FACTS againest MYTHS V0L-VI-9-2000
Item
- Title
- FACTS againest MYTHS V0L-VI-9-2000
- extracted text
-
gdweI
Vol VI # 9/2000
VIKAS ADHYAYAN KENDRA
INFORMATION BULLETIN
Dari: Kra or Foundations of Syncretism
JVlytfts of JVledievaf History — JPart J J
P.R. Rani
Comment
he very argument that certain events which took
T
place in the past need to be avenged today
is itself based on a perverse understanding of
society. Politics of past has to be kept confined to
past itself, irrespective of its interpretation. The present
in no way can redress the mistakes of the past. The
communal political forces resort to past antagonisms
to consolidate their social base. Be it the spreading of
myths about Muslim kings destroying Hindu temples
or Rana Pratap and Shivaji battling against the might
of Muslim rulers or be it the Taj Mahal being a original
Temple of God Shiva usurped by a Muslim king to
convert it into a tomb for his beloved queen. The very
root of this historiography is based on the false
assumption that Indian society is constituted by number
religious communities and the interests of one
gious community are uniform and in hostility to the
other communities. In this view politics is nothing but
an interaction of different religious communities.
S
This communal view of history has serious flaws as it
takes the religion of the ruler as the sole determining
factor of the politics of the time. It has a static view of
religion as if it does not change because of the
interaction with the people. However, it sees
communities as uniform ones ignoring the serious
differences in the socio-economic status of people within
the same religious community. Instead what we should
study in the history is “the stage of development of
society from one point to another, the change in the
society’s system of production and the resultant social
organization, etc” (Mukhia, 1993)
Another aspect in the distortion of history of medieval
times is the project of British historians who used
selected sources to show only the conflict part of the
times. In continuation with Mill and Macaulay, Elliot
and Dawson continued in the same vein and Elliot was
forthright to proclaim that the purpose of their 8-volume
project, ‘History of India as Told by Her Own Historians’,
was to divide the people on communal lines
(Chausalkar, 1995). They could succeed in their project
because historical accounts written by court historians
were normally written in an archaic style, eulogizing
the ruler and generally attributing his deeds to some
holy cause rather than to outright greed.
The illogic behind this myth, under question, refers to
the RSS goal of a Hindu Rashtra. In its agenda it
asserts that India can be united only under a Hindu
identity. It then puts forward the spurious claim that
all religions which arose in the subcontinent emerged
as mere sects of Hinduism, and are thus not full fledged
religions. Be it Buddhism or Sikhism, the RSS is prompt
to label them as mere sects of Hinduism. Its version of
Hinduism is, however, an elite Brahminical version while
these other religions arose mainly as a reaction against
the Brahminical values.
At this point, tt is imperative to challenge this
communal claim by asking; does it mean that we
Indians can be united into a single nation only as
Hindus, according to the RSS.? Our response is: On
the contrary! Indians ARE united by the overarching
Indian National identity! The attempts, on the other
hand, by the RSS to invent Hindu identity and make it
as the primary identity is fraught with dangers not only
for the minorities and weaker sections of society but
even for those with Sikh or Buddhist identity!
( FACTS against MYTHS - Vol VI # 9/2000
FOR PRIVATE CIRCULATION ONLY
MYTH: The medieval period is the darkest period
of Indian history.
FACT: The coming of the British severely affected the
already declining central authority of the Mughal empire
and they consolidated their empire by defeating the
local nawabs and kings.
A large part of Indian subcontinent was predominantly
under Mughal rule though never in the rest of South
Asia. The British for their convenience viewed South
Asian history in terms of religious categories. They
had also to nurture the loyalties of their subjects away
from the old kingdoms to their own rule. It is towards
this end that they propagated the notion that British
rule is the divine dispensation for the Indian people
that would freed them from the tyrannies of Mughal
rule.
However, the Mughal empire cannot be equated with
the Mughal period as though the emperors were
Muslims and the administrative structure was
unchanged under the Mughals. The old relationship of
landlord, kings and vassals remained undisturbed. The
top functionaries of state were not only Muslims but
also Hindus. The rajas, rulers and zamindars were
Hindus who enjoyed considerable amount of social and
political power. In the court of these emperors, which
were the highest authority next to the kings, the number
of Hindu functionaries and allies was very high. In fact
the maximum number of such Hindu Rajas were in the
court of Aurangzeb, who is supposed to be most bigoted
of emperors. Furthermore, not all Muslims were not
part of the ruling dynasty as most of them belonged to
poor, low caste shudras and who shared their plight
with the poor sections of Hindus. Thus, at the top rung
of the administration were Hindus and Muslims and at
the bottom of society there were Hindus and Muslims.
This is a totally incorrect method of periodising history
which began by J.S. Mill in his book on Indian history,
which was meant to be the primer for the British
administrative trainees preparing for their tenure as
administrators in India.
MYTH: Shivaji was a great Hindu crusader in the
cause of Hinduism and who restored the supremacy
of Hindu rule.
in his navy in large numbers. Interestingly Mirza Raja
Jaisingh on behalf of King Aurangzeb fought his major
battles with the Rajput army leader. When he was
detained at Agra fort, of the two men on whom he relied
for his eventual escape one was a Muslim called Madari
Mehtar. His confidential secretary was Maulana Haider
Ali and the chief of his cannon division was Ibrahim
Gardi.
He had respected other religions. He respected the
holy seers like ‘Hazarat Baba Yaqut bahut Thorwale’,
whom he gave the life pension and also Father
Ambrose, whose church was under attack in Gujarat.
At his capital Raigad he erected a special mosque for
Muslim devotees in front of his palace in the same
way that he built the Jagadishwar temple for his own
daily worship.
Writing in the eveninger, Mid-Day, (June 4,2000,
Mumbai) columnist, R. Zakaria, observes that during
his military campaigns Shivaji had issued strict
instructions to his men and officers that Muslim women
and children should not be subjected to maltreatment.
Mosques and Dargah’s were given due protection. He
also ordered that whenever a copy of the Koran cq*
into the hands of his men, they should show it proper
respect and hand it over to Muslim”. The story of his
bowing to the daughter-in-law of Bassein’s Nawab is
well known. When she was brought as a part of the
booty and offered to her he respectfully begged her
pardon and asked his soldiers to escort her back from
the place from where she was forcibly brought in.
Sardesai in his book “New History of Marathas” (Vol.1)
writes “...in defending the Hindu religion, Shivaji was
in no way actuated by any hatred towards Muslims as
a sect or towards their religion...He revered Muslim
saints like Baba Yakut of Kelsi to whose shrine he
made a grant...” All this goes on to show the values of
communal harmony which Shivaji persued, and that
his primary goal was to establish his own kingdom
with maximum possible area.
Corroborating the above, V.B. Kulkarni writes in his
book: “Shivaji: The Portrait of Patriot’’: “Men of£|
classes and creeds took part in the great enterprise?!
FACT: Shivaji is one of the most fascinating
personalities of Indian history. His manifold
achievements have made him a great folk hero. It is
extremely tragic, however, the name of this great king
— recognised as a symbol of national integration —is
being exploited to spread hostility against a community.
building a new order in the country. The Pathan from
the wilds of the N.W Frontier fought shoulderto shoulder
with his Hindu comrade-in-arms...The sea-faring
Muslim from the Konkan was received with open arms
in the Maratha navy and given positions of trust and
responsibility without the slightest suspicion or fear
that the ties of religion would triumph over his sense
of loyalty and obligation...”
As an outstanding administarator, Shivaji adopted a
humane policy in administrative affairs which did not
base itself on religion. In the recruitment of his soldiers
and officers for his army and navy, religion was no
criterion and more than one third of his army consisted
of Muslims. The supreme command of his navy was
with Siddi Sambal, and Muslim Siddis were recruited
In conclusion, these facts beg the question; Why, then,
Shivaji portrayed as a Hindu King? We do not have
any reference upto 1895, It was in 1895 that Lokmanya
Tilak had decided of mobilising public opinion in favour
of nationalism. Thereafter, the Kesari became a public
forum of all kinds of ideasa. For invoking thq historical
memories Tilak discussed, inter-alia, proposals
< FACTS against MYTHS - Vol VI # 9/2000
2
I
I
Brief Note on Sikh History
I
I
I In the 17th century Guru Nanak’s preaching’s came in the wake of brahminical
I domination on one hand and the spread of teachings of Sufi and Bhakti saints on
I the other. Nanak rejected Brahminical values and caste domination and concluded
I that teachings of Bhakti and Sufi differed in form, not in content. It was from the
I teachings of Muslim Sufis (notably Sheikh Farid) and Sant Kabir that Guru Nanak
I drew his inspiration. He preached monotheism and quiet devotion to God. His hymns
I were drawn from different sources. Out of Nanak’s teachings came an enduring
I religious community with a distinctive history and evolution separate from Hindu
I and Muslim religions but drawing deeply the egalitarian principles from both. Nanak
I denounced the orthodoxy and practitioners of Islam as well as Hinduism and
I emphasised the vibrant inter-community relationships that was based on the
I subaltern versions of Islam and Hinduism. His teachings at one level are a synthesis
I of the values of both religions like the doctrines of reincarnation and Karma from
I Hinduism and the oneness of God and congregation in worship from Islam.
I Nine more Gurus followed Nanak. With the fifth Guru, Arjan, Sikhism was established
I as a separate religious system. He put together the writings of his predecessors,
!• his own and those of Hindu and Muslim saints in the Adi Granth, which is the guiding
spirit of Sikh religion. Meanwhile due to the efforts of the Gurus Amritsar emerged
I as the religious and trade centre. It is important to remember that the Sufi saint
I Miyan Mir was requested to lay the foundation stone of Golden Temple. This was the
I time when organisation of Sikh community as a political process was also in progress,
I and their relationship with the Mughal sultanate was becoming quiet complex. Guru
I Arjan had become an important religious and political leader. He was socially very
I close to Miyan Mir, while his chief opponent was a Hindu, the finance minister to
I Muslim governor of Lahore. During the 17th century this community underwent a
I transformation into a military community. The gurus went into Mughal politics and
I soon found themselves in opposition to the factions, which won in the battles for
I succession. Initially Guru Arjan entered in to a liaison with Khusarau. In 1606 when
I Prince Khusarau rebelled against his father Jahangir, it was suspected that Guru
I Arjan had supported Khusarao and was arrested.
I Another Guru Hari Rai entered into relations with rebellious son of Shahjahan, Dara
I Shikoh. With Dara Shikoh’s defeat at the hands of his brother Aurangzeb this Guru
I again found himself on the wrong side of the power equations of the ruling Mughal
l» family. He therefore had to send his son to Delhi to negotiate a pardon. The cycle of
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
conflict with Mughal rulers continued and took extreme form with the 10th Guru,
Guru Govind Singh. Guru Govind wanted to establish his own kingdom while
Aurangazeb was brutally suppressing the rebellions against the Mughal Sultanate.
Guru Govind’s immediate tussle was with the Raja of Bilaspur, whom he refused to
pay any tribute. This led to the battle in which the Raja of Bilaspur was defeated.
This also led to hostilities among the Rajas of hill states towards Guru Govind
Singh. He also had allies in the plains the most notable of whom was the pir of Sadhura.
Aurangzeb in conjunction with Hindu Rajas of plains drove Guru Govind away from
Anandpur and in the battle his children were caught and tortured. Later, an attempt
to an rapprochement was made by Aurangzeb’s and he invited Guru Govind to meet
him in the Deccan. As Guru Govind was on his way to meet him, Aurangzeb died, but
the process of reconciliation with Mughal sultanate continued and in due course
Guru struck an alliance with Aurangzeb’s son Bahadurshah Jafar.
FACTS against MYTHS - Vol VI # 9/2000
T
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
1
1
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
i
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
J
regarding Kirtan and festivals at every fort. Further, for
fund collection regarding momorial issue a suggestion
was put forth that if every Maharashtrian Hindu
contributed just a paise, 5 lakh rupees could be
collected. In Bhajans and Kirtanthe secular character
of Shivaji was underplayed and what was fed to popular
conception was his heroic struggle against Mughals
who were portrayed as outsiders and Muslims.
In this sea-saw battle between Sikhs and Mughal Kings,
the lines of alliances were regularly blurred. Mughals
having liaison with Hindu Rajas, Gurus having alliances
with Muslim kings and pirs etc. This was a political fight
in which religious elements got mixed up. The same
Guru Govind Singh who had a rough patch with
Aurangzeb allied with his son Bahadur Shah Jafar.
MYTH: Rana Pratap was an anti-Muslim King and
or a Hindu king’s palace which was procured by
Shah Jahan who converted it into a tomb for his
wife Mumtaj Mahal.
is a symbol of Indian nationalism.
FACT: Rana Pratap was a Rajput king of great valour
and pride. He did not want to subordinate himself to
Mughal Empire unlike other Rajput kings. He refused
the messages of compromise leading to wars with King
Akbar. On behalf of Akbar Raja Mansing, another Rajput
King took on Rana Pratap in the battle of Haldi Ghati.
Mansingh had Rajput soldiers on his side, while Rana
Pratap’s army was a mixed one with his army being
led by Hakim Khan Sur’s Afghan contingent. Hakim
Khan Sur’s manorial still stanads at Haldi Ghati and
there is an annual festival to commemorate his
anniversary, celebrated by Rajputs in general. After his
defeat in this battle Rana resorted to guerrilla warfare,
while most of the Rajput Kings did agree to join the
Mughal administration. After the death of Rana, his
son Amar Singh allied with the Mughal king Jahangir,
who accorded full and befitting honours on him. While
words will fall short to admire the bravery of Maharana
Pratap or Shivaji Maharajforthat matter they cannot
be accused of being anti-Muslim or anti- Islam. Neither
can they be called as symbols of Indian Nationalism
as they were fighting fortheir own Kingdoms and NOT
for Indian nationalism. Indian Nationalism is a modern
concept, a concept of the times of industrial society.
The Kingdoms are around Jamindars, Nobilty and
Jagirdars who are the building blocks of the Mughal
administration.
MYTH: Sikhism is not a separate religion but a mere
sect of Hinduism created to protect the Hindu faith
from Muslim invaders and aggression.
FACT: It is not necessary to separate Hinduism from
Sikhism because it is already quite distinct as Guru
Nanak himself declared, ‘Na hum Hindu na Musalman,
Allah Ram Ke Pind Pran’. And thus, Sikhs are not
Hindus but Guru; Nanak hated no religion. Moreover,
Hindus took Guru Nanak as an incarnation of God, a
Guru, and Muslims took and respected him as their
peer. There is a common saying:
“Nanak Shah Faquir
Hindu ka Guru Muslim ka Pir”
But the myth under question is typical RSS propaganda,
one more example of the misuse of history for communal
designs. Moreover, this version of Hinduism is an elite
Brahmanical version. Other religions, on the other hand,
had emerged in reaction to Brahmanical values.
Q FACTS against MYTHS-Vol VI #9/2000
MYTH: The Taj Mahal was originally a Shiv temple
FACT: This claim is based on the interpretation of the
Badashahnama, the biography of Shah Jahan, which
according to Oak (who claims Taj Mahal to be a Hindu
monument) was procured from Mirza Raja Jai Singh,
grandson of Man Singh. Oak also maintains that the
words Taj Mahal is a distortion of the Sanskrit, Tejo
Mahalaya, meaning a Shiv temple. There are other
grounds also that the carbon dating of the door of the
mausoleum shows that it belonged to a period three
centuries before the reign of Shah Jahan.
Shah Jahan, The Emperor of Oppulence’, lost his rr^t
favourite wife Mumtaj Mahal while she was giving birtSB
their child. He was totally heart-broken and on the
promise given to her he gave orders for this magnificent
structure to be built. Abdul Hamid Lahauri the court
historian records in Badshah Namathe complete details
of the construction and the expenses involved and the
mechanism of supervision of the whole process. He given
by him are corroborated by the accounts of foreign
travelers like Peter Mundy, Jean-Baptiste Tavernier,
Nicholai Manucci and Francis Bernier, who visited Agra
at that time.
The Taj Mahal was a mammoth project replete with the
structure, gardens and all the paraphernalia of the
mausoleum. Mirza Raja Jaising gave the land in lieu of
compensation and this is confirmed by two of the firmans
(court orders) of Shah Jahan. This is what is
misinterpreted as that the structure itself was procured.
The details of construction process leave no doubt a^o
who built it. The details of regular expenses from™
king’s treasury on regular basis are also available. As
soon as the construction began it was noticed by
European travellers who visited Agra and left a record of
the monument Peter Mundy (1631 -32) writes ‘The king
is now building a Sepulchre for his late deceased Queen
Taje Mahal (Taj Mahal) whom he deafly affected....He
intends it shall excel all others..the building is big and
goes on with excessive labor.....” (From The Taj:A
Mausoleum’, R. Nath, Seminar364-Dec 1989). Tavernier,
a French jeweler first came to Agra in 1640-41, when the
Taj was still under construction. He confirmed that
Emperor Shah Jahan was building a grand mausoleum
for his beloved queen. Carbon dating of the wood of the
doors cannot be basis of dating of the structure as doors
are replaceable and the life of wood may be different
than the date of construction of the building. Tejo
4
Mahalaya cannot be the name of Shiv and, above all, the
Man Singh clan was a Vaishanvite not a Shaiv. The very
architecture of Taj Mahal goes against the temple theory
as temples have a particular architecture, which does
not conform to what we see in the Taj. This ridiculous
claim is in line with many such claims, which try to
prove that it was Hindu civilization which has given
culture and knowledge not only to India but to the whole
world.
MYTH: Aurangzeb was a rabidanti-Hindu emperor
who wanted to convert Hindus to Islam and create
a truly Islamic state (Dar-ul Islam) in India.
FACT: Similar but opposite myths are spread by Muslim
communal historians, who proclaim that Aurangzeb was
the greatest Mughal king in India as he wanted to spread
Islam in India. But objective reality is in between. Much
has been made of Aurangzeb’s intolerance of Hinduismbut
to see him as the representative Muslim emperor of India
would be idiotic history. Indeed, none of the other Mughals
showed anything like the intolerance of Aurangzeb.
The fact is that Aurangzeb was the king who ruled India
for a long stretch of 50 years and during this long span of
Ble he kept changing his policies depending on the
needs of the situation with the primary goal of expanding
his empire all the time. The fact that during the latter part
of his the rule number of Hindus in his service was larger
than ever before speaks volumes against this myth. It
rose from 24% during Shah Jahan’s reign to 33% during
his reign.For instance, the number of high-ranking Hindu
Mansabdars in the Mughal Dynasaty was at its peak
towards the last two decades of his reign. So, should
not the blame for these wrong deeds also be shared by
the Hindu nobles and kings?!
However, it is true that according to his understanding of
Islam Aurangzeb had stopped the construction of new
temples but the repair and maintenance of old temples
was freely permitted. He also generously donated
Jahagirslo many temples to win the loyalties of people.
There are number of firmans which have been compiled
±y noted historian Dr. B.N.Pande (Firmans of King
Burangzeb). These firmans include the one’s from the
temples of Mahakaleshwar (Ujjain), Balaji temple
(Chitrkut), Umanandtemple (Guwahati) and Ja/ntemples
of Shatrunjaya.There are also firmans supporting other
temples and Gurudwaras in north India. In the famous
pilgrimage of Chitrakoot, he not only built the Balaji temple
but also gave revenue of eight villages for its maintenance.
Jizia was also imposed for a brief period during his reign,
that too exempting the Brahmins, old and invalids from
such a payment. To presume that by imposing this tax
he could spread Islam is baseless. He did suspend this
tax during the famine in the Deccan. We cannot forget
that Jakaatis a regular tax levied on all believers of Islam.
And this at best can be seen as a parallel source of
revenue for the sultanate. “Ibn Batuta a fourteenth century
traveler and scholar reports that in South India jazia was
collected by a Hindu King (Zamorin) from his Jewish
FACTS against MYTHS - Vol VI # 9/2000
subjects.. .even if one is to concede that jazia is a purely
religious tax, did the Hindus really consider their religion
so cheap as to exchange it for exemption (which is not
an exemption as Muslims they have to pay zakat}”
(Mukhia)
an anti Hindu king who
converted Hindus to Islam by force.
MYTH: Tipu Sultan was
FACT: Tipu was one of the brave kings who resisted the
British imperialism onslaught with bravery and courage.
The British faced one of the most serious resistances to
their reign at the hands of Haider Ali and his son Tipu.
He is also one of the few Indian Kings who died on the
battlefield while battling the British. Encouraged by British
the Nizam and Marathas, both saw themselves as the
heir of the Mughal empire and Tipu’s clashes with the
armies. British in their frustration wanted to drive the
wedge between Hindus and Muslims and propagated
the lie that Tipu not only massacred thousands of Hindus
and Christians but also destroyed scores of Hindu
temples.
There are many a temples in south, which were gifted as
Jagirs by Tipu for their upkeep. Once in a war between
Marathas and himself, the Marathas laid siege to his
capital city, Shrirangapattnam. As they faced defeat the
Maratha troops before their retreat ransacked not only
the populated suburbs but also looted and destroyed
the famous temple of Ranga in the vicinity of the city on
the banks of river Kaveri. Tipu not only repaired the temple
but also restored its wealth. He is reported to have also
made grants to several other temples. According to the
journal, Young India, (edited by Mahatma Gandhi), Tipu
made lavish gifts to land and other items to Hindu
temples, and temples dedicated to Shri Venkataraamana,
Shrinivas and Shrianganath and situated in the vicinity
of Tipu’s palaces still bear testimony to his broad-minded
toleration. His major battles had been against British
and Marathas and also with the Nizam of Haidrabad and
Nawab of Arcot. were purely for territorial jain though
some of the court historians give it a religious colour.
Tipu Sultan sought the blessings of Shankracharya of
Sringeri Math before embarking on his expeditions. He
also donetaed money to construct the image of goddess
Sharda in Sringeri temple as well as in several other
temples, including regular gifts. The famous temple of
Sri Ranga Nath was situated barely hundred yards from
his palace.
The conversions, which occurred, were due to change in
the land holding patterns and abolition of slavery.
Conversions to Islam on Malabar coast took place not
during the invasion by Tipu but during the 1843-1850
period. Because of this, large number of low castes
formerly bonded slaves of upper caste Hindus moved
over to Islam, in the hope of getting social equality. There
are many a conversions in last couple of centuries where
passage of emancipator laws has coincided with the
conversion to Islam or Christianity.
5
r
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
0
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
History’s Message Against Communalism
Q. When Rana Sanga clashed with Babar in the battle of Khanwa, which ally
helped him the most?
A. Hasan Khan Mewati was the ally who tried his best to help Rana in this crucial battle.
Q. What is the last message that Babar left for his son Humayun?
A. Babar told him to respect the religion of the country to which they have come
(Hinduism) and respect their temples and cows. Cf.: Part I, Page 7.
Q. Babar had a special word of praise for some monuments in his Memoirs,
which ones?
A. He expressed his admiration for the temples of Gwalior and nearby areas.
Q. In view of the above questions, does it appear likely that Babar would have
approved the demolition of a very important temple in Ayodhya?
A. This is most unlikely.
Q. Is it true that a large number of qualified and eminent historians hold the
firm view that there is no basis for rumours of Babar demolishing a temple in
Ayodhya?
A. Yes! These historians have repeatedly expressed this view in writing and public
speeches.
Q. Then who brought this issue to the limelight first?
A. Colonial historians brought it forward during the days of the British rule.
Q. Is it true that the colonial historians were fond of raking up imaginary issues
that would cause hostility between Hindus and Muslims?
A. Yes actually they had specific plans to do so. Secretary of state Wood wrote to Lord
Elgin in 1857 that "we’ve kept our power in India by making one force fight the other and
we should continue to do so".
Q. During Moghal rule did Hindu forces generally fight Muslim forces, or were
there mixed battles.
A. Moghul kings and other kings had Hindu generals and soldiers and vice-versa.
Aurangzeb is considered to be the most fanatic Muslim king but even many of his
battles were fought by Hindu generals. Shivaji is regarded as a Hindu folk hero but his
army had many Muslims in crucial posts.
Q. When the (Hindu) king of Bikaner was defeated by the king of Marwar, with
whom did his family members find shelter?
A. With Sher Shah Suri.
Q. When Humayun was defeated by Sher Shah Suri where did he find shelter?
A. With the (Hindu) Raja ofAmarkot where Akbar was born.
Q. One general died fighting very bravely on the side of Rana Pratap. The
warior is still remembered very fondly in Rajasthan. Name him?
A. The name of this general was Hakim Khan Sur. He fought bravely on the side of
Rana Pratap with his Afghan soldiers against Akbar's forces.
Q. Name two kings who built special religious places of other communities just
near their palaces.
A. Shivaji built a Mosque near his palace while Tipu Sultan built a Temple near his
palace.
FACTS against MYTHS-Vol VI #9/2000
1
1
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
1
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
*
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
r — ———————
I
|
———
____ _____--
______,
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
8
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Q. What was the attitude of the Nawabs of Oudh towards temples?
A. They supported several temples and gave land grants. Names ofNawab Safdarjung
and Dewan Asafuddaullah maybe mentioned in this context.
*
Q. A senior confidante of Nawab Safdarjung died fighting for him. Who was he?
A. A Hindu named Nawal Rai..
|
|
Q. Nawab Sirajudaullah was betrayed by several people in the battle of Plassey.
But one confidante fought most bravely for him. Name him.
A. A Hindu named Mohan Lal
Q. When some Kasmiri Pandits fled in terror, did a (Muslim) Kashmiri ruler take
the initiative to bring them back?
A. Yes, Zian-UI-Abedin made this noble effort.
Q. Did Muslim freedom fighters of 1857 show a special gesture towards Hindus?
A. Yes, they prohibited cow slaughter in some areas captured by them from the British.
Q. Name the friends of Jhansi Ki Rani who fought with her till the end.
A. Juhi and Moti Bai.
|
Q. From whom did the Rani get maximum help from, in defending the fort at
Jhansi?
A. The courageous gunner Kunwar Ghulam Ghaus Khan who died fighting to defend
Jhansi.
I
(Source: A poster on Communal Harmony by Bharat Dogra)
I
r|
I
I
x
™
iI
Comm unalism: Historical Legacy
I
I
Recent historical references refer to fierce conflicts between the Sannyasi orders and the
Vairagis in the latter part of the Mughal period. In each case they are competitive sects
and religious concerns are not the only reason for the conflict. These tend to be sects,
which are highly organised and often literate. The competition is frequently for state
patronage or for control over commercial rights. In the case of the Sannyasis and the
Vairagis for example, they were also traders on a large scale, pilgramage centres, where
the taking in the way of offerings from pilgrims was lucrative, and religious belief was
bent to support commercialisation, became centres of economic competition poresent
in religious conflict, even if the conflict is sought to be presented as a matter of religious
belief.
;;
The same is true of the many conflicts between what have been called the Hindus and the
Muslims. Such conflicts first ofall should not be taken as conflicts involving two monolithic
communities. They were not so in the earlier period either, where sectarian identity was
more crucial than a monolithic religious identity. It was not the Hindus who attacked the
Buddhists and Jains, but particular sects of Saivas.
'■
Q
- Romila
Thapar
I,
I
L__ _______ _________—
FACTS against MYTHS - Vol VI # 9/2000
Ij.
I
_ _ _ ______J
7
References:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
Nath, R. The Taj: a Mausoleum, Seminar 364-December
1989.
Brown, P Indian Architecture (Islamic Period) IV Ed,
Bombay 1969.
Chandra,S. “Reassessing Aurngazeb"; Seminar,
December, 1989.
Chandra,B.’Modem India” NCERT, 1999, New Delhi.
Husain,K. 'A Hero Defamed', Communalism Combat,
June 1999.
Engineer, A.A. ‘Medieval History and Communalism’,
Centre for the Study of Society & Secularism, Mumbai,
1999.
Mukhia, H. ‘Medieval History and the Communal
Approach’, Peoples’ Publishing House, New Delhi, 1993.
Chakravarti.G. BJP-RSS and Distortion of History, in
r
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
■03 MB BM MB
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
Selected Writings on Communalism, 1994.
Dogra, B. Poster on National Integration, New Delhi,
1994. •
, B. Encyclopaedia of Development, New
Delhi,1995.
Sardesai G.S., “New History of Marathas" Vol. I.
Athar Ali, Mughal Nobility Under Aurangzeb, Asia, 1966,
p.61.
Habib I., ‘History as a Political Tool’, Times of India,
March 13, 1994.
Mukhia,H. ‘Medieval History and The Communal
Approach’, in “Communalism in the Writing of Indian
History”, Peoples’ Publishing House, New Delhi,1993.
Chausalkar, A. ‘Communalism and History text books in
Maharashtra’ Towards Secular India Jan-March 1995.
Historical memories* and Nation-Building in India, Hum
Sub Hindustani Trust, Hyderabad, 1997.
M H M
BM BM BM MB BO BBS EKS E= E=B3 ■=□ 1=3 1=3 1=3 Ej]
Medieval Coinage
I
Tanka: a little more than a rupee.
■
za i
)
Jital: A copper coin; equal to 1/2 of a silver tanka of 175 grains and corresponding in value of I
1 farthing (quarter of a penny).
8
Adali: Revived by Plohmmed Taghuq. It was equivalent in weight to 140 grains of silver.
A
Shushghani: A six-jital piece.
ji
Coinage in the Vijayanagar kingdom was both in gold and copper. There was one specimen of
|
a silver coin. Coins bore emblems of gods anad animals.
[|
Pulsiyah: the copper money (in the Martha kingdom).
B
i) In Akbar’s time, the silver rupee of about 175 grains was equal to 2s, 3d. sterling.
ii) jalali: a asquare rupee issued by Akbar.
iii) dam: also called paisa or fulus; weighed 323.5 grains. It was the chief copper coin in Sher
j
Shah’s currency. In Akbar’s time it was divided into twenty-five parts, known as jitals.
j
iv) One rupee was equal to forty dams up to A.D. 1616, and thirty dams, or a little more or less
3
I
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — M. J
Please feel free to reproduce material from this publication but with due credit.
The website ofVikas Adhyayan Kendra has been iaunched andis now operational. Kindly visit us at
http://mviK vakindia. com andlet us have your comments and suggestions about it.
r
I
I
1
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
L
Facts Against Myths is a monthly bulletin offactual
information on a number ofdevelopment myths and
fallacies, etc, including infonnation against alien
development models, paradigms and false concepts
on caste, creed and gender.
Li
p
X
Produced and Published by:
n
Vikas Adhyayan Kendra
b
D-l Shivdham, 62 Link Road,
b
Malad West, Mumbai 400 064, INDIA |
a : 882 2850 & 889 8662
Fax : 889 8941
Email: vak@bom3.vsnl.net.in
Design & Layout: Kartiki Desai
I
U
I
Printed by : Omega Offset, 4574, Shelly Gaily
Belgaum 590 002. S 0831-424124 / 433429
q
POINTED MATrj,^
|
BOOK-POST
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Position: 6642 (1 views)