Ethnicity in Sikkim

The Indian State of Sikkim presents a significant ethnic diversity: people of Tibetan culture and language (the Bhotia) cohabit with so-called "tribes" (the autochthonous Lepcha, the Limbus, Rai, Gurung, etc.) and people organised in Indo-Nepalese castes. As everywhere in India, these populations are organised in administrative categories (Scheduled Tribes, Scheduled Castes, Other Backward Classes, etc.) meant to be "compensatory discrimination" for groups listed as "backwards". This social anthropological project aims at studying the historical and sociological construction of social grouping in Sikkim, as well as the interactions between the different ways of organising the populations of Sikkim (local indigenous categories of belongingness and otherness, administrative organisation of populations and conceptions developed by the ethnic movements of identity affirmation) in order to understand the role of these modes of organisation in the relationships between social groups in Sikkim and on ethnicity. Three topics will be addressed: History of social units (clans, lineages, ethnic groups, caste, etc.) and different dimensions of belongingness Constructions of the categories organising the populations ("tribe", "caste", etc.) Interrelationship between ethnic groups in the rural area and the role of categories organising the populations in these relationships. The hypothesis is that daily relationships between ethnic groups draw boundaries between them, which cut across categories of tribe and caste, though these categories are prevalent in the political organisation. Indigenous categories of otherness and belongingness also play an important role in shaping relationships between ethnic groups. The fieldwork is methodologically of particular importance for the realisation of the project; it will be carried out in all four districts of Sikkim (mainly areas in the surrounding of monasteries), and alongside the recording of data on interethnic relationships the study in situ should lead to a detailed documentation of the settlement areas in question (representation of toponyms, clan names, local genealogies and of the relationship between landscape, monastery and social organisation). It necessarily includes also the elaboration of Tibetan primary sources where we can expect relevant data on these areas.

The present anthropological project conducted at the Institute for Social Anthropology (ISA, Austrian Academy of Sciences) aimed at studying modes of construction of ethnicity and ethnic identity in Sikkim (Eastern Himalayas, India). The first result of the research was to highlight the instrumental role of state classifications and policies in the construction of ethnicity, understood as the way social actors think of social divisions and inequalities in terms of ethnic belonging and differentiation. However, instead of arguing for an unidirectional and top-to-bottom influence by the state, this research highlighted the complexity of this process, which it described as the outcome of relations involving multiple social actors state agents, ethnic activists, common people , entailing different levels of negotiations, interpretations, and appropriation, influenced also by cultural diversity and transnational mobility.The research was largely focused on cultural production among Gurungs, in relation to the groups claim for Scheduled tribe status. This claim was supported by the state as part of a politics of cultural patrimonialization. The benefit which Scheduled tribe status confers within the Indian system of positive discrimination (reservation policy) did not by itself explain its appeal; it was also perceived as a means to obtain compensation for historical prejudices, to achieve citizenship in the wider sense of subject-hood, and to gain access to political representation. This research highlighted the historicity of ethnic categories in Sikkim and the political frame shaping the reservation policy, in particular the governments strategies to bring Sikkim away from its borders, which were perceived with suspicion. Ethnic politics led to changes in the form and structure of ethnic groups by influencing these historically and socially diverse entities in the direction of internal political centralisation, and creating their cultural unity.The construction of ethnicity nevertheless entailed contestation, negotiation and interpretation at multiple levels. Interpretable laws and administrative procedures, as well as direct relations with state agents, provided ethnic activists with spaces for negotiating the conformity of their cultural production to state classification. The ethnographic encounter was furthermore a site of authentication of new cultural production. Whereas a dichotomous view arising from ethnic politics, termed authentic versus copied or category versus practice has been highlighted in recent studies, the present research focused on the passages between these two forms of practices and the instrumental role of anthropologists in this change of status. Accordingly, this highlighted the limits of the radical constructionist stance as it is emphasized in certain recent approaches. Ethnic identity building was not a smooth and seamless process, and the operation of the state apparatus did not entirely fit into individuals perception of self-identity, but affective and existential dimensions of belonging were instrumental to the processes of ethnic identity making.This research is of interest not only to academics, but also to policy makers and administrators concerned with the interactions between politics and culture, and with ethnic conflicts.