INPUI: Hmar News & Info

Courtesy: www.youtube.com/Dumbelu

By Timothy Z. Zote

Tuithaphai (Rengkai): China, Sichuan Province, Yalung river bul laia ei pi le pu huna inthawka ei lo hluo ram le ei lo chengna ni ngeia hriet le ngaibel thei dinga um ,Sinlung khuo hmusuoktu Rev. L.Rema, Aizawl Venghnuai chun Date 11/3/2012 (Thawtanni) Dar 11:OO Am khan Tuithaphai, Rengkai Community Hall –ah mi thahnem tawk tak hmaah Sinlung khuo a hmu dan le a bebawm report a pek a.

Hi report-na programme hi Dr. Rosiem Pudaite,Chairman, Hmar Art And Culture Society chun a keihruoi a. Rev. Saithanglur Zote tawngtaina’n programme an hlan zo in, Rev. L. Rema, China rama Sichuan Province laia Hmar hai khawhlui le ngai bang thei lo, Sinlung khuo hmusuoktu hmasa tak a nina le huoisen taka harsatna tam tak ner tleng a, a hang hmusuok lawm zie suklangna le ngaisangna khelah Thangsuo-ah a ngai leiin Hmar Arts and Culture Society aiin Pu R.Tawna Khawbung, Secy. HACS le Pu S.N. Ngurte, Vice Chairman,HACS hai pahniin Hmar Thangsuopuon in battirna an nei.HACS Aizawl-a inthawka a hungna a a kal man dingin Rs. 10000/- an inhlan bawk.

Reoport petu ding hi tum : Rev. L. Rema Hualtu khuo niin , B.Th chen zo in China ramah Kum hni chung Missionary sin lo thaw ta a ni a. Phone hmanga bie nuomtu hai chun Contact – 09862860181.

Report A Nei : Rev. L. Rema chun “ Feb.22,2012 khan Aizawla inthawkin , Burma lutin, Burma inthawkin China a lut nawk a. Chuongchun, Sichuan Province chu lut nawkin, chu taka inthawk chun Sinlung khuo chu a fe nawk a. Sinlung kuo a hin ama hi fe a tum reng a ni nawh a, remchang takin a ruolpa a ram mi Pastor Yangjun Fu le an inzinnaah Motor station pakhat tuokfuin chu taka Driver hai chun “Sinlung sinlung sinlung an ti lau lau” an hriet a, chu phing chun an indawn chieng a, Sinlung khuo tieng hi an pan ta a nih. Date 20 March, 2012 ni chun mang khawm a, a la mang phak lo, Sinlung khuo chu Zo pa chun ke ngeiin a sir ta a nih. ( Chuleiin, hi ni hi Discovery date of Sinlung Village ti a nih).

A Ram Ngirhmun : China ram Sichuan Province huom sunga um, Altitude 28 degree le longitude 100 degree inkara um a nih. Yalung vadung bul a va ral ineptuoin building mawi tak tak neiin an um.

Khawsak Dan : An khawsak dan hi Tibet mi an ni deu a hawi a. An nunphung khawm hi Tibet mi hai leh an inang hle.

A Chenghai : A khuoa chenghai hi,Tibet hnam an niin a hriet a.Chun, Budhist sakhuo zuitu an nih. Mihriem sang li vel an um nia hriet a ni bawk.

Fak le Dawn Zawng Dan: Vadung bula um an ni leiin thlaihna an chieng nasa em em a. Serthlum khawm an chieng uor hle bawk. Chun, ran vai an taima a, an uor hle a. Chuong an ran vaihai chu : Kel, Beram,Vawk le Bawng an ni tlangpui.

Sawrkar sin le Dawrkaia sumdawng khawm an um bawk.

Zawrhmun (Bazar): Zawrhmun a hin thlaihnah le thlaira, vawksa,arsa,ngasa chenin an zawr ve vawng a.

Sik le Sa: Sinlung khuo hi a chang chun vur dam a tla a, a dei thei hle hlak.

Pi le Pu Sulhnu : An pi le pu mihuoisenhai thlanmuol inza takin an enkawl a.China rama mihuoisen em em Lian Hua,Army General chu Sinlung khawlailungah a lim chu an inngirtir luoi a. Chawimawina chi hran hran le Parte mawi tak tak inhlanin, Pathien biekin an biek hiel hlak bawk.

Sinlunga inthawk hin Km 320 vela, hla a chun pi le pu hai an khawsak dan lim ni dinga ring lungbangah an ziek tlar duot a. Lung an leng nuom hle “ a tih.

Pi le Pu Ro Thil : Tienlai pi le pu ro thil sie thatnachang an hrietin an fel hle a. Dar,bur le bel,Thi (Thri)kawnghren,chem.,thal, fei hai chu zawr a hlaw hle a. Sumin an chang zo tep ta thung.

Vantlang Rawngbawlna : China sawrkarin kum 60 ( old age) a upa chungtieng enkawlna bik an nei a, hi hmunah hin pasal 60 le nuhmei 89 an um bawk. Thangpui ngai nia an hriet chu an harsat dan a zirin an tul ang pei a, thangpui hlak an nih. Chun Tlawmngaina khawm hi a takin an la hmang a nih.

Sinlung Rausanna Lamtluong :Pi le pu haiin Sinlung tit nei am, ral nei lei am ? An suoksanna lampui ni dinga ring chu Yalung vadung zulah a la um thla rul a. Doral leia an lo bel hlak puk pindan 35 vel umna puk hai chu a lo la um zing thu Rev. L.rema kuomah a cheng haiin an lo hril bawk.Tuhin chu ramsa hai riek run an chang mek niin an hril bawk.Sinlung khuo hmar thlang tieng hin, Lung Kawtkhar a ram tawngin LUNGBANGKHA a um bawk. Pi pu sulhnu hi Sinlung thlang tieng hin tam tak hmu ding a la um a nih.

Ei Inhnaina : Ei inhnaina tam tak a um a, chuonglaia pakhat chu ei tawng hi a nih. Tekhina’n: Mangkhawng = Mankhawng,ka nau = ka nau, lung= lung, changkha= Chengkha,saru = saru ti hai hi an nih.” (–Rev. L. Rema,Rengkai,Tuithaphai,Churachandpur East District).

Programme-a thang hai hin zawna tam tak an nei a, chuong an zawnahai chu a thei ang angin Rev. L. rema chun a dawn a.

Resolution : Dr. Rosiem Pudaite,Chairman, HACS, chun mipui hung khawmhai kuomah thurawn siemin “ Sinlung khuo hmun ngeia intira sui chieng dingin” rem ti tlang a nih.

Hi inkhawmnaah hin hnam thuoitu le Vantlanga mipawimaw thahnem tawk tak thanghai laia mi thenkhat : Pu Hrila Zote, MDC, Saikawt, Pu Joseph D. Hmar, Vice President, Hmar Inpui, Pu F. Doliensung, Gen. Secretary, Hmar Inpui, Pu S.N.Ngurte, Chairman, Hmar Literature Society, Pu L. Ruoivel Pangamte, Secretary, Hmar Literature Society,

Rev. Ros. Infimate, Vice Chairman, Hmar Christian Leaders Forum, Pi D. Vari, President, Hmar Women Association, Pu L. Kiemlo Pulamte, Hmar Writer Academy, Pu Joseph Lalrothang , ZEO, Churachandpur District, Dr. Saidokhum Zote, Jt.Director, Vety. Churachandpur,Pu S. Damkung, Rev. T. Khuma songate, Pu H. Zaneisang hai le mi dang dang an thang bawk.

Mipui vantlang inkhawmhai kuomah le Pu Lalhosan ,EM,ADC,Churachandpur chun hi inkhawmna ahmang dingin Rs. 1000/- a hung thawlawm leiin,Dr. Rosiem Pudaite, Chairman,HACS-in lawmthu hrilna a nei.

Hi inkhawm hi Pu Darkapthang Darngawn le team hai chun Video Camera-in coverage thiem takin an thaw a, hi programme a thang lo hai chun enchak a um ta hle el. Hi inkhawmna ah hin medi team, Manmasi Digest Monthly, Mizonews.com le Lelte Correspondent hai khawm an thang bawk.

Hun tawp tawngtaina Rev. Ruolhlei Pakhuongte’n a nei zo in, Photo session neiin khawp lo takin an inlawi dar ta nih. ( Saikawt, Tuothaphai, Churachandpur East District,11/6/2012)

By Timothy Z. Zote

Khawvela Manmasi thla Hmar nau hai lai hin, Hmar History ziektu pu Hrangnglien (fam) hai le ei mithiem, Dr. Rochunga Pudaite, Prof. Dr. Lal Dena hai le hnam chanchin suitu Rev. H.V.Sunga le adang dang haiin, an suinaah Sinlung hi an lo zieksa zie, le an sui dan khawm an ang vawng dan chun, Hmar hai hi Sinlung Khuo-a inthawka hung ei ni ngei zie le ziek le tiem thiema ei um hma inthawk (Oral) hlain,

“Khaw sinlungah,

Kawt siel ang ka zuong suok a, “ a lo ti ang khan,Sinlung chanchin sui thei dingin a um tlat a nih. Chun, Sinlung khuo hi mita hmutu um naw inla khawm hmuchakna le hmu tumna , um ngeia ringna hi mi tam tak lungrilah bu a khuor tlat niin an lang.Kei ngei khawmin Kum 1998 –a inthawk ta khan China Ram laia, hmun pakhat lai tak hin Sing khuo hi um ngei ding le ei hnam le suikawp thei dingin a um ngei ka ring a, thei tawkin Internet fe thlengin ka zawng ve a, mi angina pawisa neiin inla chu ka hmu dai ta khawm ka ring a nih. Hi ka zawnna ah hin SINLUNGA Company len tak chu ka hmua chuonghai chun an company- hmingah SINLUNGA an tih a, China sawrkar-in a enkawl a ni a, phone fe thlengin kan inbiek a, an ni chun thil an mi hril sei thein aw leiin hma ka sawn thein aw a nih. Hi le inzawm hin Chinaah hin Sinlung ti a mikhuol naw hle ti chu ringna a min neitir hiel a nih. Ei ni laia nei deu le Sawrkar thaufa thei deuhaiin finance hai sien a zawngdawkna sin hi thaw inla tiin ka ruol then khat kuomah khawm ka lo hril ta hlak.

Sinlung hi Hmar Tawng part –II le Part –I-hmang haiin an ko biek deu a, Chu chu umzie chu Hmar Tawng part –I ( Sinlung) Hmar Tawng part-II ( Chhinlung) tiin ko a nih.

Chun, a thenin Khul,khur ti hai chun an ko thel deu deu a ni awm de, an ni chu Sinlung taka um ni lovin Sinlung khuo sir puk vela um an ni el awm de! Ti ngai ngaituona a min nei tir bawk.

Sinlung Hmusuokna Tluonglam:

Mizoram-a Rev. Rema Venghnuai, Presbyterian rawngbawltu le hma tieng pei rawngbawlna suklienna dinga ram, hmun le hmang zawng dinga Burma fethlenga China luta 22/2/2012 nia Aizawl suoksana a suok dawkna ah chun, Hmar haik haw hlui ni ngei dinga ring el chau khawm ni lo, a tak ngeia a hei hmu chun, Khawvela Hmar mipui lungril ngui le chau ta hai chu a kei tho thar hle a. Chuleiin, upa deu le tar tah, hnam invawi deu haiin hi chanchin an hei hriet chun, an um tawk tawk the ta nawh a, an inpui the ta nawh a ni deu tak. An dam lai ngeiin hi Khaw Sinlung hi hmu hman naw pal ka tih! Ka thi hmain vawikhat bek hi Khaw Sinlung hi hmu ka chak de ti chu hla thunawn ang elin Hmar mipui laia a boruok inleng vel dan chu a hawi.

Sinlung khuo ti hi a thenin Chhinlung tia ko ei lo um a,amiruokchu Hmar Tawng part-I- a ko ang char SINLUNG tia ko le an ziek dan khawm a ni tlat chu tie….. “Haleiluija Manmasi Pathien chu inpakin um raw seh”.

Tuita Sinlung khuo hi SICHUAN Province-a Rev. L. Rema-in Chinese Pastor, Yangjun Fu Yunnan chu fielin Sinlung khuo hmu thei a umna dingin Manmasi pathien chun a ruot pek ta hlau a, chuongchun, March 13,2012 ni chun Sinlung khuo tieng chu Bus-in ni iemnazat an tlan hnung chun Garze an tlung a, a tuok Date 2oth March 2012 ( Discovery date of Sinlung Village,the Olden Village of Hmars, in china , ka ti el a nih) zingkar chun, Sumo-in darkar 5 lai tlan a ni nawk a, chun, Sinlung Khuo mang khawm khawma a mang ngai lo chu, a mit ngeiin a hmu tah a, an khawsak dan le an tawng hai chu an angna tam tak a um thu a hriet nghal. Ni nga (5) lai umin, thil tam tak hriet le sui a nei a, hi Sinlung khuo sier lai vel hin, Puk tam tak a um. Chu puk hai lai khawm chun lung milim tam tak a um a, chuonghai chu hei sui chun, Hmar hai sulhni pakhat chu a nih ring a um nawk zuol a nih. Zo hnathlak inti lai hin , lung le inzawmin Hmar thla hai hi sulhnu an hau tak a, Champhai zawla lungdaw lunga milem ziek dam,Chawngtlai , Khawzawl ,Mizoram, bula um hai dam khi Hmar hai sulhnu vawng a nih. China rama ei um laia inthawk hin lung a thil ziek nuomna le thil inchik a that zie le a tul zie an lo hrietthiem phak ta a ni ring a um hle. China rama ei um hmain Rev. H.V. Sunga chun Middle East lai vel hin ei lo um a nih a ring thu Migratory rout map a siem chun a suklang bawk a nih.

Sinlung khuo mi hai le ei inhnaina:

Sinlung khuo hi ei hnam chanchin suituhai le ei lo umna hlui le ei hlaa inthawka an lo sui a hmun le ram awm, an ringna hmun leh an zul hle a. A Sinlung hi “ China Sichuan Province a um Latitude 28% le longitude 1005 inkara um a ni a.Yalung vadung le inkar umin, a va ral veve ah, building in an bawl tawl a, khuo lien ta luo chu a ni nawh a, mi 4000.( sangli bawr vel umin a hril). Sinlung khuo-a inthawka Km 32 vela a hlaah chun pi le pu hai sulhnu beltlettlut hmu ding a tam hle thu a hril. Tawng khawm inhnaina tam tak a la nei a, mankhawng ei ti hi “mangkhawng khuoi khawm hi “ khuoi”, saruh “ saruh” ,Chengkha” Changkha” ka nau “ ka nau”,thal “thal” lung “ lung” an ti ve tho a nih. Hril ding chu a la tam el. Hril seng el chi ni naw nih.

Hienga, Rev. L. rema –in a hmuna a hmu fie ta si hin chu, hril hril ta lo vin, a hmuna intir dan ngaituo inla, chu chun, ei unau an ni dan le , ei hnam hming ding? International politics khel ding? Kristienna tieng lampui sat a,in unauna le inzawm nghet dan ding ngaituo a, History fel fai le chieng lem siem a tha naw maw? Kei chu a tul chun, kan pei zing bawk.

A rama hi , vadung bul a nih an ti lei hin Hmar hai hi hnam Advance ( varhmasa) an lo nina a sukchiengin ka ngai. Tuita, North East India cheng hai khawm hi Vadung bula khawsa deu vawng ei nih. Hi hi hnam var hmasa ei nina le ei civilisation hi China or Midle East khawm a lo ni ta el thei? China rama inthawka ei hung suok dan hi chihni ring ding a um. China Historyan hai chun kum sang bi danah tampui le, indona inthatna, natural calamity , lirinhning, arasitlak , thlipui mak, (T.Sunami ang) thina runpui a tlung hlak a chu chu taka inthawka invengna dinga nuom le nuom lo va, kawt siel ang ka zuongsuok an ti kha a lo ni el thei bawk.

Sinlung khuo a chenghai hi, an fakzawkna tlangpui chu beram,kel, vawkvai an inhnik em e, chun an ran vai vel danah hin a ram hi ram inzawl ta luo a ni dal dim? Fe chak a um ngei el.

Hmar art and Culture hai le Hmar Inpui le thahnem ngai hai, hung suok dawk tar o khai! Inzawng suokna hi Pthien hmangaina inlangna pakhat a ni tlat. Kohranhai , inngaituo chieng ei tiu, I Hmar chanpui hai chantuon hremhmuna an um el ding chu, I ngai ngam bik dim a ?

Hieng a, hun iemna chen Rema hin China ram hmun hrnan hran a fangna ah hin ei pinn le pu hai sulhnu tam tak a hmusa bawk thu telephone-a kan inbieknaah chun a mi hril. Hmaisana inbiek hun hi a tlung pha’t chun, hril ding a va tam awm de! (Date 10/5/2012)

Ziektu: Pu Timothy Z. Zote

Hi khawvel leihnuoi huop chinah hin , mihriem pakhat ve ding a, ka hung pieng suok ve le inzawmin , ngaituona le sungtuona, mi angin hau naw lang khawm ka thei ve tawk tawkin ka thluok hi ka hmang ve a. Ruol ka ban tawk naw zie khawm ka hriet zing a, anachu, a chunga thumal khi ka lungrilah hun iemnai chena inthawk ta khan a riek zing a, ka theinghil tum khawma a hung inlang nawk hlak si, chuleiin ka sui ve dan ka hung ziek vet um a ni hi….

Khawvela mihriem cheng hai hin hming le inko dan bik ei nei seng a, rambung hming khawm a um a, chun inko nuom dan khawm ei nei seng bawk. Chun, ei nuom ang a, ei inko naw pha’t a then chu an lung a sen nawk hlak bawk. Hming hi a pawimaw chu ning a tih rawlri hrie inla khawm ei hminga inkona le biekna a um naw chun, ei ngaisak ngai nawh .

A chunga ang peiin Hmar hming khawm hi suitu hai chun, Mizorama inthawka intan chau ring pawl khawm an um niin an lang a, chu chu ngaidan nei chu , ei ni laia mi inlar le ziektu hming thang em em khawm an um bawk. Hi thu hi ka sui ve dan ah chun, Mizorama inthawka Hmar hnam hi hung suok a ni nawh a , a hming hi Myanmar lai daia ei lo lam tah niin an lang. A hrilfiena hmangruo pakhat a dingin kum 2007 lai khan Mizoram Chawnsim (Champhai)–ah Pu C. Dinthanga, Editor, Lelte Weekly, le Tv. TBC Zaithanpuia , History sui dinga ka fe nuom thu ka hril le inzawmin kan fe tlang a, khuosawt a um ngei el. Lungriemin, a mi thlak rak chu tie, pi pu sulhnung hei hmu chu…

Champhai kan hei tlung chun Guest house ah kan riek a, zingkar inhma takin Pu Khamhmingthang, Custom Officer, Sielmat, Champhaia a Post lai a ni a, ama chun ka fe nuomna le ei pi le pu hai umna a hriet hai a mi fang pui a. Champhai kan hei suok a, Km 2 vel kan hei tlan chun a hming hrieta um ri ngawt , mang hrieta ka lo hriet hlak a hming “ ZOTE’ khuo chu mit ngeiin kan hei hmu a, hi Zote khuo a hin iem a um a? SIKPUI LUNG lien tak el, tawp deu hlek , a zal, a lo um, chu Sikpui lung chu a thala an inzal pha’t pha’t a rawng a dang a, an intung pha’t a rawng a dang thu a veng mi hai chun an mi hril a, mak tak niin an lang a. Hi Sikpui Lung lu tieng deuah chun an kuotlang a,chu chu dawi thil thaw a ni ring pawl an um a, ngaidan an ang naw nuol bawk.

Hi Zote khuoa hin, tienlai nun le inthlasawng pei dan le chi le kau chanchin tam tak chanchin hril le ziek ding a lo um a, tuhin chu thai seng nawng ei tih. Amiruokchu, pi le pu sulhnu pawimaw em em el hril hmai thei der lo ding le hel thei der lova hril ngai pakhat chu, MU RAU PUK um hi a nih. Hi Murau puk hi, a ten chun Mura puk khawm an ti a, ti dan le an dik lem nia inlang chu Murau puk niin an lang. A puk dang lamna pakhat chu Pasarih a ni kher hi a nih. Zote Hmar haiin , tienlai chun Naute an khatin an lo si hlak a, fena an neisan hlak a, chuong kar chun naute hai chu Murauin a lo hung lak hlak nia hriet a ni leiin, a hmingah Murau puk an ko niin an hril.

Hi Zote khuoa hin thil pawimaw , pi le pu ro a um el hi, suitu thenkhat chun hmunpawimaw le Lal hi fel tak le ro khawm tha taka rel thei, thu nei thei, ni ngei ding a, sui pawl khawm an um bawk. Tienlaia inthawk pi le pu ro thil le lungphun umna hi Lal dangdai le Lal hril hlaw met an ni vawng a nih. Chun, pi le pu ro ngainatu Lal a ni ring a um bawk. Hi khuo a hin, Zote hmu ding an vang hle a, Manmasi Year Book Vol-II na chu Village Council Secretary ka present malamin hieng thuhai hi ka sa’m “ Hmun tum tum a , Zote hnam umhai chun, Zote khuo hi kan hung ral thlirin, hung hmu nuomin a sang tel kan um a, chun a khawhluotuhai le a khawsunga cheng, mi fel tak tak hai leiin hi Zote khuo hi an thang a nih, chuleiin lawmthu kan hril a nih, amiruokchu, Hmar Inpui or Zote Pahnam rem tina naw chun a hming hi thleng thei nawng in tih” tiin ka hril ve a. An lo lawm hle a nih.

Tekhina dingin, Saikawt nekin Muolvaiphai , Tuithaphai chun Hmar History-ah an inlang dan an ang nawh. Saikawtah chun thil tam tak ei hnamin rorelna le suktlukna hmuna ei lo hmangna khuo a ni bawk a. Muolvaiphei ruok chu Historical monument mawi tak “ Manmasi Sikpui Lung” a um leiin mi hril le ngaiven, hmu nuomum le thlalak pui nuom em em a, hmun hla tak taka inthawka hung chak an um pha na a ni ve tlat. Tourist place or Historical Munument item pakhat a ni leiin Muolvaiphei chen an lar pha a, an thang pha bawk.

Hi Zote khuoa inthawka ka suina tukvera chun, Sailo haiin 1919 khan Zote khuo hi an hluo tan a, Lungdaw ah a um a, thla khawm ka lak bawk. A khel KM 5 vel ah Zotlang Lawitlang pahnam bubitna a lo um nawk a, chu lai chun Sura naute inhrona, tiin lunga milem tam tak ziek a lo um nawk a, Sikpui Lung hai leh YMA, le Art and Culture, Mizoram-in enkawlna sin a hmingin an thaw a, anachu, hmangaitu an mamaw hlein ka hriet.

Mizoram Hmar tienga an pan leia Hmar hming hi put el ei ni nawh.

Ziektu thenkhatin, Mizoram hmar tienga pan pawl hai chu Hmar hnam an ni thu an ziek lang hlak a, hi thil hi ngaituo vuot chun awm ve tak, amiruokchu, suichieng deu chun a lo indik tawk naw zie hriet theiin a um . Champhai khawzawla ei ni Manmasi nauhai lo khawsak lai hin Hmar an lo inti tho zie hriet theiin a um. Hieng a, Champhai laia thilsuia iemani chen ka umhnung hin Tiu ral chen hang lutin, Ridil ( Leiri Dil) chen ka va lut a.Tuita Hmar inti Lawitlang hnam Tlawmte, Varte papui Kum 70 vel ding Champhai Zotlang ah kan pawlpui pa chun “Hmar thlah kan ni” tiin a mi hril a. Chu umzie chu Champhai lai khin Manipur, Aizawla inthawkin Hmar Missionary tirin Hmar lo in ti ve ro, ei hang ti hriet ding a um nawh a, Mizoram tawntira um Hmar mipui Lawitlang , Pautu hai khin Lusei le Hmar indo khawm an hriet naw tlat. Hmar thlah kan ni, ti bak chu hei suklang ding bek an nei nawh. Hmarah thi an ngam vet tlat chu tie! Champhai zawlah khin Hmar a tampawl ni dingin an inngai hiel a nih.

Champhai zawl um lai hin, Zote khuo zawl hi Sailo haiin hung runin, khuo dang chu an tawkbuoi hriet ding a um nawh, chuleiin, tienlaia LUSEI le Hmar Indo ti khawm kha thudik a ni hmel naw hle.

Lusei le Hmar An Indo nawh ?

A chunga ziek ang khin, hnam le le hnam indo ni lovin, khuo le khuo indo, fakzawngna harsat lei le bu le bal thatna a nih ti leiin ram inchu le inrun niin an lang lem a, Lusei le Hmar indo ti khawm hi sui chieng chat chat inla, khuo le khuo inhmelma leia buoina insang tak, lal lien le lien buoi leia hril dar mei mei a ni ring a um lem. Saizahawl khawm Hmar tho a na, Leisei le Hmar biel khuo then khat a hung run ti hla a inthawk hriet a ni a, amiruokchu, a fe khel Hmar khuo tam tak a um a, chu leiin Hmar ngawr ngawr chau an do a ni naw zie chu a chieng hleiin an lang. Chuleiin, ei hnam Histori Hmar Le Lusei Indo ti hi thaibo ni ta sien, a tha el naw ding? Khuo le khuo indo leia ral zam hai kha Hmar ral zam ei ti pei chun, ei hnam hming chu “Zam hnam” a lo ni el lem di’m? Ngaituona suksei a, History indik le fel ei va mamaw ta de!

E he, khai ka hril tum tak ka hril hma’n ka lo thai rawn ta luo deu ta e, inthlahrung a va um ta de. Amiruokchu,ziek ta laklaw bawk si hei hril hram hram ka tih, tiemtu inzaum tak, mi la hei tiem pek hram raw khai….ei sipliema a ni hi tie! Nakie thu hma haupa I mi ti el ta awm de! Belte phulhlat ang deu ka ni hi…. Nang the iem I ni ve ding?

A thupuia zieka um ang khin, Hmar hi ka pieng a, inthawkin pakhat khawm ka la hmu nawh a, ka mit an kal lei a ni am? Ka mit a tha naw lei am? Ka hriet bik nawh ie, lo hei thlir pei ei tih. Hieng a, ka lungrila riek zing Hmar ka hmu naw leiin hmu tumin ka zawng ka zawng a, Parbung,Lungthulien,Hmarkhawlien,Senvon, Burma,Champhai , Himachal Pradesh chen zawngin hun le ni tam tak ka lo khawral ta a, amiruokchu vawisun Date 21/5/2012 chen khawm hin Hmar mi ka la hmu chuonng nawh .

Ka ruolpa pakhat Thadou pa chun hi pa hi Hmar a ni hi a ti a, ka hei belchieng leh, Lungtau a lo ni a, Ka ruolpa Meitei pakhatin “ hi hi Hmar a ni hi, a hming tawpah khawm Hmar a si a, Hmar tawng khawm a hmang a ti a, chuong a ni chun hei belchieng ka tih, ka ti tah a, ka hei belchieng chun Biete a lo ni nawk pei a, mi tam tak Tuithaphai lai khawm kan dawn tawl a, ka hmu thei chuong nawh .

Maktakin, ka buoina chu ka hung hriet suok ta a, Hmar ti bik chu tu hnam khawm an um nawh a. Amiruokchu, Hmar hi pahnam hrang hrang inkhaikhawmna le inremkhawmna, tuihawk dang dang luongkhawmin dil a siem ang khan pahnam hrang hrang luongkhawmin Hmar hi a lo siem a lo ni zing. Chuleiin Hmar hi a lo va lien de, tui ta inthawk chu Hmar hi , Khawvelah ka hmu zo ngai naw ding zie ka hriet suok ta leiin ka hlim ta hle el. Hieng a ni lei hin, Hmar pahnam hrang hrang hai hin lungril taka ei hnam popo khaikhawmtu a ni zie hi hre a, HMAR ti hming hi chawisang ding le humhim tlat dingin thang la thar inla nuom a um hle. Tu khawm a mikhuol bik ei um naw zie hre thar bawk ei tiu khai.Hieng ang deu hin Mizo khawm hi Hnam hrang hrang infin khawma a hming Mizo hi inbuk a ni leiin Mizo biek an um nawh a, athen ngaituona khingbai neiin “Hmar hi Mizo an ni lo” ti dam an um hlak a, hi hi Hmar mipuiin an theinghil thei nawh a ni hi.Chuong nek chun, a sui sei seiin tuita an tawng hmang khawm hi Hmar tawng naupang lem a nih an ti lem.

Hmar hin tawng Pahni inlar deu deu ei nei a, a then chun in lo hriet naw el thei. Chuonghai chu: tuita Mizo tawng ang a, an ti /ko hi a nih. Hi hih, a mawi em em leiin Hmar Modern language ti dinga awm em em a ni bawk, a hming indik tak chu Hmar Tawng Part –II a nih. Chun, Tuita ka ziekna tawng hi a upa lem a ni leiin Hmar Tawng part –I ti a, ko a nih. Mizo subject inchuktirtu ‘n Mizorama an hril ka la hriet zing chu “Mizo tawng upa chu Hmar tawng hi a ni an ti” hlak. Hlado hi “ kan unau Lai/Pawi ho tawng a ni tlangpui” an ti hlak. ( Sawrtui Monthly Magazine, 2003, HSA, Golden Jubilee Souvinir,Shillong, Manmasi Year Book-2005,Vol-I, Imphal).(dated- 21/5/2012, Tuithaphai Ruom, Churachandpur East District)

By Timothy Z. Zote

Tulai Khawvel inthanglien peiin, eini Sinlung nau Manmasi hai khawm , ei khawsakna le ei ngaituona chun  kiltin kiltanga a suk vel chu a ni hi.

Hieng ang pei hin, Lekha inchuktu le thilsuituhai Scholars khawma  an hmazawnah nasa takin thil chu an sui mek bawk.

Date ni 23 February, 2012 khan Kuki Research Forum chun  Chandel tieng  thilsuina le ngaiven ding awma an ngaihai suizui le thlier chiengna nei tuma an inthawk dawknaah chun,  ringlo le an tum ni der lovin Puk pakhat Chandel District huom lai unau Kukihai chengna khaw bul ( Kholmun Village) arae lai chun an hmu ta hlau a. Hi puk hi a khaw bula cheng hai chun  an lo inser hlak a, chun an lo nel bek nawh a. hunser le iemani tia  dawi thil le ser le sang thil a ni naw chun an fe ngai nawh a.
Hmunser a an hmang a ni bawk thu a fe haia inthawka an indawnnaah chun hriet a nih.

Hienga  puk an hmu thu hi  A ziektu hi  a felaia mi Michael Haokip, Ph.D, ( research scholar) pakhat chun Hmar hai leh inhnaina in nei el thei a nih! A hming khawm hi  Kuki tawng chun a term a a um nawh a, chuleiin ngaiven  le inhnikna i nei chun  a line khawm zawngpui thei ka che tiin a mi hril a.

A hmun hi Chandel  District huom sung a ni lai zingin  hmun  fienriel le ram ngawpui, Buram le India ramri,  a ni a. Ramhnuoi mi pawl thenkhat lo cheng hlakna bul a ni bawk leiin mi hriem inlawn vel hi an tlawm em em  a. Chun hi puk hi mi hriem lo chengna  tah ni ngeia hriet a ni a, a lien dan le   an sang dan chu inkhi char a um naw a chu  A hmun ngeia hmutuhai chun Tlang anga lien  a ni thu an hril a.Chun, Puk hi pathum  vel umin an hmu a, a umdan chu  Tlangsip tienga hung inkuo thla le a bul thuta inthawka inkuo phei a um an nih.

Hienga  boruok  inver vel lai zing hin Manmasi Year Book hminga  a fe hai  Imphalah  inhmupuina nei a ni a, Pu Michael Haokip, leh Pu David K. Zote Office-ah , Manipur University A Block-ah Prof. Lal Dena inhmupuina le sawt tak inpawlna nei a ni hnungin  Hmar Arts And Culture Society  hai hmalakna hnuoia   a hmuna fe a hmalakna nei nisien tiin an nuom thu an hril a.Chungang pei chun,  an hotu pakhatPu  Ngamlien, TSA, Ledear, chun  thei tawka hmatieng peia hmalak tlang pei le ei ni tlang mi hai laia a khawm a hming  le in hnei tak chu Hmar  hnam an ni an ring thu a hril nghe nghe. Unau Kuki Research Forum hai hmalakna zara hieng ang pi le pu hai sulhnu  hmusuoka um hi iengtin am  vawng himin, khawvel hriet le ngaiven, Historical monument, (Site),Tourist Spot  le hmun hluin siem thei ei ta? tiin ngaituona an nei a, amiruokchu Pu Lal Dena  thurawn dawng hnung chun  step lak dan ding hriet thar pei a ni bawk. Hienglai zing hin,  hi lekha ziektu  chun, Pu den  nang  a hmun ah fe thei i ti? tia inphalam taka a hei indawn chun a ma ngei chun  fe thei e,  ka ngei ngei nuom a a hmun n gei ah fe dingin programme siem tum a tha tiin a nuom thu le hi puk hin a  mi a hip zie  a suklang.

A ziektu ngei khawm hi a hriet zan lem chun a inthei naw hiel a, ieng ang am, a ni ding aw... pi le pu hai lo hluo ta ram chu ni ngei dinga ring a ni leiin a ngaituonma chun  hmun a hluo lien hle a, Historian thenkhat a hei indawn leh , ei thlang tlakna le  ei lo chengna ni thei dinga an hriet thu an hril  bawk leh, hmu a chakna chun  hmun a khuorna sa ta hle a...  ruol thenkhat a hei hrila, Delhi tlanga inthawk Pu RH.Hminglien lem chun hmu ve ngei a cahk thu le thil thar, amiruokchu ei hnam ta dinga rohluo pakht  Historical Evident pakhat, le Chapter  khat  ei hnmu thar angah a ngai hiel.....      Mizoram tieng  ruol thenkhat le Hmar Art and Culture Society, mizoram khawma an hung ngaiven hle  a....

Hi puk le inzawma Manmasi year Book hma lakna fe pei chun  Hmar Art and Culture Society,manipur Chairman, Upa( Dr) Rosiem Pudaite le secretary, Pu R. Tawna Khawbung le member thenkhat kuomah intlunin  an na a ver hle a, chuleiin nhun remchang  hmasa taka a hmuna fe dan ding le chik taka sui dingin an kau hle thu  hriet a ni bawk.

A puk hming hi a hrie hi an vang em em , an hril hlei thei nawh a,an hril suok ngam nawh a, amiruokchu a puk umna  a rea laiaPutar pakhatin  vawikhat a hung hril ri zaua chu chu SENLUNG a ti a, chu chu phing chun   Kuki Research  Forum member Pu  Michael Haokip, Ph.D. ( Research Scholar) chun unau Hmar haiin Sinlung an ti le hin an hnai hmel ngei ti chu a a hung ngaituo suok ta a, asan c hu, an ni tawng chun term nei le umzie nei a ni nawh tiin a hril a, Chuleiin, hi lekhaziektu hi  a hung hril nghal a ni. Hi thu le inzawm hin Sangai Express ah vawihni lai insuo a lo ni ta bawk.

A hming le inzawm hin Sinlung puk  ni ngei dinga ngaibel thei dingin a um ta a, chuleiin, a ngaiventu ding khawm ei ni bik a, inthlahrung lova, inhmaw tak a ngaiven a, report thataka pek vat a tul ta hle a. Ministry of  Culture hnuoia dam preserved dan ding dam ngaituoa  hmalak chu  a tul tak zetin  an lang.

A thlalak khawm  hmu thei dingin a um a.....A hmun ngeia fea detail report  tiem chak a um ta ngei?

Hi Sinlung/Senlung puk hi  ieng tik a um am? Iem a sungah a la um ding? A lien dan...? An sang dan? Khawsawt um tak a ni dan...?

Kuki Research Forum hai hmalakna le inzawma a hmuna fe vat dan ding hi ngaituotuhai chun an ngaituo mek a nih...... mipui ngenna a tam em leiin a tlawm a zawng  hei ziek lang  a nih.... chanchin kimchang lem chu ei mithiemhaiin a hmunah la hang infieng an ta ei la tiem tawk ding a nih.

" Aw Sinlung, pi le pu hai chengna in,
I sakhming lawi ang inthang sien,
Vankhup hnuoilai par ang vul zing la,
I hming khuoi ang kaina incahng sien,
Rieltui ang  ral din kan phal nawh,
                          Aw, i hming Sinlung,
                          Manmasi Unau lai,
                          Puon ang i thar kan tih,
                          Umkhawsawt lunglaiah i cham,

By: Dr Joseph Suantak, Tuibuang Bazar, Churachandpur

In my previous publication viz, “The Vaipheis: Their history & Culture (with a concise & critical analysis of the Chin-Kuki-Zo origin and their exodus) [2010]” I had argued the absence of a place called Sinlung which lies on the bank of Yalong river in present day Sichuan [to pronounce ‘Shuh-chu’ân’]. Indeed, it is true that most of the maps of China bear no such name. However, it cannot be denied — there are two-three or more Xinlong [to pronounce ‘Shin’+ ‘lung’] and Xinglong. ‘XINLONG’ is a Chinese word for ‘new dragon’, which signifies ‘New China’, and ‘XINGLONG’ qualifies ‘Star Dragon’.

To tell the truth, the Chinese Xinlong or Sinlung in *Sichuan got its name only after the Chinese occupation since 1950 [Tibet was forcibly incorporated into the People's Republic of China in 1950] Ref-http://www.newworldencyclopedia.org/entry/Tibet]. This Xinlong area/county was previously called Nyarong by the natives ‘Tibetans’. ‘Nya’ = now sinocised ‘Yalong’, and ‘Rong’= valley. Historically, the township Xinlong is originally called Barshok or Drugmo Dzong. It is the hometown of the Khampa warriors. Before the Chinese annexation and its incorporation within the Sichuan Province, it used to be within the Kham division or kingdom of ancient Tibet. [*known formerly in the West by its postal map spellings of Szechwan or Szechuan is a province in Southwest China with its capital in Chengdu. The current name of the province, "四川", is an abbreviation of "四川路" (Sì Chuānlù), or "Four circuits of rivers", which is itself abbreviated from "川峡四路" (Chuānxiá Sìlù), or "Four circuits of rivers and gorges". Sources: http://www.answers.com/].

Strictly, in a nutshell, if the places that bear the name ‘Xinlong’ [pronounce Shinlung/Sinlung], anywhere within present day geopolitical boundary of China is to be accepted as the CKZ’s ancestral hometown or county, the evolution of the CKZ people should be dated back to only about 1911 CE [at the earliest] to 1970 CE!

Today, with a geo-political policy the Chinese government had gradually sinocised not only names of a number of places but also rivers. For instances, Nyarong river have been changed into Yalong River, Ma Chu into Huanghe [Yellow River], Dri Chu into Yangtze, Dza Chu into Mekong, Gyamo Ngul Chu into Salween. What is more, even some of our brethren Tibetans began sinocizing their personal names since recent time!

Now, from what has been pictured, it can fairly be posited that, the traditional ‘Sinlung’ of the CKZ and the recent Chinese name ‘Xinlong’ are simply an identical terms/names which have nothing to do with their ancestral homeland. Truly, CKZ’s Sinlung or Chhinlung rather seem to be an indication of the legendary Khul where all of them once dwelled together in about ~20-30KYABP somewhere within/between the Eastern bank of the Brahmaputra in present day Bangladesh and Western realm of Myanmar.

Concluding remark: Let us not be tempted, too soon, too easily, by identical names/terms/words &c which are Semetic, Sanskrit, Chinese, Tibetan, Burmese etc, while tracing our origin.

[Editor: This extract forms a section from yet to be published ‘Chin+Kuki=Zo Genesis & Exodus’]

Lalruong Lungkap: Lalruong Lungkap (Lalruong = A legendary cultural hero of the Hmars, Lung = stone, kap = shoot, shot) is a stone monument and is very popular among the Hmars especially when it comes to the legend related to the exploits of Lalruong.

It is located on the outskirt and towards north of Patpuihmun (Patpui = natural cotton, Hmun = place) village in the Vangai range of Tipaimukh.

The stone monument was about 5 feet in height and about 3-4 feet in diameter 3-4 decades back but as the rock is sandstone, it has been weathered and greatly minimized in size. The rock has holes bored into it by unknown hands. Legend holds that Lalruong shot the stone with his bow and hence bored the holes.

Text:- An extract from Dr. Immanuel Z. Varte’s Pre-Historical Heritage of Ruong-le-vaisuo.

Picture: – http://vangaitlang.blogspot.com

By Prof. Lal Dena*, Manipur University

Class is a basic feature of stratified societies. The concept of social stratification implies some sort of hierarchy in a society. Commonly, a class implies a stratum in a three strata structure consisting of an upper, middle and lower middle class. The question here is: does the traditional pre-colonial tribal society fit to this kind of three fold social stratification? My basic hypothesis here is that there was no middle class in pre-colonial tribal society.

There was no clear-cut class division in pre-colonial tribal society which may at most be characterized as a twofold stratification consisting of the commoners (cultivators) and the tribal ruling chiefs. The two classes again represented two broad categories of livelihood: the commoners were the producers of food and the ruling chiefs appropriated a part what the commoners had produced. As a matter of fact, the ruling chiefs practically depended on the labor of the common people. Particularly, the Chin-Kuki-Lushai people, in course of their historical evolution, had evolved an aged-old practice of Busung-sadar which was compulsorily given to their chiefs as a sort of feudal tribute. According to this practice, every household cultivator was to pay a certain fixed amount of paddy to the chiefs annually and every hind leg of any animal shot or killed in a trap was also surrendered to the chiefs. This tends to suggest that the concept of middle class in modern sense is very much conspicuous in its absence in pre-colonial tribal society.

1.Emergence of tribal middle class: The concept of middle class was a new phenomenon in colonial tribal society. With the expansion of British colonial rule in the hill areas of Manipur by the beginning of the 19^th century, there emerged some fundamental changes in tribal society too. Christian missionary influences and colonial administration resulted in the establishment of schools which provided a material basis for the emergence of a new western-educated group. Out of this group, petty clerks, teachers, evangelists, new church leaders and political leaders were recruited. Whether this newly western-educated group can be appropriately classified as a middle class is a debatable issue.

One view suggests that the newly emergent group may be identified as ‘elite class.’ The term suggests the superior status of its members. It also connotes positions of influence which the newly educated tribal leaders certainly held in redefining traditional values. Moreover, an ‘elite’ is an open group, access to which is not restricted by birth or family antecedents and modern education provides social mobility through which one can rise up in the social ladder of a society. Another view contends that the newly western-educated group may be more appropriately called a ‘middle class’ because it occupied an intermediate position between the ruling colonial officials and the mass of the tribal population during the colonial period. Today the middle class is subdivided into lower, middle and upper middle class purely in terms of one’s income.

2.Tribal middle class: Its orientation and ideology: Having explained the historical roots of tribal middle class, let us now look into their behavior and ideology. The colonizers and the Christian missionaries taught the newly emergent leaders that they were ‘backward’ and should accept the colonial rule as beneficial. This is the argument which was carefully used for justifying colonial occupation. The missionaries thus taught the people that they were ‘savages’ and should accept new concepts of Christian ethics and western values without even examining whether there was anything of permanent value in the culture and traditions of the tribal society.

One of the main objectives of the missionaries was to train native workers and operate through them. Every new convert was under obligation to abandon his old faith and habits and to give up his tribal hair-cut and to adopt the European hair style. What was most crucial here was the change in their mental outlook. The western-educated group looked at Europeans as models and tended to become pro-western in outlook and attitude. They also began to look with disgust at their own culture through the glasses of their new masters who framed the syllabus and content of the teaching they received. The profound but devastating psychological effect the colonial rule and mission education had on young men educated in their schools cannot be ignored. These young men felt and preached that their ancestors were ‘savages’, and made other young men ashamed of their past, their way of living, their tradition and culture. They also felt that the ‘western’ people and their so-called ‘civilizing mission’ had brought them into the ‘light’. This is not to ignore the fact that the impact of western civilization upon the people was only skin-deep and mere acceptance of superficial western values does not make one ‘civilized’.

One contradictory situation in which the new educated group was caught was that they were still bound by traditional values and customs. Their main problem was, therefore, the simultaneous adaptation of two mentally contradicting elements: one ‘traditional’ and the other ‘western’. In the process, they were neither western nor traditional but an incorporation of both.

What is significant here is that the missionaries educated the people and trained native workers who began to regard themselves as belonging to a more or less different category and assumed new leadership as educators, administrators, spiritual leaders, political leaders, etc., thereby disturbing the traditional social organizational structure and also affecting the economic interests of the traditional leaders. In fact, at the initial stage, there arose a conflict between the two leaderships: the traditional leaders upholding the existing institutions and practices and the church leaders tending to condemn traditional values though they were still bound by the very same traditional values and customs. Both of them, however, played more or less the same roles. The church leaders acted as a bridge between the colonial administration and indigenous population by serving, apart from their normal duties as teachers and preachers, as translators or interpreters.

As new political consciousness dawned upon the people at the beginning of the 20^th century, new political leaders who had more or less the same orientation like the church leaders, began to question even the very basis of colonial domination. With the acceptance of democracy as a form of government and consequently, adult franchise, they began to negate colonial administration and question the rights and privileges of the traditional leaders who were dubbed as ‘lackeys of the colonial government’. This is not to say that they were opposed to perceived ideals and principles of western institutions. In fact, it was through the acceptance of these ideals that they claimed their right to leadership. As a result they lacked firm legitimacy in the society in which they lived. Whatever legitimacy they had, tended to become ‘alien’ (without firm traditional roots). They, like the church leaders, denounced tradition as a basis for legitimacy. They were thus against the colonial personnel and traditional leaders but not western ideals and principles. In their fight against the colonial rulers and their close collaborators (the traditional rulers), the political leaders appealed to the sentiments of the people of different ethnic identity through the formation of various ethnic based political parties. Such parties exerted a strong appeal and there was inevitably a popular reaction against traditional leaders. The political leaders demanded democratization of traditional political institutions, which meant the abolition of village councils with their feudal-like servitudes such as the busung-sadar and forced labor.

3.Tribal middle class: Tribalists or Detribalists?

Surprisingly the tribal middle class in the post-colonial period are caught in two self-contradictory situations. While they are in the process of detribalization, they are at the same time advocates of tribalism. As a matter of fact, tribalism emerges in a situation where tribes and tribesmen are vanishing. This is to say that tribalism flourishes among the detribalized middle class which include politicians, bureaucrats, teachers, doctors, church leaders, wealthy businessmen and contractors. In order to distinguish themselves from the rest of the indigenous masses, the middle class tends to uncritically imitate western or modern values and life-styles. It also tends to look with disgust at their established traditional values and customs. What is important is the change in their mental outlook. They think and act as other non-tribal urbanized people do, beginning to impose upon themselves heavy bourgeois values.

In a sense, every professional tribal is detribalized as soon as he leaves his tribal area. He begins to live in different kinds of social groupings, earns his livelihood in a different way and comes under different authorities. But the question is: is he really free from the influences of his tribe? In this connection, Bluckman argues that urbanization does not necessarily disrupt tribal solidarity. It is true that a tribal who lands up in a town or city, becomes isolated from his ethnic environment. But it always happens that even there he continues to live with his fellow tribesmen and this can strengthen his communal or tribal ties. For instance, different tribal groups settle permanently in different parts of Imphal, Calcutta, Delhi, etc. They continue to organize themselves on the basis of tribes or communities. Ethnic-based political parties or voluntary associations are always the visible operational arms of tribalism. These are again instruments for the development of ethnic nationality. Very often, the leadership of these ethnic-based parties or associations is drawn from the detribalized elites who at the same time form a part of national elite in a wider context. They identify themselves with the state and its government. Yet, as and when occasion demands, the detribalized elitists use these parties or associations to protect or promote their own communal interests.

This is to say that tribalism is the outcome of conflicts between segments of detribalized elites in a pluralistic society. Because of the very nature of inner contradictions inherent in the class relationship, one ethnic group always tries to dominate or compete with the other tribal group. A ministry or government in which one ethnic group is dominant, is often suspected to favor that ethnic group at the expense of others. In this way, we see both competition and conflict for power and position among rival ethnic groups.

According to Professor Peter P. Ekeh, University of Ibadan, Nigeria, tribalism is the direct result of the dialectical confrontation between the two publics: primordial public and civic public. The primordial public is closely identified with primordial groupings, sentiments and activities. Whereas the civic public is based on civil structure: the military, the civil service, the police, etc. The leaders of the primordial public should not be confused with ethnic leadership. They want to channelize as great a share of resources from the civic public to individuals or to his community as they can.

The protagonists of tribalism strengthen the positive value of ethnic loyalty. They also create in many cases, cohesive groups much larger than those that existed in the pre-colonial era. For instance, the concept of Nagaisation is still an expanding and unending process and some tribes who are more akin to the Kuki-Mizo groups linguistically and culturally, are now in the process of being Nagaised. Among the Kuki-Mizo groups also, the search for a more accommodating nomenclature is still on and options opened for them are: Kukiaisation, Zomiasation or Mizoaisation. The Paites, the Vaipheis, the Zous, and Simtes, etc. tend to opt for Zomi. Whereas the Hmars in and outside Mizoram prefer to identify themselves as Mizo by still retaining their identity as Hmar. The Gangtes, as a matter of fact, have recently merged with the Mizos.

In the final analysis, tribalism, good or bad, ensures ethnic loyalty which in its turn, provides for the tribal people a sense of their identity and the values of their culture and tradition. At the same time it also provides a material basis for political and socio-religious separatist movements. Even church organizations are based on tribal lines. The whole tragedy with most of the tribal Christians is that their ethnic loyalty often transcends their commitment to Christianity. The majority of them are tribals first and Christians second. In this way, the process of tribalism and detribalization are dove-tailing in the changing tribal society today.

References:

1. P.C.Lloyd, Africa in social change, Penguin Books,1972.
2. R.M.Ismagilova, Ethnic Problems of the Tropical Africa. Can they be Solved?
3. Lal Dena, ‘Detribalized Elite Groups: Their behaviour’ in Souvenir, NEIHA Third Annual Session, Imphal, 1982.
4. Gluckman, ‘Tribalism in Modern British Central Africa’ in I.L. Markovitz’s African Politics and Society, Free Press, New York, 1970.
5. Peter E.Ekeh, ‘Colonialism and the two publics in Africa: A Theoretical Statement’ in Comparative Studies in Society and History,Vol,17, Camdridge

By Prof Lal Dena*

It may sound paradoxical that the historian, who is concerned professionally with the study of the past, plays a crucial role in the building of a stable future society. The historian tries to understand the emergence and evolution of a society in an historical perspective. To him, the term society includes every aspect of a people’s life- social, economic, political, cultural, religious, scientific, etc. The historian tries to understand the mutual interaction of these different aspects and how the interaction of these forces contributes to the process of change of a society.

Historian is concerned not merely with events, but more with the processes of change of society. His main business is to study and understand these processes through which a society changes and evolves to its present stage. As the noted historian, R.G. Collingwood has aptly pointed out, “processes are things which do not begin and end but turn into one another. There are, in history, no beginnings and no endings. History books begin and end, but the processes they describe do not end”.

What we are today is the outcome of the continuous processes of what we were yesterday. Beneath the current of changes, we still carry within ourselves and within our societies innumerable relics of the past. We may carry with us many monumental follies of the past. The past cannot sanctify these follies, nor does the present. At the same time, every civilized society, however imperfect it may be, seeks to impose new values on the living generation. These new values, if found lasting, are sought to be carried forward for the new generations yet unborn.

The real test comes when the historian is to pin-point what are to be discarded and what are to be retained. It is for this reason that the role of an historian has become all the more crucial and important. One noted French historian has said that “Quand les societes revent I’ historien doit rester eveille (when societies dream historian must keep awake)”. This statement beautifully sums up the importance of historian in a society in which he is an inseparable part. The historian is supposed to be a thinker as well as a doer. He must preach and practices what he preaches.

It is true that the historian is concerned himself with the study of the past. But the past which the historian studies is not a dead past, but the past which is still living in the present. His interest is limited to the relevance of the past to the present and the future. Can we draw a dividing line between the past and the present; and for that matter, the present and the future? Can one be really involved in the past without being involved in the present? Can one make a worthwhile reconstruction of the past without in any way contributing to the construction of the present and then to the future? What is today becomes yesterday tomorrow and tomorrow becomes today. He who confines his thought to the present time only will not be able to understand present reality. For the origin of things present are to be found in things past. The past and the present are closely bound in the same causal sequence. The historian’s duty is to diagnose these causal relationships existing among the past events in their relations to the present. The simple logic is this: to understand the present, we have to understand the past. The present society does not come from blue. It has evolved out of the past. The historian’s task is to study this evolution from the remote past to the present which are causally connected. Taken in their causal sequence, history thus illuminates the present life of any social group in all its aspects- social, economic, political, cultural, etc. In studying these causal relationships, the historian tries to develop general laws which should regulate the behavior of the phenomenon under investigation. The development of the laws necessarily introduces system or order in the knowledge gained. Unless such laws are developed, the phenomenon under study cannot be fully understood and the knowledge gained cannot be utilized for the benefit of mankind.

The present society can, therefore, be best understood in the light of the past. The past also can best be understood in the light of the present. “To learn about the present in the light of the past means also to learn about the past in the light of the present. The function of history is to promote a profounder understanding of both past and present through the interrelation between them” (E.H.Carr). But the historian is not to love the past. Nor can he make himself free from the past. But he has to understand and master the past as the key to the understanding of the present. Misunderstanding of the present is the inevitable consequence of the ignorance of the past. You cannot know the dead men if you do not know the living men. The faculty of understanding the living is, in fact, the master quality of the historian. The very names we use to describe old ideas or old forms of social organization would be meaningless if we do not know the living men. In short, in any historical interpretation as Prof. Romila Thapar has rightly pointed out “the needs of the present are read into the past; and the image of the past is sought to be imposed upon the present. The image of the past is the historian’s contribution to the future.”

No human society is static. It goes on changing and will continue to change. The historian lives and swims in the stream of this changing society. History is meaningless in a static society. History in its basic sense is change, movement and progress. It is progress towards the goal of the perfection of man’s estate in society. In such a fast-changing situation, the historian cannot afford to be a silent spectator. He has to watch the men, the things and the events around him. He must recognize the direction in which society is moving. He must have the moral courage to rise above the limited vision of his own situation in society. At times, the historian can be a prophet born before his time.

What is, therefore, required of a historian is alertness. He has to develop scientific temper to know the nature of the change of society. It is necessary not only to discover things as they actually were but also to know why they have changed in one particular way and not other-wise.

In the final analysis the historian puts his feet upon the past with the present before him. Then he looks forward to the future. His subject-matter belongs to the past. Yet his attention is on the present and his vision on the future. His ultimate goal is to lay a sound foundation because he wants to build a stable future. The historian can guide a society to avoid past mistakes and to manage better in similar circumstances next time. He can also guide a

society to anticipate a future course of events. Of course, this anticipation of future will not be a blind anticipation. It will be based on the past and present experiences. The capacity to project his vision into the future is, therefore, dependent upon his mastery of the past.

To conclude, the historian is both backward-looking and forward-looking. He imagines the past. He looks at the present. Yet he thinks for the future; to quote E.H. Carr again, the historian thus:

“peers eagerly back into the

twilight out of which he has come,

in the hope that its faint beams

will illuminate the obscurity into which

he is going; and, conversely, his aspirations

and anxieties about the path that lies ahead

quicken his insight into what lies behind.

Past, present and future are linked together

In the endless chain of History”.

About the author: – Prof. Lal Dena is a historian and teaches at Manipur University. He is also a regular contributor to Inpui.com.