Editor,
U Kiang Nangbah was executed by the British on December 30, 1862, yet the Jaintias persisted in their struggle even after his death. A meeting was held at Nongphyllut, where U Mynlon, the former Dalloi of Mynso, declared his determination to carry on the fight till the end. The patriots took a solemn oath to continue their resistance, symbolically described as Hadooh Khatar Snem Luti, which translates to “till the end of a twelve-year journey” or, metaphorically, “till the bitterest end.” Leadership was assumed by U Mynlon, Dalloi of Mynso, and Mon Lato, who valiantly continued the resistance until their last breath.
In January 1863, a renewed revolt emerged, with the populace constructing stockades and retreating into the dense forests to launch fresh assaults on British forces, resulting in significant casualties for the latter. Resistance was notably active in regions such as Rymbai, Padu, Nangjngi, Nongbareh, Umkiang, Jowai, Mynso, Nartiang, Lamin, Mukhla, and Nangbah. There were also reports of an encounter between “the Cossaya police” under Captain Worsley and the Jaintias numbering around 3,000, including women and children who had fortified themselves in a cave.
However, by February 1863, the resistance was quelled, as many leaders were killed in confrontations with British troops, while others surrendered and were taken captive. Notably, Oossa Marateang of Rymbai (as recorded in the Bengal Judicial Proceedings No. 214 on March 4, 1863) was tried by Capt. B.W.D. Morton and executed on January 16, 1863.
As we commemorate the profound sacrifices made by Oossa Marateang for the freedom of our nation, we must also honour the memory of those leaders who laid down their lives in service to the motherland. Among these distinguished figures are U Mynlon Mynso, U Mon Lato, U Kiri Dalloi of Changpung, U Swar Sutnga, U Long Padu, U Mon Rymbai, U Bang Raliang, U Bukhiar Pator of Raliang, U Woh Riang, U Kiang Sule, U Kat Changpung and U Chey Rangbah – the most trusted lieutenant of U Kiang Nangbah.
We pay tribute to the courageous patriots of Jaintia Hills, U Kiang Nangbah and Oossa Marateang, who were executed by British authorities. Despite their deaths at the hands of the British Raj, their ideals, patriotic sentiments, and sacrifices remain indelible in our collective memory.
As we honour these individuals whose endeavours to liberate us from colonial rule culminated in their ultimate sacrifice it is perplexing that the Jaintia Resistance movement is often overlooked in the historical narratives of India’s freedom struggle. More than seventy years after independence, the contributions of countless martyrs and freedom fighters from the northeastern region, who shed their blood and offered their lives for the nation, deserve rightful recognition in the annals of India’s history.
Yours etc.,
Dr Omarlin Kyndiah,
Via email
Both English and the Vernacular Languages are Equally Important
Editor,
This refers to the recent article by Bob Banter expressing concern over the alleged denial or rejection of English in India and its implications for the younger generation.
At the outset, the author deserves appreciation for drawing attention to the undeniable importance of English as a gateway to global knowledge, scientific research, higher education, technology, and international engagement. His concern that intellectual isolation and inward-looking attitudes can limit a generation’s future is both relevant and timely, and it certainly calls for serious reflection.
That said, the suggestion that English is being widely denied or consciously rejected by parents and the masses in India does not fully align with present realities. While it may be true that English is neglected by some sections—often due to socio-economic constraints, regional limitations, or lack of access—this cannot be seen as a general or deliberate national mindset. On the contrary, there is ample evidence that parents across social and economic backgrounds place great importance on English education. Many families make extraordinary sacrifices to enrol their children in English-medium schools or arrange additional language support, clearly reflecting aspiration rather than rejection.
The continued emphasis on vernacular languages at the elementary level, particularly in government-run and aided schools, also needs to be viewed in the right perspective. This approach is pedagogically sound and culturally necessary. Early education in the mother tongue strengthens comprehension, confidence, and emotional development, while also preserving indigenous languages, culture, and traditions. Far from opposing English, this foundation often enables children to acquire additional language skills more effectively at later stages.
India’s global presence itself challenges the idea of large-scale rejection of English. The growing number of Indians in top leadership positions worldwide highlights long-standing engagement with the language. Leaders such as Sundar Pichai at Google, Satya Nadella at Microsoft, Indra Nooyi at PepsiCo, and Shantanu Narayen at Adobe are not isolated success stories. They are products of an education system and social environment that have, for decades, recognised the value of English while remaining rooted in cultural identity.
The real concern, therefore, lies not in any ideological rejection of English, but in unequal access to quality education. Shortage of trained teachers, infrastructural gaps, and regional disparities continue to limit effective language learning for many students. Addressing these systemic issues would be far more constructive than framing the situation as cultural resistance or misplaced nationalism.
Bob Banter’s warning against intellectual isolation is valid and important. However, a nuanced understanding is equally essential. India does not need to choose between roots and wings. Vernacular languages give children identity, values, and belonging; English gives them reach, confidence, and opportunity. Together, they help create citizens who are grounded at home and capable in the wider world.
A balanced, inclusive, and well-supported education approach—rather than a polarised narrative—will best serve the future of our children and the nation.
Yours etc..,
Jairaj,
Via email
