Beyond the ‘Civilizing Mission'

Rajbongshi Resistance and Cultural Resilience in the Face of Colonial Modernity

Abstract

This paper will discuss how the Rajbongshi people of North Bengal and lower Assam countered the ideological, administrative, and cultural onslaught of British colonialism, particularly the so-called civilizing mission, and how they continue to do so in the postcolonial world. Rather than viewing indigenous peoples as mere subjects of change, this paper highlights Rajbongshi agency by focusing on their active processes of adaptation, resistance, and cultural resilience. The analysis is based on extensive qualitative data, including census reports, historical documents, oral traditions, local literature, and narratives that were produced within the community during the colonial period. The paper is methodologically critical-interpretive and interdisciplinary, as it combines a knowledge of post-colonial theory, subaltern studies, and cultural anthropology. It uses the notions of mimicry, Sanskritisation, and surveillance to understand
how the community resisted imposed identities and navigated the system of domination. The Rajbongshis responded through social reform movements, such as the one for the assertion of Kshatriya identity, and direct involvement in agrarian movements, such as the Tebhaga movement. Women made quite a remarkable contribution to these struggles, particularly in the fight against economic exploitation and social patriarchy. Cultural preservation emerged as a crucial mode of resistance alongside the maintenance of folk rituals, indigenous medicine, religious syncretism, and linguistic activism, exemplified by the Kamtapuri language movement. These practices are indicative of a long-standing struggle not only for recognition, but also for reintegration into historical and national discourses. The central argument of this study is that colonial modernity, instead of wholly transforming the Rajbongshi people, triggered new identity politics and cultural assertion, which persist to this day. In doing so, this paper provides a historically contextualised, culturally aware explanation of how marginalised groups reimagine themselves when faced with erasure, marginalization, and systemic inequality.