This is an article by (Late) Dr. Yuingam Jajo. With the kind permission granted by his sister Ms.Grace Jajo, we are publishing this article posthumously.

Introduction

The present work seeks to problematize the concept of “tribe” used to refer to a group of people: dwelling in the forest; practising jhumming or hunting and gathering, with no, or rudimentary forms, of economic specialisation; casteless, classless, communally owned property, especially land, etc. It would primarily attempt to critically re-examine the taken for granted or unproblematic concept of “tribe” and try to locate the methodological flaws and conceptual inconsistencies while trying to present the tribe within the broad framework of the larger society.

The chapter begins by identifying some of the stereotypical notions implied in defining tribe, the inappropriateness of the concept in reflecting the empirical reality due to its all-encompassing nature. In other words, the effort is to problematize the idea of “tribe” to dispel the stereotypical image associated with it. The next step is to write against the romanticist’s notion of tribal society as an egalitarian-that is, casteless and classless society. The chapter is organised on the basic premise that the tribal society is ‘differentiated’^[1] though not stratified as the Hindu caste society. Thus, the existence of traditional elites will be located in the traditional social structure of the tribal society, their bases of legitimising the social position being predicated upon the traditional values. The subsequent transformation of these bases, especially after the contact with the British rulers, I have argued in the chapter, perpetuated the old elites and structural differences of the Tangkhul Naga society but under a new form, the Tangkhul Nagas middle class, which includes members of the society who have been able to take advantage of the social transformation.

Tribe: Definition(s)

The term ‘tribe’ is derived from the Latin word ‘tribuz’, meaning the three divisions into which the early Romans were organized (with the Romans the tribe was a political division). However, the concept of tribe as it is used in the Indian context (to a certain extent elsewhere) is a colonial construct. Ray notes ‘[w]ith the rise of nationalism in Europe, the term “tribe” came to be used in denoting a particular state of socio-political evolution of a community of people within a given territory and language area. Class, tribe, nation etc., thus came to denote the various successive stages in the progressive march of a people aspiring towards nationhood’ (Ray 2001:360). The International Labour Organization (ILO) classified some people as ‘indigenous’ (Sasti 1960:1)^[2]. The Oxford Dictionary (2000) defines tribe as ‘(in developing countries) a group of people of the same race, and with the same customs, language, religion etc., living in a particular area and often led by a chief’. Sociologists and social anthropologists have defined tribe as ‘regulated anarchies’ (Weber 1978), ‘ethnographic heritage from Neolithic times’ (Sahlins 1968), Kirata (Chatterjee 1951) ‘acephalous’ or ‘the aboriginals’ (Elwin 1944:32), ‘adivasi’ (Prasad 2001:1) ‘the backward Hindus’ (Ghurye 1944), and also as the forest dwellers, the primitives etc.

Limitations

The above definitions of tribe are inadequate for various reasons. Firstly, the use of an all-encompassing term ‘tribe’ is problematic in itself. In the search for a common denominator it tends to gloss over the local variations. Societies, which are at different stages of development politically, economically, and educationally, etc. are clubbed together arbitrarily under the rubric of tribe. It becomes all the more problematic because the administrators, anthropologists and other social scientists often vaguely classify it using different and at times conflicting criteria. The polemics of the term lies in the fact that ‘there is no single and accepted criterion by which to distinguish a tribe from a caste. Yet at first sight the distinction is easily made: tribal people live in the hills; they are not Hindus but animists; they are economically backward; they are autochthones; and they speak tribal language. But none of these criteria are in themselves satisfactory and even when taken together they will not include all the people who are labelled as tribes by the administrators and ethnographers (Bailey 1960:263).

Secondly, the perspective of viewing tribe as a category of people occupying a particular stage in the evolutionary scale implicitly suggests the ‘end of tribe’ with the attainment of a developed status. Thus, there is an unwitting equation of the concept of tribe with development, thereby, denying the former of its own inherent identity. Therefore, it becomes pertinent to argue that there is nothing tribal per se but just another temporal stage in the long road to development, after which the tribe will have to find a new term for defining itself. Furthermore, development, as implied in the western techno-centric definition, is assumed that it would wean away nativistic tendencies of identity formation and be replaced by a more rational and universal criterion. However, in recent years, the course of tribal identity construction has come to question the validity of such a view. The growing demand for a separate identity from the mainstream led by the educated section of the tribals in developing nations like India in spite of the development and the relative increase in the living standards exposes the limitations and flaws in defining tribe as a particular stage in the scale of development (Burman 1992:33)^[3]. Furthermore, the identification of tribals on the basis of their backwardness is dangerous as it would also be equally applicable to other backward non-tribal groups.

Political expediency has also often complicated the classification of tribes in India. Therefore, in India the term tribe has legal and administrative connotations and is recognized as ‘Scheduled Tribe’ under the Constitution of India^[4]. Mathur rightly observes that ‘[i]n contemporary India, the word “tribe” has, thus, little cultural or social implications. It has become the watchword of the political consciousness of a particular group of people in the country. Like caste consciousness, linguistic consciousness or regional consciousness, tribal consciousness is fast developing to be a political tool which has become symbolic of privileged treatment, separatist tendencies and in places a barrier to national integration’ (Mathur 1970:460). Thus, it needs to be noted that the concept of ‘tribe’ is often used to serve more than one purpose thereby, leaving so much of vagueness and lacunae when using it in an unproblematic manner.

Methodological Flaws

The twin conceptual problems pointed out above are the manifestations of the methodological flaw committed while studying tribe and tribal society. The birth of anthropology and sociology in India and the preoccupation with the caste system are some of the factors that are responsible for the methodological limitations that colours the representation of tribe. In the Indian context owing to the caste pre-occupation, tribe is placed as the counter image of caste. Added to this problem is the emergence of the disciplines of sociology and anthropology. Unnithan notes “[b]oth the political and academic climates in India after independence in 1947 were such that caste became emphasized as a major focus of study in the social sciences, especially in the emerging discipline of sociology. Anthropology, by contrast, which was regarded as the study of tribes, was derided because of its colonial associations”(1997: 14). Gradually, sociology grew in pre-eminence over anthropology and subsequently its subject matter over the latter’s. There are many reasons for this discrepancy. “Most Indians”, argued Madan (1982), “who were trained as anthropologists were seen by the academic, administrative and the political community as serving the interests of the British colonialists in the latter’s interest of gathering information to strengthen control over their colonial subjects”. Thus, most of the scholarships, more often than not written by ‘outsiders’, about the tribal society are predicated on the above mentioned rigid juxtaposition of the two systems-the tribal versus the Hindu caste society. Such an analysis primarily limits itself to whether the tribal society either conforms or opposes the caste paradigm and nothing much beyond that. The opposite features of Hindu caste society conspicuously absent in the tribal society are presented to be the reality characterising the latter. The tribal society is often portrayed as the opposite of Hindu caste society: forest-dwellers, with rudimentary division of labour, egalitarian, kinship based, subsistence mode of livelihood etc. are presented as the basic characteristics of the tribal society.

Most of the studies about the tribal, based on the above definitions, therefore suffer from a common malady-reification^[5]. This is to say that observation is limited to what is given as reality rather than trying to unravel at a more abstract level and identifying the different mechanisms of differentiation operating in the tribal society. Nongbri has succinctly noted the problem:

It is interesting to note that most of the studies on the Khasi land tenure system tend to ignore the social conflict which the system generates among its members. While most of them give due attention to the classification of land they are silent about its social implications. This kind of study may be due to the fact that, in the past, most scholars who have studied tribal societies tend to consider them as egalitarian in nature free from the cleavage of class and class conflict. Of course, in contrast with caste and class based societies with their rigid stratification system, tribal present a relatively egalitarian status but this does not mean that there are no social differentiation within them or that they provide equal economic opportunities for all. An in-depth empirical study of the problem I am sure would reveal that egalitarianism is but a misconception between mechanical and statistical models, that is the ideals which people have about their social relations and the actual pattern of such relations as they exist in the society (Nongbri 1981:71-72).

Therefore, it is time that we look at it from a different point of view. Adopting a ‘structural approach’^[6] to tribal social system would reveal that there are similar forces of differentiation at work in the tribal society as it is in the Hindu caste society but manifested in different forms and types. Of late, the idyllic and romantic picture of the tribal society has come under critical evaluation both from the tribal academicians and other scholars. For instance, Prasad argued against the proposition that the tribals were originally the inhabitants of forested areas and that their practices were of ancient origin. She has, from the historical perspective, substantially pointed out that ‘the creation of the myth of the original inhabitants was a result of the marginalisation of the tribals by caste Hindu peasants on the one hand and their sedentisation into forests by the British land settlements on the other’ (Prasad 2003: 28). Significantly, the growing scholarships among the tribals themselves have slowly started questioning the appropriateness of their representations by the earlier scholars, most of whom were non-tribal.

From the above analysis it can be asserted that the use of the concept tribe is not unproblematic. Equating the term with the mainstream progressive notions like ‘development’ and ‘integration’ needs to be analyzed afresh so as to be able to explain the adverse effects of such processes for the tribal society and the growing sense of marginalization among them instead of being otherwise. The ideological dimension associated with these centripetal processes threatening the age-old traditional practices of the tribals without which they can be easily subdued by the more advanced section of the society demands urgent attention. It needs to be reiterated that the reification of ‘tribe’ has forced the anthropologists and sociologists alike to misconstrue that the tribal societies are egalitarian entities without recognizing the fact that they also have their own dynamics and paradigms of differentiation and discriminations in contrast with the mainstream Hindu caste society. Therefore, the moment one sidestep the fact that tribe is just an ideal type construct and begin treating it as an empirical reality, unlike most of the existing tribal studies, ‘tribe becomes a misnomer’. The task is easier said than done but nevertheless continues to be an important academic pursuit.

The primary objective of the work here is to debunk the stereotype “egalitarian” tribal society and locate the differentiation within the society in relation to the access to scarce resources and power, which serves as the legitimizing basis for the various positions that one occupies in the society. The guiding hypothesis is that “the traditional concept of wealth and social practices based on the principle of distribution rather than accumulation engender as well as sustain differences within the Tangkhul Naga society; that transformation of the concept of wealth from distribution to accumulation continues to sustain the differences, albeit in new forms and contents”. In the context of the present work this would mean locating the traditional elites within the Tangkhul Nagas and then analyzing the transformation they underwent after coming into contact with the English colonists and the subsequent acquisition of education, spread of Christianity and modernization, etc. to finally emerge as the ‘middle class’. It would become evident in the course of the work that the location of the traditional elites is closely tied to the culture, belief system, the land holding pattern and values of the society. And the transformation to ‘middle class’ is also closely knitted to the changing pattern of the above mentioned factors coupled with new socio-political and economic forces such as the Naga National Movement, the reservation policy of the Indian state, change in the mode of property ownership as they move to urban areas and so on.

The Tangkhul Nagas

The Tangkhul Nagas are one of the major tribal groups of Manipur. They are concentrated in Ukhrul District, Manipur^[7].  Ethnically, the Tangkhul Nagas belong to the Naga group; the latter is defined as ‘A conglomeration of numbers of distinct tribes belonging to the Mongoloid racial group that share a set of physical and cultural traits’ (Mills 1922: 15-16)^[8]. Mishra suggests that ‘A deep attachment to native soil, to local traditions and rejection of outside traditions characterize the modern Naga identity’ (Mishra 2000:16-17). The Tangkhuls live in villages, which are economically and politically independent units headed by the Awunga^[9] and his Hangva^[10] with clearly defined territories.

Tangkhul  Nagas  Traditional Elites

Contrary to the often-held notion about the tribals, the Tangkhul Naga society is far from being egalitarian, not even in the remote past. Among the community, the considerations whether one is from the Awunga’s shang, the number of cattle owned, and to a certain extent, the belief in the ‘impurity of blood’ (locally referred to as rai kaphung) act as important factors for social differentiation. It is also a common occurrence to speak of the Awungashi versus the common villagers, or names of a person like Sailuiung, Luingam, and so on which points to the differentiation on the grounds of lineage or wealth of some groups or individuals from the rest within the society. Furthermore, there are oral accounts of rivalries between rich families in the village through attempts to outdo each other in feasting and other conspicuous modes of consumption. I have associated such type of differentiation with the pre-modern or, more specifically, pre-colonial period and intend to call, at the risk of simplification, those who occupy the higher social positions during this period as the ‘traditional elite’ (Rajora 1987:1). The Tangkhul Nagas traditional elites, for operational purposes, would refer to ‘the chosen few who occupy prominent positions or status by virtue of differential endowment or access to power, be it material or immaterial, enabling them to influence important decision-making and command trust and respect from the rest of the population. The positions they occupy being, more often than not, hereditary’. However, before straightaway explaining the traditional elites within the society it would be necessary to briefly look at the concept of ‘elite’ as it is defined by various scholars.

 Elite

The term ‘elite’ is used to mean many different things and to describe certain fundamental features of organized social life. Elite theory, courtesy Vilfredo Pareto, is psychological compared to Marx’s conception of class, which is in socio-economic terms. Pareto argued against the Marxist economic determinism by asserting that humans are differently endowed and by virtue of these differential endowments the society is divided into the rulers and the ruled since time immemorial. Thus, he argue

[i]t is bootless to object that modern parliamentary democracies have no “governing classes” and that personal autocracies, by definition, represent rule by one single person and not by a “governing class”. Everywhere there exists a governing class, even in despotism; it is the forms under which it appears that differs. In absolute governments there is only one figure on the stage – the sovereign; in the so-called democratic government, it is the parliament. But behind the scenes all the time are people who have very important functions in the actual works of government. Whether universal suffrage prevails or not, it is an oligarchy that governs (Powers 1987:52).

He adds:

We can, crudely, divide society into the lower stratum and the superior stratum. This latter can in turn be divided into two groups: those who “directly or indirectly” play some considerable part in governing (and who are referred to as the governing elite and later-and more frequently- as the governing class or the governing classes), and the rest of the elite not in the government: the non-governing elite (Ibid.).

For Mannheim (1960) elites are those ‘minorities, which are set apart from the rest of the society by the pre-eminence in one or more of these various distributions’ (Rajora 1987:15). The elites are the ‘holders of high position in a given society’ (Laswell et al 1952:6); ‘superior social groups’ (Bottomore 1964:25); ‘groups which emerge to positions of leadership and influence at every social level’ (Cole 1955:105); ‘body of persons enjoying a position of pre-eminence over all others’ (Nadel 1956:415); ‘the minority which in each of the enumerated professions, has succeeded best and occupied high positions’ (Aron 1960:260-281). C.W. Mills explains elite in the institutional rather than psychological aspects thereby departing from Pareto’s conception. Mills rejects the view that members of the elite have superior psychological characteristics, which distinguish them from the rest of the population. Instead, he argues that the structure of institutions is such that those at the top of the institutional hierarchy largely monopolize power. He conceives ‘[t]he power elite is composed of men whose position enable them to transcend the ordinary environment of ordinary men and women, they are in positions to make decisions having major consequences. Whether they do or do not make such decisions are less important than the fact that they occupy such pivotal positions’ (Mills 1956:13).

There are no exhaustive works done on tribal elite and class though it has featured in some works at regular intervals. While explaining the tribal situation, rather than engaging in a rigorous analysis of the conceptual application, it has been dealt with a casual and unproblematic attitude thereby withholding the development of local categories for explaining the local situation. Nevertheless, there is growing attention towards evolving local genres or by conceptually contextualizing the more general categories. Rajora, analyzing the emergence, nature and role of elites among the Bhil tribe in Southern Rajasthan defines the elites as

[t]hus, we may think of the elites as those who are regarded as superior, influential and are held in high esteem by the people; they may or may not have formal positions in politics and the government, but they are in a position to influence the decision-making process, set values and uphold them (Rajora 1987:16).

While identifying the elites among the scheduled caste of Andhra Pradesh, Abbasayulu is of the view that ‘elites are those who use intellect and rationale judgment while participating in decision-making policy and occupy position of trust and responsibility’ (Abbasayulu 1987:19). What follows below is an analysis of the traditional practices and values regarding wealth and other properties that accrues prestige and honour to the owner, for instance the land, the feast of merit, and head hunting etc. to explain the differentiation within Tangkhul Nagas’ social structure in the pre-colonial period.

‘Wealth’ Among the Tangkhul Nagas

For the present work I have considered only two aspects of the concept of wealth within the Tangkhul Naga: society-land and the feast of merit. It needs to be noted that land is the most important asset among the Nagas; the feast of merit the most conspicuous indicator of wealth. The two aspects of wealth are different yet interlinked in the sense that the former provides almost all the necessary inputs for the performance of the latter that in turn reinforces the position, possession of wealth entails. It is for these pivotal roles they play that these two indicators have been considered hereunder.

Land

The area that the Tangkhul Nagas live, the eastern part of Manipur, is mountainous and has relatively dense forest cover mainly of tropical deciduous trees. The land was the primary source of livelihood and wealth and identity as well. Therefore, the control and ownership of land is an important criterion for acquiring social honour and prestige in the society. There are intricate and organized patterns of the land ownership and control with the Tangkhul Naga society.

Khasim roughly divided the Tangkhul Nagas village land into five categories: (i) Village settlement areas called Khalung, (ii) Woodland, the nearest land to the settlement area-Thingkhamlui. (iii) Land owned by any individual or leanage temporarily, which is next to the woodland-Masalam or Shalam. (iv) Public land towards the forest side and the forest itself-Yaruilam and (v) Cultivable terraced field-Ngaralui. He further pointed out that the land ownership is of two types: ‘individual and communal’ (Khasim 1987:55-56). According to Khasim, there is private ownership of khalung, ngaralui and thingkhamlui land. Referring to the thingkhamlui, he maintained that ‘[t]his is one of the three important immovable properties of the family and the other two are – the homestead and the terraced paddy field. Each and every family is expected to own at least one or two plots of thingkham in the village. Some well-to-do families keep six or seven plots of thingkham and some are not having even a single plot….Thingkham is individually owned. They can sell it out and repurchase it any time. Since there is buying and selling system, the number of holdings differ from family to family’^[11].

Further, the term luisha/ramshai among the Tangkhul Nagas implicitly point to the prevalence of patron-client relationship^[12].  Luisha/ramshai is the land tax, usually in paddy or sometimes labour, collected by the landowner from the person who tills his land on lease. Similarly, Hungyo, with special reference to the land ownership system of the southern Tangkhul Nagas who practice jhum cultivation pointed out ‘[i]n a village land there are several blocks of land which are owned by an individual. Though the land as a whole is considered village land, the actual landowners are a few privileged individuals only. Only a few households own the block of land whose line of descent is directly linked with the ancestors who owned the land. Younger sons have no right to claim over the immovable property as long as the eldest one is alive’ (Hungyo  1987:66). Conversely, Hungyo argues that the Thadou Chief has the absolute power over the village land. The villagers give tax to the chief for the cultivation of the land. ‘A basketful (vaibeng) of paddy equivalent to five tins is given from each household as the tax called “changseu” on a particular occasion fixed by the chief. On this occasion, the chief gives a feast to the villagers with plenty of meat and drink. Changseu is exempted from the “semang pachang” ^[13] for their service to the chief. Chengseu is also exempted from the widows and new settlers of the village who have not established themselves properly’ (Ibid,.19).

Feast of Merit

The feast of merit consists of performing a series of rites and feasting lasting into weeks, and even months. Though all the Nagas performed the feast of merit the ways and method of doing so differ from tribe to tribe. Basically, the feast of merit involves the dragging and erecting of huge genna posts. Angami, Ao, Lotha and Mao-Maram Nagas erected stone monoliths. The Tangkhuls erected huge genna posts called Tarung. The Semas, Aos, Sangtams and Lothas etc. erected ‘Y’ shaped genna posts in addition to stone dragging, whereas the Konyaks carved on wood (Ibid., 109). All these activities were followed by feasting and celebration of the whole village, the cost of which is borne by the performer. Thus, it is usually performed only by those who are exceptionally endowed with wealth like fertile lands, large number of cattle, especially mithuns^[14] and buffaloes.

Presenting the positive aspect of the feast, Shimray is of the opinion that ‘[s]haring of wealth with the whole population through a public distribution system such as “feast of merit” has been the most important factor which has prevented capitalism from overtaking the Naga system. Today there are signs of concentration of wealth and economic powers in a few hands………However, there is a big difference. In the past system, there was social control over the rich people through a public system such as the “feast of merit”’ (Shimray 1985:119). Moreover, it reinforced group solidarity, cementing the fissures, if there was any, reminding each individual component the hold of the collectivity. The emphasis here is, however, on the role it plays in fostering social differences rather than its solidifying aspect. The performance of a feast of merit, it needs to be noted, does not by itself act as a means of social differentiation. Only when it is seen as an adjunct of the economic wealth (such as land) then it becomes a practice whereby social differentiation is brought to the fore of the social relationships. Not everyone was endowed with equal wealth and material riches to perform the feast of merit and by virtue of the unequal endowment gives status and prestige to those who could perform it.

Commenting on the feast of merit Shimray note that

[i]t was partly the generous philosophy of feeding the poor and sharing of wealth with the entire population, but mostly the competitive spirit to climb the ladder social recognition that prompted the Naga rich men to perform the series of feasts of merit and honour round which the wheels of Naga society revolved’ (Shimray 1985:108). He went on to add that ‘Whatever the case may be, it was not the stone monument, nor the Genna post that was important, but the glory, splendour, and honour involved in performing the ceremonies of the feast of merit. The donor (performer) was honoured and respected while alive and after death as well. No doubt the warrior that brought the greatest number of human heads was honoured and respected but the ablest man of the village who performed the whole series of the feast of merit was perhaps more respected and honoured for he was rich, generous and resourceful. The village chief, the donor of feasts and the warriors alone could wear a special type of cloth, the finest cloth with special embroideries. They were given special seats and were highly respected in any social functions. After two or three series of the feast, they were entitled to have horns on their house (Ibid.,109).

Similarly, Takatemjen’s account of an eyewitness account of the last Mithun charity performed in Mokokchung District by Ungerchang of Longkhum village in March 1982 merits mention here: “…They waited until sunset and only after dark one man was forced to pierce the heart of the animal. It is believed that the one who pierces the victim dies soon, so only the poor and wretched are forced to do this task” (Takatemjen 1997:79).

Thus, it becomes self-evident from the above that the Tangkhul Nagas or for that matter the Nagas and other tribal groups are not egalitarian as it is made to be. There are so many differences in access to resources and other bases of power, which confers the owner of these scarce resources an unequal position within the society. Thus, we can legitimately speak of the traditional elites among the Tangkhul Nagas consisting of the awunga, hangva (the village council members), owners of large fertile lands and mithuns, persons who have performed the feasts of merit and the warriors who have to their credit brought home a good many heads from wars and raids of enemy villages. It so happens that often the richest man who is capable of performing all the series of feast of merit is also the village chief. In the past it was commonplace to find traditional, economic, political, social and power coalesced into a single individual, for instance the village awunga. However, there are others from outside the chief’s clan who are equally if not more wealthy to do the same. Together they make decisions regarding the security of the village, jointly set the date for observing village genna, conducting raids on enemies, resolving disputes and also announce the date and time for feasting and other celebrations which were mostly dictated by the agricultural activity.

Therefore, one can assume that the traditional elites make important decisions that transcend the ordinary world of the village folk. They did occupy positions of influence and trust commanding great respect and prestige from the rest of the population. Their positions of influence and trust were sanctioned by traditions of the society in the sense that their actions were presented as being in consonance with the values and practices of the society, which in turn legitimize their actions thereby making it part of the tradition of the Tangkhul society.

The Tangkhul Nagas Middle Class

It has been noted in the above pages that the Tangkhul Naga society is differentiated, though not stratified in the Hindu caste pattern, with regard to access to the scarce resources and powers in the society. What has been dealt above roughly belongs to the pre-British period.  Below we are concerned with the structural transformation that the society underwent beginning with the British rule till the present day. The rough and arbitrary division into two historical epochs is necessitated by the phenomenal transformation witnessed by the society of which the colonial period still remains the biggest landmark^[15]. The emergence of the middle class coincided with the downfall of feudalism in Europe in the 16^th century. They primarily consisted of the enterprising merchants and tradesmen who occupied the position between the aristocracy and the serfs along with the growth of capitalism. Since then it has closely grown in size and composition with the advancement of capitalism. The term ‘middle class’ (Marx and Engels 1967:115)^[16] generally refers, as the term suggests, to that section which lies between the capitalist and the working classes or the bourgeoisie and the proletariat in the capitalist society. They neither own the means of production nor the capital. At the same time they did not have the labour that produces the surplus.

Colonialism and the Emergence of the Middle Class in India

The impetus of the emergence of the middle class in the Indian sub-continent can be roughly traced to the pronouncement of Lord William Bentick, the Governor General, who found in English education a means of raising a class of persons who would be “Indian in blood and colour, but English in tastes, in opinions, in morals and in intellect: or in short, Indians with modern western minds” (Quoted by Tara Chand in Bhatia 1994:28). This class was indeed the offshoot of the British rule whose nucleus was provided by the class of intermediaries that served as a link between the local people and the English rulers ^[17]. Basically, the ‘middle class’ means the western educated urban section of the society that is largely engaged in the “service” sector of the economy for its livelihood’ (Bhatia 1994:16). Ghanshyam Shah defines middle class as ‘[t]he middle class is a class between labour and capital. It neither directly owns the means of production that pumps out the surplus generated by wage labour power nor does it, by its own labour, produce the surplus having use value and exchange value’ (Shah 1987). ‘The two key attributes distinguishing the class from other social classes are its possession of education or knowledge in the broader sense of the term and leadership qualities that help to put the class at the top in all walks of life’ (Bhatia 1944:1). ‘Broadly speaking, this class consists of petty bourgeoisie and the white-collar workers. The former are either self employed or involved in the distribution of commodities and the latter are non-manual office workers, supervisors and professionals such as engineers, pleaders, doctors etc. constitute the middle class’ (Shah 1987).

The use of middle class to explain the social reality of the Tangkhul Nagas, and the Nagas in general is questionable because capitalism is absent in the Naga society. Even otherwise in the contemporary Tangkhul Naga society the middle class have ceased to occupy the intermediary position they used to during the British rule. In fact the middle class has become the “ruling class” (Bhatia 1994:17) of the society. The limitations of employing the category middle class while explaining the Naga society in general is noted by Ghosh (1983). He argue that ‘since there is no landed or industrial aristocracy in Nagaland, technically the term middle class is wrong, because there is no other class above it, although there is one lower. But sociologically it is correct because nowadays by middle class we understand a certain educated class of people who earn their bread by themselves by brainwork, and do not depend on the interest of the money invested or other’s labour, neither on physical labour as most of the lower class people depend on’ (Ghosh 1983:219). The problem is further compounded because in the recent years the size and composition of the middle class has grown rapidly becoming more heterogeneous with the transformation of the capitalist societies that it is doubtful of calling it a single class^[18]. The problems notwithstanding, middle class continues to be widely retained by the social scientists because of its usefulness to explain social change at least in India after independence.

The self-content and not-so-conspicuous nature of differences of the Tangkhul Nagas, we noted while discussing the elites, has changed dramatically since the Nagas’ contact with the western colonialists. The major thrust towards change and the subsequent growth of the middle class came with the British colonizers. But here, it is important to keep in mind that British occupation did not bring with it any direct economic benefits to the Tangkhul Nagas who, on the whole, clung onto their traditional way of livelihood.^[19] Therefore, the growth of the middle class, at the first place, did not have a commercial or economic base among the Tangkhul Nagas, as it is also among the larger Naga society. On the contrary, the middle class was a direct product of the introduction of Christianity, western education (Misra 1983:156) ^[20], and new job and occupation opportunities along with the introduction of money economy ^[21] in society. When the western colonialists left the Indian state has taken over in this process of ‘transforming’ the society with the aim of ‘integrating’ them with the mainstream society; ‘to bring the backward groups at par with the rest of the nation’. One of the most important mechanisms of bringing the tribals into the mainstream has been the policy of positive discrimination or the reservation policy that the state adopts soon after becoming sovereign from the colonial rule that subsequently provides education and new jobs and other employment opportunities to the Tangkhul Nagas. In sum, all these recent changes have thrown up a new category of class or leaders, the middle class, within the society different in their orientation and source of legitimization from the traditional elites.

It is difficult to ascertain precisely the members of the Tangkhul Naga middle class due to its sheer composite nature. According to Mishra the new middle class is primarily composed of ‘salaried bureaucracy, businessmen ranging from affluent government contractors to petty shopkeepers, men belonging to the various professions such as medicine and teaching as well as owners of urban property in the form of houses let out to tenants. Amongst these sections it is perhaps the bureaucracy that is the most important’ (1983:166).  Such a classification is confusing because it is too inclusive leaving too little outside it. Notwithstanding the inclusive nature there is a common factor running through this class, which is ‘their knowledge of English language and the English education it has received at the high schools and university levels’ (Bhatia 1994:16). The Tangkhul Naga Employees and Professionals Association (TEPA) whose members include bureaucrats, other white-collar workers, the contractors, technocrats, teachers at the university, college and school level and politicians is the middle class par excellence. Together they roughly represent the urban-based, salaried, modernized, mobile, politically active and enterprising section of the Tangkhul Naga population.

Western Education and the Emergence of Tangkhul Nagas Middle Class

Western education came simultaneously with Christianity in the fag end of the 19th century, roughly in the 1890s. The Tangkhul Nagas’ response to western education was very passive in the beginning. Oral accounts have it that only the poor and the orphans were sent to the missionary run schools while sons of the chief and other well-off families remained in the village. Very often, it is said, this first generation of English educated Tangkhul Nagas were socially compelled by the village as a whole to attend the schools because villages failing to send their representatives were heavily fined. Women were not compelled for this purpose because they were considered to belong to the hearth and the village. Therefore, it can be assumed from such oral accounts that the first generation of ‘intermediaries’ were from the lower rung of the society who manage to gradually come to occupy important decision-making positions in the society by virtue of their possession of western education and their close association with the rulers. This is closely tied to structural transformations in other areas too. This is to say that with the establishment of colonial rule modern rational ways of governance replaced the traditional form of village republic. New centres of governance and seats of power controlled by the English rulers and their native English educated intermediaries emerged more important and powerful than the old elites and their offices or bases of power. Gradually the occupants of the newly created offices and those who possessed western education gained prominence and influence in terms of power and authority over the traditional ones.

Thus, by virtue of the possession of western education and their association with the English rulers, the newly western-educated Tangkhul Nagas, gained prominence and replaced the traditional elites in decision-making that affected the affairs of the village as well as beyond its boundaries. They were the Tangkhul Nagas in blood and colour, but English in tastes, in opinions, in morals and in intellect: or in short, modern western minds. This class of Tangkhul Nagas has grown in recent years in terms of income, power and monopoly over scarce resources. They have consolidated their hold and have been closely monitoring the flow of such resources attempting to thwart any threat to their position from the lower section of the population. Class-consciousness has taken roots, as it is evident from the formation of the Tangkhul Naga Employees and Professionals Association, which is perhaps the most influential and leading class association at all levels transcending the village and kinship boundaries.

Transformation or Continuity?

The emergence of the middle class markedly alters the social landscape of the Tangkhul Naga society by replacing the traditional elites, especially in regard to the access to scarce resources and bases of power and privilege within the society. The issue at hand is to determine whether it is ‘change in the structure’ or ‘change of the structure’. If what Majumdar said while explaining the emergence of the middle class among the Garos of Meghalaya: ‘in tribal societies, even if there was an upper class, the number of its members was limited and its social prestige depended upon distribution of wealth rather than accumulation of wealth for its own comfort. Moreover, the upper and lower classes did not represent two levels of culture and two more or less exclusive spheres of the society’ (Mazumdar 1983:182). If this was true, then it is no longer so, at least in the society.

The haves and the have-nots have become two exclusive spheres in contemporary society with the emergence and consolidation of the middle class. This is mainly because the kinship network has become less significant in the present. In the past, it was the duty of the clan members to care for the less fortunate members who had fallen on hard times-the widows, orphans, destitute, the old and sick, during times of bad harvest or the lean seasons and also against other hardships. Thus, the shang acted as the premium against hard times. Moreover, it was the shang that provided the necessary protection and assistance during feuds and other such disputes against another group. But now, with most of the well-to-do clansmen settled far away from the villages, mostly in the urban areas, and the growing thriftiness which characterises the middle class, the less fortunate clansmen could not afford to receive the same premium they once used to.

The slackening hold of kinship obligations and the related growing disparity between the rich and the poor is closely tied to the new places of settlement, which is again due to the growth of new employment opportunities and centres of power. In other words, the village-town divide directly contributes to the loosening of kinship ties, thereby augmenting the class divide. Earlier the physical location of the Tangkhul Nagas within the village demanded collective effort to exploit resources for existence. And the traditional practices and values that emanated from such a physical location reinforced the collective spirit. For instance, jhum cultivation, the construction of terrace fields on the river valleys or slopes of mountains, the construction of canals, after harvest there is again demand for labour for ferrying the paddy to the village from the fields which are miles away from the village (it should be noted that the Tangkhul Nagas live on mountain tops) demand huge labour force; and the threat of enemy headhunters further accentuated the need for group solidarity.

Again the group solidarity is strengthened and reflected in the various feasts and festivals, which are events of community activity. Significantly such a philosophy gets manifested in the notion of wealth. Accumulation or possession of wealth per se was not the primary intention, but the generosity in sharing the wealth with the community was given the ultimate prestige and honour. Generosity, rather than thriftiness, was the norm accorded with more importance by the Tangkhul Nagas in the recent past. Material wealth or riches are only means, through social distribution, to acquire social prestige and positions. Thus, the notion of wealth amongst the Tangkhul Nagas was predicated upon generosity rather than stinginess. Such beliefs acted prudently in mitigating the emergence of wide disparity between the rich and the poor in the remote past. Equally important is transformation at the cognitive and the attitudinal level. The middle class, as the product of Western education, created new values, practices, thought categories and knowledge in direct opposition to the traditional values and practices, for instance, new notions of hygiene, beauty, and new leisure activities completely dissociated from the immediate way of life. Whosoever possesses such new standards and cognitive values gains prestige and come to be accorded higher honour, thereby ushering in new principles or bases for social differentiation.

Aram (1972) notes the cumulative effects of the spread of western education that leads to the growth of new occupations, growth of urban centers, commercialization of forests and agricultural products and more recently the emergence and growth of service sectors in non-governmental organizations and related fields etc. He observes:

As the Naga society emerges from the traditional tribal form and moves into modern industrial phase, we visibly see disparities between different sections of the population and between the urban and the rural sector. There is no doubt that during the recent years some have become very rich whereas the bulk of the population is still on the old standard of living. With educated Nagas holding important administrative positions and other prestigious and remunerative job the gap is growing between the educated section and the uneducated section. Not only in matters of financial emoluments and physical facilities but in other respects also, such as cultural standards and ways of living, great disparities are developing. To some extent the growth of disparities are unavoidable in a developing society but then as these disparities goes beyond a certain limit social tensions are bound to arise (Aram1972: 127).

Closely related to this is the growing sense of individualism^[22], the means of acquiring ‘prestige through accumulation of wealth rather than distribution of the same’, the growing demand for artificial needs and desires fostered by the consumerists oriented market forces (Horam1977: 96)^[23] on the one hand, and the lack of unequal economic means of meeting all these needs on the other have created further disparity within the society.

Perhaps, the most important aspect of the present chapter lies in the sphere of decision-making. The traditional elites derived their power and legitimised their position through tradition and the possession of native knowledge. Generally, wealth and power were co-terminus, in the sense that those who possessed wealth also commanded respect and influenced the event of decision-making. On the other hand, the Tangkhul Nagas middle class, primarily the creation of the long years of British occupation, derive their power and legitimisation from the possession of educational qualifications, political knowledge and power, and by virtue of their occupying the commanding position in the bureaucracy and other power yielding position (for the majority who are not in this privileging positions they derive their influence and power through the various fictitious or real kinship relations that they managed to forge and establish with those in powerful positions.). And Just as Mills (1956) pointed out in the above pages, it is not so much whether they make decisions or not, but what is significant is the fact that they occupy important positions in the society by virtue of their possession of western education or being able to establish real or fictitious kinship ties with those who possess the same. It is relatively less probable now that the richest man will be the most powerful because the latter’s base has diversified in the present context.

The middle class has become the spokespersons of society. However, this should not suggest the end of the traditional elites. Though much of its previous domain and authority have been taken over by the middle class, the traditional elites remain important in certain matters. Perhaps, at least to a certain extent within the society, there is smooth co-existence between the two forms of authority. The traditional elites still wield considerable influence and decision-making power with regard to traditional issues though the influences of the Tangkhul Nagas middle class is gradually intruding in these matters as well. Their importance is further substantiated by the general consensus among the Tangkhul Nagas, attested by the Naga National movement ideology, that the Nagas should settle their disputes through the traditional laws and rules. The most serious challenge to the authority of traditional elites is the very recent move to replace the office of the village chief by a village chairman to be elected for a particular time period after which the next incumbent would be elected. A couple of villages were said to have implemented this practice, but there is opposition as well. Which side the trend would go is too early to tell, but there should not be any unnecessary alteration of the tradition because it is through it that one derives the sense of belongingness and identity. It is still too early to say if the new group has been able to shoulder the responsibilities consistently and prudently. However, judging by the way things are in the last few years, it is alarming to note the unprecedented prevalence of malpractices and the complete absence of ethical standards in most of the middle class leadership.

Conclusion

In conclusion, it can be reiterated that social differentiation with respect to unequal access to the scarce resources and powers in society has always been present within the society. Failure to account for this differentiation is due to the preoccupation with the Hindu caste model. The study here attempts to deconstruct the egalitarian image of a tribal society often wrongly presented by others, by seeking the explanation in the social relations and the traditional practices which, on the one hand, promoted group solidarity, clan cohesiveness, achievement of social prestige through the distribution of wealth rather than the accumulation but at the same time acts as means of social differentiation. The emergence of the middle class did not change the social differentiation but is perpetuated in a changed form. Thus, whatever the Tangkhul Nagas’ social structure witnesses with the decadence of the traditional elites and the emergence of the middle class is ‘change in its structure’ rather than ‘change of the structure’.

References:

Abbasayulu, Y.B, Scheduled Caste Elites, Hyderabad 1978.

Aram, The Emerging Social Situation in Nagaland and Some Suggestion For A National Policy, 1969,             in Singh, K.Suresh (ed.), The Tribal Situation In India, Motilal Banersidas, New Delhi, 1972.

Archana Prasad, Against Ecological Romanticism Verirer Elwin and the Making of Anti-Modern Tribal identity, Three Essays Collective, New Delhi, 2003.

Aron, Raymond, “Power and Status Relations,” European Journal of Sociology, Vol. I (2), 1960.

Bailey, F.G., Tribe, Caste and Nation, Manchester University Press, Manchester, 1960.

__________ “For a Sociology of India”, Contribution to Indian Sociology, No.111, The Hague, July             1959.

Beteille, Andre, The Definition of a Tribe, in Thapar, Romesh (ed.), Tribe Caste and Religion, Macmillan Company of India Ltd, Delhi, 1977.

Bhatia, B.M, India’s Middle Class Role in Nation Building, Konark Publishers Pvt. Ltd., 1994.

Bottomore, T.B., Elites and Society, C.A. Watts & CO. Ltd., London, 1964.

Brown A.R., Radcliffe, Method in Social Anthropology, Asia Publishing House, Bombay, 1973.

Burman, B.K. Roy, Tribes in Perspective, Series: Tribal Situation, Mittal Publication, New Delhi, 1994. p.            12-13)

________ ,  Transformation of tribes and Analogous Social Transformation  in

Chand, Tara, History of Freedom Movement in India, Volume II, Publications Division, New Delhi, 1967.

Chaudhuri, Buddhadeb, (ed.), Ethno politics and Identity Crisis, Inter-India Publications, New Delhi,             1992.

Cole, G.D.H., Studies in Class Structures, Routledge and Keagan Paul, London, 1955.

Chatterjee, S.K., Kiratajana Kiri, Asiatic Society of Bengal, 1951.

Dalton, Edward Tuite, Tribal History of Eastern India, Cosmo Publications, New Delhi, 1978.

Elwin, Verrier, Aboriginals, Oxford University Press, Delhi, 1944.

Firth, Raymond, Elements of Social Organisation, Watts., London, 1951.

Ghosh, B.B., Emergence and Role of the Middle Class in Nagaland, in Ray, B. Datta (ed.), The             Emergence and Role of Middle Class In North East India, Uppal Publishing House, New Delhi,   1983.

Ghurye, G.S., The Aboriginals So-called and their Future, Bombay, 1944.

Horam, M., Social and Cultural Life of Nagas (the Tangkhul Naga), B. R. Publishing Corporation, New     Delhi. 1977.

Hungyo, P, Land Tenure System in the Hills of Manipur: A comparative Study of the Tangkhul Naga             and the Thadou Kuki, in Dutta, B.B and Karna, M.N (ed.) Land Relations in North East India,   People’s Publishing House, New Delhi, 1987.

Laswell, Harold D., Lerner, Daniel and Easton, C, Rothwell, The Comparative Study of Elites, Hoover             Institute Studies, Stanford, 1952.

Madan, T.N., “Anthropology as the Mutual Innterpretation of Cultures: Indian Perspective”, in             Fahim, H., (ed.) Indigeneous Anthropology of Non-Western Countries, Academic Press, Carolina,           Durham, NC 1982.

Majumdar, D.N., The Emerging Middle Class Among the Garos, in Ray, B. Datta (ed.), The Emergence        and Role of Middle Class In North East India, Uppal Publishing House, New Delhi, 1983.

Mannheim, Karl, Man And Society In An Age Of Reconstruction: Studies In Modern Social Structure, New     York, 1940.

Marshall, Gordon (ed.), Oxford Dictionary of Sociology, Oxford University Press, New York, 1998.

Marx, Karl and Engels, F, The Communists Manifesto, Harmondsworth, Pelican, 1967.

Mathur, K.S., Tribe in India: A Problem of Identification and Integration, in Singh, K. Suresh, Tribal Situation in India, Motilal Banersidas, New Delhi, 1970.

Mess, Henry A, in Lewis R and Mande, A, The English Middle Class.

Mills, C. Wright, The Power Elite, Oxford University Press, New York, 1956.

Mills, J.P., 1922, The Lhota Nagas, Macmillan, London.

Mishra, Udayon, 2000, The Periphery Strikes Back, Indian Institute of Advance Study, Shimla.

Nadel, S.F., “The Concept of Social Elites”, International Social Science Bulletin, Vol. VIII (3), 1956.

Nongbri, Tiplut, The Khasi Land Tenure System; Need For Conceptual Refinement, in Dutta, B.B,             Karna, M.N, (ed.), Land Relations in North East India, People’s Publishing House, New Delhi,   1987.

Powers, H. Charles, Vilfredo Pareto, Sage Publication, Newbury Park, 1987.

Rajora, Suresh Chandra, Social Structure and Tribal Elites, Himanshu Publications, Udaipur, 1987.

Rao, M.S.A, Conceptual Problems in the Study of Social Movements, in Rao, M.S.A, (ed.) Social             Movement in India (Studies in Peasant, Backward Classes, Sectarian, Tribal and Women Movements),     Manohar Publishers and Distributors, New Delhi, 2000.

Ray, Nihar Ranjan, Tribal Situation in India, as quoted in Doshi, S.L and Jain, P.C., Social Anthropology,   Rawat Publications, New Delhi, 2001.

Ruivah, Khasim, “Land Ownership and its Problem among the Tangkhuls” in Dutta, B.B and Karna,             M.N (ed.) Land Relations in North East India, People’s Publishing House, New Delhi, 1987.

Sahlins, M.D., Tribesmen, Englewood Cliffs, Prentice Hall, London, 1968.

Sasti, Report of Scheduled Areas and Scheduled Tribe Commission, Vol. 1 1960.

Sayasaachi, Forest Dwellers And Tribals In India, in Visvanathan, Susan (ed.), Structure And             Transformation; Theory And Society In India, Oxford University Press, New Delhi. 2001.

Shah, Ghanshyam, “Middle Class Politics: Case of Anti-Reservations Agitations in Gujarat” in             Economic and Political Weekly, Annual Number may 1987, pp. AN 155-157.

Shimray, R.R., Origin and Culture of the Nagas, New Delhi, 1985.

Singh, Yogendra, Modernization of Indian Tradition (A Systemic Study of Social Change), Rawat Publications, New Delhi, 1988.

Takatemjen, Studies on Theology and Naga Culture, CTC, Aolijen, Mokokchung, 1997.

Unnithan-Kumar, Maya, Identity, Gender and Poverty New Perspective On Caste and Tribe in Rajasthan, Berghahn Books, Oxford, 1997.

End Notes

^[1] Although increasingly employed with reference to ethnic, class, and age divisions within social groups, the term ‘difference’ was initially used by ‘second wave’ feminist writers, who defined the term politically, seeing it as a polarity both between women and men and among women themselves. It is used in the negative sense of social exclusion and subordination, although radical feminists see it as a positive phenomenon, difference as a cause to celebrate and embrace. The concept as used here in the chapter claims to differ from the meaning it implies when one speaks of structural differentiation; the increasing specialization of different subsystems and institutions within the society. On the contrary, the concept is more closely identified with the usage as is evident among the Black feminists who stressed the deep differences existing between women at all levels, especially with regard to access to scarce resources and power, as a result of ethnic differences and divisions based on class and sexual orientation [Marshall, Gordon (ed.), Oxford Dictionary of Sociology, Oxford University Press, New York, 1998].

 

^[2] [Sasti, Report of Scheduled Areas and Scheduled Tribe Commission, Vol. 1 1960. p. 1.] ILO Convention (No. 107) 1957 concerns the protection and integration of indigenous and other tribal and semi-tribal in independent countries. This convention applies to (a) members of tribal and semi-tribal populations in independent countries whose social and economic conditions are at a less advanced stage reached by other sections of the national community, and whose status is regulated wholly or partially by their own customs and traditions or by special laws or regulations; (b) members of tribal and semi-tribal populations in independent countries which are regarded as indigenous on account of their descent from the populations which inhabited the country, or a geographical region to the country belongs, at the time of conquest or colonization and which, irrespective of their legal status, live more in conformity with the social, economic and cultural institutions of that time than with the institutions of the nations to which they belong [Burman, B.K. Roy, Tribes in perspective, Series :Tribal Situation, Mittal Publication, New Delhi, 1994. p. 12-13].

^[3]With the extension of effective communication and of the paraphernalia of a welfare state in almost all areas and with commercialization of local products in some of these areas, the tribal communities are faced today with new ‘challenge and response’ situations. They perceived that as dispersed entities they would not be in position to serve as pressure groups to protect their interests. Almost as a reflex action, they tend to forge unity among themselves. In northeast India, particularly one can see attempts to reinterpret, reiterate and elaborate traditional elements of culture and build up unified entities [p.33].

^[4] Article 342(1) provides that the President may with respect of any State or Union Territory, and where it is a state, after consultation with the Governor thereof, by public notification specify the tribes or tribal communities or parts of or groups within tribes or tribal communities which shall for the purpose of this constitution be deemed to be scheduled tribes in relation to that state or Union Territory, as the case may be. Further, Article 342(2) provides the Parliament may by law in or exclude from the list of scheduled tribes specified in a notification issued under Clause (1) any tribe or tribal community or part of or group within any tribe or tribal community, but said as aforesaid a notification issued under the clause shall not be varied by any subsequent notification.

^[5] The error of regarding an abstraction as a material thing, and attributing causal powers to it-in other words the fallacy of misplaced concreteness. An example would be treating a model or ideal type as if it were a description of a real individual or society. In Marxist theory, reification is linked to people’s alienation from work and their treatment as objects of manipulation rather than as human beings. [Ibid., Marshall, Gordon (ed.), 1998.]  [Beteille, Andre, The Definition of a Tribe, in Thapar, Romesh (ed.), Tribe Caste and Religion, Macmillan Company of India Ltd, Delhi, 1977] We have described the tribe as a society with a political, linguistic, and a somewhat vaguely defined cultural boundary; further as a society based upon kinship, where social stratification is absent. Now it has to be emphasized that like so many definitions of social categories, this also is the definition of an ideal type. If we make a classification of societies, they will arrange themselves in a continuum. In many of these, stratification and differentiation will be present, but only in an incipient manner. The exact point along which one should draw the line between tribal and more advanced societies will, in a sense, have to be arbitrarily decided. In India, we cannot have a readymade definition with which one can go into the field and locate a tribe. The greatest emphasis has to be placed on a historical perspective. The process by which tribes have been transformed is a historical process. And only by going into the antecedents of a group can we say with any confidence whether or not it should be considered as a tribe [pp. 13-14].

^[6] [Bailey, F.G, “For a Sociology of India”, Contribution to Indian Sociology, No.111, The Hague, July 1959. p.90] ‘A Structural analysis presupposes of abstract concepts over the ethnographic details through which the facts of social life are not only described but also explained’. Similarly, ‘A structural analysis of change differs from the cultural one which is in terms of particularities of customs, values and ideational phenomenon, their integration, interaction and change. Structural analysis is focused on the network of social relationships, which though culturally distinct share common and comparable attributes at a higher level of abstraction called social structure. A structural analysis of change consists of demonstrating the qualitativeity of new adaptations in the patterned relationship, as when a joint family breaks and becomes nuclear, a caste group is transformed into a class group or when traditional charismatic leadership is replaced by leaders of popular choice etc.’ [Singh, Yogendra, Modernization of Indian Tradition (A Systemic Study of Social Change), Rawat Publications, New Delhi, 1988. p.16-17].

^[7]According to the Census of India 2001, Ukhrul District accounts for 5.90 per cent of the state’s total population with a literacy rate of 68.96 per cent. The Naga nationalists refer to the Tangkhuls as wung. Tangkhul is a name given by the meities. However, I shall retain the first usage for its popular knowledge with the readers both within and outside the state.

^[8]The Naga tribes claim to have originated from the same place. The Makhen theory regarding the origin and the dispersal of the present day Naga tribe is the most popular. The theory has it that the Tangkhuls and the Angamis are living together in a village called Meikhel. Due to paucity of land exerted by the population pressure a section of them migrated towards northeast of the present day Angami concentration. Their common origin is attributed to the prevailing practice of deciding the date for celebrating the date for celebrations of festivals. It is said even now the priest of Angami villages does not fix the dates of any of the festivals but await the orders of the priest of Meikhel. The Tangkhuls who claim Meikhel as their place of origin hold similar beliefs and practices. The chronological period of the dispersal of the Tangkhuls and their subsequent settlement in the present area is yet to be scientifically ascertained and validated.

^[9] Awunga is the Tangkhul equivalent of the English term ‘King’. The Awunga is supposed to be the first man or his descendant under whose leadership that territory was conquered or exploited.

^[10] Hangva refers to the village councils as found among the tribal groups. The hangva is composed of the entire eldest living male heads of the various Shang (clan) in the village.

^[11]It is interesting to observe that there seems to have been economic transactions among the Tangkhuls with regard to land. However, such transactions should not be understood in the modern economic sense because land had not yet become a commodity to be bought and sold in the market. At the most, the manner of this transaction involves bartering for anything but money, accompanied by ritual performance at the time of change of ownership. Even in the present, it can be argued that land, specially in the remote areas, is yet to become a commodity whereas it is already so in the more urban centers like Ukhrul, the district headquarter, and some of its neighbouring villages.

^[12] Oral accounts have it that when the jhum cultivation fails due to natural disasters such as pest, landslide, incessant heavy rain or drought the poor villagers would borrow from the richest man in the village. In the ensuing cultivation season those who had borrowed the previous season would provide free labour for the borrowed paddy. But to summarily conclude that landlord-tenant relationships exist among the Tangkhuls is theoretically wrong because there is never a landed aristocracy among the Tangkhuls. Perhaps, patron–client relationship would be nearer to explain the practice. Sharecropping is also practiced among the Tangkhuls. In this cropping pattern normally the one who cultivates the field used to get two thirds of the harvest provided he contributed all that went into it, and the landowner received one-third of the produce. It is important to note that this is practiced only in regard to terraced paddy fields and do not apply to the jhum cultivation.

^[13] The council of ministers was nominated by the Thadou chief from different clans of the village.

^[14]Scientific name: Bos frontalis. They are semi domesticated and are considered as status symbols for the owner family.

^[15] It is not very clear if there was any trace of gradual change from one stage to the next within the Tangkhul society. However, some are of the opinion that change has been far from gradual but in leaps and haste. Therefore, it is kind of difficult to argue that the growth of ‘middle class’ has its roots in the traditional elites of the pre- British period. Rather it apparently seems to be a completely new entity hitherto unknown to the Tangkhuls. And this is where the colonial rule becomes significant while analyzing social change of a tribal society like the Tangkhuls.

^[16] Though Marx did not deal exhaustively with the middle class, he, nevertheless, mention them: “No sooner is the exploitation of the labourers by the manufacturer, so far, at an end, and he receives his wages in cash, then he is set upon by the other portions of the bourgeoisie, the landlord, the shopkeeper, the pawnbroker, etc. The lower strata of the middle class-the small trades people, shopkeepers, and retired tradesmen generally, the handicraftsman and peasants-all these sink gradually into proletariat, partly because their diminutive capital does not suffice for the scale on which Modern Industry is carried on, and is swamped in the competition with the large capitalists, partly because their specialized skill is rendered worthless by new methods of production. Thus the proletariat is recruited from all classes of the population. [Marx, Karl and Engels, F, The Communists Manifesto, Harmondsworth, Pelican, 1967, p. 115.

^[17]According to Bhatia ‘the stage in the creation of this class was set with the establishment of trading relations followed by the rule of the British East India Company in this country.’ He identified three main factors that moulded the class into shape and helped it to grow in social prestige, as well as material conditions of life. They are the new land laws and property rights that shook the rural society to its very foundation. ‘This had the effect of holding up agricultural growth, the introduction of exploitative urban-rural based relationship in the agrarian economy and an increasing pauperization of the peasantry.’ Second, the opening of new jobs and opportunities in civil administration, commercial activity, industrial enterprise and liberal professions, especially the middle ranks. And third, the introduction of English education, which he considered the most important effect of the establishment of British rule in India. ‘English language became the unifying force for diverse elements that came to constitute the new social class, giving them a distinct class identity. In fact, the middle class in the Indian context came to mean the (English) educated middle class. The English knowing class that lived in the urban areas and by virtue of their association with the foreign rulers in terms of government service, agency works of English farms and belonging to liberal profession that afforded opportunity of contacts with the Englishmen, had come to enjoy, in the eyes of their countrymen, prestige and higher social status on that count’ [1994 pp.21-26].

^[18]Bhatia has pointed out the exasperating task of defining the middle class in concrete terms for the sociologists because it has come to represent so great a diversity in terms of income, status, vocations, skills and educational qualifications. It has practically become meaningless, he argued, to group them together and designate them as a single social class. Significantly, he explained the development of the middle class in recent times in the context of the transformation that capitalist societies in particular and the rest of the world in general have undergone. This century has witnessed rapid advances in science and technology; managerial revolution in the conduct of business and industry; rise of the state planning and growing governmental intervention in the operation of the market forces; widespread fervour for democracy and egalitarianism; growing sex equality and the entry of women into professions that were earlier regarded a exclusive preserves of man; rapid spread of higher, including technical education; the emergence of high degree of specialization affecting all professions and various walks of life that had led to multiplication of experts, specialists, and “service” personnel of all types.. This has meant enormous increase in the numbers along with growing heterogeneity and diversity of elements included in the middle class. [1994. p.5-6]

^[19] The British delineated the Naga Hills as ‘excluded areas’ where there was minimum interference and the Nagas were governed by their traditional laws and customs. The political administrators took care not to interfere with the customs and the beliefs of the tribes. It was only later that the British brought the area under their direct control to prevent the interest of the tea-planters in the Assam Plains who were continually raided by the Nagas. Similarly, the Tangkhuls were also brought under their direct rule because of its proximity with Burma. Moreover, the Christian missionaries necessitated the active intervention and the establishment of direct rule.

^[20]‘Without going into the merits and the demerits of the missionary assault on the traditional practices of the tribes, one may conclude that Christianity and the western education it brought with it, which combined and the Christian ideas of universal love with the political and social beliefs of western Liberalism, no doubt helped the individual to overcome the negative aspects of tribal isolationism, thereby helping him to see across his tribe boundaries. This contributed in no small manner to the emergence of the middle class in Naga life [p. 156.]

^[21] From the Memorandum adopted in the three-day conference of the Naga National Council at Khonoma village in May 1978, [pp. 163-164. As quoted by Mishra, Op.cit.] Similarly, the introduction of currency and the development of the money economy ‘afforded opportunities to individuals to amass personal fortunes and for a few to collect in their hands the means of production formerly distributed between many, and the persons who succeeded were often those with no hereditary responsibility for the welfare of their kinsmen and their fellow villagers.’[p. 154.]

^[22]Aram has argued that with ‘the impact of modern life and culture, there is a strong trend for the Naga people to become more and more individualistic. He is further of the opinion that the average Naga is more concerned about his individual advancement and welfare which was not so in the past as earlier the Naga villages were well knit units with strong social cohesion. Today there is loosening of the community bonds and the individual is more and more on their own. In certain respects this is a healthy development because to be a prisoner of the powerful collectivity of a clan or the village was not so good as it is constricting upon the independent development of an individual. But on the other hand, the old values of community solidarity and corporate actions are disappearing.’

^[23]“The needs of the average man are multiplying, to meet which the simple farmers have overnight turned to the more interesting occupation of quick money making. This is injuring agriculture in general and weaving in particular, specially when the latter is the only cottage industry extant today in the Tangkhul Hills. Other crafts such as pottery work, basket making, and such others are threatening to disappear altogether. The colourful Tangkhul shawls are no longer a ‘must’ with the younger people, and very few girls know how to weave them. Use of tailored and ready- made, and often ultra-modern garments is on the increase, and if this state continues shawl making may also disappear altogether. Woodwork and bamboo-work are also becoming rare. But these changes can be reversed and are trivial when compared to the others which are having far-reaching adverse effects and are eating into the very foundation of Tangkhul society.”

Have you like this article?