Jump to content

Talk:Adivasi

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Move?

[edit]

Any objection to moving this page to Adivasi? QuartierLatin1968 01:18, 6 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Parsi tribal status followup

[edit]

Although absence of evidence is not evidence of absence, I have removed the statement that Parsis have tribal status from both Parsi and Adivasi entries since I can't verify this (either way).

Although I originally added the statement (to Parsi) that Parsis gained tribal status in 2004, I am now of the opinion that this was incorrect. Parsiana (the Parsi community monthly), had absolutely nothing on the subject in 2004, and given how vocal Parsis can become on the subject of receiving (or not) special privileges, I'm sure that the subject would have been covered in depth if it were true.

Fullstop 12:52, 27 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I am sure that Parsi community do not belong to the category of adivasis and the scheduled tribes/ scheduled castes. --Bhadani 13:01, 27 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Sanskrit?

[edit]

Does the word adivasi come from the Sanskrit language? 18:35, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

Why do you not respond? 09:28, 3 March 2007 (UTC)
The talk pages are specifically for discussing the article, not for general discussion.
Adivasi = Adi (original) + Vasi (inhabitant)
Hence the words roughly in English is aboriginal, although there is no negative connotation.
Also Adi and Vasi are Sanskrit words
SDas 23:24, 10 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

DISCUSS: Proposing MERGER of Adivasis of Orissa into Adivasi

[edit]

These articles are duplicative and need to be combined.OfficeGirl 06:36, 10 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Adivasi is a pan India term for a 'Tribal person', whereas the other article is only specific of the adivasis from the Indian state of Orissa, so merging the two articles would be disasterous, only the duplicative material needs to be separated.

Adivasi/Janjati in Nepal

[edit]

In Nepal there are many indigenous peoples such as Tharu, Magar and Kham, Gurung, Tamang, Rai and Limbu who are called Adivasi (or Adibasi) and Janjati. Their situation is the same as India's Adivasis, except there might be small differences in government policy toward them. I propose that they be added to this article. LADave (talk) 18:37, 11 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

adivasi or Adivasi

[edit]

Adivasi is more correct,they are aboriginal communities,having religion Aadim dharma..with Mahadeva/Lord Shiva as Supreme God.This article is clearly a work in progress, and several issues above relate to whether the term is general or specific. At the moment we use 'adivasi' in the early 'Connotations ..' section, and later often capitalise 'Adivasi' especially when referring to ST classification.

In keeping with Wikipedia:Manual of Style (capital letters), lower case should be used unless there is a definitive case (sic) for capitalising.

In any case (doh, there we go again) this article should move rapidly towards using one or the other consistently, or else explicitly explain that there are two uses of the term, one general and one specific, captialised accordingly. Earthlyreason (talk) 12:43, 10 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]


[Deleted copyright material]..Thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bigbrothersorder (talk • contribs) 08:26, 4 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It is against Wikipedia policy (and is illegal) to lift copyrighted material at this scale - so I am deleting it. You could simply have brought in a couple of lines and a set of links rather than do this. Also, you didn't acknowledge the actual authors of this material, which isn't okay in any respect. You stole (basically) material from http://www.aitpn.org/IRQ/Vol-III/issue_4/story09.html, http://www.pucl.org/Topics/Dalit-tribal/2003/adivasi.htm and other sources. You are also in violation of Wikipedia talk guidelines (WP:SOAP). Please don't do this. Many of these exact issues inform the article, except that the article is actually richer and covers them in even more detail. --Hunnjazal (talk) 12:08, 4 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Plagiarism

[edit]

Several paragraphs have been copied verbatim, unattributed, from "James Heitzman and Robert L. Worden, editors. India: A Country Study. Washington: GPO for the Library of Congress, 1995", url: http://countrystudies.us/india/70.htm.

Per WP:PD use is allowed.

Per WP:PLAG it must be properly attributed, which it is not currently. JanetteDoe (talk) 19:04, 11 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned references in Adivasi

[edit]

I check pages listed in Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. One of the things I do is look for content for orphaned references in wikilinked articles. I have found content for some of Adivasi's orphans, the problem is that I found more than one version. I can't determine which (if any) is correct for this article, so I am asking for a sentient editor to look it over and copy the correct ref content into this article.

Reference named "biomedcentral.com":

  • From Genetics and archaeogenetics of South Asia: Thanseem, Ismail; Thangaraj, Kumarasamy; Chaubey, Gyaneshwer; Singh, Vijay; Bhaskar, Lakkakula VKS; Reddy, B Mohan; Reddy, Alla G; Singh, Lalji (2006). "Genetic affinities among the lower castes and tribal groups of India: Inference from Y chromosome and mitochondrial DNA". BMC Genetics. 7: 42. doi:10.1186/1471-2156-7-42. PMC 1569435. PMID 16893451.{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: unflagged free DOI (link)
  • From Gujarati people: "Most of the extant mtDNA boundaries in South and Southwest Asia were likely shaped during the initial settlement of Eurasia by anatomically modern humans". Biomedcentral.com. Retrieved 9 December 2011.

I apologize if any of the above are effectively identical; I am just a simple computer program, so I can't determine whether minor differences are significant or not. AnomieBOT⚡ 10:38, 10 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Who coined the term?

[edit]

Please provide a source citing who coined the term Adivasi and what the reasoning was at the time. I've heard it was A.V. Thakkar... 95.224.3.198 (talk) 20:15, 16 December 2016 (UTC) R.E.D.[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on Adivasi. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 23:01, 25 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Adivasi categories

[edit]

Tha article is saying that "Adivasi can be categorised into three grouping i.e. Austro-Asiatic, Caucasoid and Sino-Tibetan", but what's the point of mixing hypothetical language families with races? Also, where are the Australoids who are possibly the original inhabitants of the Indian subcontinent? Barbar03 (talk) 15:10, 12 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Edits by Dev0745

[edit]
Copied from Wikipedia talk:Noticeboard for India-related topics#Adivasi

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Could someone take a look at Adivasi? User:Dev0745 is making extensive edits there, but I've the impression that parts of it may be rambling. For example:

Tribal are heterogeneous ethnic groups can be divided in five ethnolinguistic groups such as Indo-Aryan, Dravidian, Austro-Asiatic, Sino-Tibetan and Andamanse. Indo-Aryan tribal have same origin as their negibour caste population. Dravidian tribal have also same origin as Dravidian caste population.

Thanks. Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 16:33, 1 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I saw that, but was too busy to look at it with any focus or depth. Thanks, @Joshua Jonathan: for bringing the edits to the community's notice. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 23:07, 1 October 2019 (UTC) Updated Fowler&fowler«Talk» 23:08, 1 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, thanks for discussion. Although I was trying to edit article "Adivasi" but due to different article have different conclusion,It's seem confusing without reading them properly. It would better to write after gaining proper knowledge about it. I am giving link here what many articles talk about i.e Tribal speak five language family such as Indo-Aryan, Dravidian, Austroasiatic, Tibeto Burman and Andamanese.
So thanks, I will try to edit anything after gaining proper knowledge about the topic.(Dev0745 (talk) 01:38, 2 October 2019 (UTC));[reply]
Note:Reflist added for references--DreamLinker (talk) 02:17, 2 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Note 2: reflist removed after turnig refs into list of links. Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 05:03, 2 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

@Dev0745: thanks for providing the links. Your intention seems to be good, and the information you provided seems to correct to a certain level - but not completely. It takes time for other editors to check such edits; sigh... Anyway, if you want to try again, be welcome. Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 06:13, 2 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Linguistic grouping

[edit]

Tribal can be categorised into five linguistic grouping i.e. Indo-Aryan, Dravidian, Austro-Asiatic, Sino-Tibetan and Andamanse.[1][2][3]

References

  1. ^ "TRIBAL LANGUAGES IN INDIA – INTRODUCTION (1/4)". wordsinthebucket. 7 April 2015. Retrieved 24 September 2019.
  2. ^ Statistical Profile of Scheduled Tribes in India (PDF). New Delhi: Ministry of Tribal Affairs. 2013. p. 10.
  3. ^ "Adivasis: India's original inhabitants have suffered the most at its hands". scroll.in.

When come to think of different dialects prevalent in India, we can easily divide them into five major language families starting from the first civilization of Indo-Aryan, Dravidian, Tibeto-Burman, Andamanese, and Austro-Asiatic. However, for a better understanding of the tribal region segregation, it is best to have a look at the regions where tribal population inhabits.

The article then states what language is spoken by various groups in each region. Check: Baigani is an Indo-Aryan language. In that case, the text should state "Tribal languages can be categorised into five linguistic groupings".
  • Statistical Profile of Scheduled Tribes in India (PDF). New Delhi: Ministry of Tribal Affairs. 2013. p. 10. - no mention of language affiliation.
  • "Adivasis: India's original inhabitants have suffered the most at its hands". scroll.in. - subheader: Their presence in India pre-dates the Dravidians, the Aryans and everyone else. It further says:

they can be broadly classified into three groupings. The first consists of populations who predate the Indo-Aryan migrations, and are termed by many anthropologists as the Austro-Asiatic-speaking Australoid people. The Central Indian adivasis belong to this grouping. The other two groupings are the Caucasoid and Sino-Tibetan or Mongoloid tribal people of the Himalayan and North Eastern regions who migrated in later periods.

So, Scroll.in does not support the statement. Correct, following those spources, would be the following:

Adivasi can be categorised into three grouping, namely the Australoid people speaking Austro-Asiatic languages, who predate the Indo-Aryan migrations; Caucasoid tribes; and Sino-Tibetan.[1] Tribal languagescan be categorised into five linguistic groupings, namely Andamanse; Austro-Asiatic; Dravidian; Indo-Aryan; and Sino-Tibetan.[2]

References

  1. ^ "Adivasis: India's original inhabitants have suffered the most at its hands". scroll.in.
  2. ^ "TRIBAL LANGUAGES IN INDIA – INTRODUCTION (1/4)". wordsinthebucket. 7 April 2015. Retrieved 24 September 2019.

Still, is there a more exact definition of Adivasi? And what's "Caucasoid" in this respect? Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 06:13, 2 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Genetic studies

[edit]

Tribal are heterogeneous ethnic groups can be divided in five ethnolinguistic groups such as Indo-Aryan, Dravidian, Austro-Asiatic, Sino-Tibetan and Andamanse. According to genetic study of 2004 in south india, south indian tribal have independent origin with carrying more indigenous haplogroups.[1] Sino-Tibetan and Austroasiatic were migrants from East and South East Asia respectively and mixed extensively with local Indian populations.[2][3]

References

  1. ^ "Independent Origins of Indian Caste and Tribal Paternal Lineages". sciencedirect. 3 February 2004. Retrieved 1 October 2019.
  2. ^ Richard Cordaux; Gunter Weiss; Nilmani Saha; Mark Stoneking (2004), "The Northeast Indian Passageway: A Barrier or Corridor for Human Migrations?", Molecular Biology and Evolution, 21 (8): 1525–33, doi:10.1093/molbev/msh151, PMID 15128876, retrieved 2008-11-25, ... Our coalescence analysis suggests that the expansion of Tibeto-Burman speakers to northeast India most likely took place within the past 4,200 years ...
  3. ^ Sidwell, Paul. 2018. Austroasiatic Studies: state of the art in 2018. Presentation at the Graduate Institute of Linguistics, National Tsing Hua University, Taiwan, May 22, 2018.

On a quick note:

Tribal are heterogeneous ethnic groups can be divided in five ethnolinguistic groups such as Indo-Aryan, Dravidian, Austro-Asiatic, Sino-Tibetan and Andamanse.

should be

Tribal are heterogeneous ethnic groups, which can be divided in five ethnolinguistic groups: Indo-Aryan, Dravidian, Austro-Asiatic, Sino-Tibetan and Andamanse.

Still, it's not clear what "heterogeneous ethnic groups" means.

Further, 2004 is far outdated. Recent relevant studies are:

  • Narasimhan et al. (2019), The formation of human populations in South and Central Asia, Science. Their scenario: ancient Indian hunter-gatherers; ahg + Iranian farmer related people = Indus Valley Civilisation; IVC + Aryans = north India (ANI); IVC + southern hunter-gatherers = Dravidians (ASI); ANI + ASI = all modern Indian peolple, including Adivasi.

Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 06:24, 2 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Different tribal of Indian subcontinent have different genetic origin. According to several genetic studies North Indian and Upper Caste have more ANI ancestry whereas South Indian have low ANI ancestry. This can also be true for Tribals. North Indian tribal can have more ANI ancestry and South Indian have low ANI and more ASI ancestry. Sino-tibetan tribal carry ATB(Ancestor Tibeto Burman) ancestry and Austroasiatic tribal carry AAA(Ancestoral Austroasiatic) ancestry. Andamanese tribal are direct descendant from out of Africa migration. So Basically Tribals are not homogeneous groups but heterogeneous ethnic groups with different origin. (Dev0745 (talk) 08:45, 2 October 2019 (UTC));[reply]
I see; thanks. Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 09:17, 2 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Definition

[edit]

The term "indigenous" seems to be obscured; it's not explicitly stated which population should be considered to be 'the first people' of India. From the article:

  • In India, the term Adivasi is used to refer to Scheduled Tribes, although the term indigenous and tribe have different meanings. Indigenous means descent from populations who inhabited the country or region at the time of conquest or colonization, and tribe means a group who are distinguished by their social, cultural and economic conditions from other sections of the community.
"Who are the indigenous and tribal peoples?". ilo.org.</ref> - not specifically about Adivasi, but about "indigenous and tribal peoples." It certainly doesn't argues that the two terms have different meanings; it explains what the two components of the phrase "indigenous and tribal peoples" means, mentioning the adivasi as such a group. It does not say that the term "adivasi" refers to the scheduled tribes.
  • The word Adivasi means the first inhabitants or the Indigenous People, a phrase recognised by the Supreme Court of India.
  • S. Faizi & Priya K. Nair, 2016. "Adivasis: The World’s Largest Population of Indigenous People," Development, Palgrave Macmillan;Society for International Deveopment, vol. 59(3), pages 350-353, December - inaccesible via Google.
  • adivāsi carries the specific meaning of being the original and autochthonous inhabitants of a given region. It is a modern Sanskrit word specifically coined for that purpose in the 1930s,
  • Robert Harrison Barnes; Andrew Gray; Benedict Kingsbury (1995), Indigenous peoples of Asia, Association for Asian Studies, ISBN 978-0-924304-14-9, retrieved 2008-11-25, The Concept of the Adivāsi: According to the political activists who coined the word in the 1930s, the 'adivāsis' are the original inhabitants of the Indian subcontinent ...
  • from ādi 'beginning, origin' and vāsin 'dweller' (itself from vas 'to dwell'), thus literally meaning ‘original inhabitant’.
  • "Adivasi, n. and adj." OED Online. Oxford University Press, June 2017. Web. 10 September 2017.

This is what the Encyclopedia Britannica says:

Adivasi, (Hindi: “Original Inhabitants”)official name (in India) Scheduled Tribes, any of various ethnic groups considered to be the original inhabitants of the Indian subcontinent. The term is used primarily in India and Bangladesh. In the constitution of India, promulgated in 1950, most of these groups were listed—or scheduled—as targets for social and economic development. Since that time the Adivasi of India have been known officially as Scheduled Tribes.

I have copy-edited the definitions according to a more critical reading of the sources. Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 07:19, 2 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I think defination of "Encyclopedia Britannica" is more appropriate. Also the claim that tribal were prior to Dravidian and Indo-Aryan seems incorrect as native language of tribal is also dravidian and Indo-Aryan languages. Tribals have also same haplogroups as Caste population although they carry more ASI genetic. according to recent genetic studies, Austroasiatic tribal arrived in Indian subcontinent around 4000-3500 year ago, which is not before the Dravidian and during same time as stepe pastoralists. So claim that tribal were before Dravidian and Indo-Aryan seems incorrect. (Dev0745 (talk) 08:33, 2 October 2019 (UTC));[reply]

  • @Dāsānudāsa: can you familiarize yourself with the comments above? To claim that "Adivasis" are "indigenous" is a fringe position. To make it even more easy for you, I would ask you to name the tribes you think are "indigenous" and I will tell you how they aren't. >>> Extorc.talk 15:51, 21 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Unless I'm missing something, all the sources above (bar the comment from Dev075 (talk · contribs)) make it clear Adivasi are considered indigenous. That's Britannica, the Lok Sabha definition, Gandhi, Barnes, Gray and Kingsbury, OUP, Faizi and Nair... ie numerous sources that would usually be considered reliable. To claim it as a fringe position requires sources stating that's the case. Dāsānudāsa (talk) 17:04, 21 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
"claim that tribal were before Dravidian and Indo-Aryan seems incorrect" makes it clear. The above quotations show that why this term is dubious and does not have a single meaning when it comes to usage. I called it a fringe position because I am aware of the researches which argue against the claimed indigenousness of the tribes. At best its an activist position and should be highlighted like that and no more weight should be given to this claim. >>> Extorc.talk 12:05, 22 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:List of notable Adivasi people

[edit]

Please consider incorporating material from the above draft submission into this article. Drafts are eligible for deletion after 6 months of inactivity. ~Kvng (talk) 15:12, 29 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

[edit]

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 10:40, 8 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Are Adiwasis Hindu?

[edit]

Are Adiwasis Hindu? RishabhMeemroth (talk) 06:09, 2 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Some; some aren't. There's a "religion" section in the article. Dāsānudāsa (talk) 08:06, 2 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Adivasis vs NE tribal groups ?

[edit]

Shouldn't Adivasi and NE tribal groups be considered as separate ? Adivasi is used only for the aboriginal groups of Austroloid origin who today speaks a variety of languages including Indo-Aryan. NE tribals are ST but aren't considered as Adivasis. So there should be separate articles for "Adivasis" and "Tribals of Northeast India". Tizen03 (talk) 10:52, 28 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I agree, also since the religion part only covers Animism and Hinduism in detail. That doesn't really make sense if the NE tribes are lumped into the article as well, with three majority tribal, majority Christian states in the NER (Christianity in India article). Guduxy (talk) 17:16, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Stand of Government of India

[edit]

User:Dāsānudāsa, What is problem in including stand of Government of India which doesn't consider Adivasi as only Indigenous people. Government of India consider all citizens of India as indigenous. Whether right or wrong, It is stand of Government of India. Why should it not be added? Dev0745 (talk) 00:06, 23 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

It is WP:UNDUE for the lead. The current government of India has lots of fringe views, so we must take what they say with a pinch of salt. Dāsānudāsa (talk) 08:35, 26 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
It's also repetition: the article already says "the government of India does not officially recognise tribes as indigenous people." Dāsānudāsa (talk) 08:36, 26 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Wiki Education assignment: India in Global Studies

[edit]

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 18 January 2023 and 14 May 2023. Further details are available on the course page. Peer reviewers: Srimank123, Sparklehorse23.

— Assignment last updated by Adirrao (talk) 22:06, 17 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Adivasi&oldid=1252170463"