Mizo Chieftainship

Lushai Chiefdoms Mizo
ca. 15th Century–1954
Distribution of Mizo tribes and non-Mizo tribes in the Lushai Hills.
Status	Tribal Chiefdoms
Capital	None Aijal(Aizawl)
Common languages	Mizo ṭawng
Religion	Mizo religion Christianity
Government	Independent Tribes and Clans
Lal
• ??–1954	Various chiefs
Historical era	Precolonial era Colonial era
• Immigration from Kabaw Valley [1]	ca. 15th Century
• Settlement in Lushai Hills [1]	1724
•  Establishment of British Lushai Hills	1888-1889
• Abolishment of Chieftainship	1954
Currency	mithun rupee
Preceded by Succeeded by Tibeto-Burman Tribes British rule in the Lushai Hills
Today part of	Mizoram
Aizawl became a capital under British rule. Christianity came under the continuation of Chieftainship under British rule.

Mizo chieftainship, also known as Lushai chieftainship, is a political structure used for the Mizo people, which historically operated as a gerontocracy. The chieftain system persisted among the various clans and tribes from the precolonial era through to the British colonial period and Indian independence briefly. Upon independence, Mizo intellectuals, under the choice of political direction, chose to maintain a union with India to offset the autocratic nature of the chiefs from becoming too dominant once again. The formation of the Mizo Union advocated for abolishing chieftainship in Mizoram. The chieftainships of Mizoram were eventually disbanded with the Assam-Lushai District ("Acquisition of Chief's Rights") Act in 1954.

Society of Mizo Chiefdoms

A Fanai chief depicted by John Shakespear.

In his administration the chief would cooperate with various individuals to achieve his duties.

Among the most important of these individuals were the chief's elders, also known as Lal upate or upa. The chief could choose who to appoint to this position and how many individuals could fit this capacity. The elders did not possess the ability to question decisions or criticise the chief and typically held meetings at the Chief's house while drinking buhzu (rice beer). ^{[2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7]} An Upa who became favoured by the chief for their conduct would be granted permission to set up a hamlet near the village known as a khawper. Upa who are given headmen positions act as lesser chiefs known as Belrawh mualkil and if they're granted privileges like sachhiah (meat tax), they are known as sangal khawnghrang. The most important Upa is known as Upamin and is perceived as a prime minister. ^[8]

The brothers of the chief would also enjoy prestige by association if they did not rule any village. They were exempted from paying the rice paddy tax known as fathang. They would be given the first choice on choosing plots for jhumming and cultivation. ^[9]

Lushai and Poi villagers on the path to the Jhum field.

Influential cultivators known as ramhuals would also get the right to choose cultivation plots before other people, although they would have to give double fathang. These individuals were appointed by the chief on account of their agricultural output in order to collect larger paddy tributes. ^{[9] [10]} Ramhuals will select the slope suitable for jhumming in the year. This process allows the chief to make the first choice over his jhum plot. Ramhuals were second in the privilege to choose their jhum plots, often reserving the best and paying a larger paddy tax. ^[11] Zalen were families exempted from paying the paddy-tribute due to their specific obligation to help the chief if the food supply declined. ^{[12] [13]}

The village blacksmith was known as thirdeng. This craft and skillset would be passed down hereditarily. One of the village blacksmiths would be chosen by the chief to as a personal blacksmith. The chief's blacksmith would take part in the administration with the chief and elders. Their responsibilities would include repairing tools for agriculture and other daily work. ^[9] Due to this, they could also claim Thirdengsa, which is a small share of any wild animal killed by the village hunting party. ^{[11] [14]} The thirdeng would get remuneration by being given a basket of paddy from each household in the village. ^[15] The thirdeng would also have a separate workshop known as a pum. A unique social function of the pum outside of blacksmithing was the storing of heads of enemies brought from war. ^[16]

The puithiam was the priest of the village and had authority over rituals and spiritual matters. ^[11] A sadawt was a private priest for the chief and was granted the ability to be shared by multiple chiefs of the same clan. ^{[13] [17]} The sadawts were in charge of festivals and ceremonies with knowledge of the practice of witchcraft. ^[9] The sadawt typically has an assistant known as a Tlahpawi. A Tlahpawi was typically a friend of the chief. Their most common task would be scraping the skin of pigs with bamboo to file off the hair. ^[17] A bawlpu was assigned to cure sicknesses and procure medicine. The bawlpu would typically prescribe animal sacrifice, which would be brought with debt or offered if already owned. ^[18] The incantations used by Bawlpu were closely guarded and were only imparted to the next prospective bawlpu either due to their inability to carry out their tasks or being close to death. ^[9]

The val upa played an important role in traditional Mizo society. They were not appointed by the chief but elected by people based on reputation and merit towards community contribution. Their powers included managing all matters with children and young men. They operated as spokesmen to the chief on matters pertaining to bachelors in the zawlbuk. They also regulated and assented to decisions made by young men and opinionated common policy. ^[9]

The Tlangau was a village crier. Their responsibility was to proclaim the chief's orders and assign what tasks or work was to be done the next day. The crier was repaid with a basket of rice from each family. ^{[19] [20]} The crier would often essentially function as a servant of the chief with little status in the chiefdom. While assault was punished in Mizo chiefdoms, hitting the crier for bearing bad news or tedious work was an exception with no fines. ^{[21] [9]}

The bawis were slaves in Mizo society. There were typically four categories of slaves: Inpui Chhung Bawi, Inhrang Bawi, Chemsen Bawi and Tukluh Bawi. Inpui Chhung Bawi means a slave within a big house. This term was applied to individuals in poverty, sickness or distress who sought protection under the chief. An Inpui Chhung Bawi was expected to work within their physical capacity but would gain privileges under the chief regarding food, rice-beer and meat taxes. ^[22] After being married for three years, a bawi would be considered an Inhrang Bawi, which means a separate house slave. A Chemsen Bawi, which means a red knife slave, was anyone who had killed someone in a village and had sought sanctuary under the chief. ^{[23] [22]} A Chemsen Bawi was not obligated to work under the chief but the chief would assume paternal responsibility for the murderer's children as punishment for the criminal. Tukluh Bawi were slaves captured from war with neighbouring tribes through raids and battles. These slaves were relatively free and were allowed to live in separate houses. Mizo customs provided that these Tukluh Bawi would purchase their freedom by paying the chief a Mithun or an equivalent. ^{[24] [25]}

The khawchhiar is the village writer. This occupation emerged under the British administration and the influence of literacy with Christian missionaries' efforts. The khawchhiar is appointed by the superintendent and represents the British administration. Their responsibilities typically consisted of statistic registers, listing of village houses, rostering of coolie labour and supervising the list of guns in the village. All khawchhiar were exempt from coolie labour and house tax. ^[11]

A Thangchhuahpa was a privileged status in the Lushai chiefdoms. ^[26] To attain this status there were two distinct ways. One way was an individual was expected to throw numerous feasts known as khuangchawi for the whole community, which would make them known as Inlama Thangchhuahpa. ^[27] Another way is to hunt and kill a specific number of wild animals according to customs and practice to become known as a ramlama thangchhuahpa. The animals typically required include a wild mithun, barking deer, bear, wild boar and an elephant. ^[28] The killing of the animal was accompanied with an Ai ceremony (with the puithiam) to accompany him in death one day. The ramlama thangchhuahpa did not have all the privileges such as windows and shelves or the special cloth. ^[29] For their prestige, these individuals would be appointed as upas, the elders who would guide the chiefs. Privileges of being a thangchhuah include a special pattern of striped clothes to denote their status, the right to build a window in their house, erect a shelf by their bed and a beam on their veranda. These privileges extended to a thangchhuah's wife and their children, who had the right to wear a thangchhuah cloth. In Lushai animism, a thangchhuah was believed to enter pialral or heaven straightaway. ^[26]

Village Layout

Mizo village built on hillside and hilltops

Mizo villages were typically built on hills for fortification purposes from other warring tribes. To protect from high winds, many structures would be built on a slope on the hill as protection. Houses would not be built in a valley or the base of a hill, but raised three-four feet off the ground as protection from wild animals and draining of water. A house would be built of materials such as timber for walls, bamboo matting for floor and thatched grass for roofing.

A standard house would have decks with hollow basins designed for rice husking at the front, which would be worked with long wooden pestles. At the back of the house was a small enclosed deck serving as a storeroom. Interiors were fitted with a hearth fitted with mud or flat stones. Above this hearth was a suspended larger wooden square of grains, herbs, jerky and cured bacon. Next to the hearth was the main bed known as a Khumpui where the parents of the household sleep. This was respected and only the parents could sit or lie on it. Young unmarried men would typically sleep in the zawlbuk, a bachelor's barrack. A final section was also cleared to store water with bamboo pipes and pots, where individuals could take a bath behind a bamboo wall in a corner of the house. Windows were not built unless an individual had performed the khuangchawi ceremony, a public feast given by chiefs to well-to-do Mizos, or it was believed to bring bad fortune. ^[30]

Chief's House

Mizo villagers sitting in the lal mual outside a Zawlbuk.

Chief's House in a Lushai Village

The chief's house is generally situated in the heart of the village. A large space in front of the house was the village square known as Lal mual. The chief's house was built to accommodate various resources and activities, often with a community effort. The chief's house would consist of a front verandah with a wooden mortar for husking rice known as a sumhmun. Several rooms known as vanlung were established as slave quarters for families captured during raids. Through the vanlung you would enter the spacious area known as dawvan. The dawvan held a fireplace and was known to be the meeting room for discussion, dispute settlement and administrative work. ^[9]

Zawlbuk

Main article: Zawlbuk

A Zawlbuk to be used by the village's young men.

A dormitory for bachelors known as a zawlbuk would be provided to the young men of the village. The zawlbuk would have young men concentrated in a single building for emergencies and quick decisions. Responsibilities of the men in zawlbuks could include organising hunting parties, warfare and raiding missions, or cohesive policies decided by the chief. The boys would be divided into two groups based on age. The young men were known as tlangvals while the boys were known as Thingfawm Naupang. The boys typically did the firewood duties alongside washing clothes, doing errands and carrying materials for grave preparations. ^[31]

Legal system

Before the arrival of British legal doctrine and laws handling offences under the superintendent, the Mizo people operated under a separate, unfixed legal system. The chiefs would have customary practices and rules.

In the case of murder, the family of the victim has the liberty to take revenge and kill the murderer. This led to a practice in which a murderer would run to the Chief's house for protection. By clinging to the foundation post of the Chief's house, the perpetrator achieves 'Lal sutpui pawm which binds a chief to protect the murderer. This protection would ward away revenge-seekers due to fears of confronting the chief. If the perpetrator seeks out the chief, they become a lifetime slave to the chief. ^{[9] [32] [33]}

A special procedure for the chief was available known as kut silna which means the washing of hands. This would allow a chief to take revenge on any individual who captured or detained them during war or a raid. This was a customary practice approved by all the chiefs and no higher authority held them questionable by it. ^[32]

Due to lack of locks and other features of security, traditional homes were unguarded and a wooden pole was placed at the door to show the home was empty. Punishment for theft led to punishments known as sial and salam. Sial was a fine of the biggest domestic animal known as Mithun , while a salam was a swine. Both of these would go to the chief and other elders for a feast. ^[32]

Economy

Historically, Mizo chiefdoms were based on subsistence, with very few economic activities outside of this range. However, historically the tribes and chiefdoms had been linked to ancient trade routes connecting Yunnan with the Bay of Bengal, which passed close to the mountain ranges of Mizoram. ^{[34] [35]} Later on, chiefs would utilize tributes from subjects of neighbouring kingdoms in the plains through force and demand regular payments. ^[36] They would also have traders known as karbari. ^[37] Karbari, meaning 'men of business' , typically were associated with Mizo chiefs in south Mizoram. They functioned as a bridge between foreigners and the chiefs in procuring goods. They were skilled in jungle routes, customs of the clans and knew a bit of Mizo or communicated in Bengali as a lingua franca. ^[38] Under the British, the chiefs traded and established bazaars normally in agreement to protect the business interests of the merchants. ^[39]

Taxation

Regular payment by villagers would typically be made with a share of their harvest known as a fathang or paddy tribute. Animals procured through hunting were bound to a due known as sachhiah, which was the animal's left foreleg. If the animal was already dead upon collection, it was exempt from sachhiah. Failure to pay the sachhiah would lead to a fine. ^[9] Procurement of salt springs would have an entitlement known as chikhurchhiah if it fell within his territory. Khuaichhiah is the collection of portions of honey collected by villagers of the chief's land and territory. If the honey was collected by one person the chief would claim half, for any other group, the honey was divided with the chief in count. ^{[9] [13] [33] [40]}

Land

Land or ram was controlled by the chief. It operated both as communal ownership and private peasant ownership. It was unlike other forms of land ownership in that there was no right to ownership or right to transfer. The chief would claim his own land known as Keimahi ram and entitle himself to economic privileges. These privileges would also be distributed to blacksmiths, headsmen and priests as a feudal resembling system. ^[33]

The chiefdoms in the central Chin Hills had a two-category land classification system. Namely Bul ram (private land) and Kland ram (community land). Bul ram gave the individual the right to cultivate, forage, hunt, and customary law of a right to inheritance. ^[40]

Currency

The mithun of the Lushai Hills villagers.

Mizo chiefdoms and villages engaged in the barter system. Larger transactions required a medium of exchange known as 'mithun (tame bison). Mithun would function as a measure of wealth for the chiefs. In the legal system of Mizo chiefdoms, mithun would also function as the currency of compensation or fines for offences. ^[40] Elephant tusks were also an acceptable chiefdom currency. While using a barter system, the Mizo chiefs possessed a system of units of sorting by weight. The number of buckets varied in size and shape for commodities such as rice. There were fawng (U-shaped), Dawran (lengthy), tam em (big) and empai (medium). ^[41]

Raiding and slavery

Raiding formed an important part of the economy regarding trade and financing. Raids were formed with a coalition of chiefs against a more prosperous chief. Guns were highly valued in raids and held as trophies by chiefs. Raids, in general, were associated with a chief's funeral custom or the marriage of his daughters. A successful raid would oversee the looting of valuables, men and women. Individuals taken during raids would become slaves of the chief and traded for profits. ^[40]

Men would be valued upon their age and physical qualities, usually amounting to three mithuns. Female slaves were valued depending on age, beauty and physical fitness, usually amounting to five mithuns. Good-looking female slaves would typically become concubines to chiefs. Chiefs were also responsible for the marriage of their slaves, which increased demand for female slaves. Tribal women would not only meet this demand but also Bengali women working on tea estates. ^[40]

Riverine trade and bazaar

The forest offered resources that Lushai chiefdoms took advantage of in trading. Elephant hides and bones, which were available in the Lushai Hills, fetched demand from Sylhet merchants under the Mughal Empire. This was due to the hide being used in making shields for infantry and cavalry of local kingdoms and Mughal officials. The Elephant bones were used in making luxury goods or parts of swords. For this reason, Lushai chiefdoms used ivory as their treasury measurement. ^[41]

Lalchukla is the first recorded chief to come into contact with Bengali merchants in Sylhet who sold goods such as rice, salt, rubber, sulphur and flint glass in 1838. ^[41] Lalchukla also raided Kachu Bari, which was attributed to a headhunting tradition for his father's funeral. However, British inquiry revealed that Lalchukla took revenge with a raid on the plains merchants who had 'cheated and beaten up' Lushai traders. ^[42] An issue with the proliferation of tea estates led to a conflict with elephant hunting traditions and subsequent trading of the Lushai chiefdoms with the plains. Furthermore, the British Raj's policy to establish elephant kheda competed with and declined the value of Lushai ivory. This would become a motivator for raiding of tea estates aside from a fear of British encroachment.The chiefdoms would typically begin to sell products such as rubber, ginger, ivory and elephant bones and purchase newer products such as tobacco and clothes. ^[41]

Mizo chiefs also cooperated in the Bepari Bazaar on Sylhet and Kassalong. Bengali traders set up a marketplace in Changsil on the tlawng river. ^[43] In the winter months, the Lushai tribes sold jhum products such as big fish and crude rubber. Certain merchants were also allowed to operate in Lushai chieftain territory by offering protection. These merchants offered rent as a permanent income for chieftains. T.H Lewin, superintendent of the Chittagong Hill Tracts, supported the development of trade marts and bazaars along the Lushai frontier. ^[44]

The Lushai Hills possessed naturally occurring forests of rubber trees. This was attributed to the heavy rainfall and soil salubrity that helped the rubber species' vegetation. The rubber trade flourished as Lushai chiefdoms tapped rubber from the trees, providing it to increasing demands. This Indian rubber was used for products such as wire, pencil, and sulphur and for critical infrastructure purposes. ^[45] Government markets to handle the rubber market were established in 1868, with regular markets following along British outposts in 1871–1872. ^[44] The Mizos failed to realize the market price of rubber. Any Mizo could tap rubber with the permission of their chief. Due to frequent migrations under the practice of jhumming, rubber trees were not replanted. ^[46] Global rubber prices fell in April 1876 which affected the profit margins of merchants purchasing rubber from the Lushai chiefdoms. Rubber was traded directly for one mound to a quarter mound of salt. Later on Lushai traders travelled beyond bazaars in Lushai territory to Cachar and sell rubber at more competitive prices. Rubber was ultimately depleted due to lack of management and wasteful overlapping coinciding with desperate trading for famine relief. ^{[47] [48]} The British recorded that in 1898, there was no trace of rubber forests in the Lushai Hills. ^[49]

The increase in trade in Anglo-Lushai relations led to the adoption of currency in rupees. Lushai villagers no longer converted excess crops into rice beer and sold them to generate a profit. Three bazaars were established at Tipaimukh, Sonai, Sairang and Changsil after the Lushai expedition. Traders from Sylhet and Chakma investors provided capital for the marketplaces and bazaars in Lushai territory. The increase in markets led to fewer hostile actions, such as raiding and plundering. The Mizos used their coins and savings to purchase cattle from the plains during the winter months. ^[50]

The Sonai and Changsil bazaars were within the territory of Suikpuilal, who taxed the bazaar unfavourably before readjusting with the advice of the Deputy Commissioner of Cachar. ^[51] The Sonai bazaar provided market access for the western chiefs and was patronised by Khalkam. The Changsil bazaar was patronised mainly by Suikpilal. The Tipaimukh bazaar was within the territory of Poiboi. It was located in the eastern Lushai Hills and was accessed by southern chiefs as well. ^[52] However, Suikpilal also wished to move the Changsil bazaar with the intention of depriving southern chiefs of market access. ^[53] In 1875, Changsil oversaw 18 shops, with three shops at Tipaimukh and two shops at Tuirial. ^[51]

The bazaars were opened with the approval of the chiefs, who permitted Bengali traders and merchants to open their own shops. The chiefs were obligated to protect the traders from any threat and collect rent money from the traders. Establishing inner-Lushai marketplaces alleviated British fears of the uncertainty of Lushai traders or raiders arriving on British land. The rules around the riverine bazaars stated that subjects of Lushai chiefs could not trade with the markets of another chief' or beyond their chief's assigned market. ^[54]

Each bazaar had its own issues that wouldn't allow it to last through to British annexation. Southern chiefs threatened the Changsil bazaar due to Suikpilal's gatekeeping of access. The Sonai bazaar was threatened by Eastern chiefs. The Tipaimukh bazaar was threatened by Paite and Sukte chiefs in Manipur and the Chin Hills. Poiboi failed to protect Tipaimukh from raiding chiefs such as Lengkam and Chunglena, leading to merchants closing their businesses for a whole year. Poiboi took the initiative in making deals to share rent revenue with the eastern chiefs and made the offending chiefs apologize to the British for the misbehaviour. The elders of the Lushai chiefs gathered and pleaded for merchants to return to Tipaimukh bazaar, which was granted after they paid a fine to compensate the traders. ^[53]

Poiboi looted the Sonai bazaar, and the salt held by the merchants was confiscated by force. The British temporarily stationed a guard of twelve sepoys, after which the merchants closed their shops and left on withdrawal of the force. On the other hand, the Changsil bazaar was looted by their patron chief, Suikpilal. The looting of goods and cash held by merchants led to merchants closing shop and leaving the Lushai Hills. The British punished Suikpilal with a large fine for his misconduct. After the death of Suikpilal, his descendants charged excessive rental rates and extortion. Tipaimukh bazaar under Chief Khalkam had no fixed rent rate, which led to frequent disagreements. ^[55] Merchants frequently closed shops in the bazaar to the point that only two shops remained open in 1884. British officials attempted numerous times to fix new contracts between the two parties. The deputy commissioner of Cachar even suggested a subsidy system which would be deducted and penalized for misconduct with the bazaars. The government rejected this idea, citing it was unsuccessful with other tribes such as Aka, Bhutia and Dafla. ^[56]

Tipaimukh bazaar continued to be threatened by Sukte raids from the Chin and Manipur hills. Poiboi rejected the British's effort to provide security to the bazaar by citing that the action didn't represent his sovereignty. The withdrawal of the force led to the complete abandonment of the bazaar. Sonai bazaar had merchants return in 1889, but the interests of both Khalkam and Poiboi to collect rent frustrated merchants who left the Sonai bazaar permanently despite the profitable rubber trade. Changsil Bazaar survived the longest with no British security force stationed, as Suikpilal and his descendants prevented foreign raids. The closure is attributed to the fact that the Changsil bazaar declined due to the depletion of rubber from overlapping. The merchants found more profit in Silchar and British territories, which led to its closure in 1890. ^[57]

Socio-Cultural Traditions

Tlawmngaihna

Due to mautam and recurring famines, a communitarian philosophy known as tlawmngaihna emerged in the Mizo tribes. ^[58] Ideals of honesty, courage, self-discipline, mutual help, and readiness to organize were stipulated in this philosophy. ^[59]

Nula-rim (Traditional Courtship)

In traditional Mizo custom, young men would leave around 6-7pm to the house of the girl they were courting to sit down and talk. Commitment would entail the young man suggesting to help each other more in farm work of jhumming to prepare for marriage. Cooperating with farm work would allow the girl to accept or reject her suitor based on their conduct and work ethic. To guard against false defamation, a boy known as a puarak observes the couple's courting as a definitive witness for sexual relations. On the puarak's testimony, if sexual relations were declared, then the girl can't claim compensation for defamation if it has been publicized. ^[60] The nature of courting in general did not hold penalties for sexual relations unless the girl got pregnant. In the case of pregnancy during courtship the man responsible pays a sawn man.While men sneak to meet their courtships at the girl's house, they will have to avoid being caught by their parents, or else they will be forced to pay khumpuikaiman or marry the woman. ^[61]

Once successful and committed, a palai would be sent to work out marriage terms. A palai is an envoy typically selected from the boy's family for the purpose of marriage discussion. The discussion would entail the bride price and the date of marriage. Unlike a dowry system; a bride price would simply be paid to sell the girl into the boy's family. Traditionally a bride price would be placed at two mithuns, while a chief's daughter would demand or fetch as high as ten mithuns. Physical intimacy was permitted upon marriage agreement in a tradition known as zawl-puan-phah which means preparing the lover's bed. If the marriage does not take place after the consummation of the relationship, then the boy is fined four mithuns. Typical marriage age did not have much age difference with men at 22 and women at 19. ^[62]

Marriage

Marriage typically entailed a feast where the bride's father would slaughter a mithun, and half were given to the groom's family. The bride would redistribute a portion of the bride price, and a special sum known as pusum was given to the bride's favourite uncle. The uncle receiving the pusum was placed under the responsibility of caring for the family of the newly married couple. All others who received a portion would give a hen in return which would contribute to the settling of the couple. After the feast the bride would return to her house and is returned to her husband's house in an act known as Lawi That (permanent entry). Divorce for marriage was equally available for men and women and provided on the grounds of physical cruelty and unfaithfulness. In certain circumstances portion of the bride price would be refunded or given up. ^[63]

There are five types of marriage in Mizo society. Lungvar is marriage through negotiation and is the most common type. After paying the bride price the bride goes to the groom's house which is called lawi. Fan is when a man goes and lives in a girl's house as her husband. This practice is considered disgraceful for the man. Luhkung is the practice of a girl living in the man's house as a wife before marriage and this is also disgraceful. Sazumeidawh is a marriage without bride price. This agreement is made with both parties consent and allows the man to leave and divorce her at any time without penalties. These marriages are rare but common for daughters of widows and this custom does not require a palai. ^[64]

Inheritance

Fanai chieftainess Darbili, depicted by John Shakespear.

Traditionally, a chief would have a wife and concubines. These concubines are known as hmei and their children hmeifa are considered illegitimate for inheritance. The oldest sons would typically be granted a village as a headsman and answer to the decision of their chief father. The youngest son would stay with the chief and inherit the chiefdom as a result. With the arrival of British administrations, the superintendent approved who would inherit chieftainship and typically awarded it to the eldest sons. The chief also had power to set up new villages under his administration and influence, but this power was restrained with British oversight of the Lushai Hills. ^[65]

Precolonial Chieftainship

Origins of chieftainship

One account discusses the origins of chieftainship among the Mizos through the Lusei clan. The earliest records of chieftainship among the Mizo tribes are dated to Zahmuaka and his six sons in the 16th century. It is said Zahmuaka who was of the Paite clan was persuaded to be chief because the idea of chieftainship was too demanding for most individuals. It is said that his wife, Lawileri played a role in this acceptance. ^[66] The six sons of Zahmuaka are known as Zadenga, Thangluaha, Thangura, Paliana, Rivunga and Rokhuma. In the modern day, a significant portion of the population holds these surnames as descendants. Zahkuama and his sons were forced to accept chieftainship by the Luseis, who lacked anyone willing to take on the role. ^{[67] [32]} By the 18th century, chieftainship was established into a consistent form which would last till the British annexation of their territories. Originally chieftainship was fought for, but the institution became hereditary ^[68] through the youngest son, who would remain with the chief while the elder sons would gain their own villages.

Initially, the role of the chief had no material reward in terms of tribute to the village chief. Eventually, people within villages began to contribute a portion of the annual harvest for the chief, known as a paddy tax. This system remained among Mizo chiefdoms until its abolishment in 1954. ^[67]

Migration of the Clans

Zahmuaka's son, Thangura, became the most powerful chief among the six sons and was the last to migrate into present day Mizoram. Population increases and increase of chiefs, many smaller and weaker chiefs originally began to migrate west. The descendants of Zadenga were the first to migrate and managed to reach as far as the Chittagong Hill Tracts. ^[69] Migration was followed starting with Palian and continuing with Rokhum, Rivung, Chenkual and Thangluah descendants. Thangur's grandson Sailova was a famous chief whose name became eponymous to the Sailo clans. Sailo clans also oversaw cooperation with the Ralte, Fanai and Lushai clans. ^[70]

Map of distribution of Lushai-Kuki Clans

By the time of British annexation, the chieftains of Rokhuma were largely integrated and left no traces of their settlements apart from oral history. The chiefs descending from Zadenga, Thangluaha, and Paliana had been severely weakened and had ruled a few petty settlements that were protected by the British. Rivung chiefs settled in Hill Tipperah and were one of the earliest kukis to be recorded by the chief of Chittagong in 1777. The Sailo family under Sailova, son of Thangura, became the predominant tribe in the Lushai Hills. The arrival saw the non-integrating tribes such as Khawtlang and Khawchhak flee to Thadou chieftains in Manipur. ^[71] Clans that were not part of the Lusheis, saw their languages lost in favour of Duhlien. Apart from the Hmar and Paite who managed to preserve their dialects, the Vanchia, Kohlring, Nennte, Powtu and others eventually adopted Duhlien. ^[72]

The Mizo tribes also migrated into the Lushai Hills due to Chin aggression. The chins were known to the Lushei as poi or pawi. A long-term feud led to a great war that led to the defeat of the Lushei tribes. The chiefs evacuated their villages and settlements to the east of the Tyao river. In 1883, the Lushei attempted another attack against the poi but failed once more by over extending themselves in enemy territory. Up to 40 men were lost in the ambush and the remaining survivors were chased and escaped through the dense jungles back to their homes. ^[73]

Hmar groups established in Eastern Mizoram were pushed Northwards by the Sailo chiefs who migrated away from Chin aggression. Other established clans, such as the Pangs, Dawlawng, and Mirawngs, were scattered. The legacy of Hmar settlements is seen in eastern Mizoram, where villages are named after groups such as the Biate, Zote, Dawngawn, and Thiak. ^[70] The Lushai clans managed to assimilate smaller clans such as the Chawte, Chongthu, Hnamte, Khiangte and Ngente while other clans like the Fanai, Ralte, Paite and Rangte maintained individualities. ^[74] Other groups such as the Thadou were forced to migrate north to Cachar. ^[75] One reason the Lushai Hills area was easy to settle for the Mizo tribes is attributed to the cyclical phenomenon of mautam. By the 18th century, when Mizo tribes migrated into the Lushai Hills, previous settlers had moved on due to the bamboo flowering famines. ^[76]

Internal Conflicts of the Chiefs

Lalulla was purported by deputy commissioner Sir John Edgar to be the first Sailo chief to live in Mizoram despite the Sailos entering Mizoram half a century before. ^[77] Yet, Lalulla was the first Lushei chief to be known to foreign administrations. He led a migration from Myanmar into the western hills. ^[78] Lalulla's descendants moved westwards and became neighbours to the Zadeng chiefs who considered themselves strong enough to wage war. However, the Zadengs faced defeat and were forced to accept seek alliances with southern chiefs. Lalulla's descendants consolidated their control over northern Mizoram eventually with the absorption of petty chiefs. ^[79]

North-South Wars

Further developments saw a north-south war between Sailo chiefs in the 1850s. Vuta in the north was in a dispute with Lalpuithanga, Thangdula and Thuama in the south. The possession of land was in dispute, and the composition of a mocking song. Vuta had defeated the Zadeng tribe and had established many villages before deciding to settle further south in Buanhmun. Vuta claimed the land by building a temporary hut to develop a village around. Lalpuithanga, in the agitation against Vuta's encroachment, moved in and settled the land instead. Vuta, in retaliation, deliberately led his people to migrate to Buanhum. Lalpuithanga conceded and migrated back to his hometown of Vanchengte. ^[79] Vuta then composed a song mocking lalpuithnga for backing away from Buanhmun. This was the foundation for the divide between the North and South chieftains. ^[80]

Before Lalpuithanga moved out of Buanhmun, he took a gun which belonged to Vuta's village. Vuta brought his nephew Thawmvunga, a renowned pasaltha, to a meeting with Lalpuithanga. Lalpuithanga's upas, who mostly consisted of Zadeng tribesmen wanting revenge, had planned to ambush Vuta during the meeting. Each of them concealed a stick. When confronted about the mocking song, Vuta became fearful. However, Thawmvunga waved his dao around in anger. This subdued the upas of Lalpuithanga, and Thawmvunga was able to take the gun back unceremoniously. ^{[80] [79]}

Lalpuithanga's upas then further chased Thawmvunga and attempted to take the gun back. In the ensuing struggle, Thawmvunga sawed off the barrel of the rifle with his dao. When Vuta and Thawmvunga ran off, Lalpuithanga's upa fired a volley after them and missed. This signalled a declaration of war. This led to incessant raids on each other. ^[80]

Vuta had allied with Chief Khawtindala of Khuanglum against Chief Thuama of Khawlung. Vuta's son accompanied the Fanai of Khawtindala and planned to raid Khawlung. The bridge to access Khawlung was left assembled allowing the party to reach the village in secret during the night. The party killed all the men in the Zawlbuk as they woke up. With no defense, the raiding party massacred Khawlung and killed many individuals. Many women and children were taken captive. The massacre was ingrained and immortalized as a song. The original North-South War lasted six years. The south managed more successful raids but the raid of Khawlung cemented the victory into northern hands. However, no peace settlement was reached and hostilies finally ceased with mautam famine. ^[80]

A second North-South war concerned the descendants of Lallula in the North, who were embroiled in a fight with the family of Cherra in the South in 1856. The second north-south war occurred between the chiefs who belonged to the same family and had settled their villages closely. The point of contention concerned the territory of Piler Hill. ^[81] It was so close that their jhum cultivation lands would also touch each other. Due to this, the chiefs agreed not to ambush cultivation of their jhums as opposed to traditional warfare. ^[82] In the end, the war ended in the capture of the southern chief at Konglung along his mother who was ransomed for necklaces. After the war chiefs united against Poi and Sukte aggression. Due to this Pois failed to maintain a permanent settlement in Sailo territory. ^[79]

East-West Wars

The Sailo chiefs lost unity once more as Sukpilal, the head of the western Sailo chiefs, and Lalsavunga, the head of the Eastern Sailo chiefs, grew tensions. This was due to the lack of help to the eastern chiefs in migrating east against the Chin. The western chiefs preferred to strengthen and defend their own dominion and expand west and north instead. War emerged between the east and west chiefs after a dispute over a marriage candidate of a fallen chieftain's daughter. The Lushai expedition eventually cooled the internal tensions of the Sailo chiefs. ^[83]

A second East-West war formed due to a dispute over the jhum land. In 1876-1877, Sukpilal's son, Lengpunga and Savunga's son, Laljeeka, undertook an expedition against the Sailo village of Pugrying. The village was plundered and the inhabitants were taken captive. Similarly, Khalkam began a quarrel with Poiboi because he was cultivating crops on jhums claimed by Poiboi. A coalition of chiefs formed in the west consisting of Sukpilal, Khalkam and Lengpunga against the coalition of eastern chiefs consisting of Lemkam, Lalbura, Chungleng and Bungtey. Sukpilal attempted to involve British authorities against the Eastern chiefs which was refused. In November 1877, Sookpilal sent his upas to request the British to mediate peace. In January 1878, Lengkam's upas compensated traders of the Tipaimukh bazaar and requested the British for peace mediation. The British offered Cachar as a meeting place. ^[84] Upas from western and eastern chiefs met up on the 8th of December. They expressed the unpopular nature of the war and how shameful it is to express peace first. The deputy commissioner recommended simultaneous advances based on his advice. However, this did not lead anywhere. ^[85]

In April 1879, Sukpilal's sons Labruma and Lengpung planned an attack on the villages of Poiboi, Lemkam and Chungleng in retaliation for the burning of jhum huts. However, on the way, they encountered Poiboi's grandmother in her village between each of them, who turned them away with friendly overtures. In July of 1879, new plans were made for a raid on Poiboi but were abandoned after they were leaked. The onset of the mautam famine began to make Lushai individuals come to the British in want of food. ^[86] Around the onset of the famine, Sookpilal passed away unrelated to it from his own illnesses. This doused hopes for a peaceful resolution in the east-west war. In early 1881, the eastern chiefs began to increase the raiding of villages such as Chief Thangula's. The unpopularity of a war during famine times saw up to 400 people leave Khalkam for Cachar. The pressure of famine led the chiefs Poiboi, Khalkam, and Lalhai to meet and agree to cease hostilities and obtain food together from Cachar. ^[87]

Famine

Main article: Mautam

The synchronous bamboo flowering in the ecological cycle has been recorded as a cause of famines in Mizo history. In 1860, oral history records a mautam famine. This phenomenon extended beyond the Lushai Hills to Cachar and southern Manipur, recorded by British administrators like Colonel McCulloch, purporting how a flowering of bamboo had led to a boom in the rat population and social chaos. ^[88]

The following 1881 famine led to an estimated 15,000 deaths in the Lushai Hills. This weakening of the tribal economy, which relied on manpower, headhunting, and slavery, weakened the chiefs. Some chiefs turned to cooperation with the British or sold their weapons in return for food relief. It also showed an intensification of attacks and raiding as other chiefs began to take food by force from the plains, up to 500 people were also taken captive to supplement their lost labour and manpower or simply killed during raids. ^[89]

Labour had to be conserved and was stretched thin, which would mean hunting parties could not be established because traditionally, hunting parties would deprive the villages' ability to defend against a raid if a neighbouring village were to take their resources during the famine. ^[90] The most common way of dealing with an incoming famine was to save rice from previous years with kaka which consisted of crop millet that can be preserved in the long term. In the western Lushai Hills, the villages would practice wet rice cultivation if they had land in the plains region. The western Lushai Hills had access to the knowledge of wet rice cultivation and this would drown the rats or deter them from eating the paddies. ^[91] Crops such as tapioca and Colocasia were harvested as the rats did not consume them. ^[92] In terms of foraging, the rats tended to spare the sago in sago palm and wild yam. ^[93] Cotton seeds were devoured by rats, so the economic opportunity to import food was also impacted as no goods could be produced to effectively trade, such as Lushai cloth and handicrafts. ^[94] Another traditional solution was to consume the rats by drying them over a fire; however, the large supply of rat meat made it aversive. ^[93] Individuals from the tribes also left the chiefs and became refugees to the British for food and shelter. The refugees explained the situation of the mautam famine, which was corroborated by karbaris who validated the claim. ^[37] Mass migrations of Lushai tribespeople caused fear in plains workers who saw the people as fierce and savage raiders. Migration were seen in bordering frontiers such as Cachar, Tipaimukh and Jalnacherra. ^[94]

The British provided famine relief by sending 18,000 maunds of rice and 2000 maunds of paddy from Cachar and local traders. As the famine didn't intensify many Lushai refugees returned to their villages and distressed refugee seekers ceased by June–September 1882. ^[95] The chiefs would also sell their ivory jewellery and valuables to raise money for food. Economic developments such as rubber tapping became overtapped to fund their food supply. ^[96] The willingness to trade their guns and rifles for food signalled to the British a weakness and imminent capitulation. The chiefs also urged the establishment of trading posts that can supply grain and agreed to pay out loans with their jhum harvests. ^[97]

Foreign Relations

The Lushai clans held relations with Hill Tipperah as mercenaries and vassals. Lushai chiefs would supply warriors in exchange for goods or money. Achyut Charan Choudhury in his works covered how the Radharam, a ruler in the pratapgarh Kingdom, staged the revolt of Radharam with aid from Kuki and Lushai mercenaries. ^[98]

Another instance was when two fugitive Manipuri princes, Ram Singh and Tribonjit Singh, requested the aid of Chief Laroo to capture the throne of Manipur. Laroo declined on account of the fact that the king of Manipur at the time was the father-in-law of the King of Hill Tipperah. In due time, Lushai chiefdoms in Manipur faced rigid political control, while in Hill Tipperah, the gradual decline and political vacuum made the frontiers of the British East India Company insecure. ^[98]

In the case of Manipur and Tripura, the Lushai chiefs would see surrounding kingdoms as powerful chiefs. For the British, the Lushai chiefs referred to them as white chiefs. Thomas Herbert Lewin, superintendent of the Chittagong Hill Tracts, was named Thangliana as an exonym and recognition as a chief. Lushai chiefs would cross boundaries and appeal to British authorities for protection at times and even offer gifts and tributes, which were declined. ^[99]

British Expeditions

Before the British, the only records of the Mizo tribes were from local merchants who would enter the Lushai Hills, known as karbaris. They would subsequently provide information and insight into the nature of the Lushai chiefs, their language, and the privilege of accessing their territory. ^[37] Amidst the internal conflicts, the chiefs also engaged in raiding, headhunting and kidnapping of British subjects working in tea plantations. The Lushai chiefs attacked and raided Sylhet in 1844, Hill Tipperah in 1847, and Sylhet and Cachar in 1849, continuing sporadically to 1862 and 1868. ^[100] The British sent their first expeditionary force in December 1844 against these raids. A chief named Lalsuktla had raided Kochabari, a Manipuri settlement in Sylhet, to collect heads to commemorate the passing of the previous chief, Lalrinha. Twenty people were killed, and six were captured. Lalsuktla was defeated and apprehended, but this didn't stop further raids. Another expedition was prepared in 1850 to strike against Chief Mulla who had razed a Kuki village in Silchar tolling twenty-nine deaths and forty-two captives. Mulla's village was burnt down but was forced to retreat against a bigger force of 5000-7000 being mobilized. ^[101] The 1849 raid in Cachar saw a despatch of Frederick Lister with Sylhet light infantry. His report advocated for an expedition of 3,000 men to control the roads and depots of trade. The Bengal government rejected the offer, preferring military outposts and Kuki mercenaries to counter Mizo aggression. ^[102]

The British employed a Policy of Conciliation for Northeastern chiefs between 1850 and 1870. This oversaw chiefs releasing captives and participating in exchange for gifts. Some chiefs allied with the British due to these advancements. ^[103] One of the expeditions against a chief called Suikpilal was put off in favour of a declaration of friendship. The expansion of tea estates however remained to threaten the sovereignty of chieftains. This led Chief Vonpilal and other chiefs to launch an official complaint and objection to British encroachment. Captain Steward, the superintendent of Cachar, attempted negotiations and assured that tea estates were beneficial. This failed to reassure the chiefs who united to jointly resist the British encroachment. ^[104]

In 1850, Chief Suikpilal cooperated with the British by sending an emissary to Cachar about the fear of Pawi attacks in the South. The British assured non-interference if British borders were respected in return. During this period, some Lushai labourers left the hills and worked in tea gardens and timber industries. The British authorities such as the Lieutenant Governor of Bengal decided on a policy of leaving chiefs undisturbed in the administration of their territory. Relations soured in 1860, after Chief Rothangpuia razed a village in Tipperah. ^[101] The tensions lead to chiefs withholding their men and labourers from working on British tea estates. Suikpilal also participated in a raid in 1862. The deputy commissioner of Cachar negotiated terms for tribute to the British in return for payment. Proposals for a punitive expedition were rejected because of the failure of attempts before and the expenses required. A policy of obtaining political control was preferable. ^[105]

First Shell Fired At Howsatta's Village - ILN 1889

The British tried another agreement between chiefs to agree on the border of Cachar and their territories. A deputation of chiefs with Deputy Commissioner Edgar met to renew amicable relationships. Edgar took a tour of the Lushai Hills and granted the chiefs charters defining their duties and terms of relations with the government as well as defining a fixed border. The chief's rights to toll traders in their territory and settling of new villages would not be opposed. ^[106] However, the kidnapping of Mary Winchester by Chief Bengkhuaia led to the British intervening in the Lushai Expedition. ^[107] The incident was followed by other chiefs, such as Lalbura attacking the Monierkhal outpost and Thanranga raiding Nugdigram. ^[108] The British replaced their Policy of Conciliation with the Forward Policy. Some Chiefs began to cooperate with the British and participated in their markets. ^[103] Lalbura surrendered in his village when expeditionary forces reached Champhai. He was forced to grant the British their peace demands. The demands included granting free access to his village, providing three hostages to the force, seizure of arms and heavy fines. The fines consisted of elephant tusks, a necklace, a war gong and several animals. The force then recovered Mary Winchester and subdued numerous chiefs. ^[109] Peace was established with the chiefs until 1888 when large-scale raiding resumed. ^[110] The results of the Lushai expedition saw administrators like Edgar prefer a humanitarian approach of trade, barter and education versus T.H Lewin, who advocated complete subjugation of the tribes. The government's policy of non-intervention decided to ban British subjects from entering the Lushai Hills to potentially agitate raiders and chieftains. ^[111]

Within the peaceful years between the Mizo and the British, bazaars were established on the borders to encourage trade. The Lushai chiefs would barter rubber, ivory, and forest produce in return for salt, iron utensils, and tobacco. ^[112] Internally, the Sailo chiefs engaged in the east–west war and encountered an anti-Sailo rebellion aimed at dethroning the chiefs, which was crushed. ^[110] Depite the policy of non-interference, the British did intervene in the internal conflicts of the Lushai Hills. The British supplied help to Chief Lalngura against his enemy, the Howlong Chief Bengkhuaia. Help was provided to the Eastern chiefs conflict between Laljeika and Lalngura in 1881. After the death of Suikpilal, a close cooperator and prestigious chief, the succession wars over his descendants began, intensifying the anarchy in the Lushai Hills. ^[111] The mautam famine also occurred in the 1880s; due to this, traders were encouraged to provide aid in rice under police protection. ^[103]

Mompunga, a Lushai chief, and Mr. Murray, Political Agent, taking the oath of friendship - ILN 1890

By 1888, Sailo chiefs and a Pawi chief began to resume raiding British plantations and killing British subjects. Two expeditions were held in close succession in 1889. The first 1889 expedition oversaw exacting punishment to chiefs responsible for raiding in the south. A fort was established at Lunglei, and the force burnt down the offender, Housata's village. ^[112] The second expedition, known as the Chin-Lushai Expedition of 1889–90, did not meet resistance from Mizo chiefs and saw the establishment of Fort Aijal. Captain Browne of the North Lushai Hills was responsible for disarming the tribes of guns but was ambushed fatally. The British eventually burned down several villages of the western chiefs who tried to attack Aijal. ^[113] The eastern Sailo chiefs did not resist the British. ^[74]

The chiefs continued to resist after establishing the North and South Lushai Hills. This was exacerbated by the policies of a house tax and coolie labour quotas. By 1895 the situation became stable in the Lushai Hills and chiefs no longer resisted the British militarily. ^[114]

Ropuiliani

Ropuiliani was a Mizo chieftainess. She was the wife of a prestigious chief, Vandula in the South Lushai Hills. ^[115] When her eldest son Dotawna died with only minor sons, Ropuiliani took over as regent and chieftainess. She continued her husband's policies of non-cooperation and resistance to British power. Negotiations were rejected, and taxes, labour levies, and rice demands were all withheld from the British. The settlement of the British at Lunglei led to Ropuiliani instigating her allies Zakapa and Dokapa to confront the British, attempting to disarm the chiefs. This is what led to the killing of H.R Browne. ^[116] Ropuiliani and her son Lalthuama did not attend the Chief's Durbar held in 1890. She refused to attend all three durbars. The British efforts to let Ropuiliani's brothers Seipuia and Lalluava convince her also failed. The British even sent an interpreter known as a Rashi, which frustrated her to the point a warrior named Hnawncheuva executed the interpreter. ^[117]

The British decided to raid Ropuiliani's village upon hearing of the execution. The raid was organized under Captain John Shakespeare and R.H.S Hutchinson and Pugh. It was discovered that Ropuiliani, Lalthuama and a northern chief, Doakoma, planned an uprising against the British. ^[118] An ultimatum was given to pay a fine of several guns, pigs, fowls and rice. After some resistance, the British captured Ropuiliani and her son Lalthuama, which left the settlement leaderless. Ropuiliani was carried in a palanquin claiming she was unable to walk with her captors. In jail she was offered the opportunity for peace and freedom if she submitted to British rule which was rejected once again. Ropuiliani and her son were eventually moved to a prison in Chittagong Hill tracts out of fear of her influence. ^[119]

Ropuiliani's old age and health was reason of concern to free her from jail. Before she could be released, she passed away in confinement on 6 January 1895. Her death ultimately decentralized coordinate efforts to resist British takeover of the Lushai Hills. Guns amounting up to 100 in Ropuiliani's village and 500 in allies settlements were seized subsequently. ^[120]

Mizo chiefdom in modern history

Chieftainship during British Rule

Further information: British rule in the Lushai Hills

The first political officer of the North Lushai Hills, H.R Browne, was killed by resisting chiefs in 1890. The succeeding officer McCabe took action to punish the chiefs by burning down villages in the eastern hills and destroying crops. Rebellious chiefs such as Kalkhama, Lianphinga and Thanghula were deported. Another uprising in the South Lushai Hills was also crushed in 1891. Chiefs that resisted militarily to the new policies of house tax and coolie labour quotas had the villages burnt down subsequently. By 1895, Shakespeare of the South Lushai Hills decided that gentle civilian rule can be established rather than constant military responses. Outposts and forts were decommissioned for financial and budget reasons and the British let the chiefs manage internal administration of the villages. ^[121]

During the British colonial era of Mizoram, the British pursued a gradual policy of weakening the power of the chiefs. The British allowed the chiefs to continue their rule in accordance with aligning to British interests and authorities such as the superintendent and administrators. A number of rights and privileges exercised by the chiefs were permitted to remain unaltered. This paled in comparison to the erosion of the prestige of chieftains and their traditional roles. In 1901 the British introduced the circle system administered by chiefs. The circle system would see regulations on the practice of jhumming by restricting it to the circle administered by the particular chief. British interest in cash crops such as coffee, cotton, potatoes and oranges was also introduced under private ownership policies, further changing the traditional doctrines of land distribution under chieftainships. ^{[122] [123]}

The changes in chieftainship under British intervention can be seen as standardizing indirect rule of the Lushai tribes by limiting the power of the chiefs but granting autonomy in standard administration and chieftain rights. The land was under the government but effectively treated as a hereditary possession of chiefs who could exercise reasonable rights on it. The British also diluted the power of traditional chiefs by proclaiming and granting chieftainship on individuals who would not ordinarily be granted such a right under the traditional system. The British also extinguished certain rights of chiefs such as: ^[124]

• The Right to order capital punishment.
• Right to seize food stores and property of villagers who wishes to transfer allegiance to another chief.
• Right to tax traders doing business in the jurisdiction of the Chief.
• Right to freedom of action in making their son's chief of their territory or jurisdiction.
• Right to attach the property of their villagers when they wished or deemed fit with or without fault of the villager.
• Right to freedom of action in decisions involving bawis (slaves).

Customary Mizo law continued to be exercised by chiefs but serious crimes such as murder, rape and sodomy were to be put under British jurisdiction in courts at Aizawl and Lunglei. Novel responsibilities for chiefs included maintaining routes between villages, reporting epidemics, heinous crimes, serious accidents, and the presence of foreigners. ^[125]

During this era a new privileged class began to emerge with British modernisation and Christianity. This privileged class would challenge the power of chieftainship in the Lushai Hills. The increase of employment in government jobs and rise of salaried employment allowed for the cultivation of material wealth which would afford social mobility. This increased opportunities for education beyond the free primary course which would require extensive agricultural cultivation to afford for traditional communities. This privileged class was described as an intelligentsia that did not belong to indigenous Lushai society. It dominated in fields of medicine as doctors, agriculture as experts and nurses which was increasingly pushed back upon and unappreciated. ^[126]

The British also employed a policy known as non-interference. Non-interference saw that the British would rule and administrate the lands of the Lushai Hills through the Chief's and their existing institutions. The British tended to also confer chieftainship to anyone they felt that would be helpful as a collaborator, hence increasing the number of chiefs drastically through the years of administration. The British policy of sanctioning Chiefs to carry out administrative duties led to a pattern of autocratic tendencies in tribal leadership. The British also enabled the system of Bawis and headhunting, as these two factors determined the power of a chief and did not wish to curb these privileges. Tribal groups requested for a new administration and policy through democratic representation in a memorandum submitted to the Governor of Assam in December 1933. However, the memorandum was rejected by the governor on suspicions of conspiracy and objection to increasing representation for scheduled tribes. ^[127]

In 1935, the Young Mizo Association (YMA) formed and voiced their issues during the latter era of the British colonial period. Their concerns particularly focussed on the lack of democratic institutions in Mizoram and the privileged positions of chiefs and their councils. R. Vanlawma, a member of the YMA, founded the Mizo Commoner's Union to oppose and abolish chiefly rule. Its leadership and political direction was to emerge in union with India as this would entail the disbandment of the institution of chieftainship. The party split into left-wing and right-wing factions. The right wing was dominated by chiefs who rejected the union with India. Some members of the Mizo Union right wing supported a union with Burma to form a separate province in Burma. This led to the establishment of the United Mizo Freedom Organization. However, with little time to campaign and having a reputation as privileged elite chiefs, support for the party was small and ineffective to secure any political goals. ^[127]

Chieftainship during Indian Rule

Further information: Mizo District

After Indian independence, the Indian constitutions permitted autonomy at both regional and local levels for chieftainships to manage their natural resources. The pre-independence superintendent of the Lushai Hills, L.L Peters, remained in position after the declaration of Indian independence. The policy of chiefly privilege was perpetuated with corruption, and his policies would safeguard the chiefs and their interests. The superintendent also allowed chiefs to report misbehaving subjects for punishment; this led to many members of the Mizo Union becoming targeted by chiefs and being arrested subsequently. ^[127]

The Mizo Union organised an ultimatum of non-cooperation if Superintendent Peters was not removed from his post. Upon submitting a memorandum to the Government of Assam, the leaders of the Mizo Union were arrested. After the deadline for the ultimatum passed, supporters of the Mizo Union stopped obeying orders of the superintendent, stopped supplying taxation to their chiefs and halted all supply of labour as coolies to the administration. A massive crackdown with large-scale arrests and fines was imposed in retaliation for the protest. ^[127]

After the passing of the Assam Autonomous District Council Act 1951, the Lushai Hills district possessed more political agency in its domestic affairs. The Mizo Union secured dominance in the Lushai Hills Autonomous District. The superintendent positions was abolished and replaced with a weaker deputy commissioner role that would affect the chieftain's leverage with political policies. ^[128]

Abolishment of Chieftainship

The onset of Christianity saw a change in the traditional institutions of Mizo society, such as slavery and chieftainship. As more individuals and chiefs converted to Christianity, they released the Bawis or slaves held under their possession. However poorer, rural and destitute areas continued the tradition of maintaining bawis under their possession. One of the central figures to protest chieftainship and the bawi system was Hmar Khawbung Bawichuaka. The influence of Christianity made it so that the slave system of Mizo society was obsolete. However, this further stratified Mizo society as commoners was now bound in virtual serfdom to the chief.

The Mizo union would win all three seats to the Assam assembly in the 1952 general election. The following election in the same year saw the Mizo Union win 23 of 24 seats and campaign heavily on the topic of abolishment of chieftainship. The fist bill passed by the Mizo Union was the Lushai Hills (Chieftain Abolition) Act, 1952. It suspended the powers and rights afford by chiefs while allowing the continuation of their office and political structure. On the 1st of June 1953, the district council passed an act abolishing the taxations of thirdengsa, khuaichhiah and chikhuchhiah. The coolie system was also abolished on 1 January 1953. The Lushai Hills District Act no.III reduced the fathang (paddy tax) from six tins to 3 tins. ^[129] The Lushai Hills Act (Acquisition of Chief's Rights) 1954 abolished chieftainship. The final legislation was the Lushai Hills Reorganisation of Chiefs' Rights Act 1954 which abolished the powers and privileges that chiefs held onto. The LHA came into force in 1958 while the RCRA came into effect April 1956, 259 Lushai chiefs and 50 Pawi-Lakher chiefs were affected by the act and village councils were established instead. ^{[127] [122]}

See also

• Mizo Culture
• History of Mizoram
• Mizo religion
• History of Christianity in Mizoram

References

1. Nag 2008, p. 77.
2. Lalthangliana, B (2005). Culture and folklore of Mizoram. Publications Division Ministry of Information & Broadcasting. ISBN   978-81-230-2658-9.
3. Zorema, J (2007). Indirect Rule in Mizoram 1890-1954. New Delhi: Mittal Publications. ISBN   978-81-8324-229-5.
4. Khobung, Vanthangpui (2012). Local Self-Governing Institutions of the Tribal in North-East India: A study of the village authority/council (PDF) (Political Science thesis). IACSIT Press, Singapore. Retrieved 13 September 2024.
5. Parry, N.E (1928). Lushai Custom: A monograph on Lushai Customs and Ceremonies. Shillong: Assam Government Press.
6. Shakespear, John (1912). The Lushei and Kuki Clans. London: Macmillan and Co., Limited. p. 44.
7. Vanlaldika, Andrew H. (2014). Social Stratification in Mizo Society. New Delhi: Mittal Publications. ISBN   978-81-8324-475-6.
8. Vanlaldika 2014, p. 121.
9. Thangliana 2005, 3.The Chief and His Subjects. sfn error: no target: CITEREFThangliana2005 (help)
10. Samuelson 1991, p. 91.
11. Parry 1928, p. 7.
12. Parry 1928, p. 8.
13. Zorema 2007, p. 16.
14. Samuelson 1991, p. 90.
15. Zorema 2007, p. 15,16.
16. Samuelson, Rami Sena (1991). The Mizo people: Cultural analysis of life in a Mizo village in the 1890's. San Francisco: University of San Francisco. p. 90.
17. Samuelson 1991, p. 95.
18. Samuelson 1991, p. 93,94.
19. Parry 1928, p. 6.
20. Zorema 2007, p. 15.
21. Samuelson 1991, p. 89.
22. Samuelson 1991, p. 92.
23. Shakespear 1912, p. 48.
24. Shakespear 1912, p. 49.
25. Samuelson 1991, p. 93.
26. Vanlaldika 2014, p. 122.
27. Vanlaldika 2014, p. 124.
28. Vanlaldika 2014, p. 125.
29. Vanlaldika 2014, p. 126.
30. Samuelson 1991, p. 73.
31. Parry 1928, p. 8-12.
32. Prasad, R N; Chakraborty, P; Sailo, Michael Lalrinsanga (2006). Administration of Justice in Mizoram. New Delhi: Mittal Publications. p. 15. ISBN   81-8324-059-3.
33. Prasad, RN (1996). "Traditional Political Institution of Chieftainship in Mizoram: Powers, Functions, Position and Privileges". Dynamics of Public Administration. Retrieved 12 September 2024.
34. Bin, Yang (September 2004). "Horses, Silver and Cowries: Yunnan in Global Perspective". Journal of World History. 15 (3): 281–322. doi:10.1353/jwh.2004.0039. ProQuest   225236916 . Retrieved 25 October 2024.
35. Pachuau, Joy; Schendel, Willem Van (2015). The Camera as Witness: A social history of Mizoram, Northeast India. India: Cambridge University Press. p. 168. ISBN   978-1-107-07339-5.
36. Nag, Sajal (2018). "Shaming the self, negating history: Advent of evangelicals and transformation of a community in colonial North East India". In Seshan, Radhika; Kumbhojkar, Shraddha (eds.). Re-searching Transitions in Indian History. New York: Routeledge. p. 204. ISBN   978-1-138-22187-1.
37. Nag 2008, p. 64.
38. Kabra 2008, p. 20-21.
39. Zou, S. Thangboi (2019). "Riverine bazaars, trade and chiefs in the colonial Lushai Hills". Asian Ethnicity. 22 (4): 563–582. doi:10.1080/14631369.2019.1687284 . Retrieved 13 November 2024.
40. Chatterjee, Subhas (1995). Mizo Chiefs and the Chiefdom. New Delhi: M D Publications PVT LTD. ISBN   81-85880-72-7.
41. Kabra 2008, p. 17.
42. Zou 2019, p. 567.
43. Pachuau & Schendel 2015, p. 169.
44. Kabra 2008, p. 18.
45. Zou 2019, p. 574.
46. Kabra 2008, p. 21.
47. Zou 2019, p. 575.
48. Nag 2008, p. 84.
49. Nag 2008, p. 85.
50. Kabra 2008, p. 20.
51. Kabra 2008, p. 23.
52. Zou 2019, p. 569.
53. Zou 2019, p. 571.
54. Zou 2019, p. 570.
55. Zou 2019, p. 572.
56. Zou 2019, p. 573.
57. Zou 2019, p. 577.
58. Nag 2008, p. 87.
59. Meirion, J (1991). History of the Church in Mizoram (Harvest in the Hills). Aizawl: Synod. p. 4.
60. Parry 1928, p. 21-23.
61. Hlondo, Lalmalsawmi (2021). "Marriage Rituals and Customs in Mizo society". In Lepcha, Charisma K.; Lal, Uttam (eds.). Communities, Institutions and Histories of India's Northeast. London: Routledge. p. 166.
62. Samuelson 1991, p. 101.
63. Samuelson 1991, p. 102.
64. Hlondo 2021, p. 169.
65. Parry 1928, p. 4.
66. Vanlaldika 2014, p. 110.
67. Nunthara, C (1996). Mizoram: Society and Polity. New Delhi: Indus Publishing Company. p. 42. ISBN   81-7387-059-4.
68. Singh, Daman (1996). The Last Frontier: people and forests in Mizoram. India: Tata Energy Research Institute. ISBN   81-85419-17-5.
69. Nunthara 1996, p. 42.
70. Nunthara 1996, p. 44.
71. Shakespear, John (1909). "The Kuki-Lushai Clans". The Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute of Great Britain and Ireland. 39: 371–385. doi:10.2307/2843210. JSTOR   2843210 . Retrieved 22 November 2024.
72. Shakespear, John; M, J.L (1900). "Note on Some Tribal and Family Names Employed in Speaking of the Inhabitants of the Lushai Hills". The Journal of the Anthropological Institute of Great Britain and Ireland. 30 (1): 68. doi:10.2307/2842701. JSTOR   2842701 . Retrieved 22 November 2024.
73. Shakespear & Stanton 1895, p. 171.
74. Singh 1996.
75. Joshi, Hargovind (2005). Mizoram:Past and Present. New Delhi: Mittal Publications. ISBN   81-7099-997-9.
76. Nag, Sajal (2008). Pied Pipers In North-East India: Bamboo-flowers, Rat-famine and the Politics of Philantropy. New Delhi: Manohar Publishers & Distributors. ISBN   978-81-7304-311-6.
77. Chatterjee 1995, p. 3-4.
78. Joshi 2005, p. 12.
79. Nunthara 1996, p. 48.
80. Lalthangliana 2005.
81. Shakespear 1912, p. 7.
82. Shakespear, John; Stanton, A.G (25 January 1895). "The Lushais and the land they live in". The Journal of the Society of Arts. 43 (2201): 167–206. JSTOR   41334168 . Retrieved 22 November 2024.
83. Nunthara 1996, p. 49.
84. Mackenzie, Alexander (1884). History of the Relations of the government with the Hill Tribes of the North-East Frontier of Bengal. Calcutta: Home Department Press. p. 321.
85. Mackenzie 1884, p. 322.
86. Mackenzie 1884, p. 323.
87. Mackenzie 1884, p. 325.
88. Nag 2008, p. 62.
89. nag 2008, p. 64. sfn error: no target: CITEREFnag2008 (help)
90. Nag 2008, p. 79.
91. Nag 2008, p. 81.
92. Nag 2008, p. 80.
93. Nag 2008, p. 83.
94. Nag 2008, p. 102.
95. Elly, E.B (1893). Military Report on the Chin-Lushai Country. Calcutta: Firma KLM. pp. 14–15.
96. Kabra, K.C (2008). Economic Growth of Mizoram:Role of Business and Industry. New Delhi: Concept Publishing Company. p. 21. ISBN   978-81-8069-518-6.
97. Nag 2008, p. 105.
98. Chatterjee 1995, p. 67.
99. Chatterjee 1995, p. 68.
100. Singh 1996, p. 22.
101. Joshi 2005, p. 14.
102. Nag 2008, p. 97.
103. Singh 1996, p. 24.
104. Nag 2008, p. 98.
105. Joshi 2005, p. 15.
106. Nag 2008, p. 99.
107. Nunthara 1996, p. 53.
108. Joshi 2005, p. 17.
109. Joshi 2005, p. 18.
110. Nunthara 1996, p. 54.
111. Nag 2008, p. 100.
112. Joshi 2005, p. 19.
113. Nunthara 1996, p. 55.
114. Singh 1996, p. 25.
115. Reid, Robert (1942). The Lushai Hills: culled from History of the frontier areas bordering on Assam from 1883-1941. Calcutta: Firma KLM. p. 49.
116. Robin, K (June 2008). "Imperial Hegemony and Subaltern Resistance in Mizoram" (PDF). International Journal of South Asian Studies. 2 (1): 170–176.
117. Robin 2008, p. 174.
118. Shakespear, L.W (1929). History of the Assam Rifles. Aizawl: Firma KLM.
119. Robin 2008, p. 175.
120. Robin 2008, p. 176.
121. Joshi 2005, p. 24-27.
122. Leblhuber, Shahnaz Kimi; Vanlalhruaia, H (2012). "Jhum Cultivation versus the New Land Use Policy: Agrarian Change and Transformation in Mizoram" (PDF). RCC Perspectives: 83–89. Retrieved 13 September 2024.
123. Mahapatra, Padmalaya; Zote, lalngaihmawia (September 2008). "Political Development in Mizoram: Focus on the Post-Accord Scenario". The Indian Journal of Political Science. 69 (3): 643–660. JSTOR   41856452 . Retrieved 13 September 2024.
124. McCall, Anthony Gilchrist (1949). Lushai Chrysalis. Calcutta: Firma KLM. p. 202.
125. Singh 1996, p. 35.
126. McCall 1949, p. 206.
127. Nag, Sajal (April 2016). The Uprising: Colonial State, Christian Missionaries and Anti-Slavery Movement in North-East India (1908-1954). New Delhi: Oxford University Press. ISBN   978-0-19-946089-2.
128. Zorema 2007, p. 166,167.
129. Zorema 2008, p. 167,168. sfn error: no target: CITEREFZorema2008 (help)