Revision summary
British revenue law replaced lineage land with paper title and landlords. Forest Acts reserved timber and criminalised shifting cultivation and nistar. Mines and tea took labour after the resource base shrank. Santhal hul and Birsa’s ulgulan were resource revolts. Fifth Schedule, PESA, and FRA answer that colonial resource history.
Model answer
Copper italics in this answer — like this — are the key facts. Each one is unpacked in the Facts & figures rail.
Introduction
British policy turned tribal land, forest, and shifting plots into revenue, reserved woods, and mines. The major resources were not left as commons under custom.
Body
Land and plough
- Permanent settlement and ryotwari brought landlords and moneylenders into Adivasi tracts. Title on paper replaced lineage title.
- The Santhal hul of 1855 and Birsa Munda’s ulgulan answered diku landlords and mission-revenue pressure on Khuntkatti land.
Forest
- Indian Forest Acts of 1865, 1878, and 1927 reserved timber for sleepers and ships. Shifting cultivation and hunt became offence.
- Verrier Elwin described Baiga bewar as criminalised livelihood. Grazing and nistar shrank.
Mine, labour, and excise
- Coal, teak, and later minerals opened Chota Nagpur and central India. Tribal labour went to mines and tea without the old resource base.
- Excise on liquor attacked ritual brew and created contractor liquor, another resource loss.
After-image
- Independent India’s Fifth Schedule, PESA, and FRA, 2006 are replies to this resource history, not inventions from nowhere.
- Chipko later showed that forest as livelihood versus forest as outside timber remained the same fight in a new state.
Flow diagram
flowchart TD B[British policy] --> L[Land revenue diku] B --> F[Forest reservation] B --> M[Mines labour] L --> R[Santhal Birsa]
Conclusion
British land, forest, and mine law stripped tribal major resources of custom and made them revenue. Rebellions and later protective statutes are the long echo of that strip.
Quick related
Students also ask
-
How can a balance be struck between livelihood concern and environmental degradation in the context of shifting cultivation?
Next question on this syllabus topic (2022 · Q8(c)). View answer →
-
Did the British only take forests?
No. Land title, mines, labour, and excise all hit major resources.
-
Was shifting cultivation banned everywhere?
It was restricted and stigmatised. Local practice survived as offence more than as right.
Same topic · past papers
UPSC has asked this before
These previous-year questions sit on the same topic. Open one to practise the earlier ask.
-
2016 · Q7(c) · Anthropology GS 2 · 15 marks
Describe how various tribal development programmes and plans have impacted the process of social transformation among tribes
More from this topic
Q6(a) · UPSC Mains 2026 · Anthropology GS 2 · 20 marks · Solution
Make a critical appraisal of the mesolithic culture of Ganga basin with reference to artifacts, faunal and human skeletal remains excavated from different sites
Evolution of the Indian Culture and Civilization
• Ganga basin Mesolithic sites like Sarai Nahar Rai, Mahadaha, and Damd
Q5(e) · UPSC Mains 2026 · Anthropology GS 2 · 10 marks · Solution
Contribution of L. K. Ananthakrishna Iyer in Anthropology.
Evolution of the Indian Culture and Civilization
L. K. Ananthakrishna Iyer is a pioneering figure in Indian anthropology, known for his monumental ethnographic surveys like The Cochin Tribes and Castes and The Mysore Tribes and Castes. Working during the colonial era, he bridged western anthropological methods with indigenous scholarship. His documentation of social stratification, material culture, and folklore laid the empirical foundation for Indian sociology and anthropology. Iyer also established the first department of anthropology in India at the University of Calcutta, shaping institutional teaching and research.
Q5(c) · UPSC Mains 2026 · Anthropology GS 2 · 10 marks · Solution
Article 371A of the Indian Constitution.
Evolution of the Indian Culture and Civilization
Article 371A of the Indian Constitution grants special autonomous status to Nagaland, protecting its traditional socio-religious practices, customary laws, and land ownership rights. Enacted via the 13th Constitutional Amendment Act, 1962, following the 16-point Agreement, it reflects the asymmetrical federal framework of India. The article places a special responsibility on the Governor regarding law and order and regional financial allocations. It balances tribal autonomy with national integration, though it faces implementation challenges in modern governance.