Translate

The Suppression of the Society of Jesus

Introduction
The suppression of the religious order called the Society of Jesus, which was founded by St. Ignatius of Loyola, was officially pronounced by Pope clement XIV in 1773. The most striking feature of the Suppression is the long list of allegations against the Society of Jesus with no mention of what is favorable on one hand and on the other hand, the charges are recited categorically; they are not definitely stated to have been proved in any way. The Society was suppressed to appease the kings and others. The Jesuits were expelled from Portugal and its colonial in 1759, from France in 1763, and Spain and its colonial in 1767. The universal suppression of the Society of Jesus came into effect in July 1773 as Pope Clement XIV read the apostolic brief called Dominus ac Redemptor. It’s a note worthy to mention that the non catholic territory, where the authority was non catholic, banned the publication of the brief sent by the Pope and the Jesuits were asked to remain. 

Historical reason for the suppression in general
Until the first half of the XVIIth century, the Society of Jesus was flourishing in terms of numbers and their missions had wide spread all over the world. They had enjoyed until then a great regard from the Catholics around the world, the kings, Popes, etc. but no sooner in the second half of the XVII century, the cloud of problems arose to haunt the Society of Jesus. The same people those who had had a high regard for the Jesuits became the most hostile to them like Jesus and the Jewish. Every work of the Jesuits, their wide spread mission, their educational institutions, their residences, etc. everything belonged to them was either taken away from them or destroyed. Many of the Jesuits were expelled from their resident territory.

The causes of the suppression of the Society of Jesus include the controversy regarding the Jansenism. The violent critics raised on the obedience of Jesuits. The people who wanted to promote the rationalization of the religion considered the Church as an obstacle in their way and they attacked the Society of Jesus, which they perceived as the principle pillar of this Catholic Institution, which defends the Church.

At the same time within the Roman Catholic Church, there were hostile situations. For instance, the controversy with the Dominicans on the issue of grace and will found the interference of the Pope to silence both the parties. Some clergymen went to the extent of posing a question whether the Society of Jesus was living true to the expectations of its founder or not. S

Some other felt that the suppression of the Society of Jesus was due to the same causes which in further development brought about the famous French Revolution. The same causes, having varied in different countries were responsible for the universal suppression.

The Expulsion of Jesuit from Portugal and its colonies
The king of Portugal, Joseph I had appointed Sebastian Joseph Carvalho as his first chief minister. It is the issue on the territory that made him as enemy of Jesuits. He was the main causes for the suppression of Society of Jesus in Portugal and in its colonies. Society’s flourishing missions in Paraguay were coveted by the Portuguese. They accused the Jesuits for mining gold in those regions. These mission regions, where the Jesuits were working the region, were inhabited by the indigenous people, who were native of that land.

The indigenous people of were ordered to quit their land. Jesuits helped the indigenous people for their transfer to the allotted places. They conditions being harsh, the indigenous people revolted against the Portuguese. This was called the war of Paraguay ensued which was not doubt disastrous for the indigenous people. The quarrel between the Portuguese and the Jesuits who helped the natives further deteriorated and the weak King had to remove the Jesuits from his Court. The Jesuit fathers had to shed of their temporal administration of the missions and then they were deported out of the territory.

 Then the aged Pope Benedict XIV appointed cardinal Saldanha on 1st April 1758 to investigate the allegations against the Jesuits, which were raised by the Kings of Portugal and its colonies. The Pope, in fact, wanted to safeguard the reputed Society. This was evident through the study of his letters by the historians. His unfortunate death on May 3rd gave a complete freedom to the appointed cardinal who without proper investigation declared that the Jesuits were guilty of having exercised illicit business both in Portugal and its colonies. The work of the Jesuits was destroyed and suppressed by the king before the election of the new Pope clement XIII.

Jesuits were accused also of helping the opponents of the king of exterminate him. But the ground of suspicion were neither clearly stated nor properly proved. A saintly priest by name Fr. Malagrida was allegedly accused of heresy and was executed and burnt in a public place at Lisbon. Many of the Jesuit fathers were exiled and remaining Jesuits were thrown into prisons. In 1759, 133 Jesus priests were placed in a ship and were sent to exile for surprise of carvalho, many Jesuit brothers and young scholastics chose to accompany the priests. The Jesuits were termed as rebels and traitors immediately. Portugal was the first country which welcomed the Jesuit missionaries but the same country became hostile to the Jesuits.

Expansion of Jesuit from France
The suppression of Jesuits in France was due to the attack by the English navy on French commerce in 1755. The Jesuit missionaries in Martinique used to sell the products of their great mission farms, in which many natives were employed, and this was allowed, partly to provide for the current expenses of the mission, partly in order to protect the simple, childlike natives from the dishonest intermediaries. Fr. Antoine La Vallete, superior of the Martinique missions managed these transactions successfully and encouraged him to go far. His ships were captured in the mid sea by the English and he suddenly became a bankrupt, for very large sum. His creditors when asked for the payment he would not bulge and the creditors went to the courts and an order was made in 1760 obliging the Society of Jesus in France to pay the creditors.

The fathers, on the advice of their lawyers, appealed to the Grand chamber of the Parliament of Paris. The Society’s enemies in that assembly determined to strike a great blow at the order. Enemies of every sot combined. The Jansenists were numerous and at that moment were especially keen to take revenge on the Jesuits. The Sorrbonnists too, the university rivals of the great teaching order, joined in the attack.

The then king Louis XV was weak and the influence of his court divided. His able first minister, the Duke of Choiseul played into the hands of the parliament and the royal mistress, Madam of Pomador, to whom the Jesuits had refused absolution, was a bitter opponent. The attack against Jesuits, as such, was opened by the Janseistic Abbot Chauvelin, on 17 April, 1762, who denounced the Constitutions of the Society of Jesus itself as the cause of the alleged acts of the order.

In the parliament of Paris the case against Jesuits was desperate. They were alleged to teach every sort of immortality and errors. On 6th August, 1762, the final stay order issued condemning the Society to extinction, but the king’s intervention brought eight months delay. In favour of the Jesuits there had been some striking testimonies, especially from the French clergy in the two conventions summoned on 30 November, 1761 and 1st May, 1762. At the end of member, 1764, they unwillingly signed and edict dissolving the Society throughout his dominions, for they were still protected by some regional parliaments. But in the draft of the edict, he cancelled numerous clauses, which implied to stay in France were asked to live as good citizens of France under the Bishops. The educational institutions of Jesuits were disorganized and the MEP fathers took control of the missions, earlier owned by the Jesuits.

The suppression of the Society on Spain, Naples and Parma
The Suppression in Spain, Naples and Parma and in the Spanish colonies was carried through by autocratic kings and ministers. Charles III, a man of good moral character, had brought from Italy a finance minister, whose nationality made the government unpopular. There was a revolt against him. An extraordinary council was appointed to investigate the matter; it declared that simple people could not be behind the riots. The Jesuits were accused to be at the back of this revolt. The council had resolved to banish the Society of Jesus and that by 29th January 1767, its expulsion was settled. Secret orders, which were to be opened at midnight between the first and second of April, 1767, were sent to the magistrates of every town wherever the Jesuits resided. The plan worked smoothly. That morning around 6000 Jesuits were marching like convicts to the coast, where they deported to be exiled.

Politics in papal election
After the death of the Pope clement XIII in 1769, the conclave which followed lasted from 15th Feb to May 1769. The Bourbon courts, through the so-called “crown cardinals”, succeeded in excluding any of the party, nicknamed Zelanti, who would have taken a firm position in defense of the order, and finally elected Lorenzo Ganganelli, who took the name Clement the XIV. It has been stated that Ganganelli, before his election, engage himself to the crown of Cardinal by some sort of stipulation that he would suppress the Society by the statement of the Spanish agent Azpuru, who was specially deputed to act the crown of cardinals. He wrote on 18 May, just before the election, “None of the cardinals has gone so far to propose to anyone that the Suppression be assured by a written or spoken promise,” and just after 25th May he wrote, “Ganganelli neither made a promise nor refused it”. On the other hand it seems he did write words, which were taken by the crown of cardinals an indication that the Bourbons would get their way with him (de Bernis’ letters of 28 July and 20 November, 1769).

No sooner was Clement on the throne than the Spanish court, backed by the other members of the “family Compact”, renewed their overpowering pressure. In the middle of 1772 Charles sent a new ambassador to Rome Don Joseph Monino, afterwards Count Florida Blanca, a strong and hard man, full of artifice, sagacity and dissimulation, and so no one more set on the suppression of the Jesuits. The negotiation had been in the hands of clever, diplomatic Cardinal de Bernis, French Ambassador to the Pope. Monino then took the lead, de Berisnow coming in afterwards as a friend to urge the acceptance of his advice. At last, on 6 September, Monino gave in a paper suggesting a line for the Pope to follow, which he did in part adopt, in drawing up the brief of suppression. By November the end was coming in sight, and in December Clement put Monino into communication with a secretary; and they drafted the instrument together, the minute being ready by 14 January,, 1773, by 6 February, Monino had got it back from the Pope in a form to be conveyed to the Bourbon courts, and as these were dated, no delayed was possible beyond that date, which was 16 August, 1773. A second brief was issued which determined the manner in which the Suppression was to be carried out. To secure secrecy, on regulation was introduced which led, I friend countries, to some unexpected result.

Conclusion


It is evident from the above mentioned caused was mainly due to the political reasons. The Jesuits became victims of the autocratic authorities. Even the Pope could not do much to prevent the Society from its suppression as he was pressurized from the autocrats. Though the Society was suppressed universally and its members were imprisoned and ill treated, the Society of Jesus was not destined to its complete extinction. In Russian, under the order of Queen Catherin II, the brief consisting of suppression of the society was forbidden to be read and she even entrusted the Jesuits the responsibility to take care of the spiritual needs of the Catholic minority in her region. Even though for a brief moment in a history the light of the Society of Jesus faded yet the candle of Hope for its restoration was still burning.

The Prince by Niccolo Machiavelli


Introduction
Niccolo Machiavelli’s ‘The Prince’ is one of the most arguably books about politics. Machiavelli, once as an assistant Secretary to the State of the Republic of Florence, witnesses some tricks played by politicians or rulers, which are satirically written in this book. The political behaviour of fifteen century is very much re-echoing on our modern politics today particularly in India. Machiavelli gives advice to those heads of state on a variety of matters- including advantages and disadvantages, regarding on how to gain power on a newly annexed state, how to deal with internal rebellions, how to make alliances and how to maintain a strong military. “Machiavelli is not seeking in The Prince to give specific advice for the present situation, but the book is vibrant, nevertheless, with the conviction that advice is needed and that he is the one to give it.”1 Machiavelli’s views regarding human nature and morality on political spheres are disclosed on this book but not manifested themselves explicitly.  For the good of the State or for the maintenance of the State or for securing power of the State, the appearance of virtue is more important than true morality, which may be seen as a accountability.  He gives some specific historical contexts about the disunity of Italy, hopping that Lorenzo de Medici, to whom the book is dedicated, can restore Italy’s honor and pride.

The secret principle played by rulers or politicians in order to secure power and to serve their selfish interests, not to serve society in general, is disclosed by Machiavelli. But many critiques say that his advices to princes are devilish and which are indeed inspired by devil. The Prince was condemned by the Pope on its viewpoints. ‘Machiavellian’ is now commonly used to describe the process of being cunning, ruthless, treachery in the pursuit of power and this diabolic ‘old nick’ is identified with Machiavelli. The Prince is rather confusing whether Machiavelli is trying to advice to princes, or to gain favour from the prince to get back his old office, or to criticize the political scenario both in the Church and the state, or to disclose the secrecy of politics or to take revenge. But the conclusion chapter gives us clearer notion of his lofty goal- unification of Italy, which is the silver thread running throughout the book. Is Machiavelli really a diabolic as he is often portrayed? Is his ultimate purpose justified?

I am very interested to know about Machiavelli’s works particularly ‘The Prince’ which I studied a bit during my graduation. But most of all I am very curious to know, why is this book - ‘The Prince’ considered as inspired by devil? The question of a diabolic figure to Machiavelli, who ventilates the secrecy of politics and who ironically criticizes the political system and the politics in the church of that time in Italy, inspires me to choose this book. The writings of Machiavelli have come across to me as something pertaining to modern political situation as it was in the sixteen century, where the appearance of morality or virtue was considered more important than the true morality. Hence I began to look for some of his classical works. My primary interest is to study and to analyze critically the political book - ‘The Prince’.
Biography and the context of the book

The Prince’ is one of the greatest works of the Italian political writer and philosopher Niccolo Machiavelli. He was born in 3 May 1469 from the old Florentine nobility. His youth was concurrent with greatness of Florence under of the guidance of Lorenzo de Medici, whose grandson he dedicated -‘The Prince’. He was appointed Secretary and Second Chancellor to the Florentine Republic. During his fifteen years of office, he traveled far and wide of Europe witnessing different kinds of governments, eye-witnessed the papal election and many incredible events. The downfall of Florentine led to unemployed man. Machiavelli's best known works are Discorsi Sopra La Prima Deca Di Tito Livio (1531, Discourses on the First Ten Books of Titus Livius) The Mandrake (1528) a satirical play and Il Principe (1532, The Prince. From 1521 to 1525, Machiavelli was employed as a historiographer. Niccolo Machiavelli died in Florence on June 21, 1527.

 Italy was not a unified country, when Niccolo Machiavelli wrote The Prince, in the sixteenth century.  There was often foreign invasion took place in Italy. The political situation was practiced immorally both in the state and the Church, which had great impact in Machiavelli's life.  He, though served for the past fifteen years as a counselor and diplomat for the former rulers of Florence, was not happy with the situation. He wrote this book partly to win a favour of the prince for some personal gain from the book and also reveal the secrecy of politics.  

Summary
            Machiavelli describes the different types of states, arguing that all states are either republic or principalities. The principality can be divided into two namely – new principalities which are either completely new or new appendages to existing states. A prince can acquire new principalities by fortune or ability. Machiavelli leaves out any discussion of republic, “since he discussed them at length on another accession.”2. Machiavelli comprehensively describes maintaining a new composite principality is more difficult than maintaining a hereditary state due to familiarity with the prince and love for the ruling family. In a new principality, people have great hope that a new ruler would be better than the old one. If a new prince is not able to fulfill people’s expectation of improvement, they may take up arms against him. “Upon this, one has to remark that men ought either to be well treated or crush, because they can avenge themselves of lighter injuries of more serious ones they cannot; therefore the injury that is to be done to a man ought to be of such a kind that one does not stand in fear of revenge.”3 A prince must keep control of his subjects and protect from any foreign invasion. The prince must always act to solve problems before problems fully manifest themselves. To solve any problem a prince must be prowess in every field.

There are two ways to govern principality. This first is a prince and appointed ministers who help in governing the state.  The second way is a prince and his hereditary nobles, who have subjects of their own. The former is better, since he is the only ruler in the country, though it is hard to maintain control of that.  It is easier to conquer a country ruled by the nobles than by a man because the corrupted nobles will corrupt his subjects and it is no possible to kill all the nobles. Their hatred, revenge etc. will ever remain through. Studying the history, a prince uses ministers maintaining power in a long run.

A prince must have a lofty goal and learn from the ruler s of the past. Rulers who rely on prowess instead of fortune are generally more forceful in holding power over states because they a prince who foresees with his ability can overcome difficulties.  “That is why all armed prophets have conquered and unarmed prophets have come to grief. Besides what I have said already, the populace is by nature fickle; it is easy to persuade them of something, but difficult to confirm them in that persuasion. Therefore one should rightly arrange matters so that when they no longer believe they can be made to believe by force.”A prince, who comes to power by criminal acts and wishes to be successful, must only use cruelty in the first sense like Agathocles and them laying a string foundation like Cesare Borgia. In this way, his subjects will eventually forget the violence and cruelty and thus he wins dominion but not glory. A prince can rule directly or through magistrates, but usually a diplomatic prince rules directly. Some cruelty is necessary. The prince should always aim to keep a strong army to maintain defense and fortification from every attack. To do so, he must convince the people that the hardships are only temporary and thus creating feelings of patriotism for the states’ defense.   “The nature of man is such that people consider themselves put under an obligation as much by the benefits they confer as by those they receive.”5  
           
 The principalities, Machiavelli says satirically that, where the Church is governing, require either unusual good fortune or prowess.  The rulers of these states are much safer because no one is there to overthrow their authority in favour of one another. “So these principalities alone care secure and happy. But as they are sustained by higher powers which the human mind cannot comprehend… They are exalted and maintained by God.”6 Machiavelli invites us to look at how the Church has obtained her great temporal power by different popes by using force of arms and other means. “The main foundation of every state, new state as well as ancient or composite ones, are good laws and good arms; and because you cannot have good laws without good arms, and where there are good arms, good laws inevitably flow, I shall not discuss laws but give my attention to arms.”7   The easiest way to lose a state is by neglecting the art of war, geography, history and the action of great leaders and he must prepare rigorously during peacetime for war time. “A prince, therefore, should have no other objective or thought, nor acquire skill in anything, except war, its organization, and its discipline. The art of war is all that is expected of a ruler; and it is so useful that besides enabling hereditary princes to maintain that rule it frequently enables ordinary citizens to become rulers.”8   

A prince, who is crafty, cunning and able to treat others, is usually successful. There are two ways of fighting- by law and by force. A prince must be a master of deception.  Men love virtue, but so long as a prince appears to act virtuously, men will believe in his virtue. Moreover men judge by appearance and results. He should worry about two things- internal revolt from his subjects and external threats from foreign powers. Having a strong army and good allies with other states can solve this problem. He must build a good relation with the rank of the military. For internal issues he must subtly divide the opposition. People will admire if you institutionalize a public grand display of reward and punishment of deeds of the citizens.

The relation of ministers is a critical task. Wise and loyal ministers contribute to the image of a wise prince. He must have an ability to understand things and build a confident relationship with them. He must avoid flattering ministers who lay their eggs of conspiracy in the blanket of opposition.  He must seek advice but take decision by self. The bad luck has fallen on Italy. To succeed, Lorenzo must create a national army. A prince best defense is his own courage. If he succeeds to bring unity he would receive unending glory.  “Nor can one express the love with which he would be received in all those scourging, with what thirst for revenge, with what stubborn faith, with what devotion, with what teas. What door would be closed to him? Who would refuse obedience to him? What envy would hinder him? What Italian could refuse him homage? To all of this barbarous dominion sinks.” 9

Critical analysis:
The Prince is filled with the renaissance spirit and ideas. Machiavelli seems trying to separate - Philosophy from Politics, Ethic from Politics, and Religion from Politics. The earlier philosophers studied all of them as one discipline- philosophy. The prince is a book on direct response to the disunity and decay of the Florentine governmental system caused by foreign domination. Using The Prince as a manual, Machiavelli instructs Medici on how to acquire and maintain power and for a necessity to reunite Italy. Yet it is rather confusing, whether Machiavelli tries to give advice to princes, or to disclose the secrecy of politics, or to win favor from the prince to regain is old office, or to criticize the political scenario both in the state and the Church, or to separate politics from others disciplines. He loves the state more than the republic yet his “dismissed from office when the Medici returned, he was a lost man, continuing to follow political affairs at large with fascinated attention, continually denied the chance to participate in them himself. His loss was gain: he poured out his resentment in his books and the advice he was lunging to give the politicians went down on paper.”10 When Medici did not give him the office, he wrote a letter to Luigi Guicciardini- “It no longer charms me to read of the ancient world, nor to discuss the contemporary one … If you want to write anything about your love, do so, and discuss other things with those who value them more, and understand them better, because they have brought me nothing but loss.”11 He says that he has not joy of study history not present state. He loses his faith mankind as a whole saying “I have not one of those who fill their friends with vain hopes.” 12
            
The Prince reflects Machiavelli's fifteen years of experience in the chancery service of the Florentine Government. During his office times are the years of war or of an uneasy peace that is scarcely distinct form war.  He has seen and experienced the immoral practices in politics. “Machiavelli does not simply endorse the use of bad faith in care of necessity– the lie that diverts the killer from his victim – but as a natural part of statecraft.”13 He has witnessed on succession of many princes and even the election of papacy which has lots of malpractices – immorality. He thus ironically praises the Church. There is no doubt that there are some malpractices in the Church’s politics too. Beside that he probably wants to separate politics fromthe Church as he wants to separate politics from philosophy can be seen, which the spirit of Renaissance is.

Machiavelli says in politics real morality will not work but the appearance of morality.  Besides that, he gives different ways and means to acquire power and position in the state politics. Due to this devilish way of advice to princes and notion on men, Machiavelli is criticized to the extreme that his name becomes a synonym of evil. But if you examine carefully, Machiavelli is not really advice a prince but revealing the secrecy of politics. Rulers of that time or even rulers of today practice different ways of malpractices to acquire power and reputation.   He, being witnessed and experienced during his office time on how politicians procure political power through immoral conduct, says about the very nature of politics and its behaviour. Machiavelli says that it is men nature that they are ungrateful, fickle, deceptive, etc. Here Machiavelli is talking about the nature of politicians but not to general human nature. Looking at our modern political scenario, the present politicians follow the advice of Machiavelli. The sixteen century politics of Italy re-echoes in the present political scenario.  Machiavelli presents the political reality as it was at that time in Italy; above all, being experienced in this matter, he knows in and out about politics, and thus he discloses the secrecy of politics.

Machiavelli has got great concern for the unification of Italy. To strengthen and to bring unification, Italy needs a strong national army.  He, therefore, advices a prince that he (prince) must not have other objective, no other thought, nor to take up any profession, but of war, its method and its discipline, which are the only art expected of a ruler. Machiavelli concerns for the state is a national army for, “it is unreasonable to expect that an armed man should obey one who is unarmed, or that an unarmed man should remained safe and secure when his servants are armed,”14 He has seen that the invasion has transformed Florence from a first-rate Italian power into a second-rate power under the domination of Spain.

We must read The Prince without having any prejudice before reading.  This book declares that a republic is the ideal form of government, not a state governed by the authority of a prince.  And yet, we must note that Machiavelli never says anywhere in The Prince that he likes the notion of government by princes.  He merely states that if a country is going to be governed by a prince, particularly a new prince, he has some advice as to how that prince should rule if he wishes to be great and powerful.  In other words, Machiavelli’s book is absolutely practical and not at all idealistic.  Leaving aside what government is the best in an ideal world, Machiavelli seems to try to imagine how such a ruler might achieve success. This book after all is dedicated to Lorenzo to help him be the best prince he can be. The Prince has a very practical and very specific goal in mind- Unification of Italy.

Conclusion
            The prince is full of historical references, yet the final chapters place the book give a lofty dreams of Machiavelli to unify Italy. And it is rather a satirical one describing the nature of political situation of that time. We have got a similar situation in our modern political spheres particularly in India. “Machiavelli was not seeking in The Prince to give specific advice for the present situation, but the book is vibrant, nevertheless, with the conviction that advice is needed and that he is the one to give it.”15 Machiavelli is glaringly conscious of the weakness and shame of Italy during those years of division between Italians and foreigners. He does not blame on rulers about her fall. He says that a prince must learn from history to bring unification of Italy. And so the sole purpose of writing this book, The Prince, is for the unification of Italy. This idea of unification can be seen throughout the novel. Moreover, the final chapters give us some insight into the mind of the author and his motives for writing the book. They suggest that Machiavelli is not diabolic as he is often portrayed. 
             

Bibliography

Machiavelli, Niccolo. The Prince, tran. George Bull. New York, Penguin Books, 1961.
Machiavelli, Niccolo. The Prince, tran. W.K. Marriott London, J.M Dent and Sons Ltd, 1964.
Desbruslais, Cyril. A Survey of the History of Western Philosophy – Ancient, Medival, And Modern Periods, Jnana-Deepa Vidyapeeth, Pune, 1979.
Hale, J. R.  Machiavelli and Renaissance Italy. Harmondsworth: A Pelican book, 1972.





Mao Naga Myth of Human Origin

Mao tribe
According to the Mao Naga myth of Human origin:
                                                                                                                                              
         The Mao Naga tribe inhabits the northern part of the Manipur State- Senapati district bounded by the Angami, Rengma and Chakhesang Naga tribes in the north, the Maram and Zeme Naga tribes in the west, the Tangkhul Naga in the east and the meiteis in the south. The area stretches along the foot hills of Esii Pfoki or Mt. Tenupu on the Japfii mountain range in the west extending up to Liani River on the eastern side of the Nagaland State.     
              
               “The Origin is always obscure,” says MacIver. The origin of the Mao Naga is very obscure, for there is not any written historical document of the past, the origin of the Mao Naga traces only through the bases of folk songs, stories and folk lores. The history and customs are preserved in human memories which are handed down through one generation to another by oral narration. The songs and tales cover the whole life of the society, social system, history of origin, migration, achievements of the heroes, the love affairs, events of the war and making peace treaty and such events of times.

The Tiger, the God and the Man came into existence through the miraculous union between the already existing the first woman and the cloud of the sky. The first woman’s name was called” DZIILIMOSIIRO,” which means the “purest water “or “crystal clear water.”

One day “DZIILIMOSIIRO,” was resting under a peepal tree with her legs apart at the place called ‘MAKHRIIFII’, now MAKHEL, which is believed as the first Nagas’ native land or place by the common Nagas, presently situated in Mao, Manipur. Suddenly a dust of clouds surrounded over her and some drops of liquid came down over her private part and she become pregnant. There is another tale about the origin and migration of the Mao Naga, which seems to be more authentic. It is believe that the Naga’s fore-fathers came from China. They ran away from Chinese emperor who forcibly employed his subjects in the construction of the Great Wall of China. They walked alone the river’s side, Kriiborii, which is a tributary of Chindwin River in Myanmar, and finally reached the end of the river, where its source begins. They settled there and name the place called “Makhrefii.”(Makhre - secret, fii- place)  

When the mother grew older, she became weak. The children of hers nursed her turn by turn when the other two went to the field. The mother always felt discomfort on the day when she was looking after by the tiger because the tiger would always demand to eat this and that parts of her body as soon as she died. 
She always caught high fever whenever the God looked after her during the day as the other brothers went to the field. The woman always long for the man to nurse her because she would feel very pleasant and never get sick whenever she was with her Son (man). 

Accidentally she breathed out her last breath on the day when the man looked her after. The man buried the dead body beneath the hearth of the kitchen as being advised by his mother less the Tiger and God came back from the field. The Tiger asked from the man to show the place where the mother was buried and scratched out the mud wherever he (Tiger) suspected. 

Now they all wept together for their lost mother. They sat down together and discussed what they would do thereafter, as the mother was no more. They came to conclusion that they must go to their respective places was already being directed by their mother when she was alive. 

When the time came for their departure, the God and the Tiger were hesitant to go to their respective places. They remained at home with the Man. They began fighting for the native home. They came to conclusion that they would have a contest. The contest was- one who saw, first the rising sun would dwell in the native land. Therefore the following day they sat in a line watching the first rising sun. The Tiger and the God were looking seriously at the east while the Man was looking at the west, at the high mountains. The man saw the sun light appeared on the top of the mountains before they saw the real sun rising. Thus the Man won the contest.

The God hesitantly went away the forest. The Tiger though supposed to go where their mother had directed to go (plain) but he remained at home with the Man in their native home. In order to get rid of the Tiger the Man made some sorts of plans. The Man asked the Tiger what was he scared most. The Tiger answered that fire and thundering sound were the most frightening things for him. 

One day the Man tight on the Tiger’s tail with a bamboo cup and piece of the torn mat when he was fast asleep. He then brought the horn, buffalo’s horn, near the Tiger’s ear and blew it with his might. On hearing the deafening sound the Tiger woke up from his sleep and ran away to the plain. The youngest son, therefore, remained in the native home as the inheritor of the mother. That is why the youngest son of the family inherits the residence of the parents.

To be continued.....

Nature of India Society- Unity and Diversity

In ordinary language diversity means variety based on differences.  However, with reference to a society, diversity means differences that distinguish one group of people from other groups.  Such differences may be biological as in racial groups, religious, linguistic or any other differences that mark off one group from others.  Thus in the case of a society, diversity refers to collective differences.
The term diversity is the opposite of uniformity.  Uniformity means similarity.  Thus when people have some similarity or have some characteristics in common, there is uniformity among them.  Thus when people share the same religion or language, there is religious or linguistic uniformity among them.  It is important to note that like diversity, uniformity is also a collective characteristic.
Unity means integration or solidarity.  In a society unity refers to integration and also to the social psychological condition of one-ness or we-feeling.  Unity differs from uniformity because uniformity presupposes similarity, while unity does not presuppose similarity.
 As Durkheim has pointed out, there are two types of unity or solidarity, namely, mechanical solidarity or organic solidarity.  Mechanical solidarity is based on uniformity, and is found in simple societies like tribal and traditional societies.  On the other hand, organic solidarity is based on differences and is found in complex and modern societies.
On the basis of Durkheim’s explanation of mechanical and organic solidarity, it is possible to make the following statements. Unity signifies integration. Unity or solidarity based on uniformity is mechanical.  Unity does not mean the absence of diversity.  Unity is not the opposite of diversity.  Organic unity or solidarity implies the existence of variety or differences.  Therefore the expression ‘unity in diversity’ is not a contradiction in terms.  In fact, the expression ‘unity in diversity’ is apt and fitting for describing the fundamental nature of Indian society.
Indian society is characterised by different types of diversity.  The more important forms of diversity are racial, linguistic, and religious and caste based. Anthropologists have presented different racial classifications of the Indian population.  B.S. Guha has identified six racial types. They are: 1) the Negrito, 2) the Proto-Australoid, 3) the Mongoloid, 4) the Mediterranean, 5) the Western Brachycephals, and 6) the Nordic.
The Negrito is the people who belong to the black racial stock as found in Africa.  They have black skin colour, frizzle hair, thick lips, etc.  Some of the tribes of South India like the Kadar, Irula and Panyan have distinct Negrito features.
The Proto-Australoid group of people includes the aborigines of Australia and other people of the Pacific Islands, the Ainu of Japan, and the Vedda of Sri Lanka.  In India, this race is represented by the Ho tribe of Bihar and the Bhils of Vindhya hills.
 The Mongoloids usually referred to as the people of the yellow race, are the racial stock native to Asia. The Chinese, Japanese Burmese and other peoples of South East Asia belong to this group.  Mongoloids are found in North-East India.
The Mediterranean group of peoples are associated with the Dravidian languages. They are characterised by long head, medium stature, and dark complexion.  The population of South India is predominantly Mediterranean.
 The Western Brachycephals (broad headed) are spread throughout North India.  They are characterised by broad head, medium stature and relatively light complexion.
 Nordic peoples are found mainly in the Scandinavian countries.  They characterised by tall stature, light skin and hair, and blue eyes.  Elements of this race are found in Rajasthan and Punjab.
Indian society is characterised by immense linguistic diversity. Grierson, the famous linguist, identified 179 languages and 544 dialects.  But the Census of 1971 has reported that 1652 languages are spoken in India as mother tongue.
 Indian languages belong to four main speech families: Indo-Aryan, Dravidian, Sino-Tibetan and Austric.  About 70% of the people speak Indo-Aryan languages like Hindi, Bengali, Oriya, Gujarati and Marathi.  About 20% of the people, mainly in South India, speak Dravidian languages. Sino-Tibetan speakers are found in North-east India.  A few smaller groups speak Khol-Munda languages of the Austric family.
 In addition to the Indian languages, there are some people like the Anglo-Indians who use English use English as their mother tongues. 
The Eighth Schedule of the Constitution lists 18 languages as official languages. Of these, Manipuri belongs to the Sino-Tibetan family. Tamil, Malayalam, Telugu and Kannada are Dravidian languages.  The others are Indo-Aryan languages.
India is the home of many religions.  According to the Census of 1991, Hindus constitute the largest religious group with 81.56% of the population.  Muslims, the second largest group, account for 12.56% of the population. 2.32% of the population are Christians.  Sikhs constitute 1.94% of the population.  0.77% is Buddhists and 0.40% is Jains.  In addition there are Zoroastrians (Parsis) and Jews.  There is also a small number of people adhering to tribal religion.
Each religious group includes various sects and cults.  Hinduism has not only Shivas and Vashnvaites, but also followers of Shakti sect.  Hinduism has given rise to many other sects and cults.  The chief division among the Muslims is between Sunnis and Shias.  Christian s in India is divided into denominations and churches.
 While Hindus and Muslims are found in all parts of the country, adherents of other religions are concentrated in some parts.  Christians are found mainly in South India and in the North-East.  Sikhs are concentrated in Punjab.
India is known as the land of castes and tribes.  The term caste is used in two senses.  Sometimes, it refers to the division of Indian society into four varna, and sometimes to the jati.  The varna hierarchy consisting of Brahman, Kshatriya, Vaishya and Shudra is accepted all over India. The jati on the other hand, has a regional point of reference and signifies a hereditary endogamous status group.  There are more than 3,000 jatis in India.
The caste system in India is not confined to Hindus alone.  There are castes among Muslims, Christians and Sikhs as well as other communities. Besides the diversity based on caste that characterises most of the population, there is also a significant segment of tribal population.  There are more than 450 tribes in India, living in different States.  The population of the North-Eastern States like Arunachal Pradesh, Meghalaya, Mizoram and Nagaland is predominantly tribal.
In addition to the major forms of diversity described above, there are also other types of diversity.  There is diversity between villages, towns and cities.  Even among the villages there is diversity in settlement patterns.  There are very great differences in the types of houses, dress and food habits.  Diversity in social customs and practices relating to marriage and family is also very great. Thus India is a land of enormous diversities.
 Though Indian society is characterised by immense diversity, there also bonds of unity and mechanisms of integration which have contributed to the unique character of Indian society.  Herbert Risley, the Census Commissioner in 1911, has pointed this out in the following words.  “Beneath the manifold diversity of physical and social type, language, custom and religion which strike the observer in India there can still be discerned a certain underlying uniformity of life from the Himalayas to Cape Comorin”.  The factors that contribute to such unity are several.
The first bond of unity of India is its geo-political integration.  India is known for its geographical unity marked by the Himalayas in the north and the oceans on the other sides.  India has enjoyed some sort of political unity from the ancient times.  During the British period, political unity was more or less complete, though the British followed a policy of divide and rule. After Independence, India is a sovereign State.  The same Constitution and the organs of the Government govern every part of the country.   At present all Indians share the same political culture marked by the norms of democracy, secularism and socialism.
The second source of unity is called geo-cultural unity. This is seen in the institution of pilgrimage. As M N Srinivas has pointed out, the concept of unity is inherent in Hinduism.  There are sacred centres of pilgrimage in every corner of the land.  Certain salient aspects of Sanskritic culture are to be found all over the country.  India is the sacred land not only of the Hindus, but also of the Sikhs, Jains and Buddhists.  The Muslims and Christians, too, have several sacred centres of pilgrimage in India. In particular, the age-old culture of pilgrimage has fostered a sense of geo-cultural unity.  Geo-cultural unity is seen also in the arts and architecture, dance and music.
 A third source of unity is the tradition of accommodation and tolerance.  In particular, Hinduism is known for its highly syncretic character and spirit of tolerance.  Hinduism is an all-encompassing religion.  Sociologists have identified the not only the great tradition of all-India Sanskritic Hinduism but also the local traditions of village Hinduism.  In addition, basic Hindu concepts like samsara and karma are shared by many others.  Even Muslim rulers like the Mughals recognised the importance of religious amity between Hindus and Muslims.
Another source of unity is the basic framework of social organisation.  Traditional Indian society believed in ascribed status and organised groups in a hierarchy on the basis of ritual purity. This is the essence of the caste system.  The institution of caste cuts across diverse religious groups and gives them all a common social idiom.
The tradition of interdependence is another important source of unity.  This interdependence is seen in the form of jajmani system found in villages.  The term “jajman” refers to the patron or recipient of specialised services.  The jajman is the food producing family and the other families supported them by providing specialised services.  Thus the jajmani system is a functional interdependence of castes.  It is based on economic relations but embraces all aspects of village life.  The jajmani system is the traditional form of integration of different castes at the village level.
In tune with the traditional bonds of unity, after Independence, the Indian State opted for a pluralistic society.  It adopted the model of a composite culture based on unity rather than uniformity. This model calls for the preservation and growth of plurality of cultures within the framework of an integrated nation. This cultural pluralism with regard to religion is expressed in the form of secularism.
Kaleidoscope, India is a plural society in letter and spirit. Some problems persist.  Others have spawned in the last few decades.  These are ethnic movements, religious fundamentalism, and new twists in the pattern of inter-communal relations, linguistic conflicts, regionalism and sub-regionalism. Pose a major challenge to contemporary Indian society.






Blood

Blood is a body fluid. It transports oxygen and nutrients to the cells. It carries away waste products. Blood has several important roles to play. It helps to maintain our body temperature and normal pH levels in our body tissues. The protective functions of blood include clot formation and the prevention of infection. In many cases it also conveys hormones and disease-fighting substance. Blood is composed of cells suspended in a liquid. In short red cells carry oxygen, white cells fight infection and platelets stop bleeding in injuries.

There are four most important blood components namely: Red cell or Erythrocytes, which are relatively tiny cell without nuclei. The characteristics of these cells are similar to the primitive prokaryotic of bacteria. The red cells normally make up 40- 50 % of the total blood’s volume. They transport oxygen from the lungs to all of the living tissues of the body. They carry away carbon dioxide as waste product. Oxygen is used by cells to produce energy, which the body needs. When the number of red blood cells is too high (Polycythemia), blood also can become too thick, which may cause the blood to clot more easily, which increases the risk of heart attacks and strokes.

White cell or Leukocytes: These white cells or leukocytes exist in variable numbers and types. But they make up a very small part of blood’s volume. They are much, much fewer in numbers than red cells. They dispersed throughout the body but ready at a moment's notice to gather and fight off an invading organism. White blood cells accomplish this by killing or engulfing or digesting those organisms and by producing antibodies that attach to organisms so that they can be more easily destroyed. They are mostly produced in our bone marrow from the same kind of stem cells, which produce red blood cells. Others are produced in the thymus gland- the base of the neck.

Platelets: They are fragments without nuclei that work with blood clothing chemicals at the site of wounds. They do this by adhering to the wall of blood vessels, thereby plugging the rupture in the vascular wall. They also can release coagulating chemicals which cause clots to form in the blood that can plug up narrowed blood vessels. There are more than a dozen types of blood clotting factors and platelets that need to interact in the blood clotting process. Recent research has shown that platelets help fight infections by releasing proteins that kill invading bacteria and some other micro-organisms. Individual platelets are about 1/3 the size of red cells like the red and white blood cells, platelets are produced in bone marrow from stem cells.

Plasma: It is the liquid component of blood, in which the red blood cells, white blood cells, and platelets are suspended. It constitutes more than half of the blood's volume. It consists mostly of water that contains dissolved salts and proteins. The major protein in plasma is albumin. Other proteins in plasma include antibodies (immunoglobulin), which actively defend the body against viruses, bacteria, fungi, and cancer cells and clotting factors, which control bleeding. Normally 55% of our blood’s volume is made up fo plasma. About 95% of it subsists of water.

PROPERTIES
Blood is a serological fluid. It consists of several kinds of cells suspended in a salty aqueous solution called plasma. (If one considers that living organisms such as humans have evolved from species originally living and breathing in salt water, then one might guess that the saline solution of blood plasma is the body’s way of internalizing the seawater and living on dry land). 

The colour of blood comes from the red blood cells (RBC's) or erythrocytes. Red blood cells make up about 40% of volume of blood. This is readily apparent in a simple centrifuge test. Each red blood cell is filled with hemoglobin, the protein which carries oxygen to tissues and carries carbon dioxide (CO2) away from tissues.

Hemoglobin carries oxygen by using heme. Heme is like a large ring-like molecule, which has at its centre of a single atom of iron (Fe). Heme is what actually binds to the oxygen to form an iron (hydr) oxide complex. The chemical property of heme that, gives it these abilities, is in the many double covalent bonds that form the ring.  These double bonds can be shifted into many different “resonant” configurations. This allows for much more oxygen to be carried than if it were simply dissolved in the blood.

There are a variety of cells found within the blood. White blood cells, 'hairy' spherical particles, are instrumental in the body’s immune system by producing antibodies to defend against harmful disease-carrying bacteria, viruses, or fungi. Platelets are white blood cell fragments (also shown above) which assist in blood clotting by aggregating and forming fibres in the opening of a wound which trap red blood cells to form a scab.

Plasma is the liquid portion of blood, and it is about 90% water.  The remaining portion consists of more than 100 different organic and inorganic solutes that are dissolved in water.  Because plasma is a transport medium, it's solutes are continuously changing as substances are added or removed by the cells.

There are a variety of cells found within the blood. White blood cells, 'hairy' spherical particles, are instrumental in the body’s immune system by producing antibodies to defend against harmful disease-carrying bacteria, viruses, or fungi. Platelets are white blood cell fragments (also shown above) which assist in blood clotting by aggregating and forming fibres in the opening of a wound which trap red blood cells to form a scab.

BLOOD GROUPS
The red blood cells have an identical appearance. Protruding from their surface are molecules, called antigens. Antigens vary from person to person and from race to race. The red cells antigens are probably of carbohydrate structure. A person's blood never changes throughout his life. They are classified according to the protein (antigen) present in the red blood cell membraneThere are four types of blood groups namely- A protein, B protein, O (null) and AB protein.

Blood group A: If one belongs to the blood group A, one has  A antigens on the surface of one’s red blood cells and B antibodies in one’s blood plasma.
Blood group B: If one belongs to the blood group B, one has B antigens on the surface of one’s red blood cells and A antibodies in one’s blood plasma.
Blood group AB: If ones belongs to the blood group AB, one has both A and B antigens on the surface of one’s red blood cells and no A or B antibodies at all in one’s blood plasma.
Blood group 0: If one belongs to the blood group 0 (null), one has neither A or B antigens on the surface of one’s red blood cells but he has both A and B antibodies in one’s blood plasma. There are number of other blood groups which do not have much practical importance like MNSS,P,Lu, Le, Wr, etc.

Red cells that have "A" Protein (antigens) are called A Group. Red cells that have "B" Protein (antigens) are called B Group. Red cells that do not have these antigens are called "O" Group. Rhesus Blood Group (Rh) Rh group is named after Macacus Rhesus Monkey, as it resembles the proteins in the red blood cells of Rhesus Monkey. If this Rh protein (antigens) is present in red blood cell of human beings it is called Rh+ve. If this Rh protein (antigen) is absent it is Rh-ve. 95 - 98% of Indians are RH+ve and 2-5% is Rh-ve. Other Blood Groups There are number of other blood groups which do not have much practical importance like MNSS,P,Lu, Le, Wr, etc.

Blood Cells Blood Cells Are Produced In Marrow Red cells, white cells and platelets are made in the marrow of bones, especially the vertebrae, ribs, hips, skull and sternum. These essential blood cells fight infection, carry oxygen and help control bleeding. Plasma Carries Blood Cells Plasma is a pale yellow mixture of water, proteins and salts. One of the functions of plasma is to act as a carrier for blood cells, nutrients, enzymes and hormones.

BLOOD TRANSFUSION
A blood transfusion is a safe, common procedure in which blood is given to you through an intravenous (IV) line in one of your blood vessels.         Blood transfusions are done to replace blood lost during surgery or due to a serious injury. A transfusion also may be done if your body can't make blood properly because of an illness.      During a blood transfusion, a small needle is used to insert an IV line into one of your blood vessels. Through this line, you receive healthy blood. The procedure usually takes 1 to 4 hours, depending on how much blood you need.

 Blood transfusions are very common. Each year, almost 5 million Americans need a blood transfusion. Most blood transfusions go well. Mild complications can occur. Very rarely, serious problems develop.The heart pumps blood through a network of arteries and veins throughout the body. Blood has many vital jobs. It carries oxygen and other nutrients to your body's organs and tissues. Having a healthy supply of blood is important to your overall health. Blood is made up of various parts, including red blood cells, white blood cells, platelets (PLATE-lets), and plasma. Blood is transfused either as whole blood (with all its parts) or, more often, as individual parts.

Blood can be kept in for up to 35 days. Transfusion of whole blood or of blood fractions are used to treat at least 10 different conditions:-whole blood for acute blood loss;  packed red cells far chronic anemia; washed red cells for allergies induced in frequency transfused patients by other elements in the blood. Platelets for bleed caused by platelet deficiency; white cells for low white-cell count in patients with infection; plasma for shock without blood loss; fresh-frozen plasma, freshly drawn plasma or concentrated of the antihemophilic factor of plasma for bleeding in hemophilia; albumin, concentrated from the plasma for shock or for chronic low-album disorder; gamma globulin; fibrinogen, an important clotting factor in the blood.

The undesirable reactions are common occurring for many reasons such as allergy, sensitivity to donor leukocytes, or undetected red-cell incompatibility. Unexplained reactions are also common. There are rare cases of contaminated blood, air bubbles in the blood, overloading of the circulatory system etc. to the donor plasma or platelets.

References:
1.  Bhatia, Dr. N.K., 2005, Clinical, Diagnostic and Therapeutic Services, New Delhi: IGNOU.
2. Safra, Jcaob E., 2010, The New Encyclopaedia Britannica Vol. II, Chicago: Encyclopeadia Britannica, Inc.
3. http://anthro.palomar.edu/blood/blood_components.htm
4. http://www.maexamhelp.com/id97.htm
5.http://www.sigmaaldrich.com/life-science/metabolomics/enzyme-explorer/learning-center/plasma-blood-protein/blood-basics.html