Archive for July 4, 2007

LIM LIM LIM


































Advertisements

Leave a Comment

POIMO LEH KUUL TAZEN

-S. Mung

Delhi tualpi’n hing dol non louin, akimvel Gurgoan, Noida leh mun tuom tuom ah Zou tate iletkhe sau-sau ta ua, tamtan hing puitung Pa Pasian in thupina pahtoina tang tahen.

Khaile Delhi leh akimvel a um jeel-juul I hitah man un deibang tah in khat le khat kikawmtua theilou, thamlou in kitheitua mang lou in i um jei-jai ta ua, thei khah lou leh mel leh puang mu ngai lou lah Zou ta hingal tam pi I um uhi. I gam leh imi isa tam louna mun Delhi leh akim vel a Zou tate kikhaikhawm/kaihuaiding, shini-manni, lusuunni leh kipah ni’a i sih- le-tang a ding ding in Zou Organization Delhi (ZOD) welfare lamtoh kisai in inei ua, Zou tate hing donjang khaitu poimo tah sua hi.

Tualeh sangnaupang lamtawh kisai deu nasem ding leh bawl ding in Zomi Sangnaupang Pawlpi, Delhi Branch (ZSP, DB) inei kia uhi. Adieh in Delhi University nuoi a registration, course tuom-tuom bawl nuomte leh siamsinna sangjaw jil nuomte nahpitah in naki thuapi a sangnaupangte a di’n khuam dettah suah hi.

ZOD leh ZSP(DB) lamkaite kumchin in kiheng nanleh amaute hatna leh vaihawm siemna jieh liu-liau a tamtan tungtou ta ihi man un lamkaite tung a nuamthu mipite’n itut jing ding uh kul leh poimaw sa ing. Hinanleh,…… “Zou lamkaite’n jong hing thei kha sih, hing ve nai sih uh; sumdon ding chiang chauh in a meel uh mu in um giap” chite lamkaite talpang se na’n kinei jing hi. Adih hi, dih taluo ZOD hi’n ZSP(DB) hitaleh Delhi leh akimvel a um Zoutate kumkhat a khat vei jong a vekhalou leh aphah joulou na mun u jong um tham ding a, a um ma hi. Tuo ahitah leh koima theilou kal in mipite dohna(question) tamlou kidong juai va ui i aw…!

1. Lamkai ten mipite a veng veng a avena ding sum ipawlpi leh mipite’n kining ching iguon jou uai?
2. Lamkai te law(salary) ipieh uh ama; Law bei a nang leh kei a ding a sem ?
3. Lamkaite’n bawl ding nei ngellou ahi uai; Nang le kei ma bang a buoi ?
4. Lamkaite sep le bawl a nang le ken iki thuopi di’a iteel uh amah; itouna jaang a igen siet ding ua iteel uh ?

Lamkai dia iteel te uh pen ei mipite ma bang a Govt./privt. nasem ngen ahi lou leh student leh kaam/job sui a laisim a buai ngen ahi uh chi thei masah kul le poimaw kasa hi. Lamkaite pen law/salary pieh malah ah asep abawl sunsun te uh jong i soisel pieh te ahi uhi. Aman hun sunsun un khatvei nihvei tou na inn a a’ng leng lut juoi pen manpha mama a, nang le ken ina phun san ding hilou hi. Tuote ban ah namdang Org. or Assn. tuom tuom te bang a sum le pai nei setsut jou lou ihi man un lamkaite’n amau pocket a pat atam jaw sohkhie a hing kalsuon jel uh ahi chi thei kul leh poimo mama mai a, singpi(tea) a buong ina donsah jou sih le jong a san(red tea) beh mipiten ina tul kul le poimo tajen sang e..!

A tam jawte’n lamkaite suikhieh ngah in itun/i um na munmun uah khawphaw lou in i um ua, thamlou in Delhi hingtung thah te jong a tun naten lamkai te tawh kitheituo sah dan jong thei va ia lou in i um milmel mawh uhi. Khenkhat in ‘hing kisui doh na ve un’ chia dap um ahilou leh ‘sum-le-pai ma hing kidong put van..’ chia jau a kibu simsim lamkaite’n phone abawl sunsun chieng a – ‘ash ! umlou ding hiveng oh, ka umna jong kisuon dih ka chi hia’, chipou a lamkai te sol/khem ding leh dawng ding hilou hi. Kei le nang Delhi a itun ding imin, ikhuo leh ibe iphung lamkai ten vision a ana mu masat hilou hi. I innkuonte tawh umlou na mun Delhi tan itung thei sam leh lungsim khat nei kisam hi. Oh! Tanah bangkhat chi moh taleng chi beh lung geel nei kisam hi. Tuojieh in lamkaite hing sui doh ngah va dep non sih vai in enjong lamkai te leh imi isate suidan kisin jaw vai. Ajieh pen ipoimaw ni ihasatni, shini leh manni chieng a sum le pai tha le jung a hing panpi ding leh hingki thuo pi ding i pawlpi neisun uh ZOD leh ZSP(DB) ahi hi. ZOD leh ZSP(D) min a sum le pai, membership fee, fresher’s meet bawl nang, emergency fund a ding siki-makhai, teng sawm-sawmni, jakhat-jani hing ki dolte nei na pi a, penuom lou leh deh kankan pei nalai te ihi khah ding jau huoi mama hi.

ZOD leh ZSP(D) hat hen ichi chiet uleh pen mipite’n tha-le-jung, sum-le-pai a i phung vuh uh poimaw mama hi. Lamkai te jatat dan leh athu uh jui siem poimaw a, khat-le-khat kinou toi tuo leh kigensietna bei kei a lungkhat a luon khawm kul le poimaw taluo hi. Suongneute suong pi’n a theh hijaw lou in, suongpi pen suongneu te’n atheh hijaw hi. ZOD leh ZSP (D) hat hen ichi leh mo, nang le ken sum-le-pai, tha-le-jung a i theh poimaw leh kuul ta jen hi.

Leave a Comment

HAM LEH PAU KEPBITNA

Mangpu Samte

Leitung mihingte’n ham-le-pau hoi tahtah ki nei hi. Ham-le-pau i chi pen i tawndan leh ngainate ban ah i hina(identity) sulang tu khat ahi.Tuo ham-le-pau kibah dung jui in a pawlpawl/a namnam in ki um suh dep a, pawl/nam bang jat a hiei khat kigawm in NAMPI(nation) i suo tou kia uhi. Nampi khat sung ah ham tangpi(common language) khat ki jang hi. Hinanleh ei ZOUCHIKIM te sung a tuabang a tangpi jah khawm thei ding um lou in khat poupou zang lei ki theisiem veve hi. Ham-le-pau ki nai pipi leh pianna-menna khat chi’a khangthu sut khawm te i hi uhi. Laigui jom khawm hi nan uh lei jong i nam min teng uh paikhe jen a min khat kitang a um khawm ding i chi ciang un lah NO TURNING BACK(2Vei)…..jong hithei non mawng lou ding hi. Tuo malah in mahni nambing ham leh pau ngainatna (linguistic chauvanism) hat deudeu hi. Unau mizote’n bang Delhi a kolte nasan a mau ham in houpi sawm mawh uhi !!.

Tambang kawmkal ah nampil leh a na nava masa deute’n a neu jawte ham-le-pau ban ah a tawndan bang dan teng pi uh pumvalh sah sawm uhi. I gensa ma bang in pa khat suon-le-haa ngentang aki hina ah koi ma ki mawsah thei tuon sam lou hi. A kem jou pa leh a zuun joupapa pen ham-le-pau a hausa ding ahi (survival of the fittest). Hamlepau jah or gelh siamna khu Pasien siem namte lah a khat ihi na ding a saa-khii ( witness) ahi. Hina(identity) hoi nei i chi ciang in ham-le-pau giltah leh tawndan hoitah nei mai hi lou in a kep dan leh zuun dan siamna chi na hi. Tami hina nei lou in kei tuomi khumi nam ka hi ki chi thei lou hi.

I thei lou kal in i ham khiet or gelh thaw hun in jong ZOU ham a sieng kil-kel a ham le gelh thei ki vaang ta mama hi. Zou mimal khat in a ham leh pau kep bit sang in mite ham thei bailam a sa jaw hi. Mite ham va thei na khu pilna ahia, eima ham manghil jen a vathei seng khu mawt na ahi kia hi. Nikhat ni chieng in na Zou hina bang e !! hing ki chi ta leh bang in na dawng diei?? Na Zomi hi na lah dawng thei nawn lou khop hiel a umta chi’n a maw……Zou ham lawmlawm a Laisiengthou jong simthei lou bang Delhi a ki khopital sah viel , chi ou!. I jiet-i vei a i unau te’n a mau ham ajah siam ban uah a ma’u ham a umlou te jong ei ham a pat la/gu in ham hausa suo lel uhi. Nam changkang or khangtou hi na ding in ei jong ham-le-pau ngaisan na (Linguistic chauvanism) lungtang i nei uh ngai ahi. Ham-le-pau ngaisan na in i hina kem bit gua hi lou in ang pe
Pa (Pasien) tawi san na khat ahi. Alleluii….!!!.

Leave a Comment

The term Zo and Chin


Introduction:

In my personal point of view, both the names are so beautiful. I have no objection of using both the names in the present circumstances, at least when I communicate in Burmese or in English. I see no reason, why people should choose one, over the other, until one compels to make a political assessment and its implication. Moreover, there are no evil connotation in these two words, a part from their primary and literal meaning, though the Burman some times compare the word Chin, with bawm or lang which means basket make up of bambo, to humiliate Zo people in the social environment. The term Zo has been known, throughout Zo history from their ancestors generation of ages, but the term Chin came to exist among the Zo only after t! hey have contacted with the Burman, in 700 AD.

When we discuss about unity among our people, unless our out look or world view is broad enough to cover the whole Zo, regardless of the division, by the three national boundaries into three major sections of our society, our efforts will remain in vain. If we are really concerned about unity among all Zo people, then we might have to adjust with others in many aspects of our lives in terms of cultures, dialects, political perspectives, infrastructures, communication etc. As the term Zo covers people who live in India, Burma and Bangladesh, we should never limit ourselves, into Chin State, in Burma alone, when we discuss about unity among the Zo. There are also many Zo who live in Sakaing Division of Burma, in the plain area, which is outside Chin State of Burma..

People who already called themselves Zo, and their numbers:

In Mizoram, India, the population of Zo is estimated to be at least 700,000. The common language is called duhlian dialect which was introduced during the time of the Chief Sailo, the descendant of Sizang. In Manipur State of India, there is a district called Lamka or Charachanpur where Zo mainly inhabited the land and their population is estimated to be at least 55000 who called themselves paite or kuki, as they are also sub ethnic group of Zo. They all aware that they are Zomi. When it comes to the Zo inside Bangladesh, though they refer themselves as Bawm, and they called themselves Zo as well. Their population could be about 50000 in numbers. Now, we can see a roug! h figure of the two places in India, and Bangladesh where people have no difficulties to identify themselves as Zo. The estimated total population of Zo in India and Bangladesh could be, about 805000 in number.

Let us visit Chin State of Burma, where there are all together 9 township, among those nine, people in the two townships called Tonzang and Tedim, have no difficulties in accepting Zo and their population will be at least 120,000 in numbers. People in Falam township are originally called Laizo and their population could be at least 50,000 in numbers. In Thantlang Township and in Hakha township there are people who called themselves as Zotung or Zophei, and the Haka themselves are actually Zo. Their population could be 100,000 altogether. These are the population of people who use, our original national name or identity to refer themselves throughout ages. So they will not have any difficulties to be called themselves! as Zo, if they consider about our national heritage, which is rooted from our soils but not from the foreign soils. Now we have covered 5 town ships from northern Chin State, Mizoram of India, Lamka district of Manipur State, India, Bawm Zo People of Bangladesh. The plain Zo people, who live out side Chin State of Burma, mainly in Sakaing Division or other parts of Burma, will not have any difficulties in, selecting their ancestors original name over the Burmans given name. So, literally the numbers of people who already used the name Zo is already the majority, and it is overwhelming.

In southern Chin State, there are 4 townships, where people called themselves as Asho, Cho, Mara etc. and from our history we can see that they also called themselves as Zaw, Yo, Khlang or Chlang which means people. The ancestors of our brother plain Zo were the first to contact with the Burman people, from which the Burman called us Chin, this term derived from Khlang or Chlang. So, the majority of Zo people already called themselves as Zo. But only a very few insisted that they like to be called Chin. The British met the Burman first, before they met us, as the result the name Chin is commonly used in the world. But, unfortunately its a Burman word and it has nothing to do with our original root, or our national heritage but just a mispronunciation of the word Chlang, and you ! can see that, the majority of our people have no difficulties to be called Zo, in mizoram, manipur of India, Bangladesh, Burma.

Why some people like the name Chin:

It is part of Burmanization, and if we consider inside Burma alone Zo population is only about 500.000 in Chin State and the rest is about 48 millions people. So, they like to be contented with, how the majority called us in Burmese or in English. The other reason is that since the term Zo is continued to be the main terminology to refer ourselves, mainly, in Tedim and Tonzang town ship, though laizo, zotung, zophei called themselves too, in Falam, Haka and Thantlang township, it is diminishing in their areas, and the reason was, just because of township politics. Therefore, if they are to adopt the term Zo again, even in other town ship, they think that these two town ship might influence or dominate in terms of the name. So, they rather be remained as the servants and the faithful slaves of the (Kawlte) Burman, and still prefer the name which the Burman give us over the n! ame which is already existed from our own soil.

This is not just a theory, but historical facts on the hostilities between local politics based on to dialectical differences, which is unfortunately a hindrance to all the efforts done in the past for Zo unification. During the 70s in Rgn university, Zo student organised a student body and named Hill Chin Student Organization, where the plain Zo not only hesitated to join, this student body but the name itself became a hindrance. Later on, the name was changed into just Chin Student Organization which include the plain brothers too. But the name Zo include everyone, whether you live in India, Bangladesh, Burma. As long as you are the descendants of Zo race then you belong to Zomi automatically, it is our birth rights to be called ourselves Zo. No one can take away our national birth rights, not even the Burman, though they tried to replace with a phoney name called Chin,! and some of us happened to be very fond of that name, because it was given by, their masters. They didnt want to disappoint their masters by discarding their counterfeit name. Perhaps, the counterfeit name Chin has a sentimental value for them, and the gratitude toward the Burman is even greater to the extent that they are compelled to denounce their own national identity, and adopt a fake identity.

Implication of choosing the name Chin:

By choosing the name Chin we confirm the sovereignty of the Burman. And we totally submit ourselves into the hand of the Burman. While some of us claimed to be deterred by Burmanization, yet still embracing the name Chin, which was given by the Burman. As the matter of fact, it implies that, we are worthless and inferior to the Burman, that the Burman had to give us even our national name. By accepting the name, Chin our inferior complexity is greater than ever. In Zo language we called the Burman Kawl, now do you think, the Burman will prefer the name Kawl over Bama, or the Burman will prefer the name they already have?.

They proudly say, Nga Maha Bama kuah, which means, I am the Great Burman, or Maha Bama, Maha Banduhlah. They will never say that Nga Kawl kuah. Likewise, we should be very proud of the original name, we already have since the time of our ancestors, throughout ages, as our first preferences. By choosing, the name Chin over the name Zo we confirm the supremacy of the Burman, and at the same time, we lower our value, status as people who do not even have, our own national name, while we do already have our national name, that is Zo. There is nothing to be proud of, if we prefer the name given by kawl te, and deny the name which the majority of our people already used.

In search of our root:

There are some scholars who attempted to search our root back to BC 800, BC 700, BC 200 in the Chinese history and made an assumption that we might have our root in China. But this is only an assumption, and there is no substantial evidences to prove that we belong to Chinese race, in stead the structure of our language belongs to Tibeto Burman family, which shows that our root has nothing to do with, Chin Dynasty of China.

Another folk story of Kachin people mentioned that, Chin and Kachin were brothers, and as their numbers increased in China where they lived before, they were emigrated into Burma from the northern side. The elder brother started migration first and to show their path, they cut banana plant where ever they go, so that the younger brother, Kachin, would be able to follow. But when the Kachin and his group saw the banana plant had grown so big and they believed that they will never catch up with the elder brother so they decided to settle in Kachin State. But again, this is just a folk story and there is no written records as the Kachin also did not have their own written language, so its authenticity is again questionable.

Slave hood, and their mentality:

During, the period of the eradication of slavery in North America, it was not only difficult for the masters themselves, but also became a major dilemma for the slaves themselves, for their entire lives, they have been used to dictation, order, and command that they were no longer capable of their rational and independent decision making for their own lives, when they were declared free. Thus, many slaves, went back to their old masters and beg them to retain the old job they had been doing to feed their family. Another reason was, many of them lacked of basic capital such as land, for the slave do not own soil for cultivation, which was the main source of their livelihood, in order to provide their family.

The name Chin was given by the Burman, and if we continue to choose this name over Zo which our ancestors designated themselves throughout their history, it implies that, we are incapable of independent decision making for our own existence as those slaves did. There is no patriotism, heroism, or nationalism involved but only cowardice and inferiority complex in accepting everything you get from a dictator or Kawlte, including the most important name, such as your main national identity or your national name. To choose Chin over Zo implies and confirms that, you are incapable of rational thinking, and still prefer the supremacy of the Burman over the supremacy and existence as Zo as independent Zo national. While you claimed to deter Burmanization, but by preferring the name Chin you support Burmanization, over Zo people. !

Thus, you are nothing but a betrayer, and a coward to your own people. Many Chin politicians kiss the Burmans behind to get promotion, in order to feed their own family, while they do everything the Burman order them to do. If the Burman ask them to change our national name into Dog they will still accept that name, and it is evidence that people who prefer the name Chin over Zo will also readily accept the name Dog for our national name, if the Burman give us that name, for our national identification. To please the Burman is more important to them than to stand up for the Zo, in uplifting the living standard of our society.

The Burman leaders did not like at all, if all Zo were going to unite under the name, Zo and became a very strong Zo national. But the time will surely come one day, that we will have to make a choice between Zo and Chin as our national identity. The choose belongs to us, as the decision is also belongs to us. At present, our society is a disintegrated society, where there is a feeling of no hope and uncertainly, under our leaders who still confused among themselves, like a blind man leading another blind man, not knowing when they may step over a deep dark pit, and it is undoubtedly a very sad fact, which no one can deny about.

Against Burmanization:

Anyone who has a strong feeling against Burmanization should start by not accepting the name Chin as our national identity, it simply, because it is not our national identity. This simplified view will lead us to a very important concept of determination, in retaining our own national identity, which has reached a crucial stage, regardless of the process, and the structure that will be chosen for implementation later, when we get democracy in Burma. But, now is the right time, to make people understand about our national heritage, though the Burman with their craftiness has not only crowded our minds but also taken advantages on our ignorance about the important issue on our national identity, or national name.

Beyond any doubt, the Burman have succeeded in their attempt to assimilate all the different ethnic groups of Burma, by Burmanization in terms of culture, politics, religion, literature, social environment and even economy. Mean while, the Generals will be amused to discover about the so called many Zo political leaders, who still have no ideas about the tactics the Generals used to make us lost our original national identity over a fake identity given by those jackals, and make us involuntary assimilate into Burman way of life. The worst thing, to be a politician in Burma is, none other than, not knowing the motive behind those Burman, in their tactical operation among the ethnic minorities. Many Zo who still embrace the name Chin fall into this category, who do not know the motive behind those generals or those Burman, and that is one of the reasons, we the Zo may not! need, those idiotic politicians, in the future to lead the Zo, because they will spend their life time, only in kissing the Burmans behind, and it will be a total waste for the Zo.

Conclusion:

It will take a number of years before efficacy of this important paradigm can be determined, with absolute certainty. If it incorporates into an iterative framework more realistically, which reflects the real world, in which people could clearly see as our national heritage and its political implication then its implementation will not be a dilemma at all.

By carlson@indiatimes.com
Source: Zonet

Leave a Comment

Why Should We be Called Zoumi?


By S. Thangkhangin

“In search of Identity”, Kuki-Chin Baptist Union,
Imphal, March 1986, Pp. 52 -66.

The British colonial rulers and outsiders identified us as Chin or Kuki or even Lushai. But these misnomers and imposed nomenclatures have never gained popular acceptance among the people. Looking at it from the historical perspective and studying the socio-economic systems in the pre-British period, I cannot but draw a logical conclusion that the non-acceptance of these common nomenclatures by the various clan-groups of Zoumi could have been due to their social and economic systems, a system that lacks centralized authority which would unify and integrate all the Zou ethnic groups into one system thereby creating a well-knit nation or an united Zoumi kingdom.

Today, the Zoumis are divided into various tribes. Each tribe is further divided into a number of segments. The search for identity is still going on care-worn among the alienated so-called Kuki-Chin linguistic groups which bear a grudge of narrow clannish attitudes amongst themselves. In this world of family antagenism and alienation. I was born and brought up in a world of kindred bellicosity of Zoumi (descendants of Zou). Like many other members of Zou, I searched and searched the original name of common identity for Zou phylogenetic group, and new after many years’ research I am able to exclaim eureka; eureka :; Thank God for the period of frivolous internecines ended, and the days of interpolators and narrow communalists going by; the era of truth and nationalism begin to dawn upon the Zoumi: In this paper, I would like to explain with historical evidences the justification for ‘Why should we be called Zoumi.”

The term ‘Zoumi’ is an ancient and historical name of the Zou ethnic groups. Before the Zoumi society evolved into clanbase organization and lineage segmentation, historical records mentioned them as Yaw or Jo or Zo. The Shan chronicles clearly proved it. The Pong (Shan/Tai)
kings annals (80-1604 A.D.) pointed out the country and the people as Zo District and Zoumi respectively.[1] Sir Henry Jule’s historical geography (map about 1500 A. D.), “A Narrative of Mission (envoy) to the court of Ava, 1855”, showed the Chindwin plains and west of the Chindwind river as Zoumi District, Khampat was shown as the district headquarters.[2]

F. K. Lehman, a renewed social anthropologist, wrote in his book, ‘Structure of Chin Society’ a doctoral thesis submitted to Illinois University, Urbana (USA), 1965 thus.. ‘ all or nearly all of the peoples of the so-called Kuki-Chin linguistic group had a special term for themselves. The word by which they called themselves was almost always a variant form of a single rootword, which appeared as ZO (ZOUMI), JO (JOMI), YO (YOMI), SHO (SHOMI), CHOU (CHOUMI), and the like. People now in occupation of the Chin State of Burma like the natives of Tedim, Falam, Haka, Matupi, etc. mentioned themselves as Zoumi.[3] Lehman did his research on the Chins in Burma. He found out the truth, a true rootword of the common nomenclature that outlived the persecution of colonialism which imposed even wrong names like ‘Chin’ and ‘Kuki’ upon the natives who offered stern resistance from within and without the colonial ‘divide-and-rule’ policy by calling themselves by their original name ‘Zoumi’.

Dr. Vumkhohau, a Zoumi scholar-cum-leader and an international figure from Burma, affirmed ‘we have called ourselves Zoumi from time immemorial. Mi means man'[4] Long time ago in the middle ages, Reverend Father Vincentious Sangerno correctly referred to the Chins and the Kukis as the Zou (Jo) race. ‘There can be no doubt that the Chins and Kukis are one and the same (Jo) race, for their appearance, manners, customs, and language all point to this conclusion’.[5]

There are many opinions about the origin of the rootword Zou. B. Lalthangliana, in his M. A. dessertation, opined that the name Zoumi derived from the town they built under the leadership of Lallula in about 1765. The name of the town was Zopui, i.e., big town of Zou.[6] This opinion of Zoumi derivation from Zopui town cannot be accepted because before Zopui town was built, the name Zou or Zoumi was in existence, (See Pong chronicles translated by R. B. Pemberton). Chaw-kaa-pha, the 42nd king and the last king of Mung-Mau (Pong), who reigned from 1496-1520 A. D. distributed his kingdom to his relatives and governors, and he gave ‘Yaw (Zoumi) country (west of the Chindwin)’ to his only son, Chau-Hum-Pha.[7] The Zoumi country, on the right bank of the Chindwin and the northern districts, was under the Pong kings until the Chinese conquered Mung-Mau (Pong) kingdom, which became permanent territory of the Chinese in 1664. These historical records clearly indicated that the rootword Zou and Zoumi were in existence even in the early period of Pong dynastic rule.

Second, Zou was believed to be the progenitor of the various tribes and clans of the Zoumi. Capt. K. A. Khupzathang showing the genealogical tables of various Zoumi clans compiled elaborated genealogy. He traced back all the lineal descent to a person Zou, as the common ancestor.[8]

Dr. Vumkhohau also traced the Zoumi lineal descent to Zou.[9] V. Lunghnema wrote the genealogy of the Hmar tribe, one of the branches of the Zoumi family, and he traced all the Hmar clans to Zou, the ancestor.[10]

Yet, another belief suggest that Zou might not be the real ancestor of the Zoumi, but it might be a dynastic name of ancient times in China.[11] The Zou or Jo or Chou dynasty ruled China from 1027 to 256 B. C. The main argument or hypothesis in this regard was that in ancient times the name of the ruling dynasty became the identity for the subjects. This might be true as all the
Zoumi believe that the came from China. There was indirect evidence that the Zoumi might have migrated from China to estern Tibet sometime during the time of Jo (Chou) dynasty. In the second century B. C. during the Han dynasty, Buddhism as religion and culture became popular in China. The indirect evidence is that the Zoumi people were not proselytized into Buddist religious teachings. In Burma, Buddhism entered from Ceylon in the 4th Century A. D. and it did not penetrate the northern Burma until the Shan states were under the way of Ava kingdom in the 17th Century. The Zoumi might have left the Shan states and migrated into the west of the Chindwin when the Ava king conquered northern Burma. West of the Chindwin never felt direct influences of Buddhist rulers of Ava. The final analysis in this context would be the ancestors of the Zoumi and moved into present Burma easternly direction. Settling down in the Shan states, as Shan chronicles recorded they moved westward into the hill countries before the expansion of Ava kingdom. This would be the reason why the Zoumi maintained their own culture and religion until the western influences fell heavily on them after the British annexation of Zou countries. Therefore, there are possibilities for the name -rootword Zou’ might have been derived from the Jo (Chou) dynasty. Besides, F. K. Lehman, a British administrator, G. H. Pryer, Deputy Commissioner, Sandoway district, Arakan, wrote “The Khyanga (Chin) called themselves Jion of Shou.” Khyang was the corruption of Burmese name for Chin which was given to the Zoumi by the Burmese. In this paper our main objective is not to study the Zoumi original home or migration, but to the historical authenticity of “Zoumi” as the original name of the peoples.

Now, let us have expensive criticism of Chin, Kuki, and Mizo nomenclatures one by one so that the Zoumi today may discern the truth without any reservations and prejudices of tribalism. In view of the urgent necessity of undefiled common nomenclature and homogeneous unity among the Zoumi people. It is important to distinguish fact from fiction. The Zoumi today must accept the reality. They must accept the fact.

1. The Word ‘Chin’ was derived from the Burmese word ‘Khyan’ which meant basket.
Perhaps the Burmese c

Leave a Comment