During the writer sujatha - kalachuvadu controversy, I read a letter in kalachuvadu which stated that Islam started its base in tamilnadu when arab traders started trading in tamil lands. Arab merchants establishing mosques here is one thing and converting some of the tamils into muslims is another thing. An inscription of later pandiya - - from Thiruppullani If I remember - was quoted. The inscription stated provisions to sonagar perumpalli.
I am trying to understand the sociological implications or compulsions which drives a man or a group to convert to another religion - no other intention. Povery is one sure driver, not getting enough social respect in one's own religion is another sure driver. But were there other drivers in the past ?
Also, I'm interested in knowing whether people were forced into conversion during 80 years of islamic rule in pandiya country. Any thoughts ?
If the topic sounds controversial we will stop with this
a madurai sultanate was in place. when delhi was weakened the governor declared himself independent
a bad time for that area. when all the hindu kings of tamil nadu got together to throw them out the pandyas backed out
poor vil bhallala of hoysalas was the aged leader. he was caught skinned alive and his skin hung in the ramparts of the madurai fort for years however the madurai sultanate was weakened when its rulers were killed by cholera and finally kempenna overthrew them. the next muslim ruler of madurai was maduranayagam in 17-18th century( once again a convert)
Vittalapuram, the troops of Malik Kafur erased temples and constructed mosques on the same sites, in many villages surrounding it.Vittalapuram was spared, as it's a bit interior from the trunk road.
Many Hindu idols were saved by the people by digging the ground and concealing them.Coversion was rampant. Covert or get killed.
But, those were Mediaval times. Same happened in Europe also.It was orchestrated by the so called God Men & executed by the socalled Noble Men.
It's unfortunate, still coversions take place, in the name of God's Will ,poverty, ill-literacy, social setup, etc.Cultures are being erased and alien cultures thrust, in the name of religion.
Religion, now a days, is more like running a party - number games.The one with more number and/or organised, good religion, and those with lesser number &/or less organised,not so good religion.
> Dear all, I think malik is made to be more of a monster than he really was. some reports say he was in madurai for less than a month.( too less for even all the attributed destruction let alone construction) he was actually chased out by vikrama pandyan an uncle of the two warring pandyas.
the mosque building all took place in the next invasion in the times of parakrama pandya some 6 years later. i think the invasion was led by ulugh khan later of the thuglak dynasty/ read thiruvarangan ula for details. wassaf and khusro were the two historians who recorded the details of maliks invasion. khusro was a poet,inventor of tabla and the sitar.
I am sure malik attacked srirangam.( kannanore-samayapuram a nearby town was one of the pandya capitals) thats when the idol is taken to delhi and the thulaka nachiar episode of fiction
the second time invasion remember ranganathars ula upto melkotte.
since we have only turkish records of the looting theres a temple wassaf often calls bramasthpuri. must be sirkali. however i dont think malik ever came into tanjore.
> thats when the idol is taken to delhi and the thulaka nachiar episode > of fiction
Do you mean to say that the entire thulikka nachiyar episode is a fiction ? There are day to day practices in srirangam temple which affirm a close connection to islam. Islamic raiders caused extensive damage and plunder to the temple but the practices exist because of this single devotee. I have given elaborate mails on this in PS group earlier
Kudavoil says that the damage to big temple was caused during this invations. You are saying that thanjai was not in their scope. I am slightly confused here. Kindly elaborate
> These Muslims were Traders from Arabia - Sonagars - who got settled > in this route.
This is a very important info. My question is how many of the muslims we find today in tn trace back their roots to arabian traders and how many are converts ? What was the driver for conversion if any.
I am writing this mail because the subject of Maduranayagam came up in our below mail. Did you mean Marudhanayagam? There is a mosque near my home in Madurai where they say his head is buried. This area is called Samattipuram. This is a very volatile area for asking questions on religion, this is what has prevented me from doing so. This Marudhanayagam was also a convert and they say the British could not kill him. Every time they thought they had killed him he came back! That is why the next time they killed him they separated his head from the body and buried them separately. I dont know where they buried his body. Can anybody elaborate on this? I am really keen to know more about this person.
hi Rahul converted name was name was yousuf khan vellaalar by birth changed half a dozen sides during the anglo french- palayakarar wars when captured was tortured to reveal the reported places of a great treasure. he did not and his death happened. as you say his dismembered body was buried in several places
That was a fantastic article, really informative. Marudhanayagam's life is very similar to the Mel Gibson movie "Braveheart". I have read some other stories of scotland and their legends are not that different from our legends. Anyways thanks for taking time for this Mr Venkatesh
the best book on this yusuf khan alias maduranayakam is from asian educational services ( those red leather books with gold embossed names that you see)
as swetha said that was a troubled time and you cant really pin down a hero or a villian
but I think this guy was a conteemprory of the marudhu sagodararkaL
Tradition has many stories to tell of this remarkable man, who is commonly known in Madura as Khansa, an abbrevlation for Khan Sahib. He was born in the Rammnad country and was originally a Hindu of the Vellala Caste. He ran away from his home, took Service under a European for three years in pondicherry, was dismissed, served under another European (who educated him), went to the Nawab's court, rose rapidly in the army, married a parangi woman and eventually, as has been seen, became Commandant of all the Company's sepoys. His executive ability is sufficiently indicated in the report (see below) from Colonel Fullarton - dated March, 1785 and entitled 'A view of the English interests in India'--which was republished in Madras in1867. This says that in Tinnevelly and Madura 'his whole administration denoted vigour and effect. His justice was unquestioned, his word unalterable; his measures were happily combined and firmly executed, the guilty had no refuge from punishment.' It concludes by saying that his example shows that 'wisdom, vigour and integrity are of no climate or complexion.'
Yusuf Khan again despateched The Company accordingly sent back Muhammad Yusuf to the country, renting both Madura and Tinnevely to him for the very moderate sum of five lakhs annually. He returned in the spring of 1759 and began by teaching the Kallans a wholesome lesson. Cutting avenues through their woods, he shot them down without mercy as they fled, or executed as malefactors any who were taken prisoners. He went on to reduce the rest of the country to order, and soon had sobered all the poligars and made himself extremely powerful. He even had the audacity to make war on the king of Travancore without the knowledge or consent of the company. In 1761, and again in 1762, he offered to lease Tinnevelly and Madura for four years more at seven lakhs per annum. His offer was refused, and--whether he was enraged at this, or whether he thought himself powerful enough to defy his masters-- he shortly afterwards threw off his allegiance and began to collect troops.
He rabels and is hanged, 1764 In 1763, therefore, a strong force was sent against him and he was besieged in Madura in September. His friends nearly all deserted him, but he held out until October 1764 with great energy and skill, renovating and strengthening the fort at great expense--he is said to have 'entirely repaired' its east face and constantly employed 3,000 labourers about it--and repelling the chief assault with a loss of 120 Europeans (including nine officers) killed and wounded. At the end of that time little real progress against him had been made, except that the place was now rigorously blockaded, but he was treacherously seized by one Marchaud, the officer in charge of the French contingent, and handed over to Major Charles Campbell, who commanded the English among the besiegers. He was ignominiously hanged near the camp, about two miles to the west of Madura, and his body was buried at the spot. A small square mosque was afterwards erected over the tomb. It is still in existence--to the left of the read to Dindigul, a little beyond the toll-gate--and is known as 'Khan Sahib's pallivasal.'
This is really a lot of information about Marudanayagam!!! What a fantastic character this man must have been. He has been a Hindu,learnt his 3 R's in a christian household,had an affair with a Frenchwoman,married a parangi, and converted to Islam. Has there ever been a more diverse individual? Maybe a complete book in English about this person would be a best seller. The only way for letting the world know about our heroes would be to write their memoirs in English and sell them abroad through a renowned publisher. If only wishes were horses... May our fabled land produce more Marudanayagam's
not only the person but the period must have been fantastic ( in the retrospective)- not for guys living at that time
a period when the line between a ruler and a robber was very thin. a period when lotsa of non royals became blue blooded ones. the poligar times is a fantastic political play ground in the history of tamilnadu.
maruthu pandyar, umai thurai, kattaboman, thondaimans, the french and the british battling it out in the land and the sea( sadras kalpakkam is famous for its anglo french naval battles)
British between 1750 and 1780(correct me if i am wrong). If this is so then how come we call the 1857 Mutiny of Sepoys as the First War of Independence. Mangal Pandey was not even angry because they were ill treating Indians it was because they had mislead him into chewing beef. Is this because Marudhunayagam was not documented that well? How many Tamils have fought the British before 1857? Can you please elaborate on this?
kattabomman was hanged in 1799/ 1801 maruthu pandyar in 1801 or something.
except for vellore the entire tamil region must have been quiet during the mutiny.
but dont worry about documentation.
when did mangal pandey movie come? when did kattabomman movie come. we were 40 years ahead. but forget all this dcumentation business
but if you keep patriotism from shading your concience you will learn that none of these guys were anti british from the start. both maruthu pandyar and kattabomman had paid their taxes to the nawab and the british regularly. some dispute in the middle caused their tiff.
remember . india as an entity is post gandhi. thank him for it.
we were literally ruled by a pack of lusty thieves( sorry for the harsh language) each a tyrant in a postage size princely state before the british came. and they made the british seem better.
gandhi was banned from entering more of these princely states than british india.
I have always felt this "anger" or even "hatred" towards the Brits that many Indians have as just a wee bit irrational. I mean to say if we are upset with them for looting us for a mere 250 years..shouldn't we be more upset with the Muslim rule which looted us for almost 800 years? If not, then why this "fight agains the British" .. or are we just being politically correct since we have a number of Indian Muslims (who quite rightly shouldn't be held responsible for what some idiots from Afghanistan did a few centuries ago).?
this is a hatred psychosis imposed on us by our politicians. hatred towards the brits were the unifying force for the freedom movement.
we are still paying for the " indian rule" from 1800 till 1947.and lets realise its a costly payment. but for the british we would be like africa. 600 poor states fighting each other. thats why films like mangal pandey seem so out of place today.
Thanks for your mail. With all due respect to you both i beg to differ. I think India still would have been a vibrant economy even without the British. Maybe it would have taken a bit more time but it would certainly have happened. There is always this attitude that without the British we wouldn't have had the railways,command over the English language,cricket,etc. We would still have done these things without the British and we would have remained united. The British made sure when they were leaving that this problem of religion and partition would haunt us for ever.
I cant give you any specifics about the "If the British did not rule India" as this is purely hypothetical. Do you think a culture which is as old as ours changed for the better just because of a minuscule period ruled by the British? Just because you are a superior nation it does not give you the right to rule over the weak let alone take their lives. My clients in England still treat this country as an English colony.
What happened to us by the British is similar to what is happening to Iraq by the US. 50 years from now when Iraq has railways,proper government systems would they be happy that the US came and conquered them? No! This attitude is prevalent amongst us Indians,only! I remember reading in a thread before "Indians are the ONLY countrymen who are not proud about their past"
Remember what Nelson Mandela said "The problem is not that they think they are superior the problem we think we are inferior"
I go with Mr. Rahul. If we compare the countries of 17th century, and not countries of 20th century, we can understand the cultural and economical heights we were at that time. British Raj is definitely a total eclipse on our propects. Regarding a united India, are we not ever united by religeon, culture and geography? If Raj was not there I want to assume a similer or a better setup like the present Europe, if at all we are not one by some force or other. I am not sure about cricket or English language but a much much better railways for sure.
I believe you both didn't get where I am coming from. My point was NOT that British rule was good for us. Quite the contrary. They looted us to the tune of more than a trillion dollars apparently. I was just trying to contrast the "hatred" instilled in us from childhood for the Brits as compared to the veneration for the other invaders like Babur and Sher Shah Suri etc. I was trying to raise a point as to why the one group were villified by our educators while the other group was almost deified. If you look at actual loot, rape and plunder, the Muslim conquest was horrible for India. In fact, I would go so far as to say that in a way the British conquest hastened the end of the Muslim rule in India... not a bad thing at all was it?
Moreover, over 800 years of Muslim rule there was no headway made in science or technology (except for the introduction of cannons in India by Babur). Apart from that.. zero, nada, zip, zilch. Which is why I raised the question.. why was it a fight against British rule, but NOT a fight against Muslim rule? The answer is pretty self evident.. with 150 million Muslims, no one would dare to tell the truth in that regards.. :)