2025年9月28日日曜日

Mizo Studies April - June 2020 215 widely dispersed spatially before…



Mizo Studies April - June 2020 215 

widely dispersed spatially before administrative delimitations were carried out. As a result, the inhabitants of this group were found to be dispersed in significant percentages in some districts of Manipur, Assam, and eastern part of the Jaintia Hills district of Meghalaya and in North Tripura districts.5 Besides, they are also found in a large number across the frontiers in Burma and Bangladesh. Another account of interpretation and understanding is that the Mizos came from the East and many people believe that their original home was in and around Yunnan Province, China. Zawla, a historian asserts that the Mizo people came to the Chindwin belt (Burma) around 996 A.D. They lived there barely for 200 years.6 The cruel chiefs and the great famine in which many people died, forced the rest to leave the land. Before leaving, however, they planted a banyan tree at Khampat and took a vow in front of their Burmese neighbours that they would return to Khampat. Some historical records suggest that there was number of chieftainship and each family grouped together and each sub-tribe settled in separate villages during their movement around 1466 A.D. The popular sub-tribes were the Lusei, Ralte, Hmar, Lai, Mara, Paite, etc. There are numerous tribes, sub-tribes and clans; however, to name a particular tribe as the largest among the Mizo is difficult as no concrete census has ever been undertaken. Westward movement of the Mizos from Lentlang (Burma) to the present Mizoram is said to have taken place between 1700 and 1730 A.D.7 However, those narratives basically revolve around the Lusei migration excluding other groups like the 'Old-Kuki' group who are known to have migrated prior to the west-ward migration of Sailo and its related Lusei clans.8 The diversity of various groups reflects the historical immigration patterns. A deeper dig into this migration pattern could clearly show that different tribes and subtribes arrived in the present Mizoram, in successive waves and settled down in different parts of the state. Further, as they arrived, there were raids, fear of raids and inter-tribal feuds which forced the weaker groups among them to leave the region for their survival. The resulting isolation and separation created numerous tribes and sub-tribes among those migrating communities. The Old-Kuki group is known to have reached the present Mizoram a little earlier than Lusei and its related tribes under Sailo chiefs but these stories are not clearly highlighted in the popular Mizo history of migration. We also have very little knowledge about migration in the Southern part of Mizoram particularly among the Lais and Maras since they are basically excluded from most of the Mizo history writings which some people suspect it as merely Lusei-centric historical narratives. Some historians often project feuds and inter-tribal rivalry among those groups as fights between Mizo and other groups like Pawi (Lai) which were basically conflicts between some Sailo and Lai clans. This kind of historical misrepresentation in the form of academic writing or school text books can easily create unnecessary tensions and misunderstanding among different groups. Professional historians and some political leaders also make mistakes in producing knowledge as well as representing our historical past. History writing, whoever is in power, has always been a focus of political battle in places like India over a very long period of time. It has been one of the main tasks and conscious attempts of a particular regime in the Centre to produce a uniform or singular historical narrative neglecting the existence of a variety of cultural and religious traditions in India. Likewise, it is possible to draw some parallels on national and regional historical writing projects. The case of Mizoram is also no exception from the general trend which is being highlighted by some scholars like Bipan Chandra, RS Sharma, Romila Thapar, Irfan Habib, Harbans Muhkia, etc.9 Within Mizo society, Sailo and its Lusei dominated clans are the ones who first received western education during colonial times. Perhaps their historical imagination is more tilted towards the Lusei narrative rather than focusing on a larger complex

Mizo Studies April - June 2020 227 References: 1Vumson, Zo History: With an introduction to Zo Culture, Economy, Religion and their Status as an Ethnic Minority in INDIA, BURMA, and BANGLADESH, Aizawl: Vumson Suantak, 1987, p. 35. Keihawla Sailo, Golden History of Lushai Hills: Zoram- Chin-Lushai-Kuki Country), Aizawl, Published by author, 2010. B. Lalthanglianga & K. Zawla, etc. also talked about this. 2There is a popular tradition regarding the original home of this group of people. One common belief was that they originally came out of a place or cave which was known as Sinlung to Hmar, Chinlung to Chins, Chhinlung to Mizo, Khul to Thadou, Paite, Vaiphei, Simte and Zo; Khurpui/Khurpi to Aimol, Kom, Koren, etc. 3R. Thangmawia, Zoram: Zoram pian to dan leh kalhmang tlangpui, Aizawl: ZORO, 2011, p. 3. 4Laldena, Chin-Kuki-Mizo (CKM) in Northeast India and Bangladesh, See http://laldena.blogspot.in/2014/05/chin-kuki-mizockm-in-north-east-india.html Priyadarshni M Gangte, A Case Study of Chin-Kuki-Mizo, See http://kukiforum.com/2009/05/a-case-study-of-the-chin-kuki-mizochikim/ both accessed on accessed on 2thMarch. 2017. 5R. Thangmawia, op.cit. 6K. Zawla, "Mizo Pi Pu te Ieh an Thlahte Chanchin", Aizawl: MCP, 1983.

7L. Keivom, Zoram Khawvel, Aizawl: Mualchin Publication, 2005.

8The earliest migrants from Myanmar to different parts of North East India were called Old Kukis and the later migrants New Kukis. According to 1931 census and J.Shakespeare, Old Kuki includes Aimol, Anal, Biete, Chiru, Chothe, Kom, Koren, Hmar, Lamkang, Moyon (Purum), Ronte, Tarau. Tikhup, and Vaiphei. The New Kuki includes Gangte, Paite, Ralte, Simte, Sukte and Thadou. See Laldena.

0 件のコメント:

コメントを投稿