GUOTUI KHOLKHAWMNA (Rainwater Harvesting)

Philip Thanglienmang

DANICS, M.A(Linguistics)

Ei leitung mihingte dinga huisieng leh tuisieng a poimaw mama hi. Kumtawn a tuisieng dawn zing thei ding bangin I ngaisut uhhi. Tuisieng manphatdan theilou mi tampite i om na lâi uhhi. Tuisieng pammai dan leh poimawdan theilou in, i mawh buohmang na uh hun tampi mun nempi na om maithei hi. Mi; atawmzawte’n tuisieng pen a tawptheilou, a beitheilou tabangin a mawh tuot uhhi.

Mihing hinna díngin i nâna uh; huisieng(oxygen) bân in, tuisieng(fresh water) a poimawpen hi. Luidungte leh leinuoi tuikhûhte khu mihingte tuidawn lâhna a suoh hi. Tuhun chiengin, leinuoi tuikhûhte zong a'ng kihâzah sêngtâh ziehin, a kang sieng ding a kisata hi.
Luidung a tui luongte khu khawlsilsiemnate(industries) leh mihingte natoh silbawlte ziehin, a nini in a nieh deudeu a, tuachiin luidung tampite pen dawntheilou a suohzouta hi. Leitung khantouna leh khanletna toh kizuiin, mihingte natoh silbawlte leh silsiemte ziehin tuinêhte, tuinâhte, gundung, luidung, vadung, tuisam pulnate leh leineitui khûhte(groundwater reservoirs) a nini in a nín deudeu a, a nieh sêmsêmta hi.

Dawnthei tuisieng omsunte zong dei bangin a kiningchingthei nawnta sih a, leitung mihingte dawn dingin a kichingzouta sih hi. Tui ziehin gâldouna leh buoina tampi hing pieng ngêi va chi a ki-upmaw mama hi.

India gam sunga mipilte mudan ahileh, tam gam sungah guotui hing kesuh mawngmawng a sim chiengun, sângtul 4,000 cubic metre a pha hi, chiin a’ng hil uhhi. Tamza lah a panin, selisuosekhat(one fourth) maimai a na kizangthei bep a, a dangteng pen tuikangpi zuon in a luong siengta hi.

Tam banga guotui kesuh mawh luon mangte chinna díngin Dam tampi a kilamzouta hi. India gam ah Dam gol 4,500 a om a, dam neute pen tulsawm val bang a om hi. Dawnthei tuisieng Dam tampi toh kikholta mana’nleh zong mihing mising aleli(quadrupled) in a pung zel a, mimal sim a(per capita), zahthei leh dawnthei tuinêh pen a kiemsuh zel hi. A kihisapdan in, dawnthei tuisieng pen mimal sim in cubic meter 6,000 apatin cubic meter 2000 in a kiemsuhta hi.

Hichi bang dinmun ahitâh ziehin, mâilam hun ah, mihingte bang a dawnta ding uoi? chia a kingaisutsut chiengin mipilte’n vântung pan a hing kesuh guotuisieng(pure rainwater) kholkhawmna bawl dingin pha asa uhhi.

Kum sawmli sawmnga peisa hun sungin mihingte’n leinei tuikhûhte a hâzah sêng taluo man un, a leng(level) a kiemsuhsuhta a, kum khat in, feet 1 apat feet 4 tan a kiem zel hi. Tam banga leineitui khûhte a kiem zel leh pen mihingte hinna zong sietna lam ah a tongkha ding hi, chiin mipilte’n a’ng hil uhhi.

Guotui Kholkhawmna(Rainwater harvesting)
Khovel a tui sieng penpen chikhat khu guotui ahi. Guotui Kholkhawmna kichi bang e? A phattuomna bang ahia ?, i inn chiet ah guotui i kholkhawmthei diei? Tuachi hita bang leh khumi guotui a sieng nalai diei? Sum leh pâi bangza sên a ngai diei? Guotui a’ng kieh chienga, tuikhûh sung khat a, kizawltung leh kikholkhawm khu Guotui Kholkhawmna kichi ahi. Mangkam in Rainwater Harvesting kichi ahi. Tam guotui pen zahle ding leh leinei tuikhûhte suhdimna zahthei ahi. Vântung apata hing kesuh tuisieng na kikâizawl in, tuihu a lêng mangsah loua, leinei a lutsuhsah loua, pâmmailoutah mantamloutah tualeh mawh luon mangsah loua, mite zahthei dinga, mun kituptah a na kikholkhawm khu Guotui kholkhawmna.

I pu I pate’n guotui sieng poimawdan na thei uhhi. Inn a lam chiengun, bihla tui tuhna chi’n guotui tuhna dingin guomkuoh na hoi siem uhhi. Singtanglei; Zolei a na hlaw chiengun guotui kete mama na zang un, haichi leh antelouhingte na chîng let uhhi.

Tulai chiengin tuinêh hing hâsat toh kizuiin mite’n guotui zawldan ding leh kholkhawm ding dan ahing ngaituo poimaw mama ta uhhi. Tam silbawl theina dingin mun lienpi ngailou hi. Guotui kete kholkhawmna ding mun golpi poimaw lou hi. Tuikhûh kangsa khat amaw? Leinei a tanki kiphûm amah? ahisihleh leitawkuohte pou zahthei ahi.

A poimawpen theiding khu tuisieng a’ng vâng sêmsêm ding ahia, tuazieha tui khêtzahdân leh kholkhawmdân lamsang thupi seding ahi. Bangma zousie Kumpi tungah bangteng kimawh ngap sih vâi. Eima mimal chiet in bangchi leh tui ka kholkhawmthei diei? chia panlâh chiet ding ahizaw hi. I gam sunga tuikhûhte, vadungte, luidungte leh gunpite sungah silnieh leh buate mawh selut sih va ui, tuin a kihêh masangin pangkhawm chiet va ui. Tui kichi pen i theisa mabangun i hinna uh ahihi. Tui na omlou hitamaleh nang leh kei i om diei? chi pen ngaituo dingin hoi ka sa hi.

Ei mihingte dingin tui kichi pen tui mawhna hilou in hinna tui ahihi. Tuaziehin, koipou tami kei laigiel sim tapou, u leh nau, tui manphatdân, tui kholkhawmdân, tui zahdân, tui vândân(rarity, shortage), tui poimawdân kiziltha kia va ui.

O, Pupa lâukha: A tribute to Pu T. Ngulzakhup 1918-2009

JCA(1954) founding Chairmanpu T. Ngulzakhup sini(20/3/2009) in a tu a tate opna mun; Bharatnagar, New Delhi ah ka va vâhlut leh, unau Delhi Lutheran Church te’n ama sunna kibawl sawm ahi, chiin ei na hil uhhi. Tuachi ahileh, chiin kei zong kipâhtahin tuami hun mang dingin ka nu-uh; Nuomzavung toh ka ngah u’a, naupangte toh ka khawllim uhhi. JCA founderpa ngaituona leh sepkhiette thei khomkhom in ka na kikum uhhi. Kum sawmgiet val tusawn mom sawn muthei a, kum sawtpi Pasien ama a damsah hiva chiin zong ngaidan ka kikum uhhi. JCA founderpa sini in bangtengpi ka tuottuot a, tuotmaw tuotthei tampi ka na tuot hi.

JCA founderpa’n tuni dinmun a Zo/Zou hlattuomte ding dingin na mamu masa sâm lou ding hi a!, bangchi tuh in a lungtang ah na a sa tuntun diei maw? chiin ka tuot hi.

“Tangkuong tunga lungsim sinsim khâu bang na huol kawm a, sun annkhing na neh laite uh, ka lungsim in ka tuot zêl hi. Tuni donga Zogam mieldante ka tuottuot chiengin, tua hun laia Zogam bangchi tuh a na miel a na hi diei aw ? chi bang ka ngaisut let hi”


U Haulam leh U Kamkhosoi te pa ahi chi zong tammi ni in ka thei pan hi. U Haulam Sugnu khuo a a’ng pêm hun lai ka na thei a, ka be ka phung ahi, chi zong ka na thei a, hinaleh, JCA founderpa tapa ahi chi pen ka na theikha vawt hilhiel sih hi. Tam bang thute ka’ng thei bep in, JCA founder khat ka neusen pienna khuo; Sugnu gamlei a, a’ng kivuithei pen ka mimal lungsim ngaituona toh hampha ka kisa a, ka lung a dam mama kawi mawh hi!

Zogam mielnate tânvâh dinga na kalsuon I pu I pate; tapidaw masate lungsim ngaituona thupi ka sa hi, thupi na lawmlawm u’e ! chi loungâl gendan ding, a dang ka tuotdoh thei tuon sih hi. Bangchih chiengin Zogam mielnate kei zong ka suvahthei diei? chiin ka lung ka huol ngitnget hi. Zogam ah lah va kalsuonthei si’ng, Delhi beh ah, bang ka bawlthei ei ? chi ka ngaisutna ahita mai hi.

I Pu I Pate pen Biehna khat a na luongkhawm dieldiel sa lai, bang khopihui leh solna lummei na kâikhum a’diei maw ? chi’n ka lungsim ka tuottuot let mawh hi. Tumlam huisie lâng a’diei maw? Suolam?, Mâllam huisie lâng a’diei maw? awle, Simlam tongsie?
Zohâm ngawingawi a, Laisiengthou(Holy Bible) nei ding a na ut va tun lai u’a, a lungsim tuotdan ding uh, ka geldoh kia hi. Mite’n Zote simmaw leh musit bawl a, na bawl lai u’a, ni mu masa hla mu masate ahi u’a, bangteng lunglai a na huol khawm zel ding uoi maw? chiin ka tuot sawnsawn hi. Lungkituoh tahin, Zo/Zou Bible neitheina dingin, Zomi Inter confessional Bible Translation Committee khat a na phutkhie uhhi. Tam committee in Holy Bible in Zo kichi pen kum 7sagi sung vingveng na letdoh uhhi. Zaitha pat bang sai in a sun a zan in, I pu I pate ham ngêl zang a, Laisiengthou nei ding chiin khamul saupipi khawi pawlkhat toh kiteh in mi simmaw nawn lou dingin hating pet pum in na pang chiet uhhi.
Ahi’nlah, Holy Bible in Zo a’ng kizaw in, Simlam huisie hing lâng in, tongsie zatam Zo/Zou te sinlai sungah solna lummei bangin a na kâisah zou hi. Simlam Zolengthe khuong in na pu na pate lungtang simmaw unlen, na pu na pate hâm ngaina sih unlen, kouma lungtang leh mikang sapkângte lungtang pozaw uh lachin pen na khangtou zaw ding uhhi, chiin solna sâisîp a na mutkhum chietta uhhi. Simlam sâisîp tum ngaina mite’n Zo/Zou te pupa tongdam ngainou leh luonsiem nou khâu bang na sâttan hiauta uhhi. Zu bang mawl mielmiel Zo/Zoute nâu bang na sângta uhhi. Hêmlam tongluon a ngai amah? a ngailou ahiei? chi zong na siel manta sih uhhi. Apocripha, Apocripha, Apocripha chiin Zo Holy Bible tungah mawna lienpi na tungsahta uhhi. Apocripha laigil sunga tongdam luonsiemte simlou dingin sanggam aw, na nuntatna pammai ma e, maw!

“O, pupa lâukha Apocripha simthu tâng a tuon ah, na na theikha mawngmawng ei maw? chiin na’ng dong va’ng chi leng lah, hânkhuh bing kêikûi bangta mawh e!
O, Sienmang na vontawite simlei tunga Apocripha zieh a na sapsiet amah? ke’n awithei malmal si’ng e!. Na Vontawite na’ng sapsiet hilou e, Simlam tongsie luong in, na Zogam lei a, solna lummei na kâisah hibou e!, ka chi chiengin sinlai ah na sa’ng e, Tung a Sienmang aw e, Zo/Zou vontawite leh Pupa lâukha samgi bang khen nang Apocripha aw samsietna na tang t’aw ka chi diei leh, awleh, ka chi sih diei ?”

Zomi Christian Labupi(1959? copy) a na sutkhiette uh, ka vêl chiengin, lahâm(peotic language) tampi a na zang leng u’a, a pu a pate kamzah, hâmkam thûhtaha a na gawlching(preserve well) na lailai thei dante uh, ka ngaisut chiengin loupi ka sa hi. Tulai hun chiengin a tu a tate’n Zohâm mangngil dehdeh ta mana’n uh leh zong, laigiel lam ah a pu a pate ham a kemching tinten na lai u’a, tami zong thupi leh loupi ka hi.
Tui bang luong khawm dieldiel a Zogam miel lah a Sienmang chinthu khâu bang na zunte ke’n Salam lienpen ka pie hi.

Note: Tami article pen ka Office sunga ka tuot zuaiteng ka’ng giel ahihi, koima kapna ka giel ahi sih hi. Hithei bang hileh, hlattuomte kigawmkhawm a LABU na sut sawm pen uh, tungah Zogam Labu ahisihleh Zo Tapidaw Labu chi bang minvawthei uh lachin deihuoi ka sa hi. Zou a’ng kizah leh, pen Kawlgam a I unau Zote’n hing zang lou maithei ahimanin, Kawlgam a kipomthei ding Spelling zahsawm un chia ka ngaidan ka’ng pieh ahibou hi. Genkhiel kitheisiem va ui.
Philip Thanglienmang
DANICS, M.A(Linguistics)

MIHING LÊNNA TÅNGTHU (History of Man’s Flight)

Philip Thanglienmang, DANICS, M.A(Linguistics)
Tulâi hun in, ei mihingte’n vânlêng a I lên chiengun, a hi ding mawng bangin I gêl ta uhhi. Mipil masate’n lungsim leh hluohbu bangza a na sên zieh u’a, tuni’a eite’n nuomtah leh olsamtah a, munchin gamchin teng I kawmthei uh ahiei? chi thute I ngaisut ngai sih uhhi.Tânglâi a kipatsa’n leitung mihingte’n vân lâi zawl a, vâ lênglâite a na mu chiengun, a na êng thei mama u’a, vâte banga nuomtah a, a lênthei nadîngun lungsim sinsim na tuot let uhhi. Tua banga, a lên ûtdânte uh, lahâm ah, ‘va bang lêngkhawm’ chiin a na mang zêl uhhi. Wright unâute gêl in vânlêng a na lênsahthei masangin zong mihing in vân lâia bangchi leh a kilêngthei diei? chi tamveipi na tum uhhi. Tami toh kisaiin, tângthu tuonthu tampi na kigielzouta hi.Kumzalom 18th hun lain gasbag, valve, bawm(basket) chite na kisiemkheta hi. Leonardo da Vinci in lênna siem ding dân pilna lamsang na giel masapên ahi. Tuami pilna zangin, Montgolfier unâute gel in, hui sânga zângzaw lênna na siem masa ahi uhhi.Kumzalom 20th bul lam apatin lênna siemdân zât tampi a na kipokheta hi. Wright Unâute’n December 17, 1903 nia vânlêng masapên a na lênsah zou u’a, kipatsa’n, leitung ah lênna chituomtuom tampi na kisiemkheta hi. 1950 bul lam in, supersonic jet leh subsonic jet bomber na kisiemkhie hi. Lênna khênna lam ah, USA pen leitung pumpi a lênna tegnolozi lam a siempen leh sângpen ahi. USA pen leisiet pumpi a namchinte lah a, lênna siemna lam a, siempen ahi.Part 1: Mihingte va bang a na lên sawmna thuteLeitung ah, mihingte va bang na lêng nuom mama uhhi. Mihingte’n leisiet tungah vâte lêndânte a mu chiengun tua banga lêntheina ding lungsim a na nei uhhi. ‘Va bang lêng dîng’ lahâm gui chi bang a na phuokhie uhhi. Jesu pienma kum 400 B.C tuom hun lâiin, China gam ah sil lêngthei khat; lâilêng(lâilâm) zêm tuomtuomte toh kizêmte a na siemdoh uhhi. Lâilâm na kisiemdoh a kipatin mihingte’n tua banga lênthei ding na lunggul uhhi. Chinesete’n(Sênte’n) biehpiehna a na nei chiengun Lâilêng(lâilâm) zêm tuomtuom a na zang let uhhi.Kumzalom tampi na peisa hun sungin, mihingte’n va banga lêntheina dingun vâte lêndân na enkhie un, a na zil zêl uhhi. Mihing hlakui a na siem u’a, singpêh zâng leh va-hla(feather, plume) khut leh bân tawng a, khîthei dîng a na siemdoh u’a, tuachiin vâte lên bangin a na lên sawm let uhhi. Mihingte tel leh voute vâte hlakui bang a kisiem ahi lou ziehin vâte lênnop dânte a zilthei sih uhhi.Hero in Aeolopile na siemkhi hi.Khanglui lâiin Greek mipil Alexandria mi Hero kichipa’n tuisahu zangin thaneina(power) a na siemkhie hi. Ama’n Aeolipile kichi tuisahu(steam) patsa thaneina inzin(engine) khat a na siemdoh hi. Tuana kuon in tuni’n mihingte’n lênna inzin a’ng siemthei uhhi.Greek Pasiente leh Icarus(Greece)Greekte tuonthu tângthu ah mihingte lêntheina khu Pasien bawl ahi a na chi uhhi. Leitung minam chinte tâumui sungah zong pheh lêngthei, kâu lêng, mei lêng leh huikhuo a lêngthei sil dangdangte na kigên hi. Greekte tâumui khat ah, Lêngpa Minos in mipilIcarus vân lâia lêngDaedalus leh a tapa Icarus a mat lâiin, khuoikhep leh vamul zangin a lênna ding uh hlakui na bawl un, Daedalus pen Naple gam zuonin a na lêng hi. Hinanleh, a tapa khandawng tha-thah Icarus pen thanuom sêngsêng kisa in, a pa thuhil manglou in a lênglêng leh nipi toh kinâi mama in, a va lêngkha a, tuachiin a khuokhep hla a’ng zungmang a, a neia tuipi tungah suongtum bangin a kesuh a, a sita hi.Pu Leonardo da Vinci lênna lim suoiteItaly mipil Pu Leonardo da Vinci in kum 1480 kum tuom hun in lênna bangchi siem ding e? chi pen na ngaituozou hi.Lênna mesin masapen Pu Leonardo da Vinci in na ngaituo hi. Kum 1485-1500 tuom in Leonardo da Vinci in mihing lêntheina ding lênna mesin(machine) ‘Ornithopter’ kichi khat a na suoidoh(design) hi. Tuami lênna pen hlaninei mesin ahia, mihing thaneina a, a hlani zap kawm a, lêngthei díngin a na suoidoh hi. Kumzalom 19th hun in, lênna siemmasate(pioneers of avitation) Leonardo lâibu na en kia in, tulâi a helicopterte guong(prototype) pen tammi mesin suoi(design) zuiin a na kisiemkhie uhhi.Leonardi Da Vinci Da Vinci's design for a wing, c. 1488 Da Vinci helicopter prototypeMan in the Moon(Hlapi sunga mipa)Pu Domingo Gonzales – The Man in the Moon(England)England mipil Pu Domingo Gonzales kum 1638 in ‘The Man in the Moon’ Zohâm in Hlapi sunga mipa kichi tângthu khat a na gielkhie hi. Tuami lâibu sungah mipa kat in kângvate hlapi sunga lêngtou dingin a na kizilsah hi. Vâte lêndân, ngate lâmdân entou in mihingte’n hui a lên ding dân a na tuot uhhi.

Hui sânga zângzaw lênna(Lighter - than - air – craft) ItalyKum 1670 in Italy mipil Francesco de Lana-Terzi in hui sânga zângzaw lênna a na ngaituo(propose) masapen hi. Sumsan lum li sung hui hing pawtdoh in tuami lênna a dopkângthei ding dân in a na tuot hi.Francesco de Lana-Terzi's hui sânga zângzaw lênnaMontgolfier Balloon (France)Kum 1783 kum in Joseph Michel leh Jacques Etienne Montgolfier unâu ni in hot air balloon (huisa balun) a na siemdoh uhhi. Meikhu zangin, nâipuon bawm(silk bag) sungah huisa a lutsah uhhi. Tuami nâipuon bawm pen toutheina lawbawm(basket) toh a kikhitha hi. Huisa in a’ng dim chiengin tua ballon pen a lêngtou thei zêl hi. Tuami balloon sungah belam khat, vatawt khat leh âhtal khat a tou a, mêl khat vâl a lêng a, feet 6000 tan sângin a lêngtou hi. Paris khopi ah, November ni 21 ni, kum 1783 in Jean-Francois Pilatre de Rozier leh Marquis d’Arlandes leitung pumpi a, balloon tunga lêng masapente a suoh uhhi.1799-1850 - George Cayley Lênna masa; Gliders(Lênnate)England mipil Pu George Cayley (1799-1850) pen lênna toh kisai pilna; aerodynamics pa chipen ‘Huikhuo tunga lêntheina leh zintheina Pa’(father of aerial navigation) kichi ahi. Ama’n lênna hla siemdân toh kisai in, sil tampi a na mukhie a, a na bawlkhie hi. A dopkângdân(lift), a khâmna(drag), a mei(tail), a hêhna(rudder), toukâ leh suhkum dânte leh adangdangte a na suidoh hi. Lênna tûhtâhdân(control) zong a na suikhie hi.Kum 1799 kum in hla nei, mei nei, taisahna nei(propulsion), a lâi(fuselage) nei; vânlêng masapen a na suoidoh(design) hi. Kum 1804 kum in lâilêng sûn vânlêng lim khat lawchingtahin na lêngsah hi. Tulâi hun a vânlêng pen tuami guong(configuration) kisûn ahi. Ama’n lênna masapen; Cayley Glider(Cayley Lênna) kichi mesin khat a na siemdoh hi. Tuami Glider ah nâupang khangdawn khat a na lêngsah hi. Kum 50 sung tuami Glider(lênna) a na siempha toutou a, lênna a lên chienga a detna (stability) leh a tanna(balance, equilibrium) dingin a mei(tail) a siem hi. A hla tunga hui a luon na dingin a hla a na siempha hi.Cayley lênnaGlider thaneina kibelap theina dingin, a glider pen hlakui ni(biplane) nei in a siemtha kia hi. Hun sawtpi huikhuo a lêntheina dingin mesin thaneina poimaw ding hi, chi pen a na theidoh hi."On Ariel Navigation" thusuo tungah George Cayley in mihing lênthei dân dingte hichi in a na giel hi. “Lênna hla dettah zangin mesin thaneina toh, a tudet dingin leh a panpi dingin a mei(tail) tamteng in mihing a lêngsah thei ding hi”

Part 2: Kumzalom 19 leh 20 kâl sunga mihing lênsawmna thute Kum 1891 kum in German engineer, Otto Lilienthal in gamlapi tan a, mihing lêntheina glider(lênna) khat a na siemkhie hi. Vâte lênnop dânte a mu, a kuon in, mihing lênthei ding dân tuot in vâte lêndân hâtangtahin a na zil hi. Kum 1889 kum in aerodynamics lâibu khat a na suodoh(publish) hi. Tami lâibu sunga kigiel lênna lam a pilna thusimte zangin Wright Brothers(Unâute ) tegêl in lênna masapen a na siemdoh uhhi. Tuami lênna tunga, 2500 vâl a lên zaw in, kum 1896, August ni 9 in tua lênna a a lên lâitahin, khopihui huoisie mama khat thakhat in a’ng lâng phut a, tua glider(lênna) pen tuoltang dênna’n a na nei a, tuami tuosietna ah Otto Lilienthal na muolliemta hi.

1891 Samuel Langley; Director, Smithsonian Institute,Washington, DC.Samuel Langley kichipa pen ahsisuisiem leh mipil khat a na hihi. Ama’n tuisahu thaneina pie inzin/mesin aerodrome kichi vânlêng lim khat a na siemkhie hi. Kum 1891 kum in mêl kimkhat vâl a lên zaw in, thautui bei ziehin a kie hi.Aerodrome; vânlêng tahtah siemna dingin dollar 50,0000 a nga a, a’ng siem zaw bepin a lênsah sawm leh, tuami vânlêng pen a gih sêngsêng ziehin a kesuh a, a tuohseta hi. Tua zawin, ama pen a lungkiehna toh kidim in lênna lam kichi mawngmawng a tawpsanta hi.Langley Aerodrome LimKum 1894 tuom in, Engineer lawchingtah Octave Chanute khu vânlêng siemdoh dingin a na kipan hi. Lênna lam toh kisai a, Otto Lilienthal in a na sepkhiette a’ng sim zaw a, kuon in, vânlêng siemdoh dingin tha leh zung tampi a na sêng a, tualeh a na kipumpieh hi.Hlakui ni nei (biplane) Herring kichi lênna khat a na suoidoh hi. Lênna lam a khantounate toh kisai thute ‘Progress in Flying Machine’ kichi lâibu khat ah a na suo hi. Wright Unâute’n tami lâibu en kawm in, etkhietnate(experiments) a na nei let uhhi. Chanute leh tua unâute gel pen a na kikumtuo let uh, ahi.

UNITED STATES(AMERICA) GAM LÊNNA A NA KHANLETDÂN Kum 1903: Lênna masapen: Wright UnâuteOrville Wright leh Wilbur Wright Unâute gêl in vânlâi zawl a, lên têitêi ding a na sawm tinten u’a, mihing lênna ding hui sânga gihzaw vânlêng khat siemkhiet ding a na tum tinten uhhi. Lênna lam a mipilna na kimukhe masateng a na sim u’a, tuachiin lênna etkhietna tamtah a na bawl uhhi.Wind tunnel(Huihawm) sungah a hla lim leh a mei lim te a na enkhie let uhhi. Tuachia,North Carolina Outer Bank dunes mun ah, etkhietnate tampi nei zou in, lênna guong(glider shape/design) kituptah a mukhie u’a, tuazaw in, lênna taisah leh dopkângtou ding 12 H.P inzin a zang uhhi.Wright brothers te’n tuol patsa’n Big Kill Devil Hill sahlam ah, zîngmawng nai 10:35, December ni 17, kum 1903 kum in a ‘vânlêng’ pound 650 a gih pen Orville in a hawl a, Kitty Hawk, North Carolina sehnêl muol tungah liveitah a lêngsah hi .Ohio patsa’n tuami vânlêng a na lêngkhie hi. Tuami vânlêng min pen The Flyer na kichi hi. Hui sânga gihzaw lênna(flight) pen seken 12 sungin feet 120 a lêngdoh hi. Tuachiin, Orville pen leitung pumpi a vânlêng hawl masapen a kichi hi. Kum 1903 kum in, leitung mihing pen vânlâi ah na lêngthei hi. Tuami lênna pen hoizaw leh lên siemzaw dingin a lim a guong a hleng toutou u’a, tuachiin October hla kum 1905 in minit 38 vingveng vânlâi ah a lêngsah u’a, mêl 24 gamla a lêngdoh hi. Tuami mesin lêngthei pen USA kumpi kunga a thumvei tah a zua sawm vangun a na ki-opsawn zel uhhi. Europe gam ah a va zuata uh leh zong a lawching tuon sih uhhi.

UNITED STATES(AMERICA) GAM LÊNNA A NA KHANLETDÂN2 February hla kum 1908 in US War Department Wright unâute ngetna toh kizuiin gâldouna zah dingin lênna siem uh heh chiin a na kithukimta uhhi. Kum 1905 kum tawp lam apatsa kum 1908 kipat lam tan; kum 2ni leh a kim, sungteng in tuami lênna lam a mite a’ng lunglut theikhah leh chiin a na tangkou u’a, hinanleh, a na lawsam uhhi.Europe gam ah Wilbur zin a, a lênna siemdoh Flyer lênna lah in a khuol a zin kawikawi hi. Mite’n lamdang a na sa uhhi.US Army te zah ding lênna bawl in Orville pen Europe gam zinthei louin America gam ah a na om a, September hla ni 2 kum 1908 kum in a lênna siem lahna Fort Myer, Virginia mun ah a na nei hi. Tuana kuon in, US Army dingin gâldouna zah ding lênna a na siem masa hi.Tuachia a dinmun op laitahin, mun dang khat ah, lênna lang a, lunglut mama Glen Curtiss leh Alexander Graham Bell(telephone siemdohpa) tegel in Aerial Experiment Association kichi pawl tha khat kum 1907 kum in a na phutkhie uhhi. Tami pawl in lênna tampi khat a na khêng uhhi. Tuate lah a minthang pen khat ahileh; June Bug kichi lênna min nei ahi.CurtissJuly hla ni 4 ni kum 1908 kum in Curtiss in lênna khat mêl khat vâl New York khopi ah mipite muthei dingin a na lêngsah hi. Tuipi tung a lênna tuithei, lêngthei siemna pilna lamsang ah, America mipil Glen Curtiss min a thangpen hi. Ama’n tui tunga tuthei, tu tung patsa lêngkhethei tuilênna kum 1911 in a siemdoh hi.Kum 1911 kum in, Calbraith P. Rodgers in Vin Fiz Flyer kichi lênna hawl(pilot) in, United States gam huop in, New York patsa’n Pasadena, California gam tandong, leitung pumpi simthei dingin, Transcontinental Flight masapen na nei hi. Tuami lên sung pen ni 49 a lut a, mun 69 ah a na khawldam a, mêl 3220 gamla tan a na lêngdoh hi.Harriet Quimby America gam a numei lah a pilot certificat nga masapen ahi.

EUROPE GAM A LÊNNA A NA KHANLETDÂN 1906: Europe gam ah, kum 1906 in, Alberto Santos-Dumont in mesin thaneina toh lêngthei vânlêng, October ni 23 niin a na lêngsah masapen hi.Europe gam a thuthang pote leh thusuo gielte’n tuami lênna lêndoh pen a na mêlchi u’a, mite’n kidang a na sa uhhi.1907-1909: Bleriot XI Monoplane (France)Kum 1907 in Louis Bleriot in monoplane lênna na lêngsah masapen hi.Kum 1909 kum pen lênna pienkhiet pansa leitung pumpi a ding kum thupi mama khat ahi. Bang zieh ahiei? i chi leh, akhatna ah, tuami kum in Louis Bleroit in monoplane ‘XI’ lênna toh English Channel a na kântan zou hi. Tuami hun apatin vânlêng manphatdân Frenchte leh Britishte’n a’ng theikhie uhhi. Anina ah, tuami kum ma-in lênna toh kisai in leitung pumpi kimutuona ‘The first International Air Meet’ kichi France gam Reims khopi ah a na om hi. Europe gam leh America gam a, lênna na siem masate pawlkhatte a va tel uhhi. Wright unâute tuami kimutuona ah a tel sih uhhi. Tuami kimutuona ah lênna 40 vâl a zao hi. Europe gamkaiteng in lênna pen thupi tahin khawl lien zangin na siem panta uhhi. Ahi’nlah, lênna pienna gam; US ah, khut leh bântha zangin lênnate a na kisiem nalâi uhhi.Bleriot XILa France Huikuong(France)Dei banga kiheithei huikuong ‘airship’ masapen ‘La France’ kichi pen Renard leh Krebs in kum 1884 in a na khêng uhhi. A suadân 14 1/2 mph ahi giap hi.La France HuikuongGraf Zeppelin Huikuong Airship(Germany)Germany gam a kisiemkhie; huikuong lawching pen khat ahileh; Graf Zeppelin a kichi a, tua pen Zeppelin Company in a na siemkhiet ahi. Tua company in, kum 1900 leh 1936 kikâl sungin huikuong chi tuomtuom nempi a na bawlkhie hi. Khuolzinna lam a, gamlapi mun dong mite polele thei vânlêng a na kisiemkhieh masang peh in, Zeppelin company in, America gam tungthei huikuong a na bawl a, September hla kum1928 in Atlantic tuikângpi tungah na lêng hi. Tua huikuongte zangin Europe gam, America gam sahlam leh simlam tan chieng dongin mite puo in huikuong 1928 apatin 1938 tandong a na lêngsah hi.1910: Tuilênna masa ‘First Seaplane - Henri Fabre (France)March 28, Kum 1910, March ni 28 ni’a tuilênna Hydravion kichi Martigues, France gam a, na lêng masapen ahileh French mipil Henri Fabre in a na siemdoh ahi.Fabre's Hydravion called "Le Canard"Vickers Gunbus (England)Kum 1914 tan in lênna pen gam vânna chilou gâldouna in na kizang pha nai sih hi.Tuitaw gâl(WWI) a’ng khanlet dungzuiin vânlêngte thâute, bomte leh bomlêngte toh a’ng kithuota hi. England gam ah mihing 250,000 te’n gâldouna díngin na na sêm in, kum khat sungin vânlêng 30,000 vâl a na kisiemkhie uhhi.

Vickers Gunbus

A Critical Study of Suantak genealogies as recorded by different authors in connection with the Tungdims’ origin from Ngengu son of Suantak.

I) Suantak Clan: Its internal contradictions with regards to its pedigree.
The Chin Hills Vol.I of 1894 (reprinted in1932) after Page 38 gives a chart of the Geneaology of Thuantak/Suantak. Thuantak(Suantak) beget Neyan, Neyan beget i) Ne Nu(NgeNgu) ii)Vamlok iii) Daitong. NeNu beget Lamtam, Lamtam beget Neyal, Neyal beget Tatmun. The genealogical tree of Suantak is reproduced below:-
Thuantak(Suantak)[1 son only) ↓
Neyan
↓ i) NeNu(NgeNgu) ii)Vamlok iii) Daitong
↓
NeNu
↓ Lamtam
↓
Neyal
↓
Tatmun
According to The Chin Hills Vol.I by Carey and Tuck, page 127, it describes thus; Suantak beget Neyan of Cîmnuoi, Neyan beget 3(three) sons viz; NeNu, Vamlok(Vanglok) and Daitong . These three sons left Cîmnuoi and they migrated towards the east and they founded the villages of Limkhai and Suantak. Ne Nu(Ngengu) had one son named Lamtam who lived in Suantak village founded by his father Ngengu and his uncle Daitong. Ne Nu(NgeNgu) is the progenitor of the clan designated as the Siyin(Sizâng) tribe who are descendents of Suantak clan. Lamtam’s youngest son Neyal moved from Suantak village and founded Khosak(Koset) village.
II)Discrepancies in the pedigree of Suantak and Ngengu lineages
1) Suantak Line Discrepancies:
According to Carey and Tuck in the Chin Hills Vol.I 1894, page 127; it is recorded that Thuantak(Suantak) beget only 1(one) son; Neyan. Neyan beget NeNu, Vamlok(Vanglok) and Daitong. NeNu(Ngengu) beget only 1(one) son called Lamtam.
According to genealogical tree of Zomi Chin Race by Vum Ko Hau (a Siyin/Sizâng tribe and speaker) in his ‘The Profile of a Burma Frontier man’(1963, Bandung) gives the Suantak lineage as follows:- Suantak beget 4(four) sons viz: i) Ngengu ii) Neilut iii) Daitong iv) Vanglok(Vangluah). Ngengu beget 6(six) sons viz: i) Boklu ii) Lamtam iii) Khawkuan iv) Tungnung v) Naltal vi) Phiamphu.
Suantak(4 sons)
↓
i) Ngengu ii) Neilut iii) Daitong iv) Vanglok(Vangluah)
↓
i) Boklu ii) Lamtam iii) Khawkuan iv) Tungnung v) Naltal vi) Phiamphu.
According to B.Lalthangliana in ‘History of Mizo in Burma’ M.A Thesis, Mandalay University, 1975, he describes the pedigree of Suantak as given below:- Suantak(Thuantak) beget 4(four) sons viz:- i) Ngengu ii) Neilut iii) Daitong iv) Vanglok.
Ngengu(Ne Nu) beget 6(six) sons viz:- i) Boklua ii) Lamtam iii) Khuakuan iv) Tungnung v) Nantal vi) Phucil(Phuthil).
Here there is no mention of Phiamphu, Tunglut and Tungte clans as given above.
Suantak(4 sons)
↓
(i)Ngengu (ii) Neilut (iii) Daitong (iv) Vanglok
↓
(i) Boklua ii) Lamtam iii) Khuakuan iv) Tungnung v) Nantal vi) Phucil
The genealogy of Sailo chiefs as given by Dr. Vumson in Zo History(1995) page 65, is an extract from the above book. The Sailos are believed to have descended from Boklua.
The ‘Tungnung Khangsimna Laibu’ 2008 A.D gives a slightly differing line of descent from Suantak. The ‘Tungnung Khangsimna Laibu’ 2008 A.D gives the genealogical line of Suantak as given follows:-
Suantak beget 6(six) sons viz: i) Ngengu ii) Neilut iii)Hinnung iv) Nunzong v) Daitawng and
vi) Vanglok.
It goes on to describe that Ngengu beget 8(eight) sons viz: i) Boklua ii) Lamtam iii) Khawkuan iv) Tungnung v) Nantal vi) Phuthil vii) Tunglut and viii)Tungte.
The pedigree of Lamtam in such a way that; Batkai as the first born of Lamtam, Neizalh is the second son of Lamtam and Limtuang as the third son of Lamtam.
Suantak(6 sons)
↓
i) Ngengu(8 sons) ii) Neilut iii)Hinnung iv) Nunzong v) Daitawng and vi) Vanglok.
↓
i) Boklua ii) Lamtam iii) Khawkuan iv) Tungnung v) Nantal vi) Phuthil vii) Tunglut and
viii)Tungte.
Lamtam
↓ i) Batkai ii) Neizalh iii) Limtuang

The first pedigree of Suantak genealogy is given by Tungnung Khangsimna Laibu is exactly similar to the one described by Pu Th. Songtinlam in his extract from his Seminar paper on ‘Unau Kut Seminar’ held at Ngathal on 9th December 2000. The first line of descent is same in both cases that is Suantak beget 6(six) sons. Whereas in case of Lalthangliana’s Suantak line of pedigree says that Suantak beget only 4(four) sons, the number coincides with Pu Vum Ko Hau’s description of Suantak lineage.

2. Ngengu Line Discrepancies: According to Carey and Tuck, Ngengu beget only 1(one) son; Lamtam. According to Pu Songtinlam, Ngengu beget 5(five) sons viz: i) Bawklua ii)Lamtam iii) Tungnung iv) Nantal v) Phucil.
The Tungnung Khangsimna Laibu describes that Ngengu beget 8(eight) sons of Ngengu. The number of Ngengu’s descendants at times tally as in the case of Pu Vum Ko Hau and Pu B. Lalthangliana who stated that Ngengu beget 6 (six) sons respectively but the names of the descendants differ slightly in serial numbers 5 and 6 wherein Phiamphu appeared suddenly in place of Phucil of Lalthangliana’s and Vumson’s descriptions. The number of Ngengu’s descendants also agree in case of Tungnung Khangsimna Laibu and Pu Songtinlam’s description, however, the second line of the pedigree of Ngengu descendants are totally different in the above line of descent in all cases . Therefore, there occurrences of so many discrepancies in the pedigree of Suantak and Ngengu genealogies as described by the above scholars leads to skepticism about the genuineness of Suantak genealogy. Perhaps, no one will be able to find out the actual number of sons Ngengu beget.
A) Are the Tungdims/Tungnungs really descended from Ngengu son of Suantak ? Firstly, let us discuss the Suantak(Thuantak) genealogy as recorded by the two British rulers; Carey and Tuck, who recorded that Pu Suantak had only one son named Neyal. Different authors of various Suantak genealogies give differing views about the pedigree of Suantak clan and Ngengu, thereby giving rise to internal contradictions and discrepancies in the number of progenies or offsprings.
The fact that the various discrepancies are found in the Suantak genealogies written by different authors leads towards lost of authenticity with regards to its correct lineage as such. It is difficult to find out which one is more genuine and which one is not, is left to the persons of interest in this genealogy to decide as one thinks fit as per one's conveniences. In this type of situation, one is mentally weaned away from accepting the genuiness of Tungdim’s/Tungnung’s direct descent from Suantak.
Secondly, the Tungdims are originally Zo speakers. Therefore, the present Tungdim Tulpipa is a Zo speaker, meaning thereby, the Tungdims were not under any subjugation of local warlords(Tou kailoute). No doubt, some Tungdim families had wandered away to other villages in search of better livelihood or in course of tribal conflicts or some other factors. So, in this way some of the Tungdim families might have reached Sizang village in course of time they settled there and intermarried with the Sizang girls. Several years after their dispersion due to various factors, some Tungdim families began to adopt the culture and language of their neighbouring people such as Sizang/Siyin or Tedim/Teizang people.
The genealogical tree of Zomi-Chin Race by Vum Ko Hau (a Siyin/Sizâng tribe and speaker) in his ‘The Profile of a Burma Frontier man’(1963, Bandung) in which he gives the Tungnung and Naltal(Nantal) lineage as belonging to Suantak’s son Ngengu. Pu Vum Ko Hau being himself a Sizang speaker at the time of writing Suantak genealogy must have included the Tungdims since, they were related through intermarriages for several years and they were closely living with the Sizang people. One cannot fully accept his theory of Suantak origin of Tungdims because it has many flaws in the genealogical records. The greatest flaw in Pu Vum’s genealogy of Suantak with regards to the Tungdims is the pedigree assigned to the great legendary heroes of the Tungdim clans i.e Pu Nantal and Pu Phuthil.

In his theory of Suantak clan, he has placed these two legendary heroes of the Tungdims well below Tungnung, which of course, is contrary to the genealogical records of the Tungdim clan head. It is a well-known fact, that the legend of Pu Nantal and Pu Phuthil does not pertain to the Zo speakers alone, it is quite widespread amongst the Kuki-Chin people as a whole. Its widespread and its antiquity itself could be taken as enough proof that these two heroes lived long ago, very much before the origin of clan names(Pu Phunghawm was said to have distributed the major clan names) amongst the Kuki-Chin people. I would probably date the legend of these two heroes to the year not later than 9th century A.D; 800 to 900 A.D. Whereas, Pu Suantak and his sons are said to have established his first village sometime in the year 1450 A.D after leaving Cîmnuoi village. Pu Suantak probably is the contemporary of Pu Saiza and Pu Saikop of Tungdim families.
For the very same reasons, the theories of Suantak origin of the Tungdims(Tungnung, Nantal and Phucil, Tungte) failed completely, as found recorded in Pu. B.Lalthangliana’s ‘History of Mizo in Burma’ 1975, the ‘Tungnung Khangsimna Laibu’ 2008 A.D, Rev. T.K. Thawng Khaw Nang Golden Jubilee Booklet,February 1991 and Pu Th. Songtinlam’s paper 9th Dec.2000. Another unaccountable view of his genealogy is the presence of Phiemphu clan after Tungnung and Nantal(Naltal). It is a fact that the Phiemphu clans who are living in the Chin Hills of Myanmar and India who speak Zo language do not subscribe to his theory of Suantak origin in genealogical line of descent. Phiemphu families might have been perhaps, enculturated in course of time by the Sizang people, therefore, their presence in this genealogy of Suantak. Therefore, positioning of the Tungdims in the genealogical record of Suantak by Pu Vum Ko Hau seriously suffers much flaws from chronological and hierarchical points of view.

B) Evidences from the Genealogy of Suantah Dopmul as recorded by the Zo speakers:
i) Suantah Dopmul Khangsimna published by Zangduang Suantah Dopmul Phungpi, Khampat, Myanmar 20/2/2000.
According to this booklet prepared by the Zo speaking Suantah Dopmul clans as found on page 1 the genealogy of Suantah is given as follows: Suantah beget Suanzo, Suanzo beget Neilut, Neilut beget Neikeng, Neikeng beget Lamkeng, Lamkeng beget Lam-el, Lam-el beget Dopmul. Dopmul beget Mulpi, Hawlhang, Kunhen, Hanthual and Guizo. They acknowledged the eldership of Neilut-Mulpi line of descent which is the third pedigree from Suantah as opposed to Ngengu who is considered as the eldest son of Suantah by speakers languages other than Zo/Zou language. Suantah had 3(three) siblings viz: Suante, Galte and Setah. Suanzo being the first born son of Suantah. Suanzo’s younger sibling is Baite. Suanzo beget 2(two) sons viz: i) Neilut and ii) Ngengu. Neilut is elder to Ngengu. There is no mention of Lamtam, Khuokuon, Tungnung, Nantal, Phuthil etc.
ii) Suantah Suan leh Hah khangsutna by Kaikhohau 1973, reprinted 1994 India published by Khupsuanpau Chief of Khullien village and President Suantah Phungpi Organization Manipur. According to this book at page 10, the genealogy of Suantah begins with Pu Zo. Suantah beget Neilut, Neilut beget Neizo, Neizo beget Genzo, Genzo beget Muonmul, Muonmul beget Mulpi, Hawlhang, Kunhen, Hanthual and Guizo. Neilut beget Neizo, Nemneng and Thangsoi. Neilut’s elder brother Ngengu. They consider Neilut is their elder. There is no mention of Tungnung, Nantal, Phuthil.

iii) Suontah Dopmul Phungpi by S.D.Suon Gin Hang, Chairman, Suontah Dopmul Phungpi (Tedim) Chin State, Myanmar gives Suontah genealogy as follows: Suontah beget Neilut and Ngengu Neilut beget Neizo, Neizo beget Dopmul Dopmul beget Mulpi, Hanthaul, Guizo, Hawlhang, Kunhen There is no mention of Tungnung and Tungdim in this genealogy too. Are these not enough evidences or descriptions to prove that Tungdims do not belong to Suantah-Ngengu clan ? The genealogical tree as described in the book ‘A Profile of Burma Frontier Man’ by Vum Ko Hau 1963 A.D, was published about 69 years after the Chin Hills Vol.I of 1894 A.D and the ‘Zo Suan Khangsimna Laibu’ by Capt. Khup Za Thang was published in 1973 A.D after a lapse of about 80 years. During such long interval of time, no oral tradition has ever made any passing reference that Tungnung, Tungdim,Tungte, Phiemphu were descended from Suantak or Ngengu clan. Our elders have failed to even made any casual references of our descent from Suantak clan. Had there been some element of same genealogical pedigree, it would have been recorded orally by our elders and younger generations would have heard the same so far. While, we generally accept the oral traditions of our elders passed down from our forefathers, it is to be noted here, that whatever, Carey and Tuck had recorded also must been passed down by way of oral traditions by the informers who also might have been belonging to Suantak descendants or clans. Had the theories of Capt. Khup Za Thang, Dr. Vum Ko Hau and other authors pointing the origin of Tungnung, Tungdim, Phuthil and Nantal towards Suantak-Ngengu line of descent have been true to oral traditions, they(Carey &Tuck) could not have missed these finer points of oral genealogy or lineage which is passed down from generations to generations by word of mouth by our forefathers. It is pertinent to mention here that the descendant of the Tungdim Tulpipa himself had recorded the oral traditions of the genealogical tree of the Tungdim, Tungnung, Tunglut and Tungte and other sub-clans which has a passing reference in the biography of his late father Peter Thangkhokam published in 2006. In this genealogy of Tungdim clans, he has not made any mention of Suantak-Ngengu lineage at all based on oral traditions of their clan historian; Pu Semzakhup who was 115 years old then in 1998 A.D.

Every tribe or clan have certain ancient Zo customary law and traditions in their society. Each and evry clan or tribe respects certain cultural traditions esp; the oral traditions and incantations and clan songs. In this line of thought, it is quite important to note that Pu Semzakhup alongwith other patriarchs of Tungdim clans did not made any mention of Suantak-Ngengu line of Tungdim, Tungnung’s descent in the recent past or in ancient past. The fact that Tungnung, Tungdim etc are not Suantak clan is further corroborated by the ancient Zo customary law and traditions of giving the salu or saching ‘the head or the spine of a wild game or domestic animal to the eldest clan head called Tulpipa.
The penultimate conclusions about the Tungnung, Tungdim etc are not of direct Suantak lineage or descent is traced to the practice and usage of our ancient Zo customary laws and traditions of our forefathers; that in the past history and recent history of the existence of Tungdim, Tungnung, Tunglut, Tungte etc there is not a single evidence based on oral or written record that the Tungdim Tulpipa or the Tungdims ever presented the customary ‘salu’ or ‘saching’ to the elder of Suantak clan(Suontah Tulpipa).

Conclusions:
At the time of Carey and Tuck, it was quite possible to assume that there might have been better qualified oral traditionalists who were well-versed in genealogies of their own clans and society as interviewed by them. The data collected by them would have been more objective in a sense, that there were no literate persons of the Kuki-Chin society, at those given point of history as evidenced by records, therefore, we may safely assume that their versions are unbiased and pure in form and intent.
Later day versions of Suantak genealogies were written with the arrival of writing system in the Chin Hills, here we find too many discrepancies of the Suantak or Nge Ngu genealogies as described by different authors and there is no single agreement in the case of genealogical descriptions as written by various authors, which of course, are hard to believe as genuine genealogies or a single genealogy itself is susceptible to much debate or criticisms.
The Dopmul clan may have been Suantak’s descendant but Dopmul is not Suantak in true sense of nomenclature and christening. It is a well-known fact, that the Dopmul clan in Churachandpur district of Manipur state, India, were using the clan name; Dopmul as late as 1990s, however, they didnot like the terminology of Dopmul and so they adopted the name of Suantak thereby Suantaknising(Sanskritising) themselves into the name of a bigger clan name. However, the author had interviewed some Dopmul clans of Myanmar, it was found that the same Dopmul clans in Myanmar(Burma) still called themselves by the same clan name disregarding the Suantaknization process(read with Sanskritization process).
Evaluating the above facts and findings, the prevalence of too many discrepancies in the Suantak genealogies as given by various authors, one can safely conclude that Tungnung, Tungdim, Tunglut, Phiemphu etc are not direct descendants of Suantak as claimed by some authors. Thus, Suantaknization process in the past, might have been responsible for such misleading genealogies. However, we are certainly related to Suantak clans at a higher genealogical pedigree that is at the level of Pu Songthu, Pu Songza and Pu Zahong. That is to say we are all the same, same brethren at higher level of pedigree in the ancient past. We are definitely the descendants of our common progenitor Pu Zo/Zou.