MANORAMA WROTE, THE MAPPILAS ARE SAVAGES

Variyamkunnan A Cart Puller

In 1921, the fanaticism that marked the earlier Mappila outbreaks acquired a far more religious dimension with the nation wide Khilafat movement. Ironically,it took the form of a religiocommunal conflict. The Rebellion acquired a communal colour because of the leadership of Thangals and Musaliyars. The combination of religious appeals with poltics, created a volatile situation, highly susceptible to communalist propaganda.The reports in the print-media, reflect the communal cleavage within Malabar society.

C Gopalan Nair's Moplah Rebellion 1921 is a jouney through the news paper reports that appeared mainly in the English media.Abani Mukherji who interpreted and distorted it as the class war for the first time,turned to the reports of The Hindu and The Times,for facts.As a person who had been in journalism for 40 years,I can tell you that it is a profession that deals only with facts-it has corrective measures,when facts go wrong.Today's tendency among a large group of researchers in Kerala,is to misinterpret the factual reporting of 1921;it creates the impression that communalism is a sobriquet for communism.

The Rebellion caused an acrid narrative war of words within the print media, not only in Malabar but throughout the nation. The print media constructed the narratives of the victims. During the period between 1921-23, both vernacular and the English press regularly published reports on the Rebellion, depending upon the colonial official reports,as well as the victims who had sought asylum at Kozhikode.The Malayalam papers contained reports of Moplah outbreaks, the sources being the press communiqué issued by government , reports published by English newspapers,victim's versions and commentaries.Most of the reports of vernacular papers,presented the victim's version,while a few nationalist as well as pro-Khilafath muslim papers, presented the attacker's version.Nationalist papers had to resort to this,since Gandhi had painted the Khilafat as a national movement.

Among the newspapers, Malabar Islam, Swaraj and Muslim,were the mouth pieces for the Islam. Keralapatrika (Calicut), Malayala Manorama, Nazrani Deepika, and Yogakshemam used forceful language in their reports about the Rebellion.They wrote of the craftiness and cunningness of Mappilas. Some of the write-ups taunted the Hindus for their slavish mentality. Ellis, the Malabar Collector, convened a meeting of the editors of newspapers of Calicut in June 1922 to discuss the ways by which communal amity could be restored in Malabar( Malayala Manorama, 8th June, 1922. NMML, Delhi.).This meeting was attended by editors of Keralapatrika, Mitavadi, Reformer, Kerala Sanchari, Malabar Journal and Margadarsi while editors of Manorama and Spectator boycotted it.

Mathrubumi was started on 17 March 1923 and Al-Ameen in 1924. 

Yogakshemam, the official organ of Yogakshemasabha published a series of articles related to the Rebellion. In its editorial captioned Malabarile Chelakalapam, Yogaksehamam came to the conclusion that 'the rioters consisted of three distinct set of people, one set that wanted to fight the government, another set that was out to loot while a third set were religious fanatics who wished to convert as many as possible. The bulk of the rioters belonged to the second set'.( Yogakshemam, 2 September,1921, NMML, Delhi; FNR dated 10 September 1921, No.37, 1921, Home (General), p.289. TNA.) 

The paper was surprised that Hindu population of the disturbed areas could not offer any united resistance to Mappila rioters and called upon them to organise themselves for defense.This editorial traced the rebellion back to the time of Tipu Sultan in 18th century and hence the title Chelakalapam. Another editorial of the same paper commented:"'Everybody is busy in searching the cause of the revolt.There is no need to tell that Moplas need no cause for revolt".

R H Hitchcock,in the History of Malabar Rebellion,from first hand experience sas SP of Malappuram had reached the conclusion, that "the saddest part of the whole affair was its want of reason". We come across several instances of such convergence between vernacular press reports and colonial official narratives,beacuse they are the facts. M.P. Thuppan Nambudiri, in his article, 'Malabar Lahala' in Yogaksehmam, said: "from Tipu's invasion onwards, their [Mappila's] desire was to convert the whole Malayalis into Islam. It was the British which prevented them from materializing that and we owe a great deal to British for the same . . . . No more self rule is needed in Malabar. We have had enough of the taste of Mappila swaraj and their Khilafath".

Nazrani Deepika from Mannanam,also published reports on the Rebellion. Deepika reported that Mappilas under the veneer of non-co-operation, took the opportunity to loot and convert Hindus to their religion. To prove the vandalism of Mappila rebels, the paper reported that Mappilas entered the Trikandiyur temple and placed a copy of Quran inside the Srikovil (sanctum sanctorum).Congratulating the Magistrate E F Thomas for suppressing the rebellion, Deepika in its editorial commented, 'Thus even the Malabar Mappilas have received an experience of Swaraj and the flavour of Hindu-Muslim unity and a sense of the might of British government. May the British flag now continue to fly in all glory".( Nazrani Deepika, 2 September 1921, 9 September 1921, NMML, Delhi; FNR, 10 Sept. 1921, Home (General), p.352, TNA).

Extreme  language was used by 'Malabari', the South Malabar correspondent of Malayala Manorama, in covering the rebellion. He wrote, "It will be interesting to the readers to know that our Vasudeva Varmamaraja [Variyamkunnath Kunhamad Haji, the leader of the rebellion] who is Collector, Colonel and Governor [of Khilafath Raj] is infact a cart-puller . . . . It is heard that wife of Seethi Koya Thangal [another rebel leader] has eloped with someone and out of grief he is hiding in the forest'.( Malayala Manorama, 19 November 1921, NMML, Delhi.).

On another occasion, sarcastically, he commented: 'The Mopla Rebellion has brought name and fame to our district. Is it not a great honour to us that discussions about our district take place in our parliament".(Malayala Manorama, 8th December 1921, NMML, Delhi).

The Malabar correspondent of this paper,wrote: "Among this family of demons, the prominent ones – Sumali [Chemprasseri Thangal] and Malyavan [Seethi Koya Thangal] have been caught by the police. Only Mali [Kunhahammad Haji] who has done much Kurumalis [mischiefs] remains to be caught hold of . . . . These Thangals were mere Thongans [Impotents] and Moplas attribute Thungatha [fame] to them due to their fanatical spirit . . . . Among these wretched demons, Chempraseri ranks first for mutilating the Hindus alive'(Malayala Manorama, 29th December, 1921, NMML, Delhi).

Ali Musaliyar, a fundamentalist, was depicted in this vein by Kerala Patrika. The paper wrote, "This Musaliyar spoke that if one kills a Hindu, he can marry a houri [celestial beauty] in heaven"(Kerala Patrika, 5 September 1921.).

Malayala Manorama had reported on 25 August 1921 itself that the Mappilas had set fire to buildings and documents ,and looted weapons,cash and instruments.On August 30 it wrote that only two Britishers have been killed not in relation to rebellion:they were Inpector Reedman and Kalikavu Rubber Estate Manager S P Eton.When they shot Eton,they spared Kuttath Raman Nair,saying,they are targetting only Britishers ( Raman Nair's eyewitness account,The Hindu,14 September 1921).

The Thuvvur massacre of Hindus on 25 September was reported by Malayala manorama on 6 October 1921 and Deepika on 7 October:This had been an act of vengeance as in the case of the killing of Khan Bahadur Chekutty,the report said.The Hindus and Muslims of Thuvur village had informed the British.This infuriated the Mappilas.This gave anothe dimension to the revolt.It was not possible for the military to know the move of the mappilas without the ground support.The mappilas reached Thuvvur immediately after the military left.They massacred 34 Hindus and two mappilas and threw the dead bodies into a well.

That the report was published only after 11 days of the incident proves that the reporters had waited to cross check the facts.

Manorama wrote that it was a political blunder to have co-opted the quarelling Mappilas in the Khilafat,non co-operation movements (7 th,17th September,1921). "Mappila rebellion was the after effect of politicizing the Mappilas.Teaching the non co-operation lessons to the fanatic Muslims was like igniting the fire arms"( Malayala Manorama,30 August 1921;Sathyanadham,27 August).

Concluding his long article titled 'Jonakappada' in Malayala Manorama, Moorkoth Kumaran,who belonged to a Thiya noble family of Thalassery, made an observation regarding the measures for prevention of such outbreaks in future. He observed, "In this background two remedies are possible – crush the fanaticism of Mappilas or make Hindus equally fanatic"(Malayala Manorama, 17 September 1921, NMML, Delhi).

While compulsory primary education through common school could wipe out Mappila fanaticism, the latter could be achieved only through the unity of Hindus. He added:"'And in the meantime the Hindus must have fanatism. There should be unity among them. They have to be vigilant and purge out the Mopla phobia . . .. Do you think that so long as Hindus live in unity and harmony, the Moplas will dare to rebel or try to convert Hindus? Caste distinction alone is the cause of this disunity'.( Malayala Manorama, 17th September 1921, NMML, Delhi.)Following the pattern of colonial narratives, Malayala Manorama, in another article traced the cause of the rebellion to the inherent character of Mappilas. The article says, 'These Mappilas, who are of Arab descent, are notorious for their bigotry and blood thirstiness "(Malayala Manorama, 20 September 1921, NMML, Delhi).

Malayala Manorama opined that "fanaticism and hot-temperance were prevalent among Mappilas of other parts of Kerala but only when they got the support of South Malabar Mappilas, they showed the courage to make furcas".( Malayala Manorama, 18 September 1921, NMML, Delhi).

The English papers were pro-Government and as such they presented their most authoritative accounts of the rebellion. The West Coast Reformer, an English paper from Calicut, published a lead article regarding the rebellion. On  October 1921, the paper wrote:

"More than six weeks have passed by since the declaration by Mopla fanatics of Malabar of Jihad in the name of Khilafath. Ali-Musaliyar, the first Sulthan appointed in Tirurangadi mosque has surrendered . . . and stands in the dock with his lean hungry look facing his trial for the greatest offence . . .. The robber chieftain Variamkunnath Kunhahamed Hajee, is still at large perpetrating the cruellest deeds of savagery on the Hindu population. The criminal impudence and effrontery with which this uncrowned king of Nilambur imposes his will upon the trembling Hindus, reminds one of the marauding chieftains of the Robber hordes of Spanish Sierras … Beheading, the common game of oriental despots, is freely visited by this freebooter on Hindus of uncompromising faith without least compuction . . . . The interior of Ernad and Walluvanad taluks are still shivering with dread for this inhuman wretch and his compeer Chembrasseri Thangal".

Though Mathrubhumi was started only in 1923, two years after the Rebellion, umpteen articles and editorials dealing with Rebellion appeared in it during 1923 and 1924. In the year of its inception itself, K. Madhavan Nair,the editor and the Congress leader, wrote a series of articles examining the cause and course of the Rebellion. In one such article which elaborately deals with the fanaticism of Mappilas, he said: "The Mopla right from his childhood hears the songs that extols the martyrs died for the cause of religion and it generates wild desires in him. Or else, he hears about the case of apostasy and believes that he, who does not prevent such disgrace to religion, is outside its fold. In this matter, though Islam forbids forcible conversion, he follows the footsteps of Tipu Sulthan, not that of Prophet Mohamed and kills the Hindus indiscriminately"( K. Madhavan Nair, "Hindu-Muslim Relations" in Mathrubhumi, 24 May, 1923).

In another article of the same series Madhavan Nair wrote, "If Nairs, Thiyyas and Cherumas were united, they could have resisted the Mappila rebels. But due to age-old oppression of Nairs by Nambudiris, of Thiyyas by Nairs and of Cherumas by Thiyyas, the lower orders of Hinduism felt happy over the difficulties caused by the Rebellion to the higher castes'.(Mathrubhumi, 1 May, 1923.)

Murkoth Kumaran

The editorial of Mathrubhumi of May 26, 1923 said:" If the Hindus had the same reverence to their temples as the Muslims had to their mosques, this much of temples would not have been destroyed in the Rebellion zone. It would have been a matter of pride to Hindu community, if a single Hindu was hurt in the attempt to defend the sanctity of his temple"( Mathrubhumi, 26 May, 1923.)

Mathrubhumi in its editorial, countering the allegation of The Muslim, a Muslim journal, reiterated its secular stand and stated that "if a letter is not published in the paper, it is being considered as debasement of a community. We used to get articles written by Nairs,Nambudiris, Nambisans and Mappilas. It is not by considering the caste or creed of the writer, that articles are published in Mathrubhumi".( Mathrubhumi, 25 March, 1924).

The articles and editorials of Mathrubhumi triggered a controversy among the leaders of the Congress and a group under Mohamed Abdurahiman and Moidu Moulavi wrote a series of articles in Al-Ameen, a nationalist paper from Calicut, attacking the anti-Muslim tone of such articles( E. Moidu Moulavi, Charithrachinthakal, Calicut, 1981, p.45.).

Vidwan T.K. Raman Menon, who had served as sub-editor in Al-Ameen, observed:"The relation between Mathrubhumi and Al-Ameen was not smooth. Overtly or covertly, Al-Ameen indulged in countering the editorials and misinterpreting the ideals of Mathrubhumi. I could not see any reciprocity or unity existing between these two nationalist dailies during that period".(S.K. Pottekkat et al. (ed.), Mohammad Abdurahiman (Mal.), Memorial Committee, Calicut, 1978, pp.145-146).

Due to this controversy that Madhavan Nair abruptly stopped publishing the remaining parts of the articles. Later, these articles were collected and published in a book form titled Malabar Kalapam in 1971 by his wife Kalyani Amma. About this book, Moidu Moulavi,who had made communal speeches during Khilafat movement, remarked that "it only helped to strengthen the anti-Muslim sentiments among Hindus and it was a fierce arrow aimed at the Mappila community ... Any Hindu who read this work with an objective mind would turn to be a staunch enemy of Mappilas"( E. Moidu Moulavi, op. cit., pp.46-47.)

Madhavan Nair in his book, traced the root of the rebellion back to Tipu, who not only caused many a hardship to Hindus of Malabar but became the guru (preceptor) of later Mappila revolts(K. Madhavan Nair, Mappila Kalapam, Mathrubhumi Publishers, Calicut, 1971, p.15).

In its editorial of 18 January 1935, titled Mathrubhumikku Mathamilla ('Mathrubhumi has no religion') the paper stated, "To Mathrubhumi both Hinduism and Islam are alike . . . we don't consider it a sin either embracing or deserting a particular religion. Al-Ameen has to understand that K Kelappan is not an Arya Samajist."( Mathrubhumi, 18 January 1935).

Kerala Chandrika, a pro-Khilafat muslim journal wrote: "The government have been trying to disprove the tenets of their religion and injuring their leaders and the inglorious collector of Malabar with a military force entered the holy mosques and stirred the ire of the community. If, while the revered Malappuram Thangal, one of the heads of their religion was praying in the mosque that the holy temple of God should be surrendered by military, which Mohammedan could keep still?" (Kerala Chandrika, 29th August 1921. Also see Fortnightly Report, No.36, 1921, Home (General), p.244. TNA).

K Madhavan Nair

The Muslim ( 28 September 1922) and Kerala Chandrika (2 October 1922) published an article 'Condition of Muslim Women in Malabar' which narrated exaggerated stories about the atrocities committed by Hindus on Mappila women.Muslim Sahakari, another muslim journal also believed that "there was truth in the allegation of Hindu atrocities on helpless Mappila women in the area".(Muslim Sahakari, Calicut, 5 October 1922, MNNPR, 1922, TNA.)

Kerala Chandrika in an article to stir up the wealthy muslims to a sense of their duty towards afflicted muslims in Malabar said, "At night some police officers and their attendants come riding on the white horse [Fully drunk-Tr] and begin to outrage the chastity of helpless muslim women! Who is there to attend to the wretchedness of these poor people?"( Kerala Chandrika, 24 July 1922, MNNPR, 1922, TNA.)

A note in the same paper in 1921 opined that the reports about Mopla's looting Hindu houses, was altogether unfounded, that absolute falsehood against the Muslims were published in English-owned papers.( F.N.R. No. 36, 1921, Home Administration, p.245, TNA.)

Referring to the plight of Hindus in Malabar during the Rebellion, Dr.B S Moonje,Hindu Maha Sabha leader, in his article in Indian Social Reformer (Bombay) wrote, "With us [Hindus] it is a serious problem of scientific investigation into our sociology to find out the causes of such helplessness and unpreparedness of Hindus to defend their homes and women folk . . . Division and hatred have made us cowardly and slavish"(The Indian Social Reformer, Bombay, 26 March 1922, NMML, Delhi).

Malayala Manorma replied to Muslim allegations: "it is to be regretted that Muslim papers in Bombay and Punjab are publishing reports about the vandalism of Hinduism in Malabar. They report that, in the absence of male Mappilas in South Malabar, the Hindus are consternating the Mopla orphans and raping their mothers"(Malayala Manorama, 7 October 1922, NMML Delhi.).

Gandhi,in repentece, stated that "Moplas were never particularly friendly to the Malabar Hindus. They had looted them before. Their notions of Islam were of a very crude type (Gandhi, Collected Works, Vol.21)

Gandhi wrote to the editor of Vishala Keralam (Madras), "How to reach the Moplas as also the class of Hindus whom you would want to reach through your news paper, is more than I can say, but I know that Hindus should cease to be cowardly. The Moplas should cease to be cruel. In other words each party should become truly religious" ( Gandhi, Collected Works, Vol. 23 ).

The impact was not over even after 18 years.In 1939,Mathrubumi in its editorial titled, 'Communalism in the garb of Nationalism' wrote, "However, certain Muslim congress men held an exclusive meeting under the banner of Kerala Muslim National party to discuss the matter [secret circular issue]. To hold a communal meeting to discuss a common issue may be due to the fact that ( Muhammad) Abdurahiman is a Muslim. What will be the future of congress, if a communal group is formed within it... The Hindus, Muslims and the Christians within the congress have to be ready to address common issues without communal biases."(Mathrubhumi, 8 April 1939.)

_______________________________

NMML:Nehru Memorial Museum and Library

TNA:Tamilnadu Archives

© Ramachandran 

VARIYANKUNNAN, THE FANATIC GANGSTER

He Had Planned Mass Conversion of Hindus

Chakkiparamban Variyankunnathu Kunjahammed Haji (1877- 20 January 1922 ) was a Muslim gangster who led the Malabar Rebellion,culminating in the first Hindu pogrom in India,which was criticized by leaders like Ambedkar and Annie Besant.Subsequently he was executed by the British.He ran a parallel government, for more than six months in most parts of the then Eranadu and Valluvanadu taluks. He  raised an army of illiterate Mappilas,seized control of a large area,killed umpteen number of Hindus and looted their homes,alongwith his long term mentor, friend and Islamic fundamentalist,Ali Musliyar.

Haji was an illiterate bullock cart driver.

Haji was born in a Muslim  family with a history of criminal activities;later on moved to Nellikuth village, near Manjeri, Malappuram district. He was the second child of his parents, Chakkiparamban Moideenkutty Haji and Kunjaisha Hajjumma. Moideenkutty Haji,apart from being a criminal, was a small time farmer as well, one among those who had been deported and imprisoned in Jails of Andaman for taking part in the 1894 Manjeri Hindu massacre.32 mappilas were involved in the evolot.They set fire to Hindu houses and killed all the hindus whom they met.Finally they hid inside the temple,where they were confronted and killed.Variyankunnan's father escaped to Erattupetta;he was declared a fugitive.

He pursued his basic religious education from village Madrasa;He is said to have studied some Arabic texts from Mammad Kutty Musliyar. After his father was deported to Andaman, Haji was brought up in his mother's family. His grandfather was also a criminal, who asked a teacher named Balakrishnan Ezhuthachan, to teach Malayalam to Haji along with other grandchildren .

The Dorcett Regiment

The deportation of his father and other criminals was followed by the seizure of their properties, and Haji harboured hostility towards the British as wells as the Hindus.

In 1896 Haji turned against Manjeri Kovilakam. He and his followers seized land and properties of the Kovilakam. British army came to help the landlords. After the revolt, the mappilas took shelter in the Manjeri temple. In the fight that followed with the British forces, 94 mappilas lost their lives. Among them, 20 mappilas were beheaded by the mappilas themselves. Inspector Khan Bahadhur Chekkutty tried to arrest Haji but C I Kurikkal, a Muslim friend, helped him. Haji came under constant surveillance of the British. His friends and family insisted him to leave for Mecca when they smelt that Chekkutty was planning to arrest him. He left to Bombay, anf then to Mecca. During the  exile, he visited home several times but was compelled to go back due to the continued surveillance. Haji returned from Mecca in 1905 and married Ruqiyya, daughter of Unni Muhammed. After her death in 1908, he married Sainaba , sister of one of his friends. In 1920 Haji married his cousin Malu (Paravetti Fathima), daughter of his uncle Paravetti Koyamu Haji. They have been brought up in same home and this was the third marriage for both of them. Fed up with the aged Variyankunnan, Malu later fled with Variyankunnan's younger brother Moideenkutty.

There were 83 Mappila revolts against the Hindus, before 1921; after each revolt, the Hindus used to flee the area and their land and property were seized by the Muslim criminals. When the Hindus returned and reclaimed the properties, further attacks by Muslim fundamentalists happened.This was the reason for continued Mappila rebellions.

In 1920, Gandhi visited Calicut, after  inadvertently tying up the unwarranted Khilafat movement with the non co-operation movement of the Congress.The Congress leaders of Malabar like K P Kesava Menon and K Madhavan Nair had no other option than to join it. Thus the ignorant muslim fundamentalists like Ali Musaliyar and Haji began to bask in the reflected glory of being becoming part of the Congress band wagon. Some of these Muslims were made Khilafat committe chiefs; they shared the same platforms with Congress leaders. The Ali brothers, Muhammad and Shaukath, hijacked Gandhi at the national level and Gandhi became a hostage of Muslim fundamentalists. Haji was under the impression that India will come under the Turkey Caliphate, after the Khalifa was put back in his throne. He did not know that the people of Turkey never wanted the Khalifa.

By this time, the Communist Party of India had taken shape in Tashkent under the leadership of M N Roy, who recruited Muhajirs to the Party. The Muhajirs were the band of muslims who had left India to fight for the Turkey califate-jihadis.

Few days before the rebellion, the British got wind of the fanaticism and had reinforced its Second Leinster Regiment at Calicut with three more platoons from Madras, of the same Regiment. It was planned to search the hidden weapons of the muslim fanatics at Tirurangadi.The Magistrate with these forces reached Tirurangadi on the early morning of Saturday, 20 August, 1921. Three people were arrested  by 10 am, after the search. Information came that 2000 Mappilas have reached Parappanangadi railway station from Tanur, and they were heading for Thirurangadi. By 12.30 this Mappila mob was confronted by Meinvering, District Police Supdt R H Hitchcok, and Dy S P Amu.The mob had held the Khilafat flag. The police bayonets were attacked with iron rods by the mob.One Constable's head got split into two.Nine in the mob were killed in the police firing.When the mob withdrew, the British caught Thanur Khilafat Committee Secretary Kunjikhadar and 40 Mappilas.

When the Forces left, a small band of the Force, under Lt W R Johnston and Rowley. Another 2000 strong Mappila mob that came from another direction attacked this small British force-Johnston, Rowley and the interpreter head constable Moideen were killed.The mutilated dead bodies lay on the road.

Thus, the 1921 Mappila Jihad began.The war ship HMS Comus reached the Malabar coast. On 26th morning, a Mappila mob attacked the British forces at Pookkottur and in the fight that lasted five hours, 400 Mappilas were killed. Two British army men got killed. A S P Lancaster, who was injured, breathed his last, later.

The incidents that led to Mappila Jihad of 1921. It began on 20 August with Ali Musaliyar and his gang, attacking the Tirurangadi Revenue Office. They killed some policemen and seized the police station. District Collector E F Thomas and other officials fled to Calicut. The criminals took shelter at the Tirurangadi mosque. After  evacuation of the Tirurangadi Mosque on 30 August 1921, fanatics were up in arms. Following the attack from the mosque, 34 Mappilas were killed. Musaliyar and Haji had mobilised the fanatic muslims. They attacked and seized police stations, treasuries, courts, registrar and other government offices. The rebellion soon spread to the nearby areas of Malappuram, Manjeri, Pandikad and Tirur under the leadership of Variyan Kunnath Kunjahammad Haji, Seethi Koya Thangal, Chembrassery Thangal and Ali Musliyar. Hindus, Police, army, and  British officials fled from areas like Malappuram, Manjeri, Tirurangadi and Perinthalmanna.  The Muslim rowdies destroyed railway and telephone lines, bridges and roads.

H M S Comus 

Ali Musaliyar had been anointed as the Caliph on 22 August. In Thekkekalam meeting held on the same day, Haji appointed commanders under these leaders, and it was the duty of these commanders to recruit soldiers, train them and collect weapons. Nayik Chekkutty was the commander of Kunjahammed Haji. Amakundan Mammad, Thaliyil Unnenkutty Haji, Vadakkuvettil Mammad were some other commanders among them. Since the police and other forces had fled from Eranad, Valluvanadu and Ponnani, Haji declared it as an independent state from British. According to R H Hitchcock, the name of this state was Doula; Arabic equivalent for state. Haji got few Muslim ex-military men who had fought for the British in First World War, as part of the Mappila infantry. Nayik Thaami, the commander of Variyan Kunnath Haji, wrote in his diary that Doula had almost 60,000 soldiers in its Army.

Variyan Kunnath Kunjahammad Haji took over command of the rebellion from Ali Musliyar, after Musaliyar was arrested after the Tirurangadi mosque incident. Public proclamations were issued by Haji to the effect that he is the Amir of Muslims, King of Hindus and Colonel of the forces. On 30 August 1921, the mob under Haji, killed Khan Bahadur Chekkutty, a former muslim British  police Inspector.While he was dying on the lap of his wife, his hands and legs were chopped off by Haji and his gangsters. The declaration of the founding of the new state, was done at Manjeri. By 28 August 1921, British administration had virtually come to a standstill in Malappuram, Tirurangadi, Manjeri, and Perinthalmanna, which then fell into the hands of the criminals who established complete domination over  Eranad and Valluvanad Taluks. Haji had blacksmiths to make weapons and the gangsters had weapons that they had seized from police stations.

On 25 August, Haji began armed training. He collected tax for goods from Wyanad to Tamilnadu. Hindus  were subjected to punishment, branding them informants of the British. He captured Pookkottur Kovilakam  and their properties were distributed among the Muslims. He came to Manjeri on the 24th, raided the Nambudiri Bank, and distributed the pledged gold, to its owners, freely.

One of the most notable attacks that British had to face was the Battle Of  Pookkottur on 26 August in which 400 mappilas lost their lives and the Battle Of Pandikkad, in which British sustained many casualties and had to retreat from the field. On 1 September,the  British declared Martial law in Malabar. Haji fled and started his suicidal attacks on 13 September. On 16 September,Haji declared Martial Law against the British, he appointed guards on the border of his territory, established courts for the trial and issued passport for those who were travelling to other areas. 

Hindus could heave a sigh of relief only after the Pookottur episode. Musaliyar and Haji had planned to catch all Hindus from Manjeri and neighbouring places on 26 August and convert them en masse, including K Madhavsan Nair, into Islam after the Jama namas.The caps and dresses were ready.

After fleeing on 16 October, Haji and his gang destroyed the Nellikuth bridge in Pandikkad. On 26 October, Haji's notorious and cruel hench man Kothampara Unithari was killed with 100 gangsters by the Chin Cachin Regiment.

By 1 January 1922, Haji's gang had been reduced to just 80.They were confronted on 30 December at Pandalur hill.

List of Dorcett soldiers Killed 

The British seized Unyan Musaliyar, Haji's right hand man, and told him that they are interested in signing a treaty if Haji was ready to surrender. According to this treaty Haji had to disperse his illegal administration, he had to surrender. The police promised that he will be deported to Mecca. Unyan went to Haji's hide out at Chokkad to inform him about the  offer. Haji had no other option since his days were numbered and his army had slimmed to just seven or eight men. Unyan went to meet Haji with S I Ramanatha Iyer. Iyer had brought Subedar Gopala Menon and the force along with him and they surrounded Haji and his gang. Haji and Unyan were unaware of the presence of the battalions; they arrested him on 5 January 1922. They captured all the illegal documents of his administration and confined all  gangsters with him. On 6 January they were taken to Manjeri. He was sent to Malappuram along with his commander Nayik Chekkutty.

C Gopalan Nair's book, Moplah Rebellion 1921 records:

7 January, '21 :Kunhamad Haji with 21 followers, one. 303 rifle, 10 police rifles, and four other B. L. firearms were captured by a specially organised Police Force under the leadership of Subadar Gopala Menon and Sub-Inspector Ramanatha Iyer at Chokad yesterday.

The British Court in its judgement recorded the killings of two Muslims by Haji thus:

These were the two of the most brutal murders in the rebellion which cost the lives of two loyal Government officers who were killed for doing their duty and for their services to the Crown. It is difficult to say which of the two was the more dreadful and the callous crime. In Chekutti's case the murderers had the decency to send away the women-folk before they finished the deceased off, but they were guilty of appalling barbarity in subsequently parading the head on a spear. In the case of Hydross the murder was carried out in the presence of his wife and children and in spite of the entreaties of the latter and the efforts of his wife to protect her husband.

He was sentenced to death by a British military court. Haji's death virtually ended the rebellion for a Caliphate, peace was restored in a few months from January. Gopalan Nair records:

20 January, '22:Variamkunnath Kunhamad Haji and six other Moplahs who were charged with waging war and tried by a Military court, were shot at Malappuram to-day.

Madras Mail, 23 January,1922:

The capture of the " Khilafat King ", Varian Kunnath Kunhamad Haji, marked the collapse of the rebellion. " There are only two bands of active rebels left to be dealt with. They are under the leadership of two minor leaders, Konnara Tangal and Moideen Kutty Haji. They are being vigorously pursued and are decreasing in numbers owing to surrenders and casualties. Various detachments of troops have already left the area and it is hoped that the two battalions will have left by the 25th instant, and the force will be reduced to approximately peace garrison by the middle of next month. The total approximate rebel casualties up to date are 2,266 killed, 1,615 wounded and 5,688 captured and 38,256 surrenders.

Records show that Haji committed the following crimes:

Killing of Police Inspector Khan Bahadur Chekkutti, decapitating the head, and parading the head on a spike.

Collection of taxes; seizure of harvest directly from the Nilambur Tirumulpad's pookottur Estate.

Collection of money called Ayudha Fund, towards purchase of weapons for the uprising.
Issuance of passports to people to leave Malabar. Rs 5 Passes for transit from his area.
Warfare on British officers in various militant engagements with the officers in 1921.

Haji was sentenced to death by martial law Commander Colonel Humphrey and was shot dead on 20 January 1922 at Kottakkunnu, Malappuram. British officials burnt his dead body along with all records and documents relating to his five months long parallel government.

The Mappila Jihad was never a class war; the interpretation of it as a class war was the pervasive comments contained in the first Communist document of it by Abani Mukherji, handed over to Lenin in October 1921 and published in March 1922. It was titled Moplah Rebellion 1921.The Marxist historians of Kerala are keeping mum on this document, which I found in London in 2019. Mukherji, while trying to interpret it as class war, also highlighted the fanatic content of the rebellion. He observed that the Khilafat movement was coopted and subjugated by the fanatic Muslim clergy. He avows that the mullahs, forgetting the aim of the movement, diverted their rank and file, against their peace-loving Hindu neighbours. The Hindus were given the option," death or Islam". Thus, the Hindus were massacred, forcibly converted and if they refused, were hacked to death. They ransacked the military depot at Malappuram and looted treasury of 40,000 pounds.

Marxist historians have a pervasive tendency to infer first, distort facts and then theorize. Thus, Fazal Pookkoya Thangal, leader of the Malabar jihad , who had declared three fatwas against Hindus and hence deported to Arabia, has become an expert in class wars, in the eyes of Marxist historians like K N Panicker and K K N Kurup. When jihad becomes class war, fundamentalists become Marxists. Thus the fanatic Variyankunnan, has become a Marxist now!

The Hindu and the Variyankunnan Letter:

1. A family in Erattupetta now claims they are the descendants of Chakkiparamban Moideenkutty Haji,Variyamkunnan's father. K M Jaffar who belongs to it says that Haji escaped to Erattupetta, after being acquitted in the Mannarkkad revolt case. He lived there in disguise as an Islamic preacher for eight years, before being captured by the British police. He married Ummuhani Umma from Muttathuparambil Mather family and had a son named Muhiyuddinkutty Haji. This family didn't know of his earlier wife and the son Variyamkunnath Kunjahammad Haji ( The Hindu, 26 June 2020).

The problem with this claim is that Moideenkutty Haji was never acquitted, but was deported and was in Andaman jails.The Mappila Outrageous Act was in force. In European countries, such claims have to be proved by DNA tests.

The letter The Hindu published

2. The Hindu reprinted on 26 June 2020, a letter purported to be written by Variyankunnath Haji to the paper, on 7 October 1921. The head line of the new story was,"Reports of Hindu-Muslim strife in Malabar baseless".

There was no way to cross check for the paper then, whether the letter was actually written by him. The Hindu claims that the letter in Arabic-Malayalam was translated and printed. In the letter Haji makes a fantastic claim:" Report that Hindus are forcibly converted by my men are entirely untrue. Such conversions were done by the Government party and Reserve police men in mufti mingling themselves with the rebels ( masquerading as rebels)".

There is no question of an European mingling with the locals, because the colour will betray him. The only possibility is that Hindu local men masquerading as Muslims, which is impossible. Hindus in disguise, converting Hindus to Islam-it is an absurd fantasy,which suits The Hindu's fetish for pseudo secularism.

.

The issues of The Hindu in 1921 have reported the Muslim gangsters resorting to mass conversion, which is historically true. Abani Mukherji, founder of the Communist Party, who gave a note to Lenin on the Moplah Rebellion, had collected reports of The Hindu, probably from, Singaravelu Chettiar, his friend.

Here is a quote from The Times, 6 September 1921:

“The spark which kindled the flame was the resistance by a large and hostile crowd of Moplahs, armed with swords and knives, to a lawful attempt by the police to affect certain arrests in connection with a case of house-breaking. The police were powerless to effect the capture of the criminals, and the significance of the incident is that it was regarded as a defeat of the police, and therefore of the Government.”

Kunjahammad Haji has signed as Pandalur Commander, in the letter, published by The Hindu. He had anointed himself as "Amir of Muslims, King of Hindus and Colonel of the Forces. "By the time he is said to have written the letter, Haji had gone underground, fleeing from the British forces, as a war criminal. According to British records, he was in Pandikkad on 13 October, 1921, and had destroyed the Nellikkuth bridge that day. The letter suggests that, he was in Pandalur, a week earlier. He was caught on 6 January 1922 from Chokkad, between Nilambur and Kalikavu.

The pseudo secularist gang also has quoted Sardar Chandroth, to prove that a criminal like Haji was secular. Sardar Chandroth Kunjiraman Nair, who was a loyal follower of the Marxist, A K Gopalan, has no locus standi, being a native of Kannur.

The Hindu, so far has not published the so called original letter of Haji in Arabi Malayalam. The Hindu's then Editor, S Kasturi Ranga Iyengar, was a supporter of Variyankunnan, and Iyengar had presided over the Malabar Congress meet in April 1920, that had heckled the moderate Annie Besant, to silence. Both K Madhavan Nair and M P Narayana Menon had brought several mappilas from Eranad, to the meet, to gain majority.

© Ramachandran