Jim Corbett's 'Green' Imperialism

COMMENTARY c ommercial extraction of India’s forest Jim Corbett’s ‘Green’ r esources on an unprecedented scale. Colonial exploitation was transnational, Imperialism extensive and capitalistic in contrast to pre-colonial demands, which were local, limited and feudal. Also, the British, as Prasanta Das Mahesh Rangarajan (1996) has put it, started “fencing the forest”. Colonial for- Jim Corbett is held in great im Corbett migrated to Kenya in 1947 estry imposed severe restrictions on com- esteem in India as a despite being born in India and munities that previously had almost unre- compassionate man who had Jbelonging to a family that had lived stricted access to forests. here for two generations. This was partly The colonial takeover of the forest pro- exceptional environmental because he feared neglect if he stayed on vided the background for Corbett’s dra- awareness. A closer look however (Kala 1999). But few Englishmen have matic exploits as a hunter. Indian rulers shows that this image is been held in higher esteem in independ- like the Mughals had indulged in tiger misleading and that he was ent India than Corbett. For more than half hunts in order to demonstrate their fitness a century he has been regarded as not to rule. But unlike hawking, which was in fact a fully paid-up imperialist. only a great shikari but also as a friend of popular with the Mughals, or sports like The continuance of the Corbett the Indian poor and of Indian wildlife. bear-hunting and pig-sticking (the latter a myth is indicative of our failure The fact that the Ramganga National Park particularly dangerous one), it was tiger- to read his skilfully written was renamed after him is an indication of hunting which was appropriated by the the respect in which he is held. A good British and invested with important sym- books critically. deal of Corbett’s fame comes from the bolic meaning. In imperial representation, popular books he wrote: Man-Eaters of Indian hunting came to be seen as waste- Kumaon (1944), The Man-Eating Leopard ful and cruel while the British killing of of Rudra prayag (1948) and The Temple animals, including the destruction of Tiger and More Man-Eaters of Kumaon man-eating tigers, was supposedly regu- (1952). A gifted writer, he conveys effec- lated and defensive. Colonial hunting thus tively the sights, sounds and smells of the acquired conservation overtones despite jungle and the excitement of the hunt. He the fact that large-scale tiger-hunting also comes across as a modest and com- was quite the norm for British officials. In passionate man, an impression created by his books, Corbett is silent about his role his apparent empathy with the hill men in organising tiger hunts for VIPs who and women of Kumaon and Garhwal. visited Kumaon. Such is Corbett’s persuasive power as a Corbett does not present hunting as a writer that his bio graphers tell his life pleasurable sport and he always made it a story much as he narrates it in his two point to reject any monetary reward for memoirs, My India (1952) and Jungle Lore killing a man-eating tiger. In total contrast (1953). But Corbett’s reputation is a to George Orwell’s ironic and subversive m isleading one. He was, in fact, a fully treatment of colonial hunting in “Shooting paid-up imperialist. an Elephant”, Corbett depicts shooting Recent scholarship in environmental man-eaters as a responsible, protective history allows us to take a closer look at task, undertaken to save helpless, panic- the Corbett myth. It would of course be stricken villagers and their livestock. anachronistic to expect Corbett to display Though he never explicitly states it, the the attitudes that would today pass muster prerogative of getting rid of the menace of as ecologically sound but to continue see- a man-eating tiger is clearly that of the ing him as a pioneering conservationist white sahib. In My India, written in Kenya, and protector of the weak is wrong. Corbett looks back at an India that was largely free of strife as long as hands-on Colonial Control of the Forest Englishmen like him were in charge. In Though environmental historians like his hunting books too we get a picture of Ramachandra Guha have been accused of the villages of Kumaon existing in relative Prasanta Das ([email protected]) is with promoting a golden-ageist view of indige- tranquillity, disturbed only by the the Department of English and Foreign nous, pre-colonial uses of nature, there is o ccasional bad cat. But in The Unquiet Languages, Tezpur University, Assam. little doubt that colonialism involved Woods Guha, who studies the Chipko 20 april 11, 2009 vol xliv no 15 EPW Economic & Political Weekly COMMENTARY e nvironmental movement in the histori- On the way through the jungle Narwa 1907, official records show that the Panar cal context of forest agitations in Kumaon stepped on a sleeping tiger and was se- leopard was killed in September 1910, and Garhwal, documents the widespread verely mauled by it. With great courage and the Mukteswar tigress in the spring of discontent in the first part of the 20th cen- and strength, Haria carried Narwa to that year. tury against the forest department. Peas- Kaladhungi. Corbett describes Haria’s res- Booth also mentions an incident that ants in the region, especially in Kumaon, cue of Narwa as the bravest deed he knows occurred in April 1910 when Corbett be- often protested against the forest policies of. However, he finds that Haria is oblivi- gan his hunt for the Panar man-eating of the British by setting reserved forests ous of his remarkable display of courage: leopard. On the evening of the first day he on fire (Guha 2000). “I have not done anything, Sahib, have I, found a young farmer and his 18-year-old Once we become aware of the ecologi- that is likely to bring trouble on me or on wife who had been dragged off by the cal and historical context, it becomes pos- my brother Narwa?” (ibid). Narwa too man-eater only to be snatched back by the sible to detect cracks in the otherwise pleads with Corbett to see that Haria does husband. The young woman was uncon- seamless surfaces of Corbett’s texts. De- not get into trouble. Corbett evokes the co- scious from loss of blood and was dying. scribing the tiger as “a large hearted gen- lonial stereotype of the simple and law- Corbett decided to stay with the couple to tleman” in Man-eaters of Kumaon, Corbett abiding hillman to explain the incident. see if the leopard would return. The follo- says that it, on occasion, turns to killing However, a different interpretation sug- wing morning he left the area but not be- human beings only because its natural gests itself when we consider that Haria fore spending some time hunting (for prey has been wiped out by man (Corbett and Narwa’s anxiety probably arises from sport) a tiger reputed to be protected by 2008). He comments later on that the tiger their knowledge that the forest is no the gods. Booth comments: named the “Bachelor of Powalgarh” longer free. One has to ask here several questions which changed its quarters because of the exten- throw some doubts upon Jim’s character, sive fellings conducted by the forest de- Discrepancies suggesting that it was not as unblemished as partment in 1930 in the area surrounding Because of the enormous respect that Cor- his future legendary reputation would make its previous home (ibid). It is at such bett has so far enjoyed, few have wanted it appear. He had possibly waited three years to go af- m oments that we become aware of the d e- to question his accounts. But discrepan- ter the Mukteswar and Panar man-eaters, forestation and widespread change caused cies emerge when even an otherwise defe- when he could have made attempts for them by colonial forestry. rential biographer like Martin Booth does over that time. He was in the area of the In My India Corbett recounts how he as- a little probing. Corbett’s first man-eater man-eater on the night the girl was snatched sisted the policeman Freddie Young in the was the Champavat tigress, which he back by her husband and yet, the next day, he seemingly did not seek to …go after it al- hunt to bring the dacoit Sultana to justice. killed in 1907. In Carpet Sahib, Booth notes though he knew it must still be in the vicin- Corbett depicts Sultana as a romantic and that Corbett claimed to have killed the ity. Finally, he obviously had enough time on gallant figure – “India’s Robin Hood” Mukteswar man-eater some weeks later, leaving the area to indulge in a bit of would- (C orbett 2000). When the dacoit is finally and the Panar leopard soon after. “The be sport hunting after the temple-guarded caught and condemned to death he sends truth is”, writes Booth, “that Jim got his tiger of Dabidhura…(ibid). for Young and bequeaths him his wife and dates wrong” (Booth 1986). While Cor- But Booth does not really look at Cor- son. This episode underlines Corbett’s bett did kill the Champavat man-eater in bett’s life closely which is why there are point that Indians were trusting of the British who took their role as protectors of the poor and underprivileged seriously Medical Pluralism in Contemporary India and honourably. However, it is revealing that he describes Sultana as belonging to (Forthcoming – April/May 2009) one of the criminal tribes.

Load more