filwipé, Bhuinyé, Bkvliydn, Bbuinlnir, Bk:/miyé, Muskar, Ndil:
K7sandé_1/at, Khanddyat-Péik, Ghatwdl, G/iafwclr, T-1'/l-é_z/at, Purdn,
Rajwdr, Rai, Rai-Bhuiyd, Ber-Bhuiyd, Sardér. The bewildering array
of synonyms which stands at the head of this article suggests a
problem of great importance to ethnological research in ndia—
the question what value can properly be attached to the names
of tribes and castes as we find them at the
present day. Are such names mainly for
tuitous, deriving their origin frorn such accidents as locality, occu
pation, habit, and the like; or do they take us hack to periods
of remote antiquity and furnish clues that may safely be followed
to the actual descent and true affinities of the human aggregates
which they now serve to distinguish? Take, for example, the
name Bhuiyé. Are we to regard this as the original designation
of a tribe, once compact, which has now spread into the ends of
the earth and disguised itself—vro)JuIiu 0'1/o;ui-rwv e’1ra'wv,u,os~—under
a variety of titles, which in course of time have come to be the
badges of distinct endogamous groups; or, should we rather say,
that the word Bhuiya is itself no tribal name at all, but a mere
title conferred on or assumed by many groups of men in different
parts of India, on the strength in each case of their real or supposed
claim to be deemed the original settlers and first clearers of the soil ?
If we adopt the former view, we are led to infer that all tribes or
castes calling themselves Bhuiyé. are offshoots from one original
stock; while the latter theory points to no such general conclusion,
and leaves us to account as we may for the various groups which
use this title in a more or less pronounced and exclusive fashion.
Most of the authorities who have written about the Bhuiyas
have assumed at starting that the name must be a genuine tribal
designation of very ancient date, and have thus been led into specu
lations which in my judgment rest on a very scanty foundation of
ascertained fact. Thus Buchanan, finding in Bhagalpur, Behar, and
Dinéjpur a number of people calling themselves Bhuinyés,' seems
to take it for granted that they all come of one stock. His line
of argument on this point is not free from obscurity, but it
certainly goes perilously near to identifying the distinctly non
Aryan Bhuinyés of North Bhégalpur and Dinéjpur with the highly
Aryan Babhans of Behar, who assume the title Bhuinyé. or Bhuinhér
with reference to their claims upon the land. Sir George Campbell
travels still further afield, and suggests that the Bhuiyas of Bengal
are connected with the Buis of Madras and the Central Provinces.
Colonel Dalton thinks this opinion probable, adding that the Bhuiyé.
features are on the whole of a Tamulian cast, and that the tribe is
found in its greatest strength and purity on the southern frontier
of Bengal? The reference to the Bérah Bhuiyas of Assam, which
follows, leaves it uncertain whether Colonel Dalton looked upon
them also as an offshoot of the same stock as the Bhuiyas of Bengal;
but it is clear from several passages in his account of the latter that
he regarded them as a distinct tribe extending from Eastem and
Northern Bengal to the southern borders of Chota Nagpur. His
remark that “ there are grounds for supposing that some of the
noblest families in Bengal are sprung from this race, and they still
hold high positions in the Jungle and Tributary Mahala ” may even
he taken to imply acceptance of Buchanan’s identification of Bhuiyas
and Bhuinhar-Bébhans, but this point is not entirely clear.
It seems to me that the history of the Bérah Bhuiyés of Assam
and Eastern Bengal should of itself be suflicient to throw suspicion
on a theory which admittedly rests on the basis of a mere resem
blance of names. In an‘ article published in the Journal of the
Asiatic Society of Bengal, the late Dr. James Wise worked out with
the patience and thoroughness which mark all his researches the
obscure history of these twelve Bhuiyas or landlords, and showed
that their designation had so little of a tribal character about it
that at least one of them was a Mahomedan. They were in fact
merely territorial chiefs of portions of Eastern Bengal or Assam.
Nor is this state of things confined to the twelve historical Bhuiyés.
The title survives in Assam at the present day as the designation
of several forms of landholding rights. So in Chota Nag ur the
Bhumij of Manbhum and the Oraons and Mundas of Lo ardaga
habitually use the term to denote a certain class of tenants who
claim to hold large areas of land at privileged rates of rent in consi
deration of their being the descendants of the first clearers of the soil.
In the Tributary States of Gangpur and Bonai the leading vassals of
the chief are called Bhuiyés, both as members of a distinct tribe and in
virtue of their status in connexion with the land ; in Behar we find the
high-caste Babhan and the despised Musahar alike styling themselves
Bhuinya or Bhuinhér, though the latter have at the present day no
special status in relation to the land. Lastly, in Rajputané. the term
Bhumia or Bhuiya denotes Rajputs who hold land on a tribal tenure
in virtue of their descent throu h a particular line.
Seeing, then. how wide is t e area over which the term Bhuiya
is distributed; that it ranges from Assam to Rajputana and from
Behar to Madras ; and that its use is elastic enough to include
Rajputs and Bhumij, Mahomedans and Oraons, we should, I think,
hesitate and demand some independent evidence of affinity before
we pronounce it to be an original tribal designation, and accept the
conclusion that all tribes which bear the name at the Present day
are sprung from a common stock. Further doubt is thrown upon
this inference by the fact that the word Bhuiyé. is itself a. Sanskrit
derivative, and is always associated with some sort of claim to the
privileged tenure of land. Were it a genuine tribal name, we might
expect that its etymology would be traceable to one of the non
Aryan languages, and that it would attach to groups defined rather
by descent than by territorial status.
Although, however, the evidence, taken as a whole, goes to
show that the title Bhuiya does not necessarily denote a large
°1'l8"1a1 °11‘°l9 of tribal afiinity, embracing all manner of men who
I1°W P910118 t<_> separate groups, it by no means follows that there are
11° dlfitllwt tribes bearing the name. Among the Dravidian races
Of Western Bengal and Chota Nagpur large endogamous groups are
certainly found who call themselves Bhuiya and believe this to
be _the1r_original designation. It may well be doubted whether
their belief is correct, but the point is not very material for our
present purpose. Among a considerable proportion of the non
Aryan tribes of Bengal a Sanskrit derivative has displaced the
original tribal name so completely that in some cases no trace
of the latter can now be discerned; and as often as not it
happens that the name now sanctioned by actual usage may plausi
bly be referred to locality or to supposed rights in respect of the
land. It is easy to see how this might happen. The advanced
guard of the Aryan immigrants pressing forward in quest of land,
and seeking a name for the alien races whom they found in pos
session of scanty clearings in the forest-clad tract of Central India,
whither they had themselves been driven, would naturally ignore the
tribal names of the groups with which they came in contact, and
would call the strangers Bhuiyés or children of the soil. In course
of time, as the Aryan domination grew, the name conferred by the
conquering race would abide, and the older savage designations
would pass away and be forgotten. But wherever the title of
Bhuiyé, conferred in this rough general fashion by the new settlers
on all the non-Aryans whom they came across, chanced to be adopted
by a compact tribe, it would become the tribal name of that aggre
gate, and would be used by them for the purpose of describing
themselves collectively. Thus, it would seem, may have arisen the
distinction, well known in most parts of Chota Nagpur, between a
‘Bhuiya by tribe’ and a ‘Bhuiya by title.’ The Bhuiyas of
Bonai and Keunjhar described by Colonel Dalton belong to the
former category; the Bhumij, Mundas, and Oraons to the latter.
The distinction will be made somewhat clearer if it is explained that
every ‘ tribal Bhuiya ’ will as a matter of course describe himself as
Bhuiya, while a member of the other tribes mentioned in the last
sentence will only call himself Bhuiyé. if he is speaking with
reference to a question of land, or desires for some special reason to
lay stress on his status as a landholder or agriculturist.
It is a plausible conjecture that the tribal Bhuiyas, properly so
called. as distinguished from the titular Bhuiyas of other tribes or
castes, may have had their original settlements in the Tributary
States to the south of the Chota Nagpur plateau. In Gangpur.
Bonai, Keunjhar, and Bamra the organisation of the tribe is more
complete than elsewhere, and the name Bhuiyé. is unequivocally
recognised as the tribal designation. They form also a substantial
proportion of the population of Singbhum, but their position there is
less assured than in the Tributary States, and tradition avers that in
the western and southern parts of the district they were subjugated by
the Hos. Further north they seem to have been displaced in
Lohardaga by the Mundas and Oraons, and in Manbhum by the
Bhumij, for in those districts their settlements are scattered and
weak. In I-Iazaribagh the tribe again gathers strength, and in
Southern Behar we meet with Bhuiyas in large numbers bearing the
opprobrious name of Musahar or rat-eater, but invariably calling
themselves by their original tribal designation, which in Behar at
any rate is not associated with any claim to hold land on privileged
terms. The present distribution of the tribe seems in fact to accord
fairly well with the hypothesis that the south of the Chota Nagpur
country may have been their original centre of distribution. Spread
ing from that point, their social fortunes seem to have been deter
mined by the character of the people with whom they came in
contact. The stronger non-Aryan tribes—Mundas, Hos, and Santals
--out like a wedge through the line of the Bhuiya advance towards
the north; a small number successfully established themselves in
Hazaribagh beyond the range of Mundas, while those who travelled
furthest in this direction fell under the domination of Hindus in
Behar, and were reduced to the servile status which the Musahars now
occupy. Travelling southward from the assumed centre, the condi
tions appear to have been more favourable, and the tendency has
been for the Bhuiyés to rise rather than to decline in social status.
Some of their leading families have come to be chiefs of the petty
States of Orissa, and have merged their identity in the claim to quasi
Rajput descent. The main body of the southern colonists furnished
the tribal militia of Orissa, and have now sunk the Bhuiyé in the
Khandait or Swordsman—a caste of admitted respectability in Orissa,
and likely in course of time to transform itself into some variety of
Ra']puWtr.iting of the Bhuiyés of Gangpur and Bonai, Colonel Dalton
K7sandé_1/at, Khanddyat-Péik, Ghatwdl, G/iafwclr, T-1'/l-é_z/at, Purdn,
Rajwdr, Rai, Rai-Bhuiyd, Ber-Bhuiyd, Sardér. The bewildering array
of synonyms which stands at the head of this article suggests a
problem of great importance to ethnological research in ndia—
the question what value can properly be attached to the names
of tribes and castes as we find them at the
present day. Are such names mainly for
tuitous, deriving their origin frorn such accidents as locality, occu
pation, habit, and the like; or do they take us hack to periods
of remote antiquity and furnish clues that may safely be followed
to the actual descent and true affinities of the human aggregates
which they now serve to distinguish? Take, for example, the
name Bhuiyé. Are we to regard this as the original designation
of a tribe, once compact, which has now spread into the ends of
the earth and disguised itself—vro)JuIiu 0'1/o;ui-rwv e’1ra'wv,u,os~—under
a variety of titles, which in course of time have come to be the
badges of distinct endogamous groups; or, should we rather say,
that the word Bhuiya is itself no tribal name at all, but a mere
title conferred on or assumed by many groups of men in different
parts of India, on the strength in each case of their real or supposed
claim to be deemed the original settlers and first clearers of the soil ?
If we adopt the former view, we are led to infer that all tribes or
castes calling themselves Bhuiyé. are offshoots from one original
stock; while the latter theory points to no such general conclusion,
and leaves us to account as we may for the various groups which
use this title in a more or less pronounced and exclusive fashion.
Most of the authorities who have written about the Bhuiyas
have assumed at starting that the name must be a genuine tribal
designation of very ancient date, and have thus been led into specu
lations which in my judgment rest on a very scanty foundation of
ascertained fact. Thus Buchanan, finding in Bhagalpur, Behar, and
Dinéjpur a number of people calling themselves Bhuinyés,' seems
to take it for granted that they all come of one stock. His line
of argument on this point is not free from obscurity, but it
certainly goes perilously near to identifying the distinctly non
Aryan Bhuinyés of North Bhégalpur and Dinéjpur with the highly
Aryan Babhans of Behar, who assume the title Bhuinyé. or Bhuinhér
with reference to their claims upon the land. Sir George Campbell
travels still further afield, and suggests that the Bhuiyas of Bengal
are connected with the Buis of Madras and the Central Provinces.
Colonel Dalton thinks this opinion probable, adding that the Bhuiyé.
features are on the whole of a Tamulian cast, and that the tribe is
found in its greatest strength and purity on the southern frontier
of Bengal? The reference to the Bérah Bhuiyas of Assam, which
follows, leaves it uncertain whether Colonel Dalton looked upon
them also as an offshoot of the same stock as the Bhuiyas of Bengal;
but it is clear from several passages in his account of the latter that
he regarded them as a distinct tribe extending from Eastem and
Northern Bengal to the southern borders of Chota Nagpur. His
remark that “ there are grounds for supposing that some of the
noblest families in Bengal are sprung from this race, and they still
hold high positions in the Jungle and Tributary Mahala ” may even
he taken to imply acceptance of Buchanan’s identification of Bhuiyas
and Bhuinhar-Bébhans, but this point is not entirely clear.
It seems to me that the history of the Bérah Bhuiyés of Assam
and Eastern Bengal should of itself be suflicient to throw suspicion
on a theory which admittedly rests on the basis of a mere resem
blance of names. In an‘ article published in the Journal of the
Asiatic Society of Bengal, the late Dr. James Wise worked out with
the patience and thoroughness which mark all his researches the
obscure history of these twelve Bhuiyas or landlords, and showed
that their designation had so little of a tribal character about it
that at least one of them was a Mahomedan. They were in fact
merely territorial chiefs of portions of Eastern Bengal or Assam.
Nor is this state of things confined to the twelve historical Bhuiyés.
The title survives in Assam at the present day as the designation
of several forms of landholding rights. So in Chota Nag ur the
Bhumij of Manbhum and the Oraons and Mundas of Lo ardaga
habitually use the term to denote a certain class of tenants who
claim to hold large areas of land at privileged rates of rent in consi
deration of their being the descendants of the first clearers of the soil.
In the Tributary States of Gangpur and Bonai the leading vassals of
the chief are called Bhuiyés, both as members of a distinct tribe and in
virtue of their status in connexion with the land ; in Behar we find the
high-caste Babhan and the despised Musahar alike styling themselves
Bhuinya or Bhuinhér, though the latter have at the present day no
special status in relation to the land. Lastly, in Rajputané. the term
Bhumia or Bhuiya denotes Rajputs who hold land on a tribal tenure
in virtue of their descent throu h a particular line.
Seeing, then. how wide is t e area over which the term Bhuiya
is distributed; that it ranges from Assam to Rajputana and from
Behar to Madras ; and that its use is elastic enough to include
Rajputs and Bhumij, Mahomedans and Oraons, we should, I think,
hesitate and demand some independent evidence of affinity before
we pronounce it to be an original tribal designation, and accept the
conclusion that all tribes which bear the name at the Present day
are sprung from a common stock. Further doubt is thrown upon
this inference by the fact that the word Bhuiyé. is itself a. Sanskrit
derivative, and is always associated with some sort of claim to the
privileged tenure of land. Were it a genuine tribal name, we might
expect that its etymology would be traceable to one of the non
Aryan languages, and that it would attach to groups defined rather
by descent than by territorial status.
Although, however, the evidence, taken as a whole, goes to
show that the title Bhuiya does not necessarily denote a large
°1'l8"1a1 °11‘°l9 of tribal afiinity, embracing all manner of men who
I1°W P910118 t<_> separate groups, it by no means follows that there are
11° dlfitllwt tribes bearing the name. Among the Dravidian races
Of Western Bengal and Chota Nagpur large endogamous groups are
certainly found who call themselves Bhuiya and believe this to
be _the1r_original designation. It may well be doubted whether
their belief is correct, but the point is not very material for our
present purpose. Among a considerable proportion of the non
Aryan tribes of Bengal a Sanskrit derivative has displaced the
original tribal name so completely that in some cases no trace
of the latter can now be discerned; and as often as not it
happens that the name now sanctioned by actual usage may plausi
bly be referred to locality or to supposed rights in respect of the
land. It is easy to see how this might happen. The advanced
guard of the Aryan immigrants pressing forward in quest of land,
and seeking a name for the alien races whom they found in pos
session of scanty clearings in the forest-clad tract of Central India,
whither they had themselves been driven, would naturally ignore the
tribal names of the groups with which they came in contact, and
would call the strangers Bhuiyés or children of the soil. In course
of time, as the Aryan domination grew, the name conferred by the
conquering race would abide, and the older savage designations
would pass away and be forgotten. But wherever the title of
Bhuiyé, conferred in this rough general fashion by the new settlers
on all the non-Aryans whom they came across, chanced to be adopted
by a compact tribe, it would become the tribal name of that aggre
gate, and would be used by them for the purpose of describing
themselves collectively. Thus, it would seem, may have arisen the
distinction, well known in most parts of Chota Nagpur, between a
‘Bhuiya by tribe’ and a ‘Bhuiya by title.’ The Bhuiyas of
Bonai and Keunjhar described by Colonel Dalton belong to the
former category; the Bhumij, Mundas, and Oraons to the latter.
The distinction will be made somewhat clearer if it is explained that
every ‘ tribal Bhuiya ’ will as a matter of course describe himself as
Bhuiya, while a member of the other tribes mentioned in the last
sentence will only call himself Bhuiyé. if he is speaking with
reference to a question of land, or desires for some special reason to
lay stress on his status as a landholder or agriculturist.
It is a plausible conjecture that the tribal Bhuiyas, properly so
called. as distinguished from the titular Bhuiyas of other tribes or
castes, may have had their original settlements in the Tributary
States to the south of the Chota Nagpur plateau. In Gangpur.
Bonai, Keunjhar, and Bamra the organisation of the tribe is more
complete than elsewhere, and the name Bhuiyé. is unequivocally
recognised as the tribal designation. They form also a substantial
proportion of the population of Singbhum, but their position there is
less assured than in the Tributary States, and tradition avers that in
the western and southern parts of the district they were subjugated by
the Hos. Further north they seem to have been displaced in
Lohardaga by the Mundas and Oraons, and in Manbhum by the
Bhumij, for in those districts their settlements are scattered and
weak. In I-Iazaribagh the tribe again gathers strength, and in
Southern Behar we meet with Bhuiyas in large numbers bearing the
opprobrious name of Musahar or rat-eater, but invariably calling
themselves by their original tribal designation, which in Behar at
any rate is not associated with any claim to hold land on privileged
terms. The present distribution of the tribe seems in fact to accord
fairly well with the hypothesis that the south of the Chota Nagpur
country may have been their original centre of distribution. Spread
ing from that point, their social fortunes seem to have been deter
mined by the character of the people with whom they came in
contact. The stronger non-Aryan tribes—Mundas, Hos, and Santals
--out like a wedge through the line of the Bhuiya advance towards
the north; a small number successfully established themselves in
Hazaribagh beyond the range of Mundas, while those who travelled
furthest in this direction fell under the domination of Hindus in
Behar, and were reduced to the servile status which the Musahars now
occupy. Travelling southward from the assumed centre, the condi
tions appear to have been more favourable, and the tendency has
been for the Bhuiyés to rise rather than to decline in social status.
Some of their leading families have come to be chiefs of the petty
States of Orissa, and have merged their identity in the claim to quasi
Rajput descent. The main body of the southern colonists furnished
the tribal militia of Orissa, and have now sunk the Bhuiyé in the
Khandait or Swordsman—a caste of admitted respectability in Orissa,
and likely in course of time to transform itself into some variety of
Ra']puWtr.iting of the Bhuiyés of Gangpur and Bonai, Colonel Dalton
