Page 82 - All About History - Issue 52-17

The Tiger of Mysore

would he have been able to hold the loyalty its valuable property, and committed the sacrilege
among both Hindu and Muslim officers? of displaced the sacred image of the goddess
The evidence on temple destruction is not Sarada.” Tipu Sultan showed no hesitation in
robust either, since there is evidence of Tipu’s communicating his concern to the Jagadguru,
conspicuous support of and benevolence towards the chief abbott of Sringeri, calling for the
the most important Hindu temple complexes, re-consecration of the ’holy place’. He requested
such as Sringeri and Nanjangud. In letters still that some specific ceremonies be performed, for
preserved at Sringeri, the site of Mysore’s most which he received a share of consecrated offerings
important temple and Brahmin monastery, the to the Gods, called prasada, and in turn made
Marathas (of Hindu affiliation) “raided Sringeri, presents to both deity and Swami.
Tomb of Tipu Sultan and
Haidar Ali, Mysore, India, killed and wounded many people there, including Throughout his 17-year reign, Tipu Sultan’s own
1880-1890 many Brahmins, plundered the monastery of all allegiance to Islam was not unwavering. Since
both his political strengths and vulnerabilities “Tipu began to acquire his
heir, was an observant Sunni Muslim. That said,
led him to make public pronouncements seen as
contradictory. He referred to the British as ‘infidels’ notorious label as a tyrant”
and ‘faithless Christians’ who did not stoop to
treachery and collusion to make their territorial
gains. In contrast, he was more circumspect and
The storming of Seringapatam
respectful of the French, his allies. in 1799 spelt the end of Tipu
He did not hesitate to refer to the Nizam of Sultan’s reign
Hyderabad, a fellow Muslim who deserted him
in his hour of need to align with the British, as
Hajjam, a derisory reference to his caste. Of the
Marathas, who also sided with the British, his
choice of insult was not religious so much as
questioning their prized masculinity.
Tipu began to acquire his notorious label as a
tyrant early in his encounters with the British.
According to historian Michael Soracoe, in
early 1784, an “anonymous officer” in the East
India Company’s service wrote in the English
press: “Tippoo Saib is far from the character he
has been represented to us; instead of being a
friend to peace, he had proved himself a restless,
treacherous, inhuman tyrant. He is entirely
influenced by French politics, and has four
battalions of Dutch, Portuguese, and French in
his service... his army is well appointed, and more
formidable than that of his father Haider Ali.”
Tipu was increasingly vilified for his actions
against certain communities in his newly The Battle of Pollilur was
an ignominious defeat
conquered dominions, notably the Catholics of of the British during the
Canara, the Coorgs, and the Nairs of Malabar – all Second Anglo-Mysore War
of whom he identified as treacherous betrayers,
before giving orders for conversion.
This was not a uniform policy however, which
makes Tipu the enigma that he is. Accounts of
Tipu’s tyranny include destruction of temples,
massacres of Brahmins, and conversion and
castrations of different castes, as well as the
dislocation of large numbers of people to different
parts of his domain. Though these are exaggerated
memories, there is a kernel of truth that has been
admitted by even his warmest biographers. Yet
the governor general of India, Sir John Shore,
reluctantly noted in his minute of 18 February
1795: “during the [British] contest with [Tipu],
no person of character, rank or influence, in his
hereditary dominions, deserted his cause.” If the
sultan was as bloodthirsty as in popular memory,

82