Chapter XIV: Appendix: The Legend of Creation (4)

When Robinson and Stewart wrote, it was still remembered that the Mikirs had once been settled in strength in the country (now called North Cachar) to the immediate north of the Barail Range, and in contact with the Angami, the Kachcha, and the Kabui Nagas; and that, exposed as they were in this locality to the inroads of the Angamis and the oppression of the Kachari kings, they had migrated westwards to the territory of the Jaintia Raja in search of protection. It was noticed in the Assam Census Report of 1881 that in this region north of the Barail, where there are now no Mikirs, local names belonging to their language indicated their former presence. When they lived there, they must have been in touch with tribes belonging to the Kuki-Chin stock, who have for centuries occupied the hill ranges to the south of the valley of Cachar, and the mountains between that valley and Manipur.

The institutions of co-operative agriculture by the village lads (p. 11), the bachelors' house or teràng (id.), the former custom of ante-nuptial promiscuity (p. 19), and the traces of village tabu resembling the Naga genna, still characterizing the annual festival of the Ròngker (p. 43), all point to a connection with the Western Naga tribes, rather than to affinity with the Kachari stock. From the Kuki and Chin tribes the Mikirs are distinguished chiefly by their pacific habits, and by the absence of the dependence upon hereditary tribal chiefs which is so strong a feature among the former. The customs of both races as regards the building of houses upon posts, with a hong or open platform in front, are identical; in Major G. E. Fryer's paper "On the Khyeng people of the Sandoway District, Arakan," published in the Journal of the Asiatic Society of Bengal for 1875 (pp. 39, 99), a Khyeng house is figured which bears a striking resemblance to the Mikir house. The institutions of domestic and individual life among the Khyengs (Chins), as described by Major Fryer, especially as regards marriage, funeral ceremonies, the disposal of the dead (after copious feasting of friends and relatives) by cremation, the rules of inheritance (females being wholly excluded from succession), the treatment of disease, the propitiation of spirits, and the annual festivals in honour of the gods who preside over man's welfare, present the closest analogy to those of the Mikirs as set forth in this monograph. Like the Mikirs, the Chins are divided into exogamous groups and follow the rule of male kinship; but, like the Mikirs also in this, the approved marriage is that between a man and his first cousin on the mother's side. It has been noticed already (p. 21) that the word for father-in-law (òng-hai, wife's father) in Mikir is identical with that for maternal uncle, òng, and that son-in-law, osa, also means nephew (sister's son). The story of "the Orphan and his Maternal Uncles" illustrates the obligation which lies on a lad to marry his mother's brother's daughter (see above, p. 53). Similarly, Harata Kunwar, though but a mortal, calls his father-in-law the Bari-the Recho ònghai (p. 147), and is spoken of by him as osa (id.), while the fairy princesses call him cousin, kòrpo (p. 127). The same phenomenon appears in the Kuki-Chin languages. In Shö or Chin (Khyeng) apu means both maternal uncle and father-in-law; so also in Lushei, pu has both meanings. The following list of words indicating relationship in Mikir and Lushei (representing the Central Kuki-Chins) shows how closely the two languages correspond in this important part of their vocabulary:--

Mikir. Lushei.

grandfather phu pu
grandmother phi pi
grandson su-po tu-pa
granddaughter su-pi tu-nu
father po pa
mother pei nu
aunt:
father's sister ni ni
mother's sister pi-nu nu
father's brother's wife ni nu

Among all these tribes the most important index to racial connexion is to be found in their languages. No one would now assert that language, any more than religion, is everywhere a conclusive mark of racial unity; immense masses of the people of India to-day speak languages imposed upon them from without, and Aryan speech has extended itself over many millions in whose blood nothing is due to the original invaders from the north-west. Again, the practices of a predatory state of society bring into the tribe slaves and wives from outside; or, as among the Mikirs (p. 33), aliens may be accepted on equal terms as members, thus modifying the unity of blood. On the other hand, it would be equally unreasonable and opposed to the facts to deny that, among such communities as the Tibeto-Burman peoples of Assam, race and language do, constantly and in a general manner, coincide. People who speak a tongue which is unintelligible to their neighbours are necessarily thrown together into a unity of their own. Their ancestral ideas and institutions, secular and religious, their tribal history, must tend to keep them united, and perpetuate the influence of a common origin by the fact that all outside the community are actual or potential enemies. Language, therefore, when it coincides with tribal separateness, is our chief guide in determining the relationship of the hill tribes of Assam one to another.

Here another qualification is, however, necessary. The word-stock of the Tibeto-Burman races is to a large extent identical. The same methods of arranging the elements of the sentence, in other words the same general principles of grammar, prevail throughout the whole family of speech. We must, therefore, in investigating the nearer kinship of one group to another, not be misled by linguistic resemblances which are common to the whole stock to which both groups belong.

In comparing Tibeto-Burman languages it has been usual to choose for examination in the first place the numerals and in the second the pronouns. The vocabulary of nouns, adjectives, and verbs is liable to disturbing influences which do not equally affect the simple ideas represented by number and person. Let us begin, therefore, with the numerals. These, so far as they are necessary for our purpose, are as follows in Mikir:--

one, isi
two, hini
three, kethòm
four, phili
five, phòngo
six, theròk
seven, theròk-si
eight, ner-kèp
nine, sir-kèp
ten, kèp
eleven, kre-isi
twelve, kre-hini
thirteen, etc. kre-kethòm
a score, ing-koi
twenty-one, etc. ing-koi-ra-isi
thirty, thòm-kèp
forty, etc. phili-kèp
a hundred, pharo

Here the first thing to be noticed is that the three numerals between six and ten are not independent vocables, but compounds; seven is six plus one: eight is ten minus two, and nine is ten minus one. In most of the other languages of the family this is not so; the Boro, the Naga, and the majority of the Kuki-Chin languages all have independent words for seven, eight, and nine. It appears to be only in the Kuki-Chin group that we can find an analogy to the Mikir words for these three numerals. In Anal, a language of the Old Kuki family spoken in Manipur, seven is tak-si which seems to be identical with the Mikir theròk-si; and in Meithei (the language of the Manipuris) eight is ni-pan,"two from ten," and nine is ma-pan, "one from ten."

We next notice that ten is expressed by two separate words, kèp (in ten and its multiples) and kre (in the compounds from eleven to nineteen). So far as vocabularies have yet been published, the only other tribes of the Tibeto-Burman family [45] which have a word resembling kèp for ten are Maring Naga, one of the Naga-Kuki languages, where it is chip, and Shö or southern Chin, where gip is used for ten in the sequence thirty, forty, fifty, etc. (thum-gip, thirty, mli-gip, forty, ngha-gip, fifty, exactly corresponding to the Mikir thòm-kèp, phili-kèp, phòngo-kèp). The close resemblance of the other numerals in Maring to Mikir forms is noticeable; four is fili, five funga, and six tharuk. The other word for ten, kre, strongly resembles the Angami kerr or kerru and the Kachcha Naga gareo; in the Central Naga group the prefix ke- has been replaced by ta- or te-, and the words for ten are ter, tara (Ao), taro, tara, tare (Lhota), etc. In the Naga-Kuki group Sopvoma has chiro, Maram kero, Tangkhul thara, etc. In the Kuki-Chin group Meithei tara is the same word: in the Central Chin another prefix, pu-, pö-, or pa-, is used, and we have Lai pöra, Banjogi para, Taungtha parha. There are no Boro forms which correspond to kre, nor any much resembling kèp.

The Mikir word for twenty, ingkoi, is made up of the prefix ing-, and koi, formerly (before the loss of the final l) kol. Kachcha Naga has the same word, engkai, Kabui choi, koi, or kol. The word also appears in Garo (kol), Tipura (khol), and Deori-Chutiya (kwa), of the Boro group; Angami me-kwu, me-khi, mekko, Lhota me-kwi, mekwü, in the West and Central Naga groups; Maram and Sopvoma (make, makei), Tangkhul (maga), Phadeng (ma-kui), in the Naga-Kuki group, and Singpho khun. In the Kuki-Chin languages it is very common (Meithei kul, Siyin kul, Lai pö-kul, Shonshe ma-kul, Banjogi kul, Shö [Chin] kul, goi). There does not appear to be any trace of this word for a score in the Tibetan and Himalayan languages, where twenty is invariably rendered by "two-tens." [46] The Northern Indian word kori, which has the same meaning, has been compared with it; it is difficult, however, to imagine borrowing on one part or the other.

In the series of tens, 30 to 90, Mikir prefixes the multiplier: thòm-kèp, phili-kèp, phòngo-kèp, etc. The Boro group prefixes the tens (Garo sot-bri, 40, sot-bongga, 50, sot-dok, 60, etc.). [47] The Naga group has both systems; Angami prefixes the tens: lhi [48]-da, 40, lhi-pangu, 50, lhi-suru, 60; Lhota and Ao suffix them: Lhota tham-dro, 30, zü-ro, 40, rok-ro, 60; Ao semur' 30, lir' 40, rok-ur' 60. In the Kuki-Chin group the majority of dialects prefix the tens (Thado and Lushei som-thum 30, som-li 40, etc.), and this is also the rule for Kachcha Naga, Kabui, and Khoirao, as well as for all the languages classed by Dr. Grierson as Naga-Kuki. But the Shö or southern Chins not only have the same collocation as the Mikirs (thum-gip, mli-gip, ngha-gip)--an arrangement which also obtains in Burmese,--but use the same words. This coincidence is very striking.

The word for a hundred, pharo, bears no resemblance to any word expressing this numeral in the Boro languages. It agrees with the Angami kra, Kezhama kri, Sopvoma kre, and in a remarkable way with the words used by the Southern Chins (Taungtha ta-ya = tara, Chinbòk phya = phra, Yawdwin pra, Shö (Chin) krat). It will be seen that pha- in Mikir, k- in the Naga languages, and ta-, ph-, p- and k- in the Chin dialects, are numeral prefixes, and that the essential element of the numeral is ra (Mikir ro) or rat. It appears in this form, without any prefix, in several other Kuki-Chin languages.

Here should be mentioned a custom which obtains in Mikir of counting by fours; a group of four is cheke or chike, which corresponds to the Boro zakhai (jakhai). This system is used for counting such things as eggs, betel-nuts, fowls, etc., of the same class; e.g. vo-ti chike phòngo-ra e-pum, 21 eggs (4 × 5 + 1): chike phòngo-ra pum-thòm, 23 eggs (4 × 5 + 3). Possibly one language has borrowed from the other. (This method of counting by fours is common throughout the Aryan languages of Northern India, where a group of four is called (ganda.)

Our conclusion from these comparisons is that while Mikir has few coincidences, beyond those common to the whole Tibeto-Burman family, with the Boro group, it has many with the Naga and Kuki-Chin groups, and especially with the Shö or southernmost Chins.

Before leaving the numerals, something must be said of the prefixes which they exhibit throughout the Tibeto-Burman family. Taking first that member for which we have the oldest materials, Tibetan, the first ten numerals are as follows:--

As written. As now spoken in
Central Tibet.

one gchig chik
two gnyis nyi
three gsum sum
four bzhi shi
five lnga nga
six drug dhuk
seven bdun dün
eight brgyad gya
nine dgu gu
ten bchu chu

Here we observe several different prefixes, once no doubt supplied with vowels, but from the dawn of written record united in Tibetan with the following consonant, and now no longer heard in utterance; in the first three units the prefix is g-: in four, seven, eight, and ten it is b-: in six and nine it is d-: and in five it is l-.

In the Tibeto-Burman languages of Assam and Burma we find the same phenomenon of numeral prefixes; but while some languages have the same prefix throughout the ten units, others, like Tibetan, have several different prefixes. In some cases, again, the prefixes have been incorporated in the numeral and are no longer recognized as separable, while in others they may be dropped when the numeral occurs in composition; in others, again, the prefixes have (as in spoken Tibetan) been dropped altogether.

Of the first class the best examples are the Central Kuki-Chin languages:--

Lai. Shonshe. Lushei.

one pö-kat ma-kat pa-khat
two pö-ni ma-nhi pa-nhih
three pö-thum ma-ton pa-thum
four pö-li ma-li pa-li
five pö-nga ma-nga pa-nga
six pö-ruk ma-ruk pa-ruk
seven pö-sari ma-seri pa-sarih
eight pö-ryeth ma-rit pa-riat
nine pö-kwa ma-ko pa-kua
ten pö-ra ma-ra shom

Of the second class Mikir, in common with most of the Assam family, is an example; in one and two the prefix ke- (representing the Tibetan g-) has been abraded to i- and hi-: in three it persists; in these numbers the prefix may be dropped in composition, leaving si, ni, and thòm remaining. In four and five we have the prefix phi- (for pi-) and pho- (for po- or pa-), representing the b- of Tibetan, but now no longer separable. In six the prefix the- represents the original d-, and has similarly become inseparable. In ten, the form kre represents an original kera, answering to the Kuki-Chin pö-ra and ma-ra and the Meithei ta-ra. We notice that in Mikir, as in the Naga and Kuki-Chin languages, the hard consonants k, p, t (ph, th) have replaced the soft g, b, and d of the Tibetan. In the Boro languages, on the other hand, the original soft consonants of Tibetan are retained, as will be seen from the forms below:--

Boro. Dimasa. Garo.

one se, sui shi sa
two ni, nui gini gni
three tham gatam gitam
four brè, brui bri bri
five ba bonga bongga
six ro, do do dok

In these changes Mikir follows the phonetic laws obtaining in Naga and Kuki-Chin, not those which obtain in Boro.

It has been pointed out already (p. 78) that generic determinatives are used in Mikir when numbers are joined to nouns. This practice is common to the Boro languages and to the Kuki-Chin group (as well as Burmese), but does not appear to be prevalent in the Western Naga group. A list of the words used in Darrang Kachari is given at p. 13 of Mr. Endle's grammar; for Garo, a list will be found at p. 6 of Mr. Phillips's grammar; it much resembles the Darrang list, but neither contains any forms coinciding with those of Mikir except the Garo pat, used for leaves and other flat things, which resembles the Mikir pàk. On the other hand, in Kuki-Chin we have in Lai pum for globular things, [49] the same as in Mikir, and in Shö (Chin) we have for persons pün, the Mikir bàng (bàng in Mikir and pang in Lushei mean body), and for animals zün, the Mikir jòn (Mr. Houghton's grammar, p. 20). Here again the affinity of the Arleng is with the Kuki-Chin group, and especially with its southernmost member, rather than with the Boro.

Turning now to the pronouns, the Mikir ne for the first person singular finds it exact equivalent only in the two Old Kuki dialects Anal and Hiroi, spoken in Manipur, where the corresponding pronoun is ni (Anal) and nai (Hiroi). In Boro the form is ang, in Angami a, in Sema ngi, in Ao ni, in Lhota a, in Kachcha Naga anui. In the majority of the Kuki-Chin family another stem, kei or ke, is used. Here Mikir agrees with the two Kuki dialects mentioned and with some of the Naga forms, rather than with Boro.

For the second person singular all the Tibeto-Burman languages of Assam have nàng, or closely similar forms.

For the third person Mikir now uses the demonstrative la, but, as the possessive prefix shows, had formerly a. In this it agrees with Lai, Lushei, Chiru, Kolren among the Kuki family, and Tangkhul and Maring among the Naga-Kuki group. What the original Boro pronoun of the third person was is not now ascertainable; the demonstrative bi (Darrang), be (Lalung), bo (Dimasa) or ua (Garo) is now used instead. This seems to correspond with the Mikir pe-, pi-, pa- in the words mentioned on p. 80. In Angami the pronoun is similarly po, in Sema pa, and in Ao pa. In Meithei and many other Kuki-Chin languages another demonstrative, ma, is used; this may be connected with the Mikir mi, me, in mini, to-day, menàp, to-morrow (see p. 80). But, although ma is used as a separate pronoun for the third person in the majority of the Kuki-Chin group, the prefixed a- of relation, usual in Mikir, which (as explained on p. 76) is really the possessive pronoun of the third person, is widely employed throughout the family, as a prefix both to nouns and adjectives, in exactly the same way as in Mikir. This coincidence, again, is striking; the Boro languages seem to present nothing similar.

The plural pronouns in Mikir are formed by adding -tum to the singular. Exactly the same thing takes place in Tangkhul, a Naga-Kuki language: i, I, i-thum, we; na, thou, na-thum, ye; a, he, a-thum, they. The plural of nouns, however, in Tangkhul is formed by other affixes, generally words meaning "many" (cf. the Mikir òng).

Mikir has two forms for the pronoun of the first person plural, according as the speaker includes the person addressed or excludes him, i-tum or e-tum in the former and ne-tum in the latter case. The first, it will be seen, agrees with the general word for we in Tangkhul. In Angami also two forms are used, he-ko for we exclusive, and a-vo for we inclusive; the former seems to agree in form, though not in sense, with the Mikir e-tum. The affinity of Mikir with the Western Naga and Naga-Kuki languages seems to be exemplified here also. The Boro languages have not the double form for this person.

The reflexive pronoun or particle in Mikir, che (see p. 80), is represented in Thado Kuki by ki, which is perhaps the same word. Angami has the, Meithei na. Boro does not appear to possess any corresponding particle.

The interrogative particle -ma in Mikir (p. 80) is mo in most of the Kuki-Chin languages (in some -em, -am), while in Angami it is ma, and in Kachcha Naga me. The same particle (ma) is used in Garo and Boro for questions.

Two particles are used in Mikir as suffixes to magnify or diminish the root-word; the augmentative is -pi (as thèng, wood, firewood, thèngpi, a tree; làng, water, làngpi, the great water, the sea), the diminutive is -so (as hèm, a house, hèmso, a hut; làng-so, a brook). Boro has -ma for the augmentative, -sa for the diminutive (dui-ma, great river, dui-sa, brook); but Meithei and Thado have the same particles as Mikir, -pi and -cha (ch is equivalent to s).

The Mikir suffix -po, feminine -pi, corresponding to the Hindi -wala (see several examples on p. 12 ante), seems to be identical with the Meithei -ba (-pa) and -bi (-pi), though it has nothing like the extensive use in Mikir which -ba (-pa) has in Meithei.

The noteworthy separable prefix ar- in Mikir, which is probably connected with the Tibetan prefix r- (see ante, p. 129, note), appears to occur in the Kuki-Chin languages, but does not seem to have any representative in the Boro family. The examples in the Kuki-Chin volume of the Linguistic Survey are found in Rangkhol (p. 6, er-ming, "name"), Aimol (p. 215, ra-mai, "tail," Mikir arme), Kom (p. 245, ra-mhing, "name"; ra-nai, "earth, ground" [nai perhaps = Mikir le in lòng-le]), Kyaw or Chaw (p. 254), and Hiroi (p. 282). All these forms of speech belong to the Old Kuki group, which has already yielded several other analogies with Mikir.

The prefix ke- (ki-, ka-), which plays so important a part in Mikir (see pp. 77, 83, 84) in the formation of adjectives, participles, and verbal nouns, and answers to the Boro ga- and the Angami ke-, has for the most part disappeared from the Kuki dialects, perhaps because it conflicts with the prefixed pronominal stem of the first person, ka-. It survives, however, in the three Old Kuki languages, Kom, Anal, and Hiroi. In Tangkhul, of the Naga-Kuki group, it is used exactly as in Mikir, to form adjectives and verbal nouns, e.g.:--

Mikir. Tangkhul.

to come ke-vàng ka-va (to go)
to eat ke-cho ka-shai
to remain ke-bòm ka-pam (to sit)
to beat ke-chòk ka-sho
to die ke-thi ka-thi

The particles used in Mikir as suffixes to indicate tenses of the verb, with the exception of that for the completed past, tàng, which appears to be identical with the Thado and Lushei ta, do not seem to have any close analogues in the Kuki-Chin or Naga-Kuki groups; they are also quite different from those used in the Boro group. Causative verbs, however, are in many Kuki-Chin languages constructed with the verb pe or pèk, "to give," as in Mikir; and the suffix of the conjunctive participle in Mikir, -si, is perhaps the same as -chu in Khoirao. In Boro the prefix fi-, answering to the Mikir pi-, was formerly used to form causatives, as appears from verbal roots in current use; the construction now most common uses -nu, which has the same meaning ("to give") as a suffix.

The negative verb in Mikir is formed by suffixing the particle -e to the positive root, when the latter begins with a vowel. Similarly, in Boro a negative verb is formed by adding the particle -a. In the Kuki-Chin languages different suffixes are employed (lo, lai, loi, mak, ri), and in a few dialects prefixes. Here Mikir resembles Boro rather than the Kuki group. But the remarkable feature of Mikir in reduplicating initial consonants before the suffixed negative (see ante, p. 85) has no analogy in either family, unless the isolated example in Kolren (an Old Kuki dialect) quoted in the Linguistic Survey, vol. III., part iii., p. 19, supplies one. It is to be observed, however, that in the construction there cited (na-pe-pèk-mao-yai, "did not give"), the verb pèk has suffixed to it the negative particle mao, and that the reduplication alone appears to have no negative force. Other examples seem necessary before the rule of reduplication can be considered to be established. Possibly loi and lai in Kuki correspond to the separate Mikir negative ka-li (see ante, p. 86).

It remains to give some examples of correspondence in general vocabulary between Mikir and other Tibeto-Burman languages. It has been shown above from the analysis of the numerals that prefixes play a large part in all these languages. These prefixes, which to some extent are interchangeable, and also differ in the different members of the family, have to be eliminated in order to find the roots which are to be compared. Again, certain changes in vowels and consonants between different languages regularly occur. Our knowledge is not yet sufficient to enable a law of interchange to be formulated; but the following conclusions seem to be justified. In vowels, Mikir has a preference for long o where other languages have -a, especially in auslaut; [50] on the other hand long a in Mikir is sometimes thinned down to e; the word recho, answering to the Aryan raja, is an example of both processes. Long i in Mikir often corresponds to oi and ai, as well as to e and ei, in the cognates. As regards consonants, nasals at the end of syllables are often rejected; thus within Mikir itself we have o and òng, da and dàm, ne and nèng, la and làng. Some languages (as for instance Angami [51] Naga) tolerate no consonantal endings, not even a nasal. In Mikir itself final l has been vocalised into i or dropped; and in many Naga and Kuki-Chin dialects (as also in Burmese) final consonants have disappeared or have suffered great changes. As already noticed, the surd mutes k, p, t (sometimes aspirated) have taken the place of the original sonants g, b, d to a large extent in Mikir, though b and d (not g) still survive in a fair proportion of words. Boro generally retains the old sonants of Tibetan, and Meithei uses both classes according to the adjacent sounds. The palatals ch, j of Mikir tend to become sibilants, s, ts, z, in the cognate languages; j is also often softened to y in Kuki-Chin. L and r in anlaut frequently interchange in Meithei, the interchange depending on the adjacent vowels. These letters also interchange freely in other languages of the family. In Burmese r has everywhere been changed to y, except in Arakan. L and n also often interchange. Initial d in Mikir seems sometimes to correspond to l in other cognates; and it is possible that Mikir initial s may occasionally be represented by h in the latter, though this is not quite certain. Th and s often interchange in anlaut, some dialects of Kuki-Chin showing the intermediate stage of [theta], which in Burmese now everywhere replaces original s.

Lastly, it should be noticed that Tipura, an outlying member of the Boro group, often exhibits a sound system more closely corresponding to that of the Kuki-Chin languages (which are its neighbours) than Boro, Dimasa, or Garo.

The resemblances in vocabulary between Mikir and the Western Naga dialects are extensive, as will be seen from the list (due to Mr. A. W. Davis) at p. 201, vol. III., part ii., of the Linguistic Survey. These need not be repeated here. The following is a list of Boro (Darrang), Dimasa, Garo, and Tipura words which seem to correspond with Mikir. It will be seen, however, by reference to the columns headed Kuki-Chin and Naga (including Naga-Kuki), that in the case of nearly all these words the other two families, as well as Mikir, have the same roots. They therefore belong to the common stock of the Tibeto-Burman languages of Assam, and do not by themselves prove any close connection of Mikir with Boro.

NOUNS.

English. Mikir. Boro Kuki-Chin. Naga.
family.

nose nokàn Garo, Meithei Tangkhul
nukum, natol (n) natung
nakung Thado nakui Angami a-niki
Tipura, Lushei nhar E. Naga
bukung nakong,
natong
eye mèk Boro megan Meithei } Ang. mhi, mhü
Dimasa mu Thado } mit Tangk. mik
Garo Lushei } Maram mek
mik-ren Shö (Chin) E. Naga
mik mik, mek
mouth ing-ho Boro Lushei ka Ang. tha,
khu-ga Khami kha me-tha
Dimasa khau Shö kho Rengma
Garo màng-khòng
ho-tom,
ku-sik
tooth so Boro Andro sho Ang. ho, hu
ha-thau Sengmai shoa Sema a-hu
Dimasa id. Thado } ha
Lushei }
Shö haw
ear no Garo Meithei } na Ang. nü
na-chil, Lai } Lhota en-no
na-kal Shö a-nho Maring ka-na
face me-hàng Boro Meithei mae
makhàng Lushei hmai
Garo
mikkang
Tipura
mukhàng
belly pòk Dimasa ho Meithei puk Ang. va
Garo ok, Andro puk Sema a-pfo
pi-puk Shö puk Lhota o-pòk
Tipura Lai paw
bahak Thado wai
father po Boro } fa Meithei } Ang. po
Dimasa } Lushei } pa Sema pa
Garo pa, ba Thado } Ao ta-ba
Tipura ba Sengmai } Lhota o-po
Khami } po
Shö }
son so-po Boro f'sa Meithei } chapa Lhota o-tsöe
Dimasa Thado } Maring cha
pasa, sa Khami chopo Hatigoria
Garo sa, Shö cho chapa
pi-sa
Tipura basa
daughter so-pi Dimasa Meithei
pu-su cha-(anu)-pi
Khami
numpui-cho
cat mèng, Garo Thado meng-cha
mèng-kalu mèng-go
Tipura Ranghkhol
a-ming meng
Shö min
iron ingchin Boro shurr Andro sen, sel Ang. the-zhi
Dimasa sher Lushei thir Yachumi
Garo Thado } thi inchi
sil, sar Shö } Thukumi ise
Tipura sir Khami sing

ADJECTIVES.

English. Mikir. Boro family. Kuki-Chin. Naga.

big kethe Boro gadet Ang.
kedi
small kibi, bi-hèk Boro gahai Meithei
a-pisek
bitter keho Boro gakha Lushei kha
Meithei kha-ba
Thado a-kha
cold ke-chung Boro gazang Lushei shik
beautiful mesèn, me Boro mozang Lushei moi

VERBS.

go dàm Boro } Ang. ta
Dimasa } thàng Sopvoma ta-o
Tipura } Maring ta-so
come vàng Boro } Ang. vor
Dimasa } fai Kwoireng } pa-lo
Tipura } Maram }
eat cho Boro za Meithei cha-ba Ang. chi
Dimasa ji Khami cha Kwoireng tyu-lo
Garo cha, sa (Burmese Tangkhul ka-shai
Tipura cha cha, tsa)
beat chòk Dimasa shu Tangkhul ka-sho
die thi Boro thoi Meithei si-ba Ang. sa
Dimasa ti, thei Thado thi Sema ti
Garo ti, si, Lushei ti Sopvoma thiye
tai Khami dei Maram tei-lo
Tipura thai Tangkhul ka-thi
run kàt Boro khat Meithei chatpa Tangkhul ka-chat
Dimasa khai (?) (to go)
Garo kat Andro kat-e
say pu Boro bung Ang. pu
do, work klèm Boro khlàm
think matha Boro mithi
be necessary nàng Boro nàng Lushei ngai
Garo nàng

The above list exhibits all the coincidences which could be found on a search through the vocabulary appended to Mr. Endle's Kachari grammar, and it will be seen that the agreement is not extensive.

The words in which Tibeto-Burman languages agree most widely with one another are perhaps those for water and village; for the former di, ti, tui, dzü, zu, ji, chi, and other similar forms, all apparently identical with the Tibetan chhu and the Turki su, run through the whole family: for the latter khul, khu, ku (Turki ku, kui) are similarly widespread. It is somewhat surprising to find in Mikir an exception to the general rule. Water is làng, and village is ròng. Searching through the tribal vocabularies, Tangkhul Naga (a Naga-Kuki form of speech) appears to have, in ta-ra, the corresponding word to làng (r = l, and ta a prefix). Nowhere else in the neighbourhood is there a trace of a similar word until we come to Burmese, where water is re (now pronounced ye). Similarly, it appears to be only in Burmese that we have a word for village, rwa, corresponding to the Mikir ròng. These coincidences, like others already mentioned, seem to point to the south for the affinities of the Mikir race. At the same time it is to be observed that Mikir appears once to have had, like the Kuki-Chin languages generally, the word ti for water. This survives in the word for egg, vo-ti, which must mean "fowl's water," and corresponds in sense to the Boro dau-dui, Chutiya du-ji, Garo do-chi, Shö (Chin) a-tui. In Angami and Lushei "fowl" is omitted, and the word for "egg" is merely dzü, tui, = water. [52]

It would be tedious to enumerate the coincidences in vocabulary which are found between Mikir and all the Kuki-Chin dialects. We have had reason to expect that these coincidences will be found to be most numerous with the Chin languages spoken in the Southern Hill tracts to the west of the Irawadi Valley; and the following list of similar words will show that this expectation is borne out by the facts. In most cases the forms in Lushei, a leading language of the Central Kuki-Chin group, are added; where they are wanting the Mikir word does not appear to have any corresponding form in that language. [53]

NOUNS.

English. Mikir. Chin (Shö).

male (of man) pinso pa-tho (Lushei pasal) female (of mankind) -pi suffixed -nü [54] suffixed (L. nu, and pui) body bàng a-pün (L. pàng) corpse aru ayo (L. ruang) face mehàng hmoi-san (L. hmai) nose no-kàn hnut-to (Meithei na-ton, L. hna) ear no a-hno eye mèk a-mi, mik (L. mit) [tear amèk-kri a-mi-khli] tongue de le (L. lei) mind, breast, heart ning a-mlüng (L. lung) [angry a-ning-kethi a-mlüng-thö (L. thi-n-lung-sha)] back nung a-hling (L. hnung) arm phàng bawn (L. bawn) foot, leg kèng khön or khö (L. ke, Burmese khyè) stomach pòk pük [stomach-ache pòk-keso pük-tho] hair of body ang-mi a-hmaw (L. hmul) bone re-pi yo'' (Lushei ruh, Angami ru) tail ar-me ho-me (L. mei) old man, chief sar, sarpo hsan, hsan-bo son oso, so-po hso (Burmese sa [[Greek: theta]a]) tiger te-ke a-kye (L. sa-kei, Burmese kya) cow chainòng hsaw-nü (L. se-bawng) pig phàk wök, wo (Burmese wak) squirrel karle a-hle (L. the-hlei) rat phiju pha-yü (L. sa-zu) bird vo wu (L. va) kite vo-mu a-hmu (L. mu) parrot vo-kèk a-kye (L. va-ki, Burmese kye) bat vo-arplàk phalauh crayfish, prawn chekung kye-khön (L. kai-kuang) scale of fish lip lit (L. hlip) louse rèk hèk (L. hrik) land-leech ingphàt a-wot (L. vang-vàt) sun ar-ni kho-ni (L. anni, ni) moon chi-klo khlo (L. thla) night a-jo yan (L. zan, jan) rain ar-ve yo-o (L. ruah, Burmese rwa) fire me me (L. mei) [a flint for me-chèt a-lòng me-kha-lün (L. mei-lung), striking fire i.e. fire-spark-stone] fire-spark-stone smoke mihi me-khü (L. mei-khu) steam hi a-hu (L. hu) stone ar-lòng a-lün (L. lung) rice sàng saung vegetables hàn awn (L. an) house hèm in (L. in, Burmese im) wood, tree thèng, thèngpi then'' (L. thing) leaf lo law (Meithei la, Thado na, L. hna) fruit a-the the (L. thei) seed a-the se cotton phelo phoi broom ar-phèk pha-phe iron ingchin n'thi (L. thir) arrow thai a-thaw (L. thal) bow thai-li a-li (L. thal-ngul) boat te-lòng hmlu or hmlü (L. long) earring no-thèngpi na-thong basket tòn tawng dream màng maung (L. mang) name mèn a-mín (L. hming) matter, affair hormu a-hmu (Burmese id.) heap bui a-pün (L. vung, bum) place dim awn-dün edge, border a-pre a-pe rope a-ri a-yöh (L. hrui) handle be bi'' (to take, seize), (L. bèng)

Verbs.

to pour out bu, bup bauk, bo (L. buak, [55] bun)
to put bi bi (to clap, pat)
to jump chòng dong (L. zuang)
to die thi dü, di (L. thi
to kill by cutting thu thük, tük
to pound tòk dut''
to open ing-pu hü
to sleep, lie down i i'' (Burmese ip)
to hinder khàng kha
to fall klo, kli klauk (Burmese kra, L. tla, tlak)
to grind koi-i kluk
to be bitter ho kho (L. kha)
to bend kekèk kòk-lök, khü-i
to tie, fasten kòk khun
to laugh ing-nèk hlek; also noi (Meithei nok, L. nui)
to arrive, hit le leng
to be distant he-lo hlo (L. hla)
to get, obtain lòng lö-e
to lick ing-lèk m-le-e (L. liak, hliao)
to be happy me moi
to extinguish pe-mèp hmyit (L. ti-mit)
to smell ing-nim nan (L. hnim)
to be yellow èt oi (L. eng)
to speak pu pauh (a word, language)
to give pi pèk (L. pèk, pe)
to be full plèng ple
to reach, touch pho pho (L. pawh, phak)
to pull out phu phuk (L. phoi)
to work, labour sai saih
to wash chàm shau (L. shuk)
to beat chòk shö
to pierce chàng shün, hsün (L. chhun)
to begin chèng si
to explain thàn hsin
to be wet chàm so
to know, perceive thèk thàk, the
to be fat ing-tu thau (L. thao)
to itch ing-thàk thauk (L. thak)
to rise, get up thur thö, thü (L. tho, thawh)
to send toi tho
to weave thàk to-tàk (L. tah)
to rot thu thü (L. toih)
to be sweet dòk tü-i
to cover, veil up, òp ün'' (L. hup)
to throw var wo'' (L. vorh)
to hear ar-ju yauk
to sell jòr yi'' (L. zuar)

A few words from Lushei may be added, for which Southern Chin does not appear to possess corresponding terms:--

English. Mikir. Lushei.

buffalo chelòng cheloi
bear thòk-vàm sa-vom, vom [56]
deer (sambhar) thi-jòk sa-zuk
snake phi-rui ma-rul, rul
monkey me-sàng zawng
frog ("the jumper") chòng-ho chung-u
mosquito timsik tho-shi
water-leech ing-lit hlit, sai-hlit
crab chehe chak-ai
devil hi-i huai

These close and numerous correspondences between Mikir and the Kuki-Chin family appear to warrant the conclusion that the former is intimately connected with the latter. The institutions of the southern tribes, as already pointed out, confirm this conclusion; and it may be asserted with some confidence that no such extensive affinity can be proved between Mikir and the Boro family. As regards the Western Nagas, while the institutions largely correspond, the coincidences in language, though more numerous than those with Boro, are much fewer than those with Kuki-Chin. The Southern Nagas, and especially the Tangkhuls, who form the group intermediate between Naga and Kuki, have a considerably closer affinity with Mikir. Possibly if the inquiry were pushed further into Burmese than is within the power of the present writer, more correspondences with Mikir might be discovered in that language.

BIBLIOGRAPHY.

1. A descriptive account of Asam, with a sketch of the local geography, and a concise history of the Tea-plant of Asam, to which is added a short account of the neighbouring tribes, exhibiting their history, manners and customs, by William Robinson, Gowhatti Government Seminary: Calcutta, 1841. Account of the Mikirs at pp. 308-312.

The facts stated agree generally with those recorded by Mr. Stack. The chief deity of the Mikirs is called Hempatin. This may be a mistranscription for Hemphu, but is more probably a mistake due to a confusion between Mikirs and Kukis; Patin (or a closely similar form) is the word for God in a number of the Kuki dialects (Khongzai, Thado, Lushei, Rangkhol, Aimol, Kolren, etc.). Of course if the name Hempatin was ever actually used by the Mikirs for their chief tribal god, this would be an additional important evidence of a connexion between them and the Kukis.

2. Notes on the languages of the various tribes inhabiting the Valley of Asam and its mountain confines, by Wm. Robinson, Inspector of Government Schools in Asam. Journal of the Asiatic Society of Bengal, vol. xviii. (1849).

The Mikir language is treated at pp. 330-336. It is probable from certain indications that the Mikir words were written down for Mr. Robinson in Assamese characters, and transliterated by him into Roman. There are a great many misprints. The declension of nouns, the distinctions of gender, and the position of adjectives are in general correctly explained; but the important prefix a- is not noticed, nor its original force understood. The omission of the plural affix -tum is remarkable. The numerals agree with those of the present day, save that ch is used (as in Assamese) to indicate s. The use of determinative class-words with numerals is mentioned. The personal pronouns are in part correctly, but often wrongly given; the demonstrative pronouns are wrongly stated, and so are the interrogatives. The absence of a relative pronoun, and the substitute for it, are noticed. In the verbal forms there are many errors, unless the particles used to indicate time have greatly changed since 1849, which is improbable. Thus, -ye is given as the future suffix instead of -ji, and -bo instead of -po. The participle in ke-, ki-, ka- is omitted, and the much-used conjunctive participle in -si is misrepresented as the present participle. There is no mention of the past in tàng; ayok (possibly a mistranscription of the Assamese) is given instead of apòt as the particle indicating purpose. The form of the negative verb is altogether misunderstood. There is no mention of the causative in pe-, pi-, pa-.

One interesting point in Mr. Robinson's grammatical sketch is that words borrowed from Assamese, which now end in -i as a substitute for Assamese l, as hai for hal, tamoi for tamol, pitoi for pitol, are all written with l; and in the following cases final l appears in Mikir words now written with final i:--

ingkol, a score, now ingkoi
inghol, to do, now inghoi
sal (field-) work, now sai
aphel, afterwards, now aphi
phurul, snake, now phirui

It seems possible that this represents a real change in pronunciation, since l was certainly the original ending in the borrowed words, and most probably (from the similar forms in the Kuki-Chin languages) was the original ending in the Mikir words. This vocalization of final l is quite common in the Kuki dialects, and is an additional argument for their connexion with Mikir.

3. Travels and adventures in the Province of Assam, by Major John Butler: London, Smith, Elder & Co., 1855. The Mikirs are described at pp. 126-139. Major Butler was in charge of the district of Nowgong, and visited the Mikir Hills in 1848. His notes on the Mikir people are not very detailed, but indicate that their condition sixty years ago was much the same as it is now. On the question of polygamy (see ante, p. 19), he writes (p. 138): "Polygamy is not practised, and they reproach their countrymen of the plains for having adopted the Assamese custom."

4. Notes on Northern Cachar, by Lieut. R. Stewart. J.A.S.B., vol. xxiv. (1855), pp. 582-701. This treatise is an excellent account of the various tribes inhabiting the tract. The Mikirs are dealt with at pp. 604-607. There is a full and useful comparative vocabulary at pp. 658-675 of more than 400 words, besides verbal and adverbial forms, in Manipuri, Hill Kachari (Dimasa), New Kuki (Thado), Angami Naga, Arung Naga (or Empeo), Old Kuki (Bete), and Mikir. This is much the most important evidence of the state of the language half a century ago, and is superior in several respects to the materials collected a little earlier by Robinson (to which Stewart does not refer). The Mikir words are generally recognisable as identical with those of the present day, and it is noticeable, with reference to the change of final l to i, that Stewart gives the forms now in use (pitoi, brass, pheroi, snake, ingkoi, a score, in(g)hoi, to do). The verbs are chiefly given in the imperative, with nòn (often wrongly printed not), sometimes as the bare root, and sometimes with -lo added. There are some good measurements and other physical characters of Mikirs at pp. 690-693, from which it appears that in Lieut. Stewart's time most of the Mikir men shaved their heads, with the exception of a large tuft of hair on the scalp.

5. Descriptive Ethnology of Bengal, by Col. E. T. Dalton: Calcutta, 1872. There is a brief section on the Mikirs at pp. 53-4, which however contains no information that is not in Robinson or Stewart. The race is not among those figured in the volume.

6. Specimens of the Languages of India, collected by Sir George Campbell: Calcutta, 1874. The specimens of Mikir are at pp. 205-217; they are full of misprints and misunderstandings of what was desired, and are worthless for linguistic purposes.

7. A Vocabulary in English and Mikir, with sentences illustrating the use of words, by the Rev. R. E. Neighbor, of Nowgong, Assam: Calcutta, 1878.

A most useful publication.

8. Notes on the Locality and Population of the Tribes dwelling between the Brahmaputra and Ningthi Rivers, by G. H. Damant. Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society, vol. xii., 1880, pp. 228 ff.

A posthumous work (Mr. Damant was killed in the Naga Hills in 1879). The Mikirs are mentioned on p. 236, and there is a short vocabulary on p. 254.

9. A Statistical Account of Assam, compiled by J. S. Cotton under the direction of W. W. Hunter: London, 1879. Contains an article on the Mikirs at vol. ii., pp. 188-190.

10. A Gazetteer of India, by Sir W. W. Hunter, London. First edition 1881, second edition 1886. Article on the Mikir Hills and their inhabitants.

11 to 13. The next occasions on which the tribe was dealt with were in the Reports of the Censuses of 1881, 1891, and 1901 (Assam Province):--

11. The Report on the Census of 1881 (Calcutta, 1883) contains a chapter (VI.) on Castes and Tribes, written by Mr. Stack. The Mikirs are described at pp. 77-82. The inquiries on which these paragraphs were based were followed by the more detailed investigations which afforded the materials for the present monograph.

12. The Report on the Census of 1891, by Mr. E. A. Gait, reproduces part of the matter of the previous report relating to the Mikirs, and adds the detailed list of kurs or exogamous divisions already referred to (ante, pp. 23 ff.). It also contains an interesting comparison of the Mikir language with those of the Naga tribes, by Mr. A. W. Davis (reproduced in the Linguistic Survey, vol. iii., part ii., pp. 198-202). At pp. 254-256 there is an account of the Mikirs in North Cachar by Mr. E. C. Baker, sub-divisional officer, which states that their principal deity is called "Pertart Rijie." This is correctly Pirthàt Recho, the first word being the Khasi Pyrthat,"thunder," and indicates a borrowing by the small remaining Mikir population in North Cachar of the ideas of their Khasi neighbours.

13. The Report on the Census of 1901, by Mr. B. C. Allen: Shillong, 1902. A few remarks on the religion of the Mikirs will be found at pp. 46-47, which however require correction by the more accurate data contained in this monograph.

14. The Tribes of the Brahmaputra Valley, by Lt.-Col. L. A. Waddell, I.M.S.: J.A.S.B., vol. lxix., part iii., 1900. This account is chiefly based on anthropometrical data. The facts stated concerning the Arlengs at pp. 29-35 appear to be taken from Dalton and the Assam Census Reports of 1881 and 1891. The measurements taken by Col. Waddell (see ante, p. 4) are at pp. 78-79. The tribe is not figured in the plates appended to the paper.

15. Linguistic Survey of India, vol. iii., part ii., compiled and edited by Dr. G. A. Grierson, Calcutta, 1902. The Mikir language is dealt with at pp. 380-410 and 432-448.

16. An English-Mikir Vocabulary, with Assamese Equivalents, to which have been added a few Mikir phrases, by S[ardoka] P[errin] Kay: Shillong, Govt. Press, 1904. An extremely useful book by an educated Mikir (see Introductory Note, p. viii.). Sardoka was Mr. Stack's chief authority on the Mikir language. The phrases (388 in number) are very important illustrations of the structure of the speech. The vocabulary is an enlargement of Mr. Neighbor's work (No. 7).

A Mikir-English dictionary or vocabulary is still a desideratum.

The following is a list of all the publications in the Mikir language which have come under the notice of the writer. They are all due to missionaries.

1. Dhorom Arnàm aphràng ikithàn: First Catechism, in Mikir (Assamese character), pp. 13. Anon. Sibsagar, 1875.

2. Arlèng Alàm, a Mikir Primer, by Miss E. Pursell, 1891.

3. Arlèng Alàm (Plipli-akitàp) [57] A Mikir Primer. Anon. Published by the American Baptist Mission, Tika, Nowgong, Assam, 1903.

4. Arlèng Alàm, Angbòng akitàp. Mikir Reader, second book, by the Rev. J. M. Carvell and Thengkur Pandit. Published by the Government of Assam, Shillong, 1904.

5. Arlèng kalakha akitàp. Mikir Primary Arithmetic, by the Rev. P. E. Moore and the Rev. J. M. Carvell. Published by the Assam Secretariat Press, Shillong, 1904.

6. Birta Keme, "Glad Tidings," in Mikir, by Mosendra Pandit and Missionaries to the Mikirs. Published by the American Baptist Missionary Union, Tika, Assam, 1904. A summary of the Gospel history and teaching.

(All except the first are in the Roman character.)

NOTES

[1] The record of these travels, under the name Six Months in Persia (two vols.), was published in 1882; "A really clever and trustworthy, readable, book," was the judgment on it of the late Sir Frederic Goldsmid--the best of all judges.

[2] See Bibliography, No. 7.

[3] See Bibliography, No. 15.

[4] I must apologize for the misdescription of these gentlemen at pp. 44 and 70, as of the American Presbyterian Mission.

[5] This is the official spelling. The real name is Kala-jwar, pronounced Kola-jor (or zor), which means "black fever."

[6] It has been asserted that Arlèng means properly only a Mikir man, not a man in general, who would be called monit or munit. This, however, is opposed to usage as exemplified in the folk-tales collected by Mr. Stack, and to well-established parallels found elsewhere. Thus, in Assam, Mande (= man) is the national name of the Garos; Chingpho (= man) is the tribal name of the race so called in the Upper Dehing valley; Boro (= man) is the proper designation of the Kachari race. So, in Chutia Nagpur, the Munda people of Ranchi call themselves Horo (= man). Similar cases are found all over the world. In Europe, for example, the name Deutsch for the Germanic race indicates that their ancestors spoke of themselves as "the people" (diot, diota), ignoring the other members of humankind. Munit is a very recent loan-word from Assamese, and nowhere occurs in the tales.

[7] One is tempted to conjecture that this statement is an error based on a confusion between the Miris and the Mikirs in Colonel Dalton's notebooks. The custom referred to obtains among the Miris.

[8] In the Proceedings of the Asiatic Society of Bengal for 1874, p. 17, there is an illustration and description of a Mikir "bachelors' house," or teràng, by Mr. C. Brownlow, a tea-planter in Cachar. The group of Mikirs among whom it was found lived at the head of the Kopili river, looking down on the Cachar valley.

[9] Other authorities mention a fifth, Teròn, which Mr. Stack may have overlooked because of the similarity of its name to Teràng.

[10] P. 8.

[11] In the story of Harata Kunwar, post, p. 57, a second or co-wife is mentioned (Mikir, patèng, paju).

[12] This is an Assamese word, mel. The Mikirs cannot pronounce a final l, and always omit it or change it to i or y in words adopted from Assamese; e.g. hal, plough, becomes hay; pitol, brass, pitoi; tamol, betel-nut, tamoi.

[13] Qu. Rongphar?

[14] This name, which means "Jòm or Yama's town," is often incorrectly written Chomarong or Chumarong.

[15] Sentences enclosed in quotation marks were so written by Mr. Stack, and are probably the ipsissima verba of his informants.

[16] Sir Joseph Hooker (Himalayan Journals, ed. 1855, vol. ii. p. 182) relates that at the Donkia Pass, one of his servants, a Lepcha, being taken ill, "a Lama of our party offered up prayers to Kinchinjhow for his recovery." Perching a saddle on a stone, and burning incense before it, "he scattered rice to the winds, invoking Kinchin, Donkia, and all the neighbouring peaks."

[17] Such worship of objects and places of an impressive character is, of course, common throughout India. Thus, in the Pachmarhi Hills the writer has seen flowers and red lead (sindur) offered at the brink of a terrible gulf of the kind so common in the plateau. Again, at Balharpur, in the Chanda district of the Central Provinces, he has seen worship offered to a bastion in a solidly built ruined fort adjoining the village.--(Note by Editor.)

[18] So also among the Khasis; see Khasi Monograph, p. 119, bottom.

[19] This also is evidently borrowed from the Khasis. See Monograph, p. 221.

[20] Compare the Khasi methods of divination by the lime-case (shanam), and the bow (Monograph, p. 119).

[21] Mr. Stack notes that there was some reluctance on the part of his informant to explain what was meant.

[22] Not further explained.

[23] See, however, what is said above as to the Ròngker, which agrees with the observances elsewhere known as gennas.

[24] "Gourd": the word hànthar in the original is explained by Mr. Stack as the name of "a creeper, with a fruit as big as a small pumpkin, with a hard kernel in soft rind; the kernel is the size of a mango-stone; the marrow inside is in two slices; when washed, it loses its bitter taste, and can be fried, oil exuding. It is a favourite dish with the Mikirs." It is, therefore, not really a gourd, but I am unable to identify the species.

[25] "Sparrow": vo-ar-bipi, explained as a small bird, the size of a sparrow. In the Aimol version the corresponding word is rendered "bat"; but a bat in Mikir is vo-arplàk, and a bat has no nest (tar) as the bird has here.

[26] "Stinging-nettle": tarme-làngbòng; this is probably not a nettle (urtica), but some other kind of blistering plant found in the Assam jungles; tarme means a creeper, làngbòng a vessel made of bamboo to hold water.

[27] Fish-trap, ru: a bamboo cage placed in an opening in a weir or dam built of stones or constructed of wattled boughs, so that the fish entering cannot get out. The same word is used later (see note p. 53) for the iron cage (ingchin aru) in which the orphan is confined.

[28] "May a tiger eat you, you wicked boy!" Teke nàng kòrdutpi a-osó, literally, "You tiger-bitten boy!" pi is a syllable used in abuse, as po ("father") is used in the opposite sense, e.g. po-arnàm-po, "My good sir!" literally, "father-god-father;" lower down, addressing a girl, pe ("mother") is similarly used: "pe-arnàm-pi," "dear girl!"

[29] Cloth-full, mànthung: a cloth or wrapper (pe) folded cylindrically into a bag, and tied at the top and bottom with slit bamboo (jingtàk).

[30] "Iron cage": see note on p. 48 above.

[31] The nòksèk: the part of the house (in kàm: see plan, p. 8) between the fireplace and the middle partition, where the offerings of food for the spirits of the dead are placed.