By HH Mohrmen
In the recent tirade which sparked from the Ichamati issue, what caught one’s interest from the exchange of invectives is the contention that Khasi by which it was meant the grand Hynñew Trep community were originally from Cambodia. Humans have migrated from one place to another since time immemorial and the question rightly asked is where did the Hynñew Trep people come from? Do we have historical evidence of the people’s migration to the hills? The answer to this question is unequivocally no. Hynñew Trep people also tell stories of their migration to the place they call home now, but the question remains whether there is any truth in the statement that they came from Cambodia.
The assertion that the Khasi Pnar people come from Cambodia is no different from the overtly over-generalised statement that all Bengalis in Meghalaya are Bangladeshis. The very fact that Bangladesh has only come into existence in the year 1971 and many Bengalis in Meghalaya have lived in the hills long before that, makes this statement unfounded and inconsequential. Similarly it is irrelevant if the Hynñew Trep people had migrated to hills or they were originally settlers of the hills. The fact remains that they were the autochthons of the area.
The Hynñew Trep people have no history of their migration to the hills but the only thing they have are stories and the familiar stories that people tell is that it was a long arduous exodus of twelve long years or ‘khad ar snem pynthiah/kynthih’. It is also said that it is for this reason, that they called the Himalayas ‘ki lum Makashang’ the mountain that they walked around. These two elements which are part of the story-telling are the only parts of the tradition which connect the people with the great migration story of the tribe. But it is also to be noted that twelve here is symbolic because they used certain numbers to define something which is uncountable or innumerable, for example when they say ‘ki laiphew mrad’ or ‘ki laiphew jingthaw’ or ‘ki laiphew syiem’ it does not mean that there are only thirty kinds of animals or kings but it also means many. Similarly ‘khadar’ like in ‘khad ar daloi’ or ‘khad ar pateng’ is not meant to be taken literarily.
Apart from stories, the Hynñew Trep also have their monoliths, stone carvings and sculptures around which they weaves stories. They also weave stories around natural phenomena too. In fact the monolith culture that is being practiced by the people till date is one unique aspect of culture that needs more studies. Monolithic culture occurred in different parts of the world during the Neolithic age, hence it would be interesting to study if the Hynñew Trep people who still practice the culture till date have any connection with the tradition that was practiced in the distant past. If so, how is it that people in the area still continue to practice tradition while the monolithic culture in the other parts of the world has disappeared long time ago.
The recent history of at least the Khasi Pnar was that they have separate chieftainships of which the few prominent ones are ka hima Nongkrem, ka hima Sohra, ka hima Nongkhlaw and ka hima Jañtia to name a few. But of these the Jañtia kingdom has a long recorded history from the fifteen hundreds until the kings were defeated by the British. The state not only finds mention in the chronicles of the neighbouring kingdoms, but it has also issued its own coins. It was indeed great to know from J.B. Bhatacherjee a renowned Bengali historian of Meghalaya who first taught at the Kiang Nangbah (then known as Jowai Government) College that the Jaintia Buranji which is the main source of information about the Jañtia kingdom is now being translated into English.
The last known history about the kingdom is the rebellion against the British led by u Kiang Nangbah the famous freedom fighter of Jañtia. The freedom that u Kiang Nangbah fought for was for his country the Jañtia kingdom which was then under the dominion of the British rule. Although initially the cause of the rebellion was the house tax which the British government imposed on the people of Jañtia and also the interference of the British with the religious activities of the people, but at the later stage of the battle the rebels also demanded that the British reinstate their king. Although the people who lived in the kingdom shared the same culture and language with other Hynñew Trep people, those who live in the area known as Jañtia have since evolved to form a unique identity of their own.
The common obvious characteristics of the Hynñew Trep People is that they follow the same culture and the distinct part of it is the matrilineal family system and that people speak what the linguists call the Austroasiatic group, Khasi-Aslian language. The different sub tribes may not have the same history but they are united by the culture and language they speak. Perhaps the argument that the Khasia are from Cambodia is based on the fact that they speak the mentioned language, and if that is the case then the Mundas too speak the same language like the Khasi Pnar.
According to Tony Joseph’s book there are two questions related to the origin and spread of the Austroasiatic language speaking population in India. Question number one is whether the Austroasiatic population originated from India and spread to other parts of the world or that they migrated to India from South-east Asia. Tradition amongst the Pnars of Jañtia hills also has a story of u Sajar Ñangli who rebelled against the king of his time and left his land for good. It is believed that he led an exodus of his followers and walked towards the east.
Recent genetic studies on ancient DNA provide answers to the question of the origin of the Hynñew Trep people. With regards to the Austroasiatic population in India the studies suggest that what is relevant to us that the first wave of migration from Asia to India happened through land route. This study suggests that the migration to India happened around 2000 BCE which gives a fair idea that the ancestors of the Khasi Pnar people had arrived in India a long time ago. It was also suggested that the population migrated from South East Asia as part of the farming migration originating from China around 2000 BCE. This also answers the pertinent question about the practice of wetland farming culture of the Pnar people in particular. It also provides justification to how rice became a major crop of the people with the community having many varieties of rice in their custody.
Tony Joseph may have arrived at the conclusion about the migration of the people to their present home and their connection with rice, but the question remain as to how the people still continue with the monolithic culture which was primarily a culture prevalent during the Neolithic age. The continuation of the monolithic practice amongst the people which was in fact was prevalent between 7000 and 1000 BC remains an enigma that needs more studies. It is therefore pertinent to note that people migrated from one place to another in search of food and shelter and they continue to do so even today. Some Bengalis in Meghalaya had migrated to the hills since the British time and the Khasi Pnar too had migrated to the hills from South East Asia. If the threat to the state is the influx of illegal migrants into the state, it is the responsibility of both the communities to work together and check this illegal activity.
Email: [email protected]