The glorification of Tipu and the subsequent distortion of history to portray him as a nationalist figure began in the 1980s–90s and gained significant traction in the 2000s, under narratives created by mainly Indian Marxist writers and a few Western writers. – Monidipa Bose Dey
An oft-repeated narrative that keeps appearing in the Indian political, academic, and social media arenas is the claim that Tipu Sultan was a nationalist, with great love for this land, and a lover of freedom. There are other similar claims that say Tipu had sacrificed himself for the sake of India, or that Tipu was a connoisseur who had a library of about 2000 books in different languages. Some have even described Tipu as innovative and dynamic, and if he had been ruling Bengal instead of Siraj, the history of India would apparently been quite different.
Keeping these eulogies in mind, this article will explore to see if indeed Tipu is worthy of the halo, as the aforementioned writers presented him with.
Myth 1: A nationalist and a freedom fighter who fought against the British
Reality: Tipu was not a freedom fighter. He wanted an alliance with the French, instead of the British.
This is perhaps the biggest fake narrative created to make a nationalist figure out of a regional chieftain, a self-styled autocratic ruler of Mysore (r. 1782-1799).
From the various historically documented interactions with foreigners, it is clear that Tipu had no qualms about allowing foreign powers to enter his domain, provided they remained under his control. He was also quite willing to take help from foreign powers to fight the British, whom he detested. Tipu requested the Afghan chieftain Zaman Shah Abdali Durrani to invade north India, because Tipu believed that the Mughal king Shah Alam was a weak Islamic ruler and was being controlled by Mahadji Shinde of Gwalior.
Tipu also wanted an alliance with the French in order to expel the British from India, and he had requested for an alliance and a close bond between him and Mauritius (under French colonial rule). Thus, Tipu may have fought the British bravely, but he was certainly not a nationalist or a freedom fighter. He wanted a French alliance to oust the British, thus simply preferring one foreign power over another.
Myth 2: Tipu was a great paragon of virtue
Reality: Tipu was cruel, a religious bigot, and an autocratic ruler.
Tipu was an Islamic bigot, and at best a feudal despot, who placed more importance on personal flattery and regional hegemony, and kept himself surrounded by those courtiers who would fawn over him and applaud all his plans and wild dreams. That his governance had an Islamic overtone was clear with the re-naming of his government as khudadad sarkar (Islamic divine endowment), and in the re-reorganising of his army into ilahi or ahmadi consisting of Muslim converts (Rao, History of Mysore [1399-1799 AD], 1948).
His father, Haider Ali, a mercenary soldier looking for a chance to get wealthy, got lucky when he managed to take control of the Mysore area, which was then under a weak Hindu king, Krishnaraja Wodeyar II. While Haider Ali did not declare himself king and kept the Hindu Wodeyar as a puppet ruler, it was he, as the ‘sarvadhikari’ (chief minister), who held actual control of the kingdom. However, Tipu, who inherited this de-facto cape of kingship, was both ambitious and headstrong and wanted full control. So, he declared himself as the official king in 1782, procured a sanad and a title from the Mughal emperor, and established his ‘Sultanat-e-Khudadad.’
In the same year, Tipu sent his messengers to Constantinople, seeking confirmation of his royal title for the throne of Mysore from the Sultan of Turkey, whom he referred to as Khondkar, Padshah-i-Ahl-i-Islam, or the ‘King of Muslims’. Thus, Tipu was clear about his intentions: he sought an Islamic kingdom, blessed by other more powerful Muslim rulers.
Once he declared himself the ruler of Mysore, Tipu issued coins proclaiming the supremacy of Islam, while simultaneously displaying his ingratitude, as the coins omitted the necessary reference to the Mughals, who had granted him the sanad and title. Even in the khutba (sermons) read in the mosques, Tipu had the name of the Mughal king removed, replacing it with his own name as ‘sultan-i-din’ (prince of the faith), who would work for Islam by helping it spread and gain followers.
Tipu had a strong dislike for all non-Muslims and built a mosque in every town, with a muezzin, a moula, and a kazi for each mosque (Mir Hussein Kirmani, History of the Reign of Tipu Sultan, being a continuation of the Neshani Hyduri, 1980).
That Tipu was an Islamic bigot is undoubtedly evidenced by his own words, when he wrote to Syed Abdul Dulai in 1790 about his Calicut raid (1788): “With the grace of Prophet Mohammad and Allah, almost all Hindus in Calicut have been converted to Islam. Only on the borders of Cochin State are a few still not converted. I am determined to convert them soon. I consider this a ‘Jehad’ to achieve that objective.” (Sharma, The Real Tipu: A Brief History of Tipu Sultan, 1991).
In another letter written by Tipu on February 10, 1799, to the head of the army in Constantinople, he stated that “nearly five hundred thousand of the infidels of the districts of Calicut, Nuzzuraband, Zufferabaud, and Ashrufabaud have been converted” (Martin, The Despatches, Minutes and Correspondence of Marquess Wellesley, K. G., During his Administration, 1837).
Tipu’s stance against the British also had religious motivations, as he himself said it was a ‘Holy War’ against the English, who had allegedly converted many Muslims, destroyed mosques, and turned Muslim women and children into slaves (Habib, Confronting Colonialism: Resistance and Modernisation under Haidar Ali & Tipu Sultan, 1999).
Tipu destroyed many temples, including the Harihareswara Temple at Harihar and the Varahaswami Temple at Srirangapatnam. In Kerala and Tamil areas, he was known as a ‘Brahmin-killer’ and a ‘destroyer of temples’ (Brittlebank, Tipu Sultan’s Search for Legitimacy: Islam and Kingship in a Hindu Domain, 1997). The Portuguese traveller Fra Paolino da San Bartolomeo (1748-1806) described in great detail Tipu’s cruelty towards his non-Muslim subjects, evident through innumerable forced conversions and circumcisions, and brutal massacres of Hindus and Christians in the Malabar areas under his direct orders.
Tipu was suspicious and superstitious by nature and so fearful of being killed that he slept in a hammock hung from the ceiling to avoid the line of fire from the windows. To protect himself from death, Tipu was also not above wearing Hindu religious trinkets for protection. He even asked Brahmins to offer ceremonial prayers while wearing a gold ring, inscribed with the name of Rama, a gift from the guru of the Sringeri Math.
Myth 3: Tipu was a Sultan or a King
Reality: His full name was Tipu Sultan. The ‘Sultan’ in his name was not a title meaning a king.
As discussed in Myth 2, Tipu’s father had usurped the royal powers of the Wodeyars and became the de facto ruler of Mysore. However, Tipu was not happy with the unofficial ruler tag and decided to declare himself the official king of Mysore. While the Mughal ruler granted him a sanad and the title of a subedar (provincial governor), Tipu was not given any formal sultan title (as in a titled king).
Tipu’s full name was Tipu Sultan, and the sultan in it was simply part of his name, without any special meaning (as in a royal title). It was the fawning courtiers and court historians of Tipu seeking his favours, and later the Marxist–Islamist writers post-independence, who misused the sultan in his name to turn him into a king or Sultan. Historically, the Peshwa addressed Tipu Sultan as “Futtah Ali Khan (Tippoo).” The French Revolutionary Government addressed him as Citizen Tipu.
“There are a few historians who still use the expression ‘the Sultan of Mysore’ for Tipu Sultan. It is proposed to show them that it is incorrect and to suggest that it should no longer find a place in any book.” (The Proceedings of Indian History Congress, Vol. 7, 1944, Pages 484-485).
Myth 4: Tipu was an Indian, a Kannadiga, and a ‘son of the soil’
Reality: Tipu had Arab ancestry.
This repeated labelling of Tipu and his father Haider Ali as Indians and Kannadigas, or as ‘sons of the soil’ is nothing but a historical myth. Tipu and Haider Ali were not Indians at all. They belonged to a nomadic Arab tribe, the Quraish.
According to Haider-Nama (completed in 1784 and commissioned by Tipu Sultan himself), Haider Ali’s ancestors were “Navayats”, a term which referred to the descendants of Arabs settled in the coastal areas of south India. A courtier of Tipu, Mir Hussain Ali Khan Kirmani, in his book Nishan-i-Haideri (1798-1802), also referred to the Arabic Quresh ancestry of Tipu and Haider.
In an Arabic and Persian inscription on the north wall of the mosque that Tipu built in the centre of the Shrirangapattana, the Mysore king’s eulogy included a line that read: “[All] Muslims are dependent on the Muslims of the Quresh”, referring to the Arab-Quresh origin of Tipu.
Fateh Muhammad, Haider Ali’s father, originally lived in Punjab, and later moved to Sira (Tumkur district, Karnataka) at a young age. The family’s ancestors were Arab mercenaries who came to India by sea, looking for work under local rulers, particularly the Mughals.
Conclusion
The glorification of Tipu and the subsequent distortion of history to portray him as a nationalist figure began in the 1980s–90s and gained significant traction in the 2000s, under narratives created by mainly Indian Marxist writers and a few Western writers. The images created by these writers—such as ‘the Tiger Tipu’ or a ‘great nationalist freedom fighter’—were certainly inaccurate. Tipu did fight the British, but even if he had won, the French would have taken over. At that time in history, it was merely a question of which colonial power would replace the other, and Tipu himself was seeking an alliance with the French. Tipu’s religious bigotry and wanton cruelty made him an unpopular figure among his citizens, while his vanity and narcissism, fed by his fawning courtiers, and his own uncontrolled ambition ultimately led to his downfall. – New18, 2 January 2025
› Monidipa Bose Dey is a well-known travel and heritage writer.
Filed under: india | Tagged: indian history, islamic fundamentalism, marxist historians, myth as history, tipu sultan | Comments Off on Was Tipu Sultan an Indian nationalist? – Monidipa Bose Dey
BHARATA BHARATI 