Social Scientist

'History from Below'

Author(s): Sabyasachi Bhattacharya
Source: Social Scientist, Vol. 11, No. 4 (Apr., 1983), pp. 3-20
Published by: Social Scientist
Stable URL: https://www.jstor.org/stable/3517020
Accessed: 11-03-2019 06:31 UTC

REFERENCES
Linked references are available on JSTOR for this article:
https://www.jstor.org/stable/3517020?seq=1&cid=pdf-reference#references_tab_contents
You may need to log in to JSTOR to access the linked references.

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide
range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and
facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at
https://about.jstor.org/terms

Social Scientist is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Social
Scientist

This content downloaded from 129.78.139.29 on Mon, 11 Mar 2019 06:31:11 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 SABYASACHI BHS TTACHARYA*

'History from Below'

I SHALL begin by citing an obscure manifesto of a group of Puerto

Rican llistorians in the early 1970's: "We face the problem that the
1listory presented as ours is only patt of our1zistory.... What of tbe
history vf t1le shistorylcss', the tlnonymous people wllo in tlleir
collectivc acts, theis work, Ll.lily livess .lnd fellowship, have forgcul our
society tllrough the ccnturies'2''l About the samc time 1 lcader of the
'Dares Salaam school of history' voiced a similctr dissatisf>1ction with
the received version of national histories in newly independcnt African
countrics: " We wollkl cnd with the singul 1rly useless shistory',
celebrating indivsduals, narrating their biographies alld lleroic acts
or, at the most, erecting monuments for valiant tribes. These would
leave the iilrge m.lss of our people c)ut of history, witllout history."2
In anotller Third World country Rodolfo Stavenhagen. in the front
rank of his profession in Mexico, calle(l for the "dc-elitization" of
social sciences as part of the proccxs of {lltellectual dccolonisatioIl.3
And in Europe there develope(l a strsJng trcnd towards Whtlt camc to
be known as 'history frolll bcloww, of which perhaps the most out-
standing practitioner In noIl-Europc;lll blstory is CChesueaux, the
French Sinologist. He points out thc quaint trilcSition o5Confucian
mandarins of referring to common rebels as fcwi-a negative grammatical
expressioll denoting non-persons, a dcnial of their existencc in the
eyes of history.4 Chesneaux has called this '4occultation" which is
"one of the luost widespread practices in the state's system of control
over the past...elltire sections of world history have no other existence
than what the oppressor permitted us to know of them. . ."
I have cited just a few representative statements of a poinf of
view that has been gaining ground over the last decade. In part it is
a reactlon tO the kind of atititude exemplified by that possibly apocry-
phal st{ry of the Tsar of Russia who, when told of Pllshkin's plans of
writing the history of the peasant leader Pugacllelr, said placidly:
"Such a man has no history."5 In part this has been a reaction, in my
own field of interest to a disenchantment with economic history of

*ProSessor, Centre of Historical Studies, Jawaharlal Nehrtl Universi ty,

DJew Dellsi.

This content downloaded from 129.78.139.29 on Mon, 11 Mar 2019 06:31:11 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
4 SOCIAL SCIENTIST

the kind that developed under the banner, SNew Economic History'.
All the technical sophistication of the Cliometricians which was, of
course, useful in the quantification of long-term trends and in the
organisation and reconstruction of voluminous data did not yield
any new approach to history. The 'New' economic history, one may
say, turned out to be a silicon-chip of the same old block. Moreover,
it tended to push historians towards a "history without people", in Le
Roy Ladurie's telling phrase.6 Behind the initiative for 'history from
below' there is an effort to bring the people in, to humanise history.
There 1S, however, more to it than that. ln putting the 'history-
lesss, the oppressed, high up on the agenda of historians in the Third
World countries (from which, I shall argue, we have much more to
learn, despite the widely shared and justified admiration for the
Western academic cxemplars), zIn ideological point wts being made.
It is not just a questietl of enlarging the scopc of history. It is not
merely the addition of a few more 'topics' to the historians repertoire.
Consider, for example, the impact of Frantz Fanon. Sartre might
have been over-selling his wares a bit when he wrote, "Fanon is the
first since Engels to bring the prczcesses of history into the clear light
of day."7 But Fanon's anguished defence of 'the oppressed' of the
Third World cast a spell on a number of historians, partlcularly in
Africa as we shall see later. "The militant who faces the colonialist
vvar machine with the bare nainimum of arms realises that while he is
breaking down colonial oppression he is building up (lutematically yet
another system of exploitation. This discovery is unpleasant, bitter
and sickening: .nd yet everything seemed to be so simple before: the
bad people were on otle side, and the good on the other."8 Even if
one disagrced with lqrantz Fanon (C} g, his characterisation of the
working class) his rhetoric created tI resonance in the Third World,
far beyond Algeria. This was not merely because of the ideological
predilections of sofne Third World intellectuals in their occasional
'political activist' moments. This was aIso because a major paradigm
change was on the way in the wake of political decolonisation, a
reassessment of the 'nationalist' interpretative framework in history
and other social sciences.
However, 'history from below' reached the shores of this
collntry not from a Third World source but, judging by the citations
and so forth, from England. 1n that country the practitioners of
'history from below' derived their illspiration frotn diverse sources,
but chiefly from a Marxist orientation. Hobsbawm has recently told
us how a new approach to history developed in the intellectual
interactions of a group of Marxist historians who first got together
in 1946 to re-edit the celebrated People's History of England (1938) by
A L Morton: "There is little doubt that the rise of 'social history'
in Britain as a field of study, and especially of 'history from below' or
'history of the common people', owes a great deal to the work of the

This content downloaded from 129.78.139.29 on Mon, 11 Mar 2019 06:31:11 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 'HISTORY FROM BELOW' s

members of the group (e g, Hilton, Hill, Rude E P Thompson,

Hobsbawm, Raphael Samuel). In particular the serious concern with
plebeian ideology-the theory underlying the action of social move-
ments is still largely identified with historiaIls of this provenance,
for the social bistory of ideas was always. (thanks largely to Hill) one
of their main preoccupations. "9
To chronlcle the development of thz 'history from below' in
England will be an irrelevant exercise here. However, we shouId bear
in mind the fact that 'history from below', or speople's history' in a
broader sense, has deep roots going very far back in Europe. Raphael
Samuel of the History Workshop at Oxford lzas recently tried to
construct the genealogical tree of '11iStORY from below'. "People's
llistory is a aerm wbich migllt bc retrospectively applied to those
Vell'iOUS XttelbiptS to write an a1zchivc-based 'hislory from belows which
lave played such a large part in tlle recellt revival of English socal
history.... Impllcitly or explicilly it is oppositional, an altcrnative to
dry as dust scholarship, (lnd history as taught in thc schools. But the
terms of th;lt opposition are necessarily differcnt in diSerent epochs
and for diffcrent modes vf work."l° Thus tlle idca of 'people's
history' has, Samucl shows, diversc types of proponents. One finds a
liberal bourgeois like J R Grcen, author of A S/vzt Histc3y of tl1e
EzlglisAt People (1877), one finds thc lato nineteenth cetltury practi-
tioners of ethnohistory of maxs culture, one f1nds lale nincteenth
century East European n;tionalist historians promoting their people's
consciousness in thc incipicnt struggle .lt,tlinst iIn .llien government,
one finds the Ssoeial romanticss of thc latc eighteenth ccIltury France
'discovering thc people' so as to write their history, and one also
finds Marxists like A L Mortc)n .lnd E P Thompson and members of
the Annalles school.
Therefore, 'people's history' is neither new nor Left necessarily.
Likewise, in Indian historiography the term 'history of the people' is
bandied about right, left and centre. Recall, for instance, Sir William
Hunter's prefatory statement in his first (1868) historical work, "My
business is with the people''.1l He meant to underline the distinction,
as he conceived it, between the conventional British Indian histories
of his days from the kind of social history he proposed to write. In
the writings of the nationalist-minded intelligentsia in the late
nineteenth and early twentieth centuries 'history of the people' has a
slightly different connotation. The aim was not merely the enlarge-
ment of the scope of history: the opposition that is posited is not the
oneHunter had in mind but that between the rulers and the ruled.
Thus, for example, Bankim Chandra Chattopadhyay writes of the need
for the jatEya itShasa of the Bengali people as distinct f:rom the history
of the political rulers of Bengal; so does Rabindranath Tagore, except
that he talks in terms of India as a whole, not just of the Bengali
peoplc.lz A third connotation is carried by the term ipeople's history'

This content downloaded from 129.78.139.29 on Mon, 11 Mar 2019 06:31:11 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 SOCIAL SCIENTIST

in more recent times. Thus, for instance, D D Kosambi wanted to

shift the focus to the "essential ways of life of the whole people" as
distinct from sCepisodic history" and "the succession of outstanding
megalomaniac names and imposing battles", it is not fortuitous that
Kosambi begins his work with an analysis of the 'modern ruling
class'. 13 This third sort of usage of 'history of the people' is
evidently different from the first, where social history is posited
againstpolitical-administrative history, and the second usage, where
history of the nation is posited against the historv of the alien state.
The categories posited in the third usage come closer to the outlook
of the proponents of 'bistory from below' today. It is, hosvever,
important not to forget that 'people's history' means different things
to different pcople. And it continues lo be used in diSerent setlses, as
nauch as the tcrm 'people' is opcn to various constructions and may
well accord with populism ol any kind (including dictsltorship by a
csharisnzatic leader whv seeks to dcrive legitimacy from 'the people',
circumvcntillg the cstablished political system).

Solne Paradignls of Indian Historiograplly

As I have suggested earlier, 'people's history' or 'history of the
oppressed' or 'history from below', by svhatever name one calls it, is
not just broadening the scope of history or adding to the toplcs of
study. Such an enterprise snay lead to the development of a new
interpretativc framework. Let me summarise here the basic point in
a recently published paper.14 If one takes a long-term view of the
trends embodied in the works ofthe historians of nzodern India oxze
begins to see sorne convergent patterns cf tllillking in different slages
of tlle development of historiography. Without l)ostulating the
consciolls choice of aIl intclpretsltive franework, one tnay suggest that
historical thinking has not been without e;ertain organising principles.
We can call thcm paradigms, following Tl1omas Kuhn, or, simply,
interpretative frameworks.15 The outlook that commanded thewriting
of history throughout the second half of the nineteenth century
was the paradigm of progression towards European civil and political
society. The guiding hand of the British led India on this path. The
career of this model begins with a bang in James Mill's H;story of
British India (1817) and ends rather tamely in L S S O'Malley's
Modern India and the West (1941) in the gathering shadows of the
evening of the Raj. In this model of the 'pupil's progress' the lower
orders had no role to play in the process, except as distant recipients
of tlle benefits of the fi}tration' process through the intelligentsia
that mediated between them and the masters. The intellectual milieu
that gave birth to this paradigm-Benthamite Utilitarianism, Comtean
Positivism, and Social Darw1nism as well as the manifestation of
this outk)ok in imperialist historiography are well-known.
The alternative paradigm that developed in tbe early twentieth

This content downloaded from 129.78.139.29 on Mon, 11 Mar 2019 06:31:11 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 'HISTORY FROM BBLOW' 7

century was the work of the nationalist historians. Insc)far as

this endeavour was part of the ideological struggle to exorcise
the colonial hold over the Indian mind, to advance the definition of a
national identity, the new paradigm had a crucial role. At the same
time some of its implicit assumptions are open to question. Recent
reassessments of some of the stereotype ot 'nationalist' historio-
graphy and criticisms of the ambivalence of the colonial dependent
bourgeoasae raght from the so-called renaissance are themes which
are too familiar to require recapitulation.16 A third paradigm that
developed in the 1950's was that of 'modernisation' of a 'traditional'
society and economy. So far as its economic half is concerned,
its quick rise and early demise have been discussedvery thoroughly
in a Presidential Address at the Indian History Congress.l7 As for
the other half, the paradigm of modernisation, 1lsually yoked with
the collcept of 'Sanskratisation', has been used extensively by
sociologists, but not so Inuch in social history. The paradigm ha(l
tlle apparent merit of being broad enollgh to cover the whole range
of social change from the abolition of the sati to the diffusion of
technologies. Here were such broad spectrum concepts that 'moderni-
sation' could virtually be a synonym of 'change'; and continuities
coutd be equally conveniently subsumed under 'tradition'. The initial
fuzziness of the concepts made their descriptive use facile and their
explicatory utolity dllbious. At any rate, the point is that none of
these paradigms can comfortably accommodate the kind of questions
tha}t the practitioners of 'history from below' would raise. For
exanlple, insofar as snationalist' historiography was an ideological
effort to define and establish national unity, which was mainly in
terms of cultural history, the question is whetller such continuity and
unary are products of cultural dontination a comfortable one. Or, let
us say, does the assertion of the unity of the people as a whole in the
freedom stuggle, cutting across CItISS lines, invlove the 'occultation'
of class struggle? These phenomena were not a part of the problematic
the nationalist historian framed for himself.
This is why 'history from below' means more than just the
enlalgement of the scope of history. It may involve a break with the
nationalist paradigm. The point is aptly illustrated in the debate
between A Cabral and a Tanzanian historian. "What commands
history in colonial condition", wrote Cabrat, S'is not the class struggle.
I do no mean that the class struggte in Guinea stopped completely
during the colonial period; it continued, but in a muted way. In the
colonial period it is the state which commands history.' In opposi-
tion to this it has been said that this would reduce history to "nothing
but the history of the colonial state".18 Further, it may be argued
that the struggte of tbe whole people against colonialism is not
necessarily a struggle for the whole peopleP One must not "render
the colonial epoch in the history of the colonial people wit/out class

This content downloaded from 129.78.139.29 on Mon, 11 Mar 2019 06:31:11 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
8 SOCIAL SCIENTIST

struggles". This is, of course, an old and familiar issue. But pos-
sibly it has not been squarely faced in our analysis of our own
historiography.
At this point it may be useful to take a look at the problems and
prospects of this new kind of history, call it 'people's history', or
'bistory from below', or history of the 'oppressed', in our country. In
such an exercise it is dreadfully easy to get lost in the parsuit of other
people's hobby-horses. We are witnessing a great burst of energy in
many directions thus Hobsbawm has created research interest in
social banditry, Stedman 30nes and Chevalier in the urban outcastes
and 'dangerous classes', Laslett in the history of the family, pro-
ponents of women's movement, in the status of women, Rude in the
crowd as an actor on the stage of history, and so forth; other older
research interests in social protest movements, peasant and working
class organisation, mass mobil,isation and consciousness etc are also
equally addressed to similar questions without owing inspiration from
exemplars o f 'hi story from below' .19
Given such diversities, it is possible to have a meaningful dis-
cussion only if we delimit discussion to one set of problems. I pro-
pose to limit myselfto one research area in which I am interested,
the history of the Indian working class. Labour history has been the
fastest growing field in English economic and soeial history. Compare
the scanty literature when R H Tawney wrote (192S) on the labour
movement with Henry Pelling's (1963) embarrassment of riches.2°
According to one bibliography, between 1945 and 1970 alone, about
four thousand articles and books were published on the British labour
movements.2l Only a small fraction of it was produced under the
influence of the 'history from below' school, although in terms of
approach and method the latter, particularly Thompson and Foster,
have had far-reaching innuence. When Thompson set out to write the
history of ';the losers", seeking "to rescue the poor stockinger, the
Luddite cropper, the 'obsolete' handloom weaver, tlle 'Utopian'
artisan" etc from "the enormous condescension of posterity" he was
setting a trend.22 Within fifteen years of the publication of his
classic study (1963) there came a series of studies (I Prothero, X F C
Harrison, P Hollis, J H Weiner, R B Rose etc). Rapidly Thompson's
'losers' becatne grist to the Ph D mill. The pace of output in India
has been much slower.23

Labour History in India

Till now in our labour history the Trade Union movement has
been the subject of the largest number of published works.24 But this
does not mean that much research ground has been broken in the field
and one may now saunter in to do a bit of gardening Upon close
scrutiny many of these books turn out to be heavily dependent oll very
few published sources and newspapers, leaving unexplored the wealth

This content downloaded from 129.78.139.29 on Mon, 11 Mar 2019 06:31:11 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 'HISTORY FROM BELOW' 9

of goarernmental archives, private papers of labour and business

leaders, papers maintained by mill-owners' and merchants' chambers,
law court papers on trial proceedings, working class journals etc.
Books or documentary collections issued under the sponsorship of
poltical parties contain ex-cathedra judgements on issues and per-
sonalities along predictable lines. Moreover, although some of these
works purport to cover slabour movement', actually it ls a species of
institutionaI history disarticulated from the deep structure of its
socio-econom}c context. Finally, some ofthese tradeunionhistoraes
also appear to merit Hobsbawm's criticism of a similar tradition
an British labour history: "It tended to identify class and movement,
movement and organisation or leadership of organisation, thus by-
passing actual social realities."25 (Incidentally, the broad lineaments
of Indian trade union history suggest some {nteresting similarities
with that of many colonial or industrially underdeveloped societies.
Notc for instance the lack of development of a trade union leader-
ship from the ranks of workers an African countries; the low level of
wage differentiation and absence of a labour aristocracy; the process
of transition from welfare societies or mutualidades to sociedades de
resistencia to formal trade unionasm in Latin American countries; the
dominating role of metropolitan trade union, especially the AFL, over
the Central American and some South American national trade unions
called EnoMJoisnlo obrero, even the chronology of shifts under linter-
natonal influences in countries like Chile and Brazil in the early stage
of T U growth till World War II).26
The second theme in labour history 7hich has attracted
attention of scholars is the recruitment and composition of the labour
foree. M D Morris disposed of the theory, associated with Charles
Mers etc, regarding lack of commitment to industry and shortage of
labour suppty.27 Apart from the study of the Bombay textile labour
force, we have now well documenteel stuclies of the recruitment of
labour force in Kanpur and Bombay textilesl in the Bengal industries,
in the Assam tea plantations, in the Tata Steel works and coal mines
in Bahar, etc.28 Of the more general type of study covering the Indian
labour market XIS a whole,29 perhaps the most interesting one develops
an ancilytical framework to study labour migration,in a Cduitl econo-
my'. Contrary to the premises of many labour economists in the Third
World countries and distinct from the Arthur Lewis type models (with
ancome diSerentials between the subsistence level {n agr.ieulture and
the wage rate for cooly labour at growth poles as the migration motl-
vator in a labour surplus agrarian scene), an explanatory scheme is
developed recognising spatially diSerentiated subsistence levels,
resting upon the concept of agricultural involution. 'rhe essential
point, the predominant role of the push factor in deteraining inland
and overseas migration, is of course a part of the perennial theory of
rural-urban migration; but the merit of the scheme lies iD its ability

This content downloaded from 129.78.139.29 on Mon, 11 Mar 2019 06:31:11 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
10 SOCIAL SCIENTIST

to recognise and accommodate geographical and historical specificities

in the development of labour catchment areas and rhythm patterns of
migration.
The third type of work in labour history-and this is where
substantial contributions have been made and are forthcoming is the
history of labour movement in a particular industry or region,
comprehending the structure of the labour force, the economic and
social existence conditions of labour, and the localised working class
protest movements in their complex interrelationship with wider
national political developments.30 Such works have added greatly to
our knowledge of economic histery and have brought it to bear on
socio-political history. The available detaited studies relate mainty
to the textile industry of Bombay and Kanpur, the mining and steel
industry of Bihar, the plantation labour in Assam, the jute mills
around Calcutta. Such studies complement the economists' eCorts
to construct indices of the workers' levels of living, wage trends,
consumption budgets etc which are usually spatially broader in
scale and cover a larger time span.31 Generally these indices suSer
from three limitations: (a) the wage data exclude the unorganised
sector and unregistered small factories, (b) these provide no means of
correction for unemployment, and (c) per capita annual earnings are
available but not average hourly earnings. Fllrther, regional coverage
is uneven so that local studies {nvolve cross-checking with other data
sources.
All of labour history is not 'history from below' and it eallnot
be, for it pre-dat es that conception. Mereover, some of those
interested in working class history, to their credit, possess an interest
arising out of their life experience. Wilth the growth of the
discipline, however, new questions are arising and problems of
method are cropping up
There remain many areas Iying unexplored. One of these
unmapped areas is the history of the urban poor outside the organised
sector. I refer to the wage workers not employed in the factories
and large establishments, and irregularly employed elsewere, chiefly
in the service sector, transport, shops etc and in the smalt-scale
industries and the construction industry. Just below that we have
the outcast of the city, the so-called lumpen proletariat or, to use a
Latin American term the sllb-protetariat.32 A large number of them
populated the slums, the chawls, bastis, jhopris, that developed
around the industrial locations, and their hisWtcory .is inseparable from
that of the factory workers. But we know till now only about the
latter since the data are more easily accessible, both at thc pole of
the employers and at the other end, the trade unions. As late as the
1970's a labour survey of an Indean caty came up against this problern
of complete absence of data on the unorganised sector workers which
constatuted, in the caty, at least 44 per cent, perhaps 50 per cent, of

This content downloaded from 129.78.139.29 on Mon, 11 Mar 2019 06:31:11 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 'HISTORY FROM BELOW'
ll

the labour force.33 Historical data are, of course, even more

scarce. Further, since historians have focussed attention on the
work-place context rather than the habitation-context we have missed
ollt the slum where the worker lived, the sub-proletariat, the street
gangs. 'criminal classes' etc as well as the modes of living and
what Louis ChevalJer has called the "biological bases of social
history"34 of the working class. Very recently some attempts have
been made. There is now an excellent study of the social relation-
ships of a Bombay working class neighbourhood in relation to their
political activities.35 A study of the housing question in Bombay
and its bearinl, on the working class family has just been completed.36
More studies of this kind would help us to reconstruct the social
world of the worker, including the more disprivileged section of the
urban poor.37
The structure of leadership in the trade union movement (as
distinct from the careers of leaders) has hardly been studied yet. The
structure is usua]ly classed under two 'models' used by political
sociologists: the 'patron-client models and the 'broker model'. This
does not accotnmodate the specificities of class organisation and of
the role of 'outsiders'.38 The two studies specifically addressing them-
selves to the problem, ascribe a leadership role to jobbers in the textile
workes' unions in Bombay in the inter-war period.39 There seems to be
little evidence to support this view, especially from the 1920's. The
secret poli ce report s definitely suggest "outside influence", "notorious
leaders of the extremist party'9, i e, Tilak's followers, from 1920.4°
The term 'outsider' became established in the course of the 1920's.
The so-called outsiders themselves accepted the nomenclature. Thus
N M Joshi stoutly defended the leadership of outsiders.41 Outside
the 'moderate reformlst' camp, people like SA Dange and K N
Joglekar also used the term and likewise defended such a sitllation.42
Philip Spratt, in his report to LabourMont/ly,notedthepredominance
of "outsiders".43 The Girni Kamgar Union (Red Flag) constitution
specifically provided that outsidvrs " who are not workers can becom e
Honorary members of the tJnion" and thus become office-bearers.44
In fact, the communists' failure to develop a rank and file leadership
(except for 1928-29 when Mill Committees wbre very active) was the
cause of much criticism within the Comintern.45 The theoretically
expected supersession of the "outsider" by rank and file working
class leaders took a long time to come.46 This is a generic feature
of the trade union movemeslt all over India and in many Third World
countries. It has been noted that in African countries the leadership
came from either 'outsiders' or middle grade employees, clerks etc;
from such a position some of the 'middle-class' trade union leaders
became national-level leaders, e g, Sekou Toure in Guinea, Tom
Mboya in Kenya, Joshua Nkonlo in Soutb Rhodesia, et al.47 This was,
as in India, due to the low level of literacy in the working class, the

This content downloaded from 129.78.139.29 on Mon, 11 Mar 2019 06:31:11 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
12 SOCIAL SClENTIST

creation of unions from outside as an extension of political parties,

and the very rapid pace of development of unions towards tlle end of
colonial rule which did not allow the maturation of an internal
leadership.
Although the study of 'mentalities' should come high up in the
priorities of social historians today, it is almost untouched in labour
history. The only aspect that has attracted some researchers is the
question whether and to what extent ascriptive differences and loyal-
ties to caste and community come in the way of the formation of
working class consciousness. A study of the Madras text.ile workers
suggests that in the early stage of unionisation (in 1918-1921) and even
later, communal loyalties of caste Hindus, untouchables and Muslims
inhibited the growth of trade union consciousness.48 Another study
relating to jute mill workers' 'community consciousness' shows that
upcountry immigrants carrying such a consciousness from their place
of origin, the presence of wealthy Muslim leaders encouraging
communal loyalt.iesX and the quality and organisation of life in jute
mill areas created tensions. This "on occasion expressed itself through
Hindu-Muslim riots, through purely Muslim grievances on other
occasions and...(through) the expression of pan-slamism".49 There
is also evidence from Kanpur in the early 1930's and Bombay in the
late 1 920's suggesting the strong influence of primordial loyalti es on
the consciousness of the large textile labour force on these cities. A
contrary view has been put forward with reference to early twentieth
century (Calcutta and the Coimbatore workers in recent times.So
Actually the interaction between the primordial and new class loyal-
ties is subject to wide regional variation and flllctuations over time
determined by exogenous factors. The working class in the process
of being formed cannot cast away older forms of consciousness
at one stroke while new ones are being formed. Here again
comparison with other underdeveloped countries ss likely to be
illuminating. In the process of induction into the industrial system,
are the tribal loyalties left behind and is 'de-tribalisation' tantamount
to growth of class consciousness? Gluckman, reflenting on the
'antllropological problems arising from the African Industrial Revo-
llltion' wrote 20 years ago that the 'de-tribalisation' of the rural
tribesmen upon migration to the town is a mere stereotype: "It is
possible for men to dichotomize their actions in separate spheres"
and thus the tribal loyalties were maintained alongside the newer
ones.51 Moreover, one does not see any unidirectional development
of a new consciousness triumphing over communalltriballcaste loyal-
ties. The latter reassert themselves in conjunctures laden with
politicaloreconomictension (eg, the recrudescence of communal
riots during the depression of 1929 in Bombay, Ceylon, Kanpur).52
These are oscillations determined by factors outside of the static
scheme of 'mentalities'.

This content downloaded from 129.78.139.29 on Mon, 11 Mar 2019 06:31:11 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 'HISTORY FROM BELOW 13

The history of lnentalities can only be as good as one's sources.

E P Thompson, the chief exemplar for the modern periodf deals with
the culture of the 'autodidact'; two thirds of the English working
class were able to read and it included "men of considerable intellec-
tual attainment"; there was "an abundance of educational institutions
for the working people"; the writings of the literate artisans, journey-
men, the radical unstamped press, the mutual 1mprovement societies,
etc provide an immense wealth of sources.S3 While two-thirds of that
working class could read in the early decades of the l9th century, as
late as 1964 the proportion that could not read in the Indian industrial
working class was about two-thirds, to be exact 62.85 per cent.54
Given the low level of literacy we have to depend on inferences from
behaviour pattern, reports on op.inions and sentiments (often involving
a distorting refraction in the medium), on oral testimonies (best when
exactly recorded as in trial proceedings) etc. In pre-literate societies
use of oral sources is well established, particularly in African studies,
but there are obvious limi tat1 ons. 55 Occasionally one may comc
across things of great value. For instance, in a study of pre-industrial
artisans engaged in smelting iron in middle India, Agaria folk songs
were found useful.56 The rhetoric of working class leaders, as recorded
by police stenographers, gives us insights that nothing else can.
(Listen to the weaver Arjun Atmaram Alve: "When red antimony is
applied to a stone it becomes God. So long as we subjects honour
government they have got the prestige." The foreign rulers, the
workers must know, look upon Indians as "the children of co-wife".57
It was fortunate that the Strike Committee at Bombay in 1928 gave
formal permission to police reporters to take notes at meetings).58 The
spoken word brings history to life. It will do so especially if it brings
"recognition to substantial groups of people who had been ignored",59
people who otherwise would not get a hearing.
The method of reconstructing from oral traditi on common
people's categories of thought, their images of sczciety, their idea of
a good life, etc was eleveloped initially in the studyof the medieval
societies. Perhaps tloese metho(ls are more suited to a stable society,
where ballads, riddles, proverbs and so ol1 belong together in a tra-
dition that changes very slowly. The nlotlerll historian with a smaller
tin e horizon and studying a society unelergoing rapid change may not
find sucl1 methods useful.60 But despite this and the inaccurate
records, the difficulty of dating etc. the little that one gets can be
useful (e g, the phatkas written by two labourers in Bombay,
Gangaram and Jayaram Pandll Devag, chronicling the history of the
General Strike of 1928 on the model of "the mighty struggle of
the Kauravas and the Pandavas'').61 Products of the working class
mind have left so few records that we may never directly knovv, for
some labouringgroups, their idea of 'fair wages', or 'justice', or
'exploitation' and their basic premises of social or political action.62

This content downloaded from 129.78.139.29 on Mon, 11 Mar 2019 06:31:11 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
lw SOCIAL SCIENT1ST

The strength of the methods of 'hishory from belows lies in

micro-level in-depth investigation. It is "a history which is local in
scale, taking as its subject the region, the township or the parish: in
the case of the city, the morphology of the individual quarter or
suburb, or even of the individual home or street".63 One hopes that
this will not cost a loss of perspective, particularly in countries which,
unlike let us say Britain, are not endowed with a long tradition of
local history writing, a vast monographic literature laying down the
broad outlines, and rich local archival resources. tJnless specifically
designed to correct that tendency, micro-level research tends to take
for granted the structure as a whole. This may obscure some of the
fundamental problems specific to coloniat experience, particularly if
the problematic is derived from the experience of Western capitalist
countries. For example7 the inchoateness of class formation under
conditions where in the organised sector wage work alld capitalist
relations develop while in the economy as a whole the capitalist mode
and relations are not sufficiently generalised. In addition, there are
in the colonial societies sub-class loyalties arising out of primordial
conlmunalltriballcaste ties, as well as supra-class loyalties arising out
of the process of anti-imperialist struggle. Perhaps the outcome is a
class of "low classness", and the boundaries are fuzzy.64 Here again
the study of colonial social formations elsewhere may have something
to teach us.65 Marxist Africanists have been puzzling over this for
a long time. Mahmoud Hussein identified an incomplete proletariat
clas s in Egypt because they were in an "obstructed transitional
stage".66 Issa G Shivji put it more generally: "It is true that in Africa
there are no classical types of class divisionss', i c, there were "no
developed classes as in Europe".67 Mahmood Mamdani could find only
transitional forms and emphasised that "class formation is a process"
that had not produced a true class.68 These views were more or less
in line with the position in Arrighi and Saul's survey in 1973.69 Sand-
brook (who set out to test Fanon's generalisations about the AfYican
proletariat) was compelled to conclude that 'Fanon was incorrect in
believing that the proletariat was clearly differentiated from, and out
of sympathy with, other social strata, such as the peasantry and the
urban unemployed".70 To capture the same ambiguities in the class
position of the peasant migrating to urban wage work under conditions
of "underdeveloped class structure", Ali A Mazrui has devised the
concept of iitrans-class ambivalence''.71 The latest to join issue is
Gavin Kitching with the rather drastic suggestion that Marxists
should employ, instead of class concepts, only the "concept of
exploitation' which is '4mailltainable under a less restricted range of
historical conditions" (i es a more generalisable concept).72 Obviously
there are many differences between the South Asian and African
experience, particularly in respect of the length of the industrialisation
experience, and the empirical research in some of the above works is

This content downloaded from 129.78.139.29 on Mon, 11 Mar 2019 06:31:11 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 'HISTORY FORM BELOW' 15

rather patchy. But the debate is instructive in raising questions

common to the process of class formation in colonial contexts.
Unless one chooses to study social groups, including the
'exploited' or the soppressed', as isolates (which is possible if one
adopts the conventional 'stratification' model of one kind of
sociology) a set of systemic relations between them is assumed even
in the simplest historical statements. This s the reason why there is
a need for an awareness of the 'incompleteness' of micro-level studies
Foster so carefully detects and overcomes in his study of the workers
of Oldham.73 Perhaps sizing up the system as a whole ,is as much
necessary as the study of the exploited;#4 sizing up the 'elite' is a
part of the study of those down below. The study of the elite is not
necessarily elitist.75
To sum up, the llistory of the 'oppressed' or shistory from
below' is not merely the addition of some 'radical' topics to the
historians' stock in trade. lt may mean a break from the paradigms
of previndependence vintage. Its practice demands that we pay more
attention to new problems of method; some of these I tried to point
out while reviewing the history of the lndian working class. It is
vital to be aware of these demands or etse we fall out of step with the
craft of history today. History of the poor should not be just poor
history. As a student in this area I aIso realise, like others in the
field, thc extent of unmapped territory. This does not mean that we
wait the accumulation of a large enough monographic literature
layil]g down the broad outlines of national history before we get down
to the working man or the peasant or what have you. It means that
this kind of history is harder to write. I submit that in this enterprise,
on account of certain homomorphies in the colonial and industrially
underdevcloped societies comparison of our social and economic
experience with that of many Third World countries is likely to be
illuminating. The method and approach which have been derected
to the history of metropolitan capitalist countries in the West are not
necessarily the most useful in exploring the historical specificities of
colonial social formations. All this adds up to a rather formidable
list of tasks to be done. But it may well be worthwhile. H1story of
'the people', or the history of 'theoppressed', or 'history from below'
-by whatever name one calls it promises to oWer a new perspective
on our past.

1 Agel (2al i en tero Ri vera, Workers' Struggle in Puerto Rtco: a docutnentary stlldr,
Nenv York, 1976, pp 6-7. This is a pub]ication of a grollp of radical historians
and social scientists called Centro de Estudios (le la Realidad Puertoriqueno.
2 I ssa G Shi vj i, Class Struggle in Tanzania, New York, 1976, p SS .
3 Rodolfo Stavenhagen, Between underdevelopment and revolution: a Latin American
perspective, De l h i, I 981, pp 1 84 -1 8 6.
4 Jean Chesneaux, Pasts and Futures, London, 1978, p 19.
5 Peter Burke, "People's history and total history", in Raphael Samuel ted.),
People's history and Socialist tA1eory, 1 ondon, 1981, p 4.

This content downloaded from 129.78.139.29 on Mon, 11 Mar 2019 06:31:11 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 SOCIAL SCIENTIST

16

6 Emmanuel Le Roy Ladurie, The territory of the historian, Chicago, 1979.

7 Jean-Paul Sartre,1967,
Harmond sworth, "Preface",
p 1 3. Frantz Fanon, The Wretched of the Earth,
8 Frantz Fanon, ibid, p p 115-1 16.

9 E J Hobsbawm, "The historians' group", in M Cornforth (ed ), Rebels and

their causes: essays in honour of A L Morton, London, 1978, p 44; Hobsbawm
apart.
covers the story till 1956 when the CPSU Congress rent the Marxist group
10 Raphael Samuel, op cit, pp xv-xvi.
Il W W Hunter, The annalsotruralBengal, London, 1883 (Ist ed, 1868).
12 Bczz1kim Rachanavali, Calcutta, B S 1366, ed. J B Bagal Vol ll, p 330, "S
few words on Bangal history"; p 336, "History of Bengal". Rabindra
Rachanavali (Vishwabharati ed.), Vol IV, p 377, "Bharatvarsha"; Vol XVIII,
p 437,im"History
Musl of Bharatvarsha".
chron i clers along with Bri tiBankim Chandra is highly critical of the
sh hi storians.
13London,
D D K1(379,osambi,
p 10.
The el/ltlare cted civilioatioz of Astcieslt lilclict ial Hid toricl outlille,
14and
S Bhattacharya, ''Paradigllls lost: notes on social history in luds;l", Eco/lolniC
PoliticQl Weekly, Vol XVIJ, Apri l 1982 , pp 690 -696.
15 tthomas Kuhn, The Structllre of scientific revollltions, Chicago, l962.
16 Cf R Guha, "Review", Indian Econonlic & Social History Review, Vol VI, no. 4,
1969; D Chakrabarty, "The colonial context of the Beng.ll Renaissance",
l H C, 1972; Barlln De,"A critique of the histoIiog1aphy of the trend entitled
BRenaissance", Tndo-Soviet
R Nanda (ed.), op cit, 1975. Symposium, 1973; S Sarkar and others, in
17
IHCBipan Chandra, "Colonialism and modernisation", Prcsidential Addrcss at
XXXII, 1970,pp2-9.

18 A Cablal, Revolution irt Cllinetl, 1970, p 56; I G Shivji, op cit, pp 55-56.

19 Some of tllese works llave been reviewed by me in a forthcoming ICSSR
"Survey of Trenels in Historical Researcl: Social and economic history"
xnhlch
lSabib, includes
R S Sharma and D similar
N Jha. reviews by nharma Kumar, Satish Clzantlra, Irfan

20 R H of
Itistory Tawney,
British The
TradeBriti*Al laboar
Unionism, snoveeslet,
London, 1963. Yale, 1925; lAcly l'elling, A
21 Harold Smith, The British Labollr Movement to 1970, London, 1980.
22 E P Thompson, The making of the Engiish working clsss, Harmondsworlh, 1968
(lst ed, 1963), p 12.

23 A recent collection of essays, R Guha (ed), Subaltern Studies: Js Delhi, l982,

contains excellent essays by a number of historians, including Dr Gyan
Pandey,
include Dr Shahid
any study Amin,
Dr Partha Chatterjee and others; it does not
of the working class.

24 S C Jha, The Indian Trade Union Movement, Calcutta, 1970; V B Karnik, lndiasl
Trade Unions: a survey, Bombay, 1960; A S Mathur & J S Mathur, Trade anion
movement in India, Allahabad, 1957; C Revri, The Indian trade union movement:
an outline history 1880-1947, Delh;, 1972; G K Sharma, Labour movement in
India, Delhi, 1963. The recent work of Sukomal Sen, Working class of India:
history of emergence and movement, 1830-1970, Calcutta, 1979, stands apart
as a more comprehensive study, well-documented in parts.
25 E J Hobsbawm, in John Foster, Class struggle and the indastrial revotution,
London, 1974, Foreword.

26 Moises Poblete Trancoso & B G Burnett, The rise of the Latin American labo1lr
movement, New York, 1960, pp 14, 54, 59, 77, on features of the trade vlnions;
W A Beling, Modernisation and African labour: a Tunisian case stlldy, New York,
1965, p 50 et seq on the trade unions of the metrople vi s-a-vi s the colonial
ones, Sinclair Snow, Pan-American Federation of Labour, Durham, 1964 on

This content downloaded from 129.78.139.29 on Mon, 11 Mar 2019 06:31:11 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 'HISTORY FROM BELOW' 17

olonroismo obrero of the AFL of USA; W A Warmington, A West African

Trade Union, London, 1960, though anti-labour, contains useful information
on leadership.
27 Charles A Myers, Labour Problems in the indllstrialization of India, Combri dge,
Mass, 1958, and M D Morris, The emergence of an industrial lbbollr force in
IndiaJ Bombay, 1965.
28 Chitra Joshi, "Kanpur Textile Labour: some structural characteristics and
aspects of the labour movement 1919-39" (Ph D thesis, J N U, 198l). ch.l. [?
Mazumdar, ;'Labour Supply in early industrialization: the case of the Bombay
text i l e i nd u st ry", Economic History Review, Augu si 1913. Rana j i t Da sguptaw
"Factory labour in eastern India: sources of supply 1865-1947", IESHR,
XIT, September 1976. C P Simmons, "Recruiting and organizing an il)dustrial
labour force in colonial India-tlle case of the coal mining industry 1880-
1929", IESHR, XI1l, September 1977. Vinay Bahl, "Labour in Tata Iron &
Steel Company, Jamshedpr, 1920-1928" (M Phil thesis, J N U, 1975), ch II.
R P Behel, op cit, R K Newmal1, in K N Chaudhuri & ER J Dewey, Economyaztct
Society, Del hi, 1979.
29 P S Gupta, "()rigin alad structuring of thc industrial labour force in India,
18SV-1920", in 3R S Sharma (ed.), Indiasl Society: Historical Probislg, Delhi.
A K Bagchi, Private lel vestment in India 1900-39, Cambridge, 1972, ch. V. The
discussion in tlle above paragrap} rolates to LalitaChakravarty, "Emergence
of a labollr force in a dual economy: 1880-1920", IESHR, XV, July 1978.
30 On Kanpur 1919-39, Chitra Joshi, op cit; and Eco710mic andPolitical WeeAcly,
XVII, nos 44-46, 1981. On Calcutta, R Dasgupta, "Material conditions and
behaviotlral aspects of the Calcutta working class, 1875-99" (mimeo), CSSS,
1979. On Jamshedpur, V. Bahl, op cit. On Bombays R K Newman, "Labour
organisation ln the Bombay cotton mills, 1918-29" (Pl} D thesis, Sussex,
microfilm at Nehru Museum, New Delhi). On plantation labour in Assan1,
Rana Pratap Behels "Plantation labour in Assam, 1900-1930" (M Phil thesis,
1978, JNU). On railway labour nzovement, L R Jagga, "Labour movenlent in
the Railway 1899-1925" (M Phil thesis, JNU, 1978). Studies on a llmited
scale btlt detailed in-depth analyses are exemplified by Ravinder Kumar,
"The Bonabay textile strike, lgl9", IESHN, \'llI. April 1971; Dipesh Chakra-
borsy, "Early Railwaymen in India: Dacoity alld traillwtecking'', in Essays in
HonoutX of Prof. S C Sarkar, Delhi, 1976; Sanat Basu, "Industrial unrest and
growth of labour tInions Jn Bengal, 1920^24", EPW, XIJ, nos. 44-46, 1981.
31 Jurgen Kc7.ynski, 'iCondition of workers, 1880-1950", in V B S1ngh (ed),
Econoslicifistoryof India, 1857-1956, Bombay, 1965; Shreekant A Palekar,
Real wages in India, 1939-50, Bombay, 1962; K Mukerji on trends in real wages
in cotton textile industry in Bombay and Ahmedabad, in jute textile industry
in the period 1900-1951, in Artha Vijnana, vo1 I, no. 1 (1959), vol ItI, no. 2
(1961), and vol Il, no. 1 (1960), respective]y; M D Morris, op cit, Appendix III.
32 J F Petras, 'SClass structure in Latin America", in J D Colfax and J C Roach,
Radical Sociology, New York, 1971, p 310.
33 Mark Holmstrom, South Indian factory workers; their life asld their world,
Cambridge, 1976, p 14,
34 Louis Chevalier, Labouring classes and dangerous classess in Paris dzlrivag the first
half of the nineteentk century, London, 1973, pp 439-440.
35 Rajnarayan Chandavarkar, "Workers' politics and mill districts of Bombay
between tlle wars's, Modern Asian Studies, 15, 3, 1981, pp 603-647. A conzment:
it is possible that if we fail to see the primacy of relations at the point of
prodsetion (and thus the relations and political activity thatnucleated around
the work place), we are likely to exaggerate the weightage of neighbourhood
social 'forces'; especially this seems to be true of the period since the
beginning of eSective unionisation, {e, in Bombay since the middle 1920's.

This content downloaded from 129.78.139.29 on Mon, 11 Mar 2019 06:31:11 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 SOCIAL SCIENTIST
18

36 Radha Kumar, "Ci ty lives: women workers in Bombay cotton texti

1919-39" (M Phil thesis, JNU, 1982).
37 N Bhadra, "The carters of Calcutta, 1870-1930" (mimeo), is an urs
of urban workers in the unorganised sector. For a perceptive cont
picture see, A R Desai and S D Pillai, A profile of an Indian slum, Bom
38 Tbe role of the 'outsialers' or surrogate spokesmen is perhaps a p
internal logic of colonial socicties assigning the intelligentsia
role in the struggle for hegemony. S Bhattacharya, "The intelltg
colonial society", Stadies in History, January 1972, pp 89-104.
39 R K Newman, op cit, arld D Kooiman. "Jobbers and the emergenc
unions
no. in Bombay city", International Revlew of Social Histor
3, 1977.

40 G O I, Home Dept. (Political Branch), February 1920, no. 52J

Director,
June21, C:entral Intelligence, January 12, 1920; also Repor
1920.

41 1927,
Speech of N M Joshi at Ma(lras Labottr Conferencea Krullti,
MCr.

42 Meeru t Con spi racy Ca e: State1nent in the Court of R L Yot k e,

by K N Joglekar, p lS56; statement by S A Dange, pp 2514 et se(X.
43 l927,
Philip Spratt, "1ndian trade union movemellt", Labour Mozlthly,
p 6()6.

44 P-939-T,
"Rules ofMCT.
the C;irni Kamgar Union (Red Flag) Regtd", clatlse 4, Ex

45 Valiya, "The struggle of the working class", TXle CoennluniJt lnte

V1II) October 1, 1931, pp 516-526; "Prospects of the labour mov
1ndia", ibid, VII, October l5, 1930. A]so S P Bhise, Pre.<idetltial Ad
Bombay Textile Workers' Conference, 2I June 1931, Bombay, 193 l .
4G Eg, Jaspal Singh, India's Trade Union leaders, Delhi, 1980, cstimate
per cent of leaders (in a sample of 500 trade union offilce-bearers
'middle-class background'; the latter category is, however, open to q
particulary
pp 54-56. sincc the autllor bases it oll prestige grading vf occupa

47 W A Warmington, A West African trade union, London, p 123; lSru

The Political role of /abour in developing coalntries, Honolu1u, 1953,
115-116; E N1 Kassalow, National Labour ?zOvementS in the po*t-war
New York, 1966, p 23() et seq.

48 E D Murphys "C1ass and commun'ty in India: the Madras Labo

1 9I 8-21", IESHR, XlV, July 1977.
49 Dipesh Chakraborty, "Communal riots alld labour: Bengalss jute m
in the 1890's" (mimeo, CSSS, 1976).
50 S Bhattacharaya, "Capital and labour inBombay city, 1928-29", Econ
Political Weekly, XVl, nos. 42-43, October 1981, on Bombay workers'
ment in communal riots; Chitra Joshi, op cit, chapter V on Kanpur
1931; R Dasgupta, op cit, is critical of Chakraborty's assessmen
'communityconsciousness"of Calcutta worke1s; EARamaswamy's
of Coimbatore textile workers, "Trade unionism and caste in South
ModerBl Asian Studies, X, no. 3, 1976.
51 M Gluckman. "Antropological problems arising from the African in
revolutlon", in A Sollthal1, Social changein modern Africa, London, 19
this is
Rhode si a
a. study of tribalism among immigrant African miners i

52 V K Jayawardena, The riseof the labour movement in Ceylon, Durha

re. Tamil and Ceylonese u7orkers. Indonesia should be an interesting
study with not less than four distinct communities livjng in close
contact; Cf W F Wertheim (ed), TZle Indonesian TosXn, The Hague, 195

This content downloaded from 129.78.139.29 on Mon, 11 Mar 2019 06:31:11 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 'HISTORY FROM BELOW' 19

53 E P Thompson, op cit, pp 78t-783, 787, Part IlT.

54 Government of India, ('ommittee on l iteracy among industrial workers
showed the extent of illiteracy in the age group 16-45 years to be 62.85 per
cent (highest in Andhra Pradesh, 91.4 per cent, and lowest iIl Maharastra,
48.7 per cent), cited in V B Singh, Wage pattern, mobility and savings of workers
in India, Bombay, l 973, p l 33.
55 Of the five categories of oral tradition, Jan Vallsilla, Oral tradition: a study in
historical metAlodology (1965) mentions, alJ are to bv found in lndia and have
been used (especia11y panegyrics of bards and genealogies) in pre-modern
hi story.
56 S Bhattacharya, ''Culttlral and social constraints on technological innova-
tion", IncSian Economic & Social History Review, Vol II, 1966.
57 A A Alve's speech at workers' meeting, Nagu Sayaji Wadi7 Bombay, Jtlly 31,
1928, MCt proceedings, Exhibit, p 1706.
58 KssIti, Bolllbay, Jlxly 15, 1928J MC"I'.
5') P>l 1l Tllollll > n, rXle vC)ice of tAlc /)clst: vx (ll his fcsr.y, ()x for(l, 1 ()7 8, p 7 .
6() C't tt J Fltbsbasvlll, "Pronl social histOly lc) history oF socict\'s, L)cze/clllls,
1t)71 .
(il Ciallgaralll alld Jayaralll Pan(ltl Devag, Cirzli gh)rkerK, Phzttltcz (publisile(l by
Girnl Kal]gar Unlell, F;ebruary (j, 1929, pricc 2 ple;c), MCT Exhlbit, p 940-1.
62 In this conlecDticon f would like to melltton tlle llrbent lleed to preserve one
of ollr msljot sotllces, tlle workillg class jollrn.lls. 1I1 the period l am
*vorking on ,I substantl.ll series is a.vil.lble only for tle Kranti; of tlle weekly,
Payat-e-Mazdoor citld tllc more irreglllal periodicals like The Workers' WeeklJ?,
Tfie New Spnrk, Sveicllist, we have oll]y a broken series. Some of the pamphlets
falld le.lflets htloze bcen presesved, th.lnks to the diligence o' thc Bombay C1D.
63 Raphacl Salllllc i, op Cit, p XYi i .
64 I boll-owFfco(!ol Shtlllill's p111ase illulrlictl 1() tllc l?castllltly ill "lllc lrcasalatly
as a lsolitical l.-lctol'', ill Sll;+lliz (C(1.), PC{ISz}1fS BlZtd PeTl5r1Z1t Societies, "J-
m c?n d swo r I h , 1971, tr 258 .

65 Cf Jcctil Chesrleaux on thz 'Wess<Jllitil Chillesell^Ss9' of 811e C.'llis1ese LeJholtr

Movemewlt1919-27 Stcirl10ld, 19f8 (tl FIMWleight). 1?p41()41
66 Mctlllnotlei Elllascinv Cltt5'z' (.tolBfiiCt ltl EgApt, 1945-7() Ncsv Yv1k, 1(973, p 39.
Artilct Tt1dc1} .llld L IXlztilisOv (cds ), S'cRciz71 S'tcirtificzatizolt in Africa, Ncw York,
1970,andPCLIQyd, rhezzeev elitea ilt tropical Africcx, Lolaciol1, 1966, raised
th1s question earlicl, bLlt moIc in st WCbCliAIl fr<llll£WOrk thiln .IIXiAll
(Tutlen and I'lornicov, p 90 es1t 5er1 rIlltl 1>10yt1, 1r1z 53-58)
67 I G Shivij;> ClrzsJ strloggle in Tanzania7 Mont111y Resiew, N Y, 1976, p 18
68 Mohmood Mam(lani, PoliticsalzdClczss,£*rezlriosz isJ Ug>lta, Monthly Review,
NY, 1979, pp 10-11.

69 G Arriglli and J S Saul, Essays iel the political ecoszosrly of Africa New York,
1973.

70 Richard Saadbrook, Proletarinstlnd Africancapitalisn1: the Kenyasz case, 1960-72,

Cambridge, 1975, p 19i.

71 Ali A Mazrtli, "Casualties, of an underdeveloped class stn1cture", in WA

Shack and E P Skinner (eds), Stras?gers in African Society, Berkeley, 1979,
pp 261-965.

72 Gavin Kitching, Class and economic change in Kenya 1905-1970, Yale, 1980, p 4
et seg. We have refelred mainly to eastern and north Africa here sinca the
regi on has a certan measure of un i ty. Also see Belinda Bozzoli, The political
atllre of a ruling class: capifal and ideology ift Sourfi Africa, lS9O-1933, London,
1981 (a Ph D thesis nSrittell at the tini+ crsity of Sussex, based on a Grzmsci;1n
framework).

This content downloaded from 129.78.139.29 on Mon, 11 Mar 2019 06:31:11 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 20 SOCIAL SCIENTIST

73 John Foster, Class struggle at7d the industrial revolution: early capitalism in three
Engltsh towns, London, 1974, talks of two levels of incompleteness: "There is
that of the individual 'community'-nevermuch more than an arbitrary geo-
graphical bite out of a larger political system. And there is that of the system
itself-seen statically at a particular moment in time" (pp 2-3).
74 PeterBurke has in mind this reservation when he unfavourably compares
'history from below' with Braudel's 'total history', 'people's history and total
history' in R Samuel, op cit. One also recalls Tom Nairn's extended review of
E P Thompson's work recommending 'history from above' to complement
'history from below' in R Blackburn (ed), ldeology in Social Sciences, London,
]972.
75 I now realise that the problelll was rather oversileplified in S Bhattacharya,
"Cotton mills aIld spinnillg wheels", F.conomic and Political Weekly, Vol XT,
Novcmber 14 1976.

This content downloaded from 129.78.139.29 on Mon, 11 Mar 2019 06:31:11 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms