By: Dr. Joseph Suantak, Tuibuang Bazar, Churachandpur
Disheartened with some write-ups and theses, I ventured to jot down my findings and speculations in numerical order with few words; than being verbose as if a professional orator or a social scientist:
1. We were not ‘ANIMIST’, but ‘DEIST’. Objects [living/non-living] were propitiated and not worshipped. Sync with Genesis of the Old Testament every primitive people believed in the presence of an unseen Supreme God, creator of the universe. Even our non-Christian forefathers of the distant and vague past already called him ‘Chungpathian’, ‘ChungMang/pa’, or ‘Pathian’. They also believe in life after death and even the presence of ‘HEAVEN’ which they called ‘Pialgal/Pialral’, ‘Vangam/Vanram’, etc. etc. And their belief goes on, even to the length of ‘Kizil’, transmigration of the human soul after death to another foetus.
2. No conclusion can be made yet in regard to pointing China, Tibet, Afghanistan, the Himalayas and the Middle East as our root. Geneticists’ findings /mappings disagree with this. For instance, see Science Reporter, January 2010:8-15; HapMap/Human GenomeMapping Projects of developed Asian countries’ findings, et al. Yet, from our traditional plane [z.B., Tuipisan], one can still point at random — Huang Ho (Yellow River) valley, or Yuan Jiang (Red River) valley in present day Yunnan Province; and, Song Hong or Hong Ha (Red River) banks in present day Vietnam.
3. Before the White colonialists quelled our fierce warriors and braves, our sovereign geo-political territory seem to had spreaded, undisturbed, between 92 and 97 E (longitude) and 20 and 27 N (latitude) approximately.
4. We were neither migrators nor émigré. Our nomadic life was confined within our own ancestral homeland. Customary responsibilities oftuchabul, bechabul, chanupi, chanuneu, sawng (pu te), zawlpa, phungpi upa, &c during ritual or social ceremonies compelled them [our forefathers] to continuously shift so as to stay close to near and dear ones. Moreover, slash & burn cultivation; hunter-gatherer culture; inter-village wars and the like are some of the immediate factors that compelled them to move or shift from one place to another. Even today, shifting of settlement is felt.
5. We were untouched. Living independently and internally segmented into a number of village-states or provinces of Chiefdoms like that of the Greeks and Jews city-states for countless centuries long before the dawn of CE/AD. The first people who came close to our territory, or who first came into contact with our ancestors seem to be the Meitei people. One of their chronicles mentions about us and dated it in 30s AD [Cheitharol Kumaba (Royal Chronicles of the Meitei kings)]. Next, the Burmese in about 1200s AD; the Bengalis in about 1400s AD; and the British in 1700s AD.
6. No kingdom or civilization ever dared to infiltrate our country before the Whiteman invasion. Therefore, we have neither writings nor definite place in the chronicles of other peoples until the European colonialists’ annexation plus, the influx of altruistic White Gospel Messengers.
7. Perhaps, it was geo-ecological and environment factor — on why we had chosen hilly and mountainous country. Owing to wetly or boggy condition of the ground, frequent overflow of the rivers and streams and its confluences; and as it was infested with waterborne diseases [or numerous diseases] during those gone early days, our primitive ancestors did not covet the lowlands or ‘phaigam’ in the traditional parlance. Sure, we were not pushed up on the mountainous region [tanggam/thingtang/zogam/zopigam, or“Innbuk”,“Chungkhopi”, “Chunggam”, “Khamtung-gam/Khamchung-gam”, “Khawsak/Khawchhak”, “Khawchung”, etc.] by the Chinese, Bengalis, Burmese, Shans, nor the Mongolian legions. Again, the Burmese, Shans, Bengalis and other races in our neighbouring valleys probably arrived much later than us [possibly, nearly thousands of years, or at least, some hundred years later?] — long after the soil/land/ground was dried up to an inhabitable condition. Our legends and folktales z.B., Galngam, Hangsai, Liando & Tuaisiak, Suiting & Ngambawm, Lenchonghoi, Lersia, Benglam, Khul, Thimzin, Keimi et al ticks what I argued here.
8. We might have been a family wandering away [or evolved] during the Neolithic period in present day Burma in circa 7,000 – 2,000 BC (i.e., from any one of the Neolithic men of present day central Myanmar, Kachin State, Shan State, Mon State, Taninthayi Division, or of the Neolithic people along the bank of the Chindwin and Ayeyawaddy [Irrawady] rivers). And again, it is also likely that our primordial ancestors might have reached the Chindwin valley as early as before the establishment of the Xia [or Hsia] dynasty (2,200 – 1,700 BC) in China.
9. Khul, Khur, Khurpui, Khol, Sinlung, Chinlung, or Chhinlung [if we are to interpret it as ‘cave’] was believed to have the power of giving birth to a barren woman. As such, our traditions generally assert that we came out from it. Apart from this, no wonder, our stone-age ancestors were ‘caveman’!
10. Today, let’s put our heads together and reckon whether we shall really continue to feel comfortable with the Constitutional term “Scheduled Tribe”, “Tribe”, or “Tribal” which have no lucid definition. Whereas, ‘indigenous people’ or at least ‘indigenous tribe’ is what we are naturally fitted in. Shibboleth of the erstwhile Colonialism still lingers [in India, Bangladesh and Myanmar]. Whatever privileges be laid in the constitutional provisions of the Third World nations who are subjugating us today, it will always remain equivocal. Because, alluring privileges for those classified as ‘tribe’, ‘Scheduled tribe’, ‘backward class’ or ‘minorities’ are more likely to be a ‘stabbing from the back’, and probably nothing but a clandestine attempt to bring about more conflicting identities, more marginalization/relegation and to eventually stamp us to the lowest echelon for their own advantages. And for us, ultimately, vanishing race!
11. Affirmatively, I would advocate __ ‘Nationalism’ is, naturally and historically destined to emerge wherever a human civilization existed. Accordingly, it did emerge in chorus with the growth of family or clan/sept, and with the establishment of Chiefdoms particularly in the Chin-Kuki-Zo society. E.J. Hobsbawn too noted that ‘Nationalism comes before nation’ [Nations and Nationalism Since 1780, (1990)]. And, if the feelings of patriotism, oneness and xenophobia and the like are elements of ‘nationalism’, it already infused itself into our veins prior before the British infiltration.
12. In fine, I guessed and feared that as long as we continue to use ‘-’[hyphen = minus?] or ‘/’[‘divide’ as marked in our cellphones/mobile phones!] or ‘,’ [comma = short break] marks in between our unreceptive identities viz, Chin, Kuki, Mizo and Zomi, our aspirations such as ‘oneness’ and ‘united nationalism’ or ‘united political movement’ will topple time and again; for most of our life, what we stably see and hear influenced our mindsets. So, my humble and solemn suggestion is to start penning more meaningfully and receptively like this ˗‘Chin+Kuki+Zo’. And, at the end, yet most extensively, in spirit and prayers: “May most of our aspirations be attained through the SoO [Suspension of Operations] pact. And let it be, another step towards “perennial & emotional reunification” among ourselves for we are ONE!”
[This article is based on the author’s yet to be published manuscript “Chin+Kuki+Zo Genesis & Exodus”, ]