Separate Homes: Past and Present of the Hill and the Valley People of Manipur

Khwairakpam Renuka *

Landscape of Manipur :: Pix by Bullu Raj

Having a history which can be traced back to 33 AD, it is regrettable that Manipur, a home to various ethnic groups is recently baffled with the issue of territorial and identity crisis. In addition to the voices of the Nagas for Nagalim, the recent issue regarding the claim for territorial entity by the Kukis has become a great concerned. Questions of exploitation, indigenous or migrants, maps of wars and the attempt to disseminate or acculturate within a particular group has been the limelight of current problem. Moreover, making a prima-facet on the above features in general and raising the questions of indigenous and foreigners in particular seems to be an instrumental tool in tracing antecedents. However, it is worthwhile to note here that such an assertion could only serve to draw a line of ethnic division among the people of Manipur.

As such, in this turbulent situation, to accentuate on native or local of a particular group could flawed with complexity rather than finding a solution. Given this, it may be useful to explore here as to which particular tribe of the hills had the Meiteis initially came across in history and in which manner. If history has to tell, then perhaps it might not surprise one to link the scenario mostly in terms of war and conflict than associating it in amicable ways. By war and conflict what I meant here is not the present ethnic conflict for territory and land, but refers particularly to the trends of early stages of inter-clan or inter-tribal war for the expansion of their principality.

So, according to the most authentic and reliable historical source of Manipur called the Cheitharol Kumbaba, one of the earliest named tribe that the Meitei king had encounter is the Maring tribe. The text recorded the incident of defeating the Maring tribe and capturing a Maring sword smith along with a man and a woman as war captives by the Meitei king Thangbi Lanthaba in 1302 AD [2].

In the same way, the other tribes of Manipur also emerged in the historical context of Manipur. For instance, much earlier to Tangkhul, the Marams mentioned as settling along the Koubru hill range emerge around 1335 AD [3] during Meitei king Telheiba's reign while the Tangkhul had come to the scene in 1404 AD [3] in king Punsiba's reign.

TABLE: Showing the emergence of the hill tribes of Manipur according to the reign of the Meitei kings

Name of tribe	Location of their settlement	Reign of Meitei King	Period of Reign
Maring	-	Thangbi Lanthaba	1302-1324 AD
Maram	Koubru hill range	Tenheiba	1335-1355 AD
Koireng	Northern hill range	Punsiba	1404-1432 AD
Thangkhul/ Tangkhun	Nil	Punsiba	1404-1432 AD
Anan/Anal	Nil	Chalamba	1545-1562 AD
Kapui/Kabui	Nil	Mungyamba	1562-1597 AD
Chothe	Nil	Mungyamba	1562-1597 AD
Aimon/Aimol	Not Mentioned	Paikhomba	1666-1697 AD

* Source- edited translation of the Cheitharol Kumbaba from the archaic Meitei script into Bengali script by L Ibungohal Singh & N Khelchandra Singh, the English translation of Cheitharon Kumpapa, The Court Chronicle of Manipur by Saroj Nalini Arambam Parratt and Nepram Bihari's recent English translation of the Cheitharol Kumbaba, The Royal Chronicle of Manipur. Also the record of the above table is given from the findings of the period that covers from 33 AD- 1709 AD (early 18th century AD).

What is striking about the above given table is a contradictory picture if we compared it with today's scenario. It revealed us that each of the tribe has a distinct entity of their own. The fact is that the past understanding of the nearby hill tribes of Manipur move away from the present notion of identifying them under the two umbrellas called the Kuki or Naga. Had they been recognized as what they are today, they could have known or addressed with the same ethnic tag as 'Maram Naga' or 'Anal Kuki' etc. However, there is a complete absence of such terminology like Kuki or Naga till the early 18th century AD in the early historical account of Manipur. This could be the reason as to why such 'term' or 'terminology' was found using most widely and specifically in the reports and books of the colonial writers.

More or less, the present problem in Manipur seems to be focus more in what we can term as 'naive interest' to place one's identity. While recently it claimed that the Anal tribe were a kin of Kuki-chin, the declined of such allegation by some of the Anal's sources hints one to think over again if the whole issue lies in the attempt of impinge curiosity to assimilate neutral tribe in order to carve their territoriality. No doubt, according to the early record, the Maring were the earliest tribe to appear as compared to other tribes of Manipur, but what is confusing is, where do this particular tribe takes its shade from the two umbrellas called the Kuki or the Naga? In the recent sources they are being shown as belonged to Kuki-chin whereas in some sources they are recognized as Maring Naga.

As far as the question of political boundary is concerned, it is plausible that Manipur lacks a well defined boundary in the early period. This is because, generally in the early period, the boundary between the territories of the clans/tribes tends to be divided on the basis of topographical features such as forests, rivers and streams and hills. [4]

However, the recent report which states that Manipur does not have a properly defined boundary before 1947 would be paradoxical and misleading. If not for making a point to show the limit of their own territory, why history bears the record of the king of pong (Shan state in upper Burma now) and king Kyamba of Manipur for division of land along the Ningthi or the Chindwin river in 1470 AD. We are told that after a successful joined expedition against Kabo, king Choupha Khekhomba of Pong and king Kyamba of Manipur demarcated the boundary of the two kingdom in the presence of Mahouwangbi Sumba of Meitei and Chapak Te Te of Kabo. [5]

On the whole, how do we understanding the present problem of Manipur? As it says, "history reveals identity; history speaks of civilization", if one takes into account with what is shown in the historical record, it is difficult to trace or link the recent claim for demand of land by the various ethnic groups of Manipur. Since the Stone Age down the Global Age, no pages and maps in the history of Manipur have narrated and shown us that there is a separate land called Kuki-land or Naga-land. Neither was there an indication or evidence that the land belongs wholly to the Meiteis nor a demarcation of territorial margin along ethnic lines. It was a land that belongs to each of us.

Therefore, the present ethnic conflict on land shows the feeble attempt of a few interests and scrapping the political entity of Manipur will be a far cry answer. However, this neither confronts nor undermines the present claim on land by the various ethnic groups, what the article wants to suggest is the historical reliability and authenticity in putting the claim on territorial entity.

Key:

1. Saroj Nalini Arambam Parratt, The Court Chronicle of the Kings of Manipur, The Cheitharon Kumpapa, New York: Routledge, 2005, p.34.
2. Bihari Nepram, The Cheitharol Kumbaba, The Royal Chronicle of Manipur, Guwahati: Spectrum, 2012, p.37.
3. Singh Ibungohal Land Singh Khelchandra N, Cheitharol Kumbaba. Imphal: Manipur Sahitya Parishad, 2005, p.17.
4. Romila Thapar, From Lineage to State, New Delhi: Oxford, 1990, p.34.
5. Bihari Nepram, The Cheitharol Kumbaba, The Royal Chronicle of Manipur, Guwahati: Spectrum, 2012, p.39. Also see Oinam Bhogeshwor, Ningthourol Lambuba, Imphal: 1967.

References:

• Nepram, Bihari. (2012), The Cheitharol Kumbaba, The Royal Chronicle of Manipur, Guwahati: Spectrum.
• Parratt, Saroj Nalini A. (2005), Cheithron Kumpapa, The Court Chronicle of Manipur, London: Routledge, 2005.
• Oinam Bhogeshor, Ningthourol Lambuba: Imphal, 1967.
• Singh, Ibungohal L and N, Khelchandra, (1967), Cheitharol Kumbaba, Imphal: Manipur Sahitya Parishad, reprinted 2005.
• Thapar, Romila. (2006), From Lineage to State, New Delhi: Oxford University Press.

---

* Khwairakpam Renuka wrote this article for e-pao.net
The writer is a PhD Scholar in Centre For Historical Studies at Jawaharlal Nehru University, New Delhi and can be contacted at renuka(dot)jnu(at)gmail(dot)com
This article was posted on December 26, 2012.

---