Tag Archives: Turrebaz Khan

Mubarez-ud-Daulah’s era: Of passion, rebellion and conspiracy

Community Involvement / Social Issues, Leaders, World Opinion, , , , , , ,

Hyderabad, TELANGANA (formerly ANDHRA PRADESH ) :

A view of Golconda Fort in Hyderabad Photo: G Ramakrishna
A view of Golconda Fort in Hyderabad Photo: G Ramakrishna

The Wahabi Conspiracy of prince Mubarez-ud-Daulah is a forgotten chapter in Hyderabad history

While the attack of Turrebaz Khan on the British Residency in Hyderabad during the 1857 Revolt is well documented in the pages of Hyderabad’s history, a similar bold revolt planned to overthrow the British by Prince Mubarez-ud-Daulah, the younger brother of the Nizam, though foiled in the last moment, is hardly remembered.

The Wahabi conspiracy in Hyderabad was a serious secret movement aimed against the English around 1838. Prince Mubarez-ud-Daulah had the support of Rasool Khan, the Nawab of Kurnool, who like Mubarez also hated the presence of the British. But as ill-luck would have it, before they could strike, the British were able to unearth the conspiracy through their intelligence agencies and the entire plans, went awry. Mubarez was imprisoned till death and Rasool Khan was captured, exiled and his territory, confiscated. However, the well-planned attempt they made served as an inspiration at a time when the very idea to oppose the British authority was in a nascent stage in these parts of the country.

Wahabi Movement was a 17th century reform movement that began in Persia with a view to see the basic tenets of Islam were followed strictly and with sincerity. The movement was started by one Wahab in the 18th century and therefore it was named after him. Wahabi movement was popularised in India by the Islamic religious leader, Shahwaliullah. Wahabis opposed the British presence in India and their slogan was: “Jan ko denge- vathan ko bachayenge” (Let us sacrifice our lives; but safeguard our motherland”).

Role of Mubarez-ud-Doulah

MubarezUdDaulanMPOs10jun2017

Mubarez–ud–Doulah, the Hyderabadi prince was one of the first in south India to come under the influence of the Wahabi movement. Mubarez, born in 1800, was the second son of Sikander Jah, the Nizam of Hyderabad (1803-1829). As Mubarez had greater access to wealth and also had a private army of more than a lakh, he could devote all his time and resources for the Wahabi movement in Deccan.

From his childhood, Mubarez disliked the presence of the British in Hyderabad. As a result he was imprisoned for nearly five years from 1815 by his father, Sikander Jah at the behest of the British. Mubarez was incarcerated once again, this time during the period of his brother, Nasir-ud-Doulah (1829-57). In 1830, Mubarez collected a large army of Arabs and Afghans and started an insurrection against the British. Then a contingent of British troops under Col. Stewart marched against Mubarez and arrested him. The prince was sent to the fort of Golconda and imprisoned for several months in 1830.

The hatred of Mubarez-ud-Daulah towards the British, even as an young boy was such that once his father Sikandar Jah wanted a British sentry to be posted as a guard at his palace. But the young Prince replied that he would prefer to die rather than to see a British guard at his palace gate.

Alliance with Nawab of Kurnool

Rasool Khan the Nawab of Kurnool too was attracted towards the Wahabi movement. When Mubarez came to know of Rasool Khan’s opposition to the British, he sent his men to strike a secret alliance with the Nawab of Kurnool. Rasool Khan agreed to establish a secret arsenal to manufacture arms and ammunition that was needed for any concerted insurrection which they contemplated. Mubarez, on his part assured monetary help for the manufacture of such arms. Rasool Khan, being of the same age as Mubariz was drawn close to the Hyderabad Prince as both hated the presence of the British power.

The activities of the Wahabis greatly increased by 1838 when it was widely believed that the Russian troops were advancing from Central Asia towards India. It was the plan of the Wahabis that Mubarez will take command of the combined armies at Kurnool and overthrow the British through insurrection. Wahabis also believed that the Shah of Persia would appoint Mubarez-ud-Doulah as the Subedar of the Deccan after driving away the British and deposing the Nizam, Nasir-ud-Doulah.

Gen. Fraser, the then British Resident at Hyderabad, as soon as he came to know of the suspected involvement of Mubarez–ud-Doulah, ordered a strict watch on him. Mubarez started sending his emissaries to several places like Lahore, Sindh, Gwalior, Bombay, Kurnool, Madras, Sholapur etc. Fraser spoke to the Nizam, Nasir-ud-Doulah and convinced him of the conspiracy being attempted by his brother against both the British as well as the government of the Nizam. Mubarez-ud-Doulah was taken into custody and put under guard in the fort of Golconda. All his close associates who were involved in the spread of Wahabi movement, numbering 46 were captured and imprisoned.

Judicial Enquiry Commission

The Resident, instituted a Commission of Enquiry consisting of 6 members; three were nominated by the Resident and the other three were the nominees of the Nizam’s administration. The Commission finally found that Mubarez was engaged in a conspiracy with the Nawab of Kurnool and several others with a view to overthrow the Nizam and declare himself as the ruler and also to bring an insurrection against the British.

Network of spies

The Enquiry Commission became central in unearthing the contemplated insurrection of the Nawab of Kurnool. There was a letter written by Mubarez to the Nawab of Kurnool that was intercepted by the British agents. Mubarez in that letter had spelled out his plans for the final assault on the British requesting the Nawab to dispatch the needed arms for such an attack. If only that letter has reached the Nawab, and had he acted, the Enquiry Commission felt, “the results would have been very disastrous”. The letter was concealed in an amulet and was to be delivered to the Nawab of Kurnool. But on the way to Kurnool, fearing the capture by the British, Muhammad Khan the spy, tied the amulet to the hand of an old beggar woman living in a sarai, where he himself took shelter in the guise of a traveller. The amulet was recovered by the guards while combing the area and thus the entire conspiracy came to light. The letter thus brought to light the role of the Nawab of Kurnool, in the conspiracy against the English.

The British at Madras, immediately sent a large military contingent to deal with Kurnool. The Nawab’s armies were defeated in October, 1839 and the Nawab was deported to Tiruchirapalle (formerly Trichinopoly in English), where he was imprisoned and Kurnool was taken over by the Company administration. Rasool Khan was murdered by one of his own servants in the prison.

The Enquiry Commission also felt that Mubarez, apart from being a hand in glove with the Nawab of Kurnool, also tried to spread sedition among the Muslim sepoys stationed in Secunderabad. As a result, Mubarez had to spend the rest of his life as a prisoner in the Golconda fort till he died on June 25, 1854.

source: http://www.thehindu.com / The Hindu / Home> Society>History & Culture> Living Hyderabad / by K S S Seshan / June 10th, 2017

The tale of Turram Khan

Arts, Culture & Entertainment, Leaders, , , , , ,

REAL ISSUES, GRAND PRESENTATION Mohammad Ali Baig / Photo: P.V. Sivakumar
REAL ISSUES, GRAND PRESENTATION Mohammad Ali Baig / Photo: P.V. Sivakumar

Hyderabad , TELANGANA :

As Mohammad Ali Baig’s “1857: Turrebaz Khan” opens in Edinburgh Fringe Festival this August, the playwright-director-actor talks about the heroic figure in Deccan history

Already recognised as one of India’s best known theatre personalities and India’s youngest Padma awardee in theatre, playwright-director-actor Mohammad Ali Baig has received multiple national and global honours and awards. This time, beginning August first week, his well-known play, “Quli: Dilon ka Shahzaada”, as well as his new production “1857: Turrebaz Khan” have both been invited to the Edinburgh Fringe Festival 2016. While “Quli” has already seen several productions across the world, “Turrebaz Khan” will be premiering at the Edinburgh Fringe Festival, before travelling to London and then returning to Hyderabad.

Excerpts from an interview:

Tell us about your new play, “1857: Turrebaz Khan”, and its central character?

Turrebaz Khan was a heroic figure in Deccan history, known for his valour and courage. There is a slang in Hyderabad folklore, a positive one — “Turram Khan”. When you call someone that, you are calling him heroic. That comes from Turrebaz Khan’s name. He was a revolutionary figure freedom fighter, who revolted against the ruling design of the 4th Nizam of Hyderabad and the British. He attacked the British residency, which now houses the women’s college in Koti in Hyderabad, to free his comrade who was detained on charges of treachery without a fair trial by the British. He was caught and detained, but even the jail he was put in couldn’t hold him. After a year, he escaped, and then was caught in the forest of an area called Toopran, near Hyderabad. The man who caught him, Qurban Ali Baig, was the talukdar there. Turrebaz Khan was kept in captivity, then shot, and then his body was hanged in the centre of the city to prevent further rebellion. That is his story.

When you read about 1857, places like Delhi, Meerut, Lucknow, Jhansi and Mysore, all of them are mentioned, but Hyderabad isn’t. This is because the Nizams were allies of the British, and there was no reason to fight. But with Turrebaz Khan, there came a brief period when Hyderabad joined the struggle, the uprising.

Does the play follow Turrebaz Khan’s life?

No, the structure of the play is very interesting actually. It follows the last one hour of his life in captivity, and that one hour is also the duration of the play. It shows the difference between the man who has been captured, and his captor, Ali Baig. They are both sons of the same soil, are of the same colour, but they stand on opposite sides. Ali Baig has allied with the British. He is a man who is privileged in more ways than one, and he has no problem with who his allies are — Indians, British, French. His life is about his own family and prosperity. From his point of view, Turrebaz is “naïve”, and immature. For Turrebaz, Ali Baig has a self-serving agenda.

How does the play deal with this clear difference between the two men?

There are two people, one placating the system, another one going against it in the name of his motherland. Neither one is shown as the villain. Both are victims of their situation.

The play is about discrimination and about oppression, two issues that are relevant anywhere in the world. It can be discrimination of blacks and whites, of haves and have nots, east and west. The play brings both sides of the story out by bringing out both characters. There is very interesting wordplay between the two, philosophical debates which explore different sides of the story. At one point, Ali Baig says to Turrebaz that you talk about leaving your home to fight for your motherland, but what about your own mother at home? What about your aging father, who needs you? Before you, there have been so many others who tried to revolt against the British empire, and look what happened to them.

To this, Turrebaz replies that his motherland is more important to him than his mother; that if he is killed, the world will remember him. No one will remember Qurban Ali Baig.

There are many such debates and wordplay between the two characters and the play is an intense drama. I’ve used live percussion— marfa, dhol, etc.— to complement the dialogues.

The research must have been challenging. Do you supplement it with a lot of fiction?

A lot of research went into this play. It is definitely a challenge, because you can’t fictionalise plays like these too much. You have to pay due respect and maintain sanctity, when you portray these historical figures, since there is no one around to correct the errors. Forget political correctness, you have a responsibility of not putting them in a light that is not morally and ethically right. You can’t sit in judgement. For this play, we have picked the aspects of the story that are relevant to today’s global scenario, since it has to make sense to lot of audience everywhere.

My wife, Noor, who is also my co-playwright, has done most of the research, and a lot of it is also based on research by authorities who have written on Turrebaz.

You spoke about the need to make your play’s relevance to audience across the world. Tell us about the responses you get from these audience? How do you see them connecting to your work?

If you take “Quli”, which is the legendary love story on which Hyderabad is supposed to be founded, or “Spaces”, which is about the thought of sticking to your home and heritage, and about traditionalism versus modernism; both could be about people and lives anywhere in the world. We don’t stick to judgement; we don’t say who is right and who is wrong. Our purpose is to bring out an issue, and let the audience decide their own views.

I’ve taken these plays to English, Turkish, Romanian, Bosnian, Iranian, American audiences, to name a few. “Spaces” moves them to tears; many of them come backstage to me and tell me that this is their story. “Quli” too, sees the audience connecting to it. When they are moved, it moves me as a playwright; it shows me that the kind of theatre I believe in is working, that despite the barrier of language and context, people can connect with these plays. I hope that “1857: Turrebaz Khan” will do that same.

Your productions, held in forts and ruins, are known for usually being larger than life. How difficult is it to travel with these productions?

The earlier plays that I mounted were really huge and I was stuck with own vision of them, so we couldn’t travel. But since the last few plays, like “Spaces”, “Quli” and now “Turrebaz”, I’m still mounting them on a big scale, but I’ve tried to make them production sensible. I keep the portability in mind, so that now we are travelling light, but the end result is still grand. Of course, adapting a play I stage in forts and ruins to a festival setting is difficult, but so far, we have managed to do it successfully.

source: http://www.thehindu.com / The Hindu / Home> Features> MetroPlus / by Swati Daftuar / July 29th, 2016