jamahir
ELITE MEMBER
- Joined
- Jul 9, 2014
- Messages
- 28,132
- Reaction score
- 1
- Country
- Location
Tipu was an anti hindu ruler
The late playwright and actor Girish Karnad doesn't agree with you in this interview :
Please read the rest of the interview.Q. You said that your remarks on Tipu were casual, but wasn't it also a bit misguided? Especially since he is a polarising figure in Karnataka. Some see him as a tyrant, others as a patriot.
A. Well, I don't care. I call him a patriot. In fact, I would not use the word 'patriot', I think he was a great king, he was a great thinker, a great strategist, and he did so much for Karnataka. I stand by what I said. I admire him. I think he is one of the best Kannadigas we had in the last 500 years, after the fall of Vijaynagar. And how much he has done for the state, I don't need to repeat it, it's all been said.
Q. But there in another side to the Tipu historiography, which sees him as someone who persecuted Hindus. How do you respond to that? Because that is also at the core of this debate.
A. Yes, but he also slaughtered Moplas. The Moplas were not Hindus, they were Muslims. The rules of warfare in the 18th century were very different from what it is today. Kerala, Coorg, Mysore and Maharashtra were all considered separate countries. People now protest as an Indian, but no. That's why I called him a Kannadiga. Now, he has got an all India reputation. He was certainly ruthless in many of his movements. But then so were everyone else. Marathas were ruthless. That was what all armies did. I'm not blaming Marathas or Tipu. You can't judge Tipu now, in the 20th century for doing what he did in the 17th century. But what you can admire him for is what he brought to the country, what he brought to Karnataka.
And Tipu was not just the first Indian freedom fighter, he was also an Internationalist :
Marxist historians, on the other hand, have viewed him as “one of the foremost commanders of independence struggle” and a “harbinger of new productive forces”.
History is unkind to Tipu Sultan. The fact is that Tipu cannot be reduced to a singular narrative or tradition of intolerance or bigotry as he represented multiple traditions. He combined tolerant inter-religious traditions, liberal and secular traditions, anti-colonialism and internationalism. He could do this as he had strong roots in Sufism, which is not explored much by historians. He belonged to the Chisti/Bande Nawaz tradition of Sufism.
He was the first to confiscate the property of upper castes, including Mutts, and distribute it among the Shudras.
His tolerance is reflected in his annual grants to no less than 156 temples, which included land deeds and jewellery. His army was largely composed of Shudras. When the famed Sringeri Mutt, established by Shankaracharya, was invaded by the Maratha army, he issued a firman to provide financial assistance for reinstallation of the holy idol and restoring the tradition of worship at the Mutt. His donation to the famous Srikanteshwara temple at Nanjangud; the donation of 10,000 gold coins to complete temple work at Kanchi; settling the disputes between two sects of priests at the Melkote temple; and gifts to Lakshmikanta temple at Kalale are all well-known. Interestingly, Srirangapatna, a temple town, remained his permanent capital till the end of his rule. He was also instrumental in constructing the first-ever church in Mysuru. Incidentally, well-known historian B.A. Saletore calls him “defender of Hindu Dharma”.
The allegation of forcible conversions has to be seen in the background of political exigencies — either they were with the colonialists such as in the case of Christians of Dakshina Kannada, or were waging a protracted guerrilla war as in the case of Coorg. Here, historians have distorted the facts by reducing political exigencies to the “communal ideology” of Tipu.
A ruler, who once identified himself with the American and French Revolution and Jacobinism, has remained an enigma to many.
Last edited:
