Mazie Nakhro
The Nagas are one of the most misunderstood people groups in the world. Even the little people know about them is often distorted or at best superficial.
Where di d they get their name?
Some assume that the name “Naga” came from the Burmese word “naka,” meaning “perforated ears.” Others believe that it is from the Kachari word “noka,” meaning “fighter.” But neither of these theories can be substantiated by existing literary evidence. And we have no historical basis of that oral usage among the Burmese or Kachari people in the past. Another very popular theory is that the name “Naga” came from the Sanskrit “nagna,” meaning “naked.” This theory, again, is certainly not descriptive of all Naga peoples.
In my estimation, the name "Naga" comes from the Sanskrit "Nag," meaning “mountain,” thus implying "hill people” or “Naga” as a generic term for “snake.”
Whatever the origin of the word “Naga” may be, one thing is conclusive: The appellation was given by outsiders and it must be interpreted from their perspective. This means that most hill tribes in north-east India could easily fit into that given name.
Are the Nagas tribals?
Since the British Colonial period, the Nagas have been branded as “tribals.” This is a classificatory label, having divisive and degrading effects; and it is loaded with negative meanings such as nomadic, forest-people, backward, uncivilized, ethnic minority, etc. But the Nagas are not rootless nomads; they are not a forest-people group who live in the wild; they are not even an ethnic minority in the sense of being placed from outside within an already existing dominant society.
Nagas are “tribals” only in the sense of belonging to a tribe and as in maintaining their ethnic identity without racial mixture. Perhaps the most accurate way to describe them is the term “hill people” (from “Nag”) or simply “Nagas” of native Himalayans because they are the original settlers still living sedentarily as the dominant group within their ancestral homeland from time immemorial.
Have Nagas known any civilization at all?
Without a doubt, the Nagas have known primitive living. And many of them are still unable to catch up with modern development. Their isolation has caused them to remain backward; their prejudice against cross-cultural union has kept them within their distinct tribal confines; and the love of their own hilltops has distanced them from urban civilization.
But in ancient times, the Naga ancestors wisely adapted to their mountainous topography and appropriately adopted some kind of rural civilization: They lived in isolated, self-sufficient village communities where each family owned a house often adorned with sculpture and paintings, a field for crops and some forests for firewood. Their governing system reflected superior democratic forms; their fighting skills were legendary; their terrace agricultural systems were well-designed; their embroideries were unique; and their costumes were finely decorated with beads, shells and ivory. They were builders of stone towers, stone monuments, and defensive gates of artistic design. They also displayed a profound understanding of ecological nature and herbal medicines.
Who are the Nagas ethnically?
As far as genetic affinity is concerned, the Nagas do not belong to the families of the Caucazoids, the Negroids, the Capoids or even the Austroids. They are from the Mongoloid stock. Some would say that one such sign is the Mongoloid birth-mark on their rear at the time of birth. Other visible features include high-cheekbones, narrow eyes, flat nose, straight black hair, and a light-brown complexion. So as a Mongoloid race, they could have been part of the ancient Mongol civilization anytime between 2000 BC and AD 1368 when the Mongol Empire extended to Europe and most of Asia.
Where did the Nagas come from?
Obviously, the Naga peoples were not migrating altogether at the same time and through the same route. Some of them could have taken the north-east Indo-Myanmar corridor. Others could have come through the more common north-western route into the lower Himalayas.
According to some Naga scholars, the Naga ancestors originally migrated somewhere from mainland China toward southern Myanmar where they lived near the seas for a period of time. They support their view by citing the Nagas’ liking of sea shells in decorating their traditional dresses. Some folktales and folksongs, according to them, imply that the Naga ancestors retreated to the north-west direction along the Salween River toward Irrawaddy and Chindwin Valley, where they must have lived for another period of time. And from there they eventually migrated in several waves along the Imphal River and Barak River to their present Naga Hills as early as the 300 BC or at the latest before the Ahoms entered Assam through the eastern hills in 1228.
Some Indian historians, however, believe that the Nagas were part of an aboriginal Mongoloid people who inhabited the eastern Himalayas for over 3000 years (Akshoy K. Majumdar, S.K. Chatterji, etc.). The Vedas called these Mongoloids as “Kiratas,” meaning “hillmen” (Shukla Yajurveda, ch. 30.6; Krishna Yajurveda, ch. 3.4, 12; Atharvaveda, ch. 10.4, 14). They were described as having a gold-like complexion, unlike the Nishadas or the Dasas, who were dark. They established their own dynasties. As warriors, they used elephants in battles (cf. certain Nagas use ivory armlets as emblems of their warrior status to this day). They were hunters of animals and enemies to the Brahmins. The Indo-Aryans considered them as degraded Kshatriyas, implying their ruling status or existing civilization (Manu's Dharmashastra, ch. 10.44; The Vayu Purana: Last Book, ch. 39. 28).
If so, the Nagas made their contribution to an early Indian civilization and possibly became admixed with other Indian populations. As it is, several DNA analyses confirm a wide admixture of Aryans, Dravidians and Mongols in the Indian population.
Now tracing all the way back to the beginning of human history, Satan has been always figuratively portrayed as a serpent in disguise. Even today, if we see a shrewd or dangerous person, we would say, “He is a snake!” Similarly, many ancient groups would call any adverse force as from a “serpent race.” In other words, the term “Naga” was not necessarily an ethnic name; rather, it was a common nickname in many cultures (e.g., Filipinos, Thais, Japanese, Indian, etc.).
The Vedas, The Mahabharata, The Ramayana, and The Puranas are filled with mythological stories but they are often presented within historical contexts. If we strip off the myths, we find some facts. For example, since the Rig Vedic period, the Naga kings and warriors were portrayed as a serpent race. They were depicted as mysterious creatures who could disguise themselves in many forms. But recent studies have shown that these Nagas could be an actual human race in historical times. In India, they were linked with River Iravati (“Irrawaddy”?) in Kashmir and were said to have settled in the lower Himalayas. After his visit to their land, Narada Muni declared it as more enchanting than the heaven. Even the Aryans described the Nagas as handsome and intelligent. Naga princesses were sought after as brides for the Indian princes. But they were crafty rulers, hated for their dangerous inhuman activities. A prominent Naga king known as Ahivritra (a Sanskritized rendering) was especially depicted as a sworn enemy of Indra, the Aryan God. These were possible reasons why the Nagas of Sanskrit were mythologized by the Indo-Aryans as a serpent race. Evidently, wars were fought against them. Their race in northern India was almost exterminated by Janamejaya, the Kuru king in Arjuna’s line, who conducted the massacre of the Nagas at Takshasila (The Mahabharata, Book I: Adi Parva, Sections 13-58). However, this genocide was stopped by Astika, a Brahmin whose mother was coincidentally a Naga.
So, who were these Nagas according to the Indo-Aryans? It seems apparent that the Nagas of Sanskrit were not an actual serpent race. Neither were they an ethnic group of snake worshippers nor a religious sect who practiced nakedness as a religious sign of worldly renunciation. Rather, they were dreaded rulers and warriors of a non-Aryan race who once lived in the lower Himalayas.
Could the Nagas of north-east India be one of the serpent races in the Indo-Aryan mythologies? Again, if at all the name “Nagas” was given by the Indo-Aryans, it must be interpreted from their point of view. After all, the Nagas of north-east India bear the same name. Otherwise, we must provide satisfactory answers to these questions: How would the Indo-Aryans give the name “Nagas” to the hill people of north-east India if the latter group has no connection to the so-called serpent race? Or if the Nagas of Sanskrit literature were actual humans, what was their racial origin? If the Aryans called them a serpent race, what did they call themselves? Since the Mahabharata (Book I: Adi Parva, Section 20) depicts the Nagas negatively and calls them “persecutors of all creatures” (animals?), were they even believers in the Indo-Aryan religion which is Hinduism? And if the Naga race was not completely annihilated, would there be a remnant still living somewhere in the Himalayan region today? If so, what people groups would best fit the description of this so-called serpent race?
Why did the Nagas end up in the Himalayan regions?
The prevalence of primitive living conditions among the Naga people in a not-so-distant past shows signs that they were starting life again.
Could it be possible that the Naga people faced a near ethnic extinction experience at the hands of a more powerful enemy at some point in history? Did the Indo-Aryans in the Plains reduce the “Naga race” to a point of near annihilation as implied in the Sanskrit literature?
Or did a much better equipped Chinese power force them to migrate further south in some distant past? For example, China’s first emperor Qin Shi Huangdi (221-206 BC) was known for his ruthlessness against certain ethnic groups. He burnt their books and executed more than 400 scholars. Using a forced labor of 700,000 troops and peasants, he built the Great Wall of China.
The fact that the Nagas eventually settled on the hills instead of living in the fertile plain suggests that they put self-protection as priority over economic prosperity. For them, protecting their kith-and-kin was everything. Their brutality against their aggressors was well-known. This protective spirit of theirs was evidently displayed in the fact that they resisted the British colonial power. They fought bravely against the Japanese who swept down through Malaya, capturing Singapore, and advancing through Burma into India, only to be stopped at Kohima, Nagaland, in 1944. The same spirit is also evident in their unwavering resistance against the Indian forces for the last half a century.
What’s next?
Admittedly, we have more assumptions than proofs to connect the dots about the Naga history. Perhaps, genetic science could point us to our closest biological link so that further research is in the right direction. And there may be some archeological evidence about the Naga ancestors still laying buried under piles of rubble in Mongolia, China, or somewhere within the lower Himalayas. There is also a very high probability that further light could be shed on Naga history through historical records written in Sanskrit, Mongol script, or the Chinese language. But who is willing do the hard work?
