In e na ional Jou nal o Social Science and Human Resea ch
ISSN (p in ): 2644-0679, ISSN (online): 2644-0695
Volume 08 Issue 11 No embe 2025
DOI: 10.47191/ijssh / 8-i11-78, Impac ac o - 8.007
Page No: 9158-9163
IJSSHR, Volume 08 Issue 11 No embe 2025 www.ijssh .in Page 9158
Lis ening o he Echoes o Ulgulaan in Cho i Munda Au Uska Tee and
Dhuni Tape Tee
Ananya Sinha
PhD English, Uni e si y School o Humani ies and Social Sciences
Gu u Gobind Singh Ind ap as ha Uni e si y, New Delhi.
ABSTRACT: Legacies end o echo in he minds o he masses i hey end o inspi e. I is inhe i ed om a p edecesso , an ances o ,
o he pas om a ious epis emes o knowledge. Indian his o y has wi nessed nume ous legends who a e celeb a ed ac oss cul u es
as me apho s o eedom. Some end o be my hs, some a e eal-li e inciden s, while some could be a b ew al oge he . Wha do hese
me apho s o eedom echo? How do hey ansmi hei hough s? This pape a emp s o ace he s o ies o such legacies o he
subal e n in he Indian subcon inen . This pape shall seek o pe cei e he legacy o Bi sa Munda, who was opp essed ye esis ed
all injus ices o socie y. Bi sa Munda is now celeb a ed as a legend o all, ibals and non- ibals, who sing o his esis ance agains
he despo ic socie y. The pape a emp s o lis en o he echoes o Ulgulaan, The G ea Tumul , in Mahaswe a De i’s Cho i Munda
Au Uska Tee and Ha i am Meena’s Dhuni Tape Tee . In he as celes ial space, how does Bi sa Munda’s a ow pie ce h ough
he dis ance o become he alency o p o es ?
KEYWORDS: legacy, Ulgulaan, Bi sa Munda, memo y, esis ance, e olu ion.
Ac oss cul u es, socie ies documen hei s o ies o legends and hei legacies ha end o lea e an imp ession on he minds o
indi iduals and he collec i e. Legacies eside in a chi es, in monumen s, in sh ines and ceno aphs, in ch onicles and hei looms;
hey li e in he memo ies o he people, in hei quie ecollec ions. Th ough o al adi ions, eco ded speeches, and endu ing
agmen s o es imony, socie ies pass down he names and oices o he succeeding gene a ions. Ra he han emaining e he ed o
hei an h opological his o y as a s a ic inhe i ance, hey engage in a dialogic
1
p ocess wi h i , using his o ical memo y wi h he
discu si e, in ellec ual, and poli ical impe a i es o he p esen ha a e na a ed as s o ies ac oss cul u es and epochs.
S o ies a e no me ely ac s o na a ion; hey a e eposi o ies o cul u al memo y ha ansmi alues, his o ies, and
iden i ies ac oss gene a ions. The na a i e unc ions as a “connec i e s uc u e” ha links pas e en s o p esen consciousness,
allowing a communi y o ecognise i sel in ime (Assmann 2011). Th ough o al adi ions, olk ales, songs, and my hs, s o ies keep
ali e he memo y o s uggles, ic o ies, and e hical posi ions ha migh o he wise be e ased om o icial his o y. These s o ies
na a e he li es o hose who ha e da ed o ques ion and de y he uncon es ed me ana a i e ‘ he Wo d’ no only as my hic
ecollec ions o his o ical eco ds, bu as essen ially endu ing symbols o ans o ma ion. Challenging his dominan discou se ha
al e s eali y is a dis up i e ac : i des abilises he au ho i y ha claims uni e sali y and exposes i as a human cons uc . The ac o
ques ioning opens up space o al e na i e oices, subal e n memo ies, and eimagining jus ice. Bu when ‘ he Wo d’ is le
unchallenged, i ossilises in o dogma, making esis ance seem u ile and e en un hinkable.
Ica us, bo ne alo on wings o wax and ea he , becomes a pa able no me ely o hub is, bu o he yea ning o escape
cons ain . His a he ’s wa ning o “ ly nei he oo low no oo high”(O id, ans. 2004) ep esen s he oice o p agma ic cau ion,
an echo o socie al no ms ha seek o empe ambi ion. No wi hs anding he isk, Ica us esis s. The my h o Ica us hus becomes
mo e han memo y wi hin he imagina ion o hose who ollow, as someone who con on s he me aphysical limi s o human
ambi ion and ans o ms he legacy o a me e cau iona y ale. Spa acus, a Th acian ensla ed by he Roman Empi e, in con as ,
ises om he a enas and esis s sla e y and opp ession. His e ol in 73 BCE, hough c ushed, esounds h ough his o y as a adical
challenge o ins i u ionalised dehumanisa ion. Ica us and Spa acus eme ge o become he icons o hei communi ies and beyond
who esis dominan oices in p o oundly di e en ways, ne e heless e use o accep he e ms o hei con ainmen . Thei
1
Mikhail Bakh in de ines dialogism as he p inciple ha meaning is p oduced h ough in e ac ion among oices, discou ses, and
pe spec i es, a he han by a single au ho i a i e oice (The Dialogic Imagina ion 1981, pp. 276–77). Dialogism is he condi ion
o all language: e e y wo d esponds o wha has been said be o e and an icipa es esponses.
Lis ening o he Echoes o Ulgulaan in Cho i Munda Au Uska Tee and Dhuni Tape Tee
IJSSHR, Volume 08 Issue 11 No embe 2025 www.ijssh .in Page 9159
esis ance, o en a epe oi e o pe sonal anecdo es in e mingled wi h he causali y o he collec i e hough esul ing in dea h, enac s
a di e en kind o ic o y: a e olu ion whe e agency is asse ed in he ace o unjus and de ined con ol o li e.
This pape seeks o explo e he legacy o Bi sa Munda wi hin he Indian subcon inen , as p ese ed and eimagined h ough
bo h a chi al aces and collec i e memo y, pa icula ly as ep esen ed in Mahaswe a De i’s Cho i Munda au Uska
Tee and Ha i am Meena’s Dhuni Tape Tee . I shall a emp o ace how iconog aphe s o a ce ain space- ime, oo ed in speci ic
his o ical and cul u al coo dina es, o en anscend hei physicali y. The legacies ha communica e ac oss gene a ions, spoken i s
o hei immedia e con empo a ies and hen o hose ye o come, a e no me ely s a ic symbols bu e ol ing emblems o esis ance
ha lowe h. I shall y o ind how he succeeding gene a ions emembe , e ame, and celeb a e he legacy o Bi sa Munda no
me ely as a his o ical igu e, bu as a li ing o ce in he memo y and cul u al imagina ion.
Resis ance a i s mos p imal le el is ied o su i al. E e y o ganism, including humans, esis s h ea s o li e, au onomy,
and agency. O e ime, ou ances o s had o esis ex e nal h ea s o su i e, in due cou se o which, his biological esis ance
e ol ed o become psychological, cul u al, and in ellec ual. Resis ance in con ex o human beings, he eby is exis en ial, emo ional
and epis emological p axis o li e. While in eligion and e hics, esis ance is ied o mo al o i ude, whe e ma y s, p ophe s, and
sain s esis wo ldly emp a ions o opp essi e sys ems; in li e a u e, esis ance shapes he a c o na a i e, whe e cha ac e s esis
a e, injus ice, o e en in e nal doub s. Qui e o en, hey ques ion and challenge he au ho i a i e change ha eels unjus and
h ea ens hei amilia i y. Resis ance does no limi i sel o exis ing jus as a eac ion; a he , i becomes a mode o being, a ges u e
o ca e, and o en, an ac o imagina ion ha pulses h ough human expe ience, cons an ly in nego ia ion wi h sys ems, sel es, and
s o ies. Bashi Bhad a w i es, // (2) “I is in opposi ion ha
my being inds i s shape;
I honou my enemies, o hey help me g ow.” ™
Bi sa Munda is emembe ed as one “made up o ligh , o smoke, o a s ill pond” (Ne uda 364), a luminous igu e who
he alded he cla ion call o Ulgulaan
2
, he his o ic ebellion o he Mundas agains en enched s uc u es o domina ion in colonial
India. Mahaswe a De i, in he no el Jungle ke Da edaa , ende s a ic ionalised ye deeply poli ical na a i e o he subal e n, a
pe ec example o wha Said calls a “ ex ha esis s he ex ”. The na a i e depic s he coun e -discu si e ac o he Mundas o
Jha khand, who emain la gely absen om o icial his o ical discou se excep when hey e up in o esis ance. I bea s wi ness o a
space- ime in Indian his o y when he “colonised popula ions whose oices and agency we e silenced o mis ep esen ed in colonial
a chi es and na ionalis his o iog aphy” (Guha 45). The subal e n o Sou h Asia has been s eeped in bonded labou , colonial
opp ession, and cas e-d i en iolence du ing he nine een h cen u y, and his o m o se i ude has disp opo iona ely a ge ed
Adi asis, Dali s, and o he ma ginalised g oups, building a gene a ional ap o sus ain sys emic iolence.
Mahaswe a De i shows ha colonisa ion was no jus o land bu o meaning; o wha “ o es ,” “law,” and “jus ice”
hemsel es mean . Be o e he ad en o colonial in e en ion, he o es unc ioned as mo e han a physical space; i was a ib an
locus o cul u e, spi i uali y, and sus enance o he ibals. Fo he Mundas o he Cho anagpu egion, he o es was a communal
en i y, in eg al o e e yday li e, p o iding ood, uel, medicine, i ual si es, and he space o shi ing cul i a ion. The imposi ion o
he Indian Fo es Ac s o 1865 and 1878 adically al e ed his ela ionship by ede ining he o es as s a e p ope y. Th ough his
legal and adminis a i e ac o naming, he o es was ans o med om a sha ed commons in o a egula ed esou ce, subjec o
managemen , axa ion, and policing. Mahaswe a De i’s Jungle Ke Da eda cap u es he agic i ony o his ans o ma ion: hose
who had always belonged o he o es , and o whom he o es igh ully belonged, we e compelled o pe i ion and e en ebel o
eclaim igh s ha had ne e be o e equi ed jus i ica ion. He na a i e insis s ha he o es canno be unde s ood me ely as an
economic esou ce bu as a poli ical and spi i ual commons ha mus be eclaimed. I unmasks he colonial my h o he o es as
‘emp y’ and eclaims i as a li ing space o his o y and iden i y. The na a i e also documen s he his o ical and colonial
displacemen o he Mundas, and also how local agen s, he zaminda s, moneylende s, and bu eauc a s who pe pe ua ed hei
subjuga ion. She w i es,
Bi sa ke ansh ke adipu ushon ne cho anagpu ki nee dali hi, lekin aja hue au . Usse hama i dha i pa , junglon mei
baha se logon ne aaka kabja jama lia, sab cheen lia. Doos i jaa ke, doos e desh ke aadmiyon ne. Jo aaye, ehi ‘diku’
he. (De i 23)
The o e a he s o Bi sa’s lineage laid he ounda ion o Cho anagpu , ye he c own wen o o he s. Ou side s came and
seized ou land and o es s, ook e e y hing away. Men o ano he cas e, ano he coun y. Those who came we e he dikus.
™
Mundas e e ed dikus o all he non- ibal o eign in ude s who exploi ed he adi asis, a e m used o hose who a i ed
om ou side and g adually ook con ol o e hei land, esou ces, and imposed hei way o li e. Fo he Adi asis, especially he
2
Ulgulaan e e s o he Munda up ising o 1899–1900, led by Bi sa Munda in he Cho anagpu pla eau. I was bo h a socio-
eligious and poli ical mo emen agains B i ish colonial au ho i y and exploi a i e landlo ds.
Lis ening o he Echoes o Ulgulaan in Cho i Munda Au Uska Tee and Dhuni Tape Tee
IJSSHR, Volume 08 Issue 11 No embe 2025 www.ijssh .in Page 9160
Mundas, his mean a pe sis en cycle o dispossession ha didn’ end wi h he exi o he B i ish. The adi asis ha e li ed by he
p inciple o “ e i o iali y, a o m o peasan and ibal consciousness in which hey a e bound by blood ies on one hand and local
bonds on he o he . They de elop a sense o belongingness o a common lineage and o a sha ed habi a which o e lap wi h one
ano he ha engende s a dual belonging: o a sha ed lineage and o a collec i e habi a which ein o ces he o he ” (Dhanaga e 56).
The Munda communi y adi ionally o ganised i sel h ough he khun ka i sys em, a collec i e landholding p ac ice whe e clans
clea ed and cul i a ed o es pa ches ha became hei ances al p ope y. This sys em bound iden i y o e i o y, as a pe son’s
belonging was a i med h ough ances al pa icipa ion in shaping he land. Such e i o ial igh s p o ided bo h li elihood and
secu i y, h ough access o land and o es p oduce and social cohesion, by p ese ing sha ed i ual spaces and collec i e decision-
making. Colonial in e en ions, howe e , disman led his o de by in oducing indi idual land i les, o es ese a ions, and
zaminda i e enue sys ems, se e ing communi ies om hei commons. This dispossession was mo e han economic loss; i
ac u ed he spi i ual and cul u al connec ion o he land, p omp ing Bi sa Munda’s Ulgulaan, a ebellion demanding he es o a ion
o jal, jangal, zameen: wa e , o es , and land as he basis o li e and jus ice. (32)
The opp ession o ibal communi ies demons a es how his his o ical in usion was no jus a colonial imposi ion bu was
la e sus ained and in ensi ied by local agen s, he moneylende s, landlo ds, and bu eauc a s who con inued he p ojec o
displacemen . Th ough in la ed en s and p eda o y loans, hey d o e Munda amilies in o bonded labou , disman ling
he khun ka i sys em and b eaking hei ances al bond wi h he land. Colonial o es laws c iminalised subsis ence i sel : ga he ing
honey o i ewood became illegal, u ning ibals in o espasse s in he e y o es s ha had nu u ed hem o cen u ies. In a
con e sa ion wi h he people Bi sa ema ks,
diku ko apni palki chahiye, daam munda dega, phi kandhe mei dhoyega! Diku ko jo chhaiye -munda sab dega. Diku
hekeda ko sahab ki adalaa mei ju mana hone pa upay jama ka nge munda log!” au baad mein jaba das i upayein
udha dega munda ko, au bad mei use hi ukhad phekega! (57)
“The Diku wan s his palanquin, we’ll pay o i . Bu who ca ies he bu den? We do.
Wha e e he Diku asks o , we gi e. E en when he con ac o ge s ined, we’ e he ones who pay. Then, when we’ e
gi en all we ha e, he’ll jus cas us aside”.™
In he Indian subcon inen , cas e, when ied wi h class, con inues o s uc u e socie y along he lines o exclusion and
domina ion, making communi ies inhe en ly ulne able. The ibal communi ies a e p ima ily u al, dependen on land and o es ,
and a e inc easingly caugh in he g ip o an exploi a i e ag a ian economy. This economy is shaped by o e lapping s uc u es o
cas e hie a chies, class di isions, and eudal au ho i y, making i di icul o hem o claim ei he jus ice o ep esen a ion. This
dispossession was accompanied by cul u al humilia ion; hei dances and songs we e dismissed as “sa age,” hei es i als de ided,
and e en hei d inking habi s condemned as mo al weakness—while landlo ds and o icials eely consumed liquo wi hou
ep oach. (Said 3) This is sugges i e o wha Edwa d Said calls he powe o discou se, he abili y o empi e o ep esen he
colonised in ways ha jus i y domina ion: “ ep esen a ion i sel is a o m o powe ” (45).
The Adi asi we e pe iphe al o he colonial p ojec and pos colonial na ionhood and we e con inually e ased, displaced,
and c iminalised, bea ing an ideological esemblance o he colonial logic o Rudya d Kipling’s “The Whi e Man’s Bu den” (Kipling
156). Bi sa Munda’s ision o Bi sai
3
can be ead as he slow eme gence o wha Ranaji Guha calls “ he small oice o his o y,” a
coun e -na a i e ha e used silence and sough o eo de bo h he mo al and poli ical uni e se o he Mundas (53). In his sense,
Ulgulaan becomes mo e han a localised peasan up ising; i becomes pa o a la ge e hical and his o ical con inuum. Like Ne uda’s
call o “ ise wi h me agains he o ganisa ion o mise y,” Bi sa Munda sings he Ulgulaan agains no jus all he M Bounde bys o
Coke own bu also he Rai Sahabs o colonial India. (467) A call no me ely o esu ec ion bu philosophical as ib an poli ical
hough which eme ges and is ep esen a i e o he people, by he people and o he people, by someone who is s ead as on he
deck and e en whils he essel o humani y sinks in he con empo a y whi lpool o decadence. This eclama ion esona es wi h
Bhaga Singh’s p ison w i ings, whe e he decla ed, “ ”
(42) (“ he g ea es sin in he wo ld is o ole a e injus ice and silen ly accep wha is w ong”).
Mahaswe a De i p esen s Bi sa no as a dis an , lawless messiah bu as a leade deeply oo ed in he s uggles o his
people, u ning daily humilia ions in o a sha ed language o esis ance. His call o ac ion augh he Mundas ha eclaiming he
o es was insepa able om eclaiming hei own sense o sel and digni y. This up ising was no an explosion bu a slow-bu ning
i e buil h ough small ac s, songs, and e usals ha g adually shaped a collec i e consciousness. Like Shakespea e’s peasan s
in Co iolanus, who insis ha he people a e he ci y, Bi sa’s ollowe s a i med ha jal, jangal, jameen igh ully belonged o hose
who li ed wi h and ca ed o hem, no o zaminda s o he colonial s a e. The mo emen ’s millena ian d eams and occasional
iolence emind us ha i was no an idealised my h bu a li ing, human e olu ion. sugges ing ha cul u al li e, songs, dances, and
3
K.S. Singh, The Dus S o m and he Hanging Mis : A S udy o Bi sa Munda and His Mo emen in Cho anagpu (1874–
1901) (Calcu a: Fi ma KLM, 1983), 215–220.
Lis ening o he Echoes o Ulgulaan in Cho i Munda Au Uska Tee and Dhuni Tape Tee
IJSSHR, Volume 08 Issue 11 No embe 2025 www.ijssh .in Page 9161
p aye s, emains a i al sou ce o cou age e en in imes o opp ession. The call o Abua Dishoom Abua Raj
4
ames Bi sai as a
e olu ion o consciousness, as Auden w i es “ he ligh s mus ne e go ou , he music mus always play,” he s uggle o eclaim
land, ood, and ai h becomes a he same ime a s uggle o eclaim he digni y o esis , o make mis akes, and o imagine a u u e
ee om se i ude. (Shah 34)
Bi sa’s Ulgulaan hus becomes mo e han a singula his o ical e en ; i e ol es in o a li ing cul u al memo y, sus ained
h ough song, olklo e, and i ual p ac ice. His esis ance agains he dominan and he dic a o ial was ecip oca ed no jus by he
Mundas hemsel es bu also O aons and he Hindu ou cas es, hose who, oo, bo e he weigh o cas eis exclusion and economic
exploi a ion. Awa e o he consequences o being a ‘speaking subal e n’ in he Indian socie y, he da es o alk o a adical change
in human sensibili ies, in oking ans o ma ion. Bi sa Munda’s ision o Bi sai can be unde s ood as a p ojec o ans o ma i e
consciousness, an inne o ce ha uels collec i e esis ance agains colonial domina ion and eudal exploi a ion. Bi sa’s oice,
hough no longe physically p esen , con inues o esona e among he aawam ( he people), no as a dis an command bu as an
in ima e, a ec i e p esence. This is no me ely “wha he hunde said” (Elio 36); a he , i is wha one migh call a “s uc u e o
eeling”, a li ed, ongoing p ocess o ein e p e ing esis ance h ough new gene a ions (Williams 245). The Bi sai hus ci cula es
in he public imagina ion, inding new di ec ions h ough indi ec ions, con inually e i alising he discou se o libe a ion and
subal e n digni y.
Mahaswe a De i’s Cho i Munda Au Uska Tee echoes he c y o ebellion and esilience among he ibals h ough he
cha ac e o Dhani Munda. Dhani Munda ca ies his legacy o wa d, connec ing Bi sa’s ision o he poli ical awa eness o he
younge gene a ion. Th ough Dhani’s igh agains exploi a ion, whe he unde B i ish colonial ule, eudal landlo ds, o he pos -
independence s a e, De i depic s ha ibal esis ance is no a single e en bu a “con inuous nego ia ion wi h powe ”. (Guha 46)
Th ough Dhani Munda, who ecoun s he memo ies o ea lie up isings, he ex shows how Bi sa’s d eam becomes mo e han a
his o ical e en ; i becomes a li ing idea ha ci cula es h ough s o ies, songs, and memo y. Mahaswe a w i es o Dhani’s wo ds
alling “like a pa o ’s cha e ,” sugges ing bo h epe i ion and ansmission: a hy hm ha ca ies he pas in o he p esen . Cho i
Munda and His A ow aces i s an h opological his o y and builds a b idge be ween he con empo a y condi ion o he subal e n and
hei his o ical li e wo lds encompassing adi ions, belie sys ems, and modes o social o ganisa ion which ha e been p o oundly
al e ed by colonial domina ion, eudal exploi a ion, and pos colonial in e en ions. De i’s na a i e cap u es, h ough Cho i Munda
and his con empo a ies, how hese s uc u es o li e we e eshaped. The no el o eg ounds no only he losses imposed on he
Adi asis bu also hei c ea i e nego ia ions wi h change.
Munda logon ki bhasha ki lipi nahi hai. Islie mah a poo n ghan anon ki kahani banak e ki dan i bana de e hai, gana
banaka akh e hain. Iss a ah, kissa au gee banak Dhani Cho i Munda ke pass lau aa a hai. (37)
The Munda people possess no w i en sc ip o hei language; hus, hey ans o m signi ican e en s in o s o ies ha a e
p ese ed as legend and ca ied o wa d in song. In his way, h ough ballads and olklo e, Dhani e u ns o Cho i Munda.
™
The ela ionship be ween Cho i and Dhani unde sco es he communal na u e o memo y. Th ough Dhani and Cho i’s
ela ionship, a legacy o empowe men is sus ained; an inhe i ance ha is no bes owed bu cul i a ed om wi hin. I is h ough
imbibing “ he pas ness o he pas ” (Elio , 24) ha Cho i lea ns o he s uggle o his ances o s, hei ways o sus enance and digni y
oo ed in soil, cul u e and collec i e memo y. Dhani’s s o y elling becomes i sel a weapon, sus aining he mo al o ce o esis ance
ac oss gene a ions and allowing Ulgulaan o su i e as bo h memo y and possibili y. The na a i e depic s how, h ough Dhani’s
guidance, he younge gene a ion is in oduced o Bi sai , he cul u al and ideological legacy o Bi sa Munda han dependence on
he eli es o colonial/ eudal pa ons. De i w i es,
Bhagwaan Munda-diku logon ki a ah bhaa khane ke lie lade he. Jin kaa on se lade he, unme ye bhi ek kaa an ha.
Dhani use sa e pu ane id ohon ki ba ein o e ki a ah suna a. (36)
Bhagwaan Munda, like o he s, ough e en o he simple digni y o ha ing ice o ea . Among he many easons o which
he ose in de iance, his was one. Dhani would lis en as he ecoun ed he old ebellions, wea ing hei s o ies oge he like
pea ls on a s ing. ™
The people ini ially had “no esis ance agains he cul u al in asion ha ook place. I was cul u al, economic, i was
connec ed wi h he land, wi h e e y hing, hey wan o ob he ibe o e e y hing” (Spi ak 7). The cla ion call ha echoes in he
li es o Cho i kindles a philosophical in en o media e be ween he s uggles and su e ings o li e, meanwhile sus aining h ough
he p econdi ions o su i al. Beyond ac s o boyco , abs en ion, o seeking al e na i es o opp essi e sys ems, Cho i ac i ely
4
The slogan “Aka Dishum Abua Raj” (li e ally, “Ou Rule in Ou Land”) was cen al o Bi sa Munda’s Ulgulan mo emen
(1899–1900), exp essing he demand o au onomy agains colonial and dikus’ dominance.
Lis ening o he Echoes o Ulgulaan in Cho i Munda Au Uska Tee and Dhuni Tape Tee
IJSSHR, Volume 08 Issue 11 No embe 2025 www.ijssh .in Page 9162
pu sued pa hways o bo h pe sonal and collec i e empowe men by con on ing sys emic loopholes and aligning his s uggle wi h
Dhani Munda’s spi i o esis ance. Ra he han educing Bi sa Munda o a me e icon, De i p ese es his memo y as a li ing
he i age, embodying he ongoing s uggle agains opp ession. Th ough he sub e uge o D ona, Mahaswe a De i c ea es Dhani
Munda, who can ei he be ‘wea ing mo ley’ o be named la e on; his hough s con ain pe cep ions o he socie y and also a adical
iew o eedom is sung and echoes in he s ee . Toge he , hey a icula e a “s uc u e o eeling” o he collec i e, he li ed
expe ience o opp ession and he aspi a ion o eedom (Williams 436).
These ans o ma ions a e mi o ed in he younge gene a ion, who na iga e new social and poli ical eali ies while
e aining he e hical and poli ical consciousness inhe i ed om Bi sa. Cho i Munda, as a li ing eposi o y o memo y, embodies
he con inui y o esis ance and adap a ion: his amed a ow, passed down h ough gene a ions, is bo h a symbol o insu gen legacy
and a p ac ical ool media ing dispu es o e land and au ho i y. This con inui y is mos i idly seen in Cho i’s aining in a che y,
a ibal adi ion passed down h ough i ual and communal p ac ice. Lea ning he a ow is no jus abou physical skill; i is also
an ini ia ion in o he cul u al alues and knowledge o he Munda communi y, oo ed in land, o es , and jus ice. O e ime, Cho i
ge s my hologised, whe e he communi y belie es he is blessed by ances al spi i s and ha his a ow ne e misses i s ma k. Cho i’s
longe i y allows him o ac as a li ing a chi e o Adi asi memo y, linking he his o ic ebellion o Bi sa Munda wi h he ongoing
s uggles o his communi y.
Spi ak obse es ha subal e ns’ “his o y is no seen as a con inui y in Indian his o iog aphy”. (9) The subal e ns,
pa icula ly he ibals who a e denied any space o ep esen a ion, eclaim hei his o y h ough o al memo y. Dhani, Bis a, Cho i
and all o he cha ac e s In Cho i Munda Au Uska Tee eme ge as ibu a ies o agmen ed expe iences ha coalesce in o a la ge
i e o esis ance. This ans o ma i e low, ca ying echoes o up isings and memo y, ex ends om he o es s o Cho anagpu ,
whe e Cho i Munda wields his a ow, o he hills o Mewa , whe e Go ind Gu u ekindles he sac ed i e and he collec i e will o
ise. Bi sai , a con inuous ebb and low, media es h ough he c es s and oughs o he Maanga h hills. Dhuni Tape Tee ansla ed
as “A ow D awn om he Fi e”, appea s o be a e lec i e na a i e ha is pa memoi , pa p ose-poe y.
Ha i Ram Meena’s Dhuni Tape Tee also cen es on a con empo a y Adi asi up ising, spa ked by sys emic injus ice, land
aliena ion, and cul u al e asu e. The no el depic s he li e o ibals, pa icula ly he Bhils and Meena communi ies, who esided in
he o es s and hills o sou he n Rajas han. The p o agonis Go ind Gu u, who belongs o Banjaa a
5
communi y, is bu aised amids
he hy hms o ibal li e h ough s o ies and songs, h ough i uals o he dhuni, sac ed i e, and a way o li ing close o he land.
Go ind Gu u ecalls scenes o e e yday ibal li e: es i als, local dei ies, my hs passed down by elde s, and he wisdom o a
communi y deeply oo ed in na u e. He desc ibes how hese ea ly memo ies a e always shadowed by he dis an p esence o he
s a e, schools, and landlo ds; igu es o au ho i y who keep in uding in o hei way o li e and cons an ly a emp o ‘ci ilise’ hem.
Go ind Gu u a emp s o sub e he s e eo ype o unci ilised ibal and channels he same impulse o ebellion agains colonial,
eudal, and capi alis s uc u es ha Bi sa esis ed in he nine een h cen u y. Go ind Gu u gi es oice and shape o he sca e ed
g ie ances o he Bhils and o he ibal g oups in he egion.
I ocuses on a collec i e asse ion o cul u al and poli ical iden i y, jus as Bi sa’s mo emen was as much abou spi i ual
awakening as abou poli ical libe a ion. The p o agonis and his communi y a e oo ed in adi ion bu o ced o ace mode n
enc oachmen s, mobilise a ound a spi i ual-poli ical awakening, symbolised by he ekindling o he dhuni. His language, pa ables,
and symbolic ac s o m a sha ed na a i e ha binds his people wi h he collec i e. The ibal consciousness hus lows ac oss
egional di ides, uni ied no by geog aphy bu by he pulse o his o ical memo y and s uggle. The no el eclaims
supp essed Adi asi language, hei songs and o al his o y, ea ing hem as ac s o de iance. Small ac s such as e usal o gi e up
ances al land o p ese ing i uals become hei sub e si e ges u es. As he plo p og esses, esis ance becomes o ganised, echoing
he g ass oo s mobilisa ion o Bi sa’s mo emen . Fu he , he a ow symbolises he indigenous way o igh ing bo h li e ally and
me apho ically. The ee does no jus happen o be a ool o wa , bu an impo an ma ke o Adi asi iden i y, passed down h ough
gene a ions. Th ough a con empo a y na a i e o indigenous esis ance, Meena no only commemo a es he Ulgulaan bu e i es
i , in new o ms, o new imes.
Ha i Ram Meena’s Dhuni Tape Tee he eby ends o eme ge as a powe ul li e a y con inua ion o Bi sa Munda’s
e olu iona y hough . Roo ed in Adi asi expe iences and cul u al memo y, he ex challenges dominan na a i es o powe , be i
linguis ic, cas e-based, o his o ical. Reali y ensconced in li e a u e, ei he si ua ional o inciden al o epiphanic, c ea es a dialogic
in e en ion, a mul iplici y o oices ha in e mingle. These oices each ca y a ce ain alency o o m bonds wi h o he s and al e
hei speed and di ec ion. Bi sa Munda sus ains his legacy o esis ance and empowe men h ough Cho i Munda Au Uska Tee
and Dhuni Tape Tee and mo es beyond he image o he leade s o he ibals owa ds an abs ac isualisa ion, consequen ly o
become he alency o a adical change. An u e change ha ends o engage wi h he su e ings and p oblems o he mundane
h ough a philosophical ou look. The wo oices o esis ance ge opologically ans o med in o wo en ales, old and e old ac oss
gene a ions ha keep hem ixed in ime and concu en ly me amo phose in o memo y, my h, and meaning while being shaped by
dis inc geog aphies and s uggles, and con e ge in hei uncomp omising de iance agains sys ems o opp ession. Ulgulaan, he
5
The Banja a communi y is adi ionally nomadic and known o i s ich cul u al he i age.
Lis ening o he Echoes o Ulgulaan in Cho i Munda Au Uska Tee and Dhuni Tape Tee
IJSSHR, Volume 08 Issue 11 No embe 2025 www.ijssh .in Page 9163
song o ebellion sung by he cho us, ans o ms in o a beacon o he people o ca y o wa d and glow in he s ee s. This
ans o ma ion esona es wi h Yea s’s e oca ion o e olu iona y change, whe e he w i es,
“He, oo, has been changed in his u n,
T ans o med u e ly;
A e ible beau y is bo n”
(lines 15-16)
The ‘ e ible beau y’ he e is no a momen o aes he ic up u e alone bu is he o ging o a poli ical and spi i ual awakening ou o
opp ession. Mahaswe a De i’s ic ion is ma ked by a his o ical sensibili y, an awakening ha ans o ms he pas in o a li ing
p esence a he han a s a ic ch onicle. In wo ks like Jungle ke Da eda and Cho i Munda au Uska Tee , she does no simply
eco e o go en episodes bu eanima es hem, allowing his o y o speak in he oices o hose who ha e been silenced. In Cho i
Munda au Uska Tee , he pas is no an objec o nos algia bu an ac i e o ce—Cho i’s a ow a els o wa d, insis ing ha ebellion
is a possibili y in he p esen , no jus a memo y o he pas . By con as , Ha i Ram Meena is mo e in es ed in his o ici y, whe e i
e ie es Bi sa’s li e om he o go en ma gins o colonial a chi es and places i in he o eg ound. Meena’s p ojec is es o a i e,
eminding eade s o wha was los , whe eas Mahaswe a’s is ans o ma i e, using na a i e o expose he con inuing s uc u es o
dispossession. De i p ac ices wha Wal e Benjamin calls “b ushing his o y agains he g ain,” insis ing ha he pas is ne e closed
bu con inues o demand jus ice in he p esen (257).
Ac oss spaces, his beau y is bo n in he ac o s anding up, singing one’s his o y in o being, and esis ing e asu e. The ac
o s anding up agains opp ession, as exempli ied in he s uggles o he subal e n, does no emain me ely a physical o symbolic
ges u e; i becomes pe o ma i e, whe e wo ds e ol e in o songs, hy hm, and collec i e memo y. I in igo a es an idea oo ed in
digni y, land, language, and collec i e memo y, an idea ha insis s ha he subal e n no only can speak, bu can eimagine his o y
i sel as a lowing, li ing con inui y…kal kal beh o jaye e
6
.
REFERENCES
1) Bada , Bashi . Kulliya -e-Bashi Bad . Rajkamal P akashan, 2013.Dhanaga e, D. N. (1988). Subal e n Consciousness and
Populism: Two App oaches in he S udy o Social Mo emen s in India. Social Scien is , 16(11), 18–35.
2) Benjamin, Wal e . Illumina ions. Edi ed by Hannah A end , ansla ed by Ha y Zohn, Schocken Books, 1968, p. 257. Yea s,
W. B. (1996). Eas e , 1916. In R. J. Finne an (Ed.), The collec ed poems o W. B. Yea s (pp. 180–182).
3) Bhabha, Homi K. The Loca ion o Cul u e. Rou ledge, 1994.
4) De i, Mahaswe a. Cho i Munda and His A ow. T ansla ed by Gaya i Chak a o y Spi ak, Seagull Books, 2002.
5) Elio , T. S. (2001). The was e land and o he poems (F. Ke mode, Ed.). Penguin Classics. (O iginal wo k published 1922)
6) Elio , T. S. (1920). T adi ion and he indi idual alen . In F. Ke mode (Ed.), Selec ed p ose o T. S. Elio (pp. xx–xx). Ha cou
B ace.
7) Guha, Ranaji . Elemen a y Aspec s o Peasan Insu gency in Colonial India. Ox o d Uni e si y P ess, 1983.
8) Indian Ocean. “Ma Rewa.” Kandisa, Times Music, 2000. CD.
9) Kipling, Rudya d. The Whi e Man’s Bu den. 1899. The No on An hology o English Li e a u e, edi ed by S ephen
G eenbla , 10 h ed., ol. F, W. W. No on, 2018, pp. 1584–1586.
10) K.S. Singh, The Dus S o m and he Hanging Mis : A S udy o Bi sa Munda and His Mo emen in Cho anagpu (1874–
1901) (Calcu a: Fi ma KLM, 1983), 215–220.Meena, H. R. (2021). Dhuni Tape Tee . Vani P akashan.
11) O id. (2004). Me amo phoses (D. Raebu n, T ans.). Penguin Classics. (O iginal wo k published ca. 8 CE)
12) Singh, Bhaga . Why I Am an A heis : An Au obiog aphical Discou se. Rajkamal P akashan, 2019.
13) Roy, Kumkum. “Bi sa Munda and T ibal Up ising in Cho anagpu .” Indian His o ical Re iew, ol. 37, no. 2, 2010, pp. 45–62.
14) Shah, Ghanshyam. “T ibal Land Sys ems and Colonial In e en ion.” Economic and Poli ical Weekly, ol. 36, no. 14, 2001,
pp. 1203–1211
15) Sha ma, R. K. The Banja a: Li e and Cul u e. O ien Blackswan, 2010.
16) Spi ak, Gaya i Chak a o y. (2002). T ansla o ’s in oduc ion. In M. De i, Cho i Munda and his a ow (pp. ii–xxxii).
Seagull Books.
17) ——— “Can he Subal e n Speak?” Ma xism and he In e p e a ion o Cul u e, edi ed by Ca y Nelson and Law ence
G ossbe g, Uni e si y o Illinois P ess, 1988, pp. 271–313.
18) Williams, Raymond. Ma xism and Li e a u e. Ox o d Uni e si y P ess, 1977.
19) Xaxa, Vi ginius. “T ibal Iden i y and he Munda Mo emen .” Economic and Poli ical Weekly, ol. 28, no. 17, 1993, pp. 765–
770.
6
a song
