Indigenous Knowledge, Beliefs, Rituals and Practices Associated with Fishing
Anthropology of Fishing:
1. Fishing is a means of livelihood and subsistence for many rural and coastal communities across the world. It is an ancient occupation dating back to pre-historic times (Collins, 1976). 2. As a subject of anthropological interest, Palsson (1991) argues that fishers and fishing have been part of the anthropological enterprise since the subject emerged with the expansion of Europe overseas from the 15th century on. He points out that anthropology itself developed through encounters with other peoples and cultures associated with lands across uncharted waters. Palsson goes on to argue that anthropology, as the study of humanity, is as much the child of seafaring as colonialism and references to fish, fishers and fishing are found throughout the anthropological literature.
3. Lagoon and deep-sea fishing were central to Malinowski’s work on the Trobrianders of Papua New Guinea (1918) and
4. Mauss’s (1979) work on the band-organized coastal Inuit of Canada provides an early statement of the relation between what Mauss referred to as organic and super organic culture.
5. 19th century evolutionists such as Morgan (1928) saw fishing as a central element in the development of the human species, describing fishing as a form of hunting and gathering. Others, such as Engels (1942) paid little attention to fishing, a circumstance that has given rise to difficulties in Marxist anthropological attempts to analyse fishing economies.
6. One of the first detailed ethnographically based longitudinal studies of small-scale fishers was that of Firth (1941, 1966) who did research among Malay fishermen in the 1930s and 1960s.
7. Acheson’s (1981) review of the anthropology of fishing literature shows how fishermen have developed a wide variety of norms and institutions to share risk, establish de facto property rights over fish, reduce competition, ensure markets, gain access to information about the locations of fish stock and so on.
8. In the past, the study of fishing and fishing peoples attracted less anthropological interest than that devoted to the study of agrarian communities. More recently, interest in fisheries has grown (Acheson, 1989; Balland & Platteau, 1996; Berkes et al., 1989; Broomley, 1992; Dyer and McGoodwin, 1994; Khnudesen, 1995; McCay & Acheson, 1987; McCay & Carolyn, 1990; Pomeroy, 1994; Berkes, 1985; Leal, 1996 & 1998) and the anthropology of fishing is now an established specialization with its own journal Maritime Anthropological Studies (MAST), which has been revived recently.
9. Anthropologists and historians have largely ignored Bengali and Bangladeshi fishers, concentrating on peasant communities (Bandyopadhyay, 1990, 1993; Bandyopadhyay, et al., 1994; Bose, 1986; Guha, 1983; Hartmann and Boyce, 1983; Pokrant, Reeves and McGuire, 1999; Ray, 1979; Rozario, 1992; van Schendel, 1982).
10. Historical and administrative studies are written by some historians and British colonial officials (Buchanan-Hamilton (1877), Das (1931, 1932), De (1910), Gupta (1908), Hora (1948), Hunter (1877), Jack (1916), O’Malley (1908, 1923), and Raychoudhuri (1908). There is also a contemporary literature written between 1947 and 2003. Included here are Indian studies by Barman (1963), Pramanik (1993), Ray (1979), Sanyal (1965), Saha (1970) and Bangladesh studies by Aguero (1989), Alam (1998), Alam (2001), Blowfield and Haque (1995), Habib (1992), and Pokrant & Rashid (1997).
11. Another body of literature consists of literary sources, particularly novels written on different fishing contexts and places. These novels provide unique descriptions of the broader structures of fishing communities at different periods of time (Pokrant and Reeves, 1998). They include Padma River Boatman by Manik Bandopadhayaya (1990), A River Called Titas by Advaita Malla Barman (1963), Ganga by Shamaresh Basu (1963) and Poka Makorer Ghar Basati by Selina Hossain (1986).
12. Risley (1981) in his study The Tribes and Caste of Bengal, mentioned that originally non-Hindu fisher-hunter-gatherers, converted to Hinduism and many became settled as agriculturists even attaining non-cultivating landlord status in such areas as Medinipur (West Bengal), but a large minority remained fishers.
13. According to the 1901 census, there were some 550,000 fishers in Bengal of which over 95 per cent was Hindu (Koibortta, Kewat, Malo/Jhalo/Jaliya, Tiwar/tiyar (Rajbangshi), Namasudra (Jiani/charal), Das Shikari (Rajbangshi) and Berua). Considered unclean by Brahmins and other high castes, they lived in separate communities, practiced endogamy (in-group marriage) and mixed only with their caste equals. Socially despised, some tried to leave their fishing profession through accumulating wealth and adopting the ritual and social practices of higher caste communities. Among the Hindus, the largest fishing caste or jati in old Bengal was the Kaibarta/ Koibortta and they are thought to have been one of the region’s earliest inhabitants (Risley, 1981). In another study Russell & Hira Lal (1916) mentioned that the Kaibartta/ Koibortta consider fishing to have been their original occupation and tell a story to the effect that their ancestors saved the deity in their boat on the occasion of the deluge. In return, they were given the power of catching three or four times as many fish as others.
The main Muslim fishers in historic Bangladesh were Mahimal/Maimal, Nikari, Gutia, Jelia, Jiani, Dhawa, Abdal, Kalwar, Bebajia/Bediya/Mal Baidya, Dalatitya, Chaklai, and Dohuiriya. Today, the Muslim fishers can be classified into two groups: the Mahimal/ Mahefarosh and the rest. Mahemal (from the Persian Mahe meaning ‘fish’ and farosh meaning vendor and mohol meaning ‘place’ or ‘body’) are concentrated in the Northeast region of Bangladesh, including Kishoregonj, Sunamgonj and Sylhet, and are probably the oldest Muslim fishing group in Bengal. Another fishing community, the Magh, were Buddhist and lived in Southeast Bangladesh (see Pokrant, 1997).
As the largest fishing caste, the Koibortta, consider fishing to be their original occupation and claim that their ancestors saved the deity in their boat on the occasion of the deluge. In return, they were given the power of catching three or four times as many fish as others (see Dumont, 1987; Kotani, 1997; Russell and Lal, 1975; Sanyal, 1981). Risley (1981) identifies Koibortta as one of the earliest inhabitants of Bengal (1981, p. 376).
IK in Fishing
In general, indigenous fishing knowledge includes both material and non-material /spiritual aspects and the beliefs and rituals associated with them. Robben (1989, p.7), following Bourdieu (1977) and others, emphasises the practical activities through which people cope in the world and the ways they interpret and define them socially and culturally. The most crucial and defining quality of people is to be found not in what they think but in what they do and how they do what they do, namely, attending to everyday activities, tasks and demands of their social worlds. Robben also comments that fishers’ knowledge is taken-for-granted, tacit and based on their: ‘…actions in supernatural, moral, ideological, or ecological context. It is not static and absolute, but dynamic and historical. What seems the most insightful assessment at one point may prove to be less than perfect and complete in another context or at another time’ (Robben, 1989).
According to Durkheim (1961), such rites and rituals are the symbolic expression of the identity and cohesion of the people of the society and help to preserve and perpetuate the values through which society continually expresses itself. In other words, such rituals reaffirm group membership and reinforce group solidarity. They also enable every member of the group to carry out their tasks with confidence in the face of uncertainty, risk and anxiety (Durkheim, 1961; Malinowski, 1960).
Sillitoe emphasises the spatially and contextually defined nature of IK, arguing that IK is embedded within its distinct geographical, ecological or socio-cultural contexts (Sillitoe, 1998b; IIRR1, 9996) which give it meaning and direction. For example, to get a good catch, fishers depend on their ‘indigenous technical knowledge’ (Sillitoe, 1998c) and experience and on supernatural forces for which they perform rituals and worship specific deities (see also Robben, 1989, pp. 3-4). A change of context or space or de-contextualization might result in a change in the status and meaning of knowledge and practices because each community situates its fishing strategies in a unique context of personal interest and cultural significance which represents what is important for it and gives directions to the community’s choices in life (Robben, 1989).
Fishing Rituals
Several fishing peoples in India Ganga Ma. Beside this, they also observe various practices, including worship and fasting, in the hope of keeping their male partners free from danger and assuring their safe return from the river or sea. The popular novel by Kerala writer Thakazhi Sivesankara Pillai (1962), Chemmeen, draws on this theme emphasising that among Kerala fishers it is women, by their prayers and chastity, who bring the man home safe from the sea.
Ram (1991, p. 51) shows how Mukkuvar fishers depend on a ritualisation of their fishing technology in controlling certain environments of fishing. To the Mukkuvars, all the tools of trade, their fishing craft and gear, particularly prior to their first use at sea, must receive religious consecration. Parish priests pray over the craft and offer the insurance of divine blessings for the future luck and safety of the craft. Individuals in fishing villages who claim some knowledge of Hindu ‘mantra vaadam’, described by a practitioner as the juggling of sounds or ‘aksharam’ said to have begun with the origin of the world itself, are able to exchange their knowledge for a share in the fishing catch. By utilising their ‘mantram’ to attract fish into nets (and also deflect fish out of the nets of the rivals) these men collect five per cent of the total catch from the crew they have helped. Significantly, the type of fishing where magic is used most frequently is the ‘KaramaDi’ or beach-seine, precisely where human skills and expertise are least related to predictable levels of productivity (Ram, 1991, pp. 50-51). Ram found that many of the fishing rituals are related to fisher women and girls. Mukkuvars believe that wrongful conduct on the part of women may be responsible for the failure of economic ventures at sea and may be regarded as putting at risk the safety and welfare of the men themselves (Ram, 1991: 51).
As noted earlier, IK is neither timeless nor static. For example, Bavinck’s (2001) study of the Coromandel Coast fishing community of Tamil Nadu describes how traditional artisanal fishing communities of Tamil Nadu are incorporating new technologies in modification of their traditional fishing crafts (fishing nets and boats) and discusses the issue of conflicts and cohesions which exists in their technical innovations and motorisation of artisanal fishing crafts. His study also deals with the myths and realities in regulating the common pool marine fisheries resources in Tamil Nadu.
Rashid’s (2005) shows that Krishnapur fishers have their own kinds of ‘ecological’ knowledge on fish movements, diseases, seasonal changes, water flows and fish habitats as well as particular beliefs and ritual practices which underpin and give meaning to their fishing activities. However, there are no detailed ethnographic studies of fishers’ IK in Bangladesh.
Fishing Knowledge and Practices about
1. Fishing Environment and Fish Ecology
2. Knowledge about Fish, Fish Yielding and Fish Habitat
3. Fish Gathering and Water Characteristics
4. Water Ecology, Fishing Weather and Climate Change
5. Knowledge about Fishing Technology, Fishing Gears and Fishing Techniques
6. Knowledge about Fishing Time, Fishing Weather and Fish Production
7. Knowledge about Fish Diseases
8. Knowledge about the use of different types of Fishing Nets, Boats, Traps and other Gears
9. Knowledge about Different Types of Fishing: Jag Fishing, Ber Fishing, Patty Bandh Fishing
10. Knowledge about the Use of Fish as Medicine
11. Knowledge about Making of Different types of Fishing Gears: Gender Role Differentiation
12. Knowledge about Organization of Fishing
13. Beliefs and Rituals associated with Fishing:
a. Ganga Puja
b. Chandi Puja
c. Shani Puja
d. Mangal Chandi Puja
e. Bipad Nashi Puja
Fishing Technology
The fishing people of Bangladesh developed different technologies and knowledge over generations. They use variety of fishing gears or equipment to catch fish. They have various nets in different sizes and shapes. Most common fishing gears are:
|
Gill nets. (Faash Jaal/Current Jaal)
|
|
Seine nets. (Bhasha Jaal/ Ber Jaal)
|
|
Lift nets. (Dharmo Jaal)
|
|
Cast nets. (Jhaki Jaal/ Koni Jaal)
|
|
Drag net or Push net (Moiya Jal)
|
|
Set bag nets (Thela Jaal).
|
|
Falling net (Khoro Jaal)
|
|
Trawl net.
|
|
Spears.
|
|
Long line.
|
|
Hooks. (Borshi)
|
|
Polo
|
In rainy season when there is flood, people use different types of traps considering the depth and current of water. These traps vary in different parts of the country. Some traps are:
Ø Icber Cha.
Ø Bega.
Ø Duba Fund
Ø Darkee
Ø Unta/Aanta
Ø Chai
Ø Tepai
Ø Dheal
Ø Cheng
Ø Chari
Ø Chandi Bair
Ø
Ø Bana
Ø Raboni
Ø Charo
Indigenous Knowledge, Beliefs, Rituals and Practices Associated with Fishing
Reviewed by studynotebd
on
April 30, 2018
Rating:
Reviewed by studynotebd
on
April 30, 2018
Rating:
No comments: