![Sample our Area Studies journals, sign in here to start your access, latest two full volumes FREE to you for 14 days]({"type":"image" , "src" : "/sda/5922/TOC-Subject-Sample-2021-Area-Studies.jpg"})
ABSTRACT
This paper looks at the history of state-making in an entangled imperial frontier. The northeastern frontier of British India was a mosaic of princely states, administered and un-administered territories. The presence of the colonial state in the region was contentious, marked by violence on one hand and philanthropy on the other. The Japanese invasion of the region during World War Two had several unintended ramifications. Wartime and post-war developments produced institutions and social experiences which facilitated the process of state-making in the region. Relief and Rehabilitation project of the colonial state, and later distribution of monetary compensation was not merely governed by moral or legal obligations but was part of a larger project of imperialist reconquest in Asia after the surrender of the Japanese with Manipur and Naga Hills as the base. This project also provided the postcolonial Indian state with institutions to continue the process of state-making of its own.
Disclosure statement
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author.
Correction Statement
This article has been republished with minor changes. These changes do not impact the academic content of the article.
Notes
1. Zou, “Vai phobia to Raj nostalgia,” 119–43.
2. Pioneer, 19 July, 1870July 1870, reproduced in Mackenzie, History of the relations, pp. 566.
3. Observer, 11 February 1871, reproduced in Mackenzie, History of the Relations, 567.
4. FD, BP-A, Pro. No. 616–40, August 1881, NAI.
5. FD, BE-B, Pro. No. 62–68, June 1891 and Pro. No. 140, May 1894, NAI.
6. Letter from J.C. Sen, Assistant SECGOB, to Secretary to the Government of Assam, dated 24 July 1935, Local Self Government, Branch Secret and Revenue, ASA.
7. See Nag, Pied Pipers in North-East India; and Nag, “Bamboo, Rats and Famines,” 245–52.
8. See Nag, Pied Pipers in North-East India; and Nag, “Bamboo, Rats and Famines,” 245–52; and Serkawn, Baptist Church of Mizoram, 85.
9. Annual Reports of BMS, 85.
10. Imphal: 1600 graves, Kohima: 1420 graves, Kohima Cremation Memorial: 917 Hindus and Sikhs killed here.
11. See Hock, Legacies of WWII; Hack and Rittig, Colonial Armies in Southeast Asia; Bayly and Harper, Forgotten Armies; Bayly and Harper, Forgotten Wars; Rooney, Burma Victory; Lyman and Dennis, Kohima 1944; Keane, Road of Bones; Colvin, Not Ordinary Men; Allen, Burma: The Longest; and Latimer, Burma: The Forgotten War.
12. See Guite, “Representing Local participation”; Pau, “Situating Local Events”; and Khrienuo, “Nagas Role in World War II.”
13. See Guyot-Réchard, “When Legions Thunder Past”; Naorem, “Remembering Japan Laan.”
14. See Evans and James, Imphal, 23–25.
15. Administrative Report of Manipur State, 1943–44, 3.
16. Ibid., 4.
17. R-21-S-B/82, 1949, MSA.
18. Kots are small huts constructed for storing harvested paddy.
19. Administrative Report of Manipur State, 1943–44, 12.
20. Bore, A Report on the Measures of Rehabilitation, 14.
21. Ibid., 15.
22. See Kamtekar, “A Different War Dance”; and Kamtekar, “The Shiver of 1942.”
23. Bayly and Harper, Forgotten Wars; and Hock, Legacies of WWII.
24. Taylor, “The Legacies of World War II for Myanmar.”
25. Draft Authority for the declaration of Operational Area, MSA.
26. Administrative Report of Manipur State, 1942–43, 23.
27. Ibid.
28. The hilly route between Tamu and Pallel was often referred to as the chocolate stairway by refuges and colonial officials due to the steepness and the thick mud on the route created by the heavy monsoon rain.
29. See note 14 above.
30. The term was initially used to describe the Kacharies (people from Cachar). Several references are found in the text Chetharon Kumpapa, the chronicle of the kings of Manipur. Later in the early 20th century it was used for people from Bengal. However, it has acquired a notorious meaning in the more recent period denoting any outsider entering the state.
31. Gimson, Notes on War, 2.
32. Ibid., 2.
33. See note 15 above.
34. Gimson, Notes on War, 3.
35. Between October 1942 and September 1943, the military administration purchased/confiscated 78,014 mds of vegetables, 3,177,744 mds of firewood, 3,177,426 mds of milk, 622,343 mds of fish, 26,963 maunds of potatoes, 131,940 baskets of eggs, 109,991 maunds of fruits, 10,991 mds of charcoal and 82,322 ducks, Administrative Report of Manipur State, 1943–44, 3.
36. Administrative report of Manipur state, 1939–44, 5–6.
37. See note 16 above.
38. See note 17 above.
39. R-21-S-B/82, 1949, MSA, 2.
40. Ibid., 3.
41. Bore, A Report on the Measures of Rehabilitation, 21–22.
42. See note 39 above.
43. Bore, A Report on the Measures of Rehabilitation, 22.
44. Administration Report of Manipur State, 1943–44, 22.
45. Letter dated 29th January 1945, Department of Commonwealth Relations, ASA.
46. The rules were attached as an appendix along with the letter written by the secretary of Government of India, R. N. Banerjee to the Government of Assam and the administration in Manipur on 29th January 1945.
47. Bore, A Report on the measures of Rehabilitation, 3.
48. Reinisch, “Introduction: Relief in the Aftermath of War.”
49. Ibid., 372.
50. Snowden, “Latina Province, 1944–1950.”
51. Tyson, Forgotten Frontier.
52. See note 34 above.
53. Letter dating 29 May 1944, From Charles Ogilvie to the Secretary, H. E. the Governor of Assam.
54. Bor, A Report on the measures of Rehabilitation, 11.
55. Ibid., 12.
56. See note 20 above.
57. See note 16 above.
58. See note 20 above.
59. See note 19 above.
60. Bore, A Report on the measures of Rehabilitation, 25.
61. Shortt, Report and summary of findings in the Naga hills and Manipur state.
62. Ibid.
63. Bore, A Report on the measures of Rehabilitation, 6–7.
64. File no 47, Construction of Sylhet-Cachar-Manipur Road.
65. Tinker, “A Forgotten Long March,” 1–15.
66. R-21-S-3, no 82, MSA.
67. Bore, A Report on the measures of Rehabilitation, 29.
68. Ibid.
69. Administrative Report of the Manipur State, 1944–45, 15–16.
70. Manipur State Durbar Proceedings, 1944, Resolution no 1 of 2 February 1944 and no. 5 of 5 April 1944.
71. “Air Raid Precautions.” Administration Report of Manipur State, 1943–44, 25.
72. See note 69 above.
73. Administrative Report of the Manipur State, 1944–45, 14.
74. Memo no. 341-Claims/Inv, Letter dated 31 August 1950, written by Claim Officer U. N. Deka to the Chief Commissioner of Manipur, MSA.
75. Ibid., 2.
76. See Petition no 29, Sinam Chaoba Singh of Sagolband, claimed a total amount of 1, 37,625 rupees for loses he claimed incurred as a result of the war. Before the war, he had a profitable business dealing with firewood and his marriage to R.K. Sana Yaima, daughter of an influential member of the extended royal family in Manipur helped him expand his business. Through his family connections, he came in touch with the Allied administration in Manipur during the Great War. Captain H. Munro assigned him to the post of an Allied PWD contractor in 1941. He supplied firewood and vegetables to the Allied camps in Manipur and Nagaland, and operated between Kangla and Kohima, with depots at Karong and Maram. When his work was in full swing, he was captured by the Japanese along with his wife on his way to Kohima in early 1944. He was removed to Rangoon along with his wife, and was imprisoned in Rangoon Central Jail till April 1945. He claimed that his depots were looted by the Japanese army, and he lost property worth 80,000 rupees in Karong and 50, 000 rupees in Maram. After his release in April 1945, he was again captured by the Allied administration, and was imprisoned in Rangoon Central Jail for alleged spying for the Nishi Kikan. His wife was however released from the jail, and she took up residence at House no 56, Thayagone, Mall Road, Rangoon and continued to fight for the release of her husband. She wrote a letter to the Deputy Chief of police, Rangoon on 19th November 1945 pleading for the release of her husband, stating that she belonged to the ruling house of Manipur and her husband served the Allied administration in the state of Manipur. Chaoba Singh was finally released from the jail on 7th April 1946 and immediately wrote a petition to the G. O. C. Central Burma Command on 26th April 1946 for monetary compensation without any result. He subsequently wrote to the President of Manipur State Durbar after his return to Imphal, who replied that his claims were too large and too late. He subsequently wrote to the office of the Governor of Assam in Shillong on 23rd December 1946 with all the documents stating his employment and imprisonment, and reiterated his claim of Rs. 1, 37, 625 rupees as monetary compensation for his loses. He claimed that the state did not render any sympathy to him in spite of his services to the state and his unfortunate imprisonment for nearly two years in Rangoon. In 1953, his bill was still pending for payment, and his case was listed among the list of outstanding bills for compensation prepared by the claim office, R-21-S-B, MSA.
77. Memo written by Special claim officer Umakanta Sarma to U.N. Deka, State claim officer, Manipur, Memo no.2185/Claims dated 10 August 1949, MSA.
78. The author met Mr Medom on 27 December 2014 at his residence in Kohima.
79. Memo written by Special Claim Officer Umakanta Sharma to U.N. Deka, 20.
80. File no. 15(5) P/49, 1949 Ministry of State, Political Branch, NAI.
81. See Reid, “A Note on the Future of the Present Excluded”; Mills, “A Note on the Future of the Hill Tribes”; Clow, “The Future Government of the Assam Tribal People”; and Adam, “Some Notes on a Policy for the Hill Tribes of Assam.” These reports have been published with an introduction by Syiemlieh. He argues that there were multiple plans, proposals, and shifting political equations in the region, but all agreed that the tribal regions in Northeast have to be protected and granted autonomy after the declaration of independence. He dejectedly admits that none of the plans could be put into action as it was either too late, deemed impractical or aggressively resisted. Réchard-Guyot has more recently pointed out that political complexities created by WW2 in the region might have played some role in the abandonment of these plans by the British Empire. Consequently, all the areas including the Excluded Areas, Partially Excluded Areas, the princely states of Manipur and Tripura and a large part of the unadministered areas were annexed by the post-colonial Indian State. The tribal population of the region were granted some form of autonomy through the district councils and the Sixth Schedule, and were brought under the administration of Assam government.
82. Correspondence regarding the compensation in the Naga Hills, R-21-S-B/72, MSA.
83. Ibid.
84. Notice dated 22nd December 1949, Claim Office, MSA.
85. Correspondence between Moon and Tiankham, 7 May 1951, R-21-S-A/1, MSA, 7.
86. Ibid.
87. Letter no 683-D8/50 dated 14 February 1950, MOD, NAI.
88. Letter to the Chief Commissioner of Manipur from SDO (post not clear), dated 16 June 1950, R-21-S-A/66, MSA.
89. A Copy of the form, R-21-S-A/8, MSA.
90. Letter dated 12 December 1955, Claim Office, MSA.
91. “Disbursement of compensation regarding village Khengkot,” Memo no. 809/Claims, Dated 16 December 1955, R-21-S-B/56, MSA.
92. Ibid.
Additional information
Notes on contributors
Deepak Naorem
Deepak Naorem is an Assistant Professor at Daulat Ram College, University of Delhi, New Delhi. He is also a PhD candidate at the Department of History, Faculty of Social Sciences, University of Delhi, India. His research interests include History of Colonial Northeast India and the Trans-Himalayan Region, History of literary cultures in Southeast Asia and History of Second World War in Southeast India.