{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.027225901398086828, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 5.279445727482679, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Girasias and the Politics of Difference in Rajasthan: ‘Caste’, Kinship and Gender in a Marginalised Society

Anthropologists have often contrasted ‘caste’ and ‘tribe’ as forms of social organisation based on opposite principles (eg ‘castes' are based on hierarchy, ‘tribal’ society is undifferentiated and egalitarian). The concept of ‘caste’ is both an imposed one, a product of colonial governmental and academic exercises, and one which has political realities. However, whilst such national and regional formulations of caste are important, they do not always reflect the social categories which are central to the organisation of people's lives at the local level. The Girasias (generally held to be a ‘tribe’ by others) live in Rajasthan in proximity to the Rajputs (generally held to be a ‘caste’; Girasias themselves claim to be a branch of the Rajput caste). On many points the way in which a group categorises itself does not correspond with the way in which it is categorised by members of other groups. In practice the Girasias share many social, economic and religious institutions with the other ‘caste’ communities in the region as also with the ‘tribal Bhils. This does not mean that these groups are indistinguishable, but ‘Rajput’ and ‘Bhil’ stereotypes were used within the Girasia group to express differences, identifications and evaluations. However the tribe/caste distinction and the corresponding division of labour between anthropologists and sociologists in India is thereby called into question. To the Girasias, patrilineal kinship and territory play a central role in their sense of ‘caste’ identity, unlike other communities (the Rajputs and Bhils are exceptions) for whom caste is a more dispersed, agnatic and affinal group. Descent is crucial. Although their kinship ideology emphasises a sense of separation rather than hierarchy, Girasia kin divisions present members with equal opportunities to be unequal. Lineal kinship provides the paradigm for talking about all relationships whether or not based on actual biological ties. Equally, gender provides an idiom for the construction of difference. Descent groups are differentiated according to the evaluation of groups from which they have been able to obtain wives. Both Girasias and outsiders use the attire and the behaviour of women and perceived gender roles to distinguish between themselves. Despite the local complexity of Girasia kinship and gender relations which cannot be expressed in the language of caste and tribe, outsiders (other castes, classes, government officials, academics) continue to regard the Girasias as tribal as a result of the politics of caste and gender at the local, regional and national levels.