Society exists in a universe of dynamic influences. No society remains completely static. This has been the nature of law. Subsequently social change and development are the two-inspirable aspects that affect human existence. Development implies a desirable form of social change and is more of an 'operational' concept than 'philosophical' one. It is a strategy of planned social change in a direction that is considered desirable by the members of society.

Unfortunately, the wheel of development in many parts of the peripheral areas of the Imphal valley has stopped. Socio-economic disparity increases, social tension and unrest multiples, and inaccessibility and insecurity worsen. My endeavour here is to highlight the poverty, social discrimination, socially static and the losing history of a village called Kameng in Imphal East district. Just 17 km from Imphal, Kameng is surrounded by its neighbouring villages - Chana to the North, Nongrain to the South, Tellou to the East and Nongada to the West.

A visit to these areas doesn't give me any optimism for the future of our State. What I saw in these rural areas especially Kameng produce no positive vibes. I was immediately surrounded by a gaggle of children with dirty unkempt hair, running noses and dressed in rags. Youths and old ages that had no expectantly and hopeful look on their faces welcomed and inquired about my visit. A look, that seemed to imply that they were marginalized and deprived off from the fruits of economic development.

The Kameng village has profound historical importance and their identity is steeped in history. Historic records tell us the Kameng was called 'Suisa Kameng', a place where Chinese (Khagi) war captives were made to settle by the Manipur King Khagemba (in 1520 AD). Johnstone (My experience in Manipur and Naga hills. London, 1896 P. 80) said, "About the year 1520 AD a large Chinese force invaded the country and was signally defeated; all who were not killed being made prisoners. They taught the Manipuri Silk culture, and a number of them were settled at Suisa Kameng (Kameng) in the valley, where they have still descendants. The Chinese also taught the art of brick making, and erected two solid blocks of masonry in the palace, between which the road to the Lion Gate passed. These blocks were leveled with the ground by the Burmese invaders, but rebuilt on the old foundations by Gambir Singh". This indicates that they constructed Hogaibi Thong, an old gate of Kangla and Thong Numbonbi (the existing old bridge in Imphal bazar). The technology and skill that they possessed had its impact on Meitei society and on the formation of a lineage state headed by a chief. In course of time, as it is recorded in the Meitei Genealogy 'Nongchup Haram', the Chinese were allowed to marry local girls and were given sub clan and clans. In Meitei society every migrated clan and sub clans had their genealogy. The subclan i.e the Yumnaks are Heikham, Khongbantabam, Yend-rambam, Chengsubam, Usham Kangoi Mayum, Sendang Mayum, Lakpam Shabam, Samjet Shabam, Sangaisembam, Thong-bam, Khumbongmayum, Louriyam and Mangsidam. These sub-clains were absorbed in different clans, which are traditionally known as the seven salais.

At present, the original Yumnak, which presumed to be their descendants, are diminishing. Only the Louriyam, Khongbantabam, Khumbongmayum and Mangsidam sub clans are found. The Louriyam sub clan (Yumnaks) has 5 houses, Khongbantabam 10 houses, Khumbongmayum 10 houses and Mangsidam 4 houses. Their population hardly aggregates to 250 while the rest are other sub clans. Agriculture is their main occupation; only two or three persons are involved in brick making. The whole generation has almost forgotten or intentionally gave up their indigenous professions.

This shows that today the historical image doesn't give any impact. It rather projects the descendants as a degraded one. Fear of inferiority and discrimination exist in their minds. The reason could be because of being the descendants of Chinese war captives. Some recall that their forefather had narrated the history of their origin and identities. Some perceived it as folklore while many of them are ignorant. In fact it's hard to meet an individual who posses the conforming attitude to project and preserve their heritage.

Moreover, there is lack of evidence to convince their minds. They want an urban foothold and would even condescend to take up occupations in towns and cities that they would not design to perform in their own villages. Eventually such a scene has emanated due to the negligence of successive Govts, which are the largest owners of historic buildings and heritage sites. They are not keen to spend time and money on documentation of the conservation process. Sense of ownership - that the heritage is 'Ours', and the Govt and private owners are just the caretakers - is a concept that is not widely spread in Manipur. Another village, which is also called Kameng is situated in the periphery of Imphal west. It is traditionally known as Nongchup Kameng (west Kameng). Visiting to the village and discussing with the local leaders create confusion with the history. They claimed that they were the original Kameng i.e Suisa Kameng, and the East Kameng were shifted from the west. A conflict in history is prevalent. At this juncture a penetrating and ramifying research is necessary to ascertain the veracity. In a nutshell this could be the hub of many scholars. Again it will be very interesting here to put out that there is a district called 'Kameng district' in Arunachal Pradesh. It is the western most districts bordering Bhutan on the western flank and Tibet on the north.

They claimed that they were the original Kameng i.e Suisa Kameng, and the East Kameng were shifted from the west. A conflict in history is prevalent. At this juncture a penetrating and ramifying research is necessary to ascertain the veracity. In a nutshell this could be the hub of many scholars. Again it will be very interesting here to put out that there is a district called 'Kameng district' in Arunachal Pradesh. It is the western most districts bordering Bhutan on the western flank and Tibet on the north. A historical link between them can be speculated.

Apart from their identity and history the present condition of both the village i.e. East and West Kameng is in a pathetic state. As more individuals involve in marginal work the rural economy is not a viable entity any longer, this shows in the temper of the villages. Lack of livelihood strategies and inaccessibility to resources (money, land, credit) were the main problems. State Govt and the concerned authorities hardly focus its attention to these problems.

'Development' in these rural areas has become merely one of the tunes being sung in a desperate attempt to buy and woo the voters. For most of the politicians and political parties the poor pockets or the marginalized sections of people are just vote banks whom they visit during election with all tall promises and forget them till it is time for the next poll. The profundity of changes in the rural area is not fully captured by census figures, or by statistical surveys useful though they are, it is necessary to comprehend the depth of the disenchantment that