Interplay
of Autocracy, Nationalism and Communism
In
Hyderabad State under the Last Nizam – An Overview
(Paper presented in
the World Meet on Telugu History and Culture, held at British Library, London,
on 14-15 July 2012)
----Sudershan
Rao Yellapragada[1]
---
Hema Botlagudur[2]
Twentieth
Century heralded with an unprecedented national upsurge in both Indias –Native
and British—in varying degrees. Rulers of Native India enjoyed autonomy in
internal administration. Though their number is staggering, the status of about
a score of them was in a way comparable to the Princes of Europe. Most of these
native princes enjoyed unquestioned authority and influence over their subjects
irrespective of their personal religion.[3]
The Hyderabad State was one among such premier States.
Its
peculiarity was that the ruler was a Muslim and his subjects were mostly Hindu.
May be, Bhopal stood next to it in status, territory and population among the Muslim
minority princely states ruled by Muslim rulers. Another peculiarity of the Asaf
Jahs was that they were content with a subordinate title, the Nizam-ul-Mulk[4],
right from the founding of the Hyderabad State in 1724 to its joining Indian
Union in 1948 though they were virtually independent all through. They owed nominal allegiance to the Mughal
Emperor till 1857 and later turned into a subservient ‘faithful ally’ of the
British. Islamic Theocracy[5]
and Feudalism were the two main pillars on which Nizam’s ‘autocracy’ stood.
Based on such a stable and strong support, it was believed then that the
Nizam’s rule would never end. Even
after Indian independence was declared, the Nizam was still given to understand
by his ‘advisors’ that the withdrawal of the British hegemony unequivocally
meant his sovereignty which he strongly cherished[6].
What made the Nizam ignore the ringing bells of impending destiny resulting in
dissolution of his State? How did these
two supporting pillars become brittle? What strategies did Nationalism adopt to
unnerve the Islamic Theocracy which in course of time gave way to Muslim communalism
and how could Communism encounter the Feudalism to hasten the demolition of the
autocratic State in the last phase of the Nizam’s rule? However, these
questions are asked many a time by the lay and specialists. These questions are
investigated and answered in their own perspectives. Scores of biographies of
freedom fighters and free-lance writings[7]
have been published in the post-independent era. Hundreds of research papers
and theses were done by the research scholars in History and other allied
disciplines during these sixty years of independence[8].
Most of these works have been written in the same heat and spirit of the
national struggle outliving their need and purpose. Now that the exigencies and
priorities of the freedom struggle do not exist anymore, this may facilitate a
dispassionate revisit to the history of the last few decades of the Nizam’s
rule. It may turn out to be a useful exercise to understand the impact of the
then political developments and techniques of mass mobilization on the imaging
of the last Nizam as an autocrat[9].
I
After
the death of Aurangzeb, the wars of succession weakened the once mighty Empire.
The Nizam-ul-Mulk also had a trying time due to unstable political situation in
the empire. He was fleeing to Deccan in 1723, on the plea ‘for a change of
air’, after losing confidence of the Emperor, Muhammad Shah. But he had to
confront with his own Deputy, Mubariz Khan, who declared himself Viceroy of
Deccan. Nizam defeated Mubariz at Shakar Kheda, near Aurangabad, with the help of Peshwa Baji Rao I. Emperor
Muhammad Shah had no alternative but to confirm him to Deccan Viceroyalty with
the title, ‘Asaf Jah’[10].
Virtually, Nizam was independent of the Central authority without any
obligations what-so-ever to the Center. Nizam was ruthless in establishing his
authority over the region. His deputies were more ruthless in putting down any
insurgency. One such deputy, Rustum Khan created a ‘reign of terror’ in
bringing the coastal belt under the Nizam’s control. He had no scruples. Ballads
were sung in the villages condemning his atrocities.[11]
The
first Nizam also kept the foreign companies at a distance. He kept the English
and the French guessing whom he favoured most – a policy he deliberately
adopted. It was almost impossible for them to have an audience even with his
deputies to represent their grievances. They had to befriend the Nizam’s
officials by offering them rich gifts and helping them in their private trade.[12]
But the death of Asaf Jah I in 1748 threw the entire Deccan in jeopardy. The
French and the English intervened as ‘auxiliaries’ in the wars of succession at
Arcot and Hyderabad and soon emerged as ‘principals’. Finally, Nizam Ali Khan
could firmly seat himself on the throne as Asaf Jah II in 1761. During his long
rule spanning over four decades, Hyderabad had significant strides towards
losing its suzerainty to the English. Nizam Ali Khan was the first among Indian
princes to sign Subsidiary Alliance with the English in 1800 for his fears towards
Marathas and Mysore. He not only lost his external sovereignty, but even his
internal suzerainty was impaired to a great extent by allowing subsidiary force
to stay in his capital. The maintenance of subsidiary force proved itself a
great drain on the economy of the State.[13]
Nizam
Ali Khan was succeeded by Sikandar Jah in 1803. During his rule the process of
demilitarization of Hyderabad had started as a result of the Subsidiary Alliance.
The Nizam was forced to accede permanently Northern Sarkars (the present
coastal region from Srikakulam to Krishna districts) which were already leased
out to the English in 1768 by him expecting military assistance from the
English against Marathas. The Rayalseema districts were also ceded to the
English for payment of dues on account of subsidiary forces.[14]
Thus, Hyderabad was reduced into a land-locked country surrounded by British
India.[15]
Nasir-ud-Daula
Aaf Jah IV (1829-1857) inherited a truncated State with no considerable sources
of revenue. The country was impoverished. Nizam’s officials played havoc in
countryside to fleece the already poor peasants. The life of common man became
deplorable and the State was going from bad to worse in all respects. Dacoities,
robberies and unsocial activities became the order of the day. Many riots and
conspiracies took place. The jagirdars,
zamindars, high officials and rich landlords confined themselves to the city of
Hyderabad indulging in leisure-sport ignoring their responsibilities and
commitment to their fiefs.[16]
Summing up Nasir-ud-Daula’s times, Rajendra Prasad writes “British hegemony over Hyderabad increased
with each passing day (and) the dependency of the Nizam increased
correspondingly”.[17]
Afzal-ud-Daula
took the reins as Nizam IV in May 1857 when the reports were coming in about
the out-break of Sepoys against the British rule. The new Nizam heralded a new
era in Hyderabad under the leadership and able administration of Salar Jung I.
Hyderabad also felt the tremors of Great Revolt against the British. But soon
it settled down to normalcy. The Nizam
was decorated with ‘Star of India’ which meant, ‘Our Faithful Ally’.[18]
Afzal-ud-Daula paid least attention to the aspects of public administration.
The chief officials of the State were either recommended or thrust upon the
Nizam for appointment by the British[19].
New breed of English educated Muslims were invited to occupy important
positions in the State administration from outside Hyderabad. This policy
invited the wrath of the local aristocracy. The issue of ‘Mulki and Non-Mulki’
came up to the fore.[20]
The administration and power was going into the hands of bureaucracy. While the
Nizams were mostly confining to the palace-life, the administrative control was
concentrated in the Resident.
After
the death of Afzal-ud-Daula in 1869, a boy of less than 3 years of age, Mir
Mahaboob Ali Khan became Nizam VI. He was placed under the Regency of Salar
Jung I. During the long reign of Mahaboob, after Salar Jung I, Mir Laiq Ali
(1883-1887), Sir Asman Jah (1887-1893), Sir Viqar-ul-Umra (1893-1902) and
Maharaja Kishen Pershad (1902-1911) were the de-facto heads of the State under the directions of the English and
wielded greater influence in the Court. The reforms of late 19th and
early 20th centuries in Hyderabad could go to their credit. Mahaboob
with his fun and frivolities endeared the nobles who were lucky to have direct
access to his audience. But, he was ‘marinated in alcohol’ and his feeble attempts
to take the reins into his hands were never successful. He died in 1911. The
State was passed on to Mir Osman Ali Khan, the last ruler.
The
brief sketch of political history of the Hyderabad under the six Nizams would
reveal how once most powerful autocratic rule of the Asaf Jahs during the first
Nizam was reduced to a degenerated aristocracy by the close of 19th
century. It is a long saga of unmaking of a despotic dynasty rule resulting in
anarchy towards its closing years. The last ruler has seen dismantling of his
State. His efforts to correct the situation by playing himself into the hands
of Islamic communal forces met with disastrous consequences. The political
scene in the first half of the 20th century in Hyderabad State was
dominated by Nationalist struggles and armed revolt of the Communists. What
were the strategies of the newly emerging forces to counter the State under
given circumstances?
II
There
is a popular legend that the rise and fall of the Aaf Jahs were pre-determined.
An unknown fakir predicted that the
dynasty would rule for only seven generations.[21]
Whether one believes it or not, it came out to be true. The seventh Nizam still
dreamt of an independent Muslim State in the middle of the Deccan even after
India’s independence.[22]
He was like an innocent school boy of Hyderabad of his times who had to wish
for ‘eternity’ of the Nizam’s Government in his daily prayer in Urdu.[23]
Both Mahboob and Osman ruled for about 80 years in succession. They were well
exposed to the Western knowledge and life-style. Their attempts to bring the
benefits of modern civilization and western education were only limited to a
few aristocratic families living in Hyderabad. Their efforts in bringing some
social reforms like Sati in the Hindu
society were also confined to paper[24].
They, however, could not think of any social reforms for the Muslim community.
For this study, we take one or two reforms under the last Nizams that had
greater impact on the rise of social consciousness among the people.
With
the coming of non-Mulki western educated
Muslims occupying high administrative positions including the office of
Prime Minister, Hyderabad was drawn on to the threshold of modernity. Reforming
Education system in the State was given a serious thought. The replacement of
Persian by Urdu as State language in the second half of 19th century
was a major break-through during the Premiership of Salar Jung II. This measure
removed the artificial atmosphere
created by the continuance of Persian as Court language even when it had ceased
to be so in the other parts of India.[25]
Persian was also not a common man’s language. This was followed by introduction
of Urdu as medium of instruction in Government schools after much discussion
over the issue of what should be the medium, Urdu or English. This reform benefitted
Muslim community only. Those who were educated through Urdu could take
government employment. But Hyderabad was a multi-lingual State. Telugu,
Kannada, Marathi and Urdu were spoken by large numbers of population. While the
first three languages are commonly spoken by the people of three distinct
regions of the State, Urdu speaking people were spread all over the State.
Except Urdu, the people who spoke the other three languages as their mother
tongues belonged largely to Hindu faith. Those who spoke Urdu as their mother
tongue were invariably Muslims. The Government had deliberately ignored the
Hindus and their languages. On the other hand, the Government pleaded with Sir
Syed Ahmed, mentor of western educated Muslims in India, who favoured English
medium, that the education should be imparted in peoples’ mother tongue. But
the same thing was denied to the majority of Nizam’s subjects. Non-Muslims had
to educate their children in private and unorganized street schools. The
Government was also refusing to grant scholarships to those students who had
not learnt Urdu/Persian to go for higher education abroad.[26]
Asman
Jah who succeeded Salarjung II had introduced Compulsory Education Scheme for
the children of Jagirdars and Inamdars. The measure, in a way, was aimed at
thrusting Urdu education on other religious community. He warned if these
landlords failed to send their children to the Government School meant for
them, they would be penalized. But the scheme failed.
Introduction
of Urdu education was pursued with a religious fervor. The technical education,
sciences, engineering and medicine were taught through Urdu. Most of the
technical books were readily translated and higher education was streamlined.
Nizam Osman Ali also founded University after his name at Hyderabad with Urdu
as medium of instruction in 1918. Spread of Urdu education created a class of
its own among native Muslims who were anti-English and also anti-Congress.
The
modern education is global in its character and universal in its application.
It needs an international language for reaching the entire humanity and to
develop through research. For those who are trained in regional languages would
have lesser scope to share the global platform. This was a folly of the Nizam’s
Government. The new Urdu educated class were confined to their own State. Thus
Urdu education led the beneficiaries to take a U-turn further entrenching them
in medievalism. The modern education choosing Urdu as medium failed to be an
effective tool for moving the generation forward towards a positive social
change. Islam and Urdu have become synonymous. Promotion of Urdu as official language
and also as medium of instruction for all, irrespective of their
mother-tongues, through the Government schools had a great negative impact on
the society.
The
emerging Press in Urdu, vernaculars and English in the last two decades of the
19th century adopted different trends.[27]
Though their circulations were limited, the educated section of the population
was swayed by the waves created by these papers and periodicals. The Urdu press
like Hazar Dastan which was receiving
annual subsidy from the Government was critical of the English. Generally the
Urdu Press was critical of the British and Indian National Congress barring one
or two in the later times. The English papers which came up later, like the Pioneer,
The Hyderabad Record, The Deccan Times were not only pro-Congress and
anti-British but also critical of Nizam’s administration.[28]
In 1891, the Government issued a circular imposing several restrictions on the
newspapers. Most of the papers including some Urdu papers like Shoukat-ul-Islam who refused to sign an
agreement with the Government were closed.
Many
more stringent gastis (government
orders) were promulgated when the
political movement took momentum during the last decades of the Nizam’s rule. Entertaining
a fond hope of independent Hyderabad under the Asaf Jahi dynasty, the Nizam VII
did not even tolerate M A Jinnah who was critical of dynastic rule[29]
in the Native States – Muslim or Hindu. The Nizam took serious objection to
Jinnah’s speech in Hyderabad on ‘India Tomorrow’ in 1919 and ordered that he
should not enter Nizam’s Dominions in future without obtaining permission.[30]
The Congress and the Muslim League
leaders alike from British India were unwelcome in Hyderabad.
Like-wise,
Telugu was identified with Hinduism. Any literary activity in Telugu was viewed
with suspicion by the State as anti-Nizam. As Jinnah identified Gandhi as the
leader of Hindus and the Indian National Congress as a Hindu organization[31],
the Nizam’s administration also identified any Congress program as Hindu and
anti-Nizam. More restrictions were imposed on Hindus and their education
through non-Urdu languages. So the Hindus had to adopt programs like Library
movement and festivals like Ganesh Utsav to mobilize masses for political
change. So, all the nationalist programs in Hyderabad were wearing literary and
cultural masks[32].
The Hyderabad Political Conferences were held outside Nizam’s Dominions at
places like Kakinada (1923), Bombay (1926), Poona (1928), Akola (1931). The
Andhra Maha Sabha spearheaded the mask-political program to prepare the people
of Hyderabad for political agitation against Nizam for a responsible
Government.
As
the Hindus were preparing for a collective bargain for democratic governance, Muslims on the other
hand started their own organization, Ittehad-ul-Muslimeen in 1927 under the
leadership of Nawab Sardar Yar Jang. The organization become more effective and
active under Bahadur Yar Jung who became its President in 1939. With a body of
Muslim volunteers, Razakars, the party became a militant organization acquiring
complete control over the State administration. The Hyderabad State Congress
was banned in 1939 even before it was born. The Razakars opposed the Congress
as it was anti-Nizam and its members were mostly Hindu. Thus Hyderabad State
Congress was identified as a party of Hindus and the freedom struggle in
Hyderabad attained communal character.
The
atrocities of the Razakars were inexplicable. They dreamt of an independent
Islamic State under the Nizam by forcing his Hindu subjects to convert to Islam
dangling swords on their necks. They adopted the same strategy with which the
First Nizam brought the entire State under his command with an iron hand
through ‘State terrorism’ with the help of his officials like Rustum Khan. But
now the last Nizam did not realize that the times had changed. He had no
control over those who created terror in his State in the name of Islam. The
‘Islamic Terrorism’ was unleashed on innocent masses of other religious
communities, claiming that whatever was done was for the sake of Islam and the
Nizam. The Nizam simply walked into the prison of his own making, finally
leading to sign the letter of his own abdication prepared by the ‘other side’. While
the reign of Islamic terror was going on unchecked, there was another armed
struggle brewing in.
III
Another
major pillar of strength of the Nizam’s autocracy was a class of men who served
him in administration and army as chief officials, zamindars, deshpandeys,
deshmukhs, jagirdars etc who were generally known as doras. With their gadis (fortresses) and hench-men, they enjoyed
unquestionable position in the rural Hyderabad. Asaf Jah I, soon after he
founded Hyderabad, created a class of Nobles, both Muslims and Hindus.
Generally he granted jagirs to
Muslims to maintain army and serve him when he needed while Hindus were employed
to serve in the civil administration. Most of these jagirs were hereditary but every successor should receive a fresh sanad from the Nizam conferring the jagir or title. Nizam Ali Khan Asaf Jah II granted new forces to the existing jagirdars and granted paigah estates.[33] This class of nobles called feudal
lords in western parlance owed personal allegiance to the Nizam. As Nizam’s
authority was depleting as he became more and more subservient to the British,
these nobles were transformed into mere land-lords. The State was no more
dependent on their military or administrative support since the English took
charge of the defence and controlled the civil administration through its own
nominees. These nobles have retired to city of Hyderabad, built beautiful
mansions and lived a luxurious life. The rural folk were fleeced and impoverished.
To make a long story short, the nobility lost all its teeth by the times of the
last Nizam. Darbaar-e-Durbaar, a
contemporary Urdu book, “gives an authentic picture of the degenerate life led
by the royalty and nobility in a feudal system. It also shows how divorced that
life was from the common people. Wine, women and song were the preoccupation of
those people whom the accident of birth had provided a golden spoon at the
start of their life.”[34]
There were only two classes of people –the nobility and the slavish poor-
existed in Hyderabad. There was an unbridgeable gap between these two classes
of people. The poor were dependent on their masters for their living without
any voice to express their grievances. They lived in penury and thought that they
owed their lives to their master. It was seemingly an unending road for feudal
oppression. At this juncture, the Prime Ministers nominated by the British
brought in many changes in the economic edifice of Hyderabad that was till then
a mere feudal State.[35]
The introduction of modern industry,
mining, railways etc imported foreign machinery, capital and also work-force
both skilled and unskilled from British India into Hyderabad. This created a
new class of organized working class concentrated in modern industrial belts,
like Warangal, Nizamabad, Hyderabad, Singareni, Kothgudem and also in townships
connected by railways. A new class emerged in Hyderabad. They were not
traditionally tied up with the Nizam’s feudalism. They came from different
parts of British India. They were already exposed to new western political
ideologies like democracy and communism. Till then, the communist activists or
any other outsider had no access to rural Hyderabad because of the people’s
ignorance and feudal oppression. Now, with the new working folk from outside
the State entering rural Hyderabad to work in Industries and mines, the entry
of outside political activists became possible. They could bank upon sympathetic
supporters to carry on their mission against landlordism in Telangana.
The Razakars’ attacks on one side and
the communists’ armed attacks on other side forced the rural rich flee for
their lives to British India. In the last decade of Nizam’s rule, it is said
that Hyderabad was under the control of two governments, Razakars ruled during
day-times (din ka sarkar) and the
communists during nights (raat ka sarkar).
The contemporary literature describes various sagas of oppressions and
protests.[36] The communist movement rang death-bell to
Nizam’s feudalism. The anarchy was created by the both armed groups, Razakars
and communists. The Indian Government had scuttled the hopes of the Nizam for
an independent State. The Nizam had to bow down before the Indian army which is
moderately termed as ‘Police Action’ in 1948. Indian Army suppressed both the
Razakars and the communists soon after.
IV
Asaf
Jahs ruled Hyderabad for seven generations spanning over two and a quarter
century. The First Nizam’s autocracy was based on ‘State Terrorism’ legitimized
by ‘Islamic Theocracy’ and supported by ‘Feudalism’. The State system appeared
so stable that Nizam’s authority and rule seemed to be permanent. But the
successors of the first Nizam lost their independence and suzerainty –internal
and external- to the English gradually. Still the idea of ‘eternity’ was
ringing in the ears of the Nizams. Once being a mighty power in Deccan, the
fall of Hyderabad unceremoniously makes in interesting study.
Education
as such is a ‘change engine’ (coining in computer terminology). Obviously, Western
education consisting of modern science and technology transformed Medieval
Europe to Modernity. Language is a tool used as medium to spread education to
get the desired results. Education depending on its nature, use and content
needs a right type of medium to dispense its knowledge. Nizam’s Government used
Urdu as medium to impart western education instead of English. This proved to
be a retrograde step. The newly educated youth were still entrenched in
medievalism. The Urdu language, being the mother tongue of Muslims, became synonymous
to Islam. The new class of Razakars resorted to ‘Islamic Terrorism’ harping on
the idea of ‘eternity’ of Islamic State. But, they ignored the change in the times.
The present ‘Islamic Terrorism’ could be easily tackled by the modern State.
Further, Urdu education led to communal division on linguistic basis as the
languages were identified with religious communities. Thus, National movement
in Hyderabad was given communal overtones and treated as Hindu uprising against
the Muslim Nizam.
The
newly introduced modern industry based on modern science and technology brought
with it a new class of organized workers from British India who were exposed to
the western political ideas. The entire rural Hyderabad was an impregnable
‘citadel’ of medieval feudalism. An outsider could not penetrate into this
‘citadel’. The modern industry created a new organized working class
independent of Hyderabad feudal controls. This new class formed the base for
the political activists of various shades to develop contacts in rural
Hyderabad. Communists encouraging Trade Unionism in labor-belts rose to the
status of conducting armed attacks against the land-lords. The seemingly
never-to-be-broken ‘citadel’ gave in cracks. The feudal structure which had
outlived its purpose was already brittle. It was only waiting for a strong wind
to blow it out.
The
two strong pillars of Nizam’s Autocracy, the ‘Islamic Theocracy’ and
‘Feudalism’ fell under the pressure of modern education and Technology. The
Nizam’s State which was wished to be surviving for ever with the help of these
two pillars had finally crumbled. In seven generations, Nizam’s autocracy was
transformed into degenerated aristocracy. The last Nizam was too feeble to
offer any resistance to Indian Army to enter the capital city of Hyderabad. He
was nomore an autocrat. The long saga of the Nizams reminds us that nothing
stays permanently however strong or stable and wished or prayed. Because, as
Satguru Sivananda Murty garu[37]
says aptly, “It is in the nature of the Nature itself that does not allow
anything to stay forever in this world”.
[1] Prof of History (Rtd) and former
Dean, Faculty of Social Sciences, Kakatiya
University, Warangal 506009;
‘Sivananda’ #5-11-643, Vidyaranyapuri, Hanamkonda, 506009, India; ysudershanrao@gmail.com .
[2] Research scholar, #7, Aragon Dr,
Leamington Spa, Warwick, CV34 6LR, UK (hemayellapragada@yahoo.co.uk)
[3] This is very evident from works of
historians like Barbara Ramusack, India's Princely States: People, Princes and
Colonialism. Cambridge: Cambridge university press. 2004; Ian Copland, Princes of India in the endgame of empire,
1917-1947 . Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1997; Ian Copland, State, community and neighbourhood in
princely North India, c.1900-1950. Cambridge: Palgrave Mcmillan, 2005; Waltraud Ernst, Biswamoy Pati (Ed), India's Princely States: People, Princes and Colonialism. New York:
Routledge, 2007.
[4] Chin Qilich Khan,
who later founded Hyderabad State, was awarded the title of ‘Nizam-ul-Mulk,
Fath-e-Jung’ and he was also made Viceroy of Deccan by Mughal Emperor, Farukh
Siyar, in 1712. Sherwani & P M Joshi, History
of Medieval Deccan, Vol I, 1973, p.614.
[5] Asaf Jah I declared in his
testament that his successors should rule Hyderabad according to Sunna (the sayings and practices of
Prophet) and advised his successors to pay nominal allegiance to the Mughal Emperor.
Yusuf
Hussain Khan, Nizam-ul-Mulk Asaf Jah I, Mangalore,
1936. pp 184-220.
[6] “The Nizam was bent upon
independence. Even more so were…………Muslims called the Ittehad-ul-Muslameens”
writes Sir Mirza Ismail, a liberal Prime Minister of Hyderabad in the most
troubled period of the Hyderabad State, from Aug 1946 to June 1947. N Ramesan (Ed), The Freedom Struggle in Hyderabad, Vol IV, Hyderabad,1966, p.276.
[7] For example, one may refer to this
recent analytical study of the Telangana region, its people and their life
during the most troubled period of anarchy towards the closing years of Nizam’s
rule based on about 41 autobiographies of socio-political activists of the
times. G B Srinivasa Murthy, Atma Kathallo
Anati Telangana, (Telugu) Nizamabad, 2008
[8] For a glance, see Omar Khalidi’s Hyderabad State under the Nizams 1724-1048:
A Bibliography of Monographic and Periodical Literature, Hyderabad, 1985.
[9] Most of the Telugu literature which
came during the last phase of freedom struggle in Hyderabad State and research
studies in the post independence invariably addressed the Nizam as an autocrat.
The titles of doctoral theses also
suggest the same. For example, see doctoral thesis of Lucien D Benichou: From Autocracy to Integration: Political
Developments in Hyderabad State, 198-48, Hyderabad, 2000. Please see for
more details of dissertations and academic studies with an exhaustive note on
historical sources of the period: V K Bawa, The
Last Nizam, Hyderabad, 2010.
[10] Maasir-ul-Umara,
Vol II, Cf: Sarojini Regani, Nizam-British Relations 1724-1857, Secunderabad,
1963. P 1.
[11] Rustum Khan became notorious by
constructing kulla-minars (pyramidal
structures with the heads of all adherents of the rebelling zamindars in important
towns, on the lines of Nadir Shah, which were hitherto unknown in Deccan.
Meckenzie’s Kaifiyads: Mogiliturru, Nuzividu, Peddapuram, Samarlakota etc.
V R Jagapati Varma: Peddapura Samsthana Charitramu, (Telugu) pp 70-75.
James
Grant: Political Survey of the Northern Sarkars, Fifth Report of the Select Committee on the Affairs of the East India
Company, Vol III, Appendix 13, p.3-4.
[12] For details: Y Sudershan Rao, Andhra Between the Empires, Hanamkonda,1991.
[13] Sarojini Regani, op.cit p.185.
[14] Chandulal, who served as Peshkar to
the Nizam III and also a favourite of the British raised heavy loans for the
State to pay for the maintenance of subsidiary force. He never used to repay
the debt. To those who dared to ask him, he used to have a ready reply, “tomorrow”.
Of course that ‘tomorrow’ never came. This ‘tomorrow’ was popular as,
‘Chandulal ka kal’ or Chandulal’s
‘tomorrow’.
V K
Bawa, op.cit., p. 29.
[15] Y Sudershan Rao, op.cit, p. iv.
[16] For vivid description of the times,
see: Rajendra Prasad, The Asif Jahs of
Hyderabad, New Delhi, 1984.
[17] Rajendra Prasad, op.cit, p 68.
[18] The investiture ceremony was a
fiasco. The Nizam disregarded the whole affair. But the British showed
restraint and ignored it in view of the Great Revolt which roused the aspirations
of many Indian Princes.
[19] When Asaf-ud-Daula thought of
dispensing with Salar Jung I, he was strongly reprimanded by the Viceroy that
the British Government might be forced
to interpose its authority in a manner that could not but be distasteful to
him. By 1857, the Nizams ‘had lost even the will to resist or to assist any
enterprise which was aimed at defying the British authority in India’.
R C
Mazumdar (Ed.) The History and Culture of the Indian People, Vol
IX, Bombay, 1970.
[20] Newly emerging press took the issue
further with series of informative and critical articles in their newspapers. The Hyderabad Record had fought
dauntlessly for the cause for over four years till its end. K Sajan Lal, “The
Hyderabad Record” in Journal of Deccan
History and Culture, July 1956, p 85; cf
N Ramesan, op cit, p.38.
[21] Rajendra Prasad has written on the
rise and fall of Asaf Jahs of Hyderabad. The lucid narrative is also embedded
with literary flavour. He shows how each Nizam fell as a ‘loaf of bread one
after the other from the basket’ signaling the end of the dynasty with the
seventh.
[22] Ravi Narayana Reddy, Reminiscences and Experiences, Heroic
Telangana, New Delhi, 1973, p 48.
[23] (Translated from Urdu)
“Till
Eternity, god keep thy kingdom,
May
thou preserved be, Osman,
In His
wondrous grace
As
thou art the pride of Royalty
So may
thy reign glorious be..”
Rajendra
Prasad. op.cit. ( Preface)
[24] The custom of Sati or burning of Hindu widow along with her dead husband was
prohibited by Mir Mahaboob Ali in 1876.
J
Ramanaiah, History and Culture of Karimnagar District (AP),Jagtial,
2008, p.139.
[25] N Ramesan op.cit, Vol III, p 2.
[26] Ibid,
pp 18-20.
[27] Aftab-i-Deccan
was considered the first Urdu periodical. In 1901, there were 14
periodicals or newspapers out of which 12 were in Urdu and 2 in Marathi. Most
of these papers had very short lives.
[28] Idem,
pp 27-36.
[29] Jinnah “envisioned … a modern
democratic state governed by the rule of law”
A G
Noorani, “Jinnah’s Concept of Pakistan”, in Front
Line, June 2012.
[30] Ibid,
Vol IV, pp 8-14.
[32] Telugu consciousness had grown in
Telangana. In 1921, ‘Nizam Rashtra Jana Sangham’ was formed to work for the
progress of the Andhras. Kannadigas and Maharashtrians of the respective
lingual regions of the State already had their own associations. A central
organization was mooted and founded in 1924 to coordinate all such
organisations in the name of Andhra Jana Kendra Sangham. The objectives of this
masked political organsiation were: to establish libraries and reading rooms,
to help and encourage students, to honour scholars, to collect manuscripts and
to conduct historical research, to spread knowledge through hand-bills,
book-lets and public speeches, to propagate Telugu, to encourage fine arts and
physical culture and to help the helpless.
N
Ramesan, op.cit pp 43-46.
[33] Sajida Adeeb, Paigah “Nobility in the Asaf Jahi period”, in V Kishan Rao & A
Satyanarayana (Eds), A Thousand Laurels –
Dr Sadiq Naqvi, Hyderabad, Vol II, 2005. P 825.
[34] Narendra Luther, Hyderabad, New Delhi, 2006, p 212.
[35] See, A R Desai (Ed), Social Background of Indian Nationalism, Bombay, 1966.
[36] Numerous works are published on the
last days of Nizam’s rule in Urdu, Telugu and English by the political
activists, writers, academics etc.
[37] The authors are indebted to Him for
his love and grace.
