From Marginal Zone to Borderland? Ethnographies, Histories and Politics in North East India

Abstract

The international borders surrounding North East India that have emerged in the wake of South Asia’s arbitrary partition have not only shaped the region politically, but also culturally and historically. This reflects in the production of social scientific knowledge, which so far continues to approach the region as a marginal zone, and insufficiently acknowledges it as a part of a transnational borderland. In North East India, ethnographic knowledge is of particular importance. In the absence of pre-colonial archives, notably for the upland areas, ethnographies are appreciated as valuable sources. Ethnographies are built on observations and oral accounts that derive from research among actual people, solidifying culture, and—over time—constituting history. Considering that the meta-narratives encompassed by ethnographies are (eventually) absorbed in political discourses and administrative policies, what is the bearing of such academic accounts on the people these texts refer to? The value of ethnographies as sources can hardly be underestimated, but a rethinking of the sociological categories that they induce or implicitly support is both challenging and required. Going by my own long time engagement with the Garo of Northeast India, I discuss the impact of ethnographic imaginations on the people they refer to. I use these insights to explore how analytical frameworks that approach North East India as a borderland, and take the making and unmaking of political borders into account, can contribute to the development of new perspectives on society, history and state.