The Peculiar Identity Crises In The Northeast

Three former kingdoms-Assam, Tripura and Manipur-are burdened with a tussle between identities past and present. Their aspirational middle classes may help bridge the divide

- PRADIP PHANJOUBAM

IS identity primordial or is it a dynamic construct that's constantly evolving? The fact is, different identities are formed at different stages of history, but can there be anything as a primordial identity? Did the Chinese of today always consider themselves Chinese through the ages, or were Indians always Indians? Of course, if this timeline were to be pushed back far enough, all without exception were once unicellular amoebas living in ancient oceans.

This friction between constantly evolving identities, each presuming they were in existence from 'time immemorial', shows up in intriguing ways—even in many of the micro canvases of conflict in the Northeast. In 1929, when the Simon Commission visited Kohima, Naga leaders of the time presented a memorandum to the commission explaining why Nagas were not Indians. Interestingly, among the Naga leaders who signed the memorandum was a gentleman who is no longer considered a Naga, but is identified as a Kuki.

Similarly, in 1756, when King Alaumpaya of Ava (Burma), founder of the powerful Konbaung dynasty of 11 kings, raided Manipur to avenge past raids from this kingdom toppling his predecessor dynasty Toungoo, he brought along an interesting map of Manipur that showed two principalities, Moirang and Kangla. The former was marked as a friend and the latter as a foe. After the Burmese were repulsed, it was King Bhagyachandra who united the two principalities to ensure both ultimately acquired a common Meitei identity.

Such stories are aplenty in every community and all indicate there is nothing organic or intrinsic about identity. Its mystic is often compared to an onion that no doubt has a definite presence, but if anybody tries to find out what is at its core, the discovery will be of nothing inside.