Introduction

2The Haatis’ current demand can be likened to the struggle by South Asian groups for constitutional recognition as STs: for instance, the Adivasi groups who were uprooted and resettled in Assam and who are currently demanding recognition as ‘tea tribes’ (Misra 2007, Sharma and Khan 2018) or tribal status in Darjeeling (Chhetri 2017, 2023, Middleton 2011, 2015). These demands can be contrasted with the mobilisation of generic castes such as the Jats in Haryana (Jaffrelot and Kalaiyarasan 2019, Kumar 2021). The Haati case is different from these struggles because it is a complex mixture of ethnic and regional claims. Their demands reveal how the alternative geographies of power and difference are utilised by groups to frame their demands in anthropological language (Balibar 1998, Paasi 1996, Agnew 2008, van Schendel 2002). These demands are thus symptomatic of the minority’s quest to secure state entitlement and cultural rights (Galanter 1984, Corbridge 2000, Chhetri 2016, 2017, Middleton 2011, 2015, Shneiderman 2015, Cowan 2006, Kapila 2008). An in-depth analysis of these demands reveals how ethnicity is not just pronounced in the boundary maintenance strategy (Barth 1969) at the cultural level alone but also at the spatial level. The Haati case shows that deliberately transcending state boundaries by tracing ethnic roots to structure performances, helps to secure ST status. The myriad processes associated with the ST recognition struggle therefore draws attention to the scheduling process, the category of the tribe itself and the ways groups negotiate with the state to secure recognition.

4This article draws on data collected through in-depth interviews and focus-group discussions conducted among ethnic leaders and activists both in Sirmaur and Jaunsar Bawar (see fig 1. Map of the field sites), and draws insight from the many memoranda submitted by the Haatis and from government reports to further elucidate the nature of the demand and the response from the state. I begin with a brief account of Sirmaur as a geographical space, while noting the convoluted history of the region and the impact of geographic and territorial restructuring on the variegated ethnic formation and its reconstitution. I then discuss the nature and content of the Haatis’ demands and the scalar imagination implicit in them. In reviewing their demands, the article reconsiders the practices and processes of classification and categorisation which have evoked contestation and conflicts of various kinds in India.

A brief outline of the region

5Sirmaur is one of the twelve districts of Himachal Pradesh, with a total area of 2,825 km² (see fig 1). The district has a mountainous relief, with deep valleys lying between the Shiwalik Range and elevation of the region varying from 358 metres to 3,544 metres. The Kiardun Valley in Paonta Sahib Tehsil is the flatest region in the district. There are high ridges or dhars that cut the region into numerous valleys: Shimla in the north and Solan in the northwest, Jaunsar in the east and Ambala district of Haryana in the south and west. Within this district, the Giripar or trans-Giri region is a compact and contiguous region, its boundary formed by natural barriers such as dhars, namely Chur Dhar or Chur Chandani-ki-Dhar, Nohra Dhar, Haripur Dhar, Juni Dhar, Shalai Dhar, Kamrau Dhar etc. The district is cut off from the rest of Sirmaur, Solan and Shimla districts by the Giri River which flows in a north to southeast direction. On the northern side, Chradhar Peak (11,966ft) marks its boundary. In the east, the Tons River separates the region from the scheduled area of Jaunsar-Bawar (see fig 2). The hill-valley divide, in terms of cultural practices, is very much evident in the case of the cis-Giri and trans-Giri regions.

6The population of the district is predominantly Hindu, followed by Muslim and Sikh. According to the 2001 Census, the total population of the district was 458,593, which rose to 529,855 in 2011 (Census), recording a decadal growth rate of 15.5% (District census handbook 2011: 57). There have been waves of migration into the region since historical records exist. Following dynastic changes, large-scale migration took place from the plains of Punjab, Hoshiarpur, Ludhiana and Patiala in the Kiardun region. In the past, many Muslim Gujjars in search of pastures migrated from Jammu and settled in the region. Small Gaddi, Gorkha and Gujjar settlements are also found in the district. In terms of caste composition, the predominant castes are Brahmins and Khas/Kanets. Scheduled-caste (SC) communities, such as the Kolis, Dumnas, Chanals, Chamars, Lohars and Badhis, also inhabit the plains and the district’s hilly landscape.

Geopolitical transactions in the region

8The major objective of the British was to secure free passage across the rugged Himalayan terrain without having to pay transit or custom duties on any merchandise passing through the region. To ensure this, several territories were retained such as Bharoli which consisted of Subathu, Siwah, Bharoli, Maloun, Sandoch and the other nine parganas of Keonthal estimated to yield a revenue of Rs210,00 (D’Cruz 1843: 107). In Chakrata, a cantonment was set up and the adjoining region of Jaunsar Bawar was declared an excluded area and later a partially excluded area (Ohri 2019: 292). The creation of such exclusive spaces sealed off the region from any external influences. This classification crystallised social identities and created fertile ground for the complex politics of differentiation that were to unfold in later years. Reflecting on this process, Moran argues that the redefinition of political boundaries ‘laid the foundation for the current divisions of the Khas ethnic majority that inhabited the Uttarakhand-Himachal Pradesh borderlands into tribal and caste Hindu societies’ (Moran 2019b: 578).

9Despite being divided into various units, some form of cultural contiguity persisted between territories. Jaunsar-Bawar was historically part of Sirmaur state. It had been conquered by the British after the Anglo-Gorkha war of 1815 and was then placed under the charge of the Commissioner subordinate to the Resident at Delhi. It was only in 1829 that it was incorporated as a separate district. Cultural exchanges took place between Jaunsar and the trans-Giri region of Sirmaur. However, the place was strategically demarcated as a separate unit. The colonial administration thus created a binary between the homogeneous administrative units made up of heterogeneous cultural groups and the culturally homogeneous groups that were administratively demarcated as distinct units for strategic purposes. The kingdom of Sirmaur was thus divided into two cultural zones: the zone of Rajput culture in the low-lying hills and the indigenous Khas region, which maintained a conflictual mutual relationship. The division of the hill and the plain is encoded in folk narratives such as the exploits of Hoku Ravat, a legendary figure from the trans-Giri region who challenged the oppressive regime of the Sirmauri king (Moran 2011: 452).

The ethnic mix: caste/tribe mélange

10From the early 19th century, most travelogues and colonial accounts about Sirmaur paint a picture of the distinctive cultural practices of the people in the hills when compared to plain dwellers (see Moorcroft and Trebeck 1841, Fraser 1820). Fraser, writing five years after the end of the Anglo-Gorkha war, states ‘the general cast of their countenance is Hindoo, but they seldom possess the softness and even intelligence that may be considered characteristics of the Hindoo physiognomy’ (Fraser 1820: 68). This can be explained by the distinct religious customs observed by the people. He then writes, ‘the religion these people profess is Hindooism: but their practice is chiefly confined to the superstitious beliefs and adoration of an endless number of imaginary powers’ (Fraser 1820: 70). The distinction of the hills from the plains, both in terms of morphology, demography and belief systems are extraordinarily emphasised in all colonial records. The presence of unique caste structures backed by traditional religious institutions posed ethnological questions. For instance, Fraser writes:

The origins of these people form a curious subject of inquiry, were they a race that from a very ancient period inhabited the hills and perhaps sent their superabundance to the people of the places and fill up the country in the vicinity of their mountains? (Fraser 1820: 71).

12Early colonial records also give us some idea of the constitution of caste/tribe identity in the region. Caste identities were likely to change in the higher altitude of the Indo-Tibet borderlands, as evidenced from the writings of Lyall:

On the border line in the Himalayas, between the Thibet and India proper, anyone can observe caste growing before his eyes, the noble is changing into a Rajput, the priest into a Brahmin, the peasant into a Jat and so on down to the bottom of the scale. (Lyall 1874: 100)

13From the elite to the common peasant, the colonial enterprise consisted in classifying groups in the hills as distinct from plain dwellers. For instance, the Chandela elite of Bilaspur was contrasted with its co-named ‘aboriginal’ counterparts in the Punjab and was further distinguished from the mass of Pahari peasant followers claiming Rajput status (see Ibbetson 1916: 131). Further complications in dealing with groups in the trans-Giri region have been noted, as testified by the accounts of Ibbenson and Rose. For instance, they write that in Sirmaur and Nahan proper, Bhats are by origin Brahmins but in the inland trans-Giri region they have adopted the practices of the Kanets (Ibbetson and Rose 1911: 98–99).

14Added to this complexity was the category of tribe and its conflation with caste. Ibbetson attests to the difficulty in distinguishing the two when he writes:

It is almost impossible to define a caste and difficult to define a tribe, and that it is often impossible to draw a clearly marked line between two castes of similar standing. In fact, the tribe proper is far more definite and permanent than the caste. (Ibbetson 1916: 33)

15Interestingly, he traces the origin of caste to ‘tribal division common to all primitive societies’ (Ibbetson 1916: 9). In colonial records, the tribe appears to be far more permanent and indestructible than the caste, with a strong territorial organisation. The tendency for classifying groups was dictated by the bureaucratic requirement which often conflated the anachronistic and the orientalist imagination. The tribe category was a temporal comparison between societies that ranked them in terms of their historical stage of development, which conditioned the idea of the tribe as primitive, backward and isolated (Skaria 1997: 730).

16Within this ethnic mix, it becomes difficult to retrace the identity of the Haatis. The ethnonym was adopted by the community in the post-Independence period. The caste category in the region is loosely subdivided into Brahmins, Rajputs and SCs, which is also similar to the case of Jaunsar. The Gazetteer’s report of 1904 highlighting the cultural incongruity between the cis-Giri and the trans-Giri region of Sirmaur states:

The Hinduism of Sirmaur is of two types: the orthodox Brahminical type Cis Giri and a more primitive type trans-Giri, the latter resembling in many respects the Hinduism of the Himalayas as found in Kumaon to the east and the Shimla hills to the north. (Gazetteer 1904: 38)

17Within these categories, Brahmins are further classified into Bhats, Bhat Brahmins and Dethis. Khas, Miyans and Devas all claim Khas identity, whereas the sub-groups within SCs comprise Bajgis (Lohars, Badis, Dhakis, Natuas and Beras) and Halis (made up of Koli, Chanal and Dom castes). The presence of the entrenched caste structure makes the claims of STs somewhat of an anathema. Historically, the Jaunsar region presented a similar social structure. Caste was entrenched in the social fabric of the region yet, despite this, the region was classed as a scheduled area. The acclaimed study by Majumdar published prior to the region being declared a scheduled area states:

In conclusion, we may remark that the caste system is in existence in its most complete and persistent form even today in the cis Himalayan society of Jaunsar-Bawar. It is based on both the geo-economic conditions of the area and the socio-cultural environment of the people. (Majumdar 1962: 53)

Genesis of the ethnos and the nature of tribal demands

The sole argument (for the ST status) is likeness to the Jaunsar–Bawar tract of the Garhwal Division of Uttar Kashi. The argument runs like this – Giripar of the Sirmaur District of H.P. and the Jounsar Bawar of U.P. sail in the same boat of backwardness in almost every respect. Moreover, they are identical in culture, language, and way of life. Furthermore, they have a historical identity in that once upon a time Jaunsar Bawar was also part of the erstwhile princely state of Sirmaur the two areas being separated by the Tons River. (T S Negi quoted in Bakhshi 2011: 132)

20Based on the detailed study and considering the similarity between groups and communities in Jaunsar and the trans-Giri region, the committee submitted a favourable report to the state government, recommending the inclusion of the Haatis on the ST list. However, the proposal was rejected by central government. Haatis attribute this to the faulty report submitted by the state government. Recalling the events that had transpired, Haati leaders argue that after the committee had been set up, central government requested the demographic profile of the tribal groups living in the region. State government responded, stating that there were only 222 tribal individuals residing in the region; this only included the Gujjars, who were already listed as tribes, and did not include the numbers for the Haatis.

• 16 Letter from the Office of the registrar general and census commissioner of India, Ministry of Home (...)

Views of this office on the said proposal were that Hattee and Dudra Kwaru communities are not homogeneous groups. Hattee and Dudra Kwaru are traditional, blanket, or general terms applicable to several individual castes, these do not refer to a tribe or tribal community or part of a group within a tribe…Inclusion of territorial names and functional names not specifying any ethnic group is not being considered now for inclusion in the ST list.16

24In their letter, they maintained that the term Haati includes not just one community but several heterogeneous communities, namely Rajputs, Brahmans and SCs. The report by the registrar general of India (RGI) is also informative on other counts as it states that the Joint Committee on the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes Orders (Amendment) Bill, 1967 had recommended the removal of the territorial name Jaunsar and had proposed the names of a few ethnic groups that deserved to be classed as STs in that area. It specified 32 distinct ethnic groups, excluding the Brahmins and Rajputs. However, this could not be implemented in the SC and ST order (Amendment Act) of 1976. A similar issue was observed in Ladakh (Leh and Kargil). After considering these heterogeneous issues associated with group recognition, the RGI report concludes that ‘of course, they are living in tough geographical terrain having the snowbound area, but it cannot be the sole criterion for treating a community as ST.’16

The hill people generally bring down wheat and maize flour to Nahan for sale, the trade being considered at the times when the state revenue is paid. The trade of the hills consists chiefly of dried ginger, and turmeric, next to this opium and walnuts. The zamindars themselves generally carry their dried ginger and turmeric down to Bilaspur or Jagadhri in the Ambala district, but sometimes traders buy these articles in the hills and carry them down themselves (Gazetteer 1904: 80).

26The search for a categorical identity rooted in these practices thus reflects an anachronistic understanding of tribe as a remnant of history and therefore as lagging behind in the modern world (Skaria 1999, Guha 2003, Sundar 2016). Sporadic appeals for tribalisation reaffirm and at the same time question the ephemeral core of tribal identity (Chhetri 2019: 539). These claims essentialise the very idea of tribe, a process that Barkataki-Ruscheweyh (2017) calls ‘dancing to the state’. Such performances are shaped by what Povinelli terms ‘cunning of recognition’, where ethnic groups are required to authenticate self-identity by performing differences (Povinelli 2002: 6). In the Haati case, politics of differentiation have also initiated a large-scale homogenisation at discursive levels. This is evident in the state-sponsored ethnographic report that states:

• 18 Proposal for inclusion of various communities in the list of STs in the state of Himachal Pradesh (...)

The cultural strain of the people of the trans-Giri region is tribal in its tone and tenor and its overlaps with the people belonging to different walks of life...it may not entirely be possible to agree with the contention of the district gazetteer that people migrated to the trans-Giri region from Chaupal and Jubbal as many of the socio-cultural practices even now followed by the people are akin to or common with the people of Jaunsar Bawar.18

28Along with social organisation, other cultural practices such as inheritance laws like ‘Riwaz-a-Aam’ and ‘Wazib-ul-Urj’ are also projected as being indicative of a pristine identity. The practices of polyandry in the past, and the ensuing joḍīdārā system where the property of a deceased brother is transferred to the surviving brother(s), not to his widow and children, are presented as a tribal trait. With regards inheritance, leaders emphasise that partition of family property amongst Haatis, like other tribal groups of Himachal, is a rare phenomenon. Partition usually takes the form of kannchoṁg (part of the property transferred to the youngest brother in addition to his due share) and zeṭhoṁg (part of the property is given to the eldest brother).

29The trope of tribalism which is similar amongst many applicant groups in South Asia relies on these practices to strengthen their demands – a process of the selective appropriation of cultural tenets that Hobsbawm and Ranger (1992) call an ‘invention of tradition’. Key customs associated with marriage, childbirth and death rituals are often showcased to lend further credibility to their claims. The memoranda submitted by the group list a whole range of festivals, such as Mashrali, Bhatioj, Mon and Bishu, Haryatti and Gugal, which mark out the Haatis as a different ethnic group. In particular, they lay emphasis on the celebration of Budi Diwali, celebrated one month after the main Diwali festival, as indicative of their distinct tribal way of life. And they often underline their types of marriage, such as bala beao (child marriage), jājdā, khīt, rīt or khītāyon (arranged marriage), hār (marriage by elopement). Other institutions such as the khumli (panchayat of respectable elders) or the worship of deities such as the Sirgul, Mahasu, Vijat, Kujhiyat, Nayians, Bhangain, Thari all add to this ethnic repertoire.

Homologous scalar expression

31The case of the Haatis exemplifies how belonging to a polity becomes crucial for an ethnic group and its identity formation. The active interlinkages between administrative, territorial and governance structures give identities their salient forms, making them more pronounced and differentiated. In the trans-Giri region, historical and cultural continuity exists between groups across the Tons River. In the Haati case, the administrative divisions of the region have created two distinct territorial identities. Acknowledging Jaunsar as a scheduled area boosted the ambition on the part of the trans-Giri region of reaping similar benefits as an ST. This led to a scalar understanding of the term tribe. For leaders, people on both sides of the Tons River should be recognised without creating identity bifurcations. The logic goes: ‘If Jaunsari can be recognised as a tribe irrespective of any further clarification on caste, why not the Haatis? They follow similar customs and practices.’ Looking at similar processes, Bergmann argues that in such situations:

scales assume significance within the strategies that actors deploy to advance their interests, such as when seeking recognition as a Scheduled Tribe. Whilst some actors might favor localization to effectively voice their concerns others might opt to regionalize, nationalize, or globalize their strategies. (Bergmann 2016: 87)

32In the case of the Haatis, the cultural homology with the adjoining region informs scalar politics. Similar politics are also evident in the neighbouring regions, such as Jaunpur-Rawain where inhabitants, stressing their proximity to Jaunsar, claim preferential treatment based on cultural affinity and territorial contiguity (Bhandari 2000: 249). In the same vein, Haati leaders reason that physical and cultural proximity to Jaunsar makes them eligible for ST status. It is within this discourse that historical narratives mingle and are used within the ethnogenetic narrative to dispel the myth of distinction and to claim similitude. These narratives claim that, prior to 1833, the trans-Giri area and Juansar were a constituent part of Sirmaur state. However, the advent of colonialism severed this connection when the parganas of Jaunsar and Bawar were annexed by the British. From the reign of Raja Udit Prakash (1217) to the early 17th century, Kalsi, located in Jaunsar (today’s Dehradun district in Uttarakhand), was the capital of Sirmaur. It was Raja Karam Prakash (1621) who transferred the seat to Nahan. Documenting this narrative, Haati leaders lament that, despite the best efforts on the part of Raja Fateh Prakash to win back Jaunsar in 1844, the region could not be annexed by Sirmaur state. This historical narrative creates and sustains the idea of ‘family resemblance’ (Wittgenstein 2001 [1953]) of groups living on either side of the Tons River. This resemblance finds sustenance in the claims of homologous scalar expression often asserted by retracing common village names such as Kamrauli and Khabroli, both in the trans-Giri area and in Jaunsar. The common names of villages are considered to testify to their commonality. The commonality of village names is further reinforced by villages’ claims to longstanding cultural exchanges epitomized by unique institutions called āl and dāicārā. Āl is traced through patrilineage within a village. Every āl within the village has a sayānā (elder) who exercises patriarchal authority over the family and extended kin. Inter- and intra-āl relations are organised around dāicārā (which means brotherhood in the local dialect). Members of the dāicārā are believed to be related to one another based on patrilineal descent, hence constituting an extended exogamous unit (Bhardwaj 2018). The similarity of village names and the presence of āl and dāicārā across the two regions further sustain their idea of cultural homology. Scalar politics is thus anchored around the axis of geographic and cultural contiguity, at the same time presenting alterity and differences at other levels.

33It is worth noting that, while maintaining similarity on an identity scale, Haatis also engage in subtle politics of differentiation. Both similarity and difference permeate and inform the implicit content of these scalar politics. The claim of affinity with Jaunsar is accompanied by claims of being different from the district’s cis-Giri region. The distinction between the two regions is also attested to in the demands: for instance, the memoranda clearly state that of the 13 Gram Panchayat areas of Paonta Sahib, eight have cultural affinity with Jaunsar and the remaining five are considered to be villages of migrants from North India and hence not covered by the generic label ‘Haati’. According to their documents, the total area of the Giripar tract covers 1,299km², with a total population of 489,235 (101,742 men and 87,493 women), with 95% of the population being of the Haati tribe. In keeping with the territorial understanding of a tribe, the proposal is to include in the SA a total of 389 villages in the trans-Giri region. The details of the proposed area are given in table 1.

Sr. No	Name of block	Tehsil and sub-Tehsil	No of panchayats	No of villages	Census code no	Total population	Current ST population
1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8
1	Rajgarh	Rajgarh	30	140	022506 to 022645	45,916	136
	NP Rajgarh	Rajgarh	1	1	800130	3,083	8
2	Sangrah	Renuka	27	74	022693, 022692, 022957	45,645	56
		Nohra	14	48	022646 to 022692,022957	24,765	7
3	Shillai	Ronhat	12	22	023460 to 023481	23,324	2
		Shillai	17	28	023432 to 235459	36,905	28
4	Paonta Sahib	Paonta Sahib	13	31	023356 to 023386	34953	224
		Kamrau	19	45	023387 to 023431	37,066	34
	Total		133	389		251,657	495

34Within the rubrics of ethnogenesis lies the politics of differentiation both on cultural and territorial levels. A total of 31 villages forming Paonta Sahib is claimed to be part of the trans-Giri region which also used to be called the Ani Bhoj Area. These 31 villages, from 13 Gram Panchayats of Paonta Sahib, are regarded as having closer cultural affinity with the Jaunsaris, while the remaining five are considered to be inhabited by migrants from North India colloquially termed Bahaits, and are regarded to be culturally distinct from the Haatis and the Jaunsari. Thus, within the defined geographical units, scalar politics define cultural congruity as the sole feature of a group boundary. The trans-Giri area, as a geographical unit, consists of the entire community development (CD) block of Rajgarh and 31 villages of the CD Block, Paonta Sahib, but the claims for inclusion in the scheduled area only pertain to a portion of CD block Rajgarh and to 22 other villages of Paonta Sahib (see fig 4).

Categorisation violence and classificatory justice

39The high-handedness of classificatory practices within the regimented control of state bureaucrats, anthropologists and select leaders from the community raises pertinent questions concerning the multicultural posture of the Indian state and its governance techniques. In the Haati case, the classification of Jaunsar Bawar as an exclusive place inhabited by a tribal population has prompted the quest to be recognised along similar lines. The territorial basis for conceding scheduled areas has great implications for recognition politics because, within this paradigm, all groups inhabiting the region would by extension be placed in the category of tribe, despite any internal differentiation. The emergent categories subsequent to these classifications are mutually exclusive but relational, which further accentuates identity-based conflicts. The lack of a concrete definition of ‘tribe’ and a rigidly defined parameter for evaluating concepts of remoteness, reticence to make contact, isolation and cultural authenticity/distinctiveness, which distinctly define the classificatory practices, have led to a situation that can be called ‘categorisation violence’. An overreliance on colonial categories has led to the recognition of a few with privileged access to bureaucratic channels, while neglecting the demands of the majority. It is not a simple process of non-recognition – a deliberate denial of participation opportunities – in the political and economic spheres of life (Fraser 2000, 2007; Honneth 2004). It has more to do with seeking parity with groups similarly placed but preferentially categorised in state annals. Their position thus demands classificatory justice by a re-examination and re-evaluation of the practices of categorisation. Here David Ingram’s conception of justice and recognition proves vital because ‘lack of recognition does not imply injustice, but perhaps injustice implies lack of recognition’ (Ingram 2018: 74). The categorisation itself of groups and communities is viewed as unjust, implying a lack of recognition. In order to overcome such a situation, justice has to be divided into categories that they rightfully deserve. To view in a simplistic sense the demands made by groups, as a quest to secure the coveted ST seats and to enjoy the benefits of affirmative action, would be misleading because lurking behind them is a further quest for classificatory justice.

40Demands for recognition are seen to run into multiple problems when viewed from the lens of the social field constituted by multiple overlapping categories. This reveals the challenges of viewing recognition struggles only within the paradigm of ‘politics of the governed’ (Chatterjee 2004). In the Haati case, the demands for recognition as an ST have led to counterclaims of injustice by the SC community in the region. Some of the active votaries state that the Haatis’ demands for a homogeneous ethnic identity is a nascent effort of the elite segment to secure their interest by capturing formal positions of power in the region.

Conclusion

42The most conspicuous show of the tribal demand by Haatis was evident when we were invited to a screening of the documentary film ‘Haati-We Exist’ (see fig 7).

43The event took place in one of Paonta Sahib’s grand wedding halls. It seemed ironic that a documentary on an aspiring group deemed to be backward and lacking in resources was being showcased in such a lavish location. The director of the film, Viveek Tewari, said that he regarded this work as a solemn effort on his part to document the old and diverse Haati culture. Like an auto-ethnographic text, the film revolved around marriage ceremonies, festivals and customs, and the film tried to build on the narrative of the Haatis’ unique and primitive traits. It also showed current problems plaguing the area, such as the out-migration of people from the region and the subsequent loss of culture. The film ended with a cautionary note about preventing this loss of culture which could only be safeguarded through a collective effort. Mediated forms of identity claims harp on about the notion of pristine cultural heritage which again, by extension, interlinks different geographical scales. The film aptly ends with the scene of a groom from the region of Jaunsar and a bride from the trans-Giri region crossing the Tons River together on a hand-operated ropeway, thus suggesting a perennial cultural exchange between the regions.

Acknowledgements
The author wishes to thank the leaders of the Haati community for extending all their help and support during the course of fieldwork. In particular, special thanks are due to Pawan Bakshi and Kundan Lal Shastri for their hospitality and support during the course of fieldwork. The author also wishes to thank IIT Mandi for funding a short visit to Sirmaur as part of its Interactive Socio-Technical Practicum (ISTP). The four students who accompanied the author, namely Amit Chauhan, Aman Kumar, Sunil Kumar Dangi and Rajan Kumar, deserve a special mention for their great enthusiasm and help in the field. The author also wishes to thank the anonymous EBHR peer reviewers for their comments on an earlier draft of this paper. Their comments and suggestions have further improved the arguments presented in the paper.