A good day to recollect the story of the lesser spoken about colonialists in TN - The Dutch.
Did you know they used our Padai Veedu Tiruchendur temple as a garrison, stole our Murugan idol only to be used as a bargaining chip?
A thread (1/11)
Tiruchendur is a prominent town mentioned in Sangam Lit.
Since Muruga won over Sooran here & did Jayanthi Abishekam, this town was called Jayanthi.
Over time, Jayanthi -> Sendhi ->Thiru-Sendhur.
The town become a center of conflict b/w two invaders in 17th century.
Why?
Because of its location.
Thiruchendur was just 9km south of Kaayalpatnam, where the Dutch had opened their factory in 1645.
However, Portuguese who were a force to reckon in the 17th century, captured Kayalpatnam to forcibly depart the Dutch back to Ceylon by 1648
Thirumalai Nayak, Madurai ruler, favored the Portuguese (Parangiyar) over Dutch (Ulaandhargal), which enragëd the Dutch.
They decided to capturë Tuticorin, a Portuguese stronghold & put forth a plan.
Tiruchendur would be their base camp for carrying out this expëdition.
On Feb 1649, a fleet of 10 vessels set sail from Galle under Gov.Maetsuycker.
The expeditionary force setup a base of operation at the Tiruchendur temple.
They fortified the temple & used it as a garrison.
The Gold & silver of the temple was freely lóóted by the soldiërs.
Stone idols in the temple were mutilated by iron hammers.
The gopuram was attempted to be tórched.
Von Der Behr, a sóldier has documented in his travel accounts that: "When they left the temple, it looked more like a pigsty (an enclosure where pigs are kept) than a temple"
M. Rennel, French author writes:
"In 1648, The Dutch halted in the temple and on leaving did their best to destroy it by fire and by a heavy bombardment.
But they only partially succeeded & the tower defied all their efforts."
A truce was achieved with Nayaks intervention, but the Dutch decided to steal away the idols of Shanmukhar and Natarajar from the temple assuming they were made of gold.
Their attempt at melting it proving futile, so they tried to carry them away by sea back to Ceylon.
What happened next is based out of oral traditions of the local legend.
The sea suddenly grew boisterous, and rocked the ship violently.
Frightened that the idols had caused the bad weather, the Dutch sailors dropped the murtis into the ocean.
The loss of idols was informed to Vadamalaiyappa Pillaiyyan, a local administrator of the Nayak at Tirunelveli.
A great devotee, Pillaiyyan was sorely affected & ordered for a similar idol to be made in panchaloka.
After 4 years, Pillaiyyan had a dream that changed everything.
Muruga himself appeared on his dream to instruct that the idol was to be found at the spot where a lemon would be floating & marked by the overhead circling of a Garuda.
Miraculously, Pillaiyyan recovered the original idol from the spot mentioned & reinstalled it in 1653.
One version mentions that the idols were purchased back from Dutch for 1 lakh reals.
This is clear: Tiruchendur was bereft of its deities for 4 years from 1649-53
Venrimaalai Kavirayar has documented it in a song: "These 4 years, Tiruchendur looked like a sky without its moon"
It doesn't matter who the colonialists were - Brits or the Dutch or Portuguese - they all viewed Bharat only as a place to loot from.
Temples were desecrated, idols were stolen, gopurams were torched.
Those who forget history are condemned to repeat it.
May Muruga bless us all.
If you liked this thread, follow @labstamil for more such content in English.
Also follow backup @research_tamil for Tamil content.
Please RT the first post in the thread to spread the word. Nandri!
The Dutch used the murthis as bargaining chips. Either the Madurai Nayak aranmanai or local temple priests had to pay 100,000 reals to get them back.
Very civil behavior no?
Mercantilism runs in their veins.
It is believed that the urchava murthy at Tiruchendur lacks facial features, as he was dropped into the ocean by the Dutch and retrieved many years later.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
When things you don't want to happen, happens, how do you respond?
Do you fatalistically blame it on destiny and accept it, or take initiative to overcome it?
What is the guiding principle in the fate vs free will debate?
What did Sri Rama do in such circumstances? (1/8)
In the epic's defining moment, Sri Rama who was about to be crowned as King, was instead sentenced to exile for 14 years.
Lakshmana was outraged by the injustice of this request, but Sri Rama calmly considered the exile as the will of destiny.
Kambar writes - "நதியின் பிழையன்று நறும்புனலின்மை; விதியின் பிழை"
"it is not the fault of river to dry up when rains fail. Similarly, Kaikeyi isn't at fault for fate's doing", says Sri Rama.
Here Lakshmana is for free-will, to not passively accept injustice, and to fight for the kingdom which was Sri Rama's right.
But Sri Rama defers to destiny and accepted the extraordinarily difficult situation that circumstances suddenly placed upon him and agreed to be exiled.
I've read Ponniyin Selvan cover to cover thrice, and this is my biggest takeaway from it.
It was a decision made by the hero Arulmozhi, inspired by his Suryavanshi ancestor Sri Rama. And it has a relevant lesson for all of us to learn in current political climate.
A🧵(1/8)
BG: Arulmozhi is the more popular prince among public, and they wanted him to be king, even when his elder brother was the crown prince.
This popularity constantly unsettles him, as he wants to do the right thing. And he wants to go beyond public opinion and shape it.
He is influenced by 2 tales - the sacrifices of Shiva he hears from priests at Thiruvarur Thyagaraja temple, and Ramayana.
Rama left for the forest at night when citizens were asleep & also informs his charioteer to take it along a circle so that they can't retrace his path.
2. "My dear Anna, shall I compare thee to Thiruvalluvar or to Marcus Aurelius?"
3. "Like Socrates was punished in ancient times, fake cases, imprisonment is the punishment of our times.
When they checked the pulse of A Raja during 2G case, it was normal. Infact it was the investigating officers who were pulsating with a rapid heartbeat!"
Sati was the most forceful issue created by the Evangelical-Utilitarian alliance to validate Brit rule in India.
The missionary-Brit nexus inflated the # of incidents to horrific levels for politics.
Cholas have documented Sati giving a much needed nuance to this topic (1/8)
The colonial term Sati to refer to this practice is incorrect . Sahagamana/anugamana is the right Indic term.
Anugamana was a rare and sporadic practice in ancient Thamizhagam.
Vaanavan Maadhevi (mother of Rajaraja) chose to do it after the passing of Sundara Chola.
There are several conditions for it to be permitted in Chola tradition:
1) the wife must be in perfect physical and mental health 2) it should be purely voluntary without external influences 3) the close family members must request her to reconsider until the final moment
Kadhalikka Neramillai - a lighthearted film on the surface that espouses the Drav question of - "Is marriage really necessary?"
Directed by Kiruthiga Udhayanidhi, the film has a puratchi pudhumai pen at its helm, and yes she is not a random girl, but a TamBrahm.
An analysis:
This rom-com has Shriya Chandramohan as its central character - she has a BF, registers her marriage months before the engagement (WHY?), drinks, has premarital fun, doesn't know to wear a saree, smokes after a breakup etc.
In summary, a modern day career-centric, jolly good woman. No issues. But is she a "random" modern day woman? Nope.
In egalitarian EVR land where there are no c@ste surnames, the film portrays her family as TamBrahms with no hesitation whatsoever.
Shriya finds days before her "official" engagement that her legally wedded husband is cheating on her.
So, in a case of role reversal, she drinks, and tries smoking in an attempt to move on, like "men". Her father is sorta cool with it. Her aunt (played by Vinodhini) jokingly hints at having "properly" smoked before.
Just moments before there's a deliberate scene where the aunt calls Shriya's father as "Athimber" (a word used by Ds to m0ck TBs)
But why this depiction of community is necessary? Read on.
An asset can be at risk due to both internal vulnerabilities and external threats.
In this analogy, D is the threat - the bad actor who attacks the system.
The comm's flaws (giving up tradition, embracing liberalism/modernity, poor parenting etc.) are the vulnerabilities.
While no doubt both internal and external risks have to be addressed, is it really the right time to discuss vulnerabilities when the system is under attack?
Some say Ds shouldn't be blamed for a systemic flaw - this is such a self-flagellating view that also underestimates D.