There was no contestation on the history of Manipur. The history of Manipur and its territorial boundary can be referenced from the several international treaties, which granted international recognition to the territorial status of Manipur. Some of these treaties are: The Treaty of 1470 between Khek Khomba (the king of Pong) and King Kiyamba (the king of Manipur), which agreed that Kabaw valley should be under the territory of Manipur; The Anglo- Manipur treaty of 1762; the Treaty of Yandaboo 1826 (showed the territorial boundary of Manipur); Jiri Treaty of 1833; the Kabaw Treaty of 1834 (that transferred Kabaw valley in return for 500 siccas to pay annually), Barak Treaty of 1874, etc. Manipur maintained its territorial boundary in the modern state formation and regained its sovereignty in 1947. On 18th October 1948, Maharaja Bodhachandra, the head of the Constitutional Monarchy, announced the territorial boundary of Manipur to be 8650 sqm and 7000 sqm Kabaw Valley.
Demanding an ethnic based homeland or territory in Manipur is not acceptable. Manipur has developed into a body polity comprising of more than 35 ethnic communities and established a sovereign state in 1948. Its beauty lies in cosmopolitan feature of diverse communities thriving together in the state of Manipur. It is sad to witness some section of elites politicising most of the issues on the basis of ethnicity.
Can India govt give territory which meiteis inhabited area like in Assam, Tripura, Meghalaya, Mizoram and Myanmar if not talking about kukeis is meaningless
"According to State Durbar, 'Land belongs to Raja.'" Indeed, Meitei land was under their Raja. The land was approximately 700 sq miles. But not the hill areas where the Kukis and Nagas dwelled. Those tribals who personally went to settle in the valley might have to submit themselves under the authority of the Raja. However, the hills had never been under the Meitei Raja, instead the tribals were ruling themselves under their own chiefs. This kind of biased narrative shouldn't be believed by right thinking people. There are different versions.
India is a big country and Delhi, it's capital and Modiji is the king of India.Can we say Maharashtra isn't India or Tamilnadu Or Himachal Or Jammu and Kashmir. Can we say Modiji is the king of Delhi only...
There was no contestation on the history of Manipur.
The history of Manipur and its territorial boundary can be referenced from the several international treaties, which granted international recognition to the territorial status of Manipur.
Some of these treaties are: The Treaty of 1470 between Khek Khomba (the king of Pong) and King Kiyamba (the king of Manipur), which agreed that Kabaw valley should be under the territory of Manipur; The Anglo- Manipur treaty of 1762; the Treaty of Yandaboo 1826 (showed the territorial boundary of Manipur); Jiri Treaty of 1833; the Kabaw Treaty of 1834 (that transferred Kabaw valley in return for 500 siccas to pay annually), Barak Treaty of 1874, etc.
Manipur maintained its territorial boundary in the modern state formation and regained its sovereignty in 1947. On 18th October 1948, Maharaja Bodhachandra, the head of the Constitutional Monarchy, announced the territorial boundary of Manipur to be 8650 sqm and 7000 sqm Kabaw Valley.
500 sicca per month not annually for transfered of kabaw Valley to Burma.
Demanding an ethnic based homeland or territory in Manipur is not acceptable. Manipur has developed into a body polity comprising of more than 35 ethnic communities and established a sovereign state in 1948. Its beauty lies in cosmopolitan feature of diverse communities thriving together in the state of Manipur. It is sad to witness some section of elites politicising most of the issues on the basis of ethnicity.
After kuki lies in news9 .news9 popularity for the crisis in Manipur dim
Who will listen Meitei lies 😂😂😂😂
Can India govt give territory which meiteis inhabited area like in Assam, Tripura, Meghalaya, Mizoram and Myanmar if not talking about kukeis is meaningless
Prof. Sir, u dont absorb da questions properly , dont talk or drag da conversation only 2 ur narrative,stories that u know about
"According to State Durbar, 'Land belongs to Raja.'"
Indeed, Meitei land was under their Raja. The land was approximately 700 sq miles. But not the hill areas where the Kukis and Nagas dwelled.
Those tribals who personally went to settle in the valley might have to submit themselves under the authority of the Raja. However, the hills had never been under the Meitei Raja, instead the tribals were ruling themselves under their own chiefs.
This kind of biased narrative shouldn't be believed by right thinking people. There are different versions.
Another lies from Kuki .
India is a big country and Delhi, it's capital and Modiji is the king of India.Can we say Maharashtra isn't India or Tamilnadu Or Himachal Or Jammu and Kashmir. Can we say Modiji is the king of Delhi only...
Dumb and deaf over that drugs abusive eople what can world expect from ur community