history farook Political Affiliation

And Religious Affinity:

series
Mappilas of North
WORKING PAPER
Malabar during the
Mysorean Invasion

E.K.Fazalurahiman

P.G.Department of History
Farook College Number 4
Kozhikode-673632, Kerala
Email: historyfarook@gmail.com December 2008
Political Affiliation
And Religious Affinity:
Mappilas of North
Malabar during the
Mysorean Invasion

E.K. Fazalurahiman

Number 4
December 2008
history farook working paper series Number 4 December 2008

Summary
The Mysorean invasion of the second half of the eighteenth century was a watershed in the
history of Kerala not just for the decisive impact it brought about in the fabric of the contemporary
socio-political system but also for the unending dialogues it unleashed on questions of the nature and
repercussions of the episode. The event and its reverberations have been evaluated from varied
historiographical and ideological perspectives. The colonial viewpoint tended to depict the invasions
as brutal acts capable of subverting the political tranquility of the land and of destroying the
communal harmony that had persisted here for centuries. Even historians of the prominent anti-
colonial school repeated the same colonial version in an inverted manner. Meanwhile, a group of
Muslim historians who, while opposing the colonial version, attempted to exonerate the invaders from
all such charges and ennobled them as exponents of modernization and social justice. All the aforesaid
versions treated Mappilas as collaborators and beneficiaries of the Mysorean interregnum and sought
to justify this with reference to their alleged anticipation of a deliverance; while the colonial and anti-
colonial version portrayed them as opportunists or communalists, the mainstream Muslim version
justified their attitude as progressive and revolutionary. All these versions shared a simple but wrong
conjecture and often overlooked the way how the community structure of the Mappilas and the
contrasting internal class interests played a determinate role in defining the nature of
alliance/antagonism towards the new rulers. In fact, religion was neither the sole nor the decisive
factor for the Mappilas in welcoming or rejecting the new masters. The commonly shared conception
of a monolithic Mappila community and the notion of an immediate and unconditional support
extended to the invasion of „co-religionists‟ need to be reexamined.

The eighteenth century witnessed the fall of the Mughal Empire in India and

the rise of several regional states in its place. One of these states was Mysore, which

soon developed on a scale to challenge any of the successor states of northern India. It

evolved out of the seventeenth century Wodayar dynasty through the leadership of its

military commander Haidar Ali who came to power through a military coup in 1761

and the state reached the zenith of its power under his son Tipu Sultan who succeeded

him in 1782. From the moment of his accession to power in Mysore, Hyder started a

series of political expeditions and, by conquering the Carnatic on the east coast and

the Malabar Kingdoms on the west coast, moved with a definite plan to consolidate

the entire South Indian peninsula under his control.

E.K.Fazalurahiman, Lecturer in History-Farook College fazal@farookcollege.ac.in

history farook working paper series Number 4 December 2008 2

That Hyder was determined to subdue the petty Kingdoms of the Malabar

region was clear from the very beginning of his political career. Even when he was the

faujdar of Dindigal he had accepted an invitation from the Raja of Palghat to interfere

in the affairs of the country. The political condition of north Malabar was favorable to

the ambitious Mysorean ruler. The disintegration of the Kolathiri dynasty was already

in progress and the kingdom was in a state of anarchy because it had been struggling

under political intrigues, conflicting interests and mutual jealousies. The Ali Raja of

Kannur, who supported one of the factions of the Kolathiri house in a civil war,

personally met Haidar at Mangalore and invited him to conquer Malabar by assuring

him of great political and commercial possibilities. He was requested by Haidar to

gather troops and provide adequate ammunition.1

In the case of Malabar, Hyder had clear cut economic and commercial

ambitions. The possession of coastal kingdoms of Malabar was immensely useful to

the land locked kingdom of Mysore. Having succeeded in occupying coastal

Karnataka, Haidar Ali had a plan to bind the ports of south Canara with those of

Malabar and to bring its spice trade under his control. This motive to maintain sea

trade with the Malabar ports is revealed in a few Kannada papers preserved in the

Cochin archives.2 The invitations of the Palaghat Raja and Ali Raja of Kannur were

mere pretext to Haidar Ali to meet his economic designs on Malabar. His economic

schemes were obvious in his decision to appoint Ali Raja of Kannur as his governor of

Malabar. Through this appointment Haidar Ali expected an easy access to the pepper

E.K.Fazalurahiman, Lecturer in History-Farook College fazal@farookcollege.ac.in

history farook working paper series Number 4 December 2008 3

lands of the region and the support of the Mappila traders who were playing a crucial

role as the intermediaries in the local pepper markets.

Structure of the Mappila Community

The Mappila Muslims formed one of the major communities of Kerala. In spite

of their common origin and uniform cultural traits there are regional and local

variations among them. In the pre-modern period Mappilas of north Kerala were a

heterogeneous community characterized by varied social strata and diverse interest

groups evolved out of the age long socio-economic interaction with the native social

system centered on caste. In course of time they emerged as a socially stratified and

economically uneven group without having a sense of community feeling and a

common leadership. The Mappilas were divided on both vertical and horizontal lines.

Vertically they were divided into Tangals (Muslims of Arab origin) and Malabaris

(native Muslims). Tangals, just as today, had been a highly respected segment of the

society and were honored with grants of land by the ruling chieftains (Naduvazhis).

Valapattanam, Dharmadam, Ramanthaly, Peringathur, Kumbala, and Purathil areas of

north Kerala had been the prominent settlements of the Tangals. Horizontally the

Malabaris were divided into tarawadu (elite) Mappilas, non-tarawadu Mappilas,

pusalans, ossans (barbers) and vellam kories or suppliers of water to the mosques3.

Most of the Muslim tarawadus in north Malabar had their origin after the ascendancy

of the Ali Rajas of Kannur. They were attempting to elevate some of their co-

religionists on a par with the Nair Janmis in order to serve their commercial interests

E.K.Fazalurahiman, Lecturer in History-Farook College fazal@farookcollege.ac.in

history farook working paper series Number 4 December 2008 4

in the region, as it is evident from the history of Muslim tarawadus of Edakkadu,

Dharmadam, Sreekandapuram, Irikkur and Taliparambu4. Non- tarawadu Mappilas

found their means of livelihood from trading activities and cultivation and also by

serving the Nayar and Muslim tarawadus. As simple lease holders they were a distant

and distinct part of the hierarchical jati based social system of Malabar. Puslans or

puthiya Muslims (New Muslim) lived in the coastal villages and majority of them

were either converted fishermen or migrant settlers from the southern part of Kerala.

Fishing and boat making were their means of subsistence. Ossans or barbers and

vellam kories or people who supplied water to the mosques, were considered as lowly

people. These groups were endogamous and followed strict customs of communal

discipline imposed by the nattu muppans or local chiefs. Front rows of mosques were

reserved for the Tangals and for the people from the tarawadus and they had separate

portions of land in the burial grounds attached to the mosques. This Mappila social

structure can truly be compared to the jati hierarchy late medieval Kerala. At the same

time, they were not absorbed in to the jati system that shaped and controlled the socio-

political structure of the region. Even the Arakkal tarawadu was not recognized as an

independent authority of the land. Alienation of this kind made the Mappilas more

turbulent than others. Their struggles in the late medieval and colonial periods should

be seen as a reaction to this estrangement and were the attempts to locate themselves

in the social hierarchy of contemporary Kerala.

E.K.Fazalurahiman, Lecturer in History-Farook College fazal@farookcollege.ac.in

history farook working paper series Number 4 December 2008 5

Conflicting Representations

The colonial writings on Mysore-Kerala relations had taken a definite political

design and generally shared a common conception that during the course of the

Mysorean invasion, the Mappilas, all on a sudden, sided with the invaders. The

colonial method of painting certain communities and groups of India in dark colours

in order to nurture communal and casteist tensions had played its desired role in this

case well. The Mysorean invasion to Malabar was a favorite theme of the colonial

writers which was used to misrepresent the native Muslims and was aimed at sowing

the seeds of communal discord in the native society. They formulated stereotypes like

„Mappila treachery‟ and „Mappila infidelity‟ to describe the anti-feudal stance of the

Muslims of the region. Robert Taylor, the chief of Tellicherry factory (1789-1794)

gave the following statement about the „treachery‟ of the Mappilas and strongly

recommended to prohibit the use of arms by that community:

„From the repeated treachery and notorious infidelity of the whole

Moplah race, rigid and terrifying measures are become indispensably

necessary to draw from them the execution of their promises and stipulations.

Lenity has ever been found ineffectual, and the indulgencies of a British

government incapable of securing their attachment and we understand that for

these reasons the general means to deprive this faithless race of men of the

power of repeating their former perfidious conduct by prohibiting to the whole

cast the use of arms and the possession of all war like instruments‟.5

According to De La Tour, a French commentator, the country of the Nayres

was thrown into great consternation by the cruelty of the Maplets, who following the

E.K.Fazalurahiman, Lecturer in History-Farook College fazal@farookcollege.ac.in

history farook working paper series Number 4 December 2008 6

cavalry (of Haidar) massacred all who escaped without sparing women or children.6

William Logan coined a derogatory term „jungle Mappilas‟ to depict the Muslims who

were fighting for attaining their minimum socio-economic rights7. Most probably, he

was being influenced by the medieval European historiographical tradition and may

have been drawing a line of parallel between the „rebellious Moors‟ and the Mappila

agitators of Calicut.8 The British officials spread Memoirs, Autobiographies and

historical writings written by unidentified authors, which were filled with stories of

forced conversions and circumcisions of Hindus. A major section of the writers and

historians of Kerala, who were critical of British policy and their model of

representing native people and history, were also taking the same view of the colonial

writers on Mappila- Mysorean relations and projected the Mappilas as opportunists

and anti-Hindus. The rhetoric of K.V. Krishna Iyer who wrote elaborately on the

history of Malabar under the Zamorins can be taken as the best illustration for this

misconception and prejudice. He wrote: „The Zamorin‟s alliance with the Portuguese

and their joint siege of Kunjali Marakkayar in 1598-1600 and Haidar Ali‟s alliance

with the Azhi Raja and their joint invasion of Chirakkal, Kottayam, Kadattanad and

Calicut widened the growing rift between the Hindus and Muslims. The Mysorean

occupation served only to embitter these animosities which the British were powerless

to assuage. Wearing the white dress of a sahid or martyr the Mappilla left his home

and relatives, killed his Hindu enemy, occupied a Hindu shrine if there was one on the

way, and finally sought death at the hands of the authorities, who were also infidels‟.9

To many native writers the Mysorean invasion was „honouring the Malayalees with

E.K.Fazalurahiman, Lecturer in History-Farook College fazal@farookcollege.ac.in

history farook working paper series Number 4 December 2008 7

Islam‟ and they genuinely believed that the Mappilas greatly benefited from the socio-

political transformation unleashed by it.10 This kind of an approach still guides many

in analyzing the response of the Mappilas to the Mysorean rule, which has come to

prevail over primarily because of the oversight of the academicians on the stratified

nature of the structure of the Mappila community. Right wing nationalist historians are

happy to elaborate this frame work to see the Kerala society kept divided on

communal lines. Even the left wing historians are not fully free from the above notion

as is evident from the following statement of Dr. K.K.N. Kurup. He wrote: „The

Mappila community in Malabar as a whole had the greatest ambition to participate in

the administration of political power. When they were under the Mysorean

government they had sympathy towards it to a certain account of economic interests

and common religion‟.11 Scholars from the West like Frederick Dale,12 R.E. Miller,13

and Theodore Gabriel14 who wrote on the Mappilas recently, followed the colonial

representation of the Mappilas, and repeated the portrayal of the Mysorean invasion as

a period of „Mappila triumph‟. They did not pay any serious attention to the existence

of the inherent divisions and clash of interests within the community during the pre-

British period. It was Stephen Frederick Dale who inflicted considerable damage to

historical reality by developing the frontier theory of Mappila militancy; it was

conceived of as a product of the long confrontation with the European powers on the

one hand and the Hindu community on the other.

Efforts on the part of the so called „Muslim historians‟ of Kerala to project

Haidar Ali and Tipu Sultan as the champions of reform and reconstruction was also

E.K.Fazalurahiman, Lecturer in History-Farook College fazal@farookcollege.ac.in

history farook working paper series Number 4 December 2008 8

based on similar historigraphical misconceptions, for, they too totally ignored the

existence of divisions and diversity within the Mappila community. Neglecting the

active elements of discord, they painted a picture of pan-Mappila culture and a

monolithic Muslim community. For instance, Dr. C.K. Kareem and Prof. Ibrahim

Kunju, leading historians of this category, tried hard to salvage the Mappilas and the

Mysoreans from the allegation of cruelties, particularly by citing the list of donations

the Mysore Sultans made to the temples and other religious institutions of Malabar. To

counter the arguments of so called Nationalist and Right Wing historians, they

formulated a theory of Mysorean social revolution. Ibrahim Kunju writes: „The

occupation of Malabar by the Mysore Sultans created a social revolution of unparalled

magnitude in the country. It gave an opportunity to large numbers of lower castes who

had been ill-treated inhumanly for centuries, to escape from the trammels of caste

rules and make a bid for social and consequent economic freedom, by embracing the

religion of the conquerors The higher castes, who used to ride roughshod over the

untouchable castes, now found themselves in a strange predicament in which they

could neither oppress the new converts nor withhold them from newly won rights. The

new converts probably didn‟t fail also to make the higher castes often feel the impact

of the changed situation‟.15 Dr. Kareem vindicated the high handedness of the

Mappilas who were in league with the Mysorean officials thus: “The Mappilas who

E.K.Fazalurahiman, Lecturer in History-Farook College fazal@farookcollege.ac.in

history farook working paper series Number 4 December 2008 9

were suppressed by the local Rajas asserted their rights with the advent of the

Mysoreans. They might have harassed the Nair rebels and helped the Mysoreans to

trace out their hiding places. Thus the Mappilas might have taken revenge on the Nairs

utilizing their position as the loyal subjects of Mysoreans”16. These kinds of

arguments, which, by justifying the atrocities done on a group of people, again eroded

the true spirit of history. The study of Mappila-Mysorean relations in the background

of the colonial understanding of native societies would only help to widen the

communal gap that still exists between the Hindus and Muslims. Rather, it should be

examined in the light of socio-economic determinants on which historians have a

greater understanding today. The role of these determinants in the processes of the

emergence of particular „communities‟ of medieval Malabar and their association or

disassociation with the hierarchical jati structure of the land should be discussed as the

key issues.

The Nature of Early Mappila Response

When Haidar crossed the Nileshwar River, the Mappilas of Kottappuram on the

southern bank of the river, opposed him fiercely without giving him any concession on

religious ground. They had in their mind the memories of the gruesome attack by the

Canarese under Ragunath, the commander of Somasekara Nayak II, the Bidnur king17.

The Mappilas of the area did not see any difference between the forces of Haidar and

Naik. This, in the first phase of the Mysorean occupation, though not mentioned by

E.K.Fazalurahiman, Lecturer in History-Farook College fazal@farookcollege.ac.in

history farook working paper series Number 4 December 2008 10

the colonial writers, points to the play of local interests in determining the nature of

Mappila response towards the Mysoreans.

Ali Raja‟s support to Haidar Ali could not be seen as an act of religiosity as he

had the backing of Ambu Tamban, the Chirakal prince of northern palace of

Udayamangalam who had posed a claim over the throne of the Kolattiri. Haidar Ali,

with the support of this rebellious prince, was trying to collect from the Kolattiri an

old outstanding indemnity of two lakh pagodas due to Bidnur and his own debt against

the Zamorin18. During the second Mysorean invasion Ali Raja lost the governorship

entrusted on him by Haidar Ali in 1766. Earlier, he was also warned by the Sultan

against his cruelties in the Maldives as the High Admiral of Mysore. „Haidar Ali was

so irritated at the cruelty practiced on the unfortunate king by his admiral. He instantly

deprived him of the command of the fleet, which he afterwards, it is said, bestowed on

an Englishman named Stanet‟19. All these would reveal that the Mysoreans had no

particular interest in the Arakal family and for them the alliance was just a tactical

measure to serve their political and commercial designs.

In some parts of north Malabar, the Mappila lease holders and peasants

exploited the fluid socio-political situation created by the Mysorean invasion, to take

revenge on some Nayar janmis for their excesses. The Mappilas of Peringathur,

Panoor, Aniyaram and Puthur areas, instead of continuing under the protection of the

treaty of 1738 with the French at Mahe, occupied the plots of lands vacated by

Iruvazhi Nambiars and other Nair chieftains. When the Nambyars and the Nair

chieftains returned after sometime, probably in 1768, to reassume their possessions

E.K.Fazalurahiman, Lecturer in History-Farook College fazal@farookcollege.ac.in

history farook working paper series Number 4 December 2008 11

they were resisted by the Mappilas under the leadership of Babacharo (Bavachi Haji).

Though the Mappilas were defeated they could get some concessions from the

landlords.20 There were reports of similar revolts from Irikur, Trikaripur, Taliparmbu

and Chavassery. But the case of Talassery Muslims was different. As a centre of

English East India Company, Talassery was transforming into an urban settlement of

multifarious culture. The Mappila trading groups under the leadership of the Keyis

had been an important agency and beneficiary of this urban progression. As their

relation with the Company was beneficial to both parties, the Keyis refused to

collaborate with the Mysoreans and did not support the initiative of the Arakal family

of Kannur. Moreover, they were keen to make Talassery a town rivaling both Kannur

and Mahe. Despite the Mysorean monopoly over spice trade, Chovakaran Musa, the

head of the Keyi family who was the leading pepper broker of the town, secretly

worked to collect spices for the Company. The declaration of the monopoly of spice

trade by the Mysorean Sultans at this time hit the English Company hard and it was

through the efforts of Musa that they could get possession of these commodities. In

spite of the fact that the Mysore Sultans were his co-religionists Musa didn‟t join them

but decided to stick to his friend, the English East India Company through thick and

thin21. Though being an ally of the English Company, he had financial dealings with

the Arakal family. In 1784, the Arakkal Bibi mortgaged several Laccadive Islands to

him for an amount of two lakhs rupees. The Islands were to remain in pledge till the

principal and interest of his debt were liquidated.22

E.K.Fazalurahiman, Lecturer in History-Farook College fazal@farookcollege.ac.in

history farook working paper series Number 4 December 2008 12

The Mappila lease holders who supported the Mysoreans in the initial stage of

their conquest started to change their attitude in course of time especially with the

introduction of strict revenue regulations by the officers of the Sultans. It was true that

some Mappila elites were elevated to the position of janmis by the Mysorean revenue

officials. Politics of convenience was the reason behind these appointments. The

Mysorean officials who introduced land tax for the first time in the history of the

Malabar, found no landlords to deal with. Even those traditional janmis who remained

in the country, refused to attend the cutchery (Revenue Offices) for fear of breaking

cast rules23. Consequently, the government had no option but to make the settlement

with the tenants, who were mostly Mappilas in the interior district24. But it didn‟t

produce any basic shift in the social structure of the Mappilas of Malabar as the newly

created janmis were very few in numbers and were following the official instructions

in collecting revenues. Majority of the Mappilas continued to remain as lease holders

or peasants under the new janmies without having any hope of freedom from

oppression. The so called „destruction of theocratic political regime‟ by the Mysoreans

failed to improve the condition of the Mappilas of Malabar. Frustrated sections of

Mappilas expressed their indignation through several rebellions that shook the whole

of Malabar during the last years of Tipu‟s rule25. In Kannur Arakal Bibi showed her

sympathy towards her Mappila subjects by denying permission to the Mysoreans to

use Kannur town as their base of operation against Chirakal Raja. Tipu who could

realize this alienation of the Mappilas succeeded in winning over the Bibi to his side

by arranging the marriage of his son with the daughter of the Bibi. Two villages

E.K.Fazalurahiman, Lecturer in History-Farook College fazal@farookcollege.ac.in

history farook working paper series Number 4 December 2008 13

outside the Kannur town were handed over to her as Mahr (marriage settlement). To

pacify the Mappilas he declared the completion of works of mosques at Talassery

(palissery mosque) and Calicut (pattani palli or pattalapalli). Further, he donated lands

to the mosques of Perigathur, Kottayam, Srikandapuram, Pallikare, Taliparambu,

Ettikulam, Madayi and Mattul26. But, these measures failed to ease the strained

relations between the Mappilas and the Mysore ruler. The chaotic socio-political order

that emerged in Malabar with the Mysorean conquest had weakened the economy of

the land27. Mappila traders and brokers were the first native group to experience the

impact of this development in economy. Though they had no a recognized stratum in

the traditional social order of pre-Mysorean period, the condition was favorable for

their economic well-being. So they supported the Bibi when she deserted Tipu and

executed an agreement with the Company in August 1790 „with a sincere desire of

relieving the different Malabar powers from the oppression of Tipu Sultan‟28. In the

early phase of the conquest Mappila elites including Tarawadu Muslims and Tangals

had an expectation of some position in the hierarchical jati structure of Malabar. But

within a short span, they understood the fact that the Mysorean policy was aimed at

collecting maximum revenue and was not indented to serve the interests of natives

including them. It compelled them to take sides with the English East India Company

and they played a significant role in bringing about an agreement between the Arakal

tarawadu and the English in 1790. Though the agreement was extremely fragile it

disclosed the kind of mistrust that had developed between the native Muslims and the

Sultan. The lot of the Mappila lease holders in the villages was getting worsened for

E.K.Fazalurahiman, Lecturer in History-Farook College fazal@farookcollege.ac.in

history farook working paper series Number 4 December 2008 14

they had to pay heavy taxes fixed by the Mysorean officials. The revenue demands

which neglected the topographical features of different localities had ruined them.29

Moreover, they had to bear the blames of Nairs and others for their alleged support to

Mappila elites in their attempt to create a „Mappila aristocracy‟ outside the traditional

jati structure.

In the final years of Tipu‟ rule, certain questions of religious ritualism also

widened the relations between the Mappilas and the Muslim officers of Mysore.

Mappilas of the period, who, though did not have any religious orientation like that of

the modern age with a definite school of thought under a particular ulema group

trained in sectarianism, were following a loose form of Shafi Islam. Though being

socially graded, this bestowed them a loose form of outward unity in rituals and

prayers. For the Mappilas, especially for those who were living in the villages, had no

experience of Hanafi Islam practiced by the Muslim officials and soldiers of the

Sultans. This inconsistency in religious practices created a sense of suspicion among

the Mappilas on the ultimate aims of the Mysoreans. The invaders refused to mingle

with the native Muslims even in Friday prayers and they had separate mosques or

temporary arrangements in important towns for this purpose. Mappilas saw them in

contempt and scorned them by saying “people doing evening prayers in the night” and

described them as “Kutira Pattanis” or Patans with horse. Moreover, their celebration

of Muharram was un-Islamic in the eyes of the natives. The Mysoreans had

constructed Imam Badas or centers of Muharram festivals close to their camps which

were hitherto unknown to the Mappilas. To the Hanafi Mysoreans their religious

E.K.Fazalurahiman, Lecturer in History-Farook College fazal@farookcollege.ac.in

history farook working paper series Number 4 December 2008 15

language was Urdu. Malabar Mappilas practiced their rituals either in Arabic or in the

Arabi-Malayalam dialect. In this condition of strangeness, a cultural encounter of an

intense form was inevitable between the native Mappilas and the Mysoreans. The

spread of Urdu in Malabar could not be a result of Mysorean domination. Even before

the arrival of the Sultans there were Urdu speaking people in Talassery, Calicut,

Ponnani and Palaghat.

In spite of all the measures taken by the Mysoreans, they failed to establish a

central structure of administration in Malabar. Indeed their rule had weakened certain

elements of the traditional jati structure in Malabar but the Nairs and their tarawadus

were able to maintain their socio-political dominance despite years of war and exodus.

Although considerable changes had taken place in Malabar during the Mysorean

hegemony, the local conception of rule continued without much change30. The

Mappilas, who had strong socio-economic ties with the local jati groups at various

levels, now felt more alienated than in the pre-Mysorean period. But, the Mappilas of

north Malabar, unlike their counterparts in southern part of the region who were in

continuous conflict with the British administrators after the exit of the Mysoreans,

tried to get accommodated into the new social structure in which the English

Company was the master without much reservation. The Company, with its

commercial interests, was keen to protect them and their interests as it is evident from

the incidents at Kottayam during the period 1793-96. Kottayam Pazhassi Raja was

alleged of destroying a mosque and of killing three Muslims31. Paradoxically, during

this period Pazhassi Raja was in alliance with Tipu Sultan, the Mysore ruler32.

E.K.Fazalurahiman, Lecturer in History-Farook College fazal@farookcollege.ac.in

history farook working paper series Number 4 December 2008 16

Conclusion

The events and developments discussed here would reveal that the varied socio-

economic concerns of different sections within the Mappila community were

determinate factors in shaping the alliance/resistance duality of Mappila response to

the Mysorean rule. The general perception on Mappila response to the Mysorean

invasion still revolves around the colonial paradigm; the colonial historiography

tended to perceive religious communities along homogenous categories unaffected by

class distinctions or clash of interests. In fact in the case of the Mappila response to

the Mysorean invasion the fundamental question of the role of economic motives in

determining the possibilities of alliance/antagonism was largely overlooked. The

colonial image of „outrageous Mappilas‟ needs to be re-examined in the light of the

economic and social concerns that guided the community and the cultural factors that

had helped its members to coexist in a plural society. The colonial construct of intense

Mappila religiosity which promoted their alliance with the Mysoreans should be seen

as a historiographical project; it had its aim in gaining legitimacy for their territorial

conquests in India. But the stance taken by later writers, both Indian and foreign,

along lines of portraying the Mappilas in the same colonial contours only helps to taint

the socially sensitive minds. The so-called Muslim historians of Kerala who have

struggled hard to paint a glossy picture of Haidar Ali and Tipu Sultan also have

contributed much to damage historical objectivity. Any serious and balanced study on

the nature of the Mappila response to the Mysorean rule in Malabar should take into

E.K.Fazalurahiman, Lecturer in History-Farook College fazal@farookcollege.ac.in

history farook working paper series Number 4 December 2008 17

account the class distinctions and power mechanism within the community and the

varied socio-economic compulsions that motivated different sections to respond either

in the positive or negative manner. Religion was neither the sole nor the central factor

in determining conditions of political affiliations or loyalty.

Notes and References:

1
K.K.N. Kurup, History of the Tellicherry Factory ,Calicut University, 1985, p.140.
2
K.G. Vasantha Madhava “A Note on Kannada Papers in the Cochin Archives’’, Indian Archives
(xxvii, New Delhi, 1978), No 2, pp 33-36.
3
A.P. Ibrahim Kunju, “Mappila Muslims of Kerala: Their History and Culture”, Trivandrum, 1989,
p 177.
4
Land records of major Muslim tarawads in these areas indicate their existence before the
eighteenth century.
5
Diary 28, December 1790, Diary and Consultation of the Tellicherry Factory (MSS.
August 1751 to September 1794), serial 1518, p.379.
6
De La Tour. M.M, The History of Hyder Ali Khan Bahadur, Vol. 1, London, 1786, p.108.
7
William Logan, Malabar, Vol. I, Trivandrum, 1981, p.547.
8
Ibid, p. 504.
9
K.V. Krishna Iyer, A History of Kerala, Coimbatore, 1968, p.342.
10
P.K.S. Raja, Medieval Kerala, Calicut, 1966, p.214.
11
K.K.N. Kurup, op. cit, p. 204.
12
Stephen Frederick Dale, The Mappilas of Malabar, 1498-1922, Oxford, 1980.
13
R.E. Miller, Mappila Muslims of Kerala: A Study in Islamic Trends’’, Hyderabad, 1976, p.85.
14
Theodore Gabriel, Hindu Muslim Relations in North Malabar, 1498-1947, New York, 1996.
15
A. P. Ibrahim Kunju, op. cit, p.79.
16
C.K. Kareem, “Some Documents Showing the Religious Policy of Tipu Sultan in Kerala”, in Prof.
A.P. Ibrahim Kunju ed., Eighteenth Century India, Calicut University, 1981, pp.156-57.
17
K.K.N. Kurup, op. cit. pp 100-105.
18
William Logan, op. cit, pp 458-459.
19
Ibid, p 459.
20
A. P. Ibrahim Kunju, op. cit, p.80.
21
Ibid, p 66.
22
Ibid, p.280.
23
Ibid, pp 80-81.
24
Ibid, p 81.
25
William Logan, op. cit, pp. 506-509.
26
Land records of Taliparambu Juma Masjid refer to these donations.
27
K. M. Panikkar, A History of Kerala, Annamalainagar, 1960, pp.414-15; Ashin Das Gupta,
Malabar in Asian Trade, 1740-1800, Cambridge, 1967, pp.103, 113.
28
Ibid, pp.526-527.
29
Margret Frenz, From Contact to Conquest: Transition to British Rule in Malabar, 1790- 1805,
OUP, New Delhi, 2003, pp 94-95.
30
Ibid, p 98.
31
Ibid, p 135.
32
William Logan, op. cit, pp 577-578.

E.K.Fazalurahiman, Lecturer in History-Farook College fazal@farookcollege.ac.in