KOZHIKODE: The Hindu Aikya Vedi has raised suspicion over the historical facts portrayed in director Vinayan’s new movie ‘Pathombatham Noottandu’, (Nineteenth Century) which narrates the heroic resistance of the Ezhava leader Arattupuzha Velayudha Panicker.
The Vedi’s main objections are over the depiction of Nangeli, the Dalit woman who chopped off her breasts apparently protesting against the ‘Breast Tax’ (Mulakkaram) prevalent in the erstwhile Travancore and over the religious identity of the person who murdered Panicker. “Historians say the story of Nangeli is a just a fiction. Moreover, there is no relationship between the Breast Tax and the agitation of women for the right to cover the upper part of the body. Mulakkaram and Thalakkaram (head tax) are actually different kinds of tax imposed on women and men respectively, and they have nothing to do with their bodies,” said Vedi state secretary R V Babu.
“Historical documents say that Panicker was killed by his relative, who got converted to Islam. The film is silent of this aspect,” he said. Harikumar Elayidath, a local historian who studied extensively about Panicker, said various documents say the person who killed the Ezhava leader was a Muslim-convert. “He was called Thoppiyitta Kittan because wearing skull cap (thoppi) was the sign of converting to Islam,” Harikumar told TNIE.
He said there are references about the person in the article by P O Kunhupanicker that appeared in the golden jubilee souvenir of SNDP Yogam published in 1953. “He was Panicker’s relative who later took the name Hyder after he went to Ponnani and got converted to Islam. He had some personal grudge with Panicker and became a tool in the hands of Panicker’s enemies,” Harikumar said. He said that Muslims in Kayamkulam and adjoining areas had strong animosity towards Panicker because he had opposed Ezhavas getting converted to Islam.
“This was recorded by M K Hemchandran, the leader of SNDP Yogam and Congress, in the article published in 1988. Hemachandran wrote that Muslims had vowed to finish him off,” Harikumar said.
Harikumar argues that Muslims of the area were envious of the prosperity achieved by the Ezhava leader, who was also a merchant exporting goods to foreign countries.
Vinayan, however, dismissed these assertions. “Mine is not a documentary on Panicker, but an artistic endeavour. Through the character I have tried to recapture the inhuman treatments suffered by the oppressed classes in Kerala in 19th century,” he said.
The director said he has taken artistic liberty while making the movie. “In fact, Panicker had eight children, but I have shown only one. The religious identity of the assassin is immaterial when discussing the suffering of the oppressed sections,” he said.