This article needs additional citations for verification. (June 2015) (Learn how and when to remove this template message)
Some Kolis had also once held small princely states before the colonial British Raj period and some were still significant landholders and tenants in the twentieth century. However, most Kolis had lost their once-equal standing with the Patidar[a] community due to the land reforms of the Raj period.
During the later period of the Raj, the Gujarati Kolis became involved in the process of what has subsequently been termed sanskritisation. At that time, in the 1930s, they represented around 20 per cent of the region's population and members of the local Rajput community were seeking to extend their own influence by co-opting other significant groups as claimants to the ritual title of Kshatriya. The Rajputs were politically, economically and socially marginalised because their own numbers — around 4 - 5 per cent of the population — were inferior to the dominant Patidars, with whom the Kolis were also disenchanted. The Kolis were among those whom the Rajputs targeted because, although classified as a criminal tribe by the British administration, they were among the many communities of that period who had made genealogical claims of descent from the Kshatriya. The Rajput leaders preferred to view the Kolis as being Kshatriya by dint of military ethos rather than origin but, in whatever terminology, it was a marriage of political expedience.
In 1947, around the time that India gained independence, the Kutch, Kathiawar, Gujarat Kshatriya Sabha (KKGKS) caste association emerged as an umbrella organisation to continue the work begun during the Raj. Christophe Jaffrelot, a French political scientist, says that this body, which claimed to represent the Rajputs and Kolis, "... is a good example of the way castes, with very different ritual status, join hands to defend their common interests. ... The use of the word Kshatriya was largely tactical and the original caste identity was seriously diluted."
The relevance of the Kshatriya label in terms of ritual was diminished by the practical actions of the KKGKS which, among other things, saw demands for the constituent communities to be classified as Backward Classes in the Indian scheme for positive discrimination. Kshatriyas would not usually wish to be associated with such a category and indeed it runs counter to the theory of sanskritisation, but in this instance it suited the socio-economic and political desires. By the 1950s, the KKGKS had established schools, loan systems and other mechanisms of communal self-help and it was demanding reforms to laws relating to land. It was also seeking alliances with political parties at state level; initially, with the Indian National Congress and then, by the early 1960s, with the Swatantra Party. By 1967, the KKGKS was once again working with Congress because, despite being a haven for Patidars, the party leadership needed the votes of the KKGKS membership. The Kolis gained more from the actions of the KKGKS in these two decades than did the Rajputs, and Jaffrelot believes that it was around this time that a Koli intelligentsia emerged. Ghanshyam Shah, a professor at Jawaharlal Nehru University, describes the organisation today as covering a broad group of communities, from disadvantaged Rajputs of high prestige to the semi-tribal Bhils, with the Kolis in the middle. He notes that its composition reflects "a common economic interest and a growing secular identity born partly out of folklore but more out of common resentment against the well-to-do castes".
The Kolis of Gujarat remained educationally and occupationally disadvantaged compared to communities such as the Brahmins and Patidars. Their many Jātis include the Bareeya, Khant and Thakor, and they also use Koli as a suffix, giving rise to groups such as the Gulam Koli and Matia Koli. Some do not refer to themselves as Koli at all.
As of 2012[update], various communities bearing the Koli name appear in the central lists of Other Backward Classes maintained by the National Commission for Backward Classes, although at least one is also in part recognised as a Scheduled Tribe. These classifications have been in force since at least 1993.
Notes and references
- Jaffrelot 2003, pp. 180-182
- Fuller 1975, pp. 293-295
- Basu 2009, pp. 51-55
- Shah 2004, p. 178
- Shah 2004, p. 302
- Shah 2004, p. 221
- "Central List of OBCs for the State of Gujarat" (PDF). National Commission for Backward Classes. Retrieved 12 December 2012.
- "N.C.T. Delhi : DATA HIGHLIGHTS: THE SCHEDULED CASTES : Census of India 2001" (PDF). Censusindia.gov. Retrieved 2015-10-03.
- "Madhya Pradesh : DATA HIGHLIGHTS: THE SCHEDULED CASTES : Census of India 2001" (PDF). Censusindia.gov. Retrieved 2015-10-03.
- "Rajasthan : DATA HIGHLIGHTS: THE SCHEDULED CASTES : Census of India 2001" (PDF). Censusindia.gov. Retrieved 2015-10-03.
- James (1977)
- Basu, Pratyusha (2009), Villages, Women, and the Success of Dairy Cooperatives in India: Making Place for Rural Development, Cambria Press, ISBN 9781604976250
- Fuller, Christopher John (Winter 1975), "The Internal Structure of the Nayar Caste", Journal of Anthropological Research, 31 (4), JSTOR 3629883, (Subscription required (help))
- Jaffrelot, Christophe (2003), India's Silent Revolution: The Rise of the Lower Castes in North India (Reprinted ed.), C. Hurst & Co., ISBN 9781850653981
- James, V. (1977), "Marriage Customs of Christian Son Kolis", Asian Folklore Studies, 36 (2): 131–148, JSTOR 1177821, (Subscription required (help))
- Shah, Ghanshyam (2004), Caste and Democratic Politics In India (Reprinted ed.), Anthem Press, ISBN 9781843310860
- Bayly, Susan (2001). Caste, Society and Politics in India from the Eighteenth Century to the Modern Age. Cambridge University Press. ISBN 9780521798426.
|Wikimedia Commons has media related to Koli people.|
- Plants and animals important to the Koli-Agri community in Maharashtra on Biodiversity of India
- A community called Koli