Nation Building on the Margins: How the Anthropologists of India Contributed?

Bengal Famine and the Rehabilitation of the Destitute

Das (1898–1964) was one of the founder teachers of the oldest Anthropology department of India at Calcutta University and he was famous for his ethnographic fieldwork. He conducted fieldworks to assess the impact of industrialisation in Birlapur in West Bengal, and wrote thought provoking articles containing anthropological and sociological analyses on Bengal dowry restriction bill of 1940 and Hindu code bill in the years 1940 and 1944 along with articles on the practical suggestions for the improvement of museums in India (Ray, 1974, pp. 56–60). ⁴ Das’ book on the famine of Bengal, which took place in 1943 was a unique and rare first-hand study done by any anthropologist or social scientist on the victims of one of the greatest tragedies of our country under the colonial rule. An earlier version of the book was discussed in the then British Parliament and some of the recommendations advanced by Das were adopted by the Famine Inquiry Commission in 1944 formed by the colonial government for the prevention of future famines in India (Das, 1949, pp. iii–iv). Nehru in his book The Discovery of India also mentioned about the anthropological survey conducted by Das on the famine affected population of Bengal and expressed his confidence on the results of the survey in contrast to the one carried out by the government (Nehru, 1946, pp. 495–496). Ironically enough, the Nobel Laureate economist Sen though gave reference to Das’ original work several times in his famous book Poverty and Famines, but he did not mention the explanatory and policy dimensions of this brilliant work (Sen, 2008).

The subtitle of the book Bengal Famine is phrased in the following words: ‘As revealed in a Survey of the Destitutes in Calcutta’. It is true that the book is the result of a survey undertaken by a team of anthropologists during 1943–1944 in Calcutta city and also in the villages of the ten districts of undivided Bengal. The idea of conducting a survey with a team of trained anthropologists was first conceived by Das in July–August of 1943 when hundreds of hungry destitutes entered the city of Calcutta in search of food. Das proposed about the survey to his colleagues and prepared a detailed questionnaire and a team was formed with eleven trained anthropologists, which included the teachers and research students of the Department of Anthropology of the Calcutta University. The data, collected were analysed and a preliminary report was written, and a major part of the report was submitted to the Famine Inquiry commission in 1944 in the form of a memorandum. The report was later written in the form of a book by Das in July 1948 and was published in 1949 by the Calcutta University. This anthropological survey was conducted with full methodological rigour and the team had no national or international funding agency behind them; no political agenda was lying before them. The Calcutta University sanctioned a sum of ₹500 only to extend the survey in the rural areas of the ten districts of erstwhile undivided Bengal. In fact, the two chapters on methodology, which are the best portions of the book, reveal its strength. The chapter XI of the book entitled ‘Causes of the Famine of 1943’ is another treasure-house of the book which places Bengal Famine far above the category of a run-of-the-mill ‘sample survey’. Nehru in his book The Discovery of India (1946) mentioned about the survey on Bengal Famine before the publication of the book by Das and expressed his confidence on the results of the survey in contrast to the one carried out by the government. In the words of Nehru

The Department of Anthropology of the Calcutta University carried out an extensive scientific survey of the sample groups in the famine areas. They arrived at the figure of about 3,400,000 total deaths by famine in Bengal.… Official figures of the Bengal Government based largely on unreliable reports from village patwaris or headmen gave a much lower figure. (Nehru, 1946, pp. 495–496)

The ten chapters of Bengal Famine dealt elaborately with the demographic, economic and socio–cultural aspects of one of the greatest calamities of Bengal in the colonial period and one of the most important sections is the final chapter of the book in which Das dealt with the rehabilitative and preventive measures to tackle the famine. The section entitled ‘How to combat famine’ is divided into two subsections, viz., (A) long range measures and (B) immediate measures. Let us first discuss about the ‘immediate measures’ suggested by Das. Within a short space, Das was able to outline the short-term strategies for bringing relief to the famine affected population which according to him should first involve rapid surveys to identify the specific needs of the people according to region, occupation and the nature of devastation caused by the famine. In order to illustrate his ideas, he dealt with the petty cultivators, fishermen and the potters since the first represented the largest group in the economic life of Bengal, the second was the largest rural industry and the third was the most important artisan group in rural Bengal (Das, 1949, p. 127).

Under the long range measures, Das’ recommendations followed his analysis of causes of the famine. He strongly recommended that in order to avoid future food shortages, heavy pressure on land in Bengal must be relieved and this could be done by adopting two interrelated approaches, viz., (a) improvement of agriculture and (b) development of industries. For Das, improvement in agriculture did not mean a mere increase in food production with better technology but to change the relations of production through co-operative farming. ⁵ The co-operative farming according to Das should have been linked up with the village industries which were to be built up for creating employment for the rural population. In the final section of Bengal Famine, he worked out a plan in detail about the formation of such co-operatives and their tasks. I quote from the original

The innumerable fragments of cultivable land possessed by the inhabitants of a village or of any other similar territorial unit are to be pooled together into one gigantic farm.… All the villagers are to be members of this co-operative organisation. The capital of the organisation is to be divided into a number of shares. The owners of the plots of land will get shares of the organisation according to the market value of the plots of land taken from them. The remaining part of the capital is to be realised from the inhabitants of the village by selling the shares. The maximum number of shares which an individual will be entitled to purchase is to be fixed according to the principle of co-operative organisations. The co-operative organisation will take up the management of the farm and factory. As a general rule the shareholders are to be employed in all the different types of work of the farm and of the factory, as far as possible. (Das, 1949, pp. 124–125)

The improvement of agriculture in Bengal through the formation of co-operatives seemed to be the best solution for Das in the context of small, scattered and fragmented landholdings. But, at the same time he was also aware of the fact that pooling together of the small sized farms into a large one would lead to the unemployment of quite a good number of persons engaged in agriculture. To tackle with this problem, Das suggested that agriculture-based industries should be established to absorb the labour force no more required for agriculture. In the words of Das

Rice husking and hessian making may be profitably started in rice and jute producing centres respectively, for employment of labour not required for farming. Fruit canning may be organised where fruit gardens are planted. Cheroots may be made where tobacco is cultivated. Silk and lac may also be utilised in the same manner in the area where they are produced. In this way there should be co-ordination and co-operation between the farm and the factory—one is to utilise the products of the other as far as possible. (ibid., 1949, p. 125)

It was obvious that the implementation of this kind of programme leading to radical changes in policy on the part of the government could not be done simply by the good intentions and neatly chalked out plans alone. The programme also needed a thorough knowledge about the villages and this according to Das could only be acquired through ‘village studies’. In the concluding part of the section entitled ‘How to Combat Famine’ Das lamented by saying

To implement this policy an intimate knowledge of the villages and villagers is absolutely necessary. For this purpose, a socio–economic survey should be organised with a band of scientifically trained men. We have got archaeological survey, zoological survey, geological survey, botanical survey but no survey to understand man and his social, economic and psychological needs. This is an anomalous position.… The result is that whenever the Government is confronted with a national catastrophe like the present famine it has no knowledge to guide its activities—no trained men to depend upon. (ibid., 1949, pp. 129–130)

Bengal Famine, therefore, is a unique example of team work under the leadership of Das by a dedicated group of university based anthropologists who were driven more by a kind of social and moral commitment towards nation and its people than by pure academic quest (Guha, 2019, pp. 493–506).

Rehabilitation of Refugees in Andaman

Under the above general background, I will first take up the study undertaken by Sinha, (1929–2002) who was then just passed out as an M.Sc. student in anthropology from the University of Calcutta. ⁶ Sinha later became one of the famous anthropologists in post-independent India who was also the Director of the Anthropological Survey of India and was well-known for his contribution in the study of tribal and caste societies of India in the context of the greater Indian civilisation. Sinha’s painstaking and intensive study on the resettlement of Bengali refugee population in Andaman just after the partition of the country still remains an unnoticed work in the history of Indian anthropology. This study can be viewed as one of the pioneering anthropological works on nation building since it dealt scientifically with the burning problem of refugee resettlement which was plaguing the planners and administrators of the new nation. Sinha was appointed by the Refugee Rehabilitation Department of the Government of West Bengal in 1951 as an anthropologist. His task was to visit the Andaman Islands and report to the state and central governments on the possibilities of further resettlement of families displaced from the then East Pakistan by studying the local situation as regards the relationship between the refugees and the host populations of Andaman Islands. In the very beginning of the report, Sinha categorically stated his overall objective in the following manner

A student of Cultural Anthropology has a distinctive point of view in approaching socio–economic problems. Any social situation is assessed by him in terms of how far it satisfies the total range of human needs in the communities under observation. His attention is not restricted to economic plans only; the problems of social relationship and other cultural factors are given simultaneous consideration. So the problem of relationship between the refugees and original inhabitants was not studied as an isolated item. (Sinha, 1955, p. 1)

After outlining his anthropological position, Sinha stated the specific objectives of the study in concrete terms, which were as follows.

Most interestingly, Sinha’s intensive socio-economic survey not only included collection of quantitative data, but also the participatory observation of the whole round of daily activities of the resettled refugees. He even took part in their ‘gossips to note the psychological trends, on which direct questionnaire method or statistical enquiry did not seem profitable’ (ibid.). The socio-economic survey conducted by Sinha is one of the finest examples of an anthropological study on resettlement and rehabilitation in India. It contained detailed factual descrip-tion of the historical background, geographical environment, socio-demographic features, settlement pattern, economic and social life of the resettled refugee population in Andaman. The description vividly revealed the ground realities of resettlement around the differential adaptation of the refugee groups and Sinha was not hesitant to record the failures of the government in providing land for the resettlers. With the help of quantitative data presented in the form of a table Sinha stated

The chart amply shows that not only the promised quota of land has not been fulfilled in most cases, but there also exists a large amount of disparity in distribution of land among the different settlers. This has hindered the attachment of the refugees to the local soil. They are still in the hope that they may be given their full quota of land somewhere else. The refugees allege that their lands have not been measured to their satisfaction. (ibid., 1955, p. 14)

Along with governmental failures, Sinha also noted the limitations of the refugees in adapting to the new environment. On page 24 of the report, we find

On the whole the refugees are even today dissipating some amount of their energies in grumbling and praying for more grants than adequately exploiting their allotted quota of land. Though the cultivator families are doing fairly well in tilling the plain lands, their record in clearing jungles for expanding the cultivable land has been poor. They have moved very little in exploiting the forest or sea. (ibid., 1955, p. 24)

But, immediately after the above statement Sinha gave some positive examples of traditional higher caste (Brahmin and Kayastha) families amongst the refugees who started ploughing and also some resettlers whom he found to work hard in clearing jungles. Quite importantly, Sinha’s fieldwork was not limited amongst the Bengali refugees. He gave adequate time to understand the complex situation of adaptation of earlier settlers in Andaman, which included the descendents of Indian convict parents, the Mapillas, the Bhantus, the Burmans, the Karens and the Madrasi refugees from Rangoon which was the capital of independent Myanmar. In a section entitled ‘Local Adaptation of the East Pakistan Refugees Compared with the Earlier Settlers’ Sinha carefully depicted how the different groups adapted to the Andaman situation under a variety of historical and socio–economic factors and how these earlier settlers maintained a peaceful relationship with the Bengali refugees who were last in the series of resettlers in the islands. Finally, Sinha made a comprehensive assessment on the whole situation of refugee resettlement in Andaman and provided point-by-point practical recommendations on the further possibilities of a more planned refugee resettlement in different parts of Andaman with transparency and consultation with the refugees themselves.

Social Tensions Amongst the Refugees in West Bengal

Guha (1894–1961) was the founder of the Anthropological Survey of India and was known to the students of Anthropology as a Physical Anthropologist who made a classification of the Indian population on the basis of their Physical features (Ray, 1956, pp. 38–44). Very few people know that he first undertook a thoroughgoing field survey on the Social tensions amongst the refugees of the then East Pakistan for suggesting the government about how to understand their problem and improve their living conditions (Guha, 1959).

The book by Guha titled Studies in Social Tensions Among the Refugees from Eastern Pakistan (1959) was based on intensive fieldwork done by an interdisciplinary team of researchers. The book is basically a solid factual report and analyses of socio-economic, cultural and psychological data collected by a team of trained anthropologists and psychologists on the refugees who came from the then East Pakistan to West Bengal under the overall supervision of Guha. In his ‘General Introduction’ Guha first justified his selection of two sample areas of refugee resettlement colonies which he finalised in consultation with Gardener Murphy who was selected by the UNESCO as Consultant to Government of India in the project to understand the underlying causes of social tension in India. After this, Guha put the survey in the wider political scenario of the country and mentioned in unequivocal terms the evil effects of the earlier ‘divide and rule’ policy of the British Government as well as the sectarian approach of the Muslim League Government of the Bengal, which paved the way towards ‘engineered’ communal riots that led to large scale displacement of the Hindus from the then East Pakistan (Guha, 1959, p. viii). While searching the reasons behind the evacuation of the Hindus Guha based his arguments not on any sociological theory, but on the empirical findings of his multidisciplinary team of fieldworkers. Therefore, according to him

The loss of prestige and social status which the Hindu community previously enjoyed, and the realisation of the futility of regaining it now or in the near future was a far more potent factor in creating the feeling of frustration than the loss in the economic sphere. (ibid., 1959)

In the subsequent pages of the ‘Introduction’ Guha went on to analyse the data on the ‘areas of tension’ amongst the Hindu refugees which were collected by his research team members through the use of social anthropological and psychological methods. Guha here made an excellent sociological analysis by putting the arenas of social tension in a hierarchical and dynamic order. For Guha, his data led him show how the arenas of tension played their respective roles and how the affected members of the community shifted their grievance and aggression from one area of tension to another. Like a true social anthropologist, Guha also ventured into the variation in the social tension at the level of age, sex and socio–political situation. Another interesting explanation adavanced by Guha was on changing authority structure of the traditional Hindu joint family and the worsening of the intra-family relationships amongst the refugees and here he made a comparative interpretation of the two refugee settlements which were selected by him for the study. In one place where people depended on the governmental aid and assistance the traditional authority structure of the family was found to be stronger than in the refugee colony where the uprooted people had to struggle harder to get them resettled (ibid., 1959, pp. xi–xii). By and large what was most interesting to observe was Guha’s technique of explaining such a complex thing like social tension. All through he, like a seasoned sociologist or social anthropologist attacked the problem from a relational and dynamic angle without falling in the trap of a static view of society (Guha, 2018, pp. 1–12). While providing economic or psychological explanations he also did not take recourse to either Freudian or Marxian models. Finally, and what was really several steps ahead in his time Guha recommended a participatory and nationalist model for the resettlement of the refugees. For him, the social tension between the refugees and the government mainly arose owing to the fact that they were treated as ‘outsiders’ from the governmental side. According to Guha, the refugees should be given the responsibility of managing their own resettlement camps so that they could regain their self-respect. I will end by quoting the last line from the Guha’s ‘Introduction’ in the book on Social Tensions

Once their displaced energies are canalised into well-directed productive sources, there is every reason to hope, that instead of a burden and a clog, the refugees will turn out to be useful participants in the march of progress of this country. (ibid., 1959, p. xiii)

Displacement and Rehabilitation in Rourkela

B. K. Roy Burman (1922–2012) studied Anthropology at the University of Calcutta and like Surajit Sinha he was also trained by T. C. Das (Roy Burman, 1978, pp. 107–116). Later, he was advisor to many governmental committees for the welfare of the scheduled tribes in India.

In 1960, Roy Burman as Assistant Commissioner for Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes, Government of India got interested in undertaking an anthropological study on the problems of the tribal and other populations who were displaced by the establishment of the huge public sector steel factory at Rourkela in Orissa (now Odisha). On his suggestion the study of the ‘Social Processes in the Industrialization of Rourkela’ was taken up as a project for being investigated by the Census Organisation. The study was carried out by a team under the leadership of Roy Burman and the results were published by him under the Monograph Series of the Census of India, 1961. It is not only the first social impact assessment research on industrialisation in India, but one of the pioneering studies on development caused displacement and resettlement at the global level (Cernea, 1995, p. 96).The gigantic plant at Rourkela was the first public sector integrated steel plant with an annual installed capacity to produce 1 million ton of steel. In the introduction of his monograph, Roy Burman stated the purpose of the study emphatically

The setting up of the plant was a landmark in the strides of the nation towards progress and prosperity. But it also meant displacement of a large number of persons—mostly tribals, who inhabited the region before the plant was set up. Many of the displaced persons could ultimately re-establish their homes; many could even improve their lots, but at the same time many homes were disrupted; many individuals found themselves hurled at the bottom of an abyss. It is this human aspect of the growth of the giant enterprise at Rourkela that the present study proposes to cover. (Roy Burman, 1961, p. 1)

In the rest of this exemplary monograph which is 163 pages, we find detailed description of the ecological setting of the steel project and a thorough analysis of the demographic, economic, social, political and religious aspects of about 15,200 displaced population in thirty villages. Along with these, Roy Burman meticulously discussed the extent of rehabilitation and the patterns of new life with new hopes and frustrations that emerged out of this mega development project undertaken in the early years of independence of the country.

The book contains a plethora of quantitative and qualitative data (121 tables) not only on the spatial and economic consequences of forced displacement, but also on its demographic, social, political, psychological and cultural aspects. For example, we find in the book a number of tables on the views and attitudes of the rehabilitated persons on their job satisfaction (tables 109–111), as well as their frequency of spending time with job mates beyond office hours (tables 114–116). One of the most valuable aspects of this study is Roy Burman’s incisive sociological analysis of the social and political processes before and after displacement and that has raised the research far beyond a run-of-the-mill technical social impact assessment report. With massive data and a humanistic approach towards mega industrialisation, Roy Burman through his penetrating sociological analysis discovered the strength of the moral order of the society at the village level, which ultimately resulted in a greater bargaining power to the displaced families in terms of higher compensation rates, land-for-land and employment in the industry (ibid., 1961, pp. 159–163).

Displacement Caused by a Dam in Maharashtra

Irawati Karve (1905–1970) was one of the pioneering anthropologists in India who taught Anthropology at Deccan College and founded the department of Anthropology at the University of Pune (Ray, pp. 162–174). Karve contributed profusely to both Physical and Social Anthropology. Her lesser known book with Nimbkar entitled A Survey of the People Displaced Through the Koyna Dam (1969) was the first of its kind on displacement caused by a big dam in India. Nandini Sundar perceptively observed that this research is a model for studies on dam displaced people which received fresh attention in the 1980s and 1990s (Sundar, 2010, p. 405). The study was undertaken by Karve on behalf of the Research Committee of the Planning Commission of India and was published by Deccan College, Poona. The Koyna dam was the first big project in Maharashtra in which 100 villages were affected involving 30,000 people. A total of 30,000 acres of land under cultivation was submerged and another 32,000 land was acquired, which could no longer be cultivated. But this dam was also the first big project in which the government assumed the responsibility of offering substitute land and housing plots to the displaced families apart from the payment of monetary compensation. Under this background, Karve and Nimbkar made a detailed micro-level anthropological investigation to assess the success and failure of governmental rehabilitation and the nature of adaptation of the displaced population. This impact assessment research showed how anthropological methodology of studying small populations could also be fruitfully applied to study displacement of population caused by a big dam over a wide area. Another significant thing about the study was the fact that Karve and Nimbkar had no intention to please the government by writing a success story; they have not also said anywhere in the report that the dam was unnecessary. The results and the conclusions of the study simply revealed how the government despite its stated good intentions for development failed to deliver justice. In the Foreword, the authors stated unequivocally

More dams have been built since independence than during the two hundred years of the British rule…. With independence this major activity became entirely a state sponsored enterprise. The state also realised that paying an adequate money compensation did not end the responsibility of the State and that people so displaced must be rehabilitated by the state.

The following report will show that the State understood its responsibility and tried honestly to fulfill it but still the attempt was largely fruitless because the rehabilitation was not properly planned. (Karve & Nimbkar, 1969, p. 1)

The book contains eight sections and three appendices which included the findings as well as detailed description of the methodology along with the questionnaire schedules. Under the section on findings, the authors analysed a huge mass of quan-titative and qualitative data on landlessness, caste composition, occupational changes, education, housing, compensation and the impact of displacement on the social and religious life of the affected population. In the concluding section, the authors succinctly observed how the sufferings of the displaced population caused by the mega development project aggravated owing to lack of planning and foresight. I quote from the monograph

The chief failure of rehabilitation lies in the lack of planning…. What actually happened is that people did have to move in a hurry, and the government puts the blame for this on the indecision of the people themselves … the valley people did not have a clear idea of what was going to happen … they handed large cash amounts to people who had never before handled money, and left them to their own devices. The result was that much of this money was spent in transportation expenses, instead of being utilised in constructing houses. (ibid., 1969, p. 106)

Interestingly, the authors finally narrated the short-sighted approach of the government, which was revealed when the government gave a cash dole of few 100 rupees to the displaced persons just before the general election of the country apprehending that the dissatisfaction of the affected people might have been dissipated towards the government. Suffice it to say that Karve and Nimbkar could not accept this governmental approach to the resettled families (ibid., p. 108).