Tag Archives: Mir Jafar

Why We Need a Book About Muslims Who Fought for India’s Freedom

Mumbai, INDIA :

Can a stable and just democracy flourish on foundations of wilful amnesia and erasure?

A c. 1800 painting showing the last stand of Tipu Sultan, ruler of Mysore in 1799 at the end of the Anglo-Mysore Wars with the East India Company. Photo: Henry Singleton/Public domain.

Many will ask why a book about Muslims who fought for India’s freedom? There’s no answer to such questions except another question. Had we been better memory keepers as a nation, could we have avoided the peak disinformation and stupidity which normalises reviling ordinary Muslims as outsiders, infiltrator and insurgents? 

Muslim Freedom Fighters of India is a two-volume biographical compilation by Salim Khan on less-known, mostly forgotten and hardly known Muslim figures. The books aim to clear the fog around Muslim freedom fighters whose names are heard of without them being extensively known and this requires us to understand why this fog exists. Written in an extremely readable and accessible format, these biographical accounts embed the historical figures in the context of their times, responding to unprecedented events with foresight, clarity and conviction that sealed their fate and shaped and the nation’s destiny.

 Whether we are reading about Generals of 1857 – Bakht Khan and Khan Bahadur Khan – or the Cambridge-educated Rampur scion Mohammad Ali Juahar of Khilafat moment and his fiery mother Bi Amma, the larger questions seething beneath the stories keep rising to surface. Who does a society and nation choose to remember and celebrate? Whose memories are deemed worthy of preserving? History is always shaped by those who control archives, narratives and memorialisation and hence memory. 

Reading about Tipu’s dazzling reign through the three Anglo Mysore wars where he proved superior to British forces, I was reminded of the controversy sparked by the late Girish Karnad’s suggestion of naming the Bengaluru airport after Tipu Sultan. Karnad had said, “It is true that Tipu Sultan was not born in Bengaluru, but he was a son of this soil and a freedom fighter. Had Tipu been a Hindu, he would have achieved the status of Shivaji, and the airport would have been named after him.” I recalled Karnad because his play Dreams of Tipu Sultan echoes the same theme that this two-volume tribute to erased, obscured and deliberately unremembered historical figures echoes: that when politics lays down who should be forgotten, remembering the erased becomes a duty, an affirmation and a political act. 

It is important to clarify that this is not a compilation of eulogies but well-researched fact based account of people who had the uncommon clarity to resist colonial domination even before the nationalistic narratives took shape. That they happened to be Muslims is important today because of the distortions that have obscured and erased them. But back then when they fought and resisted, they were simply rallying for the cause of their soil and their watan. From the earliest times they understood that freedom from foreign domination required Hindus and Muslims to put up a united front as in the war of 1857, the Khilafat movement, and the period between 1919 and 1924. Back then too, traitors cut across religious lines – Jagat Seth, Mir Jafar, and Ilahi Baksh.

Muslim Freedom Fighters of India: Part 1 and Part 2’, Salim Khan, Qalam Aur Kaagaz Books.

From Siraj ud Daulah to Tipu to Shahzada Firoz Shah, the book shows how the fog around these personalities is not accidental but meticulously designed – initially by the colonial mind, then picked up by early nationalists and woven into simplistic narratives. The macabre dance of history further stifled Muslim voices. Cataclysmic events like the ‘end’ of the Mughal Dynasty in 1857 and the Partition in 1947 sundered clans, erased family histories, legacies crumbled with no one is around to defend and uphold them. Today, even people who don’t know history have heard of Lakshmi Bai, but many who read history may not have heard about Shahzada Firoz Shah, the Mughal Emperor’s grandson who in August 1857, led a band of armed soldiers to rally the rebels in Rohilkhand and Malwa and who fought alongside Tatia Tope and called for a united Hindu-Muslim front against the Company. 

The British understood the dangerous potential of popular memory and subverted any potential for memorialisation of hugely influential figures. No one knows if Shahzada Firoz died in battle or escaped to West Asia. The Maulavi Ahmadulla of Faizabad whose authority and fearlessness scared the British so much that they kept a reward on his head, was likewise interred in an unmarked grave. Knowing that even his memory could become a node to unite the rebels, the British saw to it that no commemoration was permitted or possible. Zafar, the last Mughal was exiled to Rangoon for the same reasons.

In her book, India, 5,000 years of history on the subcontinent, Audrey Truschke, elucidates how Muslim rulers like Nawab Siraj ud Daulah and Tipu Sultan to Zafar felt a responsibility for their subjects no matter what their religion. For example, Siraj ud Daulah actively intervened in times of famines and drought in Bengal. But after the British took over they did nothing to alleviate human suffering, so that 20% of Bengal’s population died in the famine of 1768 and the small-pox epidemic of 1769-70 following it. This had never happened during earlier episodes of failed harvests. Truschke says, British historians initiated the custom of categorising Indian rulers as tyrannical, effete and incompetent, reducing them to their religion and writing in terms of Hindu rulers and Muslim rulers. The British needed to demonise Muslim rulers who were their immediate predecessors in subcontinent so that they might look good by comparison, Truschke notes. It was a part of the colonial propaganda.

Another pattern Salim Khan’s compilation brings out is that from mid-18th century onwards, the first responders and the most committed crusaders resisting colonial domination – the kings, queens, princes, preachers, noblemen – were Muslims. Not only because the British had wrested from them the power they had wielded for centuries (howsoever fragmented or diluted it may have become); but also, because they were looked upon as leaders. In Awadh, for example, the Shia elite took it as their moral-ethical duty (see Chapter 7, volume I: Shia Ullema and Noblemen of Awadh

Even in the 20th century, Muslim freedom fighters like Hasrat Mohani of the Inquilaab Zindabad fame and Asfaqullah Khan of the Kakori conspiracy who was an icon for Bhagat Singh, remain in the shadows, seen only in a hazy half-light. Were their contributions any less or only less remembered? One of the most important projects post-Independence should have been to restore memory and affirmation to those whom the British put on the wrong side of history, no matter what their religion or caste. But we know this is not what happened.

Since the arrival of the political controversy over Tipu Sultan, we have entered in an era of deliberate distortion of history. The larger question that these accounts refrain from asking but that jumps to any thinking person’s mind is this: can a stable and just democracy flourish on foundations of wilful amnesia and erasure? Should the memory of Muslim freedom fighters be kept only by the Muslims? The heritage and memory of Indian Muslims needs to be reclaimed by them. But equally, these volumes are required reading for the casually miseducated, hopelessly disinformed or simply ignorant Hindus who have been stupefied into denying and distorting their composite history.

Varsha Tiwary is a Delhi-based writer and translator. She has recently published 1990, Aramganj a translation of the best-selling Hindi novel Rambhakt Rangbaz.

Mir of the Metaphor

Murshidabad, WEST BENGAL :

When Suvendu Adhikari crossed over to the BJP, it was said there’s no reason to fuss over the desertion of Mir Jafars. Now actor Rudranil Ghosh has earned the sobriquet of Mir Jafar 2.0. But what is it to be the progeny of a man-turned-pejorative?

The setting of this story is Lalbagh, a locality in Murshidabad, erstwhile capital of Subah Bengal or present-day Bangladesh, Bengal, Bihar and Odisha. According to the book The Musnud of Murshidabad (1704-1904), “Being more conveniently situated than Dacca for the collection of revenue and the supervision of trade… Murshed Kuli Khan, the Great Dewan of Bengal, selected it as his headquarters and embellished it, giving it its present name after his own.” This was in the early 1700s.

Thirty kilometres away from Lalbagh is Plassey, and Calcutta is 200 kilometres away. The nawab’s estate here has an enormous entrance; it was designed such that stately elephants could saunter through. To its left there is a two-storey stretch limo of a building punctured with countless square windows. “It is the house of the Bade Nawab and the Chhote Nawab,” says local guide Swapan Chowdhury. Yes, the Government of India abolished the princely order in 1971, which means titles are not recognised; but the usage endures in various orbits of society to suggest legacy, status or power, oftentimes as veneer on a less grand present.  

The two “nawabs” are among the living descendants — eighth generation to be specific — of Syed Mir Jafar Ali Khan Bahadur, commander of the Bengal army under Nawab Siraj ud-Daulah. He whom we today know as Mir Jafar, shorn of all gallantry, accomplishments and grandeur he might have been associated with once. The same who is synonymous with the betrayal he perpetrated on the young Siraj in Plassey in 1757.  

And so you have — mir jafar (n) once man, now pejorative; most commonly used Indianism for traitor or turncoat.

***

Syed Mohammad Reza Ali Meerza or Chhote Nawab greets me as he hurriedly picks a white kurta from the clothesline and slips it over his head. “This is the building that housed the sentries during Mir Jafar’s time,” says the 79-year-old.

Reza Ali has worked as a state government employee all his life. “My tenure as a permanent employee fell short by a few days and that’s why I do not get any pension, etc.,” he lets slip a crib and thereafter quickly arranges some plastic chairs, and with a wave of his hand and a “tashreef rakhiye” continues his narration.

Pointing to the recently installed statue of Siraj ud-Daulah bang opposite his house he says, “Siraj ke aami khoob bhalobashi… I love Siraj very much. People say Mir Jafar betrayed him. Bhul bole… that’s wrong.”

And yet from what he says, it is clear this is one “wrong” he and his kin have trouble living down even today. Tourists, visitors, researchers, all continue to raise eyebrows when they learn about the family tree. What about locals? He replies, “Oh! People here love me. They say: ‘We do not care about Mir Jafar. We know you are a good human being’.”

He offers a quick tour of the andarmahal. There are pictures and memorabilia aplenty littered all over. Is any of this Mir Jafar’s?

No. Most of the belongings of the nawabs are kept in the museum inside Hazarduari Palace. That collection includes Mir Jafar’s sword, shield and dagger, his footwear, the cutlery he used.

The Hazarduari Palace, Wasif Manzil, and Begum Manzil are all part of the nawab’s estate. Reza Ali offers to take us around. On our way out, we meet Syed Mohammed Abbas Ali Meerza, or Bade Nawab.

Abbas Ali has a persona quite distinct from his younger brother’s. He is of reserved bearing and stands on ceremony. He is quick to inform that, in 2013, he won “the case” in the Supreme Court and since then he and his brother have been recognised as genuine claimants to the title of the Nawab of Murshidabad.

Without the prodding, Abbas Ali starts talking about his ancestor. “Who says Mir Jafar was a traitor? Mir Jafar hails from the Najafi dynasty. We are the direct descendants of Prophet Hazrat Mohammad.”

The Najafi dynasty was born when the Prophet’s grandchildren Hasan and Husyain’s children married. Abbas Ali explains, “Hasan’s son Hassan e Mussanah and Husyain’s daughter Hazrat Fatimah Sughra married. And then the Najafi dynasty was born. We are the descendants of Husyain Najafi. His son Ahmad Najafi was married to Zinnat-un-Nissa, daughter of Shah Jahan’s son Dara Shikoh. Mir Jafar was their son.” He adds, “Mir Jafar was much higher in status to Siraj ud-Daulah, both by bloodline and given that he was the son-in-law of Alivardi Khan, the nawab of Bengal and grandfather of Siraj.”

Says Abbas Ali, “Had he wan-ted to kill Siraj, he wouldn’t have had to go through all the drama of Plassey. He could have got the musnud (throne) from the Mughal emperor himself.”

Dr S.M. Reza Ali Khan is another descendant of Mir Jafar. The Telegraph had interviewed him in January 2020; months later he died. Khan was a professor of history and had done a lot of research on the Battle of Plassey and Mir Jafar. He had said over phone from Hyderabad, “The ignominy attached to this name does not give us a good feeling.”

Dr Khan believed it is not quite right to judge Mir Jafar by cutting him away from the age he belonged to, the environment and those circumstances. He had said, “It was the 18th century and there was no concept of nationalism. And even if there was, let me tell you Siraj was not a great nationalist either. Besides, he had killed his own brother, his uncle and even the husband of Alivardi Khan’s eldest daughter, Ghaseti Begum, to get the musnud.”

Through the lockdown Dr Khan would call many a time with this reference and that reference from history texts. He spoke about the Sheths of Murshidabad, a very powerful community in the 18th century. They did business with French and British traders. Jagat Sheth Mehtab Chand, one of the most prominent businessmen of Murshidabad, used to lend money to the British at a steep interest. Dr Khan had said, “When Siraj declared the British as his enemy, Mehtab Chand could not have been very pleased. His business would have been hampered.” It seems a fair number of Sheths had stood up against Siraj.

Abbas Ali too spoke about Siraj’s unpopularity. Siraj had planned to kidnap the daughter of Rani Bhabani, the queen of Nator. “This was not well received by the Hindu nobility… Siraj had insulted Mir Jafar once in the durbar by having his beard shaved off.”

Octogenarian Baquir Ali Meerza is yet another descendant; he too is based in Lalbagh, but in Kella Nizamat. He says, “It is true we have to suffer the ire of people because the history books say Mir Jafar did not fight in the Battle of Plassey. But these books do not say why he did not fight.”

In The Black Hole of Empire, Partha Chatterjee cites from the Fort William Select Committee Proceedings of May 1, 1757. It reads, “The Committee then took into consideration, whether they could (consistently with the Peace made with the Nabob) concur in the measures proposed by Meer Jaffir of taking the Government from Souragud Dowla, and setting himself up…” Sometime end-June, the British won Plassey. In the same book, Chatterjee writes, “The battle was over by the fall of dusk. The next day, Clive wrote to Mir Jafar: ‘I congratulate you on the victory, which is yours not mine…’”

Baquir Ali’s version differs. He says, “Mir Jafar’s tent was closest to the British forces. The British had come to fight the French, not Siraj ud-Daulah. Armed with only 2,000 soldiers, they came to Plassey and found that Siraj was waiting there with an army of 20,000. The French army stood in front of Siraj’s camp. Mir Jafar’s camp was far away.”

According to him, the British approached Mir Jafar and asked him to mediate with the nawab. Mir Jafar sent a messenger to Siraj but it would have taken a day to cover the distance. In the meantime, the French army opened fire. The British mistook it as Siraj’s rejection of their proposal and retaliated. “Mir Jafar was confused and did not know what to do… What happened at the battlefield of Plassey is a case of misunderstanding and not betrayal,” says Baquir Ali.

The Telegraph asked Abu Taher Khan, the Trinamul MP from Murshidabad, his views on Mir Jafar. A guarded Khan replied, “In this atmosphere it is best I don’t comment on Mir Jafar… But it was because of Mir Jafar that our country lost its independence. Many people say, ‘These people come from the land of Mir Jafar’. Anyone can understand in what context it is being said.”  

Grave Truths : Mir Jafar’s tomb in Murshidabad / Picture by Moumita Chaudhuri

On my way back from Murshidabad, I make two more stops — Mir Jafar’s palace and his tomb. As it turns out, there is no trace of the palace, only remains of what used to be its gates. The place is still referred to as nimakharam deuri or traitor’s gate. The Jafarganj cemetery that houses the tomb is also closed that day. The auto-rickshaw driver who has driven me around says, “Earlier it was always open, but then tourists would come and spit on it, kick it. That is when the local administration had it walled; a gate was installed.”

Locked too behind that gate are the graves of Heera and Panna, actors of the era’s dubious games of estate and empire. Falcons both, Heera and Panna flew spying sorties for the house of Mir Jafar — to the Siraj camp or, some say, to the British battlements, who knows? They were both killed in the line of duty, shot out of the skies — some say by Siraj’s marksmen, others that it was actually the British, who knows? Both were dear enough to be accorded resting places at the back of where Mir Jafar lies — to that there is sacrophagal evidence. The rest is contrary apocrypha, pick your version. That’s often the case with history too, narratives compete, interpretations duel.

I remembered what Abbas Ali had told me, “The British wrote our history. What I don’t understand is why the nawabs after Mir Jafar did not take it upon themselves to put out their version. If only…,” his voice had trailed off.Bloodline

Mir Jafar had three wives

Shahkhanum Begum

Offspring:

Fatima Begum and Mir Miran

Mir’s son is Murtaza Khan

Murtaza’s son is Mustafa Khan

Mustafa’s son is Asadullah Khan

Asadullah’s son is Azam Ali Khan

Azam’s son is Faiyaz Ali Khan

Faiyaz’s son is Jafar Ali Khan

Jafar’s son is *Dr S.M. Reza Ali Khan

Munni Begum

Offspring:

Nazam ud-Daulah

Saif ud-Daulah

Both died young

Babbo Begum

Offspring:

Mubarak ud-Daulah

Mubarak’s son is Babar Jung

Babar Jung had two sons, Ali Jaj and Wala Jah

Wala Jah’s son is Humayun Jah

Humayun’s son is Firadun Jah

Firadun’s son is Hassan Ali Meerza

Hassan Ali’s son is Wasif Ali Meerza

Wasif Ali’s daughter, Sahibzadi Hasmat-un-Nissa, married Sadiq  Ali Meerza

Sahibzadi’s sons are

*Syed Mohammed Abbas Ali Meerza and

*Syed Reza Ali Meerza

*Descendants quoted in the story

source: http://www.telegraphindia.com / The Telegraph Online / Home> Big Story / by Moumita Chaudhuri / January 17th, 2021