PROBLEM 
FORMULATION 

Il 

. OBJECTIVE 
SCOPE AND 

lviETHODOLOG·Y 



-------

ARUNACHAL PRADESH c_;-·~.-'1 INDIA 
(_'x ___ f 
.r \, .. L,. 

rl-, • .-, I 
,. .. : ., cv··-, 

·"'-· ""'( · ...... "f'._ .. ,... ....... - .. ' 
c. _.,.~ :, ·:~'!:.-.:).:-"!' ..... ~ ,_ ,,,_, ___ .- ·< .f-... .J 

--·.!--., , --~ _ ,,_ _, ~ tl,r 
• ' • ~ "':: •• " 1. r 

·""-
J-· \.. (' (T · b ) / .. -1 j'·\ 1 e t _(· __ ,-: .y 

.r·· ·· -·-""-.., ,.1· '\ r··t 
.. T·· {,' • / 

ry..( L-; @ Anini . \ ~ _/ .. ,,, .. \.... .., r' '<I 
r 1 ,_._, • 

~ _ r' West Siang 1 East \ Dibang Valley ~-
'--"··---·· "'\. I . } ,.,· .. -....,_ -
: ' ( Stang 1 ..,~_r ··./ '\ . ....., J · I Upper ' "- l , -~ 

/, • . -'\ \ ._, ..l I 
0o .. Subans1n _ .._, , -~ 

1 

... - , Lohit ?. 
.• ;}.. -----, Doporijo ~ I> ', • ' ? 

./"_...J \ I> \Along •' fb~of) -.--./ l>rezu /'""' (; .- Lower '- t. " , v · I . 
"- _ Subansiri '1 ~> I ~ ,.--. / - __ .r-
J- "' - ,. .r • ---- ( 

"i "" ...... "" v· ' ' , " -1 ,r·· ....r "'--, Oziro ., ,..,· l. _., "' . ·~· . .-, .- ,..r·· ', East ' ri: .r· ! Chong!ang <,_ 
.lraW<i/g' ,• West 'j«meng \ ) -~· "' "'"?c•~·~·-~ "'-. 
· 0 , ' _, _,... I ·. a\.. lawarrt:l Kameng ', @ 'l / "' r·.,_, . ..-· .. , 0_,..,·· o \'(\''""') ~ ·~··""!"- <Seppo , · r · -J ~ p. 
\\ ' \ ' ,., . ., ' 

\ ,-;, l>eomd!f'i.J ~--~ , ( \-;;;;.,.; _..J\) 

p. r , • ,.. s , ·"' I ~ \ J'_.f'-·-_·-·~'---·-· ~r~~ J,ntemotio;,;,l boundory --~ .. -/--....../'..... p. s /·..r 

" 50 0 50 IOOkm. 

State n 

District 
" 

Headquarters [District 
State 

@ 

@ 



ARUNACHAL PRADESHrl~99 /"· C' 

TRIBUTION OF TRIBES IN . .r·· \ .. 
('"l. ./ 18 ••• "::-'! + 

NISTRATIVE AREAS -.. - ... :·_~ 5 ·~,.-- .. '""'"-.. .!- .......... ··· r-··~ 
.J" y 1._ .·\/"? / J • • •• • 16 •:.-J" 

~ .. 14E '·14F ·:· .• ··:: I i/ .. 
/14 ..... E_-: .~!1~ .}.I~H ~-' _.·· \, 1-

(
, ..... . . . . ... \ A ~ ' 
·. ·.. . . . . . ' ' ': I n 'nl .. ) 

~ -..,(" 15 : \ : \ 17A 
0 

: 17 B f ~ 
.,..,..._.. · 14D 14J ' 

.. ...-....... :, Wesl" SIANG' : '·· ~ f · II · • I . I · · . 

NOT TO SCALE 

\ /

• "< •.•• :. '~ • •• 14A ·t.EAST SI~NG r • •• -···· ···-~ r( ~..J"··~ 
10 

: . , . . •• .._ • \ 01 BANG VA;LLEY ~·- J ·,- , .. ... 
·. :UP<>= -, •• : ': • 14K . I \.1 -:- ...... . 
\ • ·~I' ...... ·' • ' • ~ •· '"1 

"" .J-- SUBANStRI 1 • • 148 • \ • .. , ... ,:~~ 14K : 178 ·. .· 
"-" e' .r· .. __ .i._- ·•.. I; iAI,_.j f. :.a~s¥"''1 ( J .......... ~ 
'P '0 r· ' . IO 1 ' • 0"~ 14L I . .. 

\ :f"'"·.. 7 ~ .• .'.'••:··\.' ·-.:.-.• ·:. 1
1 ~.; • ..... ) : J :' . LOHIT ~ 

~ \ e··.......... -..:,Dapor?"-, '-, { \ \~40 : 14M I , . ..-.. "/. T~- 17
C 17C -~ 

C ,(-- .. , : B :: \..~ 0 ':14A} ~14~.· I :' .r-.f . ./.~ .. / .... , ... . ~S 
c:-·· ··""'~ .rr .. l 6 .... __ .. · LowER .· · ... _ i'- ·.- L,,.;- v. 1 ·. 1s : ·· ... _,; ~ 

: ...__., . ../ .. ' ·t : 'lsuBANSIR( ~ I4A . r · 20 ·. -:.--- t 
.J 

"\...• I ,'
1 

•• I ·• (/ ...,.-· ~ t...:_ _,:.....- / • · 21 ~ 
. TAWAN~I ., •• \ :· Ziro .. ··· ·'V"·J'\/· .t- . ·... :~ 
. lA e , :I ~"ST ' : 0 / . S 23 ·. '1.; 
~-- T~ ·"4'~ KAMENG, '· 12.· / ""I...CHANGLANG-r-·':: 
B ........, .. ~'IB IC . · ,, \ ..... /. / -~·· '-" '-. ' 7 . .r'""·-- "'-·· ..... 

H u . t<A~ ... as ,or/ 7 . s ""·.f: . ..r'--··.r' . ~ ~ 22). 
• I 0 ~ .. ~·"5 ·, sr.>• epr T ./" j /:;)ChonghltJg f>. ......... 

TfBomdiiO:,. ~~- t._ ,.J ·• (. 
. . ... .l_.;..-·::-sa:·, ,-;;..~ITAIVAG4/R-. ~ .r·tfiRAP '?4../'"' ~ 

A\.,. : I ···· ·"" 0 ·;..\_ Khtlnso ..,: 
N\IE _).~·-·,-.::.::::_ • .".'~.--" NASA( 0~ .r 11-

-.... .. f-'·/ LAND ~ 25 _/'r:f..-------------1 
!'::" International B>undary - .. - .. -

~~~~~~~~~~~--~--~--~~----------~j~V.~~ 1 l MO-NPA .... .., ' 6. SULUNG. -· 14. AD[ t5. ME MBA State 
" 

A. TAWANG·MONPA 7. BANGNI/ NISHI A. ADI-GAU.ONG 16.KHAMBA CQ. l 
8. LISH PA (a.) 8. BAII&P.O B. ADI-BORI 17. M1lH.Ml. , 
C. PIRANG·MONPA (o...) g, MIKIR 4D C. ADI-I<ARKA A. IDU·MISHI 
D. BUT- MONPA (a.) IO.TAGIN .. D. ADI-MINYONG a DlGARU-MISHMI 

District 
" 

Tribe area , 
State capital 

District headquarters E. KALAKTANG-MONPA E. ADI-BOKAR C. MIJU·MISHMI 
2.. SHERDUKPEN . II. NA c.+J __ F. ADI-PAILIBO. 18. MEYOR/ZAKHRING le&J 
3. KHOWA 12.APATANI : G. ADI-ASHING 19.KHAMPTI 
,._ MIJI <DHAMMAt) 13. HILL MIRI CSARAKl H. ADI~SHIMON6 0 MIRI Gtt l . · a ADI-MILLAN6 2 • l . 
5. !!A [ ' K AOI~PADAM 21. SINGPHO 

A. HRUSSO.CAKA) L. AOI-PASI 2'2.. LISU/VOBINL"'1 Not Exclusive to Arunachal 
'a PICHANO M.ADI-PANGI 23· TAMGSA 

24. HOCTE 
?5. WANC140 

Area needs eonflrmotion 

Tribe- do-

----

t a) 

{+) 

0 
0 



- 33 -

Identities of Arunachal Pradesh tribes are in a 

state of confusion as is apparent from the haphazard and 

erratic change in the number of tribes. This sudden increase 

or decrease cannot be accepted anthropologically because a 

social set up does not change so suddenly, haphazardly or 

erratically; it may only happen as a result of political expe­

diency, an administrative fault or due to some other unknown 

reason. No detailed research on identity of these tribes is 

available to find out the reason behind this anomaly. However, 

whatever information is available in bits and pieces, might 

be able to clear som'e mist around this phenomenon. All such 

information may be pieced together to clarify some of the 

issues before any detailed study is carried out into the prob­

lem of identity establishment of these se~eral tribes. 

The records of the tribe-names of Arunachal were 

first found in Ahom-Buranjis (written mostly in 16th-17th 

centuries) where only Daflas, Miris, Khamptis and Mishmis 

are mentioned at places. After Ahom Buranjis, the tribal names 

are mentioned in the studies made by British Administrators, 

surveyors, Defence employees, Christ·ian Missionaries, trave­

llers and others, like Wilcox (1832), Griffith (1836-1847), 

Dalton (1845-1872), Hanny (1847), Vetch (1848-1873), Hudson 

(1850), Fr. Krick (1853), Jenkins (1870), Peal (1972, 1a96), 



- 34 -

Cooper (1873), Badgley (1876), Woodthorpe (1878), Hunter 

(18.79), Needham (1884-1894), Crowe (1890), Dun (1897) , 

Ward ( 1901) ,Brown .( 1913-16), Kennedy ( 1914) and Dunbar ( 1915). 

These studies covered only a few more tribes like Abhors, 

Idu-Mishmis, Akas, Mijis, Digaru-Mishmis, Wanchos, Noctes, 

Monpas, etc. 

After Independence of India, Verrier Elwin (1956-

70), c. Von Furer-Haimendorf (1956, 1962, 1980, 1982), J.P. 

Mills (1952), Sachin Roy (1953-67), Gemini Paul (1958), B.K. 

Roy Burman (1966, 1970, 1975), R. Sinha (1959), Parul Dutta 

(1959, 1978, 1983) and a few others found more details about 

these tribes and added a number of names like Apatanis·, Hill-

Miris, Monpas, Tangsas, Membas, Khambas, Padams, Minyongs etc., 

but even all these studies were not able to give out the total . .. 
number and names of tribes o.f Arunachal Pradesh. The names of 

these tribes were also not recorded as same in the studies 

by the above writers e.g., Akas were also recorded as Hrussos, 
' 

Mijis as Dhammais, Abors as Adis, Daflas as Nishis/Bangnis/ · 

Nishangs,Noctes as Nagas/ Abhori-Nagas/ Namsangyas/ Bordwarias/ 

Panidwarias etc. 

The confusion is not only in the tribe-names but 

also in the number of tribe names in Arunachal Pradesh as has 

been pointed out earlier. Only five to six tribes of this 

area have been found recorded in the 'Buranjis', the earlier 

,, 



- 35 -

historical records of the Ahom Kingdom as stated earlier. 

The Britishers, who occupied the area after Ahoms did not 

show much interest in the area except what was necessary 

to save the plains' people of Assam from the •savage hill­

tribes' (as they thought these tribes to be), and they labe­

lled them with all sorts of derogatory names, which these 

people now understand and despice. Notes and brief descrip­

tions about a few tribes were prepared by the British writers . 

primarily for the knowledge of their off.icers. Census opera­

tions during 1931 recorded some tribes, but only those who 

had, settled down in the plains of Assam. 1_931 census records 

did not include the details about the area which presently 

forms Arunachal Pradesh. 

The mention of the tribe numbe~s .. along with the 

names in Arunachal Pradesruwas first found in the Presidential 

Order, 'The Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes Lists 

(Modification) order, 1956 1 (Part II) where it was stated that 

all the tribes of the North East Frontier Agency (now called 

Arunachal Pradesh) were to be treated as Scheduled ·rribes. At 

paragraph 2 of_ Part II of Schedule III of" the Order, an illus­

trative list of the tribes of the No.rth East Frontier Agency 

(N.E.F.A.) was provided, the extract of which is as follows : 

11 All tribes of North East Frontier Agency including 

(1) Abor (2) Aka (3) Apatani (4) Dafla (5) Gallong (6) Khampti 



- 36 -

(7) Khowa (8) Mishmi (9) Momba (10) Any other Naga tribes 

(11) Sherdukpen (12) Singpho. No other tribes than the tribes 

of the North East Frontier Agency are to be treated as 
1 Scheduled Tribes of this area" • It has however, been men-

tioned that "the Presidential Order is illustrative and not 

exhaustive with respect to the tribes of North East Frontier 

Agency• 2 • The inadequacy of the numbers was found in the census 

of 1961, where the number of these tribes enumerated was so3 

and in the census of 1971 this number rose to 1104 but decre­

ased to 105 in 1981 Census5 • The number and names of tribes 
' 

as counted in 1971 were accepted as base for 1991 census, the 

results of which are not yet available. The 1981 census recor-

ded 105 tribes in place of 110, but the number as proposed in 

1981 has not been accepted for follow-up measures by the 

government. . .. 
If we compare the three census records, we find the 

following glaring differences : 

(1) Thereis a change in number of tribes abnormally 

(1961-80, 1971-110, 1981-105). 

(2) The five tribe-names which do not appear in the 

1981 census list, if compared with the list of 1971 are z 

' Lie hi Ta·ngsa, Phong-Tangsa, Simsa-Tangsa, Yanoo Bangni and 

Yatong. The remaining names appear to be the same as in 1971 

census though with abnormal variance in population of some 

of the tribes which are given in a later sub-paragraph. 



- 37 -

(3) Following 48 tribe-names appeared in all the 

three census : Apatani, Ashing, Bangni, Bangro, Bogum, Bokar, 

Bori, But-Monpa, Dafla, Dirang-Monpa, Gallong, Hill-Miri, 

Karka, Khamba, Khamiyang, Khampti, Khrodeng-Bangni, Komkar, 

Kongbo, Lish-Monpa, Momba, Miju/Kaman-Mishmi, Mikir, Millang, 

Minyong, Monpa, Muktim Nishang, Nishi, Nocte, Padam, Pailibo, 

Pangi, Pasi, Ramo, Sanke-Tangsa, Sherdukpen, Simong, Simsa­

Tangsa, Singpho, Sulung, Tagin, Tagin-Bangni, Tangam, Tangsa, 

Taraon/Digaru-Mishmi, Wancho and Yobin. 

(4) Following 20 tribes appeareq under different 

names in 1961 and 1971 (Names in 1981 also were the same as 

in 1971 except Yanoo-Bangni which did not appear) : 

Aka/Hrusso 

Havi 

Idu-Mishmi 

Kemsing 

Bogun or Khowa 

Longchang 

Longphi 

Longri 

Long sang 

Miji or Dhammai 

Miri 

1971 .. . . 
Aka 

Hav !":'Tang sa 

Idu/Chulikata Mishmi 

Kemsing-Tangsa 

Khowa 

Longchang-Tangsa 

Longphi-Tangsa 

Longri-Tangsa 

Longsang-Tangsa 

Miji 

Miri/Mishing 

contd •• 



Morang 

Moglum 

Mossang 

Rongrang 

- 38 -

Tawang or Brahmi-Monpa 

Tikhak 

Yanoo 

Yongkuk 

Yougli 

Morang-Tangsa 

Moglum-Tangsa 

Mossang-Tangsa 

Rongrang-Tangsa 

Towang-Monpa 

Tikhak-Tangsa 

Yanoo-Bangni 

Yongkuk-Tangsa 

Yougli-Tangsa 

Note ; From the above, it will be found that Akas, Mijis, 

Bugun, Idu-Mishmi, Taraon-Mishmi and Towang-Monpa tribes have 
' 

also appeared under alternate names i.e., Hrusso, Dhammai~ 

Khowa, Chulikata-Mishmi, Digaru-Mishmi and ~rahmi-Monpa, which 

may cause confusion for an ordinary reader. 

(5) Following 12 tribes were accounted for in 1961 

but not in 1971 census :- Bhutia, Gaji, Lodung, Maimong, Noknam, 

Southern-Monpa, Tibetan, Changwan-Tangsa, Teikam, Tonglum, 

Tongsing and Yankan. 

(6) Following 41 tribe-names appear in 1971 census 

but did not exist in 1961 census records :- Abor, Adi, Adi­

Gallong, Adi-Minyong, Adi-Padam, Adi-Pasi,Bagi, Bolok•Tangsa, 

Bomdo, Darok-Tangsa, Deori, Haisa-Tangsa, Hotang-Tangsa, Janbo, 



- 39 -

Katin-Tangsa, Khalim-Tangsa, Korang-Tangsa, Langkai-Tangsa, 

Libo, Lichi-Tangsa, Liju-Nocte, Longin-Tangsa, Lowang-Tangsa, 

Meyor, Millang-Abor, Mishmi, Muktum, Namsang-Tangsa, Ngimong­

Tangsa, Nonong, Panchen-~onpa, Phong-Tangsa, Pongkong, 

Ponthei-Nocte, Siram, Sulung-Bangni, Taisen-Tangsa, Thai­

Khampti, Tutcha-Nocte, Yatong, Zakhring. 

(7) In 1971 the population of the following 28 

tribes is less than 15 (The population figures are given in 

brackets) : Bolok-Tangsa (3), Darok-Tangsa (5), Haisa-Tangsa'(1) 

Hotang-Tangsa(1), Katin-Tangsa(1), Khalim-Tangsa(2) Khrodeng­

Bangni(1), Korang-Tangsa(1), Langkai-Tangsa(11), Libo(14), 

Lichi-Tangsa(2), Liju Nocte(4), Longin-Tangsa(9), Lowang-. 

Tangsa( 1), Millang-Abor(3), Muktum(3), Namsang-Tangsa (3), 

Ngimong-T~ngsa(4), Nonog(~), Phong-Tangsa(10), Pongkong(5), 

Rangai-Tangsa(1), Sanke-Tangsa(14), Simsa-T~ngsa(2), Siram(8), 

Taisen-Tangsa(4), Tarem(3) and Thai-Khampti(8). 

(8) In 1971, most of the tribes were grouped under 

the common group name i.e. , Monpa-Group, N issi/Bangni-Group, 

Adi-Group, Mishmi-Group and Tangsa-Group. In the 1981 census, 

it was seen that number of people who identified with indivi­

dual tribe-names of the above groups decreased abnormally 

while the number who identified with common group-names incre­

ased manifold. 



- 40 -

(9) The tribes which recorded an increase under 

one-tribe name and relative probable decrease under other 

tribe-names are given below : 

Increase 

Adi 

J 

Adi-Gallong 334 36,366 

Adi-Minyong 25 25,259 

Adi-Padam 1,094 4,196 

Adi-Pasi 209 841 

Probable relative 1211 
decrease 

Abor 4733 63 

Ashing 

Bagi 

Begum 

Bomdo 

Gallong 

Janbo 

Karka 

Kongbo 

Millang 

Minyong 

Pailibo 

Pasi 

Shimong 

Tang am 

Gal long 

Minyong 

Padam 

Pasi 

.... 

959 66 

2063 78 

483 36 

294 2 

38688 8988 

210 6 

2118 2 

375 

2595 

5 

696 

19146 3573 

1190 535 

1943 647 

3140 26 

84 14 

38688 8988 

19146 3573 

9864 6708 

1943 647 

Contd ••• 



- 41 -

Increase 1971 1981 Probable 121.1 1981 
relative 
decrease 

Bori 78 1,884 Adi 5520 24206 

Komkar 73 1,105 Adi - do -

Libo 14 280 -do- - do -

Pangi 593 1 ,317 -do- - do -

Bangni 21,785 31 t 125 Dafla 5,926 63 

Nissi 33,805 56' 107 Nishang 15,462 8,693 

Tag in 20,377 27' 122 Tag in- 1 '730 2 
Bangni 

Mishmi 808 8,373 Kaman/Miju-
Mishmi 8,233 3,662 
Digaru/Taraon. 
Mishmi 5,384 3,992 

Tang sa 6,941 9,896 Hav 1-Tangsa 699 383 
Kemsing- 391 129 
Tang sa 

c .•. 

Lunge hang- 21 857 Long sang- 375 30 
Tang sa Tang sa 

Morang-Tangsa 123 92 
Rongrang- 538 261 
Tang sa 
Tikhak-Tangsa 1,169 409 

Dirang-
Monpa 1 '716 3,599 Monpa 23,319 21,619 

Tawang- 826 6,503 But-Monpa 555 348" Monpa 
Liju-Nocte 4 3,048 Nocte 23' 165 19,606 

Tutcha- 911 3,289 Ponthei- 247 44 Nocte Nocte 
Meyor 100 238 Zakhring 23 14 



- 42 -

(10) The increase is in (a) all· the group-names 

(except Monpa and Nocte) i.e., Adi, Bangni/Nissi, Tangsa and 

Mishmi, (b) in the names which have the group name as prefix 

i.e., Adi-Gallong, Adi-Minyong, Adi-Padam, Adi-Pasi, Lungchang­

Tangsa, Dirang-Monpa, Tawang-Monpa, Lij~Nocte, and Tutcha­

Nocte, (c) the names of some tribes who probably assert their 

independent identities from a common tribe name i.e., Bori, 

Komkar, Libo and Pangi of Adi group and Tagin of Bangni group 

and (d) also the tribes who probably have adopted one name · 

from the earlier two names i.e., Meyor. 

(11) The decrease is in the tribe-names (a) which 

have app_eared under the group names or with group-name suffixes 

i.e., Ashing, Bagi, Bogun, Bomdo, Gallong, Janbo, Karka, 

Kongbo, Millang, Minyong, Pailibo, Pasi, "Stlimong and Tangam 

of Adi Group ; Kaman/Miju-Mishmi and Digarq/Taraon-Mishmi of 

Mishmi group; Havi-Tangsa, Kemsing-Tangsa, Longsang-Tangsa, 

Hotang-Tangsa, Rongrang-Tangsa and Tikhak-Tangsa of Tangsa 

group ; But-Monpa of Monpa group and Ponthei-Nocte of Nocte 

group; (b) the tribe which have shown independence from their 

group names i.e., from Monpa and Noete (c) and the tribes 

which have been recorded under another name as well i.e., 

Zakhring and Yobin. There are also reports that the 1Yobins' 

migrated back to Putaw, their original place is Burma6 • 



- 43 -

(12) Following 27 tribes recorded less than 15 in 

1981 census (a) Bolok-Tangsa, Haisa-Tangsa, Hotang-Tangsa, 

Katin-Tangsa, Khalim-Tangsa, Korang-Tangsa, Langkai-Tangsa, 

Longin-Tangsa, Lowang-Tangsa, Namsang-Tangsa, Ngtmong-Tangsa, 

Rangai-Tangsa, Sanke-Tangsa, Taisen-Tangsa, (14 of Tangsa­

Group); (b) Bomdo, Janbo, Karka, Kongbo, Nonong, Pongkong, 

Siram, Taram and Tangam,, (all 9 of Adi group); (c) Sulung-:­

Bangni and Tagin-Bangni (both of Bangni group); and (d) Yobin 

and Zakhring. In addition to the ones given earlier, 5 tribes 

of 1971 are not returned in 1981 census. 

(13) If compared with 1971, we find that following 

tribes returned less than 15 in both 1971 and 1981 : (a) all 

the 14 of the Tangsa group given above and the three of this 

group not returned in 1981 census at all i'•. e·., Lichi-Tangsa, 

Phong-Tangsa and Simsa-Tangsa (total 17); (b) Siram, Taram 

and Yatong (Adi group). Yanoo Bangni of Bangni group did not 

return in 1981 census. 

(14) The tribes who did nmt return more than 15 in 

1971 census but returned in 1981 census are Dorok-Tangsa, 

Khrodeng-Bangni, Millang-Abor, Muktum and Thai-Khampti while 

the tribes which had returned more than 15 in 1971 census but 

returned less than 15 in 1981 census are ; (a) Bomdo, Janbo, 

Karka, Kongbo and Tangam of Adi group ; (b) Tagin-Bangni of 

Bangni group and (c) Zakhring and Lisu, two ungrouped tribes. 



- 44 -

(15) Four tribes i.e., Mikir, Khamiyang• Deo·ri and 

Miri/Missing, whose majority is in Assam, cannot be considered 

as the exclusive tribes of Arunachal Pradesh. 

(16) If the tribe-names returned in 1971 are gone 

into further detail, it will be found that the tribes while 

identifying themeselves, got themselves recorded under two 

or more different names e.g., Adi. Adi-Minyong or Minyong 

thereby causing superficial increase in the number of tribes 

and also cbnfusion as regards their proper identities. The 

tribe names, which thus caused confusion by the use of both 

independent tribe-names or with the help of additional suffi­

xes/prefixes are Abor, Adi, Tang sa, Monpa, Nocte, Khampti, 

Mishmi and Bangni. · 

In addition to the enumeration ~ecords, the compilers 

in course of their compilation and field check found a few 

variations from the facts on ground. 

(a) R.K. Deori found that, "the Monpas are popularly 

recognised under three sections, namely, Towang Monpa, 

Dirang Monpa and Kalaktang Monpa 117 , but in census 

grouping they were shown as 'Monpa, Lish Monpa, But­

Monpa, Dirang-Monpa and Southern Monpa• 8 in 1961 ; 

and as 'Monpa, But-Monpa, Dirang-Monpa, Lish-Moripa, 

Panchen-Monpa and Tawang-Monpa in 1971' 9 • · 



- 45 -

(b) J .K. Barthakur found that· "Nissi or Nishang is 

a generic term that covers all the tribes that retu­

rned themselves as Dafla, Bangni, Hill-Miri, Bangro, 

Sulung and Tag in" 10 • 

(c) B.B. Pandey recorded that "The Nishang group of 

tribes as given in 1971 census, should be called the 

1Bangnl Group of Tribes •11 • He further records, n Some 

tribe like 'Taju' of the Damin circle have not been 

reflected in the census returns. They have apparently 

returned themselves as Nishangs. Not very long ago, 

some smaller tribes lived with the Nissis or Nishang.s 
.. 

who have now lost identities. While visiting the. area, 

the author had collected the story of 1Pe-Ta-Phe 1 

tribe that lived just near the snow-line of the Saril 
" .. 

circle on the fringe of the Bangni communal lands. 

This tribe lived in caves. The Pe-Ta-Phes have left 

no survivors1112 • 

(d) He further mentions, 11 The people of the Tali 

circle have returned themselves as Tagins but they 

fall in the Dolo group of the Daflas and are not 

different from them 111 3. 

(e) I .M. Simon mentions that,_ "Amongst Aka s there 

is a group known as 'Pichang' or Miri-Aka which has 

a different language from Akas1114 • He states, "··· 



- 46 -

between Akas and Bangnis, there is a small group of 

people living in pichang or picha, and adjacent villa­

ges (Cheje and Kitchang) who though they are grouped 

with Akas, speak a dialect that bears little resembla­

nce with Aka n 15 • To testify this, he carries out a 

comparative study of 13 basic numerals of Aka with 

pichang (also with Miji, Hill-Mir1 and Khoa languages). 

As he did not find similarity of f.ichang with Aka or 

any of the other three languages, he carried out a 
' 

comparative study of Pichang with Mishmi languages i.e., 

Idu, Digaru and Miju, and found that the similarities 

to one or the other of the Mishmi dialect numerals are 

striking. He, however, is unable to give final verdict 

·about the Pichang being entirely different from Akas 

as he admits that due to lack of !ntensive study of 

Pichang it will be unsafe to draw conclusions one way 

or another on the basis of vocabulary alone specially 

when only very limited vocabulary is used. 

In addition to the.remarks on affinities/ 

identities given by enumerating officials as stated above, 

a few other researches also commented upon the affinities/ 

identities of the tribes enumerated. These are given below 

in brief : 

(a) B.P. Misra quoted Jitendra Kr. Pangging stating 

that a small tribe-group of people called Panggi 



- 47 -

(in 1971 census, the name recorded is Pangi) which is 

regarded. as the sub-trib.e of Adis, feels that it is 

11 being deprived of its share because of its mistaken 

identity1116 • 

(b) Haimendorf mentions about a small group called 

~'Rau' meaning 'northerners' in north and north-east 

Subansiri in the valleys of Sippi and Mong? rivers. 

According to Dr. Elwin, they spoke a dialect of Gallong17 • 

(c) J.N. Chowdhury mentioned about a.tribe 'between 

Kamla and Subansiri rivers, known as 1 Rishi-Mashi 1 

having Mongoloid features of a more delicate and pro­

. t '18 gress1ve ype • 

(d) He also mentions another tribal group, 11 having . .. 
marital relations with the Rishi-Mashi but maintaining 

a separate identity-known as 1 Nidu-~ra•, located Upper 

Subansi.ri valley111 9. 

(e) He further mentions about, 11 a small population in· 

the Singi valley whic·h called 1Chikum-Dui 1 • Dr. Elwin 

considered them a branch of the Galling to the east of 

Subansiri, who seemed to be oeyond the social orbit of 
20 the other tribal groups of the region11 • 

(f) Haimendorf refers to another small group of people, 

11 known as 1Nga 1 , immediately below the Great Himalayan 

Range who are said to breed sheep, wear woolen clothes 



/ 

- 48 -

21 and build houses of stone" • B .B. Pandey calls them 

as 'Nah• 22 and Dr. K.S. Singh describes them as 1 Na• 23 • 

(g) G.K. Ghosh states that 11 Yobins are also called 

Lisus1124 • 

(h) Discussing the phenomenal increase in number of 

members of a tribe, C .F. Haimendorf states. "The con­

fusion of the nomenclature stems partly from the fact 

that a name used by members of a·tribal group for them-

selves may not be used by or even known to the members 

.of another branch of the same tribe. Thus the term 

Nishi by which so many of the tribesmen of the Suban­

siri District refer to themselves is not used by their 

fellow-tribesmen in Kameng District, who refer to them 

as Tagins, whereas the Nishis them~elves use the term 

Tagin to describe their northern neighbours in the Sippi 

valley and the region drained by the Upper Subansiri 1125 • 

If we compare the three census lists to find out the 

ethnic processes, we find that :-

(a) The increase in number of these tribes can be 

attributed primarily to ethnogenic divergenc.e process 

i.e., some of the 42 tribe-names which are accounted 

for in 1971 census but did not identify independently 

in 1961 are such a case. Janbo, Libo, Bagi, Bomdo , 

Yatong, Nonong, Siram and Pongkong born out of Adi 



- 49 -

group; Bolok-Tangsa, Darok-Tangsa, Haisa-Tangsa, Holong­

Tangsa, Katin-Tangsa, Khalim-Tangsa, Korang-Tangsa, 

Langkai-Tangsa, Lichi-Tangsa, Longin-Tangsa, Lowang­

Tangsa, Mossang-Tangsa, Ngimong-Tangsa, Phong-Tangsa. 

and Taisen-Tangsa born out of Tangsa group; Liju-Nocte, 

Ponthei-Nocte and Tutcha Nocte born out of Nocte group 

can be cited as examples of ethnotransformational 

ehtno-divergence process. 

(b) The emergence of tribe name~ like Sulung-Bangni 

and Tagin-Bangni can be considered as the cases of 

et.hno-genic mixing ( ethno-transfo.rmational sub-type). 

(c) The decrease in number of Padams and Adi Padams, 

Minyongs and Adi-Minyongs, Pasis and Adi-Pasis, Gallong 

and Adi-Gallong and other tribe-names belonging to the 

Adi group and an increase in the number under tribe 

name 1 Adi 1 in 1981 census can be considered as the 

case of ethnogenic inter-ethnic consolidation. Similarly 

the increase in Tangsa, Monpa and Mishmi groups can be 

mentioned as a case of intra-ethnic consolidation to 

some extent. 

(d) Increase of Sulungs and decrease of Sulung-Bangnis, 

and of Tagins along with. the decrease of Tagin-Bangnis, 

may be deemed to be a process of intra-ethnic consoli­

dation. 



- 50 -

(e) The non-appearance of 5 tribe names of· 1971 

census in 1981 census i.e., Yatong, Phong-Tangsa, 

Lichi-Tangsa, Simsa-Tangsa and Yanoo-Bangni, and 

9 of 1961 Census in 1971 Census i.e., Gaji, Lodung, 

Maimong, Nokna~, Changwan-Tangsa, Teikam, Tongsing 

a11d Yanian may be due to assimilation or et}1nogenic­

inter-ethnic consolidation. 

(f) It must also have been noticed by now that some 

more names have been mentioned by various researchers; 

but such names did not figure in any of the official 

census returns. One cannot vouch-safe about the accur­

aciesof the observations made by the scholars; but , 

at the same time~ if such observations are correct, 

then, the non-appearances of such tribe·-names in census, 

may be due to the fact that such people have been very 

casually, as also conveniently, incorporated under the 

more popular tribe-name ready at harid. 

(g) For further confirmation of these processes, a 

separate detailed study will be needed. 

From the above, we find that the officials list of 

tribes as has been accepted for the purpose of identifying 

tribes of Arunachal Pradesh based on the 1971 Census is not 

fully correct; it wrongly identifies some of the tribes and 

also misses the names of certain tribes thereby causing doubt 

about the identities of the people. This fact was accepted 



- 51 -

by Barthakur while compiling the census of 1971. She stated, 

"This list of ( 1961) was found to be far from being accurate •. 

The enumerators (of 1971) were cautioned not to leave out 

any of the genuine tribes of Arunachal Pradesh from being 

recorded. It was also deemed possible that some of the tribes 

since a~opted new names and preferred to return themselves 

under the~e new names. Some tribe who preferred to remain 

under the fold or one of the other major tribes during 1961 

census, might prefer to return a separate identity during 

1971 census. Some tribes that were shown as sub-tribes in 

1961 census might have a real linkage with the main tribe as 

the linkage of communities as tribes and sub-tribes does not 

always follow a stable pattern1126 • The tribe names having 

even a population as small as 1 is probably due to the result . .. 
of the above instructions, which certainly have put the very 

process of enumeration ·~f _tribe numbers to doubt. 

If we consider the tribe-names of 1971 census (which 

have been accepted by the Government of India as the base 

for 1991 census) and discard the anomalies as given above, . 

we can re-evaluate the tribe-names and tribe-numbers on the 

following lines : 

(a) Grouping of sub-tribes as is done in 1971 census. 

(b) Discarding of the following pseudo-tribe-names 

1. Tribes not exclusive to Arunachal Pradesh 

2. Tribes not enumerated in 1981 census. 



- 52 -

3. Tribes double-counted or tribes accounted 

for with alternative names. 

4. Tribes having a population less than 15. 

(c) Considering the endo-ethnonyms only whenever 

available .• 

In this reevaluation of 1971 list based on above guide­

lines, the following 46 tribes and sub-tribes have been exclu­

died due to the reason given against each : 

1. Five tribes accounted in 1971 census but not 

returned in 1981 census : Yatong, Phong-Tangsa, 

Lichi-Tangsa, Simsa-Tangsa and Yanoo -Bangni. 

2. 4 tribe names were not found to be exclusive 

to Arunachal Pradesh/in majority in Arunachal 

Pr~desh : Deori, Mikir, Mishing/Miri and Khami- ~ 

yang. 

3, 12 tribe~ were double counted or appeared 

under different .names (The names give~ in 

brackets are the alternate names) : (a) Abor 

(Adi) , Millang-Abor (Milang); Adi-Minyong, Adi­

Padam and Adi-Pasi (~inyong, Padam, and Pasi), · 

(b) Bangni, Nishang and Defla (Nissi) Sulung­

Bangni (Sulung), Tagin-Bangni (Tagin) and (c) 

Thai-Khampt). (Khampti). 

4. 19 tribes having population less-than 15 in 

both 1971 and 1981 census as have not been 



- 53 -

accounted for. These include 16 of Tangsa group 

i.e., Bolok, Darok, Haisa, Hotang, Katin, Khaling, 

Korang, Langkai, Longin, Lowang, Namsang, Ngimong, 

Pongkong, Rongai, Sanke and Taisen and 2 or Adi 

Group i.e., Karka and Siram. 

5. Following additional eight tribes have not been 

accounted for being less than 15 in 1981 census 

(a) Bomdo, Janbo, Karko, Kongbo and Tangam or 

Adi-group, (b) Tagin-Bangni or Bangni group and 

(c) Zakhring and Lisu who accounted as indepen­

dent tribes. 

After considering the exclusion of the 41 tribes above 

the tentative list of the tribes will then. b.e as follows : 

Tribes Number 

1. Gr.ouped : Adi, Nissi, Mishmi, 
Monpa and Tangsa 5 

2. Can be grouped Nocte 1 

. 3. Ungrouped Aka/Hrusso, Apatani, 
Bangro, Hill-Miri, Khamba, 
Khampti, Khowa, Mi~i/Dhammai 16 
Memba, Sherdukpen, Singpho, 
Sulung, Tagin, Wancho, Meyor 
and Yobin. 

Total = 22 



. - 54 -

The sub-tribes which fall under the six grouped 

tribes are as follows :-

Tribe"':'group 

1. Adi 

2. Bangni 

3. Mishmi 

4. Monpa 

5. Tangsa 

6. Nocte 

Sub-Tribes 

.ishing, Bagi, Boker, Bogum 
Bori, Gallong, Komkar, Libo, 
Millang, Minyong, Padam, 
Pailibo, Pangi, Pasi, Ramo, 
Simong. 

Khrodeng - Bangni 

Digaru/Taraon, Idu/Chulikata, 
Kaman/Miju 

But, Dirang, Lish, Tawang and 
Panchen 

Havi, K~msing, Lungchang, 
Longsang, Longri, Longphi, 
Langkai, Moglum, Morang 1 ~ossang, 

Rongrang, Tikhak, Yongkuk and 
Yougli 

Liju, Ponthei and Tutcha 

Number 

16 

1 

3 

5 

14 

3 

Total 42 

The total tribes and sub-tribes will then be as 

follows :-

(a) Grouped sub-tribes as given above 

(b) Ungrouped tribes 

Total 

42 

16 

58 

Notes : 6 tribe-group-names have not been included in the above 
total because sub-tribe-names have been included instead. 



' 

- 55 -

With a mere figurative assessment we have found that 

about half of the tribe-names bear a question mark as to 

their actual existence. Not only this, there are some more 

factors which confuse or are likely to confuse their identi-

ties further, some of these are given below :-

4. The tribe-names with a population less the 15 

seems to have been enumerated as a result of confused 

identities as it is unlikely that such a small number 

(even 1 or 2 could claim a separate tribal identity. 

Almost all. these names appeared from 1971 census 

onwards, possibly as a result of instructions to the 

enumerators. Similarly, the tribal-identities are 

confused where the accounting is both under a group 

name as well as under a separate tribe-name under the 
4\ •• 

same group. Assimilation and divergences of tribal 

names show that the tribal identities are not yet 

stable and are in the transition stage. 

2. Similarly, grouping of the tribes Shows that they 

are eager to enlarge their areas of influence by inc-

reasing their affinities with other tribes while asser~ 

tion of independent identities by tribes like Sulung, 

Pangi, · Tagin etc. shows that these tribes are eager 

to keep their indentity independent of the group. This 

process of grouping or breaking up groups is still not 

complete. The process of seeking larger identities/ 



( 

_;. 56 -

affinities as well as trying to maintain their 

smaller identities is a point for special attention. 

3. Ethnos like Rau, Rishi-Mashi, Chikum-Dui, Nga/ 

Nah/Na, Miri-Aka Nidu-Mora and Pe-Ta-Phes, have not , 
been found enumerated though the various researchers 

state them to be having independent identities. 

4. Tagins call Nishis as Tagin while they also account 

themselves under the head Tagin-Bangni, thereby causing 

a confusion as to what tribe-name should they be actu-

ally identified with. 

5. Out of the above, Bori, Komkar, Libo and Pang! 

sub-tribes of Adi Group and Longchang shu-tribe of 

Tangsa group appear to be asserti~g·their independent 

identities from their tribal groups. 

If their names and numbers are not recorded so far 

correctly, what are their actual identities th@n ? What and 

how many are the tribes and what are their sub-tribes ? What 

and how is the grouping done ? Is their any process of assimi-

lation or any other ethnogenic processes in progress among 

these tribes ? If so, what is its direction and dimension ? 

What new identities. they .:.are like to form in this process ? 

Which attributes suit the most for. determining the tribe 

identities ? 



- 57 -

This way a number of questions may arise requiring 

answers to clear the din of confusion existing at present. 

To solve such a plethora of questions about such a large 

number of tribes is a tremendous task which requires teams 

of expe:r:-ienced researches working over a long period. of 

time. ~ individual researcher can take up the s~udy of at 

the most two or three tribes at a time. This limited study 

about two or three tribes will also be a necessity. initially, 

as it will act like a pilot project where the guidelines for 

further research in the Arunachal situation can be worked out. 

And, it is in this spirit that the present study has been. 

undertaken. 

In the 1971 census records two tribes of Kameng 

region officially named as Akas and Mijis have been mentioned. . .. 
It is stated that "The Akas and Mijis have come close to .each 

other sine e. time immemorial; partly by a geographical neigh-
~ 

bourhood and partly by a common social outlook.·The Akas·inter-

marry with their neighbouring tribe Mijis, but they never 

intermarry with the Monpas, the Sherdukpans, the Khowas·, the 

Sulungs and the Bangis 11 • This researcher became further inqui­

sitive about the problem. And, on further enquiry he found 

that Akas and Mijis had been stated to be kindred by Dalton 

(1867_) and Capt. R.S. Kennedy (1914) who wrote 11 It would 

appear probable that Mijis are an off-shoot from the same 



- 58 -

stock as the Akas who possibly have been altered somewhat 

by blending with whatever race formerly inhabited the Bichome 

valley. Whatever their origin may have been, it is certain 

that intermarriages will eventually result in their complete 

blending with the Akas1128 • Kennedy 1 s point of view of Mij is 

blending with Akas got strengthened when this researcher 

found a legend recorded by Verrier Elwin (1959) mentioning 

that 11 Akas and Mijis originated from the same ancestor112 9~ 

Confusion regarding their relationship led one to 

_believe that 'either Akas and Miji have been the same tribe' 

or 'their differences are minimal'-; and it put to doubt the 

official version that, "Akas and Miji are two different tribes". 

This confusion was further magnified by another statement in 

1971 census that, 11 a small group o·f peopLe .living in Pichang 

or Picha and adjacent villages (Cheje and Kichang) who, 

though they are g~ouped with Akas, speak a dialect that bears 

little resemblance with Akas 11 • 

Who then, are these people who speak a different 

language but are grouped with Akas ? This group of people 

were called Miri-Akas or Migi-Akas by their neighbours -

Akas, Mijis and Bangnis. They were also called Pichang in the 

above reports and Khrome31 by R. Sinha. Dalton in his report 

described them to be different then the Hill Miris and 

called them 1Tanae• 32 • R. Sinha who stated Hrusso dialect and 



- 59 -

Miri-Akas dialect to be the dialects of Aka language, clari­

fied the point further, stating, 11The dialect of Miri Aka~, 

which differs from the dialect of the Hrussos ~orming the 

basic point of difference between the two sections of the 

Aka tribe, is not the same as the commonly known dialect of 

Hill-Mir~s, nor does it show any close affinity with the 

Bangni dialect spoken in the neighbouring area of the Miri-

Aka u33. From his statement, we find that R. Sinha seemed to. 

be quite confused about the relationship between Akas and 

Miri-Akas. Finally,. he gives up and states, 11 As to when the 

difference in the dialects of the Akas and the Miri-Akas arose, 

it is not possible to account for unless philological research 

brings some more facts to light"34 • Hence the point emerges 

as to what are the actual identities of these peopl~. Are 

Akas and Mijis same or different ? If they are same, then why 

are they officially recorded as two tribes ? If they are diffe­

rent, then, and why the legned states that they have descended 

from the same ancestor ? How do their cultural and kinship 

similarities allow them to have different ethnic identities ? 

Is the contact through. culture and marriage not affecting their 

language boundaries ? 

Similarly, the questions arise about Akas arid Miri­

Akas~ Are the Miri-Akas having different languages/dialects? 

Are these linguistic differences not determinants of their 

separate identities ? If they are separate identities, then 



- 60 -

how are they grouped together ? Have these Miri-Akas any 

link with Mijis as they are being called Migi-Akas also ? 

Other supplementary questions which emerge are : 

Why do Akas and Mijis find separate identities in official. 

records despite their culture and kinship closeness ? Why are 

Miri-Akas·not recorded separately? Are there any other such 

groups within the Akas and Mijis who have some cultural, 

Kinship or linguistic differences from these tribes ~ 

Finding the answer to above and many more linking 

questions was considered important for the purpose of deter­

mining the identity of these tribes. Hence, the subject selec­

ted for a detailed study was stated as follows : 

THE AKA, MIJI AND THEIR KINDRED INc A.RUNACHAL ·PRADESH : 

AN ENQUIRY INTO THE DErERMINANTS OF THEIR IDENTITY. 

The ingredients of the subject stated can be divided 

into two parts :-

(a) To examine the determinants of identity of tribes 

in general ; and 

(b) To study the Akas, Mijis· and their kindred, in 

particular. 

The determinants of identity of a tribe have been 

presented in Chapter I (Introduction), where we found that 



- 61 -

there are two sets of attribut~s : one set for the purpose 

of differentiating the tribals from non-tribals, while the 

other set is for demarcating the boundary of a particular 

tribe. We have also seen, in the beginning of this chapter, 

that ethnoses mentioned in census records of Arunachal Pradesh 

have already been designated as tribals due to their geogra­

phical isolation and general backwardness. Confusion has, 

however, arisen_abaut their identities as 'a tribe'. The· set 

of most distinguishing attribute defining them as 'a tribe', 

as listed in Chapter I includes common name, territory, 

culture, kinship and language. It is true that a simple enu­

meration of these attributes are sometimes not enough to 

distinguish the boundaries of 'a tribe• 35 , but, at the same 

time, for operational purposes, they cannot be avoided alto-
c .• 

gether either, particularly for as long as a definitely better 

alternative is not in sight. Hence, the study of these attri­

butes of the tribes under study i~e., the Aka, Miji and their 

kindred is required for establishing their identity. A further 

requirement is to see as to what attribute/s contribute most 

in establishing the identity in the particular situation, as 

it is most likely that the priori~y of applicability of 

these attributes and their various aspects varies from situ­

ation to situation and from time to time. Hence, the hypo­

thesis evolved is that, "Common name, territory, culture, 

kinship and language are the most distinguishing attributes 



- 62 -

for determining the identity of 'a tribe'. However their 

importance and priority for providing this distinction 

changes from situation to situation and time to time". 

Survey of Related Literature 

'sufficient material has not been found exclusively 

dedicated to this field of research on these people. What­

ever is available, is on Akas and, in a few cases, on Mijis 

but that too mostly found mentioned along with Akas generally 

in the form of notes and reports or as a part of the study 

of other tribes. A preliminary task is-of editing these notes 

and reports by E.T. Dalton (1872), A. Mackenzie (1884), 

Verrier Elwin (1959) and J.K. Barthakur (1972). Grierson 

(1909) and I.M. Simon (1972) have done som~work on the langu-

ages. Other works of some worth are R. Sinha's 'The Akas 1 

(1959), and Capt R.S. Kennedy's 'Ethnological Report on the 

Akas, Khoas and Mijis and the Mambas of Tawang' (1914). 

Other writers have generally abridged/adopted material on 
' 

these tribes depending on this requirements from the accounts 

by the above scholars. 

In his Descriptive Ethnology of Bengal (1874), E.T. 

Dalton has presented much information of Arunachal Pradesh 

tribes including Akas whom he called Hrusso also. It also 

makes passing reference to Mijis and Miri-Akas. Miri-Akas in 

this book are mentioned as Miri-Angkas under the sub-head 



- 63 

Hill-Miri. He also includes the list of about 100 words of 

Miri-Angka and Hrusso separately. The vocabulary of Miri-Akas 

when compared with other languages is the same or nearly the 

same as Bangni (Dafla) vocabulary while the vocabulary given 

under sub-head Hrusso is the same or more-or-less the same 

as that of Akas. Aka history and culture are given out in 

brief while these details are not available about Mijis and 

Miri-Akas. Mijis are stetted as kindred of Akas. 

Ethnological Report on the Akas, Khoas and Mijis and the 

Mombas of Tawang' by Capt. R.S. Kennedy (1914) is a brief 

but reliable critical account of the above named tribes. A 
few myths and legends about their origin, social and cultu­

ral life in brief~ physical dimensions of a very small sample 
41 •• 

of these tribes and about 110 vocabulary items/small senten­

ces of their languages presented in a comparative table are 

·of special significance for this study. Capt. Kennedy was the 

doctor accompanying the 'Aka Promenade' and his experiences, 

though limited, are of immense value being the eye-witness 

accounts of the period when these people were rarely visited 

and no one else studied them so clos.ely. 

India's North-East Frontier in the Nineteenth Century (1959) 

ed. by Verrier Elwin is a compilation of articles published 

before his period about the tribes of Arunachal Pradesh. It 



- 64 -

contains three articles on Akas written by A. Mackenzie 

(1884), C.H. Hesslemeyer (1867) and C.R. Macgregor (1884) 

in which some brief accounts of Aka geography, economy, 

history and socio-cult~ral aspects are of value. Mention of 

Mijis and Miri-Akas is in a passing reference. 

Census of India : A portrait of population, Arunachal Pradesh 

Series 24, 1971 ed. by J.K. Barthakur contains the population 

records of 1971 census and counts of tribes of Arunachal 

Pradesh and their general description in brief. It includes 

both Aka and Miji tribes along with other tribes. 

The Akas .(1970) by R. Sinha is a monograph of Akas which 

provides a brief description of their land, do;~stic life, . .. 
economic structure, organisation of society, social institu-

ations and usages, political system, and religion and magic 

presented in seven chapters, He also discusses Aka is· relation­

ship with Mijis and Miri-Akas briefly, stating the Miri-Akas 

(Pichang) to be different from Akas. This is a very valuable 

primary source ; however, the details in the book are not 

sufficient enough to provide a base for sorting out the type 

of problem in hand. 

The Linguistic Survey of India (1909) by G.A. Grieson contains 

Aka vocabulary and brief linguistic characteristics of this 

language. It is a good source for comparison of Aka language 



·- 65 -

with nearly 400 other languages of the region. Comparative 

studies of Aka vocabulary items have been done with Dafla, 

Abhor, Hill-Miri and Mis~11anguages~ This is a source book 

for any comparative study on Indian languages. 

The Aka Language Guide ( 1970 ). by I .M. Simon contains about 

500 Aka words and 50 sentences. It also touches in brief, the 

Aka grammer and phonetics, but it all is, however, of general 

nature, not meant for any conclusive research but for the 

administrative officials to establish some communication with 

these tribes. However, it certainly provides a base for the 

study of the language for which there is nothing else of worth 

available. Details contained in this pamphlet is made use of, 

during language study in Chapter V. The Miji Language Guide : 
.. . . 

(1979) is another pamphlet written by I.M. Simon for the same 

purpose and with the same type of contents as Aka language 

guide. More details about it will be studied in Chapter V. 

'Ethnic Processes in North-East India' (1988) is a paper by 

S.K.· Acharya, published in 'Economic and Political Weekly' 

(May 21, 1988). It studies ethnic processes in seven North-

East Indian states. Theoretical framwork draws heavily on 

analytical models developed in Soviet ethnography, particu­

larly the works of Yulian Bromley, to explain the ethnic 

complexities in India. Certain concepts divised to suit the 



- 66 -

conditions in North-East India are of value. 'Tribal Identity 

Dilemma in Arunachal Pradesh' (1990) by Bibhas Dhar, in the 

book 'Nationality, Ethncity and Cultural Identity in North 

East India 1 ed. by B. Pakem has provided a very deep insight 

into the problem of identity establishment among the Arunachal 

Pradesh tribes and is of value for the present study. 

Methodology : 

Comparative method has been employed in the present 

study to find out the similarities and differences. The compa­

rison will be both by observation and by statistical methods. 

For observation, the per~onal contact, recording, photography 

and interviews are employed while for calculation of the 

collected data and thereafter for comparison purposes the 
c .• 

quantitative measurements are frequently used with some modi­

fications to suit the requirements of the study. Various 

steps taken in this study are as follows 

1. Initial preparation 

2. Selection of area and samples 

3. Data collection and collation 

4. Analysis and interpretation 

It is necessary to point out here that the researcher 

had the privilege of staying in Arunachal Pradesh from 1985 

to 1987. During this period, he came in-to contact with the 



- 68 -

extended to include samples from this group as well. 

Selection of the area and samples : 

The area selected was where these ethnoses had the 

maximum contact vis-a-vis the least contact area. For langu­

age boundary marking, the directions of C.F. Hockett as given 

in Chapter I were kept in mindo Thirizino and Bhalukpong were 

the hub centres where these ethnoses frequently met ; and 

Jamiri, Nafra and Bana were the areas where they came in least 

contact with each other ; these being the periphery villages. 

Number of villages selected were at least two of each tribe 

at the inner circle and at least one at the outer circle i.e., 

at the periphery. Plan was to record at least 100 samples 

from each ethnos. Entire population being rural and poor ... 
(except a few neorich) and 93 percent being uneducated (as per 

1981 census), plan was to include maximum available educated 

which could be either at Bomdila, Bhalukpong, Nafra or 

Thirizino ; the administrative hub-centres of and around the 

area of research. There being no apparent caste system,. all 

were, generally, of equal status~ All the three ethnoses were 

stated to be frequently intermarrying and have close socio­

cultural contact. To take the advantage of this contact, 

maximum samples were planned from the couples having inter~ 

ethnic marriages or their close relatives. The maximum contact 

areas being Thirizino and Bhalukpong, these two places were 

made the centre of study and also of stay by the researcher 



- 69 -

where from he visited other villages. The villages visited 

for recording of data were (a) Thirizi, 6-Mile, Sakrin , 

Yayung, Sikong, Jamiri, Jamiri-Point and Paliji, all Aka 

villages ; (b) Upper Challang and Lower Challang both pure 

Miji villages ; (c) Supung and 2-Mile from Bana ; both pure 

Miri-A~a villages ; (d) Bana a Bangni and Miri-Aka mix 

(e) Bhalukpong and Bomdila, Aka, Miji and Miri-Aka ~ix with 

other tribal and non-tribal population ; and (f) Rupa where 

a Miri-Aka family is mixed with Sherdukpen and other non­

tribal population. 

In addition to the above, individuals from these 

ethnoses from other villages we+e also recorded outside their 

village background. These were from (a) Dzanachin, Nafra, 

Lada, Upper Dzong and Lower Dzong, all M~jJs ; (b) TheS§a, 

Buragaon, Palatari, Khuppi and Ramdaga~ia, all Akas ; (c) 

Pichan·g, -_ Ya!lgSe. and Kichang all Miri~Ak~s; (d) :Kayan-Valley 

and Dj~gania bqth having population of Akas and Mijis, and 

· ·· (e) Bana having population of both Miri-Aka and Bangni. 

Though plan was for having 100 samples each but 

considering the shyness of contact ·Of all the ethnoses and 

the small population of Miri-Akas and relative remoteness 

and difficulty of approach of Mijis, the number finally recor­

ded was 124 Akas, 76 Mijis and26 Miri-Akas (out of the about 



- 70 -

300 Akas and Mijis each and 150 JYiiri-Akas contacted). Out 

of these 39 Akas, 7 Miri-Akas and 25 Mijis were finally selec­

ted for detailed recording of their bio-data, socio-cultural 

background, marital details, speech sounds, vocabulary etc. 

The samples from maximum contact areas included 30 samples. 

having ~ter-tribal marriages. These were 13 from Akas, 11 

from Mijis and 5 from Miri-Akas. These included one case of 

Miri-Aka marrying a Bangni. The number of samples from {a) 

close contact villages i.e., Thirizino, Djingania, Kayan-Valley 

and Pichang having intertribal population was 22 ; (b) proxi­

mity village was 21 ; and (c) perephery villages was 26.· 

The samples selected were of both sexes, married and 

unmarried, all age groups monogamous/polygamous, monolinguals/ 

bilinguals/multilinguals and of all occup~ions. Characteris­

tics of these samples in brief are given~ Table 2. 

Table 2.1 

Characteristics of the sample of informants 

1. Total Samples 

a) Male 

b) Female 

' 
Aka Miri-Aka Miji Nissi Total 

39 

29 

10 

07 

04 

03 

25 

10 

15 

02 

01 

01 

73 

44 

29 

Contd ••• 



- 71 -

Table 2.1 (cont.) 

~ Miri-Aka Miji N:l..ssi Totf;:ll 

2. Geographical 
Distribution • • 

Area-wise 

West Kameng District 39 14 53 

a) Thirizino circle 39 04 43 

b) Nafra Circle 10 10 

East Kameng District 07 11 02 20 

a) Seppa circle 06 02 08 

b) Lada circle 01 11 12 

Tribal inter mix 10 05 05 02 22 

a) Kayan Valley 07 04 11 . 

b) Thirizino 03 03 

c) Djingania 01 01 - .. 
d) Pic hang 05 02 07 

Proximiti Villages 03 01 15 02 21 

a) 6-Mile 01 01 

b) Paliji 01 - 01 

c) Lad a 01 08 09 

d) Sikong 01 01 

e) Challang 07 07 

f) Pichang 02 02 

Peri2he~ Villages 20 06 26 

a) Jamiri 14 - 14 

b) Hussigaon 04 .. o4 

contd! •• 



- 72 -

Table 2.1 (cont.) ~' 

~ Miri-Aka Miji -'issi Total 

c) Buragaon 02 02 

d) Nafra 03 03 

e) Lower Dzong 02 02 

f) Yangse 01 01 

Other Villages 06 - 06 

3. Age Grou12s 39 07 25 02 73 

a) 8-20 years 10 05 09 01 25 

b) 21-35 years 17 01 09 01 28' 

c) Over 36 years 12 01 07 20 

4. Occu12ations 

a) Agriculture 18 01 0~ .. 24 

b) Service 04 02 01 07 

c) Students 08 05 08 01 22 

d) House wives 09 01 10 20 
(do agriculture also) 

5. Education : 

a) Uneducated 25 02 11 38 

b) Educated 14 05 14 02 35 

Under Matric 12 02 11 25 

Mat ric 01 03 02 06 

Above Matric 01 03 04 

Contd ••• 



:" 73 -

Table 2.1 (cont.) 

Aka Miri-Aka Miji Ijf.ssi Total 

6. Marital Status • • 

a) Married 27 04 19 01 51 
b) Unmarried 12 03 06 01 22 

Inter-marriages 13 05 11 01 30 

a) Aka 03 10 13 
b) Miri-Aka 03 01 04 
c) Miji 10 01 11 
d) Bangni 'W 01 - 01 

Mono gam:£ 20 04 19 01 44 

Polygny 07 - 07 

a) Two wives 05 05 
b) More than two 02 02 

7. LanSj1!ages : 

a) Monolingual 05 " .. 05 -
b) Bilingual 15 03 18 

c) Multilingual 19 07 22 02 50 

Other Languages known (other tribal languages known generally at 

understanding level only) 

a) Aka 07 20 27 
b) Miri-Aka 08 09 02 19 
c) Miji 19 05 . 01 25 
d) Bangni/Nissi 04 01 02· 07 
e) Sulung 01 04 05 
f) Khowa 01 01 02 
g) Monpa - 03 03 

Contd ••• 



- 74·-

Table 2.1 (cont.) 

~ Miri-Aka Miji N:issi Total 
~ 

h) Hindi 25 05 18 02 5d 
i) English 10 06 06 02 24 
j) Assamese 07 07 04 01 19 
k) Other languages 07 02 09 

Data Collection and Collation : Methods and tools 

adopted for data collection were as follows : 

a) Tape recordi.ng 

b) Photography 

c) Visual observations 

d) Personal discussions 
- .. 

e) Interviews, both free and controlled 

f) Questionnaires 

Data was mainly collected on socio-cultural and lingu­

istic details. Tape recorder was used to record 1958 Aka, 1164 

Miri-Aka and 1792 Miji words and about 150 sentences in each in 

each language in addition to the recording of songs, stories, 

legends, discussions and interviews. 32 tapes of 90 minutes each 

were finally recorded. Photography of topography, social, econo­

mic and cultural features and other.activities, was carried out 

with a Yashica camera in colour. Free ahd frank discussions and 

interviews were resorted to specially with elders of all the 



- 75 -

tribes and the women with whom the controlled interview did 

not work. Controlled interviews and discussions as well as 

questionnaires were employed with the educated to make maximum 

use of their understanding and explaining capabilities and 

minimal language barriers between them and the researcher. 

The services of the ~olitical Interpreter (P.I.) as was provi-· · 

ded by the state administration throughout during the resear-

cher's stay and field work ; were utilised for communicating 

specially with the monolinguals of the remote areas. Case 

studies were done for those families where there was bigamy/ 

polygyny and also where there were intertribal marriages. 

Details of various dat.a collected are attached as appendices 

in the following order : 

. '. Tool Appendices -
a) Interviews A to E 

b) Vocabu-lary G to u 

c) Sentences v to cc 

d) Stories and songs DD to FF 

Sifting and classification of the data was generally 

done immediately after the collection of the data to avoid any 

mix up and confusion and later by putting in ·table-s and .ma~;ing 

separate files. The gaps in data which were found at later 

stages were duly filled and adjusted by providing the missing 

links during subsequent visits. Data was classified keeping 



- 76 -

the distinguishing capabilities in mind according to the 

requirement of the project. Separate files were prepared for 

language and kinship while mate~ial about tribe-name• 

territory and culture was kept in one another file, conside­

ring the volume and distinctive features of these at·tributes •. 

The voc~bulary was fed in to the comput~r and divided into 13 

groups as given in appendix F. This division was done for 

comparative study of phonology, morphology, semantics and also 

for kinship terms etc. These 13 groups were further divided 

. into two manor groups i.e., basic vocabulary group and the 

cultural vocabulary group for comparison of the cultural it-ems. 

The grouping of the total material was finally done under 

tribe name, territory, culture, kinship and language sub-heads. 

Tabulation of data into tables wa_s. carried out to 

present it in a concise and comparable form. Even the vocabu­

lary of all thre~ languages was prepared in the fo~m of compa­

rative tables for the purpose of ease of comparison at the 

onset. Other tabulated data included the kinship terminology 

and structure, freedom and association levels etc. The compu­

tation of data was done mathmatically with calculators and 

computers and the analysis was done statistically. The major 

calculations involved, were of counting over a lakh phonemes 

which took considerable time of the study. For the purpose 

of finding out association and differences of the phonemic 

structure Chi Square values were workeaout. Reliability and 



- 77 -

validity checks were carried out through computer checks· and 

with the help of calculators applying both visual observations 

and common sense checks. 

Analysis and Interpretation : 

Quantification and scaling of the data was done for 

comparative analysis of the characteristics of the kinship term 

and the languages to measure the level of freedom, .similarities, 

associations and differentiation. A uniform methodology was 

adopted for scaling i.e., 5 point scale as given in table 2.2 

below. Chi Square test and percentiles were worked out for 

measuring the association and freedom levels of. the languages •. 

Use of computer was made for calculation of the phonemes ini­

tially, medially and finally for comparative study • .. . •" 

Table 2.2. 

Scale for me~suring Association/Affinity and 
Freedom I Differences 

Scale Percent Association/Affinity Freedom/ 
Difference 

5 80-100 
4 60-99 

3 40-59 
2 20-39 
1 1-19 

0 Below one 

Maximum/Excellent 
Very 'Good 

Good 
Poor 

Very Poor 

Nil 

Maximum 
Uery High/ 
Very Good 
High/good 
Poor/Low 
Very Poor/ 
Very-low 

Nil 



- 78 -

Computer also helped scanning through large quantity of words 

and phonemes and systematised the phonetic sounds • 

The interpretation was based on the primary and 

secondary data of the subjects/samples of study. It included 

statistical description on the one hand and inferferences on 

the other. The heterogeneous statistical data of kinship 

terminology has been brought to a common denominator with the 

help of scaling. 

The material and its analysis have been presented 

in two different volumes because of the importance of the first 

part from the other and the voluminous nature of the material. 

The first volume includes formulation of problem (first two 

chapters), analysis of determinants of identity (third,fourth 

and fifth chapters) and summary and con~l~~ion (sixth chap­

ter). The five determinants of identity have been included 

in three chapter~, providing two different chapters ·to kinship 

and language because of their distinguishing capability in this 

situation and also because the material collected for these 

attributes turned out to be voluminous. 

The second volume includes appendices and biblio­

graphy. The appendices include large sets of vocabulary.items 

in comparative tables and sentences, songs and stories of all 

these languages in addition to extracts crf selected interviews. 



- 79 -

References 

1. Barthakur, J.K. 1972, fensus of India, 1971, Part X-A, 

Series 24 1 Arunachal Pradesh, Shillong, 

Director of Census Operations, Arunachal 

Pradesh, p. 243. 

2. Ibid. 

3. Ibid. P• 236. 

4. Ibid. PP• 247-9. 

5. Rai, M.B. 1981, Census of India, 1981 :Arunachal Pradesh 

Part IX, SC and ST, Shillong, Director of 

Census Operations, Arunachal Pradesh, p. · 14. 

6.· Dutta, D.K. 1990, 'An Ethnographic Note on Lisus•, in. 

7. 

8. 

9. 

10. 

11 • 

12. 

- .· .. 
Agpects of Culture and Customs of Arunachal 

Pradesh, ed. P .c. Dutta and .D...K. Duarah, 

Director of Research, Government of Arunachal 

Pradesh, p. 14. 

Barthakur, J.K. op. cit. p. 252. 

Ibid. P• 243. 

Ibid. P• 236. 

Ibid. P• 256n. 

Ibid. P• 256. 

Ibid. 



- 80 -

13T Ibid. P• 258. 

14. Barthakur, J.K. 1972, Census of India, 1971, Series ~4, 

Arunachal Pradesh, District Census Handbook: 

15. Ibid. p. 22. 

Kameng District, Shillong, Directorate of 

Census Operations, Arunachal Pradesh, pp. 22-

25. 

16. Misra, B.P. 1983, 'Society and Politics in Hill Areas of 

North ... :H;lls 1 , in The Emergence and Role of 

Middle Class in North East India, ed, B.Datta 

Ray, New Delhi, Uppal, p. 32. 

17. Chowdhury, J.N. 1973, reprint 1982, Aruna~hal Panorama, 

Shillon~, pirectorate of Research, Arunachal 

Pradesh, p. 106. .. .. 

18. Ibid. 

19. Ibid. 

20. Ibid. 

21 • Ibid • p • 11 7 • 

22. Pandey, B.B. 1981, Festivals of .Subansiri District, 

Shillong, Directorate of Research, Govern-
I 

ment of Arunachal Pradesh, pp• 2-3, sketch 2. 1 

23. Singh, K.S. 1991, People of India, Delhi·, Anthropological 

Survey of India, p.2. 



- 81 -

24. G~osh, G.K. 1992, Tribal and Their Culture 

and Tripura, Vol.2, p.19. 

Arunachal 

25. Haimendorf C.F. 1982, Highlanders of Arunachal Pradesh: 

Anthropological Research in North-East India, 

New Delhi, Vikas, pp. 10-11. 

26. Bar"thakur, J .K. op. cit. n.t, p.63. 

2 7 • Ibid • p • 2 53 • 

28. Kennedy, R.S. 1941, Ethnological Report on the Akas 1 Khoas 

and Mijis and the Monbas of Tawang. 

29. Elwin, Verrier, 1958, Myths of North-East Frontier of 

India, Shillong, Directorate of Research, 

30. 

31. 

.• . 

Government of Arunachal Pradesh, p. 13. 

Barthakur, J.K. 1972,op. cit. n.14, p.22. .. ~ .. 
Sinha; _R. 1992, reprint 1968, The Akas, Itanagar, 

pirector of Research, Aruna·chal Pradesh, p. 7 

32. Dalton, E.T. 18_72, reprint 1960, Descriptive Ethnology 

of Bengal, Calcutta, Firma K.L.M.,p.40. 

33. Ibid. pp. 14-15. 

34. Ibid. p. 15. 

35. Maurice Godelier, op • cit., ; Andre Beiteille, op. cit. 

Mortan H. Fried, op. cit.