns and Sovereigns, p. 158.
30. Sundar, while discussing colonial anthropology, uses the categories of 'anthropologist-administrators' and 'professional anthropologists'. Ibid., pp. 158-60. She, however, includes Roy within this latter category (p. 158), although Roy was neither university-trained, nor a professional in the field of anthropology. More importantly, his views were often markedly different from that expressed by this group. Refer to pp. 197-98 of this article.
31. Nirmal Kumar Bose, 'Introduction', in Roy, Studies in Indian Anthropology, p. i.
32. In 1938, at the annual meeting of the Indian Anthropological Institute held in Calcutta, Roy was hailed as the 'Father of Indian Ethnology' by Hutton. 'Obituary Notice', MII, Vol. XXII(1), 1942, p. iii.
33. Refer for details to p. 176 of this article.
34. Sarat Chandra Roy, 'An Indian Outlook on Anthropology', Man, Vol. 172, 1938, pp. 146-50; and Sarat Chandra Roy, 'The Study of Anthropology from the Indian View-point', Journal of the Benares Hindu University, 10 Aug. 1937, pp. 243-56. This article, found among his private papers at the Man In India Office, Ranchi, was reprinted in MII, Vol. 66(1), 1986, pp. 81-93.
35. Sarat Chandra Roy, 'An Indian Outlook on Anthropology', Man, Vol. 172, 1938, pp. 146-50; and Sarat Chandra Roy, 'The Study of Anthropology from the Indian View-point', Journal of the Benares Hindu University, 10 Aug. 1937, pp. 243-56. This article, found among his private papers at the Man In India Office, Ranchi, was reprinted in MII, Vol. 66(1), 1986, pp. 81-93.
36. Sarat Chandra Roy, 'An Indian Outlook on Anthropology', Man, Vol. 172, 1938, pp. 146-50; and Sarat Chandra Roy, 'The Study of Anthropology from the Indian View-point', Journal of the Benares Hindu University, 10 Aug. 1937, pp. 243-56. This article, found among his private papers at the Man In India Office, Ranchi, was reprinted in MII, Vol. 66(1), 1986, pp. 81-93.
37. Roy, The Mundas and their Country, pp. 1-2.
38. Sarat Chandra Roy, 'Anthropological Research in India', MII, Vol. 1(1), 1921, p. 54. This was an elaboration of the author's Presidential address to the Section of Anthropology and Ethnography at the Indian Science Congress at its eighth annual meeting held in Calcutta from 31 Jan. to 5 Feb. 1921.
39. I b i d.
40. Roy, 'The Study of Anthropology from the Indian View-point', p. 243.
41. Ibid., p. 249.
42. Roy, 'The Importance of Anthropological Studies in India', p. 21.
43. Verrier Elwin, 'Comment', MII, Vol. XXII(4), 1942, pp. 195-96.
44. Frazer's comment is quoted in 'Some Opinions' on Sarat Chandra Roy's Principles and Methods on Physical Anthropology (Patna University Readership Lectures), Ranchi, 1921 in the back-covers of certain editions of the MII
45. Roy, 'Anthropological Research in India', p. 11.
46. Sarat Chandra Roy, Types of Cultural Theory', MII, Vol. 1(3), 1921, pp. 239-61.
47. Roy, 'Anthropological Research in India', p. 11.
48. Sarat Chandra Roy, 'Presidential Address, Anthropolgical Section, of the Sixth Oriental Congress, Patna, 1930', in Roy, Studies in Indian Anthropology, p. 9.
49. Though colonial science, itself an evolving discipline, remained distinct from the practice of science in the continent, there emerged a consensus in the understanding of the 'method' of science in practice. The mission of science implied a critical, 'judging' epistemology: dominated by the model of natural history, science sought to reach behind, and classify, everyday phenomena by comparing specimens of species, languages, or forms of civilisation, and establishing their basic units and the relations between them. See Peter Pels, The Rise and Fall of the Indian Aborigines', in Pels and Salemink, eds, Colonial Subjects: Essays on the Practical History of Anthropology, pp. 87-88.
50. Adam Kuper, Anthropologists and Anthropology: The British School 1922-1972, Allen Lane, 1973, p. 123.
51. Roy, 'The Importance of Anthropological Studies in India', p. 21.
52. Roy, 'Presidential Address', Anthropological Section of the Sixth Oriental Congress, Patna, 1930, pp. 3-4.
53. Roy, 'Anthropological Research in India', p. 52.
54. Ibid., p. 12.
55. Ibid., p. 48. Roy provided statistics to elaborate his point: 'between 1784 to 1833, out of a little over 100 anthropological papers published in the Society's Journals and Proceedings, the contributions of Indian writers did not amount to more than three short papers . . . since 1833, although we have a slightly better account to give of ourselves, Indian writers on anthropological subjects... still remain a hopeless minority. Out of about 215 articles and short notes on Ethnography and folk-lore that appeared in the Proceedings, Journals and Memoirs of the Asiatic Society of Bengal from 1884 to 1920, not more than 65 were contributed by Indians'.
56. Government of Bengal, General Department, Miscellaneous Branch, A Proceedings, November 1895.
57. For a more detailed account of the ethnographic tradition in early twentieth century India, refer to Bernard S. Cohn, 'The Study of Indian Society and Culture', in his An Anthropologist among the Historians and Other Essays, Delhi, 1990, p. 165.
58. A.C. Haddon had written the 'Introduction' to Sarat Chandra Roy, The Oraons of Chota Nagpur, Ranchi, 1915, reprinted 1984, pp. 1-7.
59. Roy, Oraons of Chota Nagpur, Preface, pp. v-vi.
60. Roy, The Mundas and their Country, p. 223.
61. Refer for details, Subrata Ray, 'Bismrita Bengali Monishi Saratchandra Roy' (The Forgotten Bengali Intellectual Saratchandra Roy), Jubomanosh, March 1996, pp. 3-8 and 41. This article, extremely detailed and informative, is a rare detailed biographical essay on Roy. The author, Roy's grandson and himself a student of anthropology, refers to his family history and draws upon the childhood memories of his grandfather, as he details the life of Roy. See also, Anonymous, 'Sarat Chandra Roy', pp. 263-64.
62. Refer for details, Subrata Ray, 'Bismrita Bengali Monishi Saratchandra Roy' (The Forgotten Bengali Intellectual Saratchandra Roy), Jubomanosh, March 1996, pp. 3-8 and 41. This article, extremely detailed and informative, is a rare detailed biographical essay on Roy. The author, Roy's grandson and himself a student of anthropology, refers to his family history and draws upon the childhood memories of his grandfather, as he details the life of Roy. See also, Anonymous, 'Sarat Chandra Roy', pp. 263-64.
63. Ray, 'Bismrita Bangali Monishi Saratchandra Roy', p. 4.
64. Roy wrote: 'Any one having had occasion to watch at close quarters the administration of justice in certain aboriginal areas of India will be struck by the amount of injustice done, in spite of the best intentions, by judges and magistrates and police officers of all grades, owing to their ignorance of the customs and mentality of the aboriginal tribes they have to deal with.' See Roy, 'The Importance of Anthropological Studies in India', p. 27.
65. T.N. Madan, 'Sarat Chandra Roy', MII, Vol. 32(2), 1952, p. 48.
66. For bibliographical references on Roy, refer to W.G. Archer, 'A Bibliography of Sarat Chandra Roy', MII, Vol. 22(4), pp. 261-62; Bulletin of the Anthropological Survey of India, Government of India, Vol. XVII(2), 1968, pp. 217-25; R.M. Sarkar, 'S.C. Roy's Contributions in Bengali', MII, Vol. 52(4), 1972, pp. 354-58.
67. For bibliographical references on Roy, refer to W.G. Archer, 'A Bibliography of Sarat Chandra Roy', MII, Vol. 22(4), pp. 261-62; Bulletin of the Anthropological Survey of India, Government of India, Vol. XVII(2), 1968, pp. 217-25; R.M. Sarkar, 'S.C. Roy's Contributions in Bengali', MII, Vol. 52(4), 1972, pp. 354-58.
68. For bibliographical references on Roy, refer to W.G. Archer, 'A Bibliography of Sarat Chandra Roy', MII, Vol. 22(4), pp. 261-62; Bulletin of the Anthropological Survey of India, Government of India, Vol. XVII(2), 1968, pp. 217-25; R.M. Sarkar, 'S.C. Roy's Contributions in Bengali', MII, Vol. 52(4), 1972, pp. 354-58.
69. Roy, 'Anthropological Research in India', p. 45.
70. He was the only Indian to have received this honour. Refer to Ray, 'Bismrita Bangali Monishi Saratchandra Roy', p. 6.
71. For biographical sketches on Roy, refer to 'Obituary Notice', MII, Vol. XXII(1), 1942, pp. i-v; Madan, 'Sarat Chandra Roy', pp. 48-51; Nirmal Kumar Bose, 'Introduction', in Roy, Studies in Indian Anthropology', pp. i-iv; Anonymous, 'Sarat Chandra Roy (1871-1942)', pp. 263-66; R.M. Sarkar, 'S.C. Roy's Contributions in Bengali', pp. 354-58; Subrata Ray, 'Bismrita Bangali Monishi Saratchandra Roy', pp. 3-8 and 41.
72. For biographical sketches on Roy, refer to 'Obituary Notice', MII, Vol. XXII(1), 1942, pp. i-v; Madan, 'Sarat Chandra Roy', pp. 48-51; Nirmal Kumar Bose, 'Introduction', in Roy, Studies in Indian Anthropology', pp. i-iv; Anonymous, 'Sarat Chandra Roy (1871-1942)', pp. 263-66; R.M. Sarkar, 'S.C. Roy's Contributions in Bengali', pp. 354-58; Subrata Ray, 'Bismrita Bangali Monishi Saratchandra Roy', pp. 3-8 and 41.
73. For biographical sketches on Roy, refer to 'Obituary Notice', MII, Vol. XXII(1), 1942, pp. i-v; Madan, 'Sarat Chandra Roy', pp. 48-51; Nirmal Kumar Bose, 'Introduction', in Roy, Studies in Indian Anthropology', pp. i-iv; Anonymous, 'Sarat Chandra Roy (1871-1942)', pp. 263-66; R.M. Sarkar, 'S.C. Roy's Contributions in Bengali', pp. 354-58; Subrata Ray, 'Bismrita Bangali Monishi Saratchandra Roy', pp. 3-8 and 41.
74. For biographical sketches on Roy, refer to 'Obituary Notice', MII, Vol. XXII(1), 1942, pp. i-v; Madan, 'Sarat Chandra Roy', pp. 48-51; Nirmal Kumar Bose, 'Introduction', in Roy, Studies in Indian Anthropology', pp. i-iv; Anonymous, 'Sarat Chandra Roy (1871-1942)', pp. 263-66; R.M. Sarkar, 'S.C. Roy's Contributions in Bengali', pp. 354-58; Subrata Ray, 'Bismrita Bangali Monishi Saratchandra Roy', pp. 3-8 and 41.
75. For biographical sketches on Roy, refer to 'Obituary Notice', MII, Vol. XXII(1), 1942, pp. i-v; Madan, 'Sarat Chandra Roy', pp. 48-51; Nirmal Kumar Bose, 'Introduction', in Roy, Studies in Indian Anthropology', pp. i-iv; Anonymous, 'Sarat Chandra Roy (1871-1942)', pp. 263-66; R.M. Sarkar, 'S.C. Roy's Contributions in Bengali', pp. 354-58; Subrata Ray, 'Bismrita Bangali Monishi Saratchandra Roy', pp. 3-8 and 41.
76. For biographical sketches on Roy, refer to 'Obituary Notice', MII, Vol. XXII(1), 1942, pp. i-v; Madan, 'Sarat Chandra Roy', pp. 48-51; Nirmal Kumar Bose, 'Introduction', in Roy, Studies in Indian Anthropology', pp. i-iv; Anonymous, 'Sarat Chandra Roy (1871-1942)', pp. 263-66; R.M. Sarkar, 'S.C. Roy's Contributions in Bengali', pp. 354-58; Subrata Ray, 'Bismrita Bangali Monishi Saratchandra Roy', pp. 3-8 and 41.
77. Refer to the title of the article by Roy, 'The Study of Anthropology from the Indian Viewpoint'.
78. Roy, "The Study of Anthropology from the Indian View-point', p. 254.
79. While tracing the sociology of Indian sociology, Ramkrishna Mukherjee writes: 'Most of the pioneers were ardent nationalists, but only a few of them were actively involved in politics. Also, even those who were engaged in active politics were not dogmatists or doctrinaires in so far as their academic life was concerned.' Ramkrishna Mukherjee, Sociology of Indian Sociology, New Delhi, 1979, p. 29.
80. Roy refers to E.B. Tylor's monograph, Primitive Culture, London, 1871.
81. Roy, 'Types of Cultural Theory', p. 241.
82. Roy, The Oraons of Chota Nagpur, Preface, p. v.
83. These are copied verbatim from his diaries titled 'Ethnological Notes' and 'Anthropological Notes Part II' found among his private papers in the Office of the Man in India at Ranchi.
84. Physical anthropology saw man as a biological entity; archaeology studied the physical remains of the past in a period when documents were unavailable; comparative philology depended upon European grammatical categories; ethnography was historically the description of the primitive; and ethnology was an attempt to classify globally the great variety of cultures. By 1860, for example, points out Stocking, the philological dominance of ethnology was passing, and the study of racial history in Britain was strongly influenced by archaeology, physical anthropology, and now folklore. George Stocking's viewpoint is referred to by James Urry in his 'Englishmen; Celts, and Iberians: The Ethnographic Survey of the United Kingdom, 1892-1899', in George Stocking, ed., Functionalism Historicised: Essays on British Social Anthropology, Wisconsin, 1984, p. 84.
85. Roy, Types of Cultural Theory', pp. 241-42.
86. Roy, The Oraons of Chota Nagpur, p. 8.
87. Ibid., p. 52.
88. I b i d.
89. I b i d.
90. Ibid., p. 16.
91. I b i d.
92. Ibid., p. 17.
93. The Oraons in their own language call themselves Kurukh,' Roy wrote. Ibid., p. 9.
94. Ibid., p. 17.
95. James Urry, 'Englishmen, Celts, and Iberians: The Ethnographic Survey of the United Kingdom', p. 86.
96. Roy, The Oraons of Chota Nagpur, p. 18.
97. I b i d.
98. Ibid., p. 124.
99. I b i d.
100. Ibid., p. 246.
101. Ibid., p. 22.
102. I b i d.
103. Ibid., p. 31.
104. Ibid., p. 248.
105. Ibid., p. 123.
106. Ibid., p. 125.
107. Ibid., p. 186.
108. Ibid., p. 189.
109. Ibid., p. 197.
110. I b i d.
111. The Oraons were not, Roy. argued, an isolated people but were in constant interaction with the landlords of the village 'who were for the most part Hindus and occasionally Muhammadans', and with the 'low class Hindu or Hinduised castes' of the Lohars, Kumhars, Jolahas, Chicks, Baraiks, Turis, Mahalis, Ors and Coraits. In addition, contact was established with other 'purely aboriginal tribes' like the Mundas, Kharias, Korwars and Asurs. Ibid., p. 45.
112. Ibid., p. 122.
113. Clifford, 'On Ethnographic Allegory', in Clifford and Marcus, eds, Writing Culture, p. 109.
114. Bernard S. Cohn, 'Anthropology and History in the 1980s', in his An Anthropologist among the Historians and Other Essays, p. 55.
115. Bronislaw Malinowski, The Argonauts of the Western Pacific, London, 1922, p. 3.
116. Refer to Cohn, 'Anthropology and History in the 1980s', p. 55.
117. Roy, 'Types of Cultural Theory', p. 250.
118. Sarat Chandra Roy, Oraon Religion and Customs, Ranchi, 1928.
119. Ibid., p. 322.
120. These are copied verbatim from his diaries titled 'Ethnological Notes' found among his private papers in the Office of the Man in India at Ranchi.
121. Roy, Oraon Religion and Customs, Preface.
122. Ibid., p. 1.
123. In his writings on magic, science and religion, Malinowski's emphasis, as Adam Kuper has pointed out, was on the individual and his goals; apparently irrational beliefs and rites made sense in his opinion when their use was appreciated. Kuper, Anthropologists and Anthropology: The British School 1922-1972, p. 43.
124. Roy, Oraon Religion and Customs, p. 4.
125. Ibid., p. 1.
126. Surajit Sinha makes this point in the context of Roy's monograph The Mundas and their Country. Refer to Sinha, 'Is There an Indian Tradition in Social/Cultural Anthropology: Retrospect and Prospects', Journal of Indian Anthropological Society, Vol. 6, 1971, p. 5.
127. Surajit Sinha makes this point in the context of Roy's monograph The Mundas and their Country. Refer to Sinha, 'Is There an Indian Tradition in Social/Cultural Anthropology: Retrospect and Prospects', Journal of Indian Anthropological Society, Vol. 6, 1971, p. 5.
128. Sarat Chandra Roy, 'A New Religious Movement among the Oraons', Mil, Vol. 1(4), 1921, p. 267. Roy's chapter on the Tana Bhagat movement in his monograph, Oraon Religion and Customs, draws upon the ideas expressed in this article.
129. Sarat Chandra Roy, 'A New Religious Movement among the Oraons', Mil, Vol. 1(4), 1921, p. 267. Roy's chapter on the Tana Bhagat movement in his monograph, Oraon Religion and Customs, draws upon the ideas expressed in this article.
130. I b i d.
131. Clifford, 'On Ethnographic Allegory', p. 98.
132. Roy, Oraon Religion and Customs, p. 314.
133. Ibid., p. 323.
134. I b i d.
135. Roy, 'Anthropological Research in India', p. 55.
136. I b i d.
137. Ibid., pp. 55-56.
138. C.V. Raman had already been awarded the Nobel Prize by the time Roy had written this paper.
139. Sinha, 'Is There an Indian Tradition in Social/Cultural Anthropology: Retrospect and Prospects', p. 2.
140. Ibid., p. 6.
141. The debate on tribal policy in India was defined in terms of two broad positions: isolationism or protectionism, and assimilation. See Sundar, Subalterns and Sovereigns, p. 180. Anthropolgical debates in this period were structured within the parameters defined by these schools.
142. Refer to Sundar, Subalterns and Sovereigns, p. 159
143. Anonymous, 'Sarat Chandra Roy (1871-1942)', p. 264.
144. Sarat Chandra Roy, 'The Aborigines of Chotanagpur: Their Proper Status in the Reformed Constitution', Indian Nation (1936), p. 25. This article is found among Roy's private papers in the Office of the Man in India at Ranchi.
145. Ibid., p. 24.
146. Roy, The Effect on the Aborigines of Chota Nagpur of their Contact with Western Civilisation', pp. 358-94.
147. Roy, 'The Aborigines of Chotanagpur: Their Proper Status in the Reformed Constitution', pp. 21-25.
148. Roy, 'The Study of Anthropology from the Indian View-point', pp. 243-56.
149. Roy, 'The Importance of Anthropological Studies in India', pp. 21-31.
150. Roy, The Aborigines of Chotanagpur: Their Proper Status in the Reformed Constitution', p. 25.
151. Ibid., p. 24.
152. Ibid., p. 22.
153. I b i d.
154. I b i d.
155. I b i d.
156. I b i d.
157. Ibid., p. 24.
158. I b i d.
159. I b i d.
160. Ibid., p. 22.
161. Ibid., p. 25.
162. Ibid., pp. 22-23.
163. Roy, 'The Effect on the Aborigines of Chota Nagpur of their Contact with Western Civilization', p. 362.
164. Ibid., p. 359.
165. Roy was critical of the negative impact of the British system of administration on the landsystem of Chhotanagpur that had transformed the communal ownership of villages, and of the British system of justice, law and legal procedure that had impaired the social solidarity of the tribe and weakened the authority of its heads. Ibid., p. 375.
166. Ibid., p. 393.
167. Roy, 'The Study of Anthropology from the Indian View-point'.
168. In its search for origins, or in its search for a 'true' and 'objective' history', scientific analysis discarded the texts of Oriental tradition as symbols of a 'rude age'. See Pels, 'The Rise and Fall of the Indian Aborigines', p. 88.
169. Roy, 'The Study of Anthropology from the Indian View-point', p. 251.
170. Ibid., p. 243.
171. A similar point was made by Roy while studying folklore and tradition in India. He wrote: The collection of folk-lore material, particularly folk-traditions and folk-customs and folk-rites, has not hitherto been altogether neglected in India .... The Puranas and the two great epics of India, particularly the Mahabharata, are undoubtedly rich store-houses of ancient Indian tradition.' See Sarat Chandra Roy, 'The Study of Folk-lore and Tradition in India', Journal of the Bihar and Orissa Research Society, Vol. XVIII, Parts III-IV, 1932, p. 353.
172. Refer to pp. 186-87 of this article.
173. Roy, 'The Study of Anthropology from the Indian View-point', p. 245.
174. Ibid., p. 246.
175. Ibid., p. 247.
176. Ibid., p. 243.
177. Ibid., p. 250.
178. Ibid., pp. 251-52.
179. Ibid., p. 252.
180. Ibid., p. 249.
181. I b i d.
182. Ibid., p. 256.
183. Roy was a 'deeply religious man', points out Nirmal Kumar Bose in his 'Introduction', in Roy, 'Studies in Indian Anthropology', p. ii.
184. I owe this point to Professor Gautam Bhadra.
185. Ray, 'Bismrita Bangali Monishi Saratchandra Roy', p. 8. Ray provides an interesting exchange between Roy and his eldest daughter-in-law, Kamaladebi. Roy explains to her why, despite his attraction for the Brahmo faith in his more youthful days, he never ultimately converted to the faith. To quote him: 'In those days, I thought much about it but finally realized that the ultimate religion is in the mind of man, in his behaviour. If true religion is in the mind of man, then all religions are equally good. There is no salvation with conversion. The implication of rituals lies elsewhere: these teach man to be governed by rules; these bind society together. .But ceremony is not religion; religion is in the minds of men.' Ibid., p. 8 (Translation mine).
186. Ray, 'Bismrita Bangali Monishi Saratchandra Roy', p. 8. Ray provides an interesting exchange between Roy and his eldest daughter-in-law, Kamaladebi. Roy explains to her why, despite his attraction for the Brahmo faith in his more youthful days, he never ultimately converted to the faith. To quote him: 'In those days, I thought much about it but finally realized that the ultimate religion is in the mind of man, in his behaviour. If true religion is in the mind of man, then all religions are equally good. There is no salvation with conversion. The implication of rituals lies elsewhere: these teach man to be governed by rules; these bind society together. .But ceremony is not religion; religion is in the minds of men.' Ibid., p. 8 (Translation mine).
187. Roy, 'The Study of Anthropology from the Indian View-point', pp. 250-51.
188. Roy, 'The Importance of Anthropological Studies in India', p. 31.
189. Roy, 'The Study of Anthropology from the Indian View-point', p. 256. Also see Roy,.'The Importance of Anthropological Studies in India', p. 31.
190. Roy, 'The Study of Anthropology from the Indian View-point', p. 256. Also see Roy,.'The Importance of Anthropological Studies in India', p. 31.
191. Refer to pp. 170-73 of this article.
192. Roy, The Study of Anthropology from the Indian View-point', p. 254.
193. Roy, 'The Importance of Anthropological Studies in India', p. 30.
194. I b i d.
195. I b i d.
196. Ibid., p. 31.
197. Elwin's response to the proposal of Mr Thakkar to establish an association for 'aboriginals' is found among the Archer Papers, 'On the proposal of Mr. Thakkar to found an "All India Society for safeguarding aboriginal interests" to be named Indian Aborigines Friends Society', European Manuscripts (MSS Eur F 236/11), Oriental and India Office Collections, London.
198. I b i d.
199. I b i d.
200. Roy, 'The Effect on the Aborigines of Chota Nagpur of their Contact with Western Civilization', p. 393.
201. I b i d.
202. Roy, 'The Aborigines of Chotanagpur: Their Proper Status in the Reformed Constitution', p. 25.
203. I b i d.
204. Carol Upadhya, 'The Hindu Nationalist Sociology of G.S. Ghurye', Paper presented at the National Workshop on 'Knowledge, Institutions, Practices: The Formation of Indian Anthropology and Sociology', Institute of Economic Growth, Delhi, 2000, pp. 24-26.
205. Roy, 'The Importance of Anthropological Studies in India', p. 30.
206. Clifford and Marcus, eds, Writing Culture, p. 25.