![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | This article is about a topic whose name is originally rendered in the
Meitei script; however the article does not have that version of its name in the article's lead paragraph. Anyone who is knowledgeable enough with the original language is invited to assist in adding the Meitei script. For more information, see: MOS:FOREIGN. |
Thangjohn added the sentence It was traditionally the homeland of the Thadou-Kuki people (Known as Chin/Zo in Burma) before other ethnic groups began settling there. I removed that sentence, as in reading the sources I found no support for the Zo being the first settlers in the Kabaw Valley. It is generally accepted that the Zo moved south from southern China into the area where they are now. If anyone feels strongly about the Zo being the first settlers in the Kabaw Valley, please do not re-add such a statement without a citation to a reliable source. -- Bejnar ( talk) 00:25, 5 August 2012 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Kabaw Valley. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 02:52, 1 May 2017 (UTC)
I removed a huge pile of WP:POV junk that was masquerading as "History". Here is a link to the sources that mention "Kabaw valley" on archive.org. These are all completely free to read, download and search. Please use solid WP:HISTRS for writing about history. Any unsourced content, and WP:POV claims, will be ruthlessly deleted. -- Kautilya3 ( talk) 20:18, 23 November 2020 (UTC)
Added back history content with sources from archive.org ꯂꯨꯋꯥꯡ ( ꯆꯥ) 07:55, 24 November 2020 (UTC)
Kabaw valley, historically, was the border region between Awa ( in present Burma ) and the Muneepoor [1]( Earlier known as Kangleipak or Meitrabak).King Kiyamba (1467–1508), son of King Khomba, was known as the "Conqueror of Kabaw Valley", as he along with his friend, Chaopha Khe Khomba, the king of Pong Kingdom of Pong (Shan Kingdom) of present Myanmar completed the conquest of Kubo valley in year 1475 [2] The valley is within the territory of Manipur as late as 1852 [3] It also need to be reminded that according to Treaty of Yandabo [4], Ningthee turel Ningthee River was no doubt the natural boundary between Manipur and Burma. [5] clarification needed.There was also an agreement between British and Manipur government in 1834 that the valley on lease to Burma if under any circumstance revert to Manipur,the monthly allowance shall cease. [6]
References
Luwanglinux Can you tell me where the sources says the Kubow Vally was given on "lease" (in the last sentence)? -- Kautilya3 ( talk) 18:28, 24 November 2020 (UTC)
You have cited a reprint of the James Johnstone's book rather than the original. (And you spuriously added "Cornell University Library" as "others". "Others" is meant for the authors of the book, not a library.) The original can be found here. We see that the full title is My Experiences with in Manipur and Naga Hills. And, that it was published in 1893. The sentence you quoted is not in the main book. It is in the "introductory memoir", written by somebody else.
All said and done, it says that Kabaw Valley was placed in Manipur in maps published in Calcutta in 1852. It does not say that the valley was in Manipur in 1852. So, your statement is not actually in the source. Can you find a more accurate statement? -- Kautilya3 ( talk) 18:42, 24 November 2020 (UTC)
@
Kautilya3: Kabaw valley come under control of Burma in 1834 as mentioned in article sources from Alexander Meckanzie's work *Sir Robert Reid (1942).
History Of Frontier Areas Bordering On Assam.Controversy centred chiefly round the Kabaw Valley in its bear-
ing on the Burma-Manipur frontier, the dispute regarding which was
kept up till modern times, though it may now be regarded as
closed.Mackenzie deals with this matter at pages 175 and following of
his book. The important dates arc as follows. In 1834 an agreement
was reached with the then Government of Burma by which the boun-
dary between Burma and Manipur was placed at the eastern foot of the
92 THE MANIPITR STATE
mountains on the west of the plain of the Kabaw Valley, in other
words the valley was ceded lo Burma. Manipur was granted com-
pensation at the rate of Rs.500 a month on account of the loss of terri-
tory. This agreement received the sanction of the Government of
India
.
ꯂꯨꯋꯥꯡ (
ꯆꯥ)
20:07, 24 November 2020 (UTC)
References
I add a tag "Clarification needed" and asked whether Kabaw Valley was in Manipur's possession for all the 400 years from the first acquisitin. You have not yet answerd it. -- Kautilya3 ( talk) 21:08, 24 November 2020 (UTC)
Saying that it was a "natural frontier" in somebody's opinion doesn't establish contiuous possession. You are repeatedly writing one thing while the sources say something else. This is called WP:SYNTHESIS or, more plainly, source misrepresentation. If you persist with it, you will end up at ARBIPA sanctions enforcement. So you really need to raise your game. I am sure you are clever enough to figure it out.
Here is a scholarly source:
For eight years the matter formed a subject of controversy between the Governments of India and Burma. The authorities in Calcutta supported the claim of Gambhir Singh until, in 1832, Major Burney submitted a confidential report in favour of the Burmese claim. In his letter dated July 5, 1832, he pointed out that the disputed valley had been in possession of the Burmese Kings since 1370 A.D.,[3] and that for 12 years prior to the outbreak of the late war the Burmese had enjoyed uninterrupted possession. Lord William Bentinck thereupon decided to return the valley to Burma. The Supreme Government wrote to the Resident at Ava on March 16, 1833, “.... the Supreme Government still adheres to the opinion that the Ningthee formed the proper boundary between Ava and Manipur; but that in consideration for His Majesty’s (i.e., Burmese King’s) feelings and wishes, and in the spirit of amity and good will subsisting between the two countries, the Supreme Government consents to the restoration of the Kubo valley to Ava, and to the establishment of the boundary line at the foot of the Yoomadoung hills”. The transfer took place on January 9, 1834. Gambhir Singh accepted the decision of the British Government, ‘but neither he nor his descendants ever willingly acquiesced in the cession’ of what they considered to be their ancestral territory. In order to compensate Manipur for this loss the Governor-General agreed to give the Raja a monthly stipend of Rs. 500. This stipend is still enjoyed by the Raja of Manipur.[1] Gambhir Singh died in 1834. [2]
which completely blows up all your theories. -- Kautilya3 ( talk) 02:56, 26 November 2020 (UTC)
Here is also another scholarly source which stated exactly in favour that the it was recognised as burmese after 1833.Claim can be made by anybody you deleted the history section written by other editor(not me)
[1] which stated history behind your claim.My point is about in legal document and agreement or treaty,are you saying content and quote of
Treaty of Yandabo is a hoax!? Marjit the one claimed by Burmese is a Manipur King,there is high doubt if he really gave the valley to Burma and it is one sided too,a disputed land need to be consulted from both side.
THE TREATY OP YANDABO 117 left to Major Burney for decision was the dispute between
Burma and Manipur for the possession of the Kale-Kabaw
valley. During the war Gambhir Sing had been paid by
the British government to maintain troops in Manipur,
and had enjoyed the services of two British ofl&cers. On
the conclusion of peace he was informed that he must
carry on the government at his own expense and without
assistance. He had, at the end of the war, received the
Kale-Kabaw valley as part of his kingdom, but the Burmans
were able to prove to Major Burney that Mar jit had ceded
the valley to Burma in 1813. The government of India
allowed the justice of the Burmese claim, and the Kale-
Kabaw valley was recognised as Burmese territory in 1833.
[3]
References
What was the protracted dispute (in the above sections) all about? I am planning to rewrite this article and trying to reconstruct a timeline over here. TrangaBellam ( talk) 22:05, 20 June 2021 (UTC)
This should have taken place over the house-floor and (thus) noted in the proceedings. I will try to verify this. (Another point is that this sum should have been 12*500 = 6000 sicca per annum. The additional 270 is not clear. Sometime in the 1850s, 6370 sicca were noted to be paid but again, without any explanation.) TrangaBellam ( talk) 11:48, 21 June 2021 (UTC)On 25th Nov. 1952, Shri L. Jugeshore Singh a member of Parliament from Manipur asked Dr. Katju, Minister of State for Home affairs and States about steps taken by the Government of India for the reversion of the Kabaw Valley. He also asked if the Govenment of India was still paying the compensatory to the Government of Manipur.
Mr. Katju replied that in 1834 the British Government decided to restore the Kabaw Valley to the King of Burma. As compensation for the loss of territory the British undertook to pay to the Ruler of Manipur a sum of Rs. 500 sicca per month which worked to Rs. 6270 per annum.
He further told that when Burma was separated this compensation became liability of the Government of Burma. After the transfer of power the amount was given to the Government of India who in their turn passed on the amount to the Manipur State. On the merger of Manipur State with the Indian union the assets of Manipur State Darbar became the assets of the Government of India. The amount which the Government of Burma were continuing to pay was therefore credited annually to central revenue.
Shri L.J. Singh also asked if the Maharaja of Manipur requested the Government of India for reversion of the Kabow Valley to Manipur after the India Independence Act, 1947 was passed. Dr. Katju replied that he did make some representations but the Government of India thought that his case was very weak.
The Kabow Valley is now an integral part of Bunna and the question of asking the Burma Government to transfer the territory to India does not arise, which isn't exactly surprising. TrangaBellam ( talk) 12:23, 21 June 2021 (UTC)
For India, Tamu is not prohibited area. As early as 1953, the Nehru-U Nu Accord met Indo-Burma's claims on that 100-square-kms rice-rich Kabo valley, halfway: 20 kilometres on either side were declared a freeway. Tamu, which is situated in the Kabo valley and is as dear to the Manipuris as it is to the Burmese, is totally accessible. It takes less than two hours on foot from Moreh.What is this accord? TrangaBellam ( talk) 16:47, 21 June 2021 (UTC)
The best I know is the source:
In 1946, the stipend/compensation was still being paid (by the British Government). It is news to me that Burma was paying it. I was given to understand by Manipuri sources that independent India stopped the practice, probably not reliable. -- Kautilya3 ( talk) 15:22, 21 June 2021 (UTC)
A pro-Manipuri source is:
But it is pure opinion and completely unusable for us. -- Kautilya3 ( talk) 15:34, 21 June 2021 (UTC)
![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | This article is about a topic whose name is originally rendered in the
Meitei script; however the article does not have that version of its name in the article's lead paragraph. Anyone who is knowledgeable enough with the original language is invited to assist in adding the Meitei script. For more information, see: MOS:FOREIGN. |
Thangjohn added the sentence It was traditionally the homeland of the Thadou-Kuki people (Known as Chin/Zo in Burma) before other ethnic groups began settling there. I removed that sentence, as in reading the sources I found no support for the Zo being the first settlers in the Kabaw Valley. It is generally accepted that the Zo moved south from southern China into the area where they are now. If anyone feels strongly about the Zo being the first settlers in the Kabaw Valley, please do not re-add such a statement without a citation to a reliable source. -- Bejnar ( talk) 00:25, 5 August 2012 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Kabaw Valley. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 02:52, 1 May 2017 (UTC)
I removed a huge pile of WP:POV junk that was masquerading as "History". Here is a link to the sources that mention "Kabaw valley" on archive.org. These are all completely free to read, download and search. Please use solid WP:HISTRS for writing about history. Any unsourced content, and WP:POV claims, will be ruthlessly deleted. -- Kautilya3 ( talk) 20:18, 23 November 2020 (UTC)
Added back history content with sources from archive.org ꯂꯨꯋꯥꯡ ( ꯆꯥ) 07:55, 24 November 2020 (UTC)
Kabaw valley, historically, was the border region between Awa ( in present Burma ) and the Muneepoor [1]( Earlier known as Kangleipak or Meitrabak).King Kiyamba (1467–1508), son of King Khomba, was known as the "Conqueror of Kabaw Valley", as he along with his friend, Chaopha Khe Khomba, the king of Pong Kingdom of Pong (Shan Kingdom) of present Myanmar completed the conquest of Kubo valley in year 1475 [2] The valley is within the territory of Manipur as late as 1852 [3] It also need to be reminded that according to Treaty of Yandabo [4], Ningthee turel Ningthee River was no doubt the natural boundary between Manipur and Burma. [5] clarification needed.There was also an agreement between British and Manipur government in 1834 that the valley on lease to Burma if under any circumstance revert to Manipur,the monthly allowance shall cease. [6]
References
Luwanglinux Can you tell me where the sources says the Kubow Vally was given on "lease" (in the last sentence)? -- Kautilya3 ( talk) 18:28, 24 November 2020 (UTC)
You have cited a reprint of the James Johnstone's book rather than the original. (And you spuriously added "Cornell University Library" as "others". "Others" is meant for the authors of the book, not a library.) The original can be found here. We see that the full title is My Experiences with in Manipur and Naga Hills. And, that it was published in 1893. The sentence you quoted is not in the main book. It is in the "introductory memoir", written by somebody else.
All said and done, it says that Kabaw Valley was placed in Manipur in maps published in Calcutta in 1852. It does not say that the valley was in Manipur in 1852. So, your statement is not actually in the source. Can you find a more accurate statement? -- Kautilya3 ( talk) 18:42, 24 November 2020 (UTC)
@
Kautilya3: Kabaw valley come under control of Burma in 1834 as mentioned in article sources from Alexander Meckanzie's work *Sir Robert Reid (1942).
History Of Frontier Areas Bordering On Assam.Controversy centred chiefly round the Kabaw Valley in its bear-
ing on the Burma-Manipur frontier, the dispute regarding which was
kept up till modern times, though it may now be regarded as
closed.Mackenzie deals with this matter at pages 175 and following of
his book. The important dates arc as follows. In 1834 an agreement
was reached with the then Government of Burma by which the boun-
dary between Burma and Manipur was placed at the eastern foot of the
92 THE MANIPITR STATE
mountains on the west of the plain of the Kabaw Valley, in other
words the valley was ceded lo Burma. Manipur was granted com-
pensation at the rate of Rs.500 a month on account of the loss of terri-
tory. This agreement received the sanction of the Government of
India
.
ꯂꯨꯋꯥꯡ (
ꯆꯥ)
20:07, 24 November 2020 (UTC)
References
I add a tag "Clarification needed" and asked whether Kabaw Valley was in Manipur's possession for all the 400 years from the first acquisitin. You have not yet answerd it. -- Kautilya3 ( talk) 21:08, 24 November 2020 (UTC)
Saying that it was a "natural frontier" in somebody's opinion doesn't establish contiuous possession. You are repeatedly writing one thing while the sources say something else. This is called WP:SYNTHESIS or, more plainly, source misrepresentation. If you persist with it, you will end up at ARBIPA sanctions enforcement. So you really need to raise your game. I am sure you are clever enough to figure it out.
Here is a scholarly source:
For eight years the matter formed a subject of controversy between the Governments of India and Burma. The authorities in Calcutta supported the claim of Gambhir Singh until, in 1832, Major Burney submitted a confidential report in favour of the Burmese claim. In his letter dated July 5, 1832, he pointed out that the disputed valley had been in possession of the Burmese Kings since 1370 A.D.,[3] and that for 12 years prior to the outbreak of the late war the Burmese had enjoyed uninterrupted possession. Lord William Bentinck thereupon decided to return the valley to Burma. The Supreme Government wrote to the Resident at Ava on March 16, 1833, “.... the Supreme Government still adheres to the opinion that the Ningthee formed the proper boundary between Ava and Manipur; but that in consideration for His Majesty’s (i.e., Burmese King’s) feelings and wishes, and in the spirit of amity and good will subsisting between the two countries, the Supreme Government consents to the restoration of the Kubo valley to Ava, and to the establishment of the boundary line at the foot of the Yoomadoung hills”. The transfer took place on January 9, 1834. Gambhir Singh accepted the decision of the British Government, ‘but neither he nor his descendants ever willingly acquiesced in the cession’ of what they considered to be their ancestral territory. In order to compensate Manipur for this loss the Governor-General agreed to give the Raja a monthly stipend of Rs. 500. This stipend is still enjoyed by the Raja of Manipur.[1] Gambhir Singh died in 1834. [2]
which completely blows up all your theories. -- Kautilya3 ( talk) 02:56, 26 November 2020 (UTC)
Here is also another scholarly source which stated exactly in favour that the it was recognised as burmese after 1833.Claim can be made by anybody you deleted the history section written by other editor(not me)
[1] which stated history behind your claim.My point is about in legal document and agreement or treaty,are you saying content and quote of
Treaty of Yandabo is a hoax!? Marjit the one claimed by Burmese is a Manipur King,there is high doubt if he really gave the valley to Burma and it is one sided too,a disputed land need to be consulted from both side.
THE TREATY OP YANDABO 117 left to Major Burney for decision was the dispute between
Burma and Manipur for the possession of the Kale-Kabaw
valley. During the war Gambhir Sing had been paid by
the British government to maintain troops in Manipur,
and had enjoyed the services of two British ofl&cers. On
the conclusion of peace he was informed that he must
carry on the government at his own expense and without
assistance. He had, at the end of the war, received the
Kale-Kabaw valley as part of his kingdom, but the Burmans
were able to prove to Major Burney that Mar jit had ceded
the valley to Burma in 1813. The government of India
allowed the justice of the Burmese claim, and the Kale-
Kabaw valley was recognised as Burmese territory in 1833.
[3]
References
What was the protracted dispute (in the above sections) all about? I am planning to rewrite this article and trying to reconstruct a timeline over here. TrangaBellam ( talk) 22:05, 20 June 2021 (UTC)
This should have taken place over the house-floor and (thus) noted in the proceedings. I will try to verify this. (Another point is that this sum should have been 12*500 = 6000 sicca per annum. The additional 270 is not clear. Sometime in the 1850s, 6370 sicca were noted to be paid but again, without any explanation.) TrangaBellam ( talk) 11:48, 21 June 2021 (UTC)On 25th Nov. 1952, Shri L. Jugeshore Singh a member of Parliament from Manipur asked Dr. Katju, Minister of State for Home affairs and States about steps taken by the Government of India for the reversion of the Kabaw Valley. He also asked if the Govenment of India was still paying the compensatory to the Government of Manipur.
Mr. Katju replied that in 1834 the British Government decided to restore the Kabaw Valley to the King of Burma. As compensation for the loss of territory the British undertook to pay to the Ruler of Manipur a sum of Rs. 500 sicca per month which worked to Rs. 6270 per annum.
He further told that when Burma was separated this compensation became liability of the Government of Burma. After the transfer of power the amount was given to the Government of India who in their turn passed on the amount to the Manipur State. On the merger of Manipur State with the Indian union the assets of Manipur State Darbar became the assets of the Government of India. The amount which the Government of Burma were continuing to pay was therefore credited annually to central revenue.
Shri L.J. Singh also asked if the Maharaja of Manipur requested the Government of India for reversion of the Kabow Valley to Manipur after the India Independence Act, 1947 was passed. Dr. Katju replied that he did make some representations but the Government of India thought that his case was very weak.
The Kabow Valley is now an integral part of Bunna and the question of asking the Burma Government to transfer the territory to India does not arise, which isn't exactly surprising. TrangaBellam ( talk) 12:23, 21 June 2021 (UTC)
For India, Tamu is not prohibited area. As early as 1953, the Nehru-U Nu Accord met Indo-Burma's claims on that 100-square-kms rice-rich Kabo valley, halfway: 20 kilometres on either side were declared a freeway. Tamu, which is situated in the Kabo valley and is as dear to the Manipuris as it is to the Burmese, is totally accessible. It takes less than two hours on foot from Moreh.What is this accord? TrangaBellam ( talk) 16:47, 21 June 2021 (UTC)
The best I know is the source:
In 1946, the stipend/compensation was still being paid (by the British Government). It is news to me that Burma was paying it. I was given to understand by Manipuri sources that independent India stopped the practice, probably not reliable. -- Kautilya3 ( talk) 15:22, 21 June 2021 (UTC)
A pro-Manipuri source is:
But it is pure opinion and completely unusable for us. -- Kautilya3 ( talk) 15:34, 21 June 2021 (UTC)