Legitimacy of Illegitmate History: Historical
Difference at the Margin of Ethnonationalism [1]
- Part 2 -

G. Amarjit Sharma *

Constructing Khoibu's Identity Through History

Documenting Khoibu's history is not a case of writing history by a historian but the Khoibu Union. The khoibu union is taken as the representative of the khoibu interests. However the study does not consider the representativeness of the said union. Rather the questions are mostly directed towards the writing of a history as mode of asserting group's identity of a marginal community in Manipur.

Khoibus while writing their own history evolved themselves as an agent of empowering the community itself. Here is the case of writing history neither by a historian nor someone/ some organization outside the group. Such writing reflects that the group is conscious of the need for such writing to assert themselves as an independent tribe.

Moreover in making themselves conscious of the surrounding they themselves get reconstituted. Hence there is a semantic shift in the assertion of Khoibu identity–the shift from the 'Maring Khoibu tribe' to 'Khoibu tribe' and from a 'sub-group' to an 'independent tribe.'

These are reflected in the writing of the Khoibu Union. In it Khoibus claim that their identity has been misunderstood: 'Khoibu people are immediate neighbour to Maring people in terms of habitation. As such there is frequent social interaction between the two tribes (italic mine). Religious fellowship, social activities like games and sports etc, are jointly organized. There are inter-marriages between the two tribes. However, the lingua franca between the two tribes is the Meiteilon (Manipuri). By this reason or the other the khoibu people are often called "Khoibu Maring".'8

The Union further claims the distinctiveness of the Khoibu. It describes: 'Khoibu is a tribe having its own distinctive culture, custom, language, genealogy, history of origin, migration, settlement, socio-political and religious organization. Khoibu people have Christian Worship Hymnal and Bible written/translated in their own dialect.' That the Khoibu is a full-fledged tribe is also attempted to prove by mentioning the characteristics.

It writes, 'the Khoibu tribe bears some distinct characteristics such as: Head hunting, common dormitory for both male and female youth term as "Yakhang" in the Khoibu dialect, socio-political system in the village level/village republic, a large quadrangular o hexagonal shield use in war or battlefield, settlement on the high lands, a crude form of agriculture practice for livelihood, every Khoibu village has a well-defined territory, population and independent internal and external policy exercised by the chief, assisted by the village council consisted of different clans, and common land ownership.'9

The Khoibu traces its genealogy in the myths handed down by their ancestors…. Though the myth of cave origin is not confined to Khoibu, the above myth still signifies how the present Khoibu relates with the past. But Khoibus do not relate with their past simply because there is a past. A more serious reason is that they attempt to locate themselves within the 'dislocated world'–dislocation, in the case of Khoibu, may be taken as the existential crisis, that are reflected in not allowing to name themselves, and establish an identity for themselves….

Khoibu also reconstructed their identity through the migration myth. The history of migration of the Khoibu is traced from their settlement in the Indo- Myanmar border….

According to their history, the Khoibu people were said to have experienced their best and prosperous life under the reign of Mikhongpa in the Inthee Basin, Angoching Range and Yoomadung Hills, in the present Indo-Myanmar border. However their tragedy started when Awa (the Burmese army) invaded their territory. They fled to Maring villages. Interview with a khoibu resident of Kakching Lamkhai in Thoubal district of Manipur revealed that the Khoibus recalled their memories of suffering under the Burmese armies because of the similar suffering at the hand of the Marings. Hence it is their experience with the Maring that led the Khoibus to recall lives under the Burmese rule and how they migrated to the present settlement.

In defining themselves as 'Khoibu', the Khoibus register the problematic side of the ways in which Maring tribe10 is representing them. In this act of defining, there is an attempt to give a message that they stand at equal par with the rest as an independent tribe, not as a constituent member of the Maring tribe. In this way the Khoibu community seeks cultural distinctiveness from the rest of the neighbouring tribes or communities. Khoibus claim that they have all the basic characteristics to be called as a tribe.

The characteristic like 'head hunting, dormitory system, settlement on the high lands, village chief, village council etc' will be found in the other tribes as well. But at the same time it seeks to cut off the continuity with the rest by asserting the difference or asserting 'its own distinctive culture, custom, language, genealogy, history of origin, migration, settlement, socio-political and religious organization.' Hence the affinities with, and distinctiveness of the Khoibus from their neighbouring tribal communities are asserted simultaneously.

…. 'Khoibu' as a name for a said group of people is also an important element in the assertion of the Khoibu identity. An interview with one of the respondents in a Khoibu village in Thoubal District (Manipur) revealed that they were not allowed to call as Khoibu. He further said that once he was severely beaten up for identifying as Khoibu when a group of Marings came to see him.

Khoibus explain how the term 'Khoibu' came to their lives and how they would like to be called: '[A]s our forefathers have been handing down our accounts orally from generation to generation; we called ourselves "Uipo". The term "Khoi-pu" is derived from the version of "Khoi" which means bee and "Pu" is derived from "Akapu" which means owner. Therefore Khoibu means the people who own bee, beehives, and honey in the indigenous land of Khoibu territory…. Though we called ourselves "Uipo", we officially represent as Khoibu to avoid any confusion of our identity.'

That the Khoibu as a subject has to constantly negotiate his own history and identity is borne by the immediate reality where the Maring still claims that the Khoibu is the constituent part of it. The active role of agency that the Khoibu Union played by writing its own history is also manifested in its ability to create crisis within the Maring society.

To give an instance of this crisis, a controversy was created within the Maring Student Union when the Khoibu represented as a separate unit to the Naga Student Union Delhi and submitted historical facts about the Khoibu to Naga Student Union Delhi and Naga Student Federation (NSF). The convener of the Maring Marnorap Delhi argues: '[T]hat, it was absolutely a matter of surprise and disappointment to all the Maring people when some of our dear brothers and sisters claiming themselves as Khoibu Students, had raised, without any prior information to the authorities concerned, as issue of affiliating themselves to NSUD (Naga Student Union Delhi) as a separate Khoibu Unit apart from Maring Marnorap Delhi (MMD). If such demand is granted without prior consultation with the apex bodies of Maring viz. Maring Uparup Assembly (MUA), Maring Literature Society (MLS) and Maring Students' Union (MSU), it would lead to the provocation of misunderstandings and social unrest amongst the Marings regarding the history of Maring identities–social, cultural, literature etc. …. On this account, the letters and historical facts about Khoibu submitted to NSUD and NSF, should be first and foremost referred and approved by the MUA, MLS and MSU.'11

….Thus as far as Khoibu is concerned it is worth mentioning that 'where a particular category of identity has been repressed, delegitimated or devalued in dominant discourses, a vital response may be to claim value for all those labelled by that category, thus implicitly invoking it in an essentialist way.'12

( This article is an abridged form of a bigger article under the same title which is published as one of the chapters in the forthcoming book entitled Fixity and Fluidity: History, Politics and Culture of North East India, edited by Lipokmar Dzuvichu, G. Amarjit Sharma and Manjeet Baruah, (Inhouse publication of the Centre for the Study of North East India, Jawaharlal Nehru University, New Delhi).

To be continued.....