Abstract:
The author in this brief paper examines the administrative divisions, devolution of power in Meiteileibak known as Manipur since the 18th century. Territorial consolidation of the existing Manipur State had been finally made in the 15th century by incorporating the Moirang principality and the hill tribes. Question has been raised if theocracy prevailed in Meiteileibak. In spite of the priestly influences in the secular monarchical administration, the Maibas and Maibis confined their professions to religion affairs. The military institution of Lallup which has its nearest counterpart in the contemporary western conscription had economic role as well. Loyyamba Shinyen has assigned professions to every Meitei family and above all, includes the protocol of the king, the queens and the noblemen. The unique character and feature of the political instrument lies in its highly assimilative quality and durability that spanned a period from 429 AD to 1891 AD i.e. nearly 15 centuries. That the early Manipur nation States was organized by a political instrument for 15 centuries remains a legacy even after the Indian takeover of the nation State in 1949. Manipur's constitutional experience of 15 countries remains a benchmarked of Manipuri polity and civil society.
Materials:
The three vital sources of Loyyamba Shinyen are the original works in Meitei language and script and re-written in Bengali script by Khulem Chandrashekar and Oinam Bhogeshwar. Khulem Chandrashekar's Loyyamba Shinyen (1975), Oinam Bhogeshwar's Loyna Shillon (1967) and Chandrashekar's Masil (1997) embody the early Meitei Constitution and royal protocols, edicts issued from time to time by King Naophangba in 429 AD, King Loyumba in 1110 AD, and other kings subsequently thereafter.
These three puyas (ancient scripts) had been orally and also in written form thereafter handed down generation after generation in the Manipur civil society and their reliability has never been in doubt considering the legitimacy these works enjoyed among the pundits of all persuasions within the State. These works are also corroborated in other chronicles like the Cheitharol Kumbaba and early history of Manipur.
The texts containing similar contents, however suffer from format dissimilarity. The texts had been re-written after every major devastation, particularly Burmese invasions and holocaust, massive burning of Meitei works by Shantidas Gosain and King Pamheiba also necessitated the re-writing of several works. The reliability of the three texts has not, therefore, eroded. Periodization may not be a problem in modern history especially after the British conquest of India, but remains a headache for all historiograpic materials of the early period.
The problem is nearly universal. In this context, adoption of an edict or a political instrument by King Naophangba in 429 AD may be put into scrutiny. Except minor variations, the fact that an organizing political instrument had been operating in Manipur for 14 to 15 centuries at a stretch is well-accepted fact.
No modern political Constitution has been found older than the two-hundred-year old American federal constitution; however, pre-modern constitutions including Manipur's Loyumba Shinyen and other Constitutions in Europe has been promulgated in the pre-republican periods. It could be fairly said that Loyumba Shinyen might have been an edict or an ordinance. It salient feature bore the basic tenets of a political instrument and the author is inclined to consider the instrument as a pre-republican, monarchical constitution of Manipur nation State. By following the Kumbaba name, the author hereafter uses the term Loyumba Shinyen in lieu of the Loyyamba Shinyen, used by Chandrashekar.
Theocracy:
Loyumba Shinyen bears dual features of a constitution and royal protocols as well. Although the instrument has allotted spiritual authority to the Maiba and Maibi (priest and priestess) who influenced the king in certain spiritual aspects of the administration, no priestly power had ever held the political sway in early Manipur. The myth that the king derived authority from divine authority like any other king elsewhere in the world did not lead to a priestly class ruling the nation State. It has to be noted that on occasions, the king intruded into spiritual domain. King Pamheiba had proselytized the Meiteis into Hindu cult under a State policy; however, Shantidas Gosain from Sylhet and not the king remained the spiritual authority in an otherwise syncretic Manipuri civil society.
Jewish political authority had been derived directly from their holy text 'Torah' and they knew not secularization process. Papal States, Caliphates, Vatican state in the present age or Khomeini's regime have accepted theocracy as they didn't render the political authority distinct from the spiritual authority. In early Manipur, it did not happen, the two authorities remained at separate hands notwithstanding strong influence of the spiritual lobby on the civil administration. In the true sense of the term, despite popular imagination to the contrary, theocracy did not operate in Manipur and Loyumba Shinyen has not been a theocratic mechanism either.
Constitutional aspects:
Loyumba Shinyen (the author uses the spelling of the name of the king as used in royal chronicle Cheitharol Kumbaba in the text, yet the title bears the spelling used in Chandrashekhar's main text) contains vital constitutional aspects that bore direct bearing with the civil and political administration of the kingdom. Undoubtedly, the instrument bears royal protocols, occupational assignments for families and clans, among others. The instrument had been updated and enriched by several kings, although the main, basic text had been promulgated by King Loyumba in 1110 AD (circa).
The instrument had been adopted in 429 Ad (circa) by King Naophangba, seven centuries ahead of King Loyumba. 'Luwang Ningthou Punshiba had entrusted this code of life (Punsiron) to king Naophangba, Shameirang, Konthouba, Naothingkhong' (KC-1:17). The edict had been promulgated during the regime of King Naophangba in 429 AD (OB: 8). King Loyumba at this Lang-shang pronounced the Masil (professions) of the different family surnames, divided six administrative divisions, pronounced spiritual functions of the priests who had to look after nine sylvan deities. (KC-I: 17).
The instrument had provided the duties of the king, the queen, functions of Pukramba-Nongthon, four Lakpas (high officials), administration of justice, among others (RK Sanahal in his introduction, OB-iii). The instrument has been incremental and constantly revised.
Naophangba has been considered to be the first human king and exacted tributes from valley and hill chiefs after defeating them in wars (SB 9). Divinity had been attributed to Meitei kings before the 5th century. It is in the domain of mythology and of lesser historiographical significance. Manipuri historical thought veered around divinity at the early stage and worked out in the territorial canvass of hill-plain unity and nation State identity.
After the final hill-plain territorial consolidation in the 15th century Manipur, King Kiyamba had shaped the market system in the valley (OB: 40) thereby launching the engine of Manipur economy for onward drive. Pheida trial and Lakhong trial had been Kiyamba's contribution. King Khagemba set up Government offices and departments strictly enforced the duties of officials (OB 43). King Chingthangkhomba and King Pamheiba (alias Garibnawaz) had reinforced the Mashil official duties and occupational assignments.
Historians consider the regime of King Loyumba - the great law giver, the Hammurabi of Manipur as turning point in the social and economic reconstruction of Manipur (GK: 124). Two schools of historical thought characterize King Loyumba's regime in the context of hill-plain unification. RK Jhaljit has considered Loyumba as hill-plain unifier which has not been accepted by Gangmumei Kabui; however, Gangmumei accepts the territorial expanse of King Kiyamba that reached out to Chindwin.
Loyumba's greatest contribution lies in his royal endorsement of supremacy of rule of law in the civil society and the denial of the absolutist monarchical regime which are the basic features of monarchy elsewhere in the world. A political constitution normally lays down the rule of law, the arrangement of power relationship in a State, a scope for spiritual domain, among others. In that wider sense of the term, Loyumba Shinyen definitely deserves the status of a constitution, although it lacks some of the parameters of a contemporary constitution. The enunciation of spiritual domain in the text, as it is being grafted even in the present day constitution, does not dilute its status of a political instrument that organized the entire civil society.
In the same vein, incorporation of royal decorum, protocols does not dilute its basic feature of being an organizing mechanism of the State. Besides, these domains had been made separable and divisible in the text.
The spiritual domain has been enunciated separately from the other secular provinces. Name of family surnames to take charge of deities have been cited in details (KC I: 19). Assignment for local, native doctors (Maibas) has also been given separately (KC- I: 20) e.g. Thangshapam to make knives, Loukham to generate fire, Lisham to make cane products, Wokrambam to look after the pig and Wanglenbam to beat the drum, so and so forth. The duty of the Tampak Maiba (native valley doctor) has also been defined (8 KC-I: 23). The elaborate distribution of duty of the priestly class in the text of Loyumba Shinyen makes it appear to be a religion-code; however, this inclusion does not alter the basic political feature of the text that keeps the civil domain to distinguishable from the spiritual domain. No priestly class has been authorized to exercise the political power which has been exclusively reserved for the king, the queen, and 64 noblemen, the pana leaders and their subordinate services.
State departments and offices have been clearly defined for the civil administration. The key officials defined in the text are Yubraj, Mantri, Senapati, Kotwan, Four Pana Hajari, Hidak Phanba Hanjaba, so and so forth (KC-I: 6). Some of the offices bore Mayang (foreign) names or words, particularly after the Pamheiba regime in the 18th century. The name of Poirei Meiteileibak is the original name of the nation State (KC-1: 39); but it had been renamed as 'Manipur' in the 18th century only.
This alternation has confused certain sections of historians and misled them to trace their origin to Mahabharata and genealogy of the Meiteileibak kings to that text. No other absurdity than this misnomer has ever maligned the historicity and Manipuri historiography. RK Jhaljit draws the word 'Mashil' from Sanskrit word 'Silpa', whereas original Manipuri terminology like 'Shinmee', 'Shintha' among a host of others use the words 'Shil'. A set of historians always falsely draw the conclusion that every near similarity has been derived from Sanskrit, whereas it may be untrue. Many European words are similar to Sanskrit words and that does not lead to European origin from Sanskrit.
Several officials looked after the State. They are viz Pukhramba, Khurailakpa, Khwairakpa, Wangkheilakpa, Yaiskulakpa (KC -1:9). The other offices are given (KC-I: 14). The state departments have been re-organized during the regime of King Khagemba who enforced the duties more strictly then his predecessors (KC-I: 72). The State officials submit their reports on daily basis to the king. Daily assessment of the performances of the State departments has been the duty of the king and the procedure enhanced the accountability of the administration. Maichou Oinam Bhogeshwar's 'Loina Shinlon' (1967) does not incorporate Hinduized regime of King Pamheiba, but Khulem Chandrashekar's 'Loyyamba Shinyen' makes good coverage of the Hinduized chapter of the instrument; the name of offices and terminology reflect the Hinduization process with utmost clarity. The 'Mashil' of Chandrashekar has been totally Sanskritized and in all probability, the original Manipuri text had been re-drafted by the Hinduized scholars of Maharaja Garibanawaz (Pamheiba). The foreign words did not find a place in the original Meitei texts. The establishment of a separate; Lairikyengba Loishang' at a later stage of history could have been responsible for the large-scale incorporation of Bengali and Sanskrit words in the otherwise Meitei texts.
During Pamheiba Shantidas Gosain and three officials scholars shifted to the Maiba Loishang (KC-I: 9). King Chingthangkhomba made new appointments like Lairikyenba Hanjaba, One Rajkhowa, Khetri Hanjaba, Posts of Kaji for the Muslims, officials for Tripura and Mayang, (KC-1: 13). Wairang Pamheiba created another post of Dewan. The Departments had expanded according to the political requirement of the successive regimes and the Loyumba Shinyen incorporates all the revisions in 93 page text.
King Chandrakirti had created a foreign minister (Awa Purel). The king made appointments of persons above thirty years of age on the recommendations of Shanglak Keirungba. In that sense, arbitrary appointments had been checked; however, the Keirungba could have made arbitrary discussions. We are quite sure that the public services commission did not strike the imaginations of the fifth century Manipuri mind and for the matter, even that of the British.
The Crown prerogative:
The Meiteileipak King did not enjoy unbridled royal prerogative under Loyumba Shinyen, as primacy of the rule of law prevailed upon the royal prerogative. In 429 the edict of Naophangba, the Meiteibak king shall never make two contradictory orders. Two mutually contradictory statements lead to the chaos in the public (KC-1: 34). Same set of orders or standards prevailed in Manipur constitutionalism.
After careful thought, the king shall address the public and his statements shall not be made often. The nobility would welcome his address. (KC - 1:29). Generally, king's address had been delivered once or twice a month.
In a month, the king had to consult the nobility in 20 days. The consultation process removed the absolutist character of the monarchial institution. He sought advice from priests and astrologers and eminent literati, who were supposed to have foresight. Even prediction had been made by the Maichous in King Khagemba's period. Whether kings had Nostradrmus or not is immaterial, but they studied the future possibilities in the decision making process. Defense matters had been received and relayed through the office of the Lairikyenba. Decisions had been more institutional rather than personal, although monarchy as an institution had been very personal.
Dissent among the nobility had been institutionally scripted in Loyumba Shinyen. The nobility would accept good orders of the king to alter bad orders. (MC-1:29). What had been a good order or a bad judgment of the king had to be assessed by the nobility and the king had the authority to alter bad judgments. The institutional arrangement for dissent-resolution had been the hallmark of Meiteileipak monarchy and that arrangement saved his head unlike Charles II or Louis XVI. Elements of democracy had spawned in the Loyumba Shiyen. The responsibility of the nobility did not merely lie in the assessment process or post mortem business; they had to make forecasts and visualize possible consequences of proposed action to be taken (KC- 1: 34).
The Meiteileipak queen also had national responsibility had national responsibility beyond her private regal domain. In 429 edict that had been endorsed by the Loyumba Shinyen in 1110 AD, it had been so stated, 'Listen - let me pronounce King Naophangba's ordinance - Meitei queen shall never reveal her suffering, shall never restrain in the use of wealth for the welfare of the people and the king shall not issue two inconsistent statements'. (KC-1:93).
Relating to the national defense matters, the Lairikyenba read out messages sent from other countries and handed out reply of the king. If messages relate to the purpose of the occupation of the land, preparations were made. (KC-1:80). The duty of army soldier had been laid down in the instrument (OB: 51).
Administration & military organization:
The administration division of the valley in 4 Panas, the civil military complex known as ‘Lallup’ based on the Panas characterizes the political instrument. Barring the defeat of an exaction of tributes from the hill tribes, the pana administration did not reach out to the more or less autonomous village administration in peripheral areas. Conceptually however, the hill areas form a part of the state.
Eight officials supervised each of the four Panas - Laipham, Ahallup, Khapam and Naharup (KC-1). The four Panas are cited in TC Hodsons' widely acclaimed work (Th: 65-67). Cheitarol Kumbaba has recorded division of the valley into 6 Panas during the regime of king Loyumba viz. Luplenlup, Thouchalup, Kongchalup, Lupkhoobalup, Chingcharup and Khaicharup (NK: 9). The six divisions are provided in other works also (NS: 306). There is room for interpolation at subsequent re-writings. Undoubtedly, four major Panas were the administrative divisions. As many as officials supervise the Pana services and there were 35 officials in each Lallup. Lallup has been cited in the political instrument (KC-1: 47).
Lallup has been a unique civil-military mechanism that functioned as military force in time of war and as civil wing in time of peace. The British conceived it as a form of forced labor, some scholars as feudal machinery; but it has been close to some form of native conscription, as it is being done in some of the western countries. The institution deserves close analysis (TH: 60-62, GK: 126; among others). Persons of the age of 17 years and above irrespective of caste or creed had to serve the military services; certain exemptions were allowed for the Pibas or high officials or winners of the annual Pana race. The civil duty of the Lallup was not indispensable; but the military duty was indispensable for the defense of the realm under all circumstances.
The Pana divisions and Lallup systems did not reach out to peripheral hill areas; however, the hill chiefs had accepted the supremacy of the king over them and his overall authority over the entire land and territory. The tribes viz. Chothe, Langte, Khulpi, Aimon, Chiru, Tangkhul Tharuk, Tangkhyl Awang, Maring, Khoipa, Lailam, Tarau, Molyom, Molshang, Purum, Anal, Kamson, Makeng, Langke, Makhui, Kapui, Yirang, Kapui Anouba, Laphak Saram, among other, paid tributes to the central king (KC-I: 88-93; OB:53-67). Loina Shinlon lists sections of valley people also paying tributes to the central king. It would be fair to state that on occasions, some hill chiefs openly rebelled against the State forces that came for collection of tributes; but they had been put down without delay by swift action of the state forces, sometimes led by the king himself. Sometimes, the king had to suffer death at the hands of the chiefs; but the law of the land and territorial integrity ultimately prevailed.
The Meiteileipak kings had opened special office known as Haomacha Loishang, exclusively run by hill people and made arrangement for celebration based of hill-plain affinity.
Mashil:
Loyumba Shinyen provides for the elaborate distribution of professions and occupations to each and every family surname viz. profession of the Maiba (priest), Hiru Hinaoshaba, Pallungba, Takhel drummer, Pana Khangba, Khoirungba, Lourungba (revenue official), Shillangba, Talyeiba, Pheida, etc. 'Loina shillon' provides the list of professionals whose occupations had been defined by the instrument. 'Masil' exclusively provides for each and every occupation for official and family surnames (KC-II: 1-54). For want of space, the detailed lists are not provided in this cursory paper. Legendary kings had opened new departments and new professions and the instrument records their incremental contributions to the State machinery. The protocol component of the instrument bears comprehensive details of etiquette, royal decorum ad nauseaum and demonstrates the weakness of the kings for rivaled loyalty from his body guards and sub-ordinate. Monarchy gives a bad taste to present day republican sensibilities and sensualities and this dead institution deserves no revival under one excuse or another. However, remnants of feudal order would explore reasons to give flesh and blood to the dry bones of the past in the name of the glorification of the past. Their presence is insignificant and unnoticeable though. We examine the past institutions in the context of historiographical perceptions only.
One of the most dreaded institutions is the 'Choranthaba' army act, which has been meticulously performed by Ayang official. Ayang should forcibly capture human beings for sacrifice before the nine sylvan deities (KC-2: 12-13). Choranthaba is one of the repressive mechanisms available with the king and his administration. We wish that these dead institutions ought to belong to the past exclusively. Despite the covert efforts of feudal elements to revive 'Choranthaba' and the barbaric acts of royalty, people who have the taste of democracy would not allow monarchy to revive in any form in 21st century.
Administration of Justice:
The revenue of justice had been looked after by Keirungba and Lourungba collects fees for land revenue works (KC-1:54); for premature harvesting of paddy, fines were imposed on peasants. The fines exacted had been exorbitant and calibrated. The criminal justicing system had been rigorous (KC-2:13). The office of Yingou Angou Panba Cheirap conducted trial of accused who had committed assault by woods, metal instrument, sword, spear, looting by drilling holes inside walls, adultery, slashing the cattle by knife etc. killing of person by group of 2, 3, 5 in conspiracy, burning of the house. Tit for tat was the form of punishment. Eyes of adulterator had been removed. In case of treason, (Ningthoushemba) the offender's body shall be stretched out till dead, shall be hung up by Sarengkhoi. The murderer of woman shall be hung by Sarengkhoi till dead. The murderer among the conspirators shall be killed along with the dead body of the victim. The conspirators shall be exiled as Loi. Justice shall be done. Loyyamba Shinyen adds more offences for punishment like liars, abductors, offenders against the king. The system had to devastate all enemies of the king without leaving any remnant. (KC-1:34). Endogamous marriage had been prohibited (OB-9).
Harem rules had been framed; the offenders had been tried and punished. The offender queen had to be beaten by firewood (KC-1:35). Trial by Phamda had been conducted in the event of misdemeanor involving the king and the queen. (KC-1:43).
Pacha Shallai Loishang holds trial for woman (Kc-1:65). Disputes made at market place had been tried at Lakhong (KC-1:68). Pheita would hold trial of cases relating to loss of goods at market and retrial could be made at Lakhong (KC-1:69). No arrest shall be made at the market place. In addition to these defined corpadeliety offences, woman offenders had been penalized in public under a barbaric system known as 'Khongoinaba' (humiliation in public). The criminal justicing system had been found to be barbaric and primitive. There had been other punishments like 'Ngabongkhaonamba', 'Sugnu Loithaba', particularly for offenders among the princes and members of the royal family who allegedly acted against the king. The espionage system was elaborate. The old proverb is - 'Ningthou Mana Phaklangda thetli' (King's ear is attached to the wall). After the parricide of Pakhangba by his son this form of crime occurred very often among the Ningthouja clan. It could be possibly due to this tendency that extreme form of punishment had been meted out to princes or their relatives- the exact reason is yet to be fully explored.
Discussion:
Loyumba Shinyen had been organizing principle of Poirei Meiteileipak, recently renamed as Manipur. The nation State's survival till 1891 owes substantially to King Naophangba's edict laid in 429 AD which had been given status of final political instrument by King Loyumba in 1110 AD. That Manipur had a rudimentary form of constitution is no longer in doubt. Regarding periodization and minute details, there is room for polemic and further discussion. A central market economy system, peripheral networking, administration devolution of authority, rule of law characterized Manipur polity continuously for 15 centuries at a stretch. This is the hallmark. |
