THE BHILS

The bhils constitute the third largest tribal group of India, the other two being the Santhals and gonds.The concentration of Bhils in the country is found in four states, namely Maharastra, Gujarat, Madhya Pradesh and Rajasthan. In the state of Rajasthan, the total Bhils population comes to 10,64,265 persons according to the 1971 census…….Though they are spread broadly all over the state, their major concentrations in the district of Udaipur, Dungerpur and Banswara where about 60 per cent of their total population resides…..within these districts Kherwara,Kotra-phalasia,Girwa,Gogunda,Nathdwara,Kumbhalgarh,Mavli and Rajsamand tehsils of Udaipur, all the tehsils of Banswara and Dungerpur, Mandalgarh tehsil of Bhilwara, Bainsrorgarh tehsil of chittorgarh district are amongst those where their concentration is very high.Aroud 40 percent Bhils speak Bhilli and it’s allied dialect called Wagadi or Vagrhi and these speakers belong to Banswara and Dungerpur districts. The Bhils living in other areas appears to have taken to the local dialect.

ORIGIN OF BHILS: MYTHOLOGY

Major Erskine writing about the Bhils of erstwhile Rajputana in 1908 traces the origin of Bhils from the Dravidian word for bow, which is weapon of the tribe, Linguistically the wors traced to the root of Sanskrit verb meaning to pierce, shoot or ‘kill’ in consequence of their proficiency as archers .The Bhils have several legends regarding their origin. According to one such legend, Mahadeo who was sick and unhappy was relaxing under a treewhen there appeared before him a beautiful women, the first sight of whom effected a complete cure of all his ailments. Mahadeo and the women have sexual intercourse. the result of this was the birth of several children. One of the children, was from infancy distinguish alike by his ugliness and with marks of vice on his body. This ugly infant slew Mahado’s favorite bull and for his crime he was expelled to the woods and the mountains. His decedents have ever since been stigmatized with the names of Bhil and Nishada.

Yet according to the another version Bhil was created by Mahadeo by breathing life into an idol of clay.It appears that the Bhils were the Pygmies of Ctesias(400 B.C.)who describe them as black and ugly,the tallest being only two ells high;their hair and beards were so long that they served as garments and they were exilent bow-men and very honest.In the Adi parva of the Mahabharat, mention is made of Nishad or bhil,Eklavya, who had acquired great mastery over the bow by practicing before a clay imagine of Dronacharya, the tutor of Pandawas, and who, on the request of Arjuna unhesitatingly cut off his right thumb and presented it to him as guru dakshina (Teacher’s fee).The Phyllito of Ptoemy (150 A.D.),but the name by which they are at present known can not be traced far back in Sanskrit literature, the term ‘Bhillala’ seeming to occur for the first time about 600A.D.

Colonel Tod, the author of The annals and Antiquities of Rajasthan says that the Bhils might have come from remote far off region. They were oldest inhabitants of the country. They must have entered the country from the north and north-east several hundred years before the Christian Era. They were driven to the hills and forest during the time of the Hindu invasion. Tod calls them so because of their living in forest as Van Putras or children of the forests. Tracing the early habitations of Bhils Colonel Tod observes:

“ I do not reckon that the Bhils raids from their jungle abroad in search of plunder supply any argument against the innate principle of locality. The Bhils return to it as truly as does needle of the north: nor could the idea enter his mind of seeking other regions from domicile”.

Anthropologists have been trying to find the origin of the Bhils. What they have done is that they have repeated the ancient origin of the Bhils and have postulated their affiliation to diverse peoples without providing any substantial evidence. The confusion between ‘tribe’,and ‘primitive’, ‘archaic’,’ backward’ or savage had led most of the writers to accept any hypothesis as truth. For instance, Venkakachar (1933) made remarkable observation that “there is no doubt the Bhils represent a race which inhabited India earlier than the Aryans and Dravidians…..The Bhills are one section of great Munda race”.S.L.Doshi (1971) supporting Vekatachar states that “In all probability the Bhils were pre-Aryans and not Dravidian settlers of this land.The Dravidians evidently belongs to a higher stage of culture.”

…………

Before the coming of the british we did not have any reliable knowledge based on scientific data regarding the Bhils.The colonial and official historians have always describe

Them as children of forest(Hendley 1957);plunderers of the night (Saletore 1838); and neaer to monkey than to men (reported by Morris Carstairs,1957).Scientifically,however,the problem of Bhil racial affiliation is not solved in a simple way.A number of physical anthropologists and others,notably D.N.Majumdar(1942,1944,1973),B.S.Guha(1944) and kurulkar(19432 have portrayed the racial charctestics of Bhils.Discussing the Bhil racial affiliation R.K.gulati and S.Shrinivasan(1973) write conclusively;

“It is not possible to arrive at any definite conclusion on the basis of present study to say anything conclusively about the racial composition of Bhils.

BHILS IN THE HISTORY

G.N.Sharma writing about the Bhils,Minas,Mers of earstwhile rajputana mentions that these tribal groups have been found since the age of the Mauryas and the guptas.From the sixth century A.D.onwards the adventurous bands of Rajputs carried their arms through the regions of rajputana and dislodged the early tribal groups to the hills and forests.From this true desperate struggle between the aboriginals and new comers commenced,resulting in the victory of one and declineof power of the other.There then emerged guerilla war and age of arrows and bows.From this age,the history of tribals took a new turn.They were no more nomads but permanent settlers with their civil and political organizations,supported and nurtured on the booty collected from the neighboring areas.Though the conquarers(Rajputs) and the tribals were some times on antagonistic terms,their long stay and consolidating activities brought the tribals nearer to them in the long run.The account of relation between the Bhils and the Rajputs right from the sixth century to twelth is so concluded by G.N.Sharma:

“The Rajput chiefs of Mewar ,Marwar, Hadoti and dhundhar adopted some tribal methods of war.In return,the tribal right of holding land was recognized and they were entrusted with the task of keeping the roads safe for the warfarers. Imprtant forts, routes, and defense points were put in their charge and many of them were recruited in the states armies. They came nearer to each other to the extent that the coronation ceremony of the princes of many states was not considered complete unless the tika mark of kingship was impressed upon the forehead of the new chief by the bleeding thumb of the hand of the Bhil leader.In the war between the Rajputana (Rajasthan) chiefs and the Mughals,the Bhil contingents played a notable role.”

We have vivid accounts of medieval India which shows the help rendered by the Bhils to the Rajputs in their fight against the Mughals. When Akbar attacked Mewar, Rana Pratap lost chittore and retired to the Aravali Mountains, his family was saved by Bhils. In 1661,Aurangzeb’s army was defeated by Rajputs and Bhils. Many more instances could b cited about the help given by the Bhils to the Rajputs.(but)……The rajputs never missed the opportunity to established their hegemony over the tribal people.

….The British policy towards the tribes was that of isolation. they new it well that the Bhils quite like the other tribal groups of the country were troublesome, It was strategically wise, therefore, to keep them isolated in hills and forests. If the tribal created any problem it was treated merely law and order. As Thushara Hewage rightly concluded in his M.phil Dissertation (1998) that –“The british category of ‘wild tribe’ was more a reflection of preconceived categories of Western thought than any indication of the reality of these communities….”