A STUDY ON WILLIAM LOGAN’S  IDEOLOGICAL ANALYSIS OF MALABAR PEASANT REVOLTS

Dr. Hussain Randathani

William Logan, (1841-1914) had been the Collector of Malabar district of British India for twenty years from 1864 to 1888 in the capacity of revenue, judicial and special officer. In the changing social and economic structure of Malabar during the British rule Mr. Logan acted not only as a British official but also worked to compromise the opposite forces emerged as a result of the change.  In the colonial context of change ‘the role of district  official as a person for collection of land revenue and administration, gradually shifted to the job of an arbitrator and conciliator of conflicting and confronting interests in  a class society without sacrificing the economic interests of  the home government’.[1] Logan did this marvellous job in the most fit manner by minimizing the troubles, considering the fact being the unrest of the people.

As a political and economic analyst Logan had done a wonderful job in finding out various reasons connected with the peasant revolts of Malabar. He thoroughly goes through the economic grievances which precipitated  Mappila revolts and at the same time he brings out the ideological factors behind them. He peeped into reasons why the Mappilas alone rushed into revolts while their counterparts among Hindus who also suffered equally, remained aloof from the revolts. Here Logan analysed the  ideological urge behind the outrages and found that it was Islamic faith and its revolutionary character behind the Mappila resistance against the British.

Logan notes that by 1880, the number of eviction decrees issued through out Malabar district had raised to over 8000, but only 34% were decreed against Mappila tenants.[2] He points out that, "the Hindu tenants were the worst sufferers and the penalty for offending a Namboodiri landlord was excommunication... Resistance to the jenmi and resistance to meet his illegal demands meant eviction and ruin."[3] Gangadhara Menon underlines the words of Logan thus:

The position of low caste Hindus was in no way better and they were in the majority in Malabar in spite of the large Mappila settlements in few Taluks like Ernad, Valluvanad and Ponnani. The Hindu tenant didn't receive any preferential treatment from the Hindu land lords…In fact the position of a low caste Hindu was even worse than that of a Muhammadan.[4]

Due to their religious obligation the Hindu tenants were passive in their sufferings and rebellion against the landlord was considered as a worst sin. Even in a court, a Hindu Munsif couldn't take any action against the Brahmin landlord since “the Brahmin as worshipped as a God by the Hindus.^"[5] Here the landlords were using Hinduism as a weapon for exploitation and in the name of religion and rigid caste system they became the worst exploiters of the peasantry who being at the lowest strata were groaned under the crushing burden. Even in the eviction cases, the Hindu tenants never turned against their landlords on account of their caste prejudices.

During the investigation, Logan found the Mappilas as a body acted well together and on the contrary, the Hindus who had before their eyes the fear of caste censure, fines and excommunication, were slow to avail themselves of the opportunities to represent their grievances.[6] In Hinduism, there was no room for rebellion and to show his resentment against the landlord and to rise against him, the only course opened before a Hindu tenant was conversion to Islam. Logan rightly points out to this fact thus:

(Mappila outbreaks were designed to) counter act the overwhelming influence when backed by the British courts, of the Jenmis in the exercise of novel powers of ouster and of rent raising conferred upon them. A Jenmi through the courts evicted whether fraudulently or otherwise, it was deemed to have merited death, and it was considered a religious virtue, not a fault to have killed such a man, and to have died in arms fighting against an infidel government which sanctioned such injustice.[7]

Sayyid Fazl had advised the Mappilas, not to respect the oppressive land lords and forbade even the use of traditional honorific titles when addressing the jenmis and the Nairs.[8] Such injunctions are the examples of challenges posed by the Mappilas against the superior position of landlords and their officials. It is also to be noted that the rebellion was directed not only against the Hindu oppressor, but the oppressor was not spared even if he was also a Mappila. " There were occasions in which an evicted Mappila tenant had taken the blood of the Mappila money lender or land holder.[9]

The role of religion thus becomes very important in the outbreaks and for the Mappilas, as their religion provided them the philosophy for the revolt. Though the revolts followed no set pattern, Mappilas conducted each attack as jihād (holy war) and they followed a ceremonial pattern; the decision to become a shahid, the resort to a shrine for blessing, attack on land owner or his attendants, attack on British soldiers and fighting to the last man. As observed by R.E Miller, "reckless bravery and the conviction that death for the faith brought a blessed end remained constant in all the incidents."[10] "There was no other association for them (the Mappilas)." Says Dr. Kurup, “except their religion or.... the religion gave them a philosophy of action and nourished their feelings of antagonism against the well-to-do land owners"[11] Hence, it was not fanaticism but putting into practice the ideals of a religion to get rid of an oppressive authority. It was something like a peasant struggle where the ideology was provided by religion and its leadership. "The communal characteristics of these riots were due to the historical situation that the landlords were mainly Hindus and the tenants or peasants were Mappilas.^"[12]

For the Mappilas, the revolt against oppression was a religious obligation and they conceived and carried them out as religious acts against all oppressions which included the peasant problems, apostasy, assaults, and problems connected with mosques etc. Attan Kurikkal, the leader of the revolt of 1844 at Manjeri, when asked to state his motives for participating in the outbreak, his reply was that the Muslims were being oppressed by their Hindu neighbours (land lords) since Tipu's time. As an example, he noted that the Raja of Manjeri had forced Mappila tenants to contribute towards the expenses for the reconstruction of a temple.[13] Kurikkal also complained that Muslim mosque property deeded to Mappilas by Tipu Sultan had been taken back by Hindus through trickery in the courts.[14] Kunhikōya Tangal, a relative of Mambram Tangal and one of the rebel leaders had the following statement:

My reason for joining these people arise from the dictates of religion; for when a member of Muslamans is in trouble and in danger it is for us Sayeds to join and die with them. Seeing their grievous state, I, thinking of the face of God, joined them.[15]

As long as mutual respect and amity existed between Muslims and Hindus, both the communities protected their identity within their own limits. But the situation became worse with later developments so much so that both the communities began to demand respect at the throat of each other. The initial movement towards such an attempt began in 1890 when a musliyār, a former Cheruman who had been converted to Islam a quarter of century earlier, was insulted by a Nair. The Nair, who was the adhikari (village officer) of Tuwwur amsom had demanded that the musliyār should remove his sandals when passing him, one of the acts of a deference which the upper castes traditionally demanded from the members of the lower castes. The Mappilas of the place were never ready to forgive the insult of a Nair towards their religious leader. Since the Nair was a government servant and was protected by them, the hatred of the Mappilas ultimately turned against the British as well. The matters became worse when a Mappila reported that the British had protected an Ezhava woman convert who had relapsed into Hinduism and at another place the police had pulled down a prayer shed. [16]

Most of the new converts from the lower castes used to maintain their caste rules and traditions even after becoming Muslims. They used to accept the leftover food by Namboodiris and Nairs and used to address the Nairs with the traditional honorific names and bowed before them. Sayyid Fazl in order to save the identity of the community in the face of large scale conversions brought reforms in the society. He proclaimed that Mappilas were no longer to accept leftover food by Hindus, shouldn't plough on Friday and bow before the high castes, for Islam never permits such acts. Such injunctions and reforms had a share in bringing out the outbreaks. As early in 1843, an outbreak occurred at Tirurangadi in which the demanding of respect by a Nair jenmi from an Ezhava convert became the obvious reason. The woman, who was the servant of the former, not only covered her body and head which was symbolic of female conversion since low caste women generally went naked above the waste, but she also ceased to stand at the required distance of pollution when conversing with the jenmi. The jenmi took the conduct of the lady as a challenge to his authority and forced the woman to remove the cloth which covered her body. The Mappilas faced the challenge by murdering the Nair jenmi within a month. [17]

Logan also invited the attention of the government to frequent disputes over the construction of mosques and burial grounds in the southern taluks and had requested certain alterations in the laws regarding the acquisition of land for such purposes. The government gave instructions to Logan to report up on, “the questions of sites of mosques and burial grounds with suggestions for a measure rendering the grand of such sites compulsory under certain conditions if such a measure appeared to him called for."[18] On 19 November 1841, an outbreak occurred at Mannur in Ernad Taluk. The reason was the construction of a mosque on a piece of land which had been in the possession of a Mappila under different tenures for long and jemnam (superior land tenure right) purchased in 1832-33. There upon a false complaint was lodged by the former landlord Tottasseri Tachu Panicker. The Tahasildar sided with him and sent a peon with four others to the mosque. The peon dragged Moideen Ikkakka out of the mosque and the Panicker tied him up. As a revenge for this brutal act K.P. Moideen kutty and seven others killed the Panicker and the peon, took post in the mosque and set the police at defiance for three days. Later they were captured.[19]On 22 August 1857, the Mappilas led a revolt against Kolathur Varier for not allowing them to construct a mosque.[20]

In 1857, another revolt took place in South Malabar and the reason assigned to it was that the Mappilas had purchased a piece of land and built a mosque in the place where a number of Mappilas had been shot dead in the revolt of 19th October 1843. They had started holding annual festival in the mosque in the honour of the martyrs.[21] At Wandoor, a jenmi had pulled down a mosque, giving, mēlcharth over the poor tenants and forcibly reconverted the new Muslims. The Mappilas led a revolt against him in 1896 and in the ensuing fight, between the Mappilas and the army; ninety nine of the former were killed.[22]

Mr. Logan points out that the "virulent class dissensions between the Hindus and Muhammadans will never be allayed so long as the latter are prevented by the former from the free exercise of their religious duties and one put to great inconvenience to provide decent burial for their dead."[23] He recommended that so long as compromise between the two communities was not possible on their problems without any interference by the government, the government should arbitrate for the compromise. He suggested that reasonable facilities should be afforded to the Mappilas and all classes of society, to obtain sites for religious edifices and for burial grounds. Logan stated that it is "inherent in every single citizen, however mean and humble his position may be a right to have a place of internment in the soil of the state"[24] and the land for such purpose could be acquired through proper compensation.

The religious importance of the outbreaks is also evident from the urge of the fighting Mappilas to become shahid or martyres. As stated by Innes " the Mappila brooding it may be, over some fancied slight to his 'pearl like' faith over the tyranny of some Hindu  landlord till it assumes in his mind the proportion of a gigantic wrong that can be washed out only in blood, determines to win eternal bliss by a martyr's death. Others join him and the murder of a landlord or his agent or of an apostate sets the seal on their resolve."[25] From the time of Mambram Tangals, the outbreaks assumed a purely religious character and were generally prefaced by a similar series of rituals and in all but a few instances; their climax was the self sought martyrdom of the Mappilas who were subsequently revered as shahids by the community. Each attack on the adversary was conducted as a jihād and the fighters determined to become shahid and in most cases a series of rituals were performed for the purpose. The rituals varied with circumstances of each incident and the religious sophistication of the Mappilas involved, but they usually included, the participants donning the white clothes of the martyr, divorcing their wives asking forgiveness to those to whom they felt had done any wrong and receiving the blessings of a saint, visiting the tombs and performing prayers at mosques for the success of their great undertaking.[26]

Before starting for the 'holy war', the Mappilas usually performed two important rites, the nērcha and mawlid. A nērcha is a vow taking ceremony, while a mawlid is, for the Ernad Mappila, a kind of nērcha usually meant to be celebrated in the honour of prophets or some deceased persons.[27] Through these rites the participants intent to get the  intercession and blessings of the prophet and the saints for the success of their mission and a place in paradise. In the words of Conrad Wood, "the significance of the adaptation of the nērcha and mawlid to the requirements of the Moplah outbreak did not consist only in the consecrating function of these rites. The vital need for unwavering adhesion to a course of action which for success had to culminate in the slaughter in hand to hand combat of each and every participant was supplied by the votive aspect of the ceremonial."[28]

In the 1st March 1896 at Manjeri the fighting Mappilas took shelter in a temple. When the troops surrounded the temple and began to fire, they, instead of surrendering deliberately counted death offering themselves as a target to the bullet on the open platform of the temple, howling, shouting, waving their arms and firing off their guns. Advancing steadily with frequent volleys over the broken ground, the troops came near enough to the Mappila strong hold to call up on the fighters to surrender. Hoarse cries of defiance were only their answer and pushing on, the soldiers entered the temple almost without opposition. A horrible sight met their eyes. Within the narrow precincts were piled up the bodies of ninety two Mappilas. Some were still breathing but the great majority was dead, and at least twenty had their throat cut from ear to ear. They had been murdered by the comrades to prevent their being captured alive.[29]

Logan’s analysis with supports of documents thus proves that the ideological basis of the Mappila peasants revolts lay in their religion and it was the religious ideology presented by the Mappila leaders like Mambram Thangals and his disciples resorted the Mappilas to an anti British rebellion against  oppression. It is also to be noted the rebellion was not against the British or the land lords as a race or group but against their oppression, since there were British and landlords who were friendly with Mappilas. The coastal trading Mappilas generally supported the British because they benefitted from their commercial policy and there religious leaders always maintained loyalty towards the British. It was with the coming of the Khilafat  and the National Movements, the Mappilas, both the peasants and traders, as a body, acted together against the British colonialism, though a few maintained loyalty accepting the titles from the British and assisting their rule.

---

[1] Dr. K.K.N Kurup, Modern Kerala Studies in Social and Agrarian Relations, New Delhi, 1988,p.69

[2] India Office Library, Malabar Special Commission, 1881-82

[3] Willaim Logan, Malabar Manual, Madras Government, 1950, Vol. II, pp.231-232

[4] Gangadhara Menon, "Mappila Outbreaks of 19^th Century Malabar ", Journal of Kerala Studies, Vo.II, June 1975, part II p.150.

[5] India Office Library, Malabar Special Commission, op.cit., V01.1, P. IXV

[6] K.K.N.Kurup, William Logan, A Study in the Agrarian Relations in Malabar, Sandhya Publications. Trivandrum,    1981 op.cit., 38.

[7] Logan, Malabar Manual. op.cit., Vol. I, p.584, No.4; See also his Commission Report, Government of Madras, 1882,Vol., p.IXXXI.

[8] India Office Library, Moplah Outrages Correspondence, 1V, p.276

[9] Regina v/s. Avayil Kunhi Athan and six others, Court of Sessions of South Malabar, Nos.36 and 37/1882, dt.19 June 1882.The house hold was attached and sold under a decree by Shernad Munsif Court. The decree holder, Moideen was murdered by the accused

[10] R.E.Miller, Mappila Muslims of Kerala, A  Study  in Islamic Trends,  Orient Longman, Madras, 1971, p.109.

[11] K.K.N. Kurup, William Logan, op. cit., p.37.

[12] Ibid

[13] Joint Commission, I, p.106, quoted in Miller, op.cit.,p. 11

[14] Correspondence on Mappila Outrages in Malabar, ( 1849-1853). Vol. 1. p.32

[15] Ibid

[16] India Office Library, Judicial. G.O. 1567,30 September, 1896. p.1

[17] India Office Library, Mappila Outrages Correspondence, Vol.11. 30th January 1844, pp. 193-220

[18] Government of Madras, Order No. 170, 25 Janua ry 1881, Judicial

[19] Logan, Malabar Manual, Vol.1, p.556

[20] Ibid, p.563

[21] Ibid., p.577

[22] J. Heweston, District Magistrate to the Chief Secretary. Judicial 2nd March 1896. Para 38, Para 39

[23] Malabar Special Commission, 1881-82, Malabar land Tenures, Madras. 1896, para 490: K.K.N. Kurup, William Logan, op.cit., p.47

[24] Malabar Land Tenures, op.cit., para,51

[25] Charles,A. Innes, Malabar,  Madras District Gazetteers. Superintendent. Government Press, Madras, 1933, pp.77-78

[26] S.F.Dale, " The Islamic Frontier in South Asia, The Shahid as a Cultural Idial of Malabar", Modern Asian Studies XI, I, 1977, p.41-55.

[27] Conrad Wood, The Moplah Rebellion, and its Genesis, People’s Publishing House, New Delhi,1987,

    pp.45-46. The word mawlid or maulud literally means birth, birth place, or birthday. Panegyrical and laudatory poems and verses are recited in the mawlid ceremony in praise of the prophets, saints and the martyrs. For different mawlids, see 333 Vaka Mawlid. Amir al Islam, Tirurangadi,1992. The folk festivals held in the name of saints and martyrs are also called nerchas.

[28] Ibid., p.46.

[29] Report of Mr. Winterbotham, a member of the Board of Revenue, Printed in G.O.No.1567, Judicial, dated 30 September, 1896: Innes, p.83                                                                     _________________________