After meticulous research by Dr David Reid Syiem, formerly professor of history, North Eastern Hill University and later Vice Chancellor, Rajiv Gandhi University and also former Chairperson, Union Public Service Commission (UPSC) the exact date of the death of Tirot Singh was established to be July 17, 1835. These conclusions were arrived at after careful study of the British records in the UK and other libraries in Kolkata and Delhi. In her book, “Placing the Frontier in British North-East India: Law, Custom And Knowledge,” Reeju Ray writes that although the British reinstated surrendered Syiems to their positions through signing of agreements, severe restrictions were placed on their authority. The restored Syiems were liable for treason if they showed any form of opposition to the British government and heavy fines were imposed as an additional punitive measure. It was for the same reason that Tirot Sing was confined to a jail in Dacca following a failed negotiation for reinstatement to his position as Chief of Nongkhlaw.
Ray raises several troubling questions on Tirot Sing Syiem’s incarceration in Dacca jail when he was identified as a sovereign by the same colonial state. She asks if Tirot Sing would have been allowed to retain his position if he had signed an agreement acceptable to the British? Was he imprisoned for instigating rebellion and causing the deaths of British subjects including Europeans? Or was he punished for not agreeing to the terms of subjection? Ray says there are no available or clear answers to these questions. Interestingly the British did not hesitate to sign a treaty with Tirot Sing’s 9-year old nephew, Rujjum Sing on March 29, 1834 wghereby Nongkhlaw was classified as a dependent territory and brought under the jurisdiction of the colonial political agent.
It is noteworthy that Tirot Sing Syiem at a time when little was known of the outside world was able to stand his ground and to refuse to sign a treaty of subjugation to the British when many other Syiems had capitulated. It would have been a great boon to the present generation if some accounts of Tirot Sing’s childhood and youth were to have been pieced together. After Tirot Sing the Khasi society has not produced a valiant chieftain except for Wickliffe Syiem the Deputy Chieftain (Syiem Khynnah) of Hima Nongstoin and a structural engineer by training. He stood against the signing of the Instrument of Accession to the Indian nation because he argued that the 22 Syiems of the Khasi states had never been under British rule. But Wickliffe was helpless since he was not the syiem. His uncle was. Wickliffe Syiem left Nongstoin and went to East Pakistan vowing never to return to a country that according to him slipped from enslavement from one power to another.
The tenacity of purpose of both Tirot Sing and Wickliffe Syiem ought to be the guiding light for the youth of this generation that actually lacks role models. It is important that more details about the life and time of Tirot Sing and Wickliffe Syiem be taught in schools, colleges and universities.