Vinny Spotleson and Trevor Layman

Ethnohistorians apply tools traditionally associated with Ethnography (like examining cultural and linguistic evidence) to the study of a particular cultural group in history. In this way they attempt to understand a given culture by its own internal standards, and they are not limited merely to textual evidence. (Axtell)

Dirk Kolff (pictured on left) is an ethnohistorian and Emeritus Professor at LeidenUniversity in The Netherlands. His 1990 work Nakaur Rajput and Sepoy: The Ethnohistory of the Military Labour Market in Hindoostancaused a major change in how we view the peasantry in Mughal and British India. According to reviewer Dewitt C. Ellinwood, “Kolff argues that, because of the extensive soldiery, not even the Mughals and the British were able to monopolize armed power.” Instead power lies within the Military-Labor market itself. For these reasons Kolff’s writing has had a major impact on how we conceptualize the “armed peasantry” of South Asia, their mobility within the caste system, and their relationships within the context of different regions, religions, and rulers in the 18th Century. Ellinwood believes Kolff is able to do this because of the richness of his sources, which range from “folk literature and censuses, as well as period documents.”

Himmat Bahadur Anupgiri Gosain (active 1740-1804) was, according to William Pinch "northern India's most celebrated ascetic warlord." He was active predominantly in Bundelkhand, and crossed paths with all of the major powers in the area: the Nawab of Awadh, the Persians, the Marathas, and the Europeans. Relying on fellow "armed ascetics," Anupgiri became a power broker, and was at times allied to all of the above; ultimately and decisively siding with the British.

Having been labeled a warlord and opportunist, Anupgiri has received a decidedly negative treatment by historians. Due his constantly shifting alliances, Anupgiri could not be claimed by Hindu or Muslim nationalists as one of their own, and his alliance with the British earned him the reputation of a collaborator. After decades of abuse by historians, the American ethnohistorian William Pinch (Wesleyan) has attempted to rehabilitate Anupgiri's image, portraying him as a shrewd champion of a dying breed of warrior-monk. After freeing Anupgiri from constrictive national and religious chauvinist perspectives, Pinch reconstructs his life in chronological order and relates it to broader political trends, attempting to answer "Who was Himmat Bahadur?"

Vocabulary

-Kolff

Muqqadam/Mirdah—local level mughal officers

Baluchis—an ethnic group now found in southwestern Pakistan

Subahs—mughal provinces

Qasbas—small towns with markets

Naukar—a servant who is paid a fixed salary for services (ex. Hired soldier)

Rajputs- a warrior group

Sepoys—the british mis-pronunciation of the Persian word sipahi or soldier

– Pinch

Ascetic-monk

Naga-monks who are associated with Saivite groups (dedicated to the Hindu god Shiva). They are armed warriors with a distinctive appearance—dreadlocks, ashes smeared on their skin, little or no clothes. Their appearance symbolizes their renunciation of worldly things

Bundelkhand-a region in central india

maharaja –literally “great king”
jaidad--inheritance

Questions for class

1. According to Pinch, how was Anupgiri's career indicative of his times? How was it exceptional?

2. How do Kolff and Pinch depict the relationship between the state and the Military Labor Market? How would you account for the differences and similarities in their argument?

3. Compare and Contrast what Pinch and Kolff suggest about the relationships between peasants and the Military under Mughal reign. How is it the same or different as other authors we have read in class?

4. What can Anupgiri's career tell us about the nature of relations between European and native powers in late 18th century India? Does it fit with Kolff's characterization of Anglo-Indian relations?

5. Are there any potential problems with the way Kolff and Pinch source their arguments?

Bibliography

Dewitt C. Ellinwood, Review [untitled], Pacific Affairs, Vol. 64, No. 3 (Autumn, 1991),

pp. 424-425.

James Axtell "Ethnohistory: An Historian's Viewpoint" Ethnohistory 26, (1979), Pp. 2-6.

Jos Gommans, The Wonder That is India, IIAF Newsletter, (March 2004),

Seema Alavi, The Eighteenth Century in India, Oxford: OxfordUniversity Press, (2002).