Tags: Mobile edit Mobile web edit |
Tags: Mobile edit Mobile web edit |
| Line 8: |
Line 8: |
| ==Prehistoric Manipur== | | ==Prehistoric Manipur== |
| {{See|Prehistory of Manipur}} | | {{See|Prehistory of Manipur}} |
| [[Manipur]] has recorded evidences of prehistory or pre literary history of the mankind. | | [[Manipur]] has recorded evidences of prehistory or pre literary history of the mankind. |
| | |
| === Human settlement ===
| |
| Few attempts have been made to establish the earliest human settlement in Northeast India, and it is generally thought to have been uninhabited by [[archaic humans]] prior to late [[Pleistocene]] due to unfavorable geographical conditions.{{sfn|Hazarika|2017|p=73,74}} This is however disputed and Northeast Corridors are proposed by some scholars to have played a defining role in early hominid migrations and [[peopling of India]].{{sfn|Hazarika|2017|p=74,92}}
| |
| | |
| === Paleolithic ===
| |
| A few paleolithic sites (Khangkhui, Napachik , Machi, Somgu and Singtom) have been located in Manipur.{{sfn|Hazarika|2017|p=79,90}} Though, in absence of good chrono-stratigraphic context of the founds and their cohabitation with remains of other ages, accuracy of such identifications remains open to critiques.{{sfn|Hazarika|2017|p=75,80}} The existence of [[Hoabinhian|Hoabinhian-like complexes]] remains disputed, as well.{{sfn|Hazarika|2017|p=86}}
| |
| | |
| Most scholars don't discuss a paleolithic age in Manipur (and Northeast).{{sfn|Hazarika|2017|p=75,80}} Manjil Hazarika, in his 2017 survey of prehistory of Northeast India, rejects that there exist plausible grounds to deny presence of Paleolithic culture.{{sfn|Hazarika|2017|p=153}}
| |
| | |
| === Neolithic ===
| |
| Multiple [[Neolithic|neolithic sites]] have been identified in Manipur; they include Nongpok Keithelmanbi, Napachik, Laimenai, Naran Siena, and Phunan.{{sfn|Hazarika|2017|p=100,111,112}} Considered to be part of a larger South East Asian complex, the identifications are primarily accorded on the bases of stone tools and pottery (esp. cord-impressed ware); characteristic cultural identifiers of the Neolithic (agriculture, animal rearing etc.) are yet to be located and their development chronology is subject of active research.{{sfn|Hazarika|2017|p=95,111,112,141,142,153}} Hazarika notes the Neolithic culture in Northeast to have began some four thousand years after that in the Gangetic Plains.{{sfn|Hazarika|2017|p=140}}
| |
| | |
| [[Roger Blench]], in agreement with [[George van Driem]]'s reconstructions of archeo-linguistic history of South East Asia, proposes that Northeast India accommodated a diverse group of foragers since neolithic age, who learned agriculture and animal rearing c. 4000 B.C before migrating eastwards and establishing the [[Tibeto-Burman languages|Tibeto-Burman]] (TB) phylum.{{sfn|Hazarika|2017|p=58}} [[Meitei language|Meiteilon]], lingua-franca of Meiteis belongs to the TB phylum.{{sfn|Post|2017|p=232,233}} Hazarika notes the Manipuri sites to have an abundance of three-legged pottery and cord-impressed ware, very similar to the ones found in Southern China and Thailand, and hypothesizes that Manipur might have been the melting pot of Neolithic impulses from adjoining regions.{{sfn|Hazarika|2017|p=112,113,142,143}}
| |
| | |
| === Chalcolithic and beyond ===
| |
| Hazarika notes the broader region to not show evidence of any significant cultural transformation, upon the dawning of [[Chalcolithic|Copper Age]] (and then, [[Iron Age]]).{{sfn|Hazarika|2017|p=16}} The state has an abundance of [[megalith]]s of various shapes, serving distinct purposes.{{sfn|Hazarika|2017|p=150,151}}
| |
| | |
| The valley region has been long inhabited by distinct ''yeks'' (clans), who probably migrated from Southern China during the late Iron Age, sometime before the Christian era.{{sfnp|Parratt|2005|pp=1,3}} The hills house tribes, who are probably of autochthonous origins.{{sfnp|Parratt|2005|pp=1,3}}
| |
|
| |
|
| == Ancient period == | | == Ancient period == |
.svg)