Socio-Economic Structure and Peasant Revolt: Moamoria Upsurge in the 18th Century Assam

Indian Anthropological Association is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Indian Anthropologist.

http://www.jstor.org

Indian Anthropological Association

Socio-Economic Structure and Peasant Revolt : The Case of Moamoria Upsurge in the Eighteenth Century Assam Author(s): Chandan Kumar Sharma Source: Indian Anthropologist, Vol. 26, No. 2 (December, 1996), pp. 33-52Published by: Indian Anthropological AssociationStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/41919803Accessed: 16-06-2015 12:29 UTC

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at http://www.jstor.org/page/ info/about/policies/terms.jsp

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

This content downloaded from 14.139.219.242 on Tue, 16 Jun 2015 12:29:46 UTCAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

http://www.jstor.org

http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=indanthassoc

http://www.jstor.org/stable/41919803

http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp



indián Anthropologist (1996) 26 : 2,33-52

Socio-Economic Structure and Peasant

Revolt : The Case of Moamoria Upsurge in the Eighteenth Century Assam

Chandan Kumar Sharma

Although there exists a plethora of literature on the peasant movements in India in different periods-pre-colonial, colonial and post-colonial-those in Assam remain by and large neglected ones. But the fact is that this region can boast of a very glorious tradition of peasant struggles in different times. The one we are going to discuss in this paper, in fact consists of a series of armed rebellions by the peasantry against the Ahom state spanning over several decades in the second half of the 18th century. Known popularly as the 'Moamoria rebellions', these peasant struggles transmuted the coursg of Assam history in a decisive manner. Although some scholars (for instance, Gough 1974:1392) have made references to this protracted peasant upsurge, yet it has not received the kind of attention it deserves from the scholars from India and abroad.

A Short Note on the Ahoms and the Ahom State

The Ahoms, an offshoot of the great Tai or Shan race (Gait 198:70) entered Assam through its eastern border from upper Burma in 1228 A.D. They faced stiff resistance from the native tribes. But the Ahoms emerged triumphant after a prolonged period of conflict and became the ruler of the vanquished tribes. The Ahoms entered into marital relations with the autochthons and gradually embraced local customs and language. From the 16th century, the process of Hinduization gained strong ground among the Ahoms. This was the result of the expansion of the Ahom state towards the western parts of the

CHANDAN KUMAR SHARMA, Department of Traditional Culture and Art Forms, Tezpur University, Tezpur-784 001 (Assam).



34 SOCIO-ECONOMIC STRUCTURE

Brahmaputra valley which came under the influence of sanskritic customs and traditions much earlier than the upper Assam. The expansion of the kingdom was facilitated by the development of the forces of production in the Ahom state yielding a greater surplus in place of the low or no surplus yielding erstwhile dry rice or shifting cultivation. It was a period when the Ahom state was undergoing a transition from a semi-tribal socio-economic structure to a feudal one.

Socio-Economic Background of the Upsurge

In order to grapple with the factors responsible for the Moamoria upsurge, it is imperative to have a clear idea about the socio-economic conditions of the contemporary Ahom state. This calls for a detail discussion of the organization of the production system in the latter which is manifestated in the paik and the khel systems.

The Paik System

The paik system was a state-organized system of compulsory labour exploitation. The paik and khel systems were the primary organizing basis of the Ahom state. Although the elements of these systems were existent in upper Assam right from the days when settled agriculture was introduced by the Ahoms, they were quite unorganised. These amorphous elements were initially tried to be organised during the reign of Susengpha Pratap Singha in around 1611 A.D. But they were organized extensively and exhaustively only in 1653 A.D. during the reign of Surampha Jayaddhaj Singha.

All active people of the state in the age group of 16 to SO years came under the purview of the paik system. Each individual was called a paik. The ordinary paiks were called kanri (archer) paiks. A got was formed with 4 paiks. The gots were the primary units of the production system. Each paik from a got had to render compulsory physical service to the state without any wage for 3 months a year. When a paik was busy in his compulsory state service, the other members of the got used to look after his land and household. The public works which the paiks had to do included land reclamation from forests and marshes or leveling of highlands for cultivation, construction of dams to resist floods, roads for communication, and ponds, tanks, etc. for water supply and so on. They also had to render manual service in the construction of temples, buildings, etc. that the ruling class undertook from time to time. It was again they who erected massive fortifications for the purpose of defence. They also had to



Indian Anthropologist ( 1 996) 26:2 35

produce crops, vegetables, etc. in the khats and pams (estates attached to the king and thé nobility). Besides, at the times of war, these paiks had to go to the battlefront as soldiers, as the Ahom state did not have a regular army. Thus, whether in times of war or peace, one-fourth of the paiks were always in a state of mobilisation for compulsory state service.

The paiks , especially during their service period, had no individual liberties. They had to do whatever was asked from them. They did not have minimum right over goods produced by them. They were not even provided with food during their service period-public or private. They were given only 2.66 acres of wet rice land (which was usufruct), the yield from which enabled them to live only at subsistence level. The land ownership belonged to a khel. When a paik died or was lost, his land went back to the khel. Thus, the paiks didnot sell their labour, they became instruments of production at the disposal of the ruling class which was the real appropriator of the agriculture surplus.

There were periodic censuses of paiks. Anyone trying to evade the paik system was subjected to ruthless punishment. The paiks were divided into different khels and the latter were under the jurisdiction of various administrative officials. The hierarchy of these officials came down from the royal family to the ministers, lieutenant governors, officials entrusted with the administrative authority over small territories within the kingdom and so on. The number of paiks entrusted to a particular official depended on his political position and military necessity. These officials had to bring out a definite number of paiks from their khels for public services. The officials were not paid with wage for their services. They were paid with landed estates alongwith a definite number of paiks for their personal use ( likchoms ). However, as soon as they were out of service, the above privileges were assigned to the newly appointed officials. The kanri paiks could be donated to anyone the officials wished. Later on, many such paiks were donated to the vaishnavite series (monasteries), temples and the ecclesiastics. These paiks no longer had to render public services but had to perform all the works of the religious institutions they were attached to which were however, less rigourous than the compulsory state service.

It is to be noted that all the people of the state were not under the same system. The ruling class created different layers within the subjects by providing special facilities to some people. The privileged subjects were called chamua paiks which included traditionally aristocratic Ahom families; jajmani brahmins, kayasthas, kalitas ( a peasant caste) born of prestigious families; some bureaucratic families and the communities who were skilled in some particular




crafts. They were exempted from the compulsory state service. Apart from the last group, the royal portfolios were open for them. Although their land also belonged to the khels , yet their right on land was gradually increasing. Even the king could not take over their land. And even if he did so, adequate compensation had to be paid for that. The chamuas however, had to pay one rupee for about one acre of wet rice land as revenue for their exemption from the compulsory state service. Towards the last part of the Ahom rule, they could even sale or transfer their landed property. They also had the right to purchase slaves. The economically and socially influential chamuas could even come out of the khel system completely. They were called apaikan chanïuas . The brahmins enjoying land as royal eleemosynary, the daivagnas (an astrologer caste), the kayasthas born of well-off families, the ruling strata of the subjugated communities and and that of the Ahoms, etc. were the people who came under this category. They used slave labour most rampantly. A portion of the apaikan chamuas later on transformed into petty feudal lords.

The Khel System

The kanri and the chamua paiks were organized under the khel system. Originally, the khels were organized on territorial basis, which later on provided a kind of clannish unity to the khels, being identified with their respective territories. Most of the khels consisted only of kanri paiks . Some khels were organized with occupationally skilled people entrusted with the production of specific commodities like clothes, instruments made of iron, or the collection of iron, gold, valuable forest products and so on. The khels under various royal officials had the responsibility and the authority of the management of the valuable wet land for sali crop. This reduced the burden of the king, who was the ultimate owner of all lands of the state. Nevertheless, the central administration kept a sharp vigil on the functioning of the khels. The khels also had considerable significance on the regulation of the »social life. It could settle minor disputes among its members. It also looked after the well-being of its members. The occupational paiks within the khels did not have to render compulsory militia duties, but had to advance a portion of their produce to the king or other important royal officials.

During the reign of the king Rajeswar Singha (1751-1759 A.D.), the gots of paiks came to be constituted with three members instead of earlier four. This was necessitated to meet the situation of labour crisis that cropped up in the wake of the increasing transformation of kanri paiks to chamuas .

The Emergence of Classes

With the expansion of the Ahom territory, there emerged a hierarchy of officials entrusted with the administration of different areas within the Ahom



Indian Anthropologist (1996) 26 : 2 37

state. The portfolios of borphukan (the officer-in-charge of lower Assam), borbarma (the officer-in-charge of central Assam), sadiakhowa gohain (the officer-in-charge of the area around Sadia in north-cast Assam), etc. are some such examples. There were also other officials entrusted to deal with different aspects of the burgeoning state activities. These officials with the association of the apikan chamuas and the ecclesiastics, formed the ruling class of the state with the king at the apex. The officials were conferred with extensive landed property and personal servants. They could administer justice for the members within a particular khel which came under their jurisdiction. Apart from the exploitation of labour, they also appropriated portions of thçir subjects' produce in various ways. When they no longer needed the service of a particular paik , they used to excuse him off his work, but not before acquiring some booty from him. This booty formed a part of his personal property.

Thus, a nacsent feudal class was sprouting up by accumulating individual property on the basis of the exploitation of corvee service of the paiks. This class had great control over the political power of the state. The members of this class fought amongst themselves for political supremacy. In addition to this royal class, even the religious leaders became sort of feudal lords by dint of their enormous property, both material and human, which they received as religious endowments from the king and their proselytes.

In the lowest stratum of the social hierarchy, there were the personal servitors of the royal officials and that of the aristocratic families. Their lives were fully dependent on the whims of their masters. The provision of debt slavery ( bandha ) was also there.

The class in between the above two classes was constituted by the ordinary paik peasants and the artisans of occupational communities. The members of the latter were involved with their activities of gold collection, iron filtration, etc. only during the winter season as the rivers from where they used to collect iron, gold, etc. got inundated during the summer rains. Thus, for the most part of the year they were also engaged in the cultivation of around 2.66 acres of usufruct land under the paik and the khel systems. So, they did not have any radical difference with the peasant paiks , excepting that they did not have to go for public works.

An analysis of the class structure of the Ahom state also provides some insights into the relationships between class, caste and ethnicity. It is already mentioned that the privileged class of the Ahom state was composed of the Ahom nobility and the subjects of the higher castes like brahmins , kayasthas ,



3 8 SOCIO-ECONOMIC STRUCTURE

etc. who were of th tapaikati chamua status. They enjoyed all the benefits of the state. They also enjoyed good amount of landed estates. The lands owned by the ecclesiastics were rent-free. On ihe contrary, most of the kanri paiks were of low caste origin, including the Ahom commoners, the plain tribes, the fishermen communities, etc. who had to perform all the production activities of the state, render services as likchous in the households of the nobility, go to the warfront and also had to construct all the buildings, fortifications, dongs for irrigation, etc. of the state. Their social rights were quite limited. Thus, apart from the Ahom nobility, the upper class was constituted mainly by the upper castes and the society was quite discernedly segmented on the lines of caste and class.

A Brief Account of the Land and the Revenue System of the Pre-upsurge Era

The lowlying flat and wet lands where sali rice was cultivated was the most important of all the lands in the Ahom state from the social, economic and political points of view. The entire society and its infrastructure was based on this land. The reclamation of these lands by cleaning up forests, by bringing down hills to dead level, etc. involved massive number of manual labour. Legally the king was the owner of all the lands of the kingdom. But gradually, many important officials and the religious institutions also began to enjoy private rights over formidable quantity of land, especially towards the last period of the Ahom rule. Th e kanri paiks used to get only 2.66 acres of usufruct rent-free land for cultivation in exchange for compulsory corvee service which could not even satisfy their subsistence requirements. The ruling class enjoyed the ownership of the best quality lands. The king had a substantial amount of land for personal use known as Crown lands. The wide difference between the ordinary peasants and the ruling class gave rise to a sharp social contradiction and intense resentment among the common people.

The agricultural land of the state was divided into three main categories on the basis of the mode of revenue extraction. They were : (a) lakheraj (rent- free); (b) nisfkheraj (semi rent-free); (c )kheraj (rented land). The lakheraj land was donated to brahmins, ganaks , vaishnavite prelates, etc. for personal use (called brahmottar land) and to the religious institutions (called dharmottar7 land). This kind of land was also owned by some aristocratic families. The latter also owned the nisfkheraj lands which in due course of time became rent-free. The kheraj land were owned by other apaikan chamuas and other chamuas. The kanri paiks had to pay rent for the additional wet rice land they possessed over the 2.66 acres of rent-free wet rice land which was however, not easy to pay in an economy where monétisation was at a very low level.




The main sources of revenue of the Ahom state were the commutation money realized from the paiks exempted from the periodical corvee service, rent paid by the paiks for cultivated lands in excess of the tax-free allotment, and other miscellaneous duties. With the increase in the ownership of lakheraj and nisfkheraj lands by the privileged classes, the revenue sources of the state were dwindling. To compensate for this, various duties were levied on the common people, e.g., water tax (for fishing in ponds, rivers, etc.), tax for crossing rivers, sales tax, wealth tax, marriage tax, etc. Heavy taxation was levied on the people hereditarily engaged in the activities like collection of gold, iron, etc.

One can easily appreciate a situation when a people with little surplus production were imposed with all kinds of taxes, compulsory corvee labour, and utmost socio-economic repression and exploitation by the ruling class. The steady development of this class contradiction prepared the base for the Moamoria peasant upsurge.

A Short Note on the Mode of Production of the Ahom State

At this stage, it will be relevant to have some discussion about the mode of production of the pre-upsurge Ahom state. Though the pre- Ahom social formation was basically a tribal one, the elements of feudalism began to germinate in the Ahom state with the development of the forces of production resulting in an increase in the agricultural surplus, expansion of its boundaries, emergence of administrative complexities and the overall sophistication of the state. It has been already mentioned that the officials recruited to look after different areas especially those distant from the capital, in course of time acquired huge amount öf landed estates and personal servitors over and above those assigned by the king, and they assumed the form of feudal lords.

Another important feature of feudalism, i.e. the correspondence of the hierarchy of land ownership to the hierarchy of political strength, was quite conspicuous in the Ahom system. The administrative hierarchy ran down from the royal family to the three great councillors (the prime ministers), two lieutenant governors ( borphukan and borbarna) and to the officials of various jurisdiction at the bottom. They were assigned different quantities of land befitting their political position.

Besides, though the lands of the apaikan chamuas belonged to the khels , yet their rights over land was gradually increasing. They mostly enjoyed rent-free or half rent-free lands, and many of them later on got transformed into a kind of feudal lords.




The satras (neo-vaishnavite monasteries) played a very important role in the development of feudalism in Assam. The neo-vaishnavite cult propounded by Sankardeva (1449-1568 A.D.) which swayed over Assam in the 15th and 16th centuries, began as a feudalistic religion and feudal elements grew stronger with its expansion. This cult originally started under the patronage of the lihuyan feudal lords in the central and west Assam. The Bhuyans being more advanced in agricultural technology, had experienced the feudal social relations much before theAhoms could achieve the same. Gradually, the satras, which were in charge of expanding the neo-vaishnavite cult turned into feudal institutions because of its internal feudal organizing principle. The satras became the main centres of permanent and steady feudal exploitation in Assam (Gohain 1981). They used to receive massive land endowments, paiks and other valuable gifts from the ruling class apart from the tithe paid to them by the proselytes. A reasonable section of the paiks and total land of the kingdom was under the satras and other religious institutions. The prelates of the satras could administer justice among their followers. They, later on, even began to interfere in the making and unmaking of kings and grew as very powerful feudal lords.

However, the Ahom state did not experience a developed form of feudalism. The Ahom economy was a simple one, commodity production was at a very low level and barter was the chief means of exchange. SihabuddinTalish, who came to Assam with the Mughal invader Mir Zumla in the 1660's, accounted that buying and selling of food in the market was not the practice in Assam. The people used to store a year's supply of food in the houses (cited in Gait 1984:150). Moreover, unlike the feudalism in western Europe, the role of the state and bureaucracy was conspicuously preponderant in the Ahom state. Again, in contrast to the European feudalism, land rights were not hereditary in case of the Ahom ruling class due to the semi-tribal character of the economy. The khel system was in fact a remnant of the erstwhile tribal social formation.

Nevertheless, the Ahom state was based on the exploitation of corvee labour, i.e. the half-peasant, half-slave paik population. Though they cannot be described as serfs, their conditions were not very different either. The paik and the khel systems directly benefited the ruling elites at the expense of the toiling masses. Considering these, Dr. Gohain has defined the mode of production of the Ahom state as 'bureaucratic-feudal' (1976:59-60, 1977:52). However, by saying this, we donot deny the scope of further discussion on this contentious issue.

A Brief Note on the Neo-Vaishnavite Movement

At this juncture, a few more words on the neo-vaishnavite movement in Assam is necessary. Its primary ideological doctrine was bhakti (devotion). It



Indian Anthropologist ( 1 996) 26:2 4 1

propounded monotheism and equality to all castes. It further devised the concept of dasya (servitude) as the form of devotion to the guru (preceptor) only, through whom the proselyte could attain god. 'Clearly, the feudal model of a personal bond between the master and his serf was projected into this relationship. The proselyte regularly paid a tithe (guru kar) to his spiritual lord' (Guha 1991:100).

The neo-vaishnavite sect in Assam was based on a wide network of the satras, each headed by an abbot, the guru. Each satra was linked with a number of villages. Each village had its own community prayer-hall ( namghar ) for holding religious discourses and village meetings. The namghars were thus the nerve centre of the Assamese village life. Later on, with the proliferation of satras , there also cropped up ideological differences among them, some accepting Vedic rites, idol worship and spiritual superiority of the brahmins and some denying them. These differences led to the emergence of four orders or samhatis of satras. Among them, the Kala samhati was the most radical with respect to the original teachings of Sankardeva. The satras of this order flourished especially in the tribal habitat of upper Assam. It had a large following among the lower castes and tribal neophytes such as the Morans , the Chutias , etc. The Moamora satra belonged to this order. The followers of this satra were called the Moamorias.

We have already noted that neo-vaishnavism was in essence a feudal ideology. Its concept of monotheism implicitly advocated the idea of one people under one monarch. This very reason prompted the Koch king Naranarayan (1540-84 A.D.) and later on, the initially hostile Ahom kings to provide patronage to it. Besides, the expansion and sophistication of the Ahom state led to an immediate possibility of the political and cultural integration of the Brahmaputra valley. These developments needed a supporting ideology that would cut across tribal fragmentation then in existence, and would legitimize the feudal rule 4 (Guha 1991:103). We have already mentioned how gradually the satras began to receive massive land endowments, paiks and other precious gifts from the ruling class and became very powerful feudal institutions. Naturally, as time elapsed, many of the satras lost their erstwhile progressive outlook and took a religious stance approved by the ruling class which barred non-brahmins proselytising brahmins and upheld the Vedic rituals and the caste system. Notwithstanding, several neo-vaishnavite preachers, a few of them even brahmins, were executed under royal orders for their non-conformism. However, it is this non-conformism which attracted the tribal population to the satras belonging to the Kala samhati. This was especially irue of the Moamora satra whose radical stance invited severe royal sanctions.




We have mentioned above that the ruling class made massive donation of paiks to the satras (naturally to those which were royalist in stance). The paiks who joined the satras were exempted from the corvee labour service. Thus, with the gradual infiltration of money in the 18th century due to the rise of trade and commerce, many paiks freed themselves from the obligatory militia duties by paying a commutiation money. Better-off peasants and artisans who gained some cash made efforts to commutation of their corvee obligations for a money tax and to acquire the superior chamua status. This created a severe crisis within the Ahom state as the dwindling labour pool threatened the entire

production system on which the former was based. In order to tide over the system, during the reign of the king Rajeshwar Singha (1751-69 A.D,), each got of paiks came to be organised with three paiks instead of earlier four. This implied more repression as each paik now had to render four months of state service instead of erstwhile three. To evade the rigour of the paik system, many paiks joined the satras or came to serve as bonded servants Ç bandha ) under aristocratic families. In the pre-upsurge era, even the buying and selling of slaves became a comhion practice. Over and above this, to compensate for the dwindling state revenue arising out of the massive rent-free land endowments made to the ecclesiastics, the ruling class imposed many taxes on the items of daily use of the ordinary paiks. All these forms of extreme exploitation aroused intense antagonism among the plebians against the ruling nobility. The radical non-conformist satras , especially the Moamora seira provided a sound organizational basis to them. It eventually led to the outbreak of a series of popular peasant revolts - bloodiest in the history of Assam known as the Moamoria revolts.

Emerging Contradictions During the Ahom Period

Althusser (1986) points out that there are several contradictions present simultaneously in a system at a given point of time. The whole Marxist revolutionary experience shows that the general contradiction (that is, the contradiction between the forces of production and relations of production, essentially embodied in the contradiction between two antagonistic classes) canrçot on -its own simple, direct power induce a ruptural revolutionary situation- several contradictions must get fused into one ruptural unity through the accumulation of various 'circumstances' and 'currents.'

The above analysis of the Ahom socio-economic and political structure has brought to light the existence of several contradictions in it simultaneously. The more significant of these contradictions are between the half-peasant, half- slave, ordinary paik population and the ruling class consisting of the Ahom



Indian Anthropologist (1996) 26 : 2 ^

aristocrats, the ecclesiastics, and the bureaucracy; the vassal ruling class and the Ahom ruling class; the neo-vaishnavism and the brahminism; radical vaishnavite saíras and the royalist safras ; vaishnavite abbots and the ruling nobility; etc.

However, among them, the most dominant one was between the half- peasant, half-slave masses of paiks and the ruling class of the Ahom state, reflecting the contradiction between the semi-tribal peasant economy and the emerging feudal relations of production. Indeed, the operation of other contradictions augmented the process of polarization between (he above two classes. For instance, the role of the religious factors was of paramount importance in precipitating class consciousness among the antagonistic groups in the pre-capitalist Ahom society. But ethnic factors did not have an equally significant role in the development of the above antagonism. Again although the radical stance of the Moamora satra helped consolidate the disgruntled peasant paiks , still the people were not polarized in the name of religious faith. Many brahmins (including women) also participated in the struggles against the exploitative ruling class even though the latter provided tutelage to brahminism and the brahminist neo- vaishnavite satras.

The Moamoria Revolt

The antagonistic relation between the Ahom royalty and the Moamora satra led to the execution of several Moamora abbots. Yet, with its massive following, this satra posed a big threat to the royal power.

At this juncture, a few words should be said about the Moranas whose name is synonymous with the Moamorias. They were a plains tribe inhabiting the north-eastern parts of upper Assam. After undergoing a process of Ahomization and later on sanskritization, they turned themselves from shifting cultivation to wet-rice cultivation. But the Morans living in the north of the Dibru river were still isolated and their relation to the Ahom state was limited to being a tribute-paying community. All the Morans were, however, devout followers of Moamora satra.

First Moamoria Revolt

Despite royal persecution, the Moamora satra continued to function and preach among the people, often clandenstinely, through a network of village based tithe collectors ( gaonburha ). In 1769, Ragh Neog, a Moran leader, was flogged by the most powerful and autocratic royal official of the time, Kirtichandra Borborua, inside the royal court, for alleged short supply of the




annual quota of elephants in fulfillment of the vassal obligations. Infuriated at this, the Moran leaders went to the Moamors abbot for his advice to stand against the ruling nobility. The abbot, however, stressed on the replacement of the repressive and unpopular minister Kirtichandra and his cohorts by some popular leaders. He also advised them not to harm the king. It implies that the abbot was not in favour of completely overthrowing the system, but was only for its reform. Despite this, the Morans got ready to launch their revolt against the entire ruling class. They were immediately joined by other Moamorias including the Ahoms, Kacharis, Chutias, kalitas , etc. who were exasperated with the exploitation and repression of the ruling class and were looking for an outlet to assert themselves. This situation already created a crisis in the availability of paiks to do the militia duties for the state.

The ill-armed rebels inflicted heavy defeats on the royal forces in split battles. In the process, they liberated a large territory in the remote areas of the state. It instilled new confidence in the rebels and eroded the same among the royal forces. The rebels then marched towards Rongpur, the capital of the decadent Ahom state. Many royal soldiers (basically the paiks engaged in milhia duties for the state) also joined the rebels. Even the ordinary paiks of Rongpur were sympathetic to the popular force and often dispatched information secretly to them on the movement of the royal force. Under such favorable circumstances, the rebels advanced and captured Rongpur in November 1769. The king alongwith Kirtichandra and several other important officials tried to escape but were captured soon. The king was kept under house arrest and Kirtichandra and other officials were executed.

The rebel leaders then embarked upon the task of establishing a new administration. They selected Ramakanta, the son of Nahor Saikia, a rebel leader, as the new king. All the important posts till now held by scions of the aristocratic Ahom families alone, were made open to commopers. Three Morans were chosen for the offices of the three great councillors, and two ordinary Ahoms as governors of Sadia and Morongi respectively. Ragh was installed as barbarua. An ordinary paik was sent to Guwahati as the borphukan.

The rebel leaders then went to pay homage to the abbot of the Moamora satra , allegiance to whom played the very crucial role of providing organizational unity to the rebels. Heavy penalty in terms of money were imposed on the royalist saíras. They were also forced to pay homage to the Moamora abbot.




Although the peasant insurgents with their hatred for the repressive ruling class of the Ahom state gained massive popular support, they were not inspired by any revolutionary ideology. Most of the rebel leaders hailed from the upper echelon of a trans-tribal society and held junior officers' ranks (neog, saikia, etc.) under the Ahom regime. Once appointed to the higher offices, they also tried to emulate the life-style of the erstwhile nobility (Guha 1991:1 16) and gradually many corrupt practices crept into the administration. Alongwith this, various differences cropped up among the rebel leaders resulting in confusion among the ordinary peasant paiks. Besides, with the demolition of the old regime, the paik and the khel systems also got dismantled. The common peasant subjects thus became free of their militia duties. With this, there occured a vacuum in the social and eco-political system of the state as the new regime could not evolve any alternative mechanism.

Four months after the rebels captured power, caine the spring festival (bohag bihu). The voluntary peasant soldiers guarding the capital started leaving for their villages to meet their families. Thus, the defence of the capital got vulnerably exposed. Taking full advantage of the situation the royalist forces entered the capital in disguise and succeeded in recapturing the city and reinstated the king in power. The reinstated royal class unleashed a reign of terror among the Moamorias. All the important rebel leaders including the king, the borbarua, the abbot of the Moamora satra and his son were executed. Though all their leaders were lost, the scattered rebel forces spontaneously built up heroic defences in many areas but were finally routed. The whole process of

suppression took almost one year. This speaks for the wide organisational base of the peasant rebels.

Second Moamoria Revolt (1782)

The royal persecution could not put out the flames of revenge and rebellion from the minds of the people, especially the heavily tortured Moamorias. The discontentment gradually spread even to the areas where the influence of the Moamora satra was only peripheral. A decade after the first upsurge (c. 1780), the ordinary peasantry of Rongpur, Gargaon (old capital), and the neighbouring areas began to organise themselves clandestinely under the veil of kirtan (collective chanting of prayer) and other religious assemblages. Towards 1782, many secret organizations cropped up in different parts of upper Assam. Internal coordination among these organizations was also established. Several leaders also emerged out of the common people. As they were less in number and strength, they planned to launch a surprise attack to snatch away power from the old regime (Bora 1983:137).




In April 1782, in the wake of the festive atmosphere of thebohag bihu , an arnied group of Moamoria rebels suddenly attacked a convoy of the king under the veil of night and killed most of the royal officials accompanying the king. The king, however, managed to escape. Amidst the ensuring chaos, the rebels entered the capital and captured several important royal officials including one prominent leader of the shakia cult which was accorded royal patronage. But eventually the handful of rebels could not withstand the subsequent massive royal onslaught and were subdued within a couple of days.

This was followed by an unprecedentally ruthless reign of repression. Since most of the rebels were ordinary peasants belonging to the Moamoria faith, all Moamorias came to be treated as rebels and subjected to severe punishment. Thousands of peasant paiks lost their lives and many escaped to the neighbouring kingdoms. It had a very adverse affect on the production system and the economy was on the verge of collapse. The remnants of the paik system which were reorganized after the first upsurge ran into disarray under the contemporary chaotic situation.

The second Moamoria revolt demonstrated that without the active and extensive involvement of the masses, it is not possible to stage a successful upsurge against the ruling class. With a handful of men, a chaotic situation can be created, even political power may be attained, but it is very difficult to sustain this result (Bora 1983:145).

Third Moamoria Revolt (1786-94)

The years between 1786-94 once again witnessed peoples' uprisings which were unprecedented both in terms of sweep and grip. After the two successive revolts, the Ahom administration became vulnerable to a great extent. In the border areas of the kingdom, it lost its authority substantially. It remained strong virtually only in the core areas of the kingdom surrounding the capital. The rebel forces now started their organization in the border areas. These areas were full of people who deserted their homes in the wake of the ruthless royal repression.

Gradually, several leaders emerged from amongst the rebels, all coming from the down-trodden peasant-artisan communities. They were organized through festivals, kirtans , etc. The people from the Bodo-Kachari tribe also participated in these festivals. The rebels within a very short span of time brought a huge area in the north-east frontier of the Ahom state under their control. In the meantime, a contingent of rebels freed the Moamora abbot, who was in captivity in the Aoniati scitrci , and set Gre to it alongwith the satras of




Garmur and Dakhinpat, all royalist satras in the river island of Majuli. These saíras followed vedic principles and had brahmin abbots. The rebels then executed the abbots of the Bareghar and the Budhbari satras , which belonged to the Kala samhati for collaborating with the royal side.

These successive triumphs of the rebel forces over the royal forces attracted many paiks to join the rebels. They gradually marched towards the capital, Rongpur. The vassal chiefs of Rani, Luki andTopakuchi of lower Assam, who came to help the royal forces were routed by the rebels. The abbots of Garmur, Dakhinpat, Dihing and Aoniati satras as well as their hundreds of bhakats (disciples) alongwith the traditional Ahom priests held weapon against the rebel force. But the latter inflicted a crushing defeat upon them. The Morans, under their leader Sarbananda, from the eastern part of Assam, also marched towards Rongpur. Both these forces encircled the capital and then captured it January, 1788. The king and the important nobles somehow escaped and left for Guwahati.

Within a short span of time, the popular rebel forces extended their authority to a large extent of areas. But the rebel leaders made no attempt to establish a centralized administration over the liberated areas. Harihara Tanti, who hailed from an artisan community engaged in weaving, ruled over a large tract on the north bank of Brahmaputra. His lieutenant, Howha, became the ruler of Majuli. Sarbananda became the Raja in the Moran habitat in the north-east part of the Ahom state. Bharat, another rebel leader and a distant kin of the late Moamora abbot, was chosen as the king at Rongpur. Both he and Harihara were followers of the Moamoria cult. The new regime then tried to bring peace to the state ravaged by the civil war. On the other hand, the royalist forces were still creating confusion and trouble in many areas. They indulged in looting, torturing and killing the ordinary peasant population as an act of revenge as these peasants and later on even many royal officials, refused to serve the royal force and instead joined the rebels. When the local division of militia of Bocha, largely composed of the Kacharis, was summoned in April, 1789 by the Ahom Prime Minister, they refused to take up arms against the Moamorias (Guha 1991:1 18). In the meanwhile, the atrocious and sinister activities (e.g., looting of food and property, molestation of women, etc.) of the royal officials who took shelter in Darrang and Nagaon led to several popinar outbursts. A people's force of Nagaon led by Sindhura Hazarika, captured the king's camp in 1791 where the king was taking refuge and forced him to change the atrocious local royal officials. The discontentment spread also among the royal forces of Biswanath (in Darrang) and Koliabor (in Nagaon). and they joined the local Moamorias.




Advent of the British

Finally, the erstwhile ruling class decided to seek the help of the British. Some British traders who indulged in trade in Assam, also requested the East India Company in Calcutta to send an army in order to bring peace to Assam so that an environment for trade and commerce prevailed there. Accordingly, the British Governor General Cornwallis sent a force under Capt. Welsh in

September, 1792. This force though faced stiff confrontation, ultimately overwhelmed the Moamoria forces and recaptured Rongpur in March, 1794. The British interventionist force left for Calcutta with huge sum of money and other precious items in May, 1794. The capital of the state was immediately shifted to Jorhat as Rongpur seemed very vulnerable under the repeated Moamoria attack.

Meanwhile, the rebels kept up their resistance alive in various parts of north-east Assam. By now, the Ahom state organized a new army based on the British model to fight against the rebels. This army was trained, armed with

guns, and was paid with wage. Many recruits of this army were non-Assamese

brought from amongst the Hindustani sepoys serving under the British. This was necessitated as the ruling class no longer could muster forces through the erstwhile paik system and often the paiks were not faithful to the king.

Though the rebellious zeal of the Moamorias had not died down, yet their defeats in the hands' of the British force, greatly weakened them. Besides, due to the prevailing situation of chaos and confusion, the earlier communication network among the rebels got dismantled. Under such circumstances, it became an uphill task for the rebels to withstand the royal onslaught. Despite this, the rebel force under Bharat fought against the royal forces till he was killed in 1799 after a fierce battle. Then the royal force was engaged in a protracted conflict with the Moran kingdom founded by Sarbananda till 1805 when both the forces got exhausted and entered into an

agreement recognizing each other's jurisdiction clearly and the Morans

resuming their traditional vassal obligations to pay in raw cotton, ivory, elephant, etc. to the Ahom king (Guha 199 1 : 1 22). With this, the long and bloody struggles among different classes in Assam came to an end.

Main Issues of the Revolts

The central issue of these revolts was the extreme socio-economic

exploitation and repression of the ordinary paik peasants by the ruling class of the Ahom state. The rebels sought to uproot the latter and appoint their own men in the positions of power. Sometimes, however, there were immediate issues




which sparked off the revolts. For instance, the insult of Ragh Neog, the Moran officer who brought tribute to the Ahom king was the immediate reason behind the outbreak of the first Moamoria revolt.

Involvement of Various Groups

The rebel force was composed of peasants and artisans-both tribais and non-tribals. Though the Moamorias were in majority, the insurgency would not have been so widespread if the people from other cults or sects had not

participated. Again, the revolts were not ethnic in nature. Antagonism was not

against the Ahoms in general, but only against the Ahom aristocracy. In fact, many Ahom commoners also joined the rebels. The revolts were not also against the brahmins in general. Many brahmins took parts in the revolts, quite a few of them being the followers of the radical Kala samhati which denounced the

spiritual superiority of the brahmins. The rebels turned only against the royalist brahmin ecclesiastics (Guha 1991:128). In short, overemphasis on the factors like ethnicity, caste, creed, etc. does not explain the nature of the Moamoria

peasant revolts. It v/as, in essence, an open conflict between classes, in which on the one hand stood 'the temporal and spiritual lords' and on the other, 'the

peasantry and the unconsoildated artisan elements' (ibid, p 129).

Role of Traditional Social Institutions in the Revolts

It is important to note that though neo-vaishnavism provided the

organizational framework, it did not supply the magico-religious support to the rebellious activities. For this, the rebels turned towards age-old magico- religious cults of nocturnal worshippings, which was an admixture of tribal

fertility rites and debased tantricism. The revival of this cult was obvious during the revolts as its secret nocturnal sessions enabled the peassant insurgents to

congregate and discuss their strategic plans. This cult was egalitarian in nature and was also a symbolic protest against the brahminic case society allying with the royal forces. The traditional literatures written under the royal patronage for obvious reasons denounced these magico-religious cults as diabolical assemblies practiced by bandits and savages. Many followers of other Kala samkati satras (supporting the king) also were simultaneous followers of this cult. Despite the sanctions of their abbots, they defected to the rebel camps. Most of these defectors were tribais and untouchables (Guha 1991:121, 124-25; Bora 1983: 137). The traditional institutions such as khels aiso served as units of mobilization.



;0 SOCIO-ECONOMIC STRUCTURE

Role of Folklores

The folklores also played a significant mobilizing role among the

peasant rebels. During the first revolt, rebels chanted at the time of martial exercises, beating their weapon of strong bamboo sticks on the ground : 'Oh

people! the time is out of joint; hold your sticks ready; (Guha 1991:116, Bora 1983:129) and thereby aroused consciousness among the rural folk against royal exploitation. Again, though the rebels did not necessarily adhere to the advice of the Moamoria abbot, yet the latter became the symbol of 'persecuted popular aspirations' (Guha 1991:126). The rebels took vow in their abbots name: 'We will kill or get killed. Repaid be our debt to our guru.'

Many folk songs were also used to symbolically exchange signals regarding the movements of the royal forces. Even some sentries of the royal palace were known to have sent messages to the rebels in the 1769 revolt by singing such songs. Besides, the songs were characterized by their tone of

mysticism by which the rebels appealed to their brethren to renounce their mayo towards the ephemeral worldly wealth and to be prepared to sacrifice their lives to attain their objective. Moreover, there were occasional festivals where different tribes performed folk dances with martial connotations.

Role of Women

The womenfolk also were in the forefront of the revolts. In the first upsurge, the two wives of Nahor Saikia, Radha and Rukmini, even led the rebels in the battle field. With their martial genius, they created havoc in the royal camp. There were rumours that they were even immune to the strikes of cannonballs. These kind of rumours dampended the confidence of the ordinary royal soldiers to a considerable extent. Radha and Rukmini also held important state portfolios under the rebel administration. A brahmin lady, named Chandramala, led a women armed force during the third upsurge. This inspired the Assamese folk poet to describe her as a great sati. The severe resentment of these women against the ruling nobility had been well reflected in the contemporary folklores (Bora 1983:156-57).

War Strategy of the Rebels

The rebels adhered to guerilla warfare. Their force was built up only with the peasants. They did not have a regular army. When the wave of revolt swept the country, the rebels experienced a formidable growth in their strength, but their force declined during the periods of relative peace as during these periods the people involved in revolts returned to their fields for cultivation or




for celebration of festivals or simply to meet their families. The capture and

recapture of power by both the royalist and the rebel forces during the celebration of bohag bihu , the national festival of the Assamese people, only underscores this point. Again the rebels lacked centralized leadership and there was even occasional conflicts among rebel leaders. Lastly, the rebels possessed quite inferior weapons (bamboo sticks, bows and arrows, spears, etc.). It proved futile in the wake of their fight against the British interventionist force.

Conclusion

We have seen how Moamoria peasant struggle was a resultant

phenomenon of the exploitative and repressive Ahom state system. Although there might be some specific issues which sparked off each of the revolts, yet the central and all-pervasive issue of these revolts was the restoration of social, economic and political justice to the people by uprooting the exploitative ruling nobility. However, they did not hav^ the idea of any alternative futuristic

arrangement in place of the existing one. Thus, they sought to re-establish the old egalitarian values of the tribal society which existed before the growth of the feudalistic society under the Ahoms (Gohain 1976:56, 58). The presence of

many remants of the old tribal society, especially among the tribal neophytes inhabiting the remote areas of the Ahom state facilitated such a tendency. Many of the seemingly barbaric practices performed by the rebels in the nocturnal cults were expressive of this tendency.

More than one tribe, caste and class participated in the revolts against the ruling class of the Ahom state. One order of neo-vaishnavism helped provide an inter-tribe, inter-caste and inter-class framework for identification and mobilization among the rebels. Apart from it, the peasants also took the help of traditional magico-religious beliefs, the folklore and the traditional social and

political institutional frameworks for mobilizing support and for gaining psychological confidence in the battles against the state. The massive agitation of the rebels shook from its foundation the once powerful Ahom state which resulted in the usurpation of state power by the rebels. Such was the strength of the ordinary peasants that to regain power from them, the erstwhile ruling class had to take help of the British force. Though the Moamoria peasant revolts ended in a failure, it demolished the exploitative paik and the khel systems which constituted the economic foundation of the Ahom state. This compelled the state to move in the direction of a money economy. The introduction of a salaried army by the reinstated Ahom state in the late 1790's was one such step. But it soon created another crisis resulting in money-stringency. The chaos which the Moamoria revolts created impeded the growth of feudalism which




was in a process of development in Assam. The all-pervading chaos as well as the internal conflicts within the ruling class led to the advent of the Burmese who ruled over an anarchy-ridden Assam from 1818 to 1824 until they got embroiled in a conflict with the British which eventually led to the British occupation of Assam.

The peasants were crushed by the might of state, but they have left behind a blazing trail that injustice generates defiance and an undying urge to seek justice. This blazing trail has the capacity of travailing long distances in time and space. It may grow bright for sometime, remain dormant and silent at some other times, but can never be extinguished.

The author expresses gratitude to Dr. S.D. Badgaiyan for his help in writing this paper. Any error, however, is the responsibility of the author.

References

Althusser, L., 1986. For Marx, London: Verso. Bora, D. 1983, Moamoria Ganga-Abhyutthan On Assamese), Nalbari (Assam): Jornal Emporium. Gait, E.A., 1984. A History of Assam , Gauhati: LBS. Gohain, H. 1976 Sahitya Aru Chetano (in Assamese), Guwahati:LBS. Gohain, H. 1977, Kal Bhramar (in Assamese), Nalbari : Journal Emporium. Gohain H. 1981 Kirtan Puthir Ras Vichar (in Assamese), Guwahati : LBS. Gough, K. 1974, "Indian Peasant Uprisings". Economic and Political Weekly , Spl. issue, August, 1974. p. 1392. Gulu A. 1991, Medieval And Early Cobnial Assam : Society, Polity, Economy, Calcutta : Centre for Studies in Social Science.



Socio-Economic Structure and Peasant Revolt: Moamoria Upsurge in the 18th Century Assam

Documents

Transcript of Socio-Economic Structure and Peasant Revolt: Moamoria Upsurge in the 18th Century Assam