By HH Mohrmen
According to local narratives, three immediate causes led to the Jañtia rebellion against the British government. The story as told by the natives of the land was that the first reason for the rebellion was the house tax imposed by the British Government on the hill subjects of the erstwhile Jañtia Kingdom. J.H. Thornton, in his memoir published in 1895 (Memories of Seven Campaigns: A Record of Thirty-Five Years’ Service in the Indian Medical Department in India, China, Egypt, and Sudan by James Howard Thornton, 1834–1919), blamed the Bengal Government for wrongly advising the imposition of income tax, which was first introduced in India by Mr. Wilson, the Finance Minister. Imposing income tax on the highlanders, who had no income in the proper sense of the term and to whom the tax was a foreign idea, was something they could not accept. The oral narratives mentioned about the house tax whereas Dr Thornton said it was income tax that was imposed on the people.
Tax by a foreign power
Tax was a foreign concept to the tribal people of the area because, although they paid a token to the Daloi called ‘dan’ for the services he provided, the payment was always in kind. This tradition persisted even into the late seventies or eighties. Tax in a monetary form was something new to the people. The land ownership system in the area, where land was owned either by the community or the clan and not the individual, also meant that a person could not be taxed for land they did not own. It is a tradition that continues to this day, where farmers cultivating land owned by the clan compensate the landowners by sharing the produce harvested from the land. In the War Jaiñtia area the farmers pay a token to the clan from which they take the land on lease. However, farmers do not have to compensate for anything if they cultivate land owned by the community.
Capt. B.W.D. Morton, D.C. of Khasi and Jañtia Hills, in his communication to the officiating commissioner of Assam (dated Jowai, September 30, 1862), stated that on his arrival in Jowai in late June, he met with the Daloi of Jowai and Shilliang Myntang and enquired about the cause that led to the people to take to the path of rebellion. When asked about the rebellion, the Daloi of Shilliang Myntang feigned ignorance, and the Daloi of Jowai casually stated that it could be due to the interference with religious festivals and the house tax the government imposed on the people.
When the Pastieh Dance was mistaken for a rebel training
The abrupt act of obstruction by British soldiers while the people of Raid Ïalong were performing their traditional warrior dance, “chad pastieh,” known as “Pastieh Kaiksoo,” was one of the major causes of the rebellion. It is called Pastieh Kaiksoo because it is connected with the deity that is part of the river Myntdu near Ïalong. Kaiksoo is considered sacred by some clans, and people still pay obeisance to the deity in this part of the river.
Oral stories recount that the British, upon learning about the Pastieh dance at Ïalong, went to stop the ceremony while it was still ongoing and confiscated all the swords and shields used by the young men in the festival. Local stories suggest that the British misunderstood the event. The soldiers believed the Pnar were practicing rebellion against the government, so they stopped the dance and seized the weapons used in the festival.
An act of blasphemy and sacrilege
Stopping a religious festival midway was an act of irreverence to the local ethos and a sacrilege to interrupt the ceremony while it was still in progress. It was an act of blasphemy that hurt the sentiments of the Pnar and was a cause of the rebellion. Unfortunately, the incident caused irreparable damage to the Chad Pastieh, which was a sacred tradition of the people of Ïalong. The incident has had a lasting impact on the religious activities of Raid Ïalong, and since then, the Raid has not been able to perform the tribal warrior dance again. This oral narrative is substantiated by available facts as the Raid has not revived the tradition since it was stopped due to British interference.
Mediators engaged by the govt mentioned another cause
Ram Singh, Raja of Cherra, and his cousin, Hajun Manick, were commissioned by the British government to meet the leaders of the rebellion, mediate and convince them to surrender. When the two were asked in the presence of Major Langmore, Commanding the 33rd Native Infantry, and Captain Morton, Deputy Commissioner in charge of the Khasi Jañtia Hills on October 13, 1862, stated: “I met the following Dalois at Lad-Tuber, namely U Myllon, Daloi of Mynso; the Daloi of Rymbai; the Daloi of Raliang; Shilliang Myntang; Sutnga; and the Daloi of Nongjngi. I did not recognize them all, but people said that all Dalois were present. I met about 1,500 rebels and asked them why they had revolted. They assigned police interference with their worship at Ïalong as the reason for doing so. They also said that another reason they revolted was that the government had stopped some families from performing funeral rites of deceased members of their clan in their cremation area.”
Oral narratives also mentioned that the police had not only interfered with their Pastieh but had stopped Kur Sumer in Jowai from performing the last rites of one of their members. In this case the government’s records corroborate the oral stories.
Demand for independence and reinstatement of the King
Howard Thornton in his memoir remarked that “the Bengali tax collectors and other subordinate officials began in their customary way to practice oppression and extortion upon the hill men, and so, at the beginning of 1862, a revolt began.” It was only later in the rebellion when the rebels came into contact with the Kur or Royal Clan from Sylhet that they openly demanded independence.
B.W.D. Morton, in his letter to the officiating secretary to the Government of Bengal dated Jowai, October 28, 1862, reported that the Jañtia rebels had now openly demanded their independence, as confirmed by the Raja of Cherra and his cousin Hajun Manick. In a meeting between Ram Singh, Raja of Cherra, and Hajun Manick with the rebels at Moobahkhon/Muwakhon, about nine miles from Nartiang (probably between October 18 and 23), the mediators informed the Deputy Commissioner that a section of the rebels expressed their willingness to submit, but the rebels from Jowai under U Kiang Nangbah were chiefly responsible for the current state of affairs.
U Kiang reaffirms the cause of the rebellion
During the trial, when U Kiang Nangbah was questioned by Captain BWD Morton: “You were dissatisfied concerning the interference with your religion; do you have any other reason to rebel?” To this, U Kiang Nangbah replied, “We were not dissatisfied with the house tax but with the income tax. We raised a little produce from the ground, and we were taxed excessively.” When asked by Brigadier Dunsford CB how much income tax he had to pay, u Kiang Nangbah said, “Four rupees.” This is according to the memorandum from Major JC Haughton, officiating Agent of the Governor-General on special duty (No. 3C., dated January 13, 1863). A copy of the examination of Ookiang Nungba, referred to in Captain Morton’s letter dated January 6, 1863, was forwarded to the Secretary to the Government of Bengal for the information of the Hon’ble Lieutenant-Governor. The memorandum detailed the proceedings in the case of Ookiang Nungba, the leader of the uprising in the Jañtia Hills, who was charged with rebellion against the government. He was tried in the presence of Brigadier Dunsford CB and Captain Morton, under Act XI of 1857. He was sentenced to death by hanging from a scaffold.
What started as a reaction against the house tax later flared up and became a fight for the country’s independence. The rebels demanded that a king from the royal family be restored to the throne of the Jañtia kingdom and for this u Kiang Nangbah and many others had to pay with their lives.