The glorious past of Northeast India can be visualised from the immense archaeological evidences scattered in the entire length and breadth of this part of India. The richness of the archaeological heritage of Northeast India needs utmost care, attention and involvement of the common people for better preservation for our better future, writes Manjil Hazarika.

Introduction

The prehistoric period witnesses developments of Palaeolithic, Neolithic and Megalithic cultures whereas the historic period has recorded emergences of several political and cultural zones. Several archaeological sites have proved their uniqueness in understanding the early state formation process during Ancient period of Assam. The patronage of the Tai Ahom rulers during the medieval period in constructing temples, ramparts, water tanks, roads, moidams is very significant as these acts as the source material for archaeological research. Further, the Neovaishnavite movement contributed tremendously towards the art and cultural heritage of Assam.

The discipline of archaeology is basically the study of the traces or evidences of past human activity. In modern times, archaeology has emerged as a more advanced scientific discipline and is not just confined in studying the past cultures, but also understanding the importance of these cultural materials as a base of our ‘Cultural Heritage’.  

Northeast India (22° and 29° 18/ North Latitude; 89° 40/ and 97° 22/ East Longitude) which includes the eight states of Assam, Arunachal Pradesh, Manipur, Meghalaya, Mizoram, Nagaland, Tripura and Sikkim, is known for its rich natural and cultural heritage. Geographically, the Northeast India connects South Asia with East and Southeast Asian countries, allowing movements of people leading to cultural connections from the prehistoric past. These prehistoric and historic connections in the form of both material and non-material culture can be visualised in every aspect of society and life of the present inhabitants. These age-old connections of different groups of people with different cultural background finally shape the rich cultural heritage of the present day inhabitants of Northeast India.

The recent discoveries of the evidences of early human presence in different geographical areas of the old world suggest that our earliest ancestors came out of the African continent to Europe and Eastern Asia through West Asia and South Asia. In a recent paper, we (Hazarika 2008a) have argued that Northeast India might have acted as natural passageways for various early human migrations. The Northeast India may have acted as a possible mid-way from Africa to Southeast Asia through South Asia for the eastward dispersal of early humans during the Pleistocene geological age (roughly within the time bracket of 1.8 Million years to 10 thousand years before present) with Palaeolithic (Old Stone Age) cultures. In this period, our ancestors were mainly hunter-gatherers, and they were mainly dependent on hunting and predating animals, gathering and collecting wild plant foods for their subsistence. So, they were in the ‘hunter-gatherer stage’ and were living in caves, rock-shelters, under the trees and had to face different obstacles such as rain, flood, wind, danger of ferocious wild animals etc. They were using tools made of stone, bone and tree branch etc. for their various activities. Due to the perishable nature of organic materials such as tree branch, bone etc. used by our early ancestors to make tools and implements, we hardly get their traces in present day landscape. As stone is a hard material and damages comparatively slowly, we find huge amount the tools made on stones by our early ancestors in a prehistoric archaeological site. In fact, stone tools are the main source of knowing the life ways of early man. 

As far as the archaeology in Northeast India is concerned, it has a history of almost 140 years of long research starting with the discovery of stone tools by Sir John Lubbock, reporting for the first time the evidence of prehistoric culture from this region in Atheneaume of London, in 1867. Subsequently, several British administrators and Assamese researchers have reported many prehistoric stone implements from different parts of Northeast India in the pre-independence era. After the establishment of the Department of Anthropology at the Gauhati University, many scholars has explored the archaeological potentiality and contributed towards understanding the past cultural background and development of this region. Garo hills of Meghalaya has drawn attention of the archaeologist for the discovery of several prehistoric sites with large quantity of stone artefacts. Keeping asides the disputes on the presence of ‘Palaeolithic’ artefacts in Garo Hills, one can simply state that Garo Hills played an important role in the prehistoric period considering the large amount of stone artefacts of several succeeding periods.  

Coming to the human evolution in the last 10,000 years BP (before present), which is geologically termed as the Holocene period, we find a revolutionary change in the history of human being. During this time, early man acquired slowly the knowledge of taming and bringing several animals and plants under their control, which finally lead to the early domestication process. Due to this change in the economy from hunting-gathering to food producing stage, this stage of human culture is known as the Neolithic (New stone age) culture of human prehistory, meaning the new ways of life with new stone tool technology related to food production, more specifically agriculture. We are yet to understand thoroughly the role played by Northeast India for the developments of the early agricultural communities. Hazarika (2008b) have recorded several plants and animals which are very likely to be domesticated in this part of Indian subcontinent, plants such as rice, citrus, banana, mango, yams and taro etc. and several animals such as cattle species, elephants, pigs, silkworms etc. Looking at the great varieties of wild, intermediate and domesticated rice found in this region (Hazarika 2006a and 2006b), it is very likely that early domestication of rice might have occurred in this area and this region might have been very important area for emergence and developments of early farming communities based on rice agriculture. The archaeological record of this period, specifically the shouldered celts and the tanged axes and the cord-impressed potteries found in different localities of Northeast India indicate close affinities with the material found in South China and Southeast Asia. In this regard, it is interesting to note that the Neolithic polished axes are regarded as the sacred Vajrashila, (axe of the deity, Indra) or thunderbolt by many communities and it is believed that these axes posses the power of curing disease and used as an medicinal properties and objects of charm. So, besides the importance of these polished axes and celts as the most important archaeological record for understanding the Neolithic culture of Northeast India, great value is paid and considered as a cultural heritage by the common people.  

Another interesting cultural phenomenon of our early ancestors is the tradition of erecting stone megaliths. These megalithic structures are present in many parts of Northeast India and acts as rich archaeological heritage. More, interestingly this practice is a still living practice among many communities and closely associated with their social-cultural and religious life. Rao (1987) discusses the ethnographic context of the area inhabited by the Khasis and the Mikirs. He describes the agricultural practices, living practice of megalithism etc. and brings out their importance in the archaeological context. The megalithic tradition (Rao 1991) has persisted in the manner of disposal of the dead in certain old customs and beliefs till today. After cremating the dead, the ashes and the uncalcified bones are deposited in a stone chamber and a memorial stone is erected in many parts of Northeast India. Bezbaruah (2003) has extensively studied the living practice of erecting megaliths among the Karbis as a post-cremation rite and drawn parallels for the prehistoric megalithic remains of Karbi-Anglong in Assam. This tradition of erecting stone and also of wood in the memory of personalities or major events, indicating respect of a particular society to the past, can tell us the artistic manifestation of past memories of a particular society, besides acting as source material for historical reconstruction. Unfortunately, there are instances of neglecting these erected stones as our cultural heritage and removing and using for various modern day activities such as raw material for construction of buildings, roads etc. In this way we are destroying the valuable properties of our past and loosing this priceless archaeological heritage forever.

The ‘Ancient Period’ of Assam witnesses emergence of several political and cultural centres (Boruah 2007) in different parts of Northeast India. The archaeological remains have gained considerable importance in the recent years in reconstructing the ‘Ancient history’ of Northeast India. The explorations and excavations at the sites of Ambari (Dhavalikar 1973), Guwahati, the ancient centre of Kamrupa kingdom (Das, 2007), Dhansiri-Doiyang valley (Dutta 2000-2001), in Arunachal Pradesh (Ashraf, 1997-98), etc. reveals rich archaeological heritage with art and architectural pieces, ancient settlements, religious sites, potteries etc. Sharma (2007) made a study on the settlement pattern history with a ‘regional approach’ addressing the crucial questions such as site formation process, context and cultural links etc. in Dhansiri-Doiyang Valley. The inscriptional, iconographic and numismatic evidences of early Assam need more careful attention for understanding the emergence and development of different kingdoms in different parts of Northeast India. Detailed analysis and comparison of the archaeological record of these early sites can be very useful in understanding the early connections and intermixing of two different racial elements of Aryan (from the west) and Mongolian (from the east), for which this region is often referred as a melting pot of various cultures for different racial background.

During the ‘Medieval period’ of Assam, one can observe tremendous developments in art and culture under the patronage of the Tai-Ahom rulers. The best known six hundred years of rule in Assam by this Tai group of people coming from Yunnan, East Asia in the beginning of 13th century contributed in a large extent in constructing / re-constructing most of the cultural heritage properties, such as temples, tanks, fortified cities, palaces, ramparts which are seen today in standing position. One of the very interesting and important aspects of the Tai-Ahoms is the tradition of constructing Moi-dam, the holly burial ground, comparable with the magnificence of the pyramids of Egypt. The sacred hillock of Charaideo has several tombs of Tai-Ahom Kings and Queens with their unique architectural splendour. There are many of these Moi-dams scattered in many places of Assam indicating respects to the ancestors and the tradition of preserving the past. Again, it is interesting that this is a still living practice among many of the Tai-Ahom families of Assam. This is one of the very unique tradition which to be recorded and preserved / protected not only due to its importance as a cultural property, but also as the indication of continuing of our age old practice of respecting our past.

Water tanks, popularly known as ‘pukhuri’ in Assamese language, play an important role in the society and life style of the people of Assam. Basically, the water tanks are meant for preserving and storing water, found throughout entire Assam. There are community tanks dug in most of the settlements, especially near the Namghars, the Assamese community prayer halls, temples, which are considered as sacred water tanks. These community water tanks are named as ‘Rajohua pukhuri’ and are used only for communal ceremonial purpose as the name indicates. Some of the water tanks has very long historical background and were dug during Ancient and Medieval period. These water tanks are popularly known as ‘Raja dinia pukhuri’ (water tanks of king's age), and sometimes they are named in relations to a specific historical events and specific king or dynasty. The Dighali pukhuri near the famous archaeological site of Ambari in Guwahati is one of the well-known water tanks, and is believed to be connected with the Brahmaputra river in ancient time and can be considered as a source of history of water conservation and management during the ancient period. The water tanks dug during the Ahom rule are very well known for its high volume and the historical background. The Shivasagar pukhuri, near the Shiva Daul, Jayasagar pukhuri near Jaya Daul etc. are important sources of Ahom history and serves as very attractive tourist spots. There are several water tanks related to the life and culture of Srimanta Sankardeva and Sri Madhavadeva, great neo-vaishnavite saints of Assam. The water tanks became a part and parcel of the Namghar and Satra premises, communal prayer halls and monasteries of Assam. The tradition of constructing water tanks is also a unique cultural heritage of Assam and need serious concern of the academicians as well as common people for better preservation and protection.  

We have evidence of pottery making tradition from the prehistoric neolithic period in Northeast India.  This tradition has continued till date. Presently, we find many potter communities in Northeast India. Cord-marked pottery making tradition similar to the Neolithic cord-marked pottery is a living tradition among the Oinam, a Mao Naga tribe in the Senapati district of Manipur. They are still in a very primitive technological stage. They make pottery with a very crude technique of moulding and hand-beater methods (Singh 1998-99). The Cord-marked pottery from the archaeological sites of Manipur can not be compared with those of the modern day pottery, except in certain processes of making technology. The Nagas make earthen pottery by hand alone without the use of a wheel. Pots are produced by a few villages notably Viswema and Khuzama of Angami tribe; Thenyezuma, Runguzuoma and Kholazumi of Chakhesang tribe; Tseminyu village of Rengma tribe; Peron and Puilua villages of Zeliang; Changki, Japo and Longsemdang villages of Ao tribe; Tokikehimi and a few other villages of Sema tribe; Wokha and several other villages of Lotha tribe; Kongsang, Yali and Nakshao villages of Chang tribe; Wakching, Shiyong, Leangha, Chui, Choshachinguyu, Longkai, Sheanga and Tangjen of Konyak tribe; Nguro and Lungmutra of Sangtam tribe; Noklu, and Sao villages of Khemungam tribe, and a considerable number of villages in Phom area (Alemchiba 1967). The study of handmade simple pottery among these communities can reveal behavioural aspects of the Neolithic culture. The pottery tradition in plains of Assam is continued by the two potter communities, Kumars and Hiras, who are very significant for the present day arts and crafts of Assam. They make earthen items like pot and pitchers, plates, incense stick holders and earthen lamps, and many decorative items. Earthen ware is still widely used in the household activities.  

Pottery is very important archaeological items which generally constitute the largest amount of the total archaeological material further signifying the extensive uses of the pottery of that particular site. Pottery is made of clay. Once the clay gets burned, it gets preserved in the soil. After using the pottery, they are discarded and usually break into pieces and buried in the soil. Broken pieces of potteries or potsherds found in an archaeological site can give not only the details of the size and shape of the pot, but also the function and uses of the pottery. Further it can explain the social systems, religious practises and other household activities of the past. So, pottery found while digging, ploughing or in the surface should be regarded as an indication of an archaeological site and should be brought to light of the interested person. 

Here we shall briefly mention a few regions of archaeological importance of historic periods of Northeast India though there are many. 

Guwahati: Guwahati and its adjoining regions has several important archaeological sites of mythological and historic significance such as Basistha Ashram, temples of Umananda, Kamakhya, Asvakranta, Bhubaneshwari, Ugratara, Sukreswar, Nabagraha, Hayagriva-Madhaba etc. Amabari near the Dighali pukhuri is the best known archaeological site of Assam with sculptures, structural remains, and terracotta objects. The site of Madan Kamdev can be compared to the Khajoraho temple for the erotic sculptures. Poa Mecca of Hajo bears Islamic heritage which is a pilgrimage site for both Hindu and Muslims.  

Majuli: This largest fresh water river island in the world is famous for rich Vaishnavite cultural heritage. The Vaishnava Satras, the glories of Majuli, are not only religious and cultural centres of Assam but also site with archaeological splendour. The main existing Satras are (a) Dakhinpat Satra, (b) Garamurh Satra, (c) Auniati Satra, (d) Kamalabari Satra, (e) Bengenaati Satra and (f) Samaguri Satra, which are the treasures of tangible and intangible heritage.

Sibsagar: Sibsagar is the former capital of Tai Ahoms rule which is full of architectural remains of medieval period of Assam such as Rang Ghar, Kareng Ghar, Talatal Ghar, Gargaon Palace, Jay Daul, Vishnu Daul etc. Besides, the Moi-dams, burial tombs of the Tai-Ahoms can be seen in great quantity. There are several stone bridges, road and ramparts, fortifications constructed during the Tai Ahom rule. As we have already mentioned earlier, the tanks are the evidences of the water management systems of the medieval period. 

Tezpur: Tezpur is known for the door frame of Da-Parbatia, Mahabhairav temple, Agnigarh, Bamuni Hills, Hazara Pukhuri etc. Da-Parbatia door frame is the oldest and finest representation of sculptural art in Assam which displays the characteristic style of the early Gupta School of sculpture. The two legs of the door-frame have the carvings of the two Goddesses Ganga and Yamuna in standing form at the bottom with garlands in their hands. The images of this door frame have been depicted in the main entrance gate of the Gauhati University, Guwahati.  

Arunachal Pradesh: Arunachal Pradesh is known for several of the Buddhist monasteries such as Tawang Monastery with Mahayana sect of Buddhism, Bomadila Monastery, Urgelling Monastery etc. Besides, there are several other important archaeological sites namely Malini Than, Ita Nagar, Bhismak Nagar etc.   

Silchar: Silchar in the Barak valley has several archaeological site namely Bhuban hill, Sri Sri Kancha Kanti Devi Temple, Khaspur, Maniharan Tunnel and temple of Goddess Lakshmi Devi etc.  

Dimapur: Dimapur was once the capital of the Kachari kingdom, which is one of the important places for the Medieval Assam. Monolithic structures of the Kachari kingdom in Dimapur, similar to the Kachomari of Golaghat have drawn attention of the archaeologist.

Gangtok and its adjoining regions: There are several monasteries in Sikkim of historical and archaeological importance such as the Labrang, Enchey, Pemalingpa, Pemayangtse, Sangacholing, Tashiding, Dubdi, Phensong and Phodong, Namchi, Zong Dog Palri Fo-Brang, Tharpa Choling, Rumtek, Tsuk La Khang, Ralang etc.  

Agartala: The capital city of Tripura, on the banks of Haora River, is full of temples and palaces. Ujjayanta Palace, a Greek styled palace built by Maharaja Radha Kishore Manikaya, Kunjaban Palace built by Maharaja Birendra Kishore Manikya, Neermahal Palace with influence of Hindu and Mughal architecture, Tripura Sundari temple, Bhavanneshwari temple, Jagannatha temple, Chaturdasha Devta temple with fourteen head images of Gods and Goddesses, Jagannatha temple, Uma Maheshwar temple, Kali temple, Venuban Vihar, Buddha Mandir, Laxminarayan temple, Gedu Mian Mosque, Portuguese Church are some of the important archaeological sites. Deotamura site is remarkable for the rock cut sculptures of Shiva, Ganesh, Vishnu, Kartikeya, Mahishasur Mardini Durga and other gods and goddesses carved out of stone. Pilak is the treasure house of Hindu and Buddhist sculptures, images of terracotta plaques and sealing etc. Unakoti, meaning “One less than a crore” with many rock cut engravings is associated with Hindu mythology. 

Comparing the growth and development of archaeological research with other parts of India, Northeast India is still in the stage of terra incognita. And we still lack a full-fledged academic department of archaeology at university level in entire Northeast India, which we believe to be one of the main causes for limiting archaeological research further effecting the important issues of protection and preservation of our archaeological heritage of Northeast India. Hazarika (2008a) has recently pointed out certain physical problems in archaeological research which are related to the problems of flood in the river Brahmaputra and its tributaries and huge deposits of sediments, extensive covers of thick vegetation, long duration of rainy climate, insurgency problem, surface soil-cover disturbance due to slash and burn cultivation in the hills resulting displacement of the context of the archaeological material, high levels of groundwater, poor preservation condition of the archaeological material in this region. Moreover, there are several drawbacks of archaeological research such as less academic departments dealing with archaeological research, relying on traditional approach; and lack of adequate technical knowledge, multidisciplinary approach, infrastructure and general interests in archaeology in Northeast India.  

Most of the cultural properties of the ancient period are not in standing positions and most of these archaeological sites are under threat of different ways of decay. Most of these ancient monuments collapsed due to tectonic activities, as this region is one of most tectonically disturbed zone. There can be many causes of decaying these archaeological monuments such as;  

(1) Climatic causes: rainfall, wind, floods etc.

(2) Geological causes: earthquakes, land-slides etc.

(3) Biological causes: effects of different bacteria, fungi, insects etc.

(4) Man made causes: vandalism, pollution, thefts etc. and moreover the neglects toward the cultural heritages by the common people.  

Most of the archaeological monuments in standing position were built during the Ahom rule in the medieval period and most of them are under the protection and preservation of the Archaeological Survey of India and Directorate of Archaeology, Govt. of Assam. But, still the protection and preservation required is far from satisfactory.  

Looking at the uniqueness of our archaeological heritage in Northeast India, it’s our duty to understand its unique values for our own identity as we all know that the identity of a nation is largely based on the past culture and civilization. So, we should always remember the fact that archaeology and archaeological heritage is not only for the Archaeologists, but they are the common cultural properties of a nation and the common people has the major role to play in maintaining, preserving and protecting our rich archaeological heritage.  

Concluding Remarks  

The nature of the archaeological record of Northeast India reveals that they posses unique values in reconstructing prehistory/history of the Indian Subcontinent. Looking at their great values as cultural heritage and as source material for reconstructing our past, everyone wants them to be properly preserved and protected from damage of natural and human factors. There are international conventions and national laws for their better preservation and protection, but without serious concern of the common and local people, it is not always possible to preserve them. The archaeological materials as the heritage of human society are primarily related with the public concern and interest. So, with the growing importance of the ‘Public Archaeological’ issues in archaeological arena in preserving and protecting and managing the archaeological heritage, it’s our duty to find out the means and measures for sustaining this rich archaeological heritage. Moreover, these cultural heritages can be used as an attraction for tourists that further contribute towards the economic growth of the region.   

Bibliography  

1. Alemchiba M. 1967, The Arts and Crafts of Nagaland. Kohima: Naga Institute of Culture, Govt. of Nagaland.
2. Ashraf, A. A. 1997-98, Archaeological Remains and Further Prospects in Arunachal Pradesh, Puratattva 28,       pp. 64-76.
3. Bellwood, P. 2005, First Farmers: The Origins of Agricultural Societies. UK: Blackwell Publishing.
4. Bezbaruah, D. Megalithic Ruins in Karbi Anglong District of Assam: A Study in the Context of Karbi Culture, Unpublished Ph.D. Thesis, Guwahati: Gauhati University, 2003.
5. Boruah, N. 2007, Early Assam, State Formation, Political Centres, Cultural Zones, Spectrum Publications, Guwahati.
6. Dani, A.H. 1960, Prehistory and Protohistory of Eastern India. Calcutta: Firma L. Mukhopadhyay.
7. Das, P. 2007, History and Archaeology of Northeast India, Agam Kala Prakashan, New Delhi.
8. Dennell, R. & W. Roebroeks 2005, An Asian Perspective on Early Human Dispersal from Africa, Nature 438: 1099-1104.
9. Dennell, R. 2009, The Palaeolithic Settlements of Asia. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
10. Dhavalikar, M.K. 1973. Archaeology of Gauhati, Bulletin of the Deccan College Post-Graduate and Research Institute 31-32, pp. 137-49.
11. Dutta, H. N. 2000-2001, Archaeological Importance of Doiyang- Dhansiri valley of Assam, Puratattva, No. 31, pp. 92-97.
12. Gaillard, C. 2006, Les premiers peuplements d’Asie du Sud: vestiges culturels, C.R. Palevol 5: 359–369.
13. Goswami, M.C. & T.C. Sharma 1963, A Brief Report on the Investigation into Prehistoric Archaeology in the N.C. Hills, Journal of the Gauhati University 13(2): 63-66.
14. Hazarika, M. 2006a. Understanding the Process of Plants and Animal Domestication in Northeast India: A Hypothetical Approach, Asian Agri-History vol. 10.
15. Hazarika, M. 2006b. Neolithic Culture of Northeast India: A Recent Perspective on the Origins of Pottery and Agriculture, Ancient Asia, vol 1. International Journal of the Society of South Asian Archaeology.
16. Hazarika, M. 2008a. Archaeological Research in Northeast India: A Critical Review, Journal Historical Research, Annual Publications of the Department of History, Dibrugarh University: Dibrugarh, pp. 1-14.
17. Hazarika, M. 2008b. Northeast India: A Potential Zone for Early Domestication of Plants and Animals, paper presented at the 6th World Archaeological Congress (WAC-6), during 29th June to 4th July, 2008 at the University College Dublin, Ireland.
18. Lubbock, J. 1867, The Stone Age Stone Tools in Upper Assam, Athenaeum June 22: 822.
19. Medhi, D.K. 2003, Potters and Pottery of the Assam Region, in J. Miksic (ed.), Earthenware of Southeast Asia. Singapore: University press.
20. Mills, J.P. 1933, Assam as a Field of Research, Journal of Assam research society 1(1): 3-6.
21. Mishra, S. 2006/2007, The Indian Lower Palaeolithic, Bulletin of the Deccan College Post-graduate and Research Institute 66-67: 47-94.
22. Ramesh, N.R. 1989, A Study on Geomorphology, Quaternary Geology and Associated Cultural Remains of West Tripura District. Unpublished Ph.D. Thesis, Guwahati: Gauhati University.
23. Rao, S.N. 1979, Survival and Continuity of Neolithic Traditions of North-eastern India, Asian Perspective 20 (2).
24. Rao, S.N. 1991, Megalithic Practices among Khasis and Nagas of North-eastern India, In Archaeology of Northeastern India (Singh, J.P. and G. Sengupta Eds.), New Delhi: Vikas Publishing House.
25. Sharma, H.C. 2003, Prehistoric Archaeology of the Northeast, in T.B. Subba & G.C. Ghosh (eds.), The Anthropology of Northeast India. New Delhi: Orient Longman.
26. Sharma, P. 2007, Archaeology of Early Settlements in Doiyang- Dhansiri Valley, Assam: A Study in Regional Perspective. Ph. D Thesis, Deccan College Post-graduate and Research Institute.
27. Sharma, T.C. 1986, Recent Advances in Prehistory and Archaeology of Northeast India, Journal of the Assam Research Society 27.
28. Sharma, T.C. 1991, Prehistoric Situation in Northeast India, in J.P. Singh & G. Sengupta (eds.), Archaeology of Northeastern India, 41-56. New Delhi: Vikas Publishing House.
29. Singh, O.K. 1993, Stone Age Culture of Manipur. Unpublished Ph. D Thesis, University of Manipur.
30. Singh, O.K. 1998-99. Cord-marked Pottery Making Tradition in Manipur, Puratattva 29: 60-61. 

[About the Author: Manjil Hazarika hails from Bokakhat, Assam and is currently working on the Neolithic Culture of Northeast India for his doctoral dissertation under the Himalayan Languages Project of the Leiden University, the Netherlands. He intends to complete an extensive study on the origins of rice agriculture and the development of early farming communities in Northeast India. He has completed his Master of Arts in Ancient Indian History, Culture and Archaeology from Deccan College, Post-graduate and Research Institute, Pune in 2005 and subsequently European Master in Quaternary and Prehistory from Universitat Rovira i virgili, Spain in 2007. He was awarded Prof. H.D. Sankalia Memorial Gold Medal for securing First class First position in Master of Arts Examination at Deccan College.]