By Bhogtoram Mawroh
When one talks about Khasi history, it feels like groups such as the Synteng and Khynriam receive more attention because of the two great Khasi Himas, viz., Sutnga/Jaintiapur and Shillong (now divided into Hima Khyrim and Hima Mylliem). However, the importance and contribution of the War to the larger Khasi identity are sometimes not given enough importance. In some cases, their identity is being subsumed by other groups. For example, the War are divided into two groups: War-Khasi and War-Jaintia. This is false classification because while Khasi is the term used for an ethnic community, Jaintia is the name of a place, i.e., Hima Jaintiapur. There is only the War, and they are Khasi. The use of the term Jaintia is therefore, highly problematic.
The term Jaintia is derived from Hima Jaintiapur, which was originally a Hindu kingdom that was later conquered by Hima Sutnga. Thereafter, all those who lived within its domain came to be known as Jaintia. Thus, Jaintia, which is derived from the patron Hindu goddess Jainteswari, is an inclusive term and does not denote only the Synteng. However, one finds that only the War are given the appellation Jaintia, and not the Synteng or the Biate. The latter are a non-Khasi group who reside in what is today Saipung. Based on folklore, colonial-era documents, and the work of Khasi scholars such as Hamlet Bareh Ngap Kynta and B. Pakem, they appear to have arrived around 600–800 years ago, making them one of the oldest communities in the Jaintia Hills and predating the founding of Hima Jaintiapur. Yet neither the Biate are called Biate-Jaintia, nor are the Synteng called Synteng-Jaintia—only the War. Now that the kingdom no longer exists, this creates a situation akin to saying that the daughter gave birth to the mother.
Today, the legacy of Hima Jaintiapur is proudly asserted by the Synteng, but it was the War who founded the original kingdom, Hima Sutnga. According to tradition, the first Syiem of Hima Sutnga belonged to the descendants of Ka Li Dokha (a puri) and U Loh Ryndi of kur Tariang from War-Amwi. A version of this story is found in the Jayantia Buranji, where, instead of reflecting the indigenous Khasi cosmology, it is connected to the Hindu goddess Jainteswari, possibly at the behest of the Brahmin priests who exercised considerable influence over the Jaintiapur court. However, the original story of Ka Li Dokha and U Loh Ryndi reminds us that it was always a Khasi story.
In fact, according to oral narratives, in 1669 there was an attempt to impose Hinduism on Raid Tuber by the converted Hindu Syiem of Jaintiapur during the reign of Amratap Singh who wanted to wipe out the indigenous religion. In response, U Woh Tep Khydiat of Tuber Kmaishnong revolted to protect his people from being converted to a foreign religion. A statue of this warrior stands in his village, and recently Sein Raij Tuber commemorated the 357th anniversary of his death. This is similar to what happened among the Ahoms, where the Deodhai (the Ahom priests) and the original Ahom religion were gradually replaced by Brahmins and Hindu myths. I am not sure how many Ahoms still practice their indigenous faith today. Perhaps many have since converted to Hinduism. If so, it would seem that, in the long run, the Brahmins won against the Deodhais, and the Ahom lost their religion.
Going back to the story, considering that the ancestress of Hima Sutnga/Jaintiapur was a divine being, the only human connection found among their descendants is through the War. At that time, Hima Jaintiapur had not yet come into existence, making the application of the composite term “Jaintia” to the Syiem inappropriate. It is therefore more accurate to say that the first Syiem of Hima Sutnga, and the successors who later established Hima Jaintiapur, were War. Indeed, the War must have played a decisive role in the conquest of Jaintiapur, since the Synteng would have had to pass through War territory to reach the plains. Yet, by using the term War-Jaintia, where Jaintia has come to denote the Synteng, the distinct contribution of the War is being disregarded.
Recently, the JHADC CEM, Thombor Shiwat, has proposed introducing the Jaintia alphabets to strengthen efforts to preserve the local language. The language that this proposal seeks to safeguard is Pnar, which is spoken by the Synteng, rather than the languages spoken by the War and the other non-Synteng groups living under the JHADC. This attempt to ignore the War identity is ironic because the language spoken by the Synteng, Pnar, began as a dialect of War.
When the Khasi first arrived in South Asia around 5,000 years ago, the language they spoke was similar to other Mon-Khmer languages, especially Palaung, which is spoken today in northern Myanmar by the Ta’ang (Palaung). Therefore, it is not the Sohra Khasi dialect but the War dialect spoken in Amlarem that bears closer similarities to the Mon-Khmer languages spoken elsewhere in Southeast Asia. This variety of Khasi emerged around 4,000 years ago. This is a very important date because the oldest archaeological sites known today—dating to around 3,000–4,000 years ago—are found in the Khasi Hills (Myrkhan) and Ri Bhoi (Lum Sohpetbneng), suggesting that the language spoken by the Khasis around 4,000 years ago would have sounded very similar to the War-Amwi dialect still spoken today in Amlarem.
Then, around 2,000 years ago, Lyngngam emerged as a distinct language within the Khasi group and is today spoken in West Khasi Hills and South West Khasi Hills. Around 1,300 years ago, Pnar emerged as a distinct language from War. Originally beginning as a dialect, it became the common language of those living on the tableland, while War continued to be spoken along the southern slopes. Then, around 700 years ago, the Sohra dialect began to take shape. The War are therefore the oldest Khasi group, and the Synteng are a branch of the War, not the other way around.
But who actually are the War? The term is used for those who live along the southern slopes and are known for their arecanut and Khasi mandarin orchards. In fact, the 1835 Pemberton’s Report on the Eastern Frontier of British India remarked that the whole of Bengal was supplied with oranges from the War areas. Perhaps the most distinctive feature of the War, however, is that they pioneered the construction of living root bridges, which are created by guiding the aerial roots of the diengjri (Ficus elastica) across rivers using temporary scaffolding. These aerial roots are known as jyrmi, which is connected to the earliest version of the myth of the Golden Bridge between heaven and earth.
An earlier version of the myth is found in the book ‘Jaintia Folklore, Legends, and the History of the Khasi Religion’ by Mrs. John Roberts. It states that a creeper, or jrymi, originally connected heaven and earth. However, when it was accidentally hacked by a farmer, heaven and earth began to drift apart.
Later, this myth, which originated in the War areas, was carried to Lum Sohpetbneng by people who likely spoke a language closer to the War-Amwi dialect. Today, the story continues to be revered through rituals performed by the Niam Khasi, with people from the Jaintia Hills also making the annual pilgrimage to pay their obeisance. Thus, the myth of the Golden Bridge and the story of the celestial families who came down to earth to farm are actually thousands of years old and could possibly be among the original stories that arrived from South China. When the story arrived here, new versions developed, but its core theme—the connection between heaven and earth—persisted, which is indeed remarkable. This would make it older than any of the stories found in the Rig Veda, making Khasi religion much older than Vedic Hinduism and among the oldest religious traditions in South Asia. And it is the War who have preserved that legacy, and it has continued as the Khasi community grew in numbers and linguistic diversity.
The War are the oldest Khasi group. They speak the oldest variety of the Khasi language and have preserved what is likely the oldest version of the Golden Bridge myth. There is a need to acknowledge their distinct identity within the Khasi people and to avoid subsuming them under labels such as “War-Jaintia” or imposing the Pnar alphabet on them. Such attempts should be resisted, just as U Woh Tep Khydiat resisted the imposition of a foreign religion, Hinduism, on the Khasis. Only then can the War’s unique historical and cultural heritage be safeguarded, and their contributions to Khasi history and society be accorded the recognition they deserve.
(The views expressed in the article are those of the author and do not reflect in any way his affiliation to any organisation or institution)
