THE ANTHROPOLOGY
OF THE THARUS:
AN ANNOTATED
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Gisèle Krauskopff
CNRS, Paris.
It is
somtimes said that very little research on the Tharus has been done, or that
the works dealing with Tharu culture are scarce or published in languages like
French, rendering access difficult especially to Nepali readers. This is why it
seems useful to me to present a bibliography on the anthropology of the Tharus,
in the hope that this might open the way to further studies since, as we shall
see, most of the existing research deals with the Tharus of the western Tarai.
On Tharus and Tharu groups
In the
last census, the Tharus appear as one of the most numerous ethnic minorities of
Nepal : 993,388 persons are classified as speakers of Tharu as their mother
tongue, and 1,194,224 as Tharu (compared to, say, the Magars, for whom the
corresponding figures are respectively 430,264 and 1,339,308). But whoever has
been in contact with Tharus will immediately stress the great diversity of the
different communities scattered over most of the Nepalese Terai and Inner Terai
valleys. One might also wonder who identified themselves as Tharu and who did
not compared to the previous census. Ethnic boundaries have always been
flexible, strongly influenced by the overall political or ideological context.
However, within the last decade and particularly since the great political
change which followed the return of the multi-party system and 'democracy' in
1991, it seems that the previous tendency to overemphasise differences between
sub-groups has faded away in favour of a search for a Tharu pan-ethnic unity.
Nevertheless, there are still many different Tharu subgroups, more or less
numerous, more or less known, some sharing a very similar culture under
different ethnic labels (e.g. Deshaurya Tharu and Dangaura Tharu in Western
Terai), some having totally different customs though living in close proximity
(Rana and Dangaura Tharu in Kailali and Kanchanpur districts). Besides marked
cultural differences, the boundary between subgroups has been mostly based on
marriage prohibitions, particularly marked for instance in the Western Terai
between the Ranas and the Dangauras. It is noticeable in this regard that for
the last few years most of the Tharu ethnic associations have been stressing
the necessity to remove those marriage barriers.
By
classifying groups which have always been changing, there is an unavoidable
risk of reifing ethnic categories. Nevertheless, I shall stick to this
sub-classification which is still meaningful for the Tharus themselves and
gives a broad picture of their regional diversity, helping us to draw a kind of
hypothetical ethnographic map of Tharu distribution before the great ecological
and sociological change of the post-Rana years. The Unification of Nepal in the
eighteenth century changed the situation in the Terai, a change that was
further enforced under the Rana administration. But we should bear in mind that
this Tharu population distribution, probably significant during the last two or
three centuries, was also the result of unknown previous changes. Migrations or
displacements of populations have shaped and reshaped group affiliation over
centuries. The Panchayat years have nevertheless accelerated this process:
there have been major changes in political and agrarian conditions, and also in
relations between the Tharus and their neighbours from the middle hills who, in
the sixties, settled permanently in Terai.
We now
have a relatively clear picture of the different endogamous Tharu groups living
in the Western and Far Western Terai. The two main and culturally contrasted
communities are the Dangauras and the Ranas. 'Dangaura' refers to the Tharus
who claim Dang as their original home (which includes the Deokhuri Valley, Dang
denoting a 'country' larger than the Inner Terai valley of the same name), and
'Rana' to the Tharus of the far western Terai who claim to have a Rajput
origin. We do not know exactly when this last appellation and the royal
pedigree attached to it became an ethnic label. In fact 'Rana Tharu' is an
anthropological creation, since the Ranas do not want to be called Tharu, preferring
Rana or Rana Thakur. I am of the opinion that the process of 'kshatrisation'
attached to this ethnonym could be a relatively recent phenomena, linked to a
general tendency of lower groups to raise their status particularly marked in
colonial British India.
Since at
least the nineteenth century, the Dangauras have migrated, partly eastward (in
Rupandehi and Kapilavastu districts or ex-Seoraj) but mostly westward, settling
in Banke or Bardiya districts and in the Inner Terai valley of Surkhet. During
the past few decades of this century, particularly after the land reform of the
early sixties, new waves of Dangaura emigrants have gone further west, coming
into closer contact with the Ranas who previously dominated the far western
districts of Kailali and Kanchanpur. If we look at our hypothetical
ethnographic map of Western Terai in the last century, the Karnali river would
appear as a kind of boundary between these two main western cultural Tharu
entities, Rana and Dangaura.
But other
Tharu subgroups live in Western Terai: the Katharyas, mostly concentrated in
India, south of Dangaura habitat, and in Kailali district, have clothes and
houses quite similar to their western neighbours the Ranas, but their paticular
traditions are still unstudied. In Bardiya and Banke districts, The Dangaura
Tharus distinguish themselves from the Deshaurya Tharus (lit. 'those of the
country'). But Deshauriya culture is so close to that of Dangaura that I
presume they could be an offshoot of an earlier wave of migrants from Dang or,
at least, may testify to an ancient closer relation with Dang that was broken
when the four districts of the Western Terai were under British administration
from 1816 to 1860. It is significant that the Dangauras quite readily
intermarry with the Deshauryas. The same can be said of the Rajhatyas of Banke
(ex-Rajhat) who call themselves Tharu or Kusumya Tharu and whose culture and
language are even closer to those of the Dangaura Tharus. These facts stress
the crucial role of migrations and of settlements at different periods of time
and under different political contexts in the shaping of group affiliation. It
also shows that older geopolitical divisions (thappa and parganna, i.e. Rajhat)
have influenced the distribution, the denomination and the relations of the
different communities.
If we
proceed eastward to Rupandehi and Kapilavastu our Tharu ethnographic map
becomes blurred. No studies have been done in Nepal. Besides recent Dangaura
Tharu migrants, the Tharus of this area, though called Katharya, do not seem to
have much in common with the Katharyas of Kailali and from the scarce
information I obtained appear to be more brahmanised than others Tharu groups
of Nepal. An interesting fact is that the Katharya ethnonym seems to be in use
all over the southern (and mostly Indian) Terai, in UP and possibly Bihar,
without necessarily implying a common culture.
In the
Central Terai, the Inner Terai valley of Chitwan shelters an important Tharu
population. Tharus living in Nawal Parasi district are slightly different from
their neighbours of Chitwan district proper, the Narayani River having created
in the past a kind of boundary. But most studies have been done in Chitwan
itself, on the eastern side of the Narayani.
The most
imprecise part of our map and the least-known areas of Tharu habitat are the
districts of Parsa Bara Rautahat, where Tharu speakers seem apparently less
numerous. Some refer to themselves as Katharya (or Kacharya?), some are
migrants of Eastern Terai or Koshila Tharus, intermixed with others minorities
like the Danuwars. The Danuwars, whose main homeland is the Sindhuli Inner
Terai valley around the Kamala river, are culturally and sociologically close
to the Tharus, with whom they can intermarry. We do not know much about this
part of Terai, but the Tharus living there are probably related to those living
in the Indian Terai of Bihar, especially in Champaran.
The
eastern Tharus, called Koshi or Koshila or Kochila Tharus, are scattered in
several districts from Morang to Rautahat, including Udayapur Inner Terai
valley (in Jhapa district the Rajbamsis, sometimes called the 'Bengali Tharus',
dominate). The Koshila Tharu, who seem to have mostly migrated westward are
fewer and fewer in the districts West of Siraha. They claim Saptari and Siraha
districts as their main home but many live also in Sunsari district on the
other side of the river Koshi. Some Saptari Tharus pretend that until recently
they would have not marry Sunsari/Morang Tharus. There are also probably
subgroups or endogamous units, such as the Lamputchwa Tharu of Morang district
who are considered different by the Koshila Tharus. However Saptari Tharus have
recently migrated to Morang. The ethnonym Koshila or Kuchila could be related
to the name of the river Koshi on the bank of which they used to live. As we
have already noted rivers seem to have played a role not only as a focal area
of Tharu settlement but as a cultural or sociological frontier. In spite of the
importance of the Koshila Tharus, their ethnography is much less developed than
for western Terai groups.
In
contrast with western Terai where the Tharus are the only and dominant ethnic
minority, the eastern - especially the far eastern - Terai is inhabited by
several ethnic groups with very different linguistic affiliation, like the
Dhimals or the Meches who speak Tibeto-Burman languages, the Rajbamsis or the
Tharus who speak Indo-European idioms and even Munda speakers like the Satars.
To give a sounder image of our map, another fact must be stressed: culturally
affiliated groups live close by the Koshila Tharus, such as the Bantars or Raj
Bantars (who can be found up to Chitwan), the Rautar, the Kebair and the
Musahar. In Saptari for instance, the Bantar are often the priests in Tharu
villages but they are of lower status. The multiplicity of jåt is a salient
feature of Eastern Terai, and it seems that besides ethnic diversity,
subdivisions through the paradigm of hierarchy have deeply moulded the
sociological landscape. This hierarchic process is found up to Chitwan (where
Bantar for instance are also living), an important difference with the
ethnically more uniform Western Terai where such a 'castification' process is
absent, especially among the Dangaura Tharu. On the contrary, the Dangaura
Tharus used to integrate people from outside on a quite egalitarian basis.
In fact,
the oldest reference we have concerning the Tharus refers precisely to the
eastern Terai. In his book on India written in 1033, the Muslim scholar
Alberuni mentioned the 'Taru, people of very black colour and flat nose like
the Turks' who lived in Tilwat (Tirhut or Mithila). Later on, in the 13th
century, a Persian historian cited the 'th'rw' near by the Meche and the Kooch
but further east in Kamrup or north Bengal. We can therefore presume that
people called Tharu have been living in the eastern Terai for at least a
millennium. But one word is not enough to establish a direct cultural link
between various present-day Tharu entities and ancient 'Tharu' settlers of the
Terai. In terms of ethnogenesis, of migration and intermixing of groups of different
origin under different ecological and political contexts, much has been
happening in the Terai for the past thousand years. An interesting fact is
nevertheless a general tendency of these very unsettled communities to migrate
westward (at least during the past centuries). Actually the Western Terai has
been deforested (or resettled) more recently than the Eastern Terai.
Concerning
the languages spoken, the areas of linguistic affiliation encompass the proper
endogamous Tharu social units. All the Tharu minorities speak Indo-European
languages related to the North Indian ones. Despite many regional
sub-variations, we can draw three main linguistic areas: Dangaura and Chitwanya
Tharu dialects are different but exhibit Bhojpuri influence, Rana is closer to Hindi
and Koshila to Maithili. Finally, the related Rajbamsis speak a form of
Bengali. We should however remark that the area of Bhojpuri influence extends
much more westward for Tharu than for Indian Bhojpuri speaking groups, a fact
which could confirm a western migration (especially from Bihar) of Tharus
otherwise noted. But regarding linguistic transformations or a hypothetical
substratum of Tharu languages, more research is necessary. More generally, we
need a better knowledge of the enigmatic old processes of Austro-Asiatic and
Tibeto-Burman reciprocal influence in north-east India to understand the
linguistic genesis of the distant past in the far eastern Terai.
It is not
my intention to make definite statements on the diversity of the Tharus. For
that purpose we need more ethnographic knowledge, and the main goal of the
present paper is precisely to help further comparative research. But I should
like to emphasise a few points. Whatever the future of the Tharu pan-ethnic
movement and the building of a new Tharu identity which will support this
revival in Nepal, published and unpublished studies show a striking diversity
from one group to another, in social organisation, rituals and religious
practices, village and domestic organisation, mythology and festivals. Tharus,
like the other minorities living in Terai share a similar ecological milieu and
material culture - rice cultivation and fishing are the two main sources of
production - but in each area they have developed a peculiar culture and social
order. Two facts should be stressed: the influence of overall political and
economic conditions, and a fission process which until recently created and
recreated endogamous barriers. Alien influences, the loss of an improbable
previous unique heritage or even the hypothesis of various origins are not
sufficient to explain a diversity peculiarly marked in ritualistic
organisation, kinship and social structure. More generally an opposition
between the east and west Terai can be stressed, the Gandaki River delineating
this passage, with significant differences in terms of hierarchical fission,
economic and agrarian conditions and levels of deforestation.
I should
like to emphasise here the significance of the region (desa) in the sense of a
political, ritual and economical space. Each local and particular 'Tharu'
culture has developed in a wider context and a different geopolitical niche.
The Terai is vast and the overall political and agrarian conditions of each
region have changed over centuries. To give just one contrasted example, the
Koshila Tharus have in the past been living in close contact with the Mithila
kingdom (and its strong Brahmanical and Vaisnavite culture), whereas the
Dangaura Tharus have been immersed in a very different context, the Himalayan Baisi
kingdom of Dang-Salyan under a heavy Sivaite Nath Yogi influence. In one case
the influence of the north Indian Brahmanical culture prevails, in the second
we see the importance of western Himalaya Pahari culture.
A
minority of Tharus live in India and in the past relations used to be close on
both sides of the border. It is still the case for the Rana Tharus, as numerous
in the Nainital and Kheri Terai districts of India as in Nepalese Kanchanpur,
who until recently were very far from Nepal's political centre. In fact the
most sizeable Indian Tharu population is in Nainital district where the Ranas
live. A few scattered Tharu groups live south of the Nepal border in UP and in
Bihar Champaran. (Further east in India we do not find any more Tharus.) This is
probably why the earlier studies on the Tharus which dealt with the Indians
Tharus concern mostly the Ranas. On the contrary, Dangauras as well as other
'Inner Terai Tharus' who are concentrated in Nepal, became a subject of
academic study only after Nepal opened to research. Therefore generalisations
on the Tharu tribe, current in writings from the beginning of the century, are
biased by this restricted access: very little can be known of the Dangauras or
the Chitwan Tharus from these earlier works.
The
Indo-Nepalese political boundary does have a meaning. First, the political
destinies of India and Nepal have split, especially since the colonial period;
and second, border regulations have strengthened the barrier. Today the Tharus,
except partly the Ranas who have maintained matrimonial and economic relations
in spite of the border, are different on either side of the frontier,
influenced by a different socio-political milieu. The Nepalese Tharus are more
numerous and have remained generally more isolated until the middle of our
century; moreover, their caste status and their relations with other castes
have evolved differently ; sanskritisation or 'kshatrisation' have played a
stronger role on the Indian side; finally political and agrarian conditions, especially
in the Inner Terai during the post-Unification period, have diverged over time.
In the
following bibliography I shall present books and articles dealing directly with
the Tharus. Short notes can be found scattered in different publications, especially
those linked to the Terai, but the interested reader will easily obtain access
to these secondary sources through the bibliographies of the works discussed
here.
The
bibliography will be divided into three periods, corresponding to methodology,
tools of collection and analysis, and geographical area or groups concerned.
For the third period - the richest in terms of anthropological works dealing
with the Nepalese Tharus - I shall follow a thematic approach in order to bring
out the main analytical and research trends.
Early
compilations : colonial encounters and evolutionary approaches
The first
period cannot properly be called anthropological, since the publications rest
mainly on the British residents' reports in India, very often second-hand
material or simple repetitions of previous ones. They do not usually mention
their sources or areas of collection, which are mixed up. Facts and customs are
miscellaneously recorded without being related. These reports suffer from a
prioris, like the postulate of a unique and culturally uniform Tharu tribe,
rooted in the ideological framework of colonial administration. They are in any
case difficult to rely on, except maybe by those familiar with the field who,
by a kind of informed rereading or by checking the area concerned, can make use
of them. The presupposed idea of a unique Tharu tribe also goes hand in hand
with preoccupations like origin, race, primitveness and so forth.
The
oldest available published mentions were compiled in the different Gazetteers
of India (Imperial, NW Provinces, Oudh and Bengal among others), in Tribes and
Castes series or in books of the same kind. Since most of these books repeat
one another, only some of the earlier Gazetteers or representative texts are
listed here. The most complete reference of that period is an article by
Nesfield (1885) who, besides quoting the information of previous Gazetteers,
includes material collected by himself. While it is full of details, this
article suffers from too general an approach. Nesfield notes for instance that
women elected for marriage must not bear any blood relation to the husband and
may not be of the same village (ibid.: 13). But if village exogamy can be
actually practised in the richest families or in the Tharu sub-groups more influenced
by orthodox Hindu concepts like the Ranas, village endogamy is also very
common, if not even a kind of rule at least among the Dangaura Tharus. In W.
Crooke's 'Tribes and Castes of the Northern Provinces of Oudh' (1896) which
mainly relies on Nesfield's article, another source is quoted, S. Knowles'
Gospel in Gonda (1889), which contains first-hand information on the Dangaura
Tharus of Gonda district by a Christian missionary. But for this entire period
the evaluation of the information given is a task in itself.
There is
not much difference between nineteenth century and early twentieth century
Gazetteers, since the latter repeat the previous ones. An exception however, in
the sense that it introduces new materials, is the Census of 1931 compiled by
Turner. But then a new period was starting, influenced by the development of
anthropology, which strengthened the importance of field work and of
participant observation. The Census of India, a vast enterprise, slowly
systematised the use of anthropological surveys, a trend reflected in later
censuses which include detailed village survey monographs;
The most
valuable aspect of the older sources is nevertheless that they document a
period when the Terai was still covered with forests and had a very low population
density, with the Tharus comprising the majority of the population. But the
quest for first-hand accounts, which requires searching through unpublished
reports (of British administrators and surveyors) as well as archival material,
is a painstaking and scarcely rewarding task.
Buchanan Hamilton, F. The History,
Antiquities, Topography, and Statistics of Eastern India, vol. 2, London: W.H.
Allen & Co., 1838.
Carnegy,
P. Notes on the Races, Tribes and Castes Inhabiting the Province of Awadh,
Lucknow: Oudh Governmental Press, 1868.
Crooke W.
The Tribes and Castes of the North-Western Provinces and Oudh, Calcutta: Office
of the Superintendent of Government Printing of India, 1896.
Elliot,
H. M. Memoir on the History, Folklore, and Distribution of the Races of the
North Western Provinces of India. London: Trübner & Co., 1869.
Grierson,
G.A. 'The Tharu broken dialects' in The Linguistic Survey of India, vol. 5,
part 2, 1903, 311-24.
Hamilton
W.The East India Gazetteer, vol. 1, London: Parbury, Allen & Co., 1828.
Hodgson
W. H. 'Continuation of the comparative vocabulary of the languages of the
broken tribes of Nepal', Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society of Bengal 26,
1857.
Knowles,
S. The Gospel in Gonda: being a Narrative of Events in Connection with the Preaching
of the Gospel in the Trans-Gaghra Country, Lucknow: Methodist Publishing House,
1889.
Nesfield,
J. C. 'The Tharus and Bhogshas of upper India', Calcutta Review 80 (159), 1885,
1-46.
Risley,
H. H. The Tribes and Castes of Bengal., Calcutta: Bengal Secretariat Press,
vol. 2, 1892.
Turner,
A. C. Census of India, vol. 18, part 1, Report, Allahabad: Superintendent of
the Government Press, 1931.
Indian Anthropology and the Tharus of
India
The
second period, from the thirties onward, saw the beginning of proper
ethnographic collection with deeper substantial field research, at a time when
ethnography was developing. Like those of the first period, these works dealt
with the Tharus living in India, and therefore the Ranas. Before the sixties,
no research on the Tharus had been done in Nepal proper, and in the books of
the first visitors to Nepal, mentions of the Tharus are nearly nonexistent.
The
ethnographic research on the Tharus during this second period was done by
Indian anthropologists. It is interesting to note in this regard that the first
detailed studies were mostly produced by Census surveyors, anthropology and
Census operations being tightly linked. An example of this trend is Majumdar's
pioneering work done in the late thirties and especially during the Census of
India operations of 1941. His most quoted work is his anthropometric and blood
study of the Tharus (1942), a topic related to the ideological preoccupations
of his time with 'race','caste' and 'tribe' and with the composition (and
classification) of the Indian population. But he also published a short
monograph, including his anthropometric results (1944: 65-109) in which,
besides his pervasive quest for Tharu origins, he dealt with the problems of
cultural contacts and the (pseudo) superiority of Rana Tharu women. However an
earlier ethnographic study of the Tharu cycle of life customs (among the Ranas,
although this is not explicitly stated) is a little-quoted article by Hari Dev
(1932) who adopts an evolutionary perspective. Other early publications include
H.D. Pradhan's work, with a misleading title on economy (1937-1938), the first
one dealing with general information on the Tharus (origins, physical
appearence and dress), the second with cycle of life rituals and practices
which actually appears very close to the work of Hari Dev (1932). It is
possible that the last two authors are one and the same person. Whatever the
shortcomings of these studies they represent a total change of approach and
methodology in data collection, and to this extent represent the beginning of
the anthroplogical study of the Tharus.
The best
representative of this period is S.K. Srivastava's monograph on the Ranas of
Nainital district, Srivastava being himself a student of Majumdar at Lucknow
University. His book (his PhD dissertation dating from 1951) includes his
previous articles and describes several aspects of Rana Tharu life (material
culture, economy, social organisation, religion, festivals, treatment of
illness, incidence of crime, dances and songs, and riddles). His main analytic
trend, as exemplified in the concluding chapter on problems of culture contacts
and dynamics, is the transformation and adaptability of a tribe under a general
Hindu influence. If his concluding part suffers from being insufficiently
related to the main monographic bulk, for the first time research based on
sociological questions and a precise description of facts was avalaible.
Another scholarly work is the geographer L.R. Singh's study on the Terai, which
includes a chapter on the Ranas Tharus (1965, previously published as an
article in 1956).
C. T. Hu
wrote only two articles, but one deals with a very interesting anthropological
phenomenon: marriage by exchange of sisters between two or more houses (1956),
a typical marriage arrangement of the Dangaura Tharus. Hu's too brief work
stands apart by trying to isolate a peculiar and meaningful social fact and by
being the only one dealing exclusively with the Dangaura Tharus (in Gonda
district) before Nepal opened to research.
The
Census of 1961 gave way to three village survey monographs, that of the Rana
Tharu village of Bankati in Kheri district (Sharma 1965) and of Dangaura Tharu
Rajderwa and Suganagar Domri villages in Gonda (ibid. 1964a; 1964b). Their aim
was to study 'the dynamic of change in the social, cultural and economic life
of rural community' in order to promote rural development and the enforcement
of social laws (ibid. 1965), an approach which actually illustrates most of the
Indian anthropological studies on the Tharus. The most valuable part of these
otherwise hastily-conducted surveys are the statistics on household and economy
(which give a good picture of the Tharu joint family system), and the precise
descriptions of dresses, jewellery and house building. The descriptions of
birth, marriage and death customs, however detailed these may be, suffer from
the methodology of the surveyors. Nevertheless the material provided could be
the basis of fruitful comparison - for instance with the Nepali Dangaura - the
customs revealing a deeper impact of Hinduisation in Gonda district.
Another
and more recent study of India's Tharus by an Indian of Lucknow is the work of
A. Hasan. He was not trained as an anthropologist but was involved in Tribal
Welfare functions and was mostly interested by folklore, economic change,
sociology and more generally questions related to tribal development. Hasan's
works do not offer a better structured approach but stand apart by his long
term involvment with the Tharus (mainly the Ranas and others related groups
like the Boksas), which culminated in his recent and last book dealing with a
Rana Tharu village of Kheri district, close to Dudwa National Park and the
Nepal border (1993). The best parts of it (containing new data) are the
chapters describing the village's relationships with the Nepalese Tharus and
with the forest officials, the village being until recently under the control
of the Forest Department, which acts as a kind of zamindar, and those dealing
with economic questions.
Other
scattered studies in the form of very brief articles on differents subjects
have been published during the fifties and sixties: V.K. Kochar on the fission
and composition of Tharu joint families (1963, 1965); S. Mathur, on marriage
among the Ranas (1967); and a few very short papers on Tharu songs: Sohoni
(1955), Chaubey (1957), Prasad (1959), Govila (1959).
So
besides S.K. Srivastava's monograph and perhaps Hu's precise but isolated
article, most of the research offers scattered results, and no general picture
or strong analytic frame is therefore proposed. As we have noted before, the
studies of this period owe their form and results to a general interest in the
questions of tribal welfare, tribal contacts with the Hindus or with the
government, changing economic and social situation or upgrading of the
so-called 'backward' communities, which were crucial for the administrators of
that time, specially after India's Independence.
If we try
to sum up the studies done on the Indian Tharus, both periods reveal the impact
of colonial anthropology through the census operations and related surveys. But
the first and earlier period's research, written only by the British and
illustrated by the Gazetteers or the Tribes and Castes series, aimed to give a
general and exhaustive picture of 'The Tharus' living in North India and in a
way created an artificial ethnic category. The work of the second period,
carried out by Indian antropologists, emphasised a monographic approach; but by
dealing mostly with the most numerous Indian Tharu subgroup, the Ranas of
Nainital, ethnic generalisations have been built from this peculiar Tharu
subculture. Nevertheles, their most noticeble contribution is the description
of socio-economic conditions, house composition and material culture.
Chaubey,
C. 'The Tharu songs', Indian Folklore 2 (1), 1957, 52-3.
Choudhury,
P.C. Roy, 'The Tharus', Man in India 32 (4), 1952, 246-50.
Dev,
Hari, 'Birth customs among the Tharus', Man in India 12, 1932, 116-60.
Govila,
J. P. 'The Tharu of Terai and Bhabar', Indian Folklore 2, 1959, 248.
Hasan,
A., 'The social profiles of a border Tharu village', Vanyajati 16, 1968, 133.
_____
'The occupational pattern in a Terai village', Eastern Anthropologist 22,
1969a, 187-206.
_____
'The economic structure of a border Tharu village', Vanyajati 17, 1969b, 19-27.
_____ A
Bunch of Wild Flowers and Others Articles, Lucknow: Ethnographic and Folk
Culture Society, 1970.
_____
Affairs of an Indian Tribe, The Story of my Tharu Relatives. Lucknow: New Royal
Book Co., 1993.
Hu, C.T.
'Demographic study of village Chandanpur' Eastern Anthropologist 9, 1955, 4-20.
_____
'Marriage by exchange among the Tharus', Eastern Anthropologist 10 (2), 1957,
116-29.
Kochar,
V.K. 'Size and composition of families in a Tharu village', Vanyajati 11, 1963,
99-106.
_____
'Fission and segmentation process in the joint families of a Tharu village',
Vanyajati 12(1), 1965, 3-8.
Maheswhari,
J.K., K.K. Singh and S. Saha, The Ethnobotany of the Tharus of Kheri District,
Uttar Pradesh. Lucknow: Economic Botany Information Service, National Botanical
Research Institute, 1981.
Majumdar,
D.N. 'Some aspects of the economic life of the Bhoksas and Tharus of Nainital
Terai'. Journal of the Anthropological Society of Bombay, Jubilee Volume, 1937,
113-35.
_____
'The Tharus and their blood groups', Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society of
Bengal 8, 1942, 25-37.
_____ The
Fortunes of Primitive Tribes. Lucknow: Universal Publishers, 1944.
Mathur,
S. 'Marriage among the Tharus of Chandanchowki', Eastern Anthropologist 20(1),
1967, 33-46.
Pradhan,
H. Dev, 'Social economy in the Terai (the Tharus)', Journal of the United
Provinces Historical Society 10, 1937, 59-76.
_____
'Social economy in the Terai (The Tharus)', Journal of the United Provinces
Historical Society 11, 1938, 51-73.
Prasad,
T. 'Folksongs of the Tharus', Indian Folklore 2, 1959, 144-48.
Sharda,
Prasad, The Impact of Socio Economic Changes on the Tribal Life of the Tharu in
Paschim Champaran Dstrict (PhD dissertation?), Muzzafarpur, 1992.*
Sharma,
R.C. Village Rajderwa Tharu (Tashil Balrampur, District Gonda). Village Survey
Monograph 1. Census of India 1961, vol. 15, part 6. Delhi, the Manager of
Publications, 1964a.
_____
Village Suganagar Domri (Tahsil Balrampur, District Gonda). Village survey
monograph 3. Census of India 1961, vol. 15, part 6. Delhi, Manager of
Publications, 1964b.
_____
Village Bankati (Tahsil Nighasan, District Kheri). Village survey monograph 11,
Census of India 1961, vol. 15, part 6. Delhi, Manager of Publications, 1965.
Singh, P.
Kumar, A Tribe in Transition with Special Reference to Tharus of West
Champaran, Bihar, PhD thesis, University of Gorakhpur, 1983.*
Singh,
R.L. 'The Tharus: a study in human ecology', NGJL 2(3), 1956, 153-66.
_____ The
Terai Region of UP, a Study in Human Geography, Allahabad: Ram Narain Lal Beni,
1965.
Sohoni,
S. V. 'Tharu songs', Journal of the Bihar Research Society 42, 1955, 332-39.
Srivastava,
S.K. 'Spring festival among the Tharus', Eastern Anthropologist 2(1), 1948-49,
27-33.
_____
'The Diwali festival among the Tharus', Man in India 29(1), 1949, 29-35.
_____
'Some problems of culture contact among the Tharus', Eastern Anthropologist 3,
1949-50, 36-39.
_____ The
Tharus: a Study in Cultural Dynamics, PhD thesis, University of Lucknow, 1951.
_____
'Directed cultural change among the Tharus', Agra University Journal of
Research Letters 4, 1956, 53-69.
_____The
Tharus: a Study in Culture Dynamics, Agra, Agra University Press, 1958.
_____
'Culture dynamics among the Rana Tharus. The past in the present', in H.O. Skar
and G. M. Gurung, eds, Nepal: Tharus and their Neighbours, Kathmandu:
Bibliotheca Himalayica/ EMR Publications, 1996 forthcoming.
Yadav,
Phool Chandra Pd. Acculturation among the Tribes in Uttar Pradesh with
Particular Reference to the Tharus of Gorakhpur District., PhD thesis,
University of Gorakhpur, 1976-86.*
During
both the periods discussed above a recurrent question pervaded most of the
works: the enigmatic origin of the Tharus. Compared with other topics, there is
a surprisingly large number of physical anthropological studies of the Tharus,
a racial approach which echoes the nineteenth century study of culture. In
Indian universities, physical anthropology was closely associated with cultural
anthropology, as illustrated by Majumdar's works. Following him and the earlier
Gazetteers, several anthropometric and genetic studies addressing the
mysterious racial mixture of the Tharus have been systematically carried out to
settle this question on a 'scientific basis', but without success.
Basu, S.K. 'PTC sensitivity among the
Rana Tharus Thakurs of Chandan Chowki (Uttar Pradesh)', Man in India 48(4),
1968, 357-72.
Basu,
S.K. and P.K. Chattopadhyaya 'ABO blood groups and ABH secretion in saliva of
the Rana Tharus Thakurs', Eastern Anthropologist 20(3), 1967, 269-76.
Kumar, N.
1968, 'A genetic survey among the Rana Tharus of Nainital District in Uttar
Pradesh', Journal of the Indian Anthropological Society 3(1-2), 39-55.
Kumar, N
and A.K. Mitra, 'Reproductive performance of Tharu women', Eastern
Anthropologist 28(4), 1975, 349-57.
Mahalanobis,
P.C. 'Physical appearance in relation to ethnological evidence', Sankhya 9,
1948-1949, 181-202.
Srivastava,
R. P., 'Further data on non-tasters among the Tharus of Uttar Pradesh', Eastern
Anthropologist 17(1), 1964, 19-22.
_____
'Blood groops in the Tharus of Uttar Pradesh and their bearing on ethnic and
genetic relationships', Human Biology 37, 1965a, 1-12.
_____ 'A
quantitative analysis of the fingerprints of the Tharus of Uttar Pradesh',
American Journal of Physical Anthropology 23, 1965b, 99-106.
The Anthroplogy of Nepal's Tharus
The
publications listed above are sufficient to belie the notion that no studies on
the Tharus have been done. Nevertheless, this notion is not totally groundless,
owing to the very scattered and disorganised approach of the first works and
moreover to the fact that they deal with with a non-representative minority of
Tharus, those living in India.
When
Western anthropologists poured into Nepal after the country opened in the
fifties, they were mostly interested by the Kathmandu Valley's rich heritage,
the Himalayan Tibeto-Burman speakers and the ethnically Tibetan groups. The
Terai sounded not much different from North India and the Tharus did not
attract much attention. In his often quoted book 'People of Nepal' (1967) the
Nepalese anthropologist Dor Bahadur Bista offered the first account on the
Nepal Tharus. But due to the general approach of the book (echoing the survey
style of the previous Indian 'Tribes and Castes' series) and the state of
research at this time, his valuable first hand data, collected in different
Tharu communities, are diluted in a too general presentation of 'The Tharus'.
Nevertheless, this first survey showed how little was known. Another book on
the economy of Western Nepal by MacDougall (1968) gave in two of its chapters a
very precise and enlightening study of landownership in Dang and in Kailali,
two districts of Nepal mainly inhabited by Dangaura Tharus. But in both cases,
the author's main goal was not to study the Tharus.
Modern
anthropological research on the Tharus started in the late sixties with A.W.
Macdonald's isolated French article describing two Tharu festivals (Holi and
Maghe Sankranti) in Dang (1969, reprinted in English in 1975) and moreover with
D. Rajaure's monograph on the Dangaura Tharus. An earlier, very brief Italian
article by G. Tucci (1956) was also published. In fact research among the
Dangauras was stimulated by Rajaure himself who accompanied A.W. Macdonald to
the field and made his home valley better known to French and other European
scholars. Rajaure's field work culminated in a Master's degree from which three
articles have been published in Kailash and in others journals. His study was
shortly followed by two European PhD dissertations (McDonaugh 1984 and my own,
Krauskopff 1985) based on field work conducted in the late seventies and early
eighties. My PhD dissertation was published in 1989, in French like most of my
others articles.
The
anthropology of Nepal's Tharus was first concentrated on the Dangauras and more
precisely on those of Dang valley proper, Rajaure and McDonaugh having worked
in the central eastern part, and I in the western. Thus the anthropology of
Nepal's Tharus started with a group markedly, if not totally, different from
the Indian Rana Tharus. It was therefore nearly impossible to create a bridge
with the earlier studies, not only because of a different ideological context,
theoretical framework and approach, but also because of this gap.
Eastern
Terai Tharus drew the early and brief attention of a Nepalese anthropologist
who published in Nepali (Regmi 1973; 1978) and whose work did not circulate and
was not discussed by others. Very recently a Master's dissertation in Nepali
has also been submitted to Tribhuvan University (N. Sangroula 2055 V.S.). In
spite of its proximity to Kathmandu and its easy access, the Chitwan Valley was
not the subject of long-term, deep anthropological studies until very recently.
K. Mikame published only two articles (1979; 1990); Pyakhuryal's PhD
dissertation (1982) dealt more specifically with sociological problems like
inter-ethnic relations, and U. Müller-Böker with an ethno-geographical approach
in a broader pan-Nepali context. But very recently, A. Guneratne has submitted
a very comprehensive PhD on the Tharus of Chitwan (1994). The topic of this thesis,
ethnicity, noticeably marks a change of approach that I shall discuss further
presently. Finally and strangely enough, Nepal's Rana Tharus had to wait for
the beginning of the nineties for a new wave of research, a Nepalese-Norwegian
team of professionals and students, whose work is in progress. They are giving
new impetus to the research, having succeeded recently in bringing together for
a conference (Skar and Gurung 1996 forthcoming), three generations of scholars,
from S.K. Srivastava, the eldest, and most of the people who have studied the
Tharus of Nepal. It is to be hoped that the gap between research in Nepal and
earlier Indian studies on the Ranas of Nainital will be bridged, since even
today the Ranas of Kanchanpur district maintain close relations with Indian
Tharus. Finally a general public and amateur concern for this numerous people
of the flat land of the Himalayan kingdom has also very recently arisen.
For this
period, of which I am a part, I shall not discuss each work in detail but shall
rather present thematic and analytic trends.
The
purely descriptive approach is represented by the work of Nepalese scholars
like D. Rajaure for the Dangauras and R.R. Regmi for the Koshilas. Rajaure's
work is a classical village monograph dealing with economy, rites of passage,
festivals and some village rituals as well as more specialised customs or
subjects like tattooing, child-rearing and the status of women. The short work
of R.R. Regmi on the Koshila is included in a book written in Nepali devoted to
two other ethnic communities. It is not a village monograph proper but,
starting with the classical Tharu origin controversy, he describes Koshi Tharu
customs collected in different districts of Eastern Nepal: house building and
decorations, fishing, agriculture, social organisation (thar and gotra,
marriage regulations and rituals), religious practices (dhami village rituals
and healing practices) and rites of passage. A.W. Macdonald's pioneering
article on Holi and Maghe Sankranti (1969) is also a purely descriptive work.
C.
McDonaugh's and my own studies of the Dangaura Tharus, although they are both
village monographs in the Western anthropological tradition, follow different
approaches. McDonaugh puts emphasis on social organisation, more specifically
on kinship relations, with ritual and mythology being used as a means to define
kinship units. Based on an exhaustive description of village, domestic and
'forest' rituals, I broaden the scope of the village study to the overall
ritual organisation of Dang valley in relation to the previous political and
agrarian structure of the Baisi Hindu kingdom of Dang. This ethno-historical
perspective developed in further articles emphasises the political aspect of
the Hindu centralisation process. Ritual is therefore a tool to bring out the
process by which Dangaura Tharu society developed in a wider Hindu kingdom
strongly influenced by the Kanphata Yogi Saivaite order. It is noticeable that
McDonaugh and I insisted on rituals as a research topic arising from the field
itself, a necessary tool to understand the Dangaura Tharus' social
organisation. In that regard both approaches are in keeping with a more general
trend in western Nepalese studies, especially illustrated by recent French
works, stressing the social and political role of ritual and echoing the
analyses of Hocart and Mus. The bibliography will illustrate the other subjects
treated by these authors, the French articles titles being translated into
English for the convenience of the reader.
A totally
different trend of anthropological research has been started recently, being
best represented by Guneratne's recent American PhD dissertation (1994). The
latter deals with ethnicity and the state, linking the ethnic movement of the
Chitwan Tharus to the Tharu elite of landlords who emerged during the Rana
period. I think this heavy influence of Chitwan Tharu landlords could be
related to the major role of Dang Tharu landlords and regional priests in the
genesis of the centralized and peculiar Dangaura culture (Krauskopff 1989a;
1990), a comparative fact which points to the importance of the specific
agrarian conditions in the Terai in moulding Tharu cultures and societies.
Echoing a
firm tradition of Norwegian anthropology, the Nepalese-Norwegian team presently
working among the far western Rana Tharus confirms this new trend of research
by dealing mainly with ethnic problems and processes, in relation with the new
context brought about by the recent political changes in Nepal. A collective
book to be published (Skar and Gurung 1996 forthcoming) gives a good idea of
their results. The subject of ethnicity is closely related to the present new
situation of Nepal's minorities and is in keeping with a more general interest
in ethnicity in recent years. Particularly interesting in this regard is the
recent ethnic movement which originated among the Dangauras (see S. Ødegaard's
article on BASE in Skar and Gurung 1996 forthcoming), and differs in its
genesis and strategies from the older Tharu Kalyankarini Sabha studied by
Guneratne (1994). The latter association was born among the Tharu elite of the
eastern Terai and developed in Chitwan, but had very little influence in Dang
and the western Terai.
In the
field of environmental studies and in a broader context, the geographer U.
Müller-Böker has written on Chitwan Tharu ecological and botanic categories (on
ethnobotany in Chitwan, see also Dangal and Gurung 1991, and on medicinal
plants in Dang, Manandhar 1985). To conclude on subjects which are on the
margin of anthropology strictly speaking, we should mention the very brief and
superficial linguistic research done by the Summer Intitute of Linguistics in
Chitwan (1972). But Grierson's much earlier comments on the Tharu 'broken
languages' (1903) and U.N. Tiwari's (1970) study of Bhojpuri still stand as
references in a little-developed field of research.
Another
topic of research has been the study of house building and spatial organisation
conducted by architects, mostly on the Dangaura Tharu house which is remarkable
for its unusual length (Blair 1983, Millet Mondon 1981, reprinted in English
1990). A forthcoming paper (Meyer and Duel 1996) offers a more general scope,
covering a wide range of Tharu house styles from the western to the eastern
Tarai.
Having
evoked the recent ethnic revival and the Tharus' concern for their own
traditions, I should like to conclude with a discussion of publications in the
Tharu language that are flourishing nowadays. They are often privately
published or circulate only locally. It is therefore difficult to list this
very miscellaneous production since most of the journals and books are
unavalaible, being almost village archives. It would be impossible to give a
fair account of all: some are quasi-ethnographic (especially collections of
myths, sacred and profane songs), some are a good example of the discourse of
the Tharus on themselves, and others simply describe a custom or offer poems or
songs (for the most prominent of these publications of myths and songs in the
Dangaura Tharu language, see McDonaugh 1989 and Krauskopff 1996). It should be
noted that a few small Nepali booklets and very short articles in English and
Nepali have been published on the Tharus, but since their perspective is not
properly anthropological they have not been included here. They are generally
written by local or national erudites, mostly Brahmin. If representative of
other Nepalese people's discourse on the Tharus, they cannot be considered as
proper anthropological research. Some of these references are for instance
listed in R.R. Regmi (1973, 1978) and quite exhaustively in Songraula (2055
V.S: 3-4; 97-101).
General
Bista, D.
B. 'The Tharu', in People of Nepal, Kathmandu: Ratna Pustak Bhandar, 1972,
118-27.
Ødegaard
S., 'Base and the role of NGOs in the process of local and regional change', in
H. O. Skar and G. M. Gurung, eds, Nepal: Tharus and their Neighbours,.
Kathmandu: Bibliotheca Himalayica/ EMR Publications, 1996 forthcoming.
Skar, H.O.
and G.M. Gurung, Nepal: Tharus and their Neighbours, Kathmandu: Bibliotheca
Himalayica/ EMR Publications, 1996 forthcoming.
Tucci, G.
'I Tharu del Nepal', La Vie del Mondo 18, 1956, 397-408. (The Tharus of Nepal.)
Architecture
Blair
K.D. 'a Tharu village', in Four Villages, Architecture in Nepal, Los Angeles:
Craft and Folk Art Museum, 1983, 19-29.
Meyer K.
and P. Duel, 'Who are the Tharus? National minority and identity as manifested
in housing forms and practices', in H.O. Skar and G. M. Gurung, eds,
Nepal:Tharus and their Neighbours, Kathmandu: Bibliotheca Himalayica/ EMR
Publications, 1996 forthcoming.
Millet-Mondon,
C. 'La maison tharu de la vallée de Dang', in G. Toffin, L. Barré and C. Jest,
eds, L'Homme et sa Maison en Himalaya, Ecologie du Népal, Paris: Editions du
CNRS, 1981, 13-32. English reprint: 'A Tharu House in Dang Valley', in G.
Toffin, ed., Man and his House in the Himalayas: Ecology of Nepal, Delhi:
Sterling Publishers, 1989, 13-29.
Ethnobotany and Ecology
D.R.
Dangal and S.B. Gurung, 'Ethnobotany of the Tharu Tribe of Chitwan District'
International Journal of Pharmacognosy 29(3), 1991, 203ff.
Manandhar
N. P. 'Ethnobotanical Notes on Certain Medicinal Plants Used by Tharus of
Dang-Deokuri District, Nepal', International Journal of Crude Drug Research
23(4), 1985, 153-59.
Müller-Böker,
U. 'Knowledge and evaluation of the environment in traditional societies of
Nepal', Mountain Research and Development, 11(2), 1991, 101-14.
_____
'Ethnobotanical studies among the Citawan Tharus', Journal of The Nepal
Research Centre 9, 1993a, 17-56.
_____
'Tharus and Paharyas in Citawan: some observations concerning the question of
multiethnicity in Nepal', in G. Toffin, ed., Nepal, Past and Present, Paris:
Presses du CNRS, 1993b, 279-93.
Dangaura Tharus
Krauskopff,
G. 'Les dieux, les rites et l'organisation sociale chez les Tharu de Dang
(Népal)', Thèse de Doctorat de l'Université de Paris X-Nanterre, 1985. (Gods,
Rituals and Social Organisation among the Tharus of Dang.)
_____ 'Le
bétail dans la vie quotidienne et rituelle des Tharus de Dang', Production
Pastorale et Société 19(2-3),1986, 83-98. (Livestock in the day-to-day and
religious life of the Tharus of Dang.)
_____
'Naissance d'un village tharu: à propos des rites de claustration villageoise',
L'Ethnographie 83(100-101), 1987a, 131-58. (The birth of a Tharu village:
concerning rituals of village claustration.)
_____
'Des paysans dans la jungle : le piégeage dans le rapport des Tharu au monde de
la forêt', Etudes Rurales, 107-8, 1987b, 27-42. (Farmers in the jungle:
trapping methods and the Tharu relationship to the world of the forest.)
_____'La
féminité des poissons. Un motif aquatique du mythe d'origine et des chants de
mariage tharu (Népal)', Cahiers de Litterature Orale 22, 1987c, 13-28. (The
femininity of fish: an aquatic motif in the origin myth and in marriage songs
of the Tharu of Nepal).
_____ 'De
la maison sur pilotis à la grande maison: reflexions sur les transformations
des habitations tharu', in D. Blamont and G.Toffin, eds., Architecture, Milieu
et Société en Himalaya. Etudes Himalayennes 1, 1987d, 15-39. (From the house on
stilts to the large house: remarks on transformations in Tharu houses.)
_____ 'La
couverture en graminées des maisons tharu de Dang', in D. Blamont and G.Toffin,
eds., Architecture, Milieu et Société en Himalaya. Etudes Himalayennes 1,
1987e. (The grass roof of the Tharu house in Dang.)
_____
Maîtres et Possédés. Les rites et l'ordre social chez les Tharu (Népal), Paris:
Editions du CNRS, 1989a. (Masters and possessed. Rituals and social order among
the Tharu of Nepal.)
_____
'Prêtres du terroir et maîtres de la forêt. La centralisation politique et le
système de prêtrise tharu à Dang et Déokhuri' in Purusartha 12, Prêtrise,
Pouvoirs et Autorité en Himalaya, Paris: Editions de l'EHESS, 1989b, 79-100.
(Priests of the soil and masters of the forest: political centralisation and
the system of priesthood among the Tharu in Dang and Deokhuri.)
_____
'Les Tharu et le Royaume hindou de Dang. Souveraineté divine et endogamie
ethnique', L'Homme 116, 30(4), 1990, 30-54. (The Tharu and the Hindu kingdom of
Dang (Nepal). Divine sovereignty and ethnic endogamy.)
_____
'Réceptions divines. Des offrandes à l'incarnation des dieux chez les Tharu',
in Purusartha 15 : Classer les Dieux? Des Panthéons en Asie du Sud, Paris:
Editions de l'EHESS, 1993, 131-52. (Divine Receptions. On offerings and gods'
embodiment among the Tharus of Nepal.)
_____
'Emotions, mélodies saisonnières et rythmes de la nature, La littérature orale
des Tharu de Dang (Népal)', in Purusartha 18. Traditions Orales dans le Monde
Indien, Paris: Editions de l'EHESS, 1996a, 350-72. (Moods, seasonal melodies
and the rhythm of nature: the oral literature of the Tharu of Dang.)
_____
'Corvées or Begari in Dang. Ethno-historical notes' in H.O. Skar and G. M.
Gurung, eds, Nepal, The Tharu and Their Neighbours, Kathmandu: Bibliotheca
Himalayica/ EMR Publications, 1996b forthcoming.
McDougall,
C. Village and Household Economy in Far-Western Nepal, Kathmandu: Tribhuvan
University, 1968.
Macdonald
A.W. 'Notes sur deux fêtes chez les Tharu de Dang', Objets et Mondes 9 (1),
1968, 69-88. Reprinted in English translation: 'Notes on two festivals among
the Tharus of Dang' in Essays on the Ethnology of Nepal and South Asia, vol 1.
Kathmandu: Ratna Pustak Bhandar, 1975, 267-80.
McDonaugh,
C. 'The Tharu of Dang: a Study of Social Organisation, Myth and Ritual in West
Nepal', PhD thesis, University of Oxford, 1984a.
_____
'Die Tharu', in M. Brauen, ed., Nepal Leben und Uberleben, Zurich:
Ethnologische Schriften Volkerundmuseum der Universität Zürich, 1984b, 99-126.
_____
'The Tharu House: oppositions and hierarchy', Journal of the Anthropological
Society of Oxford 15(1), 1985, 1-14.
_____
'The Tharu House: Gods and Rituals', in D. Blamont and G.Toffin, eds.,
Architecture, Milieu et Société en Himalaya. 'Etudes Himalayennes' 1, 1987.
_____
'The mythology of the Tharu: aspects of cultural identity in Dang, West Nepal',
Kailash 15(3-4), 1989, 191-206.
_____
'Tharu mats, and social structure', Journal of the Anthropological Society of
Oxford 25(1), 1994, 41-48.
_____
'Losing ground, gaining ground: land and change in a Tharu community in Dang,
West Nepal', in D. Gellner and J. Pfaff-Czarnecka, eds, Nationalism and
Ethnicity in a Hindu State: the Politics of Culture in Contemporary Nepal,
London: Harwood, 1996a forthcoming.
_____
'Aspects of social and cultural change in a Tharu village community in Dang,
West Nepal, 1980-93', in H.O. Skar and G. M. Gurung, eds, Nepal: Tharus and
their Neighbours, Kathmandu: Bibliotheca Himalayica/ EMR Publications, 1996b
forthcoming.
Rajaure,
D.P. 'Tatooing among the Tharus of Dang Deokuri, Far Western Nepal.'
Contributions to Nepalese Studies 2(1), 1975, 91-98.
_____ 'An
Anthropological Study of the Tharus of Dang District', MA thesis, CNAS,
Tribhuvan University, Kathmandu, 1977.
_____
'Dasya festival of the Tharus of Dangdeokhuri', Himalayan Culture 1(1), 1978,
37-42.
_____
'The Tharus', in S. Paneru, ed., Traditional and Prevailing Child Rearing
Practices among Different Communities in Nepal, Kathmandu: CNAS, Tribhuvan
University, 1980.
_____ The
Tharu Women of Sukhrawar. The Status of Women in Nepal, vol. 2, part 3.
Kathmandu: CEDA, Tribhuwan University, 1981a.
_____
'Tharus of Dang, the people and the social context', Kailash 8 (3-4), 1981b,
155-81.
_____
'Tharus of Dang. Tharu Religion', Kailash 9(1), 1982a, 61-96.
_____
'Tharus of Dang. Rites de passage and Festivals,' Kailash 9 (2-3), 1982b,
177-258.
Chitwan Tharus
Guneratne,
A. 'The Tharus of Chitwan: Ethnicity, Class and the State in Nepal', PhD
thesis, University of Chicago, 1994.
_____
'The tax man cometh: the impact of revenue collection on subsistence strategies
in Chitwan Tharu society', Studies in Nepali History and Society 1(1): 5-35,
1996.
_____
'The modernizing Matwalis: caste, class and status among the Tharus of Chitwan',
in H.O. Skar ed., Nepal: Tharu and Tarai Neighbours, Kathmandu: Bibliotheca
Himalayica/ EMR Publications, 1999.
Leal, D.
'Chitwan Tharu Phonemic Summary', Kathmandu, Summer Institute of Linguistics
(mimeo), 1972.
Leal,
W.M. 'A Preliminary Sketch of Chitwan Tharu Belief System', Kathmandu, Summer
Institute of Linguistics (mimeo), 1974.*
Mikame,
K. 'A note on the Phaguwa festival of Chitwan Tharu', Kailash 7, 1979, 226-46.
_____ 'A
note on death and mourning customs among the Tharu of Nepal', Research Bulletin
of Kagoshima Women's College 11(1), 1990, 135-154.
Pyakuryal
K.N. 'Ethnicity and Rural Development. A Sociological Study of Four Tharu
Villages', PhD thesis, Michigan State University, 1982.
Koshila Tharus
Regmi R.
R., 'Kosika Tharu samudaya ra tinko parivartansila saskrti', Ancient Nepal, 23,
13-49, VS 2030 (1973).
_____
'Kosika Tharu', Ek srot, tin dhara (bagh 3), Kathmandu: Sajha Prakashan,VS 2034
(1977)(reprint of previous article).
Songraula
(Upreti) N. 'Itaharika Saptarya tatha Morangya Tharu: ek adyayar. MA
dissertation, Tribhuvan University, 2055 V.S. (1994).
Rana Tharus
Gurung,
G. M. 'Migration, politics and deforestation in lowland Nepal', in H.O. Skar
ed., Nepal: Tharu and Tarai Neighbours. Kathmandu: Bibliotheca Himalayica/EMR
Publications, 1999.
Kittelsen,
T.C. with G.M. Gurung, 'Symbols of tradition, signs of change: marriage customs
among the Rana Tharu of Nepal', in H.O. Skar ed., Nepal: Tharu and Tarai
Neighbours. Kathmandu: Bibliotheca Himalayica/EMR Publications, 1999..
Korvald,
T. 'Notes on Cultural Performances Potential of the Tharu of Far West Nepal',
in H.O. Skar ed., Nepal: Tharu and Tarai Neighbours. Kathmandu: Bibliotheca
Himalayica/EMR Publications, 1999.
Rankin,
K.N. 'Kamaiya practices in western Nepal: perspective on debt bondage, in H.O.
Skar ed., Nepal: Tharu and Tarai Neighbours. Kathmandu: Bibliotheca
Himalayica/EMR Publications, 1999.
Skar,
H.O. 'Nepal, indigenous issues and civil rights. The plight of the Rana
Tharus', in R.H. Barnes, A. Gray and B. Kinsbury, eds, Indigenous People of
Asia, Michigan: the Association for Asian Studies, Monograph 48, 1992.
_____
'Myths of orgin: the Janajati movement, local traditions, nationalism and
identities in Nepal',Contributions to Nepalese Studies 22(1), 1995, 31-42.
_____
'Becoming Hindu: Rana identity and regional self-ascription in lowland Nepal',
in H.O. Skar and G.M. Gurung, eds, Nepal: Tharus and their Neighbours,
Kathmandu: Bibliotheca Himalayica/ EMR Publications, 1996 forthcoming.
Others
general referencies quoted in the text.
Chatterji,
S.K. The Indo-Mongoloids: their Contributions to the History and Culture of
India, Calcutta: The Asiatic Society, 1974 [1951].
Pandey,
T.N. 'The anthropologist-informant relationship, the Navajo and Zuni in America
and the Tharu in India', in M.N.Srinivas, A. M.Shah and E.A. Ramaswamy, eds,
The Fieldworker and the Field, Delhi: Oxford University Press, 1979, 246-65.
Sachau,
E.C. Alberuni's India, London: Trübner & Co., 1888.
Tiwari,
U.D. The Origin and Development of Bhojpuri, The Asiatic Society Monograph
Series 10, Calcutta: The Asiatic Society, 1960.
