![]()
CHAPTER 1
Introduction
POLITICAL BACKGROUND
Assam lies in the extreme north-east frontier of India, between 28Ā° and 24Ā° North latitudes and 89Ā° 86' and 96Ā° East longitudes. Assam has been a very important historical and cultural centre since the earliest times. The reconstruction of early history of Assam is a difficult task, mainly because of the deficiency of pure and reliable historical materials. Little is known of the history of Assam before the fourth century AD. Assam was known as Pragjyotishpur and later as Kamrupa. The modern state of Assam was a part of the extensive kingdom of Pragjyotishpur or Kamrupa in ancient times, which included major portions of eastern India. The earliest known history of Assam can be traced from the rise of the Varmanas in the fourth century AD. Kamrupa during the rule of the Varmanas included considerable portion of Bengal, some portion of Bihar, Sylhet and Tripura. This territory was under the Salastambhas from the middle of the sixth century. Although there were twenty-one kings in the Salastambha dynasty, names of only fourteen are known and the regnant periods and activities of most of them barring a few, are based on mere assumptions. The Salastambhas extended their sway to Gauda, Odre, Kalinga, Kosalla and some portions in the south-west. With the fall of the Palas, who replaced Salastambhas, the kingdom of Kamrupa disintegrated. There appeared a number of independent and semi-independent kingdoms and principalities and among them the Bhuyans were the most powerful. The Palas, of course, left a good number of epigraphs, but with their fall in the beginning of the twelfth century the history of Assam again appears to be a disconnected and fragmentary account of kings and events.
Since time immemorial Assam has been bounded on the north, east and south by hills inhabited by diverse tribes, each with its distinctive manners, customs and languages. These hill tribes were the Bhutanese, Akas, Nishis, Mishings, Adis, Mishimis, Khamptis, Singhphos, Nagas, Karbis, Garos, Jayantias, and others. On the north, she is guarded by the eastern section of the great Himalayan range, where live the frontier tribes like the Bhutiyas, Akas, Nishis (Daflas), Mishings (Miris), Adis (Abors), and Mishimis. On the east lie the mountains inhabited by the Khamtis and Singphos. This region, as a whole, except the part inhabited by the Bhutiyas, now forms the state of Arunachal Pradesh. The Patkai range on the south-east, which forms the natural boundary between Assam and Burma (Myanmar), is inhabited by the Nagas and merges itself into the mountains of Burma. To the south of the Brahamaputra Valley, beginning from the extreme south-west, the mountain chains take the name of Garo hills, the Khashi and the Jayantia hills, the North Cachar, Mikir hills and the Naga hills. This mountain system is collectively known as the āAssam Rangeā, which with the exception of the North Cachar, the Mikir hills and Naga hills, forms the state of Meghalaya. The Naga hills, together with the eastern portion of the Patkai range, created the state of Nagaland. The North Cachar and the Mikir hills (the Karbi Anglong) forming two districts remain within the present State of Assam. To the south of the Assam Range lies the Barak Valley or Surma Valley, which includes the present district of Cachar. To the south of Cachar and Nagaland lie the states of Mizoram and Manipur. To the south-west of Cachar is the state of Tripura and to the west of Cachar is Bangladesh. Assamās relations with the neighbouring hill states of Arunachal Pradesh, Nagaland, Manipur, Mizoram, Meghalaya and Tripura has been from time immemorial very close.
The early part of the thirteenth century saw major events in the history of Assam; one was the beginning of a series of invasions from the west led by the Turko-Afghan rulers of Bengal, and the other was the foundation of a kingdom by the Tai Shans, who came to be known as āAhomā, in the south-eastern part of the Brahmaputra Valley. The former appeared as raiders with an irrepressible zeal for territorial aggrandizement, the latter as agricultural settlers in search of land. Whereas the rulers of Kamrupa were losing their hold and authority over their possessions due to internal dissensions, they were finally overtaken by a small group of Tai Shans who later became lords of the Land, and also became one with the indigenous people in their fight against invaders from the west. They successfully repulsed the invaders in a series of battles which lasted more than one hundred years. With the establishment of their power, the centre of gravity in Assamās political life shifted from the western to the eastern part of the Brahmaputa Valley. The Ahoms, during their glorious six-hundred-year rule, extended their power and authority as far as to the river Manaha in the west.
The right to dispense justice comes with the acquisition of sovereignty. Before entering into the history of the administration of justice in Assam, it is necessary to begin with the origin and development of British sovereignty in this province.
Mention has already been made about the Ahoms, a member of the Shan branch of the great Tai or Thai family of South-East Asia. Their leader Sukapha en route from his homeland Maulung in Upper Burma to the Brahmaputra Valley defeated all the opposing tribes and thereafter the Nagas living between the Daikham and the Patkai hills by a policy of blood and rapine. In the Brahmaputra Valley, however, he pursued a policy of peace and conciliation against the Morans and the Barahis, the first tribes to be subjugated by him. But those who challenged him were ruthlessly killed.1 In AD 1228 Sukapha laid the foundation of the Ahom kingdom in Assam with its capital at Charaideo, a place 25 miles south from the present town of Sibsagar. Sukaphaās successors established firm control over the area from River Dihing in the east to river Dhansiri in the west. In the course of the next three centuries the Ahoms reduced to submission the Chutiyas, Kacharis and Bhuyans. The territorial expansion of the Ahoms towards the west led them to a direct confrontation with the Koches, who were interested in expanding their territory towards the east in the sixteenth century. Though initially the Koches overpowered the Ahoms, the latter soon recovered their position.
However, the most formidable power the Ahoms had to face in the western frontier of their kingdom were the Mughals. The Ahom conflict with the Mughals covered almost the whole of the seventeenth century. The Mughals after occupying the Koch kingdom attempted to conquer Assam. The western division of the Koch kingdom called Koch Hajo or Kamrupa, covering the territory between Sonkosh in the west and Barnadi on the north bank and Asurar Ali on the south bank in the east formed a bone of contention between the two powers. Consequently this part of the kingdom was ruled intermittently by both the powers. From 1616 to 1658, it was under Mughal occupation, when the Mughal system of administration was introduced here. It is to the credit of the Ahoms that they could resist the repeated attacks of the Mughals successfully, except on one occasion in 1662-3, when Mir Jumla, the great general of Emperor Aurangzeb occupied the Ahom capital, Gargaon and forced the Ahom king to flee to Namrup. But the success cost the general his life and Assam shook off Mughal allegiance which lasted barely a few months. Aurangzeb then sent Raja Ram Singh of Amber to recover the lost hold but the Ahom general Lachit Barphukan inflicted a crushing defeat on the Mughals in the famous naval battle at Saraighat in 1671. King Gadadhar Singha finally expelled the Mughals after defeating them in the battle of Itakhuli in 1682. The river Manaha remained the western boundary of the Ahom kingdom from the battle of Saraighat till the British occupation of the kingdom in 1825.
The Ahoms resorted to different policies of stratagem, peace overtures, spreading rumours, threating and so on in dealing with their enemies including the Mughals. They subjugated the Kacharis mainly by a policy of stratagem. They successfully deceived the Koches, when they were not ready for a war with them. Knowing that the Koch royal family were orthodox Hindus, the Ahom king sent his soldiers garbed as Brahmanas, who rode on the back of cows, prominently exhibiting their sacred lines in their foreheads and raising their sacred threads up on their ears. An attack under such circumstances would mean slaughter of both cows and Brahmanas. The Koch generals, therefore, retreated without fighting. Often they deceived the Mughals by making exaggerated statements about their military strength.
The Ahom rulers described Assam as Sonar Saphura or ācasket of goldā, which must not be opened to foreigners.2 They were, therefore, determined to repulse any foreign attack with the last drop of blood in their veins. But curiously enough, the Ahom kings, who could successfully meet the challenges of the great Mughals, could not defend their kingdom from the rebellion of their own subjects. This was due to the fact that after the end of the Mughal wars, the Ahom royalty and aristocracy gradually got alienated from the people. They became intriguing, pleasure-loving, and indolent and consequently oppressive. The result was the rebellion of the Moamaria (1769), the first popular challenge to the Ahom monarchy.3 The internal troubles created a situation in which the Ahom king Gaurinath Singha (1780-95) had to seek the help of the East India Company and, thus, himself opened āthe casket of goldā so dearly preserved by his predecessors, to the white foreigners.
In response to Gaurinathās appeal for help, Lord Cornwallis, the then Governor-General of Bengal sent Captain Welsh to Assam (1792-4) with a contingent of 360 sepoys. Welsh recovered the Ahom throne from the possession of the Moamaria rebels and brought about an amicable settlement between the Ahom king and the rebellious Raja of Darrang, after which he returned. But the Moamarias revolted again. They were finally won over in 1805 by the astute Ahom prime minister, Purnananda Buragohain, by ceding to them a territory which roughly covered the present districts of Dibrugarh and Tinsukia. This territory came to be known as Matak country.
In the meantime, the Burmese were becoming very powerful in the eastern frontier of Assam. The conflict between premier Purnananda and Badan Chandra, the Barphukan or Viceroy of Guwahati, gave the Burmese an opportunity to invade Assam. On Badan Chandraās advice, they first invaded Assam in 1817 and again in 1819 and 1821 and continued to rule Assam as de facto rulers keeping the puppet king Jogeswar Singha on the throne.
The establishment of Burmese authority in Assam and later in Cachar was viewed by the British government as a serious menace to the security of the British territories in Bengal. David Scott, the Joint Magistrate of Rangpur, pointed out to the Government of Bengal the vulnerability of entire eastern frontier suggesting that the policy of non-intervention which had so long been the watchword towards the north-east frontier should be definitely discarded and that it was highly expedient to support and encourage the Assamese and the frontier tribes to resist and shake off the Burmese yoke.
Early in 1824, when the Burmese converged on Cachar from three directions on the plea of restoring the rightful claimant to the throne, Lord Amherst, the Governor-General of India had no alternative but to resort to arms. The British government issued a formal declaration of war on 5 March 1824.
The war actually broke out in three regions: Assam, Arrakan and Rangoon. The force under Colonel Macmorine occupied Guwahati on 28 March 1824. In January 1825, the British forces occupied Jorhat and advanced towards Rangpur. After offering some resistance, the Burmese garrison at Rangpur asked for truce, and they were permitted to leave Assam on the condition that they would not commit any ravages on the road or forcibly carry away any of the inhabitants. The fall of Rangpur practically completed the conquest of Assam and by the treaty of Yandabo on 24 February 1826 the Burmese surrendered their claims to Assam, Cachar and Jayantia.
Lord William Bentinck, the Governor-General of British India (1828-35) admitted that āthere must have been something intrinsically good in the constitution of the Ahomsā4 due to which they could enjoy uninterrupted sovereignty for six centuries. One of the intrinsic goodness lay in their ideology of government, which was a form of benevolent paternalism. According to Ahom legends, their two progenitors Khunlung and Khunlai, at the time of their departure from heaven to rule over this earth, were advised by their grandfather Lengdon, the god of heaven thus: āJust as a man loses his wife if he quarrels with his father-in-law or brother-in-law, and just as a mother bird guards her nestlings with her wings and protects them from rain and storm and rears them up by feeding them herself, so you two brothers should protect your subjects and desist from quarreling with your friends and supporters.ā5 The Ahoms believed in utopia and their kings were encouraged to rule in a way so that the noble principles of Utopia could be realized. In the Satya Yuga or Golden Age, love was the order of the time. Men used to take food in the same dish like sons of the same mother and nobody entertained any jealousy or hatred towards any other person.6 A descend of Khunlung is said to have ruled his kingdom in accordance with this ideology, which set an example to his successors. During his rule, the sufferings of the people came to an end and they became happy as before. He governed his subjects as his own sons. There was no taxation in his time. He lived a righteous life, according due punishment to every guilt and rewards and honour to virtue and merit.7
The ideology of the Ahom government was, therefore, justice, benevolence and equity. An efficient and benevolent king was highly honoured. One such was King Pratap Singha (1603-41). When he fell ill at the age of ninety, one hundred of his subjects offered to sacrifice their lives before the Goddess Kesaikhati (eater of raw flesh) of Sadiya8 if by so doing they could save the aged monarch. The earlier Ahom kings beginning with Sukapha mixed freely with the subjects without any air of superiority. Any indolent or oppressive king had to suffer deposition or death. Disuse of these noble practices towards the end of their rule ultimately caused the decline of the Ahoms.
The Ahom government was both monarchial and aristocratic. The aristocracy, originally of three dangariyas or cabinet ministers the Buragohain, the Bargohain and the Barpatragohain acted as a strong deterrent to the king exercising arbitrary power. The Gohains, if united, could make and unmake a king. With the extension of Ahom territory the cabinet was expanded to five members, the new entrants being the Barbaruah, the Chief Executive, and the Barphukan, the Viceroy of Lower Assam.
The pivot of the Ahom administration was the paik system. In this system, all adult males within the age group of sixteen to fifty years were termed as paik and were made liable to work for the state a...
