[Page 416]

Sections: [The Baiga Tribe: Ideology and Activities] [British rule in Baigadesh] [British attitudes toward the Baiga] [British activities among tribals in the 1860s] [Baiga Aid Program, 1970-1890] [The Baiga Chak in Mandla, 1890s] [Baiga Resistance and Survival] [Conclusion]
Tables: [Table 19: Details of Planting Crops in a Bewar] [Table 20: Bewar Productivity] [Table 21: Baiga Assistance Program] [Table 22: Baiga Population]
Maps: [Map 4: Baiga and Chamar Territories] [Map 5: Six Assisted Baiga Villages in Balaghat District]
Baiga Photos: Internet 1990s

The Baigas were one of several tribal people in the Central Provinces. In the first provincial census (1866), aboriginal and hill tribes formed one-fifth of the population of nine million. Gonds accounted for almost three-fourths of these tribal people, while the remainder included Baigas, Korkus, Bhils, Kols, and others. Most lived on the middle spine of the Satpura hills, with its plateaus and valleys, which divided the province between the northern, southern, and southeastern plains. Baigas, along with some of the Gonds, occupied the Maikal range of the eastern Satpura hills. The heavily forested and sparsely populated range gave rise to streams and rivers that flowed in all direction. The Narbudda and its tributaries flowed west; and tributaries of the Wainganga emerged to join that river as it flowed south into the Godavari. In these highlands were, the boundaries of three administrative districts of the Central Provinces well as the boundary between the province and Rewa State. At times the area was referred to as Baigadesh, Baiga-country.

As described by several British administrators in the 1860s, the Baigas were viewed as the wildest and most isolated tribal people. The Satpura hills with its forests and sparse population was of major interest to the British because of their policies of taxation on forest and agricultural produce, forest conservation, and possible colonization by European and Indian settlers. British officers explored the area in the

1860s to gather information and to introduce some of the area's first government institutions and programs.

The Baiga Tribe: Ideology and Activities     

The provincial census of 1866 enumerated about 16,000 Baigas, while an estimate in 1869 of 18,000 Baigas closely approximated the census statistics. Most lived in the eastern part of the Mandla and Seoni districts (10,388and 3,907 respectively). ^(418.1) About the same number of Baigas lived outside the Central Provinces in adjacent Rewa State. Enumerations of Baigas in the 1860s or since should be considered as approximations for several reasons. Not all Baigas accepted that designation; other tribes and people had similar names. Baigas could consider themselves as Narotrias, Barotrias, Binjhwars, or Bhumias-all endogamous Baiga group names. Bhumia had other meanings. Baiga considered themselves Bhumia or "lords of the soil." In addition, Bhumia and Baiga were both occupational titles of non-Hindu village priests in the area, even hen the priests belonged to another tribe or caste. Binjhwar and other names might also refer to other tribes, separate from the Baiga.^(418.2)

[Page 419]

British observers felt the Baigas had migrated into Baigadesh from the east many centuries before, probably much before the more numerous Gonds who established political control over the highlands around the fourteenth century.. Hindu villagers viewed the Baigas as the original inhabitants and accepted their decisions in boundary disputes. ^(419.1)

Baiga myths also support their claim to long residence in the upland forests. Baiga ideology is revealed especially in two myths--one on creation and another on their role in the world.

Bhagwan (God) first created a man and a woman in his upper world. They were formed from the dirt which had settled on his body during a twelve year fast. Their names were Naga Baiga and Naga Baigin. They want to live in the middle world where there was only water and rock. In order to bring fertile earth to the middle world, four animal-god companions were ordered to go to the underworld and bring back Dhartia Mata or fertile soil. After many difficulties they found their way to the under-world, and met Dhartia Mata, who agreed to be swallowed by the companions if they would worship her. But the serpent king of the underworld discovered them as they stole away, and had Dhartia Mata squeezed out of them, ordering them to return to the middle world. By chance, a small speck of Dhartia Meta remained lodged in the teeth of one of the companions, and this was taken and churned with the drops of nectar or liquor from the mahua tree in a large caldron. The soil expanded, spilling over and starting to cover the middle earth, but she slipped and rocked and it was feared she would escape back to the underworld. To steady her, Naga

[Page 420]

Baiga was called, but as he was naked he would not come out of the water. He was offered a large cloth which he wrapped around his huge body, but it barely covered his loins. Dhartia Mata liked Naga Baiga and agreed to serve him and remain in the middle world, if he would worship and sacrifice to her. He agreed. "Nails" were replaced in the soil, and they and the guardianship and worship of Dhartia Mata by the Baiga have since the kept fertile earth steady to grow crops and trees.^(420.1)

Naga Baiga and Naga Baigin had two sons who married their sisters; from their children the world was populated. The elder son's children were the Baigas ; the younger son's were the Gonds and others.

Bhagwan also decided how the Baigas would live. When Bhagwan "called all the tribes of the world together to make a king" over middle earth, he

first chose the Baiga. But Naga Baiga begged that the Gond, his brother, might be king in his place. Bhagavan was pleased at this request, and, as a mark of his favour took Naga Baiga by the hand and placed him on his throne by his side. He granted his prayer to make the Gond king, but he gave the Baiga an even greater blessing.

"All the kingdoms of the world," he said, "my fall to pieces, but he who is made of earth and is Bhumia raja, lord of the earth, shall never forsake it. You will make your living from the earth. You will dig roots and eat them.You will cut wood and carry it on your shoulders. Your wife will pick leaves and sell them. You must not tear the breasts of your Mother the Earth with the plough like the Gond and Hindu. You will cut down trees and burn them and sow your seed in the ashes. But you will never become rich, for if you did you would forsake the earth, and then there would be no one to guard it and keep its nails in place." Then Bhagavan showed Naga Baiga how to cut bewar and sow seed in the ashes of burnt trees; and [Page 421] when he had taught him everything, he called him to receive gifts of seed.^(421.1)

The ideology represented in these myths formed the basis for many Baiga beliefs, attitudes, and practices. It defined their role in the world--as guardians of the forest and the soil. They would enjoy the produce of the forest and grow crops by shifting cultivation in the forest (cutting bewar) but would never be rich. While related to the Gonds, the Baiga considered Gonds "inferior," as kisans or farmers making use of the plough to "tear" Mother Earth outside the forest. The "nails" perhaps represent trees, which the Baiga would guard to keep the soil in place. Because they did not use a plow on the slopes of hills, and permitted forest re-growth, they would prevent denudation and erosion of the land.

Between the 1860s and the mid-1880s, British administrators observed and described most of the basic customs and practices of the Beige. A. Bloomfield, who was the District Commissioner of Balaghat for several years, presented the fullest account in his Notes on the Baigas, published in 1885. One of his reports listed several ways the Baiga obtained their living:

1. By cutting bewar and growing crops.
2. By hunting and fishing.
3. By collecting forest roots and fruits.
4. By labor for others.
5. By collecting and selling forest produce such as honey and harra (myrabaloms).
6. By making and selling bamboo mats and baskets.
7. By serving as village priests, practicing exorcism and herbalism.^(421.2)

The most important of these was growing grain and vegetables on plots i.e. bewars, cleared in the forest, supplemented by food gathering and hunting. Each activity had seasonal importance rather than being full-time activity. Only some Baigas obtained their living through the last four methods.

In cutting bewar, the axe was the most important implement. The Baigas annual cycle of activity began in the months of January and February. The Baiga, sometimes accompanied by village elders, would select a site, called a bewar, for clearing the forest. The best sites contained a thick growth of trees and brush on the slope of a hill above the frost line. Such a site would provide sufficient ash fertilizer, drainage, and prevent frost damage to late maturing crops. Some Baigas made offerings of mahua or other materials to honor the forest spirits and Dhartia Mata, before they began to cut the bewar and later before sowing the seeds. A Baiga male could cut and clear three to eight acres in two months.^(422.1)

Between February and May the wood was left to dry. During this time, the Baiga supplemented his grain diet through other activities. Baigas, especially the sub-tribe of Barotrias of eastern Balaghat, were famous for their skill in hunting, tracking, and trapping. They used bows and poisoned arrows made of bamboo, and various types of traps, to hunt and kill small animals such as the smaller deer, wild pigs, porcupines, rabbits and birds.^(422.2)Women and children collected roots, such as the wild

[Page 423]

arrowroot, until the ground was too dry and hard for digging. in late March and April the forest mahua tree (Bassia latifolia) blossomed and the fruit was gathered to be boiled or dried as food. Pressed mahua seeds produced oil; and the petals were used to ferment liquor. The mahua was thus an important source of food during the hottest and driest months of the year; it was also a source for oil used both for cooking and for lamps, and liquor made from petals was essential for rituals and relaxation.

By late May the Baiga fired the dry wood of the bewar. The fire was lit where the first tree had been cut, and started from the friction of bamboo sticks and tinder, After the ashes cooled, the Baiga spread them evenly over the bewar and planted the seeds. Kutki, a millet, was the main grain crop along with some mandi. Cucumber, gourd, beans and other seeds were planted around the tree stumps.

From the beginning of the rains in June through September, the crops were protected and weeded. The Baiga built a fence around the bewar and a small, open thatched hut (machan) near the bewar. For the fence, trees and brush were closely interwoven, leaving only a few small openings were traps were laid. The machan provided shelter for the Baiga and perhaps his wife. A fire kept animals away at night. During the day the crops were weeded. Some food gathering, and fishing in pools formed by dams up-stream, also occupied the Baigas at intervals during the monsoon months.^(423.1)

September to December were months of harvest, thrashing and storage.

[Page 424]

The grain was cut near the top leaving the stalks for next season's burning. It was threshed under foot, winnowed, and carried back to the village for storage.

In January and February the annual cycle began again. The same plot produced less the second year and further declined the third year. The old bewar was then allowed to lie fallow for tree regrowth during the next ten to fifteen years, before being cut again.

While Baigas practiced bewar, Goods practiced another form of cultivation called dhya. Unlike bewar, Gonds cut wood and shrubs from the forest nearby, brought it to dry on the plot and later burned it; then they plowed the ashes into the soil. Baigas said they never practiced dhya as it permanently destroyed the forest areas on the more level ground below the frost line. One estimate of Good cultivators in 1869 indicates about half of the Gonds practiced plow cultivation, one-fourth dhya and one-fourth a combination of the two.^(424.1)

The only estimates of bewar productivity were made by A. Bloomfield--once in 1869 and again in 1885.Bloomfield indicated a bewar (ranging from three to eight acres) was extremely productive, yet not enough to feed a whole Baiga family. (See table.) The major crop of kutki, produced about 10 khandis from one kuro(1/20th of a khandi) of seed sown. This 200-fold productivity fell to 160-180-fold in the second year and dropped to 40-60-fold in the third year. A male adult consumed about six

[Page 425] Table 19: Details of Planting Crops in a Bewar     

Source: Table on Bewar Productivity, Descriptions by A. Bloomfield.

khandis in a year, so the remaining four khandis was insufficient for another male or for his wife and children and other relatives. Besides its use as food, there were other costs. About one khandi would be needed to pay the administration a tax of one rupee on each axe, and for the depreciation of the axe. (Axes cost one-quarter rupee and lasted about six years). In addition one kuro of it was kept as seed for the next year's crop. Clearly while the bewar provided a major source of grain food for the family, the hunting and food gathering activities and garden crops were essential to sustain Baigas.

Besides these sources of food the early accounts mention the sacrifice and consumption of several domestic animals--chickens, goats, and pigs. A few of these evidently were raised in the village for eggs, milk and meat.They were killed and eaten only on rare or special occasions. Cattle ere too expensive for Baigas to keep because they easily succumbed to diseases, or to tiger and panther attacks. Later accounts also mention small gardens(baris), behind houses, specially attended and fertilized with dung, and growing small amounts of vegetables, spices, maize (corn), and tobacco. ^(427.1)

Some Baiga worked in other activities either to supplement their income or to obtain a living. Some Baiga, especially women, worked as agricultural laborers, particularly to help harvest wheat and autumn crops as they ripened during the Baigas slack season of February and March. Others contracted to cut timber or to collect forest produce such as harra. At times Baigas also collected honey and sold it. One survey

[Page 428]

in 1888 investigated the earnings of a Baiga family in Balaghat District, who made bamboo baskets to earn money to buy food. The family consisted of the Baiga, his wife and two small children. They made twelve baskets a week, selling each for two pounds of rice or millet. The earnings of 100 pounds of unhusked grain, or less than one rupee per month was supplemented by the collection of forest roots and fruits. They saved about one rupee each year for clothing.^(428.1)

Finally, a few Baigas earned a living as herb specialists and priests. They conducted ceremonies for villagers, exorcised spirits, and prescribed herbal remedies. One or two Baiga priests became famous and received windfall earnings. A Baiga was paid Rs. 80 in 1867 to exorcise cholera from the town of Mandla.^(428.2)Ranjar Pujari of Khandapar village (Balaghat) was famous for his powers, and wealthy landlords of the plains sent "elephants and various kinds of vehicles" to fetch him, if he pleaded some excuse such as "attending to his bewar fields."^(428.3)

Most Baiga, however, were not famous or wealthy; nor skilled specialists--except in their practice of bewar cutting, hunting, and food getting. They generally lived on the forested hills in small villages of up to ten houses, mostly built in a tight rectangle facing inward except

[Page 429]

for an entrance on one side.^(429.1) The whole village might migrate to a new location every three years to be closer to new bewars. Evidently each "village" changed sites within a recognized broad area which was mutually accepted by surrounding villages.^(429.2)

Although British descriptions of the 1860s stressed the Baigas' self-sufficiency, Baigas had some contact and exchange with the outside world. Peddlers visited villages and some Baigas went to local market or bazaars. The Baigas would buy salt, poison, cloth, and axes in exchange for forest produce. Some salt, however, was available as deposit in a type of bamboo and in clay.^(429.3) They obtained axes either in the bazaars or from the Agaria tribe of blacksmiths who were closely related to and lived in Gond villages.^(429.4)In the early twentieth century J. Lampard described a Baiga in a market.

A Baiga is speedily discerned in a forest village bazar, and is the most interesting object in it. His almost nude figure, . . lithe wiry limbs and jungly and uncivilized appearance, mark him out at once. He generally brings a few mats or baskets which he has made, or fruit, collected, for sale, and with the sum (a few pice or annas at the most) he proceeds to make his weekly purchases, changing his pice into cowrie shells, of which he receives eighty for each one. He buys tobacco, salt, chillies and other sundries, besides as much [Page 430] kodon, kutki, or perhaps rice as he can afford, always leaving a , trifle to be expended at the liquor shop before departing for home.^(430.1)

As already described, Baiga religious practices included sacrifices to Dhartia Mats, the forest and other spirits.Group ceremonies included songs and dances on special occasions. The Karma dance was particularly popular.Women linked arms in one line facing a similar line of man, and in between a drum beat out the rhythm. Each group alternately sang out the song's witty and romantic verses which were answered by the other. In turn, the group singing approached the other, retreating at the end of the verse. Each group swayed to the rhythm and approached the other as they sang. The rhythm slowly increased until there was rapid dancing at the end of the song.^(430.2)

In 1883 several hundred Baigas performed the Karma at Baihar, when the Lord Bishop of Calcutta visited them.Bloomfield felt this dance originally was performed only on the occasion when a Baiga had been possessed by Ganshiam, but now was performed on any occasion. Only two cases of possession had occurred in recent years--Lashkar Barotia of Jagla village, and Ganshiam Narotria of Karwahi village in 1868.^(430.3)

Three sub-tribes were distinguished in Balaghat district, each

[Page 431]

occupying its own area and with shades of different attitudes and practices. In the west, in the upper Wainganga valley, some Binjhwar Baigas practiced settled agriculture, and appeared to have less belief in the Baiga bewar legend. In contrast almost all the Barotria Baigas of the eastern forests practiced bewar on the hills and had pride in their hunting skills with the bow and arrow. Narotrias of the middle area believed in most of the distinctive Baiga myths and practiced bewar in the hills overlooking the valleys of the upper Nahar, Oskal and Banjar rivers.^(431.1)In Mandla district, to the north of Balaghat, most Baigas we Binjhwars in the west, and Barotrias or Bhumia Baigas in the forests of Ramgarh (or Dindori) tahsil. Estimates of these sub-groups varied even more than the total Baiga population. Bloomfield, in 1881, reported that of 611 Baiga families in Balaghat district almost one-fourth were Barotrias (25 percent, 147 families), over one-fourth Binjhwars (28 percent, 180families), and just under one-half Narotrias (46 percent, 284 families).^(431.2)An enumeration five years later (1886)listed 454 families of Baigas in fifty-nine villages of Balaghat district: one-sixth Bharotrias (79 families), one-third Binjhwars (140 families) and one-half Narotrias (235 families) . British officers considered the Bhinjhwars the most civilized; but felt the Barotria of the hills were the "true"

[Page 432]

Baiga.^(432.1)

Based on observations and descriptions of the Baigas in the middle of the nineteenth century, the Baiga tribe had developed a close relationship with the highland forest environment of central India in which they lived. Their ideology, represented in their myths, gave them a proud and separate identity. It provided the basis for living in an often dangerous, hostile, and precarious forest environment through the cultivation of bewar, hunting and food gathering. It reinforced their reliance on the Forest; that they would not become wealthy, but could survive if they maintained, conserved, and revived the forest, and honored the fertile soil or Dhartia Mata who gave them life.

British rule in Baigadesh     

British rule threatened to change or even destroy many practices of the Baigas and other forest tribes. British administrators expressed both an admiration and strong disapproval of the Baiga and other forest cultivators.Baiga practices, customs and beliefs contrasted sharply with dominant Western and Indian cultures. Between1861 and 1921 the relationship between the British and the Baigas became a struggle of the British on the one hand, trying to change the Baigas from forest cultivators to settled farmers, and the Baigas, on the other hand, trying to retain their culture and searching for ways to survive under new administrative and economic conditions.

[Page 433]

The British felt their policy to transform the Baiga way of living would have several benefits. First, valuable forests would be preserved under British management. Second, land could be brought under cultivation and improved. Third, the Baigas themselves would be taught a more suitable and productive way of living. While British policy remained broadly consistent during the six decades, their programs and methods were varied and sporadic. At times prohibitions alternated with incentives; several times British administrators became more involved in other activities which meant ignoring or disregarding Baiga interests. This is especially exemplified in the formation of the new district of Balaghat in 1867.

In the 1860a British administrators were actively involved in establishing British rule all over the Central Provinces but mainly in the densely populated and agriculturally productive areas. In the more sparsely-populated and forested areas, such as the area where the Baigas lived, the British concentrated on introducing basic and minimal forms of administration and promoting program of forest management and colonization. The creation of Balaghat district in 1867 exemplified some of the goals and actions undertaken by the British in the area.

Balaghat district was created specifically for three purposes: to manage and collect revenue, including that from the forests; to construct and improve roads between the plains and the uplands; and to promote "the establishment in the uphill tracts of well-to-do settlers from the low lying tracts."^(433.1)Another purpose was added later--the civilizing and

[Page 434]

weaning from their nomad habits the wilder tribes of the montane tracts."^(434.1)

The formation of this district in 1867 was a culmination of earlier British policies and activities in the area. In1862 Chief Commissioner Temple hadthought the hills of the Central Provinces possessed great potentials for colonization and forest production. Sal trees grew "in greatest abundance in the Districts of the Satpura Range."There were many sal forests "of great richness and still untouched," which would "now be preserved."^(434.2) On the topic of European colonization in unoccupied or sparsely populated lands, Temple said it was "difficult . . . to do justice to this topic, so full of interest and hope for the future." He wanted to acquire government ownership of"eligible localities without delay or trouble" and begin construction of roads into the isolated areas.^(434.3)

First, the "eligible localities" had to be discovered. In 1863, W. B. Thomson reported on a large area of the uplands called the Bichia-Raigarh tract of eastern Seoni district. As the Land Revenue Settlement Officer of Seoni district, Thomson had recently toured and explored the area in order to gather information on its geography, population, and economic potentials. He thought tea and coffee plantations could be established in some of the area and cattle ranches in other places. The

[Page 435]

main obstacles to European colonization might be its isolation, lack of communications, and scarcity of labor. To solve these problems he recommended road construction and the immigration of labor. His detailed report along with a short summary by Temple was published in the Government Gazette of March 1864 with the hope of informing and attracting European settlers ^(435.1)

Second, the government needed to acquire title to land suitable for colonization and forest improvements. Like other districts of the Central Provinces, Mandla and Seoni districts were being surveyed, assessed, and a landrevenue determined in the 1860s. By 1865 Thomson had classified land as either agricultural and non-agricultural, also called "waste" land, in the Bichia-Raigarh tract. In an area of 1356.5 square miles with S89inhabited and uninhabited villages, he thought only 186 square miles of 68 villages could be considered agricultural land. He classified over 86 percent of the area (1170.6 square miles) with 521 villages as "waste" or government land.^(435.2)In recommending Thomson's proposals, the Settlement Commissioner, John Morris, emphasized that "the tract to be reserved as excluded Government waste will be very large."Since most of the land consisted "of very superior land, with first-rate soil and excellent pasturage, covered in portions with very valuable forests and admirably adapted in other ways, from situation and climate for European settlers, the question of the measures necessary

[Page 436]

for reclaiming the same becomes one of considerable importance."^(436.1)Morris recommended that the explored tract along with sow adjacent plains of Bhandara district be formed under a separate administration to ensure its improvement.

Morris, like Thomson before him and other British officials later, expressed two reasons why tribal forest cultivators should not be allowed to occupy or have land rights in the reserved government waste land. First, he thought they destroyed valuable forests, and second, they did not cultivate and settle in what Morris considered the best land. He described the tract as a "howling wilderness" in spite of "the extreme fertility of the soil and its great natural capabilities." He said

For miles not a habitation is to be seen whilst its only regular inhabitants are the wild Gonds and Baigas, who make no effort to reclaim the fertile virgin soil, and destroy the valuable sal forests by dhya cultivation." ^(436.2)

Thomson, in his final report on the land revenue settlement of Seoni, again described how and why he had decided to classify so large an area as reserved government waste and so small an area as agricultural land. He left instructions that the tribal population in the reserved government waste lands should be notified and moved into the agricultural villages .^(436.3)In Mandla district, just north of the

[Page 437]

Bichia-Raigarh tract, the Land Revenue Settlement Officer, H. C. E. Ward, generally followed the same procedures as Thomson, classifying most of the area as government waste land. However in twelve Baiga villages, he allowed them to continue bewars.^(437.1)

As a result of the land revenue proceedings in Bichia-Raigarh and Mandla district, about 7491 square miles were classified as government waste. All of this or 5010 square miles in Mandla district was made available for sale or lease, though only 860 square miles or 17.2 percent were considered cultivatable. In Balaghat 13 percent of the waste land was made available for allotment.^(437.2)These figures applied to the new areas of the two districts after the founding of Balaghat district. Bichia was added to Mandla district, and the larger Raigarh tract formed the northern part of Balaghat. Southern Balaghat consisted of the northern plains of Bhandara district.

As created in the late 1860s, Balaghat district included two very different sub-units: the densely-populated plains called Balaghat tahsil, and the sparsely-populated uplands or Baihar tahsil. British administrators had decided to unite these two areas under one district administration to facilitate the immigration of farmers from the plains to the uplands.

In 1869, the Deputy Commissioner of Balaghat, A. Bloomfield, reported on the progress of programs. Three roads had been built through the

[Page 438]

hill passes fro. the lowlands. Indian farmers had been encouraged to lease plots of land and villages in the uplands, and government revenues had risen considerably. Forest revenues, for instance, had risen fro. Rs. 2,106in 1865-66 to Rs. 9,634 in 1866-67 and up to Rs. 18,411 in 1868-69. Excise revenue (taxation on liquor and drugs) had risen from Rs. 4000 to over Rs. 13,000 in three years.^(438.1)Bloomfield was encouraged by road construction and the increased revenue but he was disappointed by the small number of immigrant farmers and the lack of success among forest cultivators. Only fifty-nine cultivator colonists had "been induced to leave the plains and take up lands in area about 60,000 acres."^(438.2)Also little had been "accomplished in bringing the wild Gonds and Bygahs down from the hills." He defended, however, the lack of success among the forest cultivators in the last two years, saying, "these people," had "followed for ages their present wild pursuits," and could not "be entirely weaned therefrom and introduced into an entirely different sphere of life," in a short time.^(438.3)

The activities of the British administrators in the Balaghat-Mandla area during the 1860s indicates they concentrated more on the promotion of programs such as colonization and increasing forest revenues than on tribal welfare. When faced with decisions, British administrators almost always chose and justified their own special programs which meant they ignored, disregarded or failed to promote tribal

[Page 439]

interests. The main feature of British administration in this area during the 1860s was the seizure of tribal land for government property, especially to promote colonization by non-tribal settlers. By 1870, this colonization program showed small progress among Indian settlers. Among Europeans, it was a failure. Only one European, a Frenchman, M. Michia, had bought land in Mandla district, but he did not fulfill his promise to colonize the land. A British administrator, J. Forsyth, characterized him as "speculating on the value of the forest produce," and"land-jobbing."^(439.1)

British attitudes toward the Baiga     

While British laws, procedures, and programs of the 1860s deprived forest tribes of their legal rights to occupy and cultivate in the new government land, British administrators remained divided in their attitudes and goals about forest tribes. They admired some aspects of Baiga culture and disapproved others. They sought to change the Baigas, but were unable to discover and decide on which methods to use.

The British admired the Baigas for their independence, courage, and skill to live in a hostile forest environment.In the early 1860s , forest officer Pearson thought the "Bhoomeahs or Bygars" were "in some respects . . .superior to the Gonds." They showed "considerable energy in cutting down very large tracts of jungle on the hillsides, where they invariably farm their fields." Their "villages had an

[Page 440]

exceedingly compact and neat appearance."^(440.1) Thomson added that the Baigas were "the most expert sportsmen, though armed with the bow and arrow." They knew "every inch of the country" and were "thoroughly acquainted with the habits of all the beasts of the forest."^(440.2)Ward, in Mandla, remarked on their courage even "to attack tigers, if it is to save a comrade." He was even more impressed by their "truth and free bearing"; and "a power of combination and independent organization very rare among savage tribes."^(440.3)They had a system of village tribunals to hear and decide disputes and manage "the internal affairs of their communities." This "patriarchalform of self-government" also impressed James Forsyth, though he remarked it, "of course," had, "under ouralien system, . . no legal authority."^(440.4) Bloomfield had considerable contact with the Baiga as District Commissioner of Balaghat district from 1868 to 1872, and 1879 to 1884. Instead of being shy as other Englishmen had described them, Bloomfield had "always found the Bygahs quite friendly."^(440.5)He thought them as "perhaps the least known and most interesting of the aborigines."^(440.6)His Notes on the Baigas of the Central Provinces, published in 1885, fully described Baiga culture and ended with a plea for a Christian mission among the Baiga to ensure their

[Page 441]

continued improvement.^(4441.1)

While British administrators admired the Baiga for several reasons, they were unanimous in their disapproval of forest cultivation and were convinced it destroyed valuable forests. British administrators generally agreed with Forsyth's remark that "the Baigas were the most terrible enemy to the forests we have anywhere in these hills."^(441.2)Yet the British, in the 1860s, never seemed conscious of a contradiction in their observations and descriptions, nor answered it. The same area where Baigas had lived for centuries contained extensive sal and bamboo forests.For example, three paragraphs after Forsyth characterized the Baiga. as "the most terrible enemy to the forests,"he described "the area," which the sal forests "already cover with good timber and that which may with conservation be recovered for production of timber, is very great."^(441.3)British administrators already had the answer in the 1860s, but they did not make the connection: the rotation of bewar sites over twelve to fifteen year periods permitted forest regeneration. In. the 1860s, however, the British remained convinced that forest cultivators destroyed the forests. This justified the occupation of lands by the government for conservation, taxation, and colonization.

The British disapproved of the Baigas for several other reasons, besides their supposed destruction of the forests.Baigas were criticized for being lazy, nomadic, poor, isolated, not contributing to the

[Page 442]

market economy or government revenue, and for being less civilized than others. As early as 1863, Thomson had talked with a local Indian who traded in grain with the Baigas; and he hoped the trader could "succeed in civilizing them [the Baigas] so far as to make them settle down, cultivate the soil like other people, and leave off destroying the forests."^(442.1)Later Thomson said he had grouped agricultural villages in clusters to provide "large continuous blocks" of government waste land and to

check the wandering of the squatter people, the dhya cultivators, who, having unlimited areas no longer at their disposal (which has virtually been the case, hitherto), must settle down as agriculturalists, and cultivate after a more civilized fashion, paying a jama [rent] which though light, will still be something appreciable, not as they do at present, two or three annas a year per axe.^(442.2)

While Thomson criticized them for their nomadic way of life and because they paid little for the use of land, Morris was similarly annoyed by their isolation from the market economy.

So long as these people do nothing but grow kodo or koatkee on dhya patches for their own food; so long as they produce nothing at all for sale or barter to other people, and so long as they actually consume nothing except a few grains of salt from the outer world, they can never improve, they can never rise in the human scale, but must continue to be wild men of the woods as they are now.^(442.3)

Ward predicted the Baiga would not "drop the axe and take to the plough," until the British had convinced the Baiga of the "benefit it is to them," and had "created wants which their present practices and habits

[Page 443]

will not enable them to provide for."^(443.1)

It is clear from British attitudes that they favored a single social and economic framework -- settled farmers, practicing plough cultivation and using intensive methods such as irrigation to produce food and cash crops for exchange in a market economy, and paying a legitimate rent or revenue to the government. A local group which the British officials highly praised and contrasted with the Baiga, was the Powar "agricultural caste." The Powars practiced intensive rice cultivation in settled villages in the plains south of the uplands and in the valleys of the uplands. In the 1820s a retired Maratha officer, Lachman Niak, had carried out a colonization scheme by building a road and attracting Powars to settle some villages in the valleys.^(443.2)The British colonization efforts in the late1860s were mainly directed to attract more Powar settlers. In 1869 Bloomfield reported the majority (42 of 59)of the new settlers were Powars. He considered them "the most reliable and successful," as they had "set to work in earnest in embanking their fields and constructing tanks."^(443.3)Not one of the new settlers was a Baiga, though nine Gonds were included.

British activities among tribals in the 1860s     

British mixed attitudes of approval and disapproval toward the Baigas contributed toward uncertain and varied suggestions on how to

[Page 444]

deal with forest cultivators. Almost all agreed the Baigas should eventually cease forest or axe cultivation and become settled or plough cultivators, but they could not agree on specific measures. In the late 1860s, though Baiga claims of land ownership were rejected, they were allowed the use of the land in some places. The administration declared that "according to all positive law, according to the [land revenue] Settlement Code, and according to the custom of the country," Baiga. had "no title to proprietory [landlord] right or to occupancy[tenant] right in the tract over which they roamed."^(444.1) In Mandla, Ward found it "quite impractical as well as hard and impolitic, to force the Baygars to give up their dhya cultivation and take to the plough." Instead he tried"to confine their destructive propensities within a ring fence." He found the Baigas of twelve villages "claimed" an area of 30 thousand acres, though they cultivated only 1,432 acres at the time. Ward allotted them over five times this area or 7,794 acres and said the Baigas were "quite satisfied with the arrangement made for them."^(444.2)The Chief Commissioner criticized Thomson for not giving "sufficient consideration to the claims of aboriginal tribes"who had brought some forest lands under cultivation in the Raigarh tract. He hoped "the wild tribes" would eventually "settle down permanently" and "adopt more civilized ways." Meanwhile he thought "bewar-cutting tribes [villages?] should be assigned tracts of land averaging a square mile or so."^(444.3)Later British

[Page 445]

reports indicate this was not done.

Chief Commissioner Temple recognized the absolute prohibition of bewar might "improve these poor people off the face of the earth," and stopping dhya might lead "to despair" or to "distress." It might even mean "armed resistence by Gonds," or "plunder" or "cattle-stealing." He wanted to keep the forest tribes in the forests to prevent the "wild beasts" becoming "masters of the forests."^(445.1)More than saving the forests from destruction, he wanted "to civilize these people and make them use-ful members of the Commonwealth."^(445.2)

Local British administrators found these idealistic goals difficult to implement. Thomson learned from a "young kind of Chief" of a Baiga village that he did not cultivate "the good land" because "they had no bullocks," and"their fathers had" cultivated the hillsides "before them." Thomson tried to arrange for him to get bullocks.^(445.3) In Mandla, Ward had several discussions with Baigas to convince them that plough cultivation was better than bewar. But he found it difficult "to reply to some of the pertinent questions of the shrewd old men," and "one grey-beard" eventually shut him up.They made him a flattering offer of four wives if he would teach them plough cultivation. Seventy years later, an anthropologist remarked, if only Ward had "been a little more

[Page 446]

adventurous."^(446.1)

Bloomfield found some Baigas, probably Binjhwars, had begun to "use the plough" in five villages located mostly in the northwest comer of Balaghat.^(446.2) FACE="Times New Roman">He thought the main reason other forest cultivating Gonds and Baigas did not adopt plough cultivation was because their life was "the least laborious that can be imagined."^(446.3)It would be difficult to induce forest cultivators "to follow a different mode of life." Compulsory measures would only drive them into adjacent areas such as the Feudatory States of Chhattisgarh, where they could "carry on the old practices without any form of interruption." Bloomfield advised conciliation, and he especially hoped the Baigas would begin "to look to the district authorities as their protectors." He told of one example of how he had"protected" the Baigas when they complained that private contractors had illegally fined them; he had made the contractors refund the money. Even more important, he permitted the Baigas to use forest land by paying an annual tax of Rs. 1 per axe. ^(446.4)

The writer of the Provincial Gazetteer was concerned about the tribals--so far contact with "civilization" had reduced "the semi-savage aboriginal" to the "condition of a mere besotted animal." The writer suggested alternative occupations which would shield forest tribes from

[Page 447]

"deteriorating influences." They might become policemen in the malarious forest areas or work as "watchers and woodmen in the Government forests."^(447.1)

Forsyth also questioned the effects of British laws on tribal people in the 1860a and for the future. He saw that one of the "flaws" in the sale and leasing of waste lands was that only "capitalists" could secure "legal property title; and the aboriginal never had such capital as would enable him to do so." More generally he realized the British legal system was "too sharp and swift" for the aboriginal. It was "death to the honest, timid, and unsettled aboriginal."^(447.2)Even after a decade of British administration in the Central Provinces, Forsyth confessed "a grave problem remains unsolved in the question of our duty towards these races as a Government."^(447.3)

During the 1860s British administrators made several suggestions and attempts to deal with the forest tribes. Like their attitudes of approval and disapproval, their methods alternated between conciliation and compulsion. They legally reserved large lands for the government and informed forest cultivators they must move out of those lands into agricultural villages. They considered the prohibition of bewar and the end to the axe tax in order to force forest cultivators to begin plough cultivation and pay rents and taxes. But generally British administrators found proposals for these compulsory measures hard to enforce. In

[Page 448]

trying conciliatory measures, they permitted a continuance of some axe cultivation in specially designated areas and tried to "wean" forest tribes from the axe through discussions, suggestions, and protection. Most Baigas were too poor to buy or rent land, cattle, and farm implements. They lacked the training and skills for plough cultivation; nor were they convinced of its comparative benefits.

Baiga Aid Program, 1870-1890     

British activities to settle Baigas and prevent bewar cultivation in the 1870s and 1880s occurred in four stages. In the first stage, during the early 1870s, Bloomfield continued to encourage Baigas to adopt plough cultivation. In the second stage, in the late 1870s, the British decided finally to prohibit bewar; the new District Commissioner Repton attempted to enforce the prohibition while offering financial assistance to willing Baiga settlers. In the early 1880s, when Bloom-field returned to the district as Deputy Commissioner, he expanded aid programs. In the last stage, British administrators decided to reduce aid and limit it to a few villages. By 1888 the British diverted their attention to other administrative problems, considering the aid program a success.

During Bloomfield's first administration (1868-1872), he was able to encourage and assist Baigas of three villages to begin plough cultivation under their leaders. Before 1868 some Binjhwar Baigas of north-western Balaghat district, in the Mau valley, had already begun plough cultivation. Among the Narotrias of the central highlands, the Baigas of Gohara village also began plough cultivation under Garur's leadership.

[Page 449]

Bloomfield convinced a second Narotria chief, Matna Pujari of Jaldidhar, to try plough cultivation, but Matna Pujari warned Bloomfield he would also continue some bewar, even if Bloomfield "cut his throat for it."^(449.1)The capture of a rogue elephant led to the settlement of a third Narotria village. The elephant, having escaped from Ellichpur in 1851, eventually wandered into the Balaghat highlands. In 1871 the "man eating" elephant ran amok,killing 41 persons, before he was captured and killed. Bloomfield and Mr. Naylor were helped by the Baigas of Khandapur who used their "charms and incantations" to blind the elephant.^(449.2)With the Rs. 200 reward money and Bloomfield's encouragement, the villagers under Ranjur Pujari's leadership bought bullocks and implements to settle on the "waste lands" of Karwahi village, granted to them revenue free by the government.^(449.3) Bloomfield's departure in 1872 marked the end of this first stage.

The second stage began in 1875 with the prohibition of bewar in Government forests and culminated with Major H. M. Repton's rule of the district in 1878. After bewar prohibition there was a very extensive emigration of Baigas from Government to Zamindari forests where they continued bewar.^(449.4)Repton arrived in March 1878.He appears to have been the type of "young man" a later administrator described and dreaded,

[Page 450]

who was "in a hurry to build up a standardized brave new world" by stopping bewar, a practice "so often misrepresented as an unmitigated evil."^(450.1) Repton saw the contradiction behind bewar prohibition and continued taxation of bewar axes. In 1877, 282 axes had been taxed. Repton wrote, "the Baigas have noticed that the prohibition was nominal and have therefore not obeyed the law."^(450.2)Bewar was prohibited in Zamindari forests also; Repton ended the axe tax, and destroyed bewar crops. However, he recommended aid to Baigas willing to try plough cultivation. The Chief Commissioner rebuked Repton--he would not "sanction so harsh a measure as the destruction of crops," and recommended somewhat less stringent measures of axe confiscation, arrests, and penalties for bewar. This "vigorous system of prevention" should be "accompanied by offers of land and grants of bullocks and seed." Rs. 1000 was sanctioned for this.^(450.3)The reaction to Repton's "harsh" measures initiated a ten year period of aid programs to "induce Baigas to settle."^(450.4)

In the third stage aid programs for the Baigas dramatically expanded as Bloomfield returned as District Commissioner of Balaghat from August 1880 to February 1885. Bloomfield attempted to encourage any and

[Page 451]

all Baigas who wanted to try cultivation, and to introduce closer contact between Baigas and Europeans. In June1881, he obtained the sanction of a Rs. 10,000 grant for Baiga assistance. From a small beginning in 1878 of Rs.400 to assist 19 Baiga families, the aid program reached a peak in 1882 when about 190 Baiga families were assisted with Rs. 2,280 spent on bullocks, grain and implements.^(451.1)

British administrators justified this conciliatory aid program mainly as a means to save the forests from bewar and dhya cultivators.In Mandla district, where there was also an aid program in the early 1880s, the District Commissioner remarked that if the "bulk" of the Baigas would settle down, "the result most be most beneficial to our forests and to the people themselves."^(451.2)Lindsay Neill also thought it would "be profitable."^(451.3)He wanted to "wean the Baigas of Balaghat from the destructive habits of their forefathers and to turn them into regular cultivators."^(451.4)Though he had "no intention to deal harshly with the Baigas," he emphasized "the abstinence of these people from destruction of the forests is worth many thousands of rupees."^(451.5)John W. Neill went further, saying "these people have a claim on the public and on the Government for assistance" since "their ways of life are being interfered

[Page 452] Table 21: Baiga Assistance Program    

Year	Amount in Rupees		Families		Villages
	Total to date	Current year	Total to date	Current year	Total to date	Current year
1878 (end)	400	400	19	19	1	1
1879 March	c.2,000 or (1,430)		c.33
1880 June	1,830		44
1881 May	2,730 or c.3,000	900	c.75
1881 (end)	(4,983)	2,163	c.173		8
1882 (end)	(7,173)	2,280	(224)	c.190	20	18
1883 (end)	7,500 or 6,250	1,626	(274) c.300	84	23
1884 1885	(no reports)
1886 Sept.	8,261	397 or 565	(276)	69	30	6
1887	c.9,500	632		94		10

Sources: Bloomfield, Notes, and Notes--App.; "1884 Report;" Thomas, "1866 Report;" and "1888 Report."
Amounts of assistance and number of families assisted vary according to source even within the same year. Numbers in parenthesis are my own calculations.

with, and unaided" they would "not be able to adapt."^(453.1)

In a plea to the administration, Bloomfield fully stated the case for assistance even more strongly. The need to end the "very great" damage Baigas did to the forests was only one reason they were "worthy and deserving" of assistance. While some officers might

naturally feel indignant on seeing these devastations, and vow vengeance and reprisals in the way of burning crops, summary evictions, and so forth, . . they entirely forget, if indeed are not ignorant, of the rights the Baigas might claim. For generations untold . . . the ancestors of these Baigas have lived, died and been buried on the slopes of these hills and in the fastness of these jungles. They have supported themselves, their families and their aged parents without the aid or interference of the State, or poor laws, or anything else . . . .
    Surely then these Baigas might fairly claim absolute occupancy [tenant] rights of the land they have held so long .. . . They have not, however, . . . put forward any claim whatever . . . . They have quietly bowed to whatever authority has been set up over them . . . . They have hardly so much as grumbled; they have given no trouble at all . . . [and] earned a hard though earnest livelihood in their own quiet way.^(453.2)

It would have been difficult with other tribes such as Sonthals and Bhil or Assamese tribes--"bloodshed and jungle fighting would have been the order of the day."^(453.3)Bloomfield wanted to use "steady continuous pressure coupled with unchanging kindness and an annual expenditure." He hoped Baigas would "bring all their troubles direct to the head of the district," so they would soon be "confident in him" and "more ready to follow his advice."^(453.4)

[Page 454]

While John Neill rejected Bloomfield's idea of giving Baigas rights in the land "as extravagent and based on an erroneaous theory of property," he approved of spending "every year something . . . on settling these uncivilized men."^(454.1)

By mid-1881 Bloomfield reported Rs. 2730 had been spent to settle about 75 Baiga families in eight villages.Over the next three years he spent about Rs. 2,000 annually, so that by the end of 1883 he estimated about half(300 families) of the Baiga population (600 families) in the district had been assisted to settle down in twenty-three villages.^(454.2) The majority of these were Narotrias in the four villages of Ghondi, Karwahi, Budhutoli, and Sarekha, located south of Baihar town. (See map.) Sow Binjhwars also were assisted in northeastern Balaghat district, where they took "more readily to the plough" than other Baigas. The most difficult and "wildest of all"were the Barotrias of eastern Baihar tahsil.^(454.3)At first they refused "to have anything to do with Government bullocks on my terms," because they feared "the Government was endeavoring . . . to get them well into their power."^(454.4) After Bloomfield assured them it "was for their benefit," five families accepted assistance in 1882,and the next year 20 families accepted grain assistance

while eleven accepted bullocks.^(456.1)Several Barotrias , however, were not "assured." The Barotrias of Kinarda and other villages, totaling 57 families along with 24 Gond families, fled south to the "remote parts of the Saletekri Zamindar" to continue bewar.^(456.2)Bloomfield felt generally the aid program had at least begun and made"fairly good" progress while admitting "the resuscitation of bewar in the Zamindaris" was a "serious check" on the program.^(456.3)

Baigas protested against the prohibition of bewar in other ways than fleeing the area. When John W. Neill, Commissioner of Nagpur Division, visited Baihar in March 1881 he met almost all the adult male Baigas at Karwahi, Baihar and other places. They asked that the prohibition "be withdrawn and prayed and besought me not to deprive them of their only means of livelihood," or to permit it one more year, pleading "their inability to take to regular cultivation." Neill recognized that forbidding all bewar and not assisting Baigas would result in one of two unfortunate alternatives--either the Baigas would "cut bewar at all risks," or "emigrate en mass to enjoy in Kawardha and elsewhere the liberty they no longer possess with us."^(456.4)Another report recognized that "however will the forests might be watched surreptitious dhya clearing would occur," unless Baigas were offered and learned "other means of

[Page 457]

livelihood."^(457.1) Though some Baigas in the early 1880s were able to become plough cultivators with government assistance, they continued to protest the Government's prohibition; other Baigas probably continued bewar in remote areas or fled to areas where British pressures were less.

Bloomfield's efforts to help the Baigas went beyond administrative assistance programs. He tried to give some Baigas I'm idea of a more civilized state of society," by showing them the "wonders" of contemporary India.^(457.2)In1969 he convinced a Pujari (headman) to visit Balaghat town . However, the night after he arrived he disappeared without telling anyone.^(457.3)In 1877 two Baigas walked with Bloomfield the 100 miles to Nagpur to see the town, and in February 1882 two others accompanied Bloomfield to Nagpur, traveling part of the way by train. Bloomfield showed them the cotton mills, museum, the fort with its large guns, the electric light, 'land everything else of interest." In Balaghat, he later showed Baigas "the scenery, etc. of other lands" by a "Magic Lantern."^(457.4)

At the same time Bloomfield was trying to interest Baigas in con-temporary British and Indian culture, he felt Europeans should know more about the Baigas. When the Lord Bishop of Calcutta visited Baihar in

[Page 458]

1882, Bloomfield invited Baigas to perform their Karma dance. About 250 Narotrias and ten Binjhwars, including no less than eighty women came to "honor" the visitors.^(458.1)Bloomfield hoped his Notes on the Baigaswould attract European attention, donations, and perhaps a missionary. He feared the Baigas would revert to bewar cultivation or sink to "the level of the lowest classes" in agricultural villages unless "a Christian Mission"was established in the Baigas "midst." He thought this was the "only one means" to ensure "the Baigas continuing a steady advance in the direction in which they have been started."^(458.2)Though a mission was established several years later in Balaghat town with branches in Baihar, it did not work mainly among Baigas nor convert them.

Proposals for reorganizing the aid program to Baigas in 1884 initiated the fourth stage. The proposals came from F. Venning, Commissioner of Nagpur Division. His ideas implied a criticism of Bloomfield's efforts, seen as too"unsystematic."

Venning wanted to concentrate government assistance in two ways--(1) "to grant substantial aid to deserving cases," instead of small sums to a large number of Baigas, and (2) to reduce the number of assisted villages so that Baigas could be "properly supervised."^(458.3) In 1885-86 District Commissioner Bryce Thomas implemented this revised program.

[Page 459]

Whereas 30 villages had been assisted before 1885, Thomas offered assistance to Baigas in only six of the largest Baiga villages. The amount of aid and the number of families assisted also declined. While as many as 190families had received Rs. 2,280 assistance in 1882, Thomas concentrated the program among 69 Narotria families using Rs. 397. Most of these received only grain and tools, while 11 families received "substantial" aid of bullocks, grain and tools. One of them was Natti of Sarekha village. The administration supplied his family with two bullocks, one khandi food grain and one and a half khandis seed grain, one pickaxe (dholi), and one plough, a total value of Rs. 31.^(459.1)

By the mid 1880s, British administrators had begun to question the effectiveness of the aid program. Even Bloomfield, while thinking the settled Baigas were "more happy and contented" than before, admitted they were"like all wild branches of the human race . . . only too ready and willing to be spoilt by being allowed to sit at home at ease and do nothing."^(459.2) The Chief Commissioner also remarked the program was "not intended to pauperize the Baigas but to aid them to tide over the difficulties" of abandoning "their hereditary means of livelihood" and adopting "a new and to them a somewhat irksome occupation."^(459.3)Thomas

[Page 460]

characterized the Baigas as "excessively lazy and opposed to any work"; they built "wretched field bunds"(embankments). He suspected the Baigas of digging up and eating the Government seed grain, and "that more than one Government bullock, reportedly destroyed by tigers," had "furnished a meal for these people."^(460.1) Whether these suspicions were true or not, later British writers accepted and repeated them, and Thomas decided Baigas had to be more closely supervised. He chose and designated a local resident in the six villages as "Madatgar" or assistant. Each received some "land rent-free,' as payment to teach the Baigas how to "prepare their fields" and sow the seed, and take "care of the produce of all Baigas after the harvest"; then the grain was measured and "accounts . . . made up." Two or three of the six madatgars were non-Baigas. Only by the arrangement of madatgars, Thomas felt, could the administration hope "to gradually reclaim these people from their wild life and forest-destroying proclivities."^(460.2)

The last year Baigas were assisted appears to be 1887. The administration granted Rs. 732 to 94 families in 10villages. 81 families were assisted in the five villages which had been assisted the previous year and 34 families were assisted in five new villages. Over the past six years, Rs. 9,500 had been spent on the Baigas.^(460.3)

Already in late 1886 Venning felt "the main object" of the aid program "in training the Baiga to settle" had "been attained." He thought

[Page 461]

"bewar had really been put an end to in the Government forests," though some of the Zamindars still allowed "it in their own forests." Thus he found it "unnecessary to apply to Government for any further grant."^(461.1)

Over a twenty year period from 1868 to 1888 British administrators had used "compulsory and conciliatory"methods to end bewar and settle Baigas. While at first conciliation brought Baigas of only three villages to settle down, the compulsory methods later brought as little success, resulting in difficulties and an exodus of the Baigas.The intensified assistance program of the early 1880s provided some Baigas with the necessary land, bullocks, grain and tools to begin plough cultivation.In the mid-1880s administrators reduced and limited assistance and became convinced the program had generally succeeded.

As administrators considered the Beige program a success, they once again turned their attention away from tribal improvement to reorganizing the management of forests and promoting agricultural settlement of the upland valleys. In the late 1880s the provincial administration reassessed forest and colonization policies. In each district Government forests were divided between "A" and "B" lands. In the next decade, forest officers made detailed examinations of forest lands and formed "working plans" for "A" forests to ensure conservation through rotated cuttings.More lands were classified as "B" or less valuable forest; "survey plots" of about ten acres each were clearly mapped and

[Page 462]

made available for agricultural settlers. The administration decided on two changes--(1) in order to provide forest workers with lands, "Forest Villages" were established within the "A" forests; (2) agricultural settlers on government and "B" forest lands would be taxed through the ryotwari system.^(462.1)

In the Forest Villages, families were permitted to live and cultivate some nearby land as long as one adult male of each family worked for the forest department. In Balaghat and Mandla districts, most of these families were Gonds and Baigas. Later investigations indicated life was not easy in the forest villages, unless families had an additional adult male who could supplement the family income of wages from forest work through garden cultivation or other activities. Nonetheless, the existence of forest villages generally supplied the forest department with local labor while they allowed tribals to remain within a forest environment.

By classifying some of the forest lands as "B" areas, more lands were made available for cultivators. One of the main reasons for the creation of Balaghat district in 1867 had been to encourage colonization. A report of the1890s reviewed this goal over the years.

After the first wild hope of European colonization and tea and coffee plantations had died away, it remained only to carry through the more modest ambition of making the tract a well cultivated one according to native standards.

[Page 463]

As the local Gond was "a migratory, thriftless fellow," it was necessary to attract "cultivators of industrious castes. . . from the plains." Bloomfield made "some progress . . . towards settling the large expanses of fertile land with sturdy Powar peasantry."^(rf463.1) By 1869, 37 villages, and by 1870, 55 villages had been leased out for ten years with the prospects of either renewing the leases, or obtaining landlord rights over the village if fifty percent of the area was brought under cultivation.^(463.2)By 1872, 71 other villages had been leased out on somewhat similar term.Other batches of villages were leased in 1876, 1877 and 1884 for a total of about 300 villages. The new settlers found many hardships of disease, fatigue , and wild animals.^(463.3)When Venning visited the leased villages in1886, he reported few settlers had fulfilled the terms of the leases. Consistent with the general shift of administrative policy from landlord to cultivator ownership of the land, all villages except eleven became ryotwari villages. Five men were awarded landlord rights and six awarded the post of hereditary headmen (patel). After the late 1880s the administration managed and taxed the majority of the leased villages and my new villages under this ryotwari land tenure.

The Baiga Chak in Mandla, 1890s     

While administrative activity among the Baigas languished after the

[Page 464]

1880s in Balaghat district, a new program was initiated in Mandla in the early 1890s. Like Balaghat, forest administration was being reorganized in Mandla and the administration began to consider how to effectively prevent bewar in that district. At the same time, the administration considered Baigas and others as valuable forest workers and wished to establish some areas especially for the Baigas to live .

In the 1860s Ward had permitted Baigas of twelve villages in eastern Mandla district to continue bewar. In the late 1870s and early 1880s, the administration offered assistance to Baigas to settle down, simultaneous to the program in Balaghat district. In Mandla between June 1879 and 1884 a total of Ra. 2806 was spent on 127families to settle in six villages. The money bought cattle, seed-grain, and farm implements, plus a small amount used in 1879 to settle petty debts. One of the villages was Silpur (later probably called Silpura). Lap Singh, the leader of Baigas from Kisli and Lalijharia villages, had been convinced in an interview with the District Commissioner in 1881 to bring twenty families to settle in Silpur village near Bichia.^(464.1)In that same year, however, "as soon as it was made clear" that "fire and axe cultivation" would be prohibited, "most of the [Mandla] Baigas fled into Kawardha State."^(464.2)

Mandla district consisted of two distinctly different tahsils--in the west (Mandla tahsil) around Mandla town, much of the valley was well

[Page 465]

cultivated though surrounded by forests. In the east, in Ramgarh (later Dindori) tahsil, the geography was the opposite--mostly forested hills surrounding small cultivated valleys. Correspondingly, malguzari villages predominated in Mandla tahsil, while government villages (ryotwari) and forest villages predominated in Dindori tahsil. While the assistance programs of the early 1880s dealt mainly with Baigas of Mandla tahsil, the program of the 1890s concentrated on bewar prevention in Ramgarh tahsil.

It was here that the administration wanted to re-establish an area for Baigas, like Ward's "ring-fence" of the1860s. M. Mattanah (Divisional Forest Officer of Mandla) indicated the value of Baigas to the forest department.

We are entirely dependent for our labour supply on these Baigas who are by far the best wood-cutters of the district. Indeed it appears to me we can scarcely get on with our work, should we loose this valuable source of labor supply. Collection of harra and minor products, and line cuttings, would be impossible without them. ^(465.1)

In May 1890 the administration selected an area of 23,920 acres in southeast Ramgarh tahsil, to be called the"Baiga reserve," or the Baiga Chak, for all bewar-cutting Baiga. Baigas were to move into the Chak as bewar would be strictly prohibited outside the area. Only Baiga "must be allowed to settle in the Reserve."^(465.2)Forest officers would show Baigas

[Page 466]

the areas where bewar was permitted, in order to prevent bewar and denudation of the forest on the ridges. The administration made it clear, however, that even in the Chak they disapproved "this form of cultivation," and would tax each axe Rs. 1 per year. Baigas were offered two alternatives to bewar --(1) to settle down as plough cultivators, and (2) to work for the forest department. The incentives for plough cultivation included no rent on leased plots for the first three years and one-quarter rupee for the next seven years; in addition the administration would advance interest-free loans "for the purchase of plough cattle and seed-grain." The Forest Department would find work "for all who may agree to work in the forest under the orders of Forest Officers." These Baiga would be helped to build houses and provided with "plots for home cultivation" in Forest Villages. They would be "preferentially employed" by the Department; all private contracts for collecting forest produce "must stipulate this preferential employment." The Baigas who refused to migrate into the Chak, were offered the same two alternatives on the same conditions--to become plough cultivators on Government plots, or be hired as workmen for the forest Department. For Baigas living in or near malguzari villages, the administration encouraged the landlords to settle Baigas. If a landlord brought Baigas to cultivate land for five years, the fields would be taxed at only one-half the normal rate; landlords "who really interest themselves" to settle Baigas, would be given an honorary headdress (purgri) in a public ceremony (the District Durbar).^(466.1)

[Page 467]

The administration discouraged Baigas who lived in Mandla tahsil from migrating to the Reserve, though The administration said there was "room enough in the Reserve for the Baigas" of both tahsils. Rather efforts "shall be made to induce" the Mandla tahsil Baigas "to settle down" under the previous described "attraction of terms" on government or malguzari land. In order to stop any further bewar cultivation in malguzari villages, The administration would enforce the term of the village administration papers (wajib-ul-arz) which prohibited the cutting of valuable trees.^(467.1)

The administration's orders of May 1890 establishing the Baiga Chak contained a mixture of confusing, or even contradictory, ideas. Rather than the original purpose of the Chak--to provide an area for all bewar-cutting Baiga--in essence the administration wished to convert or reform their residents into plough cultivators. The administration also preferred, in the end, for Mandla tahsil Baigas to remain in their villages, not to move, but settle to plough cultivation.

The next few years became some of the most difficult for Mandla District Baigas; many of the provisions of the May 1890 orders were not consistently enforced or fulfilled. Within the Chak, forest offices selected areas for bewar which the Baigas found unsatisfactory or insufficient. The administration was also slow to offer the promised financial assistance both within and outside the Chak. In 1895 the administration decided Baigas were not settling rapidly enough and thus allowed Gonds and other plough cultivators to migrate into the Chak to help

[Page 468]

bring land under cultivation.^(468.1) In 1903, the Forest Department wanted the Baigas of Rajni Sarai village in the Chak to move to the Banjar Forest Reserve to cut timber for railway sleepers (ties).Instead the entire population of about 100 escaped to Kawardha. Gonds repopulated the village. In ten years (1891 to 1901) the population of the Chak fell from 1,551 Baigas of 362 families to 700 Baigas of 132 families. The exodus of the Ragni Sarai Baigas further reduced the Baiga population to 600.^(468.2)The Mandla District Gazetteer of 1912 reported that only four of the original seven villages remained in the Chak. The writer seemed somewhat puzzled that "in spite of the many inducements offered by the Government" for Baigas to "abandon their old style of cultivation,"seventy-one families (or about 200 people) still cut bewar at the enhanced rate of Rs. 2 per axe.^(468.3)By 1912 the Chak's forests were "altogether barren of game, both large and small"; the Baigas evidently exhausted this supplementary food source during the last twenty-two years.^(468.4)In these years the Chak Baigas had not received sufficient bewar lands or adequate financial assistance; non-Baigas had been permitted to enter the area; The administration's attempt to requisition Baiga labor had caused some to leave the Chak.

Baigas in forest villages just outside the Chak refused to migrate into the Chak, and the strict prohibition of bewar, inadequate assistance

[Page 469]

for agriculture, and the lack of employment in the forests meant the Baigas faced near starvation. Later Baigas remembered the early 1890s-"There was no food, there were no bullocks, there was no money."^(469.1)A local Forest Ranger, Mohan Lal, reported to his superiors,

the poor Baigas is . . . living from hand to mouth . . . having even no sufficient cloth to cover their loins. They could not be allowed to make new bewars nor have they been supplied with other means of support. So death is staring these poor helpless people in their faces . . . and these innocent loyal creatures are at the mercy of district authorities.^(469.2)

He asked that bewar be permitted for at least one more year but his request was unsuccessful.

Baigas, themselves, petitioned the Government. Dholi Baiga of Udhor village pleaded in 1892, that since bewar prohibition

we daily starve, having had no food grain in our possession. The only wealth we possess is our axe. We have no clothes to cover our body with, but we pass cold nights by the fire-side. We are now dying for want of food . . . .We cannot go elsewhere, as the British Government is everywhere. What fault have we done that the Government does not take care of us? Prisoners are supplied with ample food in jail. A cultivator of the grass is not deprived of his holding, but the Government does not give us our right who have lived here generations past.^(469.3)

The provincial officer in charge of the Agriculture Department, J. B. Fuller, toured the Mandla and adjacent Bilaspur areas in 1893 and wrote,

The recent orders of Government have really brought the bewar-cutting Baigas of Mandla and Bilaspur to a state of destitution. Their cultivation with the axe and mattock is of an entirely different type to plough cultivation, and they cannot more reasonably be forced to [Page 470] a plough than a weaver can be forced to service in a cotton mill.
    The Bhumias of Bilaspur complained bitterly to me of the hard-ships they were put to for bare subsistence . . . .The Bhumias of Lormi obliged me by an exhibition of dancing, but they refused for some time my presents of money, eagerly asking instead for their lost bewars.^(rf470.1)

He questioned whether there were sufficient reasons for the Government

calling on its subjects to reform or perish. But the reform must be supported by very strong reasons, and the more numerous the people affected the stronger must be the case against them. With these people there are . . .sentimental reasons for kind treatment. They are relics of old time; they live in places which no others would dare to inhabit; and it seems hard to deny them their customary food in order to lengthen the life of valueless jungle.^(470.2)

Sixty-four Baiga families in four forest villages began cutting bewar again at the end of 1892. Government severely reprimanded them but did not take criminal action. The District Commissioner remarked that the Baiga"clung like a spoilt child to their axes."^(470.3) Finally in 1894, Rs. 800 and fifty-six bullocks were supplied to Baigas. It was the intention to lend two bullocks and seed grain to each Baiga family who wished it.^(470.4)By 1912however, about 450 Baiga families had migrated to the Pandaria Zamindari of Bilaspur district where they continued bewar.^(470.5)In the Mandla tahsil, at least one large landlord, the owner of the

[Page 471]

Ghurgi estate, allowed bewar from 1894 to 1898, until it was detected or reported to the administration. Then the prohibition of cutting valuable trees in malguzari areas was enforced. The landlord had allowed 1,153 bewars to be cut on 6,172 acres at an axe rate of one and a half rupee.^(471.1)This probably was the last time Baigas were allowed or detected practicing bewar on a large scale in Mandla tahsil or even in Mandla district. Baigas continued to petition against the bewar prohibition, especially during the famine of the late 1890s. In 1897 Guhra and Ramsingh, Baigas of Kukrapani village, begged the administration to permit bewar in the forest near their village, at a time when the administration was "helping everyone." They said, "We are dying of starvation.Besides bewar we have no other profession."^(471.2) Like other petitions it was rejected as being contrary to The administration's policy.

The pleas of the Baigas in the 1890s and the administration's investigation of forests began to stimulate a re-assessment of administration policy toward Baigas in the twentieth century. Fuller had already felt Baigas might be allowed to bewar in remote forests. C. M. McCrie, the Divisional Forest Officer of Mandla, examined the effects of bewar in the Ghurgi estate. He found "the figures clearly show that bewar-cutting does not entail the permanent extinction of forest growth on the areas on which it is practiced."Bewars did "little harm or permanent damage" when old bewars were allowed "sufficient rest" and when the forest was protected from fires spreading beyond the bewars. Bewars

[Page 472]

"did not have any real effect of denudation or ruining the water-supply."^(472.1)In the early twentieth century (about1901) J. B. Fuller again restated his doubts about "the past rather exaggerated ideas . . . of the injurious effects of bewar." Bewar might change the types of trees which grew in bewar areas, but he thought it "much more important that a tribe of people should live in peace and comfort."^(472.2)A. P. Percival, a forest officer, who had worked several years in both Balaghat and Mandla districts, re-affirmed McCrie's and Fuller's ideas in 1909. He thought "the importance of the whole matter [of bewar destroying forests] had been exaggerated," and there was"a general want of perspective," when "urgent questions such as the fire protection and the working of several hundred square miles of pure sal forests" were "ignored or passed by without comment" while so much was"talked and written about the Baiga Chak."^(472.3) Percival emphasized that Baigas only practiced bewar above the frost zone permitting "the extraordinary regrowth that springs up within a few years." Gonds and others might damage the forest below the frost line causing "the ruined aspect of many low-lying frost-bitten areas." Percival asked, if bewar caused permanent damage, how could one explain the often wonderful regrowth of sal" that stretched "in an almost unbroken line of forest from the Baiga Chak to Karadih towards Amarkantak, say twenty square miles," or the sal forests of Balaghat where "the majority are old bewar areas?" He thought that if the forests

[Page 473]

were near railways and had obvious commercial value, "no one would say anything about damage or denudation"and the forest department would "not professionally hesitate for a moment in constituting felling series."^(473.1)

McCrie, Fuller, Percival and other officers expressed opinions on forest conservation which coincided with the Baiga ideas and practices for controlled bewar cultivation and forest conservation. Unfortunately these ideas began to predominate administration policy only in the last twenty years of the period between 1861 and 1921.During the first forty years British administrators had remained convinced bewar cutting mined forests and they used a variety of methods to prohibit bewar and "wean" the Baiga from forest cultivation to plough cultivation.

In 1916 the administration finally passed a law permitting con-trolled bewar in selected villages. The village administration paper for Ganjaisarra (in south-central Baihar tahsil) for example, stipulated

In this village, in accordance with Secretariate latter . . . 16th October 1916, and with the Deputy Commissioner's. . . bewar or siddam is permitted in the entire forest area on condition that any plot on which bewar has been done in one year and siddam the next, shall not again be cultivated in bewar or siddam till after 10 years.^(473.2)

B. N. De (Land Revenue Settlement Officer for Balaghat, 1914-1917) had found the prohibition of bewar in the1890s had been "openly disregarded and bewar cultivation was extensively in vogue in these wild areas" of southern Baihar tahsil. The permission of bewar cultivation "in well defined areas" in 1916 was "to the great satisfaction of the

[Page 474]

proprietors and Baigas alike."^(474.1)

Baiga Resistance and Survival     

In the 1860s Baigas learned that the new rulers wanted them to follow another way of living and working.Previously most Baigas lived and worked in the upland forests of Central India by bewar cultivation, hunting, and gathering forest food and produce. They used axes, bows, spears, and digging tools. The new White Sahebs of the 1860s and later told the Baigas they must move to the valleys and learn plough cultivation like their Gond brothers. The White Sahebs brought new laws by which they took possession of the land. The laws allowed the rulers to sell or lease the cultivatable land to anyone such as other white men and Powars. Even Gonds and Baigas could lease or buy back the land. The rulers took the forest lands to manage and tax as they chose.Between 1861 and 1921 the Baigas struggled to live and work under the new rules of the British. A few adapted plough cultivation; most found other ways to live and work.

Balaghat district provides a specific example of British activity in the highlands of central India. The British had created Balaghat district in the 1860s with three main goals in mind--(1) to manage the forests, (2) to attract colonists, and (3) to convert forest cultivators into plough cultivators. They were more successful with the first two goals than the third. The government's management and sale of forest produce brought increased forest revenue. From Rs. 2000 in 1866 it rose

[Page 475]

to Rs. 18,000 in 1869; by the early 1890S it had jumped to between Rs 70,000 and 80,000. With railway construction in the western valley during the first year of the twentieth century, the forest revenue exceeded Rs.200,000; it then declined in the remaining years before 1921 to around Rs. 100,000.^(475.1)The colonization program failed to attract European settlers, but Indians began to settle in the valleys, though the early pioneers found life extremely difficult.^(475.2) By the 1890s, 4,199 tenants occupied 46,000 acres in the Baihar uplands. The next twenty years saw rapid growth--by 1920 almost three times as many tenants (12,008) occupied about four times as much land (160,877 acres). Their rent had quadrupled (from 15,000 to 63,000).^(475.3)Few of these tenants were Baigas. The Balaghat District Gazetteer of 1907 admitted "the attempt to teach this wild tribe to cultivate has failed." Only a few Baiga families settled in six villages which the government had "reserved for the dispossessed Baigas."^(475.4) The British acquisition and development of land in Baihar had brought considerable revenue; they had transformed the "howling wildreness" of the 1860s, but not reformed the Baiga.

The Baigas used three methods to resist British pressure and

[Page 476]

survive--(l) nominal cooperation or superficial reform, (2) occupational adjustments, and (3) protest by petition or migration. At the same time, though the main thrust of British policy was (as J. B. Fuller said) for Baigas to"reform or perish," British administrators expressed mixed attitudes toward the Baiga of sympathy and disapproval which also resulted in a variety of methods including conciliation and compulsion.

Bloomfield told about the Baigas' nominal cooperation when he explained the difficulties of settling Baigas in1869. It was hard to make them understand "that orders must be obeyed"; they promised "not to cut any . . .prohibited kinds of timber," but then "cut all kinds of trees . . . in spite of all promises repeatedly made." A"common saying among . . . the officials" was that every official who becomes "much annoyed" by the "mischief done in the forests by the Bygahs, and declares they must be expelled," when he goes to "interview" them, "he relents and does all he can to protect them."^(476.1)

The Baiga Chak represents an example of superficial reform or conversion of Baigas to plough cultivation. While the Mandla District Gazetteer of 1912 said it was "highly satisfactory" that "the plough has supplemented the axe in most of the fields owned by Baigas," it remarked

in actual fact, however, the Baiga has not been reclaimed; he has learnt enough wisdom to know that Government prefers a ploughed field to a bewar, and has sub-let his land to men who will plough it for him--a method which is gratifying to both the authorities and to himself, but is no indication of his own agricultural regeneration.^(476.2)

By the 20th century only a few Baigas in the valley villages had taken

[Page 477]

to plough cultivation; most could not or did not because of poverty, lack of training, or personal belief against the use of the plough. Others earned a living by relying on particular skills and knowledge. Most of the Baiga who made these occupational adjustments, if prevented from practicing bewar cultivation, lived in villages adjacent to forests, or in the "Forest Villages," which the administration had established after the late 1880s. They worked mainly as woodmen, forest guards or hunting guides (shikaris). Some sold forest and bamboo produce. A few also worked as field laborers, the men uprooting the plants and the women planting them.^(477.1)The Balaghat District Gazetteer commented that Baigas made "excellent forest villagers," where their 'axes" earned them

"a good livelihood."^(477.2)Most Baigas had to combine some of these activities or supplement their earnings through collecting forest food or growing crops on hidden and remote bewars. One officer reported he discovered "some unauthorized bewar" in the Forest Village of Dhiri in northeast Baihar tahsil.^(477.3)

A third way Baigas earned a living was by continuing to practice bewar cultivation. Though bewar was legally prohibited, Baigas found They could practice it in Zamindari areas or on remote hills where British administrators rarely went. The Balaghat District Gazetteer described eastern Baihar as "a wild tangle of hill and jungle," where Baigas and Gonds practiced "the only method of cultivation possible

[Page 478]

among these precipitous hills, that of axe and fire, known as bewar."^(478.1)

Ever since the arrival of the British in the 1860s, Baigas protested against the administration's efforts to end bewar and "wean" them from the axe. These protests took the form of verbal or written petitions as well as migrations to escape British domination. Both types of protests have already been described, in the 1860s by Ward and Bloomfield, and later by Neill, Fuller and others.

While these protests did not change the anti-bewar attitudes among most British administrators, they stimulateda sympathetic awareness among some of them of Baiga complaints and conditions, and attained some small concessions. Ward allowed villages to continue bewar. The financial assistance program of the 1880s and the establishment of Forest Villages were perhaps influenced by Baiga protests. Certainly their protests had some influence on the British re-assessment of bewar prohibition policies in the twentieth century. A legal change in1916, allowing controlled bewar in a few villages, evidently was not enough for the Baigas, and, like other orders, was not enforced or publicized. One Zamindar continued to collect a high axe tax of Rs. 9; his justification was that he was trying to stop illegal bewar.^(478.2)In the 1930s Ketu Baiga complained of the continued bewar prohibition by the British government. He commented on the current Indian political demand for swaraj or independence and freedom from the British--"The English are

[Page 479]

giving swaraj to everyone but the Baiga; why can't they give us bewar swaraj ?"^(479.1)

Baigas adopted three methods to survive under British pressures to "reform or perish." Though only some Baigas"reformed," and though at times others faced near starvation, the Baiga and their culture did not "perish." Their growth in numbers at a minimum suggests survival and there is some indication of cultural survival and continuity. The Baiga population (in the three districts of Balaghat, Mandla and Bilaspur) grew from about fifteen thousand in the 1860s to eighteen thousand in the 1890s, twenty-eight thousand in the 1930s, and forty-three thousand in the 1960s.^(479.2)The work of G. N. Tiwari (1976) surveys a predominately Baiga village, Amwar, in southeastern Mandla district. As with other studies about the Baiga such as Verrier Elwin (1930), W. V. Grigson(1940s), Stephen Fuchs (1950s), and D. N. Nag (1960s), Tiwari examines the survival strategies of the Baigas and their cultural activities. Even at this late date, half the Baigas of the village practiced bewar, though it was illegal and mostly undetected by the local officials. He also records several of their witty songs which accompany the Karma and other dances.^(479.3)

Conclusion     

Two very different cultures came into closer contact with the

Sources: Census 1866, Statement B; C. P., Census of 1931, Part II, Table XVIII, Part A, Variation of Selected Tribes, pp. 408-455; Central India Agency, Census of 1931 (Delhi: 1933), pp. 217, 224; Fuchs, Bhumia, pp. 3-4 for 1941 statistics; Nag, Economy, pp. 25-26; and Tiwari, Amwar, pp. 174-75 for 1961 statistics.

arrival of the British in the highlands of central India in the 1860s. The relationship of the Baigas with the British between 1861 and 1921 was essentially a struggle of the people of each culture to maintain or impose their culture on the other. The Baiga adopted methods to survive British domination, mainly by adjustments in their occupations and locations. British policy generally sought to convert the Baiga, in the early years, but because of inconsistent implementation and Baiga resistance they achieved little success. In the end, they, too, had to adopt methods, such as Forest Villages, in an effort to accommodate to the completely different culture of the Baiga.

Back to the top.    

418.1. Central Provinces, Report on the Census of theCentral Provinces for 1866 (Nagpur: M. Lawlor at the Chief Commissioner's Office Press, 1967), "Statement B"; and James Forsyth, The Highlands of Central India. Notes on their Forests and Wild Tribes, Natural History, and Sports (London: Chapman and Hall, 1871), p. 359. The census was taken the evening of November 5, 1866 and is reported in the letter of the Chief Commissioner of the Central Provinces to the Government of India, 2 April 1867. Abbreviations of Central Provinces is C.P., of The Chief Commissioner of the Central Provinces is CCCP, and Government of India is GOI.. See also table on Baiga population.[Back]

418.2. See especially R. V. Russell, The Tribes and Castes of the Central Provinces of India, 4 vols. (London: Macmillan and Company, 1916), 2:77-91; and Verrier Elwin, The Baiga (London: John Murray, 1939), pp. 2-9. [Back]

419.1. Russell, Tribes and Castes, 2:78. [Back]

420.1. These myths are reported in several places including Russell, Tribes and Castes, and Elwin, Baiga.This version is from Musra, a Dewar of Bijora near Dindor, as recorded in Stephen Fuchs, The Gond and Bhumia of Eastern Mandla, 2d. ed. (Bombay: New Literature Publishing Company, 1968), pp. 414-427. Naga (snake) Baiga is often called Nanga (naked) Baiga. Some of the earliest mention of these myths are in A. Bloomfield,Notes on the Baigas of Central India [Nagpur: 1885], p. 2. [Back]

421.1. Elwin, Baiga, pp. 106-07. [Back]

421.2. Report of the Tahsildar of Baihar, 1878, in Elwin, Baiga, p. 80. [Back]

422.1. The bewar method of cultivation was described by many writers, but see especially Bloomfield, Notes, pp. 14-16, and Daya Shankar Nag, Tribal Economy: An Economic Study of the Baiga (Delhi: Bharatiya Adimjati Sevak Sang, 1958), pp. 62-75. Nag suggests the annual cycle of bewar.Back]

422.2. Bloomfield, Notes, pp. 16-20. [Back]

423.1. Fuchs, Bhumia, pp. 82 and 131-134. [Back]

424.1 A. Bloomfield, "Progress Report on Balaghat District, 1868-1869," 30 June 1869, in India, Foreign Department Proceedings December 1869, #84, p. 105, par. 80. Hereafter, Bloomfield, "Progress"; and India, Foreign Department, Proceedings hereafter IFP. [Back]

427.1. Fuchs, Bhumia, pp. 88-89. [Back]

428.1. "Abstract of the District Reports on the condition of the lower classes in the Central Provinces," Balaghat, p.21, in India, Revenue and Agriculture Department, Famine, Proceedings, December 1888. [Back]

428.2. H. C. E. Ward, Report on the Land Revenue Settlement of Mandla District [1867], quoted in Bloomfield, Notes, p. 25. Hereafter Ward, Mandla. [Back]

428.3. Bloomfield, Notes, p. 24. [Back]

429.1. G. F. Pearson, quoted in W. B. Thomson, "Report on Mandla," in India, Supplement to the Gazette of India,30 March 1864, p. 129, par. 27. Hereafter Pearson, "Bhoomeahs"; Thomson, "Report"; and India, Gazette--1864. Thomson's original letter on the Bichia-Raigarh tract is dated 14 July 1863 to the Jabalpur Commissioner. [Back]

429.2. Bloomfield, Notes, p. 24. [Back]

429.3. Thomson, "Report," p. 131, par. 38. [Back]

429.4. Bloomfield, Notes, p. 6. [Back]

430.1. Balaghat DG (1907), pp. 98-99. Mr. Lampard was a missionary in Balaghat in the late nineteenth century. [Back]

430.2. Bloomfield, Notes, pp. 21-22; and G, N. Tiwari, Amwar, A Village Survey, Census of India, 1961, vol. viii, Madhya Pradesh, Number II, Amwar, Tahsil and District Mandla (Bhopal, Superintendent of Census Operations,1976), pp. 141-42 . Hereafter Tiwari, Amwar. [Back]

430.3. Bloomfield, Notes, p. 22; and Bloomfield to Commissioner of Nagpur Division, 16 December 1882, in Bloomfield, Notes, Appendix, p. 23, par. 15. The Appendix to Bloomfield's Notes contains several letters; hereafter, Bloomfield, Notes--App. [Back]

431.1. Bloomfield, Notes, pp. 2, 4, 6, 16; and Notes --App., p. 12. [Back]

431.2. A. Bloomfield to Commissioner of Nagpur Division, 10 May 1881, in Notes--App., p. 10, par. 2. Abbreviations: Commissioner--Cr. and Division--Dn. [Back]

432.1. Bryce Thomas, Balaghat District Commissioner to Cr. of Nagpur Dn., 28 October 1886, in Central Provinces, Revenue and Agriculture Department, Proceedings, Takavi, December 1886, p. 15. Hereafter Thomas, Report of 1886. See also Forsyth, Highlands, p. 360. [Back]

433.1. CCCP to GOI, 9 August 1867 in IFP, August 1867, #2, p. 43, par. 2. [Back]

434.1. Bloomfield, "Progress," p. 87, par. 2. [Back]

434.2. Central Provinces, Report on the Administration of the Central Provinces up to August 1862, by Richard Temple (1862; reprinted., Nagpur: Government Press, 1923), p. 93, par. 455. [Back]

434.3. Ibid., p. 92, par. 451. [Back]

435.1. Thomas, "Report," and India, Gazette--1864, pp. 127-137. [Back]

435.2. W. B. Thomson, "Statement showing details of cultivation and waste, etc. in the Raigurh Tract," in IFP, March 1866, General #30, pp. 48-49. [Back]

436.1. John Morris to CCCP, 24 January 1866, in IFP, March 1866, General #29, p. 42, par. 4. [Back]

436.2. Ibid., p. 43, par. 6. [Back]

436.3. W. B. Thomson, [Report on the Land Revenue Settlement in Seoni District, 1868], pars. 360-364, in Bloomfield, "Progress," pp. 100-01. Hereafter Thomson, Seoni. [Back]

437.1. Ward, Mandla, quoted in Elwin, Baiga, pp. 112-13. [Back]

437.2. C. P., Report on the Administration, 1866-67, ed. John Morris (Nagpur: M. Lawlor at the Chief Commissioner's Press, 1867), "Statistical Tables," A. 1. [Back]

438.1. Bloomfield, "Progress," p. 110, par. 103. [Back]

438.2. Ibid., p. 109, par. 99. [Back]

438.3. Ibid., p. 110, par. 101. [Back]

439.1. Forsyth, Highlands, p. 380. The Frenchman is named in Bloomfield, "Progress," p. 91n. [Back]

440.1. Pearson, "Bhoomeahs," in Thomson, "Report," p. 129, par. 27. [Back]

440.2. Thomson, "Report," p. 129, par. 28. [Back]

440.3. Ward, quoted in Central Provinces Gazetteer (1870), p. cxvi. [Back]

440.4. Forsyth, Highlands, p. 361. [Back]

440.5. Bloomfield, "Progress," p. 106, par. 86. [Back]

440.6. Bloomfield, Notes, p. 1. [Back]

441.1. Ibid., pp. 31-34. [Back]

441.2. Forsyth, Highlands, p. 364. [Back]

441.3. Ibid., p. 366. [Back]

442.1. Thomson, "Report," p. 130, par. 28. [Back]

442.2. Thomson, Seoni, par. 361, in Bloomfield, "Progress," pp. 100-101. [Back]

442.3. John Morris as quoted in Elwin, Baiga, p. 111. [Back]

443.1. Ward, Mandla, quoted in Elwin, Baiga, p. 113. [Back]

443.2. Thomson, "Report," pp. 134-34, pars. 63-68, and C. P. Gazetteer (1870), p. 23. [Back]

443.3. Bloomfield, "Progress," p. 99, par. 56. [Back]

444.1. Quoted in Elwin, Baiga, p. 111. [Back]

444.2. Ward, Mandla, quoted in Elwin, pp. 112-13. [Back]

444.3. Quoted in Elwin, Baiga, p. 112, and in Bloomfield, Notes, p. 27n. [Back]

445.1. C.P., Administration Report for 1863, Temple quoting himself in Stephen Hislop, Papers Relating to the Aboriginal Tribes of the Central Provinces, and Preface by Richard Temple (Nagpur: 1866), p. vi. [Back]

445.2. Richard Temple, quoted in Elwin, Baiga, p. 111. [Back]

445.3. Thomson, "Report," p. 130, par. 28. [Back]

446.1. Ward, Mandla, p. 39 in Elwin, Baiga, p. 113. [Back]

446.2. Bloomfield, "Progress," p. 108. The five villages were Kinara Merpa, Mau; Cowerja, Raigarh; Gowara, Sareka; and a "nameless tola near the Teepagurh hill." [Back]

446.3. Ibid., p. 107, par. 90. [Back]

446.4. Ibid., p. 109, par. 96. [Back]

447.1. C. P. Gazetteer (1870), pp. cxi-xx. [Back]

447.2. Forsyth, Highlands, pp. 163, 165. [Back]

447.3. Ibid., p. 24. [Back]

449.1. Bloomfield to Cr. of Nagpur Dn., 10 May 1881, in Bloomfield, Notes--App.,p. 12, par. 6. Hereafter Bloomfield, May 1881. [Back]

449.2. Bloomfield, Notes, p. 24; and Balaghat DG (1907), pp. 38-41 as quoted from the C. P.Gazette of 16 December 1871. [Back]

449.3. Bloomfield, Notes, p. 24; and May 1881, p. 12, par. 6. [Back]

449.4. Bloomfield, Notes, p. 27. [Back]

450.1. W. V. Grigson, The Aboriginal Problem in Balaghat District (Nagpur: 1941), p. 33. [Back]

450.2. Repton, quoted in CCCP to Cr. of Nagpur Dn., letter of late 1878, in CCCP to GOI, I September 1881, par.4, in Bloomfield, Notes--App.,p. 2. [Back]

450.3. CCCP to Cr. ofNagpur In. late 1878, in Bloomfield, Notes--App., p. 2. [Back]

450.4. CCCP to GOI, 1 September 1881, par. 4, in Bloomfield,Notes--App., p. 2. [Back]

451.1. Bloomfield, Notes, pp. 28-29. [Back]

451.2. Letter, 10 June 1881, in Bloomfield, Notes--App., p. 6. [Back]

451.3. Letter, 1 September 1881, par. 14, in Bloomfield, Notes--App., p. 6. [Back]

451.4. Lindsay Neill to CCCP, 27 December 1882, par. 1, in Ibid., p. 26. [Back]

451.5. Ibid., par. 10, in Ibid., p. 27. [Back]

453.1. John W. Neill, Cr. of Nagpur Dn., 6 June 1881, in Ibid., p. 8. [Back]

453.2. Bloomfield, 10 May 1881, pars. 12 and 13, in Bloomfield, Notes--App., pp. 13-14. [Back]

453.3. Ibid. [Back]

453.4. Ibid., par. 15, in Ibid., p. 15. [Back]

454.1. Letter, 6 June 1881, In Ibid., p. 8. [Back]

454.2. Bloomfield, Notes, pp. 28-30; and Bloomfield to Cr. of Nagpur Dn., 4 September 1833, in Bloomfield, Notes-App., pp. 24-25. [Back]

454.3. Bloomfield, 10 May 1881, p. 12. [Back]

454.4. Bloomfield to Cr. of Nagpur Dn., 16 December 1882, par. 11, in Bloomfield, Notes--App., p. 22. Hereafter Bloomfield, Dec. 1882. [Back]

456.1. Bloomfield, 4 September 1883, in Bloomfield, Notes--App., p. 24. [Back]

456.2. Ibid., par. 9, p. 25. [Back]

456.3. Bloomfield, Notes, p. 30n. [Back]

456.6. John W. Neill, 6 June 1881, in Bloomfield, Notes--App., p. 8. [Back]

457.1. CCCP to GOI, 1 Sept. 1881, par. 14, in Bloomfield, Notes--App., p. 10. [Back]

457.2. Bloomfield, Dec. 1882, par. 14, in Notes--App., p. 23. [Back]

457.3. Bloomfield, "Progress," pp. 108-09, par. 95. [Back]

457.4. Bloomfield, Notes, p. 32; Notes--App., p. 24. [Back]

458.1. Bloomfield, Notes, pp. 22,32; and Notes--App., p. 23. [Back]

458.2. Bloomfield, Notes, p. 31. [Back]

458.3. CCCP to Cr. of Nagpur Dn., 21 February 1888, in CPRAP, February 1888, Settlement #10, p. 76, par. 2. Hereafter 1888 Review. [Back]

459.1. Thomas, Report of 1886, in CPRAP, Dec. 1886, Statement A., pp. 10-11. [Back]

459.2. Bloomfield, 4 September 1883, in Notes--App., p. 25. [Back]

459.3. CCCP, "Review of the Measures Taken for Reclaiming Baigas in the Districts of Balaghat and Mandla," 21April 1884, in CPRAP, April 1884, Land Revenue #10, p. 39. Hereafter 1884 Review. [Back]

460.1. Thomas, Report of 1886, p. 5, par. 3. [Back]

460.2. Ibid., pp. 5-7. [Back]

460.3. 1888 Review, par. 3. [Back]

461.1. F. Venning, Cr. of Nagpur Dn. to CCCP, 26 November, in CPRAP, December 1886, Takavi #2, p. 4. [Back]

462.1. See CCCP, Resolution, 8 November 1888, on "Forest Cultivation and Excise of Culturable Land," in CPRAP, November 1888, #20, pp. 65-70. The ryotwari system contrasted to the malguzari or landlord system of tenants paying rent to the landlord and the landlord paying revenue to the Government. Under the ryotwarisystem cultivators (or ryots) paid rent to the Government collected by a local agent, the patel. [Back]

463.1. A. Mayne, "Preliminary Reports on the re-assessment of Balaghat and Baihar tahsils," quoted in J. R. Scott,Land Revenue Settlement Report of Balaghat District, 1895-1898 [1901], p. 4, par. 12. [Back]

463.2. Bloomfield, "Progress," p. 98, par. 54; and Balaghat DG (1907), p. 211, [Back]

463.3. Balaghat DG (1907), pp. 60-62. [Back]

464.1. Mandla District Commissioner, letter mid-1881, in Bloomfield, Notes--App., p. 5; see also 1884 Review, p.39. [Back]

464.2. Mandla DC, mid-1881, p. 6. [Back]

465.1. Muttanah quoted in Elwin, Baiga, p. 116. [Back]

465.2. CCCP to Cr. of Jabalpur Dn., 13 May 1890, in CPRAP, May 1890, Land Revenue, #17, p. 43, par. 5. Hereafter "Baiga Chak." Under this Resolution, the British dealt with four types of lands--the Chak orreservation, Forest Department land, ryotwari or Government land mainly in Dindori tahsil, and malguzari landmainly in Mandla tahsil. Baigas at times migrated to a fifth type of land--Zamindari estates where British administrators had less direct authority. [Back]

466.1. Ibid., p. 44, pars. 8-10. [Back]

467.1. Ibid., p. 45, par. 11. [Back]

468.1. Elwin, Baiga, p. 122. [Back]

468.2. Ibid. [Back]

468.3. Mandla DG (1912), p. 233. [Back]

468.4. Ibid. [Back]

469.1. Elwin, Baiga, p. 118. [Back]

469.2. Mohan Lal, in Elwin, Baiga, p. 119. [Back]

469.3. Dholi Baiga, in Elwin, Baiga, p. 130. [Back]

470.1. J. B. Fuller, in Elwin, Baiga, p. 128. [Back]

470.2. Ibid., p. 129. [Back]

470.3. Ibid., p. 119. [Back]

470.4. Ibid. [Back]

470.5. Mandla DG (1912), p. 233. Concerning the 450 families who refused to move into the Chak, the writer is unclear if all or a portion of them migrated. [Back]

471.1. Elwin, Baiga, p. 122. [Back]

471.2. Guhra and Ramsingh, in Elwin, Baiga, p. 130. [Back]

472.1. McCrie, in Ibid., p. 126. [Back]

472.2. Fuller, in Ibid., p. 128. [Back]

472.3. Percival, in Ibid., p. 125. [Back]

473.1. Ibid., pp. 125-126. [Back]

473.2. Quoted in Grigson, Balaghat, p. 29. [Back]

474.1. B. N. De,[Final Report on the Land Revenue Settlement of Balaghat District, 1914-1917 (1920)], par. 209, in Grigson, Balaghat, p. 29. [Back]

475.1. Central Provinces, District Gazetteer, Balaghat District, B. Volume, Statistical Tables (Nagpur: GovernmentPress, 1927), pp. 32-35 and 70-71. [Back]

475.2. Balaghat DG (1907), pp. 60-62. [Back]

475.3. Grigson, Balaghat, p. 64. In the next twenty years growth was not as rapid--tenants rose to 15,242, area to191,351 acres, and rent to Rs. 76,867; they were respectively percentage increases of only 27, 19 and 21 �. [Back]

475.4. Balaghat DG (1907), pp. 97-98. [Back]

476.1. Bloomfield, "Progress,: p. 108, par. 94. [Back]

476.2. Mandla DG (1912), pp. 175-76. [Back]

477.1. Central Provinces Gazetteer (1908), p. 129. [Back]

477.2. Balaghat DG (1907), p. 98. [Back]

477.3. Grigson, Balaghat, p. 32. [Back]

478.1. Balaghat DG (1907), p. 299; see also "Kinhi Zamindari," p. 320. [Back]

478.2. Grigson, Balaghat, p. 31, the Saletekri Zamindari. As late as the early 1940s one officer, Mr. Gupta, suggested bewar should be permitted in the Saletekri Zamindari, evidently unaware of the 1916 orders. Ibid., p.32. [Back]

479.1. Ketu, in Elwin, Baiga, p. 107. [Back]

479.2. See table on Baiga population. [Back]

479.3. Tiwari, Amwar, pp. 84, 90-92, 141-146. [Back]

Back to the top.