[Assam] Tai-Ahom Connection - Yasmin Saikia/ A Follow-up

[Chan Mahanta]

At 8:34 PM -0700 3/10/09, Dilip and Dil Deka wrote:
>Remember while history is interesting, it is not 
>perfect. History as we know is winners' history, 
>losers' history gets lost or hidden. - Word of 
>wisdom from one with certitude :-)




**** Maybe so, but it can be changed.   Except it 
won't unless those who know the difference lead 
the way in accepting newer and better truths.





>
>
>
>
>________________________________
>From: Chan Mahanta <cmahanta at charter.net>
>To: A Mailing list for people interested in 
>Assam from around the world <assam at assamnet.org>
>Sent: Monday, March 9, 2009 9:48:51 PM
>Subject: Re: [Assam] Tai-Ahom Connection - Yasmin Saikia/ A Follow-up
>
>*** Should this open our eyes to the pitfalls of 
>our own certitudes of what we consider HISTORY ?
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>At 8:50 AM -0700 3/9/09, Dilip and Dil Deka wrote:
>>  Does anyone know Yasmin Saikia's whereabouts? Is she still in the USA?
>>  She has done a significant amount of research 
>>in Tai-Ahom history. She should be able to 
>>educate us on the origin of the word Ahom and 
>>other related issues we have been discussing. 
>>How do we bring Yasmin Saikia into the net?
>>  Dilip Deka
>>  =============================================================
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>  The Tai-Ahom connection
>>
>>
>>  YASMIN SAIKIA
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>  Andrew and John Carnegie, two brothers from 
>>Liverpool, England, unable to find employment 
>>in the metropolitan city of London, decided to 
>>set sail for India in May 1865. A month later 
>>they arrived in the colonial capital city of 
>>Calcutta and immediately found employment in an 
>>English tea garden in Assam. On 18 July 1865, 
>>Andrew wrote a letter to his mother in England 
>>in which he described the people and place in 
>>these words: 'There is nothing visible but mud 
>>and jungle here in Assam. I am alone in the 
>>jungle, a sort of a small king among the 400 
>>niggers, counting women and children.' Andrew's 
>>representation of a dark, impenetrable land and 
>>people echoed the sentiments of colonial 
>>administrators of the 19th century. Almost all 
>>of them agreed that 'Assam [is] more a land of 
>>demons, hobgoblins, and various terrors.'1 'The 
>>denseness of its jungles, the steep precipices, 
>>the torrential streams,' in British colonial 
>>eyes, 'created a sharp
>>   geographical line separating the known from 
>>the unknown, civilization from savagery.'2
>>  Colonial representation of the place matched 
>>their attitudes concerning the people. 'The 
>>Assamese,' Colonel Butler writes, 'have 
>>ferocious manners, and brutal tempers. They are 
>>fond of war, vindictive, treacherous and 
>>deceitful· the seeds of humanity and tenderness 
>>have not been sowed in their frames.'3 Further, 
>>they were declared as unlike any other group 
>>and not part of the Aryan race, within which 
>>the British codified the high caste Hindus who 
>>were deemed the majority community in India. 
>>Placed outside the lineage of Aryan history and 
>>Indic culture, Assam and her people were 
>>reduced in the colonial official lexicon into a 
>>wild frontier society without history. The 
>>unthinkability of a history of Assam survived 
>>and has been reinforced in postcolonial India. 
>>Even today, scholars of Indian history by and 
>>large view the region as a 'militant' frontier 
>>peopled by insurgent groups who disrespect the 
>>sacred national history. These perceptions,
>>   we should note, are the views of outsiders 
>>who back their assumptions with official power 
>>to transform myths into believable facts.
>>  If, on the other hand, one investigates the 
>>memories and local narratives of the people of 
>>Assam a very different picture emerges. Local 
>>history that is recorded in the premodern 
>>chronicles called buranjis provides a picture 
>>of a place in motion. Ruled by a god-like king 
>>referred to as swargadeo, the area of the 
>>swargadeo's domain was a blended space settled 
>>by a hybrid community referred to as kun-how in 
>>the Tai language and Ami in the Assamese 
>>language buranjis. This group did not have a 
>>fixed label but was referred to as a 
>>conglomerate of 'we' people.
>  > What is the memory of the historical 'we' 
>community in Assam today? In this paper I 
>investigate the process and consequences of the 
>making of a new Tai-Ahom memory to rethink a 
>history of the 'we' community at the crossroads 
>of Assam linking South Asia with Southeast 
>Asia.4 Although a very small number, no more 
>than six hundred thousand people in Assam, are 
>involved in the Tai-Ahom identity struggle, they 
>have raised a salient question about the 
>epistemological and geographical limits of 
>Indian history and are challenging the inherited 
>colonial historiography to open the space for a 
>dialogue between Delhi, Rangoon and Bangkok in 
>order to benefit marginal groups and extend the 
>horizons of history and memories to include the 
>past in the present, South with Southeast Asia.
>>  In the following sections I first provide 
>>three short disjointed narratives of the 
>>moments when Ahom and later Tai-Ahom were 
>>conceived, constructed, and used for different 
>>purposes. Next, I examine the performance and 
>>production of Ahom memory in different public 
>>sites to show that it is both a political and 
>>economic process attracting diverse audiences. 
>>In the final section I investigate the Indian 
>>national and the Thai transnational interests 
>>in this movement to suggest possible outcomes 
>>of the invocation of memory linking Assam with 
>>Southeast Asia.
>>  Until 1826, the kingdom of Assam was 
>>independent. On colonial occupation the region 
>>was transformed into a frontier and a policy 
>>for taming the hostile tribes was immediately 
>>generated.5 In 1873, the northeast was 
>>demarcated into two zones by the Bengal East 
>>Frontier Regulation I: the inner line area of 
>>hills with their local administration, and the 
>>plains area of the Assam Valley under colonial 
>>administration. Ironically, while the 
>>topographical and administrative division 
>>between hills and plains was established within 
>>colonial discourse the negative stereotypical 
>>perception toward the people remained unchanged.
>>  Initial reports on the people were not 
>>positive.6 The Assamese were deemed by Moffat 
>>Mills an 'unattractive', 'degenerated' and 
>>'stupid people' (1854, 5).7 The colonial 
>>representation was neither strange nor 
>>surprising. However, what is deeply problematic 
>>is that colonial intervention led to an abrupt 
>>end of histories that preceded that encounter 
>>and closed the channels of communications with 
>>groups that were mapped outside British India. 
>>Hence when we view the changes during 
>>colonialism we have to interrogate the policies 
>>and labels of representations both for what 
>>they convey as well as hide.
>>  The negative recognition of Assamese by the 
>>colonials, in turn generated internal 
>>formulations of labels by pioneers like Moniram 
>>Dewan and Ananda Ram Dhekial Phukan, to name a 
>>few. While the local leaders readily accepted 
>>the colonial name, Assamese, to refer to 
>>themselves, they focused on constructing 
>>positive markers of community identification 
>>and suggested Assamese was a 'blended' 
>>community constituted by Hindus and non-Hindus 
>>who were bound together by shared social 
>>interactions facilitated by the Assamese 
>>language.8 The emphasis on language as an 
>>identity marker was very effective in the face 
>>of Bengali penetration and degradation of the 
>>local community.9
>>  Alongside the construction of a linguistic 
>>identity for the Assamese, political rhetoric 
>>also emerged. The high-tide of Gandhian 
>>nationalism drew many in Assam to join the 
>>Indian National Congress (INC) in the shared 
>>hope of freedom and economic development to 
>>follow. Immediately, the Assamese started 
>>seeing themselves through caste Hindu eyes as a 
>>low-caste, polluted people, not unlike what the 
>>British had told them.
>>  To rethink an image for overcoming the stigma, 
>>the Assamese created several new organizations, 
>>such as the 'Assamese Language Improvement 
>>Society', 'Assam History Society', and 'Assam 
>>Literary Society' that laboured to produce a 
>>'civilized' history for making the Assamese a 
>>cultured Hindu group. This met with opposition 
>>from groups in Upper or eastern Assam. In 1893, 
>>'Ahom Sabha' and, again, in 1915, an 'Ahom 
>>Association' were created to bring the 
>>Mongoloid people together and resist the 
>>intrusion of the Congress party. In reaction, 
>>the Hindu community published a book called 
>>Ripunjay Smriti in which they defamed the Ahom 
>>as a polluted group and suggested that the 
>>Assamese should perform rituals to cleanse 
>>themselves for seeking reentry into the Hindu 
>>caste fold. The harsh language of the Hindu 
>>Assamese motivated the Ahoms leaders to ask 
>>their supporters to relinquish Hinduism, give 
>>up learning Assamese language and return to
>  >  local dialects and archaic rituals of ancestor worship.
>>  In turn, to create pride in their past, new 
>>narratives of Ahom were written by trained and 
>>amateur historians to enable children to 
>>remember 'Assam in the context of heroes.'10 
>>The assumption that history should be the saga 
>>of heroes was not an unusual expectation. 
>>Almost all history is the record of the winners 
>>and a tool for creating a continuous genealogy 
>>of power. What is surprising in the narrative 
>>of Ahom history is the disruption of the 
>>formula in very interesting ways. Instead of 
>>borrowing heroes of the 'high' Aryan 
>>civilization and culture, danabs and akhurs 
>>(demons and monsters) were invoked as the 
>>founder of Assam's history. Padmanath Borooah 
>>wrote a narrative that soon found wide 
>>circulation and was repeated in many new 
>>versions by historians of Assam.11
>>  Borooah writes, 'In ancient times this land 
>>was ruled by danabs and akhurs. Mahiranga Danab 
>>was probably the original king here. Among his 
>>successors Narak Akhur became a very powerful 
>>king. During his rule, this land became 
>>Pragjyotispur [land of the eastern light].' The 
>>story continues to relate that the Hindu god 
>>Krishna attacked the kingdom of Pragjyotispur 
>>but could not defeat the local king. Krishna 
>>ingratiated himself by marrying a local 
>>princess and his grandson, Anirudha, too, 
>>married a princess from Assam. Many more 
>>dynasties of akhurs and danabs followed who 
>>thwarted invasion and made Hindu gods 
>>compromise to their superior power.
>>  In the 13th century 'the Tai people came from 
>>Burma· They were Buddhist people· But to 
>>conquer land they moved southwest, intermixed 
>>with the hill tribes, and adopted their 
>>religion· Sukapha, a prince of Mungrimungram, 
>>the original homeland of the Tai people, came 
>>to Saumar in 1229 A.D· The Ahom kings ruled for 
>>six hundred years.'12 In narrative a chronology 
>>of the swargadeos was suggested and they were 
>>valorized for mitigating differences and 
>>generating a combined polity in an ever 
>>expanding domain.
>>  What was the purpose of this kind of history 
>>telling and memory building and wherefrom did 
>>the historians of Assam derive a story of the 
>>historical Ahom and swargadeos? To examine 
>>these issues we have to return to the category 
>>called Ahom and Assamese and the politics of 
>>identity generated by the colonial 
>>administrators. It appears that the first myths 
>>about Ahom were created by the British agents. 
>>Borrowing from the myths of Ahom origin 
>>compiled by J.P. Wade, the first British 
>>resident in Assam, Walter Hamilton-Buchannan 
>>introduced the term Ahom in the East India 
>>Gazetteer in 1828. He claimed that originally a 
>>group of Shan warriors led by a mythical 
>>godlike figure called Sukapha came to Assam in 
>>1228 and established an Ahom kingdom. 
>>Buchannan's story of the Ahom which was neatly 
>>packaged within a western linear chronology 
>>became a colonial discourse in the early 19th 
>>century.
>>  By telling a story of migration, conquest, and 
>>settlement of a warrior group from upper Burma, 
>>over and over again, a particular memory of the 
>>past was created in colonial documents. Most 
>>importantly, by creating a group of rulers and 
>>identifying the swargadeo as the fountainhead 
>>to inherit power from, the colonials predicted 
>>their own future in Assam. No sooner they 
>>achieved this purpose the colonials became 
>>active in debunking the Ahom rulers. In 1891, 
>>the colonial ethnographers, E.T. Dalton and 
>>H.H. Risely concluded that the Ahoms, the 
>>descendents of the proud race of Shans, had 
>>degenerated into superstitious, backward, 
>>apathetic Assamese.
>>  Consequently, new problems emerged as the 
>>economy of Assam was radically altered with the 
>>imposition of tax on all products and 
>>importation of labour to slave in the colonial 
>>capitalist economy. In the shifting economic 
>>and social conditions new enclave societies 
>>emerged and the historical 'we' community 
>>became a phantom. Its only visible remnant was 
>>in the new shared condition of poverty of the 
>>local people. By the beginning of the 20th 
>>century, Assam, which was once a thriving 
>>crossroads kingdom in the east, became one of 
>>the poorest regions in British India.
>  > The distinctions between Assamese and those 
>claiming to be Ahoms were blurred, so much so 
>that when Ahom was declared dead and folded into 
>the Assamese no one questioned the colonial 
>power of myth making; rather the local 
>intellectuals accepted the colonial version of 
>their history. The elimination of Ahom as a dead 
>community by the colonials is bothersome, but it 
>was preceded by yet another blatant lie - that 
>of the 'discovery' of an Ahom community in the 
>buranjis. Did the colonials find a distinct Ahom 
>community in the chronicles? To answer this 
>question we have to return to the buranjis and 
>investigate the descriptions of Ahom within them 
>and the distortions that followed in the 
>colonial reading of these texts.
>>  It is assumed with some reservation, following 
>>G.E. Grierson's suggestion in The Linguistic 
>>Survey of India that buranji means 'a 
>>storehouse to teach the ignorant' (1904). By 
>>and large, almost all buranjis being narratives 
>>of swargadeos tell the readers of the deeds of 
>>the godlike figures. The effort is to create a 
>>cult of god-kings. In this ontological scheme 
>>demarcated identities of the subject 
>>communities was counter-politic; they appear to 
>>us a generic 'we' community that is 
>>continuously in process. For creating 
>>identifiable units within the 'we' polity, 
>>service caucuses under the command of six 
>>nobles were created. The name of the place they 
>>were associated with became their identity.
>>  Although Ahom is not a defined ethnic 
>>community in the buranjis, it is not an unknown 
>>term either. It is used to refer to a class of 
>>officers constituted from within the 
>>preponderate 'we' community. The Ahom men, in 
>>other words, were the swargadeo's or king's 
>>men. They were the civil and military officers 
>>controlling and administering his domain. Ahom 
>>was not an inherited status, but an appointment 
>>that could be gained and lost in one's 
>>lifetime. Ethnicity was not the factor that 
>>made Ahom, but the favour of the reigning 
>>swargadeo and an individual's ability 
>>determined his status as Ahom. Hence, in the 
>>reign of different swargadeos, the composition 
>>of the Ahom officers differed greatly. In the 
>>buranjis we find that Naga, Kachari, Nora, 
>>Garo, Mikir, Miri, and even Goriya (Muslim) 
>>formed this blended community of trusted 
>>servants. Like the space of the polity, the 
>>class called Ahom expressed the reality of the 
>>crossroads. This history of the
>>   hybrid Ahom was overlooked by the British when they came to Assam.
>>  Unable to read the original chronicles, they 
>>concluded that the large number of king's men 
>>belonged to one community. The discovery of Tai 
>>language buranjis led the colonial 
>>administrators to conclude that a 'foreign' 
>>group had migrated from the hills of Burma into 
>>Assam, established an Ahom kingdom, and used 
>>the buranji literature to record their history 
>>and culture. Immediately after declaring them 
>>an ethnic group, the colonials made the Ahoms 
>>'unthinkable' by proclaiming them 'dead'.
>>  Ahom as a memory and a politics resurfaced in 
>>Assam in the 1940s and, again, in the 1960s. In 
>>1967 when Assam was reorganized into hill and 
>>plains states, the Ahom group petitioned the 
>>Indian government to recognize them as a 
>>separate community. In October 1967 the 'Ahom 
>>Tai Mongolia Parishad' demanded a separate 
>>Mongolian state to be formed in Upper Assam 'in 
>>which Ahom-Tais and the various other tribes 
>>would enjoy social recognition and all 
>>political rights.'13 Their demand was not 
>>accepted and Ahom continued to be part of the 
>>Hindu Assamese but within it became a 'backward 
>>community'.
>>  In 1968, an attempt to create the boundaries 
>>of Ahomness led to a renewed invocation of 
>>Southeast Asia. This was actualized in the term 
>>Tai-Ahom that was coined by Padmeshwar Gogoi, a 
>>professor at the Guwahati University, in his 
>>book, Tai and the Tai Kingdoms with a Fuller 
>>Treatment of the Tai-Ahom Kingdom in the 
>>Brahmaputra Valley (1968). To complete the 
>>breakaway from the Assamese Hindus, the new 
>>Tai-Ahoms revived a religion calling it Phra 
>>Lung, which emphasized the worship of 
>>ancestors, mainly swargadeos. In the next 
>>section of the paper, I will focus on the 
>>contemporary dialogues and politics of identity 
>>in various sites, in Upper Assam, Thailand, and 
>>Delhi, which point to one thing - Tai-Ahom is 
>>now a label of identity that is exchangeable 
>>for a variety of aspirations and demands for 
>>the future. The question is whether these 
>>aspirations will be fulfilled?
>  > On 17 October 1981, during the International 
>Tai Studies Conference in New Delhi, a group of 
>Ahom men and Thai scholars met to discuss 
>strategies about how to make the Ahoms of Assam 
>Thai-like. Tai-Ahom they hoped would overcome 
>the restrictive labels of Indian, Hindu and 
>Assamese. The foundational moment was also part 
>of a long series of 'articulations' of 
>marginalization and disempowerment that had 
>produced anxieties and hopes, which now 
>travelled easily to new distances to find 
>'belonging' among Thai people in Thailand.
>>  But first the base in Assam had to be 
>>constructed and strengthened. Toward this end, 
>>the Tai-Ahom activists created an organization 
>>called the Ban Ok Publik Muang Tai (Eastern Tai 
>>Literary Society) and revived the moribund Phra 
>>Lung religion. New prayers were written by the 
>>late Domboru Deodhai Phukan, who was earlier 
>>identified by the Thai anthropologist B.J. 
>>Terwiel as 'the last of the Tai-Ahom ritual 
>>experts.'14 Domboru Deodhai explained to me the 
>>Phra Lung religion in these words. 'Phra is a 
>>Buddha like figure. Lung means the Sangha. Phra 
>>Lung means the community of the worshippers of 
>>Phra.'15 Dietary habits were also changed to 
>>mark the departure from Hinduism. Beef, taboo 
>>among caste Hindus, was introduced in the 
>>Tai-Ahom diet, as did partaking of alcohol 
>>called haj or lau pani.
>>  Along with the identification of a community 
>>based on old and new customary practices, 
>>revival of Tai language was taken up in the 
>>newly established Tai Language Academy at 
>>Patsako. New festivals and commemorative events 
>>such as Sukapha dibah, Jaymoti dibah, 
>>Me-dem-me-phi, etc, were created and publicly 
>>celebrated. Additionally, an active academic 
>>conversation about Tai-Ahom history and culture 
>>was generated and several conferences were 
>>organized in Assam and outside to facilitate 
>>the entrenchment of a Tai-Ahom memory among 
>>believers and scholars. The academic and 
>>cultural impetus for this movement was 
>>facilitated by the then chief minister, 
>>Hiteshwar Saikia, a self-proclaimed 
>>'Ahom-Assamese'.. Saikia donated vast sums of 
>>money to make the Ahom a community. This gave 
>>boost to the publication industry, which 
>>created a new knowledge base about Ahom.
>>  Under the leadership of the Ban Ok and many 
>>more new organizations that emerged in the 
>>1990s facilitated with financial help by local 
>>politicians, Tai-Ahom turned the gaze of Assam 
>>from the west, that is Delhi, to the east, to 
>>Southeast Asia. In this enterprise, besides 
>>Thai academic interest in and support for the 
>>Tai-Ahom movement, networks of complex 
>>transnational relationships developed with 
>>Buddhist missionaries, the Thai monarchy, and 
>>rebels groups of Upper Burma who were drawn 
>>into the politics of identity in Assam.
>>  However, after Saikia passed away in April 
>>1996 the Ban Ok lost its local financial 
>>support. In the mean time, in 1997 the stock 
>>market collapsed in Thailand and this affected 
>>the funding of academic projects and slowed the 
>>pace of trade and tourism that were part of the 
>>Thai search for Tai groups outside of Thailand. 
>>Alongside, in India, under the leadership of 
>>the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) a new wave of 
>>Hindu religious nationalism took hold. The lack 
>>of financial support coupled with the rising 
>>tide of fundamentalist Hindu identity slowed 
>>down the exchanges between the Ban Ok and their 
>>Thai supporters. Nonetheless, throughout the 
>>early 1990s, the leaders and supporters of 
>>Tai-Ahom performed the critical task of 
>>revealing the restrictive limits of national 
>>identity and created new patchworks of 
>>contingent labels and a local narrative linking 
>>Ahom with Thailand to make a pan-Thai identity.
>>  A question that arises is why do some people 
>>in Assam want to be recognized as Tai-Ahom? The 
>>reasons, like the various groups who profess 
>>this identity, are neither orderly nor 
>>homogenous. There are clear divides between the 
>>classes and their respective expectations. The 
>>urban class views it as a political and 
>>professional tool for empowerment, and they 
>>focus on the issue of job allocations and 
>>economic improvement. On the other hand, for 
>>the depressed groups of deodhais, the 
>>subalterns in the movement so to speak, the 
>>movement is an arena of resistance against the 
>>exploitative institutions of the caste Hindus. 
>>The Tai-Ahom connection with a variety of 
>>Buddhist groups in Southeast Asia, the deodhais 
>>hope, will deliver them from their ignominious 
>>and powerless condition and place them, once 
>>again, in positions of social and religious 
>>leadership.
>  > Because the spaces that the urban youths 
>occupy are different than their counterparts 
>living in the villages, consequently their 
>aspirations also differ. Urban youths want 
>adventure and experiences in the form of travel, 
>education and employment in Thailand. These 
>young men consider a new level of consumerism as 
>a mark of their difference from the Assamese. 
>This is not an option available to the rural 
>youth who are engaged in a life and death 
>struggle for survival. Irrespective of the gaps 
>between the different groups, it is clear that 
>varieties of people are engaged in the movement 
>and are facilitating and sustaining change. This 
>is not to suggest that they are autonomous 
>architects of their world; I believe these 
>agents are also subjects of history and the 
>society that they inhabit. They are made by 
>circumstances of history both within and outside 
>Assam
>>  One of the visible groups influencing and 
>>making Tai-Ahom is a group of Thai academics. 
>>Why are the Thais interested? To answer this 
>>question, a brief note on the 20th century Thai 
>>academic and intellectual politics is important.
>>  In 1939, by royal mandate Siam was renamed 
>>Thailand and a composite Thai society was 
>>created by including the diverse communities. 
>>Resistance to the contained Thai national 
>>community emerged almost immediately. Phibun 
>>Songgram and Luang Wichit Wathakan launched an 
>>ambitious movement called Choncat Thai to claim 
>>a common Tai race constituted by people living 
>>within and outside Thailand. This discourse was 
>>reinforced by invoking the 19th century story 
>>of Tai migration from Nanchao in Southern 
>>China, which western missionary historians had 
>>identified as the original homeland wherefrom 
>>the Tais had supposedly migrated in the remote 
>>past.16
>>  Several groups in Laos, Vietnam and Southern 
>>China were claimed as sharing a common Tai 
>>ancestry. The search for kin groups was 
>>intensified in the 1970s as Thailand was drawn 
>>into the western capitalist commercial orbit. A 
>>new school of thought called 'Community 
>>Culture' emerged in Bangkok. The group aimed to 
>>help the Thai villages withstand the intrusion 
>>of the state and western norms of economic 
>>development and empower them to generate a 
>>'native' economy. For this they needed an 
>>archaic Tai village system to serve as a model. 
>>Chatthip Nartsupha, the leader of the Community 
>>Culture School in Bangkok, saw in the buranjis 
>>of Assam the possibility of an imaginative 
>>space for return to a pastoral village life. 
>>Ahom, the unspoken subject of Assam and Indian 
>>history, was adopted to fulfil the aim of the 
>>Thais.
>>  Thai history and pan-Thaiism transcended the 
>>boundaries of Southeast Asia and moved beyond 
>>to include areas and people mapped within South 
>>Asia. For a decade and a half (1981-1997) 
>>exchanges between Ahom and Thai activists 
>>generated a transnational discourse and created 
>>a real expectation to make Assam a meeting 
>>place for historical, cultural and commercial 
>>exchanges between South and Southeast Asia.
>>  The activities in the east also drew attention 
>>of the (previous) BJP government. A two pronged 
>>plan toward Assam was developed in consequence. 
>>One, Delhi tried to bridge the differences 
>>between Assam and the rest of India by bringing 
>>the Assamese closer to the Hindutva fold, 
>>strengthening their power in multiple ways in 
>>order to distance them from their northeastern 
>>neighbours and crush the people's movements 
>>through armed violence. Second, the government 
>>tried to capitalize the new found connections 
>>with Southeast Asia. A direct flight between 
>>Guwahati and Bangkok was started in 2002 to 
>>launch a new relationship with Thailand and a 
>>transnational roadway system connecting India 
>>with markets in Southern China and Southeast 
>>Asia passing through the Northeast was 
>>seriously considered.
>>  The government went so far as to acknowledge 
>>the historic connections of the Ahom people 
>>with Thailand in the hope that a new level of 
>>commerce and trade between the two countries 
>>would be engendered in this admission. As is 
>>evident, the goal of the new friendship was 
>>driven by economic exigencies and financial 
>>forecasts. This sets a dangerous precedent to 
>>transact and barter memories, pillage history 
>>and hopes of everyday people for temporary 
>>monetary gains, and fictitiously manufacture a 
>>friendship without the desire to uphold it in 
>>good and bad times.
>  > The people claiming to be Tai-Ahom, however, 
>are not admitted into the new arithmetic of 
>history and commerce. They continue to struggle 
>for recognition and economic and political voice 
>in Assam. Their murmurs are rarely heard. By and 
>large, those claiming to be Ahom continue to be 
>among the poorest in Assam, which is one of the 
>poorest states in India. Nevertheless, the web 
>of interpretations concerning Tai-Ahom has 
>generated a creative tension for departure from 
>the tyranny of a modern singular national 
>history.
>>  I read this effort of remembering a different 
>>past and attempt at writing a new history as an 
>>assertion to claim a possible place for 
>>speaking outside the limits of the 
>>authoritative state records and engage national 
>>history to move beyond the limits of a bounded 
>>geography and sites determined by power. If 
>>these efforts can be translated into action, it 
>>may help to mitigate the continuing mistrust 
>>and grievances of neglected and marginalized 
>>groups and create new possibilities for them as 
>>well as herald a friendship between India and 
>>Southeast Asia.
>>  Footnotes:
>>  1. The Curzon Collection, MSS Eur F 111/247a, 
>>Oriental and India Office, British Library, 
>>London.
>>  2. Col. S.G. Burrard, Records of the Survey of 
>>India: Exploration on the North-East Frontier, 
>>vol. IV (1911-1913), Superintendent Government 
>>Printing, Calcutta, 1914, p. 3.
>>  3. J. Butler, Travels and Adventures in the 
>>Province of Assam during the Residence of 
>>Fourteen Years, Smith, Elder and Co., London, 
>>1855, pp. 223, 228..
>>  4. Although terms such as South Asia, 
>>Southeast Asia, etc, are hollow and 
>>undefinable, within the world of these terms, 
>>however, are cultures and communities with deep 
>>histories and enduring memories. When I refer 
>>to Southeast Asia here, I invoke the neighbours 
>>in the east with whom Assam and her people 
>>share many centuries of common memories. The 
>>forgotten memory of connections with these 
>>communities is somewhat revived by the Tai-Ahom 
>>identity struggle.
>>  5. Many more descriptive terms are available 
>>for the different groups in Assam. Some terms 
>>that recur are 'freebooters and plunderers', 
>>'treacherous tribe', and 'warlike frontier 
>>tribe'. See Albums and Scrapbooks of Oscar 
>>Mallite, Bailey and Carter, British Library, 
>>Oriental and India Office Collection, London.
>>  6. See J. Butler, A Sketch of Assam with Some 
>>Account of the Hill Tribes, Smith, Elder and 
>>Co., London, 1847, p. 127; W.W. Hunter, 
>>Statistical Account of Assam, 2 vols, Trubner 
>>and Co., London, 1879, pp. 235-239.
>>  7. M. Mills, Report on the Province of Assam, 
>>Calcutta Gazette Office, Calcutta, 1854.
>>  8. See Mills, Report, Appendix 'Translation of 
>>a Petition in Person by Moniram Dutta Borwah 
>>Dewan, on account of Ghunnokanth Singh Joobaraj 
>>and Others', pp. Lxv-ixxxvi.
>>  9. In 1836, influenced by the Bengali agents, 
>>the colonial administration in Assam dropped 
>>Assamese language from public documents, school 
>>education, administrative and judicial use. It 
>>was not until 1873 that Assamese language was 
>>reinstated and put into use, once again. The 
>>historical-political process by which Assamese 
>>language was superseded and degraded into a 
>>secondary position in its home ground created a 
>>peculiar anxiety among the people and this led 
>>over time to a struggle to self-define the 
>>Assamese community.
>>  10. Padmanath Borooah, Assam Buranji or The 
>>History of Assam, Lila Agency, Tezpur, 2nd ed., 
>>1906, p. 47.
>>  11. See Hemchandra Goswami, Purani Assam 
>>Buranji, Kamrup Ansandhan Samiti, Guwahati, 
>>1922; Keshav Kanta Borroah, Ahamar Athutajati 
>>Jatir Utppatir Bibaran, D.R. Gogoi Nakhrai 
>>Bagicha, Tinsukia, 1923; R.K. Sandikai, 
>>Mula-Gabharu, S.C. Goswami, Jorhat, 1924. Many 
>>more followed and reiterated the same plot of 
>>Assam history.
>>  12.. Padmanath Borooah, Buranji-Bodh, Lila Agency, Tezpur, 1900, p. 46.
>>  13.. Ahom-Tai Rajya Parishad, Assam Tribune, 3 June 1967.
>>  14. B.J. Terwiel, The Tai and Ancient Tai 
>>Ritual, 2 vols, Review Office of South East 
>>Asian Studies, Gaya, 1983.
>>  15. Sometimes, it appeared from his 
>>explanation that Phra also took on the 
>>representation of Shiva. The new religion 
>>combined Buddhism with Hinduism to accommodate 
>>some old beliefs and practices of Ahom Hindus, 
>>while slowly enabling their transition to a 
>>Buddhist way of life and worship to mirror 
>>Southeast Asian cultures and customs. (Personal 
>>Conversation, 26 December 1992, Patsako, 
>>Sibsagar.)
>  > 16. A few examples are Ney Elias, 
>Introductory Sketch of the History of Shans in 
>Upper Burma and Western Yunan, Foreign 
>Department Press, Calcutta, 1876; L. Milne, 
>Shans at Home, John Murray, London, 1910; 
>William Dodd, The Tai, Race, Elder Br ther of 
>the Chinese, Torch, Iowa City, 1923; W.A.R. 
>Wood, History of Siam, n.k.. London, 1926; 
>D.G.E. Hall, Burma, Hutchinson University 
>Library, London, 1950.
>>  _______________________________________________
>>  assam mailing list
>>  assam at assamnet.org
>>  http://assamnet.org/mailman/listinfo/assam_assamnet.org
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>assam mailing list
>assam at assamnet.org
>http://assamnet.org/mailman/listinfo/assam_assamnet.org
>_______________________________________________
>assam mailing list
>assam at assamnet.org
>http://assamnet.org/mailman/listinfo/assam_assamnet.org