ABSTRACT
Moving away from the commonplace subject of studying local tribal identities in the North-East studies, this chapter would look into the case of political conflict between the local Bodo tribe of Assam and the Adivasis—Santal, Oraon, Munda tribes—who migrated to Assam from Central India, mainly Jharkhand and Chhattisgarh, since the nineteenth century as labour in the tea plantation industry. On this plank, the group claims Scheduled Tribe status, as their ethnic counterparts enjoy this in Central India and other migrated places, except Assam and Andaman and Nicobar Islands. This, the local tribes of Assam led by Bodos, resist, though they concede that the migrant Adivasis are also tribals, but as migrants they lose the status of Scheduled Tribe and are, therefore, disparagingly labelled as ‘tea- tribes’.
Besides devising political strategy for this, the Bodos have from time to time resorted to violence against the settlers in order to silence their voice. This, instead of suppressing the Adivasi voice, 252bolstered its articulation by political mobilisation and assertion for the ST status. An effort has been made to understand the epistemic premises of tribal indignity theoretically and examine its development empirically through qualitative research method/s. The chapter examines the viability of oral narratives as a social science research tool to evaluate the conflict during COVID-19 times when field work was difficult. It has also taken into account the oral narratives of the Adivasi militants, internally displaced people (who have been victims of Bodo insurgency in 1996–98) exercised through digital medium and telephonic interviews. Through these engagements it has sought to fill the normative and theoretical gap in the subject, which is analysed on the basis of existing literature, both primary and secondary as well as employment of virtual oral narratives as a tool of major research method.
