Saturday, November 30, 2013

Where does Assam lead demographically?                                                               
                    Hira Charan Narjinari

The greatest and the most spectacular single event that took place in the history of Assam during the first half of the twentieth century was the immigration of enormous number of peasants from Bengal. Out of these immigrants an overwhelming majority of more than 90% of the land-hungry immigrants consisted of Muslims alone. And the second half of that century was wrought with infiltration of illegal East Pakistanis/Bangladeshis into Assam.  Assam and Bengal were two separate provinces with distinct languages, cultures and religions. Naturally, inflow of Bengali-speaking Muslims into Assam meant invasion by people of different ethnic community. Therefore, while writing the 1931 Census Report C.S. Mullan had employed military term like ‘army corps’ to describe the Bengali Muslim immigration into Assam.  How the Bengali people of Bengal/Eastern Bengal province invaded Assam and settled there permanently against the wishes of the indigenous Assamese people has been brilliantly described by early Superintendents of Censuses.

Although the British annexed Assam in 1826, en masse movement of Bengalis from Bengal/East Bengal to Assam took almost a century from that time. It was only during 1901-1911 that a great change in the demography of Assam was noticed when the men of Mymensingh began to advance to Assam, “driven apparently by pressure on the soil at home.” They were joined by people of other Eastern Bengal districts, in less numbers. There had been extraordinary increases of migrants to the Char lands of Goalpara from the Bengal Districts of Mymensingh, Pabna, Bogra and Rangpur, and only few cultivators from Eastern Bengal went beyond Goalpara, and the colonists formed an appreciable element of population in all the four lower and central districts. Persons censused in the other districts of the Brahmaputra Valley were mostly clerks, traders and professional men who numbered only a few thousands.

During the whole of twentieth century the activities of Eastern Bengal peasants concentrated chiefly in the Brahmaputra valley which consisted of the districts of Goalpara, Kamrup, Nowgong, Darrang, Sibsagar and Lakhimpur. The opening of the Assam-Bengal Railway and the extension of the Eastern Bengal State Railway to Guwahati had not only greatly improved communications but had facilitated an influx of settlers to the Brahmaputra Valley from North and East Bengal. Almost every train and steamer used to bring parties of Bengali Muslim settlers and it was believed that their march would extend further up the valley and away from the river before long. It was also believed that once the good news spread in the more distant districts like Dacca and Rajshahi divisions, colonists from those divisions would begin to come to Assam.[1] Hutton remarks that “Since then these settlers have not refrained from breeding and their progeny born in Assam was not distinguishable in the Census returns, except in so far as it was predominantly Muslim which the indigenous population was not.”[2]  R.B. Vaghaiwalla as Deputy Commissioner of Goalpara during the 1940s personally saw hundreds of Muslim immigrant persons coming by trains to Goalpara. He had the same experience as Deputy Commissioner of Cachar during 1948-49 when he saw hundreds of Muslim immigrants regularly travelling by the Hill Section Railway from Badarpur to Lumding in order to go to the Brahmaputra Valley for settlement.[3]

As Goalpara was the nearest district to the Bengal frontier, settlers from East Bengal were initially most active in that district. In 1881-1891 the population of Goalpara increased by 1.4% and in 1891-1901 by 2% only but in 1901-1911 the increase shot up by 30%. E.A. Gait commented in the 1911 Census of India that the large increase of 30% was due mainly to “the extensive immigration of Muhammadans along the course of the Brahmaputra from Mymensingh, Rangpur and Pabna.”  In 1941 the total Muslim population of the district was 468924 forming 46.23% of the total population of Goalpara.

Kamrup felt the impact of immigration only in 1931 when the decadal variation rate rose suddenly from 14.20% to 27.93%. Throughout the 1921-1931 the Bengal Muslim settlers continued to immigrate into Barpeta. They filled up all the chars and riverain tracts and gradually occupied all available waste lands. There was an unprecedented increase of 69% in the population of Barpeta in 1931 which is stated to have been solely due to Eastern Bengal immigrants, chiefly from Mymensingh.[4] In the 1941 Census the population of Kamrup was 1264200 which was an increase of 287454 over 1931 population of 976746. In 1951 the population of Kamrup increased by 226192. The density of population in Kamrup had doubled in the 30 years from 198 per square mile in 1921 to 387 per square mile in 1951. In 1951-1961 the population increase of Kamrup was 38.39%.

In the Darrang district the impact of immigration was felt first in 1921, when decennial variation suddenly shot up from 11.89% to 26.67%. The increases in 1931, 1941, 1951, 1961 and 1971 were 22.68%, 26.07%, 24.25%, 39.64% and 34.62% respectively. In 1941 the total Muslim population in the district was 120995.

In Nowgong during 1911-1921 the percentage increase was being 31.9 per cent. But during 1921-1931 there was a largest percentage increase of 41.3 percent in Nowgong. During the decade immigration continued unabated and there were 56,000 more persons in Nowgong district who were born in Mymensingh. The greatest increase of population had been in mauzas Bokoni (295 per cent.), Lahorghat (163 per cent.), Laokhowa (140.5 per cent.), Dhing (126 per cent.), Namati (108 per cent.) and Juria (101 per cent.). It has been stated in the Report that those enormous increases were due almost entirely to the influx of new settlers – mainly from Mymensingh. In 1941 the total population of Muslim in the district was 250113.

Sibsagar showed in 1901 an increase of 117,310 persons or 24.4% which was  due in equal proportion to immigration and natural increase. Since 1872 Sibsagar added 280,000 to its population or 88%.[5] Of the three subdivisions of Golaghat, Sibsagar and Jorhat in 1931 the highest rate of increase had been recorded by Golaghat with 18.4 per cent. Sibsagar subdivision showed an increase of 14.4%, as against 20.5% in 1911-1921, and Jorhat, the Sadar subdivision only 8.5% as against 18.2% in 1911-1921. In 1941 the total Muslim population was 51769.

The population of Lakhimpur district was 117343 persons or 46.1% in 1901 – 16% from natural growth and 30% from immigration. The growth of Lakhimpur district had been continuous and the population had trebled since 1872.[6]  The total population of the district in 1941 was 954960 which had increased to 1126294 or 17.94% in 1951. In 1941 the total population of Muslim was 44579.

G.T. Lloyd in 1921 estimated that including children born after their arrival in Assam the total number of settlers was at least 300,000 in that year. Mullan placed their number in 1931 to be over half a million. The number of new immigrants from Mymensingh alone had been 140,000 and the old settlers were undoubtedly increasing and multiplying. It was pointed out in the Census Report for 1921 that the colonists had settled by families and not singly. This has been confirmed by the fact that out of the 338,000 persons born in Mymensingh and censused in Assam over 152,000 were women.

During the decade 1921-1931 the principal districts that were affected by Muslim invasion were Nagaon, Kamrup and Darrang where Muslims increased by 152%, 115% and 85% respectively.[7]  It was noticed in 1931 that Sibsagar and Lakhimpur were still untouched. Mullan reports: “Sibsagar and Lakhimpur are now the only districts in the Assam Valley which have remained practically untouched by the invading army of Muslim immigrants. One-fifth of the entire population of the Assam Valley is now Muslim.”[8]

By 1931, the whole complexion of the population of Assam was being altered by the permanent immigrants from Mymensingh in Bengal. This had for years been an obvious and disturbing change to all native residents in the Assam Valley.[9] It will be best to quote C.S. Mullan, the Census Superintendent for Assam himself.  

“Probably the most important event in the province during the last twenty five years – an event, moreover, which seems likely to alter permanently the whole future of Assam and to destroy more surely than did the Burmese invaders of 1820 the whole structure of Assamese culture and civilization – has been the invasion of a vast horde of land-hungry Bengali immigrants, mostly Muslims, from the districts of Eastern Bengal and in particular from Mymensingh. This invasion began sometime before 1911, and the census report of that year is the first report which makes mention of the advancing host. But, as we now know, the Bengali immigrants censused for the first time on their char lands of Goalpara in 1911 were merely the advance guard – or rather the scouts – of a huge army following closely all their heels. By 1921 the first army corps had passed into Assam and had practically conquered the district of Goalpara”[10] 

As to the change at the 1931 Census, C.S. Mullan, the Census Superintendent may again be quoted:-

“I have already remarked that by 1921 the first army corps of the invaders had conquered Goalpara. The second army corps which followed them in the years 1921-1931 has consolidated their position in that district and has also completed conquest of Nowgong. The Barpeta subdivision of Kamrup has also fallen to their attack and Darrang is being invaded. Sibsagar has so far escaped completely but the few thousand Mymensinghias in North Lakhimpur are an outpost which may, during the next decade, prove to be a valuable basis of major operations. Wheresoever the caracase, there will the vultures be gathered together – Where there is waste land thither flock the Mymensinghias. In fact the way in which they have seized upon the vacant areas in the Assam Valley seems almost uncanny. Without fuss, without tumult, without undue trouble to the district revenue staffs, a population which must amount to over half a million has transplanted itself from Bengal to the Assam Valley during the last twenty-five years. It looks like a marvel of administrative organization on the part of Government but it is nothing of the sort; the only thing I can compare it to is the mass movement of a large body of ants. It is sad but by no means improbable that in another thirty years Sibsagar district will be the only part of Assam in which an Assamese will find himself at home.”[11]

The trend continued even after the partition of India in 1947. Partition however did not “assuage the land hunger in East Pakistan.”  The border failed to create territories that acted as self-enclosed containers of human resources because it was imposed on a region with an expansionary population. People crisscrossed the border in their thousands, and most of these population movements were not authorized by the new states.[12] A booklet was produced by the Directorate of Advertising and Visual Publicity, Ministry of Information and Broadcasting for the Ministry of External Affairs, Government of India in August 1963 on the subject of ‘Influx.’ In this booklet continued influx of large number of Muslims from Pakistan (East Pakistan, now Bangladesh) even after partition, has been acknowledged by the Central Government. The following extract confirms this:

“The new international boundary was not physically marked on the ground, was largely unguarded and virtually unpatrolled. Interplay of economic forces continued despite Partition. Large numbers of Muslims from East Pakistan continued to move across the open frontier into Assam, Tripura and West Bengal – for land, work, and opportunity. Their passage was illegal but economic forces proved more potent than passport and visa regulations.”[13]

In 1951, persons born in Pakistan and enumerated in Assam reached the enormous total of 833 thousand persons, out of whom excepting a bare 37 thousand enumerated in the Assam Hills Division, the vast majority of 796 thousand was enumerated in the Brahmaputra Valley alone. These huge numbers included the large number of refugees born in Pakistan who had migrated to Assam during the partition. The number of refugees in Assam in 1951 was 274 thousand, out of whom, all excepting 14 thousand were in the Assam Plains. [14]  These figures are a striking testimony to the vast number of East Bengal settlers in Assam. Even the setting up of two Dominions of India and Pakistan did not deter these settlers from continuing to pour into Assam.

The East Bengal immigrants were not natives of Assam yet enormous amount of land had to be settled with them throughout the Brahmaputra Valley. Till 1930 no exact amount of land settled with East Bengal immigrants is available. But from 1930 to 1950 we possess Reports of the Land Revenue Administration which reveal startling truth about land settled with East Bengal immigrants other than ex-tea garden labourers. During the years 1930-40 land settled with East Bengal immigrants in the Brahmaputra Valley alone was 5967 thousand acres, 58 thousand acres in Sadiya and Balipara and 137 thousand acres in Cachar. During the decade 1940-50 land settled with East Bengal immigrants was even larger in area viz. 8926 thousand acres, out of which 8702 thousand acres were settled in the Brahmaputra Valley alone and 165 thousand acres in Cachar and 59 thousand acres in Sadiya and Balipara. Thus during 20 years from 1930 to 1950, apart from Sadiya and Balipara and Cachar, 14669 thousand acres of land in the Brahmaputra Valley alone were settled with East Bengal immigrants. Can you believe the immensity of the figure? It is almost unbelievable. How many states/provinces in India during those decades siphoned off such huge amount of their lands and settled with immigrants? 

It may be noted that at a time when Muslims in Assam even did not constitute majority in no districts, they produced crimes of violence, disregarded government officials, openly announced that they were the kings and the law was not made for them.[15] Rai Bahadur P.G. Mukherji, the then Commissioner of Nowgong reports in 1931 thus:  “Their hunger for land was so great that, in their eagerness to grasp as much as they could cultivate they not infrequently encroached on Government reserves and on lands belonging to the local people from which they could be evicted only with great difficulty. In the beginning they had their own way and there was frequent friction with the indigenous population who did not like their dealings as neighbours.”[16]

But now they are stronger in number and it will be natural that they would become more aggressive in their activities. Some intellectuals have criticized C.S. Mullan’s prophecy that “in another thirty years Sibsagar district will be the only part of Assam in which an Assamese will find himself at home” is rather exaggerated and the prophecy is not likely to be fulfilled.[17] Just consider the total Muslim population of Sibsagar in 1872. They were in that year only 12619 persons but in 2001 they had increased to 85761. Mullan’s “thirty years” might be taken figuratively, but what he meant by saying this, I presume, is that a day will come when Assam will become a Muslim majority State. The 2001 Census Report on the total Muslim population in Assam is pointing towards the fulfillment of the prophecy though in a slow pace but the trend tells us that the destiny of Assam as a secular State is under great threat.

According to Mr. Pakyntein, the Superintendent of Census operation, Assam, 1961, at least 5,20,000 people migrated into Assam during 1951-61. The number of Muslim immigrants into Assam from East Pakistan (now Bangladesh) during this period had been worked out to be about 220,000. So the remaining 300,000 must be Hindu displaced persons and other non-Muslim persons who came to Assam from other parts of India.[18]

In 1965, Intelligence Bureau, Ministry of Home Affairs, drafted a scheme for the prevention of Infiltration from Pakistan into Assam states under sub-title “The Problem of Illegal Immigration” in which it has been remarked thus:

“The number of illegal immigrants into Assam from Pakistan over the course of the last 12 years has been very conservatively estimated at about 250 thousand. Local unofficial estimates, however, put this figure even higher. The fact that such a large number of immigrants succeeded in illegally crossing the frontier and settling down unnoticed would prove that the measures so far taken have not been effective. Indeed very large pockets in Nowgong, Darrang, Goalpara, North Lakhimpur districts are inhabited almost entirely by Muslims, a very large proportion of whom are new immigrants.”[19] 

Nilim Dutta, Executive Director of the Strategic Research and Analysis Organisation, Guwahati, states that “the high population growth rate in Assam has declined since 1971 and has remained lower than that of India, categorically refuting assumptions of continuing illegal immigration from Bangladesh”.[20] How would Sri Dutta explain out the exclusion of about 9-10 million population of Bangladesh in 1991 from the computation? Sarifa Begum, a Bangladeshi demographer has rightly attributed the ‘missing millions’ to unregistered ‘out-migration’.[21] A study by Irvine Kamal Sadiq also reveals that the highest percentage growth rate of population of Assam occurred during 1971-1991 which registered a growth of 53.56 percent.[22] This shows that Sri Dutta’s claim that high population growth rate in Assam has declined since 1971 is not tenable.

That the Muslim population has been going on increasing decade after decade is conclusively confirmed by the Censuses since 1872. The 2001 Census reveals startling truth about this. In 2001 out of 23 districts in Assam at least 14 districts are found Muslim majority districts. Out of 14 districts 6 districts viz. Dhubri (74.29%) Barpeta (59.37%), Hailakandi (57.63%), Goalpara (53.71%),Karimganj(52.30%) and Nagaon(50.99%) Muslims form absolute majority; 4 districts viz. Marigaon (47.59%), Bongaigaon (38.52%), Cachar (36.13%), and Darrang (35.54%) are closely following and 5 districts viz. Kamrup (24.79%) Nalbari (22.10%), Kokrajhar (20.36%) Lakhimpur (16.14%)and Sonitpur (15.94%), are slowly but steadily advancing.

The first formal Census of 1872 shows that immigrant Bengali Muslims in the Brahmaputra Valley numbered only 176108 or 4.24% but now they are the malik of a few districts in the Valley.  Will critics give rational explanations as to how from an insignificant number of population in Assam, Muslim population has grown so spectacularly? Shall we disagree with the Census figures of the Muslim population in Assam enumerated in 2001?  What does the 2001Census indicate about the Muslim population compared to the 1872 Census? In 1872 the total Muslim population in Assam, excluding Sylhet and including Cachar, was 250469 persons only and in 1941 they increased to 3442479 persons but in 2001 they had shot to 8240661 persons. How did it happen? Is this solely due to natural growth?  Is migration/illegal immigration a myth or a reality?

The latest 2011 Census of India shows that the population of Assam has increased by 4513744 or 16.93% and the total population now stands at 31169272. Kamrup (Metro) has registered the highest density of population of 2010 persons per square kilometer followed by Dhubri (1171 persons per sq.km.). Once the religion-wise population of Assam as per the 2011 Census is published then it will be ascertained as to whether there was in-migration or not. In 2005 D.N. Bezboruah, Editor, The Sentinel, lamented saying, “The biggest problem facing Assam and the north-eastern States of India today is large-scale illegal migration from Bangladesh. The problem is very serious today because at the present rate of influx, there is the very real danger of Assam being annexed to Bangladesh in just a couple of decades from now, and the irony of the situation is that the problem has stemmed from greed on both sides – greed for cultivable land on one side and greed for votes on the other. And now there is the remarkable poetic justice of the greed for power having infected the providers of easy illegal votes as well.”[23]  

The question of illegal Bangladeshi infiltration into Assam is still a matter to be sorted out once for all. How and when this issue will be finally settled rests with the seriousness, interest and intention of the State and Central governments.  




[1] G.T. Lloyd, Census of India, 1921, Vol. III, Assam, Part-I, Report, p. 42.
[2] Census of India, 1931, Vol. I, India, Part I – Report, p. 65.
[3] R.B. Vagjaiwall, Census of India, 1951, Volume XII Assam, Manipur and Tripura, Part 1-A Report, p.75.
[4] C.S. Mullan, Census of India, 1931, Assam, Volume III p.14
[5] H.H. Risley & E.A. Gait, Census of India, Volume I India Part I Report, p.46.
[6] H.H. Risley & E.A Gait, Census of India, 1901, Volume I India Part I Report, p. 46.
[7] C.S. Mullan, Census of India, 1931, Assam Vol.III Part I Report, p.193.
[8] C.S. Mullan, Ibid.
[9] J.H. Hutton, Census of India, 1931, Volume I, India, Part I, Report, p.65
[10] C.S. Mullan, Census of India, 1931, Vol. III, Part I Report, pp. 49-50.
[11] C.S. Mullan, Census of India, 1931, Volume III Assam Part I Report  p.52
[12] Willem Van Schendel, The Bengal Borderland Beyond State and Nation in South Asia, 2005, p.210.
[13] DAVP, Ministry if I&B, for Min. of External Affairs, GOI, August 1963, quoted by Sekhar Gupta in Assam: A Valley Divided, Appendix 3 p.191.
[14] R.B. Vaghaiwalla, Census of India 1951 Vol. XII, Assam, Manipur and Tripura, Part I-A Report, p. 74
[15] Harendra Nath Barua, Reflections on Assam Cum Pakistan, 1944, pp.65-66.
[16] C.S. Mullan, Census of India, 1931, Volume III, Assam, Part I, Report, p.52.
[17] H.K. Barpujari, North-East India Problems, Policies & Prospects, 1998, p.37.
[18] Census of India, 1961, Vol-III, Assam, Part I-A, General Report, p.72.
[19] Annexure 4 in Shekhar Gupta’s Assam a Valley Divided, 1984, p.201-202. 
[20] Nilim Dutta, The Myth of the Bangladeshi and Violence in Assam, available at http://kafila.org/2012/08/16/the-myth-of-the-bangladeshi-and-violence-in-assam-nilim-dutta/
[21] Bibhuti Bhusan Nandy, Space Invaders, The Hindustan Times, New Delhi, February 14, 2003.
[22] Irvine Kamal Sadiq, Paper Citizens: How Illegal Immigrants Acquire Citizenship in Developing Countries, 2009, p.42.
[23] The Sentinel, January 02, 2005.
The Vanity of Wisdom
                              Hira Charan Narjinari
The learned professor of History Dr. Ramesh Chandra Kalita in his article entitled “Asamar Bukat Barna-Baisammyabadi Rajyar Janma Jantrana” that appeared in the Assamese daily Dainik Agradoot in two instalments on 20 and 22 November 2013 is an interesting reading. However, the very heading of Dr. Kalita’s article is fallacious. Blinded with either pride or ignorance Dr. Kalita has used the term Varna-Vaisyamma to define the Bodos which is not at all applicable to them. Because the Bodo Race does not believe in Varna-Jati system and hence calling the Bodos as Barna-baisyamabadi is totally wide of the mark.   
Through his article Dr. Kalita has tried to show his knowledge. But in his haughtiness he lost his own intellect and presented himself as a man of laughing-stock in the eyes of erudite scholars. By spilling of abomination on the Bodo intellectuals he has not only shown himself as bigoted but has reviled the entire Bodo community by furnishing incoherent information on the history of the Bodo people.
It would be better if we take up at seriatim to comment on his deliberation on the subject. Let us first begin with Para 1 of his article. In this Para Dr. Kalita states that river and place names in Upper Assam testifies the existence of historic Kachari kingdom during the medieval period. However, according to him there is no trace of Bodo elements in the river names of Lower Assam. We agree that all the river names may not be of Bodo origin but some rivers in Lower Assam and North Bengal are of Bodo origin. For example, Pagladi, Kaldia, here di is a Bodo element. Ai is not an Aryan name. Tista, Torsa, Mujnai etc., are of Bodo origin. Jaldhaka is sanskritisation of Bodo name Dichu. Many place names in Jalpaiguri district were given by the Bodos. These place names are still extant. Anyway, he states that he cannot accept the view that in the past there was a great Bodo kingdom in the region because he does not find any traces of Bodo elements in river names. How could Dr. Kalita find a great Bodo kingdom unless he undertakes reconstruction of the history of Assam? He must first study and understand what the term Bodo signifies then only he would be able to develop an idea about the Bodo people. 
In Para 2, Dr. Kalita has strongly criticised Sir Edward Albert Gait accusing him for his being prejudiced in writing his A History of Assam. Dr. Kalita believes that with the exception of a few Marxist historians, all other historians have distorted the history of India. According to him the book contains elements for political divisiveness and the book was written for colonial interest only. He states that Gait’s history book has influenced the Bodo intellectuals to dip themselves into the sea of imagination for Bodoland State. As a teacher of history Dr. Kalita is aware of what history means and what the function of an historian is. Even a Marxist historian E.H. Carr has impartially defined history thus: “History consists of a corpus of ascertained facts. The facts are available to the historian in documents, inscriptions and so on, like fish on the fishmonger’s slab. The historian collects them, takes them home, and cooks and serves them in whatever style appeals to him.” [E.H. Carr, What is History? Second Edition, 1987, p.9].
In the same way Gait had collected facts or materials from different sources and presented his finished work in the form of a book which has been adjudged as the magnum opus. He states that Gait had received assistance of Golap Chandra Barua, a clerk, in writing his History of Assam. Dr. Kalita’s statement that at the time when Gait was compiling Assam’s history there was no one who was highly qualified to assist him clearly shows that Barua was unqualified and his assistance to Gait was trifling. Dr. Kalita should know that it was Golap Chandra Barua who edited Ahom Buranji written in Tai-Ahom language with parallel English translation and published it in 1930. 
By making derogatory remarks about Gait and Barua and undermining their works Dr. Kalita has probably wanted to tell the present generations that he excels them in wisdom and is greater in erudition than Gait and Barua. Hiren Gohain praised him as “a devoted scholar to the discipline and profession he has chosen.” [R.C. Kalita, Assam in the Eighteenth Century, 1992]. But this adjective appears to be wrongly applied on him because he might be a devoted scholar to his profession but his present article under review does not qualify him to be so. For in his present article, he has clearly shown his chauvinistic character. The article is highly provocative and there are sufficient ingredients for creating animosity between the Assamese people and the Bodos. 
In Para, 3 Dr. Kalita states tales, fairy tales, legends, myths, ballads &c., are the foundations of literature and history and hence he says that ingredients for history or Bodo country will not be available in these works. Any average person knows that myths are stories generally not believed to be true, or at least, not literary so and they may involve impossible adventures or supernatural creatures. Any knowledgeable person is aware of the fact that myths, legends, fairy tales are not historically true. He also remarks that despite having educational qualifications sometimes men remain as a child in intellect. There is no doubt that by this remark he has loathingly pointed his fingers towards the Bodo scholars. Does Dr. Kalita consider himself to be the only highly qualified master of history and the rest are qualified bamboozle? Be it known to him that any student of history knows it well that history concerns actual events that are documented through the evidences.
In Para 4, Having said that history is a chronological and methodical records of past events Dr. Kalita quotes some historians’ definition of history to substantiate his view. Then he brings in Irawati Karve and Dr. Jogiraj Basu and states that according to their works during the time of the Mahabharata the people used to eat beef.  He particularly mentions the name of the book written by Dr. Basu. He says that Dr. Basu in his book ‘India in the age of the Brahmanas’ has recorded that people used to eat beef. However, he has wrongly named the said book, but actually the book is titled as “India of the age of the Brahmanas”, published by Sanskrit Pustak Bhandar (Kolkata) in 1969.
How a scholar like Dr. Kalita who is sceptic of other scholars’ works could easily believe Smt. Karve’s and Dr. Basu’s statements on beef-eating without cross-checking the Vedas and the Mahabharata? He should have personally investigated into the authenticity of what the above scholars have stated about beef-eating during the time of the Vedas and the Mahabharata instead of quoting them. He opines that it would be unjustified now on the testimony of history of beef-eating to reintroduce beef-eating by any member of Hindu community. Likewise, he thinks, demanding a separate State by the Bodos on the basis of past real or fake Bodo history is not justified. He then childishly says that society and State or country do not fall from the sky just in a day. He alleges that those who play politics under the garb of historians are trying to split the society.  In fact, this statement applies exclusively only to Dr. Kalita himself because he is the person who is spreading hatred against the original inhabitants of the State by writing derogatory treatise against them.
In Para 5, Dr. Kalita discusses about how different people immigrated into the ancient Assam and made it their home. He writes that the Ahoms started from the province of Yunan in China in 1215 A.D. and by 1228 A.D. they came to the foot of the Naga Hills and there they founded their kingdom. My question is where did he get the above dates from? Shall we not presume that he must have consulted some books for his information? The dates of starting and arrival of the Ahoms as mentioned by Dr. Kalita tally with the dates given by E.A. Gait in his A History of Assam. Will Dr. Kalita deny that he has not utilised Gait’s history?
He says that it is not a big question when the Bodo people migrated to Assam, though out of many questions it is a question too, yet it is not a special one because there is no answer to it. By saying there is no answer Dr. Kalita has a deliberate intention to undermine the Bodo sentiments. The sum and substance is that his reservoir of historical knowledge does not contain any records about Bodo people. Naturally, he has proved himself that his knowledge of history is limited. If he were an impartial teacher of history he would have certainly made efforts to know as to whether there is any history that relates Bodo kingdom. Probably, Dr. Kalita was never inquisitive to know as to when the ancestors of modern Bodos came to Assam and by what names their ancestors were known. Hence, he is quite in the dark about their advent. 
Paras 6 and 7 are irrelevant for any comments.
In Para 8, Dr. Kalita has criticised Dr. S.K. Chatterji in strongest terms for his book called Kirata-jana-Kriti. He smelt a big conspiracy against the Assamese people behind writing of the said book. Dr. Kalita has deliberately accused Dr. Chatterji that he did not provide sources for his writings. However, if he had sincerely read the said book he would have noticed that wherever necessary Dr. Chatterji has furnished references, though no bibliography was appended to the book. He also accuses Dr. Chatterji for describing Maharaja Naranarayan of Cooch Behar as ‘Indo-Mongoloid king of Bengal’. In this case also Dr. Kalita is misinformed. Nowhere in his book Kirata-jan-Kriti, has Dr. Chatterji used the above term. This proves that he has not minutely read Dr. Chatterji’s book.
He states that no words of history are infallible like the Vedas, because he thinks that historical truth changes with the discovery of new evidences, if not, cultivation of historical studies would have ended with Gait, S.K. Chatterji, S.K. Bhuyan and H.K. Barpujari and there would not have been any necessity for a scholar like Ramesh Chandra Kalita to emerge as a historian. Dr. Kalita, who does not even know about his own neighbour the Bodos, imagines himself to excel Gait, Chatterji, Bhuyan and Barpujari in wisdom. What profited Dr. Kalita by self-praising? Does he consider himself to be the greatest historian in the world? There is a saying which goes like this: One who thinks himself as a great man is not really a great man but a great man is he who other people say great. Anyway, Assamese people are so fortunate that they are blessed with the greatest historian in the person of Dr. Ramesh Chandra Kalita. They should be proud of Dr. Kalita.
Our learned teacher of history writes that historical truth always changes with the discovery of new evidences. His view is certainly correct. But historians may differ in their opinions on certain controversial historical explanation but there are certain facts which always remain the same and it does not change. We know that the Dewany authority over the provinces of Bengal, Bihar and Orissa was conferred by King Shah Alam in perpetuity on the East India Company, by a firman or royal grant on 12 August 1765. This is historically true because the date is supported by documentary evidence. Hence we cannot say that the Firman was signed on 12 August 1764 or 1766. 12 August 1765 is a major historical event which cannot be changed or altered. As a teacher of history Dr. Kalita should know that accuracy of facts is most important for historians.
Para 9 is irrelevant for comment.
In Para 10, he says that he had earlier stated that all Mongoloid people are not Bodos and in spite of that if the Bodos imagine that all Mongoloid people are Bodos then he is quite helpless in the matter. There is no doubt about it that Dr. Kalita’s thought on the subject is the produce of his barren brain.  Because no Bodo scholars have so far claimed that all Mongoloid people belong to Bodo race.  Next, he counsels the Bodo intellectuals to claim all Mongoloid people as belonging to Tibeto-Burman speaking people and bring them together to form a State or a country. Here also Dr. Kalita has shown his own imprudence.
In 1936, Kaliram Medhi in his Assamese Grammar and Origin of the Assamese Language stated that Kalitas are pure Aryans. Now Kalitas speak a language called Assamese. Can we consider that all Aryans speak Assamese? From an inscription of Persian king Darius in Naqshe-e-Rostam we learn that he was an “Aryan from the Aryan race”. Shall we then say that king Darius spoke Assamese and he was a Kalita?  In reality this is not so. I think Dr. Kalita has been so blinded with jealousy against the Bodos that he could not make any head or tail of what he is writing about.  Tibeto-Burman is a language group within the Sino-Tibetan family and Tibeto-Burman languages are spoken in Myanmar, China, India, Nepal, Bhutan, Thailand, Bangladesh, Pakistan, Laos and Vietnam. (http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/595009/Tibeto-Burman-languages).  Again within the Tibeto-Burman language family there are divisions. Isn’t Dr. Kalita aware of this fact?
 In Para 11, Dr. Kalita states that after Independence Chapter X of the Assam Land and Revenue Regulation, 1886 was amended under the leadership of Gopinath Borodoloi and created Tribal Belt or Block for reserving lands for the tribals. By making such erroneous statement the learned teacher of history proved his own imprudence before the readers of his article. The fact is that Chapter X was not amended but it was added by the Assam Land and Revenue Regulation (Amendment) Act, 1947 to provide protection not to tribal people but to backward classes. It was only after this Act came to be operative Chapter X was amended for the first time in 1964 and then in 1981 and then in 1990. By a Notification No.RD.69/46/18, dated 5th December 1947, the State Government had specified (a) Plains tribals, (b) Hills tribes, (c) Tea Garden tribals, (d) Santals, (e) Scheduled Castes and (f) Nepali cultivator-graziers as the backward classes of people entitled to protection in protected belts and blocks. [See D.K. Gangopadhyay’s Land Administration in Protected Belts and Blocks Assam, 1991 and K.N. Saikia edited The Assam Land and Revenue Regulation, 1886, 1st edition 1965  & 2nd edition 2003]. Another interesting thing is that Dr. Kalita could not distinguish between belt and block and hence he mixed up the concept of belt and block by saying belt or block. Belt differs from Block and as of 30th July 1990 there were 17 tribal Belts and 30 Tribal Blocks. Again he supposes that as per his information the Borodoloi government did not make any detailed survey of the areas before they were converted into tribal belts and blocks. Interestingly, Dr. Kalita has not supplied any source of his information in support of his contention. As a teacher of history he is quite aware that facts are to be supported by evidence without which it becomes redundant.    
On the testimony of H.L. Dampier, Dr. Kalita states that the Kacharis were migratory race even in 1868 and they used to migrate from one place to another so that they can evade payment of tax and enjoy life affluently. It is agreed that some Kacharis might have had migrated from one place to another for jhum cultivation but that does not mean that entire community used to migrate en masse. According to Report on the Census of Assam 1881 the population of the Kacharis was 265,418. Supposing in 1868 the total population of the Kacharis was only 165,418 deducting 100,000 then shall we expect that 165,318 persons used to migrate constantly? Will Dr. Kalita give us explanation to this?    
Para12. Dr. Kalita concludes his long article expressing surprise as to how the Bodos demand a separate State in an area where the Ana-Bodo population is 72-70 per cent while the Bodos are only 28-30 per cent. He then says how 30% Bodos demand a separate State for themselves in an area where 70% Ana-Bodos live permanently. He is so confused about the ratio of Bodo and Ana-Bodo percentage that he contradicts in furnishing the percentage. Another interesting thing is that he equates the Bodos with the White people of South Africa who according to him had comprised only 15% of the population but they ruled over the Black people atrociously. In other words, the Bodos are outsiders in Bodoland Territorial Council area and a day will come when 72-70/70 per cent Ana-Bodo people will be victorious as Nelson Rolihlahla Mandela was in South Africa, to establish democracy. However, Dr. Kalita has not questioned why non-protected class of people got land in the Tribal Belts and Blocks that are protected for the tribal people and other backward class.   
Dr. Kalita accuses the Bodos for fostering racism and states that the Government of India will not allow to such people xenophobic State to form. Isn’t it an interesting topic? Can Dr. Kalita vouch that the caste Hindu Assamese people never fostered racial discrimination? Dr. Kalita may not be able to recollect the gruesome violence perpetrated by the Assamese people on the Bengali Hindus during the 1960s in which nine persons were killed and one hundred injured, 4019 huts and 58 houses were vandalised and destroyed, because at that time he was just 12 or 13 years old. Can we not call this racialism? Whatever it may be, history tells us that despite strong opposition from the Assamese people the Bodos have been given geopolitical power safeguarded under the Sixth Schedule to the Constitution of India. There is no ambiguity that Bodoland State will be formed today or tomorrow. But one thing Dr. Kalita should note that time is fast approaching when the name Assam may be a thing of the past and the coming generations may reminisce saying that once there was a State called Assam. Therefore, those intellectual or scholars who are publicizing fallacious information about and antagonistic attitude towards the Bodo people and other tribal people should commence pondering on their own destiny.



Tuesday, September 10, 2013

Cooch Behar Rajas belonged to Mech Tribe
It has been observed that Rajbansi intellectuals, political leaders and student leaders are inclined to claim that the Royal Family of Cooch Behar belonged to Rajbansi or to Koch-Rajbansi race. A Rajbanshi scholar from Cooch Behar named Wing Commander Ranjit Kumar Mandal in his article entitled ‘Chila Ray the War Lion’ in Indian Air Force Millennium Issue 1999 claims that “General Shukladhwaj Ray was born in a king’s race called Rajbanshi of North Eastern India. The dynasty which he belonged to was called ‘Kamatapur Dynasty’ which ruled over North Eastern part of India for centuries.”  Another Rajbansi bureaucrat turned writer-scholar named Sukhbilas Barma, IAS, is also very keen to name the dynasty that ruled Cooch Behar as Koch-Rajbansi dynasty.[1] Dinesh Chandra Dakua, a Rajbansi, who was a Minister in the Left Front Government of West Bengal, writes that the Cooch Behar kings and their subjects were Rajbansi and the main dynasty was named Koch Rajbansi.[2] President of All Koch Rajbansi Students’ Union, Assam, has gone one step ahead and publicly declared that following the agreement signed on 28 August 1949 with Government of India Kamatapur State was included in India.[3]
From the above statements of the Rajbansi scholars one thing that compels us to say is that they are attempting to pass the history of Cooch Behar as the history of Rajbansi or Koch Rajbansi. The Rajbansi scholars, however, have not cited any documentary evidences to substantiate their claim that Cooch Behar was founded by Rajbansi kings or by Koch Rajbansi kings. In fact, they have utterly dishonoured the historical facts regarding the kingdom of Cooch Behar.
It is also surprising to note that a zealous Koch Rajbansi leader named Biswajit Roy has created a new history by saying that Kamatapur State was included in India consequent upon agreement signed on 28 August 1949. Why he had made such unhistorical and biased statement is best known to him.  Historically speaking, Kamatapur kingdom ended with the defeat of its last king Nilambar at the hands of Hussain Shah in 1498 A.D. And out of the ruins of Kamatapur a new dynasty at the close of the 15th century A.D. rose into prominence under the Meches.[4] This new dynasty has been called Koch dynasty by historians.   
There are ample evidences to refute the claim made by the Rajbansi scholars that the royal dynasty of Cooch Behar belonged to Rajbansi or Koch Rajbansi race.
The oldest document that speaks about the ethnic identity of the Royal family of Cooch Behar is a chronicle written by a Persian Chronicler named Ibn Muhammad Wali or Shihabuddin Talish. He wrote Fathiya-i-Ibraiya which is also called Tarikh Fath i Asham, or History of the Conquest of Assam. The book was written between 9th August 1662 and 13th May 1663 A.D. This work informs us that the inhabitants of Koch Bihar “since ancient times, are the Mech and Koch tribe. The Rajah belongs to the Mech. He coins gold muhurs and Narain rupees.”[5] When the above book was written the reigning king of Koch Behar was Maharaja Pran Narayan. In other words, Muhammad Talish was quite aware of the fact that Maharaja Pran Narayan was a Mech and that is why he had conclusively stated that the “Rajah belongs to the Mech.”
Under the behest of Samudra Narayan of Darrang Raj Family, Surjya Khari Daibajna wrote about 1791 a book called ‘Darrang Rajvamsavali’ in metrical Assamese in which it has been acknowledged that Biswa Singha’s father named Haoria or Herya or Haridas Mandal hailed from the highest Mech family.[6]
Ghulam Hussain Salim wrote ‘Riyauz-us-Salatin’ in 1787-88 A.D. which was translated into English from the original Persian by Maulavi Abdus Salam. According to Riyaz “Its inhabitants belong to two tribes, namely, Makh (Mech) and Kuj (Koch), its Rajah is of the first tribe.”[7]
In about 1833, under the instruction of Maharaja Harendra Narayan, his personal assistant Joynath Ghosh better known as Joyntha Munshi wrote a book entitled ‘Rajopakhyan’. In Deva Khanda of the said book it is written that the eight-year old Hiradevi and her elder sister Jira were married to Hariya alias Haridas Mech, an inhabitant of Chikina hill.[8]
Munshi Joynath Ghose writes that his work was made over to Maharjah Harendra Narayan for his reading and after reading the whole of the same granted as a reward five villages (panchagram) rent-free.[9] The highly learned Maharajah Harendra Narayan did not object to the tracing of the origin of his family to Mech race. In other words, the Maharajah had accepted that his ancestors belonged to Mech tribe. The Maharajah could have asked his Munshi to omit that portion and substitute it with a different story.  But he had not done this and accepted what is true.
On the occasion of the Coronation Ceremony of Maharajah Nripendra Narayan Bhup Bahadur, Bhagabati Charan Bandyopadhyaya wrote a book entitled ‘Koch Bihar Rajyer Songkhipto Bibaran’ with due permission from the Maharajah. In this book the father of Viswa Singh has been named as Hariya Mech.[10]
Maharajah Nripendra Narayan, who received English education in India and in England, had also accepted Haria Mech as the progenitor of the Koch Behar Royal family. In 1903, a monumental work entitled ‘The Cooch Behar State and its Land Revenue Settlement’ was published under the order of Maharajah Nripendra Narayan. In this book on page 225 it has been written that both Hira and Jira were “married to a Mech of the name of Hariya, otherwise known as Haridas, who lived in Mount Chikna.”[11]
Maharajah Nripendra Narayan highly praised this book and it is obvious that he had gone through the book with great interest. Interestingly the Maharajah had also accepted that his forefathers belonged to Mech tribe or else he would have resented the insertion of the above statement.

A History of Cooch Behar in Bengali was written by Amanatulla Ahmed and published in 1936. In this book also the ancestor of Cooch Behar royal family has been traced to Haria Mech. 

Maharajah Biswa Singha’s contemporary landlords or Bhuyans knew him as Mech. Narayan Bhuyan, the head of the Bhuyans emphatically declared before the assemblage of the Bhuyas that “they would never submit to the Mech Chief even if it cost them their territories, wealth and life.”[12]
Ram Chandra Ghosh had delivered a lecture on the origin of the Kingdom of Cooch Behar before Kuch Bihar Hitaishini Sabha and his lecture was printed at the expense of the Raj in 1865. In his lecture Ram Chandra Ghosh stated that a certain Mech named Haria who lived in Chikna Hill had two wives, called Jira and Hira, by his wife Jira he had two sons Chandan and Madan and by his wife Hira he had two sons named Sisu Singh and Bisu Singh.[13]
Dr. Buchanan says that the progenitor of Koch Bihar family was “a certain Herya who is said to have been of the impure tribe called Mech.”[14]
B.H. Hodgson says that Hajo the founder of the Koch kingdom gave his daughter and heiress to a Bodo or Mecch chief in marriage.[15] N.N. Vasu, however, thinks that Hajo was a Mech Sardar (Chief).[16] On the other hand, R.G. Latham considers Hajo as a “suspicious denomination” and suggests that “Hajo is a fabulous individual, no real founder of the Kocch or any empire; but an eponymus hero.”[17] The real founder of the Koch kingdom appears to be Haoria Mech. The kingdom founded by Haoria Mech which later came to be known as Cooch Behar State lasted till the transfer of administration of the State to the Dominion Government on the 12th day of September 1949.
 The States Merger (Governors’ Provinces) Order, 1949 was passed on 27 July 1949. The effect of this order was that the States which had merged with the Provinces were to be administered in all respects as if they formed part of the absorbing Provinces. This order was amended from time to time. On 28 August 1949, an agreement of merger was entered into between the Government of India and the Ruler of the State of Cooch Behar and in pursuance of this agreement the Government of India took over the administration of Cooch Behar on 12 September 1949. The State of Cooch Behar thus became a part of the territory of India and was accordingly included in the list of Part C States as Serial No. 4 in the First Schedule to the Constitution of India. Thereafter, on 31 December 1949, the States Merger (West Bengal) Order, 1949, was passed. It provided that whereas full and exclusive authority, jurisdiction and power for and in relation to the governance of the Indian State of Cooch Behar were exercisable by the Dominion Government, it was expedient to provide by the order made under s.290A for the administration of the said State in all respects as if it formed part of the Province of West Bengal. In consequence, on 1 January 1950, the erstwhile State of Cooch Behar was merged with West Bengal and began to be governed as if it was part of West Bengal. As a result of this merger Cooch Behar was taken out of the list of Part C States in the First Schedule to the Constitution and added to West Bengal in the same Schedule, and the territorial description of West Bengal as prescribed in the First Schedule was amended by the addition of the clause which referred to the territories which were being administered as if they formed part of that Province. In other words, after the merger of Cooch Behar the Territories of West Bengal included those which immediately before the commencement of the Constitution were comprised in the Province of West Bengal as well as those which were being administered as if they formed part of that Province.[18]












[1] Sukhbilas Barma, ‘North Bengal and its People’, in Socio-Political Movements in North Bengal (A Sub-Himalayan Tract), 2007, vol. I, edited by Sukhbilas Barma,  pp.8-16
[2] Dinesh Chandra Dakua, ‘A Journey from Hitasadhani to Greater Kuch Bihar’, in Socio-Political Movements in North Bengal (A Sub-Himalayan Tract), 2007, vol. I, edited by Sukhbilas Barma, pp. 49-50
[3] “Governor discusses with AKRSU’ – The Assam Tribune, 4 August 2013.
[4] N.N. Vasu, The Social History of Kamarupa, First printed in 1922, reprinted in 1983, vol. ii, pp.35-36
[5] H. Blochman, ‘Koch Bihar Koch Hajo Assam’, Journal of Asiatic Society of Bengal, 1872, vol. Xli(i) p. 66
[6] Surjya Khari Daibajna, Darrang Raj Vamsabali, Edited by H.C. Goswami, 1917, vs. 52
[7] Gulam Hussain Salim, Riyaz-us-Salatin, Translated by Abdus Salam, 1902, p.11
[8] Joynath Ghosh, Rajopalhyan (Bengali), Edited by Biswanath Das, 1985, p. 7
[9] Joynath Ghosh, Rajopakhyan (Bengali), Edited by Biswanath Das, 1985, p, 120
[10] B.C. Bandopadhyaya, Koch Bihar Rajyer Songkhipto Bibaran (Bengali), 1291 B.S. p.11
[11] H.N. Chaudhuri, The Cooch Behar State and Its Land Revenue Settlement, 1903, p.225
[12] Kayastha Patrika, New Series, vol.xii, pp.5-6, Quoted by N.N. Vasu in his Social History of Kamrup, vol.ii
[13] W.W. Hunter, Statistical Account of Bengal, vol. X, 1876, p. 405
[14] Dr. Buchanan, ‘History of Cooch Behar’ Journal of Asiatic Society of Bengal,  1838, vol.vii, p. 11
[15] B.H. Hodgson, ‘On the Origin, Location, Numbers, Creed, Customs, Character and Condition of the Koch Bodo and Dhimal People’   in Journal of the Asiatic Society of Bengal, vol.xviii, 1849, p. 705
[16] N.N. Vasu, The Social History of Kamarupa, First printed in 1922, reprinted in 1983, vol. ii, p.37.
[17] R.G. Latham, Ethnology of India, 1859, p. 34
[18] Supreme Court of India,  In Re: The Berubari Union... vs. Reference Under Article 143(1).. on 1, April 1959. Available at http://www.indiankanoon.org/doc/727445/