Social Tensions among the refugees: the contributions of Biraja Sankar Guha

Abhijit Guha

Biraja Sankar Guha (1894-1961) was the founder of the Anthropological Survey of India and was known to the students of Anthropology as a Physical Anthropologist who made a classification of the Indian population on the basis of their physical features (Ray 1956:38-44). Very few people know that he first undertook a thoroughgoing field survey on the Social tensions among the refugees of the then East Pakistan for suggesting the government about how to understand their problem and improve their living conditions (Guha 1959). Guha had a holistic view of anthropology and accordingly he shaped the Anthropological Survey of India by giving due importance to all the subfields of anthropology (Guha2018). B.S. Guha was the first anthropologist in India who led a thoroughgoing field survey by a multidisciplinary team on the social tensions among the refugees of the then East Pakistan for suggesting the government about how to understand their problem and improve their living conditions (Guha 1959). He was   interested in writing the history of anthropology in India in which he gave due importance to social and cultural anthropology (Guha 1937). Guha also wrote on social anthropological and sociological topics like material culture, youth dormitories, place of aborigines in national life, culture contact, tribal welfare and administration and role of social sciences in nation building (Guha 1939; 1944; 1951a&b; 1953; 1955; 1958). These social anthropological and sociological contributions of B.S.Guha had neither been discussed in any detail nor their theoretical and applied relevance were evaluated by the anthropologists of the later generation. For example, in the book The History of the Anthropological Survey of India N.K. Das in his chapter did not even mention Guha’s contribution in social and cultural anthropology (Das 1991:89-103).In the same book, Jayanta Sarkar and Palash Chandra Coomar in their chapter on Cultural Anthropology only referenced B.S.Guha’s 1949 article on the ‘Progress of anthropological research in India’ as one of the review articles on the overall development of Anthropology in India  (Sarkar and Coomar 1991:104-120).

The book by B.S.Guha entitled Studies in Social Tensions among the Refugees from Eastern Pakistan (1959) was based on intensive fieldwork done by a multidisciplinary team of researchers. The book is basically a solid factual report and analyses of socio-economic, cultural and psychological data collected by a team of trained anthropologists and psychologists on the refugees who came from the then East Pakistan to West Bengal under the overall supervision of B.S.Guha. Nirmal Kumar Bose in his article ‘Problem of national integration’ had just mentioned B.S.Guha’s survey on social tension among the Hindus and Muslims without any further comment on its important findings and analysis (Bose 1962: 57).

In his ‘General Introduction’ Guha first justified his selection of two sample areas of refugee resettlement colonies (one in Jirat, Hugli and the other in Azadgarh, Kolkata) which he finalised in consultation with Gardener Murphy who was selected by the UNESCO as Consultant to Govt. of India in the project to understand the underlying causes of social tension in India. After this Guha put the survey in the wider political scenario of the country and mentioned in unequivocal terms the evil effects of the earlier ‘divide and rule’ policy of the British Government as well as the sectarian approach of the Muslim League Government of the then Bengal, which paved the way towards ‘engineered’ communal riots that led to large scale displacement of the Hindus from the then East Pakistan (Guha 1959: viii). While searching the reasons behind the evacuation of the Hindus Guha based his arguments not on any sociological theory but on the empirical findings of his multidisciplinary team of fieldworkers. Therefore, according to him

The loss of prestige and social status which the Hindu community previously enjoyed, and the realisation of the futility of regaining it now or in the near future was a far more potent factor in creating the feeling of frustration than the loss in the economic sphere (Ibid 1959).

In the subsequent pages of the ‘Introduction’ Guha went on to analyse the data on the ‘areas of tension’ among the Hindu refugees which were collected by his research team members through the use of   social anthropological and psychological methods. Guha here made an excellent sociological analysis by putting the areas of social tension in a hierarchical and dynamic form.  Guha’s data led him show how the areas of tension played their respective roles and how the affected members of the community shifted their grievance and aggression from one area of tension to another. Like a true social anthropologist Guha also ventured into the variation in the social tension at the level of age, sex and socio-political situation. Another interesting explanation of B.S.Guha was on changing authority structure of the traditional Hindu joint family and the worsening of the intra-family relationships among the refugees but here also he made a comparative interpretation of the two refugee settlements, which were selected by him for the study. In one place(Jirat) where people depended on the governmental aid and assistance the traditional authority structure of the family was found to be stronger than in the refugee colony where the uprooted people had to struggle harder to get them resettled(Azadgarh) (Ibid 1959: xi-xii).By and large what was most interesting to observe was Guha’s technique of explaining such a complex thing like social tension. All through he like a seasoned sociologist or social anthropologist attacked the problem from a relational and dynamic angle without falling in the trap of a static view of society (Guha 2018:1-12). While providing economic or psychological explanations he also did not take recourse to either Freudian or Marxian models. Finally, and, what was really several steps ahead in his time Guha recommended a participatory and nationalist model for the resettlement of the refugees. For him, the social tension between the refugees and the government mainly arose owing to the fact that they were treated as ‘outsiders’ from the governmental side. The refugees should be given the responsibility of managing their own resettlement camps so that they could regain their self-respect. I will end by quoting the last line from the Guha’s ‘Introduction’ in the book on Social Tensions

Once their displaced energies are canalised into well-directed productive sources, there is every reason to hope, that  instead of a burden and a clog, the refugees will  turn out to be useful participants in  the march of progress of this country(Ibid, 1959: xiii).

B.S. proposed that the social scientists should understand the deeper mechanisms and anatomy of conflicts between human groups having different socio-cultural attributes. He did not believe in just a superficial approach towards nation building (Guha 1958). By and large Guha’s technique of explaining complex phenomena like social tension was most interesting. All through he, like a seasoned sociologist or social anthropologist attacked the problem from a relational and dynamic angle without falling in the trap of a static view of society. While providing economic or psychological explanations he also did not take recourse to either Freudian or Marxian models. Finally, and what was really several steps ahead in his time, Guha recommended a participatory and nationalist model for the resettlement of the refugees. These are the social anthropological or sociological contribution of B.S. Guha having immense contemporary relevance.

References
Bose, N.K. (1962). Problem of national integration. Bulletin of the Anthropological Survey of India. 11(2):57-61.
Das, N.K. 1991. ‘Social Anthropological Research in the Survey as Reflected through All-India Surveys’, in Dr.K.S. Singh (ed.).The History of the Anthropological Survey of India. Calcutta: Anthropological Survey of India, pp.89-103.
Guha, A. (2018e). Social anthropology of B.S.Guha: an exploration. Indian Anthropologist. 48(1): 1-12.
Guha, B.S.  1937. ‘Progress of Anthropology in India during the past twenty five years’. Calcutta: Indian Science Congress Association, pp. 300-335.
Guha, B.S.1939. ‘Indian basketry---- their texture and design’. Man in India. 19(1): 56.
Guha, B.S. 1944. ‘Comment’. Man in India. 24(3):135-136.Reprint of his talk ‘Culture Contacts, broadcast from the All India Radio, Lucknow, on April 13, 1944.
Guha, B.S. 1951a. ‘Aboriginal population and their place in the national life of India’. Science and Culture. 14(11): 447-450.
Guha,B.S. 1951b. ‘Indian aborigines and their administration’.Journal of the Asiatic Society. 17(1):19-44.
Guha,B.S. 1953.’The Abor moshup as a training centre for youth. Vanyajati. 1(4): 83-95.
Guha,B.S. 1955.’Tribal welfare in India,’ in Social Welfare in India, issued on behalf of the Planning Commission, Government of India. Delhi: Director Publication Division, pp.491-503.
Guha, B.S.  1958. ‘The role of social sciences in nation building.’ Sociological Bulletin.7(2): 148-151.
Guha, B.S.   1959. Studies in social tensions among the refugees from eastern Pakistan. Memoir No.1. Delhi: Department of Anthropology, Government of India.
Ray, S.K. 1974. Bibliographies of Eminent Indian Anthropologists (WITH LIFE-SKETCHES) Anthropological Survey of India, Govt. of India, Indian Museum, Calcutta.
Sarkar, J.  & Coomar, P.C. 1991. ‘Researches in the Cultural Anthropology Division of the Survey,’ in Dr.K.S.Singh (ed.).The History of the Anthropological Survey of India. Calcutta: Anthropological Survey of India, pp.104-120.

Back to Home Page

May 18, 2020

Abhijit Guha abhijitguhavuanthro@rediffmail.com

Your Comment if any