Tribes of Western India: A Comparative Study of Their Social Structure 9781032199542, 9781032290508, 9781003299790

Citation preview

Tribes of Western India

India has two key social formations, the castes and the tribes. Both groups can be studied from the perspective of society (samaj) and culture (sanskriti). However, studies on castes largely deal with social structure and less on culture, while studies on tribes focus more on culture than on social structure. What has resulted from this bias is a general misunderstanding that tribes have a rich culture but lack social structure. This volume emerges out of an in-depth empirical study of the social structure of fve Scheduled Tribes (STs) in Gujarat, western India, viz., Gamit, Vasava, Chaudhari, Kukana and Warli. It analyses and compares their internal social organisation consisting of institutions of household, family, lineage, clan, kinship rules and marriage networks. The book also deals with changes taking place in the social structure of contemporary tribal societies. While the focus is mainly on the data from tribes of western India, the issues are relevant to pan-Indian tribes. An important contribution to the studies on tribes of India, this book will be of great interest to students and researchers of anthropology, sociology, demography, history, tribal studies, social work, public policy and law. It will also be of interest to professionals working with NGOs and civil society, programme and policy formulating authorities and bureaucrats. Dhananjay Kumar is currently teaching at the Department of Anthropology, Kalahandi University, Odisha, India. Earlier he worked as an Assistant Professor at the Centre for Culture and Development, Vadodara, Gujarat, India. He did his post-graduation in Anthropology from the University of Delhi and has a doctorate in Social Anthropology from the Department of Humanities and Social Sciences, National Institute of Technology, Rourkela, Odisha, India. Lancy Lobo has been Professor and Director at the Centre for Social Studies, Surat, India. He holds a master’s degree in Anthropology and a doctoral degree in Sociology from the Delhi School of Economics, University of Delhi, India. He is also the Founder-Director at the Centre for Culture and Development, Vadodara, India. Currently, he is a research scholar at the Indian Social Institute, Delhi, India.

Tribes of Western India A Comparative Study of Their Social Structure

Dhananjay Kumar and Lancy Lobo

First published 2023 by Routledge 4 Park Square, Milton Park, Abingdon, Oxon OX14 4RN and by Routledge 605 Third Avenue, New York, NY 10158 Routledge is an imprint of the Taylor & Francis Group, an informa business © 2023 Dhananjay Kumar and Lancy Lobo The right of Dhananjay Kumar and Lancy Lobo to be identifed as authors of this work has been asserted in accordance with sections 77 and 78 of the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988. All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reprinted or reproduced or utilised in any form or by any electronic, mechanical, or other means, now known or hereafter invented, including photocopying and recording, or in any information storage or retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publishers. The international boundaries, coastlines, denominations, and other information shown in the maps in this work do not necessarily imply any judgement concerning the legal status of any territory or the endorsement or acceptance of such information. Trademark notice: Product or corporate names may be trademarks or registered trademarks, and are used only for identifcation and explanation without intent to infringe. British Library Cataloguing-in-Publication Data A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data A catalog record has been requested for this book ISBN: 978-1-032-19954-2 (hbk) ISBN: 978-1-032-29050-8 (pbk) ISBN: 978-1-003-29979-0 (ebk) DOI: 10.4324/9781003299790 Typeset in Sabon by codeMantra

Late Professor A. M. Shah for his continuous guidance and encouragement.

Contents

List of Figures List of Maps List of Genealogical Charts List of Tables Preface List of Abbreviations Glossary

ix xi xiii xv xvii xix xxi

1

Introduction: Social Structure of Tribes in Western India

1

2

Profle of Gujarat Tribes

20

3

Kinship System

41

4

Kinship Behaviour

69

5

Marriage Networks and Social Space

103

6

Taxonomy of Households – Part I: Simple Households

141

7

Taxonomy of Households – Part II: Complex Households

160

8

Social Structure and Change in Tribes

192

Appendix I: Kinship Terms of Five Tribes in South Gujarat Appendix II: Kinship Terms from Children’s Perspective Appendix III: Kinship Terms from Wife’s Perspective Appendix IV: Kinship Terms from Husband’s Perspective

211 225 227 229

viii

Contents

Appendix V: Some More Kinship Terms for Group of Relatives Appendix VI: Generation-wise Kinship Terms among Five Tribes of South Gujarat Appendix VII: Abbreviations for Kin Types

233 241

References Index

245 255

231

Figures

1.1 3.1 5.1 5.2 5.3

Tribal Social Structure A South Gujarat Kinship System with Kin Terms in English Marriages over a Distance in Five Tribes Khandadiya Marriages over a Distance in Five Tribes Social Distance of Marriage in South Gujarat Tribes

18 43 117 118 119

Maps

1.1 2.1 2.2 2.3 5.1 5.2 5.3 5.4 5.5 5.6

Study Area in South Gujarat Tribal Areas in Gujarat Taluka-wise Distribution of Tribes in Eastern Gujarat Hamlets of Makadban and its Neighbouring Villages Vasava Bride Movement (Incoming and Outgoing) Chaudhari Bride Movement (Incoming and Outgoing) Gamit Bride Movement (Incoming and Outgoing) Kukana Bride Movement (Incoming and Outgoing) Warli Bride Movement (Incoming and Outgoing) Vasava Ghar Jamai Marriage Movement (Incoming and Outgoing) 5.7 Chaudhari Ghar Jamai Marriage Movement (Incoming and Outgoing) 5.8 Gamit Ghar Jamai Marriage Movement (Incoming and Outgoing) 5.9 Kukana Ghar Jamai Marriage Movement (Incoming and Outgoing) 5.10 Warli Ghar Jamai Marriage Movement (Incoming and Outgoing) 5.11 Tribal Women Movement (Incoming and Outgoing) 5.12 Tribal Resident-Son-in-Law Movement (Incoming and Outgoing)

14 21 24 39 110 111 111 112 112 114 114 115 115 116 124 126

Genealogical Charts

3.1 Summary of Warli Kinship Terminology (Male Perspective) 3.2 Summary of Warli Affnal Kinship Terminology (Male Perspective) 3.3 Summary of Warli Affnal Kinship Terminology (Female Perspective) 4.1 Bhukiya Gamit’s Lineage in Chikhalpada 4.2 Barkiya Mahla’s (Kukana) Lineage and Linkage in Three Hamlets (PS, PF and NP) 4.3 Kindred among the South Gujarat Tribes 4.4 Inheritance Pattern in One Warli Lineage (Deval Kanat’s Lineage) 7.1 Parental Unit with Unmarried Children and Daughter’s Daughter (for Table 7.2(3)) 7.2 Parental Unit with Two Married Brothers (for Table 7.2 (4)) 7.3 One Married Man, His Wife and Children with Unmarried Siblings (see Table 7.3) 7.4 Households of Parental Unit with One Married Son (see Table 7.4) 7.5 Households of Parental Unit with One Married Son and Unmarried Children (see Table 7.5) 7.6 Households of Parental Unit with Two Married Sons and Their Children (see Table 7.6) 7.7 Households of Parental Unit with One Married Daughter (see Table 7.7) 7.8 Households of Parental Unit with One Married Daughter and Other Unmarried Children (see Table 7.8) 7.9 Parental Unit with Both Married Son and Daughter Living Co-residence (see Table 7.9) 7.10 Grandparental Unit with Married Granddaughter (see Table 7.10) 7.11 Households of Grandparental Unit with Married Grandsons (see Table 7.11)

46 64 64 74 75 83 99 164 165 166 170 172 174 181 182 184 186 188

Tables

1.1 Distribution of Tribes in the Five Regions by States and by Names 3 2.1 Taluka-wise Tribal Distribution in Eastern Belt of Gujarat 22 2.2 District-wise Tribal Population in Gujarat 23 2.3 Population of Major Scheduled Tribes (ST) as per the 2011 Census 26 2.4 Socio-Religious Movements among the South Gujarat Tribals 28 2.5 Incidence of Poverty in the Sub-Regions of the Rural Gujarat 29 3.1 Some Frequently Used Kin Terms for Distant Relatives in Daily Use 44 3.2 Distribution of Generation-wise Kinship Terms (Warli) 47 3.3 Kin Terms for Parallel Paternal and Maternal Aunt and Uncle (Elder) 51 3.4 Kin Terms for Parallel Paternal and Maternal Aunt and Uncle (Younger) 51 3.5 Kin Terms for Cross-Paternal and Maternal Aunt and Uncle 52 3.6 Use in the Modification of Kin Terms in Male, Female and Children 55 3.7 Different Kin Terms Usage for Sister and Cousins 58 3.8 Different Kin Terms Usage for Brother and Cousins 58 3.9 Terms Denoted for Husband and Wife 62 4.1 Avoidance Observed among Kin Members 90 4.2 Joking Relationship Observed among Kin Members 91 4.3 Important Traits of Social Organisation among the South Gujarat Tribes 92 4.4 Transfer of Rights between Roles 94 5.1 Village Endogamy among Five Tribes over Generations 107 5.2 Distances (in km) from which Women Come to Five Tribal Study Villages and Hamlets (as Brides) over Six Generations 108 5.3 Distances (in Km) to which Girls from Nodal Villages are Married over Six Generations 109 5.4 Distances (in Km) from which Resident-Son-in-law (Khandadiya) Come to Nodal Villages over Six Generations 113

xvi

Tables

5.5

Distances (in km) to which Sons have Gone as (Khandadiya) over Six Generations Changes in Tribal Women Marital Movement (Incoming) Changes in Tribal Women Marital Movement (Outgoing) Tribal Men’s Marital Movement (Incoming) Tribal Men’s Marital Movement (Outgoing) Vasava Females Chaudhari Females Gamit Females Kukana Females Warli Females Marriage Direction for Females Marriage Direction for Males Household and Population Distribution among Five Tribes of South Gujarat Numerical Composition of Households among Five Tribes of South Gujarat Size-Wise Household Distribution in Five Tribes Numerical Composition of Households of Five Tribes Husband-Wife Households and their Married Children among the Five Tribes Kinship and Numerical Composition of Complex Households of Five Tribes Atypical Households in Five Tribes One Married Man, His Wife and Children with Unmarried Siblings Households of Parental Unit with One Married Son Households of Parental Unit, One Married Son and Other Unmarried Children Households of Parental Unit, Two or More Married Sons and Their Children Households of Parental Unit with One Married Daughter Households of Parental Unit with One Married Daughter and Other Unmarried Children Households of Parental Unit with Both Son and Daughter Married and Co-residence Households of Grandparental unit with Married Granddaughter Households of Grandparental Unit with Married Grandson Patterns of Social Structure among the Five Tribes

5.6 5.7 5.8 5.9 5.10 5.11 5.12 5.13 5.14 5.15 5.16 6.1 6.2 6.3 6.4 6.5 7.1 7.2 7.3 7.4 7.5 7.6 7.7 7.8 7.9 7.10 7.11 8.1

113 121 122 125 126 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 143 144 144 149 155 161 163 166 169 172 173 180 182 184 185 187 204

Preface

This book has emerged from the studies undertaken by the Centre for Culture and Development, Vadodara, during the last four years. Indian Council of Social Science Research provided support for a pilot study of one tribe and then the Province Development Offce provided support for four studies. Late Professor A.M. Shah inspired us to take up these studies. We feel sad that he is no more with us to see this work in print. We dedicate this book to him for his continuous guidance and encouragement. We thank a number of persons who assisted us in the feld with hospitality. Many locally educated youth helped us in our feldwork. The director (Dr. James C. Dabhi), faculty member Dr. Kanchan Bharati, Amba Gamit (offce superintendent) and staff members Soma Vartha, Champak Vasava, Priyanka Gamit and Sayna Vasava deserve our thanks for processing this volume. Dr. Alice Anugraham has edited it with great interest. Professors Subhadra Mitra Channa, Siva Prasad Rambhatla and Premananda Panda have given us valuable comments which have added value to the volume. The anonymous reviewers too are thanked for their valuable comments, suggestions and remarks on the manuscript. Finally, it was a pleasure to work with Shoma Choudhury and her effcient team at Routledge.

Abbreviations

AG DG DHF DHM DS eBW F FB FBCh FBD FBS FeB FF FFF FS FyB FyBW FZ FZCh FZD FZH G GJ (Ghar Jamai) HeB HeBW HeZ HF HM HyB HyZ K (Khandadiya) MB MBCh

Ascending generations Descending generations Daughter’s husband’s father Daughter’s husband’s mother Daughter’s son Elder brother’s wife Father Father’s brother Father’s brother’s children Father’s brother’s daughter Father’s brother’s son Father’s elder brother Father’s father (grandfather) Father’s father’s father (great-grandfather) Father’s son Father’s younger brother Father’s younger brother’s wife Father’s sister Father’s sister’s children Father’s sister’s daughter Father’s sister’s husband Generations Uxorilocal marriage (resident-son-in-law) Husband’s elder brother Husband’s elder brother’s wife Husband’s elder sister Husband’s father Husband’s mother Husband’s younger brother Husband’s younger sister Uxorilocal marriage (resident-son-in-law) Mother’s brother Mother’s brother’s children

xx

Abbreviations

MBD MBW MD MeZH MyZ MyZH MZCh MZD NK OBC RSS SD Sp SpeSib SpeZ SpeZH SpF SpFB SpFZ SpM SpMB SpMZ SpMZH SpyZ SpyZH SpZ SS STs SW SWF SWM VHP W WBCh WeZ WF WM WyZ WZCh yBW yZH ZD

Mother’s brother’s daughter Mother’s brother’s wife Marriage distance Mother’s elder sister’s husband Mother’s younger sister Mother’s younger sister’s husband Mother’s sister’s children Mother’s sister’s daughter Not known Other Backward Class Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh Son’s daughter Spouse Spouse’s elder siblings Spouse’s elder sister Spouse’s elder sister’s husband Spouse’s father Spouse’s father’s brothers Spouse’s father’s sisters Spouse’s mother Spouse’s mother’s brothers Spouse’s mother’s sisters Spouse’s mother’s sister’s husband Spouse’s younger sister Spouse’s younger sister’s husband Spouse’s sister Son’s son Scheduled Tribes Son’s wife Son’s wife’s father Son’s wife’s mother Vishwa Hindu Parishad Wife Wife’s brother’s children Wife’s elder sister Wife’s father Wife’s mother Wife’s younger sister Wife’s sister’s children Younger brother’s wife Younger sister’s husband Sister’s daughter

Glossary

adad agewan ashram shala atak bajri bavdiyoho

           

bhagat bolpen brahma dev chandlo

       

chhuta chheda   chulo   dahej   dangi   davo mangvano   dej pana   dev worship   diyer- lagn   faliya   fuichi, fuis   ghar   haat   jhagda, zagda

 

jowar   kaka   khandadiya, ghar jamai  

a lentil village leader residential school surname or title of the name a grain eldest son of MB or FZ refers to all children of MB and FZ as bavdiyoho village priest engagement or first marriage village male deity contributions made by a person’s friends and relatives on important social and ritual occasions; a conventional form of collaboration divorce hearth dowry from Dangs compensation of bride-price bride-price lineage worship in Warli leviratic union hamlet/lane father’s sister house moving market that gathers regularly on specified days in the week, at some of the bigger villages in rural India dispute over elopement/intertribal marriage between two parties boys and girls a grain father’s younger brother a person who goes to live with his wife as a consequence of marriage instead of the normal practice, where the wife lives with the husband

xxii Glossary khandadiya lagn kodra kul kutumb lagn laine bhagi jau lakhn makan mamo motha or mothi

                   

nani, barik

 

nanipen   natru   odhkhaye   padas   pedhi worship   pedhi/pidhi   pohon   rajikhushi lagn   sali-lagn   samaj   sanskriti   sarpanch   tame   tu   tumha   tuver   viral   wadils  

uxorilocal marriage by service a grain clan family marriage marriage by elopement written document, marriage deed, agreement house mother’s brother kin terms for elder male and female relatives, respectively kin terms for ‘the term of reference’ for younger relatives wedding ritual widow remarriage seen/recognisable person village lanes lineage worship in Kukana lineage son, or address term for male child by elders arranged marriage by negotiations sororate union societal structure culture village head honorific address address for same age honorific address a lentil upper land elders

1

Introduction Social Structure of Tribes in Western India

This is an empirical study of the social structure of Scheduled Tribes (STs) in western India. Studies on the theme of tribal cultures are abundant; however, there are very few studies on their social structure. Tribal culture has been widely studied by many scholars on their material culture, such as habitat, economy, technology, arts and crafts, and non-material culture. In the case of non-material culture, greater attention has been given to dance, music, language, folklore, magic, witchcraft, religion, festivals and so on than to ideas, values, norms, world views and so on. It is true not only for the tribals of Gujarat but also for the tribals of India in general. However, their social structure, which means their internal social organisation consisting of household, family, lineage, clan, kinship and marriage rules, have gained less attention from anthropologists or sociologists. In other words, we have lesser knowledge of the elements of their social organisation. So much so when one thinks of tribals, one only talks of their culture and hardly about their social structure. Society and culture are concepts from which one tries to investigate the social system. A social system is not an unsegmented system. A social system consists of different parts arranged in a systematic way to form a structure. Hence, it can be called social structure and cultural structure. Generally, one part is augmenting for the other1 but is rarely seen in their full dimensions. India has two major social formations, viz., caste and tribe. Both can be studied from the society and culture concepts and perspectives. Caste (jati), in its multiple dimensions, has been exhaustively studied by anthropologists and sociologists. When one talks about the caste, one mostly talks about the social structure of caste (jati ki samajik samrachna); their internal social structure or agglomeration of social relations consisting of household, family, lineage, clan, kinship, marriage rules and so on. Rarely does one use the word ‘culture’ (sanskriti) or ‘cultural structure’ (sanskritik samrachna) for studies of caste. On the other hand, studies on tribals are dominated by their culture and cultural structure dimensions. It appears from the above that tribals have only culture and no social structure and the castes have social structure but no sanskriti. The present study focuses on the samajik samrachna of the tribals highlighting their social relations

DOI: 10.4324/9781003299790-1

2

Introduction

within their social boundaries – that is, their social structure. The next section discusses a general overview of tribes in India, followed by a synoptic view of tribal social structure in western India.

Tribals of India India has the second-largest tribal population in the world, after the African continent. According to the census of 2011, the total population of the STs is 104.3 million, constituting 8.6 per cent of the population of the country. Tribals in India are classifed into 705 communities, including ‘major’ and other sub-tribes. They inhabit almost in all parts of the country, except a few states like Punjab, Haryana, Delhi and the union territories of Chandigarh and Puducherry. Their number, population size and demographic features vary from one part to another. According to the number of ST communities in different states, Odisha has the largest (62), followed by Karnataka (50), Maharashtra (50), Madhya Pradesh (43) and Chhattisgarh (42). On the other hand, Nagaland, Daman and Diu and Uttarakhand have fve each followed by Sikkim, which has just four ST communities. The major tribes such as Gond, Bhil, Santhal, Oraon, Mina and Munda have a population that ranges from one million to a little over seven million and spread over a vast area of the central and western Indian region. On the other hand, there are communities like Andaman Islanders, Asur and Birohor of Jharkhand who are less than 200 persons (Dev 2016). Their habitat also varies in various ecological and geo-climatic conditions ranging from plains and forested hills. These communities practise various methods of production from collecting minor forest products to huntergatherers, shifting cultivators, pastoralists, nomadic herders and artisans. Their occupations in these diverse regions range from honey collection, hunting small animals, rope making and so on. Each tribal group is somewhat distinct from the other in respect of dialect, food habits, clothes, etc. STs of the country can be classifed in different ways, such as those based on racial and linguistic affnity, and ecological, social, economic, administrative and ethnic factors. They can be distinguished into fve broad regions (Vidyarthi and Rai 1976), namely: 1

The Himalayan region a b c

2 3 4 5

North-eastern Himalayan region Central Himalayan region North-western Himalayan region

Middle India region Eastern India region Western India region South India region

Introduction 3

Five broad tribal regions of India The above classifcation is not watertight as various criteria may overlap. Table 1.1 shows the details of these regions with states, tribal group names and their population percentage to the total tribal population of India. Table 1.1 Distribution of Tribes in the Five Regions by States and by Names Region

Sub-Region

States

ST (in Tribal Name per cent) 1.8

Gujar, Bakerwal, etc.

12

2.4

Bhotias, Tharus, Khasas, etc.

48

Himalayan North-western Himachal Pradesh Region Himalayan and Jammu and Kashmir region Central Terai areas of Himalayan Uttarakhand, Uttar Pradesh and Bihar region North-eastern Assam, Meghalaya, Himalayan Arunachal region Pradesh, Nagaland, Manipur, Mizoram, Tripura and mountainous part of West Bengal

11.8

Himalayan Region Middle India Region

16.0 44.8

Madhya Pradesh, Chhattisgarh, Jharkhand, West Bengal and Odisha

Number of Tribes

Western India Region

Rajasthan, Gujarat, Maharashtra, Goa and the Union Territories of Daman and Diu and Dadra and Nagar Haveli

27.6

South India Region

Telangana, Andhra Pradesh, Tamil Nadu, Karnataka and Kerala

9.0

Island Region

Andaman and Nicobar Islands, Lakshadweep

0.11

Source: Modifed from Vidyarthi and Rai (1976) with Census 2011.

Akas, Dafas, Apatanis, Mishmis, Khamptis, Singphos, Kukis, Khasis, Garos, Lepchas, Bhotias, Tharus, etc.

131

Juang, Kharia, Khonds, Bhumijs, Baiga, Muria, Marias, Mundas, Gonds, Santhals, Oraons, etc. Barodias, Bharwads, Bhils, Damors, Dhanwars, Dhodias, Girasias, Gonds, Katkaris, Kukana, Kolis, Minas, Siddi, Warlis, etc. Chenchus, Irulas, Paniyans, Kurumbas, Kadars, Todas, Badagas, Kotas, etc. Great Andamanese, Onges, Jarawas, Sentinelese, Koyas, Malmis, etc.

219

106

147

7

4

Introduction

The western India region comprises the states of Rajasthan, Gujarat, Maharashtra, Goa and the Union Territories of Daman and Diu and Dadra and Nagar Haveli. Around 30 per cent of the country’s tribal population comprising more than 100 tribal groups inhabit this region. Some of the major tribal groups are Bhils, Dhodias, Girasias, Gonds, Katkaris, Kukana, Kolis, Minas, Siddi, Warlis, etc.

A synoptic view of tribal studies in western India Tribal studies in western India have been mainly focused on some of the major tribes of the state. The earliest work was done by British administrators turned scholars. This includes Hendly’s work on Bhils of Mewar (1875), Baden-Powell’s study of Lunar and Solar Aryan tribe (1899) and Barnes’ work on Bhils of western India (1907). More in-depth accounts of tribes have been given by James Tod in two volumes of the Annals and Antiquities of Rajasthan (1920). Other than demonstrating explorative ethnography, this study has also thrown some light on the tribe-Rajput relations. At the same time in Bombay, several studies were begun on tribes. R.E. Enthoven’s two-volume handbook (1920–1922) presented some of the explorative studies on major tribes of the region. Zimmerman (1921–1924) started work on the Katkari tribe of Bombay division. However, the fulllength monograph of the tribe was published by Weling (1934). Some of the missionaries have also done commendable work, such as William F. Pledger (1944) and Carstairs (1952, 1953–1954 and 1957) who studied Bhils in different areas of the state (cited in Vidyarthi and Rai 1976). Other than foreign writers, some Indian scholars have also written about the tribes of western India. Kavi Raj Shyamal Das’ paper on Meena of Jaipur in Mewar and Sarat Chandra Roy’s long paper on customs of Black Bhils of Jaisamand Hills are a few examples in this category (Vidyarthi and Rai 1976). After independence, several tribal research institutions were set up in western India to study various aspects of tribes. A tribal research centre in western zone came up through the Anthropological Survey of India at Udaipur. It produced a monograph on Bhils. Using the anthropological approach, Chauhan studied Bhils and Meenas and developed the concept of ‘tribalization’ (1967, 1978). Vyas has studied Bhils and their dynamics across the Indo-Pakistan border area (1969). Then came a newer paradigm whereby combining anthropological approach with historical and regional research as a holistic picture of the Bhils in western India was presented (Deliege 1985), whereas Doshi has analysed social structure and change in Bhils of Udaipur (Doshi 1974). Mehta’s explorative study on Garasia was infuential (1950) to lay down the foundation for further studies on the tribe. Since then, several scholars

Introduction 5 using different approaches have studied the Garasias. Dave (1960) had positioned Garasia in between the Hindu (caste) and tribal society, while other scholars have focused more on their identity and history (Lal 1979; Meharda 1985). More recently, using gender and social structure perspective, the Garasia’s fuid identity – blurred between tribe and caste boundaries – has been explored in southern Rajasthan (Kumar 1997). The focus of tribal studies shifted on some of the other less explored dimensions. Sahoo (2013) by using in-depth empirical analysis and comparative case studies in the tribal communities in south Rajasthan showed how civil society is related to tribes and the democratisation process. Coming to Gujarat state, the Gujarat Research Society under P.G. Shah had studied various aspects of tribals in Gujarat. He discussed the historical setting (1939) and stages of acculturation of Bhils (1942) and linked them to the earlier settlers of Gujarat. He also wrote two full-length monographs on Dublas (1958) and Naika-Naikdas (1959). In his book, Tribal Life of Gujarat, Shah (1964) presented an ethnographic view of the tribes of Gujarat as a whole. He was of the view that tribes in Gujarat were in the process of accepting the cultural pattern of the Gujarat region. Mehta had studied Chodras (1933), and Solanky (1955) studied Dhodia Patel in South Gujarat. T.B. Naik (1956), under the guidance of D.N. Mujumdar, studied the Bhils of Gujarat. The most intensive study on the social structure of a tribe was done by Nath on Bhils of Ratanmal (1960). Using the anthropological feld view coupled with the British social anthropological approach, he brought out the social structure of the Bhil society. Department of Sociology in Bombay and Deccan College of Pune, similarly, gave impetus to tribal research in the Bombay Presidency. Ghurye in his book, The Aborigines, So-Called and Their Future, had examined the status of the tribals in India. His tribal integration approach was also refected in some other work, like Mahadev Kolis (1957) of western India. His students had also studied the different tribes, V. B. Punekar’s (1959) work on Son Kolis and Chapekar’s study on Thakur Tribe (1960). At Deccan College of Pune, Irawati Karve studies tribal education (1957a) and a small monograph on Bhils of west Khandesh (1957b). In gauging this literature review, it is clear that the tribal studies in western India have more or less revolved around a few ethnographic monographs and very few have focused on social structure.

Social structure of tribes Social life is the essence of human life. It grows through patterns of social interaction and relationships among human beings. In the social life of the Indian tribal societies, though certain common characteristics cut across the fve geographical regions mentioned above, there are some strong local variations.

6

Introduction

The social structure is of “critical importance for the behaviour of the members of society, so that if such relations were not in operation, the society could not be said to exist in that form” (Firth 1961: 31). For RadcliffeBrown, the most basic elements of the social structure are “human being, the structure itself being our arrangement of person in relationship institutionally defned and regulated” (Radcliffe-Brown 1952). The elements of social structure do not exist independently of one another. They are connected “with the ordered relations of parts to a whole, with the arrangements in which the elements of the social life are linked together” (Firth 1961: 30). These relations are built up one upon another with a series of varying order of complexity. These ordered arrangements are formed by the corporate groups of society. Meyer Fortes showed that the description of social structure is based on kinship. In such order, the principal corporate groups such as the lineage and clan provide a stable structure viz., the, warp, and the organised domestic life (household) acts like the woof. He also used the metaphor of blood and tissue to describe these structural units (Fortes 1958). Firth (1961: 53–55) demonstrated that Tikopian social structure has basically two divisions: frst based on geographical nature and second based on clan and kinship division. They further segmented into different types. Similarly, the social structure of tribal societies in India has some of the basic structural elements. In the social life of a tribal group, social structure is not an isolated element but situated in a web of social relations. To ascertain it, the actual behaviour of the group and their repetitiveness have to be observed. These behaviours are mostly governed by social institutions. For example, to understand the clan structure of any group, one needs to observe the group’s behaviour associated with the clan, through clan exogamy, etc. The exogamous rule requires that a clan member shall not marry anyone who is a member of the same clan. They believe that they are brothers and sisters who originated from a common ancestor even though they cannot trace their actual line of descent. Social structure is always relational. Clan structure is linked with several other structures, like the marriage network. For a tribal group, the marriage network has some rules: whom to marry, whom not to marry, where to marry and where not to marry. This behaviour can be observed by gauging actual marriages that happened in the tribal society over a period of time (say some generations back). These networks give the rules of marriage and become the structural unit of marriage. The social structure is the important system of elements that last and that everybody takes account of. The social structure offers a framework for actual social action. Thus, the social structure is defnable morphological elements, the social anatomy, and it is maintained and given its ultimate form by organisation decisions. After presenting the framework of social structure, let us see how the social structure of tribes can be viewed using this framework.

Introduction 7

The social structure of tribal India The social life of the tribals involves methods of grouping, grading people who can be ascertained from sharing of repetitive behaviour. Each tribal society forms a small community of its own in particular territorial limits so that their relations are direct and intimate. So, the social structure here may be seen as their social design, both emergent from and determinant of their repetitive behaviour. Let’s frst discuss social design. Using a different type of classifcation based on social units, Das (1953) demonstrated that tribal India can be grouped into seven types of social structures, viz., 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

Family-local group-tribe Family-clan-tribe Family-moieties-tribe Family-clan-phratries-tribe Family-clan-phratries-moieties-tribe Family-clan-subtribe-tribe Family-subclan-orthogamous clan or selected clan-tribe

According to Dube (1977), the basic design of the tribal social structure consists of four spheres with different combinations. They are individuals forming families, families forming lineages, lineages forming clan or local groups and clans forming the tribe. A broad typology of the tribal design from single person ‘individual’ to the whole tribe might be evolved in different forms in its ascending order. The constituent matrices of tribal society make up a progressively inclusive series of groups from a closely knit family to an encompassing tribal whole. This will show the tribal social structure and will help us observe and study the social phenomena. The very arrangement of one tribe may vary from that of another. No two tribes are the same in details. The household as the basic domestic unit and one of the important dimensions of the family was brought out by Shah (1974). The smallest unit of the social structure of tribal society remains the individual. However, the individuals by living with different kinship and numerical combinations go through different stages of the developmental cycle of the households. These smaller groups are combined into a larger one through several levels of incorporations. Household is the basic unit of family, families joined in lineage, lineages into clans or sub-clans, in territorial groups such as village or hamlets of a village. Sub-clans, clans or village or local groups may be joined into sub-tribes which are fnally making up the tribe. In majority of the tribes of India, the categories such as individual, household, family, lineage, clan and tribe are valid. But there are several exceptions; some do not have a clan, some have a notional clan and some are territorial groups.

8

Introduction

The social structure of tribes in western India In western India, the Bhils are spread out in a very large area. Various studies (Shah 1958, Haimendorf 1960, Nath 1960, etc.) confrm that the term ‘Bhil’ is used as a blanket term for different tribes living in adjacent areas and bearing a superfcial resemblance. So, Bhil is a heterogeneous group consisting of a number of originally distinct tribes to whom their more advanced neighbours referred them under the loose term ‘Bhil’. They cover a wide area in western India from the border area of Rajasthan, Gujarat, Madhya Pradesh and Maharashtra. Their traditional language is Bhili. However, after independence they were taught in the language of the state which was different from Bhili. The Bhil social system is a polysegmentary system where successive narrow segment divides the entire community into several kinds of kindred groups. The basic principle of alignment is patrilineal descent. The frst order of segmentation is based on territorial units. They say that Bhil may intermarry and interdine with Bhils. But there are several variations among them. There are different group names based on direction, different ecological habitats, plains and hills. In short, a Bhil’s life, more or less, revolves around an orbit of 30–40 kilometres. Beyond this distance, membership of the same tribe as indicated by the term ‘Bhil’ ceases to be of any special signifcance. This orbital distance is important for their recognition of sameness. This is the distance within which they marry, and within this distance they trace their close kins (Nath 1960). Within a tribe, they have a large number of exogamous patrilineal clans bearing a specifc name. Bhils are divided into several exogamous clans. A clan consists of several loose clusters of lineages dispersed over a wide area. The segments of numerous clans may be found distributed over many villages. It is often observed that lineage members of a clan form the majority while those of other clans are relatively small in number. There appears no hierarchical ordering of the Bhil clans. They are all of the same status, and the members of the different clans are free to marry each other except where a union is considered incestuous. There is no defnite number of clans found among the Bhils; over 100 clans are observed by Nath in his book, Bhils of Ratanmal (1960). Within a clan or sub-clan, there are lineages. Most members of a lineage group are able to trace their descent over seven or eight generations. This structural unit covers extensive social and ritual activities, such as life-cycle rituals or religious rituals. The members of the lineage group co-operate in economic and other activities. Within the lineage are a number of families, which are often segmented in a number of households with varying generations based on kinship. While doing feldwork among Garasias of south Rajasthan, Kumar (1997) came across that the tribe-caste category needed to be revised. She found that these categories were created by outsiders mostly for academic

Introduction 9 purposes. However, the real structure of society is different. Using the gender and social structure approach, she revealed the more complex issues of the Garasia tribe. Among the Sahaydari groups of tribe, the social system is more or less identical in nature. Clan, lineages, families and household are common social units. The members of the group always use clan names as their surnames. Clans are more prominent here as compared to Gujarat or Rajasthan. The Mahadev Kolis have exogamous clans like Bhangare, Bendkoili, Badade, Dhandekar, Gode, etc. The Thakurs have two primary exogamous division of Ma Thakurs and Ka Thakurs. Within these groups, Ma Thakurs have 22 clans and Ka Thakurs have 26 clans. The primary social unit is the household and family. Among the Dhankas of Gujarat, there are two groups, Tadvis and Tetarias. They do not exchange food among themselves and neither intermarry. The exogamous divisions among the Pardhi are Solanki Pawar and Chavan. The principal subtribes of Pardhi are named after their occupation Shikari or Bhil Pardhis.

Tribal social structure in Gujarat In Gujarat, one can fnd only one study done on the social structure of a tribe called ‘Bhils of Ratanmal’ by Nath in 1960. The other signifcant study on social structure on Indian tribes was done by Surajit Sinha, then Director of the Anthropological Survey of India in the years 1962–1965 (Sinha 1962, 1965). But due to his untimely demise, the direction he had given was not pursued by the anthropologists in India. One academic reason is that after the 1960s, the concept of social structure came under a lot of criticism. Associated with the concept of function, it had presumed that societies were static, bounded and had no natural propensity to change. Post-colonial critiques were directed at the assumption of social solidarity and equilibrium by structural-functionalists, even at a time when these societies were being torn apart by the impact of colonial rule. Also, many had already transformed by the violent impact of colonisation, but these historical aspects were ignored by most of the scholars. The rejection of structural-functionalism took the attention away from the study of social structure. The focus was on process and culture. Most tribal studies done in recent times have been done from the point of view of political movements, social injustice and marginalisation. Few have gone back to the study of social structure like family, marriage and kinship, although several ethnographies do include them while discussing political and economic issues. But, one cannot understand the tribals by studying their culture alone. The social dimension is perhaps more important in understanding the socially expected behaviour and their compulsions. Thus, it is important to study the social structure of tribes as they are important in setting guidelines and provide the setting for social action. The present

10

Introduction

study desires to compare and contrast the social structure of fve STs and their social formation in south Gujarat. The frst section discusses the concept of social structure. It presents a discussion on the theoretical perspective of social structure used in the present study.

Theoretical orientation of the social structure in social anthropology The concept of social structure, as quoted by Karim (2016: 367), has been used by many pioneering forefathers2 of social science (to cite a few, Ibn Khaldun, Montesquieu, Comte, Spencer and Durkheim). Comte (1974 [1842]), Spencer (1896 [1873]) and Durkheim (1933 [1893]) proposed that the society is structured according to the functions that social groups fulfl through the division of labour. While Spencer retained an emphasis on the ontological primacy of the individual, Durkheim based his theory in the ‘sui generis’ existence of social order. He examined how the functional interdependence upon which the division of labour is based and served as society’s source of social solidarity. The most fundamental ‘function’ in society is the division of labour which integrates and unites the societal organism, thereby sustaining its life (Durkheim 1933 [1893]: 11). Mechanical solidarity – solidarity is based on individuals’ similarities which was the dominant foundation for social bonds in earlier epochs, modern society – according to Durkheim, is bound primarily by ‘organic’ solidarity which arises from individuals’ interdependence through the societal division of labour. Differentiated social groups comprise a system of ‘organs’ (p. 132), each of which performs a specialised duty that sustains the whole. These organs are bound to each other by relationships of functional interdependence (pp. 83, 173), where the survival of the whole depends on each organ performing its specifc duty. The more specialised the function of an organism, the more integrated and developed is the society. This perspective infuenced the work of Radcliffe-Brown (1952: 179), who emphasised that social structure “is thus to be defned as a set of relations between entities”. Further, while other theorists had focused on a few roles, Radcliffe-Brown (1952: 191ff) argued that structure had to be understood as involving all relations such as kinship and occupation. Radcliffe-Brown used it consistently during his career from 1911 (Radcliffe-Brown 1940, 1950 and 1958). Srinivas (1964) later on used it in a simpler form. There was a time when British social anthropology was synonymous with the social structure school as Firth (1955: 1ff) noted that “all British social anthropologists are structuralists in their use of the analytical principles developed by this method”. There are different views regarding what is social structure. Most explicitly the concept social structure has been defned by Radcliffe-Brown (1952) in two ways. First, social structure to him includes “… all social

Introduction 11 relations of person to person. For example, the kinship structure of any society consists of a number of such dyadic relations, as between a father and son, or a mother’s brother and his sister’s son”. He gave an example from an Australian tribe; the whole social structure is based on a network of such relations of person to person, established through genealogical connections. Second, in the social structure, he also includes, … the differentiation of individuals and of classes by their social role. The differential social positions of men and women, of chiefs and commoners, of employers and employees, are just as many determinants of social relations as belonging to different clans or different nations. According to Srinivas (1964), these above two ways are not ‘divergent’ as they seem to be the two sides of the same coin. The social structure of society consists of several other structures, like kinship structure, religious structure and economic structure. And to understand these structures we have to look at different dyadic relationships. The most basic relations, viz., dyadic relations, can be referred to classes or categories which are a part of the structure. He gave different examples of classes and orders, like the relationships of a master and servant, patron and client and priest and worshipper. Further, these dyadic relationships become knowledgeable when seen through the kinship structure. He gave the example of “[t]he mutual rights, duties and privileges of mother’s brother and sister’s son” that vary from society to society and must be gauged as a part of the kinship structure which is, in turn, a part of the total social structure. Similarly, the relationship between priest and worshipper is part of the religious structure, while the relations between master and servant and patron and client are part of the economic structure and the status system. Further, Radcliffe-Brown contrasts social structure with the study of culture by saying that “we do not observe a ‘culture’”, since that word denotes not any concrete reality but an abstraction and, as commonly used, a vague abstraction. But direct observation does reveal that human beings are connected by a complex network of social relations (1952: 189–190). So, the term ‘social structure’ is used with reference to description, analysis and explanation of social life by most social anthropologists. Social structure is now said to be made up of human beings considered not as an organism but as occupying positions in a social structure. It is the study of groups, especially that are organised along territorial, kinship and political lines and the inter-relationships. In a slightly different sense, all differentiated social positions or statuses derived from the consideration of membership in social groupings constitute parts of social structure. (Radcliffe-Brown 1952: 193)

12

Introduction

But then how the notion of social structure is related to other parts of a socio-cultural system? According to Radcliffe-Brown (1952: 9) there are three separable ‘adaptational’ aspects of the total social system. The arrangements by which an orderly social life is maintained is one of these three aspects. The other two are the ‘ecological’, or the way the system is adapted to the physical environment; and the cultural or the mechanisms by which an individual acquires ‘habits’ and ‘mental characteristics’ that ft him for participation in social life. According to Srinivas, a social structure can be looked at from different points of view. From the point of view of individual members, a social structure consists of two things. First, it includes a set of rules which are to be obeyed or else sanctions are attached to their violation. Second, it also includes a confguration of sentiments and values. These things exist in the minds of the members. Further, in a society with differentiated structure, members of different sections have different rules, sentiments and values and also share certain common group values. Thus, in the multi-tribe villages, such as seen in Vasava and Chaudhari, and Kukana and Warli, different tribes in a village or hamlet have different sentiments and values, though all have a common attachment to the village and the tribal society. So, in these societies, village or hamlet acts as an administrative unit where the social structure traverses such a unit. Thus, the concept of social structure focuses on patterned social arrangements to form a complex relationship, from a holistic perspective to building a life relating to society. In the majority of cases, the concept has been defned amidst existing empirical situations. These empirical studies started with the so-called ‘simple’ societies, tribal communities and later on adopted the same theoretical orientation to study the more ‘complex’ societies, like an urban, civilisation-based or non-tribal agrarian communities. One needs to mention that there are other conceptions of social structure held by different persons, such as Levi Strauss, Parsons and Giddens, which are different from Radcliffe-Brown’s. This work follows Radcliffe-Brown’s perspective.

Social and cultural anthropology Two streams of thoughts in the past focused on two slightly different concepts – society and culture. Social anthropology used ‘society’ as a leading concept and ‘culture’ as a subordinate to it, while the cultural anthropology gave prominence to culture wherein structure was subsumed. Historically both have different origin and spread. Until the 1930s, the concept of culture was the main focus of anthropology and shared by both British and American anthropologists. On either side of the Atlantic, Tylor’s (1871: 1) defnition3 of culture was used to defne the discipline. In the 1930s, Franz Boas and Malinowski wrote two

Introduction 13 different articles in two different volumes of the same Encyclopaedia of the Social Sciences. For Boas, “Culture embraces all the manifestations of social habits of a community, the reactions of the individual as affected by the habits of the group in which he lives, and the products of human activities as determined by these habits” (Boas 1930: 79). For Malinowski, culture comprises “inherited artefacts, goods, technical processes, ideas, habits and values” (Malinowski 1931: 621). This was, however, quite different from Radcliffe-Brown’s perspective, in which anthropology is seen as a natural science of society. Culture is no longer the central aim of this study of man; it is society. Owing much to Durkheim, Radcliffe-Brown sees social structure as a set of institutions whose function is to contribute to the maintenance of society through time. However, this functionality differs from that of Malinowski who sees function as a response to individual and psycho-biological needs. So, the word ‘culture’ is almost absent from the structural-functional dictionary. Thus, until the end of 1940s two schools of thought known as ‘culturalist’ and ‘structural-functionalist’ groups developed in a parallel fashion. Later on after the publication of collective works on kinship directed by Radcliffe-Brown and Darryl Forde (1950), a heated debate took place between social and cultural anthropologists (for more details refer to Dianteill (2012: 93ff)). For a few like Levi-Strauss, there is no such distinction between social and cultural anthropology (Levi-Strauss 1953: 524). A few others used social and cultural anthropology interchangeably and focused on problems (Tax et al. [eds.] 1953: 225). When coming to the Indian scenario, however, things were different. Here, the concept of social structure was borrowed from western studies focused on tribal Africa and used in ‘village societies’, mostly non-tribal. As a result, anthropologists and sociologists have for long focused on the social structure of caste, village communities but rarely of that of ‘tribal villages’. This study is based on empirical feld data that draw attention to this important social domain and explains how ‘social structure’ works in ‘tribal villages’ in south Gujarat. The present study follows the social anthropological perspective to study the social structure of the fve tribes in south Gujarat.

Methodology of studies The present study is the result of two years’ intensive feldwork with fve major tribal societies, viz., Gamit, Vasava, Chaudhari, Kukana and Warli, located in eight different villages and hamlets in three different parts of south Gujarat (see location in Map 1.1). The individual micro-studies of these tribes are followed by the comparison of their social structure. Subsequently, it tries to uncover the underlying principles, rules, norms, values, institutions and structures on which the tribal society is based on as well as the changes creeping therein. A pilot study was undertaken of Gamit tribe where the methodology and research design were tested and perfected during several rounds of

14

Introduction

feldwork. First, it began with the identifcation of a village comprising this tribe. Second, training of the local feld investigators was done. Third, a household census of the village was taken. Fourth, genealogical charts were constructed of household, families, lineages, clans and kinship networks. Fifth, it collected kinship terms, both terms of reference and terms of address. Sixth, through interviews, it had traced the spread of kinship networks, both consanguineal and affnal. After the pilot study, a similar approach was taken in the other six villages and hamlets of four tribes. The fve tribal societies had different habitats and ecology in three different parts of south Gujarat. The frst study was a monographic account of a single tribe, Gamits, in two adjacent villages. The second study was conducted in three multi-tribal villages where each village had a predominant population of one of the other tribes, viz., Vasava or Chaudhari. The third study was conducted in three large hamlets of one multi-tribal village with a predominant population of Kukana and Warli and few others being Dhodiya Patel, Dhor Koli or Kolcha and Parsis. Unlike the frst study of Gamits, the other four studies helped to observe inter-tribal relations. The following section deals with the methodology in detail.

Map 1.1 Study Area in South Gujarat Source: Authors.

Introduction 15

The pilot study of Gamit tribe in Tapi district The frst study was conducted in two Gamit villages, Chikhalpada and Vadirupgadh, located in the Songadh taluka of newly formed Tapi district. Initially, research team wanted to select one village, Chikhalpada, for the study. Signifcance of a single village study has been dealt with thoroughly by Srinivas (1955: 98). According to Srinivas, as for a biologist one drop of water under the microscope provides the detailed properties of the source from where water is taken, river, lake, pond, etc. In a similar way, for a sociologist or a social anthropologist, study of a single village provides the arena to understand the social life of the region. In the region, based on the number of households, the villages were locally categorised into three categories, viz., small, medium and large. Small villages consisted of around 50–70 households, medium villages around 100 and large villages consist of more than 150 households. The Chikhalpada was a small village with just 72 households. Further, it had kinship relations with a neighbouring village, Vadirupgadh, from six generations onwards. Chikhalpada and Vadirupgadh were revenue villages, but kinship-wise they were one. Since Chikhalpada had only 72 households and at least 100 households were needed for percentages in data presentation, Vadirupgadh was also included in this study. The establishment of good rapport with the villagers was possible because one of the employees of the Centre for Culture and Development belonged to Chikhalpada village. The research team comprised two trained anthropologists, two research assistants and fve feld investigators. All the feld investigators were hired from within the villages. They, being local, knew the people, their dialect and, of course, who is who in these villages. The research team camped in the village itself, allowing it better contact with the people. The data were collected in three phases of feldwork extended over four months. After each phase, a time gap was given to analyse the data and look for gaps which were covered in the following feld trip. During the interaction with villagers, special care was taken to ensure that the respondents understood the project and the following care was taken while conducting interviews: 1 The research team tried to get answers from the head of the household. However, in a few cases, it got information from the other members of the household. 2 To describe the household dimension, it took people who were living together and shared a hearth (chulo), which ultimately was the defning criterion of the household (ghar). 3 Notes were taken of people who had moved out of the village, due to marriage, education and employment.

16

Introduction

4 The institution of ‘Khandadiya System’ (resident-son-in-law)4, in which the husband goes to live at the wife’s place (uxorilocal), is common in these villages. Not only men from these two villages had gone away as resident-sons-in-law but men from other villages also came as residentsons-in-law into these villages. 5 If a father has no son or has much cultivable land or both, then he takes resident-son-in-law for his daughter/s to take care of the household and manage agricultural activities. 6 On the other hand, if a man does not have enough resources to pay the bride price or has more brothers but less cultivable land, then also he will accept the resident-son-in-law position in his father-in-law’s household. In both cases, the resident-son-in-law neither loses his lineage identity nor owns his wife’s property. However, he transfers his lineage and his wife’s property to his children. 7 Marital status was carefully enquired. During the investigator’s training, it was emphasised to list down every type of union, especially in the case of multiple marriages and divorce. The cases of couples living without the formal marriage, especially with a second companion, were also listed. 8 The study also recorded their marriage rules, age at marriage, residence after marriage, distance and spatial spread of incoming and outgoing brides and resident-sons-in-law. 9 The research team took genealogy of each household in the feld and arrived at lineage segments and lineages. However, it required rounds of feldwork to arrive at the accuracy of genealogical relationships. These genealogies were useful in obtaining kinship terminology, in knowing the rules regulating inheritance pattern and in fnding out the duties and privileges of kin and lineage members. 10 A few detailed case histories of inheritance and succession were also collected from key informants.

The second study: two tribes in Surat district The second study was conducted with Vasava and Chaudhari tribes of Katkuva, Rakhaskhadi and Ambapur villages. The three neighbouring villages were located in eastern hilly parts of Mandvi taluka of Surat district. Initially, it was decided to select one village each for each tribe – Katkuva for Vasava and Rakhaskhadi for Chaudhari. However, in both villages, there were less than 100 households each in the village. Hence, Ambapur, which is an adjacent village, was also included in the study. The people of 62 households of Ambapur had kin members in both the other villages. The establishment of good rapport with the villagers was possible because of earlier contacts with Fr. Rajendran, the local Catholic priest and principal of Katkuva Ashram Shala (Vrindavan Ashram Shala). Khatariyabhai, Sarpanch, Lakhgam Group Panchayat and Fr. Rajendra not only helped for

Introduction 17 initial contacts with villagers and for selecting local feld investigators but also arranged the research team’s stay in the villages. At the outset, a few meetings were conducted with some representatives of each village where the project’s aims were discussed and their consent and help were sought. On asking for few educated persons for data collection, villagers provided a list of few persons from each village who were trained by the research team in administering the household census. Being local they knew the people, their dialect and also the identities of the villagers and their internal relations with each other.

The third study: two tribes in Valsad district The third study of Kukana and Warli tribes was conducted in three hamlets (locally called falia), Pathshali, Nayakpada and Patel Falias, of Makadban village. The Makadban village was located in Dharampur taluka, Valsad district. Almost, 95.0 per cent population was composed of Kukana and Warli people. It was a large village comprising seven hamlets (Pathshali, Nayakpada, Patel, Umarmal, Chanwaimal, Jamanpada and Mahuwad) spread over roughly 6 kilometres. In Makadban, a hamlet was more like a village in terms of population. For this reason, each hamlet was taken as if it was a village. The two hamlets – Pathshali and Patel – were selected for studying Kukanas, and similarly, Pathshali and Nayakpada were selected for Warlis. Unlike earlier studies, where prior contacts helped the research team to build a good rapport, in Makadban they had limited contacts. In the frst phase of feldwork in the village, the research team had faced several issues. They had not found a suitable place to stay, nor did they get any cooperation from the villagers. On top of it, they also faced diffculties to fnd local investigators. In the village, hardly any educated youth stayed in the house during the daytime as they were daily commuters to neighbouring industrial town and cities, such as Valsad, Pardi and Vapi, for the semi-skilled jobs in different industries. They called it as ‘company job’ (company na kaam). Moreover, the timing of the frst phase of feldwork was not appropriate. The frst phase was conducted just one month before Holi – the popular and lengthy festival. The festival is celebrated for fve days. To celebrate the festival with pomp and joy, they work hard to collect enough money. So, the research team hardly found any good investigators. These limitations forced the research team to take several pragmatic steps. The team had to fnd competent investigators from nearby villages and trained them on the feldwork. They went early to the village and returned in the late evening. In this process, villagers and the research team came to know each other very well. For the second phase of feldwork, the team arranged their accommodation inside the village and identifed local investigators and helpers and some key informants. Unlike the frst phase,

18

Introduction Kinship Structure

Marriage Structure

Household and Family Structure

Figure 1.1 Tribal Social Structure Source: Authors.

the subsequent phases of feldwork were more smooth, less hectic and came up with a tremendous amount of local cooperation and support. The tribes in India are the most misunderstood part of Indian society. They were called by different derogatory words, such as ‘primitive’, archival people, ‘vestiges of past’ and bearers of simple technology. In the past, some have been converted to Christianity. The affliates of Hindu nationalists have also indulged in proselytisation. Moreover, the state has ignored their languages, and many tribal groups were forced to assimilate into the dominant culture by using the language of the state. In the same way, their social structure is less known. Strikingly, the role of household, family, clan and kinship networks is vital towards the understanding of a tribal society, but hardly any writings exist on these issues. To understand their samajik samrachna, the researchers have undertaken a holistic study of tribal villages, with a focus on social structure in and around these villages. As far as the social structure of tribals in south Gujarat is concerned, it appears that they are similar. On looking deeper, however, they can be all regarded as different varieties of single general type. So, the study describes the general type frst and then goes on to describe, as far as possible, the variations. In this way, the present study is an attempt to fll the lacunae in the structurological studies of tribal India. Thus, this study does not only attempt to understand these tribal villages but also refect on the tribal society in Gujarat, and by extension, in India in general. This could be a singular contribution to the anthropology of tribals in India.

Chapterisation The social structure of tribal society revolves around three domains, namely, kinship, marriage and household and family. All these three together form a unique inverted triangle (Figure 1.1). In this inverted triangle, kinship structure and other marriage practices fow down to create the household and family structure downwards. The chapterisation of this study is arranged similarly (see Figure 1.1). Following this introduction, Chapter 2 profles the tribes of highland Gujarat. Chapter 3 attends to a comparative analysis of the kinship system, and Chapter 4 delineates descent, clan, lineage, kindred and some kinship

Introduction 19 behaviours. Chapter 5 discusses marriage and social networks of tribes. Chapters 6 and 7 together describe the household dimension of the family. The tribal households have been classifed into two types – simple and complex. While simple household compositions are discussed in Chapter 6, taxonomy of complex households is discussed in Chapter 7. The last chapter attempts to lace the studies of fve tribes with theoretical perspectives and tries to locate this comparative study within the larger domain of anthropological studies of tribes in Gujarat and India.

Limitation of the study Each of the tribes has a vast spatial spread in terms of population distribution in south Gujarat. But the present study has been a micro-study of few villages only. For example, the population of Vasava is spread in a vast area from Narmada to the Tapi River. Further, in this vast area, they do have several territorial groups. However, the present study has mainly focused on Vasava of three villages of Mandvi Taluka in Surat District. Tribal social structure is, indeed, spread around different households in several neighbouring villages of the region. The research team, following Srinivas (1955: 98), confrms that through a careful selection of the few village studies, one can have a pattern of tribal social structure in the region.

Notes 1 The social system can be seen as analogous to a computer system, where both society and culture can be seen as the hardware and software part of the computer. Both are supplementary to each other. Even both are required to perform a whole function. Different scholars have seen it from different perspectives. For more discussion about the social and cultural structure, refer to Wallace’s (1986) paper. In local Hindi, society can be referred to as samaj and culture as sanskriti and social structure as samajik samrachna and cultural structure as sanskritik samrachna. 2 Although many of these classical scholars did not use the term ‘social structure’ specifcally for their theoretical interpretations, however, a few of them clearly hinted on it by giving importance of social structure in their sociological analysis. To be specifc one may mention here the name of Abdel Rahman Ibn-Khaldun, a Tunisian scholar (1332–1476) who produced a corpus of works that had contained many ideas common to society and social structure, such as state formation (see Alatas 2014). 3 “Culture is that complex whole which includes knowledge, belief, art, morals, law, custom, and any other capabilities or habits acquired by man as a member of society”. 4 In south Gujarat tribes, different tribes used different terms for denoting the resident-son-in-law system. Vasava and Chaudhari refer to it as Ghar Jamai, Gamit refers to it as Khandade and Kukana and Warli refer to this institution by the term ‘Khandadiya’. For the sake of uniformity, the study will use K for both Khandadiya and Khandade and GJ for Ghar Jamai. In all cases, this system represents both context of marriage, postmarital residence type and respective household types composed of a married daughter and her K or GJ husband.

2

Profle of Gujarat Tribes

In this study, all eight villages and hamlets had different physical structures and characters. The two Gamit villages had medium-sized dispersed habitation composed of one tribe only, three Vasava and Chaudhari villages had small nucleated habitation, and three Kukana and Warli hamlets of one large village had highly dispersed hilly habitations. Despite that, all these villages have certain common features. First, tribal villages experience village solidarity in varying degrees in their day-to-day lives. Though villagers have contacts with persons in neighbouring villages and hamlets, with other people of their tribe and other tribes, the greater part of their activities are carried out within their village or hamlet and their strongest ties are generally with their fellow village/hamlets’ persons. The local term for the village is gam. A person is known by his gam. If a stranger visits a tribal person, he is frst asked about his village. Gam acts as a unit in many activities of the people. In agricultural production and house repairing, the households of a family help each other in the village. In any ceremonial feast, such as marriage, the whole village is invited. The village as a whole has certain common rights over the village pasture. Fellow villagers are called as gam na loko. Any villager can trace their kinship relations to other persons, including both real and fctive relationships. The villagers generally also know the lineage of every person in the village. In fact, most villagers can be placed on a single genealogical chart showing their relationship by blood and marriage. Second, a tribal village is generally not composed exclusively of members of a single lineage. It is generally composed of more than one lineage. In fact, the members of a lineage are scattered over different villages/hamlets. Third, due to village endogamy, villagers have multiple levels of relationships among fellow villagers. In these multiple levels of relationships, most recent relations dominate over older relations. Fourth, a very striking feature of the social structure of tribes of south Gujarat is the social hierarchy. The hierarchy, though not very similar to one found in a caste society, clearly stratifes the tribal groups. They are placed differently with relations to one another. Some are higher, others are lower and some others are placed middle in the hierarchy. This

DOI: 10.4324/9781003299790-2

Profle of Gujarat Tribes 21 could be observed in different forms, especially in multi-tribal villages and hamlets (like, in Vasava, Chaudhari, Kukna and Warli). So, Chaudhari and Kukana were ranked higher than Vasava and Warli, respectively. Further, these Vasava and Warli consider themselves higher than other minor groups residing in the same or neighbouring villages and hamlets, such as Khant and Gavit (with a relation to Vasava) and Kolcha (with a relation with Warli). The next section presents a synoptic profles of tribes in highland Gujarat.

The tribals of highland Gujarat Gujarat can be geographically and culturally distributed in three zones, viz., peninsular, mainland and highland. The eastern boundaries of Gujarat state are formed by the mountain ranges of Aravalli, Satpura and Vindhyas. Highland Gujarat lies along the eastern border of the state and stretches from south Rajasthan right up to Maharashtra, with ranges of low-lying hills, rising to a height of 1,000–3,000 ft. above sea level; some covered with trees and brushwood, while others clothed with the bamboo foliage. Highland Gujarat is intersected with streams, some of which dry up in summer (see Map 2.1). The tribes of Gujarat inhabit the rugged terrain adjoining the Aravallis, the western ridges of the Vindhya and Satpura mountain ranges and the northern slopes of the Sahyadri ranges (Table 2.1).

Map 2.1 Tribal Areas in Gujarat Source: Tribal Development Department, Govt. of Gujarat.

Table 2.1 Taluka-wise Tribal Distribution in Eastern Belt of Gujarat S. No. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51

Taluka

2011 (in Main Tribes per cent)

Dediapada Ahwa, Subir, Waghai Uchchhal Songadh Dharampur Sagbara Umarpada Kaprada Kawant Chhotaudepur Dahod Garbada Vyara Jhalod Vansda Fatepura Naswadi Santrampur Pavi-Jetpur Nandod, Garudeshwar Mandavi Vijaynagar Mahuva Khedbrahma, Poshina Nizar Valiya, Netrang Kadana Chikhli, Khergam Valod Dhanpur Jhaghadia Limkheda Pardi Bardoli Danta Bhiloda Umbergaon Amirgadh Navsari Tilakwada Mangrol Sankheda, Bodeli Valsad Palsana Ghoghamba Dabhoi Meghraj Morwa (Hadaf) Gandevi Jambughoda Halol

98.8 98.3 98.1 97.5 97.5 96.9 96.7 96.2 96.0 95.2 94.8 94.8 94.2 94.1 93.7 93.5 91.3 84.8 84.7 83.2

Vasava, Bhil Kukana, Kunbi, Bhil, Warli, Gamit, Kathodi, Kotwalia Vasava, Bhil, Dhanka Gamit, Vasava, Bhil, Chaudhari Kukana, Warli, Dhodiya, Nayaka, Kolgha Vasava, Bhil, Tadvi Vasava, Bhil Warli, Dhodiya Rathwa, Nayaka Rathwa, Dhanka Bhil, Pateliya Bhil, Pateliya Chaudhari, Dhodiya, Gamit, Kukana, Kotwalia Bhil Kukana, Warli, Dhodiya, Nayaka, Kolgha Bhil, Nayakda Tadvi, Bhil, Rathwa Nayakda Rathwa, Dhanka Vasava, Bhil

81.7 81.5 81.2 80.9

Chaudhari, Vasava, Kotwalia, Halpati, Gamit Sokla Garasia, Dungari Garasia Chaudhari, Dhodiya, Nayaka, Kolgha Dungari Garasia, Bhil Garasia, Bhil

80.8 78.6 78.2 72.3 71.6 71.1 68.7 63.6 62.5 61.3 60.3 60.0 59.2 58.5 56.1 55.4 54.5 50.1 48.0 45.3 41.5 40.2 39.2 38.5 36.9 35.6 35.5

Vasava Bhil, Dhanka, Gamit Vasava, Bhil, Gamit, Dhanka Bhil, Nayakda Halpati, Kukana, Nayaka, Kolgha, Dhodiya Chaudhari, Dhodiya, Halpati, Gamit Bhil, Pateliya Vasava, Bhil Bhil, Pateliya, Nayakda Dhodiya, Halpati, Nayaka Chaudhari, Halpati, Dhodiya Bhil Garasia, Rajput Garasia Sokla Garasia, Dungari Garasia Warli, Halpati, Dhodiya Bhil Garasia, Rajput Garasia Halpati, Kukana, Nayaka, Kolgha, Dhodiya Tadvi, Rathwa Vasava, Chaudhari Tadvi, Bhil, Rathwa Halpati, Kukana, Nayaka, Kolgha, Dhodiya Halpati Bhil, Nayakda Tadvi, Dhanka, Vasava, Bhil Sokla Garasia, Dungari Garasia Bhil, Nayakda Halpati, Kukana, Nayaka, Kolgha, Dhodiya Bhil, Nayakda Rathwa, Nayaka

Profle of Gujarat Tribes 23 Total tribal population of Gujarat is 8,917,174, out of which 8,021,848 people (89.95 per cent) live in rural areas (Census 2011). They are also called as Adivasi. The tribal population of the state is roughly 15 per cent of the total population, while at the national level it is 8 per cent of the total population. Majority of the tribal population is spread over 14 tribal dominated districts (north-eastern belt) of Aravalli, Banaskantha, Sabarkantha, Chhotaudepur, Dahod, Mahisagar, Panchmahal, Surat, Bharuch, Dang, Narmada, Navsari, Tapi and Valsad (see Map 2.2). The tribal population of the districts is given in Table 2.2. Table 2.2 shows that the highest tribal population is in the Dang district and lowest in the Amreli district. Comparing with the total population of the district, one comes across a different picture. The highest percentage of the tribal population as compared to the total population is in Dang and Table 2.2 District-wise Tribal Population in Gujarat S. No.

District

Total Population

ST Population

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 Gujarat

The Dangs Tapi Narmada Chhotaudepura Dohad Valsad Navsari Bharuch Panch Mahals Vadodara Sabar Kantha Aravallia Surat Banas Kantha Porbandar Junagadh Kheda Gandhinagar Ahmadabad Surendranagar Anand Kachchh Jamnagar Patan Rajkot Amreli Mahesana Bhavnagar

228,291 807,022 590,297 1,071,831 2,127,086 1,705,678 1,329,672 1,551,019 2,390,776 4,165,626 2,428,589 954,384 6,081,322 2,228,743 585,449 2,743,082 2,299,885 1,391,753 7214225 1,756,268 2,092,745 2,092,371 2,160,119 1,343,734 3,804,558 1,514,190 2,035,064 2,880,365 60,439,692

216,073 679,320 481,392 837,963 1,580,850 902,794 639,659 488,194 721,604 1,149,901 542,156 211,488 856,952 – 13,039 55,571 40,336 18,204 89,138 21,453 24,824 24,228 24,187 13,303 24,017 7,322 9,392 9,110 8,917,174

ST Population (in per cent) 94.7 84.2 81.6 78.2 74.3 52.9 48.1 31.5 30.2 27.6 22.3 22.2 14.1 – 2.2 2.0 1.8 1.3 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.1 1.0 0.6 0.5 0.5 0.3 14.8

a The newly formed tribal dominant districts, Chhotaudepur and Aravalli, are extracts from Vadodara and Banaskantha.

24

Profle of Gujarat Tribes

Map 2.2 Taluka-wise Distribution of Tribes in Eastern Gujarat Source: Kumar and Lobo 2019.

the lowest is in Kheda. There are fve districts, viz., Dang, Tapi, Narmada, Dahod and Valsad, which have more than 50 per cent tribal population. Thirty different tribal groups reside in Gujarat and are spread over different districts of the state. These tribes are geographically divided into specifc locations based on geographical markers, such as mountains, rivers and forests.

Profle of Gujarat Tribes 25 Based on population distribution, Bhils and Garasiyas are present in northern Gujarat; Bhils, Nayaks and Nayakdas in Panchmahals; Rathwas in Chhotaudepur; Vasavas in Bharuch; and Chaudharis, Dhodiyas, Gamits and Kukanas reside in Surat, Navsari, Valsad and Dangs. Of the total 252 talukas of the state, in 43 talukas tribals constitute over 50 per cent of the total population. Table 2.2 represents the percentage of tribal populations as compared to the total population of the talukas. These talukas generally fall on the easternmost part of the state (see Map 2.2). The tribals of Gujarat may be divided into the following three sections according to the geographical spread: 1 2 3

Bhils and their sub-tribes, such as Rajput Garasiyas, Dungri Garasiyas and Bhil Garasiyas, live in north Gujarat explicitly in Banaskantha, Sabarkantha and Aravalli districts. Bhils who are known as Pateliya, Dhanka, Naikda and Rathva live in central Gujarat, i.e. in Mahisagar, Panchmahal, Dahod and Chhotaudepur districts. Vasava, Tadvi, Dubala, Gamit, Kukana, Dhodiya, Warli, Bhil, Nayaka and Chaudhari live in south Gujarat, viz., in the Dangs, Valsad, Surat, Tapi, Narmada and Bharuch districts.

Population: size and distribution The above three could be further classifed into eleven major groups as shown in Table 2.3. The Bhils with their several subdivisions represent a majority of the Scheduled Tribe (ST) population, and Patelia represent a minimum. Several tribes that reside in the depths of the forests do not have proper contact with the mainstream society or plains people. They live among different tribes with whom they share a few common characteristics. The source of livelihood for these tribes varies from collecting and selling minor produce from the forests to the production of handcrafts items. These communities follow their own culture rooted in a particular region and specifed identity. At the same time, they also want to become a part and contribute to the country’s development and wish to be included in the mainstream. There was a misconception that tribes always remain isolated, they are always poor, they are always oppressed, they never had a voice and their identity always was frozen. From the 1970s onwards, there was a considerable scholarship to dispel such myths (Wolf 1966). Some people even called them the vestiges of the past or simply primitive people (Kuper 1988). About 100 years ago, the tribes of Gujarat were known and called by a single classifcatory term – Bhils. At the local level, Gujarat had two major substrata of the marginal population known as Bhils and Kolis. The Kolis were 20 per cent of the population. Popularly, the Kolis were known as the tribes of the plains, while Bhils were known as the hilly tribes (Lobo 1995). In broader brush stroke we can say that Kolis generally occupied plain areas,

26

Profle of Gujarat Tribes

Table 2.3 Population of Major Scheduled Tribes (ST) as per the 2011 Census S. No. 1

Name of the ST

Total Population

Bhil, Bhil Taviyad, Bhil Garasia, 4,215,603 Dholi Bhil, Dungri Bhil, Dungri Garasia, Mewasi Bhil, Rawal Bhil, Tadvi Bhil, Bhagalia, Bhilala, Pawra, Vasava, Vasave 2 Dubla, Talavia, Halpati 643,120 3 Dhodia, Dhodi 635,695 4 Rathawa 642,348 5 Naikda, Nayaka, Cholivala 459,908 Nayaka, Kapadia Nayaka, Mota Nayaka, Nana Nayaka 6 Gamit, Gamta, Gavit, Mavchi, 378,445 Padvi 7 Kukana, Kukana, Kukna 361,587 8 Chaudhari (in Surat and Valsad 302,958 districts) 9 Warli 328,194 10 Dhanka, Tadvi, Tetaria, Valvi 280,949 11 Patelia 114,414 12 Other Tribes 553,953 All ST 8,917,174

Proportion to the Total Tribal Population in State (in per cent) 47.28

7.21 7.13 7.20 5.16 4.24 4.05 3.40 3.68 3.15 1.28 6.21 100

while Bhils occupied the hills. Later on, Kolis were classifed as OBCs. They too were named differently in different parts of the state of Gujarat. Today, there exist nearly 30 different tribal groups in Gujarat of which the Bhils, Vasavas, Dodiyas, Gamits, Chaudharis, Rathwas, Halpatis, Dublas, Warlis and Kukanas are the main ones. Among the Bhils there are Garasia Bhils of Sabarkantha district, Bhils of Panchmahals, Bhil Vasavas of Bharuch and Dangi Bhils of Dang district. It is not just the physical distance that separates them but also the social and cultural spaces among and between them. Though the term ‘Bhil’ today stands for a particular group, it was a blanket term used to cover nearly all the tribals of highland Gujarat. In other words, most of the tribal groups of Gujarat were Bhils at one time. And over a period of time, they differentiated and assumed different names. Many tribal groups, such as Chaudharis and Gamits, resent being called Bhils. Hence, the word ‘tribes’ of Gujarat rather than ‘Bhils’ of Gujarat is used, except for named Bhil groups. There exists speculation regarding the origins of the Bhils in anthropological literature. We might turn our attention to their identity rather than origin. A tribal has been considered an aborigine, archaic, backward, savage and so on. In the popular imagination of the Hindus of Gujarat, a Bhil is

Profle of Gujarat Tribes 27 characterised as a dark man, killing anyone who comes to rob him. Naik (1956) has written that to silence a naughty Hindu boy, the mother threatens him by saying that a Bhil will come and take him away if he does not cease his mischief. The Bhils were never a criminal tribe, and yet in the popular Hindu imagination, Bhils are considered as criminals. In the history of ancient Gujarat, some Bhil kings and chieftains have ruled some areas of Gujarat. They had a martial tradition and marital relations with the conquering Rajputs. Bhil elites gave their daughters in marriage to low-ranking Rajputs. The name ‘Bhil’ was commonly understood as ‘bowmen’. They were often seen with bows and arrows. It perhaps indicated their culture of being warriors and hunters.

A brief overview of the lifeways of the tribes of Gujarat The soil of highland Gujarat is reddish or brownish and not fertile. The average annual rainfall in Surat district is 107 cms, and it decreases as one proceeds from south to north in eastern Gujarat. One can also divide the tribal belt into three zones: (1) plains, where the hilly tract begins; (2) hills; and (3) remote interior jungles. The villages in the frst zone are nearer to towns, relatively advanced in terms of technology and have a monetised economy. Most crops are rain-fed. Coarse crops like jowar, bajra, kodra and pulses, such as Urad and Tuver, are grown on the slopes or the immediate foothills of the major undulations where the topsoil is thin and loosely bound. A double crop is cultivated in the plains where the soil is thicker with matured topsoil. Until about a century ago, the Bhils of the second zone were not settled agriculturists. They practised slash and burn or shifting cultivation as well as food gathering. The concept of private property was alien to them. But the Land Settlement Act in the frst decade of the century marked a turning point in agriculture when land was allotted to the tribal people. The tribes of the third zone also were not settled agriculturists, being seminomadic, at the beginning of the century. At present most tribals are settled agriculturists. Capitalist penetration, enactment of forest and excise laws and land alienation have caused socio-economic disruption in the region. Several socio-religious movements have risen as listed in Table 2.4. Hardiman (1987) has studied one such movement called Devi Movement among the south Gujarat tribals. The tribes have come in for progressive dislocation on account of institutional changes after Independence and the government’s efforts to bring them into the mainstream. For example, they have been facing continuous displacement due to dams, canals, mines and industrial development. Also, non-tribals have intruded their space in various forms and brought about several changes. They have gone to tribal areas as shopkeepers and moneylenders, and many Hindu Ashram schools have been established.

Satkaival

Devi

Moksha Margis or Vallabh Swami

Viswanath movement

Sati Pati

Kaladia Panth

Swaminarayan

–

Sanatan

1829

1921

1925

1930

1940

–

–

1945

1950

Centre of Origin

Fakirbhai, Vallabhbhai Narayan, Swaroopdasji Godavaribai Parulekar Vidyanad Akhandanad

Gulia Maharaj Ramdas, Keshri Singh

Viswanath

Vallabh Ram, Syra Son Ramuji

Warlis

Dhodia

–

Many tribal peoples

Tadvis

Dhodia, Chaudhari, Gamit

Chodra

–

Recruited Groups

Nasik, Dhodia Chandod, Narmada

–

Valsad taluka –

Dhulia

Padekola

Ahemdabad

Kuberswami Kheda a) Tapossi Raghu Ram, b) Tentisbhai – Khandesh

Leader/s

External Marks

Stop wine Guru mantra and toddy, regular bath Stop drinking – wine, toddy tapping Sex only Satsang with legal Usgpad partners, tilak Guru no meat Mantra and wine

Prescriptions

Pardi, Valsad

No meat or wine

Vyara, Valod 206 rules Mahuva Dharampur, Venad –

Satsang

–

Satsang

Surat-Mahuva, Valod, Vyara, ValsadDharampur, Chikhli Pardi, Bansda, Navsari Gomdeshwar, Orthodox Guru Kanthis Nandod Hindu customs, no wine, meat Songadh, Vyara, Greeting Aao AmvasMandvi-Surat, ju jai, no Poonam Dangs, Bharuch wine or gatherings district meat Valsad taluka – Bhajan

Surat, Valsad

Vyara, Valod, Mandvi, Badoli

Area of Spread

Source: Compiled from Socio-Religious Movements among tribals of South Gujarat by R.B. Lal 1983.

Name of the Movement

Year

Table 2.4 Socio-Religious Movements among the South Gujarat Tribals

28 Profle of Gujarat Tribes

Profle of Gujarat Tribes 29 Although historically tribes have observed their traditional religions, presently, they experience ‘de-tribalisation’ or ‘assimilation’ in basically two ways: by (1) incorporation into Christianity and (2) absorption into Hinduism (Lobo 2019). Tribals of Gujarat have the following faith-based typologies: those holding on to traditional belief systems, those converted to Christian denominations and those Hinduised or following many sects, both classical and modern. They are not only on the margins of faith but are also marginalised in terms of their identity and in terms of the economy and the polity. The Christianisation process among the Bhils of Gujarat is about 120 years old (Lobo 2010), while Hinduisation or Sanskritisation as a process has been prevalent among the tribals over a very long time (Srinivas 1956). It involved the lower castes and tribes emulating the behaviour and lifestyle of those above them. Diffusion of Hindu cultural traits among the tribals began with traders, businessmen, moneylenders and priests. The Hinduisation process was furthered by the many Gandhians, such as A.V. Thakkar and Jugat Ram Dave, and several organisations, like Bhil Seva Mandal, Rani Paraj Seva Mandal and Sadguru Seva Sangh, in tribal areas (Lobo 2010). The Hinduisation process has been best carried out by sectarian movements mentioned in Table 2.4 who insisted on the following elements: teetotalism, vegetarianism, purifcatory baths and abstaining from tobacco.

Socio-economic situation of Gujarat tribals In a fairly recent study (Shah et al. 2008: 7), scholars mapped chronic poverty in tribal rural belt in central India. They have come out with a poverty profle of different sub-regions of Gujarat as shown in Table 2.5. Table 2.5 shows the breakup of the percentage of the total rural population living below the poverty line. South Gujarat plains and the eastern hilly area of Gujarat, which is largely tribal, account for the maximum percentage of poor, i.e. 54.6 per cent. Apart from massive poverty, one fnds that the tribal society is disintegrating. Its traditional social institutions are being displaced by the Table 2.5 Incidence of Poverty in the Sub-Regions of the Rural Gujarat Sub-Regions 1 2 3 4 5

Eastern Hilly areas South Gujarat plains North Gujarat plains Gujarat Dry Areas Saurashtra peninsula Total Gujarat

Source: Shah et al. (2008).

Percentage of the Poor (per cent) 25.9 28.7 22.7 10.9 11.8 100.00

30

Profle of Gujarat Tribes

superimposition of a host of external agents, such as courts, constables, police, priests, pastors and panchayats. Many religious groups, both Hindu and Christian, are recruiting tribals, sometimes in the same area among the same groups. These competing religions are confusing tribal people. Their traditional religious feasts and festivals stand little chance of survival. For the tribes, the forest is not only a source of sustenance but their religion is also embedded in it. The disappearance of the forests has ruined not only their source of subsistence but also their religious or cognitive maps. The traditional medical system of the tribals is increasingly challenged both by the disappearance of the forests and also by the competing medical systems introduced by the Hindu and Christian missionaries as well as the government. The tribals are being increasingly dragged into the realm of the monetised economy from their traditional non-monetised economy. Huge dams built in tribal areas, such as Sardar Sarovar, Ukai, Karjan and Madhuban, have displaced a large number of tribal people, and they have not been given adequate compensation (Baviskar 1995). They are the minimal benefciaries of the dams that have been built in their environment, thereby destroying their habitat. Having been thrown out of their natural habitat and deprived of their age-old subsistence base, they are like fsh out of water, mostly found in the plains working as bonded labourers, or wandering in large cities, such as Surat and Vadodara, in search of wage labour. The tribes become the sacrifcial goats for the ‘national interest’, i.e. the interests of upper caste and class and landlords of the plains of Gujarat. The building of the massive Sardar Patel statue again touted as a ‘national symbol’ has been done at the expense of the life and livelihood of the local tribes whose land was usurped and who have now been reduced to doing menial labour on the very land of which they were the owners. The tribals have also faced cultural disintegration. The survival kit handed down over the generations in the form of cultural institutions and their indigenous wisdom stands rejected by the so-called modern education. The values of the Hindu society, viz., hierarchy, purity-pollution are steadily creeping into the tribal society. The constant ridicule which the tribals have to confront from the Hindus has eroded their self-confdence in their cultural institutions and practices. They have to perform their traditional practices privately with great apprehension and hesitation. Tribal dialects are relegated to the background, and Gujarati is imposed on them. Their traditional entertainments are pushed into oblivion, and commercialised city-based entertainments, such as flms and music, are imposed on them. Thus, they are pressurised to become culturally homogeneous with the rest of the Gujarati society. This is again done in the name of ‘development’ and welfare. The tribals are subjected to the ordeal of development by the government. Non-tribal government offcers who have little sympathy for or empathy with the tribals introduce large-scale multi-purpose credit societies, such as Primary Agricultural Credit Societies, Integrated Rural Development

Profle of Gujarat Tribes 31 Programmes and so on, into tribal areas. They hardly take cognisance of tribal culture and society. Some schemes are vigorously promoted among the tribes, such as loan schemes, because the offcials pocket a large sum, especially the subsidy. It is alleged that the illiterate tribals are enticed to take loans and are swindled by these corrupt offcials who ruin them. What the moneylenders did illegally, these offcials are doing it legally today in the name of development. Development in the tribal areas has multiplied opportunities for further exploitation of the tribals. Unforeseen consequences are generated from the so-called development, which is detrimental to the tribal society. The political disintegration of tribal society is fast taking place. Politics of crime and goondaism are spreading in these areas. Development projects which carry a lot of money have a close nexus with political parties. The tribal population today is at cross-roads; their cultural, social, economic, political, legal and religious spaces have been violated by so many agencies, some of which claim to further tribal interests. Several scholars working in different parts of India have highlighted the plight of the tribes under this onslaught of ‘development’ that is directed only towards a particular kind of nationalism, mainly feeding the interests of the elite and the corporates (Sundar 1997; Shah 2010).

An overview of fve tribes under study The fve tribal societies have different habitats and ecology in three areas of south Gujarat. This section presents a brief overview of these communities based on feldwork and some earlier studies. This section provides some background information on these fve communities to have an understanding prior to discussing their social structure in subsequent chapters. Gamits The Gamits are also known as Gavit, Gamta, Mavchi and Padvi. They inhabit the south-eastern region of Surat, Tapi, Dang, Valsad and part of Bharuch district. They are also found in the neighbouring Khandesh region of Maharashtra. They claim higher status over neighbouring tribes such as Bhil, Vasava, Kukana and Warli. However, Gamits consider themselves of lower status to Chaudhari. They speak a dialect of their own among themselves and communicate in Gujarati with outsiders. Gamits are mainly agriculturalists but also do fshing and hunting. Many people work as daily wage labourers. Few people earn their living as tailors, carpenters, masons and shopkeepers, etc. Through education, they have achieved a certain amount of upward mobility and are also found doing white-collar jobs, such as doctors, engineers and teachers. Being an agrarian community, they obtain their food from crops, namely, paddy, nagli (fnger millets; Eleusine coracana), toor (pigeon pea; Cajanus

32

Profle of Gujarat Tribes

cajan), adad (urad bean; Vigna mungo), mug (mung bean; Vigna radiata), etc. In some places, due to increased irrigation facilities, sugar cane and okra farming has been considerably practised. Rice and rice products are the chief food for the community. They eat chapattis made of rice four called rotlo and the potion like mixture made of fermented four called ghatho. Their staple diet includes rice, dal, and red chilli chutney. They eat the meat of many animals and birds, except for crow, mouse and monkey. They invariably serve chicken and mahua liquor to their guests. Mahua liquor, made from Mahua fowers (Madhuca longifolia), is part of their life and also used in several rituals. Because of the spread of several sects and cults like Sat-Keval, Sati Pati and Moksh-Margi, some of the Gamit families have renounced alcoholic drinks and non-vegetarian foods. Gamits have their traditional religion but write Hindu in the offcial documents. In the former category, they worship several local deities. If they are not worshipped, it is believed that they get angry and punish the devotees. However, they are appeasable as well. They propitiate Kansari Mata (Grain goddess), Mari Mata, Wagh Dev (Tiger god), Gowal Dev (Cattle god), etc. (Soni 2003a: 371). From the Hindu pantheon, they also worship Mahadev, Ram and Hanuman. They celebrate Holi, Dhuleti, Navratri, Dussera, Diwali, Diwaso, Wagh Baras, Sheetala Saptam, etc. They go on pilgrimage to Unai Mata, Amba Mata, Goli Garh, etc. They also have taken to mostly Pentecostal Christianity. The converts continue to follow their traditional customs. They have also come under the infuence of several other religious sects. The Gamits have their traditional council of elders or adjudicators called village panch. It is headed by the Patel and Police Patel and helped by Karbari. They have also formed a modern association known as Dakshin Gujarat Gamit Samaj headed by a Pramukh and assisted by a secretary and other offce-bearers. The cases brought before the community panchayat are generally adultery, divorce, breaking of engagement, quarrelling and disputes related to property. Vasava The Vasava tribe is inhabiting largely in the districts of Bharuch, Surat, Tapi and Narmada in the hilly regions between the rivers of Narmada and Tapi. There is no separate census of Vasava but are considered as a subtribe of Bhils. As mentioned earlier, the term ‘Bhil’ is a generic, blanket term used for different groups of people of the region in hills and forests. Traditionally, Bhils were dynamic supporters of one or another side in the late medieval confrontation of several small kingdoms (like Mughals, British, Maratha, etc.). At the same time, they preserved their self-identity and polity in their daily behaviour (Guha 1996: 133ff). Bhils are the largest tribal group in Gujarat and are divided into several sub-groups: Bhil Garasia, Vasave Bhil, Pawra Bhil and Tadvi Bhil. Vasava

Profle of Gujarat Tribes 33 are considered the largest sub-tribe of Bhil. Until 1961, there were no offcial records of the Vasavas. Enthoven considered Vasavas as one of the clans of Bhils (Enthoven 1920). While Naik considered them as a sub-group of Bhils in Rajpipla and Khandesh. He also observed that the Bhilli village head was referred to by the term Vasvao or as Vahavo by simply use of sound ‘h’ in place of ‘s’ (Naik 1956). They claim higher status to other subgroups such as Katkari and Kotwalia (primitive tribes of the region). They concede higher status to Chaudhari, Gamit, etc. They speak the Vasavi dialect. Their dialect, Vasavi, has several versions spoken by people based on different geographic locations, such as Dubli, Kahudi, Vahudi, Khatali, Ambudi, Mathwadi, or Dongri, Dehwali, Nansuli, Noire and Kotli. These sub-dialects do not exhibit major differences, except for some words and intonations. Their main occupation is agriculture. They also work as labourers, and many of them are involved in construction work as they migrate to nearby towns and cities. A good number of them have taken up jobs in government and non-government offces. Few families are doing petty business also. They consume cereals like jowar (sorghum), bajra (pearl millet) and wheat and pulses like toor and mug. They eat the meat of goat, sheep, etc., besides chicken, eggs and fsh. They also consume locally available roots and tubers. Alcoholic drinks are taken moderately by men. Bidi1 and tobacco are availed by both men and women. Vasavas follow their traditional as well as Hindu religion. Their ritual is performed by community elders. Vasava has one kuldevi (family deity). During the Navratri festival, they worship their kuldevi. They most often visit shrines of local deities, such as Dhoodh Mogra and Dev Mogra. They also worship several deities to protect their crops and cattle. The deity Khetlo or Khetarpal (boundary god) who looks after the farm is worshipped. A coloured thread, coconut and chicken or goat are offered to Khetarpal. Many festivals are observed, like Shivaratri, Holi, Dhulendi, Diwali, etc. Besides, they also take part in local and regional fairs of deities like Bagoria mela, Orani mela, etc. The traditional council consists of elected offce bearers of elders and educated people from different villages. They meet at a place to decide and settle their conficts, quarrels, adultery, divorce, theft, etc. The panch has the right to fx any amount of fne and compensation on the defaulters on case basis (Das 2003: 228). If any person does not honour the decision of the panch, then his/her family is socially boycotted. Chaudhari In the past the Chaudhari tribe was also known as Chaudhara or Chodra in old records. They mainly reside on south and north of the river Tapi and are found in Surat and Tapi districts. Presently, they are divided mainly into two groups – Nana and Mota Chaudhari. The Nana (small) live in

34

Profle of Gujarat Tribes

the south, and Mota (big) live in the north of Tapi. Among them the Nana Chaudhari is treated higher as they have better economic status due to irrigated agriculture. Concerning neighbouring tribes, they claim higher status to Vasava, Gamit and Kukana. They speak in the Chaudhri dialect, and they are also well conversant with Gujarati. People in multi-tribal villages understand each other’s dialects also. They communicate among themselves using their own dialect. They also speak in Gujarati with outsiders and use Hindi as well. Their main source of livelihood is agriculture. The rate of literacy among the Chaudharis is much higher than the average tribal literacy rate in the state. Educated Chaudharis work in different government jobs, and many work as primary and secondary school teachers. Before independence, they participated in the freedom movement. They organised reform movements against the consumption of liquor and for the spread of education among them. At present, the community has several political leaders and social workers. Amar Singh Choudhary, the frst and only tribal chief minister of Gujarat, came from this community. Chaudharis consume common cereals such as rice, jowar and wheat. The common pulses are toor, adad and gram (Chickpea; Cicer arientinum). Meat, fruits and vegetables are a part of the diet but are occasionally consumed. The Chaudhari are Hinduised. However, they worship several deities at family, lineage and village and regional levels. Their main deities are Ahindo-Dev (God of the hills), Himario-Dev (protector of felds and crops) and Mokhri-Mata (looks after the health of humans and cattle) (Ghatak 2003: 295). Stone images of ancestors known as Khatrans are also worshipped. Among these images, one image is of Dabhio dev who is considered to be the protector of other Khatrans. A few among them also follow Christianity. A majority of the converted group are found in Vyara, Songadh and Mandvi talukas. However, they continue to participate in their traditional festivals also. The Chauhdaris have their traditional jati panchayat headed by village head, Karbari. Sometimes Karbari also acts as traditional medicine man, Bhagat. The panchayat settles disputes between the members of the community. The Police Patel is another important offce in the village who is responsible for the maintenance of law and order and collection of revenue for the government. The statutory panchayat is primarily concerned with the implementation of developmental schemes. Kukana Kukanas were also called by different names in the past, such as Kokani or Kunbi. It is said that they originally migrated from the coastal Konkan region. Presently, the largest concentration of the Kukana is in the Valsad and Dang districts of the state. They are also found in the districts of Thane,

Profle of Gujarat Tribes 35 Nashik, Dhule and Nandurbar of Maharashtra. In Dharampur taluka of Valsad district and Vansda taluka of Navsari district, they live with Warli, Nayak, Kolcha, Dhodiya Patel and Parsis. In the hierarchy, they are considered above the Bhils, Kolcha and Warli and considered lower than Gamits and Chaudharis (Nanda 2003: 692). They speak their dialects, Kokni, a mixture of Marathi and Gujarati words. With the outsiders, they speak in Gujarati quite well and can also converse in broken Hindi. The main occupation of Kukanas is agriculture and agricultural labour. They are considered as good agriculturalists. They can cultivate the land wherever they fnd it, be it plain, valley or highland. They are also engaged in horticulture of several seasonal fruits and vegetables such as mango, chikoo, okra, tomato, etc. Besides this, recently, they have also taken to various other secondary occupations to supplement their economy such as tailoring, carpentry, etc. A few educated people are also engaged in government and private sectors. Some of them are also engaged as unskilled, semi-skilled and skilled labourers in industrial units in nearby towns. Very few have taken up to small-scale business. Their main staple diet consists of cereals, such as nagli and rice. Adad is the main pulse grown in the area. They prepare rotla (chapattis of rice or nagli) and eat with mug, adad or simply with chilli chutney. They take the meat of goats, sheep, deer, rabbits, wild pigs and fowls. They relish fsh with rice. Fresh fsh from streams and rivers or dried fsh (bumbla) purchased from the weekly market are eaten. Alcoholic drink is an essential component in every ritual and ceremonial function. Fruit consumption is very less except for eating some locally available fruits. The habit of smoking and chewing tobacco is common among both men and women. Kukana professes their traditional religion. There are many gods and goddesses in their pantheon. They have their Kul Devi (family deity) in the name of the whom they take vows for fulflling certain desires. They offer a part of the frst harvest of all the seasonal crops to the deities before they consume. Bram-Dev is a sacred site in each hamlet where they house their deities (sacred grove). Holi Mata is their family deity, and Ashper-Dev is their village deity. The other deities are Malhwada Mata, Sitala Mata (goddess of smallpox), Mohavhu Mata (deity of the pimple), Akashi Mata (deity of the sky who protects children from the evil eye), Bamania Bhoot (King of spirits residing near crematorium), Petforio Mata (protects from abortion), Kakawaliya (smallpox god), Marki Mata (deity of plague), Kansari Devi (deity of corn) and Kholkholi Mata (deity of cough). Kansari Devi (deity of corn) is worshipped on every festive occasion and at the beginning of any auspicious work. Gram dev, Simaria dev, and Baghdev are the village deities. They also worship the deities of the Hindu pantheon, such as Hanumanji, Unai Mata, Kalka Mata, etc. They celebrate Holi, Mahashivratri, Dussera, Navratri and Diwali. The next day of Diwali is meant for ancestor worshipping (details will be presented in preceding chapters). They came under the infuence of Christianity, and more recently, they are also

36

Profle of Gujarat Tribes

infuenced by various sects of Hindu, such as Swami Narayan, Sat Keval, Sanatan Dharma, and Yogeshwara. The community has their own jati panchayat composed of elders. This panchayat acts as a means of social control. The jati panchayat adjudicates matters of social behaviour, intra- and inter-group conficts and cases of divorce. Punishments are inficted on the man/woman who violates the communal norms. The statutory panchayat implements different developmental programmes launched by the government. Warli The Warli tribe mostly inhabits the hilly region of Dharampur and Vansda talukas. They are also found in the Thane region of Maharashtra. According to Enthoven (1922), the term ‘Warli’ originated from viral, which means upper land, whereas Save (1945) opined that the term has roots in the word warul, which means forest. Overall they reside in the forested region of the eastern slopes of Sahayadris. Some believe that (Mandal and Malhotra 1983) Warli migrated from the Konkan region of Maharashtra. They are famous for their wall painting known as Warli painting, which depicts their daily life activities. They are also experts in bamboo work. They claim higher status over tribes such as Dhor Koli or Kolcha and Nayak (primitive tribes of the region). However, the Warlis are considered lower in social status to Dhodiya Patel and Kukana tribes. They speak their own dialect, Warli, which is a mixture of the Khandesi Bhili dialect and Marathi. They also speak Gujarati with outsiders. They are agriculturalists and also work as agricultural labourers. They act as Gwalas (graziers) and Rakhewala (servants) for other local communities. However, the neighbouring Dhor-Koli tribe serves the Warli as Kathio (watchmen). Warlis have less education as majority of their children drop out after primary or secondary education. The Warlis eat the meat of deer, goat, wild rabbit, fowls, pigeons, etc., but their most favourite is fsh. Dry fsh is mixed with dal or vegetable and then eaten with rotla. The staple cereals are nagli and rice. Rice is eaten with red chilli chutney. Rice-gruel is taken in the morning. Occasionally they consume fruits from the forest. They also take minor forest products such as asitra (timro; Bauhinia racemosa), which is used for the preparation of bidi (local cigar) which they use for self-consumption. Being forest dwellers, they have immense faith in natural objects and supernatural spirits (Soni 2003: 1436). They worship several local deities who protect them from evil spirits, epidemics and misfortunes. They make sacrifces of fowls and goats to the deities on different occasions to fulfl their wishes and to get rid of the effect of malevolent spirits. They worship Kansari Devi, Hirwa Devi and Naran dev as family deities, whereas Gamdev – village deity – and Nakherdev and Dungardev – hill deity – are worshipped collectively by them. They also worship Mawli Devi and

Profle of Gujarat Tribes 37 Hanumanji. They celebrate Holi, Diwali, Diwaso, Akhatrij, etc. Under the impact of Christianity, very few people have changed their religious faith. The Warli community does not have a formal organisation of community panchayat, but one fnds the Mukhi or Patel (chief/headman) who plays a vital role in keeping the social norms intact. This post is hereditary, but he may take the help of an elder person in the community. The Karbari (helper of headman) and Kathio (watchman) help him in the daily work of panchayat. The Warlis also take the help of the statutory panchayat’s Sarpanch and Police Patel in different socio-political matters.

Profles of the studied villages In order to have an understanding of their background information of living, this section presents brief profles of villages and hamlets in which these fve tribes live. Gamits of Chikhalpada and Vadirupgadh The two adjoining Gamit villages, Chikhalpada and Vadirupgadh, are well connected with nearest towns Songadh, the taluka headquarter; Vyara, the district headquarter; and Ahwa, the district headquarters of adjoining districts Dang. The ‘Chikhalpada’ is a union of two Dangi words Chikhul, which means marshy land, and Pada, which means the village or hamlet, whereas ‘Vadirupgadh’ is a union of Vadi, which means boundary, and Rupgadh, which is the name of the fort2 on the adjacent hill. These two villages are situated on the border of two districts – Tapi and Dang – and are predominately inhabited by Gamits, except for fve households of other tribes (Bhils, Warlis and Kuknas). Recounting their history of origin, villagers said that they immigrated here six to seven generations ago. Prior to immigration, this land was densely forested and only resided by a few non-Gamit people. Chikhalpada is divided into three hamlets, falias, while Vadirupgadh is divided into four. The falia is a cluster of houses or lanes belonging to a group of close kin. The houses are dispersed in a large area mostly in or near to their agricultural lands. Houses are of three types – most are kutcha, while few are semi-pucca and rarely pucca. Kutcha houses are made of mud, bamboo and wood with a roof of daub. Their huts are simple and large, with threefold division, viz., a bedroom (kholi), fre place or hearth (chula) and storage (kotar). The front of the house is called otlo. In otlo a swing is most commonly found. There is also a cowshed (kotho) next to it. In their houses, they keep the utensils made from copper, brass, aluminium, steel, clay or glass. Besides, they have some mattresses, cots, kerosene lamp, wooden stand, drum to store food grain, a radio, T.V., tape recorder, tin box and steel cupboard, etc. The villagers primarily live off agriculture, forest products and dairy farming. Some are agricultural labourers. In the villages, a few are also

38 Profle of Gujarat Tribes skilled workers – Suthar (carpenters), Kadia (mason) and drivers – while some have their own business, like grocery shops and tailoring shops. Outside the villages, occupations are mainly services – both private and government – labour and business. Vasava and Chaudhari of Katkuva, Rakhaskhadi and Ambapur These three adjacent villages of Vasava and Chaudhari are well connected with the nearest towns of Mandvi (the taluka headquarter) and Bardoli (the nearest city in Surat district). They are part of ‘inhabited forest village’ in the taluka. Several uninhabited villages exist in the forest; e.g. Dhajamba is an uninhabited village for fve decades, next to Ambapur, the newest settlement among the three villages. Tapi river fows by the side of Mandvi town. Two small rivers, DhankiKhadi and Mandvi ki Khadi, fow on both the west and east side of villages, respectively. On moving southwards, they pour their water into Tapi River at two different places. Three medium dams for irrigation were constructed during the 1970s on these two rivers – Lakhigam Dam on Dhanki-Khadi River and Kevadi and Isar Dams on Mandvi ki Khadi River. The Lakhigam Dam had submerged three inhabited villages. Some displaced people of this project have settled in Katkuva village. The population of these villages are a mix of Chaudhari and Vasava with a sprinkling of other tribes, such as Naik, Khant and Gavit. Katkuva and Rakhaskhadi have more than 90 per cent population of Vasava and Chaudhari, respectively, while Ambapur has around 80 per cent of Vasavas and the rest are Chaudharis. Unlike the Gamit villages, where houses were largely dispersed, these three are nucleated settlements. The houses are built very close to one another, with small lanes for passage of people and sometimes for carts. Fields surround the settlement and are within the walking distance from the settlement. The size of the population in the villages is quite large (with a total of 333 households (172 in Katkuva, 99 in Rakhaskhadi and 62 households in Ambapur)). Villages are divided into different hamlets (falias) based on some landmark place, person or tree, marshy land, barren land, etc. Generally, the households are related by kinship ties. Agriculture is the primary means of livelihood for the majority of villagers (64.7 per cent in Vasava and 64.1 per cent in Chaudhari), and the major economic resource is the land. A few of them are engaged in jobs in Surat, Daman, Mandvi and Vadodara. Some of the persons also work as teachers in the neighbouring villages and towns. The communication system in these villages is good. They are well connected by a good all-weather mettle road with the outside world through Mandvi town. Daily six buses of state transport ply from Ambapur to Mandvi. The public transport is used mostly by students, service class or daily workers. Because of the better communication facilities, the people of the villages are more exposed to urban life. One can also fnd private vehicles plying on Ambapur and Umarkhadi road regularly. Apart from these,

Profle of Gujarat Tribes 39 people also have their vehicles in the village. Almost every two households have one motorbike, which is the convenient mode of travelling to the nearby villages and as far as to Surat or Bharuch. Kukana and Warli of Makadban village The Makadban village is well connected with nearest towns and cities, such as Dharampur (the taluka headquarter) and Valsad (district headquarter) (see Map 2.3). The village is located at the border region of two talukas, Dharampur and Kaprada, where river Par forms the boundary. The river Par fows from the south-eastern side to the north-western side of the village. It is used by villagers for fshing, washing, bathing and irrigation purposes. The river Par at Dhamani also becomes an arbitrary boundary of two tribes, Kukanas and Warli. Towards the north and east of the river, Kukanas are in majority, while towards the south and south-east, Warlis become preponderant. The hamlets have a highly dispersed type of habitation where houses are situated in their felds in clusters of two or three huts, all related by close patrilineal kinship. They consist of the huts of a father and grown-up sons or brothers and their wives. Sometimes, because of uxorilocal residence, father and brothers of a woman may be in the same cluster as her husband. This happens when there is a resident-son-in law. Each family builds its homestead on their land. Because of dispersed highland settlement pattern, a few house clusters of one hamlet are nearer to the neighbouring villages than to other hamlets of the same village. For example, Pathshali falia of Makadban is much closer to neighbouring villages, Nali

Map 2.3 Hamlets of Makadban and its Neighbouring Villages Source: Authors

40

Profle of Gujarat Tribes

Madni or Arnai, than Patel or Nayakpada hamlets of Makadban. So, there is very little face-to-face contact among different hamlets except on some specifc occasions, such as marriage and death. Due to sparse day-to-day basis interactions, the villagers recognise (Odakhiye) people from different hamlets, yet they are not familiar with each other. So, the basic unit for intensive social interaction is located in the hamlet rather than the village. One may, therefore, look upon the hamlet as the basic social unit. The hamlet identity is emphasised by certain specifc falia-based symbols such as Devli (falia deity/female goddess), Brahma Dev (falia male deity) and persons like Dayan (delivery woman), Aagewan (falia leader), etc. Daily social interactions of people are centred more in and around their own falia than other falias or a village. In government records, Makadban is a revenue village, but in reality, it is not a social village. But in terms of actual group identity and social interactions, it is a group of seven villages (large hamlets) fashioned into one revenue unit. Each falia for all practical purposes is itself a village. Agriculture is the primary means of livelihood for the majority of villagers (60.1 per cent in Kukana and 55.9 per cent in Warli). Some of the persons also work as sharecroppers. Apart from agriculture, villagers also grow some vegetables, such as ladies’ fnger (okra), onions, garlic, ginger, potato, sweet potato, carrot, radish, gourd and cucumber. Some of the innovative persons practise horticulture of seasonal fruits, like mango. After agriculture, the next occupation is unskilled and skilled labour work in nearby industrial centres of Vapi, Valsad, Pardi and Atul. Total 3.6 per cent of the villagers go to these centres (2.0 per cent of Kukana and 5.6 per cent of Warli). Only a minuscule population (1.0 per cent), who do not have education and agricultural land, are engaged in wage labour in the village. And only 0.9 per cent are engaged in the services sector. The communication system in the Makadban village and its hamlets is good. They are connected with Dharampur town through a good allweather mettle road. For transport from the village, buses of state transport ply from Dharampur to Tamachadi. The public transport is used mostly by students, service class or daily workers. Apart from public transport, personal vehicles are also there in the village. Almost every household has one motorbike, which is the most convenient mode of travelling to the nearby villages and towns like Vapi, Pardi or Valsad. Consequently, the villagers have some opportunities for employment as wage earners in the towns. Next chapter deals with Kinship system of Tribals in South Gujarat.

Notes 1 A local type of cheap cigarette made of unprocessed tobacco wrapped in leaves. 2 Built by Pilaji Rao Gaikwad of the Gaikwad dynasty in 1721, the fort is an example of traditional Dangi mountain architecture. It was the time when nearby town and fort Songadh was the capital of Gaikwad state.

3

Kinship System

This chapter deals with the kinship terms and systems prevalent among the fve tribal societies in south Gujarat. The study will be dealing with two aspects: frst, describing a basic type of south Gujarat tribal kinship; second, enumerating variations in kinship systems among these societies.

Kinship and social structure Kinship, as an important organising principle in human society, plays a crucial role in the regulation of behaviour and thus enjoys a privileged position in social anthropology. Most anthropologists consider kinship as an “area of anthropological discourse where the ground rules are clearly laid down” (Barnard and Good 1984: 2) and are central to the theoretical development of the discipline. This subfeld attempts to apprehend comprehensively the nature and rule of descent, marriage alliance, relations of affnity, kinship terminology and behaviour, which occupied a central place in the general discussion of kinship theory during the 1950s, 1960s and 1970s. “Kinship and marriage are about the basic facts of life” (Fox 1967: 27). They are about “birth, and conception, and death”, the eternal circle of life that seemed to depress the poet but which excites, among others, the anthropologist (ibid). “Kinship is a system of social relationships that is expressed in a biological idiom. … It is best visualised as a mass of networks of relatedness, not two of which are identical, that radiate from each individual” (Tonkinson 1991: 57). In short, kinship is the basis of production and reproduction in human beings. According to Godelier (1998:387), it also appears as a huge feld of social and mental realities stretching between two poles. One is highly abstract: it concerns kinship terminologies and the marriage principles or rules they implicitly contain or that are associated with them. The other is highly concrete: it concerns individuals and their bodies, bodies marked by the position of the individual in kinship relations.

DOI: 10.4324/9781003299790-3

42

Kinship System

Combining together, both forms make kinship important elements of social structure. While many anthropologists would agree today that there are kin-based societies (Godelier et al. 1998; Dousset 2007) – societies in which kinship provides the overarching ideological domain for social structure and behaviour – they would also argue that in many, if not in most, societies it is an important vehicle of social structure, behaviour and moral order. Be it landownership, inheritance and its transmission, behavioural codes, role distribution in ritual contexts, status attribution and its political and economic consequences, etc., the domain of kinship is often involved with considerable effects. The analysis of the domain of human relationships thus involves multiple and intertwined levels of social reality, viz., from the human body to the social and moral order and from spheres of practice to the domain of the symbolic. This chapter, however, is limited to analyse a few central concepts and processes based on the empirical study of fve tribal societies. These are elementary forms for the investigation of human kinship in general and tribal kinship in particular. For the sake of organising data collection and analysis, it is useful to split the complexities of kinship into its various constituents from which in-depth analysis can proceed. First of all the domain of kinship is treated in two chapters – this chapter deals with kinship terms and system, while the next will deal with the kinship behaviour. The present chapter is further divided into four parts. The frst part deals with theoretical concepts of kinship and social structure. The second section deals with tribal kinship terms and terminology. The third section analyses the feld data using kinship range theory. The last part deals with kinship concepts for affnal relationships and some aspects of social reality.

Tribal kinship Kin relationships are traditionally defned as ties based on blood and marriage. They include lineal generational bonds (children, parents, grandparents and great-grandparents), collateral bonds (siblings, cousins, nieces and nephews and aunts and uncles) and ties with in-laws. An often-made distinction is that between primary kin (members of the families of origin and procreation) and secondary kin (other family members). The former is what people generally refer to as ‘immediate family’, and the latter are generally labelled ‘extended family’. Marriage, as a principle of kinship, differs from blood in that it can be terminated. Given the potential for a marital break-up, blood is recognised as the more important principle of kinship. This section questions the appropriateness of traditional defnitions of kinship for ‘new’ family forms, describes distinctive features of kin relationships and explores varying perspectives on the functions of kin relationships.

Kinship System

43

The structure of tribal kinship terminology conforms to the Dravidian type with slight modifcation. The fundamental rule is siblings and cousins are treated differently. In fact, siblings and parallel cousins are treated as brothers/sisters. All parallel cousins are addressed mainly in four categories: elder brother, younger brother, elder sister and the younger sister only. But, cross-cousins are never brothers/sisters. So this fts into two sections: one is parallel who is not marriageable and the other one is cross-cousin, which is marriageable one. This system of kinship terms is in agreement with marriage among close relatives (Figure 3.1). Two broad systems of exchange through marriage are prescriptive (closed) – cross-cousin marriage and preferential (comparative open) – although no system is totally open (even present-day western society). In the tribes, preferential cross-cousin marriage system is observed. It separates all descent lines into those with whom one can marry and those with whom one cannot marry. The terminology clearly tells that in a man’s own generation, males are either his brothers or brothers-in-law. Similarly, females are either sisters or potential spouses. Perhaps in this very sense, Morgan (1871: 394) described the Dravidian kinship terminology as ‘consistent and symmetrical’. The basic feature of the Dravidian kinship system is its systematic depiction of the rule of prescriptive bilateral cross-cousin marriage. While in these tribal societies, there is a modifcation that instead of prescriptive bilateral, it follows the preferential bilateral cross-cousin marriage. It means symmetry is observed in cross-cousin marriage, but it is preferential in nature, not prescriptive. So, cross-cousins of both father’s side (patrilateral cross-cousin) and mother’s side (matrilateral cross-cousin) are preferential marriageable category, and they are equated through the use of a single kin term for both sides. Thus, for a male ego the MBD and FZD (cross-cousins) are the preferential persons to marry, while union with his FBD and MZD (parallel cousins) is forbidden. The second category of cousins is treated as sisters and brothers. Further, age differences between the couple are also

Figure 3.1 A South Gujarat Kinship System with Kin Terms in English Source: Through feldwork (only very close kin are given). 5

44 Kinship System noted during their union. A man will usually prefer to marry a cross-cousin who is junior to him, and a woman will prefer a male cross-cousin senior to her. In some societies, like in Gamit, there are different terms for younger and elder cross-cousins, while in others, there are no different terms for these categories of cross-cousins.

Kinship terminology All the terms of kinship and affnity among south Gujarat tribals, with a few exceptions, are limited within the local tribal dialects. The dialects are a mixture of variants of Gujarati with the observable infuence of regional words, from Khandeshi to Marathi. Few terms are used frequently in daily use, such as old man, old woman, the little one and brother. They are not specifc to particular relatives but connote a distant degree of relationships. It appears that tribal society in the region was until very recently not in much need of defnite terms with regard to distant relations. Distant relatives are related by more than third ascending generations. For example, they do not differentiate the frst cousin with other cousins. Whereas the ‘frst cousin’, ‘second cousin’, ‘third cousin’, all describe the degree of the cousin relationship or the number of generations to their closest ancestor. In this, frst cousin shares grandparents, second cousin shares great-grandparents and so on. Other than the frst cousin, they do not have specifc terms for other cousins and refer them as ‘they are from the same lineage’ and call them as ‘brothers’. Since their villages are endogamous and they have multiple relations, they use this form. Further, more often the terms are used for new kinship terms developed by newer marital alliances. This pattern is observed in the closer relative terms also, like for father from Baahku (in Vasava) to Bahas (in Warli) and similarly for mother, Yaahki to Aaya. It is important to observe similarities for these terms in all fve tribes (see Table 3.1). In Table 3.1, the sequence of the pattern can be observed in some kin terms, Paavos to Bhavus or Daye to Davaran. Some modern infuence can also be seen, such as Dikhroho in Chaudhari is borrowed from Gujarati Table 3.1 Some Frequently Used Kin Terms for Distant Relatives in Daily Use

Old man Old woman The little one Brother Father Mother

Vasava

Chaudhari

Gamit

Kukana

Warli

Daye Daya Poyro Paavos Baahku Yaahki

Daye Daya Dikhroho Baabho Baha Aaya

Dayayen Dayayen Poho Baha Aabo Aayo

Davaran Dosses Posa Bavus Bahas Aaya

Davaran Dosses Posa Bhavus Bahas Aaya

Kinship System

45

language and they do not remember their local words for this. So kin terms refect a pattern, continuity as well as change. Looking into a general pattern of generation-wise kinship terms’ variations, one fnds maximum kin terms are applied to the Ego’s generation (G0) and its immediate ascending (AG1) and descending generations (DG1). Table 3.2 shows the distribution of the kinship terms in fve tribes used for ascending and descending generations. Moving away from G0 generations towards ascending and descending directions, one fnds a decrease in kin terms. Here, we have a diverse range of kinship terms for the immediate generations of relatives (G0, AG1 and DG1) as compared to other relatives distant from each generation (AG2, AG3, DG2 and DG3). Further, the terms applied to relatives in parental generations (AG1) and the terms applied to relatives in children’s generations (DG1) are extended to the second and third generations in both directions, (AG2–3) and (DG2– 3) (Genealogical Chart 3.1). Of course, there is slight modifcation while addressing them AG2–3 by adding prefxes to the terms used in AG1. These prefxes are not similar in all societies, except in the case of Kukana and Warli. For example, Vasava, Chaudhari and Gamit use Dohono, Gado, and Aaba, respectively. However, in the case of descending generations, the terms used for DG1 are applied to relatives in second and third descending generations. There are no specifc terms of references for these relatives, and they are addressed by their respective names (see Table 3.2). Every tribal society in the villages more or less followed the kinship terms similar to their neighbouring tribal society. This is more frequent in the case of a boundary zone of two societies, like of Vasava and Chaudhari and Kukana and Warli, while in some cases it is not the effect of any local tribes but has the infuence of regional language, like in the context of Gamit. Situated at the boundary zone with Dang region, Gamit dialect clearly shows the infuence of Dangi language. Further, people of these areas are mostly multilingual. They understand their dialect, neighbouring societies’ dialect and dialect of the state language. We have seen two persons of different tribal groups conversing using their own dialects – a Warli and a Kukana conversing with each other through using of terms of Warli and Konkani, respectively. And whenever they faced us they were using the Gujarati language.

Kinship terms by their mode of use Appendix I and Table 3.2 show the distribution of tribal kin terms by their mode of use in terms of reference and address. Murdock (1949) was the frst to distinguish between these two terms. According to him, a term of reference is one which is used when speaking about a relative, and the term of address is the one which is used when directly speaking to a relative. The use of prefxes and suffxes in the tribal kinship is important. An analysis of the use of kin terms by their mode of use reveals that same kin

Genealogical Chart 3.1 Summary of Warli Kinship Terminology (Male Perspective)

46 Kinship System

47

Kinship System Table 3.2 Distribution of Generation-wise Kinship Terms (Warli) Generations Symbols

6

Kins/Relations

Term of Reference

Term of Address

FFF MFF MMM FMM

Father’s Father’s Father Mother’s Father’s Father Mother’s Mother’s Mother Father’s Mother’s Mother

Davar Bahas Davar Bahas Dose Aaya Dose Aaya

Davarba Davarba Dosses Dosses

FF MF MM FM

Father’s Father Mother’s Father Mother’s Mother Father’s Mother

Davar Bahas Davar Bahas Dose Aaya Dose Aaya

Davarba Davarba Dosses Dosses

FeB FeBW FyB FyBW F M MeZ MyZ MeZH MyZH

Father’s Elder Brother Father’s Elder Brother’s Wife Father’s Younger Brother Father’s Younger Brother’s Wife Father Mother Mother’s Elder Sister Mother’s Younger Sister Mother’s Elder Sister’s Husband Mother’s Younger Sister’s Husband

Motha Bahas Mothes Kakas Kakis Bahas Aayis Mothes Jijis Motha Bahas Kakas

Mothaba Mothes Kakas Kakis Ba Aaya Mothes Jiji Mothaba Kakas

WF HF MeB

Wife’s Father Husband’s Father Mother’s Brother (elder)

AG3

AG2

AG1

MyB WZHF BWF FeZH FyZH ZHF WM HM FZ WZHM MBW BWM ZHM

Mamas Mamas Motha Mamas Mother’s Brother (younger) Barik Mamas Wife’s Sister’s Husband’s Father Kakas Brother’s Wife’s Father Mamas Father’s Sister’s Husband (elder) Motha Mamas Father’s Sister’s Husband Barik (younger) Mamas Sister’s Husband’s Father Mamas

Mama Mama Motha Mama

Wife’s Mother Husband’s Mother Father’s Sister Wife’s Sister’s Husband’s Mother Mother’s Brother’s Wife Brother’s Wife’s Mother Sister’s Husband’s Mother

Fuis Fuis Fuis Kakis

Fui Fui Fui Kakis

Fuis Fuis Fuis

Fui Fui Fui

Barik Mama Kakas Mama Motha Mama Barik Mama Mama

(Continued)

48

Kinship System

Generations Symbols

Kins/Relations

G0 (Ego’s Generation) H Husband

Term of Reference

Term of Address

ChSpF ChSpM

Gohale/ Chokarana pita name, thi Wife Bayako Bayako/ Chokarana mata name, thi Wife’s Elder Sister Aakad Sasus Eldest child name/ Barikfui Wife’s Younger Sister Salis Salis Wife’s Elder Sister’s Husband Motha Sadus Motha Sadus Wife’s Younger Sister’s Husband Barik Sadus Barik Sadus Wife’s Elder Brother Motha Motha Bhawad Mehnas Wife’s Younger Brother Barik Barik Bhawad Mehnas Wife’s Elder Brother’s Wife Bihinis Buyu Wife’s Younger Brother’s Wife Bihinis Buyu Elder Brother Babas Baba Younger Brother Bhavus Name Elder Brother’s Wife Vahinis Vahinis Younger Brother’s Wife Vahus Vahus Elder Sister Bihinis Buyu Younger Sister Bihinis Posi/Name Elder Sister’s Husband Motha Motha Bhawad Mehnas Younger Sister’s Husband Barik Barik Bhawad Mehnas Husband’s Elder Brother Jethus Jethus Husband’s Younger Brother Derus Derus Husband’s Elder Brother’s Wife Jethanis Jethanis Husband’s Younger Brother’s Deranis Deranis Wife Husband’s Elder Sister Nandas Nandas Husband’s Younger Sister Nandas Nandas Husband’s Elder Sister’s Nandvas Baba Husband Husband’s Younger Sister’s Nandvas Baba Husband Children’s Spouse’s Father Bhawad Bhawad Children’s Spouse’s Mother Buyu Buyu

S SW D DH SWB DHB SWZ DHZ

Son Son’s Wife Daughter Daughter’s Husband Son’s Wife’s Brother Daughter’s Husband’s Brother Son’s Wife’s Sister Daughter’s Husband’s Sister

W WeZ WyZ WeZH WyZH WeB WyB WeBW WyBW eB yB eBW yBW eZ yZ eZH yZH HeB HyB HeBW HyBW HeZ HyZ HeZH HyZH

Gohale

DG1 Posa Vahus Posi Jawans Jawans Jawans Vahus Vahus

Baba/Name Vahus Posi/Name Jawans Jawans Jawans Vahus Vahus

Kinship System

49

Generations Symbols

Kins/Relations

Term of Reference

Term of Address

Male Perspective BS BD WZS WZD ZS ZD WBS WBD

Brother’s Son Brother’s Daughter Wife’s Sister’s Son Wife’s Sister’s Daughter Sister’s Son Sister’s Daughter Wife’s Brother’s Son Wife’s Brother’s Daughter

Posa Posi Posa Posi Jawans Jawans Jawans Vahus

Baba/Name Buyu/Name Posa/Name Posi/Name Jawans Jawans Jawans Vahus

Female Perspective ZS ZD HBS HBD

Sister’s Son Sister’s Daughter Husband’s Brother’s Son Husband’s Brother’s Daughter

Posa Posi Posa Posi

Posa/Name Posi/Name Posa/Name Posi/Name

BS BD HZS HZD

Brother’s Son Brother’s Daughter Husband’s Sister’s Son Husband’s Sister’s Daughter

Jawans Vahus Jawans Vahus

Jawans Vahus Jawans Vahus

SS DS SD DD

Son’s Son Daughter’s Son Son’s Daughter Daughter’s Daughter

Natus Posi Posa Posi

Posa/Name Posi/Name Posa/Name Posi/Name

SSS DSS DDD SDD

Son’s Son’s Son Daughter’s Son’s Son Daughter’s Daughter’s Daughter Son’s Daughter’s Daughter

Natus Posi Posa Posi

Posa/Name Posi/Name Posa/Name Posi/Name

DG2

DG3

AG – Ascending Generations; DG – Descending Generations; G0 – Ego’s Generation.

terms are used by adding different sounds as suffxes in both contexts, term of references and addresses. Vasava use the sound of ku (Baahku (F)) and ki (Yaahki (M)) used as suffxes in kin term of reference while suffxes sound ah (Baah (F)) and Yaah (M) in the term of address. Chaudhari use ay (Bahaay (Z)) and ho (Baabho (B)) in kin term of reference and ai (Baai (Z)) and ha (Baba (B)) in the term of address. Gamit use hin (Boahin (Z)), ho (Aajloho FeB) and ha (Baha (B)) in kin term of reference and ay (Bay (Z)), ha (Aajlaha (FeB)) and ya (Baya (B)) in the term of address. And, Kukana and Warli use the sound of as (Bahas (F)) and is (Aayis (M)) in kin term of reference and sound a (Ba (F)) and ya (Aaya (M)) in the term

50

Kinship System

of address. Sometimes, different sounds are used to denote different group kin terms also. Like, Gamit distinguishes Hogvadiyen (lineage members, male and female) with Hogvadiyo (female lineage members) by changing suffxes from yen to yo. So, there is a difference in pronouncing the same term by using different sounds as suffxes to differentiate between male and female, singular and plural, etc. Further, in some relatives, they have different terms for ‘term of reference’ and ‘term of address’. Like for elder sister eZ, Kukana and Warli use Bihinis as the ‘term of reference’ and Buyu as the ‘term of address’. However, there are exceptions in every tribe where a single term is used for both contexts (see Table 3.2). There are some common sounds meant for the particular group like in the Kukana dialect they generally use the sound of na, while their neighbours, Warli, use the sound of ni in everyday communication. The same kin terms are used for siblings and cousins; in all the four tribes different kin terms are used for brothers and sisters and cousins, except the Vasava. But in all fve tribes, there are no distinguishing kin terms for cross-cousins (Ch of MB and FZ) and parallel cousins (Ch of FB and MZ). Based on these two kinship patterns, the cases of children of MB-FZ relationship can be ascertained in all fve tribes. As we move from north to south, cross-cousin marriage tendency increases. We do not fnd this type of marriages among Vasava and Chaudhari but fnd it more prevalent in Gamit, Kukana and Warli. Tracing of kin terms has been done from the Ego’s perspective. An Ego fundamentally classifes all relatives into two types, the consanguineal (patri-kin or blood relative) and affnal (kin by marriage) relatives. An Ego generally groups all relatives into three distinct categories, viz., equivalent to his/her age, elders and youngsters. Later it can be distinguished into several more orders. Generally, the terms used for the elder relatives in the frst, second and third ascending generations are the same, in terms with respect to senior relatives. On the other hand, the terms of address used for younger relatives in the frst, second and third descending generations are mostly by name, thereby indicating intimacy and familiarity towards youngsters. And, the brotherhood terms are used for relatives equivalent to Ego’s age. In the Ego’s generation, the terms of address used for relatives are based on kinship terms or personal names or particular combinations of both. Personal names indicate either age equivalence or close relationship. It is only in this generation that teknonyms are used. Teknonymy is the phenomenon in which a parent is referred to by the name of his or her children. It is a Greek term, means ‘child’s name’, coined by E.B. Tylor, to denote the practice of referring to parents by the names of their children. Teknonymy is common in the tribal community, especially in the context of relatives having special respect and closeness. For instance, husband and wife call one another by name of their children (usually frst child’s name, father or mother of so and so).

Kinship System

51

In the frst ascending generation, the structural principles of parallel/ cross distinction and sex distinction work together to give two male and two female kin groups terms opposing each other. The paternal and maternal relatives (uncle and aunt) in the frst ascending generation are called by different terms than those of their parents. In the case of collateral relatives, parallel siblings of parents’ uncle and aunt’s cases, there is the merging of father’s same-sex siblings. All four tribes, except Chaudhari, use the same terms to refer to their father’s elder brother (FeB) and mother’s elder sister’s husband (MeZH) and same terms for father’s elder brother’s wife (FeBW) and mother’s elder sister (MeZ). The literal meaning of the term is the elder father or elder mother (Table 3.3). On the other hand, except Chaudhari and Gamit, all the other three tribes use the same terms to refer to father’s younger brother (FyB) and mother’s younger sister’s husband (MyZH), which means father’s younger brother. This is more prevalent in north Indian kinship system. Further, father’s younger brother’s wife (FyBW) is not equated with that of the mother’s younger sister (MyZ). For both groups of relatives, they use different terms in each tribe (Table 3.4). Hence, the father’s elder brother is equated with the spouse of the mother’s elder sister. This is how it is in the case of Dravidian kinship. Also in most of the cases father’s younger brother is equated with mother’s younger sister’s husband. But the mother’s younger sister is not equated with the father’s younger brother’s wife. Both are referred to by different terms. Table 3.3 Kin Terms for Parallel Paternal and Maternal Aunt and Uncle (Elder) Tribe

FeB

FeBW

MeZH

MeZ

Vasava Chaudhari Gamit Kukana Warli

Vaados Motho Ba Aajloho Motha Bahas Motha Bahas

Vaadisi Mothi Aaya Aajlihi Mothes Mothes

Vaados Jimho Aajloho Motha Bahas Motha Bahas

Vaadisi Jijihi Aajlihi Mothes Mothes

Table 3.4 Kin Terms for Parallel Paternal and Maternal Aunt and Uncle (Younger) Tribe

FyB

FyBW

MyZH

MyZ

Vasava Chaudhari Gamit Kukana Warli

Kako Khakhho Kako Kakas Kakas

Kaku Khakhhi Kakhi Kakis Kakis

Kaku Jimho Jiji Kakas Kakas

Jijih Jijih Jiji Jijis Jijis

52

Kinship System Table 3.5 Kin Terms for Cross-Paternal and Maternal Aunt and Uncle Tribe

FZ

FZH

MB

MBW

Vasava Chaudhari Gamit Kukana Warli

Fuichi Fuhui Fuchi Fuis Fuis

Mamu Mamo Mamo Mamas Mamas

Mamu Mamo Mamo Mamas Mamas

Fuichi Mamhi Fuchi Fuis Fuis

FeB = MeZH FeBW = MeZ FyB = MyZH FyBW /= MyZ (not equal) The children of all these relatives are parallel cousins to Ego. They are considered almost as their brothers and sisters, behaviourally as well as terminologically. Quite different to that, in the case of the collateral relatives, things are different. Here, more or less two terms are used to refer to these two groups of relatives in all fve tribes. The same term ‘Mama’ is used for father’s sister’s husband (FZH) and mother’s brother (MB), and ‘Fui’ is applied to father’s sister (FZ) and mother’s brother’s wife (MBW). Slight variations are found in pronunciation; for instance, it differs from Mamo to Mama and fuichi to Fuis (see Table 3.5). In using the same term for ‘fuis’ for father’s sister and mother-in-law and ‘mama’ for mother’s brother and father-in-law, it predicts the occurrence of cross-cousin marriages in these societies. However, the data of Vasava differ from the pattern. Their kin terms follow the pattern of the other four tribes, but they do not follow cross-cousin marriages. Apart from above relatives (Table 3.5), the term used for father-in-law is ‘Mama’ and mother-in-law is ‘Fuis’. The equivalence of MB (Mama) with FZH, WF and HF and of FZ (Fuis) with MBW, WM and HM clearly depicts the rule of bilateral cross-cousin marriage. However, in practice, cross-cousin marriage is practised by all the tribes, except the Vasava. It is important to note that such similarities are observed in societies having cross-cousin marriage rules.

Kinship terms by the range of application According to Murdock (1949: 97–99), kinship terms are technically classifed into three different ways – by their mode of use, by their linguistic structure and by their range of application. As regards their use, two kinds of terms, namely, a term of address and a term of reference, are employed. With respect to linguistic structure, kinship terms are classifed as descriptive, and as regards their range of application, they are differentiated as classifcatory. In descriptive terminology, only one specifc kinship category

Kinship System

53

is used for one relationship, while a classifcatory term stands for more than one kinship category. A kinship terminology which includes more classifcatory terms than descriptive terms is called the broad range, and when it contains more descriptive terms than the classifcatory terms, it is called a narrow range (Murdock 1949). In this context, the south Gujarat tribal kinship terminology comes under a ‘broad range’ category. It means, in their kinship system, both descriptive and classifcatory terms occur somewhat in equal proportion; however, the latter covers a vast majority of relatives as against the former. What appears to be classifcatory terms in grandparental and great-grandparental generations are also found in a limited measure in parental generations. Likewise, the classifcatory terms in the grandchildren and great-grandchildren generations are mere extensions of those occurring in the children’s generations. The very principles that operate with regard to the mode of use and linguistic structure of the kinship terms also operate with reference to the range of application of the kinship terms.

Criteria for kinship distinction Kroeber (1909) has put forth the notion of simple kinship in classifcatory and descriptive typology. He was of the opinion that kinship begins with genealogy and asserted that “kinship systems are terminologies; terminologies are [genealogical] classifcations …” (Kroeber 1917: 395). He looked at the principles that were used in separating kinds of kin and suggested eight bases for the distinction: generation, affnity, collateral, sex of relative, bifurcation, sex of speaker, relative age and decedence. Robert Lowie (1928) added a ninth one, polarity, and also examined the kind of differences which can be employed to distinguish kin. Murdock (1949), later on, refned Kroeber and Lowie’s concept of categories of distinction and reasoned that these nine criteria were distinctions, as the linguistic non-recognition of either one of these produces classifcatory, as opposed to descriptive, terms. Nearly in all the kinship terminologies, the distributional criteria are Egocentric. The basic typology frequently used for kinship terminologies traces back to distinctions made by Lewis H. Morgan, Robert H. Lowie, Peter Kirchhoff, Leslie Spier and George P. Murdock. The basic nature of derivation for this typology is how the kin terms identify or categorise to primary genealogical relations. Morgan (1871) made a division between descriptive versus classifcatory terminologies according to the way the terminology incorporates lineal and collateral genealogical relations. Lineal relatives are either the direct ancestors or descendants, whereas collateral are other than lineal kins of a particular Ego. Descriptive terminologies were said to distinguish lineal from collateral relatives, and classifcatory terminologies were those that did not. Lowie (1928) (see Murdock (1968) and Trautmann (1981: 83)) added a parallel/cross contrast derived from Kroeber (1909) to Morgan’s lineal/

54

Kinship System

collateral distinction and worked out a four-part division of terminologies based on distinctions made in the parental generation. He referred to his four-part division as Generation, Bifurcate Merging, Bifurcate Collateral and Lineal terminologies.1 This model was used to examine south Gujarat tribal kinship system, and we found several drawbacks. People use certain terms for certain relatives without bothering about their reasons. This is similar to other studies. As Lorna Marshall (1976: 204) commented regarding the Kung san: “a person would not always know why [in a genealogical sense] he applied a certain term to someone, but he would know that the term he used was proper …” The genealogical position must assume categories labelled by kin terms for understanding any kinship system. Second, layered kinship system like in south Gujarat is due to village endogamy and marriage within the known group, leading to a person having multiple relationships. Which relationships they use in their daily behaviour depends upon their closeness and time factor. Most recent relations generally prefer to address an older relation. Taking cue from this model, south Gujarat tribal kinship system is analysed and results are presented below.

Generation Among the tribals, the principle of generation in kinship terms is ignored even though the kinship terms may spread over seven generations, viz., three generations above and three generations below the Ego’s generation. They rarely remember kin beyond the fourth or ffth generations. The criterion of generations has been recognised only in a few generations, frst and second ascending generations (AGI and AGII) and frst descending generation (DGI) (see Appendix VI). Thus, analogous to the distinction of generation, there can be seen a split in Ego’s generation into two distinguishing relatives, older and younger than the Ego, and different terms are used to differentiate them. The terms of reference and address applied to parents are also extended to grandparents and great-grandparents with a slight modifcation in it. This modifcation is done as per relationship with the term of reference and term of the address of the Ego’s parent’s generation (AG1). For example, in the case of Warli, for father (F), the term of reference and term of address is the same term Bahas. Similarly, the grandfather (FF) and great-grandfather (FFF) are referred by the same term of reference and address, Davar Bahas. This shows how the principles of generations are ignored. The kinship terms used for the relatives in the second ascending generation are extended to those belonging to the third ascending generation with slight modifcation. For instance, among Warlis, terms like Bahas (F) and Aayis (M) are extended to the second and third generations simply by putting prefxes – Davar or Dose.

Kinship System

55

F = Baha M = Aayis FF/MF = Davar Bahas MM/=FM = Dose Aaya FFF/MFF = Davar Bahas MMM/FMMM = Dose Aaya On the other hand, such a logic of assigning prefxes is not followed in the case of extending the term of Posa (S)/Posi (D) to second and third descending generations. These relatives are addressed by their names and term of reference remains as Posa or Posi. S = Posa D = Posi SS = Posa DD = Posi SSS = Posa DDD = Posi In brief, the criterion of generation is recognised only to AGI and DGI. Besides these generations, the criterion is simply ignored by other generations, both ascending and descending sides.

Gender The tribals of south Gujarat generally use gender as an attribute for most of their kinship system to distinguish relatives at the individual level as well as at the group level. They have the same term with slight modifcation in pronunciation with a special twist for male and female category (Table 3.6). Out of fve tribes, except Chaudhari, all employ different pronunciation for children. Further, overall similarities are observed in the case of son, sons, daughter, daughters and children in all tribes. The vocabulary of Chaudharis contains more of Gujarati words than among other tribals. The Gujarati term used for the son is Dikro, and the tribals use it with slight variation. They have the same terms for male and female in-laws. Men and women exert unequal authority and have different rights and obligations. Hence, they are careful to distinguish between their relatives on the basis of sex. They do this in two ways: frst, by having different terms for both categories like for father (F) and mother (M) and second, by having the different pronunciation for the same term for male and female, viz., Kaka (FyB) and Kaki (FyBW). Table 3.6 Use in the Modifcation of Kin Terms in Male, Female and Children Tribe

Sons

Son (S)

Daughters Daughter (D) Children (Ch)

Vasava Chaudhari Gamit Kukana Warli

Poyar Dikhroho Poha Posa Posa

Poyar Dikhroho Poho Posan Posan

Poyari Dikhrihi Pohi Posin Posin

Poyari Dikhrihi Pohiyo Posi Posi

Poyaro Dikhroho Pohen Poson Posanho

56 Kinship System

Affnity These tribal societies distinguish their relatives on the basis of affnity, that is, whether the person is related to them by marriage (affnal relative) or by blood (consanguineal relative). The term ‘affnity’ implies marriageability. This feature divides the entire community or kinsmen into two halves of parallel and cross relatives. 2 The whole set of kin categories are divided into two sections as consanguines and affnes. In Ego’s second ascending and second descending generations, the distinction is ignored. Thus, there are only two terms in these levels showing the sex distinction, and the cross-parallel distinction remains neutralised. They have one term for sister and another term for spouse’s sister(SpZ). However, such a term is not always employed for identifying the affnal relatives because some affnal relatives are equated with consanguineal relatives. Thus, Mama = MB = SpF = BWF = ZHF = FZH = WZHF Fui = FZ = MBW = SpM = BWM = ZHM = WZHM It may be noted that the criterion of affnity does not operate in the Ego’s generation. To be specifc, the term used for the wife is not applied to female cousins. This is clarifed through the analysis by Dumont (1957: 44) of south Indian kinship system, what he called Dravidian kinship system. He argues that the so-called rules of cross-cousin marriage are one such expression; for what the ‘positive marriage rule’ enjoins is not marriage between cross-cousins but marriage between ‘affnes’ of the same generation. In this system, he reasons that the various parts, such as kin classes, marriage rules and groups and their relations, are articulated not by one being predicated structurally on the other but by their common structural dependence on the concepts ‘consanguines’ and ‘affnes’, which he says “defne each other reciprocally” (ibid). In this kinship system, the system of kin classifcation does present a paradigm of the whole social system (see Dumont 1950, 1953, 1957). In Dumont’s view, in this system, society is segmented into endogamous groups, each of whose members employ some version of Dravidian kinship terminology to classify one another in two basic categories – either marriageable (affnes) or as non-marriageable (consanguine). He further describes affnes as having an ‘alliance relationship’ with one another and as expressing, in word and deed, the south Indian value of ‘affnity’. Moreover, the descendants of kin groups once allied by marriage inherit a jural obligation – rule – to renew the alliance by repeating the marriage between their groups. Affnity, thus, conceived extends beyond potential spouses and defnes a relationship between all members of descent lines who have once intermarried, whether or not any marriage between their members actually occurs again. Indeed, Dumont extends the concept of affnity even to relationships between members of descent lines that have never intermarried but who

Kinship System

57

nevertheless are subject to terminological classifcation as marriageable affines. However, Dumont’s critique came from Rao’s (1973) work on Teluguspeaking Jalari, 3 fshermen-caste of Visakhapatnam. The Jalari allow both matrilateral and patrilateral cross-cousin marriages and also marriage with elder sister’s daughter, treating these kins as classifcatory categories, the hallmark of Dravidian kinship theory. However, for clarity, it can be stated that the Jalari prefer cross-cousin (MBD and FZD), maradalu and sister’s daughters (ZD), menakodalu (ibid: 19). The fshermen community is further segmented into nine lineages of which Kadiri is considered superior while the other eight are below. The person belonging to the Kadiri lineage consciously avoids entering into a marriage alliance with an FZD since the previous marriage transaction of a sister's daughter marriage excludes FZD from the category of maradalu. The fundamental basis of this behaviour is the rank difference and marriage reciprocity. The pattern of their marriage alliance is not a static one but varies over time and always depends on the success of previous marriage transactions. If a previous marriage is considered as satisfactory and advantageous among one or both the partners, then further marriage transactions take place between them generation after generation. Thus, the principle on which marriages are contracted is the transaction based on reciprocity. This view does not support Dumont’s assertion that the “…very existence of marriage implies that affnity is transmitted from one generation to the next just as consanguine ties are” (1957: 24). So, the recognition of alliance between whole local descent groups is notional rather than empirical. Since, in reality, no group as a whole enters into marital relations with other groups; marriage transactions are carried on between families (Karve 1953: 216; McCormack 1958) or between lines in a lineage (Dumont 1957: 22). The exchanging units in the marriage transactions among the people are, in fact, independent households, the basic unit of the family. The head of these households formally enters into marriage alliances on behalf of the households and the family.

Linearity/collaterality Linearity refers to the kin related in a single line, such as son, father and grandfather. Collaterality, on the other hand, refers to kin related through a linking relative, such as the relationship between Ego and his or her parents’ siblings. While the principle of linearity distinguishes between father and father’s brother, the principle of collaterality does not. The tribals of south Gujarat employ the criterion of collaterally to some extent. For example, in the case of Chaudhari, Kukana and Warli, they use Motho Ba, Motha Bahas and Motha Bahas, respectively, for FeB. Further, Vasava and Gamit employ the same term for FeB and MeZH as Vaados and Aajloho,

58 Kinship System respectively. A similar trend is also found in the case of FeBW and MeZ (see Table 3.3 for more details). The term Mothaba literally means as ‘elder father’ or ‘father’s elder brother’ who is a respected authority in their life. In this context, Ego uses the same term as father to refer to both his or her father and his or her father’s brother. Similarly, the Ego’s mother and her sister are referred to by respective terms as Mothes, which means ‘elder mother’ or ‘mother’s elder sister’. It is important to note that this reference is only meant for parents’ elder siblings, while younger siblings are called by a different name (Table 3.3). Collaterality has to do with the closeness of a kinship relationship. Some kinsmen, such as their father and mother, are closely related, whereas others, like their father’s sister’s husband’s brother’s son, are more distantly related. They apply this attribute when they classify their parents with their siblings only. In their frst descending generation’s (DG1) relatives, this classifcation does not exist. Except for the Vasava who have same terms, other tribes have different kin terms for siblings and cousins. In kin term usage they do differentiate between the parallel and cross-cousins. The parallel cousins are treated like siblings in kinship terminology, whereas cross-cousins are treated as a future spouse. It is more clearly refected in the case of Gamit kinship (Tables 3.7 and 3.8). This is due to the prevalence of cross-cousin marriage among all the tribes, except the Vasava. Table 3.7 Different Kin Terms Usage for Sister and Cousins Tribe

Vasava Chaudhari Gamit Kukana Warli

Sister

Cousins

Z

FZD

FBD

MZD

MBD

Bonisi Baai Boahin Bihinis Bihinis

Bonisi Benhi Bojhan Buyu Buyu

Bonisi Benhi Boahin Buyu Buyu

Bonisi Benhi Boahin Buyu Buyu

Bonisi Benhi Bojhan Buyu Buyu

Table 3.8 Different Kin Terms Usage for Brother and Cousins Tribe

Brother

Cousins

B

FZS

FBS

MZS

MBS

Paavos Fahaav Bavdiyoho Baba Baba

Paavos Fahaav Baha Baba Baba

Paavos Fahaav Baha Baba Baba

Paavos Fahaav Bavdiyoho Baba Baba

Vasava Paavos Chaudhari Baba Gamit Baha Kukana Bhavus Warli Bhavus

Kinship System

59

Bifurcation Bifurcation means ‘forking’, and in kinship it refers to the terminological distinction of father’s and mother’s side relatives, on each side, being called by different terms. For example, one’s MB would be distinguished from one’s FB. Bifurcated collateral refers to the terminological distinction between both father’s and mother’s sides and between lineal and collaterals. Bifurcate merging refers to the terminological distinction between father’s and mother’s sides where the same-sex siblings of lineals are equated with lineals themselves. Bifurcation is a criterion employed in the analysis of kinship terminologies in which kin terms referring to the maternal side are distinguished from those referring to the paternal side. The children of a person’s parents’ same-gender siblings (a FBCh or MZCh) are termed as parallel cousins, while cross-cousins are the children of a person’s parents’ opposite-gender siblings (a FZCh or MBCh). Based on the above principle of opposition, the tribal kinship terminology can be described as a bifurcate merging system, which is a characteristic feature of Dravidian terminology. They recognise the criterion of bifurcation merging for some relatives, while for others they observe bifurcation collateral. They divide relatives on the basis of the gender of the linking relative. For example, in the case of Warli, they employ the same term Motha Bahas for FeB and MeZH and Kakas for FyB and MyZH. Further, FeB = MeZH = Motha Bahas FeBW = MeZ = Mothes FyB = MyZH = Kakas While for some relatives they recognise the criterion of bifurcation collateral like MyZ = Jijis; FyBW = Kakis.

Polarity Polarity recognises that a relationship consists of two parties and thus refers to them by two terms – aunt and niece. It refers to a situation in which two brothers or two cousins, or any other pair, may or may not use the same term for each other. Although the criterion of polarity is also found, yet this is ignored in certain kinship terms as each relationship is taken as a unit and both the participants apply the same classifcatory terms to each other. For example, children’s spouse’s parents are called by using the same terms. ChSpF = Bhawad/Mehnas ChSpM = Buyu As said earlier, the Warli term Mehnas is used simultaneously with the Kukana term Bhawad. It means the term Bhawad/Mehnas is used for both SWF and DHF. Similarly, the term Buyu is used for SWM and DHM.

60

Kinship System

Relative’s age The criterion of relative age recognises within a generation kin terms which vary by relative’s age. The distinction of relative’s age most prominently appears when it does among the parallel relatives, and it seems to be absent among cross-relatives. Thus, according to Trautmann, “the distinction of relative’s age among categories of kin serves social relations of subordination and super-ordination, cross kin are affnes of a kind, with whom one is in a social relation of reciprocity …” (Trautmann 1981: 46). The south Gujarat tribes recognise the attribute of relative’s age as a defning characteristic of kinship identity. They stress that older people are to be respected. Particularly, those who have the most authority should be obeyed. It is not surprising, therefore, to discover that they use this principle as an attribute of kinship identity. For example, they employ one term for FeB while another term for FyB. In these cases, in fact, the former relatives have authority over their parents (father and mother), whereas the latter is subject to their authority. On the other hand, they do not distinguish between MeB and MyB, as they have a closer relationship with them. Not considered as authoritative fgures, these relatives come in the purview of having special care and love bond relationship. Generally, they prefx motha or mothi to kin terms for elder male and female relatives, respectively. The term nani or barik is attached to kin terms to ‘the term of reference’ for younger relatives. These younger relatives are ‘addressed’ by their respective names. One can also observe the presence of ‘siblings distinguished by relative’s age’, for elder and younger, with regard to term of reference. For example, in the case of Warli siblings, the term of address remains changed as per their respective age, younger or older. Relationship eZ eB yZ yB

Term of reference = Mothi Bihinis = Motha Bhavus = Barik Bihinis = Barik Bhavus

Term of address Bihinis Bhavus Name Name

Speaker’s gender The criterion of the speaker’s gender means having different terms depending on the sex of the speaker. The tribal kinship system distinguishes the gender of the speaker. For example, a distinction is made between elder siblings on the basis of the speaker’s gender. Kinship terms, such as those for siblings-in-law, uncles-in-law and aunts-in-law, do refect the sex of speaker criterion. But different tribes also show distinctions. This is wider in the case of Gamit where it clearly refects cross-cousin marriage. They use different

Kinship System

61

terms on the basis of speaker’s sex and relative age for their cross-cousins, their FZ’s and MB’s children. The eldest son of MB or FZ refers to all children of MB and FZ as Bavdiyoho, while for him, FZyS = MByS = Halho FZyD = MByD = Halhi Similarly, the eldest daughter of MB or FZ refers to all children of MB and FZ as Bojaha, while for her, FZyS = MByS = Deyehu FZyD = MByD = Nondehe These are the terms of reference and the terms of address are calling their name, except in the case of Bavdiyoho. In the case of Warli, the principle of speaker’s sex has a limited use. In some cases, they make the terminological distinction on the basis of the gender of Ego, while in some cases it is ignored. For example, they use different terms for HeZ, WeZ, HyZ and WyZ. Thus, HeZ = Nandas; HyZ = Nandas WeZ = Aakad Sasus; WyZ = Salis

Decedence Last of Murdock’s ‘nine criteria’, decedence, also called as ‘condition of life’ of a linking relative (Kroeber 1909), refers only in connection with the change in marital status of a brother’s wife relative to Ego when Ego’s brother dies and Ego is eligible or expected to marry her. The south Gujarat tribes, for example, have different terms for wife’s younger sister and elder brother’s wife. A male ego relates to his wife’s younger sister and his elder brother’s wife in a more friendly manner. A joking relation exists between them. But a man uses a different term for a wife’s sister after his wife dies. Decedence assigns a different term to a relative depending on whether the relative is alive or dead. This is most prominent in levirate and sororate marriages. As per tribal custom, in most of the tribes, both type of marriages are possible in theory. In genealogical data, while junior sororate is observed in older generations, levirate is conspicuously absent. For example, in the case of Warli, a man calls his wife’s younger sister (WyZ) as Salis and elder brother’s wife (eBW) as Vahinis, but when he marries her in tune with the custom of junior sororate or levirate, he refers to her as Bayako (W). The senior sororate is denied as wife’s elder sister (WeZ) is viewed more as wife’s mother (WM) and called as Akkad Sasus.

62

Kinship System

Affnal kin terms The marriage between two persons brings together the members of their respective paternal family alliance relationship. However, in practice, only a limited range of persons become involved in the viable affnal relationship such that certain characteristic behaviour pattern exists between persons who are immediately related by marriage. Genealogical proximity to a great extent determines the interaction between members of affnally related families. In all fve tribes, a husband and a wife addresses each other by using their eldest child’s name (teknonymous term). But if they are having no children or they are newly married, in that case they will use the specifc name denoted for husband and wife (Table 3.9). It is important to note that some tribes have the same term for the same set of relatives. For instance, Vasava and Gamit call their husbands Matdo and wives Theye. Similar patterns are observed in Kukana and Warli. This leads to speculation of their common development of kinship terms, while some other factors are also responsible for developing kinship terms. Chaudhari, leaning towards Gujarati terms, call their husbands Gharawalo and wives as Gharawali (see Table 3.9). These terms used by husband and wife to address each other do not carry respect and are also used casually to address members who are considered as equals and belong to same age group. During the frst few months of marriage, a wife will not be much interacting with the husband and avoid each other in the presence of others. If frequent quarrels occur between the couple, the wife may strain her relationship with her husband and return to her natal hamlet. After separating from the husband, a woman may often get married to another man. However, in their old age, a husband and wife will be more loyal and show greater concern and care for each other. The relationship between a husband and a wife is not characterised by any formalised pattern of behaviour. A husband does not enjoy much authority or control over his wife, and they behave freely and consider each other as equals, though, in the household, the husband’s position is regarded as superior to that of his wife. But there is no explicit sign of respect and politeness in the behaviour of a wife towards her husband. A wife will sit along with her husband in the group and participate in talking and gossiping. If Table 3.9 Terms Denoted for Husband and Wife Tribe

Wife

Husband

Vasava Chaudhari Gamit Kukana Warli

Theye Gharawalo Theye Gohale Bayako

Matdo Gharawali Matdo Gohale Bayako

Kinship System

63

the wife happens to be sitting while the husband enters, she never stands up as a symbol of respect. They consider each other as equals. Both husband and wife have equal responsibility in the family affairs. However, it is the wife who manages and controls the household activities, and a man will be mostly spending time outside the hut in the feld and in forest. A man is responsible to earn money and provide the necessary requirements for the household, and it is the duty of a woman to cook and serve food for her husband. A lack of responsibility in managing the expenditure of the household by the husband will lead to severe criticism and heavy scolding from the wife. Among south Gujarat tribes, women are never meek or submissive to their husbands. A husband and a wife are usually seen smoking together, and they even share the same beedi. In the case of spouse’s parents, the Ego employs the same terms for both genders. They call spouse’s mother (SpM) as Fui and spouse’s father (SpF) as Mama (there are several variations in pronunciation among all fve tribes, e.g. for SpM from Fuichi to Fuis; similarly, for SpF from Mamo to Mamas). Some relatives in affnal context are more important than others. The term Mama is also used for MB, FZH, SpF, SpFB and SpMZH. This is a characteristic of Dravidian kinship terminology. Similarly, they have some traits similar to middle Indian kinship system. There is the identifcation of SpF = SbSpF (sibling of spouse’s father), and SpM = SbSpM seems to be important in this context, as it gives the direction of McDougal’s statement that SbSpSb is the most sought-after marriage partner in Juang tribe (Parkin 1992). To conform to this characteristic, cross-cousin marriage is found to be prevalent in these societies. They use different terms on the basis of age or seniority of relatives. Corresponding to this, they practise different relationships for the junior and senior relatives, viz., SpeZ, SpyZ, SpeZH and SpyZH. WeZ is called with a term of respect and equivalent for elder sister. All of these terms for spouse’s elder sibling (SpeSib) signify respect, authority and do not come within a joking relationship. In this, speakers of opposite sex observe avoidance. While at the same time WyZ indicates closeness, equality and also comes in the purview of joking relationship. However, at the WBs side there are no different terms. Only the suffx is added to the term, to denote the elder and younger, used as motha or nana or barik (see Genealogical Chart 3.2). The children of spouse’s father’s brothers (SpFB) and spouse’s mother’s sisters (SpMZ) are treated in the same way as siblings. However, the children of spouse’s father’s sisters (SpFZ) and spouse’s mother’s brothers (SpMB) are treated more like cousins and termed accordingly (see Genealogical Charts 3.2 and 3.3). Like the Dravidian kinship – where in Mama’s and Fui’s children are considered as prospective partners in the context of death of spouse – except in the case of Vasava, all four tribal societies use different terms for cousins and siblings in the context of cross-cousins. A similar pattern continues in the descending generations. On the other hand, the wife’s sister’s and brother’s children (WZCh and WBCh) are

Genealogical Chart 3.3 Summary of Warli Aff nal Kinship Terminology (Female Perspective)

Genealogical Chart 3.2 Summary of Warli Aff nal Kinship Terminology (Male Perspective)

64 Kinship System

Kinship System

65

called as sons and daughters (see Appendix III and IV). This pattern is quite common in middle Indian tribal kinship terminology (Parkin 2005). Thus, the south Gujarat tribal kinship system is closer to middle Indian tribal kinship system (Pfeffer 2004; Parkin 2005; Skoda 2007) with some affnity towards the south Indian kinship.

Conclusion Considering the south Gujarat tribal kinship terminology (a summary of which is given in Genealogical Chart 3.1), one observes therein both the elements of north and south Indian kinship. Starting off with the parent generation, the equations FeB = MeZH or MeZ = FeBW are striking features of south Indian kinship. The existence of same terms for spouse’s parents (SpPa) enables a clear-cut opposition of kins and affnes. The use of same terms for SpF, MB and FZH is typical for South Indian terminologies. They use different terms for siblings and cousins. This division is more related to south Indian kinship system. It is also complemented with cross-cousin marriages as cousins are prospective life partners. For the structure of south Gujarat tribal kinship, we can say a few things related to both north Indian (also called Indo-Aryan) and south Indian (also called as Dravidian) kinship systems. It also shows the contrasting characters of both north and south Indian kinship. While comparing the Dravidian kinship system, the south Gujarat tribal kinship shows absence of some key features. First, it lacks the Dravidian equations that mingle affnal and consanguineal kin. Second, it lacks the uniformity pattern of cross and parallel cousins. On the contrary, the occurrence of the third rule of Dravidian equation, the rule of cross-cousin marriage, provides it a structural principle leaning towards south Indian kinship. The tribal kinship of south Gujarat also shows contrasting characters to the north Indian kinship. The north Indian kinship system is structured by the opposition of wife-givers and wife-takers. It differentiates the affnes of one side from those of the other. These are governed by a logic such that a giver of a giver is a giver (GG→G) and the taker of a taker is a taker (TT→T) (Trautman 2000; Tharakan 2006, Dravidian kinship). The regime of marriage requires the non-relatedness of bride and groom and observes the non-reciprocity of the marriage transaction. However, the ethnography of tribal kinship of south Gujarat represents repetitive marital transaction, generally relatedness of bride and groom side, the reciprocity of wife-givers and wife-takers. Contrary to both north and south Indian kinship, the central Indian4 kinship is the third type of kinship system that resembles the Dravidian kinship in distinguishing cross and parallel kin and repeating marriage alliance between groups. But here cross-cousin marriage is not allowed. All the consanguines of Ego’s generation are called brothers and sisters. The

66

Kinship System

cross/parallel distinction is being suppressed in this generation. Further, there is a separate affnal terminology much similar to that of north Indian terminologies. Marriage alliances are, nevertheless, repeated but only with a one- or three-generation delay, that is, with more distant (second or fourth) cousins, who are not classed as brother and sister. Both in terminology and in the effect of the marriage rule, which is to push marriage out from the circle of close kin to more distant ones, the central Indian kinship system occupies a structural middle way between the north and the south Indian kinship system. Parkin (1992) fnds two principles underlying the Munda system: alternation of generations and the rule of repeated bilateral marriage alliance, bilateral in the sense that alliances may be directly reciprocated rather than being systematically oriented in one direction only, by means of a radical distinction of wife-giving from wife-taking affnal relatives (as in north Indian kinship). In comparison to this, while describing north Indian kinship, Karve (1953) talks about how the marital alliances seek to spread kinship groups within a particular region. The ancient rule was to avoid marriage to someone who is related by less than seven degrees from the father and fve degrees from the mother’s side. The rule was an essential feature for the spread of kinsmen and the prohibition of village endogamy, which is the basic feature of north Indian kinship. However, the actual rule as per Karve (1953: 118) is that no man is allowed to marry a daughter of his patriline. Here, the lineage looks up to six to seven generations which are generally remembered, and marriage alliances are not allowed within this range. In such a situation the lineage turns into the clan, and we speak of gotra (clan) and gotra bhai (clanmates). Further, she has given the four Clan Rule in marriage alliances (Karve 1953: 123) as per which a man must not marry a woman from (i) his father’s gotra, (ii) his mother’s gotra, (iii) his father’s mother’s gotra and (iv) his mother’s mother’s gotra. In other words, this rule prohibits marriage between two persons who share any two of their eight gotra links. It means that the rule of exogamy goes beyond one’s own lineage. Another related kind of exogamy, which exists in north India, is village exogamy. A village usually has members of one or two lineages living in it. Members belonging to the same lineage are not permitted to intermarry. This principle extends even to the villages, which have more than two lineages. In other words, a boy and a girl in a village in north India are like a brother and sister and hence cannot marry. Thus, there is a wider and wider circle for seeking marital alliances with always an outer limit for this expansion, which is different with every sub-caste, called the region of endogamy. Although some of the foregoing discussion must remain inconclusive, the main analysis allows us to establish a basic paradigm for the south Gujarat tribal kinship. From this, it can be seen that their kinship terminologies cannot be frmly aligned with those of either north or south India. The former are not at all of prescriptive type, symmetric or asymmetric, though they resemble them in such matters as the equivalence of parents, sibling’s

Kinship System

67

children, and siblings, possession of distinctly affnal terms, distinction of relative age and treatment of terms for some of the remoter affnes in Ego’s level. These frst two similarities also serve to distinguish their terminology from south Indian ones, from which they otherwise resemble more closely, especially in the use of a relative’s sex as an ordering principle, presence of cross-cousin marriage and having similar equations of symmetric prescriptive type. One might raise here the possibility that their kinship systems are in essence a systemic compromise between the north and south Indian system, with both they are in contact. This is suggested chiefy by the presence of north Indian term such as Kaka and Kaki (of course with variation in pronunciations in all fve tribes) and the basic systemic similarity with the south Indian kinship system. One the other hand, while there is evidence of diachronic change, especially when it comes to reducing these terminologies to a ‘purer’ symmetrical prescriptive type. Be that as it may, the present-day kin terminologies are suffciently distinct to suggest a third system for south Asia, more common as central Indian kinship that famously called Munda terminology, of course minus cross-cousin marriages. Apart from looking from everyday practices of kin terms, south Gujarat tribal kinship must be looked in the context of pan-Indian scenario. Here we fnd geographical impact on kinship system. In a particular zone, an ideal zonal pattern emerges from practices and attitudes most commonly found among the majority (caste/tribal groups) of the population. Also in a zone, kinship behaviour changes slightly from region to region and, within each region, from one group (caste/tribal) to another group. The study of these similarities and differences is very fruitful for the understanding of the social structure of each region. While looking at the Indian kinship context, individual kinship system is characteristic of a particular zone of south Gujarat tribal location in the middle India. In the middle Indian zone, both northern and southern zones give each of its linguistic areas a far greater variety than is found either in the individual zone (northern or southern) (Karve 1953). Apart from this zone in Rajasthan and Gujarat, there is an illustration of an area in which a majority of people follow northern kinship pattern with certain modifcations, whereas few practise cross-cousin marriages. It is important to note that the system is followed irrespective of the so-called tribal or non-tribal affliation of people. Certain clans of Rajputs of these region also practise the cross-cousin marriages (Trivedi 1986). So overall, terminology is more north Indian (Sanskritic origin). Still, some non-Sanskritic-origin terms do enter their kinship but are more inclined towards the central Indian derivation. The southern side of this central region (as we move below to Satpura range), however, is an area where the Sanskritic northern traits and southern Dravidian traits almost hold the balance with perhaps a slight tilt towards the southern Indian pattern. On the other hand, the central region

68

Kinship System

covers a vast belt of broken mountain ranges (of the Satpura and Vindhya) and forests rich in habitats or dwelling places of many so-called tribes who speak Mundari and Dravidian languages mixed with the dominant language of the region, such as Rajasthani, Gujarati and Marathi. In other words, if we move eastward and cross Maharashtra and enter Madhya Pradesh and Chhattisgarh, the local dialect is mixed with Hindi or Oriya or Bangla. The tribes of these regions speak – at present – dialects of their own. These dialects are generally a mixture of or a dialect of the language of the region.

Notes 1 In genealogical equation form, the types are as follows: Generation: FB= F = MB, FZ = M = MZ; Bifurcate Merging: FB = F ≠ MB, MZ = M ≠ FZ; Bifurcate Collateral: FB ≠ F ≠ MB, FZ ≠ M ≠ MZ; and Lineal: FB = MB ≠ F, FZ = MZ ≠ M. 2 Dumont (1983: 3–35) uses the label ‘consanguines’ and ‘affnes’ for distinguishing these two categories of relatives, but Good (1981) argues that the labels ‘Parallel’ and ‘Cross’ are more neutral. 3 The Jalari is one of the three (the other two are Pallis and Vadas) fshermen castes scattered along the east coast from Puri, Odisha, to the border of Andhra Pradesh and Tamil Nadu. The Pallis are predominant in southern coastal districts, whereas Jalari and Vadas are found in parts of Ganjam and Puri districts of Odisha and northern districts of Andhra Pradesh. 4 It is also called the Munda kinship system as it is frst observed and studied in Munda society. We have the beneft of the excellent comparative work of Robert Parkin (1992) who synthesised many particular studies in this zone. Speakers of Munda languages in India are a small minority compared to those of the Indo-Aryan and Dravidian language families, and their kinship system is less infuential and more often infuenced by the large populations following Indo-Aryan and Dravidian systems among which they live. We use Munda and central Indian kinship synonymously. 5 Triangles stand for males, and circles for females. Vertical lines stand for fliation/descent, and horizontal lines for siblingship. The line uniting Ego’s parents below their fgure means they are married (Figure 3.1). All other kin categories are combinations of these elements. For example, MB (mother’s brother) is a matrilateral ‘uncle’; his daughter, MBD (mother’s brother’s daughter) is a matrilateral cross-cousin. Additional abbreviations used by anthropologists are ‘y’ for younger, such as in yB (younger brother), ‘e’ for elder, ‘m’ for a male speaker and ‘f’ for a female speaker. Older ethnographies often write ‘m.s.’ for male speaking and ‘f.s.’ for female speaking. 6 For kinship terms for other tribes, please go through the appendixes.

4

Kinship Behaviour

After discussing the kinship system in south Gujarat tribes in the previous chapter, this chapter now moves to see its larger implications, viz., descent, clan, lineage, kindred and some kinship behaviours. The nucleus of the tribal social organisation revolves around the household and family, lineage, clan and kindred. The kinship system knits all these structures of their society. In the present chapter, structure of lineage, clan system and kindred are analysed with examples. An attempt is also made to understand their relationship with other aspects of society, such as marriage, household and family. This chapter describes how these important aspects are related to their day-to-day activities and behaviours, like kinship obligations, forms of respect, avoidance and joking relationships. It also describes the rules and pattern of inheritance.

Social structure and kinship: two distinct but complementary domains The expression social structure, as used by social anthropologists, may produce some misunderstanding. It does not cover all that is social and organised. The social universe is indeed organised, since reactions to individual behaviour would otherwise be unpredictable and ‘living together’ diffcult. What the expression social structure covers generally speaking are those elements that organise people into locally recognised groups, categories or classes dividing the social body into more or less distinct entities. One could have started describing social structure by discussing the notion of the household and family, and covered in it is kinship structure, such as descent, clan and lineage. In fact, the most classic and better-defned examples for the kind of groups or categories that constitute a social structure are latter types. For example, there are numerous households combined in several families, but they are grouped into different lineages, which are ultimately organised in a certain number of clans. A society, tribe or ethnic group may be divided into a number of groups that are called clans if their epical ancestor is mythical, or lineages if genealogical memory traces ancestry.

DOI: 10.4324/9781003299790-4

70

Kinship Behaviour

Similar myths exist for each clan whose members recognise a link of kinship to their epical ancestor, and each such clan is divided into several ‘brother lineages’ that refer to the same ancestral origins. Since members of the same clan share the same ancestor, it is considered incestuous to marry a spouse from within the clan. The clans of one society are thus linked to each other through ties of marriage (Dousset 2011). Thus, descent, clan and lineage are important and claim a common mythical or historical ancestor and usually recognise some shared culture, shared memory or any other shared background, which is used to justify the social body as a corporation. Landownership, residential composition, confict and its resolution, roles in ritual and so on are in many cases articulated around membership of such categories and the opposition or distinction of various such categories within a society or ethnic group. These groupings (clans or lineages) abide by rules that organise their internal structure and establish the relationships between all the clans of society (usually marriage rules, as we shall see later). Additionally, these clans may be organised around local typologies and representations that need to be understood in order to grasp the social structure. The next section discusses these groupings and behaviours.

Descent group The south Gujarat tribal social organisation is defned by the patrilineal descent ideology in terms of a common agnatic inheritance from their paternal ancestors. It means sharing of patrilineal resources, names and identity. The sharing and transmission of the agnatic substance across generation form the basis of descent ideology. The social unit comprising all male members tracing common descent from a particular male ancestor forms the patrilineal descent groups that are found here. The patriclans are formed of people who claim to be descendants of a particular ancestor, but they cannot trace their exact genealogy from the founding ancestors. All members of a clan believe that they are connected as siblings, and they practise clan exogamy. The membership to descent group is attained by birth only. The notion of parentage is based on fliation. It is important to note that adoption is uncommon in tribal societies. Biological elements form an important aspect and the basis for the inheritance as members of a descent group. Kinship relations based on biological ties form the core meaning of descent. The tribal societies consider that agnates should live together, share land and food and also co-operate in important activities. These activities comprise collective religious activities, like ancestor worship rituals and other ceremonial functions, and other economic activities, such as agriculture, that they have to perform collectively. The property of the local descent

Kinship Behaviour 71 group encompasses the hamlet site, graveyard, farmland, water resources, hunting territory and grazing grasslands. Further, the principle of patrilineal descent is drawn on to establish a system of corporate groups, clans and lineages. This determines and regulates inheritance and succession. This confrms that kinship is an important aspect of social structure. The kinship remained an anthropological territory, and several scholars have studied it. Among them, Mayer Fortes is an exceptional one who combines theoretical abstract with concrete ethnographic details. Fortes’ two monographs on Clanship (1945) and Web of Kinship among the Tallensi (1949) of northern Ghana made his name in the British School of Social Anthropology. His account of Tallensi Clanship (1945) followed Evans-Pritchard’s path-breaking analysis of the segmentary lineage system among Nuer of southern Sudan (Evans-Pritchard 1940). But his Web of Kinship among the Tallensi appeared before Evan-Pritchard’s equivalent Kinship and Marriage among the Nuer (1951). These two sets of monographs formed a coherent package, directly inspired by Radcliffe-Brown. They offered a paradigmatic account of social systems organised into corporate descent groups.1 However, each of these two scholars has their specifc focus for describing the social system. While Evans-Pritchard’s model of the Nuer system (1940) was notably clear and abstract, Fortes on the Tallensi was more concerned with ethnographic details. In Fortes’ account, Tallensi lineages did not appear near Nuer-like pattern of lineage segments. Tallensi clans were also fuzzier constructs than their Nuer counterparts (Kuper 2016). Fortes, nevertheless, gave considerable explanatory weight to the emotional power of kinship. According to Fortes, what gave kinship its moral force was the ‘axiom of amity’ – the idea that it is kin who can always be relied upon to help you out and who are the people you turn to when other help fails (Fortes 1953: 17ff). This emotional content is the source of the power of kinship. This emotional content is the source of the power of kinship. A person’s primary loyalty is to his agnatic group, and it is from this group that he derives the greatest portion of his social identity. From elders, he receives guardianship and care from his childhood days. He receives rights to the resource of the land, a right to cultivate it, a share in them and other property. A young man gets a house site when he marries and other economic and ritual assistance on necessary occasions. With the people of the patrilineage, he lives, works and participates on public occasions, and his kinship ties with them are recognised as being strong and close. The structural principle of patrilineal descent assigns the agnates with the right to reside on their clan land following a rule of virilocal residence. All clan members have the birth right to reside on their natal land where their ancestors have lived, died and lie buried or cremated. Traditionally, around 60 per cent cremate, while rest bury their dead. Men marry and establish their households and extend their families, remaining in the locality

72

Kinship Behaviour

of their fathers and such that a particular patrilineal descent group is localised and remains associated with a certain hamlet or part of the village. This space, along with the agricultural felds, including all trees and objects on these grounds, becomes the property of the particular descent group whose ancestor is believed to be the founder who frst occupied this land. This is a common occurrence in the scattered settlements in the highland region where the population lives dispersed in the hamlets, villages and neighbouring villages. Persons may also be spread out in far-fung areas because of migration and Khandadiya marriages.

Clan – Kul Out of fve studied tribal societies of south Gujarat, the existence of clans was found clearly in three groups, namely, Gamit, Kukana and Warli, while among the remaining two, Vasava and Chaudhari, there are no clans. It is important to note that as one moves from north to south, the institution of clan becomes strong. Gamits do not put their clan name as their surname but simply mention Gamit. Kukana and Warli, on the other hand, put their clan name as their surname. In these two groups, clans are prominent, and they always know their clan name. If one wants to locate a person in the village, they have to inquire about the person’s clan name followed by his name. The clan is a patrilineal kin group based on stipulated descent. The members of a clan believe that they are the descendants of a particular ancestor, but they cannot actually demonstrate their genealogical links to their ancestor. A clan is thus a named group of people who believe in themselves to be descended in the male line from a common ancestor in the remote past. Members of the same clan are always exogamous, viz., they marry outside their clan. There is a difference between a clan and a lineage. A lineage consists of all the descendants in one line of a particular person through a specifed number of generations. The genealogical links of a lineage are traceable, while a clan is identifed as descended from a mythical ancestor, who at times can be non-human. In the latter case, these are known as totemic clans, and the mythical non-human ancestor is known as a totem. A totem can be an animal, plant or bird, but it can also be a natural object like sun, moon or water. Clans deal collectively with respect to several issues of marriage, life cycle and other religious rituals. All the people who are members of the same clan enjoy closeness and solidarity. They are also structurally equivalent of each other. Clan members may not be able to trace genealogical links with most members of their clan and are often widely dispersed geographically. The local term for the clan is Kul, which is used as a surname (Atak), and it includes several lineages. The clans are distributed unevenly in the region. There are certain clans found clustered in specifc hamlets or villages, while

Kinship Behaviour 73 others are more dispersed in the region. In the villages of Gamit, Kukana and Warli, the distribution was found to be of following types: Two Gamit villages had 8 clans, two Kukana hamlets had 17 clans and two Warli hamlets had 15 clans unevenly distributed. Among Gamits, nearly 30 per cent population do not recall their clan names. Here, clan exogamy is not so strict, while among the other two tribal groups (Kukana and Warli) the clan was ubiquitous. Everybody knows their clan names. Clans of neighbouring hamlets and villages have been related by matrimonial ties for fve to six generations. Further, inter-tribal marriages between two clans of two tribes are also found among the Kukana and Warli. Apart from matrimonial alliances, in day-to-day interaction clan holds little signifcance. It is observed that certain hierarchy among clans is related largely to their economic status. These comparatively richer clans are eagerly sought after for marriage proposals. Among the Warli, Kanat, Vejal and Hilim clans are socially and economically dominant in the two hamlets of Nayakpada and Pathshali. These clans are the earliest settlers in the village, going back six to seven generations. Consequently, they have a strong demographic presence and are also economically better off than the other clans. On the other hand, those clans that are recent settlers have very less population in the village. The clan being only a loose cluster of numerous and widely scattered lineage segments, the inter-relationships between them are not likely to be very frequent or signifcant. Local affliation with segments of other clans in the neighbourhood tends to develop and cut across the clan loyalties. The mere fact of sharing a clan name need not involve any further obligation. Thus, clanship has structural signifcance in these three tribes, only for the purpose of reckoning descent and indicating the limits of exogamy.

Lineage The lineage is a descent kinship group where the members are in a position to trace their relations to each other through a common patrilineal ancestor. It might be a large one, extending over many generations, or it might have a depth of just two or three generations. Generally, the members of a lineage are not able to trace their exact genealogical ties to their ancestor who lived four to fve generations ago. They just use the name of the oldest male ancestor that they can remember, for instance, Bhukiya lineage (see Genealogical Charts 4.1 and 4.2). Thus, a lineage is a named, small exogamous group whose members consider themselves descendants of a known male ancestor who lived not more than four to fve generations ago and are able to demonstrate their actual genealogical connections to each other. As they are descendants of a single male ancestor, they consider themselves brothers and sisters, and incest taboo is maintained in marriage among them.

K = Khandadiya. Note: Here one can see that within same lineage (Desai), there is a marriage between Somi and Vechiya. Second, there is a new lineage segment with coming of Khandadiya in the village like Gulji (K) of Malavi Kul. Third, there are persons who do not remember their Kul name due to Khandadiya marriage.

Genealogical Chart 4.1 Bhukiya Gamit’s Lineage in Chikhalpada

74 Kinship Behaviour

Note: The lineage located in different hamlets. Distribution of lineage started by Khandadiya marriage and developed by different lineage segment of a clan. Their marriages with the other clans create new lineage.

PS – Pathshali, PF – Patel Falia, NP – Nayakpada, GJ = Khandadiya.

Genealogical Chart 4.2 Barkiya Mahla’s (Kukana) Lineage and Linkage in Three Hamlets (PS, PF and NP)

Kinship Behaviour 75

76

Kinship Behaviour

Formation of lineages Fortes fnds lineage as the ‘warp’ and the organised domestic life as the ‘woof’2 of the social fabric (Fortes 1949a). He fnds the lineage as the ‘warp’ and the household3 as the ‘woof’ of the social fabric. The two elements of the social structure are different yet complimentary. In the case of lineage, the entities of the system are the corporate groups themselves, while the relationships within the household serve different micro-level functions than the lineage. In household relationships, the relationship is more intimate and serves necessities like food, sex and general requirements of day-to-day life, including socialisation and education of children as well as the fulflment of emotional needs. It is in the domestic relationship that reproductive and primary economic needs are met. But lineage is there in the background with a stable structure acting as the principal corporate group having a permanent framework of society. Further, Chapters 6 and 7 will shed more light on this dimension. A tribal family is a collection of different households, simple-, small-, medium-size to complex large-size households, including many migrant members of extended families. A lineage, on the other hand, forms across four to fve generations and is more of a structural, legal-political unit.

Distribution of lineages The tribal hamlet and villages are composed of more than one lineage. When male members of lineage migrate to other hamlets or villages as residentson-in-law (Khandadiya), the lineage cuts across the village boundaries. They may marry within the village and set up a different household of the same lineage. In another instance, when a father brings in a Khandadiya for his daughter to take care of the household and manage agricultural activities, a new lineage enters the village. Here, Khandadiya and his wife’s progeny is the bearer of his lineage. A lineage also moves to and from the village through migration of the household. Each lineage has its own Wadil (oldest living male) who takes care of the social, legal, economic and ritual responsibilities of his lineage members in the village (see Appendix V).

The function of a lineage A lineage is a patrilineal exogamous body of agnatic kin. Marriages between members are considered incestuous and forbidden. A lineage is not only a group of recognition but also a ‘corporate group’. The lineage determines the recognition of a person’s group affliation, a socially recognised group of persons, whereas the group may be said a ‘corporate group’ when it has certain characteristics, such as a chief, collective participation in rituals and holding collective property (Radcliffe-Brown 1950: 41). A corporate lineage group also has a jural and political status. Or, to put it

Kinship Behaviour 77 in another way, all legal and political relations in the society take place in the context of the lineage system (Fortes 1953: 26). The concept of the ‘person’ as an assemblage of statuses has been the starting point of some interesting enquiries. A generalisation of long-standing is that a married person always has two mutually antagonistic kinship statuses, that of spouse and parent in one family context and that of child and sibling in another (Fortes 1953: 37). The social structure must be thought of as a system of interconnected politico-legal statuses symbolised and sanctioned by ritual and not as a collection of people organised in self-perpetuating descent units. The stability of society over time is preserved by perpetuating the status system. Thus, when a person dies, his status is kept alive by being taken up by an heir, and this heir is selected on the basis of descent rules. At any given time, an individual may be the holder of a cluster of statuses, but these may be distributed among several persons on his death in a manner analogous to the widespread societal custom by which a man inherited his parental resources, as these go to his lineage heir and his self-acquired property to his personal heir. Ideally, therefore, the network of statuses remains stable and perpetual, though their holders come and go. Ritual symbols defne and sanction the key positions in the system. Lineage and descent together thus have the function of selecting individuals for social positions and roles. In other words, for the exercise of particular rights and obligations just as in cross-cousin marriage, they serve to select Ego’s spouse (Fortes 1953: 36–37). People differentiate between clan (kul) and lineage (pedhi). One clan will have several lineage segments worshipping their own deities as found in Warli and Kukana. In other words, they worship their own lineage segment deities called Dev in Warli and Kul Devata in Kukana. Both have similar worship patterns. Both worship during Diwali festival, which is closer to agricultural harvest in the months of October/November. There are also differences in worshipping patterns of Kukana and Warli. In Kukana it is conducted on a larger scale, viz., presence of at least one member of each household of that lineage at one place at a time, whereas among Warli, this ancestor worship is limited to the household and family level.

Fission of lineage The fssion of lineage takes place in different situations: frst, when lineage members become too many to come to one place, and, second, due to any confict among the members of the lineage group. A number of cases of fssion also seems to be due to predominantly economic factors due to the migration of some family members to a different village. At times this migrated household may behave like it is setting up a new lineage and dissociate from the parent lineage, but this does not always happen. So, migration may or may not lead to actual fssion of the lineage group.

78

Kinship Behaviour

Usually, however, the lineage segments which are small and isolated in the hilly and forested terrain discourage the maintenance of regular and frequent contacts with the parental group. Contacts, wherever maintained, are not suffciently extensive, and over long periods, interdependence and interaction between such segments tend to be weakened. Such isolated segments tend to establish a more and more signifcant social and ritual relationship with the other lineage groups in the same neighbourhood even though they might belong to different clans. Ritual collaboration is maintained between several lineage segments if they are not far removed from each other, and the representatives of several clans are able to come together, at least, on certain important occasions. But the corporate identity of the lineage cannot be maintained when the members are dispersed over large distances which eventually leads to fssion of the lineage. As noted by Nath (1960), when confict leads to cleavage in a lineage, the separated segment may assume an independent lineage status. Ritual collaboration and social participation depend considerably upon the various clan segments being spatial as compact as possible. Therefore, a signifcant clan collaboration among them seems to exist, only where their lineage segments are settled in the communicable distance. The more dispersed the segments are in space, the more limited seems to be the scope for signifcant collaboration among them. Eventually, the population of the migrated household gets multiplied over generations and becomes too large to have continued relations to the parental lineage. At that time, fssion occurs with the help of mutual understanding among lineage members. This fssion is represented in the sharing of pedhi deities among the Kukana and Warli. There are fve types of statues made of silver among Kukana and clay among Warli of their lineage deities. All the metals of the statutes are melted, and two sets of fve deities are made and given to lineage representatives of respective villages. On arriving at the village, the group sacrifces a male goat and celebrates through the entire night. Generally, they used to have one Bhagat from their own community for worshipping one Pedhi. But with the division of pedhi, a new Bhagat is appointed. Each segment takes its respective metal statue and make a new pedhi and start worshipping with participation limited to their respective groups only. The formal fssion usually takes place, at some ceremonial occasion, such as Diwali celebration. These are basic functions of lineage as corporate group.

Lineage as religious corporate group A corporate group is a group which does or owns something together. Usually, it is derived on descent basis. If a descent group lives on the same plot of land and subsists on agriculture there, they have property in common,

Kinship Behaviour 79 they constitute a daily work group and have many interests in common and then they are a typical example of kinship-based corporate group. For deeper understanding of these kinds of groups, let’s take an example of Kukana. Kukana share mainly two kinds of activities, secular and religious, with fellow members. Secular work involves the co-operation in works, such as agricultural, or making or repairing houses, or roof making, etc. These works involve the co-operation of the household of lineage members and hamlet members. On the contrary, religious activities are related to deity worshipping ceremonies. It further can be divided into three kinds, household, lineage and village deities. The household deities are worshipped jointly by members of the same lineage, from the same hamlet, village or only nearby villages, on certain important occasions. These deities are generally installed in the house of the senior-most members of the lineage. They worship several deities which are associated symbolically with different things. The most important few are himai, hirwa, munja and kansari. Deities are kept in bamboo basket, locally called salad. The salad is frst flled with rice over which deities are kept. The salad is kept in that part of the house which is used to store grains, and the part refers to as devsthan. It is considered sacred and not to be polluted. Members avoid entering that place with footwear. Different deities are represented through different objects. Himai dev is represented by a small oval or round pebble coated with vermillion. Hira dev is represented by a peacock feather wrapped up in a piece of red cloth, which is further covered by a large black cloth. The deity is hung at the roof just over the salad. These two deities are worshipped during Diwali with sacrifcing the fowls along with liquor (mahuda), which later on will be distributed to the household members. The lineage deities are propitiated in the form of ancestor worship. The Kukana people keep a few thin silver pieces having engraved images called pedhi. The pedhi is wrapped in red cloth placed on a wooden plank beside the household deities. Pedhi represents their ancestors and is jointly worshipped by the members belonging to the same lineage. Pedhi worshipping is observed on the last day of the month of baadhon (August–September). An earthen lamp is lighted besides pedhi on all important festivals. It is customary among the Kokna that after the death of the elderly members of the lineage, a new pedhi is installed. They do not make these pedhi themselves. The pedhi is prepared by the goldsmiths at nearby towns such as Dharampur or Valsad, from where Kokna purchased them. The pedhi deities either installed in the house of the senior-most members of lineage or kept moving circular from one lineage member household to another. In some lineages, this movement of deities’ installation shifted annually, whereas in some other, shifting is based on certain circumstances. For example, on auspicious occasions like in marriages, it is installed in the household in which marriage ceremony is going to occur, while in inauspicious circumstances, like in the case of death in the household, they

80 Kinship Behaviour are shifted to some other household. Usually, one would expect to fnd a good collection of the pedhi in the households of the senior members of the lineage. If the householder is unable to make a new deity image every time, then at the demise of an elderly person, they melt one of the old pedhi and get a new one prepared from the same metal. On the festival day, deities are washed with milk by the head of the household. They are offered boiled rice, pulses and liquor, and an earthen lamp is lighted in front of them. It is reported that during worship each head of the household who belongs to the lineage brings two bottles of liquor and one fowl for sacrifce. Sacrifcial offering is consumed within the lineage members, and some part is kept for other lineage members who were not present (for some reason). After that sanctifed food will be distributed among the children of the hamlet who also, in most of the cases, belong to the same lineage. The village deities are known as gam dev and are worshipped jointly by all residents of the entire village. The term gam dev, in most cases, is used in generic sense to represent a set of deities that are worshipped collectively by the villagers. The gam dev’s shrine is generally located at the periphery of the hamlet or village or mostly in the sacred grove. In Makadban village, these deities are worshipped on the 12th day of the second half month of Aswin (July–August) and again on the 15th day of the month of Margshirsh (November–December). During the feldwork, it was also noticed that few villagers of Pathshali hamlet worshipped village deities at the Par River crossing. The bhagat with the assistance of village elders prepared fgures of deities with rice four and performed the ritual together. After completion of the ritual, the coconut with some batashe (hollow sugar cake) were distributed among the devotees. Village elders explained that earlier fowl used to be sacrifced with liquor, but now fowl is replaced by coconut and liquor is replaced by tea. Other gam dev deities are vaghdev, makardev and kansari dev represented to give protection and well-being from tiger, crocodile and food grains, respectively. The pancham of Holi (ffth day of Holi festival) is also considered a communal festival and celebrated with the collective contribution from each household of the village. Every lineage has its own norms, the transgression of which is considered as serious lapse by its members. The representative of the lineage assembles the heads of the households, and discusses with them the issues relating to the lineage and takes prompt action in any issue that may arise pertaining to the lineage. The importance of lineage has diminished in recent times. Earlier there were socio-economic, political and religious control over the behaviour of the lineage members (Karve 1957b; Nath 1960). But nowadays these functions are carried out by different institutions in the village. Conficts have increased due to an increase in individualism and decreasing cooperation in the socio-economic domains of life. In contemporary times,

Kinship Behaviour 81 erstwhile reciprocal exchange of labour is being replaced by wages or paid labour. Earlier co-operative agriculture involved kin and fellow villagers. But nowadays, labour is paid, and outside contract agricultural labourers also come, for example, for transplanting paddy or sugarcane harvesting.

The kindred Lineages are descent groups which are focused on ancestors, but kindred are Ego-oriented aggregates of the related persons. Between the two, there is a technical difference. There is a division of kin groups into those based on a common ancestor (descent groups) and those based on common kinship (kindred). The latter is a more fundamental one (Goodenough 1980). Kindred are an aggregate rather than a social group because its membership is composed of individuals who defne their respective memberships in terms of their relationship to a particular individual, technically known as ‘Ego’. In a social group, such as lineage, each individual has a relationship with every other member of the group. In kindred, on the other hand, the only relationships are those between Ego and every other member of the aggregate. Here, the relationship is traced only through the Ego’s perspective. An Ego-oriented aggregate includes membership only of kinsmen who may consist of any individual’s relatives, including ancestors and collateral, such as uncle’s or aunt’s siblings and cousins (Genealogical Chart 4.3). Among the tribes of south Gujarat, the kindred may be classifed into two types, e.g., agnatic and affnal. While the former is descent based, the second is formed after marriage. The kindred are a category of kin which consists of all recognised relatives of an individual. The individual knows who are his kindred and to whom he can usually approach in order to fnd support or assistance for any eventuality. In the tribal society, one can identify the members of the kindred up to second-degree kin with whom close social interaction is laced with mutual affection and obligations (Genealogical Chart 4.3). These kindred are subject to constant change throughout the life cycle. During childhood, the kindred consist of Ego’s parents, their closer cognates like all siblings and cousins and all senior close consanguineous kinsmen in the frst ascending generation. The cross-cousins are treated as closer rather than parallel cousins. The above equations accord well with the rule of bilateral cross-cousin marriage and the concomitant prohibitions of parallel cousin marriage. Further, this thing can also be observed with the occurrence of preferential cross-cousin marriages and their kinship terminologies. The idea of cross-cousin marriage is embedded in the terminology, and cross-cousin marriages are imperative if the kinship terms are to be kept consistent. The classifcatory kinship terminology functions in such a way that not only genealogical affne but distant relatives may also be brought under the

82

Kinship Behaviour

wide compass of ‘marriageable category’. Yalman (1967: 357) emphasises this when he writes it is the systematic linguistic categories of kinship (the terms of reference) which structure the entire kin circle and specify in an orderly manner marriageable and unmarriageable persons in that universe. The cross-cousin marriage is simply a restatement of the rights and obligations inherent in certain categories. There is no lineal emphasis at all, but only rules regarding the interconnections between categories. Affne are relatives by marriage. During Ego’s early age, the kindred may include close affnal relative like WB, ZH, WyZ and WyZH besides one’s own siblings. The kinship terms take into account the relative age of the kin. The Ego has a respectful caring relation with WeB and has more closeness and friendly relations with WyB. Similar types of relations exist with ZH. At the time of crisis, the Ego will frst ask for help from WyB and yZH, while some seek the role of some relatives like WeB and eZH, which suggests that they should offer their help to Ego on their own. But for the Ego, it will be the last option to take help of these relatives. The Ego can take help of these relatives if no other option is available to him. Because these relationships, though, closely linked are not considered good for asking help. At older age of Ego, kindred consist of few remaining relatives of Ego’s own generation as well as most of his descendants. It is usually stated that only closest cognates, full siblings of the same mother and father, can have the same kindred. This is true for kindreds as a category of kin. It is not necessarily true for kindred as a quasi-group since the descendants of the siblings are related differently to each of the siblings. The term ‘quasi kin’ is often used to denote relationships where the traditional rules of kin membership do not apply. A quasi-group may be defned as an aggregate or portion of the community (a) which has no recognisable structure or organisation and (b) whose members may be unconscious or less conscious of the existence of the grouping. For example, for a man, one sibling is his brother (FS), but the other sibling (FBS) also includes him in his kindred group. Thus, there may be one kindred of the quasi-group type for each member of the family. Kindred of both types overlap in their memberships. That is, each individual may belong to several different kindred. It need not be true that an ego feels closest to the members of his own lineage group from whom he expects to inherit property and status. Among the tribal groups, the betrothal or bol is an agreement by which the marriage contract is entered into by both parties. The engagement rituals are more important than the wedding. It is an obligation on the part of the maternal uncle (MB) to take an active part in searching the suitable alliances for his sister’s son and becoming an active member of Wadils (elders) in fxing alliances. He is obliged to bring a pair of cloth and other gifts for the wedding. Second, he also plays an active part in the collection

Genealogical Chart 4.3 Kindred among the South Gujarat Tribes

Kinship Behaviour 83

84

Kinship Behaviour

of chandlo and personally provides chandlo (things in cash and kind for marriage feast). A woman is under obligation to bring at least one pair of clothes to her brother when his wife dies. Similarly, eZH is expected to decorate his WyB and lead the marriage procession. So, it is kindred to whom a man is obliged for maintenance of socio-political control and performances of various rituals and ceremonies in accordance with the cultural requirement. However, changes are taking place in these traditional rituals. Yet, the relevance of kindred in contributing to the performance of the marriage ceremony and death ritual is still relevant. It was observed that south Gujarat tribals make a fundamental distinction between consanguineal and affnal relatives, as is common in most societies. Their kinship behaviour follows the same pattern. The interpersonal interaction among the consanguineal relatives is derived from patrilineal principles and descent organisation. And it is through the marriage alliance between descent groups that the members establish and extend their affnal link. Following is the description of the interpersonal behaviour that characterises some of the crucial consanguineal and affnal relationships, where relationships between different kin categories involve a distinct pattern of social behaviour, of rights and obligations. Radcliffe-Brown has described all kinship relations to be dyadic in nature. Every relationship has its counterpart. There can be no father without a child, no husband without a wife and so on. It is analysed by Radcliffe-Brown (1950) who opines that the various contributions of different social systems and customs are nothing but the social functions. The rights and obligations are structured to be mutual and reciprocal so that principles involved will run down the tradition to maintain the same among the next generations to come. So, for the proper understanding of the societal principles, one has to go through the vivid picture of the ‘kinship’ structure of a particular society and then only one can be able to look into the other society(s) and its other aspects too. In his own words, “… in any society the rules of etiquette, morals and law are part of the mechanism by which a certain set of social relations is maintained in existence” (Radcliffe-Brown 1940: 8).

Kinship behaviour Kinship behaviour consists of what people actually do. It refers to the kind of relationships that are existing and or stipulated between relatives. The relationships established in the family group are affected by generation, relative age and by similarities or differences of sex. Those members of the parental generation who are in a position of authority are entitled to obedience and respect, while others may share intimacy without super or subordination. Mutual affection, loyalty and support are expected of brother and sister. The patterns of behaviour that prevail between relatives defne their relationship and as such are an integral part of the kinship system.

Kinship Behaviour 85 Father-son relationship: The relationship of a son with the father is characterised by respect and distance, and the behaviour of father towards his son is more of authority. The father-son relationship is seen in terms of descent-based and has well-defned rights and obligations. A child will be given the name from among those of his father’s group. A boy learns from his father how to cultivate, hunt, fsh and engage in other activities. He will be dependent on his father until marriage, after which he sets up his own household, in most cases close to his father’s house. A son helps his father in all economic activities from an early age, and more or less authority remains with the father. After getting married the son’s relationship with the father is more formal in nature. A strong agnatic bond is found in this relationship. The father is obliged to make bride-price payment for his son and take all responsibilities of his son’s marriage. The member of a lineage group and fellow villagers also contribute chandlo. In his old age, the father stays along with son or near to his son’s household, and it is the son’s responsibility to take care of his old father. In most cases, after the death of mother, it is imperative for a son to look after his father. Father-daughter relationship: The relationship of a daughter with father is of respect and distance. The latter has authority over the former. A father takes care of her while she is young. However, after adolescence, he has little interaction with the daughter. The father shows concern towards his daughter, and it is his responsibility to arrange her marriage. It is the father who is having the right over the bride-price of his daughter. Since the father enjoys the right over the daughter’s bride-price, it is his obligation to reciprocate it by giving different things like cattle and household items to the son-in-law. Whenever a father has only one daughter with enough land, he brings resident-son-in-law (Khandadiya) for his daughter and gives one share of land to her. The daughter’s strong bond and obligation towards her natal group become clearly evident in such a situation. Any break in the matrimonial ties or death of her husband, she returns to her father’s household as a likely option. So, even after the marriage the relation of a daughter towards her father and father’s group persists. Mother-son relationship: The relationship of a mother with children is characterised by warmth and affection. During childhood, there is no difference in the mother’s treatment of a boy and a girl. She is more responsible to take care of the children than the father. She looks after their daily needs and personal requirement. A boy, until he becomes an adult and takes part in the activities of an adult, remains in close contact with the mother. During childhood, a son is freer towards his mother than his father. However, after adolescence, he becomes independent of the mother. Once a son establishes his own household after his marriage, a mother often visits him and takes care of his children and assists in the domestic activity. Mother-daughter relationship: The relationship between mother and daughter is characterised by love and affection. But unlike son, a mother

86

Kinship Behaviour

has more control and authority over her daughter. Their relationship is also based on mutual co-operation and obligation. By the early age of 10–12 years, a daughter becomes trained in all household chores by the mother. By helping and assisting the mother, a daughter gradually learns the household activities, like fetching water, cleaning utensils, sweeping, collecting frewood and taking care of her younger siblings. She also engages in agricultural activities, like sowing, weeding, etc. In the absence of a mother, it is the grown-up daughter who manages the household affairs. A girl of around 12–15 years is considered as a grown-up for managing the household in the absence of her mother. Brother-brother relationship: After the father-son relationship, the strong bond of descent exists between brothers. The relationship between brothers is strong as they are members of the same corporate group throughout their life. If the brothers are of similar age, they behave more like friends. If there is a great difference in age between brothers, their relationship will be characterised by respect and distance. The younger brother sees the eldest brother in his father’s place. The elder brother fulfls the responsibilities of the father in the absence of the father. It is the responsibility of the elder brother to pay the bride-price for his younger brother’s marriage in the absence of father. The eldest brother among all siblings is regarded as the head of that generation. He receives more respect and deference from younger siblings. They also co-operate in agricultural activities. There exists a great amount of sharing of labour and exchange of food between married brothers. Brother-sister relationship: There exists a strong bond of concern and also rights and obligations between a brother and sister. During younger days, a brother and a sister of similar age grow up playing and spending time together. By the age of 10–12 years, their interaction reduces, and the girl spends most of her time in assisting her mother in various household chores and the boy assists his father. Later, ties develop when both are married and lead their own households, for instance, during the marriage negotiation between a brother’s son and her daughter. As seen earlier, MBD is preferentially sought after for marriage. Women do not have the right on the agricultural land. However, when her economic condition is poor, and her relationship with her brother is good, the brother can give a share of land. Further, she is also looked after if any misfortune befalls to her, such as divorce, death of a husband and so on. Sister-sister relationship: The relationship between sisters is characterised by closeness and co-operation in household activities. Sisters of similar age group spend most of their time playing together and moving about. They grow up under the care of their mother and learn most of the household work and other minor agricultural activities. In the case of differential age, the elder sister shows concern and care for the younger and takes responsibility in bringing up the younger and training her in household activities.

Kinship Behaviour 87 After their marriage, if they are residing in the same hamlet, their intimacy and obligation towards each other are evident from their frequent visits to each other and the mutual sharing of food and labour. In the absence of her elder sister, the younger one takes care of the elder sister’s household activities and looks after her children. They treat each other’s children as their own.

Kinship obligations While the tribal society assigns specifc rights and obligations on the basis of each kin term, they also make a broad distinction between relatives on the basis of respect, joking and avoidance kin. Respecting kin generally also has authority over Ego’s life and behaviour. Joking kin is expected to maintain a cordial and affectionate relationship. Their behaviour marks their intimacy by extensive joking involving insults, mock threats and naughty remarks. Avoidance kin is supposed to be respectful and reserved. In some extreme cases, such as mother-in-law/son-in-law relationships, they are not to talk to each other at all. For Radcliffe-Brown (1924, 1940a, 1949, 1952), joking and avoidance relationship are meant for maintaining social cohesion. Both joking and avoidance relationships were in general designed to avoid confict wherever there is ‘social disjunction’, as is the case between affnes, and through this ‘social equilibrium’ is created and maintained. He recognised the element of hostility inherent in joking and also that avoidance need not suggest hostility. He also recognised that potential marriage was one important basis for joking, especially where there was cross-cousin marriage or what Dumont called a positive degree of marriage in the case of Dravidian kinship (Dumont 1953). As is well known, in such cases Ego is expected to marry into a particular, predetermined kin category, and as a consequence, he, in a sense, inherits his affnal relationships. Thus, the direction of marriage is predictable, at least as a category, and since it may involve ritual and material exchanges as well, it is potentially confictual and hostile. Joking gives expression to the distance involved, as well as assuaging the hostility by directing it into avenues in which it can be controlled. Levi-Strauss (1963 [1958]) accepted Radcliffe-Brown’s basic precept that the joking relationship, or rather what he called the ‘system of attitudes’ as a whole, was designed ‘to ensure group cohesion and equilibrium’. But against Radcliffe-Brown he argued that the avunculate, or its absence, could not be traced to the presence of patrilineal and matrilineal descent, respectively. Indeed, in these terms its presence could not be predicted, as even Radcliffe-Brown had recognised, but what could be predicted was the fact that if the father-son relationship were one of authority in any one society, the mother’s brother/sister’s son relationship would be indulgent, and vice versa – whatever be the content of these two relationships, they are always contrasted.

88

Kinship Behaviour

Respect On studying the kinship system, it is possible to distinguish different relatives by reference to the kind and degree of respect paid to them (Murdock 1949; Haekel 1963). Fathers are respected in most societies, and the tribes in south Gujarat also have the norm of showing respect to the father. However, the interaction between the father and son becomes closer in the former’s old age. But the interaction between the father and the daughter sharply gets diluted as the girl attains puberty. The interaction between the mother and daughters becomes friendlier with the latter’s attainment of puberty. The intensive interaction between the mother and son gradually decreases as the son attains adulthood, but it may be revived if she becomes a widow or in her old age. Respect is extended not only towards the frst ascending relatives (like FeB and MeZH) but also to men of a person of father’s age who may or may not be relatives. However, one can fnd closeness between the grandparents and grandchildren. The grandparents even defend their grandchildren in case of minor mistakes committed by the latter when the parents take them to task. This was analysed by Radcliffe-Brown’s (1950: 28) law of merging of alternate generations, which he discusses in an African context (the structural principle of the merging of alternate generations). As per this law, kin of adjacent generations are clearly separated, while those of alternate generations are commonly merged in behavioural norms and terminology, an alternation that serves to sharpen the extended sequence of generations so that ascendant or descendant lineal kin can be precisely identifed in the ongoing generational cycle. Where ‘grandparents’ are merged with generational peers, so too ‘great-grandparents’ are merged with parents, and in this way, each generation is sharply distinguished from those adjacent to it. It is observed that in all kinship systems, there is a certain distance or tension between members of succeeding generations. For example, a mother has to socialise a son/daughter; hence, she will try to discipline or control the son/daughter. However, as Radcliffe-Brown points out, members of alternating generations (grandparents and grandchildren) tend to share easy and friendly relationships. In many societies, it is believed that the grandchild replaces the grandparent in the social system. Kinship terminology in tribal kinship uses generational combinations and oppositions to classify kin. Further, grandparents restrain the parents in disciplining their children. It is observed that the interaction between the siblings’ changes after childhood. They eat together, play together and sleep together, and so a warm relationship exists between them. But in course of time, particularly after the marriage of the elder brother, the interaction between elder brother and younger brothers becomes less intimate. But sister-sister interactions continue to be warm even after their marriage. A person generally has a friendly relation with members of his/her own generation. However, some kin members of Ego’s generation are more

Kinship Behaviour 89 respected (see Appendix VI). A woman commands respect from the younger brother’s wife (yBW) and younger sister’s husband (yZH). A woman is expected to respect her husband’s elder brother (HeB), as she respects her father-in-law (see Appendix III). Likewise, a man is expected to respect his wife’s elder sister (WeZ) (see Appendix IV). Special respect towards all persons of the parents’ generation is expected, not only to one’s father and mother but also to FB, SpF, FeZ, MeZ, SpM, and so on (see Appendix II). As Parkin (1993) argues, respect towards all persons of parents’ generation is basic to middle Indian tribal kinship pattern. However, signifcant differences were observed among some of the relatives of parent’s generation. A combination of closeness and friendly behaviour was observed towards one’s MB, MBW, MyZ and FyZ (see Appendix II and VI). This is also refected in their kin terms. Among all relations, the mamo (MB) is closer to a person with whom one may remain carefree and have special affectionate relation. This is refected during marriage where mamo acts as an important member of a person’s wedding ceremony. Similar is the case with FZs (father’s sisters). There are complex rules of etiquette governing the behaviour of certain relatives toward each other. A man will not address by proper name his father, mother, grandparents, uncles, father-in-law, mother-in-law and elder brother. A woman will not use the proper name of her parents-in-law (HF and HM) and husband’s elder brothers and their wives (HeB, HeBW) (see Appendix III). Even the husband and wife do not address each other by personal names but instead use the elder child’s name (Teknonymy).

Avoidance The tribal society observes taboos between some relatives. Among such relatives, marriage or any other type of sexual relationship is strictly prohibited. More than that, they are expected to avoid all close contacts with each other. According to the custom, there shall be mutual avoidance between woman and her husband’s elder brother (HeB). The woman should avoid all the real or classifcatory elder brothers of husband. The woman should not mention husband’s elder brother (HeB) by name. But she can refer to her husband’s younger brother (HyB) by his personal name. A man may call his younger brother’s wife by name. A woman may serve food and water to her husband’s elder brother (HeB), but it also must be done with an air of indifference indicating the absence of any direct contact between the two. There is also avoidance between a man and his wife’s elder sister (WeZ). The relatives coming under this category should avoid touching each other. They should not talk to each other in a way that indicates any intimacy or familiarity. A woman may serve meals to her father-in-law, wash his plates and clothes and speak to him a few hurried words. A father-in-law is not

90

Kinship Behaviour Table 4.1 Avoidance Observed among Kin Members 1 2 3 4

WM DH WeZ yZH SW HF yBW HeB

→ → → → → → → →

DH WM yZH WeZ HF SW HeB yBW

permitted to beat his daughter-in-law. Further, a woman’s relations to her husband’s elder brother (HeB) are as restrained as those with her fatherin-law. A woman should not speak with him and never be alone with him in the house, though they may work together in the feld. The society enforces strict taboo between these two. The relatives coming in this category should not talk to one another face-to-face, nor should they have any direct communication with one another. They should not sit on the same mat or cot. A daughter-in-law (SW) should not mention her father-in-law’s (HF) name even though the latter can mention the former by her personal name. In the kinship system, some relatives are addressed with respect by using honorifc plural tame for parents-in-law (Table 4.1). This honorifc term refects respect, distance in the relationship and also avoidance behaviour among them. Other than these, all relatives are addressed using singular tu, meant for the closer relationship. One essential part of the kinship system on the normative level pertains to the rules of avoidance. They not only determine behaviour and limit of contact between certain relatives but also indicate taboo regarding sexual relations. Traditionally, in all the cases of avoidance mentioned in Table 4.1, the relatives concerned should not sit together on a bed or on a scooter, but a certain distance must be kept. In former times, the female relatives left the room when the person to be avoided entered. Nowadays this etiquette is not followed strictly. However, terms of address are followed.

Joking In contrast to the rules of avoidance and relationship of respect, ritualised, public and partly obligatory jokes are cracked with respect to some relatives. The custom permits and encourages joking or privileged familiarity between certain categories of relatives. Joking is a relationship between two persons in which one is by custom permitted and, in some instances, required to tease or to make fun of the other without any offence. A special intimacy is attached to or expected from those with whom people have a joking relationship. It hints not only a familiar relationship but also possible sexual relations or marriages, for example, in sororate or levirate relations

Kinship Behaviour 91 Table 4.2 Joking Relationship Observed among Kin Members Relationship

Relationship

Characteristics

WyB eZH HyB eBW HeZH

eZH WyZ eBW HyZ WyBW

Strongest joking relationship

Mildest joking relationship

(Haekel 1963; Parkin 1993b). This type of relationship is common among some of the affnal relatives. Correspondingly, the relatives with whom one can joke are husband’s younger brother and wife’ younger sister (HyB and WyZ) who may marry each other. So, a person can have familiarity and joking relationship with the younger siblings of the spouse like younger brother or sister or their respective spouse (SpyB, or SpyZ), that is, why a man is allowed to marry his deceased wife’s younger sister (junior sororate) and deceased elder brother’s wife (senior levirate). Not all relatives observe the degree of joking relationship equally. Some have more cordial relationship, while others have only mild joking relationship (Table 4.2). The degree of joking also depends upon the age of the relatives. If there is no much age difference between a woman and her husband’s younger brother (HyB), joking is limited. Same is the case between a man and his wife’s younger unmarried sisters (WyZ). There is also a joking relationship between grandparents and some grandchildren. A man will regard his son’s son (SS) as his lineage member and will treat him as his younger friend. Similarly, he will regard his son’s daughters (SD) as his younger friends. As such he will have no joking relations with them. However, he will regard his daughters’ daughter as his female friend and will joke with her. In addition to the above-mentioned joking relationships, there is also contextual joking within the people of a generation. These relationships change in practice over a period. Generally, the intensity of jokes decreases with age, and people over 40 only rarely or mildly joke with others of same or older age.

Fictive kinship Fictive kinship is a form of kinship that is based on neither consanguinity nor affnal ties. The consanguineal and affnal kinship ties might be considered real or true kinship. On the other hand, the fctive kinship has in the past been used to refer to those kinship ties that are fctive, in the sense, they are not real. The fctive kin have a permanent relationship with the ego just like the kindred. The custom of ceremoniously entering into a permanent friendship

92

Kinship Behaviour

is of great importance among the tribes of south Gujarat. It is always between members of the same sex, between two married men or women, two boys or two girls. The friendship is respected and shared by the respective families of the two friends. The two persons on the strength of their friendship are supposed to render each other all the services customary between relatives: lending cattle and agricultural implements, giving small loans without interests and making presents and paying each other visits on festive occasions. Fictive relations start from friendship. If a man is roaming in an unknown territory, or lost in the forest, and if he comes across an unknown person, he simply uses the kin term designating his wife’s brother to the stranger to ask for his help. In reply, the other person also uses the same term. Such friendships are not restricted to persons of one’s own tribe alone but may be formed with members of other tribes as well. A man feels highly honoured if he is asked by a member of superior gyati to be his fctive kin. If a person becomes aware that his friend is in fnancial diffculties, he is expected to help him. In fact, this friendship formed between two persons belonged to the same tribe would pave the way for marrying their children with each other; hence, establishing a closer tie of kinship.

Kinship as a social organisation Table 4.3 shows the important traits of the social organisation of south Gujarat. Table 4.3 Important Traits of Social Organisation among the South Gujarat Tribes S. No.

Traits of Social Organisation

1 2

Descent group Cousin form

3 4 5 6 7 8 9

Traits Found in Tribal Society

Patrilineal Middle Indian or Munda Kinship inclined on south India Residence Patrilocal (Khandadiya Marriages (uxorilocal)) and also Neolocal) Exogamy Clan and lineage Endogamy Village, tribe Marriages Monogamy and rarely polygamy Family Patrilineal Female collateral terms Bifurcate merging M = M’s all Z not equal to =/F Z F = F’s all B not equal to =/M’s B Children of siblings BS=WBS=HBS BD=WBD=HBD ZS=WZS=HZS ZD=WZD=HZD

Kinship Behaviour 93

Kinship and inheritance pattern Kinship becomes the dominant basis for ownership of the property for a person, and it passes on to his future generations. Among the south Gujarat tribes, the patrilineal descent determines succession to status and inheritance of property between men, and thereby continuity in the male line is stressed. Certain fundamental ideas about the property, ownership, inheritance and succession are necessary to understand the intergenerational movement of resources. The term ‘property’ refers to things that are owned by or attached to a person or entity, like the family, lineage, clan, community or a corporate body. The property includes not only material possessions, landholdings, houses and animals but also intangible things such as intellectual property, ideas and knowledge (Morris 2012:205). It is common to distinguish between immovable and movable property. The immovable forms of property are houses and land that are owned individually. There are, in addition, different types of communal ownership. Communal ownership refers to holding the assets of an organisation, enterprise or community indivisibly rather than in the names of the individual members or groups of members as common property. Anthropologists, on the other hand, have pointed out that communal ownership systems are not the same as open-access systems, that a group may restrict access to its members and regulate usage by custom and tradition and that this can be more effcient than private ownership solutions (McCay and Acheson 1987). On the other hand, movable property includes such items as personal belongings, clothing and ornaments, agricultural implements, animals and valuable utensils. While dealing with the matter of property, three basic aspects need to be studied. First is the social or cultural perspective of property; second, the nature of rights over property; and the third is inheritance. The term ‘inheritance’ refers to the process and means by which property is transferred from one generation to another. The various aspects of the property were observed in the feld. The concept of property, rights over it and its transmission have been observed from a gendered perspective. The various social aspects include the nature of overall ownership and management and the structural characters such as the number of siblings or the number of children, including male and female, and their overall relationships with the present owner and in a few cases with the additional affnal members in the family, i.e. resident-son-in-law. Among the many important questions, which are generally missed by researchers, is the actual process of inheritance that not only or solely depends upon the rights of the ownership but also depends upon inheritor’s relationship at the structural level of kinship with the person from whom the property is to be passed down. Before going further, let us have some working defnitions of the few key terms. Succession is the process whereby things or individuals follow one

94

Kinship Behaviour

another. It is most often used to mean the transfer of an offce, status or title, frequently from an older to a younger person, typically when the frst holder dies. It is generally compared and most often confused with the term ‘inheritance’. Jack Goody gave an elaboration of succession and inheritance in his work Production and Reproduction on the African tribe ‘LoDagga’ (Goody 1958, 1969, 1977; Hann 2008). He analysed the relationship of kinship with the economy in general and made a distinction between succession and inheritance. Among the many linkages between these two, one prime element is in the area of passing things with immediate generation from ego’s generation to frst descending generations (DG1). He defned it as the intergenerational transmission of goods, including the instruments of livelihood, especially in the basic means of production at the household level, as well as the authority relationship associated with their management. When there is the movement of offce, title and status related to the offce from one generation to the next, after the death of the manager, the term ‘succession’ is used. The successor is only the manager of this offce. The offce remains, and only person-in-charge keeps changing. There may be different modes and methods of appointing the manager for the post based on cultural tradition. On the other hand, inheritance is referred to as an intergenerational movement, like the movement of land and other things. Goody added another dimension, sexual rights, into this category that is basic for most of the households (Goody 1977). In an attempt to deconstruct the intergenerational relationship in this way, tension based on rights and domestic authority could be given a separate consideration from those based on different forms of property rights, and these, in turn, were linked to the process of production and reproduction. In addition to this, Goody categorised the transmission of three types (see Table 4.4) based on a property (inheritance), offce (succession) and sexual rights (levirate and sororate). In all these three categories, there are authorised transfers based on the custom of the society. Table 4.4 Transfer of Rights between Roles Types of Exclusive Rights

Authorised Transfer

Property Sexual

Inheritance Holder-Heir Levirate, Husbandetc. Levirate

Roles and Offce

Succession

Source: Goody 1977.

Role Relationship

IncumbentSuccessor

Unauthorised Role Relationship Transfer Theft Adultery, Incest, Abduction Usurpation

Holder-Theft CuckoldAdulterer Ruler-Rebel

Kinship Behaviour 95

Property and inheritance among the South Gujarat tribes After analysing feld data, some unique features of tribal intergenerational transmission of resources were found in the feld. The central consideration of their inheritance is that of kinship. It is according to the relationship in which the various heirs stand to the original owner that the property is divided among them. The norm is that the heirs should be patrilineal descendants of the benefactor and so members of his particular social group. There are defnite rules of inheritance recognised at the family level. The fve tribes under study are patriarchal and patrilineal. The system of inheritance promotes the continuity of family and social structure over generations. The transference of resources from older to younger generation helps to maintain a family’s position and power in the social order. In the patrilineal setup, the line of descent always follows through the male. Here, the father is considered the head of the family and is the authority over the household, and the property passes to the sons alone. The other members of the family, not part of the patriline, who are part of the same household enjoy and share the property, but they do not have the right to claim any of the property. Women, who are born in the patriline, do not have any share in its property. The land owned in common by the local descent group, families, lineages, have the right to cultivate it according to their capacity. Hence, the land under cultivation is managed by families. Sometimes, people also clear the neighbouring land not owned by anyone and cultivate it. So, land cultivated and cleared by the father will be inherited by his male children. The brothers have a common claim on their father’s land. Other properties like huts, cattle, agricultural implements, etc. will also be inherited by the male children. However, the female children inherit ornaments and other personal belongings from mother and grandmother. Whatever a tribal male possesses is equally distributed to his male heirs, i.e., sons. Generally, the question of the division of property is followed by the partition of the household, which happens within the frst few years of marriage of the son. During this intermittent period, son co-operates with father and other brothers in agricultural feld while maintaining his own household. In some cases, even after the division of property, they share their common labour resource in agriculture. Brothers, who separate by setting up different hearth, often keep the feld in common possession. They cultivate it as a whole and only divide the harvest. There is a custom that if the problem of division of property occurs during the lifetime of the father, then an equal share would be given to his heir or heirs and the father would retain one share. The youngest son or whosoever looks after the parents would get the parent’s property after the death of the father. If a person does not have a child, the property would go to his brother or brother’s son. If one son remains with the father, while the other sons separate, he gets his share of the property only after his father’s death, while his brothers

96

Kinship Behaviour

receive their share though not the complete share at the time of separation. After the father’s death, a redistribution of the whole property is made. At this redistribution the son who remained with the father until the latter’s death receives a bigger share of the property, for it is he who has to pay the expenses of the funeral feasts. The other sons may also contribute a certain amount, but the bulk of the expenses are met by the son who remained with his father. When the brothers cannot agree on the inheritance, they may appeal to the village elders. Many disputes are amicably settled by the elders of the lineage and village. Such disputes arise, of course, only if the father has left a considerable property and if several claimants hope to beneft from it. Although the right of inheritance is enjoyed by men generally, this state of affairs is not absolute. There are conditions under which women can, to some extent, have the right of inheritance. If there is no male heir in a family, the daughter may inherit property though indirectly through her Khandadiya husband. If the father has only daughters, then most often he brings Khandadiya, resident-son-in-law for his daughter(s). The term Khandadiya literally means tiller. The person who is brought in for tilling is called Khandadiya. In the case of only one daughter, resident-son-in-law is the rule. In case of more than one daughter, the father can bring more than one resident-sonsin-law. If he brings resident-son-in-law for only one daughter, generally it is for the eldest daughter. However, it is not a strict rule. During his lifetime the father will give management of the property to the resident-son-in-law. If a father has more land, then also he will seek a son-in-law to live with and help him in managing the feld. The manager, resident-son-in-law, can transfer this property to his children. However, he cannot transfer to any other members of his own descent group. In case, if he returns to his native village or goes to any third village by ending the Khandadiya relation, he is debarred from any right on the property. Further, in case he moves out (migrate) from the village with his wife and children, he retains the right on the land. In some other non-Khandadiya marriages, where daughter and her husband return to her father’s household, usually, they get some land for their support and maintenance. This happens mainly for two reasons. Either the family of the married daughter does not have suffcient land or she is unable to live with her in-laws. The latter reason leads to quarrels at in-law’s place, and subsequently, she with her husband comes to her natal village. The former reasons are more prominent than the latter one. There are also few circumstances in which sons lose their right to inherit their ancestral property. If a man goes as Khandadiya, then he loses his right to his ancestral property. However, these circumstances are more dependent on the will of the father, and a father may still choose to give his sons(s) share in his property. Generally, this condition occurs in the case of

Kinship Behaviour 97 a son going as Khandadiya within or to a nearby village. Further, if a man goes as Khandadiya and returns to the village after few years, then it all depends on his father’s or brother’s (if a father is not alive) decision whether he will get a share or not from their ancestral property. Generally, the partition of immovable property takes place after the death of the father, with the mutual understanding of all family members. The process is also witnessed by village and lineage elders who know the situation and relationship of the different members of the household in question. Partition of immovable property does not mean a loss of interdependence of family members as they continue to share their movable property in the form of agricultural instruments and animals. If there is less of agricultural land, they jointly till the land and distribute the harvest. The general case of inheritance follows a set of rules: 1 2

3

4

5

When the owner is survived by sons, the property is inherited by son/ sons or grandson/s. When the deceased leaves behind no son but is survived by daughters and his widow, his property will go to the widow and not to a female child regardless of her marital status. A widow can retain ownership only up to her life and until her remarriage to a person outside or inside the village. In both cases, the property returns to her husband’s brothers and their sons. However, as is mostly seen under such conditions, the older widow prefers to bring Khandadiya husband for her daughter/s rather than remarry herself. When the deceased is survived by more than one widow and has no sons or daughters, the property will be inherited by all the widows equally, but they retain it only up to their remarriage or death as explained above. When the deceased landowner has kept Khandadiya son-in-law during his lifetime in his house, there are instances of mutation in favour of the daughter. The general practice in such case is that the property is transferred by different ways to the daughter or son-in-law during one’s lifetime. Similarly, a widow can also bring son-in-law for her daughter and can transfer the land in favour of her daughter. When a woman has acquired the property through Khandadiya process, the property belongs to and is inherited by her children. When she is survived by neither son nor daughter, her property returns to the source from where it came, to closest lineage member of her father – most often to the father’s brother (FB) or father’s brother’s son (FBS). However, many times, to avoid the chance of losing property, a marriageable-age woman seeks remarriage through Khandadiya system. If the woman is old and crossed the marriageable age, then she will be looked after by one of her father’s lineage, and that person will get the property.

98 6

7

Kinship Behaviour If a woman is survived by Khandadiya husband who decides to remain with the household and manage the land, then he can retain it and transfer it to his children. If he remarries and brings a second wife then her children also have the share of the land. Though, the manager is son-in-law, he cannot transfer this land on his own accord to his lineage member, meaning to his brothers. He can lose the right to manage the land when he moves out from Khandadiya relationship. There are unique cases of inheritance to unmarried daughters under exceptional circumstances, i.e., when the deceased has neither son nor widow but is survived by only daughters. In such cases, the inherited property remains with his daughter up to her marriage. She continues to retain the property if she keeps Khandadiya husband. If she is married away in a different village, she will lose the right over the land, and the land will go to the closest male relatives of her father’s patrilineage.

Case studies from the village Let’s look at an example of the inheritance pattern of one Warli lineage (Deval’s lineage) in Nayakpada hamlet in Makadban village, Dharampur. A Warli patrilineage includes male as well as female descendants, in the male line, of a recognised common ancestor. Although the female descendants are members, their children are not. The female descendants of the lineage may marry and join the male descendants of other lineages. Daughters and sisters become members of their husbands’ families after marriage. The wife and all the children take the husband’s and father’s name, respectively. Sometimes a woman is not known by her name but as the wife of so and so. Sometimes, even the word ‘wife’ is dropped, and the possessive case of the husband’s name serves the purpose. Thus, a woman may be known as and called Kakdushi (Kakdu’s) or Jethyashi (Jethya’s), meaning Kakdu’s wife and Jethya’s wife, while in her natal home also she is called by her husband’s name or in-law’s name. In the case of Khandadiya marriage, the same is also observed in the matrilocal residence. In such a movement, Khandadiya does not lose his family identity, nor does he go by the name of the family of his father-in-law. He constitutes a separate family within a family with himself, his wife and his children. A married daughter is no more a member of her father’s family, but she has a sort of claim over it, provided her father or brother is willing to share it with her. One thing that needs to be understood is that among the Warli, both ancestral and acquired property are equally transferable to the next generation. There is no difference between these two kinds of property as long as brothers are living together. After the dispersal, one brother can keep his acquired property on which other brothers will not have a claim. The land

Source: Field data.

Genealogical Chart 4.4 Inheritance Pattern in One Warli Lineage (Deval Kanat’s Lineage)

Kinship Behaviour 99

100 Kinship Behaviour inheritance pattern of Deval Kanat’s lineage is given in the Genealogical Chart 4.4. The son will inherit equally all the land of father except when he goes as Khandadiya to another village. Deval had three sons and one daughter, but he transferred all his property to only two of his sons as his daughter was married into a different village, hence not inherited. The third son went as Khandadiya in a different hamlet, Umarmal, and settled there. He has also not inherited any land. If one had a son or sons, then there is less chance of bringing Khandadiya for one’s daughter. Baban’s lineage segment could be viewed as an ideal situation when the household had sons and a daughter. The pattern shows that sons are inheriting the ancestral land and transferring it to their sons only as the daughters are marrying away, therefore not getting any share. It is interesting to note that the same rules also apply to the step-sons. It is also common to have a compound family due to prevalence of polygamous marriages. Similar to this, four compound family cases are observed in the Deval’s lineage, but all are without any issue to add to the dispersal movement. On the other hand, if a father has only a daughter or daughters, like in case of Zuliya, then there is a high chance of getting Khandadiya for his daughter and transfer his ancestral land to him. Khandadiya inheritance pattern also has special situations resulting during the specifc events in the life cycle. For example, two brothers’ (Kakad and Devji) inheritance patterns have the same kinship composition. Each of the two brothers has one son and one daughter. While Kakad’s case followed a set pattern, marrying daughter away and bringing daughter-in-law for the son. In Devji’s case, he brought daughter-in-law for the son and Khandadiya for daughter. The reason being that Devji’s son died early, leaving widowed daughter-in-law with two children. In order to manage the agricultural land, he brought Dasrath as Khandadiya from Fulwadi, a nearby village. In the case of Khandadiya marriage, initially, the father retains one portion of land for himself after giving one part to the daughter. Later on, however, if the daughter takes care of her father or parents in their old age, then she can get this part as well. This transfer of land is the sole preserve of the father, and whoever takes care of the father can get this portion of land. There are some special cases found in this particular lineage segment. Rupal had four sons and two daughters. His eldest son, Somi, was not married, while others were married. Out of two daughters, Rupal married one, Lasu in Arnai village, and for Ramku, Khandadiya husband was brought. Ramku and her Khandadiya husband got a share of the land from her father’s land. At present, Somi is living with the Ramku’s household and transferred his share to his sister. In such cases, after the death the ‘person in question’, there are two possibilities left. First, the more general pattern is that whoever takes care of the dependent will get

Kinship Behaviour 101 the share of land. He/she can retain and transfer the land to his or her children. Like in one of the cases of Ambapur, a Vasava village, where an old brother was looked after by her married sister’s family and they get his share of land also. Second, if all the children or brothers of a deceased dependent are not satisfed, then they can redistribute the land among themselves. However, the second option involves confict and is rarely followed in the village.

Conclusion Among the South Gujarat tribals, three categories of kinship are found, viz., consanguineal relationship (blood relative), affnal relationship (relationship by marriage) and fctive kinship. The fundamental function based on sharing and exchange – sharing among the consanguineal and exchange between the affnes – forms the major aspect of tribal social structure. Thus, between the affnes, there is an exchange of women, bride-price, goods and service, whereas the agnates share among themselves food, land, labour and above all the sharing of agnatic fliation and ancestry. The nucleus of the tribal social organisation revolves around the household and family, lineage, clan and kindred. The clan is prominent in a few tribes of south Gujarat, especially south of the Tapi River. The clan system also leads to a division of the tribe into several separate groups, each having its own name and identity. The lineage and lineage segment play an important role in everyday life. The lineage is the maximum unit or broadest unit of household, of which household is a smallest or minimum unit. Formation of lineage is traced from a household. After a few generations, the lineage gets distributed in different villages mainly through migration and Khandadiya marriages. The eldest living male of a lineage segment represents the lineage in a particular village. This representative is also one of the Wadils of the village. Since a patrilineage is an exogamous body, the basic function of lineage is marriage regulation. Marriage within the lineage is incestuous and frowned upon. The lineage also represents the corporate activities of lineage members like Pedhi worshipping in Kukanas and Dev worshipping among Warlis. In the present times, the importance of the lineage is diminishing due to the changes in the mode of production, reproduction and thinking. Now people think about personal gains and profts in place of group status. Unlike the lineage, kindred are still prominent among the villagers. Kindred are ready to provide help and hold a special ritual-based relationship. Therefore, one can see that kinship is not a static unit but a dynamic one, which controls the varying nature of kinship obligations and behaviour. Particular kin members have a special status of respect and authority, while for others avoidance is observed. At the same time, there are kin who are very close and have a joking relationship. Kinship also becomes

102 Kinship Behaviour an important phenomenon related to the social and economic function of a group through inheritance. The patterns of inheritance are generally based on multiple relations of household members, their relations with other related households and above all the management of production. Tribals have specifc rules and patterns of resource transfer to the next generation. Being patrilineal, they transfer only through the male line, with the exception in the case of Khandadiya marriage. Apart from the kinship relationship, the transmission of resources to the next generation depends upon the social behaviour of relatives. Whoever takes care of the ‘person in question’ gets his/her share of the property. However, it also, sometimes, becomes an issue for confict among the close relatives.

Notes 1 They (Radcliff-Brown, Mayer Fortes and Evans-Pritchard) together form a famous triad of structural-functionalism of British Social Anthropology and produced seminar contributions. 2 Using ‘warp and woof’ idiom, M. Fortes equated social structure with fabric structure by giving example of warp (lineage) and woof (domestic group). In weaving, the ‘woof’ is the term for the thread or yarn which is drawn through, inserted over-and-under, the lengthwise warp yarns that are held in tension on a frame or loom to create cloth. Warp is the lengthwise or longitudinal thread in a roll, while woof is the transverse thread. 3 Fortes used it as organised domestic life, whereas present authors use the term ‘household’.

5 Marriage Networks and Social Space

Tribal marriages Tribal people in south Gujarat get married mostly in three ways: i Arranged marriage by negotiations (Rajikhushi lagn) ii Marriage by elopement (laine bhagi jaun) iii Uxorilocal marriage by service (Khandaidya lagn) i Arranged marriage by negotiations (Rajikhushi lagn) Most marriages are arranged among the tribes of this region. However, since boys and girls have contact with each other in educational institutions and there is considerable ease in the mixing of the opposite sex, there are greater chances that boys and girls suggest elders to arrange marriage with known partners for them.

ii Marriage by elopement (laine bhagi jaun) The marriages taking place by elopement are socially recognised after the couple return after their rendezvous and following the mediation of the Agewans (village elders) and Wadils (family elders). The Agewans and Wadils of the households, hamlets and villages of both the sides act as the mediators. If the conflict (Zagda) between both the parties is settled, the couple is given husband and wife status with some formalities. On the other hand, if the conflict cannot be settled or both parties are reluctant for settlement, then the boy and the girl are separated. The research has encountered several cases of such conflicts during the fieldwork. The following two cases of Vasava of Ambapur and Warli of Nayakpada may be seen as good examples of this phenomenon. In the first case, a Vasava boy of the Ambapur and a Chaudhari girl1 of Luharwad village eloped together and came to Ambapur. They stayed for a few days in the village. Afterwards, a meeting was held in Ambapur participated by elders (Wadils) and Sarpanchs of both the sides. In this meeting, the girl’s side (especially her father) was very reluctant for this relationship considering the boy’s poor economic condition. So, they asked for a higher bride-price as Rs. 50,000/- for the

DOI: 10.4324/9781003299790-5

104

Marriage Networks and Social Space settlement of marriage. Although the boy’s side (including Ambapur Sarpanch) argued for lowering the bride-price, the girl’s side was adamant and did not relent. Eventually, the only resolution of this confict was possible by separating the boy and the girl. In the second case, a Warli boy of Nayakpada hamlet and a DhorKolcha 2 girl of Arnai village eloped together and came to live in the neighbouring Pathshali hamlet. They stayed for two days at the boy’s maternal uncle’s house. Later a meeting was held in Nayakpada at the house of the Sarpanch. The meeting had participants from both the sides, Agewan of both the villages, Sarpanch (who himself a Warli) of Makdaban and Sarpanch of Arnai. In the meeting, the girl’s side was represented by her maternal uncle (mother’s brother), her main gaurdian, as the girl’s father had died. The girl’s maternal uncle was very reluctant for this relationship as the boy was unemployed. So, they (girl’s side) too asked for a higher bride-price of Rs. 65,000 for settlement and marriage. Although the boy’s side insisted on lowering the bride-price, still the girl’s side was frm on their demand. Eventually, both the sides decided to separate the couple. However, in all such cases, if the couple (both girl and boy) insist on living together, even when their elders dictate otherwise, they are left on their own by Sarpanch and Agewan of the village. Therefore, we can see that the tribal people are much more humane in their approach than caste Hindus, who sometimes even resort to murder in such cases. It is important to note that in above both cases, couples belonged to different tribes. The reluctance of the elders can, therefore, be attributed to this reason as well as the economic condition of the prospective groom. In the frst instance, in Vasava case, the Chaudhari girl was considered as higher, whereas in the second instance, in Warli case, Dhor-Koli girl was considered as lower in the social hierarchy of the area. However, at present, economic condition is the main criterion for selection or rejection of the marriage. Earlier this type of inter-tribal marriage was less and not considered as good. But now things are changing, and intertribal marriages also occur. There are many marriages by elopement even without informing the village Wadils or Agewan. Although people recognise such types of marriages, they are seen as different from proper lagn (marriage). The eloped couple generally is advised to give a feast to fellow community members or village members in recognition of the marriage. However, these practices are not followed as strictly as compared to earlier times, due to weakening of the traditional infuence of the Agewan. If the elopement happens between unmarried young couples of the same tribe, then it is not a big issue, and Wadils generally give their consent for marriage. However, if anyone who has already married or is in a relationship with someone elopes with someone else’s spouse, then it is frowned upon.

Marriage Networks and Social Space

105

iii Uxorilocal marriage by service (Khandadiya lagn) Khandadiya (resident-son-in-law) is a person who goes to live at his wife’s place (uxorilocal) as opposed to the normal practice, where the wife lives virilocally. This type of uxorilocal marriage is a fairly common practice among the tribes of south Gujarat. Often when a man has no male children, he makes it a condition that whosoever wants to marry his daughter should be prepared to live with him, work in his felds, look after his cattle, etc. In this arrangement, it is the daughter who will be heir to her father’s land, cattle and other property and pass it to her children. However, children get the lineage from their father only. Further, when a man is unable to pay the bride-price, he goes as residentson-in-law. In fact, this is just opposite to normal lagn (marriage) where future daughter-in-law is identifed by the boy’s relatives, while in this case a suitable resident-son-in-law is searched by girls’ side. This marriage does not involve bride-price, which is normally given from boys to girls’ side. The resident-son-in-law (Khandadiya) basically comes to manage agricultural work. The term itself is derived from Khandad, meaning spade to perform agricultural work. Women are always associated with sowing, transplanting, caring, harvesting and processing, to some extent, with the agricultural activities. While at the same time men always are associated with the plough, spade, or tilling, preparing the land, caring for the land and transporting the harvest.

In some cases, if the groom’s family is not able to pay the bride-price, then compensation is made in the form of labour wherein the groom goes to the bride’s house and helps in the farming and other household-related activities. The period of the bride service varies from society to society, and it might last from a few months to several years. In short, resident-son-in-law enters the household initially as a worker in the agricultural feld, though on the land record the name of his wife is registered. He is not the inheritor of the land of his wife’s side, but he is the manager of the land. In case the resident-son-in-law is given the land to do as he pleases, then it is completely up to him how he manages and what he produces. During this time he also provides help in his in-law’s feld. But if he lives with the wife’s family, then economic resources are shared, and as long his father-in-law is alive, they work as a team. If he settles in a new household, then there is a separate hearth, and he manages his household.

Mapping marital networks The marital network is different from the marriage circle (gol), which consists of a set of villages having territorial endogamy. Gol is an endogamous unit of a caste composed of defnite numbers of families living in certain

106 Marriage Networks and Social Space villages, towns and cities (Shah and Desai 1988: 8). In tribal area, usually few endogamous groups in nearby villages give their daughters in marriage and bring daughters-in-law outside their lineage. To map out the tribal marital networks, the research included two exercises which included tracing and analysing of male and female marital movements in their respective villages and hamlets (nodal3 villages). First, it recorded in the household census the natal villages of all the incoming women (as remembered by informants): wives (including second or third wives), daughters-in-law, mothers, grandmothers and great-grandmothers. It also recorded the villages and hamlets into which all the girls (as remembered by informants) from our nodal villages were given in marriage. The same exercise was also done in the case of male uxorilocal movement of Khandadiya marriages. Second, it plotted this information on genealogical charts and prepared marital movements as per ascending generations (AG). It started from the most recent generations G0 (Ego’s generation) and moved upwards towards parental, grandparental and so on. Tribal societies have their cognition regarding their marriage areas, and that plays an important role in marital transactions in specifc group villages. These data were analysed by identifying emerging trends and patterns in marital movements. There are basically four processes in tribal marriages: the marital movement distance (physical) – how far or close they marry; marriage networks – in which villages they marry; repetitive marriage-villages which have reciprocal exchanges of males and females and marriage direction – directions of villages in which they marry over six generations. These geographical movements also in effect limit and resultantly form their social space. In the end, it would like to tease out the patterns of their marriage networks. This chapter will also discuss the rules and related practices of marriage. 1

Village endogamy among tribes of south Gujarat

A dominant feature of tribal society is that they do not follow the rule of village exogamy or marry outside one’s village as it is found among caste groups. Many tribal people marry within their village. The household survey and genealogical chart of the village show evidence of this phenomenon. Table 5.1 gives details of the tribes, their villages and hamlets who have married within their village of birth over six generations. The results of village endogamous relations are: 1 2 3 4

They marry people who are known to them. They marry among genealogically connected to them. There are repetitive marriages. They share mutual labour among affnes. They can attend to close kin when they fall ill.

Marriage Networks and Social Space

107

Table 5.1 Village Endogamy among Five Tribes over Generations Tribes and Villages Number of Girls Married

Vasava (Katkuva + Ambapur) Chaudhari (Rakhaskhadi + Ambapur) Gamit (Vadirupgadh + Chikhalpada) Kukana (Pathshali + Patel Falia) Warli (Pathshali + Nayakpada Falia)

2

AG1

AG2

AG3

AG4

AG5

AG6

Total

7

45

57

31

13

2

155

6

48

61

33

10

1

159

6

42

63

30

8

149

2

29

32

17

5

85

2

25

41

23

3

1

95

Village exogamy: physical coverage and social space

The south Gujarat tribes choose their brides from the nearby villages. Table 5.2 shows distances from which the brides come into nodal villages. 1

2 3

Out of 1,975 incoming women, 970 (49.1 per cent) come from villages located within a radius of 0–10 km; 427 (21.6 per cent) come from 11 to 20 km; 167 (8.5 per cent) come from 21 to 30 km; another 103 (5.2 per cent) from 31 to 40 km; 29 brides (1.5 per cent) come from 41 to 50 km; and 55 (2.8 per cent) come from a distance of 50 km or more. For remaining 224 (11.3 per cent) brides, informants are not able to recall their natal villages. The maximum women, 1,397 (70.7 per cent), have come from within 10–20 km distance. As we move farther from these villages, the percentage of the incoming brides becomes lesser. They rarely marry girls from the village located at a distance of more than 50 km, which accounts for only 2.8 per cent of all marriages. Further, these long-distance marriages happen as exceptions and only because of special circumstances. Most often village boys go to faraway places for work or study and get connected to some girls and marry them. Majority of these associations are inter-tribal/caste marriages and are limited to recent generations (AG2 – AG1). So, the new circumstances and situations have contributed to altering the marriage patterns in recent times.

108 Marriage Networks and Social Space Table 5.2 Distances (in km) from which Women Come to Five Tribal Study Villages and Hamlets (as Brides) over Six Generations Tribal Societies

Distance (in Km) 0–10

11–20

21–30

31–40 41–50

Vasava

259 (55.1) 201 (58.9) 192 (50.9) 142 (35.5) 176 (45.5) 970 (49.1)

45 (9.6) 42 (12.3) 69 (18.3) 153 (38.3) 118 (30.5) 427 (21.6)

30 (6.4) 11 (3.2) 50 (13.3) 37 (9.3) 39 (10.1) 167 (8.5)

31 (6.6) 21 (6.2) 29 (7.7) 13 (3.3) 9 (2.3) 103 (5.2)

Chaudhari Gamit Kukana Warli Total

Total 50+

NK

7 (1.5) 19 (4.0) 79 470 (100.0) (16.8) 5 (1.5) 6 (1.8) 55 341 (100.0) (16.1) 6 (1.6) 19 (5.0) 12 377 (100.0) (3.2) 7 (1.8) 6 (1.5) 42 400 (100.0) (10.5) 4 (1.0) 5 (1.3) 36 387 (100.0) (9.3) 29 (1.5) 55 (2.8) 224 1975 (100.00 (11.3)

Based on household census and genealogies; NK = Not known: the place of movement not known to informants

While observing and comparing individual tribal data, some specifc features emerge. Generally, they choose their spouse from within or nearby villages, roughly 0–10 km. Around 60 per cent of the incoming brides in Vasava and Chaudhari came from 0 to 10 km, while roughly 30–40 per cent came in Kukana and Warli. And Gamit stood in the middle with 50 per cent and closer to the average of the fve tribes. So, as we move farther from north to south of Gujarat, the distance of getting a daughter-inlaw becomes greater. It is important to remember that the marriage distance is also dependent upon the topography of the region. Vasava and Chaudhari reside in nucleated villages, with a closer cluster of households, more or less like in plains villages or caste-based villages, whereas Kukana and Warli follow pure hilly topography where households are dispersed and the distance between households is much greater. The local people who know the geography are aware of short cuts which they use in their daily life. For example, in Makadban village, spatial distance via roads between two villages Nalimadani and Malundpada is quite a lot, but, actually, they are just across the banks of one river. Earlier people used to travel this distance by crossing the river at the shortest distance where the rivers were shallow. Now they use vehicles to travel this distance via pucca road. So, the marriage distance is to some extent dependent upon the time it takes to travel and the ease by which the distance can be covered given the nature of the terrain. The more diffcult the terrain, the closer people are likely to marry. However, in the present times, with the use of wheeled vehicles, the distance may have come to have a different meaning.

Marriage Networks and Social Space

109

Outgoing women from nodal villages Tribes arrange the marriage of their daughters in nearby villages. Out of 1,493 outgoing girls, 1,120 (75.0 per cent) have gone to the villages located within the radius of 0–20 km (Table 5.3). A similar pattern is found for the outgoing women in all fve tribes. They prefer to give their daughters to nearby villages. Around more than half of the daughters have gone within the village or to very close by villages. As we move farther from nodal villages, the number of villages in which daughters of nodal villages are married become less (see Maps 5.1–5.5). Generation-wise analysis of the place of origin of incoming brides conveys that the villagers are not able to recall incoming women’s natal place from AG5 onwards (see Table 5.2). Most people (11.3 per cent) do not remember where their grandmothers or great-grandmothers came from. They are also not able to recall incoming women’s names after four generations. On the other hand, villagers remember their paternal side names until six generations. They name the person by adding his father’s name as a suffx. As compared to this, villagers easily recall the villages in which their daughters are married away. Only 14 (0.9 per cent) outgoing girls’ affnal villages are not known. After AG4 people do not remember where their daughters were married. It is important that they remember more incoming women as compared to outgoing women. Generally, sisters and daughters have forgotten over two or three generations. This is an important indicator of patrilineality as more importance is given to women who are born in

Table 5.3 Distances (in Km) to which Girls from Nodal Villages are Married over Six Generations Tribal Societies

Distance (in Km) 0–10

11–20

21–30 31–40

41–50

50+

NK

Vasava

203 (60.2) 197 (65.7) 161 (48.8) 98 (34.8) 119 (48.8) 778 (52.1)

44 (13.1) 34 (11.3) 72 (21.8) 118 (41.8) 74 (30.3) 342 (22.9)

25 (7.4) 28 (9.3) 43 (13.0) 46 (16.3) 26 (10.7) 168 (11.3)

27 (8.0)

11 (3.3)

21 (6.2)

20 (6.7)

8 (2.7)

9 (3.0)

25 (7.6)

9 (2.7)

19 (5.8)

5 (1.8)

4 (1.4)

10 (3.5)

8 (3.3)

8 (3.3)

7 (2.9)

85 (5.7)

40 (2.7)

66 (4.4)

6 (1.8) 337 (100.0) 4 (1.3) 300 (100.0) 1 (0.3) 330 (100.0) 1 (0.4) 282 (100.0) 2 (0.8) 244 (100.0) 14 (0.9) 1493 (100.0)

Chaudhari Gamit Kukana Warli Total

Total

110

Marriage Networks and Social Space

one’s patrilineage than to one’s that come into it. Further, male relatives are of more importance than female relatives of all kinds. The category is termed NK (not known) when people remember the incoming or outgoing women but are unable to tell their natal or affnal place. Comparing NK category in both incoming and outgoing women, we have revealing pictures. While in incoming bride category NK are 224 (11.3 per cent of total incoming female), and in the case of outgoing only 14 (0.9 per cent of total outgoing women) is observed (Tables 5.1 and 5.2). So, it is a dominant pattern, in the not known category, when people remember more affnal places of their daughters, fois, than the natal places of their mothers and grandmothers. Second, people do not remember the natal places of incoming women from different villages in the ascending generations. Here, while people counted their mother, grandmother and great-grandmother, they were unable to recall their natal place due to several reasons. A most common reason is lessening the contact with their places, or migration or others (like no old person is alive to tell this). However, in the case of outgoing women, when they told their daughters are married outside, they recall their place.

Map 5.1 Vasava Bride Movement (Incoming and Outgoing)

Map 5.2 Chaudhari Bride Movement (Incoming and Outgoing)

Map 5.3 Gamit Bride Movement (Incoming and Outgoing)

112

Marriage Networks and Social Space

Map 5.4 Kukana Bride Movement (Incoming and Outgoing)

Map 5.5 Warli Bride Movement (Incoming and Outgoing)

Marriage Networks and Social Space

113

Table 5.4 Distances (in Km) from which Resident-Son-in-law (Khandadiya) Come to Nodal Villages over Six Generations Tribal Societies Vasava Chaudhari Gamit Kukana Warli Total

Distance (in Km) 0–10

11–20

Total 21–30

31–40

45 (68.2) 3 (4.5) 6 (9.1) 7 (10.6) 42 (71.2) 4 (6.8) 4 (6.8) 4 (6.8) 57 (70.4) 7 (8.6) 8 (9.9) 1 (1.2) 6 (35.3) 4 (23.5) 3 (17.6) 1 (5.9) 10 (41.7) 6 (25.0) 3 (12.5) 2 (8.3) 160 (64.8) 24 (9.7) 24 (9.7) 15 (6.1)

41–50

50+

NK

1(1.5)   2 (2.5)     3 (1.2)

3 (4.5) 1 (1.5) 3 (5.1) 2 (3.4) 4 (4.9) 2 (2.5)   3 (17.6)   3 (12.5) 10 (4.0) 11 (4.5)

66 (100.0) 59 (100.0) 81 (100.0) 17 (100.0) 24 (100.0) 247 (100.0)

Table 5.5 Distances (in km) to which Sons have Gone as (Khandadiya) over Six Generations Tribal Societies

Distance (in Km)

Vasava Chaudhari Gamit Kukana Warli Total

10 (90.9) 1 (9.1) 18 (85.7) 1 (4.8) 19 (47.5) 10 (25.0)         47 (65.3) 12 (16.7)

0–10

11–20

Total 21–30 31–40

41–50 50+

NK

0 1 (4.8) 3 (7.5)     4 (5.6)

0   0     0

0         0

0 1 (4.8) 7 (17.5)     8 (11.1)

0   1 (2.5)     1 (1.4)

11 (100.0) 21 (100.0) 40 (100.0)     72 (100.0)

Uxorilocal marriages among the fve tribes Incoming resident-sons-in-law These tribes also select uxorilocal resident-sons-in-law to their daughters from the nearby villages (see Maps 5.6–5.10). Table 5.4 shows the numbers and percentage distribution of Khandadiya by the physical distance between their native places. Out of 247 incoming resident-sons-in-law, 184 (74.5 per cent) come from villages located within a radius of 0–20 km. As we move farther from the village, we have a lesser chance to get an incoming resident-son-in-law. For 11 (4.5 per cent) incoming Khandadiyas, villagers are unable to recall their native village; hence, distances were not known. It is likely that it was better forgotten. Similarly, they give their sons as resident-sons-in-law to nearby villages. Out of 72 outgoing resident-sons-in-law, 59 (81.9 per cent) are going to the villages located within a radius of 0–20 km (Table 5.5). The researcher is not able to get the data for outgoing resident-sons-in-law of Kukana and Warli tribes. Men from these societies became resident-sons-in-law because of two basic reasons. If a father has no son or has much cultivable land or both, then he takes a resident-son-in-law for his daughter to take care of the household and managing agricultural activities. If a man does not have enough resources to pay bride-price or has more brothers but less cultivable land, or both, then also he will accept to become a resident-son-in-law.

114 Marriage Networks and Social Space Outgoing resident-sons-in-law

Map 5.6 Vasava Ghar Jamai Marriage Movement (Incoming and Outgoing)

Map 5.7 Chaudhari Ghar Jamai Marriage Movement (Incoming and Outgoing)

Marriage Networks and Social Space

Map 5.8 Gamit Ghar Jamai Marriage Movement (Incoming and Outgoing)

Map 5.9 Kukana Ghar Jamai Marriage Movement (Incoming and Outgoing)

115

116

Marriage Networks and Social Space

Map 5.10 Warli Ghar Jamai Marriage Movement (Incoming and Outgoing)

Marital movement: physical space and social space Around 72.5 per cent of girls’ marital movements (incoming and outgoing) are restricted to a distance of 0–20 km. Further, a majority (76.2 per cent) of Khandadiya sons-in-law movement were limited to the same distances (0–20 km). By combining incoming and outgoing marriage movements, of both women and men, one gets all the information on marriages of the village. If one constructs the distance-wise hypothetical rings of the female and male marital movements over distance, then one can see that tribes of south Gujarat select their daughters-in-law and give their daughters in marriage within closer distances (Figure 5.1). Same goes for their sons-in-law and sons’ marriage (Figure 5.2). The marriage distance (MD) of tribes is generally restricted within 20 km for both girls and boys. The MD means the distance within which the maximum numbers of movements occur in marriages over the last six generations. One can conclude that the samaj of tribals is within a given physical space. One can say that the kinship space (consanguineal and affnal) is their effective samaj wherein they interact with each other. It does not cover the whole tribe to spread elsewhere. The wider tribe is samaj of mere recognition.

Marriage Networks and Social Space

117

Figure 5.1 Marriages over a Distance in Five Tribes Notes: Total marriages: 3,468 marriages in fve tribes. NK – place of marriage not known = 238 cases (6.9 per cent). 1,748 (50.4) (0–10 km) = 1,748 marriages comprise 50.4 per cent of all marriages, took place across a distance of 0–10 km from the nodal villages. Last circle, 50+ km, shows increase in number which is a recent phenomenon found in second and third ascending generations due to migration of the villagers for education and economic purposes. Total 121 (3.5 per cent of all marriages) marriages take place across the distance more than 50 km far from the nodal villages. Majority of these 121 marriages are limited to AG3 to AG1.

The MD decides the spouse selection pattern. These societies prefer to marry within adjacent villages for multiple reasons: 1

2

First, nearer the village, better the Wadils (elders) are in a position to know about future life partners of their children, their nature, income, household and agricultural land. These criteria are very important to decide the prospective marriage alliances. Second, in these nearby marriages, they can take service of alreadyknown matchmakers generally known to both the parties. Known by

118

Marriage Networks and Social Space

Figure 5.2 Khandadiya Marriages over a Distance in Five Tribes Total marriages: 319 Khandadiya or Ghar Jamai marriages. NK – the place of marriage not known =11 cases (3.4 per cent). 207 (64.9) (0–10 km) = 207 Khandadiya (K) marriages comprise 64.9 per cent of all K marriages, took place across the distance of 0–10 km from the village.

3

4

different local names in different tribes, the matchmaker is a person who arranges alliance and wedding rituals. They are also sought after, by both the parties, in the case of confict in future. Third, in such close distance marriages, elders can keep an eye on prospective bride and bridegrooms and their respective natal households. Due to multiple corresponding relationships in the nearby villages over the generations, they have some or other relatives at their children’s would-be in-laws. Fourth, girls are a workforce in these communities for household chores and for agricultural activities. They regularly keep providing a helping hand in both their affnal and natal households during the agricultural season. The shorter the distance between the affnal and natal village, the swifter the girl’s movement at the need of the hour.

Marriage Networks and Social Space 5

119

Fifth, nearby marriage, as we will view in household and family chapter, keeps them ready to look after their aged parents and other relatives.

So, tribal societies have rules of exogamy, closely related to incest taboo, which specify the ranges and categories of relatives who are considered forbidden for marriage and as sexual partners. These are always the most closely related biological and lineage kin members, and prohibitions on sexual relations and marriage between parents and children and brothers and sisters are universally applied. Among other functions, incest taboo and exogamous regulations force people to extend their circle of contact, co-operation and alliance beyond their immediate circle to link small kin groups into wider social constellations. These tribal societies are concerned not only with restricting marriages among closely related kin but also with specifying rules that channel individuals into marriages within particular categories and groups. So, individuals are encouraged to marry within their groups of people from which they share world view (Channa 2020: 53). According to considerations of exogamy and endogamy, in tribal societies the marriage patterns are determined by a society’s concept of social distance as indicated in the following diagram (Figure 5.3):

Figure 5.3 Social Distance of Marriage in South Gujarat Tribes

120 Marriage Networks and Social Space This diagram specifes three ranges of relationships: • • •

An inner group of close relatives with whom marriage is forbidden, generally lineage and clan members; An intermediate range of relatives, associates and allies with whom marriage relations are encouraged and often preferred, like crosscousin marriages; and An outer range of outsiders with whom marriage or other forms of interaction must be avoided, such as other tribes or caste people.

Changes in physical and social space Incoming and outgoing women movements among the fve tribes In seven nodal villages of fve tribes, total 1,973 women came from 691 villages of 32 talukas of 12 districts. For 222 women, villagers were unable to tell their natal places. We have 469 women whose natal villages are shown in Table 5.5. On the other hand, from these seven nodal villages, total 1,496 women went out to 496 villages of 40 talukas of 19 districts (see Map 5.11). For only 11 daughters, villagers were unable to tell their affnal places. So, Table 5.6 shows affnal villages and their natal places for incoming women and Table 5.7 for outgoing women. When compared to incoming women, the village of the marriage of outgoing women is mostly known. A few comments are needed for those marriages that have taken place in faraway villages, which have both provided and received few of the daughters from these villages. 1 2 3 4

First, only a few girls are exchanged in between these faraway places. Second, they are from recent generations. Third, these places are not uniform for every tribal society. Fourth, these exceptional marriages are out of pattern and hence are not reciprocal in nature. In other words, these faraway places do not both give and take. They are only limited to one way, either give or take girls. Hence, those districts that give girls do not take girls from the nodal villages.

Marriages in these faraway places are usually limited to a single marriage or two. Like in incoming bride section, Ahmedabad, Surendranagar, Narmada have provided only to Vasava and Chaudharis. On the other hand, Dhule has provided only one bride to Vasava, and Palghar has given two brides to Kukana and Warli. Both of these districts, Dhule and Palghar, fall in the neighbouring state, Maharashtra. And these two pairs of societies are situated at the extreme points – Vasava and Chaudhari at the northern boundary and Kukana and Warli at the southern boundary of south Gujarat.

4(3) 4(3)       8(6)

7(4) 2(2)       9(6)

1(1)         1(1)

    1(1)     1(1)

9(2) 3(2) 5(1) 1(1) 44(20)           14(3) 48(23)

Maharashtra

1(1)         1(1)

290(53) 238(50)       528(103)

16(6) 12(6)       28(12)

    2(2) 3(3) 1(1) 6(6)

    22(5)     22(5)

    17(7)     17(7)

    1(1) 2(2) 1(1) 4(4)

    1(1) 1(1) 1(1) 3(3) 2(2) 7(6) 3(3) 12(11)

   

      232(40 224(45) 456(85)

      111(31) 116(29) 227(60)

      1(1) 3(2) 4(3)

      1(1) 1(1) 2(2)

    12(9)   1(1) 13(10)

    1(1)     1(1)

1(1)         1(1)

AP+KK AP+RK CP+VR PS+PF PF+NP  

25(10) 13(7) 258(64)     296(81)

1(1)         1(1)

Vasava Chaudhari Gamit Kukana Warli  

    1(1)     1(1)

Nizar Songadh Uchhal Valod Vyara

Tapi

1(1) 1(1)       2(2)

Nodal Dang Navsari   Valsad Nandurbar Dhule   Villages Ahwa Subir Waghai Chikhali Navsari Vansda Dharampur Kaprada Pardi Umargam Navapur Nandurbar Sakari

Gujarat

1(1) 1(1)       2(2)

Tribe

 

1(1) 1(1)       2(2)

      1(1) 1(1) 2(2)

Talasari

Palghar

1(1)         1(1)

Total

79(79) 470(182) 55(55) 342(136) 12(12) 374(126) 41(41) 400(127) 35(35) 387(120) 222(222) 1,973(691)

Not Known

27(14) 9(8)       36(22)

AP+KK AP+RK CP+VR PS+PF PF+NP  

Vasava Chaudhari Gamit Kukana Warli  

2(2)         2(2)

Nodal Ahmedabad Surendranagar Narmada Bharuch Surat Villages Ahmedabad Limbdi Dediapada Sagbara Netrang Valiya Bardoli Kamrej Mahua Mandvi Mangrol Surat Umarpada

Gujarat

Tribe

 

Table 5.6 Changes in Tribal Women Marital Movement (Incoming)

Vasava Chaudhari Gamit Kukana Warli  

Tribe

AP+KK AP+RK CP+VR PS+PF PF+NP

Mahesana

Ahmedabad

Anand Narmada

Bharuch

1(1)         1(1)

1(1) 1(1)       2(2)

Tapi

    1(1) 1(1)   2(2)

  1(1)       1(1)

1(1) 1(1)       2(2)

6(4) 1(1) 1(1)     8(6)

242(57) 227(49) 2(2)     471(108)

10(7) 9(7)       19(14)

2(2)   1(1) 1(1) 1(1) 5(5)

36(19) 18(13) 1(1)     55(33)

16(11) 21(7) 238(70     275(88)

    3(3)     3(3)

3(2) 7(2)   2(1) 1(1) 13(6)

3(2)   37(21)     40(23)

  1(1)       1(1)

1(1)         1(1)

        1(1) 1(1)

Vyara

  1(1)       1(1)

Bardoli Mandvi Mangrol Surat Umarpada Songadh Uchhal Valod

Surat

1(1)         1(1)

1(1)         1(1)

1(1) 1(1)       2(2)

1(1) 4(3)       5(4)

5(5) 4(4)       9(9)

Jam Jpurr Rajkot Bhavnagar Morbi Kadi Mahesana Ahmedabad Sanand Anand Dediapada Nandod Sagbara Netrang Valiya

Nodal Gujarat Villages Jamnagar Rajkot Bhavnagar

Table 5.7 Changes in Tribal Women Marital Movement (Outgoing)

122 Marriage Networks and Social Space

Nodal Villages

AP+KK AP+RK CP+VR PS+PF PF+NP

Tribe

Vasava Chaudhari Gamit Kukana Warli  

Nandurbar

Navapur

    11(7)     11(7)

Dadra and Nagerhaveli 

        2(2) 2(2)

Nasik

      1(1)   1(1)

1(1)         1(1)

Nasik

    1(1) 4(4) 8(6) 13(11)

Sakari

Dhule

    1(1) 1(1) 1(1) 3(3)

Dadra and Nagerhaveli

    16(6)     16(6)

Maharashtra

    15(4)     15(4)

Valsad

      1(1)   1(1)

 

Gazipur

      1(1) 1(1) 2(2)

 

4(4) 3(3) 1(1) 1(1) 2(2) 11(11)

Not Known

      97(29) 89(28) 186(57)

      2(2) 1(1) 3(3)

337(123) 300(95) 333(122) 282(81) 244(75) 1,496(496)

Total

      1(1) 1(1) 2(2)

Kaprada Pardi Umargam

Ballia

Uttar Pradesh

1(1)   1(1) 169(37) 135(29) 306(68)

Waghai Chikhali Vansda Dharampur

Navsari

Dadra and Nagerhaveli

    1(1)     1(1)

Ahwa Subir

Dang

Gujarat  

        1(1) 1(1)

    2(1)     2(1)

Valsad Vapi

 

Marriage Networks and Social Space 123

124

Marriage Networks and Social Space

Map 5.11 Tribal Women Movement (Incoming and Outgoing)

Male marriage network – incoming and outgoing men movements among fve tribes Incoming resident-sons-in-law in fve tribes There are total 248 resident-sons-in-law coming from 145 villages of 19 talukas of 8 districts to 8 nodal villages and hamlets of 5 tribal societies (see Table 5.7). Except fve, all came from Gujarat state, while three residentsons-in-law for Gamit came from Navapur, Maharashtra, and one each came to Kukana and Warli from Ballia, Uttar Pradesh. The two alliances that have taken place in two different states have occurred for two different reasons. Gamit residents, as said earlier, have had traditional contact with the Navapur region from eight generations back. On the other hand, in Kukana and Warli the Uttar Pradesh resident-sons-in-law came because they were working in the neighbouring Pardi and Vapi towns. These two

Nodal Villages

CP+VR AP+KK AP+RK PS+PF PF+NP

Tribe

Gamit Vasava Chaudhari Kukana Warli

  2(2) 2(1)     4(3)

  2(1)       2(1)

  48(24) 48(26)     96(50)

  1(1) 1(1)     2(2)

  1(1)       1(1)

64(22) 2(2) 3(2)     69(26)

1(1)         1(1)

    1(1)     1(1)

Nandurbar

      1(1) 1(1) 2(2)

Ballia

Ballia

2(2) 1(1) 2(2) 3(3) 3(3) 11(11)

1(1)         1(1)

81(35) 66(39) 59(35) 18(17) 24(19) 248(145)

4(2)         4(2)

Ahwa Subir

Dang

Total

6(4)         6(4)

Vyara

Maharashtra Uttar Pradesh Not Known

  9(7) 2(2)     11(9)

Mandvi Mangrol Surat Umarpada Songadh Uchhal Valod

Valiya

Netrang

Tapi

Surat

Bharuch

Gujarat

Table 5.8 Tribal Men’s Marital Movement (Incoming)

Valsad

      2(2)   2(2)

      7(7) 10(5) 17(12)

      5(4) 8(8) 13(12)

        1(1) 1(1)

        1(1) 1(10

3(3)         3(3)

Chikhali Dharampur Kaprada Pardi Valsad Navapur

Navsari

126  Marriage Networks and Social Space Table 5.9  Tribal Men’s Marital Movement (Outgoing) Tribe

Nodal Gujarat Villages Surat

Total Tapi

Dang

Mahua Mandvi Songadh Uchhal Valod Vyara Subir Waghai Vasava Chaudhari Gamit Kukana Warli Total

AP+KK AP+RK CP+VR PS+PF PF+NP

    1(1)     1(1)

11(9) 19(10)       30(19)

    29(21)     29(21)

    1(1)     1(1)

  1(1)       1(1)

  1(1) 5(4)     6(5)

    2(2)     2(2)

    2(2)     2(2)

Map 5.12  Tribal Resident-Son-in-Law Movement (Incoming and Outgoing)

11(9) 21(12) 40(31)     72(52)

Marriage Networks and Social Space

127

industrial towns attract a lot of migration from other states also, including some regions of Uttar Pradesh. These towns are also where tribal girls from the nodal villages come for work, especially from Kukana and Warli. One man who was working in Pardi married a Nayakpada hamlet, Makadban village, girl, and another working in Vapi married a Pathshali hamlet girl, and they married and settled in respective hamlets. Villagers do not remember the native places of 11 sons-in-law. Only fve talukas of three districts – Netrang and Walia of Bharuch district; Mandvi, Mangrol, Surat and Umarpada of Surat; and Songadh of Tapi – provide 65 out of 66 resident-sons-in-law among Vasavas. Only one is not a known category. Similarly, six talukas of three districts – Netrang of Bharuch; Mandvi, Mangrol and Umarpada of Surat; and Songadh and Valod of Tapi district – provide 57 or 59 sons-in-law to the Chaudharis. In fact, the areas of sons-in-law coincide with the social space of tribal societies. Majority of the men come from the talukas with which the nodal villages were associated. Similar to the women movement, greater numbers of marital transactions have taken place in this taluka. Further, all the villages of Kaprada are situated roughly within 30 km of the distance. On the other hand, outgoing men were more concentrated in defnite areas: Vasava and Chaudhari in Mandvi taluka (Table 5.8) and Gamit in Songadh and Vyara (Table 5.9). Only a few sons of the nodal villagers went to other neighbouring talukas. Mostly they are married in different villages of the taluka (see Map 5.12). The research team was not able to have data of the outgoing males of Kukana and Warli.

Marriage network The maximum number of marriages took place within a few nearby villages. Due to the shorter distance between the affnal and natal villages, a married woman can move more frequently between the two. For a married girl, it is easier to move from her affnal to her natal household situated in the different or same hamlet or village to see her parents and conversely to move back to her in-laws’ place. The research team has observed that such movements are critical in some emergency, like in the case of illness, or some ceremonies. Let us discuss two examples of Vasava and Kukana. In the frst case of Vasava of Ambapur village, Isanbhai’s mother was unwell, feeling feverish from some viral fever, and since he was unmarried, there was no other woman in his household to take care of her household chores. During such critical times, his elder sister (Ramilaben), married in a different hamlet within the village, came to take care and managed the household. So, in this case, Ramilaben managed the household chores of both her affnal and natal households effciently. In the second case of Kukana of Pathshali hamlet of Makadban village, Bablabhai was working for harvesting mangoes during the harvesting season. He had been using a lot of labour from within and from nearby falias

128

Marriage Networks and Social Space

such that there was a need to cook food for a sizeable group of people. His sister, Kakadiben, who was married into a neighbouring village, Nali Madani, across the river Par came and helped his wife to take care of the kitchen and the household. So, in this case, Kakadiben managed the household chores of both the affnal and natal households effciently. This kind of help is needed not only in agricultural season but also in several other occasions like marriage, ritual, feasts, illness, etc.

Repetitive marriages Repetitive marriages are the marital relationship within hamlets or villages in giving and taking girls over generations. There are certain villages which give and take an almost equal number of girls among themselves. Most of these villages have a marital relationship over fve generations. In fact, through the circulation of women among these villages, families and lineages in the villages form networks to constitute lasting social structure (for more details see Levi-Strauss 1963). For Levi-Strauss, the exchange of women through marriage is the most fundamental expression of reciprocity. According to him, the transition from a state of ‘nature’ to one of ‘society’ or ‘culture’ (i.e. the existence and diversity of human society) is conditioned by three forms of exchange or communication: messages (language), goods and services (economy, cooperation) and women (marriage, kinship and social groups). The last form of exchange is summarised under the heading ‘alliance theory’ (Levi-Strauss et al. 1969: 178). Tables 5.10–5.14 show the incoming and outgoing movement over six generations by villages represented (at either way incoming or outgoing) at least for fve or more women.

Marriage direction Marriage direction is the spatial direction in which the marriages have been happening since the last six generations. Tables 5.15 and 5.16 give the details of marriage direction for female and male movements, respectively, for fve tribes. As far as the women movement is concerned, the data indicate similar trends of marriage repetition. In every tribe or tribal group, all the directions of marriage can be grouped into two, directions with having higher frequencies and with lower frequencies of marital alliances. These directions are not the same but different for every tribe. The nature of direction from Vasava to Warli sketch could be done here. Directions having higher frequencies (of 50 or more) of bride movement (by combining incoming and outgoing) have reciprocal exchanges of females, which means that there is no appreciable distinction of girl giving and girl receiving directions. The girls come and go between two villages regularly. The exchange relations are fairly even, largely because most of

Katkuva Ambapur Kevdi Lakhgam Kalamkuva Sarkui Tarapur Maldha Rakhaskhadi Devgiri Isar Jetpur Khareda Jharni Choramba Kolkhadi Luharvad Vadi Amali Dadhvada Lambapat Kherwada Vekur Bedkuva Balalkuva Limdha Amalchuni Karanjvan

Surat Surat Surat Surat Surat Surat Surat Surat Surat Surat Surat Surat Surat Surat Surat Surat Surat Surat Surat Surat Surat Tapi Tapi Tapi Surat Surat Surat Surat

Mandvi Mandvi Mandvi Mandvi Mandvi Mandvi Mandvi Mandvi Mandvi Mandvi Mandvi Mandvi Mandvi Mangrol Mandvi Mandvi Mandvi Umarpada Mandvi Mandvi Mandvi Songadh Songadh Valod Umarpada Mandvi Mandvi Mandvi

Village

District Taluka

Table 5.10 Vasava Females

1     2 3           1                                  

11 10 2 6 2 2 4 2 5 3 1     1 1 2 4 1 2 2   4 4 1 3 2   1

14 13 3 5 6 7 4 4 3 2 4 5 7 1 2 2 1 5   2 2 1   2 1 2    

10 8 8 4 1 3 3 3 1 2 1 2   4 2 2 1   3 1 1   1 1       1

AG4 3 5 4   1     1             1           1     1        

1 1                       1             1              

40 37 17 17 13 12 11 10 9 7 7 7 7 7 6 6 6 6 5 5 5 5 5 5 4 4   2

AG5 AG6 Total 3 3 1 2 1   1   1       1 1                            

14 10 1 3 2 2 4   3   2   2 1 1 1 1   4 1 1   1 2 5 1   2

21 9 7 3 1   5   5 4   4 1 1 1 1 1   5 1   3 1     2 3 3

AG3 6 7 7     1 3 1   2   1             1     1     3 3 2  

3 2               1     1                                                                                      

47 31 16 8 4 3 13 1 9 7 2 5 5 3 2 2 2   10 2 1 4 2 2 8 6 5 5

AG4 AG5 AG6 Total

AG1 AG2

AG3

AG1

AG2

Katkuva and Ambapur Outgoing Female

Katkuva and Ambapur Incoming Female

87 68 33 25 17 15 24 11 18 14 9 12 12 10 8 8 8 6 15 7 6 9 7 7 12 10 5 7

Total (IC + OG)

Surat Surat Surat Surat Surat Surat Surat Tapi Surat Surat Surat Surat Surat Surat Surat Surat Tapi Tapi

Mandvi Mandvi Mandvi Mandvi

Surat Surat Surat Surat

Village

Rakhaskhadi Ambapur Dadhvada Gangpur Harshad Mandvi Kevdi Mandvi Lakhgam Mandvi Isar Mandvi Katkuva Mandvi Sarkui Mandvi Jetpur Mandvi Luharvad Valod Bedkuva Mandvi Kalamkua Mandvi Karutha Mandvi Devgiri Mandvi Makanzar Mandvi Lambapat Mandvi Ladkuva Mandvi Pipalvada Mandvi Vaghnera Songadh Borisavar Songadh Bhatwada

Taluka

District

Table 5.11 Chaudhari Females

    1               1              

  1    

AG1

2 2 1 7     4 1 3 4 3   2   1      

11 12 2 1

AG2

1   2 1 2 5 1 1 1 1   2 2 2 1 1    

20 14 3 8

AG3

1 1 1 1 5 1 1 1 1 1 1   2 3 2 3    

14 4 3 2

AG4

1             2 1           1 1    

3 4   3

AG5

                                   

  1   2

AG6

5 3 5 9 7 6 6 5 6 6 5 2 6 5 5 5    

48 36 8 16 1 3 1   1     1                    

3 2     2 7 3 2     4 3 1 1 2 4   1   1 2 2

12 13 4  

AG2

5 4 5 1 2 4 1 1   2 2   1   1   4 3

18 9 10 3

AG3

5 1 1 1 1 1     2     3   1 1      

7 8   1

AG4

                                   

2 1    

AG5

                                   

       

AG6

13 15 10 4 4 5 5 5 3 3 4 7 1 2 2 1 6 5

42 33 14 4

Total

Rakhaskhadi and Ambapur Outgoing Female

Total AG1

Rakhaskhadi and Ambapur Incoming Female

18 18 15 13 11 11 11 10 9 9 9 9 7 7 7 6 6 5

90 69 22 20

Total (IC + OG)

Village

Vadirupgadh Chikhalpada Sirispada Mota Tarpada Bardipada Kosimada Raniamba Khogalgam Ghuntvel Amalgundi Borpada Vadada Vadpada Sajupada Kapadbandh Jhakhari Borkua Gunkhadi Ghanchikua Umarda Taparwada Dholiumbar Amalipada Amba Temka

District Taluka

Songadh Songadh Songadh Songadh

Subir Waghai Vyara Songadh Songadh Songadh Songadh Songadh Songadh Subir Songadh Vyara Songadh Songadh Songadh Songadh Songadh Vyara Songadh Songadh Songadh

Tapi Tapi Tapi Tapi

Dang Dang Tapi Tapi Tapi Tapi Tapi Tapi Tapi Dang Tapi Tapi Tapi Tapi Tapi Tapi Tapi Tapi Tapi Tapi Tapi

Table 5.12 Gamit Females

          1 1                            

       

AG1

8 6 5 2 1 1 3   2 2 1         1 2 1 1 1 2

19 5 2 2

AG2

1 2 3 6 3     2 2 4 3 3 5 3   2   1 2 2  

19 11 6 4

AG3

1 1   2 4 1 2 5       1   1   1   3 1 1  

4 14 8 5

AG4

2     2 2 1   1 2         1 3            

1 3 2 1

AG5

                                         

      1

AG6

Chikhalpada and Vadirupgadh (Incoming Women)

12 9 8 12 10 4 6 8 6 6 4 4 5 5 3 4 2 5 4 4 2

43 33 18 13   2   1                   1              

2 4   1

Total AG1

1 5 3 2 1 2     2 1 1 2   1 1   2 1 1 1 2

10 8 2 4

AG2

1 2 7   1 2 3   1 1 3 2 3 1 2 4 1   1 1 2

21 12 4 5

AG3

4 1 1 2 1 5 2 2 1 1 1 1     2   2        

5 7 4 3

AG4

2 1     1 1                              

2 2   2

AG5

                                         

       

AG6

Chikhalpada and Vadirupgadh (Outgoing Women)

8 11 11 5 4 10 5 2 4 3 5 5 3 3 5 4 5 1 2 2 4

40 33 10 15

Total

20 20 19 17 14 14 11 10 10 9 9 9 8 8 8 8 7 6 6 6 6

83 66 28 28

Total (IC + OG)

 MB PF Tiskari Talat Kelvani MB PS Amadha Zariya Khuntli Fulwadi Ukta Bilpudi Nali Madhani Jogvel Arnai MB Jamanpada F Dhamni Karanjveri Kurgam MB NP Kakadkoper Luheri Ozarda Lakadmal Baroliya Sidhumber Panas

  Valsad Valsad Valsad Valsad Valsad Valsad Valsad Valsad Valsad Valsad Valsad Valsad Valsad Valsad Valsad Valsad Valsad Valsad Valsad Valsad Valsad Valsad Valsad Valsad

  Dharampur Dharampur Dharampur Dharampur Kaprada Kaprada Dharampur Dharampur Dharampur Kaprada Kaprada Dharampur Kaprada Dharampur Dharampur Dharampur Dharampur Kaprada Dharampur Kaprada Dharampur Dharampur Dharampur Kaprada

Village

District Taluka

Table 5.13 Kukana Females

              1               1                  

AG1 8 6 3 6 4 3 2 3 3 3 2 5 8 3 4 3   2 5 3 3 2 3 1 2

AG2 13 10 8 4 6 5 2 8 9 5 6 5 3 3 1 3 5 3 2 2 2 4 3 2 1

AG3 11 3 3 2 2 4 5     1       4 2   1 2     3       1

AG4 4     1             1                         2 1

AG5                                                  

AG6

Pathshali and Patel Hamlets, Makadban (Incoming Women)

36 19 14 13 12 12 9 12 12 9 9 10 11 10 7 7 6 7 7 5 8 6 6 5 5

1     1 1 1 1 1       1         1                

Total AG1 9 6 7 6 3 6 2     5 3 1 2 3 3 5 4 4 2 1 1 1 1 1  

AG2 8 6 8 7 5 1 6 3 5 3 4 2 1 2 3 1 1   1 4   2      

AG3 3   1 1 1 1 1 1     1 2 1   2   1               1

AG4                                                  

AG5                                                  

AG6

Pathshali and Patel Hamlets, Makadban (Outgoing Women)

21 12 16 15 10 9 10 5 5 8 8 6 4 5 8 6 7 4 3 5 1 3 1 1 1

Total 57 31 30 28 22 21 19 17 17 17 17 16 15 15 15 13 13 11 10 10 9 9 7 6 6

Total (IC + OG)

Taluka

Dharampur Kaprada Dharampur Dharampur Kaprada Dharampur Dharampur Kaprada Dharampur Kaprada Dharampur Kaprada Dharampur Kaprada Dharampur Dharampur Dharampur Dharampur Kaprada Dharampur Kaprada Dharampur Dharampur Dharampur

District

Valsad Valsad Valsad Valsad Valsad Valsad Valsad Valsad Valsad Valsad Valsad Valsad Valsad Valsad Valsad Valsad Valsad Valsad Valsad Valsad Valsad Valsad Valsad Valsad

MB NP Nali Madhani Fulwadi MB PS Amadha Dhamni Ukta Arnai Kelvani Khuntli Tiskari Talat Kunda Lakadmal Moti Vahiyal MB Umarmal F MB Jamanpada F MB PF Zariya Jogvel Nani Vahiyal Ozarda Panva Luheri Malanpada

Village

Table 5.14 Warli Females

1

AG1 7 3 8 5 5 6 1 7 5 2 2 3 1 2 5 3 1 3 3 1 2 4 4

AG2 13 14 6 6 7 3 9 4 5 3 6 4 4 1 2 2 5 1 5 2 1 2 1 2

AG3

2

3 3

2 1 2 3 1 3

2 5 2

14 1 5 3 3 2 1

AG4

1

1

2 1 1 1

AG5

1

AG6

Pathshali and Nayakpada, Mankadban (Incoming Women)

36 19 21 16 15 11 11 11 12 10 10 7 7 5 9 8 7 7 8 6 6 6 5 5 1

1

1

Total AG1

1

1

1

3

8 4 2 5 2 3 1 4 4 3 3 2 1 3

AG2

1 1

3

17 7 6 5 5 4 6 2 2 3 2 3 3 4 2

AG3

2

1 1

1

5 4 1 1 1 2 1 2

AG4

AG5

AG6

Pathshali and Nayakpada, Mankadban (Outgoing Women)

1

31 15 9 12 8 9 8 8 6 7 5 6 5 7 2 3 4 3 1 1 1

Total

67 34 30 28 23 20 19 19 18 17 15 13 12 12 11 11 11 10 9 7 7 6 6 5

Total (IC + OG)

C E N NE NW S SE SW W NK Total

149 9 261 55 98 11 38 55 18 13 707

Total Male Movement

86 25 43 14 94 37 41 27 24 79 470

4 4 10 20 9 6 9 18 6 NK 86

49 14 46 52 53 29 9 80 26 42 400

2 5 13 10 8 6 8 20 7 NK 79

36 11 41 32 31 12 12 83 23 1 282

Village Total

Village Total

173 47 100 54 135 51 69 56 39 83 807

Outgoing

87 22 57 40 41 14 28 29 15 4 337

Chaudhari

93 11 16 19 51 28 44 18 6 55 341 Warli

3 2 13 14 29 4 16 8 2 3 94

79 18 24 21 57 22 36 21 18 3 299

Village Total

Outgoing

85 25 87 84 84 41 21 163 49 43 682

3 9 9 14 10 7 9 19 5 NK 85

51 31 25 45 48 29 13 87 22 36 387

Total Male Incoming Movement Village Total

3 2 10 11 22 5 16 8 3 55 135

Total Male Incoming Movement Village Total

Incoming

Kukana

3 3 13 26 26 8 17 17 5 4 122

Village Total

Village Total

3 3 14 11 29 6 18 13 6 79 182

Outgoing

Incoming

Direction Vasava

Table 5.15 Marriage Direction for Females

3 7 7 12 8 6 9 17 5 NK 73

43 14 17 27 31 19 11 65 15 2 244

Village Total

Outgoing

172 29 40 40 108 50 80 39 24 58 640

76 4 134 30 55 6 22 30 5 12 374

94 45 42 72 79 48 24 152 37 38 631

Total male Movement

2 1 35 21 28 4 5 14 4 12 126

Total Male Incoming Movement Village Total

Gamit

2 1 43 18 27 5 5 10 11 1 123

73 5 127 25 43 5 16 25 13 1 333

Village Total

Outgoing

134 Marriage Networks and Social Space

C E N NE NW S SE SW W NK Total

3 1 8 6 8 3 5 2 2 1 39

28 3 52 9 17 0 7 0 3 2 121

Total Male Movement

7 3 10 9 14 6 6 2 8 1 66

1 0 2 1 4 0 0 0 1 0 9

2 1 3 1 1 1 1 3 0 3 16

2 1 3 1 1 2 1 3 0 3 17

                     

                     

Village Total

Total

Village

3 1 3 6 5 2 5 5 2 2 34

Outgoing

9 3 12 10 18 6 6 2 10 1 77

3 0 1 1 3 1 1 1 1 0 12

Warli

10 0 1 1 3 2 1 1 2 0 21

20 1 4 12 11 5 8 7 10 2 80

2 1 15 4 7   3   1 2 35

2 1 3 1 1 2 1 3 0 3 17

2 1 1 2 2 1 2 5 0 3 19

7 1 1 2 2 1 2 5 0 3 24

                     

                     

7 1 1 2 2 1 2 5 0 3 24

Total male Movement

21 3 34 4 11   5   1 2 81

2   16 4 5   2   2   31

7   18 5 6   2   2   40

Total Male Incoming Outgoing Movement Village Total Village Total

Gamit

Total Male Incoming Outgoing Movement Village Total Village Total

10 1 3 11 8 3 7 6 8 2 59

Total Male Incoming Outgoing Movement Village Total Village Total

Chaudhari

Incoming

Kukana

2 0 2 1 4 0 0 0 2 0 11

Total

Outgoing

Village Total Village

Incoming

Direction Vasava

Table 5.16 Marriage Direction for Males

Marriage Networks and Social Space 135

136

Marriage Networks and Social Space

the villages in this category consist of large populations and continued matrimonial relations from at least AG6. The second group with marital exchanges having lower frequencies (less than 50 female movements) shows characters of unequal exchanges. They do not form a group of villages having an equal number of reciprocal marital exchange relationships; either of the marriages, incoming or outgoing, is occurring at a greater frequency. Moreover, these unusual types of marriages have begun to occur only recently. It is clear that traditionally the villages were bound in ongoing marital exchange relationships that indicated that kin ties were often repeated and most people were bound in some form of kin relations (affnal or consanguineal) with one another across the villages that formed close-knit kinship networks or formed a social space of intensive interactions.

Rules of choosing spouses among the tribes of south Gujarat The marriage rules have to do with selecting a suitable spouse and ensuring that he/she is a satisfactory match to the groom/bride and his family and fnally to his community. Marriages in effect create networks of affnal kin among the households, hamlets and in the neighbouring villages. Such marriages are a means of strengthening the existing relations and expanding networks of the kinsmen upon whom the household and family can call in the times of need. It is a situation in which any person visiting another hamlet or village can quickly establish his credentials by identifying his own family, lineage and his affnal relationship. This structure of kinship network enables them to search for the frst point of contact for future spouses in their ‘social space’. In this ‘social space’, there exist multiple layers of relationships over different generations due to recurring marriages. In case of absence of lineage, the groom is still likely to meet a woman from his village or a close relative of one of his friends or neighbours. So, with the help of these networks of relations, it is easy to travel from one hamlet or village to another to fnd known and trustworthy people with whom one can have social interaction for different purposes. We can see that there is a prohibition of marriage within the patrilineage or within agnatic relation to that extent it is remembered, although, at present, love marriages may occur among the tribal people by ignoring these prohibitions. Tribes of this region observe cross-cousin (mama-foi na santano lagn) marriage system. As per locals, it is a preferential type of marriage and not a prescriptive one. Vasava and Chaudhari of Mandvi taluka do not practise cross-cousin marriage, but Gamit of Songadh do readily practise this type of marriage. Then again in Dharampur area, Kukana and Warli practise this very strongly. So, as we move downwards from Tapi River to Par River, cross-cousin marriages become more frequent.

Marriage Networks and Social Space

137

They generally choose the spouse from the villages they already have contact and where they easily fnd the matchmaker. In the marriage network patterns, we have seen that villages from which the spouses are selected are the ones that have been traditionally preferred hamlets and villages, where marriages have been taking place over generations. At present, a few marriages have begun to occur in some of the new villages. With the establishment of one marital relation, there is a chance to start the process of repetitive marriage with that village. Regarding the direction of movement of women, there are repetitive marital exchanges in the case of bridal movement, or in other words, if a daughter is given from one village, there are high chances to get a daughterin-law from that village. Hence, when one wants to marry their daughter or son, then he/she has a better chance to know the household condition of the future spouse. Girls from that village feel secure in coming to the inlaws’ household as she already knew the members due to multiple relations. Moreover, it is easier to fnd a matchmaker, as mostly a close relative works as a matchmaker. Most often FZ, MBW, MB or FZH acts as the frst point of contact for fnding matches. With close kin relations, disputes or Zhagda pertaining to marriage are handled very discreetly. The lineage exogamy is a strongly observed norm and practised in all cases. Hamlet or village endogamy is also prevalent. To search for one’s spouse, it is most likely that people will look into the nearest villages or hamlets for the frst round of prospective match seeking. The villagers cite several real dangers regarding why they are not bringing brides or giving daughters to faraway villagers. They fear that a bride or groom from a far-off place may be culturally different and that is why marriages were limited to a certain distance only. Due to multiple overlapping relationships over the generations, people in the nearby hamlets or villages are related to each other in many ways. Not just that intra-tribal marriages are directly proportional in intensity with distance, wherever two or more tribes live side by side, they observe intertribal marriages in good numbers, like in Vasava and Chaudhari in Mandvi or Kukana and Warli in Dharampur. Gamit in Songadh also live with Kukana people of the neighbouring Dang region. This indicates that nearness in terms of physical distance is one of the most important criteria of matchmaking and marriage to the extent that it overrides the tribal boundaries. It is more important for affnes to be physically close to each other than be part of the same tribal identity. The tribal boundary between multi-tribal villages and hamlets of Vasava and Chaudhari and Kukna and Warli is rather fuid. In the absence of a suitable bride within the village, she is sought in neighbouring hamlets or villages within which many successful marriages have been arranged in the past. We have worked on the list of villages which consist of what we call ‘social space’ of the tribal hamlet or village, where a large number of marriages have taken place. Apart from this ‘social space’, there are a few marriages which occur in distant villages. Nowadays, more

138

Marriage Networks and Social Space

often, boys and girls see and get attracted to each other and they decide to marry, often ignoring the traditional boundaries, such as clan and tribe. The tribe practises diyer-lagn or leviratic marriages, i.e. the widow marries her husband’s younger brother, usually after the death of the husband. Although it was only observed in the case of Vasava, other tribals have also accepted the occurrence of this form of marriage. There is also the practice of Sali-lagn (sororate union), a man marrying the wife’s younger sister. This is more prevalent than the diyer-lagn. Tribals, by rule, admit its existence under certain conditions. Most Sali-lagn are practised by the husband after the death of his wife. After the death of his wife, he brings his sali (his wife’s younger sister) to take care of his small children and household. Second, if a wife does not have children for a long time after the marriage, her husband might marry another girl. He has the option to marry his wife’s younger sister. Parents opine that if both wives are siblings, they know each other and there is less chance of quarrels in the household. Further, it is also related to bride-wealth. If women are unable to bear children, then the husband has the right to engage in sororate marriage and have children without paying bride-wealth. Polygynous marriages are also practised among the tribes. The men living with two women are found in the village. They may be of two types, sororate or non-sororate. In the frst case, two sisters are married to one man. While in the second case, two unrelated women are married to a man. Marrying another man after leaving and divorcing the frst husband is prevalent in the tribes, while there are cases where a woman starts living with a different man without any divorce. In such cases, the frst husband has the right to ask for ‘compensation of bride-price’ (Davo mangvano) from the second man. The practice of ‘marriage’ (Natru) of a widowed or divorced man and woman is also prevalent. As we will see in the household chapter, there are three possibilities for widowed women/men depending upon their age and parenthood (having children or not and the age of the children) at the time of tragedies. There is a greater chance for a young widow with small children to remarry and either go to a new affnal home or take a Khandadiya to her household. However, there are cases of widowed women with grown-up children managing their household, of course with the help of their near relative in their neighbourhoods. Similar happens with the widower. But he has a lesser chance to go as Khandadiya leaving his children than bring a second wife in his household. Bride-price involves the transfer of money and goods from the groom’s kin to the bride’s kin. In general, bride-price (Chandlo) is prevalent among the tribals of south Gujarat. Dowry (dahej) is prevalent among the uppercaste groups. The marriage process started by Bolpen (engagements or frst marriage). After the Bolpen the bride’s relative goes to decide the bride-price. In this meeting, money and goods are decided on bride price. After some days,

Marriage Networks and Social Space

139

the groom’s relative goes to the bride’s place to give Chandlo or bride-price (Dej pana). After Chandlo, Wadils decide the nitty-gritty of marriage exchanges, like what jewellery the groom should take for the bride, what clothes the groom needs and the marriage dates. In earlier times, Bolpen and Chandlo had big gaps because it gave enough time to arrange the brideprice from the groom side. Financially, getting a daughter married is easier than getting a son married. Khandadiya marriage happens if a boy is unable to give the bride-price. Bride-price for the frst marriage or virgin girl is more as compared to a widowed or divorced woman. Among tribes, Bolpen or nanipen is more important than any wedding ritual. After this engagement, the couple can meet and visit each other’s home. Even in some cases, like in Warli, after the bolpen ritual, the boy and girl meet each other, visit their would-be in-laws’ home and start living together. When they get enough money, they would perform the proper wedding ritual. During the feldwork among the Warli, we came across several couples with children living without wedding ritual. Bride-price is returned in the case of divorce. Disputes regarding brideprice, other marriage-related conficts, divorce, etc. claim a lot of attention from the network of relatives. There is no arbitration in the case of divorce (Chhuta Chheda) (like written document, lakhn, etc.) is executed. The marriage discussion takes place inside the village, while divorce discussion is held outside the village, amidst the agricultural land between the two villages. Generally, among the Wadils and Agewan of the village, some are specialists of handling these conficting situations like marriage zagda or divorce settlement. They are respected and much sought after. Their job is not merely to work out the terms shrewdly but also to bring about reconciliation between two parties. Divorce is allowed only after all attempts of reconciliation have failed.

Conclusion The tribes of south Gujarat practise repeated marriages within a prescribed geographical area that results in most of their kin relations being confned to a particular region that may be recognised as their social space of interaction. They prefer to marry at closer distances and also practise village endogamy, unlike many caste Hindus, especially of northern India. These repetitive marriages have several social advantages. The previously existing network ensures the possibility of negotiating a marriage without too much uncertainty. Several aspects about the would-be bride or would-be groom and their family would be mutually known because of the familiar kin network. This network is not only evoked to negotiate marriages but also comes in handy whenever there is any marital dispute and settlements are required. The closeness of marriage distances also ensures that the offspring of the lineage are always available at the time of any crises or even as stand by

140 Marriage Networks and Social Space labour resource. Married women can visit their natal family whenever they are needed, and if they are close enough, they manage both their households, natal as well as affnal. They follow a classical lineage-based organisation of society where both levirate and sororate are practised. This can also be linked to the practice of giving and taking the bride price. In a few villages, quite far away from the nodal villages, we observe new marriage linkages spreading among the recent frst or second ascending generations. This is a new phenomenon. The formation of new marriage links however does not erode the existing links but add to them, thereby ensuring both continuity and change the formation of kin networks through marriage. The new set of marriages are bringing different tribes together and also at times bring in partners from different states, such as Uttar Pradesh and Maharashtra. These changes are linked to changes in life ways, where tribal men and women are going out for work and also going to schools and colleges where they have a chance to meet people from outside of their traditional social circle. In this, one would expect a widening of the tribal social circle in the coming days.

Notes 1 Important to note that Chaudhari is considered as higher than the Vasava in social hierarchy. 2 Also called Dhor-Koli, a particularly vulnerable tribe, placed below than Warli in social hierarchy of the area by local people. 3 Nodal means the joining point of relating entities. These are not exactly nodal villages, as we have not studied directly the other village having marital exchange with them. But through indirect research on the study of villages and hamlets, we have created a network of marital exchanges (of women and men). So, we are going to use the operational defnition for these villages and hamlets as nodal villages.

6

Taxonomy of Households – Part I Simple Households

This chapter and Chapter 7 together describe the household dimension of the family among the fve tribes – Gamit, Vasava, Chaudhari, Kukana and Warli of south Gujarat, where household refers to those members of a family as well as additional members who live under the same roof and eat from the same hearth. Household is taken as a production and consumption unit. The tribal households have been classifed into two types – simple and complex – for the purpose of this study. While simple household compositions are discussed here, complex households will be discussed in the next chapter. A family refers to those connected by genealogical ties but whose members may be dispersed over different households or living in other places. It delineates the similarities and differences in the size of tribal households and families, their genealogical depth over the generations and structural compositions. It also explores the development process of the household and its relation with various kinship compositions through a stretch of time and respective rights and obligations (norms) followed by these communities. The nucleus of the social structure of the tribe is the household and the other principal units are family, lineage, clan and kindred. The structure of the family is a universal feature of all tribal societies. However, its core membership differs primarily according to the prescribed rules of descent, inheritance, rules of residence and norms of marriage. As the lineage, clan and kinship were already dealt with in the previous chapters; only the structure of the household and family is discussed here on the basis of the data collected from the feld.

Family The family, household, domestic group, its structure and its relationship to other aspects of society have been the central interest to social anthropology since the beginning. Family studies mainly centred around three approaches, viz., (a) analytical distinction between family, household and domestic group; (b) typological approach to family; and (c) processual approach to the family (Yanagisako 1979).

DOI: 10.4324/9781003299790-6

142

Taxonomy of Households – Part I

Among the many forms taken by the family, one is a household, which is the focus of this chapter. The tribes of south Gujarat differentiate between family (kutumb) and household (ghar). A household is formed around a chulah (hearth). It is an economic production and consumption unit but is also related to a larger entity called the family. There could be one or more chulah or households attached to a family. They may reside under one roof or construct their new house for a separate household unit. Nath (1960) who has studied the Bhils of Ratanmal termed different households living together as a joint family. But this study has followed defnitions given by Shah (1974). A household is persons sharing the same hearth, while the family is a larger unit which may have several households. Like if two brothers set up different households, they remain part of the same family. Usually, if a family has been staying in the same place over a long period of time, they may, over a length of time, separate into different households, especially to take care of growing members in the family. On the other hand, if a family has recently migrated to the village, then it could continue as a single household till its members settle down and acquire more resources, like land and money. Several examples of both kinds of families are found in the villages that have been studied. All fve tribes trace descent along the male line and, hence, are patrilineal and patronymic. A man brings his wife to his household after marriage, and his offspring trace their lineage through the lineage of their father. Daughters are, in general, married off and live in their husband’s household. A woman is transferred to her husband’s lineage after marriage, and the children belong to her husband’s lineage. Or in other words, all children trace ancestry through the father, but girls change to their husband’s lineage after marriage. One may also fnd many uxorilocal households where the husband goes to live in the wife’s house as a resident-son-in-law. Different terms are used by different tribes to describe this practice; the Gamit, Kukana and Warli use Khandadiya (K), while Vasava and Chaudhari term it as Ghar Jamai (GJ). In these marriages, in spite of living in the in-laws’ houses, lineage is traced through the husband’s side. Therefore, as one sees, although the residence pattern is usually virilocal, in the case of resident-son-in-law-type marriage, the residence is uxorilocal. But in both cases, patronymic and patrilineal norms continue to be observed among all the tribes. Sons, in general, get married and continue to live in their parental household. After some time, usually with the birth of their frst child, or few years after that (some say when their child becomes 5 years old), they may settle in their independent household very close to the parental household. Or they may create their new household in the agricultural feld, in some distance from the parental household. Whatever the case may be, both parental household and son’s household help each other in their agricultural activities, such as ploughing, sowing and harvesting. When there is a large undivided land, they cultivate jointly. And when there is less or no land, they split quickly. So, the fssion process starts with the

Taxonomy of Households – Part I

143

separation of hearths and ends with the division of agricultural land. Many households exist in between these two processes.

Size of households Table 6.1 shows the population distribution of fve tribes. There are a total of 973 households with 4,749 people with an average is 4.9 persons per household. However, all fve tribes have different sets of individual demographic characters specifc to them. The empirical data indicate a difference in both average household sizes and sex ratio. While Kukana have the highest number of persons per household, the Warli have the highest sex ratio among the fve. On the other hand, the Vasava society has shown the lowest number in both the parameters. They have 4.3 persons per household and sex ratio of 933 females per 1,000 males. It is important to note that Vasava living at their territorial boundary are often mixed with other groups (in the present study with Chaudhari). Table 6.2 shows the variations among the fve tribes in terms of their household size (number of members per household). The range in these classifcations is of 1–14 members per household. The mode, i.e. the households having maximum members, is six, and the arithmetic mean (or average persons per households) is 4.9. Out of the 973 households belonging to the fve tribes, only 19 households consist of single member, viz., only one member, adult male or female. Out of these, 9 are single males and 10 consists of a single female household. Two households are the largest; they consist of 12 and 14 members each. Four-members household predominate, and there are 218 of them combining all fve tribes. Table 6.2 shows the size of each type of household. A maximum of 1,074 (22.6 per cent) persons reside in six-member households. And the minimum 19 (0.4 per cent) persons reside in one-member households. Table 6.1 Household and Population Distribution among Five Tribes of South Gujarat Tribes

1 2 3 4 5

Gamit Vasava Chaudhari Kukana Warli Total

HH

208 234 161 185 185 973

Population M

F

P

505 524 391 487 491 2,398

497 489 383 477 505 2,351

1,002 1,013 774 964 996 4,749

HH: Household; M: Male; F: Female; P: Persons. Source: Household Census.

Average Persons per Household

Sex Ratio

4.8 4.3 4.8 5.2 5.4 4.9

984 933 980 979 1,029 980

1 2 24 24 31 23 112 100 109 96 110 106 50 55 38 50 14 22 4 6 5 6

7 7 505 497

3 24 18 53 41 36 15 11 4 1 1

1 208

F

3 48 54 212 205 216 105 88 36 10 11

14 1,002

P

7

234 524

1

10 5 41 41 24 39 53 110 43 115 33 100 24 81 2 10 2 10 1 6

HH M

Vasava

489

5

5 41 33 102 100 98 87 6 8 4

F

12

10 82 72 212 215 198 168 16 18 10

Small (1–3) Medium (4–6) Large (7–9) Very Large (10+) Total

208 (100.0)

30 (14.4) 3 (1.4)

45 (21.6) 130 (62.5)

28 (12.0) 2 (0.9)

75 (32.1) 129 (55.1)

1,002 (100.0) 234 (100.0)

229 (22.9) 35 (3.5)

105 (10.5) 633 (63.2)

HH

HH

Persons

Vasava

Gamit

Percentage in parenthesis.

3 4

1 2

Household Size

3 14 14 39 33 34 16 8

HH

1,013 161

P

1,013 (100.0)

202 (19.9) 22 (2.2)

164 (16.2) 625 (61.7)

Persons

F

P

F

P

1 1 0 1 10 11 9 20 19 31 26 57 37 85 63 148 39 96 99 195 37 107 115 222 26 91 91 182 9 30 42 72 5 24 21 45 1 5 5 10 1 6 6 12

HH M

Kukana

2 6 21 36 33 39 29 6 7 4 2

161 (100.0)

24 (14.9) –

31 (19.3) 106 (65.8)

HH

Chaudhari

774 (100.0)

176 (22.7) –

73 (9.4) 525 (67.8)

Persons

299 (31.0) 22 (2.3)

78 (8.1) 565 (58.6)

Persons

185 (100.0) 964 (100.0)

40 (21.6) 2 (1.1)

30 (16.2) 113 (61.1)

HH

Kukana

HH M

2 19 12 95 63 96 144 218 165 189 234 179 203 110 48 36 63 18 40 7 22 4 1

P 9 97 160 470 486 527 375 133 72 34 21 7

F 10 93 128 402 459 547 395 155 90 36 24 5

Total Five Tribes

314 (31.5) 62 (6.2)

164 (16.9) 13 (1.3)

210 (21.6) 586 (60.2)

HH

185 (100.0) 996 (100.0) 973 (100.0)

42 (22.7) 6 (3.2)

77 (7.7) 543 (54.5)

Persons

14 4,749

19 190 288 872 945 1,074 770 288 162 70 45 12

P

4,749 (100.0)

1,220 (25.7) 141 (3.0)

497 (10.5) 2,891 (60.9)

Persons

All Five Tribes

1 7 7 505 996 973 2,398 2,351

1 5 28 62 81 127 103 26 39 21 12

F

29 (15.7) 108 (58.4)

HH

Warli

491

1 7 35 82 84 107 100 22 24 19 10

HH M

Warli

391 383 774 185 487 477 964 185

1 2 3 14 14 28 24 18 42 81 75 156 82 83 165 103 101 204 53 59 112 33 31 64

M

Chaudhari

Table 6.3 Size-Wise Household Distribution in Five Tribes

HH: Household; M: Male; F: Female; P: Persons. Source: Household Census.

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Total

No. of Gamit Persons in HH H M

Table 6.2 Numerical Composition of Households among Five Tribes of South Gujarat

Taxonomy of Households – Part I

145

By following Shah’s (1974) defnition of the household, the size has been classifed into small, medium, large and very large. Households with 1–3 members have been considered as small, with 4–6 as a medium, with 7–9 as large and with 10 and more as very large. Total and percentage of each of the household categories are shown in Table 6.3. It shows that most of the people of these two villages live in medium and large households.

Size-wise households In Table 6.3 we notice that the majority (60.2 per cent) households are of medium size, having a population of 2,891 (60.9 per cent). Next to this, large households (16.9 per cent) are having 1,220 (25.7 per cent) persons. Kukana and Warli have more persons in large households (31.0 per cent and 31.5 per cent, respectively) as compared to all the other three tribes. Further, a very large household is conspicuously absent among the Chaudharis but found maximum among the Warli. The large and very large size joint families consist of parents living with their grown-up sons along with their wives and children. In some cases, the married sons are yet to beget children. In the case of very large families, generally, half of the members reside outside the village for the purpose of education, job and business. When children grow up and marry, they usually break away from their parental home. A daughter in most of the cases goes to live with her husband, while the married son is given some land and few cattle for his sustenance. The young couple eventually operates as a separate economic and consumption unit and does not depend upon the parental family. Still, technically, division of property does not take place at that moment of separation. There are several households observed in the feld which have no property or whose holdings are small. A family generally shares their labour for agricultural purposes, though they have separate households. Sometimes conficts arise between father and sons or among brothers. Such confict is often believed to originate from disagreements between mother-in-law and daughter-in-law or between the brothers’ wives. In the development cycle of household, one can see that there are various stages a household goes through when members assert claims for the resources. These conficts often start with minute sparks but eventually germinate and grow into large-scale disputes that may continue for a long time. Large and very large households are usually held together by the ownership of property. In case there is no tension about resources, large household functions very well; divisions begin when there is a scarcity of resources and members compete over scarce resources. In the same way, a refusal to perform traditionally assigned task threatens even close family relationships, and it often results in a separation of a household. In the tribal world view, an ideal family can be formed only by those who are successful in begetting children and in maintaining a level of wealth. One fnds in the

146

Taxonomy of Households – Part I

villages well-managed medium-sized and large and very large-sized households keeping the family ideal alive. There is great variability in kinship composition of households that presents a greater complexity than the range in numerical composition. The study classifes the households by kinship composition into two major categories: ‘simple’ and ‘complex’. For describing kinship composition, it uses the term ‘parental family’, meaning a unit of a man, his wife and their unmarried children. Such a unit is also referred to as an elementary or nuclear family. It will use, throughout this study, plural forms for family members, like children, brothers, sisters, etc., whenever it means ‘one or more’. A parental family is thus composed of one or more unmarried children.

Simple and complex households In his work Household dimension of Family in India, Shah has analysed minutely the data of household census collected during his feldwork in Radhvanaj village of central Gujarat. He compiled the census data from 1825 to 1960s and analysed every household. He concluded that the average number of the persons per household in the village is 4.6 and nearly two-third households are ‘simple’ and one-third are ‘complex’ in nature (Shah 1974). Shah distinguished between the ‘family’ and ‘household’ based on numerical and kinship compositions of different types of households. He modifed the concept of the developmental pattern of domestic groups formulated by Fortes and Goody (Fortes 1949b, 1958; Goody 1958) by adding the pattern of interpersonal relationship in each type of household. Shah had modifed the western-centric perspectives on the household patterns by suggesting that they should be viewed in relation to other social characters, such as caste and kinship. Basic precondition for defning the household is that members of the family need to live in one house (Shah 1998). According to him the average size of household in India for the period 1819–1991 remained below fve until the year 1951 (1998: 66). From the year1961 the average size of a household has been increasing to 5.55 until 1981. There are several factors identifed by Shah for this increase. These include increase in life expectancy, the formation and accumulation of assets in households and Sanskritisation among others. He defned the household as “a residential and domestic unit composed of one or more persons living under the same roof and eating food cooked in a single kitchen” (Shah 1974: 8). He distinguishes ghar from makan. Ghar is a household, while makan is a house. A physical house (makan) can have more than one household. At the same time ‘household unit’ is different from ‘household group’, which consists of a group of a particular type of household unit. Further, he asserts that there is no historical evidence to prove that the joint household was strong in Indian society in the past, and

Taxonomy of Households – Part I

147

he points out that inter-household relations have become stronger. This is also refected in the tribal context, where inter-household relations are intimate (Nath 1960; Shah 1974, 1998). According to Shah, a ‘simple household’ is composed of the whole or part of a parental family. He has given six major possible compositions: (1) husband, wife and unmarried children; (2) husband and wife; (3) father and unmarried children; (4) mother and unmarried children; (5) unmarried brother and sister; and (6) single man or woman. He further cautions that this ‘simple household’ is not equal to ‘parental family’ (Shah 1974). But parental family is a genealogical model and represented by only one of the six types of simple households mentioned here. Parental family1 means a unit of a man, his wife and their unmarried children. Further, he has differentiated several terms clearly by closely examining terms like ‘parental unit’ (not to be confused with parental family), 2 which covers three possibilities of father, mother or both father and mother. In the similar manner, he used ‘fraternal unit’ as composed of two or more brothers, ‘sororal unit’ for two or more sisters and ‘sibling units’ for a unit of one or more brothers plus one or more sisters. Similarly, Shah has defned the complex household as composed of one or more simple households together. Complex household is “based on the principles of a residential unit of patrikin and their wives, which have each only one married son in addition to the parental unit” (Ibid 1974: 58). Discussing the concept of the development process of a household, he states that the structure of household relations becomes more complex with added categories of relatives. He uses the criteria of the dyadic basis of a relationship between two persons, which increases with added category of relatives and having ramifcation in the network relationship. Like in one-member household, there is no relationship; in a two-member household, there is one relationship, but in three- or more member household, the addition of one relative means addition of multiple relationships. Everyone in a household has his likes and dislikes, habits, tastes and idiosyncrasies, which have to be harmonised to a reasonable extent. Life in a household is marked by sentiments, emotions and tensions, which are related to its kinship composition. He argues to analyse the household dimension in its entirety, and one has to understand the classifcation of households by taking into consideration all the relatives in a household (Shah 1974: 81). In his study, The Thakors of North Gujarat, Lobo (1995) uses this concept and analyses the family on the basis of the household dimension of the Thakors of Dhoria village in Mehsana district. The research uses the same concept to analyse data from fve tribes of south Gujarat. For the household pattern, the age group of the members of the household residing together is important as it identifes the variability in it. The determinant of actual age among the tribals (especially older persons) is diffcult as they do not have the same cognition of time. So, here approximate age has been taken with the suggestion from the informants with

148 Taxonomy of Households – Part I modifcation or correction from other kin members. It will follow the three categories: young age – up to 40 years of age; middle age – between 41 and 50 years; and old age – above 51 years.

Simple households in the fve tribes There are 531 simple households in all fve tribes of south Gujarat. The classifcation of these tribal households with their kinship and numerical composition according to six basic types is shown in Table 6.4. The references for complex and total households are also given in the table. The households of each type are described in detail.

Single-member households Only 19 single-member households, 10 composed of one adult man and 9 of one adult woman, exist in the fve tribes. They constitute only 3.6 per cent of the total simple households and comprise only 0.9 per cent of the total population. Out of all fve tribes, this type is least in Kukana and maximum in Vasava. The average of this type is 3.8 households per tribe. Of these, 14 are either old widows or widowers; 3 middle-aged men (one divorced and two separated) who, though eligible for remarriage, are not remarried for various reasons; and 2 elderly persons, one man and one woman, were never married. It is noteworthy that no young woman is living alone in the villages. It is more recent, and only in large towns and urban centres, that young women pursuing careers are found to be living alone. In tribal villages, there are two reasons for which women are never found living alone. First, among the tribals, the institution of remarriage and multiple marriages of widowed, divorced or separated women prevents the need for them to live alone. Second, similar to caste Hindu group, a young woman can always look forward to living with members of her parental kin group until she becomes old. And after her marriage, she looks towards her affnal kin group member for support. Another stage comes after one of the partners of a two-member, husbandwife household expires, divorces or separates, causing the two-member household to become an one-member household. The widow/widower or separated person lives alone, and his/her married children stay in a separate household. There are only two cases of unmarried persons residing in a single household. In most of the cases, an elderly person lives alone when their married children, both sons and daughters, are living in separate households. However, even if they are living in separate households, they have the support of their kin living in different households nearby. So, living alone in one household does not rule out the support system from the other members of the kin groups and family. Persons who are at any time living in a complete parental family consisting of sons and daughters know that there is a possibility that their children might set up a new household after some years of their marriage. However, in these tribal societies, people are not unduly perturbed about living alone as they are sure about getting help and support from others and all agricultural work is done with mutual help.

Household Type

Single man/woman (person) 1 2 Unmarried Brothers 3 Father with unmarried children 4 Mother with unmarried children 5 Husband, wife 6 Husband, wife, unmarried children Total simple HH Total complex HH Total households

S.N.

2 23 91 119 89 208

3

10 2

6 9 46 36 389 89 444 146 559 88 1,003 234

3

HH

HH

P

Vasava

Gamit

Table 6.4 Numerical Composition of Households of Five Tribes

10 5

3

HH

28 5 72 13 375 56 490 77 523 84 1,013 161

P 3 18 26 229 276 498 774

P

Chaudhari

1 9 16 363 389 575 964

3 8 83 95 90 185

P

1

HH

Kukana

1 2 4 85 94 91 185

2

HH

Warli

2 2 5 8 385 402 594 996

P

19 2 4 18 84 404 531 442 973

HH

19 5 11 57 168 1,741 2,001 2,749 4,750

P

All Five Tribes

Taxonomy of Households – Part I 149

150 Taxonomy of Households – Part I

Fraternal households The brother-brother household is rare among the tribes of south Gujarat. Among all fve tribes, only two Vasava households were found to be of this type (see Table 6.4). Of these, one is a two-member household and another one is a three-member household. Together they constitute fve persons. All are adults, more than 18 years of age and unmarried. In a two-member household, two brothers (Vasava) aged 23 and 19 have been found sharing one hearth in Katkuva village. Their parent’s union was uxorilocal (Ghar Jamai) marriage. Katkuva is their mother’s natal village, and their father’s natal place is Kevdi, a neighbouring (3 km) village. They are four brothers. Incidentally, their father had got a small plot of land near the Kevdi dam from his ancestral property, which he has managed while living in Katkuva village. He also got some more land to manage in Katkuva due to Ghar Jamai marriage. Five years ago, after the death of their mother, their father along with their two younger brothers had moved to live in Kevdi village leaving two elder brothers to look after the cultivation in Katkuva as well as manage their household. Out of these two, the elder brother is managing the feld while the younger one is studying. In the Katkuva village, two brothers have two maternal uncles and their families to support. Their younger maternal uncle (mamo), who is widowed, lives in a single-member household nearby. In this manner, the family is managing the land of both, father and mother’s side of the villages. In another instance, a three-member household of three brothers, aged 23, 21 and 18, shares one household. They have lost their parents six years ago. Four years ago, their elder sister was married and had left three unmarried young brothers. The eldest brother managed the household and agriculture, while both younger brothers were studying. The grandfather, uncles and cousins of their lineage, living in the neighbourhood, actively supported them. In this way, orphaned (pohon) unmarried children were taken care of by their close kin, who usually resided nearby. During the feldwork, the research team came across a few such cases where the orphaned children are taken care of by their close relatives after the death, divorce or remarriage of their parents. In many of the cases, grandparents, either of paternal or maternal (in the case of Ghar Jamai marriage) side, take care of the grandchildren by adding a new member to their household. For example, in one case, the daughter was married away in a different village and bore two sons. After the sudden death of daughter and son-inlaw, one of their sons came to his maternal grandparents and stayed with them. Grandparents also supported him and gave some land for cultivation. The grandfather passed away, and later on the grandson was married. Presently, he is living with his wife, two children along with his maternal grandmother in a household. According to the normative rules, in the case of remarriage of a divorced or widowed mother, if the children are small, then the mother can take them; otherwise, they will be looked after by either father or close kin of their lineage in the village.

Taxonomy of Households – Part I

151

Father with unmarried children Only four households of father and unmarried children are found among the Kukana and Warli. Remaining three tribes do not show this particular type of household. The four fathers are of different age group. One is young, while three are middle-aged. Of these, three (one young age and two middle-age) are married twice. Further, three are divorced, and one is separated from his wife without divorce. Out of three households of fathers and unmarried children in Kukana, two have only two members, while one has fve members. In the frst case, a middle-aged man had married twice. Both of his wives are dead. He has fve children, with four daughters, three from frst wife and one from the second wife. All the daughters are married and live in their households. He is living with his unmarried son. In the second case, a middle-aged widower is living with his unmarried son. He has four children, three daughters and one son. All daughters are married in different villages, and now he is living with his unmarried son. One father and his unmarried children were living in a fve-member household. The man had married twice. He has four children from his frst wife. After the death of his frst wife, he brings the second wife for taking care of children. The second wife left him without a divorce. Now, he is taking care of all the four unmarried children by himself. In one Warli household, a man is married twice. Both of his wives are dead. He has fve children, with four daughters, three from the frst wife and one from second wife and one son from the second wife. All the daughters were married away, and now he is living with his unmarried son. Incidentally, all these households are composed of a father with his unmarried sons. After the sons’ marriages, the father would look forward to receiving the care and service of the sons and daughters-in-law and becoming the head of the complex household. After a few years of marriage, the sons will set up new households, and the father will live alone in a single-person household. There is no father and unmarried daughter household. In such a case, a father has two options, either bring uxorilocal son-in-law or marry his daughter to a different household. The frst option is more preferred in the case of a single daughter. In either case, after a few years of marriage, there is a chance of him to be left alone in a single-member simple household after his daughter sets up a new household adjacent to his.

Mother and unmarried children households There are 18 households comprising a total of 57 persons in which a mother lives with her unmarried children (see Table 6.4). They constitute 3.4 per cent of all simple households and 2.8 per cent of the total population living in simple households. While comparing across the fve tribes, the incidence of this particular household type varies across the fve tribal societies. The largest number of such households is found among Vasava, constituting

152

Taxonomy of Households – Part I

nine households with 28 persons residing in them, and least number is found among the Warli, constituting only two households and fve persons residing in them, while Kukana do not have such types of households at all. In each of the 18 mother-children households mentioned in Table 6.4, the mothers are of varying age groups: six are young, seven are middle-aged and fve are aged. Further, all are widows, except one who is a middle-aged separated (but not divorced) Warli mother. The mother’s affnal place is Nayakpada and natal place is Mahlunpada. Both are neighbouring villages across the Par River. She had been living in Nayakpada with the support from her natal home. All mothers have only unmarried children. In 10 households sons are working as earning members, while in 2 households daughters are earning. In the remaining 6 households, children are young and studying in varying standards. Many of them, including daughters, are helping in cultivation and managing livestock. In such households, the mother is the sole earning member as well as the manager of a household. Each of these three types of households represents a particular phase of the development process of the household. On comparing these two types of compositions, single father and mother with unmarried children households, few observations have been noted. First, only 4 households are of father and unmarried children, while 18 households consist of a mother with unmarried children. Similarly, 11 persons reside in the frst type of households, while 57 persons live in the second type. Second, comparing these two types of households, one can say that probability of having a father with unmarried children households in south Gujarat tribes is less and limited to a few tribes like Kukana and Warli. It points to the fact that women are more likely or able to run a household by themselves, with help from minor children, but men are not so self-suffcient. Women can both earn a livelihood and take care of household duties. Moreover, it is the mother who plays a great role in managing unmarried children. Men also have a greater tendency for remarriage as compared to women. Lastly, whenever there is a separation of a couple having young children, the mother has a greater chance of taking the responsibility for managing the children. The father has a greater tendency to leave this responsibility and remarry. The separation of husband and wife may be due to three reasons, e.g. death, divorce or split. If the couple has children, then separation has different consequences. There are two phases in this situation. In the frst phase, if either of the husband or wife dies (or separates) leaving his/her young spouse with young children, the surviving person, the young widower or widow, with unmarried children has two options. The frst option, which is common in all the tribes, is that the person can remarry and set up a new household and remarriage is very frequent. The second option is to stay in the same household and wait for children to grow up and thus enter the next phase of the development cycle. In the latter case, single parents (father or mother) have to put in an extra effort to earn a livelihood, manage land and also support their children until they grow up. At such times close kin-members in the neighbourhood play an important role in giving social support. Grown-up children can help their mother/father with cultivation as well as in the performance of household duties. The household at this point enters

Taxonomy of Households – Part I

153

the second stage consisting of middle-aged women/men with unmarried children. Gradually, children become adult and get married. The elder child (son or daughter) gradually becomes the chief earning member. In this transition period, the responsibility of running the household is shared by mother/father and adult son or daughter. They are jointly responsible for taking care of younger children. Then the adult son or daughter gets married. In the case of the daughter, there are two possibilities: either she gets married and sets up her new household or she brings her uxorilocal husband and shares the same household. The same two possibilities exist for the adult son; he can go as an uxorilocal husband to a different household or marry and bring his bride to his household. The possibilities of the adult son going as an uxorilocal husband are less as compared to the daughter getting married away. Apart from this outgoing movement of daughter and son, they share the same household (with a single parent) in both cases, either daughter brings uxorilocal husband or son brings his bride. In both the cases, initially, for some years the same household is shared by all. Gradually, the new household is set up by elder children – son and daughter-in-law or daughter and son-in-law – while the younger one remains with mother or father. Now comes the third phase. As a result, some of the elderly widowed mothers and widower fathers share the household with unmarried younger children, while their elder children are married and live in separate households. This phase may extend to the time when all the children get married and set up their households leaving single mother or father in one-member households.

Husband-wife households There are 84 households with only husband and wife as members, which account for 168 persons (see Table 6.4). They constitute 15.8 per cent of all simple households and are 8.4 per cent of the total population that lives in simple households. While comparing across the fve tribes, one fnds variation in the occurrence of this type of households. The largest number are found among the Vasava, constituting 36 households with 72 persons residing in them making up to 24.7 per cent of all simple households, while least numbers are found among the Warli, where only four households consisting of eight persons are found, constituting 4.3 per cent of all simple households. In 84 cases of husband-and-wife households, 7 couples are young age, 16 are of middle age and 61 are of old age (see Table 6.5). Among the seven young couples, fve (three Kukana, one each Vasava and Warli) do not have children, while other two (one each Chaudhari and Vasava) have only daughters. The Chaudhari couple has married away one daughter in a different village, and for another one, they brought an uxorilocal husband. The second daughter with her resident husband is living adjacent to their household, while the other Vasava couple has only one daughter who is married away in a neighbouring village. Among the 16 middle-aged couples, only one couple (Vasava) has no children. Rest of the couples have children, while nine couples (one Gamit, seven

154 Taxonomy of Households – Part I Vasavas and one Kukana) have only married daughters, two (one Gamit and one Vasava) have only married sons, and four (two Gamits, one each Vasava and Kukana) have both sons and daughters. No middle-age Warli couple is residing in husband-and-wife households. Among the 16, in two cases the couples have brought in a resident husband (ghar jamai) for their daughters. Among the 61 old couples, three couples (one each Gamit, Chaudhari and Vasava) have no children, while the rest of the couples have children. Among them 14 couples (2 Gamits, 4 Chaudharis, 7 Vasavas and 1 Warli) have only married daughters; 18 (4 Chaudharis, 9 Vasavas, 3 Kukanas and 2 Warlis) have only married sons; and 26 (16 Gamits, 3 Chaudharis and 7 Vasavas) have both married sons and daughters. In 14 cases (9 Gamits, 1 Chaudhari and 4 Vasavas) couples have arranged for a resident husband for their daughters. These varying age groups represent different stages of development of the household. The most interesting aspect that comes to light is a large number of resident-sons-in-law or ghar jamai, indicating that although the tribes are notionally patrilineal and patrilocal, yet they have a strong tendency for bilateral kinship or giving equal importance to sons and daughters. In a comparable situation, most upper-caste Hindu households would have opted to adopt a male child in the absence of a son, or even if they had only daughters, would have married them away. In caste Hindu society, the practice of ghar jamai is looked down upon. It seems, however, an acceptable option among these tribal groups. Any girl’s father having ample resources can boast of his status by taking resident-son-in-law for her daughter. Instead of paying the bride-wealth, the groom performs bride-services. As mentioned earlier, he cannot inherit the property. The position of a resident-son-in-law is not of good status, especially in the initial years of marriage when he does not have offspring. He does not have any of his lineage member from his natal village. During initial years, he neither participates in the decision-making process nor occupies a position of authority or importance in either his natal or his affnal village. His status is related to his wife and children. If his wife dies or divorces him, then in most cases he will return to his natal village. If he has children from his frst wife, then it all depends on his father-in-law whether he wishes him to remain in the village or not. For example, in one case, a divorcee from a far village came as the residentson-in-law in one of the Kukana hamlets in Makadban village. In his frst marriage also, he had gone as a resident-son-in-law. As he did not have land and he had seven brothers, all have gone as a resident-son-in-law to different villages. After six years of his marriage in this village, his wife died leaving two children. His father-in-law was a good man, and for taking care of the children, he brought a wife for his resident-son-in-law. He was living for some time but got attracted to another widow of a neighbouring village, who sold liquor which he was very fond of. So, his second wife divorced him and returned to her natal village, and he went ahead with his affair. In all this situation his children remained with their maternal grandparents family. Later on, after the death of grandparents, these children were taken care

Taxonomy of Households – Part I

155

Table 6.5 Husband-Wife Households and their Married Children among the Five Tribes S. No.

Tribes

1

Couple’s Age

Married Children Living in Separate Households S

D

Ch Married Daughter’s Residence

Chaudhari Young Age

–

2

2

2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11

Vasava Vasava Kukana Kukana Kukana Warli Gamit Gamit Gamit Gamit

Young Age Young Age Young Age Young Age Young Age Young Age Middle Age Middle Age Middle Age Middle Age

– – –

1 – –

– – 1 1 1 –

1 – – – – – – 1 3 3

– – 1 2 4 3

12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22

Vasava Vasava Vasava Vasava Vasava Vasava Vasava Vasava Vasava Vasava Kukana

Middle Age Middle Age Middle Age Middle Age Middle Age Middle Age Middle Age Middle Age Middle Age Middle Age Middle age

1 2 – – – – – – – – 2

1 – 2 1 3 1 1 – 2 2 1

2 2 2 1 3 1 1 – 2 2 3

23 24

Kukana Gamit

Middle age Old Age

– 1

1 2

1 3

25 26

Gamit Gamit

Old Age Old Age

1 4

1 5

2 9

27 28

Gamit Gamit

Old Age Old Age

– 1

2 2

2 3

29

Gamit

Old Age

1

2

3

30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39

Gamit Gamit Gamit Gamit Gamit Gamit Gamit Gamit Gamit Gamit

Old Age Old Age Old Age Old Age Old Age Old Age Old Age Old Age Old Age Old Age

– 3 2 2 – 2 3 4 3 1

– 2 1 1 2 2 1 1 2 4

– 5 3 3 2 4 4 5 5 5

40

Gamit

Old Age

3

2

5

One daughter married away and for one brings Ghar Jamai Daughter married away No children No children No children No children No children One daughter brings Ghar Jamai Eldest daughter married within village One married away and two bring Ghar Jamai Married daughter living in the village Daughters are married away Daughter married away Daughters are married away Married daughter living in the village Daughter married away No children Married daughter living in the village Daughters married away Daughters have married away, and both the sons are living in different household Daughters are married away One daughter married away and for one brings Ghar Jamai One daughter brings Ghar Jamai Three daughters married away, and two bring Ghar Jamai Daughter married away One daughter married away and for one bring Ghar Jamai Son went as Ghar Jamai outside the village, daughters bring Ghar Jamai No children Daughter married away Daughters bring Ghar Jamai Married daughter living in the village Daughters bring Ghar Jamai Daughters married away One daughter brings Ghar Jamai One daughter brings Ghar Jamai Daughter married away Two daughters married away, and two are within the village Daughter married away (Continued)

156 Taxonomy of Households – Part I S. No.

Tribes

41

Gamit

42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49

Couple’s Age

Married Children Living in Separate Households S

D

Ch Married Daughter’s Residence

Old Age

3

2

5

Gamit Chaudhari Chaudhari Chaudhari Chaudhari Chaudhari Chaudhari Chaudhari

Old Age Old age Old age Old age Old age Old age Old age Old age

1 2

2

– 2 – 1 2

1 – 1 2 – 2

3 2 1 – 3 2 1 4

50 51 52 53

Chaudhari Chaudhari Chaudhari Chaudhari

Old age Old age Old age Old age

2 – 2 –

– 1 – 2

2 1 2 2

54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69

Chaudhari Vasava Vasava Vasava Vasava Vasava Vasava Vasava Vasava Vasava Vasava Vasava Vasava Vasava Vasava Vasava

Old age Old Age Old Age Old Age Old Age Old Age Old Age Old Age Old Age Old Age Old Age Old Age Old Age Old Age Old Age Old Age

2 2 – – 2 2 3 1 2 1 2 – 1 2 2 –

1 – 1 – – – 1 1 – 1 – 2 1 – – 2

3 2 1 – 2 2 4 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2

70 71 72

Vasava Vasava Vasava

Old Age Old Age Old Age

1 4 –

– 1 2

1 5 2

73 74 75 76

Vasava Vasava Vasava Vasava

Old Age Old Age Old Age Old Age

– – 2 –

3 3 1 3

3 3 3 3

77 78 79 80

Vasava Vasava Kukana Kukana

Old Age Old Age Old Age Old Age

1 2 1 2

1 – –

2 2 1 2

81 82 83 84

Kukana Warli Warli Warli

Old Age Old Age Old Age Old Age

1 1

– – 2

1 1 2 2

2

One daughter married away, and one is within the village Daughters married away For one daughter brings Ghar Jamai No children Daughter married away One son went as Ghar Jamai, and two daughters married away One son gone Ghar Jamai Daughter married away One married within the village and one married away Daughter married away One daughter brings Ghar Jamai No children One daughter brings Ghar Jamai Married daughter living in the village One daughter brings Ghar Jamai Daughters married away Daughter married away One daughter married away, and one brings Ghar Jamai Married daughter living in the village One daughter married away, and one is within the village Daughters married away Daughters married away Daughters married away The eldest daughter married within the village Daughters married away Son is living in different household Both the sons are living in different household Son is living in different household Son is living in different household Daughters are married away Sons are living in different household

S = Son; D = Daughter; Ch = Children; GJ = Ghar Jamai (through uxorilocal marriages).

Taxonomy of Households – Part I

157

by their maternal uncles and aunts. So, the relationship between residentson-in-law and father-in-law varies as per situations. The beginning of the development process of household will be described while discussing complex household types. It needs to be mentioned here that once the boy gets married, within fve years of his marriage he usually establishes his household, leaving his aged parents to live in a separate household. In the majority of cases, one of the children, usually the youngest, or eldest, son or daughter (in the case of Khandadiya), continues to share the household with parents. There are cases where all the children got separated and set up their households, leaving their aged parents to live alone. Further, as per the tribal custom, sometimes after the marriage of younger brother, or thereafter, the elder brother is required to move out with his wife and children (if any) and set up a new household. In this task, he is helped by his brothers and father. Normally, he constructs his house close to his father’s or in the agricultural felds. Because of this custom, it is noticed that generally, unilineal kin are living in the same neighbourhood along with other kin related by several overlapping intra-village marriages. So, the neighbourhood, composed of lineage and other kin, becomes the frst support base in times of need. This support system also comes handy in the case of aged husband-wife living in separate households. The data indicate seven young couples who represent the starting phase of a new household. Their parents are living with one of their siblings and their families. It is possible that in the future these young age couples have children, and they might get on to the next phase of the development process – husband, wife and unmarried children.

Husband, wife and unmarried children household There are a total of 404 households composed of husband, wife and unmarried children that are of complete parental families. Together these comprise 1,741 persons (see Table 6.4). This composition constitutes a maximum number of households and persons residing among the various types of households (including simple and complex households). They constitute 76.1 per cent of all simple households and comprise 87.0 per cent of total persons living in simple households. While comparing across the fve tribes, this composition varies across the tribal societies. The largest number of such households are found among Warli, constituting 85 households with 385 persons residing in them, constituting 90.4 per cent of all simple households. While the least number is found among the Vasava, constituting 89 households and 375 persons residing in them, constituting 61.0 per cent of all simple households. Among these 404 households, seven (three Chaudharis and four Warlis) are compound families. A compound family exists when a man has two or more wives or a woman has two or more husbands (both either simultaneously or at the end of frst marriage)3 and have children from these relationships. It is not normal for tribal men and women to have several marriage partners in their lifetime. Still, one observes serial monogamy.4 The people in the south Gujarat tribal society differentiate between the full

158 Taxonomy of Households – Part I siblings (children from same biological father and mother) and half-siblings (children from one father or one mother and other different parents). This is important socially. These additions of relationship in simple households mean that the words ‘children’, ‘mother and father’, also include step-children, step-mother and step-father, respectively. In such a situation, the term ‘parental family’ also includes not only the elementary family but also certain types of what Radcliffe-Brown (1950: 5) called ‘compound family’. The two tribes have compound families under different circumstances. Among the three Chaudhari cases, in one case there is leviratic union, where children by the frst and the second husband live together. In this case, the elder brother had started living with another woman at his working place, outside the village, and had one son from this union. Thereafter, the younger brother started living with his deserted sister-in-law (brother’s wife) as his wife and looked after her children. In another case, a person’s frst wife was dead, and he married another woman, and children by both the wives live together. In the last case, the husband’s frst wife left him after having two daughters with another man of her maternal village; the husband has remarried and has one son from the second wife. The husband, his second wife and children by both the wives live together. Of four compound families in Warli, three belong to seven-member households and one to the fve-member household. Of these, in two cases, the husband’s frst wife is dead, and he has married another woman. So, husband, his second wife and children from both wives are living together. Of these, the frst household has three children: one son and one daughter from frst wife and one daughter from the second wife. The second household has fve children; two daughters and one son are from frst wife and two sons from the second wife. In the other two cases, the middle-aged husband, his two wives and their children are living together. Out of these, in one household, the father has four children, three daughters and one son: one daughter from frst wife and two daughters and one son from the second one. From his frst wife, he also has two daughters who are married away in neighbouring villages. In the second household, the father has four children, three sons and one daughter: one daughter and two sons from frst wife and one son from the second wife. From the frst wife, he also had one more daughter who is married off in the neighbouring village. Various permutations and combinations can be found in 404 households. Some of these include only sons, some only daughters and some have both sons and daughters in varieties of possibilities. As households are at different stages of development process, some of them have got more children while some have none. The children may get married, or bring uxorilocal husband, and develop a complex household. It may seem inconsequential to describe these simple facts about the sons and daughters and their subsequent marriage, but it is important in the development process of a household. Among the tribes, if a man has no son but has enough land, then he can take the uxorilocal husband for his daughter(s). In this way, a complex household may

Taxonomy of Households – Part I

159

develop. This is contrary to another study where the absence of sons does not lead to the development of complex household (Shah 1974: 75).

Conclusion Almost half (54.6 per cent) of the households are of simple type. Out of 4,750 total population of the fve tribes, 2,001 (42.1 per cent) persons are residing in simple households. So, from the above descriptions, it is clear that the simple household covers a considerable number of socially distinct types of kinship and numerical compositions. It is necessary to distinguish the simple households composed of the complete parental family from those composed of the various stages of the incomplete parental family. The latter comprise an overwhelming majority of households. They form roughly 90 per cent (87.0 per cent) of the total number of simple households residing in 404 (76.1 per cent) households. When compared to total households of all types, these simple household compositions constitute of 41.5 per cent of households and 36.7 per cent of all tribals living in such households. Second, this study found these six types of households mentioned in Table 6.4. It may also differentiate more types of households based on sex and the number of children.

Notes 1 In social science these types of kinship composition are expressed with different terms. The conventional term ‘elementary or nuclear family’ is often defned in a similar but not identical way, e.g. as a group of people who are united by ties of partnership and parenthood and consisting of a pair of adults and their socially recognized children. Typically, but not always, the adults in a nuclear family are married. Although such couples are most often a man and a woman, the defnition of the nuclear family has expanded with the advent of same-sex marriage. Children in a nuclear family may be the couple’s biological or adopted offspring. (Encyclopaedia Britannica, Chicago 2015) 2 Parental family is a genealogical model consisting of different types of household, whereas parental unit is the kinship unit having three different combinations of parents, viz., father, mother or father and mother. Parental unit is more similar to fraternal unit meant for a unit of two or more brothers; sororal unit for a unit of two or more sisters and sibling unit for a unit of one or more brothers plus one or more sisters. 3 The end of marriage, as per local custom, means divorce, separation, left out or death of spouse. 4 When men marry women serially, or women marry men serially, we call it serial monogamy. Serial monogamy pertains to a state where a man has a series of wives one after the other but only one wife at any given point of time. Thus, in the United States, where divorce rate is high but only monogamy is legal, serial monogamy is widely practised. In Hindu society of India, monogamy exists where a man has a single wife throughout his life. In such societies the divorce rate is rare and as such it is the preferred norm.

7

Taxonomy of Households – Part II Complex Households

In this chapter, the complex households have been analysed by using defnitions and methods of Shah (1974) with slight modifcation in it. The prominent modifcation in this analysis is done with regards to the institution of uxorilocal marriage and through it household composed of married daughter and resident-son-in-law.

Complex households in fve tribes Out of a total 973 households in fve tribes, 442 households are complex. In this section, frst, complex households will be classifed into certain types of kinship compositions. Then, the number of households and the patterns of interpersonal relations in them will be discussed in detail for each type to illuminate the nature of the developmental process of household and the operations of the principles of residential patterns in tribal households. With this, each tribal household is also compared and contrasted based on the similarities and differences. These 442 households are classifed with varying degree of complexities of kinship compositions in Tables 7.1–7.10. These will be assisted with the relevant genealogical charts. The complex household composition is based on principles of residential patterns in tribal societies, which is the merger of the patrikin of men and their wives as well as of women with their uxorilocal husbands. It can be seen that in south Gujarat tribes, there are always two options available for both male and female descendants of a family – either to live in their parental household or to move out to live in the parents-in-law household. These possibilities of two-way movements are available for both son and daughter of the household. These movements occur to exchange men and women between two lineages within or outside the village within a certain geographical area. The details of these marital movements and social space were covered in Chapter 5 on marriage. Table 7.1 gives some generalised facts of complex households. There are two options to analyse it – based on kinship composition or based on the numbers of households and of people residing in those households.

DOI: 10.4324/9781003299790-7

One married man and one or more unmarried siblings Household of two married brothers Parental unit and one married son Parental unit, one married son and other unmarried children 5 Parental unit and two or more married sons 6 Parental unit with one married daughter 7 Parental unit with one married daughter and other unmarried children 8 Parental unit with both son and daughter married and co-residence 9 Parental unit with married grand son 10 Parental unit with a married granddaughter Complex HH-Atypical Complex HH Atypical Complex HH Total Complex HH (complex +atypical Complex HH) Total simple household Total household

1 2 3 4

S. Household Type No.

247 145 24 40 20 31 52 559 559 444 1,003

42 21 3 9 4 3 7 89 89 119 208

7 5 87 1 88 146 234

3 14 5

34 19

HH

29 74 30

187 121

41 35 517 6 523 490 1,013

P

Vasava

P

Gamit HH

Tribal Societies

Table 7.1 Kinship and Numerical Composition of Complex Households of Five Tribes

83 1 84 77 161

7

2 15 2

41 16

HH

493 5 498 276 774

46

16 84 12

234 101

P

89 1 90 95 185

4

1

8 2 2

52 17

3

HH 19

569 6 575 389 964

26

8

73 10 11

306 116

P

Chaudhari Kukana

Warli

90 1 91 94 185

7

2

7 2 2

2 1 53 15

HH

589 5 594 402 996

57

18

66 7 10

13 5 321 97

P

57

208 215 83

32 5 1,295 580

P

32 222 5 35 438 2,727 4 22 442 2,749 531 2,001 973 4,750

6

23 42 15

5 1 222 88

HH

Total

162 Taxonomy of Households – Part II While for the frst method, one has several kinds of kinship compositions such as atypical households, parental unit and one married son household, parental unit and one married daughter with her uxorilocal husband household, a parental unit with both married son and daughter co-residing household and parental unit with married grandchildren household. These types may be further divided based on various kinship compositions and probabilities. However, based on relative numbers of household and persons residing in it, complex households can be divided into three types. The most common types, which are maximum in number and represented by three-fourths of all complex households, are households of the parental unit with at least one married son. The second-highest households are with at least one married daughter with her uxorilocal husband represented by nearly 10 per cent of the total complex household in terms of the population residing in them. And the third types are households consisting of married grandsons in which 4.8 per cent of the total complex households population reside. Overall, it can be said that these types of households represent the tribal norms as they are found among all fve tribes involving most of the population. On the other side, there are kinship compositions that are very rare in occurrences and not found in all tribes. They not only occur in the least number of households but are also represented by the least number of persons. These households can be divided into two categories, viz., atypical households and least occurring households of the parental unit with married granddaughters. The latter type is found only in fve households of Vasava tribe, viz., 1.1 per cent of total complex households, with 35 persons. It appears that in south Gujarat tribes, parental unit sharing the same household with married granddaughter is a rarity. The second, rarest, household composition is a parental unit with both married son and daughter residing in the same household. This composition consists of only six households, representing only 1.4 per cent of all complex households with 57 people, 2.1 per cent, of total people in the complex households. Further, it is limited to Gamit, Kukana and Warli. So overall, it is not the norm of south Gujarat tribals to share the same household with a married son and married daughter together. There will be a basic contradiction in such a household as an incoming son-in-law is according to norms a replacement for a missing son.

Atypical households Tribal societies follow a pattern in the developmental process of their households. This pattern can be understood by frst studying the four atypical households (see Table 7.2). They are a part of complex households, represented by the least number of households. These four households are 0.9 per cent of the total complex households in numbers and 22 persons (0.8 per cent) live in such households. They

Taxonomy of Households – Part II

163

Table 7.2 Atypical Households in Five Tribes S. No.

Tribe

1

Vasava

2 3 4 Total

Kinship Composition

Married brothers, their wives and unmarried sister Chaudhari Married brothers, their wives and divorcee brother Kukana Father, mother, unmarried children, remarried daughter’s daughter Warli Two married brothers, their wives and unmarried children

HHs P 1

6

1

5

1

6

1

5

4

22

reveal, among other things, the maximum limit to which a household may grow. This is not a normal case but important for studying the limits of the developmental process of households. In other words, they are the markers of a range in which the development process of most of the households is confned. Though rare in occurrence, such composition exists in all the tribes, except Gamit. Vasava A Vasava household consisting of one married man and his other unmarried sibling represents the limits of the developmental process of household in Katkuva village (see Table 7.2(1)). The distinguishing characteristic of this household is co-residence of one married brother with one unmarried sister after the death of their parents. Only one case was found because the sister has remained unmarried. The brother in this household is around 50 years old and has three daughters who are married. Two younger daughters are married into different villages. The elder daughter is a widow from an uxorilocal marriage. It is a rare case that anyone remains unmarried. If anyone does, however, then they generally live with one of their siblings. Chaudhari One household consisting of a married man and his divorced sibling represents the limits of the developmental process of household in Rakhaskhadi village (see Table 7.2(2)). The distinguishing characteristic of this household is co-residence of one married brother with one divorced elder brother. The occurrence of such a household can be traced to some unusual life-cycle events that are narrated below. Among the three brothers, the youngest is living in a separate household with his wife and children. The elder two are sharing the same household. Out of them, the elder brother (in his early 50s) is a divorcee and does not have children. The younger brother (in his

164 Taxonomy of Households – Part II mid-40s) has one son and one daughter; both are married. The daughter is married away outside the village, and the son brings a bride from within the village. It is a rare case of a married brother sharing a household with his elder divorced brother. Kukana One Kukana household consists of father, mother, their unmarried children and remarried daughter’s daughter (see Table 7.2(3)). The distinguishing characteristic of this household is that the daughter’s daughter lives with her mother’s paternal family after the remarriage of her mother into another household (Genealogical Chart 7.1). The older couple has four children, two sons and two daughters, and their elder daughter remarried after separation from the frst husband. She is now living with her second husband in a different village leaving her daughter from the frst husband in her father’s household. The household also includes the younger daughter and two sons, who are unmarried. This is a case of an atypical household.

Symbols = Male alive = Female, alive = Related by descent = Living in separate household, IIH = Second Husband,

= Related by marriage = Sibling Relationship = Separated without divorce IH = First Husband,

Genealogical Chart 7.1 Parental Unit with Unmarried Children and Daughter’s Daughter (for Table 7.2(3)) In the fgure, elder daughter is remarried and living with the second husband leaving his daughter from frst marriage to his household.

Taxonomy of Households – Part II

165

Warli Among the Warli tribe, one atypical household consists of two married brothers, their wives and their unmarried children (see Table 7.2(4)). The distinguishing characteristic of this household is co-residence of two married brothers where the parents are staying separately (Genealogical Chart 7.2). This is a transition state, where one of the married brothers is yet to separate his household as is the norm. This is a unique case among all fve tribes in which two married brothers and their wives are living together without their parents. Among south Gujarat tribes, the separation of the brothers is normal as also indicated by the prevalence of households with only one married couple in the same generation. As said earlier, there is a successive separation of sons from the parental household as they keep getting married leaving their parental home. Usually the youngest son takes care of the elderly parental couple. Although as the cases indicate, it is usually a son who takes on this responsibility, and it may be taken up by a daughter as well. The co-residence of two married brothers is indicative of arrested development of the household.

Household of one married man and other unmarried siblings The complex household starts from the ‘one married man and his unmarried siblings’, and this process ends at ‘households of married grandsons, where the previous two generations are still present’. These ranges of complex households reveal, among other things, the maximum limit of which a household may grow. Given the normal life span of humans, the threegenerational family is the outer limit. These households with maximum depth are along with atypical households, the markers of the range within which the development process of most of the households is confned. However, as the majority of households follow the normative pattern, such households are very few among the tribes of south Gujarat. These fve households constitute of 1.1 per cent of total complex household and with 32 persons, just 1.2 per cent, of total complex households population.

Genealogical Chart 7.2 Parental Unit with Two Married Brothers (for Table 7.2 (4))

166  Taxonomy of Households – Part II Moreover, this household type is not found in all tribes. Only Kukana and Warli tribes have such composition. This type of household composition as given in Table 7.3 is represented by five households: three Kukanas and two Warlis. The distinguishing characteristics of these households are co-residence of one married brother with unmarried sisters in four cases and one case with separated elder sister. Among these, in four cases brothers are elder siblings. In one case only brothers among the five siblings who heads the households. This stage where siblings stay together arrived after the death of their parents. This Table 7.3  One Married Man, His Wife and Children with Unmarried Siblings S. No.

Kinship Composition

HHs

1

Eldest brother, his wife and unmarried children with unmarried younger sister Eldest brother, his wife and married children and grandchildren, with unmarried younger sister Only brother, his wife, and unmarried children with a separated sister Total

2

2 3

2 1 5

Symbols MS

= Married Sisters

K

= Khandadiya

SS

= Separated Sister = Living in a separate household = Separated without divorce

Genealogical Chart 7.3  One Married Man, His Wife and Children with Unmarried Siblings (see Table 7.3)

Taxonomy of Households – Part II

167

is in contrast to the households in Table 7.5 where one married brother co-resides with one or more unmarried sibling during the lifetime of their parents, who also form part of the household. After the death of the parents, the eldest brother is the head of the household and responsible for unmarried or separated sisters. These cases are found because of the unusual coincidence of certain life-cycle events. In the frst four cases (Table 7.3 (1 and 2)), the older married brothers are taking care of the younger unmarried sisters. In the second case, married brothers also have grandchildren living with them. In all the cases, elder brothers have a varying number of sisters (Genealogical Chart 7.3). All the sisters are married (for some bring K Husband and share different households), except one, where the unmarried sister shared the household with married brothers. And in the last case, only brother of fve siblings takes responsibilities for his eldest separated sister, along with his wife and unmarried children (see Table 7.3(3)). He has four sisters. Two sisters are married away in different villages. The eldest sister was married within the village but got separated due to some reason and now living with the married brother’s household. So, like caste society in other parts of the state, the responsibilities of an unmarried, separated or divorced sister are taken by the married brother. In the examples of household formations, one sees no signifcant difference in the social norms of the tribes and the caste society. The tribes emphasise on patriliny as well as patriarchy although in a more diluted form. The daughters of the household appear to have more rights over their father’s and their brother’s households than is normally found among caste Hindus. Moreover, there is a greater degree of fexibility of residence, and children are taken care of under all circumstances. Another signifcant difference from upper-caste norms is the option given to women to remarry, both after divorce and after becoming widows. The miserable condition of upper-caste widows is not replicated among tribes in general, and certainly not among south Gujarat tribes.

Interpersonal relationship in households consist of parental units and married sons Out of total 442 complex households, the most dominant pattern of coresidence in south Gujarat tribes is a parental unit with married son or sons, although married sons also tend to set up their households and separate from the parents. Total 333 (75.3 per cent) households consist of a parental unit with at least one married son and constitute of 2,083 (75.8 per cent) persons altogether. Such composition is prevalent in all fve tribes, with varied probabilities. Kukana tribes contain a maximum number of households, 77 (85.6 per cent), and a maximum number of persons, 495 (86.1 per cent), residing in such types of households. Vasava has the least numbers of such households (56 (63.6 per cent)) with 337 (64.4 per cent) persons residing in them.

168 Taxonomy of Households – Part II Traditionally, geographical location played an important role in accounting for the variations in the social institutions in the tribal societies. First, it is important to locate all these tribes in a geographical map. The study has drawn a pictorial graph of the tribal population of south Gujarat tribes, from north to south. Generally, Vasavas are found in between the Narmada and Tapi Rivers. Chaudharis reside around both the banks of Tapi River, and Kukana reside between Tapi and Par Rivers in south Dharampur, and from the Par River, the Warli preponderance increases till the end of the Gujarat state. A comparative assessment of all fve tribes with respect to the features, namely kinship composition and numbers of parental units with married sons, indicates signifcant variation in household numbers and persons residing in such households. While coming from north to south, or in other words from Vasava to Warli, one can see increasing numbers of the households and persons residing in such households. Coming from the other direction, the Vasava have the least numbers of such households, even less than an average number of households in all fve tribes. Warli have, among them, the maximum number of such households, which is more than average, taking into account all the fve tribes. The present data so far indicate that parental unit with married son is a norm of all south Gujarat tribes, but variations may be seen conditioned by differences in living conditions. Varying from maximum occurrence in southern tribes, such as Warli and Kukana, it is less in number among the Vasava and Chaudhari, whereas Gamit can be located in the centre of these trends. These kinship compositions are shown in Tables 7.4–7.6 and 7.9. These households receive close attention in this section on comparing household formations in these societies. Another set of prominent patterns of combinations are seen in the residence patterns of married children. In each household in Tables 7.4–7.6, there is one married son (in four cases (in Table 7.4(4)) and when a son (7.4(10)) is dead the widowed daughter-inlaw is residing with the parental unit (father and mother, or father with two mothers). In Table 7.5, there are unmarried children (in one case divorcee daughter (in Table 7.5(4)) as well as married sons residing together with the parental unit. In Table 7.6, more than two married sons are residing with a parental unit and in a few cases with unmarried children. In all the three tables (Table 7.4–7.6), the households are classifed based on (1) the parental unit (father, or mother or father and mother or father and two mothers) and (2) the married sons having or not having children, that is, the household with or without grandchildren. In 24 households in Table 7.4 (5, 6 and 7), two cases in Table 7.5 (5 and 6) and three cases in Table 7.6 (7, 8 and 9), a father shared household space with at least one married son and his wife with or without their children (Genealogical Chart 7.4). Of these 29 cases, two consist of divorcee father and others are of widower father.

Taxonomy of Households – Part II

169

Table 7.4 Households of Parental Unit with One Married Son S. No.

Kinship Composition

1

Father, mother, son and his wife Father, mother, son and his wife and their children Father, two mothers, son and his wife and their children Father, mother, widow daughter-in-law and her children Divorced father, son and his wife and their children Widower father, son and his wife Widower father, son and his wife and their children Widow mother, son and his wife Widow mother, son and his wife and their children Widow mother, widow daughter-in-law and her children Total

2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Tribal Societies

Total

Gamit Vasava Chaudhari Kukana Warli 1

2

2

4

1

10

32

16

24

31

27

130

1

1

2

1

1

1

1

1 6

3

42

2 1

3

1

2

3

1

5

4

19

3

1

2

2

8

6

12

8

15

44

1

1

34

41

2 53

52

222

In 54 households in Table 7.4 (8, 9 and 10) and 13 cases in Tables 7.5 (7 and 8), a widowed mother shared a household with at least one married son, his wife, with or without their children and with or without her other unmarried children. In most of these cases, the mother is regarded as the exclusive head of the household. In the total number of complex households, the mother is found to be the head of the household (67 cases), which is far greater as compared to the number of households where the only father is head of the household (24 cases). This is indicative again that the patriarchy among the tribes is much diluted and not as assertive as in caste Hindu societies, wherein the absence of the father, the eldest son usually assumes the status of the head of the family, sometimes surpassing the authority of the mother. In the best possible cases, the widowed mother shares the authority with the son, but it is rare to fnd that a widowed mother is a sole authority in a household with a grown-up and married sons. She may command respect but does not hold the ultimate decision-making powers. In 168 households in Table 7.4 and 75 households in Table 7.5, a father and a married son live together. Whereas in 23 households in Table 7.6, a father co-resides with more than two married sons, with or without other

170 Taxonomy of Households – Part II

Symbols = Male alive

= Male, dead

= Female, alive

= Female dead

= Related by marriage

= Related by descent

= Sibling Relationship DP = Divorcee Father

= Living in separate household. IW = First wife IIW = Second wife

Genealogical Chart 7.4 Households of Parental Unit with One Married Son (see Table 7.4) In fgure (3), three married sons with their wives and children are living in three separate households, while their father, mother, step-mother and step-brother with his family are living in one household (compound family).

unmarried children. In all such households, the father is the formal head of the household, and the son is supposed to be in the subordinate position. During the starting phase of this co-residence, which begins after the marriage of the adult son, the son is supposed to work as per the instructions of his father. However, the position of son changes, quite often after the birth of his frst child, and he assumes greater responsibility of the household. Gradually, the father tends to pass the responsibility of managing the household on to the adult son.

Taxonomy of Households – Part II

171

So, the relationship between the father and married son can be seen differently in the three phases of development of households. (1) In the frst phase, the father, a dominant fgure, does not allow the son to have much voice, and the son works under the father. In most cases, it is the starting point of a household consisting of a new married son, his wife and parental unit, which is represented in Table 7.4 (1) by 10 households; (2) In the second phase, father and son work almost on equal footing for making and managing the household. This phase is most commonly found when the married son becomes a father after the birth of his frst child and gets a more important role in managing the household. This phase, shown in Table 7.4 (2), is represented by 130 households, more than any type of composition, among such households. (3) In the third phase, the father acts as an advisor or supervisor of the household affair, while the son makes most of the decisions and executes them. This is a more advanced phase. A gradual change is observed in the father-son relationship after a few years of the son’s marriage where the son becomes the father of more than one child. Father begins to give respect to the son, and later on after setting a separate household, the son takes up the charge of becoming the head of the household. Out of 88 households, 87 households in Table 7.5 are the ones with a father and a married son and their unmarried children. These unmarried children are generally at a young age, and it is the joint responsibility of the father and the married son to look after them. In such households, along with father, elder brother too is given respect and regarded as a father fgure. In one household, a divorcee daughter shared the household giving rise to a rare kinship composition (Table 7.5 (4)). It is rare for a daughter, divorcee or widow, with or without children to live with her parental unit. Most women get absorbed into another household because they can always remarry after divorce or after becoming widows. Further, in 53 households in Table 7.4 (8, 9 and 10) and 13 households in Table 7.5, a widowed mother shared a household with at least one married son and with or without other unmarried children (Genealogical Charts 7.5 and 7.6). In one household she resided with her widowed daughter-in-law and her children. Such households are displaying two phases of the developmental process. In the frst phase, which has been already discussed in the simple household section, a young widowed mother co-resides with all her unmarried children. Later on, when one of her sons becomes an adult and marries, then it becomes a complex household having co-residence with other unmarried children. In such households, until the son becomes an adult, the mother plays a dominant role in running and looking after the household. On the death of her husband, she socialises the son for managing the social obligations. Then gradually, the mother passes on the responsibilities of the household to her married son.

172 Taxonomy of Households – Part II Table 7.5 Households of Parental Unit, One Married Son and Other Unmarried Children S. No.

Kinship Composition

1

Father, mother, unmarried children, married son and his wife Father, mother, unmarried children, married son, his wife and their children Father, mother, unmarried sons, one widowed son Father, mother, divorcee daughter and married son, his wife and their children Widower father, unmarried children and married son and his wife Widower father, unmarried children, married son, his wife and their children. Widow mother, unmarried children, married son and his wife. Widow mother, unmarried children, married son and his wife and their children

2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Total

Tribal Societies

Total

Gamit Vasava

Chaudhari Kukana

Warli

2

5

4

2

4

17

17

9

5

12

10

53

1

1

2

1

1 1

1

1

1 1

1

1

3

5

2

21

19

16

17

2 11

15

88

Genealogical Chart 7.5 Households of Parental Unit with One Married Son and Unmarried Children (see Table 7.5)

Taxonomy of Households – Part II

173

Table 7.6 Households of Parental Unit, Two or More Married Sons and Their Children S. No.

Kinship Composition

Tribal Societies Gamit Vasava Chaudhari Kukana Warli Total

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

9

Father, mother, two married sons, their wives and children of elder son Father, mother, two married sons, their wives and children of younger son Father, mother, two 2 married sons, their wives and children Father, mother, unmarried son, two married sons and their wives Father, mother, unmarried son, two married sons, their wives and children Father, mother, three married sons, their wives and children Widower father with two married sons, their wives and unmarried children Widower father, unmarried 1 son and two married sons their wives and one grandson Widowed father, three unmarried sons, and two married sons their wives and children Total 3

1

4

4

1

1

3

6

12

1

1

1

1

1

1 1

1 1

1

3

2

1

8

7

23

Mother-in-law and daughter-in-law relations In 198 households in Table 7.4, 84 households in Table 7.5 and 20 households in Table 7.6, the daughter-in-law lives with her mother-in-law. The mother-in-law is the chief housekeeper and takes all major decisions concerning the household. At the initial phase, the daughter-in-law has to take instruction for doing all household work from her mother-in-law, and she has no rights to protest or question. Later on, the relationship between mother-in-law and daughter in law becomes more congenial, and they begin to co-operate, and the senior woman becomes less dominating over time. But, the passing of responsibility of the older person to the younger generation in females (mother-in-law to daughter-in-law) is not as swift as

174

Taxonomy of Households – Part II

Genealogical Chart 7.6 Households of Parental Unit with Two Married Sons and Their Children (see Table 7.6)

in the case of the men (father to son). The reason is very obvious. The father and son have a close blood relationship, and the father has both a relation of authority and love with his son. A father feels happy to pass on his mantle to his son. But the daughter-in-law comes as a stranger to the house and may take some time to adjust to her mother-in-law. The senior woman also does not have any affective relationship with her young daughter-inlaw, who she also looks upon as rival for the affection of her son. The rivalry over the son is always a bone of contention between the two women. However, over time, the relationship may soften, and the two women may co-operate in doing household work. As indicated in Table 7.4 (3), two households consist of father, mother and step-mother as a parental unit with youngest son, his wife and unmarried children. This unique phase occurs due to the custom of multiple marriages among Kukana and Warli. This kinship composition is not found in other tribes. This is also an example of a compound family with the marriage of a son. Only two households in Table 7.4 (4) consist of a parental unit with a widowed daughter-in-law and her children. It is found in one household, each of the Vasava and Kukana. This stage is unique in the developmental

Taxonomy of Households – Part II

175

process of a household where a married son dies and leaves his widowed wife and her children with his parents. Such a household is very rare in the tribal communities due to the prevalence of widow remarriage. Looking at from the perspective of the woman, the parental unit comprises her fatherin-law and mother-in-law, who share the responsibility for looking after her children. In the actual case that has been studied, it was found that they are being very protective in nature and helping in the upbringing of the children in the absence of their son. In 54 households in Table 7.4 (7, 8 and 9) and 13 households in Table 7.5, a widowed mother-in-law shares the household with the daughter-in-law. In such a household, more authority is in the hands of mother-in-law, as she also manages the household authoritatively, with her married son. A mother-in-law continues to wield authority, even in her old age, over her daughter-in-law.

Relationship of a married son, his wife and parents The relationship between the father-in-law and daughter-in-law is that of avoidance in all the households. The avoidance rules dictate that they should not sit together on a bed or a scooter, or while travelling in a car, and must always maintain a certain distance. The daughter-in-law must leave the room when the father-in-law enters it. However, the father-in-law has to take care that he does not obstruct her movements in the household because of his presence. In the relationship of a married son, his wife and parents, Shah (1974) has noted the son’s diffculty in trying to keep a balance between his parents and his wife; a dilemma that is near-universal. A similar situation is also found in the present study. The son has to divide his loyalty between two fronts, one for parents and another for a wife. There is a difference between the types of loyalties a son has towards his father and towards his wife, as compared to that to his mother. The loyalty to his mother is of utmost importance and overrides all others, it is even more than that towards his father. According to the value system of the tribes, the son is viewed as closer to the mother than the father. The son is under the direct control of his father in a patrilineal society as the father has the direct authority over him. He also replaces his father in the lineage and society. The mother does not have direct authority, and he stands to inherit nothing from her. Yet the mother is tied to her son which is a relationship of pure affection, and he is also responsible for her upkeep as she owns no property. The relationship of father and son, therefore, has an element of the juridico-legal, in addition to the effective, while the relationship of mother and son is purely affective. Father has complete control over the land and other property and at some stage may view his son as his rival over property and status. The mother-son relationship is not intervened by any material aspects and is one of pure emotion.

176 Taxonomy of Households – Part II Father can be authoritative, having control over resources that he may use as he pleases. He may give differential treatment to his children while giving the share of land to them and thus initiate relations of envy and contestation among them. He may disinherit any of his sons. Moreover, friction may develop during the daily affairs of the household. A son might feel that father is unduly interfering in his internal affairs. It might be a matter of marriage like son marries a girl not liked by the father or he marries a girl by elopement or he marries a girl of another tribe. Later on, jhagda (dispute over elopement/intertribal marriage between two parties boys and girls) may settle after the meeting of Wadils (elders) of both villages (boy and girl) (see Appendix V). But the matter may not settle down. In many cases, the son goes to live with his mother’s brother (maternal uncle) right after the marriage. It is seen in the fve tribal societies that father is more respected and is an authoritarian fgure. On the contrary, with a maternal uncle, the nephews (sister’s son) have a more intimate relationship, as the mother’s brother is seen as an extension of the mother and a person has the same kind of effective relationship with him as he has with his mother. Meyer Fortes has termed these relations as that of ‘Complimentary Filiation’, which is counterbalance of the descent principle (Fortes 1953). A nephew can share any secret with the maternal uncle and can seek him out for help during diffcult times. There are cases where father married second time usually after the death of the mother, and the son was then subjected to some kind of abusive treatment by both the father and the step-mother. The help of maternal uncle is sought for solving any issue, and Mamo is termed as permanent wadil for the boy. In households composed of one married son and other unmarried children, there are mutual frictions between the son’s wife and her unmarried brother-in-law and sister-in-law. Generally, when unmarried brothers and sisters-in-law are young, they are treated as equivalent to one’s children and given the child-like care by their elder brother’s wife. But as they grow older, tension may develop between the younger brothers-in-law and the elder brother’s wife as well as the elder brother. The elder brother’s wife has a joking relationship with the husband’s younger brother. The younger brother of the husband is usually nearer in age to the elder brother’s wife, and there is a danger of sexual relationship developing among them. Through a joking relationship, this tension is eased off. At the same time, the younger brothers have greater loyalty towards their parents as compared to their sister-in-law, and once they get married, they become competitors for resources of the household. Again with the marriage of the husband’s younger brother, his wife comes into the house. With K marriage of husband’s younger sister, there is a chance of the husband’s younger sister’s husband coming into the house. As these marriages increase friction and tension within the household, the older married couple sets up a new household. Such a process is recurrent in the case of households with two or more married brothers, where one by one the brothers separate and

Taxonomy of Households – Part II

177

set up their households. The reasons are varied, such as friction among sisters-in-law, between mother-in-law and daughter-in-law, between brothers and between father and son. The only relationship that rarely goes into confict is that between mother and son. Additional relationships like the husband of a married daughter may also increase the chances of friction. Among all the fve tribes, there is only one case of two married brothers staying together among the Warli tribe, but there are 23 households in which two married brothers are living together with their parents as indicated in Table 7.6. When parents are still around, the chances of friction are much less. Since sisters leave the household after marriage, there is no chance of a brother-sister household. In 24 households in Table 7.4, two households in Table 7.5 and three households in Table 7.6, a married woman is living with a divorced or widower father-in-law who is head of the households. In such households, the daughter-in-law is free not only from the authority of the mother-in-law but also from the control of father-in-law, as a father-in-law is not able to exert direct control over his daughter-in-law because of rules of avoidance. The only way he could do so was through his wife, and at her death, he loses complete control over the women members of his household. He is also dependent on the daughter-in-law for many services that can only be provided by a woman, for example, the cooking and serving of meals.

Brother-brother relationship In households composed of two or more married sons, as indicated in Table 7.6, more complex level of interpersonal relations exists among the members of the households. One of the major issues that cause friction between the married couples is the fact of having or not having children and their numbers and gender. Out of 23 cases, both the married sons have children in 18 households. While in four cases, only elder sons have children, in one case, only the younger son has children. Only one household among the Vasava has three married brothers living together with their parents; this is the maximum limit to which a household seems to have grown. There are 23 households of two married brothers living together with their parental unit (father, mother or father and mother). But in only one case, two married brothers shared the household after the death of their parents (see Table 7.2(4). On the other hand, there are many instances of married brothers living separately from one another, both after and before the death of their parents. In fact, in many cases, one of the brothers lives with parents, and in some cases, parents live separately from the married son in two-member households. This shows that the separation of brothers is normal. Second, societal customs approve that every married man has to set up a new household adjacent to his parents’ home after a few years of his marriage. In most of the cases, it happens with the birth of children. This is the common stage of the development of the domestic group as already described by Goody (1958).

178

Taxonomy of Households – Part II

Now come to the cases of two married brothers living together. In a household composed of two married brothers and their wives and married brothers and sisters with their respective spouses, there is a likelihood of the tension developing. Both the cases will be discussed one by one. In the two married brother household, there are many causes of tension between the brothers and/or their wives. First of all, in the case of the elder brother and younger brother, as Srinivas has rightly observed in his work: [a]s long as the brothers stay united, the social personalities of the younger brothers do not attain completion. The younger brothers are husbands and fathers, and heads of elementary families. But as member of the joint family they are subordinate to the eldest brothers. The headship of an elementary family and membership of a joint family are in some respects incompatible. (1952a: 30; ‘joint family’ means ‘joint household’ here) Second, there is also the possibility of tension between the wives of the brothers. The younger brother’s wife does not easily acknowledge the elder brother’s wife’s position as the head of the household, as they generally come from different villages, sometimes from different social strata within their tribal group and occasionally from a different tribe in the case of intertribal marriage. Unless the brothers marry two sisters, the social and cultural background of their wives tend to be so different that they rarely get along with each other in a joint household. Further in four households, unmarried sons also live together with their married brothers that intensify the irritations. For instance, a younger son has to remain under the authority of not only his parents but also of his elder brother. Similarly, an unmarried son has a lower level of authority as compared to all elder brothers and parents. Complications and contestations may arise with the distribution of specifc chores to the different sons and household chores distributed among the different daughters-in-law.

Interpersonal relationship in households consisting of parental unit and married daughters with their K husbands The second-most prominent type of complex household among the fve tribes is resultant of K marriage. In this type of marriage, the husband goes to live at his wife’s place. Often if a father has no son and has enough cultivable land, he makes it a condition that whosoever wants to marry his daughter should be prepared to live with him, working in his felds, looking after his cattle, etc. Also, if a man is unable to pay bride-price, then he goes as K. It is an arrangement of a household, to have an adult working male for the household. This kind of arrangement is very ancient and has been happening since biblical times, especially in all societies where there is a

Taxonomy of Households – Part II

179

prevalence of bride-price. The anthropological terminology for this practice is bride-service. In this arrangement, it is the daughter who will be heir to her father’s land, cattle and other property that are passed on to her children. Here, K husband is treated just as a supervisor of the cultivation and management of land. He seldom attains the status of the son in the household, at least during the initial years, as he remains an outsider, but later on gradually, he attains more or less similar status as of son, and the household follows the similar set of patterns as of parental unit and married son households. Daughter and her K husband may later disperse and set up a separate household. The term ‘dispersal’ used by Shah (1988) presents here the reality of division, separation and partition together. Out of 442 complex households, 57 households, 12.9 per cent of all complex households, are represented by the co-residence of a parental unit and at least one married daughter (see Tables 7.7–7.9). These households have 238 people, 10.8 per cent of total persons, who live in complex households. Mapping the geographic spread in the fve tribes, one found a decreasing trend from north to south. Warli has the least number of such households, whereas Vasava has a maximum number of households. The Gamits have the central tendency. Further, the tribes living side by side show more or less a similar pattern. Vasava and Chaudhari and Kukana and Warli show a similar pattern in their groups. Hence, it is clear that though K marriage and taking resident-son-in-law is the norm among all the south Gujarat tribes, the girls generally set up a new household with their K husband (see Appendix V). There are few households where even married girls continue to stay with their parents. In the case of southernmost tribes, such as Warli, the chances of formation of a complex household are meagre, while on the northern side, there is a greater chance of joint households. The numbers of parental units with a married daughter and her K husband with or without children are shown in Tables 7.7 and 7.8. Table 7.9 also shows the parental units co-residence of both married son and daughter together. In 14 households in Table 7.7 and 2 households in Table 7.8, widowed mothers are shown acting as the heads of the household. Except this, in the remaining 41 households, the father acts as the head of the household, so one may presume that most households follow the patriarchal norm (Genealogical Charts 7.7 and 7.8). In one household in Table 7.7 (8), a widowed mother-in-law shares household with her widower K son-in-law and his daughter. In one household widower father lives with his widowed daughter. And in another case, widowed mother lives with her divorcee daughter and her children. In 26 households in Table 7.7 and 13 households in Table 7.8, a fatherin-law and K son-in-law live together. In all such cases, the relationship between the father-in-law and K son-in-law passes through three phases.

180

Taxonomy of Households – Part II

Table 7.7 Households of Parental Unit with One Married Daughter S. No.

Kinship Composition

1

Father, mother, married daughter and her K husband Father, mother, married daughter, her K husband and their unmarried children Father, mother and daughter’s children Widower father, married daughter, her K husband and their unmarried children Widower father, widow daughter and her unmarried children Widow mother, married daughter and her K husband Widow mother, the married daughter her K husband and their unmarried children Widow mother, her late daughter's K husband and their unmarried children (daughter) Widow mother and her divorced daughter Total

2

3 4

5

6 7

8

9

Tribal Societies

Total

Gamit Vasava Chaudhari 1

1

2

7

1

1

Kukana

Warli 2

11

1

21

1

1

1

3

1

1

2

2

2

4

2

1

1

10

1

1

1 9

14

1 15

2

2

42

(1) In the frst phase, the father-in-law is a dominant fgure and does not allow the son-in-law to have much voice, and the son-in-law works under the father-in-law. In this phase, the son-in-law acts merely as a manager of the cultivation. In most of the cases, it is the starting point in the household of a newly married daughter and his K husband. This phase is represented in Table 7.7 (1) and 7.8 (1) and is composed of six households. (2) In the second phase, the father-in-law and son-in-law work almost on equal footing for making and managing households and distributing the household work.

Taxonomy of Households – Part II

181

Genealogical Chart 7.7 Households of Parental Unit with One Married Daughter (see Table 7.7) K = Khandadiya.

In such cases, the son-in-law does some extra work other than cultivation. This phase is most commonly found when the son-in-law becomes a father with the birth of his frst child and attains a more important role in managing a household. This phase is represented in Table 7.7 (2) and 7.8 (2). (3) In the third phase, the father-in-law acts as an advisor to the son-in-law for managing household matters. This is a more advanced stage of phase 2 discussed above. The gradual changes happen in the relationship between father-in-law and son-in-law. When the son-in-law reaches the stage when he has more than one child, the father-in-law begins to give him more respect. It is interesting to observe that son-in-law, contrary to a son, never assumes himself to be the head of the household till the father-in-law is present. During the feldwork, it was observed that even after the demise of the father-in-law, the son-in-law is never cited as the head of the household, instead, the daughter is referred as the head of household. During the lifetime of the father-in-law, the son-in-law shares an intimate and affective relationship with him. They spend a considerable time together in the feld, drinking liquor or gossiping. A son-in-law usually is treated with respect,

182

Taxonomy of Households – Part II

Table 7.8 Households of Parental Unit with One Married Daughter and Other Unmarried Children S. Kinship Composition No. 1 2

3 4

Father, mother, unmarried children, married daughter and her K husband Father, mother, unmarried children, the married daughter her K husband and their unmarried children Father, mother, unmarried children, divorcee daughter and her unmarried children Widow mother, unmarried children, the married daughter her K husband Total

Tribal Societies

Total

Gamit Vasava Chaudhari Kukana Warli 2 4

1

1

2

1

1

1

1 4

5

4

2

2

7

2 1

2

2

15

Genealogical Chart 7.8 Households of Parental Unit with One Married Daughter and Other Unmarried Children (see Table 7.8) K = Khandadiya.

but in the case he is a resident, the relationship turns to one of informal intimacy. In case the household is headed by the mother-in-law, the situation is different. She is more dependent on the son-in-law and daughter. So, though she represents the wadil (elder) of the household, still the power is more concentrated in her son-in-law and daughter. Another pattern is also available, where an elderly couple resides in a separate household and their daughter and son-in-law live separately. In such cases, after the death of

Taxonomy of Households – Part II

183

one of them, the surviving person (mother or father) comes to live in the daughter’s household. In all the households of Tables 7.7–7.9, parental unit (father and mother, father or mother) shares the household with a married daughter. As in K marriage, daughter remains at her parental home, so it does not alter her role much in the initial phase. She is considered the prime member of the household and is more concerned with the household when there is only one daughter. She regularly helps the mother in housekeeping and managing unmarried children as she used to do before the marriage. Further, there are cases where the eldest or youngest daughter with her respective K husband remains in the household, while the other daughters are married away to different households or in different villages. In such cases, she is a permanent member of the household having more control over household matters. She is managing resources of the household with her husband and retains authority. In fve households in Table 7.9, parental unit lives with both their married son, his wife and daughter and her K husband together with or without their unmarried children (Genealogical Chart 7.9). This combination is rare among the tribe and is not found in all fve tribes but limited to Gamit, Kukana and Warli. So overall, it is not the norm of south Gujarat tribals to share the same household with a married son and married daughter together. In this kind of situation, in initial years, the daughter is content to play a subordinate role, but later on, with the birth of her children, she gains more control in the management of the household. At this stage, there is friction observed between daughter and mother or father, or both as well as with other siblings, and she may set up her new household with her K husband and children. At the later stage of such household, there is a possibility that one of the parents come to live with the daughter and her K husband. But this situation is very rare. In households composed of son-in-law and other unmarried brothers or sister-in-law, there are mutual frictions. Two types of situations arise. When unmarried brother-in-law and sister-in-law are of younger age, they have a very cordial relationship with their elder sister’s husband. Especially as the sister’s husband is a K, the relationship is informal and friendly. During the initial years, the elder sister’s husband takes care of his wife’s younger siblings with the child-like care along with joking relationship. Tension may develop between them at the later stage as they are getting older. The loyalty of the wife’s younger siblings is more towards the parentsin-law. In later years, they become a source of trouble as they become the competitor of resources of the household. As discussed earlier, the wife’s adult siblings have an option either to live in their parental household or to move out to live in a parents-in-law’s household. So, there are possibilities

184

Taxonomy of Households – Part II

Table 7.9 Households of Parental Unit with Both Son and Daughter Married and Co-residence S. No.

Kinship Composition

1

Father, mother, one married son, his wife and their children, and one married daughter and her K husband Father, mother, one married son, his 1 wife and one married daughter and her K husband and their unmarried children Father, mother, unmarried daughter, one married son, his wife and children and one married daughter with K husband Widow mother, one married son, his 1 wife and unmarried; and one married daughter, her K husband and their unmarried children Total 2

2

3

4

Tribal Societies

Total

Gamit Kukana Warli 1

1 1

2

1

1

1

1

2

5

Genealogical Chart 7.9 Parental Unit with Both Married Son and Daughter Living Co-residence (see Table 7.9)

Taxonomy of Households – Part II

185

of new members coming in from both sides. That is the cause of tension between them, and they get separated in different households. The study hypothesises that it is the reason why the study has not found a household consisting of two married sisters.

Interpersonal relationship in households consisting of parental units and married grandchildren Of all the complex households, 37 (8.4 per cent) households consist a parental unit with the married grandchildren. These households are shown in Tables 7.10 and 7.11. These have two possibilities, married granddaughters and grandsons (Genealogical Chart 7.10). The frst kind that is married granddaughter household is only found in the Vasava tribe. The study has found fve households of a married granddaughter and her K husband residing with the grandparental units, only in Vasavas. Maximum per cent of households of grandparents living with married grandsons are found among Chaudharis, whereas maximum number of people residing in such households are found among Warlis. As both Chaudharis and Vasavas live side by side, they show similar patterns. But Kukanas and Warlis are different despite sharing similar space. In Kukana tribe, it is rare to fnd married grandson living with grandparents. There is a chance for grandson setting up a new household near his own parental or grandparents’ household. When both grandson and granddaughter households are compared, one found that other than Gamit, tribal groups have more tendency of having married grandchildren sharing with grandparents households. Table 7.10 Households of Grandparental unit with Married Granddaughter S. No.

Kinship composition

Vasava

1

Grandfather, grandmother, their married son and his wife, one unmarried granddaughter, one married granddaughter, her GJ husband and children Widower grandfather, his married daughter her GJ husband, one married granddaughter, her GJ Husband and children Widow grandmother, her married son and his wife, one unmarried grandson, one married granddaughter and her GJ husband Widow grandmother, her married son and his wife, one unmarried grandson, one married granddaughter her GJ husband and children Widow grandmother, her married son and his wife, one married granddaughter her GJ husband and their children Total

1

2 3 4 5

1 1 1 1 5

186

Taxonomy of Households – Part II

Genealogical Chart 7.10 Grandparental Unit with Married Granddaughter (see Table 7.10)

In each household in Table 7.11, there is at least one married grandson, his wife, with or without children, grandparental unit (complete in eight cases with grandfather and grandmother), two cases with widower grandfather and seven cases represented by widowed grandmother. Of these 17 households, in 5 households unmarried grandchildren are also present, while one household consists of an unmarried son and in one widowed daughter also shares the household. Ten houses are headed by a male member, that is, the grandfather, and in seven households, females are the heads of the household. Majority of the households are headed by single grandparents, nine by widower grandfather and eight by widowed grandmother. Together these households show the limits of the household development process. They are few because their existence itself is created by special circumstances of a life cycle of household and its members.

Grandfather, grandmother, their married son, his wife, one married grandson, his wife and children Grandfather, grandmother, their married son, his wife, unmarried grandchildren, and one married grandson, his wife and children Grandfather, grandmother, their married daughter, her K husband, one married grandson (DS), his wife and children Grandfather, grandmother, their married daughter, her K husband, and two married grandsons (DS). Elder grandson has children. Grandfather, grandmother, their widow daughter-in-law and married grandson, his wife and children Grandfather, grandmother, their widow daughter, one married grandson, his wife and children Grandfather, grandmother, separated daughter (from her K husband), one married grandson, his wife and children Grandfather, grandmother, one married grandson, his wife and children Widow grandfather, married son, his wife, unmarried grandchildren, one married grandson, his wife and children Widow grandfather, married son, his wife, unmarried grandchildren, two married grandsons and their wives Widowed grandmother, her married son and his wife, one married grandson, his wife and children Widow grandmother, her son and his wife, unmarried grandchildren, and one married grandson and his wife Widow grandmother, her unmarried son, her married son, his wife, unmarried grandchildren, and one married grandson, his wife and children Widow grandmother, her son, his wife, and two married grandsons, their wives and their unmarried children Widow grandmother, one married grandson, his wife and their children Widow grandmother, one married grandson (DS), his wife and their children Widow grandmother, widow daughter, one married grandson(DS) and his wife Total

1

15 16 17

14

13

12

11

10

8 9

7

6

5

4

3

2

Kinship Composition

S. No.

Table 7.11 Households of Grandparental Unit with Married Grandson

2

1

1

1

2

Gamit

1 7

2

1

1

1

1

2 7

1

1

1

1

1

Vasava Chaudhari

Tribal Societies

4

1 1

1

1

Kukana

7

2

1

1

1

1

1

Warli

3 1 3 25

3

1

4

2

2

1 2

1

1

1

1

1

2

3

Total

188

Taxonomy of Households – Part II

Genealogical Chart 7.11 Households of Grandparental Unit with Married Grandsons (see Table 7.11) = Living in a separate household. In fgure (16), daughter, her K husband and their unmarried son living in a separate household. Daughter is married away. IH = First K husband, who ran away with a different woman and separation is without proper divorce. IIH = Second K husband.

In three cases two married grandsons, their wives and unmarried children share a household with the grandparental unit (Table 7.11 (4, 10, and 14)). Further, in four cases grandsons are from the maternal side, represented by daughter’s son (DS). And at the last, the study has found that having one son has got a greater chance to live with grandparents and their married grandsons (Genealogical Chart 7.11). Second, it is an arrangement made to take care of old grandparents. The relationships between grandchildren and grandparents are mutually loving and caring. The grandchildren have enough freedom and care while living with their grandparents.

Conclusion This chapter had two basic aims. The frst one is to clearly differentiate the household as one of the important dimensions of family, a larger unit,

Taxonomy of Households – Part II

189

which has been ignored from a long time in tribal studies arena. The second one is to elaborate on different phases of household process over a time period and demonstrate how it became a minimal recognised social unit that make sense in tribal south Gujarat. This being an important question acts both as the beginning and as the end product of the kinship and marriage network. That is why this is called the building block on which social structure is based. At the level of the feld, when one asks people about what constitutes their family, many possibilities may be evoked. Among the tribes understudy, the family includes the household, parental unit and all his children who may reside in different households, a lineage segment or a group of people residing under one head of the household, which also includes the servants. All these defnitions convey different meanings and are usually related to each other. Further, the institutions may defne the family based on biological or legal criteria (e.g. marriage or birth) where members may defne their family based on affection, shared responsibilities, roles or interactional processes. Who constitutes the family can also be based on the beliefs and values of a cultural or religious group that exists within the larger society. But for the anthropological understanding, one needs to distinguish one from another. Among the many characteristics of the family, one is household, which has been focused in these last two chapters. A household is a basic economic production and consumption unit comprising members of the family, but others may also be included. The household is a dynamic concept that goes to several stages as the members marry, grow up and die or leave the household to set up other units. Fortes categorises these into four phases.1 Theoretically, this has been defned as the developmental cycle of the domestic group (Goody 1963). In his ‘introduction’ to Goody’s The Developmental Cycle in Domestic Groups (1958), Fortes distinguishes between the domestic group and family. The term ‘family’ relates to reproduction in the narrow biological sense, whereas the ‘domestic group’ is the nucleus of social reproduction (Fortes 1958). Reproduction and replacement of household relationships is a cyclic process. It starts with a nuclear or basic family, father, mother and unmarried children. Then during the next phase, children get married, additional members come or leave the household and form the various compositions of the complex household as has been discussed in this chapter. With time these children marry and become parents and replace previous generations. But the whole process may go from various phases constituting different kinship compositions residing in a household as discussed in this chapter. In all the tribal societies, medium-sized and simple households predominate over large and complex households. The medium-sized households constitute 60.2 per cent of total households with 60.9 per cent of the total population. Next come the large households which, though less than small size households (21.6 per cent with 10.5 per cent of the total population),

190

Taxonomy of Households – Part II

constitute the larger population. They are 16.9 per cent of total households with 25.7 per cent of the total population. The very large households are very few among the tribes (1.3 per cent households with 3.0 per cent of the total population). In the study sample, the simple households form 54.6 per cent and the complex households 45.4 per cent, of the total number of households. The simple households account for 42.1 per cent and the complex households 57.9 per cent of the all fve tribal populations. Thus, it is clear from the above that simple households are more in number and have fewer persons than in complex households. Second, comparing the simple and complex households in all fve tribes, it was observed that Vasava represents a maximum number of households, 62.4 per cent of households and 48.4 per cent of the population resided in such households, while Chaudhari represents the least number of households and population in such compositions. They have 47.8 per cent households with only 35.7 per cent of the population. On the other hand, in complex households, the situation is reversed. Chaudharis represent maximum and Vasavas represent the least, both in terms of household and population residing in such households. It is a startling fact that despite living side by side in a neighbouring space, two tribal groups refect differences in the organisation of the households. The compositions of the households are informed by the pattern of post-marital residence of both the sons and the daughters, and interestingly, there are a number of variations of residential patterns that one may observe among these tribal groups. The study has seen that among the series of norms subsumed by this principle, the co-residence of husband-wife and unmarried children is at the core of the composition of 404 households (41.5 per cent), followed by the residence of a parental unit with one married son together in 222 households (22.8 per cent). Both the types of residence together constitute 64.3 per cent of the total population. Among 626 households out of 973, these two dominant types of residential patterns are observed. In the development process of a household, this type of composition is in the initial phase of development of simple and complex households. In the frst case, when the son grows up and marries, he brings his wife as an added member to the household, leading to multiple relations within the complex household. Every simple household belongs to one of the phases in the process of progression towards or regression from such household. There are only 19 single-member households among the fve tribes. If one among the parents die, then the other one is taken care of by one or the other sons or daughters. This study has observed that some heads of the household are sons, or daughters, in spite of having their parents living with them. In general, tribals always refer to parents as the head of their household.

Taxonomy of Households – Part II

191

Among the tribal societies, in case there is no son and they have much cultivable land, they take K for their daughters. Thus, they can develop a complex household. Some kinship compositions are rare. There are only two households (in simple households) that constitute unmarried brothers living together. Second, only one household (in complex households) constitutes of two married brothers sharing the same households without their parents. Only in four households, father and unmarried children households are limited to Kukana and Warli tribes. Further, some kinship compositions are conspicuously absent in south Gujarat tribes. Brother-sister household is completely absent. Similarly, there is an absence of any household having two or more married daughters living. In the development process of household, this is the point where a new household is created with the dispersal of members. There is a signifcant number (23 households) having a composition of the parental unit with two married sons, their wives and children living together.

Note 1 Fortes compares the indidiual life cycle with that of domestic group. He distinguishes between four major phases in a person’s life cycle, which are closely connected with what he regards as the three main phases of the developmental cycle in domestic groups. These are (1) the phase of expansion: from the marriage of a couple to its completion through offspring. The frstborn has particular importance, as he ‘opens the womb’ and can be regarded as the creator of parenthood. This phase lasts as long as the children are economically, affectively and jurally dependent on their parents; (2) the phase of dispersion: the marriage of the children and their bringing forth of offspring; (3) the phase of replacement: death of the original couple and their replacement by the families of their children (1958: 4–5). The three stages in a person’s life cycle are marked by changing structural relationships for the individual in each of these stages. In the frst phase, the child is wholly contained in the matricell; it is a mere appendage to its mother. In the second phase, the father/husband assumes responsibility for the mother/child unit and for the child in relation to society at large. In the third phase, the individual comes under the jural and ritual authority and care of the domestic group and its head; the child is not yet jurally autonomous. In the fourth phase, fnally, the individual is admitted to the politicojural domain and becomes jurally responsible. On these points – the reconstruction of phases in an individual’s life cycle – he was stimulated by Miller’s The Generations: A Study of the Cycle of Parents and Children (1938; see Fortes 1974: 81–82). The infuences of van Gennep (1960 [1908]) and Malinowski, especially his Sexual Life of Savages (1929), are also discernible.

8

Social Structure and Change in Tribes

This chapter reviews the objective of this research which was to enquire into the nature of the social structure of tribal societies in western India. Most aspects of tribal social structure have been exhaustively dealt in this volume. The frst chapter highlighted the paucity in the structurological studies regarding tribals in western India, particularly in Gujarat. This research has also raised fundamental questions on the unevenness in the anthropological and sociological studies on caste and tribal societies in the region. Compared to an in-depth understanding of the structure of caste-based societies, there is a superfcial understanding of tribal social structure and of tribal villages in India. Since 1950s, through the village studies using concepts of social structure efforts have been made to understand Indian village. These ‘village studies’ by sociologists and anthropologists generally focused on a ‘village’ as a unit for a holistic study. These studies were not only different in their subject matter, namely, village society, but also in their innovative approach to understanding rural India. Unlike earlier Indological perspectives that were constructed from Hindu scriptures and historical records, these village studies were based on feldwork. Though the village studies brought out a vast amount of empirical data, they mainly focused on caste-based social formations rather than tribal formations. The caste studies focused on the vertical dimensions in the village. However, these rarely examined tribal society from a vertical and horizontal dimension. The frst chapter also discussed the methodological lacunae in tribal studies in India. Most of the earlier tribal monographs have dealt rather superfcially with individual tribes in a given area, thus perpetuating the image of tribes as isolated units (Shah 2010: 20). However, ground realities were seen to be different.1 People from two or more tribes, and even some caste groups, were observed to be living alongside each other in a given area, or sometimes in a single village. But this fnding has hardly been noted by earlier studies. Thus, while attempting to bridge this methodological gap, a set of different tribes and their villages were selected for our enquiry – these were identifed as one tribe in two neighbouring villages, two tribes in three

DOI: 10.4324/9781003299790-8

Social Structure and Change in Tribes

193

adjacent villages and more than two tribes with some other people from different castes and religions in three hamlets of a single village. Before starting our investigation, the research team encountered several scholarly problems. Some of these problems were how to study the social structure of tribal communities and their constituent units. The literature review threw light on some of the issues, while other problems were resolved during the analysis of the feld data. As social anthropologists and sociologists identifed ‘social structure’ as one of the most fundamental concepts in their study, theorists have rightly and consistently argued that social systems and social relationship in human society should be understood in the light of social structure. Social structure is an ordered arrangement of parts, the components of which are humans and their social relations. These arrangements are regulated by institutional rules regarding their social behaviour. So, to study the social structure of a society, one needs to understand these arrangements which can be studied by observing actual repetitive human behaviour. Based on the above defnitions and examining the data obtained from the feld, one can state that social structure is composed of a system of relationships. The understanding of one unit and its relations with respect to another unit helps to understand the structure as a whole. Similar approaches have been used, by several other scholars (Srinivas 1952b; Mayer 1960; Shah 1988; Lobo 1995), in order to study the internal structure of caste. Several scholars have studied caste structure, segmentation of different groups, classes and categories in different regions of western India. However, we found that there are not enough studies that have been carried out on tribal social structures. The current volume, thus, is an attempt to fll the void in the methodological study of tribal-based societies in western India. The second chapter has profled the tribals of south Gujarat and has also provided the methodological approach to the study. This investigation has taken a holistic view of a village from each of the fve tribes and has not only focused on the social structure of the tribals in these villages but has also studied the horizontal dimension to some extent. The social structure was seen to revolve around the nucleus of household and family, lineage, clan, marriage and network of kinship and affnity, thereby highlighting the role of kinship in tribal society. The analyses on the individual micro-studies of these tribes are followed by a comparison of their social institutions. Chapter 3 and the following chapters of the volume presented the analysis of the feld data that were collected during the enquiry. Our investigation had led us to surmise that the groups and subsequent divisions in these societies had been created by various linkages of the structural units. Several assumptions were made in order to examine these linkages which are based on factors like kinship, lineage, clan, marriage networks, household and territorial units such as villages. However, these units may not always portray a linear entity but often get intermingled in everyday social behaviours.

194

Social Structure and Change in Tribes

Before we analysed our data, it was considered necessary to present the linkages of the kinship system and the behaviour patterns in tribal societies. Though the spatial spread of these tribes was taken as a variable, it was noted that their kinship ties usually determine their kinship territory. Normally these kinship ties interrelated with lineage, clan and villages of a particular tribe to form their kinship space. They may belong to a particular tribe, but their sense of belonging was found to be limited to the kinship territory based mainly on clans or on lineages. The clan or non-clan groups are further fragmented into several lineage groups. Each lineage is an actual kin-based local organisation, and this local organisation is not limited to a particular village alone. It was found that several families of a particular lineage may be scattered in different villages further. Thus, members from more than one lineage were also residing in one of the villages. Adrian Mayer (1960) has used concepts such as caste of recognition and caste of co-operation in his study of castes in central India. These concepts were examined in this study. As a rule, a kin-based tribe upholds the tribe of co-operation within their kinship circle. In general, kinship groups and boundaries are created by marital linkages. And these marital exchanges are mapped according to spatial distance, villages, direction, or repetitiveness, etc., found over a few generations. Working on this idea, one can identify the geographical space of a group in nearby villages and by which a tribal group can recognise and associate as their area. The marital networks in these villages constitute of networks in a society where different families are connected through lineages and clans. Hence, this becomes their social space, and this idea of kin network becomes important in order to defne their territorial units. Normally, these territorial units can be studied at the tribal or clan group level. Primarily, these regions remain more or less constant for particular clans because of the repetitive marital networks over generations. It is then relatively easy for people to trace their kin members readily in a specifc region, and clan members can claim this region as their own. Thus, several clan networks can be combined to form a particular region of a tribal group. This type of structure was observed in the tribes of south Gujarat, chiefy among the Vasavas who lived between the two rivers (Narmada and Tapi) and the Chaudharis who lived on both sides (north and south) of the river Tapi. At the basic level, social behaviour occurs at the residence unit, viz., the household. The household is not just a residence but also a kin group which is linked to family. To understand these basic units, the study has used both numerical composition and kinship data. The resultant fndings and analyses have been presented in Chapters 6 and 7 on different types of households which are examined from a developmental process perspective. We fnd it important to note that this is not just a cyclic process but a process which has its own progression and regression (Shah 1974: 155). This process depends not only on the demographic factors of society but also on

Social Structure and Change in Tribes

195

life-cycle events like birth, marriage and death as well as on the norms of residence and degree of observance of the norms, such as resident-son-inlaw – which is a system practised in tribal societies. The study revealed important aspects, such that the local people in the area rarely see their society as ‘tribe’ or as a whole group except while interacting with outsiders, or of different tribes or with government machinery. People see their society largely in terms of households, families and lineages. They may meet other members of the same tribe when they visit households in other villages of their kin. In this setup, the village becomes a structural unit where various groups reside and have close interactions with each other. Villagers cooperate in several activities, such as roof making, digging a well and sharing agricultural implements, bullocks and buffaloes during the agricultural season. They also participate collectively in a variety of rituals and ceremonies, festivals and feasts. Collective participation in various activities is not just shared by villagers of the same village, but it was observed that residents from other villages, often related by lineage and clan, also participate. However, how they operate in a particular village depends upon the particular constellation of major social groups residing in the village-like single tribe village, two tribe village or more than two tribes living with other caste people. It was seen that in a mono-tribal village, there was a better collective participation than a multi-tribal village. In this manner, one can say that the social structure of tribal societies revolves around three domains, namely kinship, marriage and household and family structures. The kinship terms and their usage form the building blocks of the kinship system. These terms have been studied in relation to the larger implications they wield on the social structure; they are therefore analysed in relation to the whole system of which they are a part (RadcliffeBrown 1950: 7). It was observed that households and families are grouped into lineages in the village which are, in turn, grouped into clans. Thus, after a few generations, the households in a lineage group get distributed into different villages, mainly through migration and marriage. Each lineage is an exogamous group and thus regulates marriages. Since a lineage is patrilineal, the daughters move out of the lineage through marriage and sons bring their wives into it. A lineage is not just a group of recognition, but it is also a ‘corporate group’. All members of a lineage collectively participate in one or more rituals. Each tribe is usually divided into several clan groups, each having lineages and segmentation of lineages. This concluding chapter attempts to weave the studies of fve tribes based on our theoretical perspectives. It also explicates as to the objective of our research and study, the fndings that emerge and how this work contributes to the theories of social structure. The analysis and the ensuing discussions of this research have also outlined the emerging realities and changes in the tribal social structure.

196

Social Structure and Change in Tribes

Commonalities and differences As has been mentioned earlier, the present study is an attempt to enquire into the social structure of the tribes while establishing and identifying the similarities and differences that exist among them. These similarities and differences could be identifed in terms of geographic distribution, settlement patterns, linguistic affnities and economic pursuits. Similar characteristics were also found in the internal features of their social structures, such as household and family, marriage and social space and kinship structures. A large number of differences were found, for instance, the villages of Vasava and Chaudhari were nucleated types, whereas the Gamit villages were of the dispersed type, while the villages of Kukana and Warli fell in highly dispersed category where size of the hamlets are as big as a village itself, and it behaves like a village itself. The following themes have also been dealt with in this section: • • •

Comparative analysis of kinship system and behaviour Comparative analysis of marriage and social space Comparative analysis of household and family

Comparative analysis of kinship system and behaviour Three categories of kinship have been identifed here, viz., consanguineal relationship (blood relative), affnal relationship (relationship by marriage) and fctive kinship that are found among the tribes. It was perceived that the nucleus of the tribal social structure revolves around several aspects like household and family, lineage, clan and kindred. The clan is prominent in some of the tribes of south Gujarat, especially to the south of the Tapi River. The clan system also divides the tribe into several separate groups, each having their name and identity. Each tribe has a unique pattern of distribution in their specifc region. The lineage and lineage segment plays an important part in everyday life. The kinship system of south Gujarat tribals carries the elements of both North and South Indian kinship system. It has more features of the middle Indian kinship system. Moreover, the comparison of descent groups2 in these fve tribes shows that they share some similarities. However, certain differences also distinguish them from each other. It was found that the similarities found among the descent groups outnumber the differences. All these fve societies in our study belonged to the patrilineal and exogamous unit whose members were considered as brothers. In fact, it was observed that the most distinguishing feature among these tribes was the absence or the presence of ‘clan’ and its related corporate activities. As our observations moved from Vasava in the north to Warli in the south, with remaining three tribes in between, one could identify and fnd features of corporate clan activities. While in three tribes, namely Gamit, Kukana and Warli, clan was present, the Vasava and

Social Structure and Change in Tribes

197

Chaudhari did not have the concept of the clan. However, some segmentation was observed. This segmentation is based on linguistic, geographic or socio-economic factors. Vasavas are a large tribe spatially spread and speak different variations of the Vasavi dialect. The subdivisions among them are based on the dialects they speak and the territory they occupy. They distinguish several local groups, speaking different sub-dialects of Vasavi such as Dubli, Kahudi, Vahudi, Khatali, Ambudi, Mathwadi, or Dongri, Dehwali, Nansuli, Noire and Kotli. These sub-dialects do not exhibit major differences except for a few words, intonation and pronunciation. The people of one local group refer to other groups on the basis of their respective geographical location: Dehwalia towards the east or the area which fell towards the rising sun, Ambudia towards the west, Khatalia towards the river valley and Dongri for hill people. No restrictions were observed with respect to social interaction among these groups including marriage. Similarly, Chaudhari tribe has four main endogamous subdivisions, namely Nana, Mota, Pavagadhi and Valvi Chaudhari. The Nana and Mota segmentation are based on socio-economic status and religious-ritual myths. These two divisions are also known as Nana (small) or Chokapur, while Mota (big) is also known as Chantala or Santala. The Takaria, Ravalia and Naladri Chaudhari are also referred to as Pavagadhi based on their migration history. Returning to the other three tribes located south of the Tapi, one can fnd other features. Among the Gamit, there is a notional awareness of clan. They have clan names. But they do not represent them as corporate units, nor do they worship clan deity or are they exogamous. Around 30 per cent of the people who belong to two adjacent Gamit villages seem not to know their clan’s name at all. Moreover, Vasava, Chaudhari and Gamit do not use the clan as their surname. Instead, they use their tribe’s name as a surname. So, the clan as a category is less used in social engagements like marriage. Among the Kukana and the Warli, everybody knows and identifes with their clan names. They use their clan as their surname, not their tribe’s name; clan exogamy is strictly followed while considering marriage. Hence, to sum up, we could state that (1) the concept of clan is absent as in the case of Vasava and the Chaudhari, (2) the concept of clan is notional as in the case of Gamit and (3) the concept of clan is omnipresent as observed among Kukana and Warli. Further, among these three, Gamit, Kukana and Warli, a multi-clan system seems to be prevalent at the village level. It means in these villages more than one clan was found with a varying number of households and families. For instance, in the two Gamit villages, there were 8 clans, while in the two Kukana hamlets there were 17 clans, and in the two Warli hamlets 15 clans were identifed. Even at the socio-economic level, they were also not considered equal, though at the initial stages of the feldwork, the villagers told the research

198 Social Structure and Change in Tribes team that all clans were considered as equal. However, later ethnographic observations negated this feature. In the entire neighbourhood, certain clans were seen as having higher status than others. This was mainly due to their dominance in numbers and better economic status when compared to the other clans. These factors made them more attractive, and we highly sought after for marriage proposals. The fact remains, however, that marriages among the clans are based on older ties since generations. For instance, among the 15 Warli clans, three clans – Kanat, Vejal and Hilim – were considered higher than the others. These clans also claim to be the earliest settlers in the village, going back six to seven generations. As far as the lineage system is considered, the fve tribes do not report similar patterns. Gatherings which are based on lineage were not observed among the Vasava, Chaudhari and Gamit tribes, but these gatherings were regularly observed among the Kukana and the Warli tribes. In the latter group, if some of their lineage segments were dispersed, the members of the lineage come together to collaborate at least during certain important ritualistic occasions. Ancestor worship is an important ritual and is observed as pedhi worship (Kukana) or dev worship (Warli); it occurs during Diwali time (October or November) and coincides with the harvesting season. On such occasions, persons who have migrated to far-off villages are expected to return to their ancestral village in order to participate in the ceremonies and rituals. This could be observed among certain families who could be living in a village for several generations and yet claim membership of a particular lineage in another village. Such instances were clearly seen among lineage members of the Bhoya clan of Pathshali Falia who had migrated two generations back to Nana Pondha village in neighbouring Kaprada taluka. Yet every year during pedhi worship, they return without fail to Pathshali Falia.

Comparative analysis of marriage and social space Marriage is considered an important institution in all fve communities and embodies special cultural traits and features. All these communities demonstrate certain similarities and resemblances in their marriage customs. The similarities were more visible considering the meaning and objectives of marriage, criteria and process of mate selection. It was evident that in all the tribes, marriage was the means to getting an additional hand in order to carry out household responsibilities as well as agricultural activities. However, broadly speaking marriage ensured continuance of lineage, sexual gratifcation and social recognition and gave legitimacy to the offspring. Violation of marriage norms led to ostracism from the tribe or imposition of a substantial pecuniary penalty upon the man, thus highlighting the fact that social recognition is an important objective of getting married among the tribes in south Gujarat.

Social Structure and Change in Tribes

199

The criteria for selecting a mate appeared to be more or less similar among the fve tribes. The selection was mainly based on location of the villages, fnancial background and physical appearance. The frst criterion defnes their marriage network and their ‘social space’, which is an important norm for mate selection. ‘Social space’ is considered by anthropologists to be the central element of social life, one of the three dimensions of space-time-culture within which human life is immersed, which are at once universal and yet variously conceived and experienced by different societies. This anthropological analysis aims to account for the dynamics of meaning construction, the lived experience of place and the practices of space within particular societies. The task set out for anthropologists studying space in the context of socio-cultural life is mainly to observe, elicit responses through interviews and record facts using participatory research of all features, symbols, meanings, beliefs, activities and experiences relating to space and place in a particular society; in other words it means “to look at things obsessively up-close” (Geertz 1996: 260). Subsequently, creating an ethnographic account recorded from the perspective of those who live it as a culturally meaningful experience is an important aspect. A record of space examines how this ‘space’ is socio-culturally organised and experienced – similarly or differently – by social groups, while a study of place records how spatialised culture is lived: learned, experienced, conceived, contested, resisted, transgressed, remembered or longed for. Spatial networks created by marital linkages lay down the way for occurrences of maximum marriages. Overall, it was observed that marriages in these tribal groups take place within proximal distance and within specifc groups of villages, which had linkages from fve to six generations. This research showed that there is an inverse ratio between distance and the frequency of marriages contracted. Similarly, it was found that the principles of exogamy and endogamy were basic concepts to the negotiation of marriage. Tribal endogamy, clan and lineage exogamy and village endogamy were observed. Similarities were also noticed in the bride-price with regard to mode of payment, the person who offered bride-price and the person who received the bride-price as well as in the process of bargaining and fnalisation of the bride-price. The manner in which selection of mates was done varied according to marriage by negotiation to frequent marriages by elopement, which seem to have become more common. Monogamous families always predominate among the fve tribes, and serial monogamy is commonly found among them, that is not to say that polygamy is not practised. A man could remarry after divorcing or after becoming a widower. The case is similar for women, divorced or widowed, which is known as serial monogamy. In simple terms, it means one spouse at one time. One forms a new relationship with a new spouse after the dissolution of an older relationship with the frst spouse due to divorce, death or desertion.

200 Social Structure and Change in Tribes Some notable differences distinguish the institution of marriage prevalent among these tribes. There is no concept of the clan and hence no rule of clan exogamy among Vasava, Chaudhari and Gamit, whereas among the Kukana and Warli clan, exogamy exists. This study has recorded several successive steps to contracting a marriage. In all the tribes, the engagement ceremony is preceded by a wedding ritual. In some tribes, the engagement ceremony is more important than the wedding. The couple can live together after the engagement, and they can perform a wedding later on when they gather enough money for the event. This is more popular among the Warlis, where wedding or lagan may be or may not be performed at all. Marriage ritual is a very complex one and is performed by the tribal elders, bhuva or by a pastor in the case of Christian tribals. In some Sanskritised tribes, such as Kukana and Warli, marriages are performed by Brahmins from the neighbouring town. In marital linkages, some new phenomena have been observed. Some new marital linkages have been found in quite faraway villages and hamlets as well as outside their tribe. This aspect is responsible for the change as well as continuity in marriage social structure among the tribes. Educated tribals in the last two generations have been engaging in intertribal marriages irrespective of physical distances.

Comparative analysis of household and family It is a known fact that kinship and marriage typically create a family, but the notion of ‘family’ is not clear and straightforward to the local societies. It delineates basically three types of entities, viz., the family as a genealogical unit, the domestic group as an economic unit and the household as a residential unit. Particular attention must be paid to the ways they interact with each other. The study showed that investigating different processes and phases of the household are important to understanding the structure of tribal families. We observed that in all fve tribal societies, medium-sized and simple households predominate over the large and complex households. Simple and complex households have different ratios and proportions. The most conspicuous similarities are visible in the concepts of household and family, household types, division of labour and principles governing the inheritance of property and surnames. Household and family are the primary social units among tribes, from which they derive their basic identity. Households practically work as the basic unit of production, consumption and reproduction. A household is a secure place to live in that provides a relaxed life and supplies sustenance and food, but it is not a static unit. A household becomes complex in nature in the context of its social relations – through the addition of more members into the family unit. In most common cases, the process of adding more members into the

Social Structure and Change in Tribes

201

household is done by two methods: through reproduction or marriage. This expansion of personal relationships is termed as consanguineal and affnal, respectively. Among the similarities found among the fve tribes, the most important was the pattern of establishing a new household after marriage. In the majority of cases, a new household is established near the parental abode. Usually, it was customary for the new household to share some items from the parent household. However, in almost all cases, the splitting of the household does not mean partition of parental property. The partition of the parent property usually follows a step-by-step process and, generally, leads to the division of agricultural land. In between these intervening years, between splitting of household and division of agricultural land, parents and children of household shared their labour pool for common agricultural production. An important characteristic of a household was its economic independence and interdependence with the other households in the larger kinship groups. Much of the economic activities could be seen at the functional level of the household. Thus, a household obtains autonomy in the economic sphere and becomes a self-suffcient entity. However, during times of need, closely related families and kinsmen often co-operate and work as one unit on agricultural lands. Although many were found living in independent households, they received support from the household of their kin members. Similarly, it also involves the sharing of cooked food among closely related households. Further, there is no logic in the argument that a large extended household was essential to support an economy with many working members. Hence, this fact led us to observe how individual households could be better organised to meet their economic needs. At the same time, they were ready for greater interpersonal relations and interactions for corporate activities. Co-operation and corporate nature are extended further to kin members and kindred families. Larger network of the families’ kin members is found beyond the simple unit of a household. Kapadia (1959: 71) has found similar cases in Navsari and Surat stating that “…even in those cases where the property is divided and the income is not pooled. …[T]he constituent families (households) maintain their connection through mutual co-operation, right and obligations other than those of property…” Moreover, it was observed that there are some basic factors which alter the composition of a household through birth, marriage and death of an individual. These processes are the stages of a life cycle which alter the composition of the household through the process of expansion, dispersion and dissolution. The phase of expansion is from the time marriage between two people takes place until procreation, which is stage of the completion of their family. The phase of dispersion begins with the marriage of the oldest child and continues till all the children are married and thus dispersed into different units. On the death of the parents, the last phase in the developmental cycle begins when the youngest or eldest head their own families.

202

Social Structure and Change in Tribes

The comparative social structure of tribes Based on the comparative study of repetitive behaviour among the fve tribal societies, the social structure of tribes in south Gujarat can be ascertained. This section has briefy summarised the internal social structure of the fve tribes: Gamit, Vasava, Chaudhari, Kukana and Warli. The south Gujarat tribal social system is polysegmentary, separated into several successive groups and orders. The entire structure is the tribe (locally termed as Gyati, Jati), and the basic or elemental of segments is a household (locally called ghar), which is a basic economic and social unit. The underlying principle of this alignment is based on patrilineal descent, which is generally supported by genealogical evidence or in some cases at least based on certain traditions like fctive kinship.3 Tribe Among the members of the tribe, the awareness of the jati – that they belong to a particular tribe – is important, and this makes them aware of their status as a Scheduled Tribe (ST). But their jati identity (tribal identity – belongingness or ‘we-ness’) does not extend beyond a certain geographical space. This sense of belongingness or horizontal unity for the entire tribe, however, may come up only during special circumstances – for instance, during elections, while interacting with the state and adhering to its welfare schemes or in social setting with outsiders. But in the social context, their identity is more or less limited to a ‘geospatial level’. They usually marry within their tribe. But in reality, their marriages are confned only to a certain space (villages). Their marital networks are confned to specifc villages, within a radius of 20–30 kilometres and over six generations at least. Over several generations, they have overlapping and multiple relationships within these villages. Clan The tribe was found to have segmentary features which can be divided into two types – type A and type B (see Table 8.1). While type A is a non-clanbased segmentation, type B is a clan-based segmentation. The clan-based segment may also contain the ‘local group’ segmentation. In type A, the endogamous tribe is divided into several groups based on locality, which may extend over a wide area or may be restricted to a group of villages. The differences which exist may be based on linguistic, geographic, socioeconomic, religious or any other criteria. These local groups follow different marriage rules. Each local group again is divided into lineages, and marriages within such a group are regarded as incestuous and, therefore, strictly prohibited. This type of social structure was observed among the Vasava and Chaudhari tribes. In type B structure, the endogamous tribe is

Social Structure and Change in Tribes

203

divided into several exogamous clans, each of which is again divided into several exogamous lineages. The Gamit, Kukana and Warli tribes fall into this type of social structure (see Table 8.1). In this manner clans are said to be highly segmented, and several segments are seen to be scattered over a wider area, as well as interspersed with the segments of many other clans. It was observed that clanship had virtually no regional or corporate signifcance. The several segments were independent of the other and owed no allegiance to any other segment. In no sphere of activity does the entire clan, or their representative members, come together in collective participation or collaboration. Only a principle of descent recognition and exogamy is valued, and clans have little signifcance among these fve tribes. Lineage Within a clan there are several lineages. In a lineage genealogical relationship can be established though not in the clan. Within a clan, the belief is that the clan members have a common ancestor and hence belong to the same clan. A member of a tribal lineage feels more closely related than clansmen. Among all the fve tribes in the study, ‘lineage’ was found to be patrilineal and thus has patriarchal features. Depth of the lineage is limited by a clear genealogy and encompasses at the most seven generations. Most members of a lineage group can trace their relations to each other by tracing their descent from a common ancestor. When a lineage has an unusual depth or extension, and genealogical links are lost, it leads to lineage segmentation. Within a lineage group, inter-personal relations are observed through kinship system, and behaviour is based on genealogical links. These kinship relations, in turn, are governed by several other criteria, such as age, sex and generation principles. It was noticed that lineage takes on a corporate character, and the members of a lineage group co-operate in economic and other activities. It was also observed that the male elders of a lineage group have the power to act under certain circumstances. They direct, coordinate and control activities of the lineage members. They also hold the right and obligation to adjudicate and resolve disputes between members of the lineage group. When the corporate activities of the lineage member are not manageable, the lineage eventually splits into segments. A lineage generally fssions under two circumstances: either lineage members become too numerous to assemble in one place or any strife which develops among the lineage members splits the group. Family Within a lineage, families exist as an integrated group. The family is seen not merely as a residential or commensal group but as a well-integrated

Tribe

Endogamous Kukana and Tribe Warli

Gamit

Exogamous

Exogamous Lineage

Lineage

Exogamous

Exogamous Clan

Exogamous Lineage

Clan (notional Lineage presence, no surname, 30 per cent do not know)

Exogamous

Endogamous Local Group (socioeconomic, religious, territorial)

Endogamous Tribe

Chaudhari

Endogamous

Local Group (dialect and geo-territorial)

Agamous 4

Tribe

Endogamous

Vasava

Source: Authors’ feldwork.

Type B Social Structure

Type A Social Structure

Table 8.1 Patterns of Social Structure among the Five Tribes

Exogamous Family

Family

Exogamous

Exogamous Family

Family

Exogamous

Exogamous Household

Household

Exogamous

Exogamous Household

Household

Exogamous

204 Social Structure and Change in Tribes

Social Structure and Change in Tribes

205

corporate group at the functional level. It generally consists of a couple, their children and patrilineal descendants. Normally, it has a depth of three generations but sometimes extends to four. The senior male member of the family generally acts as head, wadil, and his word is generally fnal in the family. For example, when several sons marry and set up their different households, there is a break which takes place at the commensal relations. But in some other respects, the solidarity of the family is a little impaired. For one thing, authority and control over the landholding continue under the jurisdiction of the father. Second, despite the partition of land, they work together and co-operate in agricultural activities. Father and son(s) are seen to help each other in agricultural activities, such as ploughing, sowing and harvesting. Third, the allocation of land could be done later by the father because of different life-cycle circumstances. For instance, a father may give his one son more land as the son’s family grows in size. He may, in other cases, take away a portion from what was given to his son for more balanced distribution among the other sons or to make provision for a distressed daughter or sister who does not have enough land for her household. By and large, the title deeds for land are made after the death of the father. Household The basic residential and commensal unit of the family is the household. The description of a household is mainly based on the chulo (hearth). This being an economic production and consumption unit, it is also related to a larger entity called the family. Thus, the household is subservient to a family unit. However, there could be one or more chulo or households attached to a family. While all family members could reside in one house, they could also develop their new house for an individual household unit. Thus, a household is seen as having persons sharing the same hearth, while a family is seen as a larger unit that may comprise several households. For example, if two brothers set up different households, still they remain part of the same family. Village The village, or gam, is an important unit in a tribal social structure. Though the village consists of several tribal families and their households, their settlement patterns are different in different types of villages – nucleated and dispersed. In nucleated villages, the houses are situated besides each other, whereas in the dispersed village, houses are scattered away from one another and are situated mostly in the agricultural land they own. The village is usually divided into different sub-parts, locally called pada or faliyu hamlets. The structure of hamlets also varies as per the type of village settlement. In the nucleated village, a hamlet is closely situated to

206

Social Structure and Change in Tribes

the next hamlet, making it diffcult to recognise the demarcation for the outsider. While in the highly scattered village, the hamlet is so large and has all the important components of a village that it is like a village by itself except for revenue purposes. Hamlets are named after landmarks – a particular house, stream, rivulets, school, etc. The naming of the hamlet could also be after a known person staying in that hamlet – for example, majhi sarpanch faliyu – because of the house of former sarpanch located in that hamlet.

Social structure and change Change in structural features can also apply to social change. Not all parts or units of a society change uniformly. Changes take place in a social structure when some members of this society are hostile to the existing structure. And this antagonistic attitude triggers a change. Whenever the old structure has been replaced by a new one, it was observed that there was bound to be a lag between values and sentiments. The concept of social structure enables us to mark off a special area in social anthropology and sociology. When a sociologist studies the economic, political, legal, moral or religious behaviour of a group, he/she views such behaviour patterns in relation to the total social structure. This aspect is what is peculiar to social anthropologists and sociologists, and this is what differentiates their approach from that of other social scientists. Social structure may be viewed as being made up of kinship structure, economic structure and political structure. However, for our study, we have focused mainly on those social structures and changes which revolve around tribal identity, their comparison with tribal and caste-based villages and the horizontal dimension in tribal villages. The term ‘tribe’ was given by the British in the eighteenth century. Before this period, there was no such word as ‘tribe’ in India, although there were terms like Varna and jati used for caste people. The words like Janajati, Vanyajati or Adivasi are translated into English as tribes and aborigines. Further, the British did not make any differentiation between these words. For example, in the case of the Jats and the Gurjars of North India, they used both terms – tribe and caste – interchangeably. In India, the tribals did not live in pure isolation. In many cases, they lived in the hills and the forests and in remote areas away from the plains, but they were not isolated. They had regular contact with the plains people, especially during fairs, haat and other religious fairs and pilgrimages. There were always caste-tribe relations found in peripheral villages (Sinha 1965). Further, it was seen that some tribals had hypergamous relation with lower Rajputs of the area and had political relations too. In fact, several small principalities and kingdoms at different levels existed from a long period. Thus, it was found that these groups have been living in the overall ambience of the Indian civilisation for centuries. This fact has been clearly

Social Structure and Change in Tribes

207

brought out by Ghurye (1943), and he called them ‘backward Hindus’ in his book The Aborigine So-called, which he later on changed to The Schedule Tribes in 1959 (Shah 2010; Lobo 2019). In modern parlance, a social group is a tribe because it has been included in the list of STs by the president of India. In this regard, B.D. Sharma said that ST under the Constitution is “a tautological proposition” (2001: 55), whereas K.S. Singh, an administrator-turnedanthropologist, is of the opinion that “[a]ny discussion of tribes in India has to proceed from the assumption that a tribe is an administrative and political concept in India” (1994: 1). In this regard B.K. Roy Burman, an anthropologist, with a lifelong engagement with tribal studies holds the same view (1993: 175).

Sanskritisation and Hinduisation Social change in tribal society was experienced through contact with nontribal societies. This has been captured by a process commonly known as Sanskritisation and Hinduisation. At times, it was also termed as ‘Kshtriyisation’ and ‘Rajputaisation’. These social processes led to a tribe becoming a caste or gaining caste-like features. The concept of Sanskritisation enunciated by Srinivas in 1952 has been extremely infuential in the study of Indian society and culture, present and past. It is through the emulation of the upper-caste Sanskritic culture by the lower caste or the tribal community that they gained social mobility. At certain places, people from the upper castes usually represent the dominant caste which may be different caste, and hence, the term has been used differently. If Kshatriya and Rajput are dominant, it may be referred to as ‘Kshtriyisation’ and ‘Rajputaisation’. ‘Sanskritisation’ and ‘Hinduisation’ processes have been active among the tribals. However, both these processes are different. Sanskritisation is a slow and spontaneous process. Sanskritisation has provided a convenient ground to fundamentalist Hindu organisations, such as the RSS and VHP, for spreading their ideologies and activities. Many secular thinkers tend to attribute the recent spread of Hindutvisation to the activities of these fundamentalist Hindu organisations. What these Hindutva affliate groups are doing is akin to proselytisation as differentiated from Sanskritisation. In the villages where we conducted our research, we found several agents of Sanskritisation, who promoted Sanskrit rituals among the Kukana and Warli tribes in Dharampur. They also subscribed to several religious sects in the area and the infuence of these different Hindu sects, such as Sanatan Dharma, Yogeshwara, Swami Narayana, etc. The pictures of leaders and saints of different sects were seen to adorn the walls of many tribal houses. This also had an effect on the religious and social life of the tribal people. Marriages and other post-mortuary rituals are performed by the Brahmins of Dharampur, but these rituals are new phenomena in the villages. We

208

Social Structure and Change in Tribes

observed that these rituals were not performed by all members of the two hamlets or by the villagers in Makadban village. These rituals were mainly performed by people from the upper socio-economic status in the village, for example, particular clans of Kukana tribe, such as Mahla and Bhoya. Thus, these modifed forms of rituals could not be followed by the members of the clans of the village that did not have enough resources. The concept of inclusion and exclusion in the Sanskritisation process has been observed by Pocock (1957). He noted, “The group, whatever it may be, included itself with the higher and was excluded by it; it excludes the lower initially but eventually is included by it” (Ibid: 31). Every society followed different procedures for this process. For example, the Thakors of north Gujarat followed hypergamy with the Darbars to achieve this inclusion (Lobo 1995), whereas among the tribes of Dharampur, the achievement of socio-economic status went hand in hand with the Sanskritisation process. By following these rituals, members perceived themselves as higher than among their group. It is evident that social structure has also some links with the agrarian structure of society. The change in one aspect also brings changes in the other aspects. The tribal agrarian structure revolves around the social relations that it holds with the land and also with the organisation of labour which is interwoven around kinship structure. Often, the land is locally divided, owned by several kin members genealogically linked. Several households related to each other based on kinship pool their labour for co-operative agriculture. Money in exchange for labour is rarely involved, but pooled labour for shared agriculture is indulged in by different households. It was seen that market penetration in tribal areas had brought about many changes. Many tribal peasants have become politicians, businessmen, contractors, government servants, doctors, school and college teachers, etc. The strength of these professionals, however, is very limited. A majority of them are still peasants, but with a difference for they are no longer peasants of the days gone by. On the contrary, they have become market oriented and invest their money (personal savings and loans) in cash crops and other rural businesses like transport, dairy, poultry, vegetables, fower production, etc. These products are marketed either personally or through brokers. In the dairy sector, they have formed co-operative societies which market the milk that their cattle produce. These social changes indicate that tribal communities are heading towards social stratifcation. The proft-oriented market-related activities have created the new rich and the new poor in the village. The tribals who were traditionally controlled by kinship structures are now controlled by a market-based economy. It was noticed that they are increasingly linked to the outer world, and at the same time, they are being alienated from their own people in their villages.

Social Structure and Change in Tribes

209

Contribution to the anthropological theory of social structure The present research that has been done on the internal features of the social structure of south Gujarat tribals will contribute to anthropological theories in several ways. This study will conribute signifcantly to fll in the lacunae which currently exists in the studies on tribals. Gujarat has 30 named tribes contributing 15 per cent of its total population, but these tribal social structures are hardly known. It is a well-known fact that India is known for its caste and tribal social formations. From the 1950s onwards, several anthropological works have focused on the social structure of caste-based societies in western India. However, until now, little anthropological work has been done on the social structure of tribal societies. Although the study of kinship and marriage is the core of anthropological studies worldwide, it has remained weak in Indian tribal studies. This study thus tries to fll this vacuum in anthropological studies in western India. Since India has 700 STs and they reside in different environmental conditions and territories, clubbing vast groups without knowing their social structure is not a fair study of their social units. In order to achieve this, more detailed work with a sound theoretical approach is required in order to have a clearer understanding of these societies. In this way we can compare and contrast these societies with the caste-based societies so as to have a holistic overview of the social structures that exist in India. Generally, anthropologists focused their studies on a single tribe or a tribal group within a limited area. They have rarely compared their studies on a wider regional basis. Studies have shown that the areas where the tribals of India inhabit are divided into fve main regions, but there are hardly any comparative studies that have been done on the social structure of two or more tribes in any of these regions. To this effect, the present work focuses on the region of western India, especially in Gujarat, and presents an empirical-comparative picture of fve tribes which will contribute to a deeper understanding of the social structure of tribes not only in Gujarat in western India but also comparatively to the other regions of India. It has been established, and we have seen that social structure is not a static entity but is dynamic and changes over time. Thus, this study captures the change in the different elements of the social structure of tribal communities. In order to achieve this, an understanding of clan, lineage, kinship, marriage network and household relations is important to comprehend the differences and resemblances it has with neighbouring societies, both tribal and non-tribal. In this context, the present study is an attempt to fll the gaps in structurological studies and makes signifcant contributions to the feld of social anthropology of Indian tribes. More importantly, our study outlines a research approach and analysis of data gathered in multiple villages with multiple tribes.

210

Social Structure and Change in Tribes

Notes 1 Reddy (1973) reported that how in large hilly villages in Visakhapatnam district in Andhra Pradesh, seven tribes lived practically as castes. Also, Kumar (1997) reported the fuidity in the nature of caste-tribe among villages of Bhil Garasia in southern Rajasthan. 2 Descent group is a kin group whose membership is based on a rule of descent. Appropriate descent status (patrilineal, matrilineal or cognatic, depending on the society) entitles a person to be a member of the group (Keesing 1975: 148). A socially recognised group of persons traces real or putative descent from a common ancestor (or ancestress) with parent-child links between every generation. In-marrying persons (affnes) may or may not be assimilated to this group as formal members (Fox 1967: 49; Graburn 1971: 1). 3 Fictive kinship is a relationship, such as godparenthood, modelled on relations of kinship but created by customary convention rather than the circumstances of birth (Keesing 1975: 149). Examples include ‘blood brothers’ and ‘godparents’ (Schusky 1965: 5). In south Gujarat, examples include Bavidyio, Bhavad, etc. 4 Agamy is the lack of any rule in regard to marriage within or without of a group; it denotes absence of marriage regulations on the part of a social unit (Schusky 1965: 72). The adjective of agamy is agamous.

Fathers Father’s FFB Brother Father’s FFZ Father’s Sister Father’s FMB Mother’s Brother

3

12

11

10

9

8

7

6

5

Mother’s MM Mother Mothers MMB Mother’s Brother Mother’ s MMZ Mother’s Sister Mother’s MFB Father’s Brother Mother’s MFZ Father’s Sister

Father’s FMZ Mother’s Sister Mother’s Father MF

Father’s Mother FM

2

4

Father’s Father FF

Symbols

1

S. Kins/Relation No.

Mothi-aayo

Motha-aabo

Mothi-aayo

Motha-aabo

Aaye-aayo

Aaye-aabo

Mothi-aayo

Motha-aabo

Mothi-aayo

Motha-aabo

Aaba-aayo

Aaba-aabo

Mothi-aaya

Motha-aaba

Mothi-aaya

Motha-aaba

Aaye-aaya

Aaye-aaba

Mothi-aaya

Motha-aaba

Mothi-aaya

Motha-aaba

Aaba-aaya

Aaba-aaba

Dohoni Yaahki

Dohonu Baahku

Dohoni Yaahki

Dohonu Baahku Dohoni Yaahki Dohonu Baahku

Dohoni Yaahki

Dohonu Baahku

Dohonu Baahku Dohoni Yaahki Dohonu Baahku Dohoni Yaahki

TOR

TOR

TOA

Vasava

Gamit

Dohoni Yaah

Dohnu Baah

Dohoni Yaah

Dohnu Baah

Dohoni Yaah

Dohnu Baah

Dohoni Yaah

Dohnu Baah

Dohoni Yaah

Dohnu Baah

Dohoni Yaah

Dohnu Baah

TOA

Gadi Aaya

Gado Baha

Gadi Aaya

Gado Baha

Gadi Aaya

Gado Baha

Gadi Aaya

Gado Baha

Gadi Aaya

Gado Baha

TOA

Aayhene Gado Baha Khakhho/ Motho Baha Aayhene Fuhui Gadi Aaya

Aayhene Jijihi

Aayhene Aahaay Gadi-Ayaane Fahaav

Aayhene Baha

Bahaane Aahaay Gado-baane Fahaav Bahaane Fuhui/ Gado-baane Benihi Bahaane Mamho/ Gadi-Ayaane Fahaav Bahaane Jijihi

Bahaane Baha

TOR

Chaudhari

Kinship Terms of Five Tribes in South Gujarat

Appendix I

TOA

Dosses

Dosses

Dosses

Dosses

Dosses

Dose Aaya

Dosses

Davar Bahas Davarba

Dose Aaya

Davar Bahas Davarba

Dose Aaya

Davar Bahas Davarba

Dose Aaya

Davar Bahas Davarba

Dose Aaya

Davar Bahas Davarba

Dose Aaya

Davar Bahas Davarba

TOR

Kukana

TOA

Dosses

Dosses

Dosses

Dosses

Dosses

Dose Aaya

Dosses

Davar Bahas Davarba

Dose Aaya

Davar Bahas Davarba

Dose Aaya

Davar Bahas Davarba

Dose Aaya

Davar Bahas Davarba

Dose Aaya

Davar Bahas Davarba

Dose Aaya

Davar Bahas Davarba

TOR

Warli

(Continued)

Gujarati/ English Equivalent

Mother Mother’s Brother (elder)

26 27

M MeB

Father’s Sister’s FZD Daughter

FZS

FBD

FBS

FyZH

FeZH

FyBW

FeBW

FyZ

FeZ

FyB

25

24

23

22

21

20

19

18

17

16

15

F FeB

13 14

Father Father’s Brother (elder) Father’s Brother (younger) Father’s Sister (elder) Father’s Sister (younger) Father’s Brother’s Wife (elder) Father’s Brother’s Wife (younger) Father’s Sister’s Husband (elder) Father’s Sister’s Husband (younger) Father’s Brother’s Son Father’s Brother’s Daughter Father’s Sister’s Son

Symbols

S. Kins/Relation No.

Kaku

Baahku Vaados

Fuichi

Kaka

Obaa/Baah Vaada

Jiji

Aajlihi Kaki

Vaadisi Kaki

Vaadisi

‘Name’ Fuchi hanni Fuichi Fuichi

‘Name’ Fuchi Moti Fuichi

Kaka

Aaba Aajlaha

TOA

Aayo Mamo

Bojhan

Bavdiyoho

Boahin

Baha

Name/Dada

Name/Dada

Bonisi (Baya) Name/Baya

Paavos (Paavoh)

Bonisi (Baya) Name/Baya

Paavos (Paavoh)

Mama

Aaya Yaahki Oyaa/Yaah Name- Mama Motu Mamu Mama

Bojhan

Bavdiyaha

Bay

Baya

‘ Name’Mamo ‘Name’ Mama Hannu Mamu

‘Name’ Mamo ‘Name’ Mama Motu Mamu Mama

Jiji

Aajlihi

‘Name’ Fuchi

‘Name’ Fuchi

Kako

Aabo Aajloho

TOR

TOR

TOA

Vasava

Gamit

Bahaane Favhaane Dikhroho Bahaane Favhaane Dikhrihi Bahaane Beynehene Dikhroho Bahaane Beynehene Dikhrihi Aahaay Aayhene Moto Fahaav

Bahaane Fajdoho

Bahaane Fajdoho

TOR

Kukana

TOA

TOR

Warli

TOA

Barik Fuis

Mothi Fuis

Aaya Mamo

Benhi

Fahaav

Benhi

Fahaav

Mamo

Mamo

Mamas

Kakis

Mothes

Fuis

Fuis

Aayis Motha Mamas

Salis

Bhavad

Bihinis

Bhavus

Aaya Mamas

Salis

Bhavad

Buyu

Baba

Barik Mamas Mama

Motha Mamas

Kakis

Mothi/Mothi Mothes Aaya

Fuhui

Fuhui

Mamas

Kakis

Mothes

Fuis

Fuis

Aayis Motha Mamas

Salis

Bhavad/ Mehnas

Bihinis

Bhavus

Sister

Brother

Gujarati Equivalent

Aaya Mamas

Salis

Bhavad/ Prospective Mehnas (sala)

Buyu

Baba

Barik Mamas Mama

Motha Mamas

Kakis

Mothes

Barik Fuis

Mothi Fuis

Baha Bahas Ba Bahas Ba Motho/ Motha Bahas Motha Ba Motha Bahas Motha Ba Motho Ba Khakhho Kakas Kaka Kakas Kaka

TOA

Bahaane Nanna Khakhhi Favahavali

Baha Bahaane Moto Fahaav Bahaane Nanno Fahaav Bahaane Moti Benihi Bahaane Nanni Benihi Bahaane Fabihi

TOR

Chaudhari

Wife

40

39

Mother’s Sister’s Daughter Husband

38

37

36

35

34

33

32

Mother’s Brother’s Wife (elder) Mother’s Brother’s Wife (younger) Mother’s Sister’s Husband (elder) Mother’s Sister’s Husband (younger) Mother’s Brother’s Son Mother’s Brother’s Daughter Mother’s Sister’s Son

31

W

H

MZD

MZS

MBD

MBS

MyZH

MeZH

MyBW

MeBW

Mother’s Sister MyZ (younger)

Mother’s MyB Brother (younger) Mother’s Sister MeZ (elder)

30

29

28

Theye

Matdo

Boahin

Baha

Bojhan

Bavdiyoho

Kako

Aajloho

Fuchi

Fuchi

Jiji

Aajlihi

Mamo

Fuichi

Jiji

Vaadisi

Mama

Kaka/Kaku

Vaados

Name/Dada

Kaka

Vaados

(Eldest child name) Aayehe

(Eldest child name) Aabaha

Name-Bay

Name-Baya

Name/Dada

They

Matudo

(son Name) Yaahki

(son Name) baahka

Bonisi (Baya) Name/Baya

Paavos (Paavoh)

Name-Bojhan Bonisi (Baya) Name/Baya

NamePaavos Bavdiyaha (Paavoh)

Kaka

Aajlaha

Husband Hanni Fuichi Fuichi name-Fuchi

Name (if Vaadisi married Village name)Aajlihi Name(if Jijih married Village name)-Jiji Husband Moti Fuichi name-Fuchi

Name -Mama Hannu Mamu Jijihi

Jimho

Gharawali

Aayhene Favahaane Dikhroho Aayhene Favahaane Dikhrihi Aayhene Beynehene Dikhroho Aayhene Beynehene Dikhrihi Gharawalo

Fui

Fui

Jiji

Mothes

Fuis

Fuis

Jijis

Mothes

Fui

Fui

Jiji

Mothes

Barik Mamas Mama

Gohale

Bihinis

Bhavus

Vahinis

Bhavad

Kakas

Kakas

(Eldest child name) Bahas (Eldest child name) Aayis

NameBuyu

NameBaba

Bayako

Gohale

Bihinis

Bhavus

NameVahinis Vahinis

NameBhavad/ Bhavad Mehnas

Kaka

(Eldest child name) Bahas (Eldest child name) Aayis

(Continued)

Teknonymy

Teknonymy

Name-Buyu Sister

Name-Baba Brother

NameBhavad/ Mehnas NameVahinis

Kaka

Motha Bahas Motha Ba Motha Bahas Motha Ba

Fuis

Fuis

Jijis

Mothes

Barik Mamas Mama

(son Name) Bayako Ne-aahay

(son Name) Ne-baha

Benhi

Fahaav

Benhi

Fahaav

Aayhene Nanno Jimho Benehevalo

Aayhene Fajdoho

Aayhene Fabihi Mamhi

Aayhene Fabihi Mamhi

Aayhene Nanni Jijihi Benihi

Aayhene Moti Benihi

Aayhene Nanno Mamo Fahaav

Son

Daughter Son’s Son

Son’s Daughter SD

Daughter’s Son DS

Daughter’s Daughter Brother’s Son

Brother’s BD Daughter Brother’s Son’s BSS Son

49

50 51

52

53

54

56

58

57

55

Sister’s husband yZH (younger)

48

Brother’s Son’s BSD Daughter

BS

DD

D SS

S

Sister’s husband eZH (elder)

yBW

eBW

47

46

45

Brother’s Wife (elder) Brother’s Wife (younger)

Brother yB (younger) Sister (elder) eZ Sister (younger) yZ

42

43 44

Brother (Elder) eB

Symbols

41

S. Kins/Relation No.

Name

Motho-baya

Baha-pohapohi

Baha-pohapoho

Baha-pohi

Baha-poho

Pohiye-pohi

Pohiye-poho

Paha-pohi

Puhi Paha-poho

Poho

Janvahan

Bavdiyoho

Vovlihi

Bojhan

Name

Name

Name

Name

Name

Name

Name

Name Name

Name

Janvahan

Bavdiyaha

Vovlihi

Bojhan

Mothi-Boahin Mothi-Bay Vahno-Boahin Name

Vahno-baha

Motho-baha

Pojaah

Name/Baya Name/Baya

Name/Dada

Name/Dada

TOA

Poyari

Poyar

Poyari

Poyar

Poyari

Poyar

Poyari

Poyari Poyar

Poyar

Jamaah

Fajdoho

Vavnihi

Fabhi

Bahaay Bahaay

Baabho

Baabho

TOR

Chaudhari

Name

Name

Name

Name

Name

Name

Name

Name Name

Name Dikhrihi Dikhrahane Dikhroho Dikhrahane Dikhrihi Dikhrihene Dikhroho Dikhrihene Dikhrihi Favhaane Dikhroho Favhaane Dikhrihi Favhaane Dikhrahaane Dikhroho Favhaane Dikhrahaane Dikhrihi

Dikhroho

Name/Jamaah Fajdoho

(son Name) Yaahki/ Nandey Paavdisu/ Paavdisu/ Paavdiyuh Paavdiyuh

Vovdih

Pojaah

Paavos (Paavoh) Paavos (Paavoh) Bonisi (Baya) Bonisi (Baya)

TOR

TOR

TOA

Vasava

Gamit

Dikre

Dikra

Dikre

Dikra

Dikre

Dikra

Dikre

Dikre Dikra

Dikra

Fajdaha

Fajdaha

Vavniho

Fabhe

Baai Baai

Baba

Baba

TOA

TOA

Bhavad

Uhus

Posi

Posa

Posi

Posa

Posi

Posa

Posi

Posi Posa

Posa

Motha Bhavad/ Mehnas Barik Bhavad/ Mehnas Posa

Vahus

Vahinis

Name/Posi Posi

Posa

Name/ Posa Posa Name/Posi Posi

Bhabhi

Gujarati Equivalent

Name/Posi

Name/Posa

Name/Posi

Name/Posa

Name/Posi

Name/Posa

Name/Posi

Name/Posi Name/Posa

Name/Posa

Bhavad/ Jamai Mehnas

Bhavad/ Bahnoi Mehnas

Vahus

Vahinis

Mothi-Bihinis Buyu Barik Bihinis Name/ Posi

Name/ Posa posa Name/posi Posi

Name/ Posa

TOA

Motha Baba Bhavus Barik Bhavus Name

TOR

Warli

Name/ Posa Name/Posi Posi Name/ Posa Posa Name/Posi Posi

Barik Bhavad Bhavad

Motha Bhavad

Uhus

Mothi-Bihinis Buyu Barik Bihinis Name/ Posi Vahinis Vahinis

Motha Baba Bhavus Barik Bhavus Name

TOR

Kukana

Sister’s Daughter’s Son Sister’s Daughter’s Daughter Husbands Father’s Father Husband’s Mother’s Father Husband’s Father’s Mother Husband’s Mother’s Mother Wife’s Father’s Father

65

Wife’s Mother’s WMF Father

Wife’s Mother’s WMM Mother

73

WFF

HMM

HFM

HMF

HFF

ZDD

ZDS

ZSD

ZSS

ZD

ZS

BDD

BDS

72

71

70

69

68

67

66

Sister’s Son’s Daughter

Sister’s Daughter Sister’s Son’s Son

Brother’s Daughter’s Son Brother’s Daughter’s Daughter Sister’s Son

64

63

62

61

60

59

Name

Name Poyari

Poyar

Motha-aayo

Motha-aabo

Motha-aabo

Motha-aayo

Motha-aayo

Motha-aabo

Motha-aabo

Motha-aaya

Motha-aaba

Motha-aaba

Motha-aaya

Motha-aaya

Motha-aaba

Motha-aaba

BoiyeheName pohiyepoho BoiyeheName pohiye-pohi

Boiyehe-poha- Name pohi

Boiyehe-poha- Name poho

Dohoni Yaahki

Dohonu Baahku

Dohonu Baahku

Dohoni Yaahki

Dohoni Yaahki

Dohonu Baahku

Dohonu Baahku

Poyari

Poyar

Poyari

Poyar

Boiyehe-poho Name/ Paanjoh Janvahan Boiyehe-pohi Name/Vovlihi Paanjehi

Baha-pohiyepohi

Baha-pohiyepoho

Dohoni Yaah

Dohnu Baah

Dohnu Baah

Dohoni Yaah

Dohoni Yaah

Dohnu Baah

Dohnu Baah

Name

Name

Name

Name

Name

Name

Name

Name

Favhaane Dikhrihene Dikhroho Favhaane Dikhrihene Dikhrihi Beynehene Dikhroho Beynehene Dikhrihi Beynehene Dikhrahaane Dikhroho Beynehene Dikhrahaane Dikhrihi Beynehene Dikhrihene Dikhroho Beynehene Dikhrihene Dikhrihi Gharwalaane Bahaane Baha Gharwalaane Aayhene Baha Gharwalaane Bahaane Aahaay Gharwalaane Aayhene Aahaay Gharwaline Bahaane Baha Gharwaline Aayhene Baha Gharwaline Bahaane Aahaay Gadi Aaya

Gadoba

Gadoba

Gadi Aaya

Gadi Aaya

Gadoba

Gadoba

Dikre

Dikra

Dikre

Dikra

Dikre

Dikra

Dikre

Dikra

Name/ Uhus

Name/ Javans

Name/ Uhus

Name/ Javans Name/ Uhus Name/ Javans

Vahus

Javans

Vahus

Javans

Vahus

Javans

Name/Posi Posi

Name/posi Posi

Name/ Vahus

Name/ Javans

Name/ Vahus

Name/ Javans Name/ Vahus Name/ Javans

Name/Posi

Name/Posi

Dose Aaya Dose Aayis

Dose Aaya Dose Aayis

Dose Aaya

Dose Aaya

Dose Aayis

Dose Aaya Dose Aayis

(Continued)

Dose Aaya

Davar Bahas Davar Ba Davar Bahas Davar Ba

Davar Bahas Davar Ba Davar Bahas Davar Ba

Dose Aayis

Dose Aayis

Davar Bahas Davar Ba Davar Bahas Davar Ba

Davar Bahas Davar Ba Davar Bahas Davar Ba

Uhus

Javans

Uhus

Javans

Uhus

Javans

Posi

Posi

Husband’s Mother

Husband’s Father’s Brother Husband’s Father’s Sister Husband’s Mother’s Brother

Husband’s Mother’s Sister

Husband’s HFBS Father’s Brother’s Son Husband’s HFBeS Father’s Brother’s Son (elder)(age compared to husband) Husband’s HFByS Father’s Brother’s Son (younger)

76

77

80

81

83

82

79

78

Husband’s Father

75

HMZ

HMB

HFZ

HFB

HM

HF

Wife’s Father’s WFM Mother

Symbols

74

S. Kins/Relation No.

Kaka

Jiji

Mama

Fuchi

Mama

Motha-aaya

Deyehun

Name/ Deyehun

Fuchi/Fuchiye- Fuchi Boahin

Kako

Jiji

Mamo

Fuchi/Hahu

Mamo/ Hahroho

Motha-aayo

Deyhu

Jethuh

Haavdi

Mamu Haahroh

Haavdi

Haahroh

Haavdi

Haahroh

Dohoni Yaahki

TOR

TOR

TOA

Vasava

Gamit

Name

(son Name) Baahkaay/ Daailoho

Fuichi

Mama

Fuichi

Mama

Fuichi

Mama

Dohoni Yaah

TOA

Gharwaline Aayhene Aahaay Gharwalaane Baha/ Hahroho Gharwalaane Aahaay / haahav Gharwalaane Bahaane Fahaav Gharwalaane Bahaane Benihi Gharwalaane Aayhene Fahaav/ Gharwalaane Mamho Gharwalaane Aayhene Benihi / Gharwalaane Mamho Jijihi Gharwalaane Bahaane Favhaane Dikhroho

TOR

Chaudhari

Jethho/ Derho

Ghannaho

Ghannaho

Ghannaho

Ghannaho

Ghannaho

Ghannaho

Gadi Aaya

TOA

Derus

Fuis

Kakas

Jijis

Mamas

Fuis

Mamas

Dose Aayis

TOR

Kukana

TOR

Name/ Derus

Fui

Kaka

Jiji

Mama

Fui

Mama

Derus

Fuis

Kakas

Jijis

Mamas

Fuis

Mamas

Dose Aaya Dose Aayis

TOA

Warli

Name/ Derus

Fui

Kaka

Jiji

Mama

Fui

Mama

Dose Aaya

TOA

Gujarati Equivalent

Husband’s Father’s Sister’s Son (elder) Husband’s Father’s Sister’s Son (younger) Husband’s Father’s Sister’s Daughter Husband’s Father’s Sister’s Daughter (elder) Husband’s Father’s Sister’s Daughter (younger) Husband’s Mother’s Brother Husband’s Mother’s Sister

88

94

93

92

91

90

89

87

86

85

Husband’s Father’s Brother’s Daughter Husband’s Father’s Brother’s Daughter (elder) Husband’s Father’s Brother’s Daughter (younger) Husband’s Father’s Sister’s Son

84

HMZ

HMB

HFZyD

HFZeD

HFZD

HFZyS

HFZeS

HFZS

HFByD

HFBeD

HFBD

Name-Bay

Name-Baya

Vovehe

Nondah

Vovah

Deyhu

Jethuh

Nondah

Vovah

(Name or Haahroh village name) Kaka Fuchi/Fuchiye- Fuchi Haavdi Boahin

Kako

Boahin

Baha

Vovehe

Fuichi

Mama

Name

(son Name) Yaahki/ Vovsey

Name

Name/Memas

Name

(son Name) Yaahki/ Vovsey

Gharwalaane Bahaane Beynehene Dikhrihi

Gharwalaane Bahaane Beynehene Dikhroho

Gharwalaane Bahaane Favhaane Dikhrihi

Nandaha

Jethho/ Derho

Nandaha

Fuis

Mamas

Bihinis

Bhavus

Nanadas

Fui

Mama

NameBuyu

NameBaba

Name/ Baayi

Fuis

Mamas

Bihinis

Bhavus

Nanadas

Fui

Mama

(Continued)

Name-Buyu

Name-Baba

Name/ Baayi

103

102

101

100

99

98

97

96

95

Symbols

(Name-village name)Baya

(Name-village name)Bay

(Name-village name) Baya

Deyhu

Jethuh

Nondah

Vovah

Deyhu

Jethuh

TOR

TOR

TOA

Vasava

Gamit

Husband’s HMBS Baha Mother’s Brother’s Son Husband’s HMBeS Mother’s Brother’s Son(elder) (age compared to husband) Husband’s HMByS Mother’s Brother’s Son (younger) Husband’s HMBD Boahin Mother’s Brother’s Daughter Husband’s HMBeD Mother’s Brother’s Daughter (elder) Husband’s HMByD Mother’s Brother’s Daughter (younger) Husband’s HMZS Baha Mother’s Sister’s Son Husband’s HMZeS Mother’s Sister’s Son(elder) Husband’s HMZyS Mother’s Sister’s Son(younger)

S. Kins/Relation No.

Name

(son Name) Baahkaay/ Daailoho

Name

(son Name) Yaahki/ Vovsey

Name

(son Name) Baahkaay/ Daailoho

TOA

Gharwalaane Jijihene Dikhroho

Gharwalaane Mamhaane Dikhrihi

Gharwalaane Mamhaane Dikhroho

TOR

Chaudhari

Jethho/ Derho

Nandaha

Jethho/ Derho

TOA

Bhavus

Bihinis

Bhavus

TOR

Kukana

(Name/ Baba

(Name/ Buyu

(Name/ Baba

TOA

Bhavus

Bihinis

Bhavus

TOR

Warli

(Name/ Baba

(Name/ Buyu

(Name/ Baba

TOA

Brother

Sister

Brother

Gujarati Equivalent

Fuchi/Hahu

Mamo/ Hahrahabaha

Jiji/HahrohaBoahin

(village)Kako/ Kaka Hahvehebaha

Fuchi/ HahveheBoahin

Bavdiyoho

WM

108 Wife’s Mother

109 Wife’s Father’s WFB Brother

110 Wife’s Father’s WFZ Sister

111 Wife’s Mother’s WMB Brother

112 Wife’s Mother’s WMZ Sister

113 Wife’s Father’s WFBS Brother’s Son

NameBavdiyaha

Fuchi

Jiji

Mama

Fuchi

Haavdi

Mama Haahroh

Haavdi

Haahroh

Haavdi

Haahroh

Mama

WF

Mamo/ Hahroho

Nondah

HMZyD

(Name-village name)Bay Vovah

Boahin

HMZeD

HMZD

104 Husband’s Mother’s Sister’s Daughter 105 Husband’s Mother’s Sister’s Daughter (elder) 106 Husband’s Mother’s Sister’s Daughter (younger) 107 Wife’s Father

Fuichi

Mama

Fuichi

Mama

Fuichi

Mama

Name

(son Name) Yaahki/ Vovsey

Gharwaline Baha/ Huhroho Gharwaline Aahaay/ Haahav Gharwaline Bahaane Fahaav/ Khakhho Hahroho/ Mothoho Huhroho Gharwaline Bahaane Benihi/Fuhui Haahav Gharwaline Aayhene Fahaav/ Mamho Huhroho Gharwaline Aayhene Benihi/Jijihi Haahav Gharwaline Bahaane Favhaane Dikhroho/

Gharwalaane Jijihene Dikhrihi

Faai/Name

Ghannaho

Ghannaho

Ghannaho

Ghannaho

Ghannaho

Ghannaho

Nandaha

Bhavad

Fuis

Kakas

Jijis

Mamas

Fuis

Mamas

Bihinis

Fuis

Kakas

Jijis

Mamas

Fuis

Mamas

Bihinis

NameBhavad/ Bhavad Mehnas

Fui

Kaka

Jiji

Mama

Fui

Mama

(Name/ Buyu

Sister

(Continued)

NameBhavad/ Mehnas

Fui

Kaka

Jiji

Mama

Fui

Mama

(Name/ Buyu

Symbols

123 Wife’s Father’s WFZeD Sister’s Daughter (elder)

120 Wife’s Father’s WFZeS Sister’s Son (elder) 121 Wife’s Father’s WFZyS Sister’s Son (younger) 122 Wife’s Father’s WFZD Sister’s Daughter

117 Wife’s Father’s WFBeD Brother’s Daughter (elder) 118 Wife’s Father’s WFByD Brother’s Daughter (younger) 119 Wife’s Father’s WFZS Sister’s Son

114 Wife’s Father’s WFBeS Brother’s Son (elder)(age compared to wife) 115 Wife’s Father’s WFByS Brother’s Son (younger) 116 Wife’s Father’s WFBD Brother’s Daughter

S. Kins/Relation No.

Boahin

Baha

Name-Bay

Name-Baya

Vovehe/Name/ Vovehe/ Hanhi Name/ Hanhi

(son Name) Yaahki/ Vovsey

Name

Haalah

Vovah

Name/Memas

Name

Haalhih

Memah

(son Name) Yaahki/ Vovsey

Vovah

Gharwaline Bahaane Beynehene Dikhrihi

Gharwaline Bahaane Beynehene Dikhroho

Gharwaline Bahaane Favhaane Dikhrihi

Name

Haalah

TOR

Name/Memas Halho

TOA

Chaudhari

Memah

TOR

TOR

TOA

Vasava

Gamit

Halahi/ Vadhaav

Halaho

Halahi/ Vadhaav

TOA

Bihinis

Bhavus

Salis

TOR

Kukana

NameBuyu

NameBaba

Name/ Salis

TOA

Bihinis

Bhavus

Salis

TOR

Warli

Gujarati Equivalent

Name-Buyu Sister

Name-Baba Brother

Name/Salis

TOA

134 Wife’s Mother’s WMZeS Sister’s Son (elder)

131 Wife’s Mother’s WMBeD Brother’s Daughter (elder) 132 Wife’s Mother’s WMByD Brother’s Daughter (younger) 133 Wife’s Mother’s WMZS Bavdiyoho Sister’s Son

Boahin

Baha

127 Wife’s Mother’s WMBS Brother’s Son

128 Wife’s Mother’s WMBeS Brother’s Son (elder)(age compared to wife) 129 Wife’s Mother’s WMByS Brother’s Son (younger) 130 Wife’s Mother’s WMBD Brother’s Daughter

Fuchi/ HahveheBoahin

Kako/ Hahvehebaha

126 Wife’s Mother’s WMZ Sister

124 Wife’s Father’s WFZyD Sister’s Daughter (younger) 125 Wife’s Mother’s WMB Brother

NameBavdiyaha

Name-Bay

Name-Baya

Fuchi

Name-Kaka

Name/Memas

Name

Haalhih

Memah

(son Name) Yaahki/ Vovsey

Name

Haalah

Vovah

Name/Memas

Fuichi

Mama

Name

Memah

Haavdi/ Fuichi

Mamu Haahroh

Haalhih

Gharwaline Aayhene Beynehene Dikhroho

Gharwaline Aayhene Favhaane Dikhrihi

Gharwaline Aayhene Fahaav/ Mamho Huhroho Gharwaline Aayhene Benihi/Jijihi Haahav Gharwaline Aayhene Favhaane Dikhroho

Halaho

Halahi/ Vadhaav

Halaho

Ghannaho

Ghannaho

Bhavad

Nanads

Derus

Fuis

Mamas

Bhavad

NameBaayi

NameBaba

Fui

Mama

Bhavad/ Mehnas

Nanads

Derus

Fuis

Mamas

(Continued)

Bhavad/ Mehnas

NameBaayi

Name-Baba

Fui

Mama

144 Husband’s Brother’s Wife (younger) 145 Husband’s Sister’s Husband (elder)

Derhandi

Bayo/Vovehe matdo

HeZH

Bavlandihi

HeBW

HyBW

Nondenhen

Vovehe

HeZ

HyZ

Deyehun

HyB

142 Husband’s Sister (younger) 143 Husband’s Brother’s Wife (elder)

Jethuh

Bavloho

HeB

baya

Name

Name Bay

Name/ Nondenhen

Vovehe

Name/ Deyehun

Name

Name

(son Name) Yaahki/ Vovsey

Name

TOA

Paavos (Paavoh)

deraahi

Jethaahi

Name/Dada

(son Name) Yaahki/ Name

(son Name) Yaahki

Vovah/Vovas (son Name) Yaahki/ Vovsey Nondoh Name

Deyhu

Haalhih

WMZyD

Bavloha

Vovah

WMZeD

137 Wife’s Mother’s Sister’s Daughter (elder) 138 Wife’s Mother’s Sister’s Daughter (younger) 139 Husband’s Brother (elder) 140 Husband’s Brother (younger) 141 Husband’s Sister (elder)

TOR

TOR

TOA

Vasava

Gamit

Haalah

Symbols

135 Wife’s Mother’s WMZyS Sister’s Son (younger) 136 Wife’s Mother’s WMZD Vovehe/Name/ Vovehe/ Sister’s Hanhi Name/ Daughter Hanhi

S. Kins/Relation No.

Halahi/ Vadhaav

TOA

Salis

TOR

Kukana

Moti Vahinis Nandaha

Derho/Name Derus

Gharwalaane Moto Favhaane Gharawali Gharwalaane Nanno Favhaane Gharawali Gharwalaane Mota Beynehene Gharawalo

Fahaav

Deranihi

Jethanihi

Bhavus

Deranis

Jethanis

Gharwalaane Nani Nandas Nanni Benihi Nandaha

Gharwalaane Nanno Fahaav Gharwalaane Moti Benihi

Gharwalaane Jethhu/Name Jethus Moto Fahaav

Gharwaline Aayhene Beynehene Dikhrihi

TOR

Chaudhari

Baba

Baayi

Baayi

Name/ Baayi

Vahinis

Name/ Derus

Jethus

Salis

TOA

Bhavus

Deranis

Jethanis

Nandas

Vahinis

Derus

Jethus

Salis

TOR

Warli

Baba

Baayi

Baayi

Name/ Baayi

Vahinis

Name/ Derus

Jethus

Salis

TOA

Nandoi

Devrani

Jethani

Choti Nanad

Devar

Jeth

Gujarati Equivalent

WeZ

149 Wife’s Sister (elder)

SW

SS

SSW

155 Son’s Wife

156 Son’s Son

157 Son’s Son’s Wife

Poha-pohi

Poha-pohiyematdo

Janvahann

158 Son’s Daughter SD

SDH

DH

159 Son’s Daughter’s husband 160 Daughter’s husband

Poha-pohatheye

Poha-poho

Vovlihi

Janvahan

Name

Name

Name

Name

Vovlihi

Name-Baya

WyZH

154 Wife’s Sister’s Husband (younger)

Handihi matdo/ hadobaha

Vovehe matdo/ Name -Baya Hadobaha

WeZH

153 Wife’s Sister’s Husband (elder)

Name

NameHandihi Name Bay

Vovehe

NameHandaha

Boi/Handaha theye

Bavaha theye

Handihi

Vovehe

Handoho

152 Wife’s Brother’s WyBW Wife (younger)

150 Wife’s Sister WyZ (younger) 151 Wife’s Brother’s WeBW Wife (elder)

WyB

Bavoho

WeB

Bavaha

Baha/ Name-Baya Nondenhen matdo

HyZH

148 Wife’s Brother (younger)

146 Husband’s Sister’s Husband (younger) 147 Wife’s Brother (elder)

(son Name) Yaahki/ Vovsey Name

Name

Jamaah

Poyar

Poyari

Poyari

Poyar

Vovdih

Paavos (Paavoh)

Paavos (Paavoh)

(son Name) Baahkaay/ Jamaah

Name

Name

Name

(son Name) Nadey Name

Name/Dada

Name/Dada

Baya/halahay baay/baaya koaawali

Gharwaline Nanni Benihi Gharwaline Moto Favhaane Gharawali Gharwaline Nanno Favhaane Gharawali Gharwaline Mota Beynehene Gharawalo Gharwaline Nanno Beynehene Gharwalo Dikhrahaane Gharawali Dikhrahaane Dikhroho Dikhrahaane Dikhrahaane Gharawali Dikhrahaane Dikhrihi Dikhrahaane Dikhrihene Gharawalo Dikhrihene Gharawalo

Gharwaline Nanno Fahaav Gharwaline Moti Benihi

Bihinis

Bihinis

Salis

Name/ Buyu

NameSalis Buyu

Jamhaay

Dikre

Dikra

Dikre

Dikra

Vavnihi

Javans

Javans

Posi

Uhus

Posa

Uhus

Hadu Fahaav Barik Sadus

Bhavus

Vahus

Posa

Vahus

Barik Sadus

Javans

Name/ Javans

Javans

Javans

Nandoi

Name/ Buyu

Buyu

bahu

potabahu

Javans

Name/ Javans

(Continued)

Jamai

poti-jamai

Name/Posi poti

Name/ Vahus

Name/Posa pota

Vahus

Name-Baba Choti Sali ka pati

Badi Sali ka pati

Chote sale ki patni

Bade sale ki patni

Name- Salis Sali

Name/ Chota Sala Bhavad/ Mehnas Barik Fui Badi Sali

Bhavad/ Bada Sala Mehnas

Name/ Baba

Motha Sadus Baba

Bihinis

Bihinis

Salis

Name/Posi Posi

Name/ Posa Name/ Uhus

Uhus

NameBaba

Hadu Fahaav Motha Sadus Baba

Benhi

Benhi

Halahi

Vadhaav

Nanno Halaho

Bhavad

Name/ Baba

Motha Bhavad/ Mehnas Barik Bhavad Name/ Barik Bhavad Bhavad/ Mehnas Akad Sasus Barik Fui Akad Sasus

Gharwalaane Fahaav Bhavus Nanno Beynehene Gharawalo Name/Memas Gharwaline Moto Halaho Motha Moto Fahaav Bhavad

Name/Dada

Bonisi (Baya) baay/ baaya

Haalhih

Vovah

Haalah

Memah

Paavos (Paavoh)

Pohen

ch sp

DHk

167 Khandadiya

TOR – Term of Reference. TOA – Term of Address.

Pohiye-pohiye- Name matdo

DDH

Khandadiyo

Pohiye-pohi

DD

163 Daughter’s Daughter 164 Daughter’s Daughter’s husband 165 Children 166 spouse

Name

Name

Pohiye-pohatheye

DSW

162 Daughter’s Son’s Wife

Name

Poyar

Poyari

Poyari

Poyar

TOR

TOR

TOA

Vasava

Gamit

Pohiye-poho

Symbols

161 Daughter’s Son DS

S. Kins/Relation No.

Name

Name

Name

Name

TOA

Dikhrihene Dikhroho Dikhrihene Dikhrahaane Gharawali Dikhrihene Dikhrihi Dikhrihene Dikhrihene Gharawalo

TOR

Chaudhari

Dikra

Dikre

Dikre

Dikra

TOA

Posan-ho BaykoGohle/ GohoByako Khandade/ Gharatne

Javans

Posi

Uhus

Posa

TOR

Kukana

Vahus

Posa

TOR

Khandad

Posan-ho

Name/ Javans

Khandade/ Gharatne

Posan-ho

Javans

Name/Posi Posi

Name/ Posa Name/ Uhus

TOA

Warli

Gujarati Equivalent

Khandad

Posan-ho

Name/ Javans

Name/Posi

Name/ Vahus

natibahu

Name/Posa nati

TOA

FF FM MF MM F M FeB

FeBW

FyB

FyBW

FeZ

FeZH

FyZ

FyZH

MeZ

MeZH MyZ

1  2  3  4  5  6  7

 8

 9

 10

 11

 12

 13

 14

 15

 16  17

S. No.  Relationship

Jiji

Kaka

Aajlihi

Aaba-aaba Aaba-aaya Aaye-aaba Aaye-aaya Aaba Aaya Aajlaha

‘Name’ Fuchi ‘Name’ Mamo ‘Name’ Mama ‘Name’ Fuchi ‘Name’ Fuchi ‘Name’ Mamo ‘Name’ Mama Aajlihi Name(if married Village name)Aajlihi Aajloho Aajlaha Jiji Name(if married Village name)-Jiji

‘Name’ Fuchi

Jiji

Kako

Aajlihi

Aaba-aabo Aaba-aayo Aaye-aabo Aaye-aayo Aabo Aayo Aajloho

Vaados Jijih

Vaadisi

Hannu Mamu

Hanni Fuichi

Motu Mamu

Moti Fuichi

Kaki

Kaku

Vaadisi

Dohonu Baahku Dohoni Yaahki Dohonu Baahku Dohoni Yaahki Baahku Yaahki Vaados

TOR

TOR

TOA

Vasava

Gamit

Vaados Jiji

Vaadisi

Mama

Fuichi

Mama

Fuichi

Kaki

Kaka

Vaadisi

Dohnu Baah Dohoni Yaah Dohnu Baah Dohoni Yaah Obaa/Baah Oyaa/Yaah Vaada

TOA

Aayhene Fajdoho Aayhene Nanni Benihi

Aayhene Moti Benihi

Bahaane Nanni Benihi Bahaane Fajdoho

Bahaane Nanno Fahaav Bahaane Nanna Favahavali Bahaane Moti Benihi Bahaane Fajdoho

Bahaane Baha Bahaane Aahaay Aayhene Baha Aayhene Aahaay Baha Aahaay Bahaane Moto Fahaav Bahaane Fabihi

TOR

Chaudhari

Kinship Terms from Children’s Perspective

Appendix II

Jimho Jijihi

Jijihi

Mamo

Fuhui

Mamo

Fuhui

Khakhhi

Gado Baha Gadi Aaya Gado Baha Gadi Aaya Baha Aaya Motho/Motho Ba Mothi/Mothi Aaya Khakhho

TOA

Kakas Jiji

Jijis

Mamas

Fuis

Mamas

Fuis

Kakis

Kakas

Mothes

Davar Bahas Dose Aaya Davar Bahas Dose Aaya Bahas Aayis Motha Bahas

TOR

Kukana

Kaka Jiji

Jiji

Mama

Fui

Mama

Fui

Kaki

Kaka

Mothes

Davar Ba Dosses Davar Ba Dosses Ba Aaya Motha Ba

TOA

Kakas Jiji

Jijis

Mamas

Fuis

Mamas

Fuis

Kakis

Kakas

Mothes

Davar Bahas Dose Aaya Davar Bahas Dose Aaya Bahas Aayis Motha Bahas

TOR

Warli

(Continued)

Kaka Jiji

Jiji

Mama

Fui

Mama

Fui

Kaki

Kaka

Mothes

Davar Ba Dosses Davar Ba Dosses Ba Aaya Motha Ba

TOA

MeBW

MyB

MyBW

B

Z

S

D

Children Sons

Daughters Youngest Son

Youngest Daughter Eldest son

Elest Daughter Jethi Pohi

Middle sons Middle daughters

 20

 21

 22

 23

 24

 25

 26

 27  28

 29  30

 31

 32

 33

 34  35

TOR– Term of Reference. TOA– Term of Address.

Majdo Poho Majdi Pohi

Pohiyo Lesendo Poho/ Poosdiyo Lesendi Pohi/ Poosdi Jetho Poho

Pohen Paha

Pohi

Poho

Boahin

Baha

Fuchi

Mamo

Fuchi

Mamo

MeB

 19

Kako

MyZH

Moti Poyari

Vachlo Poyari Vachli Poyari

   

Motu Poyar

 

 

Hanni Poyari

Poyri Hanno Poyar

   

 

Poyaro Poyro

Poyari

Poyar

Bonisi(Baya)

Paavos(Paavoh)

Hanni Fuichi

Hannu Mamu

Moti Fuichi

Motu Mamu

Kaka/Kaku

   

 

 

Name -Boahin

Name -Mama Husband nameFuchi Name -Mama Husband nameFuchi Name -Baha

Kaka

TOR

TOR

TOA

Vasava

Gamit

 18

S. No.  Relationship

Moti Dikhrihi

Moto Dikhroho

Nani Dikhrihi

  Nanno Dikhroho

   

Dikhrihi

Dikhroho

Bahaay

Baabho

Aayhene Nanno Fahaav Aayhene Fabihi

Aayhene Nanno Benehevalo Aayhene Moto Fahaav Aayhene Fabihi

TOR

Vachlo Poyari   Vachli Poyari  

Moti Poyari

Motu Poyar

Hanni Poyari

Poyaro Hanno Poyar

Poyaro Poyaro

Name

Name

Name/Baya

Name/Dada

Fuichi

Mama

Fuichi

Mama

Kaka

TOA

Chaudhari

Posanho Posan

Posi

Posa

Bihinis

Bhavus

Fuis

Mamas

Fuis

Mamas

Kakas

TOR

   

Moti Dikhrihi

Barik Posa Barik Posi

Mothi Posi

Moto Dikhroho Motha Posa

  Posin Nanno Posa Dikhroho Nani Dikhrihi Posi

   

Dikre

Dikra

Baai

Baba

Mamhi

Mamo

Mamhi

Mamo

Jimho

TOA

Kukana

Motha Baba Mothi Buyu Barik Baba  Barik Buyu

Name -Baba Name / Posi/ Buyu  Posa/ Babale  Posi/ Buyali  Posa ho Posa/ Babale Posi/Buyali Posa/ Babale Posi/Buyali

Fui

Mama

Fui

Mama

Kaka

TOA

Barik Posa Barik Posi

Mothi Posi

Motha Posa

Posi

Posin Posa

Posanho Posan

Posi

Posa

Bihinis

Bhavus

Fuis

Mamas

Fuis

Mamas

Kakas

TOR

Warli

 Barik Baba  Barik Buyu

 Mothi Buyu

 Motha Baba

 Posi/Buyali

 Posi/Buyali   Posa/Babale

 Posa ho  Posa/Babale

 Posi/Buyali

 Posa/Babale

Name /Posi/ Buyu

Name -Baba

Fui

Mama

Fui

Mama

Kaka

TOA

Bayo/ Vovehematdo

Boi/ Handahatheye

WyBW

Vovlihi

yBW

HeZH

Bojhan Vovehe

eBW HeZ

6

7

Deyehun

Derhandi

HyBW

HyB

Bavlandihi

Vovlihi

yBW

HeBW

Bavloho

Vovlihi

SW

HeB

Mamo/Hahroho

Vovlihi

SW

HF

Fuchi/Hahu

HM

5

4

 3

 2

1

TOR

S.No.  Relationship Gamit

Name

baya

Vovlihi

Name/ Deyehun Bojhan Vovehe

Name

Name Bay

Vovlihi

Bavloha

Vovlihi

Mama

Vovlihi

Fuchi

TOA

(son Name) Yaahki/ Name Name

(son Name) Nadey (son Name) Baahkaay (son Name) Nadey (son Name) Yaahki

(son Name) Nadey Mama

Fuichi

TOA

Bonisi (Baya) baay/baaya

Pojaah Pojaah Vovah/Vovas (son Name) Yaahki/ Vovsey Vovdih (son Name) Nadey Paavos Name/Dada (Paavoh)

Deyhu

deraahi

Jethaahi

Vovdih

Jethuh

Vovdih

Haahroh

Vovdih

Haavdi

TOR

Vasava

Gharwalaane Mota Beynehene Gharawalo Gharwaline Nanno Favhaane Gharawali

Vavnihi

Gharwalaane Moto Favhaane Gharawali Gharwalaane Nanno Favhaane Gharawali Gharwalaane Nanno Fahaav Fabhi Gharwalaane Moti Benihi

Gharwalaane Aahaay/haahav Dikhrahaane Gharawali Gharwalaane Baha/ Hahroho Dikhrahaane Gharawali Gharwalaane Moto Fahaav Vavnihi

TOR

Chaudhari

Kinship Terms from Wife’s Perspective

Appendix III

Benhi

Fahaav

Vavniho

Fabhe MotiNandaha

Derho/Name

Deranihi

Jethanihi

Vavniho

Jethhu

Vavnihi

Ghannaho

Vavnihi

Ghannaho

TOA

Vahinis

Jethus

Uhus

Mama

Uhus

Fui

TOA

Jethanis

Vahinis

Jethus

Uhus

Sasras

Uhus

Sasus

TOR

Warli

Bihinis

Bhavus

Vahinis

Vahinis Vahinis

Derus

Bhavus

Vahinis

Vahinis Vahinis

Derus

Name/Buyu Bihinis

Vahinis/ Baayi Baba

Name/ Derus Vahinis Vahinis

Deranis Name / Deranis Deranis

Jethanis Jethanis

Vahinis

Jethus

Uhus

Sasras

Uhus

Sasus

TOR

Kukana

Jethani

 

Jeth

Vahu

Sasra

Vahu

Sasu

Name/ Buyu

Vahinis/ Baayi Baba

Name/ Derus Vahinis Vahinis

(Continued)

Nana Salanipatni

Nandoi

Vahu

  Moti Nanand

Diyar

Name / Derani Deranis

Jethanis

Vahinis

Jethus

Uhus

Mama

Uhus

Fui

TOA

 Relative Gujarati Terms

eBW HyZH

9

TOA

TOR

Vasava

Bavahatheye

Name Bay

Bonisi (Baya)

Name/ Nondoh Nondenhen Bojhan Bojhan Pojaah Baha/ Name-Baya Paavos Nondenhenmatdo (Paavoh)

Nondenhen

TOR–Term of Reference. TOA–Term of Address.

WeBW

HyZ

8

TOR

S.No.  Relationship Gamit

baay/baaya

Pojaah Name/Dada

Name

TOA Gharwalaane Nanni Benihi Fabhi Gharwalaane Nanno Beynehene Gharawalo Gharwaline Moto Favhaane Gharawali

TOR

Chaudhari

Benhi

Fabhe Fahaav

NaniNandaha

TOA

TOA

TOR

Warli

Bihinis

Name/Buyu Bihinis

Nandas Name/ Nandas Nandas Vahinis Vahinis Vahinis Bhavus Name-Baba Bhavus

TOR

Kukana

Name/ Buyu

 

Name/   Nandas Vahinis   NameNandoi Baba

TOA

 Relative Gujarati Terms

WF

DH

WM

DH

WeB

yZH

WeBW

HyZH

WyB

eZH

WyBW

HeZH

1

 

2

 

3

 

4

 

5

 

6

 

Janvaha

Bavaha

 

Fuchi

Janvaha

Mama

TOA

Name/Dada

Paavos (Paavoh)

Name/Dada

NameHaalah Name Handaha Bavdiyaha Paavdisu/ Paavdisu/ Paavdiyuh Paavdiyuh Name Baya/halahay baay/baaya koaawali

Bayo/Vovehe baya matdo

Boahin/ Handaha theye

Bavdiyoho

Handoho

TOA

Gharwaline Aahaay/ Haahav Dikhrihene Gharawalo

Ghannaho

Gharwaline Baha/ Ghannaho Huhroho Dikhrihene Jamhaay Gharawalo

TOR

Chaudhari

Gharwaline Nanno Favhaane Gharawali Gharwalaane Mota Beynehene Gharawalo

Gharwaline Moto Favhaane Gharawali Gharwalaane Nanno Beynehene Gharawalo Gharwaline Nanno Fahaav Fajdoho

Fahaav

Benhi

Nanno Halaho Fajdaha

Fahaav

Benhi

(son Name) Jamhaay Baahkaay/ Jamaah Name/Memas Gharwaline Moto Moto Fahaav Halaho Name/Jamaah Fajdoho Fajdaha

(son Name) Baahkaay/ Jamaah Fuichi

Mama

TOA

Bonisi (Baya) baay/baaya

Jamaah

Memah

Jamaah

Haavdi

Jamaah

Haahroh

TOR

Vasava

Baha/ Name-Baya Paavos Nondenhen (Paavoh) matdo

Bavaha theye Name Bay

Janvaha

Bavoho

 

Fuchi/Hahu

Mamo/ Hahroho Janvaha

TOR

S.No  Relation-ship Gamit

Kinship Terms from Husband’s Perspective

Appendix IV

Javans

Fui

Javans

Mama

TOA

Javans

Fuis

Javans

Mamas

TOR

Warli

Javans

Fui

Javans

Mama

TOA

Bhavus

Bihinis

Bhavad

Bhavad

Bhavus

Baba

Bhavus

Bhavad/ Mehnas Bhavad/ Mehnas Name/Buyu Bihinis

NameBhavad Bhavad

Name-Baba Bhavus

Nandoi

Mota sale ni patni

Jamai

Mota Sala

Jamai

 Foi

Jamai

 Mama

Relative Gujarati Terms

Baba

(Continued)

Nandoi

Name-Bhavad/ Nano Sala Mehnas Bhavad/ Nandoi Mehnas Name/Buyu Nana sale ni patni

Name-Baba

Motha Bhavad Motha Bhavad/ Bhavad/ Bhavad Mehnas Mehnas Barik Bhavad Barik Bhavad/ Bhavad/ Bhavad Mehnas Mehnas Bihinis Name/Buyu Bihinis Name/Buyu

Javans

Fuis

Javans

Mamas

TOR

Kukana

Bavdiyoho

WeZH

WyZH

WyZ

eZH

 

8

 

9

Janvaha

Vovehe

Bavdiyaha

TOA

Jamaah

Vovah

 

TOR

Vasava

Matdo

Theye

H

W

Haalhih

 

TOR

Chaudhari

Name

Name/Dada

Name/Dada

Gharawali

Gharawalo

Gharwaline Mota Beynehene Gharawalo Gharwaline Nanno Beynehene Gharawalo Gharwaline Nanni Benihi Fajdoho

(son Name) Gharwaline Moti Yaahki/ Benihi Vovsey Name/Jamaah Fajdoho

 

TOA

Paavdisu/ Paavdisu/ Paavdiyuh Paavdiyuh (Eldest child Matudo (son Name) name) baahka Aabaha (Eldest child They (son Name) name) Yaahki Aayehe

NameHandihi Bavdiyaha

Vovehe Name -Baya Paavos matdo/ (Paavoh) Hadobaha Handihi Name-Baya Paavos matdo/ (Paavoh) hadobaha

TOR–Term of Reference. TOA–Term of Address.

11

Handihi

yZH

7

Janvaha

W all Bavdiyoho younger Bs WeZ Vovehe

 

TOR

S.No  Relation-ship Gamit

 

TOA

Bhavdos

Salis

Barik Sadus

Motha Sadus

Javans

(son Name) Bayako Ne-aahay

Akad Sasus

 

TOR

Warli

Bhavad/ Mehnas (Eldest child Gohale name) Bahas (Eldest child Bayako name) Ayis

Bhavdos

Name/Salis Salis

Name/Sadus Barik Sadus

Bhavad/ Mehnas Baba/Sadus Motha Sadus

Javans

Akad Sasus Barik Fui

 

TOR

(son Name) Gohale Ne-baha

Fajdaha

Halahi

Hadu Fahaav

Hadu Fahaav

Fajdaha

Vadhaav

 

TOA

Kukana

Bhavad/ Mehnas (Eldest child name) Bahas (Eldest child name) Ayis

Name/Salis

Name/Sadus

Bhavad/ Mehnas Baba/Sadus

Barik Fui

 

TOA

Teknonymy

Teknonymy

Bahnoi

Sali

Nani Sali na pati

Moti Sali na pati

Jamai

Moti Sali

 

Relative Gujarati Terms

Bride or Bridegrooms mother Own Brothers and sisters Own brothers Own sisters Family members (male and female) Male Family members Female Family members Lineage members (male and female) Male lineage members Female lineage members In-laws member Male In -law members Female In-law members In -laws

8 9 10 11 12

16 17 18 19 20 21

13 14 15

6 7

Hogvadiya Hogvadiyo Harvadiyen Harvadiya Harvadiyo Harvadi

Goriya Goriyo Hogvadiyen

Vevhandi Baundenhen Baundaha Baundohiyo Goriyen

Okhli Vevaha

Okhlo

Vovdo Vovdi

Bridegroom Bride Bridegroom companion ( all male and female) Bridegroom companion male Bride's companion ( all male and female) Bride's companion female Bride or Bridegrooms father

1 2 3

4 5

Gamit

S. No. Equivalent English Terms

Hagawala Hagawalya Hahrakiye Hahrakiya Hahrakiya Hahrakiye

Koera Koeriya Hagawale

Vevan – Hagga Pavos Hahya Boisiya Koere

Anuthi Vevah

Anutha –

Nado Nadi –

Vasava

– – – – – –

– – –

– – – – –

– –

– –

– – –

Chaudhari

– – Sagawan – – Sasarwadi

– – Pidhi

Navri-sehunle-bayka Navra /Navri na Bahas Navra /Navri ni Aayis Bhaven Bhavus Bihinis Kutbare

Navra-sehunla-gohle Navri-van

Navara Navari Navra-van

Kukana

Some More Kinship Terms for Group of Relatives

Appendix V

– – Sagawan – – Sasarwadi

– – Pidhi

(Continued)

Navra /Navri ni Aayis Bhaven Bhavus Bihinis Kutbare

Navri-sehunle-bayka Navra /Navri na Bahas

Navra-sehunla-gohle Navri-van

Navara Navari Navra-van

Warli

Female match maker

Elders Old people (Male and female) Male tur (pawari) player at marriage ceremony

24

25 26 27 Wodil Dayayen

Lavandiyewaldi

Lavandiyewaldo

Khandadiya

Male person moved with female native after marriage Male match maker

22

23

Gamit

S. No. Equivalent English Terms

Vevhal Kwavnar Vevhal Kwavnari Wadil Daye

Gharjamai

Vasava

– – –

–

–

–

Chaudhari

Davaran Davaran Pawarkar/Kahadewa

Vathudi

Vathude

Khandade/Gharatne

Kukana

Davaran Davaran Pawarkar/Kahdewa

Vathudi

Vathude

Khandade/Gharatne

Warli

FyBW

Father’s Younger Brother Father’s Younger Brother’s Wife

FyB

Jiji

Kako

Jiji

Kaka

Aajlihi

Father’s Elder Brother’s Wife

FeBW

Aajlihi

Aajlaha

Aaba-aaba Aaye-aaba Aaye-aaya Aaye-aaba

AG1 (Ascending Generation 1) FeB Father’s Elder Aajloho Brother

Aaba-aabo Aaye-aabo Aaye-aayo Aaye-aabo

AG2 (Ascending Generation 2) FF Father’s Father MF Mother’s Father MM Mother’s Mother FM Father’s Mother

Kaki

Kaku

Vaadisi

Vaados

Bahaka Baahku Yahake Baahku Yahake Yaahki Bahaka Yaahki

Aaba-aaba-aaba Bahaka Bahaka Baahku Aaye-aaba-aaba Yahake Bahaka Baahku Aaye-aaye-aaya Yahake Yahake Yaahki Aaba-aaye-aaya Bahaka Yahake Yaahki

TOR

TOR

TOA

Vasava

Gamit

Aaba-aabaaabo Aaye-aabaaabo Aaye-aayeaayo Aaba-aayeaayo

Relation-ship

AG3 (Ascending Generation 3) FFF Father’s Father’s Father MFF Mother’s Father’s Father MMM Mother’s Mother’s Mother FMM Father’s Mother’s Mother

Symbols

Kaki

Kaka

Vaadisi

Vaados

Dohnu Baah Dohnu Baah Dohoni Yaah Dohoni Yaah

Dohonu Baahku Dohonu Baahku Dohoni Yaahki Dohoni Yaahki

TOA

Bahaane Nanno Fahaav Bahaane Nanna Favahavali

Bahaane Fabihi

Bahaane Moto Fahaav

Bahaane Baha Aayhene Baha Aayhene Aahaay Bahaane Aahaay

Bahaane Bahaane Baha Aayhene Bahaane Baha Aayhene Aayhene Aahaay Bahaane Aayhene Aahaay

TOR

Chaudhari

Khakhhi

Motho/ Motho Ba Mothi/ Mothi Aaya Khakhho

Kakis

Kakas

Mothes

Motha Bahas

Davar Bahas Davar Bahas Dose Aaya Dose Aaya

Dose Aaya

Gadi Aaya

Gado Baha Gado Baha Gadi Aaya Gadi Aaya

Dosses

Dose Aaya

Gadi Aaya

Kakis

Kakas

Mothes

Mothaba

Davarba Davarba Dosses Dosses

Dosses

Davarba

Gado Baha Davar Bahas

TOA

Davarba

TOR

Gado Baha Davar Bahas

TOA

Kukana

Generation-wise Kinship Terms among Five Tribes of South Gujarat

Appendix VI

TOA

Kakis

Kakas

Mothes

Motha Bahas

Davar Bahas Davar Bahas Dose Aaya Dose Aaya

Dose Aaya

Dose Aaya

(Continued)

Kakis

Kakas

Mothes

Mothaba

Davarba Davarba Dosses Dosses

Dosses

Dosses

Davar Bahas Davarba

Davar Bahas Davarba

TOR

Warli

Mother’s Elder Aajloho Sister’s Husband Mother’s Younger Kako Sister’s Husband

MezH

 

 

 

Wife’s Sister’s Husband’s Father Brother’s Wife’s Father Father’s Sister’s Husband  

 

Sister’s Husband’s Father

MyB

WZHF

FyZH

ZHF

FeZH

FZH

BWF

Mother’s Brother  

MB MeB

Name-village - Mama Mama

 

Name- Mama  

Mama

Mama

Kaka

Aaba Aaya Name (if married Village name)-Aajlihi Name (if married Village name)-Jiji Aajlaha

Mamo

Name-village - Mama

 

 

Mamo/ Hahroho ‘Name’ Mamo ‘Name’ Mama

Mamo

 

Husband’s Father

HF

Mamo/ Hahroho Mamo/ Hahroho Mamo  

Wife’s Father

Jiji

  WF

MyZH

Mother’s Younger Sister

MyZ

Aabo Aayo Aajlihi

Father Mother Mother’s Elder Sister

F M MeZ

Mamu

 

 

Mamu

Mamu

Mamu

 

Mamu  

Haahroh

Haahroh

Kaka/Kaku

Vaados

Jijih

Baahku Yaahki Vaadisi

TOR

TOR

TOA

Vasava

Gamit

Relation-ship

Symbols

Mama

 

 

Mama

Mama

Mama

 

Mama  

Mama

Mama

Kaka

Vaados

Jiji

Obaa/Baah Oyaa/Yaah Vaadisi

TOA

Jijihi

Baha Aaya Jijihi

TOA

 Mamo  Mamo

   

   Mamo

   

 

 Mamo

 

 

 

Mamo  

Ghannaho

Ghannaho

Jimho

 

Gharwaline Baha/Huhroho Gharwalaane Baha/Hahroho Aayhene Fahaav  

Aayhene Nanno Benehevalo

Aayhene Fajdoho Jimho

Aayhene Nanni Benihi

Baha Aahaay Aayhene Moti Benihi

TOR

Chaudhari

Mama

Mama

Kakas

Mothaba

Jiji

Ba Aaya Mothes

TOA

Mamas

Mamas

Motha Bahas Kakas

Jijis

Bahas Aayis Mothes

TOR

Warli

 

Mama

Kakas

Mamas

Kakas

Motha Mamas Motha Mama Motha Mamas Barik Mamas Barik Mama Barik Mamas Mamas Mama Mamas

 

Mamas

Kakas

    Motha Mamas Motha Mama Motha Mamas Barik Mamas Barik Mama Barik Mamas

Mamas

Mamas

Kakas

Motha Bahas

Jijis

Bahas Aayis Mothes

TOR

Kukana

Mama

Barik Mama

Motha Mama

Mama

Kakas

Barik Mama

Motha Mama

Mama

Mama

Kakas

Mothaba

Jiji

Ba Aaya Mothes

TOA

Husband’s Mother

Father’s Sister Wife’s Sister’s Husband’s Mother Mother’s Brother’s Wife Brother’s Wife’s Mother Sister’s Husband’s Mother

HM

FZ WZHM

Wife’s Elder Sister

Wife’s Younger Handihi Sister Wife’s Elder Sister’s Vovehe Husband matdo/ Hadobaha Wife’s Younger Handihi Sister’s Husband matdo/ hadobaha Wife’s Elder Brother Bavoho

WeZ

WyZ

WeB

WyZH

WeZH

Theye

Wife

W

Vovehe

Matdo

Fuchi

Fuchi/Hahu

Fuchi

Fuchi Fuchi

Fuchi/Hahu

Fuchi/Hahu

G0 (Ego’s Generation) H Husband

  ZHM

BWM

MBW

Wife’s Mother

WM Haavdi

Haavdi

Haavdi

Fuichi

Vovah

Bavaha

Name-Baya

Name –Baya

(Eldest child name) Yaahki/ Vovsey Name

(Eldest child name) Yaahki

(Eldest child name) Baahka

Fuichi

Fuichi

Fuichi

Fuichi Fuichi

Fuichi

Fuichi

Memah

Hadu Fahaav

Hadu Fahaav

Halahi

Vadhaav

Gharawali

Gharawalo

 

 

 

Gharwaline Aahaay/ Haahav Gharwalaane Aahaay/ haahav Bahaane Bahaay  

Name/Memas Moto Halaho

Paavos (Paavoh) Name/Dada

Paavos (Paavoh) Name/Dada

Name- Handihi Haalhih

Vovehe

(Eldest child Matudo name) Aabaha (Teknonymy) (Eldest child They name) Aayehe (Teknonymy)

‘Name’ - village Fuichi -Fuchi

Husband name-Fuchi Fuchi

‘Name’ Fuchi Fuichi ‘Name’ – village Fuichi –Fuchi

Fuchi

Fuchi

Fuis

Fuis

Fuis

Fuis Kakis

Fuis

Fuis

Name/ Halaho

NameFahaav

Name Halahi NameFahaav

Fuis

Fuis

Fuis

Fuis Kakis

Fuis

Fuis

Fui

Fui

Fui

Fui Kakis

Fui

Fui

Salis

Salis

Barik Sadus

Motha Mehnas

(Continued)

Motha Bhawad

Barik Sadus Barik Sadus

Motha Sadus Motha Sadus Motha Sadus

Salis

Gohale/ Gohale Gohale/ Chokarana Chokarana pita name, pita name, thi thi Bayako/ Bayako Bayako/ Chokarana Chokarana mata mata name, thi name, thi Eldest child Aakad Sasus Eldest child name/ name/ Barikfui Barikfui

Fui

Fui

Fui

Fui Kakis

Fui

Fui

Motha Bhawad Motha Bhawad

Barik Sadus

Motha Sadus

Salis

(son Name) Aakad Sasus Ne-aahay

(son Name) Bayako Ne-aahay

(son Name) Gohale Ne-baha

 Fuhui

 Fuhui

 Fuhui

Fuhui  Fuhui

Ghannaho

Ghannaho

Wife’s Younger Brother Wife’s Elder Brother’s Wife Wife’s Younger Brother’s Wife Elder Brother Younger Brother Elder Brother’s Wife Younger Brother’s Wife

WyB

Bavloho

Husband’s Elder Brother

Husband’s Younger Deyehun Brother Husband’s Elder Bavlandihi Brother’s Wife

HeB

HyB

Husband’s Elder Sister

HeZ

Vovehe

Husband’s Younger Derhandi Brother’s Wife

HyBW

HeBW

Bavdiyaha

Bavdiyoho

Vovehe

Name

Name Bay

Vovah/Vovas

Deraahi

Jethaahi

Name/Deyehun Deyhu

Bavloha

Paavdisu/ Paavdiyuh Jethuh

Janvahan

Janvahan

Baya/halahay koaawali Paavos (Paavoh) Paavos (Paavoh) Pojaah Vovdih

Bonisi (Baya) Bonisi (Baya) Paavdisu/ Paavdiyuh Jamaah

Motho-baya Name Bojhan Vovlihi

Name

Mothi-Boahin Mothi-Bay Vahno-Boahin Name Bavdiyoho Bavdiyaha

Boi/Handaha theye Motho-baha Vahno-baha Bojhan Vovlihi

Bonisi (Baya)

Name-Handaha Haalah

Bavaha theye Name Bay

Handoho

TOR

TOR

TOA

Vasava

Gamit

Elder Sister Younger Sister Elder Sister’s Husband yZH Younger Sister’s Husband Bavdiyoho  

eZ yZ eZH

eB yB eBW yBW

WyBW

WeBW

Relation-ship

Symbols

Fajdoho

Bahaay Bahaay Fajdoho

Baabho Baabho Fabhi Vavnihi

Benhi

Benhi

Nanno Halaho

TOR

(Eldest child name) Yaahki (Eldest child name) Yaahki/ Name (Eldest child name) Yaahki/ Vovsey

Moti Nandaha

Deranihi

Jethanihi

Paavdisu/ Fajdoho Paavdiyuh (Eldest child Jethhu name) Baahkaay/ Dailoho Name Derho

Name/Dada Name/Dada Pojaah (Eldest child name) Yaahki/ Nandey Name/Baya Name/Baya Paavdisu/ Paavdiyuh Name/Jamaah

baay/baaya

baay/baaya

Name

TOA

Chaudhari TOA

TOR

Babas Bhavus Vahinis Uhus

Bihinis Baba Name Vahinis Uhus

Bihinis

Babas Bhavus Vahinis Vahus

Bihinis

Barik Bhawad Barik Bhawad Barik Mehnas Bihinis Bihinis Bihinis

TOR

Warli

Derus

(son Name) Deranis Neaahay/ Name (son Name) Nandas Neaahay/ Name

(son Name) Jethanis Ne-aahay

Name

(son Name) Jethus Ne-baha

Nandas

Deranis

Jethanis

Derus

Jethus

Nandas

Deranis

Jethanis

Derus

Jethus

Name/Baai Bihinis Buyu Bihinis Name/Baai Bihinis Posi/Name Bihinis Fajdaha Motha Bhawad Motha Motha Bhawad Mehnas Fajdaha Barik Bhawad Barik Bhawad Barik Mehnas Fajdaha Bhawad Bhawad Bhawad

Name/Baba Name/Baba Fabhe Vavniho

Benhi

Name/ Halaho Benhi

TOA

Kukana

Nandas

Deranis

Jethanis

Derus

Jethus

Buyu Posi/Name Motha Bhawad Barik Bhawad Bhawad

Baba Name Vahinis Vahus

Buyu

Barik Bhawad Buyu

TOA

Daughter’s Puhi Husband’s Sister

DHZ

Male Perspective BS Brother’s Son BD Brother’s Daughter WZS Wife’s Sister’s Son WZD Wife’s Sister’s Daughter

Son’s Wife’s Sister

SWZ

poho pohi poho pohi

Vovlihi

Son’s Wife’s Brother Poho Daughter’s Janvahan Husband’s Brother

SWB DHB

Name Name Name Name

Name

Vovlihi

Name Janvahan

Name Janvahan

Daughter Puhi Daughter’s Husband Janvahan

D DH

Bavdiyaha (Vevaha) Boahin (Vevhandi)

Name-Baya

Name/ Nondenhen Baya

Name Vovlihi

Husband’s Younger Nondenhen Sister Husband’s Elder Bayo/Vovehe Sister’s Husband matdo Husband’s Younger Baha/ Sister’s Husband Nondenhen matdo Children’s Spouse’s Bavdiyoho Father Children’s Spouse’s Boahin Mother

DG1 (Descending Generation 1) S Son Poho SW Son’s Wife Vovlihi

ChSpM

ChSpF

HyZH

HeZH

HyZ Name

Poyar Poyari Poyar Poyari

Poyari

Vovdih

Poyar Jamaah

Poyari Jamaah

Poyar Vovdih

Vevan

Vevah

Name Name Name Name

Name (son Name) Nadey Name (Eldest child name) Baahkaay/ Jamaah Name (Eldest child name) Baahkaay/ Jamaah/ Name (Eldest child name) Yaahki/ Name Name

Vevan

Vevah

Paavos (Paavoh) Name/Dada

Paavos (Paavoh) Name/Dada

Nondoh

Dikhroho Dikhrihi Dikhroho Dikhrihi

Dikhrihi

Dikhrihi

Dikhroho Jamhaay

Dikhrihi Jamhaay

Dikhroho Vavnihi

 

 

Fahaav

Fahaav

Nani Nandaha

Nandas

Posa Uhus

Buyu

Name Name Name Name

Name

Name

Name Jamhaay

Posa Posi Posa Posi

Uhus

Uhus

Jawans Jawans

Name Posi (son Name) Jawans Ne-baha/ Jamhaay

Name Vavnihi

 

(son Name) Nandvas Ne-baha (son Name) Nandvas Ne-baha/ Name   Bhawad

Name

Baba/Name Buyu/Name Posa/Name Posi/Name

Uhus

Uhus

Jawans Jawans

Posi/Name Jawans

Baba/Name Uhus

Buyu

Bhawad

Baba

Baba

Nandas

Posa Posi Posa Posi

Vahus

Vahus

Jawans Jawans

Posi Jawans

Posa Vahus

Buyu

Bhawad

Nandvas

Nandvas

Nandas

(Continued)

Baba/Name Buyu/Name Posa/Name Posi/Name

Vahus

Vahus

Jawans Jawans

Posi/Name Jawans

Baba/Name Vahus

Buyu

Bhawad

Baba

Baba

Nandas

Sister’s Son

Brother’s Son

ZS

BS

DG2 (Descending Generation 2) SS Son’s Son Poha-poho DS Daughter’s Son Pohiye-poho SD Son’s Daughter Poha-pohi DD Daughter’s Pohiye-pohi Daughter

HZD

BD HZS

Name/ Janvahan Brother’s Daughter Name/Vovlihi Husband’s Sister’s Name/ Son Janvahan Husband’s Sister’s Name/Vovlihi Daughter

Poyar Poyar Poyari Poyari

Name Name Name

Name

Name Name Name Name

Name

Name Name

Poyar Poyar Poyari Poyari

Poyari

Poyar Poyari

Poyar

 

Name

Name

 

Paanjehi  

Name Name

Name Name Name Name

Name

Name Name

Name

Name

Name Name Name

Name  

Paanjoh

Name

TOA

Name

TOR

TOR

TOA

Vasava

Gamit

Name/ Janvahan ZD Sister’s Daughter Name/Vovlihi WBS Wife’s Brother’s Son Name/ Janvahan WBD Wife’s Brother’s Name/Vovlihi Daughter Female Perspective ZS Sister’s Son poho ZD Sister’s Daughter pohi HBS Husband’s Brother’s poho Son HBD Husband’s Brother’s pohi Daughter

Relation-ship

Symbols

Dikhroho Dikhroho Dikhrihi Dikhrihi

Dikhrihi

Dikhrihi Dikhroho

Dikhroho

Dikhrihi

Dikhroho Dikhrihi Dikhroho

Dikhrihi

Dikhrihi Dikhroho

Dikhroho

TOR

Chaudhari

Name Name Name Name

Name

Name Name

Name

Name

Name Name Name

 Name

Name  Name

Name

TOA

Natus Posi Posa Posi

Uhus

Uhus Jawans

Jawans

Posi

Posa Posi Posa

Uhus

Jawans Jawans

Jawans

TOR

Kukana

Posa/Name Posi/Name Posa/Name Posi/Name

Uhus

Uhus Jawans

Jawans

Posi/Name

Posa/Name Posi/Name Posa/Name

Uhus

Jawans Jawans

Jawans

TOA

Natus Posi Posa Posi

Vahus

Vahus Jawans

Jawans

Posi

Posa Posi Posa

Vahus

Jawans Jawans

Jawans

TOR

Warli

Posa/Name Posi/Name Posa/Name Posi/Name

Vahus

Vahus Jawans

Jawans

Posi/Name

Posa/Name Posi/Name Posa/Name

Vahus

Jawans Jawans

Jawans

TOA

Source: Field data. TOR–Term of Reference. TOA–Term of Address.

DG3 (Descending Generation 3) SSS Son’s Son’s Son Poha-pohapoho DSS Daughter’s Son’s Pohiye-pohaSon poho pohiyeDDD Daughter’s pohiyeDaughter’s Daughter pohi SDD Son’s Daughter’s Poha-pohiyeDaughter pohi Poyar Poyar Poyari Poyari

Name

Name

Name

Name

Name

Name

Name

Name

Dikhrihi

Dikhrihi

Dikhroho

Dikhroho

Name

Name

Name

Name

Posi

Posa

Posi

Natus

Posi/Name

Posa/Name

Posi/Name

Posa/Name

Posi

Posa

Posi

Natus

Posi/Name

Posa/Name

Posi/Name

Posa/Name

Appendix VII

Abbreviations for Kin Types

S.No.

Symbols

Relations

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36

FFF MFF MMM FMM FF FM FFB FFZ FMB FMZ MF MM MMB MMZ MFB MFZ F FeB FyB FeZ FyZ FeBW FyBW FeZH FyZH FBS FBD FZS FZD M MeB MyB MeZ MyZ MeBW MyBW

Father’s Father’s Father Mother’s Father’s Father Mother’s Mother’s Mother Father’s Mother’s Mother Father’s Father Father’s Mother Fathers Father’s Brother Father’s Father’s Sister Father’s Mother’s Brother Father’s Mother’s Sister Mother’s Father Mother’s Mother Mothers Mother’s Brother Mother’ s Mother’s Sister Mother’s Father’s Brother Mother’s Father’s Sister Father Father’s (elder) Brother Father’s (younger) Brother Father’s (elder) Sister Father’s (younger) Sister Father’s (elder) Brother’s Wife Father’s (younger) Brother’s Wife Father’s (elder) Sister’s Husband Father’s (younger) Sister’s Husband Father’s Brother’s Son Father’s Brother’s Daughter Father’s Sister’s Son Father’s Sister’s Daughter Mother Mother’s (elder) Brother Mother’s (younger) Brother Mother’s (elder) Sister Mother’s (younger) Sister Mother’s (elder) Brother’s Wife Mother’s (younger) Brother’s Wife (Continued)

242

Appendix VII

S.No.

Symbols

Relations

37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86

MeZH MyZH MBS MBD MZS MZD H W eB yB eZ yZ eBW yBW eZH yZH S D SS SD DS DD BS BD BSS BSD BDS BDD ZS ZD ZSS ZSD ZDS ZDD HFF HMF HFM HMM WFF WMF WMM WFM HF HM HFB HFZ HMB HMZ HFBS HFBeS

Mother’s (elder) Sister’s Husband Mother’s (younger) Sister’s Husband Mother’s Brother’s Son Mother’s Brother’s Daughter Mother’s Sister’s Son Mother’s Sister’s Daughter Husband Wife (Elder)Brother (younger) Brother (Elder)Sister (younger)Sister (Elder)Brother’s Wife (younger) Brother’s Wife (Elder) Sister’s husband (younger) Sister’s husband Son Daughter Son’s Son Son’s Daughter Daughter’s Son Daughter’s Daughter Brother’s Son Brother’s Daughter Brother’s Son’s Son Brother’s Son’s Daughter Brother’s Daughter’s Son Brother’s Daughter’s Daughter Sister’s Son Sister’s Daughter Sister’s Son’s Son Sister’s Son’s Daughter Sister’s Daughter’s Son Sister’s Daughter’s Daughter Husbands Father’s Father Husband’s Mother’s Father Husband’s Father’s Mother Husband’s Mother’s Mother Wife’s Father’s Father Wife’s Mother’s Father Wife’s Mother’s Mother Wife’s Father’s Mother Husband’s Father Husband’s Mother Husband’s Father’s Brother Husband’s Father’s Sister Husband’s Mother’s Brother Husband’s Mother’s Sister Husband’s Father’s Brother’s Son Husband’s Father’s Brother’s (elder) Son (age compared to husband)

Appendix VII 243 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100

HFByS HFBD HFBeD HFByD HFZS HFZeS HFZyS HFZD HFZeD HFZyD HMB HMZ HMBS HMBeS

101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132

HMByS HMBD HMBeD HMByD HMZS HMZeS HMZyS HMZD HMZeD HMZyD WF WM WFB WFZ WMB WMZ WFBS WFBeS WFByS WFBD WFBeD WFByD WFZS WFZeS WFZyS WFZD WFZeD WFZyD WMB WMZ WMBS WMBeS

133 134 135 136 137

WMByS WMBD WMBeD WMByD WMZS

Husband’s Father’s Brother’s (younger) Son Husband’s Father’s Brother’s Daughter Husband’s Father’s Brother’s (elder) Daughter Husband’s Father’s Brother’s (younger) Daughter Husband’s Father’s Sister’s Son Husband’s Father’s Sister’s (elder) Son Husband’s Father’s Sister’s (younger) Son Husband’s Father’s Sister’s Daughter Husband’s Father’s Sister’s (elder) Daughter Husband’s Father’s Sister’s (younger) Daughter Husband’s Mother’s Brother Husband’s Mother’s Sister Husband’s Mother’s Brother’s Son Husband’s Mother’s Brother’s (elder) Son(age compared to husband) Husband’s Mother’s Brother’s (younger) Son Husband’s Mother’s Brother’s Daughter Husband’s Mother’s Brother’s (elder) Daughter Husband’s Mother’s Brother’s (younger) Daughter Husband’s Mother’s Sister’s Son Husband’s Mother’s Sister’s (elder) Son Husband’s Mother’s Sister’s (younger) Son Husband’s Mother’s Sister’s Daughter Husband’s Mother’s Sister’s (elder) Daughter Husband’s Mother’s Sister’s (younger) Daughter Wife’s Father Wife’s Mother Wife’s Father’s Brother Wife’s Father’s Sister Wife’s Mother’s Brother Wife’s Mother’s Sister Wife’s Father’s Brother’s Son Wife’s Father’s Brother’s (elder) Son (age compared to wife) Wife’s Father’s Brother’s (younger) Son Wife’s Father’s Brother’s Daughter Wife’s Father’s Brother’s (elder) Daughter Wife’s Father’s Brother’s (younger) Daughter Wife’s Father’s Sister’s Son Wife’s Father’s Sister’s (elder)Son Wife’s Father’s Sister’s (younger) Son Wife’s Father’s Sister’s Daughter Wife’s Father’s Sister’s (elder) Daughter Wife’s Father’s Sister’s (younger) Daughter Wife’s Mother’s Brother Wife’s Mother’s Sister Wife’s Mother’s Brother’s Son Wife’s Mother’s Brother’s (elder) Son (age compared to wife) Wife’s Mother’s Brother’s (younger) Son Wife’s Mother’s Brother’s Daughter Wife’s Mother’s Brother’s (elder) Daughter Wife’s Mother’s Brother’s (younger) Daughter Wife’s Mother’s Sister’s Son (Continued)

244

Appendix VII

S.No.

Symbols

Relations

138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171

WMZeS WMZyS WMZD WMZeD WMZyD HeB HyB HeZ HyZ HeBW HyBW HeZH HyZH WeB WyB WeZ WyZ WeBW WyBW WeZH WyZH SW SS SSW SD SDH DH DS DSW DD DDH Ch Sp K

Wife’s Mother’s Sister’s (elder) Son Wife’s Mother’s Sister’s (younger) Son Wife’s Mother’s Sister’s Daughter Wife’s Mother’s Sister’s (elder) Daughter Wife’s Mother’s Sister’s (younger) Daughter Husband’s (elder) Brother Husband’s (younger) Brother Husband’s (elder) Sister Husband’s (younger) Sister Husband’s (elder) Brother’s Wife Husband’s (younger)Brother’s Wife Husband’s (elder) Sister’s Husband Husband’s (younger) Sister’s Husband Wife’s (elder) Brother Wife’s (younger) Brother Wife’s (elder) Sister Wife’s (younger) Sister Wife’s (elder) Brother’s Wife Wife’s (younger) Brother’s Wife Wife’s (elder) Sister’s Husband Wife’s (younger) Sister’s Son’s Wife Son’s Son Son’s Son’s Wife Son’s Daughter Son’s Daughter’s Husband Daughter’s husband Daughter’s Son Daughter’s Son’s Wife Daughter’s Daughter Daughter’s Daughter’s Husband Children Spouse Khandadiya ( resident-son-in-law)

References

Alatas, Syed Farid. 2014. Applying Ibn Khaldun: The Recovery of a Lost Tradition in Sociology. London: Routledge. Baden-Powell, Baden H. 1899. “Notes on the Origin of the ‘Lunar’ and ‘Solar’ Aryan Tribes, and on the ‘Rajput’ Clans.” Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society of Great Britain and Ireland, April, 1899, pp. 295–328. https://www.jstor.org/ stable/25208101. Barnard, Alan and Anthony Good. 1984. Research Practices in the Study of Kinship. London: Academic Press. Barnes, E. 1907. “The Bhils of Western India.” Journal of the Society of Arts, 55 (2829), pp. 323–336. https://www.jstor.org/stable/41335952. Baviskar, Amita. 1995. In the Belly of the River: Tribal Conficts over Development in the Narmada Valley. Delhi: Oxford University Press. Boas, Franz. 1930. “Anthropology.” In C.G. Seligman (ed.), Encyclopedia of Social Sciences. Vol. 2. New York: Macmillan, pp. 73–110. Britannica, The Editors of Encyclopaedia. 2015. “Nuclear Family.” Encyclopedia Britannica, 1 November 2015, https://www.britannica.com/topic/nuclear-family. Accessed 10 March 2021. Census of India. 2011. Registrar General and Census Commissioner, Government of India. Channa, S. Mitra. 2020. Anthropological Perspectives on Indian Tribes. Hyderabad: Orient Blackswan. Chapekar, L. N. 1960. Thakurs of the Sahyadri. New York: Oxford University Press. Chauhan, Brij R. 1967. A Rajasthan Village. New Delhi: Vir Publishing House. ———. 1978. “Tribalisation.” In N. N. Vyas, R. S. Mann and N. D. Chaudhry (eds.), Rajasthan Bhils. Udaipur: MLV Tribal Research Institute, Social Welfare Dept., Govt. of Rajasthan, pp. 29–40. Comte, Auguste. 1974 [1842]. The Positive Philosophy. Freely Translated and Condensed by Harriet Martineu. New York: AMS Press. Das, Biplab. 2003. “Bhil Vasava.” In K. S. Singh (ed.), People of India: Gujarat-Part One, Volume XXII. Calcutta: Anthropological Survey of India, pp. 226–230. Das, Tarak C. 1953. “Social Organization of the Tribal Peoples.” Indian Journal of Social Work, 14 (3), pp. 245–262. Dave, P. C. 1960. The Grasias: Also Called Dungri Grasia, a Scheduled Tribe in Bombay and Rajasthan States. New Delhi: Bharatiya Adimjati Sewak Sangh.

246

References

Deliege, Robert. 1985. Bhils of Western India. Some Empirical and Theoretical Issues in Anthropology in India. New Delhi: National Publishers. Department of Tribal Development. 2019. Tribal Demography of Gujarat, Government of Gujarat. Available at https://tribal.gujarat.gov.in/tribal-demography-of-gujarat. Accessed on 25 September 2019. Dev, P. Vishnu. 2016. Foragers: The Chenchus. Chennai: Notion Press. Dianteill, Erwan. 2012. “Cultural Anthropology or Social Anthropology? A Transatlantic Dispute.” L’Annee Sociologique, 62 (1), pp. 93–122. Doshi, J. K. 1974. Social Structure and Cultural Change in a Bhil Village. Delhi: New Heights Publishers. Dousset, Laurent. 2007. “There Never Has Been Such a Thing as a Kin-Based Society: A Review Article.” Anthropological Forum, 17 (1), pp. 61–69. ———. 2011. “Understanding Human Relations (Kinship Systems).” In Nicholas Thieberger (ed.), The Oxford Handbook of Linguistic Fieldwork. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 209–234. Dube, Shyama C. (ed.). 1977. Tribal Heritage of India: Ethnicity, Identity and Interaction, Vol. I. New Delhi: Vikas Publishing House. Dumont, Louis. 1950. “Kinship and Alliance among the Pramalai Kallar.” Eastern Anthropologist, 4, pp. 3–26. ———. 1953. “Dravidian Kinship Terminology as an Expression of Marriage.” Man, 53, pp. 34–39. ———. 1957. Hierarchy and Marriage Alliance in South Indian Kinship. London: Royal Anthropological Institute of Great Britain and Ireland. ———. 1983. “The Dravidian Kinship Terminology as an Expression of Marriage.” In Louis Dumont (ed.), Affnity as a Value: Marriage Alliance in South India, with Comparative Essays in Australia. Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press, pp. 3–35. Durkheim, Emile. 1933 [1893]. The Division of Labour in Society. New York: The Free Press. Enthoven, Reginald E. 1920. Tribes and Castes of Bombay, Vol. I. Bombay: Government Central Press. ———. 1922. Tribes and Castes of Bombay, Vol. II. Bombay: Government Central Press. Evans-Pritchard, Edward E. 1940. The Nuer: A Description of the Modes of Livelihood and Political Institutions of a Nilotic People. Oxford: The Clarendon Press. ———. 1951. Social Anthropology. London: Cohen & West. Firth, Raymond. 1955. “Some Principles of Social Organisation.” The Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute of Great Britain and Ireland, 85 (III), pp. 1–18. ———. 1961. Elements of Social Organization. London and New York: Routledge. Fortes, Meyer. 1945. The Dynamics of Clanship among the Tallensi. London: Oxford University Press. ———. 1949a. The Web of Kinship among the Tallensi. London: Oxford University Press. ———. 1949b. “Time and Social Structure: An Ashanti Case Study.” In Meyer Fortes (ed.), Social Structure: Studies Presented to A. R. Radcliff-Brown. Oxford: Clarendon Press, pp. 54–84. ———. 1953. “The Structure of Unilineal Descent Groups.” American Anthropologist, 55 (1), pp. 17–41. https://doi.org/10.1525/aa.1953.55.1.02a00030.

References 247 ———. 1958. “Introduction.” In Jack Goody (ed.), The Developmental Cycle in Domestic Groups. Cambridge: Cambrdige University Press, pp. 1–14. ———. 1974. “The First Born [The Emmanual Miller Memorial Lecture of 1972].” Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, XV, pp. 81–104. Fox, Robin. 1967. Kinship and Marriage: An Anthropological Perspective. London: Penguin Books Ltd. Furer-Haimendorf, C. Von. 1960. “Forward.” In Y. V. S. Nath (ed.), Bhils of Ratanmal: An Analysis of the Social Structure of a Western Indian Community. Baroda: The Maharaja Sayajirao University of Baroda, pp. v–vii. Geertz, Clifford. 1996. “Afterward.” In Feld Stephen and Keith H. Basso (eds.), Senses of Place, Advanced Research Series. Santa Fe: School of American Research Press, pp. 259–262. Ghatak, N. K. 2003. “Choudhuri/Choudhury.” In K. S. Singh (ed.), People of India: Gujarat-Part One, Vol. XXII. Calcutta: Anthropological Survey of India, pp. 292–297. Ghurye, Govind S. 1943. Aborigines – “So-Called” – and Thier Future. Pune: Gokhale Institute of Politics and Economics. ———. 1957. The Mahadev Kolis. Bombay: Popular Prakashan. ———. 1959. The Scheduled Tribes (2nd Revised Edition). Bombay: Popular Prakashan. Godelier, Maurice. 1998. “Afterword: Transformation and Lines of Evolution.” In Maurice Godelier, Thomas R. Trautmann and Franklin E. Tjon Sie Fat (eds.), Transformations of Kinship. Washington, DC and London: Smithsonian Institution, pp. 386–413. Godelier, Maurice, Thomas Trautmann and Franklin E. Tjon Sie Fat (eds.). 1998. Transformations of Kinship. Washington, DC and London: Smithsonian Institution Press. Good, Anthony. 1981. “Prescription, Preference and Practice: Marriage Patterns among the Kondaiyankottai Maravar of South India.” Man, New Series, 16 (1), pp. 108–129. Goodenough, Ward H. 1980. Description and Comparison in Cultural Anthropology. Cambrdige: Cambridge University Press. Goody, Jack (ed.). 1958. The Developmental Cycle in Domestic Groups. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. ———. 1962. Death, Property and the Ancestors: A Study of the Mortuary Customs of the LoDagaa of West Africa. Standford, CA: Standford University Press. ———. 1969. “Inheritance, Property, and Marriage in Africa and Eurasia.” Sociology, 3 (1), pp. 55–76. ———. 1977. The Domestication of the Savage Mind. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Graburn, Nelson. (ed.). 1971. Readings in Kinship and Social Structure. New York: Harper and Row. Guha, Sumit. 1996. “Forest Polities and Agrarian Empires: The Khandesh Bhils, C. 1700–1850.” The Indian Economic & Social History Review, 33 (2), pp. 133–153. Haekel, Josef. 1963. “Some Aspects of the Social Life of the Bhilala in Central India.” Ethnology, 2 (2), pp. 190–206. Hann, Christopher (ed.). 1998. Property Relations: Renewing the Anthropological Tradition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

248 References Hann, Christopher. 2008. “Reproduction and Inheritance: Goody Revisited.” Annual Review of Anthropology, 37, pp. 145–158. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev. anthro.37.081407.085222. Hardiman, David. 1987. The Coming of the Devi: Adivasi Assertion in Western India. Delhi: Oxford University Press. Hendley, Thomas H. 1875. “An Account of Mewar Bhils.” Journal of Asiatic Society of Bengal, 44, pp. 347–388. Jodhka, Surinder S. 1998. “From ‘Book View’ to ‘Field View’ Social Anthropological Constructions of the Indian Village.” Oxford Development Studies, 26 (3), pp. 311–331. https://doi.org/10.1080/13600819808424159. Kapadia, Kaniayalal M. 1959. “The Family in Transition.” Sociological Bulletin, 8 (2), pp. 68–99. https://doi.org/10.1177/0038022919590207. Karim, A. H. M. Zehadul. 2016. “Conceptualizing Social Structure: A Reorientative Discussion Based on Persistent Paradoxical Debates.” Anthropologist, 24 (2), pp. 667–675. https://doi.org/10.1080/09720073.2016.11892062. Karve, Irawati. 1953. Kinship Organization in India. Delhi: Munshiram Manoharlal Publishers. ———. 1957a. “Social Education of the Scheduled Tribes.” Vanyajati, 5 (4), pp. 164–169. ———. 1957b. The Bhils of West Khandesh: A Social and Economic Survey. Bombay: Anthropological Society of Bombay. Keesing, Roger. 1975. Kin Groups and Social Structure. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston. Khaldun, Ibn. 1967. The Muqaddimah: An Introduction to History (Translated from Arabic by Franz Rosenthal). London: Routledge and Kegan Paul. Kroeber, Alfred L. 1909. “Classifcatory Systems of Relationship.” The Journal of Royal Anthropological Institute of Great Britain and Ireland, 39, pp. 77–84. https://doi.org/10.2307/2843284. ———. 1917. California Kinship Systems. Berkeley: University of California Press. Kulke, Hermann. 1976. “Kshatriyaization and Social Change: A Study in Orissa Setting.” In S. Devdas Pillai (ed.), Aspects of Changing India: Studies in Honour of Prof. G. S. Ghurye. Bombay: Popular Prakashan, pp. 398–409. Kumar, Dhananjay and Lancy Lobo. 2019. The Tribal Social Structure in South Gujarat. Vadodara: Centre for Culture and Development. ———. 2020. A Comparative Study of the Social Structure of Five Tribes of South Gujarat. Vadodara: Centre for Culture and Development. Kuper, Adam. 1988. The Invention of Primitive Society: Transformations of an Illusion. London: Taylor & Frances /Routledge. ———. 2016. “Meyer Fortes: The Person, the Role, the Theory.” The Cambridge Journal of Anthropology, 34 (2), pp. 127–139. https://doi.org/10.3167/ ca.2016.340209 Lal, R. B. 1979. Sons of Aravallis: The Garasia. Ahmedabad: Gujarat Vidyapith Tribal Research and Training Institute. ———. 1983. “Socio-Religious Movement’s among the Tribals of South Gujarat.” In K. S. Singh (ed.), Tribal Movements in India. Delhi: Manohar, pp. 285–308. Lévi-Strauss, Claude, John R. Von Sturmer, James H. Bell and Rodney Needham. 1969 (orig. 1947). The Elementary Structures of Kinship. Boston, MA: Beacon Press.

References 249 Levis-Struass, Claude. 1953. “Social Structure.” In Alfred L. Kroeber (ed.), Anthropology Today: An Encyclopedic Inventory. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press, pp. 524–553. ———. 1963 (orig. 1958). Structural Anthropology. Trans. Claire Jacobson and Brooke G. Schoepf. New York: Basic Books. Lobo, Lancy. 1992. Religious Sects among the Tribals of South Gujarat. Surat: Centre for Social Studies. ———. 1995. The Thakors of North Gujarat: Caste in the Village and the Region. Delhi: Hindustan Publishing Corporation. ———. 2010. “Christianization, Hinduization and Indigenous Revivalism among the Tribals of Gujarat.” In Rowena Robinson and Joseph M. Kujur (eds.), Margins of Faith: Dalit and Tribal Christianity in India. London: Sage Publication, pp. 211–234. ———. 2019. “Indigenous People of Gujarat: Tribals of Gujarat on the Margins of Faith.” In M. Carrin (ed.), Brill’s Encyclopedia of the Religions of the Indigenous People of South Asia. Leiden: Koniklijka Brill NV, pp. 1–10. Lobo, Lancy and Dhananjay Kumar. 2017. Study of Social and Political Structure of the Gamit Tribe in Gujarat. Vadodara: Centre for Culture and Development. ———. 2018a. The Social Structure of Chaudhari Tribe of South Gujarat. Vadodara: Centre for Culture and Development. ———. 2018b. The Social Structure of Vasava Tribe of South Gujarat. Vadodara: Centre for Culture and Development. ———. 2019a. The Social Structure of Warli Tribe of South Gujarat. Vadodara: Centre for Culture and Development. ———. 2019b. The Social Structure of Kukana Tribe of South Gujarat. Vadodara: Centre for Culture and Development. Lowie, Robert H. 1928. “A Note on Relationship Terminologies.” American Anthropologist, 30 (2), pp. 263–267. Malinowski, Bronislaw. 1931. “Culture.” In E.R.A. Seligman (ed.), Encyclopedia of Social Sciences. Vol. 4. New York: Macmillan, pp. 621–646. Mandal, Sandeep K. and Rajeev Malhotra. 1983. “Worlis of Gujarat-A Profle.” Tribe, XV (1–2), Jaipur: Tribal Research Institute, pp. 27–40. Mann, Rann Singh. 1978. “On Structuralism, Social Structure and Beyond-An Analysis.” Indian Anthropologist, 8 (2), pp. 127–147. https://www.jstor.org/ stable/41919350. Marshall, Lorna. 1976. The Kung of Nyae Nyae. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Mayer, Adrian C. 1960. Caste and Kinship in Central India: A Village and Its Region. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul. McCay, Bonnie and James Acheson (eds.). 1987. The Question of the Commons: The Culture and Ecology of Communal Resources. Tucson: University of Arizona Press. McCormack, William. 1958. “Sister’s Daughter Marriage in a Mysore Village.” Man in India, 38 (1), pp. 34–48. Meharda, B. L. 1985. History and Culture of the Girasias. Jaipur: Adi Prakashan. Mehta, B. H. 1933. Social and Economic Condition of Chodras: An Aboriginal Tribe of Gujarat. Master’s Thesis in Sociology, Department of Sociology, University of Bombay.

250 References Mehta, Balwant Singh. 1950. Garasias. Tribes in India. New Delhi: Bharatiya Admijati Sevak Sangh. Miller, Emanuel. 1938. The Generations: A Study of the Cycle of Parents and Children. London: Faber and Faber. Morgan, Lewis H. 1871. Systems of Consanguinity and Affinity in the Human Family. Washington, DC: The Smithsonian Institute. Morris, Mike. 2012. Concise Dictionary of Social and Cultural Anthropology. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell. Murdock, George P. 1949. Social Structure. New York: The Macmillan Company. ———. 1968. “Patterns of Sibling Terminology.” Ethnology, 7, pp. l–24. Nadel, Siegfried F. 1957. The Theory of Social Structure. London: Cohen and West Ltd. Naik, T. B. 1956. The Bhils: A Study. Delhi: Bharatiya Adimjati Sevak Sangh. ———. 1957. “Social Status in Gujarat.” Eastern Anthropologist, 10 (3–4), pp. 173–181. Nanda, Mandira. 2003. “Kokna.” In K. S. Singh (ed.), People of India: Gujarat – Part Two, Vol. XXII. Calcutta: Anthropological Survey of India, pp. 688–692. Nath, Y. V. Surendra. 1960. Bhils of Ratanmal: An Analysis of the Social Structure of a Western Indian Community. Baroda: Maharaja Sayajirao University. Parkin, Robert. 1992. The Munda of Central India: An Account of Their Social Organization. Delhi: Oxford University Press. ———. 1993a. “Middle Indian Kinship Systems: A Critique of George Pfeffer’s Interpretation.” Anthropos, 88, pp. 323–336. ———. 1993b. “The Joking Relationship and Kinship: Charting a Theoretical Depenency.” Journal of the Anthropological Society of Oxford, 24 (3), pp. 251–263. ———. 2005. “Tribal Kinship in Central India: A Reply Article.” Anthropos, 100, pp. 567–570. Pfeffer, Georg. 2004. “Order in Tribal Middle Indian Kinship.” Anthropos, 99, pp. 381–409. Pocock, David F. 1957. “Inclusion and Exclusion: A Process in the Caste System of Gujarat.” South Western Journal of Anthropology, 18 (1), pp. 19–31. Punekar, Vijaya B. 1959. The Son Kolis of Bombay. Bombay: Popular Prakashan. Radcliffe-Brown, Alfred R. 1924. “The Mother’s Brother in South Africa.” South African Journal of Science, 31, pp. 542–555 (reprinted as Chapter 1 in his 1952, pp. 15–31). ———. 1940a. “On Joking Relationships.” Africa, 13 (3), pp. 195–210 (reprinted as Chapter IV in his 1952, pp. 90–104). ———. 1940b. “On Social Strucutre.” The Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute of Great Britain and Ireland, 70 (1), pp. 1–12. ———. 1949. “A Further Note on Joking Relationships.” Africa, 19, pp. 133–140. (reprinted as Chapter V in his 1952, pp. 105–116). ———. 1950. “Introduction.” In Alfred R. Radcliffe-Brown and Cyril D. Forde (eds.), African Systems of Kinship and Marriage. London: International African Institute and Oxford University Press, pp. 1–85. ———. 1952. Structure and Function in Primitive Society. London: Cohen and West. ———. 1953. “The Dravidian Kinship Terminology.” Man, 53 (7), p. 112.

References  251 Radcliffe-Brown, Alfred R. and Cyril D. Forde (eds.). 1950. African Systems of Kinship and Marriage. London: International African Institute and Oxford University Press. Rao, M. Kodanda. 1973. “Rank Difference and Marriage Reciprocity in South India.” Contribution to Indian Sociology, 7 (1), pp. 16–35. https://doi. org/10.1177/006996677300700102. Reddy, N. S. 1973. “Caste in a Tribal Society: The Formative Processes.” Contributions to Indian Sociology, 7 (1), pp. 159–167. Redfield, Robert. 1955. “The Social Organization of Tradition.” The Far Eastern Quarterly, 15 (1), pp. 13–21. https://doi.org/10.2307/2942099. Roy Burman, B. K. 1993. “Tribal Population: Interface of Historical Ecology and Political Economy.” In Mrinal Miri (ed.), Continuity and Change in Tribal Society. Shimla: Indian Institute of Advanced Study, pp. 175–216. Sahoo, Sarbeswar. 2013. Civil Society and Democratization in India: Institutions, Ideologies and Interests. London: Routledge. Save, K. S. 1945. The Warlis. Bombay: Asia Publishing House. Schusky, Ernest L. 1965. Manual for Kinship Analysis. London: Holt, Rinehart and Winston. Sedgwick, L. J. 1924. “Is the Retention of the Term ‘Animism’ as a Main Religion Head in Our Census Tables Justified?” Journal of the Anthropological Society of Bombay, 12 (4), pp. 389–402. Shah, A. M. 1974. The Household Dimension of the Family in India: A Field Study in a Gujarat Village and a Review of Other Studies. Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press. ———. 1988. “The Phase of Dispersal in the Indian Family Process.” Sociological Bulletin, 37 (1/2), pp. 33–47. ———. 1998. The Family in India: Critical Essays. New Delhi: Orient Longman. ———. 2010. The Structure of Indian Society: Then and Now. Delhi: Routledge. Shah, A. M. and I. P. Desai. 1988. Division and Hierarchy: An Overview of Caste in Gujarat. Delhi: Hindustan Publishing Corporations. Shah, Alpa. 2010. In the Shadow of the State: Indigenous Politics, Environmentalism, and Insurgency in Jharkhand, India. Durham, NC: Duke University Press. Shah, D. C., Ashish Bhatt and Tapas K. Dalapati. 2008. Chronic Poverty in Remote Rural Areas: Evidence from Central Tribal Belt of India. Ujjain: Madhya Pradesh Institute of Social Science Research. Shah, P. G. 1939. “Bhils: The Earliest Inhabitants of Gujarat.” Journal of the Gujarat Research Society, 1 (4), pp. 79–84. ———. 1942. “Non-Hindu Elements in the Culture of the Bhils of Gujarat.” In J. P. Mills, B. S. Guha, M. Chattopadhayay, D. N. Majumdar, and A. Aiyappan (eds.), Essays in Anthropology Presented to Rai Bahadur Sarat Chandra Roy. Lucknow: Maxwell Co., pp. 169–186. ———. 1958. The Dublas of Gujarat. Delhi: Bharatiya Adimjati Sevak Sangh. ———. 1959. Naikas-Naikdas: A Gujarat Tribe. Bombay: The Gujarat Research Society. ———. 1964. Tribal Life in Gujarat. An Analytical Study of the Cultural Changes with Special Reference to the Dhanka Tribe. Bombay: The Gujarat Research Society. Sharma, Brahm D. 2001. Tribal Affairs in India: The Crucial Transition. Delhi: Sahyog Pustak Kuteer.

252 References Singh, Kumar S. 1994. The Scheduled Tribes. Delhi: Oxford University Press. Sinha, Surajit. 1962. “State Formation and Rajput Myth in Tribal Central India.” Man in India, 42 (1), pp. 35–80. ———. 1965. “Tribe-Caste and Tribe-Peasant Continua in Central India.” Man in India, 45 (1), pp. 57–83. ———. 1966. “Vaisnava Infuence in a Tribal Culture.” In Milton Singer (ed.), Krishna: Myths, Rites, and Attitudes. Chicago, IL: Chicago University Press, pp. 64–89. ———. 1970. “Complex Religious Institutions: Study of Sects in Hinduism.” In Surajit Sinha (ed.), Research Programmes on Cultural Anthropology and Allied Disciplines. Calcutta: Anthropological Survey of India, pp. 128–136. ———. (ed.). 1987. Tribal Polities and State Systems in Pre-Colonial Eastern and North Eastern India. Calcutta: K.P. Bagchi & Co. Skoda, Uwe. 2007. “The Kinship System of the Aghria: A Case Study of Peasants in Middle India.” The Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute, 13 (3), pp. 679–701. Spencer, Herbert. 1896 [1873]. The Study of Sociology. New York: D Appleton and Company. ———. 1898. Principles of Sociology. New York: D Appleton and Company. Solanky, A. N. 1955. Dhodias of South Gujarat. Master’s thesis in Sociology, Department of Sociology, University of Bombay. Soni, L. N. 2003a. “Gamit.” In K. S. Singh (ed.), People of India: Gujarat-Part One, Vol. XXII. Calcutta: Anthropological Survey of India, pp. 368–372. ———. 2003b. “Varli.” In K. S. Singh (ed.), People of India: Gujarat-Part Three, Vol. XXII. Calcutta: Anthropological Survey of India, pp. 1431–1437. Srinivas, Mysore N. 1952a. “A Joint Family Dispute in a Mysore Village.” Journal of the Maharaja Sayajirao University of Baroda, 1, pp. 7–31. ———. 1952b. Religion and Society among the Coorgs of South India. Oxford: Clarendon Press. ———. 1955. “Village Studies and Their Signifcance.” In Dhirendra N. Majumdar (ed.), Rural Profles I. Lucknow: Ethnographic and Folk-Culture Society, pp. 95–100. ———. 1956. “A Note on Sanskritisation and Westernisation.” Far Eastern Quarterly, 15 (4), pp. 481–496. ———. (ed.). 1958. Method in Social Anthropology: Selected Essays by A. R. Radcliffe-Brown, Chicago. Chicago, IL: Chicago University Press. ———. 1964. “Social Structure.” Sociological Bulletin, 13 (1), pp. 12–21. Sundar, Nandini. 1997. Subaltern and Sovereigns: An Anthropological History of Bastar, 1854–1996. New Delhi: Oxford University Press. Sylvia, Junko. 1979. “Family and Household: The Analysis of Domestic Groups.” Annual Review of Anthropology, 8, pp. 161–205. Tax, Sol, Eisely Loren, Irving Rouse and Carl F. Voegelin (eds.). 1953. An Appraisal of Anthropology Today. International Symposium on Anthropology of the Wenner-Gren Foundation. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press, p. 224. Thakur, Manish. 2014. Indian Village: A Conceptual History. Jaipur: Rawat Publications. Tharakan, George. 1998. “A Study of Kinship and Marriage among the Mudugas of Attappady in Kerala.” Ph.D. Thesis, Department of Anthropology, University of Hyderabad.

References  253 ———. 2006. “Louis Dumont and the Essence of Dravidian Kinship Terminology: The Case of Muduga.” Journal of Anthropological Research, 62 (3), pp. 321–346. Thurston, Edgar and K. Rangachari. 1909. Castes and Tribes of Southern India. Madras: Government Press. Tod, James. 1920. Annals and Antiquities of Rajasthan or the Central and Western Rajpoot States of India. Vol. I, II and III (edited by Crooke, William). London: Humphrey Milford / Oxford University Press. Tonkinson, Robert. 1991. The Mardu Aborigines: Living the Dream in Australia’s Desert. Fort Worth, TX: Holt, Rinehart and Winston. Trautmann, Thomas R. 1981. Dravidian Kinship. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. ———. 2000. “India and the Study of Kinship Terminologies.” L’Homme, No. 154/155, pp. 559–572. https://doi.org/10.4000/lhomme.49. Trivedi, Harshad R. 1986. The Mers of Saurashtra: Revisited and Studied in the Light of Socio-cultural Change and Cross-cousin Marriage. Delhi: Concept Publishing Company. Tylor, Edward B. 1871. Primitive Culture: Researches into the Development of Mythology, Philosophy, Religion, Language, Art and Custom. London: J. Murray. ———. 1889. “On a Method of Investigating the Development of Institutions; Applied to Laws of Marriage and Descent.” The Journal of the Anthropological Institute of Great Britain and Ireland, 18, pp. 245–272. Unnithan-Kumar, M. 1997. Identity, Gender and Poverty: New Perspective on Case and Tribe in Rajasthan. Providence. Oxford: Berghahn Books. Van Gennep, A. 1960 [1908]. The Rites of Passage (transl. M. B. Vizedom and G. L. Caffee). London: RoutIedge & Kegan Paul. Vidyarthi, Lalita P. and Binay K. Rai. 1976. The Tribal Culture of India. Delhi: Concept Publishing Company. Vyas, N. N. 1969. “The Bhils on the Border of Rajasthan-An Emerging Situation.” Paper Read in the National Seminar on Tribal Situation in India at Indian Institute of Advanced Study, Shimla, Himachal Pradesh. Walker, Gavin. 2001. “Society and Culture in Sociological and Anthropological Tradition.” History of the Human Sciences, 14 (3), pp. 30–55. Wallace, Walter L.1986. “Social Structural and Cultural Structural Variables in Sociology.” Sociological Focus, 19(2), pp. 125–138. Weling, A. N. 1934. Katkaris: A Sociological Study of an Aboriginal Tribe of the Bombay Presidency. Bombay: Bombay Book Depot. Wolf, Eric R. 1966. Peasants. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall. Yalman, Nur.1967. Under the Bo Tree: Studies in Caste, Kinship and Marriage in the Interior of Ceylon. Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press. Yanagisako, Sylvia J. 1979. “Family and Household: The Analysis of Domestic Groups.” Annual Review of Anthropology, 8 (1), pp. 161–205.

Index

Note: Bold page numbers refer to tables and page numbers followed by “n” denote endnotes. alliance theory 128 ancestor worship 35, 70, 77, 79, 198 assimilation 29; Hinduisation 29, 207; Sanskritisation 29, 146, 207–208 avoidance 63, 69, 87, 89, 90, 101; avoidance rules 175, 177 axiom of amity 71 Bhils 4, 5, 8, 29, 37; subgroups of 25–27, 32–33 bride-price 85–86, 101, 103–105, 113, 138 bride wealth 138, 154; see also bride-price caste of recognition 194; caste of co-operation 194 Chaudharis 25–26, 34–35, 38, 55, 120, 127, 145, 154, 157, 168, 185, 190 clan system 69, 101, 196; clan exogamy 6, 70, 73, 197, 200; clan rule in marriage alliances 66 complimentary fliation 176 cousin: cross-cousin 43–44, 52, 56–61, 63, 65, 67, 68n5, 77, 81–82, 87, 136; frst cousin 44; parallel cousin 43–44, 50, 52, 58, 59, 65, 81; second cousin 44; third cousin 44 descent group 57, 70–72, 78, 81, 84, 92, 96, 196, 210n2; agnatic group 71 Dumont, L. 56–57, 87, 68n2 endogamy: region of endogamy 66; village endogamy 20, 54, 66, 87, 107, 137, 139, 199

Evans-Pritchard, E.E. 71, 102n1 exogamy: village exogamy 66, 106–107 family: compound family 100, 157– 158, 170, 174; extended family 42; immediate family 42; nuclear family 146, 159n1 Fortes, M. 6, 42, 71, 76–77, 102, 146, 176, 189, 191n1 Gamits 14, 25–26, 31–32, 35, 37, 72–73, 154, 179 Ghurye, G. S. 5, 207 Goody, J. 94, 146, 177, 189 Guha, S. 32 Hardiman, D. 27 horizontal dimension 192–193, 206; vertical dimension 192 household: development process 141, 147, 152, 157–158, 163, 165, 186, 190–191; developmental cycle 7, 189, 191n1, 201 household settlement: nucleated settlement 38; scattered settlement 72 incest taboo 73, 119 Indian Kinship System: middle Indian kinship 63, 196; north indian kinship 51, 65–66; south Indian kinship 56, 65–67, 196 inheritance: pattern of inheritance 65; rules of inheritance 95

256 Index Jalari tribe 57, 68n3; marriage reciprocity 57; rank difference 57 joking: degree of joking 91; joking relationship 63, 69, 87, 90–91, 101, 176, 183 Kapadia, K.M. 201 kin: primary kin 42; secondary kin 42 kindred 8, 19, 69, 81–84, 91, 101, 141, 196, 201 kin relations: affinal relations 42, 62, 84, 87, 101, 136, 196; consanguineal relations 101, 196; fictive relations 20, 92 kinship relations: kinship obligations 69, 87, 101 kinship terminology: classificatory 52–53, 57, 59, 81, 89; descriptive 52–53; kinship terms by the range of application 52; terms of address 14, 50, 61, 90; terms of reference 14, 45, 54, 61, 82 Kroeber, A. L. 53, 61 Kukanas 17, 25–26, 34–35, 39, 101, 154, 166, 185 Kumar, U. 5, 8, 210n1 Levi-Strauss, C. 13, 87, 128 lineage: distribution of 76; fission of 77–78; function of 76–77 lineage division: lineage deities 78–79; lineage segment 16, 71, 73, 77–78, 100, 101, 189, 196, 198, 203; as religious corporate group 78 Lobo, L. 25, 29, 208 Lowie, R. 53 marriage networks: marriage direction 106, 128; repetitive marriage 106, 128, 137, 139 marriage types: arranged marriage 103; marriage by elopement 103; marriage by service 103, 105; see also uxorilocal marriage marriage union: cross cousin marriage 43, 50, 52, 56–58, 60, 63, 65, 67, 77, 81–82, 87, 136; leviratic marriages 138; sororate union 138; serial monogamy 157, 159n4, 199

Marshall, L. 54 Mayer, A. 193–194 Morgan, L. H. 53 Murdock, G. P. 45, 52–53, 61, 88 Nath, Y.V.S. 5, 8–9, 78, 80, 142, 147 Nuer 71 Parkin, R. 63, 65–66, 68n4, 89, 91 patrikin 147, 160 Pocock, D. 208 property: communal ownership 93; immovable 97; movable 93, 97 Radcliffe-Brown, A. R. 6, 10–13, 71, 76, 84, 87–88, 158, 195 Rao, M. K. 53 Shah, A. M. 7, 8, 29, 31, 106, 142, 145–147, 159–160, 175, 179, 192–194, 207 Sinha, S. 9, 206 social distance 119 social hierarchy 20, 104 social structure: theoretical orientation of 10, 12 Srinivas, M. N. 11–12, 15, 19, 29, 178, 207 structure vs culture 12–13 Tallensi 71 teknonymy 50 territorial groups 7, 19 totem 72 Trautmann, R. 53, 60 Tylor, E.B. 12, 50 uxorilocal marriage 103, 105, 113, 160, 163 Vasavas 25–26, 33, 38, 127, 154, 168, 185, 190, 194, 197 village studies 19, 192 Warlis 4, 17, 26, 36–37, 39, 54, 101, 154, 157, 166, 185, 200 Yalman, N. 82