TODAY -
| Chieftainship among the Meiteis & Mizos - Part 4 - |
By: Dr. (Mrs.) Priyadarshni M Gangte * |
In support of it, Thomas Earle has opined that some of this intervention may have been part of a strategy to increase economic control. More important is the fact that we must recognize the unforeseen consequences of the efforts of individual households and communities to improve their lot, and the role of customary laws which were exercised by the Chiefs of several enlightened clans, and the fact when sometimes the customary laws failed to resolve inter-village or inter-personal disputes recourse to negotiations were opted for. As such conflicts in law were settled through negotiations. We know that ownership of the irrigation systems in Manipur is not known but it was the customary role of the king and his subjects in increasing the production and irrigational facilities, dredging of canals which was at a magnificent scale – a yearly ritual which ultimately had led to the emergence of the field system. This indeed was an attempt to control subsistence production through land ownership. It may be recalled here that in pastoral chiefdoms such as those of Manipuri societies ownership of animals offered another basis of control. Carneiro (Robert Carneiro : A theory of the Origin of the state : Science, 169 ; pp. 733-38 : 1970) has contended that warfare has been recognised as a common characteristic of chiefdoms with warriors used to conquer new communities and their tribute base and to intimidate communities reluctant to give up their full share to the overlord. His theory can be seen operative in the Manipur society. Meiteis expanded through conquest of inter-clan rivalry and their supremic rivalries. Interestingly, the potential for control based on military force seems quite limited and unstable for it happened again and again. Warfare was prevalent but local chiefdoms were apparently unable to expand spatially to incorporate sizeable regional population. Many of the small Meitei polities remained politically independent of the expanding Meitei hegemony for a long time. Local clans like Moirang and the Angom seem to have been able to retain political autonomy by defending themselves in fortified locations virtually unassailable with the tactics that characterize chiefdoms. Some other strategies in case of Manipur relate to ideology that legitimizes the position of leaders as necessary for maintaining the ‘natural’ order of the region. In many cases this involves the leaders’ security connecting themselves to the past. Incorporation of social leaders into a religious pantheon of God like figures e.g. Thangjing, Marjing etc. seem to plant a community’s leadership line on an eminence that dominates the landscape of the region. (Richard Bradley, 1984 : The Social Foundations of pre-historic Britain, London, Harlow). It is a reflection of legitimizing social formations. Equally important is competition for ties to a new ideology from outside, which acted as impetus to set off the ruling elite as a separate order,( Kent Flannery: The Olmec and the Valley of Oaxaca. A model for international interaction in formative times, “in Dumbarton Oaks Conference on the Olmec”: Edited by E. Benson, 1968; pp.79-110, Washington D.C., Dumbarton Oaks and Mary Helms: Ancient Panama Austin: University of Texas Press, 1979) for example, the warring elite of the Meiteis used such symbols as head hunting to define its status (Kristian Kristiansen : The formation of tribal systems in later European pre-history: 1982: Northern Europe 4000-500 B.C. in Theory and explanation in archeology: The Southampton Conference : Edited byh C. Renfrew, M. Rowland, and B. Sea-graves, pp.241-80, New York, Academic Press (1987) “From Stone to Bronze”). Importance of ideology as a source of chiefly power has several historical examples. State ideologies derived from the Roman texts held by the church following collapse of Rome were used to “civilize” the invading barbarians and then to legitimize the emerging ruling system of small Italian city states. The influence of Hinduism on the Meitei Civilization as is often claimed by regional historians, is also a fact that Chiefdoms with their few high-status positions, are inherently competitive in their political dynamics. It is again more surprising that some chiefdoms are able to sustain themselves while others disintegrate. Here economic control would seem of paramount importance. It is a fact that merger of the seven chiefdoms, which is now known as ‘Meitei State’ converting into a kingdom, was accelerated in the 17th century, (Unpublished work of Sanasam Amal : Socio-dynamics of chiefs and their chiefdom in the State formation in early Manipur (from the earliest time to the 16th Century AD) 2003 : p.220) more in particular by consolidation of dominance of Ningthouja lordship over other six chiefdoms completed during Charairongba. Related Articles:
to be continued .. * Dr. (Mrs.) Priyadarshni M Gangte wrote this article for The Sangai Express . This article was webcasted on January 31 , 2008 . |
* Comments posted by users in this discussion thread and other parts of this site are opinions of the individuals posting them (whose user ID is displayed alongside) and not the views of e-pao.net. We strongly recommend that users exercise responsibility, sensitivity and caution over language while writing your opinions which will be seen and read by other users. Please read a complete Guideline on using comments on this website.
LATEST IN E-PAO.NET
Jump Start
DBS Imphal SubSite |
Readers Mail |
Editorials |
Education Announcements |
Essay |
Exclusive Event |
Flash - Audio Visual |
Incidents |
LFS Imphal SubSite |
News Timeline |
Poetry |
Opinion |
Sports |
Rock Concert |
RSS |
Top Stories |
Wathi Jugai