Historiography of the Kukis: The Forces that Have Shaped The Kuki Nationalism in Manipur

Published on February 26, 2011

By Priyadarshni M. Gangte

Historiography was unknown to the Kukis and their early attempts to reconstruct their own were made only after modern education had made the impact in society during the later part of the twentieth century, when they began to imbibe modern ideas including the values of historical knowledge. They started a reevaluation of their society and themselves. Gradually, they discovered their pride and their roots as well.

At the same time the cultivation of the art of writing history began to develop in Manipur. This had its impact upon the Kukis; other ethnic groups had already been collecting facts from the British ethnographers, Army Officers, Anthropologists and Administrators. Thus Historiography of these regions was based primarily on the British perceptions, which were reflected in their works.

In every work written by the colonial writers, the British policy of divide and rule is evident. This was reflected in their administration. With a firm determination, they had started to create fissures among peoples of the region. Since the Kukis had challenged them in the year 1917 greater measure of wrath was directed towards them.

Now, it is incumbent that historical and traditional background of the ‘KUKIs’ be understood in its right perspective. For this purpose, we should understand that in much the same manner as ISRAEL signifies the people of ‘Hebrew’ origin, so the terms, Chin, Kuki and Mizo being of one and the same generic term ethnic tribal groups mostly are of KUKI origin (P.M. Gangte (ed): Why Must We Be Mizo, Spectrum publications, Guwahati (Delhi, 2006; p.38) – New Kukis and Old Kukis. They are classified by Shakespear (Lt. Col. J. Shakespear: The Lushai Kuki Clans, 1912; p.147) in his work on LUSHAI KUKI CLANS, several sub-clans and their cognate groups : the different ethnic groups of the North East since the 18th and the 19th Centuries. Early part of the 20th century had shown them the necessity of controlling the several tribes of the North East including the Kukis.

In such a situation, it should be understood that the term KUKI would denote the clans collectively. [For a detailed study on Kuki clans see (I) S. Kipgen : Political And Economic History of Kukis; (II) P.M. Gangte : Customary Laws of Meitei and Mizo Society and (III) D. L. Haokip : Traditional Religions of the Kukis.] While KUKI as a common nomenclature is accepted, for its purpose, a National identity in the backdrop of contemporary political situation as it exists today.

Historically the Kukis are a Mongoloid race of the Tibeto-Burman group of tribes, however of its Indian presence Paramesh Choudhury writes in : The Mystery of the Chinese Dragon) that the mountainous region of Southern China the original home of these people is unquestionable because their tradition, myths, legends and the historical facts based on research all point to it. But it is extremely difficult, perhaps impossible, to definitely give the correct date of their settlement and beginning of their migration from there.

Therefore, with reference to this aspect of the Kuki history, no conclusive research can presently be made. Nevertheless, the Kukis were the families of Chin group, who formed a formidable force in the ancient past. They were part of the larger group taking an active part in the Chin’s army expansion towards building an empire, and in the process of state formation. (The Chin : History Channel).

In Manipur’s context, the Treaty of Yandaboo, signed in 1826 A.D. was a landmark. The British political agents, had started writing history with a different slant. With their superiority complex, they, in fact, did a great wrong to the Kukis. However, Christianity and modern education played a major role in the development of the historiography of the Kukis during the 20th century but till some fifty years back, common origin theory of the Chin people was not accepted however, today, anthropologists and sociologists including historians give emphasis on common origin. Indeed it is a historical fact that even Meitei, Kuki and Naga communities have a common origin. Reading between the lines of earlier works the British historiography shows similar trends, though they never implicitly implied.

The major forces that have contributed considerably to the development of the Kuki nationalism in Manipur lies in the social ethos of their culture. The Kukis did not like the Englishmen to infringe upon their rights of living independently. As a matter of fact, they were always on the look out for an opportunity to drive the Englishmen out of their hills  (Publication Committee, Anglo-Kuki War Patriots Memorial Foundation, Manipur : Untold History of Manipur; Imphal, 2005, p.6). The socio-political institution of chieftainship known as HAOSA which the Kuki people had always venerated, obeyed and fought for him in expression of loyalty and solidarity whenever necessary. It forged a unity of purpose among them.

In the beginning of their settlement, the Kuki had given too much emphasis to their indigenous religion. It is a factor which facilitated their growth of a national spirit and which led them to oppose Christianity. The deep routedness of their culture and tradition in general customs and customary laws, in particular, were the unifying agents. For instance, the war rites, known as HANSA-NEH and SAJAM LHA, (Publication Committee, Anglo-Kuki War Patriots Memorial Foundation, Manipur : Ibid; p.7) brought about the Anglo-Kuki-War (1917-1919) in the North-East region.

Besides, the fact that the political developments which happened at the regional level after the British left India, especially the Manipur (Village Authorities in the Hill Areas) Act, 1956 (80 of 1956) created a strong sense of opposition. It generated a great deal of discontent and apprehension among the Kukis of a possible government intent to do away with the Chiefs right (Eastern Quarterly edited by Th. Tarunkumar, Vol.4, Issue-II, Delhi, 2007, July-September; p.97).

Traditionally the Upas or Semang Pachong had been concerning unlimited power in their respective domains and they garnered a great deal of respect and brought about cohesiveness among the people. If deprived of traditional power their status would be reduced, and so they were hostile to the implementation of the act. This, however, brought about in certain quarters a closeness among the Upas to protect their political interests. As such with the abolition of chief-ship democratic norms were brought in and that led to many changes at village levels. Now even ladies could become chiefs and administrators, giving a rephrase new blend of power in socio-political system. It created a new nationalism.

The spread of Christianity along with education was the stimulating factors for the growth of nationalism and historiography among the Kukis; the development of education started with William Pettigrew in the year 1890. After initial failures he became instrumental in the spread of missionary activities in Manipur which resulted in a tremendous impact bringing social change in the mindset of the people and the society.

It was during the tenure of J. Shakespeare’s (1905-08 & 1909-14) Political Agency that by virtue of his initiative, a central school at Ukhrul with a three years course was established. It was meticulously arranged in such a way that two boys from every school-less village were to be sent to school for general studies and doctrines of Christianity (Christianity In The Development of Modern Education in Manipur; presented by T.S. Gangte, at the National Seminar on Role of Christianity in the Development of North East India, held on 5-7 April, 2005 at Guwahati sponsored by the Centre for Advanced Studies in Civilization, N.Delhi).

Likewise formal education was introduced among the Hmar People under the Singson Chief, Kamkholun of Senvon in Churachandpur in 1910. Education was aimed strictly at religious instruction which had made a challenge to the Tribal education which directly aimed and prepared for life (Rochunga Pudaite : The Education of the Hmar People, Indo-Burma Pioneer Mission Sielmat, Churachandpur, Manipur, Calcutta, 1963; po.73). Some students belonging to Ukhrul School were Tiba Kilong, Seizalut and Ngulhao and from the Senvon, Rochunga Pudaite. They became pioneer educationists in this region.

After mastering the three R’s to facilitate Bible reading and understanding and simple arithmetic the hill people began to neglect their traditional culture and religion. Thus, Christianity gradually became popular and was accepted by them, along with education which not only imparted the secular knowledge to read and write but also taught social niceties and mannerisms. (T.S.Gangte, ibid).  The advent of collegiate education ever since the establishment of Churachandpur College, Lamka College in Churachandpur and Presidency College, Motbung by T.S. Gangte, Vung D. Tombing and Henkholien Sitlhou respectively, continued to play a vital role in sustaining higher education among the people of Kuki by virtue of the locational advantage of these educational institutions in the areas dominated by Kukis.

By the middle of the twentieth century, some Kukis who had completed their primary education went outside Manipur for their further studies. This ignited in them a spirit of nationalism which had already developed as an inherent characteristic among the Kuki people in Manipur. It was during this time that sentiments of nationalism were nurtured and strengthened this period covered that before and after Independence of India. During this phase, the atmosphere of nationalism that prevailed all over India impacted the Kukis. However, deprived of economic benefits nothing much could be attained in the social and economic sphere.

In cause of time, the Kukis acquired liberal thought and western ideas, armed with these tools they opposed what the British wrote about them. Their historiography took cognizance of their writings and a new tradition of historiography developed. With the establishment of the Kuki Literature Society the growth of a nationalist school among themselves was discernible. Dena (Lal Dena: Christian Missions And Colonialism, Vendrame Institute, Shillong, 1988; p.112) maintains that this recent phenomenon as well as the ethnic, cultural, linguistic and economic activities exclusively resulting from the secluded policy of colonial rulers who perhaps the root cause of the separatist movements in North-East India. Nationalism was now branching out in several directions.

Separatists’ Movement was emerging because of the long deprivation of economic needs and the fact that the educated class was not getting a share in the power structures. To mention a few, The Thinglhang Post, Sumkawn, Zalen Banner, etc. are some of noted dailies, journals which gave ideas of nationalism to the Kukis. Kuki Nationalism in Manipur could now impact in Manipuri politics.
The organization of a labour corps aroused the collective consciousness of the Kukis. The Kukis immediately rose in arms in 1917-19 as a protest against the call from the British for the battlefronts in France in the First World War. It had its significance in the neighbouring area, thus, in 1918, the Naga Club was formed, perhaps the beginning of Naga Nationalism was as a response to it.

Kuki nationalism picked up many ideas from other world movements and a power struggle amongst the clans commenced. These used to be more deeply hegemonic; the Kuki society became more heterogeneous rather than homogeneous. Therefore, cold war ensued with the establishment of KNA coming as it did from Burma. Likewise, allegedly its sister organizations such as KNF, KLA, KRA were also born. It can be a matter of debate how and why they were born but one thing was certain that they were inspired by nationalistic sentiments and to that cause they are committed. Moreover, Gosh (The Cry of Thunder, Now All so Distant by Subir Gosh : The Telegraph, Calcutta : North-East Telegraph: Monday 30th June, 1997) has contended that insurgency has come and gone, but the reasons why the youths chose the path of armed struggle poverty – linger on in Manipur too.

Now, the Government initiated a peace building process agreement with the power strugglers in the form of suspension of operation (SOO) manifested with the recognition of them being a formidable force. It may tilt peace process. Therefore, conceptualization of their problems along with grant of constitutional rights and status is necessary. In this regard, it is pertinent to mention the contention of Touthang (S. Touthang, 37 years old, a social activist, Old Lambulane, Imphal; interviewed on 10.11.2008) that as man rides the waves of change a change of social strategy, shaping tomorrow to human needs and designing the future are always finding its place in the hands of a strong leadership.

In the present context of the Kuki societies, a change of social orders is also being seen, in which the “Concept of Nationalism” finally emerges under the leadership of the umbrella organizations of the KNO/KNA and the UPF which led them to signing Suspension of Operation (SOO) with the Government at National and State levels. Whereas question of integrity of the State of Manipur has never been in doubt.

However, several steps for enhancement of conceptualizing globally about their role needs development of literature, for instance to translate Bible and several works of western ideas into local dialect to ultimately bring unity and amity amongst the power strugglers in the right perspective.

To get an idea as to how world movements are generated the Kukis will have to work harder. In this regard, essentially the inclusion of UKLF’s plans, such as, the use of force and dialogue to the negotiating table can be debated but in the interest of Kuki unity it has to be thoroughly discussed. C. Doungel’s family, Dr. T. Lunkin, Holkhomang Haokip, Kimneilhing Gangte, and P. Gangte, Ngulkhohao Lhungdim, Routhanglien, Paokai Haokip, Satkholal Neishiel, Ngulkholam Haokip, P.T. Yamthang, Solanki Chothe, Yangangam Haokip, Lengpau Vaiphei, S. Kipgen, etc – the emerging and emerged leaders, (as cited by Nehkhothang Haokip, 56 years, Chief of Maolphie, Chandel District, the ex-Chairman of Kuki Chief Association, Manipur, 1988-89 – interviewed on 20.11.2008 at my residence) as also the Kuki Inpi, the K.S.O, the Kuki Human Rights Movement and the Kuki Mothers’ Association under Rose Mangshi Haokip – their roles initiated which are of highly remarkable and appreciated qualities at several levels, however, require to assert in a very sincere way, of course, transparency should be emphasized exactly in respect with the issues facing the community including human rights among many other issues.

Indian politics will not easily accept the theory of a separate state or nation for the Kukis, so it is better to develop economic self help programmes to empower the Kukis. In this venture the direction given by the church will act as a catalyst, as has been the case in Nagaland. It is a known fact that religion is one of the social controls of society (A.R. Blackshield : Secularism And Social Control, London, 1969; p.27). Hence a religious leadership can deliver perhaps what the Kukis want.

“The Kukis of Manipur” (1993) by T.S. Gangte is the most authenticated work ever written on the Kukis. It deals with every aspect of life of the Kukis be it social, economic, political and religious. There are various books on the Kukis written by British ethnographers, army officers, administrators which are of descriptive nature. However, Gangte’s work is the product of intensive field study pin pointing certain aspects of the Socio-cultural life of the Kukis with conclusions arrived at on account of their scientific analyses. He also unfolds other aspects of the life of the Kukis in historical perspectives and makes a comparative study of the identity issue of the Kukis and Nagas.

Unlike the other writers Gangte has given emphasis to the unification of the Kukis. Indeed, he emphatically, has asserted that all the people other than Meiteis and Nagas, are Kukis. The British writers rendered valuable insights into the life and culture of the Kukis but their accounts are prejudiced, because of bias or lack of complete facts and knowledge of the subject on which they were writing. As a matter of fact, the problems have to go for many years to come, it seems the problem persists and to remedy earlier errors.

A concerted effort is required. This will be a turning point in the history of the Kukis that an opportunity arises to get access to the mainstream with the hope of raising some crucial issues confronting the Kuki societies before the Central and State Government for finding an amicable solution. As such, it is now time for all sections of the Kuki societies to extend full cooperation both to the Government and the leadership of the Kukis in order to realise the goals of Kukis as well as achieve unity, peace, prosperity. (S.Touthang : Ibid.)

A different approach is manifested in Gangte’s work. Gangte, belonging to this group of ethnic community, knew very well where the British writers eered. He felt that it was admirable that despite such a situation wherein different ethnic groups, being prisoners of indecision, were clamouring for a new identity, the Thadous and their cognate tribes stuck to their traditional nomenclature – ‘Kuki’, without any inhibition or the slightest concern as to what the term meant. (Ibid; p.227). He further maintained that in the past, till the end of British rule in India, different groups did not object to being identified as Kukis when inter-tribal feuds were the practice of the time. The term ‘Kuki’ gave security and protection, and was an expression of solidarity and ethnic identity (Ibid; p.233).

In this regard, it is pertinent to mention that the blood brotherhood as claimed by NSCN(IM) top brass may draw our attention to the Ritual History of Manipur’s ancestory which claim that Meitei originated from a common pool of three kin brother namely; (This was as per authenticated document of Dr. P. Khuman Khomba, Advisor of His Highness, Maharaja of Manipur).
(i) Thangkhul Saram Pakhangba (origin of Ukhrul and Valley tribals); (ii) Nongda Lairen Pakhangba (wherefrom the lineage of present royal family of Manipur descended) and (iii) Chothe Thangmai Pakhangba (wherefrom the Kukis believed to have descended).

It is a paradox that several scholars have claimed that the Kuki women have not played directly or indirectly a role in social or political movements. But today we know that Kuki women played quite an important role in the society (J.D. Baveja: The Land Where The Bamboo Flowers : Gauhati, 1970, p.29). Kuki women played a major role in the affairs of the household and they influenced their husband’s views for household matters as also their political understanding at the larger level. In other words, they are like the men, very talented, wise and clever in sharing views with their men whose natural intuitions and behaviours make them responsive to wives. In fact, the Kuki men are very proud of their patriarchal system and do not take cognisance the silent hand of their ladies (J.D. Baveja : Op.cit, p.23).

There have been historiographers of individual interests and perhaps even of political exigencies, but the different ethnic groups of Kukis have a common origin, affinity in language, culture, tradition, customs, and customary laws in particular. It is the right time to undertake a scientific study of Kuki historiography.

For better understanding of the Kukis, Mizos and the Chins/Zomis separate bibliography have been given below as ‘A’ for Kuki, ‘B’ for Mizo and ‘C’ for Chins/Zomis though today we believe they are the same people.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

A. Kuki :
1. Bernot, Denise et Luccin, (1959), Chittagong Hill Tribes in Pakistan Society and Culture, HRAP, New Haven.
2. Bernot, L, (1960), Ethnic Groups of Chittagong Hill Tracts Social Research in Pakistan, Dacca.
3. Chakravorty, B.C. (1964), British Relations with The Hill Tribes of Assam Since 1858, Firma K.L. Mukhopadhyay, Calcutta.
4. Crawford, G.C., (1984), Handbook of Kuki Customs, Directorate of Printing and Stationery, Manipur.
5. Dalton, E.T., (1972), Descriptive Ethnology of Bengal, N. Delhi.
6. Pudaite, Rochunga, (1963), The Education of the Hmar People, Churachandpur, Manipur.
7. Gangte, T.S., (1993), The Kukis of Manipur, Gyan Publishing House, N. Delhi.
8. Hansing, Ngulseh, (1961), Thadou Labu, Imphal.
9. Hansing, Ngulseh, (1975), Khul Kon Ho Thusim Vol.(I)
10. Hansing, Ngulseh, (1977), Khul Kon Ho Thusim Vol.(II)
11. Haokip, D.L., (2000); Thiempu ho Thu, Churachandpur.
12. Haokip, P.S., (1998), Zalen Gam, Kuki National Organisation., Imphal.
13. Haokip, Thongkhohao, (1956), Neichawng, Imphal.
14. Haokip, Thongkhohao, (1960), Lakawila, Imphal.
15. Haokip, Yamthang, (1984), Chin Kuki ho Thusim, Imphal.
16. Hutton, J.H., (1929), Notes on the Thadous by W. Shaw, Govt. of Assam, Shillong.
17. Johsntone, James, (1971), Manipur And Naga Hills, Vivek Publishing House, Delhi.
18. Kipgen, Kaikhotinthang, (1985), The Thadou Kukis, Imphal.
19. Kipgen, Mangkhosat, (1996), C/O Eastern Theological College, Rajbary, Jorhat, Assam.
20. Kabui, Gangmumei, (1985), Anal : A Transborder Tribe of Manipur, Mittal Publication, Delhi.
21. Laldena, (1988), Christian Missions and Colonialism : A Study of Missionary Movement on North East India with particular reference to Manipur and Lushai Hills, 1894-1947, Vendrame Institute, Shillong.
22. Langsun Mate, (2000), The Mate Tribe of Manipur, Omsons Publication, Delhi.
23. Lewin, T.H., (1984), Wild Races of South Eastern India, Mittal Publications, Delhi.
24. Palit, D.K.; (1984), Sentinels of North East – The Assam Rifles, N.Delhi.
25. Rajput, A.B. (1965), The Tribes of Chittagong Hill Tracts, Karachi.
26. Reid, Roberts, (1942), History of Frontier Areas Bordering on Assam from 1883-1941, Delhi.
27. Shakespear, J; (1912), The Lushai-Kuki Clans, Part.II, London.
28. Shaw, William; (1929), The Thadou-Kukis, Govt. of Assam, Shillong.
29. Sitlhou, Jamkithang, (1967), Thadou Puchon Pachon, M/S. B.K. Store, Paona Bazar, Imphal.
30. Sitlhou, Mangkhohen, (1953), Lengchonghoi, Imphal.
31. Soppit, C.A.; (1893), A short Account of Kuki-Lushai Tribes on North East Frontier with an outline grammar, Aizawl, Mizoram (Reprint).
32. Thangtindal, (1988), Ancient Polity of the Gangtes, Lamka.
33. Th. Shonthang, (1978), Songthu Kuki Custom, Imphal.

B. Mizo :
1. Barkataki, S, (1969), Tribes of Assam, National Book Trust, N. Delhi.
2. Baveja, J.D., (1970), The Land where The Bamboo Flowers, Secretary, Publication Board, Assam, Gauhati.
3. Bimal, Dev J. and Lahiri, Dilip Kumar, (1983), Lushai Customs and Ceremonies, Mittal Publications, Delhi.
4. Chatterjee, N. (1975), Status of Women in Mizo Society; Tribal Research Centre, Aizawl.
5. Chatterjee, N. (1975), Zawlbuk as Social Institution in Mizo Society, Tribal Research Centre, Aijawl.
6. Chatterjee, N. (1975), Mizo Chief And His Administration, Tribal Research Centre, Aijawl.
7. Chatterjee, S.K., (1974), Kirata Jana Krite, Language And Linguistics, Calcutta.
8. Choudhury, P.C., (1987), The History of Civilization of the People of Assam to the 12th Century A.D., Spectrum Publication, Guwahati.
9. Davis, A.W., (1987), Gazetteer of North Lushai Hills, Matero Company, Delhi.
10. Gait, Edward Sir, (1981), History of Assam, Guwahati.
11. Gangte, P.M. (2006), Why Must We Be Mizo, Spectrum Publications, Guwahati.
12. Gangte, P.M. (2008), Customary Laws of Meitei and Mizo Societies, Akansha, Publications, Delhi.
13. Goswami, B.B., (1979), The Mizo Unrest: A Study of Politicisation of Culture, Aalekh Publishers, Jaipur.
14. Goulienthang (2001), A Short Chronological Account of Mizos, Lamka.
15. Hrangthiauva and Lalthungnunga, (1978), Mizo Chanchin, Lalriana and Sons Bara Bazar, Aizawl.
16. Keivom, L., (1990), Hmar Tolung : A Study of Hmar History, Eastern Standard Offset and Latter Printing Press, Keishamthong, Imphal.
17. Kipgen, Mangkhosat, (1997), Christianity and Mizo Culture, The Mizo Theological Conference, Mizoram, C/O Eastern Theological College, Rajbari, Jorhat, Assam.
18. Kuanga, Rev., (1989), The Role of Christianity in Socio-Economic Life of Mizos, Aizawl.
19. Lalbiakthanga, (1978), The Mizo : A Study in Racial Personality United Publishers, Gauhati.
20. Lalbiakthanga, (1989), Theological Trends in Mizoram, Aizawl.
21. Laldena, (1995), Hmar Folk Tales, Scholar Publishing House, N. Delhi.
22. Lianzualla, P.L. (1989), Towards a Tribal Theology: The Mizo Perspective, Tawmngaihna, Aizawl.
23. Mc. Call, A.G., (1949), The Lushai Hills District Cover, Marantha Princing Press, Aizawl.
24. Mc. Cree, John Surgeon, (1949), Asiatic Research, Vol-VII, Asiatic Society of Bengal, No. N.S. XXIV.
25. Parry, N.E., (1976), The Lakhers, Firma KLM (Pvt) Ltd, Calcutta (Reprint).
26. Parry, N.E., (1976), The Monograph of Lushai Customs and Ceremonies, Firma KLM (Pvt) Ltd., Calcutta (Reprint).
27. Quareshi, F.A. (1951), Christianity in South Eastern Hills of South Asia : Social Impact and Political Implication, Bangladesh University Press, Dacca.
28. Ray, Animesh (1958), Mizoram Dynamics of Change, Pearl Publishers, Calcutta.
29. Sangkima, (2004), Essays on History of Mizos Spectrum Publications, Gauhati.
30. Sangkima, (2004), A Modern History of Mizoram, Spectrum Publications, Gauhati.
31. Shakespear, J., (1912), The Lushai Kuki Clans, Part-I, London.
32. Thamzauva, K., (1989), The Theory of Zawlbuk Towards a Tribal Theology; The Mizo Perspective, Jorhat, Assam.
33. Zaithangchhungi, (1990), Isreal – Mizo Identity, J.K. Bros. Offset Printer, Aizawl.

 
C. Chin/Zomi :
1. Booning, Mindat, (1967), Chin Taung Thaimai (History of the Chin Hills), Govt. Printing Press, Rangoon.
2. Browne, H.A., (1884), Accounts of the Chins of the District of Thayetmyo; extracts from the Statistical and Historical Account of that District : In Maung Thet Pyo : Customary Laws of the Chin Tribes; Appendix pp.1-5, Govt. Printing Press, Rangoon.
3. Berkitt, M.C., (1929), Out Early Ancestors, Cambridge.
4. Carey, Bertram S. and Tuck, H.N., (1896), The Chin Hills, Vol.I, Rangoon.
5. Gerini, G.E., (1909), Researches on Ptolemy’s Geography of Eastern India, London.
6. Grierson, G.A. (1904), Linguistic Survey of India : Tibeto-Burman Sub-Family, Reprinted by Motilal Benarasedas, Delhi.
7. Hall, D.G.E., (1964), A History of South East Asia, London.
8. Hardiman, Scott, (1912), Gazetteer of Upper Burma and the Shan States – I & II.
9. Hurvey, G.E., (1945), History of Burma, London.
10. Gangte, Lienkhokam, S; (1982), Zomi Polity in Transition , J.N.U., N. Delhi (M.Phil Desertation).
11. Ginzataung, J; (1973), History of Zomi Family, Tiddim Burma.
12. Gougin, T., (1984), History of Zomi, Zomi Press, Churachandpur.
13. Kamkhenthang, H; (1988), The Paite : A Transborder Tribe of India and Burma; Mittal Publications, Delhi.
14. Khup-Za-Go, (1988), Chin Chronicles, Sante, Karbi Anglong, Dephu, Assam.
15. Kunstadter, Peter, (1967), “Burma” in South-East Asian Tribes, Minorities and Nations, Peter, Kunstadter, Princeton University, N. Jersey, U.S.A.
16. Lalthangliana, B., (1979), History of Mizos in Burma; Zawlbuk Agencies, Aizawl.
17. Lehman, F.K., (1980), The Structure of Chin Society, Tribal Research Institute, Aizawl (Reprint).
18. Luce, G.H., (1959), Chin Hills Linguistic Tour, Journal Burma Resolution. S.42.
19. Sangermano, Fr., (1883), A descriptive of the Burmese, Empire Allen & Co, Rome.
20. Singh, G.P., (1990), The Kiratas in ancient India, Delhi.
21. Vumkhohau, U., (1963), Profile of a Burma, Danding.

The writer, who has authored several articles and books, is a lecturer in the history department at Damdei Christian College, Manipur, India. She is the wife of late Thangkhotinmang Sielpho Gangte (T.S. Gangte), a well-known sociologist in the Kuki society.

Related Posts

Tags

Share This

10 Comments

  1. Lulun Haokip

    ka ngailut ka thisan chan khom pi ka sopi te ho, mipi japi chapang nu nao jah dia ki lom lou tah tah iso ji u hi pha lheh jong leh a dih jou jep ta poi. Keima aneo pen in ka bol khel um jong leh kuki amin se in, ka toh phat jong leh kuki min pha ahi chu ihet sao ahi. Hi jeh chun nam lamkai ho na mosuo leh nang ki su jum ding na hi ti hen, ajeh chu ksdc hi lam kim iphah uh ahi tai , hi jehchun nam lamkai leh mipi lung lhah thei na ding thu tam tah iso ji sang un, state idel ngal u ahi tah leh tha ki peh be thei na ding thu joh ha so in so tau hite. Inam igam dam na din nang leh kei ipan khom angai tai

  2. lun

    I enjoyed alot. Thanks. Superb post…keep it up, let us lit the gone candle.

    @khaimang!
    Zomi is just a new faction of KUKI-CHIN next to Mizo.
    I don’t know the actual reason, but may be coz of Power hunger among the three leading tribes,viz Thadou, Lushei and Paite. They are a little faster in grapping western education, plus more in number. They are just like the two butterflies couple. They surely will be gone.

    Yes, Thadou too are divided into two. KUKI NATION and kuki tribe. It’s kuki tribe people who are striking matches in the family making us fall apart as if we were from different planet.

    @letminlun!
    Well said. It’s such a same for new scholars and writers, who kept rewriting old truth to add new non-existing facts kha3. Kithidoh uvo.
    In the same way, there are people among Paite and Lushei who do the same thing.

  3. these so called historians will take up any article and replace all the “thadou” with “kuki” and call it kuki history. the article shows full partiality toward all the articles written by PS Haokip and Seilen haokip the king of KNOs.

    • lalboi haokip

      There is no place for emotions in historiography. You have already shown your full partiality when u call somebody king of KNO. I have not seen any organisation as KNO’s who take their organisation based on ideologies. Atleast they are rational organisation as compared to others.

  4. chhanism

    Awesome,it challenges me and even gives me a great pleasure for reconstructing The Mizo Historiography which i found quite a critical task for a young tribal like us. The paucity of written works has been a hindrances also lack of traditional historian.

  5. Thangneo

    and…Khaimang, the Zomi fanatics don’t even include Thadou in their list of Zomi tribes. hehe

  6. khaimang

    zomi n kuki r same, we r not different its just……..u know

  7. khaimang

    i have lot of doutbts in ur studies or articles, im doing my Phd in Jnu like ur husband. see there r lots of flaws in what u said… i don,t understand wat u mean kuki…who2 r they? only thadou tribe?????? if yes its correct. but if not what school(though it is not fit)of thought r u following…the kna/zra or kim/zc , as far as me i don,t c ur academic approach bt just emotional. so that mean there is a big factor zomi is there….u never interview any zomi guy or leader bt jst thadou speaking…than it a bias n unfit 2 be a scholar or if u said the zomi are dfferent its ok. but, it will u dobn’t understand wat us writes..thank u we will discuss mre

    • i agree with your point. but if u ask them they will never call themselves as thadous. they will simply call theselves as kukis.

      • MY NAME IS LUNKHEL KAIKHOLAL HAOKIP
        I BELONGS TO THADOU TRIBE, I LOVE ANYTHING ABOUT THADOU.
        MY PRIORITY IS FOR THE WELFARE OF THADOUS…AND I WILL DO ANYTHING TO STRENGTHEN THE THADOUS BUT WILL NOT TOLERATE ANY ATTEMPTS TO DEFAME OR SPLIT THE THADOUS BECAUSE I BELIEVE IN GOD THE CREATOR OF THADOU TRIBE. I MEANT IT.