indigenousnagaland #13 — Headhunting

IMAGE

PROLOGUE

In the Americas, Africa, Australia, India's northeast and elsewhere, colonial administrators applied misleading terms to specific groups almost immediately upon contact... who are Naga tribesmen? Do they practice headhunting?

Tribe Or Nation: the word "Tribe" carries connotations that weren't true but rather misleading in the Naga historical context; the term "Nation" (anthropologists began using chiefdom and state, in the 19th century, to convey a given culture’s population and sociopolitical organization) does encapsulate their historical reality with more accuracy than its alternatives, such as "tribe". The term and idea of "tribe" was not to be found in the Naga historical psyche and lexicons ("Village-state" was the bedrock of one's identity among Nagas). This is a simple fact — we cannot/shouldn't manipulate it otherwise if we esteem ethics. However, today, the term "tribe" — as a label of convenience — is used or spoken, because, to an extent, the usage of the term "nation" terrifies India: the violent-occupational-power.

HEADHUNTING

[It has to be informed beforehand, to give the reader an informed frame of mind, that Nagas have more than 40 linguistic groups, who have their own strand of political and religious traditions — there's neither unity nor uniformity among them in the bygone days; the log-drum and tattoo found among northern and central Nagas are not to be found among the southern Nagas (such as the Zeliangrong groups) who're considered less warlike but instead well-known for their religion; the Konyak and Sumi have a king in their chieftain-system whereas other Nagas are republicans]

Headhunting comes in two categories: war and concomitant-of-war.

WAR: "When in war, act like in war"? War and peace are governed by codes of conduct; those who are known for wars are also known for their native system of peace-ambassadorship, which is manned by their womenfolk — the less warlike groups, interestingly enough, don't have similar peace-ambassadorship. Hasn't it been said, "Necessity is the mother of inventions"?

CONCOMITANT OF WAR: this is revenge-killing, as opposed to legitimate responses to violence. It is noteworthy that there's a belief all across the globe that "the head contained "soul matter" or life force, which could be harnessed through its capture"; a section of Nagas have held to this belief. Some experts theorized that the Zeliangrong Nagas, along with few other groups in India's northeast, were relatively resistant to religious conversion because they all had a primal religion of their own that could be compared favorably to other mainstream religions of the world, whereas those that were quick to convert to another religion were found to have been lacking a developed religion of their own. The Zeliangrong Nagas were documented by the British to be relatively less warlike — they maintained an oral tradition called "Mianti" that speaks against "preemptive strike". Headhunting, among Zeliangrong Naga groups, was a legitimate response to aggression and has no spiritual/religious motivation/connotation; to strengthen this argument, it could be pointed out that the so-called less warlike (Zeliangrong Naga groups) were the first to revolt against the British (100 years ahead of other Nagas).

Both from the Emic and Etic (from the perspective of the subject and outside observer, respectively) sources, cannibalism or human sacrifice was never known. Shockingly, cannibalism and human sacrifices were known among the "civilized": the British and Hindus. British royalty dined on human flesh, according to Daily Mail, as late as the 18th century.

Child marriage in Naga society was never known. Shockingly, child marriage was a common practice in the British and Indian societies. Culture of child marriage in medieval Europe: John McLaughlin, PhD, writes in his article MEDIEVAL CHILD MARRIAGE: ABUSE OF WARDSHIP? that the practice of child marriage was rampant in medieval Europe, but "there is not a single book, not a single article, on the separate topic of medieval child marriage in contemporary scholarship, even where there are passing references in the middle of other discussions of medieval childhood, as in problems of medieval wardship".

Slavery and capital punishment in the Naga society was never known (some were victimized by enemies). Shockingly, slavery and capital punishment was practiced in the British and Indian societies. Slavery in Britain beyond 1800s. Capital punishment in the United Kingdom was used from ancient times until the second half of the 20th century. The last executions in the United Kingdom were by hanging, and took place in 1964, prior to capital punishment being abolished for murder (in 1965 in Great Britain and in 1973 in Northern Ireland).

Incest and bestiality in the Naga society was never known. Shockingly, such practices were found in the British and Indian societies. Birmingham father and daughter sentenced for incest

Land theft and commercially motivated murders, in the Naga society, were never known. Shockingly, such practices were conducted by the British and Indian peoples from their leadership levels. The colonial British and the Indian nation invaded the defenceless indigenous, whose suffering goes on to this today.

There are two common tests of truth: Correspondence and Coherence theories; every claim has to be put through these two tests. The question of context also arises — if one doesn't have the proper context then one cannot claim to have understood the message. That would be absurd. A philosopher once warned, "What are words, but symbols of symbols; hence, twice removed from reality." The prevalent idea in regard to Naga headhunting was that, the practice continued till the 1960s with an isolated case in the 1990s. Or that it was banned by external entities, namely the Christian missionaries and Indian govt. These are lazy assessments. And they can be easily contested. Even the word "headhunting" itself is problematic... fraud with ontological errors in which things belonging to a particular category are presented as if they belong to a different category. "Headhunting" was, firstly, described in a particular way and a whole bunch of peoples — whether or not they fit into the given description — were then put in the same box. This is a form of lies told by a person who doesn't know that he's lying.

First Question

Did all the "headhunters" hold the belief that human head contained "soul matter" or life force, which could be harnessed through its capture? [Answer: NO]

Second Question

Was "harnessing of life-force" their common motive for "headhunting"? [Answer: NO]

Third Question

Which one originated first: the practice, or the standardised explanation of motive for the practice? Or did the two spring up at once?

[It is very likely that the "acting out" of the practice originated first. And then the myth of "life-force" was developed later]

Fourth Question

Did all the "headhunting" involve decapitation? [Answer: NO]

Fifth Question

Is "headhunting" the right word/name for the practice? [For some groups (e.g. Zeliangrong groups), "Guerilla warfare" may be the correct terminology; in fact, they called it as "war of defence"]

International Context

Will France repatriate its collection of 19th century Algerian skulls?

There's a little-known chapter of the French conquest of Algeria: the Algerian fighters shot and beheaded in the mid-19th century for resisting French colonialism. More than 150 years after their deaths, the skulls of these resistance fighters still sit in the vaults of the French National Museum of Natural History in Paris.

18000 skulls of those shot and beheaded are different from those at Catacombs of Paris

Other cases of headhunting: Maya civilization sites, Celts, Germanic tribes, Montenegrins, and Ottoman Turks (Ottoman Turks are alleged to have taken heads of the Montenegrins, when they came into conflict).

Vietnam War
During the Vietnam War, some US soldiers engaged in the taking of "trophy skulls".

War in Afghanistan
A Gurkha soldier beheaded a supposed Taliban leader and took it from the battlefield to base for identification.

On the Samurai, Tom O'Neill wrote:

Samurai also sought glory by headhunting. When a battle ended, the warrior, true to his mercenary origins, would ceremoniously present trophy heads to a general, who would variously reward him with promotions in rank, gold or silver, or land from the defeated clan. Generals displayed the heads of defeated rivals in public squares.

Conclusion
Today's scholars generally agree that headhunting's part of the process of structuring, reinforcing, and defending hierarchical relationships between communities and individuals.

---

PREVIOUS POSTS

Tattoo

Naga Xylophones (Log Drum)

Terrorism

###