<p>Tipu was an embodiment of Hindu-Muslim unity.”<br />— Mahatma Gandhi, <br />Young India.<br /><br />Tipu Sultan has long been denied his right place in history. He has been depicted either as an ambitious despot engaged in self-aggrandisement, as one who paid an insignificant price struggling hard to survive the onslaught of an imperial power, or as a rash adventurer who had no notion of the incompatibility of his own strength with that of a mighty power. <br /><br />However, closer examination of his life and career shows that he was an imaginative and a dynamic leader who had a noble mission in life: to prevent the foreigners from gaining control of the country. <br /><br />Although his domestic policy, aimed at making his state prosperous and progressive, deserves greater attention, the main significance of his rule lies in his external relations which were aimed at seeking the cooperation of both domestic and foreign powers for a concerted action against the British. <br /><br />Undoubtedly, he failed in his efforts but his failure would not minimise the importance of his policy. Long before 1857, when a spirited uprising attempted to throw the English out, and before the formation of the Indian National Congress which set the pace for the freedom movement, Tipu strived hard to rouse the consciousness of Indians to the impending danger from the British. <br /><br />It is difficult to find a figure from the 18th century who so resolutely offered resistance to British aggrandisement in India as Tipu. One would think that for this reason alone his memory would be cherished. Yet, there was no visible attempt at the national level to commemorate the bicentenary of his death — Tipu died on May 4, 1799 bravely fighting the British forces which stormed Srirangapatna. One would wish this was only a case of amnesia, and not part of a deliberate attempt to delete particular figures from our history. <br />Tipu was greatly encouraged in new ideas. His intellectual heritage interest was not purely theological. He was very much interested in secular science as well. If Islamic tradition was important for Tipu to justify his claims to be Sultan in his own right (compare Ranjit Singh’s claim to be a maharaja), he did not derive from this tradition any instance on intolerance, which religiousness of any kind so easily slips in to. <br /><br />Tipu was friendly and religious in his life. He has been portrayed, especially by the colonial and some post-independence Indian historians as a religious bigot, a fanatic, a king who oppressed non-Muslims and forcibly converted them to Islam. But a sensitive reading of Tipu reveals the nuances of his character and shows that he was just a king who strived for the welfare of his people. <br /><br />Tipu’s action of punishing the rebels of Coorg and Malabar by forced conversions cannot be covered by any apologia: they became the basis for charges against him of persecuting and destroying or closing Hindu temples. Yet the evidence to the contrary is almost definitive. <br />He recognised pre-existing land grants, gave revenue-free grants to several astrologers and ‘Shastris’, never deposed the Wadiyar kings of Mysore, and used Hindu symbols such as elephants on his coins. It is often forgotten that Tipu belonged to a milieu where Hindu-Muslim co-existence in the religious sphere was an accepted part of culture and polity. <br /><br />Union of beliefs<br />Tipu made generous grants to temples and had idols that had been desecrated by the marauding Maratha army reconstructed at its expense, indicating clearly that for him there was no contradiction in his belief in the efficacy of both Muslim and Hindu prayers. <br />Indian and western scholars who have written about Tipu have neither given due importance nor paid attention to how his personality was projected through every act of his — be it administrative, his struggle against foreign invaders or in the weapons, armour and flags he used. <br /><br />After Tipu’s death, Anantapur, Kadapa, Kurnool and Ballari were occupied by the British, who for some time gave them to the Nizam. The parts on the north of Tungabhadra were also taken away by the English on the plea that it belonged to the Marathas. But it was not given to them. The greater part of the sultanate was given to an old Hindu family.<br />This was done in lieu of the services the members of that family did to the English as conspirators against Tipu. This country was placed under the Resident. Seven lakh “Pagodas” a year were fixed as tribute to be paid by the Raja. Poornaiah, the alleged chief conspirator, was appointed the diwan. <br /><br />The reign of this Hindu Raj presented the following document to the English in gratitude of what they received from the latter: “As long as the sun and the moon will shed its lustre, we would never stand against your Excellency’s government. We always remain under your subordination. Your Excellency had restored our name. This would be remembered by the members of our family for generations to come. Our descendents would never forget to propose their good-will to your Excellency’s government on whose support we have our reliance.” <br /><br />(The writer teaches at Al-Ameen College, Bengaluru)<br /><br /></p>
<p>Tipu was an embodiment of Hindu-Muslim unity.”<br />— Mahatma Gandhi, <br />Young India.<br /><br />Tipu Sultan has long been denied his right place in history. He has been depicted either as an ambitious despot engaged in self-aggrandisement, as one who paid an insignificant price struggling hard to survive the onslaught of an imperial power, or as a rash adventurer who had no notion of the incompatibility of his own strength with that of a mighty power. <br /><br />However, closer examination of his life and career shows that he was an imaginative and a dynamic leader who had a noble mission in life: to prevent the foreigners from gaining control of the country. <br /><br />Although his domestic policy, aimed at making his state prosperous and progressive, deserves greater attention, the main significance of his rule lies in his external relations which were aimed at seeking the cooperation of both domestic and foreign powers for a concerted action against the British. <br /><br />Undoubtedly, he failed in his efforts but his failure would not minimise the importance of his policy. Long before 1857, when a spirited uprising attempted to throw the English out, and before the formation of the Indian National Congress which set the pace for the freedom movement, Tipu strived hard to rouse the consciousness of Indians to the impending danger from the British. <br /><br />It is difficult to find a figure from the 18th century who so resolutely offered resistance to British aggrandisement in India as Tipu. One would think that for this reason alone his memory would be cherished. Yet, there was no visible attempt at the national level to commemorate the bicentenary of his death — Tipu died on May 4, 1799 bravely fighting the British forces which stormed Srirangapatna. One would wish this was only a case of amnesia, and not part of a deliberate attempt to delete particular figures from our history. <br />Tipu was greatly encouraged in new ideas. His intellectual heritage interest was not purely theological. He was very much interested in secular science as well. If Islamic tradition was important for Tipu to justify his claims to be Sultan in his own right (compare Ranjit Singh’s claim to be a maharaja), he did not derive from this tradition any instance on intolerance, which religiousness of any kind so easily slips in to. <br /><br />Tipu was friendly and religious in his life. He has been portrayed, especially by the colonial and some post-independence Indian historians as a religious bigot, a fanatic, a king who oppressed non-Muslims and forcibly converted them to Islam. But a sensitive reading of Tipu reveals the nuances of his character and shows that he was just a king who strived for the welfare of his people. <br /><br />Tipu’s action of punishing the rebels of Coorg and Malabar by forced conversions cannot be covered by any apologia: they became the basis for charges against him of persecuting and destroying or closing Hindu temples. Yet the evidence to the contrary is almost definitive. <br />He recognised pre-existing land grants, gave revenue-free grants to several astrologers and ‘Shastris’, never deposed the Wadiyar kings of Mysore, and used Hindu symbols such as elephants on his coins. It is often forgotten that Tipu belonged to a milieu where Hindu-Muslim co-existence in the religious sphere was an accepted part of culture and polity. <br /><br />Union of beliefs<br />Tipu made generous grants to temples and had idols that had been desecrated by the marauding Maratha army reconstructed at its expense, indicating clearly that for him there was no contradiction in his belief in the efficacy of both Muslim and Hindu prayers. <br />Indian and western scholars who have written about Tipu have neither given due importance nor paid attention to how his personality was projected through every act of his — be it administrative, his struggle against foreign invaders or in the weapons, armour and flags he used. <br /><br />After Tipu’s death, Anantapur, Kadapa, Kurnool and Ballari were occupied by the British, who for some time gave them to the Nizam. The parts on the north of Tungabhadra were also taken away by the English on the plea that it belonged to the Marathas. But it was not given to them. The greater part of the sultanate was given to an old Hindu family.<br />This was done in lieu of the services the members of that family did to the English as conspirators against Tipu. This country was placed under the Resident. Seven lakh “Pagodas” a year were fixed as tribute to be paid by the Raja. Poornaiah, the alleged chief conspirator, was appointed the diwan. <br /><br />The reign of this Hindu Raj presented the following document to the English in gratitude of what they received from the latter: “As long as the sun and the moon will shed its lustre, we would never stand against your Excellency’s government. We always remain under your subordination. Your Excellency had restored our name. This would be remembered by the members of our family for generations to come. Our descendents would never forget to propose their good-will to your Excellency’s government on whose support we have our reliance.” <br /><br />(The writer teaches at Al-Ameen College, Bengaluru)<br /><br /></p>
