Veerapandiya Kattabomman!

[Manoj Kumar]

[tscii:eed9dd87fb]Veerapandiya Kattabomman a villain !


Looking into the history and the condition during the close of 17th century, one has to wonder if Veerapandiya Kattabomman was really a national hero.

SOME UNSAID TRUTHS
1) Veerapandiya Kattabomman was not a King, but a Feudal Lord.
2) He did not fight only against the British, but he had fought against the earlier legitimate Indian Rulers also.
3) Whenever he was not at war with the central authority he was at war with other neighboring Poligars. He would often set plundering and murdering expeditions into other Poligar’s territories around his place; often to take over their villages.
4) He was not a person who treated all caste equally. He was a terror and committed acts of cruelty and oppression on the inhabitants of the other caste people residing nearby.
5) He killed more Indians than the British. Most of the Tamils he killed were ordinary peasants and traders.
6) Except for his followers, who approved him and his methods, he never did any good for the Tamil people. There was no development of the place or the people during his periods. There were no roads in existence. What are called roads were merely cross-country tracks, sometimes lined with trees. Bridges appear to have been unknown. There were no schools, except for Brahmins. Trade was unprotected, and merchant did not dare to appear to grow rich. Hospitals were unknown.
7) Kattaboma Nayaka was tried and executed on 16th October 1799. During this time the legitimate rulers were the Nawab of Carnatic . On 31st July 1801, the entire region along with Carnatic was peaceably ceded by a treaty to the British. Therefore during Kattaboma Nayaka’s time the revenue was collect by the Bristish on behalf of Nawab of Carnatic.

With all the above facts, Kattaboma Nayaka seems to be more a villain than a hero. He can’t become a hero just because he fought British. His motives were not of a national cause but his own selfish gain only to exploit the ruling authority.

I always wonder why our historians and the writer never write the history as it is. They have an inborn tendency to omit all the evil deeds committed by their so-called Indian hero and at the same time conveniently, omitting all the good deeds done by the opposing side.

They never portray the real identity or the nature of the so-called Indian hero. They just want to stress one deed without explaining the background just to make him an idol.
However, when one reads the history from other sources, one is astonished to find that most of the history we are taught is fabricated or just one sided.

TRUTH
In the year 1520, the king of Vijayanagara, Krishna Rayalu sent his Governor Visvanatha Nayaka to take over Madurai (old name Madura). The governor Viswanatha Nayaka appointed the Palaiyakaras (Poligars), many of who were the dependents and adherents of his own caste, and they were granted a tract of country consisting of certain number of villages. These Palaiyakaras (Poligars) were bound to pay a fixed annual tribute and to supply and keep in readiness a quota of troops for the governor’s armies. For fifteen generations Nayaka rulers ruled (1559 – 1736) Madurai. The Nayaka never called themselves kings of Madura. They professed to be lieutenants of the great Rayalu of Vijaya-Nagara. These Poligar’s reign record little more than a disgraceful, murders and civil commotions, relieved only by the factitious splendor of gifts to temples, idols, and priests, by means of which they apparently succeeded in getting the Brahmans and poets to speak well of them, and thus in keeping the mass of the people patient under heir misrule. Most of the time these poligars were not fighting the foreign foes but their legitimate ruler of the country.
The Poligar of Panjalamkurichi was a Nayaka of the Kambala division of the caste. Boma is a common Telugu name. Kattaboma Nayaka’s rule towards the close of the 17th century was the centre of all disloyalty and misrule. He was just another ruthless, rapacious feudal lord, who just managed the fort that was granted to him. But, he nor his ancestors were true to their given assignments. From 1748, after the commencement of the rule of the Nawab of Arcot, under the Carnatic Nizam, Kattabomma Nayaka continued his attack against them. They collected taxes and other kaval charges from the people residing there but never gave their annual revenue to their ruling authorities (Vijayanagara rulers or the Carnatic rulers). By doing so, they often fought with the central authority. It was rarely possible to collect from them the revenue due to the central authority without the display of military force. (Even earlier than British Intervention)
From his fort of Panjalamkurichi the Poligar used to sally forth at the head of his armed followers, and making incursions into Circar villages, as well as into the villages of other Poligars, sack and plunder all that came into his way, often times carrying off some of the principal inhabitants. Kattaboma Nayaka often used to make raids into the neighbouring territories, especially into the territories of the Poligar of Ettaiyapuram. He occupied Supplapuram village of Ettappan. This resulted in the enmity between the two Poligars. He often made war or committed depredations, as his local interests, or his passions lead him, upon other Poligar’s territories without any provocations.

CAN THIS MAN BE A NATIONAL OR TAMIL HERO?
JUDGE FOR YOURSELF
[/tscii:eed9dd87fb]

[r_kk]

Hi Manoj,
Do you have any historical record to validate the contents in your posts, like criminal records from British rulers, documents of any such mischiefs recoreded by Ettayapuram Jamin or any thing. Please understand, the unwritten poems and folk arts of south districts among the village people still praises Kattapomman.

More over the presence of famous dalit warrior Veeran Sundaralingam as a leading commander of his army shakes your critical view stating Kattabomman as casteist.

Then your comment about him as selfish (not a real broad minded or national level) is doubtful because no selfish fellow will raise the sword against british army consisting much much higher number of soldiers and death was sure for those who raise the voice against them. Fighting against British army, ne selfish guy with fear about death can't imagine. It is possible only by a braveheart with lot of self respect.

The difference beween terrorist and a freedom fighter is very thin and all depending on which side you are standing. Even Nethaji was a terorist in British point of view. But the true definition should based on the feelings of suppressed people, not from the views of suppressors.

So, please read the history unbiased and write in detail again with proofs.

[Manoj Kumar]

[tscii:b72f8b7922]Hi R_KK,
Sorry to note that you too are a victim of the biased history. For reference, you can read any history written by early non-Tamil writers.

The unwritten poems and folk arts among the village people may still praise Kattapomman. However, you should understand the truth. Eminent Indian and foreign historians agree that all the historical poems are exaggerated and evince much carelessness about accuracy in details. In all the poems the poetical narrator’s imagination is allowed to free play.

I am sure; no person can be 100% evil. There should have been many good characters in Kattabomman also. However, to qualify as a national or Tamil hero, several other qualities and noble attributes are required. Apart from this, he should not indulge in any killing or atrocities on the innocent. Unfortunately, Kattabomman fares well in the second one.

Moreover, the presence of one or few members of the underprivileged in his camp does not make him a righteous person. His deeds were evil against those, who didn’t belong or accept him or his ways.

Fighting British (between 1799 to 1947) does make anyone a hero. One has to really see his/her motive behind the fight. Many noble souls fought for the independence of their motherland, but many were forced to fight, because their atrocities were too inhuman, and the ruling authority had to take hard action to protect the general pubic. Unfortunately, Kattabomman falls in the second category.

You have totally a wrong idea about terrorist. There is a vast ocean between a terrorist and a freedom fighter. (You wrongly mentioned it as a very thin line). Irrespective of which side you are standing, Freedom fighter is a freedom fighter and terrorist is a terrorist. The moment one knowingly kills an innocent person/civilian, he is a terrorist.

The great Nethaji can never be compared to Kattabomman. By comparing, it is an insult to Nethaji. Nethaji never had any self-interest in his fight. He had no other reason to fight the British; other than freedom for his country. He never killed innocent people. He never killed ordinary Indians. However, this was not the case with Kattabomman. Gandhiji was a freedom fighter, respected by the British and all people all around the world.
Also, the true definition for terrorist and freedom fighter should be based on the general human rights record and not on the feelings of the small beneficiary group. It should take the whole mass into consideration and not just the few. In today’s world, no one in independent, a small event in any small part directly or indirectly affects the whole mass. Therefore, human rights should be the basis of consideration.

There is an ocean full of noble and great souls from India. Nevertheless, there were many ruthless, selfish, and crazy figures also from this sacred land. One has to identify and condemn their acts and not hide the truth. Just because, the person being an Indian, his evil deeds cannot/can-never be justified. Wrong is always wrong, whoever it is. (Netrikan thirapinum kutram kutrame) Instead of justifying, their cruel acts, one has to learn from their past mistakes and ensure that such evil is not repeated in the future.

Valga Valamudan, Valga Tamilagam
Manoj
[/tscii:b72f8b7922]

[r_kk]

[tscii:ee5401a72a]Hi Manoj,
Before calling currently popular history as wrong, why can't you provide some evidences against kattabomman? If you read Pirabanjan's book on "Maanudam Vellum' and "Vaanam vasapadum", you can understand most of the histories of early rulers of Tamil Nadu were exagrated and wrong. Most of them were cruel when it comes to the people outside their province. Common people were suffering lot due to ruthless fightings out of self centered wishes of rulers.

I agree, we don't have the history of many famous (assumed) rulers in the eyes of common man and most of them exaggerated according to the own prefernces of historians. As I requested you already, provide some evidence. I will support you, if you are correct. Till that time, let me believe what folklores present (not the historians).

As I explained, the line is very thin. For example, the Kashmiri Jihadis, LTTE or PLO or Naxalbaris or IRA may be terrorists in most of our prejudiced view but they may be freedom fighters from their people point of view. So, definition changes based on which side you stand and the history of such movement projected to people by each side changes. In order to understand the true history we need some unbiased opinions form third parties. Do you have any proofs from such independent source? If we don't have proofs from third party, the next preferred proof is the sayings of common man.

I have heard about the book by Thamizhvanan titled “kattabomman kollaikaran” during my school days. But I didn’t have much interest to read his book because of his master of jackal traits (assumed to be written books on any subject on earth) and particularly after reading some of his books. I hope you may not quote his book alone.

So till I get some authentic proof, let me believe the sayings of common man.

Can you please give some authentic proof?[/tscii:ee5401a72a]

[rajasaranam]

Manoj,

As r_kk explained terrorist and freedom fighter are just views from two different perspectives. Well you gave an one liner stating that 'The moment one kills knowingly an innocent person/civilian he is terrorist- If agreed what honor does 'Netaji' hold when he allied with Japan and Germany knowingly :(. Was he innocent that he was thinking Germany was fighting for its freedom from jews and japan from chinese?!!

I agree on one view that 'Kattabomman' was a feudal lord and it was only a war of authority over people and wealth between 'British' and 'Kattabomman. It was a fight for right over territories. just like a war between a Dada from 'Pudupettai' and a Dada from 'Ayothi kuppam' but still 'Veeramani' will be their local hero for 'Ayothi kuppam' people.
Similarly we can contrive history for our own liking and say 'Raja raja Chozhan' was a Terrorist who invaded ' Srilanka', ' Java' and 'Sumatra' and killed many innocent people to establish a larger kingdom. IMHO opinion i would like to say only this, that all kings and rulers were terrorists against people. But it was history of those times and it was the way of life and people had accepted it and hailed them as their heroes. Nothing can be done against it now and we can only look forward for a true people's democracy in future rather than delving into past and terming X Y and Z as terrorists.
We need some heroes for the time being to make people understand that they are the true heroes of the future.

[a.ratchasi]

But it was history of those times and it was the way of life and people had accepted it and hailed them as their heroes. Nothing can be done against it now and we can only look forward for a true people's democracy in future rather than delving into past and terming X Y and Z as terrorists.
We need some heroes for the time being to make people understand that they are the true heroes of the future.

How very true!

[Manoj Kumar]

[tscii:5c8abaf6aa]Hi Rajasaranam,
Logically when you want to compare any two, it should be apples with apples & not with oranges. Likewise, when we speak on the topic of committing terrorist acts, Kattabomman committed terrorist acts but Nethaji never committed terrorist acts. He just got aid from Japan and Germany in the form of weapons and training for his army. INA (Indian National army) never killed any Jews, they were fighting against the British, in and around India. Therefore, no one can accuse Nethaji for the Nazi crimes in the Second World War. So, your comparison is totally wrong.

Secondly, on terrorism, irrespective of which side you are standing, no terrorist acts of killing innocent people can ever be justified by any people. What so ever your noble cause may be, you do have right to take the life of an innocent person. When one starts killing innocent people routinely for a certain cause, he is a terrorist. I agree the small beneficiary group around him will always call him a hero but for the general majority and on the scale of human right records he is a terrorist. Whether you like it or not, whether you agree or not, majority in the world will call him a terrorist based on the human rights records. In this case, we have to accept the rational majorities view and not the small beneficiary group’s view.
Even the band of dacoits will call their leader a hero, but in reality, he is a desperado. The world can never accept the band’s view; he is to be weighted on the scale of human rights and condemned as a criminal.

You logic of comparison is again wrong this time. You are comparing Raja Raja Cholan who was a king trying to establish a larger kingdom with a feudal lord who was just plundering and murdering people to loot.

I agree with the point that the history at those times; when all kings and rulers were always fighting against each other and bought misery to the common people. It was their way of life, people had no other choice, they had to accept it, and the local people always unquestionably hailed their leaders as their heroes. Definitely, nothing can be done against it now. However, we can certainly avoid portraying these despots as our national heroes.

Of course, I am not interested in branding X Y and Z as terrorists, but would also not like these X, Y & Z to be depicted as a selfless national heroes.

I agree with you that we need some heroes to make people understand that they are the true heroes of the future. India has plentiful of noble heroes with virtue/integrity/morality and uprightness. Only these people should be projected as heroes to inspire / motivate/ encourage the present and future generation for a prosperous and glorious India.[/tscii:5c8abaf6aa]

[Idiappam]

Kattabomman was the first freedom fighter against- 150 years before Mahatma Ghandi. The rest of India had no idea of freedom. They were quiet contented with the crumbs.

He is an hero allright.

[sureshkumar]

Manoj's statement.

"In this case, we have to accept the rational majorities view and not the small beneficiary group’s view."

True.

Did the rational majorities accept PULI THEVAN as a freedom fighter.
Only people of his communities accept him as a hero.Same is the
case with Pandya Kings also.


History is written by people just to express the facts.
Facts which seem to be right for a few may seem to be wrong for others.This happens with all freedom fighters.

But one kind suggestions is while speaking about people who are not in this contemporary world, let us not spread messages ill about him.

[gogiyaya]

[tscii:8a7ec85438]Kattabomman is a real hero. Many tamilian betrayed him and deliberately isolated him to suffer against British. At that time, there were many educated people in Tamil Nadu but they saluted the British and obeyed for them like a slave people.
More people didn’t willing to pay any tax and not supported Kattabomman.
Now, they describing him anyhow they think. :!:

[/tscii:8a7ec85438]

[Albert]

gogiyaya,

May be you are the rare minority who would have had a good life during the nayaka rule espsecially katta bommu naiker.
But come to think of the people who are majority, unarmed and harmless peasants, who suffered under the tyrannic rule of that coward. Nothing has been written about them and nothing is known to the people whose news source is again from the brahmins who hate the locals wherever coexist with them out of fear for their numbers. These people helped many intruders to establish themselves aand always opened the gate for enemy stayed close to power centre.
They who wrote history of which none of the sons of this soil could find a place and wise educated people who follow them always forget that tamil nadu is all for tamils and whatever goodness you see today in tamil nadu is all from tamis. and last do not hail fake heroes and insult the true tamil spirit.
Mr Manoj's version true, is even in the syllabus of manonmaniyam sunderanar univ. has the same kind of mention of katta bommu.
Finally this is not to hurt anybody who worship the great hero, but practice it at home in your pooja room.

[gogiyaya]

:roll: Tamilian! Ha ................Ha......................
Pls create true history of Tamil Nadu. Then you come to talk.
I love Tamil and speak well then tamilian. But Tamilian don't know how to respect. But they feel shame to speak their own language. You speak tamil, they will start to speak English. How great they are? Wonderfull. I never see such people in other country.

Katabomman is great!
He give his life to the Tamil Nadu.
His belonging all destroyed by enemy.
He never bowed to British!
He sacrificed himself willingly infront of cowards and betrayers of tamil Nadu.
He was a true hero of Tamil Nadu.

[aathirai1]

Hi:
I am from the area which was affected by Katta Pomman. Native folks consider him as a thief. (Kollaikaran) He comes with people and steel cows goats and even kitchen utensils. Even now if any empty metal (Venkalam ect.) utensils get hit and make noise people go touch them to stop the sound saying Kattappa Naikan will come and take it if he hear the sound.
He chased away people from the native villages and occupied those villages.
He collected Taxes from people and didnt paid to the British. There are records in Madras Archives to prove this. Finally when he knew that the British is after him he tried to meet the official in three different places. He couldnt meet them.
These are recorded history.
The movie made him a hero. Actually he is not.

[bingleguy]

Hi:
I am from the area which was affected by Katta Pomman. Native folks consider him as a thief. (Kollaikaran) He comes with people and steel cows goats and even kitchen utensils. Even now if any empty metal (Venkalam ect.) utensils get hit and make noise people go touch them to stop the sound saying Kattappa Naikan will come and take it if he hear the sound.
He chased away people from the native villages and occupied those villages.
He collected Taxes from people and didnt paid to the British. There are records in Madras Archives to prove this. Finally when he knew that the British is after him he tried to meet the official in three different places. He couldnt meet them.
These are recorded history.
The movie made him a hero. Actually he is not.

i ve heard about such a History !
but the one catch that led the story of his movie was the boldness of him against the british !

[ramky]

Hi:
I am from the area which was affected by Katta Pomman. Native folks consider him as a thief. (Kollaikaran) He comes with people and steel cows goats and even kitchen utensils. Even now if any empty metal (Venkalam ect.) utensils get hit and make noise people go touch them to stop the sound saying Kattappa Naikan will come and take it if he hear the sound.
He chased away people from the native villages and occupied those villages.
He collected Taxes from people and didnt paid to the British. There are records in Madras Archives to prove this. Finally when he knew that the British is after him he tried to meet the official in three different places. He couldnt meet them.
These are recorded history.
The movie made him a hero. Actually he is not.

i ve heard about such a History !
but the one catch that led the story of his movie was the boldness of him against the british !

.. .and Chevalier Nadigar Thilagam Sivaji Ganesan playing the part of Kattabomman in the movie, made Kattabomman a household name.

[crazy]

manoj kumar: hm i never knew so much about kattapomban. all i know is the movie played by shivaji! :roll:

cant really imagine that he was cruel! whats the proof that he was a cruel person? even Gandhi called himself as "not a good person" in his book! he was also an average man...................who turned into a mahatma! ok ok i should not bring mahatma into this. he was an outstanding person.

maybe kattapomban did change himself or came a bit less cruel :roll: hm i dont know! just asking!
whatever he did fought againt our main enemy at the time- the british! so i think he do deserve a place in our history!

sorry!

[aravindhan]

Veerapandiya Kattabomman a villain !

Oh, for heaven's sake.

If Kattabomman was so hated, why are there so many folk songs - all written well after his death - celebrating his name? Why does the Kaliyuga Perunkappiyam - written many years after his death - celebrate him as an incarnation of Murugan, born to cleanse the earth of the pollution of the kali yuga? Why does Virapandiya Kattabommu Kataippadal sing of him as a just king, who ruled a prosperous and rich country? Why does the Kattapommu Petti Viruttam exult in his dealing with Jackson during that famous interview? Why did the Englishman HR Pate, writing in the early 20th century, speak of how Kattabomman's name was still such a revered one in Tirunelveli?

For that matter, if Kattabomman was such a hated villain, why did the British have to go to the extent of hanging his brothers, extinguishing his heirs, exiling every one of his relatives and forbidding their return for eighty years, demolishing his fortress and even sowing the soil of Panchalamkurinchi with castor seeds to ensure that it never rose again? Does that sound like what you'd do to a hated villain, or does it sound like what you'd do to prevent the folk rising to the memory of a beloved leader? For heaven's sake, the folk legends even said that the British hacked Kattabomman's body to prevent it coming to life again and that they took away the earth from Panjalamkurinchi to prevent the people recovering the heroism that flowed in it. Does *that* sound like a legend of a hated figure?

Are you really sure you understand the nature of the poligar reign? Tamil Nadu in the 18th century was NOT feudal, however the British might have tried to interpret it. Are you sure you understand the REAL nature of the obligation and the relationship, as it was seen by the parties, and aren't interpreting it through the lens of European feudalism, as the British did?

And are you sure you understand Tamil culture as it then was? The British launched a very successful campaign to transform Tamil attitudes after the Poligar wars. One of the things they tried hardest to eliminate was Tamil militarism - largely so that they would have a more readily subjugable nation. So are you sure you really understand what the folk songs which sing of how he burned fields and stole cattle are saying? Have you read the way the Purananuru praises kings for doing precisely this? Has it occured to you that these songs might be *praise*, rather than condemnation, because it was of such stuff that Tamil heroes were made in the 18th century? That a strong king was *expected* to be cruel to enemies? That the basis for kingship rested in the way kings protected their subjects, and that therefore a strong hero was *expected* to torment the subjects of his enemies? Are you sure that your analysis of Kattabomman isn't based on viewing 18th Tamil culture through modern eyes?

And yes, I know what scholars like M. Arunachalam and N. Subramaniam have said about Kattabomman. My questions still stand. What on earth did Arunachalam mean by the "law of the land" which he accused Kattabomman of disregarding? An 18th century Poligar equivalent of the modern notion of "the rule of law"? Oh, please - I suppose it's too much to expect historical knowledge of a literary scholar, no matter how high his accomplishments in that arena. And N. Subramaniam accuses journalists and national romanticists of having spun the tale out of empty air, conveniently glossing over the many folk songs about Kattabomman that date back to a century before the first national romanticist had even heard of him.

No, Kattabomman wasn't an angel. By today's standards, he wasn't even a just king. But you don't judge an 18th century Palayakkaran by the standards you apply to a 21st century Chief Minister. What *is* relevant is what Kattabomman meant to the Tamils of Tirunelveli in Kattabomman's time and thereafter. And the answer to that question is pretty clear.

And finally, the story of how Kattabomman has been depicted by scholars and popular writers over the years from the early 20th century to the 1990s actually tells you a lot more about the evolution of Tamil politics during that time than it does about Kattabomman himself. But that's a story for another time.

[Badri]

Woah! Aravindan, :notworthy: for sheer writing genuis!!!

[gaddeswarup]

No, Kattabomman wasn't an angel. By today's standards, he wasn't even a just king. But you don't judge an 18th century Palayakkaran by the standards you apply to a 21st century Chief Minister. What *is* relevant is what Kattabomman meant to the Tamils of Tirunelveli in Kattabomman's time and thereafter. And the answer to that question is pretty clear.


I too think that this is something to watch out when discussing the past.

[asan]

[tscii:577be4c481]Veerapandiya Kattabomman a villain !


Looking into the history and the condition during the close of 17th century, one has to wonder if Veerapandiya Kattabomman was really a national hero.

SOME UNSAID TRUTHS
1) Veerapandiya Kattabomman was not a King, but a Feudal Lord.
2) He did not fight only against the British, but he had fought against the earlier legitimate Indian Rulers also.
3) Whenever he was not at war with the central authority he was at war with other neighboring Poligars. He would often set plundering and murdering expeditions into other Poligar’s territories around his place; often to take over their villages.
4) He was not a person who treated all caste equally. He was a terror and committed acts of cruelty and oppression on the inhabitants of the other caste people residing nearby.
5) He killed more Indians than the British. Most of the Tamils he killed were ordinary peasants and traders.
6) Except for his followers, who approved him and his methods, he never did any good for the Tamil people. There was no development of the place or the people during his periods. There were no roads in existence. What are called roads were merely cross-country tracks, sometimes lined with trees. Bridges appear to have been unknown. There were no schools, except for Brahmins. Trade was unprotected, and merchant did not dare to appear to grow rich. Hospitals were unknown.
7) Kattaboma Nayaka was tried and executed on 16th October 1799. During this time the legitimate rulers were the Nawab of Carnatic . On 31st July 1801, the entire region along with Carnatic was peaceably ceded by a treaty to the British. Therefore during Kattaboma Nayaka’s time the revenue was collect by the Bristish on behalf of Nawab of Carnatic.

With all the above facts, Kattaboma Nayaka seems to be more a villain than a hero. He can’t become a hero just because he fought British. His motives were not of a national cause but his own selfish gain only to exploit the ruling authority.

I always wonder why our historians and the writer never write the history as it is. They have an inborn tendency to omit all the evil deeds committed by their so-called Indian hero and at the same time conveniently, omitting all the good deeds done by the opposing side.

They never portray the real identity or the nature of the so-called Indian hero. They just want to stress one deed without explaining the background just to make him an idol.
However, when one reads the history from other sources, one is astonished to find that most of the history we are taught is fabricated or just one sided.

TRUTH
In the year 1520, the king of Vijayanagara, Krishna Rayalu sent his Governor Visvanatha Nayaka to take over Madurai (old name Madura). The governor Viswanatha Nayaka appointed the Palaiyakaras (Poligars), many of who were the dependents and adherents of his own caste, and they were granted a tract of country consisting of certain number of villages. These Palaiyakaras (Poligars) were bound to pay a fixed annual tribute and to supply and keep in readiness a quota of troops for the governor’s armies. For fifteen generations Nayaka rulers ruled (1559 – 1736) Madurai. The Nayaka never called themselves kings of Madura. They professed to be lieutenants of the great Rayalu of Vijaya-Nagara. These Poligar’s reign record little more than a disgraceful, murders and civil commotions, relieved only by the factitious splendor of gifts to temples, idols, and priests, by means of which they apparently succeeded in getting the Brahmans and poets to speak well of them, and thus in keeping the mass of the people patient under heir misrule. Most of the time these poligars were not fighting the foreign foes but their legitimate ruler of the country.
The Poligar of Panjalamkurichi was a Nayaka of the Kambala division of the caste. Boma is a common Telugu name. Kattaboma Nayaka’s rule towards the close of the 17th century was the centre of all disloyalty and misrule. He was just another ruthless, rapacious feudal lord, who just managed the fort that was granted to him. But, he nor his ancestors were true to their given assignments. From 1748, after the commencement of the rule of the Nawab of Arcot, under the Carnatic Nizam, Kattabomma Nayaka continued his attack against them. They collected taxes and other kaval charges from the people residing there but never gave their annual revenue to their ruling authorities (Vijayanagara rulers or the Carnatic rulers). By doing so, they often fought with the central authority. It was rarely possible to collect from them the revenue due to the central authority without the display of military force. (Even earlier than British Intervention)
From his fort of Panjalamkurichi the Poligar used to sally forth at the head of his armed followers, and making incursions into Circar villages, as well as into the villages of other Poligars, sack and plunder all that came into his way, often times carrying off some of the principal inhabitants. Kattaboma Nayaka often used to make raids into the neighbouring territories, especially into the territories of the Poligar of Ettaiyapuram. He occupied Supplapuram village of Ettappan. This resulted in the enmity between the two Poligars. He often made war or committed depredations, as his local interests, or his passions lead him, upon other Poligar’s territories without any provocations.

CAN THIS MAN BE A NATIONAL OR TAMIL HERO?
JUDGE FOR YOURSELF
[/tscii:577be4c481]manoj i think you haven't read about history.my native is tirunelveli the place whre kattaboman ruled.and i know him a lot.can you name any one south indian king who opposed the british regime the one and only tirunelveli singam who has the guts to oppose british of not paying the tax.all where like pulikesi :lol: :lol: :lol: even in that film they would have said about kattaboman.people fear about tirunelveli only because of this hero.he is the strongest pandiya king.even when district transport corporations where named with great peoples chennai corporation was named with Dr.Ambedkar but do you know tirunelveli corporation was named as Veerapandiya Kattabomman! transport corporation.beside in tirunelveli there r many other freedom fighters like kappalotia thamilan v.o.c chidambaranar and bharathiyar

[nilavupriyan]

asan :clap:

[Albert]

Hi

Knowing tirunelveli is not a qualification to disagree Mr. Manoj's argument gentleman!. Your knowledge of Tamil history is not simply not enough to challenge him. Ketti bommu is of naiker clan and his court language is telugu. He is not a king and zamindhar holding just half of todays tuticorin dist.

No relation to Pandiya dynasty and he is not even of tamil orgin.
He failed to pay his taxes and escaped to pudukottai after a tussle with british forces, captured and hanged.

He is a blot to Tamil history. No tamils whose mother tongue is Tamil in the neigbhouring areas liked him. He was brutal and robbed ordinary peasants of that area of their livlihood because he is a telugu he has no respect for the tamil speaking people. They joined hand with the british and eliminated him.

This is the true history, donot live in a world of cheap celluloid fantasy.

[Albert]

Hi

Knowing tirunelveli is not a qualification to disagree Mr. Manoj's argument gentleman!. Your knowledge of Tamil history is not simply not enough to challenge him. Ketti bommu is of naiker clan and his court language is telugu. He is not a king and zamindhar holding just half of todays tuticorin dist.

No relation to Pandiya dynasty and he is not even of tamil orgin.
He failed to pay his taxes and escaped to pudukottai after a tussle with british forces, captured and hanged.

He is a blot to Tamil history. No tamils whose mother tongue is Tamil in the neigbhouring areas liked him. He was brutal and robbed ordinary peasants of that area of their livlihood because he is a telugu he has no respect for the tamil speaking people. They joined hand with the british and eliminated him.

This is the true history, donot live in a world of cheap celluloid fantasy.

[Albert]

Hi

Knowing tirunelveli is not a qualification to disagree Mr. Manoj's argument gentleman!. Your knowledge of Tamil history is not simply not enough to challenge him. Ketti bommu is of naiker clan and his court language is telugu. He is not a king and zamindhar holding just half of todays tuticorin dist.

No relation to Pandiya dynasty and he is not even of tamil orgin.
He failed to pay his taxes and escaped to pudukottai after a tussle with british forces, captured and hanged.

He is a blot to Tamil history. No tamils whose mother tongue is Tamil in the neigbhouring areas liked him. He was brutal and robbed ordinary peasants of that area of their livlihood because he is a telugu he has no respect for the tamil speaking people. They joined hand with the british and eliminated him.

This is the true history, donot live in a world of cheap celluloid fantasy.

[asan]

:banghead: who said like that kattaboman is not of telugu origin and he did not tease any peasants if he did so how come people praise him and about his tamil fluency.he was the only single king to oppose the british and heis a brave men and he dosen't need to hind behind anywhere :notworthy:

[great]

He occupied Supplapuram village of Ettappan.

It has been told that the village belongs to forefathers of Ettapan and during the allocation it was passed on to Kattaboman. The enemity is not due to the village but Britishers used this to divide them or seeded the enemity between the two their own concept of divide and rule .

I am not too sure on the theif part mentioned in the post of 2 hubbers :confused2: there is a saying that he go for patrols regularly and ppl were pretty happy with his rule.


Aravindan :notworthy: :clap:

[Albert]

He did not oppose for the sake of Indian independence, rather for his own survival after he is not a favourite among the majority of the population. The songs written about kings and Zamindhars are by the begging poets who pledge tamil for their livlihood cannot be taken seriously. If he is a real hero of the masses, why only naidu s in that region worship him.(with some of their rusted weapons) That too very few of them in numbers.
He is a Telugu and he is a Hero of telugus only accept the reality and we have many heros of Tamil orgin and give them the due respect. Don't belive the fake tamil's claim and get carried away.

[Badri]

The songs written about kings and Zamindhars are by the begging poets who pledge tamil for their livlihood cannot be taken seriously.

It was not only the "beggin poets" as you allege, Albert. See below for what even the British had to record. I quoet Aravindan, earlier on in this thread


Why did the Englishman HR Pate, writing in the early 20th century, speak of how Kattabomman's name was still such a revered one in Tirunelveli?

[nilavupriyan]

He did not oppose for the sake of Indian independence, rather for his own survival after he is not a favourite among the majority of the population. The songs written about kings and Zamindhars are by the begging poets who pledge tamil for their livlihood cannot be taken seriously. If he is a real hero of the masses, why only naidu s in that region worship him.(with some of their rusted weapons) That too very few of them in numbers.
He is a Telugu and he is a Hero of telugus only accept the reality and we have many heros of Tamil orgin and give them the due respect. Don't belive the fake tamil's claim and get carried away.

heyy even tippu fought for his sword...jansi rani for her country...

in their period nationality is restricted to their area!

[dsath]

[tscii:6d5b4529e4]
He did not oppose for the sake of Indian independence, rather for his own survival after he is not a favourite among the majority of the population. The songs written about kings and Zamindhars are by the begging poets who pledge tamil for their livlihood cannot be taken seriously. If he is a real hero of the masses, why only naidu s in that region worship him.(with some of their rusted weapons) That too very few of them in numbers.
He is a Telugu and he is a Hero of telugus only accept the reality and we have many heros of Tamil orgin and give them the due respect. Don't belive the fake tamil's claim and get carried away.
There was no one single India back then to fight for. I think in spite of having Telugu origins, he fought for his land/kingdom which happened to be populated with Tamils. Does that not say something about him? And as Aravindhan has pointed out, we cannot apply today’s standards to judge what happened back then. If we do that, all of history's great figures can be easily prosecuted for Human Rights violation, War Crimes and almost everything that is listed in the UN to protect the common man.[/tscii:6d5b4529e4]

[Billgates]

Mr.Sudhama

Can you share your thoughts on KB here ?

Reading the previous posts create more confusion on whether this KB was a NALLAVAN or a KETTAVAN ? :roll:

[pizzalot]

Looks like your Sudhama is busy there. No worries. I will answer. KB is good or bad ? It all depends on point of reference. For the British .. he was Bad. Now free India (under the Indian National Congress) did not treat British as enemies anymore. Instead the British were their allies. Subjugation of micro-nations within India was still going on even after Indian Independence. The British operated as Consultants in securing solidarity and power to the Union. To a lot of extent British's divide and rule was continued as the diplomatic policy by INC. So a lot of KB anti-legends were floated aimed at confusing people and destroying micro-nationalism just to confuse people like yourself who will have to seek answers/disclosures from people (like Sudhama). But those days when there was a big uncertainity their relationship was Competition. Those were times Micro and macro nationalists were pitching against each other as competitors. Today (and in the future) their relationship is more of Cooperation / Partnership / affiliation. So KB will be seen as a NALLAVAN now so as to strengthen people's participation in the India Inc, unless you do not need a India Federated Inc.

[asan]

He did not oppose for the sake of Indian independence, rather for his own survival after he is not a favourite among the majority of the population. The songs written about kings and Zamindhars are by the begging poets who pledge tamil for their livlihood cannot be taken seriously. If he is a real hero of the masses, why only naidu s in that region worship him.(with some of their rusted weapons) That too very few of them in numbers.
He is a Telugu and he is a Hero of telugus only accept the reality and we have many heros of Tamil orgin and give them the due respect. Don't belive the fake tamil's claim and get carried away.
He is not favourite among people ah... :lol: come to south and see the voice and geth of him.to be true he is the people's champion!!!!!you say he is of telugu origin come to nellai point out who speaks telugu we r tamil verians hindi ethirpaium arambichathu nangathan tamil ah nelainatupavarum nellai makkal than.in all other district u can find more people speaking other languages.moreover they say he speaks tulu.even raja raja cholan a tamil king only spoke tulu