Dissertation, Chapter 2

Part 1

Chapter 2. Historical Lisu
Lisu were a people found primarily in the far west of Yunnan and east of northern Burma before their migration southwards to northern Thailand. This was an extensive region of great environmental and political differences. Specific forms of political and economic organization varied with the situational environment in which they lived. Lisu ranged from the independent groups in Eastern Tibet where they were imbricated in the Tibetan cultural and political modes of interaction, which were based on ritual, tribute relations, and a great deal of autonomy, due to the decentralized nature of Tibetan rule. At a far southwest location, Tengchong (T’eng-yuëh), Lisu were tied into the Chinese sphere. The Lisu were a non-state people but their relations with states were salient in their socio-political forms. Lisu adapted to whatever political conditions they found themselves in, assimilating to Chinese government where necessary and later to British colonial government. Trade, brigandage, and soldiering were important political economic adaptations for the Lisu.
For much of the history of Lisu relations with the Chinese empire, they were allowed a great deal of independence within the framework of the tusi system, providing that the tusi prevented warfare and brigandage. But in the nineteenth century, Chinese administration was extended to more of Yunnan, the role of tusi changed, population pressure resulted from Chinese immigration, and trade patterns changed with the appearance of Western mercantilism. As a result, many Lisu and other uplanders came under the direct influence of Chinese administration. This was far more true in the southwest of Yunnan than in the northwest, and Lisu political organization reflects this as they adapted to these conditions. The northern, “independent” range is typically referred to as the homeland of the Lisu, but given the history of warfare, natural disaster, trade, and debt, it would be audacious to designate any one place or population as the pure, original group. Nevertheless, looking at what we do know about these Lisu in particular times and places expands the range of comparison available to us to better understand the full variety of expression of Lisu society and culture, and it is likely that the northern Lisu were less influenced by Chinese, thus appearing more primitive and unspoilt to western observers.
In this section, I will discuss the transformation of Lisu social organization with the onset of British colonialism in Burma, the breakdown of the Chinese empire and rise of warlordism, and the introduction of opium as a cash crop. What information that is available on Lisu in Yunnan and Burma is in the form of reports by British and other Western observers in the colonial era. These include consular officials’, explorers’ and missionaries’ reports. Despite the limitations of these documents, they give a sense of Lisu history and social structure in the generations immediately preceding and during migration. Observers of Lisu recorded that which corresponded with their interests. Chinese noted degrees of civilization, warfare and rebellion, and the shifting political alliances. Europeans were interested in asserting their superior right to rule (in the case of the British in Burma) and extension of trade (in the case of both British and French). They noted dress, food, and drink as ways to classify people. Some found religion of interest, but only as evidence of the superstitious and primitive nature of the people; their ultimate concern was conversion to Christianity. The existence of slavery was also much commented upon and greatly misunderstood. Trade, brigandage, and soldiering were noted especially as they affected possibilities for expansion of trade. There were considerable differences in dialects, dress, and political forms among Lisu in this region. These differences led to the creation of ethnic sub-classifications rooted in territorial location, political structure and relations, and economic organization without consideration of how these people all remained, in some sense, ‘Lisu.’
I argue that the focus of observers on superficial features such as dress, housing, and practice of warfare highlighted difference among and within ethnic groups in southwest China to the exclusion of understanding the continuities in social relations. Even those Lisu who moved beyond the Tibetan and Chinese spheres of influence worked from a common prior text of meanings that resonated with them and mediated the new influences. And, indeed, it cannot be denied that essentially the same language was spoken from north to south, with clear gradations in dialect and practice. It seems to me that there was probably common ritual practice as well, although there is little or no specific information available on this. Historical contingency was as important as adaptation to immediate conditions, but that done it became historical contingency.

Locations, Ethnic Identification, and Relations
People called or self-identified as Lisu live from the Upper Salween in southern Sichuan bordering Tibet in the north down to northern Thailand in the south, to Putao (Nam Tamai, Upper Burma) bordering Assam in the west and Wuting, Yunnan in the east (see map). They were mostly commonly found along the Yunnan-Burma frontier in from Weixi down to Simao and in Burma followed the same line from Putao/Nam Tamai down to the Southern Shan States {Fraser 1922: v; Leach 1965: 309}. A substantial Lisu population lived as far north as 28 N on the Salween River south of Tra-mu-tang in the Tibetan parts of Sichuan {Davies 1909: 124}. Baber {!Baber 1882: 72} notes that Desgodins met “Lissou” south of the Tibetan border in Kham (Eastern Tibet) territory in the middle to late nineteenth century. North of that, people spoke Tibetan {Kingdon-Ward 1986: 196}. D'Orleans met Lisu north of Weixi in southern Sichuan, living among Tibetans and “Massa” {d’Orleans 1896: 302}.
The core area of Lisu settlement is in the Upper Salween (Nu Jiang River), but also on the Jinsha and Mekong (Lancang) rivers, and straddling the boundary between southern Sichuan and northwestern Yunnan (Daniels 1994). While this is often referred to as the Lisu homeland (just as the Lolo “homeland” was considered the Taliang Shan), in fact the ancestral Lisu population may have moved to the Salween River Valley as a result of warfare among the Naxi and Tibetans about two to three hundred years ago {Gros 2001a}. Similarly, the Lisu far north in Bingzhongluo on the Nujiang river moved there from the Upper Mekong in the fifteenth century to escape warfare {CHINAdaily 2001}. Migration is also indicated by linguistic evidence. Bradley states that the Lisu are linguistically part of the Central subgroup of Loloish or, as he prefers, Niish, but now living in the western part of their range. The linguistic evidence of compound forms for corn/maize indicate that one closely related language group moved away, to the east, only after the introduction of corn in the sixteenth century (Bradley 1996b: 161, 169). Regardless, by the mid-nineteenth century to the early twentieth centuries, the core area of settlement was between roughly 25 30' and 27 30' on the Salween {Davies 1909: 391-2}, and practically the whole population of the Salween Valley between 26 and 27 30' was Lisu. The idea of this area being “the homeland” is due in part to the density of Lisu population without being interspersed with other ethnolinguistic groups and because the people living in the homeland were “Independent” Lisu. These features gave rise to the idea of a pure and original population. In fact, we can know no more than that this was a highly significant population of Lisu living together more contiguously than in other places, but certainly not isolated from other ethnic groups or polities to which they were connected through political and trade relations. We also know that they were strong enough to maintain a degree of independence or to have become allied with more powerful Naxi chiefs who allocated them certain rights to collect tribute and taxes. They were never rich and powerful enough, however, to become chiefs of large territories themselves, much less hereditary. There were also significant Lisu populations on the upper slopes of the Salween-Mekong Divide and the Mekong-Yangtze Divide in the Weixi District; and on the Nmai Hka (an eastern branch of the Irrawaddy) in Burma {Forrest 1908: 261; Fraser 1922: iii; Davies 1909: 391-2}.
Aside from the core area, Lisu were non-contiguously settled throughout western Yunnan {Rock 1947: 124} and northeastern Burma. Another significant population was located north and east of Tengchong (known at the time as T’eng-yuëh or Momien) and as far west of the Salween as Bh mo {Davies 1909: 391}. They were also reported in Kengtung (Shan States, Burma) {Rose & Brown 1911: 258}. Lisu were reported as far south as “Kianghung-gyee” and the mountains east of Yungchan according to Anderson {!Anderson 1871: 135-6}. By 1900, Lisu were reported as far west as Wuting (25 33' N, 102 38'?E) in the vicinity of Nunming near Guichou province. By the 1920s, a small population of Lisu had moved to the Myitkyina Plains on the Irrawaddy {Fraser 1922: vii}, considerably south of the main settlements. The population in Thailand is the southernmost one, having first arrived 150 years ago according to one Lisu informant. However, the earliest verifiable date is that villages were established by Lisu in the 1890s {Hanks & Hanks 2001: 78, 80}.
Lisu lived in villages scattered over a wide area. They were surrounded by other groups, both uplanders and people of lowland states, and their relations with these people had a great deal to do with expression of their ethnicity. In the northwest of Yunnan, Lisu were surrounded by Tibetan and Naxi lowlanders; in the central region, their neighbors to the east were Chinese, Yi (Lolo), and Minchia. And toward the southern part of their distribution in Yunnan and Burma, their neighbors were Lahu, Wa, Kachin, and Shan {Davies 1909: 307}. The Tibetans, Naxi, Chinese, and Shan were lowland state societies of greatly varying levels of complexity but all in position to militarily, politically, and culturally control or dominate uplanders such as the Lisu. These groups varied even more in the degree and impact they would have had on each other, the assessment of which is made more difficult by the fact that such labels, designated by people of lowland polities, reflected the latter’s own interactions with the uplanders more than the uplanders themselves. For instance, Kachin, designated by Burmans as a block of uplanders, were actually speakers of several different languages {Leach 1965: 41-44} not all that closely related to each other, while several are closely related to Burmese (Bradley 1997b:168).
Such categorizations reflected geographical or environmental differentiations and incorporation into the cultural frameworks of a neighboring group. This pattern of ethnic zonation was remarked by observers from as early as the time of Marco Polo {Rose & Brown: 1911: 251}. he “ethnogeographical boundary” between Lisu and Kachin was the steep and severe Salween-Irrawaddy divide {Forrest 1908: 258}, although in fact there were many Kachin in western Yunnan along the southern reaches of Yunnanese Lisu distribution. One main difference seems to have been ethnic zonation – the Kachin tended to live at slightly lower elevations than did the Lisu {Harris & Ma 1997: 171} and there were also considerable climatological differences on either side of the Salween-Irrawaddy divide that may have helped to maintain a degree of ethnic and ecological zonation. Other factors in Burma were Kachin incorporation into Shan cultural forms and Kachin domination of mountain trade routes and mines, which gave chiefdoms an economic base.
From north to south along the Salween, Lisu were increasingly in contact with and influenced by Chinese markets and administration {Rose & Brown 1911: 251} and in the southern and eastern parts were more directly under Chinese influence {Enriquez 1921: 72}. The Lisu living in these different areas therefore had different characteristics and were categorized by both Chinese and British observers as different types of Lisu, albeit still Lisu. In order to discuss transformations in social organization, I will start by distinguishing among these sub-groupings.

North Lisu
The Lisu of the Upper Salween were largely independent of Chinese control. They were greatly influenced by the common Tibetan conceptual substratums, especially the cultural and political framework, but at the beginning of the twentieth century Lisu were not effectively incorporated into the rule of Naxi or Tibetan polities. As discussed previously, in the eighteenth to mid-nineteenth centuries a significant population of fiercely independent Lisu lived to the south of Kangpu and Yezhi, tusi domains in the Weixi Prefecture of Yunnan {Gros 1996; !Gros 2001a} (Yezhi being at approximately 27 50' and 99 ). Baber notes that Desgodins remarked the independent character of Lisu he met south of Tibet {Baber 1882: 72}, where they were in their “natural, primitive state” in the Salween Valley north of 26 30' {Davies 1909: 391-2}. These were the “Black Lisu.” They were among the groups noted, along with Tibetans and Independent Lolos of western Sichuan, Wa, and Naxi, as maintaining their dress, language, and customs in the face of Chinese assimilatory forces {Davies 1909: 368}. They were marked by not speaking Chinese, wearing hempen clothes, frequent feuding among villages, and sometimes not having a village headman {Forrest 1908: 250, 254} as well as exhibiting Tibetan characteristics {Kingdon-Ward 1986: 176}. This was particularly true of Lisu living on the west bank of the Salween, the Irrawaddy divide {Forrest 1908: 252-54}.
In the far north of Burma, across from Weixi, (Akyang Valley, Putao, and Nam Tamai) there was a mixture of Lisu, Nung, and Kachin but the Lisu villages were organized into a stratified society radically different from that of Kachin and other societies in the Kachin Hills. The Nung tended to pay tribute to their Lisu and Lolo neighbors of the Upper Salween among others, that is, to populations at about 27 to 28 N, 98 {Leach 1965: 52-59}. Here, they were likely “Black” or Independent Lisu, involved in the same complex of political relations influenced by the interplay of Tibetan/Naxi/Chinese tusi warfare and political relations.
To the east, the Lisu along the Mekong River (between 27 and 29 ) were described as timid {d’Orleans 1896: 136}. Lisu on the east of the Salween toward the Mekong were considered more peaceable and prosperous even when not under Chinese rule; the land in which they lived there was also less severe and more fertile {Forrest 1908: 252-254}. They were under the protection of other polities. They may have been a more assimilated population; influenced by Chinese categorizations, degrees of timidity and fierceness in European explorers’ eyes was often congruent with degrees of assimilation to Chinese culture. At the very least, these Lisu were susceptible to raids by the independent Lisu to their west. These were “White Lisu.”
There was a small eastward population of Lisu in San-ying-p’an (26 , 102 30') or Yong-bei Ting (26 45', 100 45') {Davies 1909: 392}, which was east of Lijiang, likely the region noted in Daniels’ (1994) report of a Lisu uprising in 1821. This is just south of Shigu, a Naxi area north of Lijiang at an oxbow in the Yangtze River, and thus was a population more exposed to Chinese immigration in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries, as well as closer to the independent Lolo (Yi) “homeland” in the Taliang Shan mountain range {Baber 1882: 66-7; Davies 1909: 389}. The furthest eastern points were eastern settlements at Yuan ma (approximately 25 40', 101 50') {Enriquez 1921: 74}, San-ying-p’an (approximately 26 , 102 ) and Wuting (25 30' N, 102 20') {Rose & Brown 1911: 257}. They were probably White Lisu but were marked by the difference of their dialect {Fraser 1922: xi}.
In summary, Lisu in the far northwest were considered independent or Black Lisu, meaning they were less under Chinese control, although they were probably imbricated in Tibetan ritual and political relations. Lisu populations to the south and east of the “core” population were more assimilated to Chinese culture and government.

Central Lisu
Further south, below 26 30', Lisu were more Sinified {Davies 1909: 391-2} in clothes and forms of governance, and more people spoke Chinese, although these were generally tusi and their families {Forrest 1908: 244, 247}. Davies thought it probable that the upper part of the Shwe-li or Lung-Chiang Rivers north of T’eng-yuëh (Tengchong) (25 , 98 30') was once inhabited by Lisu who “became” Chinese {Davies 1909: 391}. Chengjia (Cheng-ka) was the farthest point north where there was any real Chinese authority through native tusi. From 25 50' to 26 30', tusi were more powerful, claimed a history of being Chinese who “turned” Lisu, and the Lisu appeared to be mixed with Chinese. While given a racial connotation by British explorers {Forrest 1908: 244}, this admixture was more likely to have been a matter of assimilation.
To the west, Lisu were found scattered in small communities throughout the Kachin Hills, east of the Irrawaddy, Upper Burma, and as far south as 23 40' (well south of Bh mo). In general, the Lisu in Burma extended directly west of the main southwest area of Lisu populations in Yunnan, particularly across from Tengchong, which was the furthest outpost of Chinese administration and settlement, a Chinese island in the midst of non-Han people {Rose & Brown 1911: 250}. Lisu were even reported as far west as the Assam-Burma border {Rose & Brown 1911: 257}, citing {Young 1907}, in the Akyang Valley, Putao, and Nam Tamai, directly opposite the northern core area of Lisu in Yunnan {Enriquez 1921: 70, 72; Leach 1965: 51-52}. In the years following the Burmese independence and Chinese Communist control of China, Christian Lisu took advantage of these connections to move to Arunachal Pradesh and live there today {Maitra 1993}.
Further south in Burma, Lisu were more Sinified and lived in smaller less powerful communities interspersed among Kachins. They were often engaged in intermarriage and political relations with the Kachin, Lisu lineages being incorporated into Kachin kinship and clan structure, so that Kachin kinship networks were extended to embrace Lisu speakers. In one village southeast of Bh mo (on the border with Yunnan, across from Tengchong) studied by Leach, one of the eight lineages was a Lisu lineage, the other being speakers of Jinghpaw, Gauri, Maru, Atsi, and Chinese {Leach 1965: 59, 88}.

South Lisu
Still further south, there were some Lisu in the Northern Shan States (south of 24 N) and until the colonial government created an arbitrary administrative separation, all of the people of this linguistically polyglot territory were dependencies of one of the local Shan chiefs of saopha or sawbwa (Thai, jaofaa, meaning lord of the sky) {Leach 1965: 51}. Lisu here, although relatively remote from the Chinese frontier, were said to be very Sinified – they smoked opium, kept Chinese New Year, the men spoke Chinese, and intermarried with the “hill Chinese.” This was in Möng Ka, a staging post on the route from Sadon to Tengchong {Leach 1965: 39}. Lisu in the Kachin Valley wore dress that resembled that of Chinese-Shans except for “Lisu” features such as the bag, turban, earrings, and necklaces of the women {Anderson 1871: 136}. Further north, Lisu also lived in the Chinese Shan States (24 - 26 N) among a similar polyglot of linguistic groups. The main difference cited by Leach was that Chinese administration appeared to be less direct than that of the British. While Chinese Shan chiefs retained greater control over the rule of their domains, the chief himself was “ruthlessly” taxed by the Chinese {Leach 1965: 52}, which have contributed to the celebrated avarice of tusi. Finally, in an area of irrigated rice terraces between Mogok in the south up to the confluence of the Nam (Tamai) and Mehk Rivers, there were some Lisu between Sadon (25 15' N) and Namkhan (south of 24 N). This was east of Tengchong {Leach 1965: 52}. I will write more of Mogok later in this chapter.
By the early twentieth century, therefore, Lisu had moved south and west into Burma. There was a Sinified population of Lisu with roots in the territory of Tengchong. They were found in villages of Shang Tai, Ta Shan, Hkringmu-dan, and Kha-kan Krung around Bh mo; at Bernardmyo; in Hsenwi (south of Bh mo); and in the mountain tops on the left bank of the Shwe River, between Bh mo and Hsenwi. Further north of this, there were five Lisu villages near Sima and large village near Sadon, and north of Tengchong on the present-day Burmese side of the border at Htawgaw {Enriquez 1921: 70} and in the Southern Shan States and the Myitkyina Plains {Fraser 1922: iii, vii}. Much further south, Lisu reportedly lived in Mong Lung in Laos (20 55', 101 45') and there called Chedi or Cheli {Davies 1909: 392}. This was the furthest southern point they were noted aside from Thailand. Interestingly, LeBar, Hickey and Musgrave {LeBar et al. 1964} did not report on Lisu living between 23 and 19 , between Upper Burma and northern Thailand.

Return Home