SOCIAL AND CULTURAL INTEGRATION

   THE ZOMI  -  COMMON ORIGIN

1. 1.Tibeto-Burman group of people originated from the headwaters of Yang Tse kiang and Huangho Rivers (S.K. Chatterjee), most probably somewhere in the Deqen Prefecture of Yunan province of China. 

1. 2.The first wave of migration was led by Mon Khmer followed by the Tibeto-Burman group comprising of Zomis, Lolos and Kachins and the third wave by Tai-Chinese such as Shans, Siamese, Karens (Historical Linguistics, Archaeology & recent relationships did indicate that their ancestors came from the North: F.K Lehman). 

1. 3.Recent ecological and Cultural research shows that the Deqen Prefecture is a gene pool of 56000 species of plants and mammals, 417 birds, dozens of ethnic minorities like the Nu, Lisu, Pani, Naxi, Dang etc. with their traditional costume of intricate designs still intact. The Naxi music, songs and systems of cultivation and dancing in groups, for days together is a strong indication of our similarities. The theory of Northern origin (Yunan Province) is accepted by the Kachins, Karens, Shans, Burmese, and Thais (Zomia Nomadia concept). 

1. 4.Ruili in Yunan province of China appears to be the main route followed by the migrating tribes. 

1. 5.The tribes moved to Hukawng Valley in the present Kachin state of Myanmar, following the Chindwin River and settled in and around the Irrawaddy River. 

1. 6.The Burmese King was defeated by the Mongols headed by Kublai Khan in the 13^th century AD which prompted the tribes to move Northwards in the present Kabaw Valley (Lt. Trent described it as the destruction by interlopers). 

1. 7.In the opinion of Wilhelm Klein, the Chin-Kachin people landed in Burma in the 9^th Century AD, according to G.H. Luce, Chin migrated to south via Hukawng valley and settled in the Chindwin Valley from 1250-1400 AD and lived in Kabaw Valley (which appears to be appropriate).  

1. 8.From 1200 AD to around 1400 AD the tribes settled in and around Khampat and lived harmoniously for over two hundred years. These were the days of Dahpa, Penglam, and Lengtonghoih. The ruler of Khampat Sourumkhum was dethroned by the Pong (Shan) king due to his misadventure in the marriage arrangement between the Meitei princess and the Pong prince, thereby forcing the CHINS to move to the Hills. 

1. 9.In the 11^th Century, contact with the Burmans produced one generic name for the tribes, basket carrying people (CHIN), this word is also derived from the Chinese word Jen, meaning MEN. It is also believed that Chin denotes people settling in the Chindwin Valley. It is also believed to have originated from the word KHYANG meaning CHIN in Burmese (the alphabet Khy was later replaced by CH). Khyang is especially used to describe the plain Chins. CHIN is the first generic name given to us by the outsiders. 

1. 10.Settlement in the Chindwin and Irrawaddy river valleys was testified by the exceptional skills of our forefathers in swimming, which was correctly noted by J Shakespeare.  

1. 11.The myth of common origin from Chhinlung/Sinlung, a rock cave in the Kachin state of Burma (Khamrangpui) was noted in the Memorandum to the PM of India by the Mizo Union in 1946. 

1. 12.The common symbol (Khampat Bungpui) planted by one Thado, the common place of worship at mount Awksatlang (Aokpatong) near Tahan is a testimony to our settlement there. 

1. 13.The construction of Kale fortress by the Shan Prince, forced conscription as labourers, the mass exodus due to hardships faced during the construction (basket filled with cut fingers) is a living testimony of our common settlement in the Kabaw Valley. 

1. 14.The settlement of Thados on top of hills and the Hmars below is testified by names given to each other (Thado=Khawsak, Hmars= Khawthlang). 

1. 15.Dispersals of our ancestors in different directions from the construction site of Kale fortress coupled with the ravages of the Thingtam (tree famine), forcing them to find new settlements at Zangpitam, Chimnuai and Locom (Falam) is a common knowledge. 

1. 16.H.N.C. Stevenson opines that the Sihzang and Sukte migrated from Chimnuai, Ngawn and Kawlni from Kawlni village, Zaniats from Lotsawm. The Fanai, Zahau, Laizo from Sunthla and the Lai from Khawrua. The pawis were sovereign in their own right who settled from Locom to Ramthlo (Haka). 

1. 17.It was only in the early part of the 17^th Century AD that the first wave of Thados and Hmars moved to Lentlang and subsequently crossed over to the present Mizoram; one reason often cited for the forward movement was the war with the Chakmas. 

1. 18.J Shakespeare opines that the Meitei, Kukis, Chins, Lushais, Kabuis etc. came from the same stock, bearing the same countenance, and Mongoloid in origin, even though the Meities refused to recognize the truth about their common origin with their cousins. 

1. 19.According to Tom Lewin, the generic name of these groups of people is DZO (ZO). 

1. 20.The word COOKIS first appeared in 1777 in a report given by Tom Lewin to the government and also in the report of Lord Warren Hastings about the depredations of the unknown tribes of the Chittagong Hill Tracts. J. Rennel, Chief Engineer, Bengal in 1800 talks about certain unknown tribes in the frontiers of Bengal in the course of his survey, named them as CUCIS or KUKIS, who were uncultured, savage, unclothed, not knowing the use of guns. 

1. 21.Further on, the name Kuki was used by the Kacharis and Bengalis to any tribesmen living in the adjoining foothills and mountains of Chittagong Hills, Tiperrah and Chachar. This name was subsequently used by the British writers as Old Kuki to describe the Biate, Hrangkhawl, Darlong etc. who first appeared in Tiperrah and Cachar. The word New Kuki was coined to describe the tribes migrating later on to these places (Thado-khongjais and others) and also, to the Present Manipur and North Cachar Hills. 

1. 22.This derogatory word used to describe the tribes living in the then Lushai Hills was completely discarded by the Mizo Union in their Memorandum to the PM of India in the year 1946, preferring and justifying the nomenclature Mizo to Lushai/Lusei or Kuki to describe themselves. 

1. 23.As a counter to the Mizo Union and also the Kuki nomenclature, some of the Hill Tribes of Manipur propagated the concept of KHUL UNION (1948 to 1950) with limited success. In the meantime the Paite national Council Manipur propagated the CHIN nomenclature in their Memorandum to the PM of India in the year 1960, with the justification that their generic name is CHIN and not KUKI. 

1. 24.As the Naga political movement gained momentum in the later part of 1940`s, it infiltrated the political space of the tribes residing in the Hills of Manipur and Lushai Hills, leading to the birth of the MNF. Meanwhile, in Burma a parallel movement for a separate independent state gained momentum leading to the birth of CNF. 

1. 25.Cultural, socio-religious and political awakening was brought to the fore with the emergence of educated Christian believers, working very closely with western Missionaries. This phenomenon led to the splitting of Zo Tribes into different political compartments, assuming each to be superior to the other. It led to the birth of tribe/clan wise competition for recognition as a distinct political entity, thereby missing the bigger picture of political identity altogether.

CHIN/KUKI/MIZO/ ZOMI/ LAI/KHULMI/ WHAT ELSE?

CHIN: The origin of the word CHIN as already described is generic in the sense that, it originated from the characteristic of a group of people or their place of settlement. The name CHIN was recognized in the Chin Hills Regulation, 1896 to include, the Kukis, Lushais and any Chin tribes etc. which is much wider in scope and all encompassing.

KUKI: Kuki as described earlier, was coined by foreigners to describe the savage nature of the tribes in a derogatory sense, just as the Assamese coined the Naga word to describe the unclothed wild and ferocious people living in their immediate surroundings, the headhunting Nagas of yesteryears. It is not uncommon to describe unknown people in derogatory manners amongst the tribes as well, such as Pawis who knot their hairs on the forehead, Pai who knot their hairs at the back (the name paite was dropped in 1931 census and resurrected in 1950`s-Singkhawkhai), Lusei the long head, Cho Chins as Chinbok, Paite the people who were wrestled down, Vaiphei the people who migrated en-mass, Tuikuk the Reangs of Tripura, Khawchhak the Thados, Khawthlang the Hmars etc. Such derogatory names have been subsequently changed by new generations in the course of rediscovering themselves, such as Pawis to LAI (Laimi/Laizo), Tuikuk to Riang, Khawchhak to Thado, Khawthlang to Hmar, Chinbook to K`Chou etc.

LUSEI/LUSHAI: The wild fire of nationalism and the desire of a common nomenclature was immediately felt by the Lushai people in the wake of India`s independence struggle and the imminent departure of the British from Burmese and Indian soil in the early 1940`s. With much effort and sacrifice, the Lushai Hills dwellers ultimately decided to have a common name in 1946 with far reaching political cohesion. The birth of the Mizo Union with the resultant political aspirations, encompassing the entire communities dwelling within its fold, was farsighted and visionary to say the least. The self-imposed nomenclature (MIZO), the recognition of ANY MIZO TRIBES as Mizos in a codified form is the secret of their success, survival and unity in the face of diversity.

ZOMI: It is generic in nature and aimed at achieving the ideals of a unifying platform for all the zo tribes with all its diversities in language, dialects and political aspirations. It goes to the root of Zo origin with all the commonalities of culture practices, social systems, traditional beliefs, Customary and traditional practices, Religious beliefs, and most of all, a common strategy for survival, be it political or cultural. Such a road to unity is fought with dangers as can be demonstrated from the Kuki-Hmar clashes of the `60`s or the Kuki-Zomi clashes of the `90`s; clashes of gigantic proportions for little known tribes with very heavy costs, be it economic, human, or emotional. Forceful imposition of one`s own will amongst the tribes is a misadventure of the highest order and certainly cannot last, which must be avoided at all cost.

The Zo tribes have traditionally been known to bear names of clans from the places of their dwelling places such as Sinlung from Sinlung cave, Chin from Chindwin River…, Teizang from the Tei trees growing in their original village, Sihzang from the spring (sih) in their original village, Lai from the Lailun Cave (village), Saizang from the gamsai grass growing in their dwelling place, Guite from the rays of the sun, Dim from Dim village, Khawsak from their dwelling places atop of hills, Khawthlang from their dwelling places on the foothills, Hmar from their places of abode to the North of Sailo settlements, Vaiphei from Khaw-vai-phei a large village or “an vai in an phei” a Lusei terminology on the occasion of their mass exodus from Lalkhama Sailo`s village, Simte from their place of settlement to the south, Lamzang from Lamzang village, Lusei from Seipui village, Lousau from Lousau village, and the like.

The Zo tribes also bear clannish names and characteristics from their respective progenitors or forefathers such as Sailo, Thado, Kawlni, Guite, Sukte, Kamhau, Manlun, Haokip, Kipgen, Doungel, Hauzel, Thomte, Leivang, Sianthuam, Tombing, Gangte, Samte, Bawngmei, Bawmkhai Langel, Buansing, Rivung, Hrangchal, Hrangkhol, Darlong, Biate, Baite, Chenkual, Kullai, Ngaihte etc. This clannish concept of identity resulted in their separation from each other, led to inter and intra tribal conflicts, led to variations in dialects and most of all foster ill feelings against each other. It further fuelled the concept of tribe recognitions in clannish styles such as Guite, Sukte, Haokip, Kipgen, Gangte, Simte, Zou etc. leading to the disintegration of tribes, branching out in different directions. The bone of contention is, how to bridge the divide created by ourselves?

Our common unifying factors must be exploited to the hilt without any loss of time:

 

1. 1.The concept and theory of common origin must be strongly ingrained in all of us. 

1. 2.The history of common ancestors, common dwelling places, and common sufferings for survival must be recreated and reenacted repeatedly amongst the children of all Zo tribes. 

1. 3.Unpolluted common history of cultural practices, social systems, festivities, religious beliefs, ceremonies, traditions etc. must be recreated and taught to each child of the Zo tribes. 

1. 4.Common folk lore/folk tales with their local variations must be researched upon and rewritten to depict the true meaning of such stories for the benefit of future generations. 

1. 5.Unified and codified customary practices into legally recognized LAW CODE must be attempted to encompass all the Zo tribes, so that differences are minimized to the barest minimum. In the present form as it existed, each of the tribes having its own code of customary practices does not augur well for the unity of the Zo tribes. Different law codes by each constituent tribe on our customary practices only shows to the world that, we are different, and not common. Unified law must be attempted at all costs, as the Mizos did. The present practices of dispensing justice by tribal councils must be given a decent burial, the sooner the better. Dispensation of justice is the domain of the sovereign, codified laws must be interpreted by duly appointed judges. A must do, establish District courts to deal with such cases, and certainly the Zomi Council must refrain from its involvement in such cases, at all cost. 

1. 6.Religious beliefs and practices being common (100% Christians) there is really nothing to write home about, splinter groups, or denominations cannot be prevented either. 

1. 7.At the social level, it would be most desirable to have a common unifying Association/ organization, a voluntary body of youths at different levels. The attempt at this unification exercise at the ZYA level must be given a big push, as is being done by the YMA for Mizos. 

1. 8.The existence of student`s bodies on the basis of tribal affinities (dialect spoken) cannot be ignored, however an umbrella organization of student`s bodies will do wonders. It is there for all of us to see, in the case of Naga Students Federation and MZP for Mizos. 

1. 9.A single, strong and united political party with crystal clear aims and objectives (achievable) with participation from all the Zo tribes is the crying need of the hour. Revolutionary parties with separate and distinct goals, does not suit the political climate of the day. It is important to have a democratic political party system for spearheading the political, administrative and local aspirations of the Zo tribes as a whole that too within the four corners of democracy. 

1. 10.The concept of a lingua franca as a unifying factor with all its intricate ramifications cannot be ignored (whether we like it or not). Groups of people without any unifying language cannot stick together for long, the one big negative point in the Naga political and social conglomerate. In India, Assam, Mizoram for instance, language plays a pivotal position in their unification efforts, as a nation, or state, as the case may be. Common language speaks volumes. Common literature and common historical records will take us afar. 

1. 11.Vigilante groups like the MHIP of Mizoram, Meira Paibis of Meiteis, and Naga Mothers of Nagaland, with total independence to exercise their plans and policies is a must. The efforts of any vigilante groups with the honest objectives of fighting social evils, intoxications, drug addictions, corruption etc. must be given a big push.

NOW THE BIG QUESTION:

In the given circumstances and given scenario of tribal animosities, conflicts, selfish attitudes, each vying for a political space, each vying for an administrative pie, what is the road ahead?

The Mizos call the Zomi movement and the Zomi nomenclature par-se, as the brainchild of perverted mentality, in the sense that the Mizo name has been in existence and is there to stay.

The people of Southern Chin Hills in Myanmar did not accept the Zomi concept that comprises the major chunk of Zo population.

The Hmars may not en-mass baptize to the ideal of being a Zomi, as an established entity already existed (Mizo), which does not exclude them at all.

May be some Kuki brothers were wary and scornful of this very name as it is. The reason is not far to seek. The very name kuki flows in the veins of many generations which is next to impossible to despise, in-spite of the name, with all its connotations.

The road forward is fraught with dangers, one must tread carefully, else the pitfalls are eminent, plenty and immediate. As we all trudge and sputter along this roadmap to survival, we must be able to carry each other along in order to enable others to rediscover themselves, who are sitting on the fence, and more so who are watching on the other side of the bridge.

In the ultimate analysis, is it a road map to survival or a road to nowhere?

Should we fall back to CHIN or merged with Mizo or Kuki? The bigger picture as it emerged, the blood of …. Is thicker than….? The few building blocks of nationhood as enumerated above may be deliberated upon with an open mind. The world is watching us.

To conclude, which of the Zosuan blocks survived, only time will tell, till then, let us keep our fingers crossed.

THANK YOU ALL, GOD BLESS THE ZOMI

VALTE VUNGZAMUAN

ZOMI CONCLAVE, NEW DELHI, 19^TH FEB. 2013