The country suffers due to crisis of perception and lack of credible action. This applies more to the Northeastern region. The Britishers talked about the multi stage isolation of the region from the country and that of the hills and the plains within the region. Our own academicians talked about the 'splendid isolation'. They misinterpreted the society and culture; gave colonial bias to our history. We uncritically accepted their ideas; followed in their footsteps; promoted all round social, cultural, ethnic and religious divide. They introduced the racist thinking in our society; we made assertion of separate identity and social distancing' profitable and most alluring. Ethnocentrism occupied the central stage. Certain sections developed vested interest in generating sense of alienation among the people.

Creation of Nagaland opened up the possibility of the formation of the small states irrespective of valid parameters. It unsettled the Sixth Schedule experiment. Gradually, more and more ethnic states were demanded. Genuineness and reason became the first casualty. The Naga National Council wanted Naga Hills to be constitutionally included in an autonomous Assam in free India in 1945. The First Naga People's Convention, the most representative and biggest in the history of the Nagas till that date where more than one percent of their population attended, wanted Centrally Administered Territory status. It was granted and Naga Hills Tuensang Area came into existence. The demand was further updated in 1960 by two more Naga People's Conventions. They got full-fledged state in 1963. Mr. Kevichusa, a very senior Naga leader, addressing a highly attended public meeting convened to welcome the Peace Mission members, at Kohima in April 1964, made a strong plea to start all over again'. He wanted dissolution of newly elected Assembly and doing away with the ministry. There was Shillong Accord with NNC in 1975 and within five years a splinter group revived the old demands. This 'Over and over again syndrome' is not without significance and its adverse impact on the Nagas and their neighbours. The demands were updated in quick succession and met. A section of the Nagas wanted Sikkim status in 1965. For many, like B.K. Nehru, grant of statehood to the Nagas was a blunder. Many Nagas believe and express their opinion that the Statehood was granted too early.

The creation of Nagaland had destabilising effect in many ways. The quick succession of the updating of the demands, which were met immediately, affected the Naga psyche. They wanted more and more. The situation was aggravated by the myths, such as 'Delhi fears', 'the money shall stop flowing, or at least the flow shall be retarded if there is peace in the state'. It has harmed the state and the country.

The present situation is created by the permutation and combination of many factors. The most important factors are the systems' failure and the failures of the academic community. The academic community has failed to give lead in the post independence era. However, its negative role has done more harm. They ignored the significance of the democratic process operating in the states of the region. They not only could not free themselves from the colonial biases, but strengthened them. We shall discuss this point in detail in this paper.

Demographic invasion from across our borders was a matter of serious concern in this part of the country. There was no serious attempt on the part of the Central and the State Governments to solve the problem. The Northeastern states get most favoured treatment from the Central Government in the matter of allotment of funds and yet deliberate propaganda is carried out that the Central Government neglects the region. The people of the region are thus allowed to be misinformed and misled resulting in anger and alienation.

The Northeast is the most densely administered region of the country. The emergence of new states generated hope; there were tremendous job opportunities and the explosion of expectations. It was necessary to have the man power planning and to control the state expenditure to allow the percolation of resources to the lowest level of the society. There was also the urgent need of reform in the existing system of education. The same was not done in spite of loud pronouncements. The education generated hope when there was enough scope for employment of the white collar jobs seekers. Today, the saturation point has been reached in many states. The number of employment seekers is swelling; the education has ceased to generate hope. Apart from this factor, other factors, such as drab syllabus, is responsible for heavy and ever-increasing number of drop-outs from the schools. The 'education' was a state subject upped early seventies. Now, it is included in the concurrent list. The state governments can not blame the Central Government for the serious lapses in this case. The academicians and the universities also, should join hands in overhauling the present system of education.

The underground Nagas used to apply force for recruiting persons during the early fifties. The recruitment used to be done mostly from the small unprotected villages. The villagers were often fined for sending their children to schools. Ironically, the top underground leaders were sending their own children to the schools and colleges for the best education. The ever-increasing number of drop-outs have made the task of insurgent outfits easy. A large section of drop-outs are shirkers and form floating population in the towns. They want easy money and to be feared. The arms given by the insurgent outfits give them both and the former gets their recruits. Extortion has become a cottage industry due to system's failure and the failure to bring change in the system of education.

The development work, mostly lopsided, has halted in many states. Mobilization of local resources was never tried sincerely in some of them. Uncontrolled unproductive employment resulted into the situation in which the state government remains busy in bringing fund from Delhi and distributing the same among its employees. The state machinery has become all-consuming. Situation is not better in many other states such as in Bihar. Of course, that state gets far too less Central funds and fails to utilize even that; but that does not lead to the sense of alienation. The causes of this vital difference need to be robed. We should peep into our colonial past and the policies followed by our colonial masters for searching the root cause. The colonial myths and lies created crisis of perception and blurred our vision. The colonial bias continues to dominate our social and historical studies in the post-independence era also. It further deepens the crisis of perception and tends to confuse us. The studies with colonial bias accelerate the process of social distancing. Such studies, mostly highlight the racial, linguistic, religious and social differences, lack objectivity and strengthen the sense of alienation of the people. This paper discusses the colonial roots of the Northeastern syndrome and its post-independence after effects and developments.

Paradoxically, insurgency, secessionist demands with a lone exception, and upsurge of ethnocentrism is post-independence phenomena, in the Northeast India. The Mizos, under the leader- ship of the Mizo Union, the most influential political party of the district, favoured autonomous political structure for the Mizos, within India. They turned down the plan of the creation of the "Crown Colony of Eastern Agency", independent of India and Burma, consisting of the Hills Districts and areas of Assam and Burma'. The Naga National Council in its meeting on 19th June 1945 drafted a memorandum about the future of Nagas to be submitted to His Majesty's Government. They wanted Naga Hills to be included in, an autonomous Assam in a free India', according to one of the resolutions in the same meeting'. The other people were also happy within Assam State in free India. The people of the princely states of Manipur and Tripura wanted merger with India. The British rhetoric about the tribals of the region being non-Indians had no impact on them. The above mentioned NNC resolution does not show the impact of the Memorandum submitted to the Simon Commission in 1928. The reason is obvious. The two memoranda submitted to the Commission were prepared by the British officials themselves. The memorandum submitted at Kohima was signed by 20 persons, most of whom were employees of the Deputy Commissioner's office.

The NNC took an about-turn posture and demanded secession just before independence. The intense propaganda, that followed, was highly believed and people were afraid that they would be forced to become Hindus, their land would be occupied by the plainsmen, and they might be prevented from eating beef and pork. The British propaganda that Indians were aliens also helped Phizo and the NNC. Naturally, the Nagas became apprehensive and supported them. The people of Arunachal Pradesh did not come under the effective contact of the Britishers, and therefore, remained free from the virus of the isolationist and racist colonial ideas. There was gradual and smooth evolution and they got their state in most peaceful way in course of time. The Mizos were not allowed to have any High School due to isolationist policy of the Britishers and therefore went outside in large numbers for education and later on for service. They came in contact and knew the people of other parts of the country, like Khakis, Jaintias, Garos, Mikirs and Kacharis, and therefore did not develop similar apprehensions as the Nagas did. The Nagas of Tuensang welcomed and asked for more and more administrative centres in the early fifties due to obvious reason.

The Britishers aimed at unprecedented social, cultural, religious, linguistic and racial divide in India, especially after 1857. India was depicted as heterogeneous and confused conglomeration of different races, castes, tribes, dialects, regions, religions and sects. They successfully projected empire as the liberator, the deliverer of good, unifier of India, and the best guarantee for safeguarding the interests of the fringe areas, the tribals and the untouchables. The aim was twofold: to weaken India and to strengthen the empire. In the Northeast, the racial misinterpretation of the society and culture gave birth to social, cultural and religious distancing. The Government of Assam undertook the publication of monographs on different tribes in pursuance of the Lyallist Theory. The history of the region emphasises the isolation of the region from the rest of India and that of the hills from the plains within the region. There was overwhelming colonial bias in the history of Assam written by Gait. He continues to be the role-model of the historians of the Northeast India even today. The works of Alexander Mackenzie, R.B. Pemberton, J.M. Butler, Needham, Woodthrope and Robert Reid have the same colonial bias. Their works held tribals responsible for the British conquest. The tribals' views were always ignored. The histories written in the broad frame-work of imperialist/ colonial historiography justified colonisation.

The unfortunate part of the whole story is that Indian ethnographers, ethnologists, anthropologists and historians in particular, and other social scientists in general were unable to free them- selves from the strong clutches of the imperialist/colonial disciplines. Their failure to do so is certainly one of the most potent factor contributing to the present state of affairs in the country and the region. Our scholars continue to use official/non-official colonial sources; use racist, Euro-centric/Middle East centric, isolationist and borrowed frame work; and rarely question the colonialism. They emphasise and enlarge the differences within; describe colonial conquests and how colonialism developed.

The Indian historians have many failures to their credit. They failed to incorporate regional histories in the broader frame-work of Indian history. They are so ignorant that a paper on Northeast was categorised as 'non-Indian' in a volume of the Indian History Congress.' The struggle of the Khasis, Jaintias, Nagas, Mizos, Manipuris, etc. against the British should have found legitimate place in the history of the freedom struggle of the country. The Indian historians have failed to do so. The nation was weakened by this lapse. One important reason for the spread of insurgency in the region was also the isolation of the people. The national freedom movement could not penetrate in certain areas due to the same. It was claimed that the Inner Line Regulation was devised to ensure the identity of the tribals. The tribal identity, ironically, is not discussed therein. There were ample proofs of the interference by the British in the internal affairs of the tribals within the inner line. They also monopolised the trade of their products. This shows the hollowness of their claims.

Edward Thompson and G.T. Garratt have opined, 'it would be absurd to imagine that the British connection will not leave a permanent mark on Indian life. Yes, it has affected our lives and thinking. We accept most of their opinions and have ceased to question the colonial myths and lies. There is ample proof that Surma Valley was once ruled by Bhaskara Barmana, but K.L. Barua does not agree that Surma (Barak) Valley was included in Karnarupa. The reason given by him is strange. He gives the main argument that the two valleys (Barak and Brahmaputra) are so separated by the hill range that any kind of relationship between the two in early period was impossible. The Indians could cross the Himalayas and the Indian Ocean hundreds of years earlier than that period, but not the Meghalayan plateau in their own country. H.K. Barpujari borrows the expression from the European history and says that Assam had maintained its 'splendid isolation'. Suhas Chatterjee also uses the expression in the context of Mizoram. They never explain the splendidness of isolation. They never care to examine that the so called isolation is a lie. The students of history of the region are taught that the Northeast India was an independent political unit in the pre-colonial period. The secessionists say that the Naga Hills, Manipur or even Assam was never a part of India till their conquest by the Britishers, and justify their movement. The colonial trick works and our historians unwittingly help such patently false beliefs.

The colonial control of Indian mind is superb. Contrary to the reality, and as stated earlier, scholars of Indian origin also believe and propagate the isolation of the Northeast region from the rest of the country and that of the plains of the region from the surrounding hills. The mind-set which refuses updating creates problems throughout the country, but more acutely in this region. As if that is not enough, attempts are made consciously or unconsciously to divide the people on racial, ethnic and religious grounds. The worst sufferer of the whole game has been the Assamese society. It suffers from unprecedented division and fragmentation.

It may not be out of place here to write about the colonial bias in the history written by some of our historians of the Northeast. H.K. Barpujari's 'Assam in the days of the Company' (Guwahati, 1963) tells the story of colonisation and the British rule in Assam. He heavily relies on colonial sources for writing the history and follows the pattern of British historians of India who wrote how India was colonised (Ramsay Muir and others) and administered (Dowell and others). J.B. Bhattacharjee (Cachar under British Rule, New Delhi, 1977) and Sruti Deva Goshwami (Aspects of Revenue Administration in Assam: 1826-1874; Delhi 1987) follow the same line. The relationships of the British with the tribal communities was studied by S.K Bhuyan, H.K. Barpujari, S.K. Barpujari, J.B. Bhattacharjee (The Garos and t 'he English; New Delhi, 1978), Helen ' Giri (Khasis under British Rule; Shillong 1992), Hamlet Bareh (History and Culture of the Khasi People; Calcutta, 1967), Milton Sangma (History and Culture of the Garos; New Delhi, 1981) and others. These writers also mostly followed the tradition of Gait, Mackenzie, Shakespeare, etc., relied on colonial sources, followed their technique and carried their bias and outlook. The Britishers' views were uncritically accepted in these works.

The uncritical acceptance of the British views in the Indian historical writings becomes painful when we find the Britishers blaming others for everything and never failing to give themselves credit everywhere. As already pointed out, our historians failed to incorporate regional histories in the broad framework of the Indian history. On the other hand, the historians writing about the North- East have failed to view the region's history in pan-Indian context. This two way insularity is responsible for much of our perceptional haziness.

The ancient Assam was never cut off from the rest of the country. It was occasionally ruled from outside the valley and valley's rulers also ruled over the other parts of the country. The hills were also not always cut off from the plains of the Brahmaputra Valley. Gait quotes Vishnu Purana and Jogini Tantra and writes that Kamarupa included the parts of Himalayas and the Meghalayan plateu and the whole of the Eastern Bengaig. The Sapta Khanda Kamarupa included seven hills, including Tripura, Kaikika, Jaintia (Jayanti), and Kachar Hills (Kacehadi), according to Kamakhya Tantral". The Northeast region was linked up with all the parts of the country through land routes in ancient days.

As already stated, the Northeast region was not an isolated region in the past and the region was linked up to the rest of the country and to Tibet and Myanmar through various land routes. A land route from Peshawar to Parvatipur via Vazirabad, Lahore, Jalandhar, Saharanpur, Lucknow, Tirhut and Katihar", extended to Assam" keeping Ganges mostly to the South. The southern route from Lahore to Bhagaipur, viz Raivind, Firozepur, Bhatinda, Delhi, Allahabad, Varanasi and Patna, extended to Kajangal in Rajmahal and then to Gangasagar (Calcutta). A route branched off from the same at Kajangal. It crossed Ganges there, Bhaskar Varman, the king of Kamarupa and the Chinese traveler, Yuan Chuang met the emperor Harsha Vardhana at Kjangaill and they might have used the same route. Both Harsha and Bhaskar Varman traveled from Kajangal to Kanauj with their respective armies following the southern and northern routes respectively'.'. The route upto Kamarupa extended further upto Yunnan province of China'6. Brahmaputra Valley had land routes to Myanmar via Manipur is also but one or two routes linking the Brahmaputra Valley to Manipur were comparatively more difficulty.

There were two land routes linking Upper Assam to Cachar. One route passed through Dhansiri Valley and other through Kapili Valley"'. The route from Brahmaputra Valley to Tripura and Manipur passed through Cacharlg. A route linked up Brahmaputra valley with Jayantiyapur also". Assam was linked up through many trade- routes and passes with tibet. Gait has mentioned that there used to be hectic trade between Assam and Bengal in one hand and between Assam and Tibet on the other.

Like Assam, Manipur was also not an isolated and closed area. It was linked up with the rest of the country and with Myanmar through the land routes. Johnstone writes: "in the days when the Indian branch of the Aryan race was still in its progressive and colonising stage, the district (Manipur) was reportedly passed over by one wave after another of invaders intent', on penetrating into the remotest part of Burma."

Sir A. Phayre has mentioned that the 'route by which Ksahatriya princes arrived (in Burma) is indicated in the traditions as being through Manipur . Capt. Dun has written that "There can be no reasonable doubt that a great Aryan wave of very pure blood passed through Manipur into Burma in prehistoric times. There were at least three routes connecting Surma Valley with the Manipur Valley and two connecting Manipur with Kabaw Valley in the Chindwin river valley. A road connected lower Burma and India via banks of lrrawady, bank of Chindwin and Manipur, ac- cording to D.G.E. HaII. Yet there was another route to China through these hills, according to K.M. Panikar. Many important articles manufactured in the region were marketed outside. Mahabharat , Harsh Charit' etc. mentioned about the products of Kamarupa. Many items, such as the Chinese clothes were imported through Yunnan and Assam". Chinnamon was imported from China, Burma and Tibet to Assam and then was exported to other parts of the country and outside.

Thus, Northeast did not form an isolated corner of India in the past. Geographically, culturally and politically, the region remained a part of India from the very beginnings. We had some of the longest ruling dynasties in the Northeast India. The Ahoms ruled Assam almost for six centuries. The ruling dynasty of Manipur ruled almost uninterrupted for over 19 centuries. Mention may also be made of the Naraka dynasty (C 2200 BC to 1389 BC), the Varman dynasty (C 350 AD to 654 AD), the Miechchha dynasty (C 655 to 985 AD), the Pala dynasty (985 - 1130 AD), the Varahi Pala dynasty (1200-1400 AD), the Deva dynasty (1130-1500), the Sotia dynasty (1 194-1523), the Varahi dynasty (1190-1 390) and the Koeh dynasty (1513-1772) and their long rules. The Kachari kings ruled uninterrupted from 1385 AD to 1831 AD. The rule of the Jaintia kings (the new dynasty rule from 1500-1835 AD) and that of the Syihet kings (including Pator dynasty, 550 to 1304) was very long. The long dynastic rule in the Northeast is not without significance.

The early history of the British rule is a well documented one. There were raids by the hill-men (Nagas, Mizos and others) on the plains areas of the Brahmaputra and Surma Valleys during the early days of British rule. The raids stopped after (a) the Britishers became stronger, and (b) they established effective control over the surrounding hills. The existence of long dynasties in Brahmaputra, Surma and lmphal valleys presuppose the existence of strong empire in these valleys with effective control over the hills. Long lasting Cachari and Jaintia dynasties had the plains areas in Surma valley also under their control.

Delhi Sultans and Mughals could not conquer the Northeast, except for small areas for brief periods. The region got partially isolated during the period. This, however, did not prevent the pilgrims and the traders from travelling across the region.

The Northeast region of the country has maximum linguistic/ dialectical plurality. There are over four dozen dialects spoken in the Naga inhabited areas alone. A close examination of the lexeme reveals that linguistic plurality is not the result of lexical plurality. The permutation and combination of limited sets of lexemes have given birth to vast linguistic differences. Living together, and not isolation, is essential for the same. Living together necessitated bilingualism, pidginization and random drop-out of a set of lexemes (delexification). Such process is repeated and the repeated change should be perceived in considerable time depth.

The advent of the British in the Northeast followed the Burmese invasion of Assam and Manipur and that of Bhutan on Cooch Bihar. They entered the region in 1826 and consolidated their hold in the beginning of the last decade of the Nineteenth Century.

Northeast region of the 'country was one of the last to come under the British rule. The annexation was gradual and slow. The Brahmaputra Valley was annexed in 1826, Cachar plains in 1832, Khasi Hills in 1833, Jaintia plains in 1835, Karbi Anglong in 1838, North Cachar in 1854, Naga Hills in 1866-1904, Garo Hills in 1873- 73 and Lushai Hills in 1890-96. Upper Assam, except Sadiya and Muttuck country was allowed to be ruled by Raja Purandar Singh till its annexation in 1838. Sadiya and Muttuck countries were also annexed soon after-34. The region was the part of the Lt. Governor- ship of Bengal upto early part of 1874. The Chief Commissionership of Assam was formed on 6th February, 1874. It was merged with East Bengal in 1905 and again separated in 1912. Assam became a Governors Province in 1921.Manipur and Tripura remained princely states under British paramountcy.

Inner Line Regulation was passed in 1873. It drew artificial line between Ahe hills and plains of Assam. It was decided to remove the remote backward tract of British India from the operation of General Acts and Regulations under Scheduled District Act, 1874. The Chief Commissioner of Assam was empowered to remove any part of Assam from the operation of enactment in force there as per the Assam Frontier Tracts Regulation, 1880. As per Section 52A of Government of India Act, 191 5, as amended by Government of India Act, 1 91 9, as per the recommendations of the Montague Chelmsford Report, 1918, the Governor-General in Council was empowered to declare any territory to be a backward tract and deny application of any legislative Act in such areas. Accordingly, the Garo Hills District, the Khasi and Jaintia Hills district (except Shillong Municipality and Cantonment Area), the Mikir Hills (in Nowgong and Sibsagar districts), the North Cachar Hills (in Cachar district), the Naga Hills district, the Lushai Hills district, and the Sadiya, Salipara and Lakhirnpur Frontier Tracts were declared as backward tracts. The Indian Statutory Commission, 1930 (Simon Commission) examined the administrative position of the backward tracts and made certain recommendations which were included in the Government of India Act, 1935. The backward tracts were regrouped under excluded and partially excluded areas as per the government of India (Excluded and Partially Excluded Areas) Order, 1936:19. The Excluded Areas included (a) North East Frontier (Sadiya, Balipara and Lakhimpur) Tract, (b) the Naga Hills District, (c) the Lushai Hills District and (d) the North Cachar Hills sub-division of the Cachar District. The partially excluded areas included (a) the Garo Hills District, (b) the Mikir Hills in the Nowgong and Sibsagar districts, and (c) the British portion of the Khasi and Jaintiya Hills District. The Excluded Areas were to be administered by the Governor of Assam himself and Partially Excluded Areas were to be his special responsibility and the powers of the provincial legislature were not to extend to these areas. The Indian (Provincial Constitutional) Order, 1947, by and large, retained the provisions contained in the Government of India Act, 1935 about these areas. However, the discretionary powers of the Governor with regard to administration of the Excluded Areas was withdrawn. Special provisions were made in the Constitution of India in the Sixth Schedule for the district level autonomy by the Constituent Assembly on the recommendations of the Bordoloi Committee. Autonomous District Councils were formed in the tribal districts of Assam, except in the Naga Hills District, as per the provisions of the Sixth Schedule of the Constitution. There was further extension of the provision in the newly formed districts of Mizoram and in the Tribal areas of Tripura later on. In due course, separate Autonomous District Councils were formed in the Jowai and North Cachar Hills Districts. People, by and large, were happy with the arrangement till Small States Syndrome started showing up in the Northeastern scene.

The Northeast did not form uniform administrative unit at the time of India's independence. Three distinct systems operated at that time in the region, which were:

i. the Brahmaputra and Surma Valley districts under the control of Assam Government: ii. the Excluded and Partially Excluded areas; and iii. Princely States of Manipur and Tripura and Khasi Syiemships.

The colonial policy in the Northeast was aimed at the social, cultural, religious, administrative and political segregation of the hills and the plains. The Inner Line Regulations and the administrative segregation by declaring the hills as the backward areas and then the Excluded and Partially Excluded areas resulted into the alienation of the people. This was done keeping in view the interest of the empire. The Britishers were successful in restricting the freedom of movement within the boundary of the inner line.

A section of Britishers wanted to separate the hills of North- East region from India on the eve of Independence. Prominent among such British colonial functionaries was Robert Neil Reid, the Governor of Assam, Andrew Clow, Hutton and Mills. Sir (Prof.) Reginald Coupland wanted the creation of a Crown Colony consisting of the hills of India and Burma"'. This nefarious plan could not succeed as the independence of India came too early and the war ravaged Britain was not prepared to shoulder the financial burden of the Crown Colony. The signatories of the Simon Commission Memorandum from Naga Hills were mostly the employees of the Deputy Commissioner's office. Out of the twenty signatories, one was a Head Interpreter and two were clerks. Others included one Peshkar, three Masters, one Doctor, one Treasurer, one Potdar, one Sub-Overseer, eight Interpreters and one Chaprasill. It is alleged that the Deputy Commissioner, Kohima played active role in drafting and getting the memorandum submitted to the Simon Commission. The Naga Club was replaced with Naga Hills District Tribal Council by C.L. Pawsey, the then Deputy Commissioner of Naga Hills District in 1945. The Council converted itself into Naga National Council in 1946. It quickly received official patronage". The organisation spearheaded the secessionist movement in Nagaland soon after.

The British journalists - Donald Wise and Gavin Young - managed to slip into Naga Hills and met the underground Naga leaders in 1959-60 with the help of the British planters. They publicised the underground cause in the British Press. British and Europe based organisations provide moral support and platform to the secessionist insurgent groups. Such organisations act as the extended arms of the neo-colonialism. Many Europe based Human Rights Organisations lend their platform to lndian outfits to enable their members to attend the conferences organized by even the UN bodies. Organizations, such as the Assam Watch, UK and the Netherlands Centre for lndegenous Peoples arrange talks on the rights of self-determination and related theme.

The Britishers colonized and left the country within 90 years of the conquest of Delhi. Unfortunately, the colonization of Indian mind initiated by them continues with the same vigour. The race was a foreign concept for Indians. The Britishers imposed the myth, invented Aryan aggression theory, misinterpreted Indian history and tradition and engineered unprecedented social divide. The racist interpretation of Indian society, Euro-centrism, uncritical acceptance of the colonial theories, etc. were harmful for our country. Paradoxically, such tendencies increased after independence. These, however, are more pronounced in the Northeastern region of the country.

As stated earlier, Britishers segregated the hills and plains of the then Assam. The administrative segregation was reinforced by the isolationist theory and the racist interpretation of the society, culture and the history. Aryan-Mongolian divide, core-fringe divide, hills-plains divide ad all other sorts of divides dominate the writings of the European and Indian colonial writers. This brings crisis of perception. New myths are added to the already existing colonial myths. The myths and lies add to the complexities of the problem.

The British colonial functionaries believed in the use of religion for colonial, rather than the spiritual purpose. J. Johnstone's following statement makes the point clear:

"The late General Dalton, C.S. I., when Commissioner of Chota Nagpur, did his utmost to aid Christian Mission among the wild Kols; his argument being like mine, that they wanted a religion and that were they Christian, they would be a valuable counterpoise in time of trouble to the vast non-Christian population of Behar. In the same way it can not be doubted that a large population of Christian hill- men between Assam and Burma, would be a valuable prop to the state.

Johnstone did not hide his worry that the Nagas' would sooner or later become debased Hindus or Mussulman Hutton was equally worried to observe the Hindu influence on the Nagas. David Scott, the most important colonial functionary of the empire in the Northeast, wanted to win over the Garos through religion and agitation. In his letter to Bailey, Secretary to the Government, he wrote "if we do not interfere on behalf of the poor Garos, they will soon become Hindus or half Hindus, retaining and acquiring many of the bad parts of both their present and improved creeds.would greatly prefer two or more Moravian missionaries of the old school who alongwith religion will teach the useful arts',"

It is clear that the British administrators wanted to facilitate the spread of Christianity and to weaken the influence of Hinduism. Many Hindu castes and tribes of the Northeast were declared animists and the theory of Hindisation and Aryanisation was prominently propagated. The racist interpretation of history and society was aimed at the social divide keeping in view the policy of 'divide and rule' of the Britishers. The colonial thinking continues to influence our people in post-independence period also.

One can not forget the commendable role played by the Baptist Church of Nagaland and the Churches of Mizoram in bringing peace to the strife-torn states. However, there were many Church leaders elsewhere in the North East whose perception differed. Eruption of TNV movement in Tripura made Rev. Dr. Rieweh Cunville happy. It was a "nationalist uprising" according to him and he hoped that this political upheaval would make the tribals more receptive to the Gospel. Cunville, an American Church leader and a director of the Bible Society of India, hailed tribal assertion for right and freedom like those of Mizoram, Nagaland and Meghalaya and observed that if large numbers are to come to Christ via these peoples movement, the Tripura Baptist Christian Union (TBCU) would require aid from other Churches and Missions. The Union continues to describe Hinduism as a threat to the tribal identity49 . Hokishe Sema has written about his serious reservations about the role of Rev. Scott as a member of the Nagaland Peace Missions".

European writers ignored the fact that the terms, such as the 'Arya','Asura','Danav', and'Dasyu' had behavioural connotations. 'Miechchha' denoted linguistic category and'Das' was a functional one. European scholars gave them racial meaning. These terms were taken from the Indian tradition and therefore the meanings given should have conformed to the same. Vritra was an Asura and yet a vedic rishi. lndra murdered him and suffered the sin of killing a Brahmin. Ravana was a Rakshasa and he was also a Brahmin. Rama performed Ashswamedh Yajna to get rid of the sin of killing Brahmin (Brahma-Hatya) as he killed Ravana and other Rakshasas. Ravana graduated in the vedic studies, and he used to perform Agnihotra daily (a vedic fire worship)'. There were Brahmans born in rakshasa families. Brahmanas of theYajurveda School, born among the Rakshasas, performed the cremation rights of Ravana according to the vedic rights. Bali and Kartavirya Arjunas" were made his ritual brothers by Ravana in front of the fire (a vedic ritual). lndra killed his own sinful kinsfol (Danavas). Devas and Danavas were brothers but they had eternal enmity. Danavas used to perform vedic rituals','. A Brahmin or a king used to become Rakshas, or Chandal' due to his sinful acts.

It seems that 'monkey' was the totem of the Kings and subjects of Kishkindha. Bali, the king of Kishkindha used to recite Vedic mantras, and perform'Sandhya'. The racist scholars forget that lndra not only killed Asuras, but also the Brahmanas well-versed in Vedic lore (88 thousand Shalavlik Brahmanas) when they sided with the Asuras in their conflict with the Devas.

The term 'Arya' meant,' a senior person of noble and righteous conduct', and not a person belonging to any specific race or that of a particular language group. A person of questionable conduct was invariably called 'Anarya'. Ulupi was addressed as 'Arya Ulupi', whereas Jayadratha", as well as Duryodhana and his party' as lanarya'. The learned and the informed ones were often called Aryas. Thus, the term does not have racial connotation.

The epic Mahabharat mentions about the Brahrnanas of diverse nature, customs and rites". It also mentions about the large gathering of Kshatriyas expert in the use of arms and ammunitions, with diverse dresses and ornaments and different physical appearances.

Kiratas and Shakas were considered to be Kshatriyas of good birth, according to Mahabharat . These communities were included among the Kshatriyas killed by Parashurama." Thus,. the claim of Kshatriya status of the Kiratas (indo-Mongoloid) is con- firmed by the Indian tradition. The Parashurama legend mentioned above is current among the Rajbanshis and Poliyas. Like many other communities of the eastern India, these two communities also claim to be Kshatriyas.

Like race, colour of the skin is another European obsession. They have invariably misinterpreted Indian tradition due to the obsession of colour. The Aryan Gods and early Rishis should have been white ecomplexioned and Shiva, the so called Dravidian God, black according to European colonial myth. On the contrary, the colour of so called Aryan God lndra was not white but greenish brown.:" The colour of Vishnu was dark or dark blue, and that of Rama was dark. The colour of Krishna was compared to that of linseed flowering and with the colour of the dark Tarnal tree." The color of Angiras Rishis of the Rigveda was black, and they were described as being born of coal."' Kanva Rishi was black. Rishi Vyasa was black and very ugly. Both Krishna Rishi' and Krishnasura of the Rigveda were black. Drona, Arjuna , Kunti' and King Nalallg, all of Mahabharata fame, were black complexioned. Rigveda describes the birth of a brown coloured 'pious hero'.' The colour of the person (Yajna-purusha) appearing from the sacrificial fires of Dakshagl and Dasaratha was black. There is a prescription in an Upanishada for the births of' white complexioned son who will study only one Veda', 'tawny or reddish-brown son who will study two Vedas' and 'black/dark coloured son with reddish eyes who will study three Vedas' The colour of Shiva (Rudra), contrary to the European theory is described in the Rigveda to be white.' Thus, the European obsession of colour is not supported by the Indian tradition.

The term' mlechchha' is derived from Sanskrit root 'mlich'(to speak indistinctly). The person speaking meaninglessly / indistinctly was labeled as Mlechchha. People of Sindhu region, for the same reason, were called Melchchha although they spoke a language derived from the, Sanskrit. Manu debars one from reading Vedas indistinctly and without proper pronunciation of vowels and consonants. Indistinct pronunciation was considered to be a sin. The residents of Madra, Sindhu, auvira Aratta and Saurashtra,eg. covering the area from Gujarat to Satluj in Punjab and Kabul, and that of many other areas were declared Mlechchhas on linguistic ground. Bhaskar Verman was a Brahman according to Yuan Chwang and a Mlechchha Brahman according to Vasu."

The European scholars have suggested that 'Dasyu' and 'Dasa', both words are derived from the root 'damsh', 'to shine'. Denasalization, as well as derivation of both words from the same root seems improbable. Dasyu is a word with continuity of meaning from the remote past. Dasyus arrived at the scene when ever there was anarchy. They were robbers and not liked for their deviant behavious. They were variously described as cruel-hearted, path-preventers and robbers,"" greedy,"" and inflictors of pain on living beings." lndra defeated them several times. It was the duty of a king to control and punish dasyus. Dasyus did not belong to any particular race.

The colonials have also given wrong meaning to the term 'Dasa' and used it for the misinterpretation of the history and tradition of the Indian people. The term denoted paid employees, servants and slaves'06 and did not indicate racial differences.

As stated earlier the Britishers built up edifice of colonial history on many pillars and one of them was race. Narakasurs dynasty ruled Pragjyotish for generations. Narkasur' and his descendants, Bhagadatta and Vajradattall will find copious mention in the Puranas, Mahabharat and Tantras. Subahu, born in the 18th generation of the dynasty became an ascetic and went to the Himalayas. Thus he followed the ancient tradition of the Indian kings. According to Gait, the dynasty belonged to non-Aryans race, because Naraka, the founder of the dynasty used the appellation 'Asura' Elsewhere, similar inferences are drawn on the basis of the appellation of' Danav"" and' Mlechchha'. Obviously Gait has drawn wrong conclusions as the terms' Aryans', 'Asura', 'Danava' and 'Mlechchha' do not have racial connotations.

The colonial scholars often mixed up race and religion to create further confusion. Aryanization and Hinduization were al- most the synonymous terms. Melchchha and non-Hindus ware also synonyms terms."' The Hindu dynasties of Northeast India- Cachari, Koeh and Manipur dynasties - were declared dynasties of aboriginal origin, and therefore converts to the Hinduism. The basic fact that aborigine could also be Hindus and Kshatriyas, as mentioned earlier, was ignored by the colonial scholars. Cachari King, Vikramadityapha ruled in Dhansiri valley during 141 0 to 1469. He established a city called Lakshmindrapur (now the town of Dimapur in Nagaland) after installing the stone image of Vishnu (Lakshmindra; the lord of lakshmi, the Goddess of wealth).' Bhubaneshwar Vachaspati prepared a manuscript of Naradi Puran during the reign of Cachari king Suradarpa Narayan (1707-1732) on the command of the mother of the king, Chandra Prabha, the widow of the king Tamaradhwaj Narayan. A conch shell with ten awataras of Vishnu (Shri Krishna) carved on it with the inscription that the same was carved during the reign of Bir Darpa in 1671, was discovered, according to Gait."' A silver coin discovered in the neighbourhood of Maibong in the North Cachar Hills district of Assam "bears a date equivalent to 1583 AD and was issued by Yaso Narayan Deva, a worshipper of Hara Gauri Shiva and Durga .........Krishna Chandra (1780-1813) and Govinda Chandra (1813-1832) were the last kings of the dynasty. Their forefathers already claimed origin from Bhima and took the title of 'Lord/King of Hidimba"" and the Kacharis of Darrang used to call them- selves Bhim-ni-fsa or children of Bhim." Obviously, the fore fathers of Krishna Chandra and Govinda Chandra were Hindus and the question of their conversion into Hinduism is a colonial lie. The two brothers entered into the body of the copper effigy of a cow and then came out of the same. It was a misfortune aversion devise. It may be mentioned that no Hindu scripture pre- scribes this ritual of conversion.

Garib Newaj favoured Ramanandi Vaishnavism (worship of Rama) under the influence of Shantidas as against already existing Chaitanya's school of Vaishnavism. Khyamba (1467-1507), born 12 generations before Garib Newaj (1709-1748') built the temple of Vishnu-which still exists at Bishnupur. Khongtekeha (765-784) was the devotee of Shiva and Devi, and regarded Hari (Vishnu) as the Supreme God. Even the father of Garib Newaj was a Vaishnava. Two Kali temples were built during his reign. Thus Hinduism not only existed during the reign of his predecessors, but was also free from Vaishnava-Shaiva-Shakta divide. It worked under over-all framework of continuum. It is obvious that the colonial assertion of the conversion of the said king into Hinduism is baseless. The colonials were conscious of their weakness, and, therefore, used such phrases initially, as "the formal act of conversion and the "public profession of Brahminism It is pertinent to mention here that colonial writers often used 'Hinduism' and 'Brahminism' as synonymous terms by ignoring the fact that more than 50% of Vedic Rishis were not Brahmans. Again, such acts of formalisation and public profession is unknown in the history and tradition of India and the two Kachari Kings could never be exceptions.

Contrary to the factual evidence, the colonial writers widely applied Hinduisation theory. 'Degraded Brahmins' were held responsible for Hinduisation and inventing genealogy and awarding Kshatriya status to the Manipuris' ' Koch, Rajbanshi" Kacharis and others; forgetting the fact that Hindu scriptures and epic Mahabharat mention that Kiratas were Kshatriyas of good birth. The attitude and actions of the Britishers towards average Indians was deplorable, and the same was condemned even by per- sons like Max Muller. However, they never missed any opportunity to condemn the Brahmins. Duboi has used choicest abuses for them. The reasons for the Britishers dislike for the Brahmanas is not difficult to identify. The so called 'Brahminic prejudice' was held to be the invincible barrier in the way of conversion in India. The Brahmins, along with the Rajputs were the main participants of 1857 mutiny and a committee set up to enquire into the causes of the rebellion also revealed the fact and as a result of the post- mutiny steps taken by the British government the Brahmans' number in the army was highly reduced. Many leaders of the mutiny such as Mangal Pandey, Tantia Tope and Nana Saheb, were Brahmans. Brahmans were the main players of the early terrorist game in Maharashtra.

Yuan Chuang found hundreds of Deva temples in Assam, when he visited that part of the country. Different communities of Assam worship the same pan-Indian Gods and Goddesses"' and form part of the continuum. The colonial writers have tried to project multi-level break of religious, cultural and political continuum.

I have discussed about the colonial bias in the historiography of the Northeastern region. The strong impact of isolationist ideas on the region's history have already been discussed. There is a strong tendency towards overlooking the ancient history and the pan-Indian links. Euro/Middle-East-centrism is so pronounced that the reference of 'Asura' tempts the writers to remember Assyria. Any deliberation on divine kingship brings a reference to Mesopotamia. It is safely forgotten that sources nearer home, the Hindu scriptures are full of the references of the divinity of the kings. The king is also considered to be Lord Vishnu. The famous and grand temple of Angakor Wat is also dedicated to the king. Racist interpretation of the history and society continues to be a dominant theme in the Northeast. Aryanisation and Hinduisation theories continue to be widely applied. The views of the Colonial racists and the Marxists converge. Loose expression like 'The greatest victims of this type of Aryan invasion were the Koehes go unquestioned.

The obsession of the Northeastern writers with race, Hinduisation, Aryanisation, and isolation; and loose and massive application of the same, in their writings was also responsible for generating a sense of alienation. The very people who were instrumental in the development of their tradition and religion were told that they were the converted people. The trend got boost up when the expressions of separate identity was made a paying venture after the creation of Nagaland. It took many forms. A kind of revivalism was attempted at certain places. Some claimed that the Tai Ahoms are neither Hindu nor Assamese. A militant Revivalist Nativism was attempted in Manipur. There were not many takers and in Manipur anti-Hindu revivalist acts met resistance from the local people. It may not be out of place to mention here that Shans, who were Hindus, migrated from Burma to Manipur in the 14th century, and the image of Vishnu, installed in the Vishnu temple by king Khyamba was given by their king (the king of Pong in Burma).TheThai kings took the epithet of Ravna and named their capital Ayodhya' after coming to present location of Thailand from Southern China. Their entire religious activities controlled by a few thousand Brahmin families, as mentioned in Encyclopaedia Britannica, indicates towards Hindu-Buddhism continuum among the Thais. The Shans and Thais are the cousins of Ahoms, and the above facts indicates towards the need of change of the perception among the revivalists.

Apart from the factors mentioned above, some assumed notions are also at work in Northeast India. The people also have assumed as well as real grievances. The view of N. Bishweswar, the Meitei insurgent leader, quoted below indicates the same :

"The Meitei, who joined the Indian Union on their own initiative, as they are devoted Hindus, has become a victim of India. The Meiteis are proud that they are more real Hindus and theirs is one of the more sacred origin of Hindu or Hinduism. If there suffering is the price of that, how can Hinduism survive in Manipur? In the eye of India, the Meiteis are a people from an undiscovered part of India untouchable politically and economically. If this is the price of the Meiteis joining India and of their excessive loyalty to the Indian leaders, how long will they remain within the Indian Union? Even in their own homeland-Manipur, the Meiteis have already been reduced to second class citizens. How can a Meitei in such circumstances join the national mainstream of India? How far the Meiteis are legitimate Indians in the context of equality, freedom and liberty? Why the Meiteis be treated as colonial people? Why the Meiteis be called people of flat noses and half open eyes who have no claim to survive? ... If Meiteis were not converted into Hinduism, instead adopted Christianity, just as the Naga, Mizo, or preferred to remain with their ancient past following and preserving rich heritage of their ancestors without any foreign religion and caste, certainly they would not have remained like a defeated people on the verge of extinction. Today the Meiteis are facing a threat to their very existence. They have no motherland-neither Manipur nor India. Perhaps they have no other alternative but to build up a new home outside India's control. Should the Meiteis bid farewell to India and its Hinduism or should Indian leaders review and correct their mistakes."'

Such opinions are in wide circulation in Manipur. and else- where and need answers and remedial actions if based on real grievances. There is also the need of academic activism to clear much of the doubts and haziness created in the region.

The statement quoted above shows the misplaced anger, much of which is the result of the misgivings and misperceptions. A large number of our people have such misgivings and misperceptions and they are sulking. This helps in aggravating the sense of alienation. and in many cases the outward expression of the sense of alienation is the violence in the society. Steps should be taken to resolve the crisis of perception. Genuine grievances of the people need immediate remedial action.