You are an authority on Travancore history. How did it all start?
History and literature are deeply connected. While working as a Malayalam professor, there was a paper on Kerala history and culture. What fascinated me was that a Travancore king defeated the Dutch East India Company that had seized Sri Lanka and even Indonesia. Delving further, the interest built up and I wanted to know more.
We often hear about Mathilakam records…
It’s about the temple rituals. But it has political history as well, because the temple is the ruler. Many say the Vault B inside the temple was never opened. But many times ‘kappam’ was given from the Vault B. Mathilakam records were in a pathetic condition. But once news about the treasure came out, people started taking these records more seriously. There are many positives for monarchy, but there are downsides too. It doesn’t encourage free speech the way a democratic set-up allows. People used to keep away from research, thinking the monarchs wouldn’t like it.
Are you suggesting the Travancore royal clan was actually very autocratic, in contrast to the general perception of being progressive?
The Travancore royal clan was very progressive in many aspects, especially when compared to other clans. But they were afraid of their own history. The reason is their lineage is mostly through adoptions. Even Travancore’s founder, Anizham Thirunal Marthanda Varma, was adopted into this family. As per Travancore custom, adoptions have to be done only from those clans that have branched out from this particular one. The entire system was brought down by Umayamma Rani who began adopting from matrilineal branches. Marthanda Varma was born after one such adoption from Pallikovilakom in Kannur.
So, Marthanda Varma has a Kannur lineage?
Yes (smiles). I often joke that people from Kannur are fortunate because they get to rule Kerala. From Anizham Thirunal Marthanda Varma, who was adopted from Kolattu Naadu or the present-day Kannur, to E K Nayanar, K Karunakaran and Pinarayi Vijayan, all of them are from Kannur (laughs out).
Was it the reason why Ettuveetil Pillamar targeted him?
One reason was that he was adopted from a branch that was not in the traditional list. There’s another reason too. Ettuveetil Pillamar always liked a king who was weak. There was a crude form of democracy even then in Travancore, rather in India. Across the country, there was a decentralised form of governance. Each region had its own chieftain who would decide the administrative processes as well as who the next ruler should be.
Let’s come to the Battle of Colachel. Despite being the first-ever victory of an Asian kingdom against a European colonial power, why did it never get due historical importance?
The reason why it didn’t get a space in Indian history is due to our own historians. Those who wrote it down never did their job well. Even books on Travancore history have very little mention about the Battle of Colachel. Historians like K M Panikkar did not give it due importance. Interestingly, the British and the French accorded a lot of importance to this battle.
It’s said the British influenced decision-making in royal families…
Yes. Marthanda Varma was the first to question the Britishers. He was a king who never succumbed to a foreign force. We should credit him in this regard. Interestingly, there’s not even a single statue of him in the state capital, but Chithira Thirunal has eight in his honour!
What was the condition of ordinary women in Travancore, a land that had seen powerful queens?
It varied, depending on the community and the region. There was no subjugation, in the way we often imagine. The notion that Nair women enjoyed great freedom is wrong. Queens in the Travancore royal family did hold prominence. For instance, Sethu Parvathi Bayi deliberately played down her official designation as Junior Rani, and instead propagated the title Amma Maharani.
There are a few theories about the death of Swathi Thirunal…
One theory says he died due to a massive heart attack, while another suggests a cerebral haemorrhage. Sooranad Kunjanpillai indicated that the king died of ‘prayopavesham’, which effectively meant that he died of starvation. Another theory suggests that he ended his life by swallowing a diamond. Interestingly, Swathi Thirunal’s room is kept locked for visitors. The royal family held the notion that only good things should be spoken about them. They wanted history to be narrated strictly according to their version. This stance was also upheld by Chithira Thirunal’s mother and continued into the 21st century. The result of suppressing actual history was that people began to invent stories, often exaggerated or hostile, against royalty.
Do you mean to say that what we know is only the sycophant version of history?
Yes, to some extent. Chithira Thirunal, despite his progressive credentials, declared Travancore as sovereign. He shouldn’t have done so, especially after witnessing the unprecedented independence struggle that people across the country had taken up. The princely states were being merged into the Indian Union, with notable exceptions such as Hyderabad, Junagadh, and Travancore. Had Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel not taken a strong decision, the integration process would have dragged on.
It is said the royal family was under the control of Diwan CP…
That isn’t true. It was more of a dual responsibility. Both Sethu Parvathi Bayi and C P Ramaswamy Iyer did the backseat-driving. Chithira Thirunal was largely a ceremonial king, according to a reliable source. He wasn’t without ability but lost prominence in front of his mother. It would be accurate to say that the declaration of a sovereign Travancore came through CP. In my research, I found documents showing serious discussions at Kowdiar Palace about purchasing arms and aircraft from the USA. CP was interested in the commission from such purchases. Machine guns were even imported from a US dealer to suppress the Punnapra–Vayalar uprising. A division of the Travancore Army was sent to Aluva Palace to manage the situation, but nothing happened. CP warned the royal family against playing with fire.
Was that after Sardar Patel’s intervention?
Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel invited CP for a special meeting. When he arrived in Delhi, there were three chairs. Two were already occupied – one by the Diwan of Junagadh and the other by the Diwan of Bhopal. Sardar remarked that he was going to ‘electrocute both of them’. Whether it was a casual remark or a veiled
threat, this was exactly what Sardar told CP, something CP himself later admitted. After the meeting, CP flew back and informed the royal family that “we should stop this game”. Thus, the accession of Travancore was effectively through threat.
Were Sardar Patel and the home department aware of the attempt on CP?
It is quite possible. He was after all the Iron Man of India.
And?
Chithira Thirunal Balarama Varma did not attend the funeral of Sardar Patel. Instead, he sent Uthradam Thirunal Marthanda Varma. Maniben Patel (Patel’s daughter) was upset. She conveyed that it was Balarama Varma who should have attended the funeral. She also exclaimed that had it not been for her father, Chithira Thirunal would have been in trouble. Had Chithira Thirunal delayed accession to India, there would have been a coup. They had even thought of police action. But as the Governor-General, C Rajagopalachari reminded Patel that Chithira Thirunal was a pious Hindu king and it would not be wise to imprison him.
There are a lot of speculations about Vault B at Padmanabhaswamy temple…
Most information available on YouTube about Vault B is baseless. The keys to the vaults were under my custody in my capacity as acting chairman of the expert committee for a year-and-a-half. I later handed over the keys to the district judge.
Did you know that the vaults were opened?
No doubt. It is untrue to say that Vault B was never opened. According to (former Comptroller and Auditor General of India) Vinod Rai’s report, Uthradam Thirunal had signed and authorised the opening of the vault seven times. On two other occasions, it’s opening was recorded in pencil. Now, there’s a version that Vault B is double-storeyed, with a level below. There is a hidden chamber, but I don’t think there’s a key for it. I have only seen the key for the level above Vault B. Recently, (former Chief Secretary) K Jayakumar said the lower level of Vault B is the foundation of the main sanctum, and therefore, should not be opened. That statement is misleading. There is a chamber beneath but it is not the foundation of the main sanctum, rather another sacred section.
Has it ever been opened?
I don’t know if this sacred chamber has ever been opened. It’s not mentioned in any records.
Any records available on the inventory in these vaults?
The expert committee never opened Vault B. We can only guess. We know what’s there in vault A, C, D and E. Old newspapers have reported about the inventory of the temple vaults during the reign of Chithira Thirunal, during 1931-32. He was keeping track of this and many prominent dailies, including Deepika, The Hindu and The Service, carried reports. The inventory in Vault B would have also been definitely recorded at the time.
Didn’t the Supreme Court look into all this in detail?
Initially, the judges handled the case meticulously. As years dragged on, the judges were desperate to wind it up. The real case was about documentation and missing gold. The report by Vinod Rai noted more than 1,100 golden ‘kalasa kudam’ of inventory. According to him, the temple gold was diverted to make other ornaments, far more than required. This should have been the focus of the SC. But it all came down to Vault B. People get distracted by legends...
curses and stories of retired judges getting injured while trying to open Vault B. The real issue is mismanagement of treasure.
How did these become part of the treasure?
These chambers were filled with treasure from all parts of the world and includes jewels, coins... their historic value exceeds their actual value. A major portion of the treasure dates back to Marthanda Varma who brought it from conquered kingdoms. In addition, the rulers who visited here offered gifts over the centuries.
How much do we know about whether something was taken away from the vault?
I was present when the treasurer confessed in front of the amicus curiae, about who took what from the vault. That’s how I came to know about the secret chamber. According to the confession, theft has taken place, including from Vault B. It happened in 1998. The royal family believed that it was a private trust and all these were in their possession. They came to know that it was a public trust when the Supreme Court asked a question. Maybe it was done unknowingly.
V S Achuthanandan had alleged gold smuggling via payasam tiffin boxes by the royal family...
He did not know anything either about the temple or the rituals followed there. But the spirit of his statement was true.
Some of your statements on Sabarimala were controversial. One of them was about the fire in Sabarimala; you said there was a Christian angle to it…
Yes, definitely. It is mentioned in the Kesava Menon report. At the time, new estate owners centred around Kanjirappally had estates there. Forest land was encroached upon. As the forest was encroached, these estates expanded. If pilgrimage in Sabarimala increased, it would hinder their illegal activities.
Does Vavar have an Islam connection, or not?
The Pandalam prince has nothing to do with either Ayyappan or Sastha. Pandalam prince Manikantan was the one who played a huge role in transforming Sabarimala into a big pilgrim centre. He probably lived in the 12th century. Vavar was his companion. I don’t share the RSS’ view. I am not the one who said that Vavar is a non-Muslim. Kesari Balakrishna Pillai, a great historian, said that. All I added was that, today, all those who belong to the family of the old Vavar are Muslims.
You said Manikantan lived in the 12th century. Does that mean Manikantan is not Sastha?
Today, there is a lot of confusion among people, what with numerous stories doing the rounds. The Devaswom Board should bring out a book that covers all such aspects. As there is no such book to guide one, the concept of Sastha is set in prehistoric times. One thing is for sure: all the rituals of this pilgrimage have the flavour of Buddhism.
Can you give an example?
The Sharanam chants. ‘Swamiye Sharanam Ayyappa’ is an imitation of Buddham Sharanam. Similarly, vegetarianism. To prepare for Sabarimala pilgrimage, one has to be a brahmacharya and eat only vegetarian food for the entire duration of the pilgrimage.
But vegetarianism has always been part of Hinduism too…
Hinduism is like a sea. There are pure vegetarians, and also non-vegetarians among Shakti-ites. For Shaiva Aghoris, meat is a must.
As such, does Hinduism not promote vegetarianism?
We cannot say that vegetarianism is the core character of Hinduism. Similarly, there are non-vegetarians in Buddhism too. There are non-vegetarian Buddhists in Cambodia, Sri Lanka and Tibet. It is said that there is no caste in Buddhism. That’s incorrect. There are four castes in Buddhism. Sree Narayana Guru understood all this precisely.
As a historian, what’s the most crucial turning point in Kerala’s history?
I cannot pinpoint one particular instance. EMS had pointed out the Malayali Memorial (a petition given to Travancore king) and the novel ‘Indulekha’ (by O Chandumenon) in the 19th century as significant turning points. But he failed to acknowledge ‘Maru Marakkal Samaram’. According to me, important developments in the 20th century are the Vaikom Satyagraha, Payyannoor agitation, and the Punnapra-Vayalar uprising. Many such things will influence us at some point of time or the other, but later on, they could be irrelevant. Today, ‘Indulekha’ may not be very important. But at the time of the matrilineal system, it was very important.
Was the matrilineal system that bad?
At a point in time, this system might have been harmless. But such practices should change with changing times. Though it sounded romantic, after a certain phase, it led to anarchy. By the 20th century, the system suffered a downfall. That was then the need of the hour. Christian missionaries too played a key role. It’s true that they had other reasons, like religious conversion. There are certain hidden facts behind everything.
Isn’t Tipu’s invasion a crucial point in Kerala history?
Of course, it is. Tipu’s invasion brought in good roads. Travel till then was via rivers and backwaters. Tipu Sultan taught us why we need an army. He taught that war is not just ‘Dharma Yudh’. Tipu’s invasion is a turning point. If Cheraman Perumal’s visit to Mecca is true, that too marks an epoch. The Zamorin’s defeat in the wars with the Portuguese too is a big event. The Portuguese building a fort in Kochi is another.
How did Christianity make inroads into Kerala?
The Christian community taught Keralites how to use trade in politics. Earlier, there may have been Buddhists, Jains, Chettis, but we don’t know anything about them. It was the Christian community that got involved in politics through trade.
There are many speculations about St Thomas’ arrival…
There is no proof that St Thomas came here. St Thomas is a myth brought in by the Portuguese. But it is certain that Thomas of Cana came here. Anyway, Christianity was very strong from the 5th century. It may have been around from the 3rd century.
Isn’t British patronage a reason for conversion?
Before the British, there were the Portuguese. It was the Portuguese who patronised them (missionaries) and gave them the strength to bargain. They promoted Catholics. It was the Dutch East India Company who promoted the Protestants.
It is said the lower castes converted to achieve respect as it was the white man’s religion, and a civilised one at that...
Very true. Here, they weren’t allowed to walk on the road, weren’t allowed to dress modestly… had no good education. When Portuguese explorer Cabral suggested that some farmers be recruited into the army, the Minister of Kochi opposed, saying they were Pulayas and hence could not be recruited into the army.
Your recent remarks on the film ‘Lokah’ kicked up a debate...
The film story doesn’t bear any resemblance to the orginal story of ‘Kalliyaankaattu Neeli’. In the film, Neeli belongs to the ‘Avarna Tribe’ while Neeli actually belongs to the ‘Vaishya Tribe’. History shouldn’t be twisted so. I pointed out such issues with the film ‘Perunthachan’ too. My argument was that Perunthachan lived in the 9th century while another character in the film, ‘Thirumangalathu Neelakandan’, lived in the 15th century. I wrote to M T Vasudevan Nair, who didn’t take it well.
It’s the age of social media. Studying history seems more challenging now...
History is like a river. No matter what people do, it knows its way. There will always be someone to restore history and to tell the truth. If not me, someone else.
TNIE team: Cithara Paul, Anil S, Aparna Nair, Jose K Joseph, Varsha SomarajVincent Pulickal (Photos)Pranav V P (video)