SOCIOLOGY OF LABOUR AND SOCIAL STRATIFICATION IN NORTH EAST INDIA:

CONTEXUALISING HANDLOOM WEAVING AS AN OCCUPATIONAL CRAFT IN MANIPUR

Otojit Kshetrimayum*

This paper highlights how weaving as occupation is associated with various lineage groups of Manipur and also emphasises how hierarchy and differentiation is linked with it. Social stratification in India tends to concentrate exclusively on the caste system. This paper argues that although weaving in Manipur, one of the North Eastern states of India is generally a traditional craft practiced by mostly each and every household, there is a ‘caste-like’ system of social stratification developed and operated within the structure of Manipuri society. It tries to explore another model of ‘Hindu’ social stratification, which may not be explicitly explained by those concepts and theories propounded on the basis of caste system prevalent in other parts of India.

1 INTRODUCTION

When we talk of social stratification in India we tend to concentrate exclusively on the caste system. This paper argues that although weaving in Manipur, one of the North Eastern states of India is generally a traditional craft practiced by mostly each and every household, there is a ‘caste-like’ system of social stratification developed and operated within the structure of Manipuri society. It tries to explore another model of ‘Hindu’ social stratification, which may not be explicitly explained by those concepts and theories propounded on the basis of caste system prevalent in other parts of India.

Traditionally in India, one’s occupation is a function of caste, but with the modernisation of society the association of occupation with caste has diminished. Though brahmins still retain the right and duty of being priests many other groups have diversified in order that each community may realize the full range of occupations needed to function.

Labour & Development, Vol. 20, No. 2, December 2013

* Coordinator, Centre for North East, V.V. Giri National Labour Institute, Noida. <otojit@gmail.com>

Sociology of Labour and Social Stratification in North East India 83

Despite the more liberal interpretation of caste, certain occupations still tend to be confined to certain families or certain sub-castes, passed down through one generation to the next. Textile production is one of these. Within India, textile production is associated with certain castes or families, and even aspects of their use are governed by caste. Saliya (or Chaliyan or Sali or Sale) is an erstwhile Malayali weavers’ caste found mostly in Northern Kerala and Southern coastal Karnataka. In South India the castes traditionally associated with weaving are Sale, Devanga and Kaikkolar. Among these the first two castes are natives to Kannada and Telugu speaking regions as per inscriptional evidences (Ramaswamy, 2006:13). Whereas Kaikkolar community is natives to Tamil speaking region, Padmashali is a Telugu caste or social group of weavers found largely in the state of Andhra Pradesh in India. Ramdasia Sikh is a caste in India. Members of this community are traditionally engaged in the profession of weaving. At times, they are also referred to as Julaha, which means weaver in Punjabi and Hindi. They are found in the states of Punjab, Haryana, Delhi, Rajasthan, Uttar Pradesh, Uttarakhand and Himachal Pradesh.

It is only when hierarchy and differences are externalized and socially demonstrated that we can truly talk about social stratification. Hierarchy is vertical arrangement of strata, while difference is salient when stratification is understood in a ‘qualitative’ sense. Social stratification is the ordering of social differences on the basis of a set of criteria or a single criterion, which ties the differentiated strata into a system (Gupta, 2005:1-21). Social differentiation is defined as the process by which different statuses, roles, strata, and groups develop or persist within a society. The most basic stage in this process is the differentiation of sex roles, which divides the society into two functional parts. Differentiation and specialization also result in different role behaviour for people of different ages, occupations, skills, influence, income, etc (Scott, 2005:387). Social differentiation is also termed as the process by which social positions are distinguished from one another. It assigns to each position, a distinctive role i.e., a set of rights and responsibilities. It also refers to the social division of labour (Abercombie, 1994:122). Social differentiation is turned into social stratification through: differential evaluation and ranking of positions and by offering or withholding rewards to the incumbents. Through this line of enquiry, the following section tries to examine the Manipuri society.

84 Labour & Development

Traditionally, the people of Manipur valley, had a clan based social system and political units, which ultimately emerged as the principalities. The principalities of the salai or clan had delineated territories. The chief of a village or groups of villages was the protector of the clan who ultimately became the chief of the principality and is called Ningthou. Though land is generally owned by the clan in its name, the chief was the protector of the clan territory, its forests and agricultural land, grazing and hunting grounds etc. With the development of settled agriculture the concept of clan territory was transformed as the chief established his rights over the land and individual families possessed only the right over the use of land. The chief’s control over the land and people was legitimized by the creation of myth associating or adducing divinity status to the chief. He also assumed the religious and ritual role to become the high-priest of the community and the principality. The chief of the principality was originally the social head and he retained it even after he was the political head of the principality. Support to the principality came in the form of feudal service from the population and lesser clans or ethnic groups at the village levels, which came under their control. As the head of the clan, the chief got support from the heads of the sub-lineages (sageis) and the households (Kamei, 1991:71). Broadly, the Meitei society is a segmentary system constituting of group of several genealogical depth. The largest group is called Salai which may be roughly described as clan. It is followed by Yumnak (maximal lineage), Sagei (major lineage), Chagok (unit of three generations of person), Imung (family) and Mi or man.

2 SOCIAL DIFFERENTIATION IN MANIPURI SOCIETY

Until the occupation by the British in 1891, Manipur was constitutionally a monarchical state. The king enjoyed almost absolute power of rule. He dictated and enforced the terms and conditions of enjoyment of civil liberty and of property rights by his subjects on the different inputs of production, such as, labor supply including personal labor, land and other natural resources, outputs turn out by them as well as on different items of immovable and moveable assets of individuals and groups of individuals. The nature, extent and effectiveness of enjoyment of property rights largely determined the people’s incentives to produce beyond the subsistence level. The king benefited from

Sociology of Labour and Social Stratification in North East India 85

increased volume of production of goods and services as his monopoly rent thereby went up. He devised the administrative, bureaucratic and military structure to keep the system going and for maximizing the extraction of monopoly rent in cash and/or kind, such as, in the form of land revenue, taxes, duties, levies and free labor services etc. Taking into account social differentiation as the process by which different statuses, roles, strata, and groups develop or persist within a society the nature of social differentiation in Manipuri society can be discerned through Lallup system, mashin and service relationships.

2.1 Lallup System

In the pre-colonial time, Manipuri society was governed by a highly organized administrative system of Lallup. Lallup was the highest state militia, which literally means war association, (Lal means war and Lup means association). It was a feudal service rendered by the subjects to the king. Originally it was a military service, which was extended to other non-military or economic activities of the state. The general system of Lallup was based on the assumption that it was the duty of every male between the ages of 16 to 60 years to attend Loishang (royal office) and render his service according to his skill and grade for 10 days of every 40 days to the state. Women however were exempted from this service. As a reward for the Lallup service, a person was entitled to cultivate one paree of land (approximately 2.5 acres) for his support subjected to the payment of regular tax in kind to the king (Hodson, 1999:61; Brown, 1975:83). In default of his Lallup the man had to forfeit one rupee, and for this sum a substitute was hired. Lallup covered all the state works. In times of peace it worked for economic development of the country; in times of war, it did military services. As a matter of fact, there was hardly any work, which was not covered by Lallup. Thus, the Lallup system was the pivot of the governmental machinery of the early Manipur state. However, the British criticized this system as being highly exploitative. After Manipur came under the British control in 1891, Lallup was abolished on 29th April, 1892.

In the beginning, the institution of Lallup consisted of six constituent parts or Lups, namely Kongchalup, Nongmailup, Angoubalup, Tolongkhombalup, Lupkhubalup, Khaijalup (Singh & Singh, 1989:9). Different works were

86 Labour & Development

distributed among the Lups. These works covered all the aspects of life. However, the major activities of this Lallup institution were focused on the socio-religious and economic aspects, and little emphasis was given to the political aspect. It was during the middle of 15th Century that along with the change of the department from Lup to Pana the numbers of the divisions was subsequently reduced to four. The new four divisions were Laipham, Khabam, Ahallup and Nahalup. The first two divisions- Laipham and Khabam were called Khunja, and the last two divisions were called Naicha. All these units are called Pana, which means Nashin (duty) (Singh & Singh, 1989). Inorder to ensure the smooth functioning of the Lallup system, each Pana was headed by an officer called Panalakpa, who is subordinated by another officer called Lallup-Chingba. These officers were appointed by the king from amongst his favourites and generally without reference to their origin. The appointment to this office exempts the immediate family of such officer from the performance of any heavy duty. But no fixed allowance was bestowed to any of the officers.

In the beginning the people liable to the Lallup services were Meiteis only. However, in the later period other communities such as the different tribes, Lois, Pangans, Bamons, and other immigrants who were subjects of the Meitei king were also incorporated into the fold of the Lallup services. Bamons as Lallup service cook food for the king and their idol Govindaji. While the Tangkhul (one of the Naga tribes) rendered services like gardening, digging ponds and ditches; the Loi population was mainly assigned the duty of manufacturing of silk, iron-smelting, salt making, earthen vessels and liquor. And those tribes in more distant hills like the Mao and Maram, instead of attending to the palace and other civil service, used to provide a kind of taxation in kinds (Dunn 1992:27). However, there were no fixed rules for this. Later on when the king adopted Hinduism, two more Panas- Hidakphanba and Potshangba were constituted for Lois and Tangkhul respectively.

The emergence of Lallup system was the manifestation of the emergence of feudalism in the social, administrative and political structure of the state. Thus the development of the institution was very significant in the process of centralization of power of the state. It also led to the reduction in the autonomy of the segmented social and ethnic groups ruled by different chiefs.

Sociology of Labour and Social Stratification in North East India 87

2.2 Mashin

There was another system of division of labour called Yumnak Mashin. Under this system, each yumnak (lineage) of each of the seven Salais (clans) had its own Mashin (work). As discussed before, the work done by each yumnak also determines its name, i.e., the yumnak’s name. For example, the yumnak called Khoirom of Ningthouja clan did the work of bee keeping [Khoirom= Khoi (Bee) and rom (etymologically means gathering)] etc. Practically, all the yumnaks of the seven clans did play their own roles in the life and well being of their society. The works so done covered all the aspects of life- social, economic, political, cultural and religious.

2.3 Service Relationships

In order to consolidate the hold over the subjects and to strengthen the pattern of settlement, a code of service relationship was developed by the king himself. The code comprised three types of services, namely, famnaiba, lallupkaba and loipotkaba. All people in the valley served the king with the required services under the provisions allowed to them. These services can be categorised as prestigious, essential and dishonourable respectively (Shah, 1994:140-145).

i) Famnaiba

These services are prestigious. The officials under this service, who were also called famnaiba, were engaged in activities related to customary laws, judiciary, administrative and military services. They were mostly the relatives of the king and they constituted the aristocratic group. These persons who performed prestigious services were allowed to enjoy many facilities. They were given the most fertile land in the valley. They were also provided the facility of a system known as Pothang,1 which entitled them to exact free labours from others when they were on official duties. Even the princesses were given in marriage to persons belonging to this class of people. They were close in social distance from the king. The religious services, after the acceptance of Vaishnavism (Hinduism) were assigned to the Brahmin. They were also given a certain amount of tax-free land.

88 Labour & Development

ii) Lalupkaba

As explained above, it was a feudal service rendered by the subjects to the king. These were the necessary services for the smooth administration of the state. It was the responsibility of the head of each “family” or “tribe” to furnish the proper persons for the different services. There was a sort of hierarchy among the Lalupkabas. The Piba was not to perform any heavy duty like hard manual labour. He acted as the personal attendant of the king (Ningthou Selba). His family had the status of the seniormost family. The next family on the line of seniority was responsible for duties like making houses, bridges etc., in the leikai (locality). The third family constituted the lalmee (soldiers) while the fourth one performed the duty of sungsaroi (public works). The second and the fourth families worked in unison. The families below the above families performed the function of khootnaibas or artisans such as goldsmiths, blacksmiths, carpenters, workers in brass and bell metal and so on.

iii) Loipotkaba

Loipotkaba literally means paying of tribute to the king, a service mainly rendered by the Lois. It also included the performance of heavy duties for the king. These were the services with least honour or status performed by the degraded section of the Meiteis i.e., the Loi/Chakpa, Bishnupriya and the Yaithibi. They did not perform Lallup but paid tribute to the king. These people were assigned certain occupations, which were considered lowly and were not performed by the common and aristocratic Meiteis. These included silk manufacturing, smelting of iron, distilling of spirit, making of earthen vessels for storing water or for cooking, cutting of the posts and beams and canoes, manufacturing of salt, fishing, provision of grass for the king’s ponies etc (McCulloch, 1980:13). The tribute paid in kind was the general rule. However, the tribute paid in coins was also in vogue.

3 SOCIAL ‘HIERARCHISATION’ IN MANIPURI SOCIETY

In their self-identification the common Manipuri people distinguish themselves into Meitei and Loi. The Meiteis are again classified into aristocrat and common groups. The Lois are treated as degraded people. They are now designated as the Scheduled Castes.

Sociology of Labour and Social Stratification in North East India 89

Chart 1 Classification of Manipuri Society

Manipuri Society

Meiteis Lois

Aristocrats Commoners

Previously, the Manipuri society was more based on social differentiation as discussed in the preceding section. However, the ‘hierarchisation’ of the various status groups became prominent with the introduction of Hinduism as the State religion in the early 18th century. Singh (1978:62) identifies three classes of people: noble, commoner and slave while Singh (1986:344) cites only two classes viz, nobles and commoners in Manipuri society. Like Singh, R. K. Saha (1994:85) in his ethnographic study of the valley society of Manipur identifies three status groups among the people though in general outlook they are said to be indistinguishable from one another. They are i) Achou Ashang Macha (aristocrats), ii) Meecham (commoner) and iii) Hanthaba Mee (degraded people). They are the ones, which were created historically based on two criteria:

1) their participation in the overall segmentary structure and

2) their participation in the political organization of the state.

The three-status groups- Achou-Ashang Mee, Meecham and Hanthaba Mee performed the services of Famnaiba, Lallupkaba and Loipotkaba respectively. This caste-like distinction between groups prevalent in Manipuri society has been viewed as Lineage-based Status Stratification. This model is diagrammatically illustrated in the Chart 2.

90 Labour & Development

Chart 2 Model of Lineage-based Status Stratification

6

3.1 Achou-Ashang Mee The people of the aristocratic lineages of the Meitei constitute the status group, Achou-AshangMee. They include the lineage of the king (Royal lineage), the lineages of the families into which the Rajkumaris (princess) marry called Sija-mouwa (Sija means Rajkumaris/princess and mouwameans husband), which can be broadly termed as Connubial lineage and the lineages of the king’s favourite people, which may be referred to as Noble lineage. Those Meiteis who helped the king in formulating customary laws and in provisioning judicial, administrative and military services constitute the royal lineage along with the king and his sons (Ningthoumacha or prince). The lineage of the chiefs constitutes the Noble lineage. Intermarriage between the Royal lineages and the other Meitei lineages, mainly of the Noble lineages broadened the base of the aristocracy. Within this group also, there is a hierarchy. The royal lineage with its power and respect from the people of the kingdom is positioned at the top. This is followed by the lineage of the in-laws of the Royal lineage, and the people favoured by the king occupy the lowest rank of this highest status group. With the abolition of kingship and advent of the modern democratic establishments, this privilege enjoyed by the aristocratic people has been made non-functional though the descendants of those royal people continue to hold position of respect and are called

Chart 2: Model of Lineage-based Status Stratification Royal Lineages

Achou-Ashang Connubial Lineages

Mee (Aristocrats)

Noble Lineages

Non-occupational Lineages

Meecham Non-artisans

(Commoners)

Occupational Lineages

Primary Artisans

Artisans

Secondary Artisans

Degraded Meitei Lineages

Hanthaba Mee Loi/Chakpa Lineages Makhutchadaba

(Degraded) Impure Brahmin Lineages

Yaithibi Lineages Ganak/Konok

Sociology of Labour and Social Stratification in North East India 91

3.1 Achou-Ashang Mee

The people of the aristocratic lineages of the Meitei constitute the status group, Achou-Ashang Mee. They include the lineage of the king (Royal lineage), the lineages of the families into which the Rajkumaris (princess) marry called Sija-mouwa (Sija means Rajkumaris/princess and mouwa means husband), which can be broadly termed as Connubial lineage and the lineages of the king’s favourite people, which may be referred to as Noble lineage. Those Meiteis who helped the king in formulating customary laws and in provisioning judicial, administrative and military services constitute the royal lineage along with the king and his sons (Ningthoumacha or prince). The lineage of the chiefs constitutes the Noble lineage. Intermarriage between the Royal lineages and the other Meitei lineages, mainly of the Noble lineages broadened the base of the aristocracy. Within this group also, there is a hierarchy. The royal lineage with its power and respect from the people of the kingdom is positioned at the top. This is followed by the lineage of the in-laws of the Royal lineage, and the people favoured by the king occupy the lowest rank of this highest status group. With the abolition of kingship and advent of the modern democratic establishments, this privilege enjoyed by the aristocratic people has been made non-functional though the descendants of those royal people continue to hold position of respect and are called Rajkumars.

3.2 Meecham

Meecham literally means commoners. These include the common Meitei lineages and also of chaste Brahmin (Bamon) lineages. They are the people who do not have any conjugal relationship with the royal lineages. Originally, this group was formed of different ethnic groups- Meitei Ariba, Nongchup Haram and Nongpok Haram. The first is the only one formed of indigenous people, the second group includes ‘foreigners’ from the West like Bishnupriyas and Brahmins while the third group comprised people who came from the East. The last two groups are now indistinguishable from the Meitei socially and culturally and are part of the common Meiteis.

92 Labour & Development

The common Meiteis can further be divided into occupational and non-occupational groups. The occupational lineages have one occupation assigned to each of them. Agriculture was a non-assigned occupation and there was no prepared list of the sagei, which engaged in agriculture only. But the list of the sageis who had other assigned occupations was prepared. The occupational lineages are again bifurcated into artisans and non-artisans. There were some yumnaks who used to supply primary requirements like clothing to the king. They are known as Primary Artisan Lineages. There were also some lineages that supplied secondary requirements to the king called Khutnaiba. These include: Thangjam (blacksmiths; thang means knife/sword), Aheibam (brass metal worker) and Sanasam (goldsmith; sana means gold) etc. which may be referred as Secondary Artisan Lineages. The non-artisan lineages include Lairikyengbam which are assigned duties clerks in the king’s courts. The non-occupational groups are those who are settled in the Northern fertile land and who enjoyed physical and social proximity to the kings. During native rule, the non-occupational lineages were at the top followed by the Lairikyengbam and the artisan lineages respectively.

The Brahmins who performed priestly duties were viewed as pure or chaste Brahmins and favoured by the former kings. Some of the Pure Brahmins are the priests of the state temple of Gobindaji (Lord Krishna), some of them are the preceptors of the royal families, and some served as the priest attached to the Meitei commoners or the Bishnupriyas. Though at present, there is no status distinction among them, during the reign of the kings they had differential status positions. Those who were engaged in worshipping Gobindaji had higher status than the preceptor, and the ordinary priests had lower status than the preceptor. After the adoption of Vaishnavism as the state religion, the Brahmins were allowed by the king to take lineage names. This incidence that the king allowed them to adopt lineage names put them under the category of commoners along with the common Meitei lineages. Interestingly, these pure Brahmin lineages were not included in the Meitei genealogical structure.

Sociology of Labour and Social Stratification in North East India 93

3.3 Hanthaba Mee

It literally means degraded people. It consists of the degraded section of the Meitei lineages, the “impure Brahmin” lineages, the Loi/Chakpa lineages and the Yaithibi lineages. All the lineages of the degraded status group were formed under certain pressure from the king. It is also thought that these lineages were formed after the creation of the lineages comprising the commoner’s status group. So their genealogical position was fixed in the total genealogical structure below the position of the lineages of the commoners. Like the Meecham, the degraded Meitei lineages also composed of Meitei Ariba, Nongchup Haram and Nongpok Haram who, of course, are degraded ones unlike the Meecham. They are often loosely called loi- a word denoting low status. They differ from the common Meitei on the ground that they were either forced by the king to accept some occupations or were not allowed to settle down in the fertile Northern plains of the valley. Although they were assigned lowly occupations they differ from the Loi/Chakpa in so far as traditionally they adhere to non-derogatory occupations. They are specifically identified by the name of their residence. They have two divisions namely, i) those who were subjugated and isolated, and were not allowed to live in the upper part of the valley, such as the Moirang people, and ii) those who were forced to settle down in fixed villages in the lower part of the valley that comprised predominantly of marshy low lands.

The latter group i.e., the Loi/Chakpa is again divided into two categories, namely, those who were forced to accept assigned occupation and those who were free of assigned occupations. Some of the assigned occupations were derogatory while others were not. The villagers of Ithing and Thanga for instance were assigned fishing-a non-derogatory occupation as their means of livelihood. The villagers of Chairel were assigned pot making- a derogatory occupation. The people of Wangoo village were not forced to accept any assigned occupation.

The impure Brahmins comprised those who do not perform their duties perfectly or adhere to the prescribed ritual and social norms. They are divided into- makhutchadaba and the ganaks or konoks. The makhutchadabas

94 Labour & Development

do not respect the food interdiction. So the Meitei do not appoint them as cook in the communal feast. They can, however, officiate in ceremonies because they attend to their sacred commitments. Even then the high status Gouriya Meiteis do not appoint them as priests. Since the ganaks do not respect both the ritual and food prescriptions at any time they are considered most impure and are not allowed to act as a priest or as a cook in ceremonial functions. They primarily function as astrologers and are considered lower than the makhutchadabas.

The creation of the Yaithibi lineages is connected with their most derogatory act. Literally Yaithibi means bad luck (yai means luck and thibi means bad). Though they come under the Meitei fold they were considered as outcastes. The Meitei version of the excommunication of the Yaithibi is that they were exiled because of their indulgence in socially tabooed behaviours such as marrying close relatives like sisters, stepmothers and other near kin. These people also comprised descendants of criminals who were exiled to the border areas so as to prevent any social communication with the Meiteis. They were viewed as untouchables and grouped in one village, Waithou, situated near Thoubal Khunou. It is believed that they served as scavengers in the king’s palace. Otherwise, they were not allowed to move freely in the Meitei villages and even their shadows were considered impure.

It has been highlighted in the foregoing section that the Manipuri society was a feudal2 society with the dominance of institutions like lallup and loipotkaba. Since the beginning of the twelfth century there has been a process of ‘feudalisation’ of occupation in Manipur. The two major factors that have contributed to this process were: first, the enforcement of the royal decree Loyumba Shilyen in 1110 AD and second, the adoption of Hinduism as the state religion in 1714 AD. The feudalisation of Meitei society was associated with the king taking control over people’s labour and assigning specific occupations to each lineage group. This process also gave rise to sex role differentiation of labour and formalisation of hierarchy by ascribing different values to different occupations.

In traditional Indian society, one’s occupation is a function of caste. However, in Manipur, a family becomes an occupational unit by virtue of the fact that the king has assigned a particular occupation. For

Sociology of Labour and Social Stratification in North East India 95

instance, a particular job was assigned to a particular yumnak (lineage). Thus the names of each yumnak would normally indicate the occupation assigned to them traditionally. Though weaving for domestic use was the function of every household the alliance of lineages with productive labour processes was formally institutionalized in the early twelfth century during king Loyumba’s reign (1074-1112 AD) (Hodson, 1989:27). The king’s control over the economic production of the artisans is clearly embodied in the royal decree Loyumba Shilyen issued by the king himself in 1110 AD. The code was based on the earlier codes and conventions current during the previous reigns. The decree is regarded as the first written constitution of Manipur. Later kings like Kyamba (1467-1508), Khagemba (1597-1652), Garibniwaz (1709-1748), Bhagyachandra (1763-1798) and Chourjit (1803-13) further expanded and strengthened the decree.

The decree Loyumba Shilyen deals with the distribution of occupations according to yumnak (lineage), assignment of duties to priest and priestess (Maibas and Maibis), assignment of responsibilities for the maintenance of the abode of deities (Umanglais) to selected sageis, creation of administrative departments (Loishangs), duties and functions of kings and queens, royal etiquette, titles and decorations awarded to the nobles, administration of justice, keeping of standard time and many other things (Khulem, 1980). The decree was basically written for two purposes, one, to organize the division of labour and to avoid social conflict within the community and even outside it, and the other to maintain royal control over the subjects.

The above account brings out the evolution of social differentiation and ‘hierarchisation’ in Manipuri society. In the following section, we shall be situating handloom weaving in the context of social difference and hierarchy prevailing in the Manipuri society.

4 CONTEXUALISING ‘FEUDALISATION’ OF HANDLOOM WEAVING AS AN OCCUPATIONAL CRAFT

Weaving is the torchbearer of Manipur culture and heritage. It is a household activity based on age-old tradition. Each aspect of the life of Manipuri people, either of cultural value or of social establishment, finds vivid reflection in its material culture. There is no material culture

96 Labour & Development

that is comparable to traditional costume with respect to establishing the ethnic identity, social hierarchy, aesthetic attainment and religious concept rooted in the cultural ethos of any ethnic group (Roy, 1979). For example, there are a number of myths in Manipur that talk about the introduction of cotton plant and the art of weaving. This account of the origin of cotton plant and the art of weaving, as given in the ancient texts, signify the sacredness of weaving as a practice.

In the case of cottage industries like handloom and dyeing, the weaving of different types of cloths was assigned to different yumnaks or sageis (lineages) belonging to various yek-salai (clan).3 These occupations were distributed to 34 lineages. It is further reported that most of the traditional dyes were produced and developed under the king Loyumba’s patronage. The tasks of dyeing were distributed to eight lineages. It is mentioned in Mashin (manuscript dealing with the duties allotted to the people) that the color of the yarn used in weaving the Ningthouphi (King’s cloth) was dyed in diverse colours by different lineages (Devi, 1998:87). The assigned occupations of the lineages were not interchangeable. Those who failed to conform to the orders of the king were punished by sending them into exile and reducing them to a degraded class or status of Loi. This system of strict ascribed specialisation is a vivid example of ‘patriarchal feudalism’. It did not give the women weavers the freedom to engage in diverse weaving crafts. The following table gives the list of the names of lineages with their respective assigned crafts:

Table 2.3 List of lineages with their assigned crafts

Name of lineage Weaving craft

Thingucham Mungphi

Lairellakpam Laiphi

Kaswam Wana Katang Phi

Chakpa Thiyam Laiphi Tonkap

Chakpa Lampam Phiren

Kongpacham Langtomphi

Thonngkabam Yarongphi

Sociology of Labour and Social Stratification in North East India 97

Name of lineage Weaving craft

Khumallabam Chamiphi

Haokhom Tungkap Phi

Laikhuram Sarong Phi

Salchiram Leirum Phi

Wahengbam Dolai Kup Phi

Kabacham Dolai Thanaba Phi

Apucham Phiren Phi

Haodijam Heikoi Phi

Thodingcham Singkap Phi

Thongpam Laiyek Phi

Kongbam Purum Phi

Chingkhalpam Tarao Phi

Thinpam Pumthit Phanek

Taibangcham Phimu Yekpa Phi

Yumlenpam Nongphi

Wokthiyambam Khunung Musum Phi

Chakpram Phiren

Thoudam Phagang Phi

Nongthombam Ningthouphi

Ahongsangbam Embroidery work

Ninghthoujam Chinphi

Khoirisumbam Khunung ChumkhunPhi

Yumnak Sangbam Chingkhong Phi

Khoisnam Phimu Lanphi

Singkhangbam Khunung Mathang Phi

Chingkhwapam Korou Phi Phingang

Wangpacham Shangmi Lanmu Phi

98 Labour & Development

The hierarchy in the society finds expression the products of the female craftsperson. Consequently, instead of elaborate paraphernalia of regal grandeur, the colour, size, shape of the simple wearing apparels and ornaments were used to signify the status of the chief and other dignitaries. This became an important factor in the development of crafts work in the society. To differentiate the chief from the serf, the craftsmen (craftswomen in this context) had to produce goods of superior appearance and durability in terms of colour, design and quality. This put the craftswomen continuously on the attempt to improve their skill and constant experimentation with vegetable dyes and different variety of threads viz., cotton, silk etc., to attain excellence (Haobam, 1991:207).

It is further reported that most of the traditional dyes were produced and developed under Loyumba’s patronage. The tasks of dyeing were distributed to eight lineages as follows:

Table 2.4 List of lineages engaged in yarn dyeing

Name of lineage Colour of yarnAkangcham Leirel Khoipaklei (light pink) Chingakham Chengsang Muyumlei (light brown)Irom Ureirom Makhong Meiri (flame red)

Khumanthem Higok Nanou Lei (light blue)Khumukcham Kumlang Kumpal Lei (black)

Ipusangbam Chingya Napu Lei (yellow)

Washiyampam Sanglen Yaichu Lei (deep green)Phijam Loirang Thangchulei

It is mentioned in Mashin that the color of the yarn used in weaving the Ningthouphi (King’s cloth) was dyed in diverse colours by different lineages (Devi, 1998:87). The lineages that were involved in weaving were different from those in dyeing. Thus, there is division of labour among the lineage groups in both weaving and dyeing.

An important dimension that calls for examination here is the culture of silk production that took place after the adoption of Hinduism.

Sociology of Labour and Social Stratification in North East India 99

The manufacture of silk cloths was entirely in the hands of the Lois (Hodson, 2003: 27-28). Anyone who dared to engage in the production of silk faced the risk of losing his position and reduced to a Loi. This is because after the adoption of Hinduism as the state religion in the early 18th century the concept of purity and pollution has attained a major significance in the Manipuri society. As per the ‘new Hindu value system’ since production of silk involves killing of silk worms it is considered as a polluted activity.4 Thus, the production of silk used to be on a very limited scale. However, today anyone either belonging to Loi community or not engages in silk culture. This activity has become one of the main occupations and major source of income among the women, irrespective of lineage or status groups in Manipur, particularly with the commencement of the sericulture project funded by the Japanese government in 1997.

5 CONCLUSION

From the discussion above, there are strong indication that there is pervasiveness of both hierarchy and difference in handloom weaving in Manipuri society that is different from the one based on caste. In Manipur, weaving like agriculture is a primary occupation which provides people their basic requirements. Weaving of certain cloth as an occupational craft was assigned to various lineage groups by the king. Each assigned lineage group was to weave a particular design of cloth. No other lineage group could weave the design of cloth given to another lineage group. The weavers are considered as primary artisans and they belong to the commoner lineage. Thus, the weavers are above the degraded lineage but below the aristocratic lineage in the status hierarchy, except with respect to silk where the job was allocated to the degraded lineage of Lois. Thus, it shows that Manipuri society is a lineage-based society with hierarchical division of people on the basis of lineage and not caste. Though the allocation of specific occupation to specific lineage is reminiscent of caste-like stratification, close observation of the situation reveals some difference between the two models of stratification.

The social structure of Indian society is based on the ascribed hierarchy of caste and non-competitive division of labour among various status

100 Labour & Development

groups. Social anthropologists like Louis Dumont considered caste system to be a feature that developed only with the socio-cultural context of Hindu values of hierarchy guided by the idea of ‘purity’ and ‘pollution’ associated with ritual status of Hinduism. Other scholars such as McKim Marriot and Fredrik Barth hold a different view that structure of caste system may be developed without the support of the Hindu ideology of purity and pollution. Marriot states that an elaborate system of caste ranking depends on systematic interaction among the members of various ethnic groups at the local level in a specific context of demographic profile. The study, which is based on five regions- Kerala, Coromandel, Upper Ganges, Middle Indus and Bengal, postulates that a system of caste-like social ranking may exist beyond the context of Hindu society (Marriot, 1955).

Fredrik Barth follows the same view and states that a cluster of statuses characterise the position of the caste groups. He relates endogamy to the kinship system, cooperated professional specialization to the economic system and dominance to define the concretized nature of caste hierarchy, which he prefers to call as ‘the principle of status summation’ (Barth, 1971). His study is an important contribution in this direction as the ethnic groups of Swat Pathan that he studied are characteristically situated at the periphery of Hindu civilization.

In the light of the above views, we can claim that the Manipuri society has the unique case of inter-ethnic relationship viz., from a tribal base segmentary system to a system of highly centralized institution of kingship. Although Manipur had been influenced since 18th Century by Brahmanical culture of Vaishnavite Hindu, originated from Bengal, it offers a unique pattern of caste-like social stratification, which developed out of the interaction between the indigenous system of social differentiation and principle of purity and pollution of Hindu caste system. The inter-group hierarchy in Manipur valley is basically a pattern of status hierarchy, which is built into the genealogical structure and political organization outside the core pattern and varna-jati hierarchy (Shah, 1994:195).

Sociology of Labour and Social Stratification in North East India 101

NOTES

1 Under the pothang system, whenever those officials used to go on tour they forced the villagers to carry their luggages free of cost.

2 Feudalism flourished between the tenth and thirteenth centuries in Western Europe. At its core, it was an agreement between a lord and a vassal. A person became a vassal by pledging political allegiance and providing military, political, and financial service to a lord. A lord possessed complete sovereignty over land, or acted in the service of another sovereign, usually a king. If a lord acted in the service of a king, the lord was considered a vassal of the king. The meaning of feudalism has expanded since the seventeenth century, and it now commonly describes servitude and hierarchical oppression.

3 The main feature of the social structure of the Meiteis is the institution of Yek-Salai. It is a large exogamous unit, each tracing itself to a common mythical ancestor, who is part of Meitei Divine Pantheon. It can be loosely translated as clan. Meitei society has seven patrilineal units known as Yek-Salais. These seven Yek-Salais are Mangang, Luwang, Khuman, Moirang, Angom, Khabanganba and Sarang-Leishangthem (also called Chenglei).

4 Silk moths lay eggs on specially prepared paper. The eggs hatch and the caterpillars (silkworms) are fed fresh mulberry leaves. After about 35 days and 4 moltings, the caterpillars are 10,000 times heavier than when hatched, and are ready to begin spinning a cocoon. A straw frame is placed over the tray of caterpillars, and each caterpillar begins spinning a cocoon by moving its head in a “figure 8” pattern. Two glands produce liquid silk and force it through openings in the head called spinnerets. Liquid silk is coated in sericin, a water-soluble protective gum, and solidifies on contact with the air. Within 2–3 days, the caterpillar spins about 1 mile of filament and is completely encased in a cocoon. The silk farmers then kill most caterpillars by heat, leaving some to metamorphose into moths to breed the next generation of caterpillars.

102 Labour & Development

REFERENCES

Abercombie, N. et al. (1994), Dictionary of Sociology, London: Penguin.

Barth, Fredrik (1971), ‘The System of Social Stratification in Swat, North Pakistan’, in E. R. Leach (ed.) Aspects of Caste in South India, Ceylon and North West Pakistan, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Brown, R. (1975), Statistical Account of the Native State of Manipur and the Hill Territory under its Rule, Calcutta: OSG Printing.

Devi, K. Sobita (1998), Traditional Dress of the Meiteis, Imphal: Bhubon Publishing House.

Dunn, E. W. (1992), Gazetter of Manipur, Delhi: Manas Publication.

Gupta, Dipankar (ed) (2005), Social Stratification. New Delhi: Oxford University Press.

Haobam, Shyamsunder (1991), ‘Arts and Crafts in Manipur’, in N. Sanajaoba (eds.) Manipur: Past and Present, New Delhi: Mittal Publications.

Hodson, T. C. (2003), The Meitheis, Delhi: Low Price Publications.

Kamei, Gangmumei (1991), History of Manipur (Pre Colonial Period), Vol. 1. New Delhi: National Publishing House.

Khulem, Chandrashekhar Singh (ed.) (1980), Umanglai Khunda, Imphal: All Manipur Umanglai Haraoba Committee.

Marriot, McKim (1955), ‘Little Communities in an Indigenous Civilization’, in McKim Marriot (eds.) Village India, Chicago: The University of Chicago.

McCulloch, W. (1980), An Account of the Valley of Manipur, Delhi: Gyan Publication.

Mutua, Bahadur (1997), Traditional Textiles of Manipur, Imphal: Mutua Musuem.

Ramaswamy, V. (2006), Textiles and Weavers in South India, USA: Oxford University Press.

Roy, Nilima (1979), Art of Manipur, Delhi: Agam Kala Prakashan.

Sociology of Labour and Social Stratification in North East India 103

Scott, William P. (2005), Dictionary of Sociology, Delhi: Goyal Publishers and Distributors.

Shah, R. Kumar (1994), Valley Society of Manipur, Calcutta: Punthi Pustak.

Singh, K.B. (1978), ‘Social Stratification and Mobility in Manipur’ in S. M. Dubey (ed.) North East India: A Sociological Study, Delhi: Concept Publishing House.

Singh, W. Ibungohal (1986), History of Manipur: An Early Period, Imphal: Manipur Commercial Co.

Singh, L. Ibungohal and Singh, Kh. Khelchandra (ed.) (1989), Cheitharol Kumbaba. Imphal: Manipur Sahitya Parishad.