“What is the attitude of our so-called civilized society towards tribal society and culture? Be it tourists – journalists, writers or sociologists, generally everyone’s joint effort has been to find out what is wonderful and unique about tribals?
People have turned to tribal societies and cultures in their lives and behavior to attract public attention and for entertainment, in search of wonder and spectacle, and to highlight the unique and alien aspects of ourselves alike.
The result is before us: vaguely sensationalized accounts of their sex life and customs abound, but not the human suffering of their family life.
Their paranormal beliefs, witchcraft and fantastic rituals can be seen through their eyes, not a multifaceted and authentic picture of the hard-hitting struggles of their lives.
They are still represented as wonders as a distinct race of man. Like a primitive and wild man in a strange costume.”
The direction of thinking about the cultural tradition and socio-culture of tribals can be considered from here as well.
Anthropologists and sociologists have presented extensive survey-oriented studies of various tribal communities and based on this, we have a vast collection of information about various tribes.
Again, based on this abundant research material, crucial similarities can also be pointed out about various tribal groups and societies. But the crisis of such studies arises.
When we begin to seek knowledge not for its sake but for its social connection. All this information gives us an encounter with an unknown-unknown world.
But how to combine this knowledge for their harmonious adjustment in Indian society, this question becomes more important than any other question. The true examination of our vision and angle of social thought begins here.
This is where data analysis and analysis becomes a challenge. The past of any society is very important. Even then there can be no rationale for the existence of a pure past.
Considering the tribals, the question becomes even more acute whether they should be isolated in a state of primitive life as the absolute antiquities of primitive human civilization or should they be given a chance to be assimilated into the modern system of scientific and technological progress? a
Equally important is the question whether in the name of their development they should be left to falter against the modern complex political and social order or should they be given ample opportunity to move freely in the new environment?
Today, mineral wealth and forest-mountain areas are considered essential to the national economy for industrial development.
And all these facilities are accessible in these tribal areas so should 10 percent tribals be displaced for regional or national interest?
Should we be deprived of force? In our way of life, social structure, cultural values? That is, today is the supreme need.
That the existing concept of development should be reviewed once again and the human rights of tribal groups should be properly protected in the new modern system.
Only then will our concern about caste culture or its tradition have a real basis. “The stories of tribals are important today because of their mythology, their traditions.
Because they tell the story of a bygone era, but also because of the historical logic and intellectual context of their own institutions and cultures.
Their artistic expression, aesthetic gestures and ceremonial actions are not things to fill moments of rest like our art-culture, they have an active, purposeful and reciprocal relationship with their whole life.
That is why their culture is an infinity that takes shape. Their lives and realities are reconstructed.”
Before considering cultural tradition, it seems appropriate to define what is culture? Taxing culture seems appropriate What is the difference between culture and democracy: Is there a difference between tribal culture and folk culture?
What could be the basis of his classification and integration of spatial and indigenous forms of culture found in various lifestyles and social traditions.
How valid is the interpretation of culture given by anthropologists to cultural workers? Culture simply means sophistication or culture.
In fact, culture is culture. Explaining its nature, Dr. Ram Ghelawan Pandey has written that “The use of the word culture is relatively ancient and synonymous with English culture.
There are enough differences and conflicts in its relational beliefs, enough differences and conflicts in its relational beliefs, that it touches religion to its limits, and on the other hand, binds literature in its stupidity.
Along with the accumulation of material resources, civilization is adorned with pride in spirituality. Dress, tradition, worship and social customs and discussion of social customs policy are also under culture.
The physical form of man’s discovery of victory over the limitations of nature is culture and the spiritual, spiritual or mental form is culture. Civilization is the proud flag of our victory over the external – nature and culture are within.
Such definitions of culture have been given by many scholars, which appear to be attempts to establish a synthesis of one side or the other or its many aspects.
But such definitions make the study of culture fragmentary, while in the last two centuries many new definitions have been developed in various fields of knowledge, one of which is that man is a culture-creating animal.
Culture cannot be explained solely on the basis of genetic biology, not only on the basis of sociality. Similarly, it cannot be understood by dividing it into different parts of culture.
In the broad concept of culture proposed by Tyler, a summation of many differences can be seen. According to Tyler, culture is “that complex entity that includes the wider practices that a person acquires as a member of society.”
Thus, Tyler proposes that culture is the sum total of all forms of thought, experience and behavior – mental and functional behavior derived from social tradition. This concept became the basis of the methodology of later anthropologists.
Malinowski’s definition is similar to that “culture consists of inherited artifacts—facts, objects, technological processes, beliefs, practices, and values.”
The same thing is expressed in the definitions of Linton, Kluckhoun, Kroeber etc. In fact, on the subject of culture, the field of thought is full of different theories.
An independent study of the difference test is not within the scope of this book. In this regard, a detailed discussion of this subject is accessible and visible in Dr. Dineswar Prasad’s book Loksahitya.
As a conclusion, it can be said that “comparative statistics of different cultures show that human species evaluate the same reality in different ways.
There is much disagreement between them regarding the concepts and values of beautiful and ugly, Shiva and Ashiva, meaningful and meaningless. ….. Indians envision six ten directions.
In Europe red is a symbol of mourning’ but in the plains the Indians symbolize victory and joy. In China, white is a symbol of mourning, while in the Cherokee tribe, it is of the South.
These differences range from artistic perceptions to both raga and rhythmic importance, but most African cultures idealize monogamy and Islamic cultures believe in polygamy.
While some castes in India have practice of polygamy as well. Thus the significance of patterns is local or regional, and each culture has its own arguments regarding what it considers irrefutable.”
Cultural relativism has several implications for scholars of culture. Based on this logic, it is believed that culture can be neither superior nor inferior, neither important nor unimportant.
When we call some species primitive, we probably mean that they are examples of conditions prior to our contemporary life. But this notion is also not based on fact.
In fact, on the map of the world, there are many cultures in different geographical environments, it has to be said that the culture of each society is its mold and no single culture mold is complete in determining its characteristics.
Jharkhand Cultural Zone
Jharkhand is also called a part of the cultural region, a region with a culturally rich past and present. If your vision is not just that of a tourist and reading glasses reading statistics of industrial development.
So you can interview a prominent figure of Jharkhand culture. The region and its tribal tribes, including tribes and ethnic communities, have lived together for centuries as a harmonious and egalitarian society.
This history dates back almost two thousand years when the original Nagavanshis of the Sadani caste formed a kingdom in Chotanagpur. The first king of Khukhar kingdom was Nagavanshi Phanimukut Rai.
who established the state with the help of the Mundas. Not enough research has been done about the snake species so far.
Dr. Ambedkar, Dr. Kumar Suresh Singh, Dr. B.P. The proofs and evidences collected by Keshari and many other scholars clearly establish the existence of the history of the Naga caste.
Naga caste is a very cultured, brave and peace loving caste, this caste fought against caste discrimination and untouchability of Brahminism for hundreds of years under the leadership of Gautama Buddha.
Hindus have taken many of their festivals from the culture of this tribe, the famous king Shashanka belonged to this Naga tribe. The tribal society of this area and its culture are also very old parallel to the evergreen castes.
The Bhumij people of the Munda tribe established Bhumiraj in the Singhbhum-Varahabhum area. It is said based on the antiquities found at several Asura sites found in Chotanagpur.
Culturally, Chotanagpur is as ancient as the Indus Valley Civilization. Yet the early cultural history of Bihar in general and Chotanagpur in particular is shrouded in mystery.
Therefore, the history of this region can be prepared mainly on the basis of scattered observations of Vedic Puranas, Jain and Buddhist literature, study of archaeological objects and analysis of regional folklore and legends.
It is speculated that the Mundas may have settled in this area before the Christian era. About the Asura culture, it can be said that this culture existed at least till the Kushan period (circa 70 to 150 AD).
As revealed by Kushan coins found at two Asura sites. It is believed that the Asuras were great devotees of Lord Shiva and worshiped the Shivlinga.
“The community of anthropologists has so emphasized the separateness of India and the separation of tribal and non-tribal cultures that today we have come to regard them as completely separate.
But when considered in historical context, it becomes clear that they are not as separate and unrelated as they have been understood and explained.
Many castes have turned into castes of Hindu society and many cultural features have become features of its general culture. Where they have not been transferred to caste.
Even there they are interacting with non-tribal communities. It is not necessarily the case that tribals who today live far and away from non-tribals, did not live with or near them in the past.
According to the available evidence, they have lived for centuries in several Indian regions, in an almost limited geographical area, then they have only migrated from one border of India to another.
In each situation they have come into contact with non-tribal communities due to social, political and economic compulsions. Not only this, a significant portion of them live in villages with non-tribals.
Due to the conditions ranging from mutual contacts to proximity and mixing of blood in different periods of history, they have created and developed the culture known as Indian culture.
Thus it can be said that the process of mutual exchange between the tribal culture of Jharkhand and the non-tribal culture is old. Scholars who have used language as the basis of its investigation.
Among them Dr. Capper, Propijuliski, Dr. Prabodhchandra Bagchi, Prof. Sylvan Levy and Dr. Dineshwar Prasad’s study proves the fact that the history of cultural integration is just as old. As human development in this desolate region.
Dr. Scholars like Veer Bhagat Talwar interpret this age-old tradition of cultural integration as a struggle journey of Jharkhand versus Brahminical culture. He tried to convey this.
The egalitarian culture of Jharkhand and the Brahminical culture of Brahminism are antithetical to each other. The cultural pollution that has spread over time to the non-Aryan culture of the region is due to the intervention of the Brahminical culture.
They believe that Brahminization of Jharkhand tribes actually started after the rise of feudal state power in Jharkhand. Gathering evidence for his statement, Dr. Talwar, Dr. Kumar cites Suresh Singh’s research study on Chero people.
As shown in Jharkhand, separate feudal states were established, after which it was their royal families, who would influence the rest.
People wanted to prove their superiority, Brahmin became the means to bring civilization. In order to declare himself superior to the rest of the same clan, he allied himself with Brahmanism.
Brahmanism was the most useful system for this task because it is only Brahmanism that creates the notion of high and low among like-minded people and provides the sacred basis of religion to maintain that distinction.
Dr. Kumar Suresh Singh calls this process Sanskritization. Dr. Talwar asks – “And what was the result of this sanctification? The Sadan clan split into two.
The sadans belonging to the royal family became agents of cosmic culture and began to consider themselves superior to the rest and the illiterate, poor and impoverished sadans who were ruled by the royal family lived in worse conditions than the tribals.
When Sadan came to Jharkhand there was one tribe, no caste system. Brahmanism created a caste-system among them and declared some Brahmins, some Kshatriyas, Kayasthas, Vaishyas and the rest Shudras.
The Bhumijs who established the feudal kingdom in Varahbhum were divided into two parts – the Sardar Bhumijs who belonged to the royal family and the rest of the petty Bhumijs.
From the studies so far it is clear that the culture of Chotanagpur, also known and named as Jharkhandi culture, is an old culture.
It was developed in this geographical area by the Nagavanshi Sadan castes of Aryan origin and the tribal communities of Mundkul as a labour-intensive egalitarian culture devoid of caste consciousness.
Although the distinctive culture of the region continued to come into contact with the rest of Indian culture, and both sides influenced each other’s cultures at the level of exchange, but in the medieval period, during the period of Muslim rule, feudal kingdoms were established.
After this, a new phase of Sanskritization began in the cultural life of the region with the increase in the movement of outside population.
Cultural changes of Chotanagpur or Jharkhand The past five hundred years of history has been a period of great upheaval and has shattered the basic identity of Jharkhand culture at many levels.
In this period, old social-institutions were disbanded and Muslim and Christian youth-views were introduced. Therefore, it would be historical to say that many of the distortions and rites of Hindu socio-culture were associated with this regional culture in its early emergence.
But on a larger scale, the onslaught of culture-hybridism is visible during Muslim and British rule.
It may be mentioned here that two major tribes of today’s region entered the area during this period. These tribal communities belong to the Santal and Oraon tribes.
who succeeded in creating the largest demographic equation between the medieval and pre-modern periods after the Mundas and the Sadans. Before the arrival of the Oraonvos and Santals, these regions of Jharkhand were under the dominion of the Asuras and the Paharia tribes.
In the history of India A.D. The period from 647 to 1200 AD is also called the Rajput period. Chotanagpur Raj is believed to have been established in the first century.
After the fall of the Gupta Empire, Phani Mukut Rai became the first king of Chotanagpur. He was placed in the government at the age of 19 in the year 83. Kanishka was ruling in western India then.
As regards the Urans, it is said that they fled to Chotanagpur after Sher Shah’s attack on Rohtas. The date of his leaving Rohtas is said to be April 6, 1538.
If this is taken as a basis, it is about four and a half hundred years since the Oras settled in Chotanagpur. Similarly, the arrival of Santals in Chotanagpur was possible only during the British rule.
The arrival of the Santals in what is now known as the Santal Pargana region was only a matter of years ago. The inhabitants of this area are Paharia caste people. When the exploitation and oppression of the British Empire began to increase, the Paharias revolted.
The British brought the Santals here from 1770 to 1790 to quell that rebellion. Thus the history of the two major tribal communities in the area of present Jharkhand is not very old for this region.
This period of change in the tribal culture of Chotanagpur becomes particularly noteworthy in view of the destruction of the old identity factors. Even after reaching Ranchi from Rohtas, the Oraon culture was also forced to revive under new pressures.
The concept of tribal property was completely eroded under British law. Tendencies of degradation developed in their sense of community and the land-system of their Khuntakti villages was disintegrated and replaced by the concept of privately owned property.
The transformation has also registered itself in the account of modernization and alienation by gradually expanding – increasingly – organizing the dominant class of these communities from the original roots of their culture.
Due to this new situation, the social organization of the tribals weakened, the spirit of socialism declined, the tradition of akhada-ghukkudia was interrupted.