Debunking the ethnic appellate Old Kuki with special reference to

Lamkang Naga tribe.

Dr. Anjana Sankhil
Ph.D. Anthropology
University of Delhi.

Lamkang tribe is one of the indigenous Naga tribes living in the present Indian state Manipur
with an approximate population of 15,000. They are compactly found settled in Chandel district.
Some Lamkang villages that were at the frontier of the district bordering Myanmar and Moreh
town (Kuki dominated area now) were razed down and displaced in the aftermath of Kuki-Naga
conflict of the early 1990s. One such example is the village of Betuk Sengkreng where the
village has now resettled close to the district head-quarter, Chandel. It may be worthwhile to
mention that since their mass exodus into present Manipur state in the 18 th and 19th century, the
Kukis have been at war with other Naga tribes. This is also true in the case of Lamkang Nagas as
the account of Kukis aggressions on Lamkang villages in the past have been orally narrated as
well as recorded in folktales and folksongs.

There are more than 40 Lamkang villages spread across the district of Chandel at present. People
of Lamkang speak Lamkang dialect which falls under Tibeto-Burman group of languages. They
are also intelligible with Manipuri, Nagamese, English and Hindi besides some other
neighbouring tribal dialects.

There is no written account of the origin and exact date of migration of the Lamkangs, however,
oral tradition has it that Lamkangs had migrated from somewhere in the East to their present
settlement. In the Cheitharol Kumbaba, the presence of Lamkangs in Manipur was recorded
when Poireton migrated to Manipur in the turn of the first century A.D. A citation from the
Moirang kings Chronicle by Gangumei Kamei in his the History of Manipur vol. 1 also briefly
recorded about the attack carried out by the Moirang king Leiya Punsiba on a Lamkang village in
the third century CE, asserting the fact that Lamkangs were independent people and occupied a
territory that strategically posed threat to the Moirang king (Shelmi Sankhil, 2010).

Despite being one of the oldest tribes living in present day Manipur, the Lamkangs have been left
unexplored by ethnographers and academicians alike. Apart from Ranjit Singhs seminal work
on the Lamkang tribe there are only stray references without any significant attention and
attempt to study or describe their socio-cultural and political life in the writings of both the
colonial and post-colonial periods. This neglect has certainly blurred the picture of the evolving
historical identity of the Lamkang tribe from its incipient past to its present context. Early
colonial writers like Pemberton (1835) classified Lamkang as a Naga tribe while some of the 20 th
century colonial writers like Colonel J. Shakespeare (1912) clubbed them under Old-Kuki tribe
following G.A Griersons (1905) arbitrary classification of Lamkang as Old Kuki-Chin group
in his Linguistic Survey of India. Interestingly, Grierson himself later aborted this view and
observed that tribes like Anal and Lamkang show closer affinity with the Naga languages than
the Kuki-Chin group. Also, as opposed to Griersons argument of Kuki-Chin group dialects
intelligible among its different sub-tribes; Lamkang dialect is not intelligible with any of the
Kuki-Chin tribes. In fact, if one were to closely examine the colonial writings, one cannot help
but notice the vast disparity between Lamkang and Kuki-Chin tribes.

In addition, it may be recalled that the identity Old Kuki was a colonial construct arbitrarily
given based on some linguistic affinity and geographical location in their bid to
compartmentalize the different tribes for military and administrative strategy rather than on the
sameness of socio-political and cultural life of the so-called Kuki-Chin group. Linguistic
affinity with Kuki Chin group if any could be explained by taking recourse to the process of
assimilation and acculturation between Lamkang and Kuki-Chin group; as the geographical
proximity between them entailed constant interaction with one another since the latters (Kuki-
Chin) migration to Manipur in the 18th and 19th century. To further explain this point, one can
look at present day Lamkang language which has assimilated so many meiteilon words into it.
In addition, there are assimilation of some cultural traits from the Meiteis as post Indian
independence, there has been constant interaction with the Meites. Taking these few linguistic
and cultural similarities as a yardstick and ignoring the vast socio-cultural disparities between
them, can it be said Lamkang and Meitei belong to the same ethnic group?

In fact, both colonial and post-colonial writers and ethnographers have never really studied the
socio-cultural and political institutions of the Lamkangs in totality. Therefore, their arbitrary
classification carried out for military and administrative strategy should not be invoked as the
gospel truth in consolidating Lamkang ethnic identity under Kuki-Chin group. Conversely, there
is an enormous similarity shared by Lamkang with other Naga tribes in terms of their culture,
polity and social life despite the lack of physical contact or geographical proximity with other
major Naga tribes. As such, the categorization of Lamkang as Old-Kuki is a misnomer that
has been comprehensively rejected by the Lamkangs since the dawn of literacy and education
that brings in ethnic consciousness and identity in the late 1940s and early 1950s. Vivid
example of this rejection can be seen from the adoption of the identity Naga in all Pan-
Lamkang organization/forum (eg: Lamkang Naga Baptist Association, Lamkang Naga Kver
Kunpun, Lamkang Naga National Council, etc.) and the active participation in the Naga National
Movement. Additionally, Lamkang is a bonafide member of the Naga Student Federation, Naga
Mothers Association & Naga Hoho. In fact, Lamkangs have never in their oral history of origin
or folktales associated themselves as belonging to the same ethnicity with the Kuki Chin group.
Far from sharing any historical affinity as falsely claimed and validated by non-Lamkangs, the
Kuki Chin group have always been referred as the Other people/Raalmi meaning
outsiders/adversary in the oral history of the Lamkangs. As mentioned earlier, the Kukis
repeated aggression on Lamkang villages have been recorded as early as the mid 19 th century
when Haika, the largest Lamkang village then was attacked and almost the entire villagers
slaughtered while they were absorbed in the merriment of Totlang kakam (feast of merit)
villagers. Lamkangs fondly recall the names of two brothers: Thamsui Sankhil and Thamsen
Sankhil who resisted and fought back hard by killing several Kuki aggressors in the Haika war
commonly remembered as the first Khongsai raal or Kuki war.

Coming to the colonial classification, it may be mentioned that the small population of
Lamkangs (they posed no threat to the British with their insignificant population), illiteracy, lack
of communication (unintelligible) and interaction with outsiders and ignorance to ascertain
their own identity were the contributing factors for the early 20th century colonial writers to
categorize them in the Old Kuki Chin group to suit military and administrative strategy of the
then British Crown. This arbitrary colonial classification was later invoked as the gospel truth by
the Kukis to advance their own geo-political agenda. It is necessary to keep in mind that the
arbitrary classification was based on the information provided by a Bengali clerk whose
knowledge and account of the Lamkang is extremely disputable.

But sadly, published works or for that matter colonial writings are often considered as the
authentic reference source by scholars and ethnographers for identifying the ethnicity of several
allied tribes in Chandel district. This is quite understandable considering the acute lack of any
published work from the insiders point of view which represents them, therefore, their ethnic
identity is yet to be consolidated in the academic realm. Some outsiders (non-Lamkang) still
invoke the validity of the colonial phrase and attempts to restore the immediacy and historical
authenticity of the phrase both in academic and political debates. Ironically, the so called
outsiders arguing in this vein ignored the enormous disparities evident in the socio-cultural and
political structure of the Lamkang from the Kuki-Chin group. For instance, a cursory glance at
the traditional attires of the Lamkangs and Kuki-Chin group and the dissimilarity exhibited in the
patterns and motifs of the attires are self- revealing to dispel the notion of the two as belonging to
the same ethnicity. For that matter, Lamkang cultural attires and the motifs displayed on the
shawls and kilts (hornbill, weaponry, headgear, sea shells, conch, etc.) show closer affinity with
other Naga tribes. Additionally, as opposed to the Kuki Chin group that subscribes to typical
autocratic political organization (chieftainship is inherited), the political organization of
Lamkang tribe is democratic in nature (chieftainship is elected on merit basis).

In fact, Shelmi Sankhil in his M.phil dissertation titled Lamkang identity: between history and
ethnography submitted to the Department of English, University of Delhi (2010) has critically
examined one such argument/claimed by Ralngam in Zale-Ngam (published by Kuki National
Organisation) on the basis of these assertions, the Kukiness of Lamkang which are incorrect.

1. Shetkarnung Sankhil is from Haokip clan (Thadou-Kuki)

2. Lamkang fought on the sides of the other Kuki tribes during the first and second Kuki
war of independence in 1917-1919 and 1942-1945

Shelmi rebutted Ralngams claimed with the following argument First, to say that Shetkarnung
Sankhil belongs to Haokip clan cannot translate to the claim Lamkang tribe is/was Thadou or
Kuki. For that matter, Shetkarnung is not the founding-father of the Lamkang clans and therefore
if Shetkarnungs father were originally of the Kuki tribe who had converted to Lamkang and
adopted Sankhil clan in the past, which however is not the case, Ralngams claim does not have
any bearing on the issue of the Kukiness of the Lamkang tribe or the clan Sankhil. As a matter
of fact, Sankhil clan has always been a Lamkang clan, and Shetkarnung parents who were from
Challong, had migrated from their ancestral village Aibul which had existed before the
Thadous/New Kukis came to Manipur in the nineteenth century and so on. In the light of these
facts, Ralngams claim can be understood as an example of desperate pamphleteering against the
Naga political movement in general, and against the history of the Lamkang people in
particular. Shelmi further dismissed Ralngams false claimed of Lamkangs participation in the
Kuki uprising. To quote him, Lamkangs never participated in the two Kuki uprisings, 1917-
1919, and 1942-1945. Instead, vivid memories of Kukis aggression on Lamkang villages during
these periods leading to village destructions, deaths, untold miseries, displacements, new village
settlements, etc. are still narrated by the elderly folks in the tribe today. It has been popularly
referred to as Khongsai Raal in common memory of the Lamkang people.

Ralngam also claims that both Assam Rifles history and Indian history recognized the Lamkangs
as Kuki. In this matter, as has been pointed out earlier, the afterlife of colonial constructions of
identity which were dubiously researched and largely determined by political necessity is not
authentic and acceptable to the people themselves. Therefore, it is a sad mistake to continue to
subscribe to the colonial terminology as gospel truths, especially when the contradictions in the
colonial taxonomies are pointed out by scholars of cultural studies (Shelmi Sankhil, 2010)

References
1. Arambam-Parratt SN, 2005. Trans. The Court Chronicle of the Kings of Manipur: The
Cheitharon Kumpapa. Oxford: Routledge.
1. Grierson GA, 1966. Linguistic Survey of India. Volume III, Part III. 1905. Delhi:
Sunderlal Motilal Banarsidass.
2. Jacobs Julian, Alan MacFarlane, Sarah Harrison and Anita Herle, 1990. The Nagas: The
Hill People of Northeast India: Society, Culture and the Colonial Encounter. London:
Thames and Hudson.
2. Kabui Gangmumei, 1991. History of Manipur. Volume I: Pre-colonial Period. New
Delhi: National Publishing House.
3. Sankhil Shelmi, 2010. Lamkang identity: between history and ethnography. M.Phil
Dissertation submitted to the Department of English, University of Delhi.
4. Shakespear J, 1912. The Lushei Kuki Clans. Delhi: Cultural Publishing House, 1983.
5. Shimray UA, 2001. Ethnicity and Socio-Political Assertion: The Manipur Experience.
Economic and Political Weekly, Vol. 36 (39):3674-3677.