Nizam's generous side and love for books

by Guest Thu Apr 19, 2012 8:40 pm

Nizam's generous side and love for books

J. S. Ifthekhar

A 160-page book dwells on his secular aspect and donations for just cause

The year was 1932. The Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute, Puna,
needed money for publication of the Hindu epic, ‘Mahabharata', and
construction of a guest house. A formal request was made to the seventh
Nizam, Mir Osman Ali Khan. He lost no time in issuing a ‘farman'
granting Rs. 1,000 per year for 11 years. For the guest house Rs. 50,000
was offered.

The last ruler of the Hyderabad State was generous with money for the
just cause – be it of Muslims or Hindus. If he extended help for English
translation of the holy Quran by Marmaduke Pickthall and the book on
Seeratun Nabi by Maulana Syed Suleman Nadvi, he also supported the
Telugu Academy for bringing out the book on Ancient Hindu buildings of
Hyderabad.

Not many know about this secular aspect of the Seventh Nizam who
proclaimed Hindus and Muslims to be his “two eyes”. Noted historian, Dr.
Syed Dawood Ashraf, brings out these little known facts in his new book
Kitabaon Ke Qadr Shinas: Asaf-i-Sabi.

The 160-page book tells how the Nizam was an appreciator of books and
opened his purse strings to support writers. “Though a strict follower
of Islam, he displayed exemplary tolerance towards other faiths”, says
Dr. Ashraf who has authored a total of 22 books in both English and
Urdu. The unique thing about this book is that Dr. Ashraf corroborates
whatever he has written with foolproof documentary evidence extracted
from the A.P. State Achieves and Research Institute. At the end of every
article, the relevant ‘farman' along with the file number of archival
source is mentioned.

The erstwhile ruler's largesse was not confined to just India. Even educational institutions outside the country benefitted.

For instance the Nizam donated for Palestine University, School of
Oriental Studies, London, Leiden University, Holland, Armstrong College,
Newcastle University, Durham.

Book collector

Dr. Ashraf's book recalls an interesting anecdote of how the Nizam
acquired the entire manuscript collection of one Hakeem Mohd Qasim when
he died in 1939 as there was a danger of his sons disposing off the
books cheaply.

As a compensation a sum of Rs. 80 per month was fixed for the bereaved
family by a three member committee. But the Nizam promptly enhanced it
to Rs. 100. A poet himself, he valued books and writers.

http://www.thehindu.com/news/cities/Hyderabad/article2886529.ece

by Guest Thu Apr 19, 2012 9:05 pm

HYDERABAD:
In the backdrop of the renewed Telangana agitation, the focus is once
again on Hyderabad and by extension, the Nizam rulers. Was he secular
and modern in outlook? Debating on these questions were intellectuals,
advocates and Telangana activists at a seminar on 'Makers of Modern
Hyderabad' held here on Sunday.
Most of the speakers were of the view that the Nizam was secular. Advocate K Pratap Reddy
said the concept of secularism was introduced into the Constitution only
in 1972 and added that it was very much in vogue in Hyderabad state."Although
headed by a Muslim monarch, the government was absolutely secular. The
Nizams scrapped the death penalty way back in 1937," Pratap Reddy
explained. He further said that Hyderabad was a developed state
before independence and was bigger than even Delhi in those days.
Drawing a parallel with the current state of affairs in the country, the
advocate said the Nizams did not give away land free of cost to
industrialists and ruled as per the aspirations of the people.He
claimed that Telangana was never one with Andhra, as there were two
unions for employees and people were psychologically separated.Another
advocate K Jithendera Babu recalled that when priests wanted the Nizam
to perform Ganga puja to control the fury of the river Musi, he had
obliged them. "The Nizam respected the sentiments of the people," he added.He
said that the Nizam also gave importance to education and allocated
`1.5 crore annually for the sector. He said Panagal tank was renovated
at a cost of `10 lakh.The seminar was jointly organised by the
Deccan Archeological and Cultural Research Institute and the 1969
Telangana Movement Founders' Forum at the Madina Education Centre.

http://expressbuzz.com/cities/hyderabad/Nizam-was-secular-modern/315367.html

by MaxEntropy_Man Thu Apr 19, 2012 9:17 pm

why so much reverence for kings and nawabs who survive on government dole? there are far better heroes and role models in india today, like tessy thomas.

by Guest Thu Apr 19, 2012 9:37 pm

MaxEntropy_Man wrote:why so much reverence for kings and nawabs who survive on government dole? there are far better heroes and role models in india today, like tessy thomas.

this has to do with the legacy of the Nizams: were they secular or communal? The question is relevant also in the backdrop of the demand for separate Telangana.

HYDERABAD:
In the backdrop of the renewed Telangana agitation, the focus is once
again on Hyderabad and by extension, the Nizam rulers. Was he secular
and modern in outlook? Debating on these questions were intellectuals,
advocates and Telangana activists at a seminar on 'Makers of Modern
Hyderabad' held here on Sunday.
Most of the speakers were of the view that the Nizam was secular. Advocate K Pratap Reddy
said the concept of secularism was introduced into the Constitution only
in 1972 and added that it was very much in vogue in Hyderabad state."Although
headed by a Muslim monarch, the government was absolutely secular. The
Nizams scrapped the death penalty way back in 1937," Pratap Reddy
explained. He further said that Hyderabad was a developed state
before independence and was bigger than even Delhi in those days.
Drawing a parallel with the current state of affairs in the country, the
advocate said the Nizams did not give away land free of cost to
industrialists and ruled as per the aspirations of the people.He
claimed that Telangana was never one with Andhra, as there were two
unions for employees and people were psychologically separated.Another
advocate K Jithendera Babu recalled that when priests wanted the Nizam
to perform Ganga puja to control the fury of the river Musi, he had
obliged them. "The Nizam respected the sentiments of the people," he added.He
said that the Nizam also gave importance to education and allocated
`1.5 crore annually for the sector. He said Panagal tank was renovated
at a cost of `10 lakh.The seminar was jointly organised by the
Deccan Archeological and Cultural Research Institute and the 1969
Telangana Movement Founders' Forum at the Madina Education Centre.

http://expressbuzz.com/cities/hyderabad/Nizam-was-secular-modern/315367.html

by charvaka Thu Apr 19, 2012 11:10 pm

MaxEntropy_Man wrote:why so much reverence for kings and nawabs who survive on government dole? there are far better heroes and role models in india today, like tessy thomas.

This particular king presided over a government that killed his own subjects in the thousands, by officially aiding and abetting a murderous religious militia. He was more culpable for the activities of the Razakar murderers than Narendra Modi was for the Gujarat riots. But I am sure he was quite generous to the Razakars -- that has got to be a redeeming feature, and makes him secular.

by Guest Fri Apr 20, 2012 10:05 am

At the time of independence, a madness had seized the Indian sub-continent. Wrong decisions were taken by many of our political leaders which lead to the deaths of millions of people in north-west and eastern India. So it is not surprising that a few thousand died in Hyderabad during this time.

It is also not surprising that the Nizam tried to preserve his powers instead of unilaterally handing over his state to India. The difference between Narendra Modi and Razakars is that Razakars were not targeting on the basis of religion. They were simply trying to preserve and protect Hyderabad from being absorbed by India. In this we see the human weakness of the Nizam: he probably thought he was strong enough to keep being ruler of Hyderabad, and he was probably misguided by his advisors.

But leaving aside what happened at the time of the partition, the Nizam comes across as a secular person and that is why the majority of the intellectuals who took part in this debate in Hyderabad hailed the Nizam as a secular person.

----
HYDERABAD:
In the backdrop of the renewed Telangana agitation, the focus is once
again on Hyderabad and by extension, the Nizam rulers. Was he secular
and modern in outlook? Debating on these questions were intellectuals,
advocates and Telangana activists at a seminar on 'Makers of Modern
Hyderabad' held here on Sunday.
Most of the speakers were of the view that the Nizam was secular. Advocate K Pratap Reddy
said the concept of secularism was introduced into the Constitution only
in 1972 and added that it was very much in vogue in Hyderabad state."Although
headed by a Muslim monarch, the government was absolutely secular. The
Nizams scrapped the death penalty way back in 1937," Pratap Reddy
explained. He further said that Hyderabad was a developed state
before independence and was bigger than even Delhi in those days.
Drawing a parallel with the current state of affairs in the country, the
advocate said the Nizams did not give away land free of cost to
industrialists and ruled as per the aspirations of the people.He
claimed that Telangana was never one with Andhra, as there were two
unions for employees and people were psychologically separated.Another
advocate K Jithendera Babu recalled that when priests wanted the Nizam
to perform Ganga puja to control the fury of the river Musi, he had
obliged them. "The Nizam respected the sentiments of the people," he added.He
said that the Nizam also gave importance to education and allocated
`1.5 crore annually for the sector. He said Panagal tank was renovated
at a cost of `10 lakh.The seminar was jointly organised by the
Deccan Archeological and Cultural Research Institute and the 1969
Telangana Movement Founders' Forum at the Madina Education Centre.

http://expressbuzz.com/cities/hyderabad/Nizam-was-secular-modern/315367.html

by Guest Fri Apr 20, 2012 10:15 am

So how does one explain Charvaka's hatred for the Nizams to the extent that he has posted Naxalite poetry denouncing the Nizams on Sulekha (Gaddar, who Charvaka claims has sung this song, is a well known naxalite):

http://forums.sulekha.com/forums/coffeehouse/a-song-from-telangana-776092.htm

The explanation is that some of Charvaka's relatives or family friends probably got injured or killed by the Razakars during the time of independence. It is not possible otherwise to reconcile Charvaka's hatred for the Nizams with what the Hyderabadi intellectuals say on this issue.

by charvaka Fri Apr 20, 2012 10:21 am

Rashmun wrote:At the time of independence, a madness had seized the Indian sub-continent. Wrong decisions were taken by many of our political leaders which lead to the deaths of millions of people in north-west and eastern India. So it is not surprising that a few thousand died in Hyderabad during this time.

Your callousness on this matter is strangely not surprising.

Rashmun wrote:The difference between Narendra Modi and Razakars is that Razakars were not targeting on the basis of religion.

You are wrong. The Razakars targeted primarily Hindus.

Rashmun wrote:But leaving aside what happened at the time of the partition, the Nizam comes across as a secular person

Leaving aside what happened during WWII, Hitler comes across as a great leader.

Rashmun wrote:and that is why the majority of the intellectuals who took part in this debate in Hyderabad hailed the Nizam as a secular person.

These "intellectuals" have a very different agenda. They want a separate Telangana and are trying to rewrite history.

PS: It is clear that you don't know the details of what happened in Hyderabad. So I won't argue with ignorance. I just thought I would tell you the facts once, and let you continue along on your quixotic quest.

by Guest Fri Apr 20, 2012 10:29 am

charvaka wrote:
Rashmun wrote:At the time of independence, a madness had seized the Indian sub-continent. Wrong decisions were taken by many of our political leaders which lead to the deaths of millions of people in north-west and eastern India. So it is not surprising that a few thousand died in Hyderabad during this time.
Your callousness on this matter is strangely not surprising.

--> i am not being callous. i am simply trying to understand a particular phenomena in a scientific manner. Razakars only came into existence at the time of the partition of India.

charvaka wrote:
Rashmun wrote:The difference between Narendra Modi and Razakars is that Razakars were not targeting on the basis of religion.
You are wrong. The Razakars targeted primarily Hindus.

--> that's because the majority of the populace in Telangana were hindus. Razakars were only targeting people who wanted the Nizam's state to unite with India.

charvaka wrote:
Rashmun wrote:But leaving aside what happened at the time of the partition, the Nizam comes across as a secular person
Leaving aside what happened during WWII, Hitler comes across as a great leader.

--> the comparison is flawed because the persecution of jews by Hitler had started before WWII

charvaka wrote:
Rashmun wrote:and that is why the majority of the intellectuals who took part in this debate in Hyderabad hailed the Nizam as a secular person.
These "intellectuals" have a very different agenda. They want a separate Telangana and are trying to rewrite history.

--> That is pure guesswork on your part. There is sufficient evidence to show that the Nizam was patronizing both hindus and muslims for instance as the Hindu article which i posted (the first post in this thread) says.

by charvaka Fri Apr 20, 2012 10:42 am

Rashmun wrote:Razakars were only targeting people who wanted the Nizam's state to unite with India.

Yes, they had a questionnaire they used to administer. It had various questions like "on a scale of 1 to 10, with 10 being extremely satisfied and 1 being extremely dissatisfied, how do you rate your satisfaction with the customer service of the Nizam's government?" If your overall score was below a certain threshold, they would shoot you. If your scored high, they would offer you a job with them. Their process was entirely religion-neutral.

by doofus_maximus Fri Apr 20, 2012 10:53 am

Rashmun wrote:At the time of independence, a madness had seized the Indian sub-continent. Wrong decisions were taken by many of our political leaders which lead to the deaths of millions of people in north-west and eastern India. So it is not surprising that a few thousand died in Hyderabad during this time.

It is also not surprising that the Nizam tried to preserve his powers instead of unilaterally handing over his state to India. The difference between Narendra Modi and Razakars is that Razakars were not targeting on the basis of religion. They were simply trying to preserve and protect Hyderabad from being absorbed by India. In this we see the human weakness of the Nizam: he probably thought he was strong enough to keep being ruler of Hyderabad, and he was probably misguided by his advisors.

Thus speaketh Nizam's psychiatrist/confidant.

But leaving aside what happened at the time of the partition, the Nizam comes across as a secular person and that is why the majority of the intellectuals who took part in this debate in Hyderabad hailed the Nizam as a secular person.

l

by MaxEntropy_Man Fri Apr 20, 2012 11:52 am

what's the right response if the nizam invites you for dinner?
answer: fo shizzle my nizzle.

by charvaka Fri Apr 20, 2012 12:41 pm

MaxEntropy_Man wrote:what's the right response if the nizam invites you for dinner?
answer: fo shizzle my nizzle.

Hahaha.

On second thoughts, though, if you have something valuable that the Nizam might covet, you may be better off declining politely. The story goes that the guy who built the extravagant Falaknuma Palace didn't get to enjoy his creation. The Nizam liked the palace and wanted it for himself. So the owner was invited for an audience with the Nizam, and was pressured to offer the palace to the king as a "gift." The Nizam was, however, generous. He must have fed the guy rather well.

by Guest Fri Apr 20, 2012 1:57 pm

charvaka wrote:
MaxEntropy_Man wrote:what's the right response if the nizam invites you for dinner?
answer: fo shizzle my nizzle.
Hahaha.

On second thoughts, though, if you have something valuable that the Nizam might covet, you may be better off declining politely. The story goes that the guy who built the extravagant Falaknuma Palace didn't get to enjoy his creation. The Nizam liked the palace and wanted it for himself. So the owner was invited for an audience with the Nizam, and was pressured to offer the palace to the king as a "gift." The Nizam was, however, generous. He must have fed the guy rather well.

HYDERABAD: Once upon a time, just a little over 100 years ago Nawab
Vaqar-ul-Umra, the Nizam's prime minister, decided to get a slice of
heaven for Hyderabad. Nine years and an expenditure of a princely Rs
(Hali sikka) 60 lakh later, the Falaknuma (which means heaven-like)
Palace was standing tall barely five kilometres from Charminar. The year
was 1893....
It is said that the sixth Nizam, Mir Mahbub Ali Khan, got the palace as a
gift from his prime minister, which some note is more of a legend than
reality. They say that the Nizam had paid for the palace.
http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/2010-10-31/hyderabad/28239540_1_taj-group-guests-royal-palace

by Guest Fri Apr 20, 2012 2:12 pm

Nizam VII , a secular Monarch
------------------------

Since Hyderabad Deccan was a Hindu majority state,there
were about 16,000 Hindu temples in the state and all of them
were taken care by department of Umoor-e-Mazhabi or endowment
office. Most of the pundits and pujaris were on the payroll of
Nizam's government. Also Nasranis and padres were paid by the
state government. Nizam VII was always a strictly secular head of
state and government.

One example was the courage and impartiality shown by Nizam.
In front of old Viccaji restaurant on Abids , Sir Afsar Jung started
the construction of a beautiful mosque. After the construction was
completed the workers discovered a small temple very close to the
mosque. When this was disclosed to Nizam VII he immediately
ordered to stop any further construction and the mosque was
abandoned completely.Viccaji restaurant was previously the site
of Nawab Mohsin-ul-mulk's mansion.Nawab was one of the nobles
of Hyderabad Deccan who at the request of the Hyderabad government
moved here from North India.
.
There was a special agency to look after Sikh families and children.
If a Sikh dies with out any children a government inspector would go
to Punjab to find the next of the kin. The person was then appointed
in place of the deceased . He created a trust of Rs.one lakh (in 1920s)
for the Hindu Temple welfare.

There was no income tax department in Hyderabad and this was
most beneficial to the business community which consisted of large
number of Hindus who were businessmen,shop owners ,landlords
and farmers.

In districts and small villages there was a tradition whereby the
Hindu parents would leave their minor daughters in Mandirs
as Diva vasues .These girls used to spend their entire lives in
the Mandirs. Nizam in consultation with progressive Hindus
banned this practice (Ms Mue in her book Mother India-page 616)

He officially banned cow slaughter . In our younger days I never
ate beef in Hyderabad (was called bada Ghosht).I grew up
in Himayatnager which was predominantly a Hindu
neighborhood. I felt very safe and happy with my Hindu neighbors
and we jointly celebrated Hindu festivals.

Prominent and popular Hindus during Nizam

1)Maharaja Kishen Pershad , Prime Minister(longest serving)
2)Sarojini Devi (Bulbul-e-Hind)
3)Raja Lala Deen Dayal (photographer)
4)Dewan Bahadur Latcman Narayan Ram Gopal (D.B.R. Mills)
5)Dewan Bahadur Seth Than Malji(Dewan Bahadur Tah Malji Co)
6)Kishen Rao(Musheer-e-Deccan,newspaper)
7)Dr.Mallana & wife Ahilya Kalvakar(parents of Gen.Srinagesh)
8)S.N.Reddy Police commissioner
9)Venkat Ram Reddy police commissioner
10)Narsing Girji and adopted sons Pratap Girji and Dhan Raj Girji
11) Bansilal Pittie and son Panalal Pitti,philanthropists
12)Raja Murlidhar,Subedar and close friend of Nizam VI
13) Shivraj Dharamvant (Malwala Palace)and sons Dharam Karan
Mahboob Karan and Inder Karan.
14)Basheeshar Nath, Justice
15) Dr.Waghray,Dr.Bankat Chandra,Dr.Ramchanda(Ophthalmologist)
Dr.Borgaunkar,Dr.Shanta Bai,Dr.Shrikhande,Dr.Roop Karan,
Dr.Madan Gopal (son in law of Maharaj Kishen Pershad & Physician)
16)Raja Dilsukhram, P.M. Reddy who founded Deccan Airways,Hyd.,
Ramlal,Revenue Board Member,Dr.Ramlal director Education
17)Raja of Wanparthi and Kumudini Devi
18) Mr.& Mrs.Dhage one of the most popular and pioneering
social activists of Hyderabad(Children Society)

The mistrust and hatred between two great religions, Hindus
and Muslims is the creation of the politicians following the
practice of British masters of "Divide and Rule".

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/CharminarConnection/message/15979

by Jeremiah Mburuburu Fri Apr 20, 2012 2:15 pm

MaxEntropy_Man wrote:fo shizzle my nizzle.

what does that mean?

by Guest Fri Apr 20, 2012 2:21 pm

http://dir.groups.yahoo.com/group/CharminarConnection/message/6972

by MaxEntropy_Man Fri Apr 20, 2012 2:31 pm

Jeremiah Mburuburu wrote:
MaxEntropy_Man wrote:fo shizzle my nizzle.
what does that mean?

it means, "for sure my african american brother".

by Propagandhi711 Fri Apr 20, 2012 3:45 pm

charvaka wrote:
Rashmun wrote:Razakars were only targeting people who wanted the Nizam's state to unite with India.
Yes, they had a questionnaire they used to administer. It had various questions like "on a scale of 1 to 10, with 10 being extremely satisfied and 1 being extremely dissatisfied, how do you rate your satisfaction with the customer service of the Nizam's government?" If your overall score was below a certain threshold, they would shoot you. If your scored high, they would offer you a job with them. Their process was entirely religion-neutral.

bwahahahahhaaaa....I sure hope the questionnaire was in three languages - hindi, telugu and hyderabadi khari bholi sanskrit-urdu-persian synthesized telangana

by Guest Fri Apr 20, 2012 5:11 pm

Propagandhi711 wrote:
charvaka wrote:
Rashmun wrote:Razakars were only targeting people who wanted the Nizam's state to unite with India.
Yes, they had a questionnaire they used to administer. It had various questions like "on a scale of 1 to 10, with 10 being extremely satisfied and 1 being extremely dissatisfied, how do you rate your satisfaction with the customer service of the Nizam's government?" If your overall score was below a certain threshold, they would shoot you. If your scored high, they would offer you a job with them. Their process was entirely religion-neutral.

bwahahahahhaaaa....I sure hope the questionnaire was in three languages - hindi, telugu and hyderabadi khari bholi sanskrit-urdu-persian synthesized telangana

Propa, please share your thoughts on KCR's explanation of the differences between Telangana and Andhra languages. Do you agree or disagree with KCR?

by Guest Fri Apr 20, 2012 5:18 pm

Rashmun wrote:
Propagandhi711 wrote:
charvaka wrote:
Rashmun wrote:Razakars were only targeting people who wanted the Nizam's state to unite with India.
Yes, they had a questionnaire they used to administer. It had various questions like "on a scale of 1 to 10, with 10 being extremely satisfied and 1 being extremely dissatisfied, how do you rate your satisfaction with the customer service of the Nizam's government?" If your overall score was below a certain threshold, they would shoot you. If your scored high, they would offer you a job with them. Their process was entirely religion-neutral.

bwahahahahhaaaa....I sure hope the questionnaire was in three languages - hindi, telugu and hyderabadi khari bholi sanskrit-urdu-persian synthesized telangana

Propa, please share your thoughts on KCR's explanation of the differences between Telangana and Andhra languages. Do you agree or disagree with KCR?

a more complete version of the earlier video:

by Guest Fri Apr 20, 2012 5:20 pm

Propa would you agree that this is shameful:

Anyone familiar with the recent genre of
Telugu cinema will understand the nature of the cultural grievance. The
“hero” and “heroine” in Telugu cinema speak a Telugu closer to the
dialect of the coastal region, while Telangana Telugu, with its mixture
of dakhni, is reserved for the movie’s comedian or villain.

http://www.indianexpress.com/oldStory/43925/

by Guest Sat Apr 21, 2012 1:29 am

Remembering
the last Nizam

Mir Osman Ali Khan's 120th birth anniversary falls today. A lecture on
his life and times is being organised by the Nizam's Jubilee Pavilion
Trust at the Nizam's Museum, Purani Haveli at 11 a.m.

ROYAL SPLENDOUR: Mir Osman Ali Khan.

ALTHOUGH THE great flood ravaged the domain of Hyderabad in 1908 three
years prior to the ascent of the VII Nizam Nawab Mir Osman Ali Khan to
the throne, one of his first assignments was to invite Visweswaraiah to
advise him on how a similar flood could be controlled and excess water
be put to good use. In accordance with his suggestion, the embankment of
the Musi River and construction of Osman Sagar and Himayat Sagar Dams
at Gandipet were undertaken. If the old city suffered minimum damage in
the recent flood two years ago the credit goes to the last Nizam for his
foresight and commitment to the welfare of his people. What precautions
have been taken after these waters shattered not just the homes but
lives of so many citizens? Have we used advanced technology and
scientific know-how to implement necessary precautions? Or has the
incident been washed away like so many others from the memory of those
in power and positions of responsibility?

Today, everyone is on the fast track and very few stop to remember the
last Nizam -whose contribution to his people never was and never will be
matched. The ruler who was praised by great leaders like
C.Rajagopalachari, Jawaharlal Nehru, Dr. Ambedkar and even the imperial
British. Rabindranath Tagore wrote in praise of the first vernacular
University established in 1917 by the Nizam, "I have long been waiting
for the day when, free from the shackles of a foreign language our
education becomes naturally accessible to all our people.'' Up to 11 per
cent of the Nizam's budget was spent on education - schools, colleges,
universities and even a Department for Translation was set up. Primary
education was made compulsory and provided free to poor sections of
society.

A corpus of one crore was earmarked for industrial development and the
Nizam was responsible for the earliest public sector undertakings -
Singareni Collieries and Nizam Sugar Factory. In 1911, the Nizam
suspended capital punishment and replaced it with life imprisonment,
something that was introduced only in 1964 in Britain. He separated the
Judiciary from the Executive, another landmark in history. The City
Improvement Board was set up by him and slums were replaced by planned
colonies. Health and hygiene were amongst the several welfare programs
he pioneered. Unfortunately public memory is short-lived and few people
remember the contributions of the last Nizam. Bhaskar Rao, curator of
the H.E.H. The Nizam's Museum reinforces, "The Nizam's secular outlook
is more than evident in his keen interest to preserve the magnificent
Buddhist frescos at the Ajanta and Ellora Caves. Italian experts were
specially invited for restoration and recreation of these works on
canvas to preserve them for posterity. Each object in this museum speaks
volumes of his enormous contributions.''

``Ours were glorious days, days of plenty under the flourishing regime of the Nizams. Hyderabad was known to bring bharkat
to both the underprivileged and privileged classes alike,'' reminisces
Themi Mehta, wife of well-known cricketer late Soli Mehta. Her
grandfather Sorabjee Pestonjee Kanga, a Persian scholar, was the
personal tutor to the last Nizam, Mir Osman Ali Khan. On every birthday
of the Nizam Kanga composed poetry and presented it in a silver casket
to his `Sarkar' and student. Likewise, the Nizam reciprocated with
utmost respect to his tutor and visited him twice every year - on Parsi
New Year's day and on Kanga's birthday.

The 120th birth anniversary of the VII Nizam falls on September 9, the
Ist Rajjab as per the Hijri calendar. To mark this occasion, The Nizam's
Jubilee Pavilion Trust is holding a Memorial lecture on the Life and
Times of the VII Nizam on Monday,(today) September 9 at 11 a.m. at the
Nizam's Museum, Purani Haveli, Hyderabad.

Find out what no history textbook can ever emphasise enough about this true jewel of Hyderabad. For details, call on 4521029.

PADMINI B. PATELL

http://www.hindu.com/thehindu/mp/2002/09/09/stories/2002090900640200.htm

by truthbetold Sat Apr 21, 2012 10:23 am

Facts be damned. True research is just picking up some article from unverifiable internet and present that as evidence of your formulations.
Just match the above article against the well recorded history of telangana armed struggle of 1946 to 1949. Also read the living conditions of millions of peasants and agri labor of that era. Read about Razakaars.

Remember TajMahal. It was the start of Mughal financial decline.

Last Nizam was considered to be very wealth conscious and stole property from his own noble man. He forced the hand of his uncle to hand over Falaknuma Palace to him. He was listed as the world's richest man in 1940s while ordinary Telangana peasent was one of the poorest in the country.

There are few beneficiaries of that era who try to rewrite history. But the people of telangana remember 1940s history well enough to ignore the revisionist history.

by Guest Sat Apr 21, 2012 2:22 pm

truthbetold wrote:Facts be damned. True research is just picking up some article from unverifiable internet and present that as evidence of your formulations.
Just match the above article against the well recorded history of telangana armed struggle of 1946 to 1949. Also read the living conditions of millions of peasants and agri labor of that era. Read about Razakaars.

--> The facts are from the widely respected 'Hindu' newspaper for which you yourself have expressed admiration for in the past if i remember correctly.

truthbetold wrote:Remember TajMahal. It was the start of Mughal financial decline.

--> This is debatable. Aurangzeb did not splurge money and his tomb is the simplest of all tombs imaginable--an open tomb with no paraphernalia--like a tomb for a commoner. But of all the mughal emperors he probably did the most to damage the Mughal kingdom's finances by picking up fights with everyone from marathas to rajputs to jats to sikhs to just about everybody.

truthbetold wrote:Last Nizam was considered to be very wealth conscious and stole property from his own noble man. He forced the hand of his uncle to hand over Falaknuma Palace to him. He was listed as the world's richest man in 1940s while ordinary Telangana peasent was one of the poorest in the country.

There are few beneficiaries of that era who try to rewrite history. But the people of telangana remember 1940s history well enough to ignore the revisionist history.

it is said that the Last Nizam was gifted the Falaknuma palace by the Nizam's own prime minister, but this story is believed to be a myth by at least some people who claim that the Nizam paid for the palace. (Refer to the TOI article i gave in an earlier post.)
Many kings of the time in India were very rich while their subjects were poor. Nizam is more conspicious because he was the biggest of all such Indian kings. Of course, Nizam made many mistakes in the the 1940's but at that time many people in the country including the top leaders made wrong decisions. One cannot take away from the Nizam the good things he did that have been elaborated in the several articles i have posted in this thread. Leaving aside the mistakes the Nizam made in the 1940's he seems to have been a good king.

by truthbetold Sat Apr 21, 2012 9:41 pm

I can get into a discussion on many assertions you made. but knowing how they end up I will avoid all of them except one.

Whether Nizam is a good king?

Who is in the best position to decide that? rashmun after 70 years? few writers whose families profited from the Nizam's nepotism? or the millions of people who actually lived in that era and tilled the land to pay the taxes?

I think the ruled have the right to pronounce whether a ruler is good bad or ugly. In this case, the people of telangana rose in revolt against the feudal rule of Nizam. It implies that Nizam's rule was not just bad, it is bad and ugly. Nizam's rule forced the simple labor to take up arms. Read the history before making pronouncements like Nizam was a good king. your pronouncements about Nizam's rule are your imaginary fiction. You start from a POV to suit your thinking and then find morsel of facts to support your pov. You take one or two facts and then make huge leap of faith to make claims like Nizam was a good king.

People in Telangana suffered immensely during the rule of Nizam and his ancestors and were left behind by time. It is that lack of normal development that leads to difficulties in current Andhra vs Telangana issue.
Nizam not only ruined the lives of telangana people of his day, he ruined the future of many generations after he was thrown out.

by MaxEntropy_Man Sat Apr 21, 2012 10:05 pm

truthbetold wrote: your pronouncements about Nizam's rule are your imaginary fiction.

imaginary fiction? isn't all fiction imaginary?

by Kris Sat Apr 21, 2012 10:17 pm

MaxEntropy_Man wrote:
truthbetold wrote: your pronouncements about Nizam's rule are your imaginary fiction.

imaginary fiction? isn't all fiction imaginary?

>>>But docudramas can blur the lines

by charvaka Sun Apr 22, 2012 2:50 am

truthbetold wrote:Whether Nizam is a good king?

Who is in the best position to decide that? rashmun after 70 years? few writers whose families profited from the Nizam's nepotism? or the millions of people who actually lived in that era and tilled the land to pay the taxes?

I think the ruled have the right to pronounce whether a ruler is good bad or ugly. In this case, the people of telangana rose in revolt against the feudal rule of Nizam. It implies that Nizam's rule was not just bad, it is bad and ugly. Nizam's rule forced the simple labor to take up arms.

That is the crux of it. The Nizam's rule was bad for much of his reign, and it went to disastrous around the time of India's independence. He has the dubious distinction of having his people revolt against him. If that is a "good king" I don't know what "bad" would be!

This "good king" collected all revenue from 10 percent of all agricultural land in his state as personal income (separate from the state's revenue). The people of that area were literally the Nizam's slaves. He became the world's richest man although his state was near the bottom on per-capita income. The vetti system of forced labor was in place; each "lower-caste" family had to send one man to do unpaid forced labor the landlord. The Nizam's autocracy admitted of no elected bodies at any level. Political parties were not allowed; there were no civil liberties.

But that was not the worst aspect of this good king's rule. That was the unleashing of the Razakars on a large-scale campaign of murder, rape and pillage in a bid to terrorize the villages into submission. Neither the Gujarat riots of 2002 nor the massacre of Sikhs in Delhi in 1984 compares to the scale and duration of this state-sponsored terror. Even the horrific violence of the Partition did not have the state's support. But the Razakar rampage had the full backing of the state machinery. Unlike in Gujarat and Delhi, there was no fig lead of separation; Kasim Rizvi was formally appointed as the head of the Razakars by the Nizam's chief minister. And the rampage went on for many months before Patel finally intervened with the Police Action. As the head of that state, the Nizam bears full responsibility for that violence.

The Nizam used terrible violence on his people to keep Hyderabad out of India. Then after the Indian takeover, he moved to safeguard his wealth as well as income in the form of a privy purse. Within a few days after the Indian army moved into Secunderabad and Golconda, he made statements distancing himself from the Razakars, so his ill-gotten money would not be endangered. When he did, he admitted that the Razakars' tactics were Hitlerite in nature.

The most popular Telangana song of the time has a line "nAzIla minchinavurO naizAmu sarkarODA" ("you have exceeded the Nazis, o Nizam"). In the statement he made in order to secure the public dole, he pretty much conceded that point.

by charvaka Sun Apr 22, 2012 3:13 am

Rashmun wrote:So how does one explain Charvaka's hatred for the Nizams to the extent that he has posted Naxalite poetry denouncing the Nizams on Sulekha (Gaddar, who Charvaka claims has sung this song, is a well known naxalite):

http://forums.sulekha.com/forums/coffeehouse/a-song-from-telangana-776092.htm

Thank you for posting this. I will reformat this and post it again. It is a song of liberation.

Rashmun wrote:The explanation is that some of Charvaka's relatives or family friends probably got injured or killed by the Razakars during the time of independence.

I am proud of my family members who played their small parts in the revolt against the autocratic Nizam. I am entirely glad that they chose to fight tyranny rather than be servile. I recognize your innate need to praise and hero-worship despots; it is not something I can empathize with.

by charvaka Sun Apr 22, 2012 3:27 am

A little over 60 years ago, the people of Telangana were in revolt. The revolt was triggered by the feudal exploitation of Telangana's people by the autocratic regime of the Nizam. Thirteen months after India's independence, the Indian Army moved in and ended the tinpot dictatorship of His Exalted Highness Mir Osman Ali Khan Pasha, the seventh Nizam of Hyderabad. Patel's decision to send in the Army to liberate Hyderabad was influenced in large part by the growing armed struggle led by the Andhra Communists. Thousands of villages had thrown out the Nizam's police and army, killed or expelled their feudal landlords, and redistributed agricultural land to the tillers.

Starting out from my home district of Nallagonda, this movement swept across Telangana, in spite of brutal repression by the Nizam's Razakars -- a reactionary private militia with support from the government. The song below became the anthem for this revolution, like La Marseillaise had for the French Revolution. To this day, young and old people in Telangana's villages sing this song in memory of telangANA sAyudha pOrATam ("armed struggle"); many people know the song word for word. This song provides insights into Telangana's history, politics and language, particularly for Telugu people from outside Telangana.

banDenaka banDi gaTTi
padahAru banDlu gaTTi
E banDlo pOtavu koDukO
naizAmu sarkarODA...
nAzIla minchinavurO
naizAmu sarkarODA
Vehicle after vehicle, a convoy of sixteen you have readied; which one will you travel in, my son the Nizam? You have exceeded the Nazis in your brutality, o Nizam!

pOlIsu milTri renDu
balavantulAnukOni
nuvu pallelokostivi koDukO
aha pallelokostivi koDuko
naizAmu sarkarODA
You thought your police and military were mighty; you came into our villages -- oh, you came into our villages, my son the Nizam!

jAgirudArulantA
zAmInudArulantA
nI anDa chEriri koDukO
nI anDa chEriri koDukO
naizAmu sarkarODA
The landlords -- jagirdars, zamindars, all of them -- they came to your aid, oh, they came to your aid, my son the Nizam!

strI purushalnta kalisi
pillAlamanta kalisi
vaDi chela rAllu nimpi
vaDivaDi ga koTTitenu
karApu nILLu techchi...
kaLLallo challitEnu
nI milTri pAripOyerO
nI milTri pAripOyerO
naizAmu sarkarODA
Women and men got together, and children too; we filled the paddy fields with stones, and fast and furious we pelted them, water with chilli powder we threw in eyes. Your military ran away -- oh, your military ran away for good, my son the Nizam!

chuTTu muTTU sUryapETa
naTTanaDuma nallagonDa
nuvvunDEdi haiderabAdu
dAnipakka gOlukonDa
golukonDa kilA kinda
golukonDa kilA kinda
nI gOri kaDtam koDukO...
naizAmu sarkarODa
nI gOri kaDtam koDukO...
naizAmu sarkarODa
nI gOri kaDtam koDukO...
naizAmu sarkarODa
Around our area is Suryapeta, bang in the middle is Nallagonda, you live in Hyderabad, and next to that is Golconda. Below the fort of Golconda, right below the fort of Golconda, we will build your tomb, my son the Nizam! Oh, we will build your tomb, my son the Nizam! Oh, we will build your tomb, my son the Nizam!

The references in the song to the Nizam as a son are mildly derogatory and belittling.

Finally, here is a video of this song being sung by Gaddar.

PS: It is a reasonable bet that "good kings" don't cause their subjects to fantasize about burying them.

by charvaka Sun Apr 22, 2012 3:56 am

Kasim Rizvi was the leader of the Razakars, appointed to the post by the Nizam's government. Here are extracts from his speeches. One can tell from his words whether his group targeted Hindus or not.

"A Hindu is a kafir, who worships stones and monkeys (laughter), who drinks cow’s urine and eats cow-dung in the name of religion (renewed laughter), and who is a barbarian and wants to rule us! What an ambition and what a day dream!....The only answer to them is the naked sword!"

"If the Indian Union ventures to enter Hyderabad, the invaders will see the burning everywhere of bodies of one crore and sixty five lakhs of Hindus. We, Muslims, will not spare others when we ourselves are not allowed to exist."

by Guest Sun Apr 22, 2012 7:54 am

charvaka wrote:
Rashmun wrote:So how does one explain Charvaka's hatred for the Nizams to the extent that he has posted Naxalite poetry denouncing the Nizams on Sulekha (Gaddar, who Charvaka claims has sung this song, is a well known naxalite):

http://forums.sulekha.com/forums/coffeehouse/a-song-from-telangana-776092.htm

Thank you for posting this. I will reformat this and post it again. It is a song of liberation.

Rashmun wrote:The explanation is that some of Charvaka's relatives or family friends probably got injured or killed by the Razakars during the time of independence.
I am proud of my family members who played their small parts in the revolt against the autocratic Nizam. I am entirely glad that they chose to fight tyranny rather than be servile. I recognize your innate need to praise and hero-worship despots; it is not something I can empathize with.

--> I only praised the Nizam based on the facts presented in your favourite Indian newspaper--The Hindu. All kings in the past were despots. Some--like Krishnadeva Raya--were enlightened despots and these are people who i admire. Other kings, like Aurangzeb, who did not behave in a wise and just manner, are people for whom i have no admiration whatsoever.

by Guest Sun Apr 22, 2012 8:06 am

charvaka wrote:Kasim Rizvi was the leader of the Razakars, appointed to the post by the Nizam's government. Here are extracts from his speeches. One can tell from his words whether his group targeted Hindus or not.

"A Hindu is a kafir, who worships stones and monkeys (laughter), who drinks cow’s urine and eats cow-dung in the name of religion (renewed laughter), and who is a barbarian and wants to rule us! What an ambition and what a day dream!....The only answer to them is the naked sword!"

"If the Indian Union ventures to enter Hyderabad, the invaders will see the burning everywhere of bodies of one crore and sixty five lakhs of Hindus. We, Muslims, will not spare others when we ourselves are not allowed to exist."

--> Kasim Rizvi was appointed leader of Razakars by Mir Laiq Ali who was the Prime Minister of the Nizam. But the dates are very interesting.

Mir Laiq Ali (died 1971) was the last Prime Minister of Hyderabad State under the rule of the Nizams.^[1] His official title was "President of the Executive Council of the Nizam of Hyderabad".
Laiq Ali was an engineer and an industrialist. He served as Prime Minister of Hyderabad State from November 1947 until the Operation Polo "police action" of 18 September 1948.
He was the mastermind behind the Razakars and appointed Kasim Razvi as its chief. He was kept under house arrest in Begumpet, from where he escaped in March 1950.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mir_Laiq_Ali

----
Kasim Razvi was a high court advocate. He was appointed as Chief of Razakars by the then Prime Minister of Hyderabad State, Mir Laiq Ali.
He was politically powerful and a close advisor of the Nizam, whom he
encouraged to defy the Indian government, and block the accession of
Hyderabad into India. At the height of the crisis, Razvi had placed his
allies in influential posts, and was virtually dictating the Nizam's
policy on the issue. Razvi even traveled to Delhi and had a stormy meeting with Indian leader Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel.
He is quoted to have said "Death with the sword in hand, is always
preferable to execution by a mere stroke of the pen, prompting the
Indian government to call him the "Nizam's Frankenstein monster".^[1]

^{http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kasim_Razvi}

by Guest Sun Apr 22, 2012 8:15 am

Rashmun wrote:
charvaka wrote:Kasim Rizvi was the leader of the Razakars, appointed to the post by the Nizam's government. Here are extracts from his speeches. One can tell from his words whether his group targeted Hindus or not.

"A Hindu is a kafir, who worships stones and monkeys (laughter), who drinks cow’s urine and eats cow-dung in the name of religion (renewed laughter), and who is a barbarian and wants to rule us! What an ambition and what a day dream!....The only answer to them is the naked sword!"

"If the Indian Union ventures to enter Hyderabad, the invaders will see the burning everywhere of bodies of one crore and sixty five lakhs of Hindus. We, Muslims, will not spare others when we ourselves are not allowed to exist."

--> Kasim Rizvi was appointed leader of Razakars by Mir Laiq Ali who was the Prime Minister of the Nizam. But the dates are very interesting.

Mir Laiq Ali (died 1971) was the last Prime Minister of Hyderabad State under the rule of the Nizams.^[1] His official title was "President of the Executive Council of the Nizam of Hyderabad".
Laiq Ali was an engineer and an industrialist. He served as Prime Minister of Hyderabad State from November 1947 until the Operation Polo "police action" of 18 September 1948.
He was the mastermind behind the Razakars and appointed Kasim Razvi as its chief. He was kept under house arrest in Begumpet, from where he escaped in March 1950.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mir_Laiq_Ali

----
Kasim Razvi was a high court advocate. He was appointed as Chief of Razakars by the then Prime Minister of Hyderabad State, Mir Laiq Ali.
He was politically powerful and a close advisor of the Nizam, whom he
encouraged to defy the Indian government, and block the accession of
Hyderabad into India. At the height of the crisis, Razvi had placed his
allies in influential posts, and was virtually dictating the Nizam's
policy on the issue. Razvi even traveled to Delhi and had a stormy meeting with Indian leader Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel.
He is quoted to have said "Death with the sword in hand, is always
preferable to execution by a mere stroke of the pen, prompting the
Indian government to call him the "Nizam's Frankenstein monster".^[1]

^{http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kasim_Razvi}

-----
So the first point to note is that when the Indian government called Kasim Razvi 'Nizam's Frankenstein Monster' they acknowledged the fact that although the Nizam may have had a role in creating him, he was now someone who was no longer under the control of the Nizam--just like Frankenstein's monster. The second point to note is that it is not disputed that there were muslims in the state of hyderabad who were for the merger of the Nizam's state with India. Kasim Rizvi was free to say what he wanted to but the fact is that Razakars did target muslims who were for the merger. One last point: i realize Kasim Rizvi was a crackpot but it is possible some fanatics may be imputing false quotes to him. For this reason it is better to give the url of the site from which one is copy pasting the purported quotes of Kasim Rizvi from.

by MaxEntropy_Man Sun Apr 22, 2012 8:27 am

carvaka -- thanks for posting the history of the overthrow of the nizam and the poetry. it was a most interesting read. besides the obvious similarity in vocabulary, i found the following interesting.

-- minjuthal in tamil also means to exceed (same meaning as minchina in telugu)
-- chuththu mutRam in tamil means surroundings (i am quite certain it is from the same root as chuTTu muTTu)

by Guest Sun Apr 22, 2012 8:29 am

charvaka wrote:Kasim Rizvi was the leader of the Razakars, appointed to the post by the Nizam's government. Here are extracts from his speeches. One can tell from his words whether his group targeted Hindus or not.

"A Hindu is a kafir, who worships stones and monkeys (laughter), who drinks cow’s urine and eats cow-dung in the name of religion (renewed laughter), and who is a barbarian and wants to rule us! What an ambition and what a day dream!....The only answer to them is the naked sword!"

"If the Indian Union ventures to enter Hyderabad, the invaders will see the burning everywhere of bodies of one crore and sixty five lakhs of Hindus. We, Muslims, will not spare others when we ourselves are not allowed to exist."

--> Charvaka, can you give the source of these quotes (book or url)? Thank you.
--> Meanwhile, consider the following:

-----
Falsifying history

PARVATHI MENON

....The autocracy of the Nizam undoubtedly had a pro-Muslim, anti-Hindu aspect
to it. The Nizam's administration was largely Muslim, Urdu was imposed on
his subjects, and the Razakars' actions were targeted against Hindus. The
Arya Samaj, which took up cudgels for the 'Hindu masses' against 'Muslim
oppressors', took over the leadership of the anti-Nizam movement partly owing
to the late arrival of the Congress; until 1940 the Indian National Congress
did not take up the people's struggle in the princely state.

What is not emphasised in the current debate is the fact that Hindu
deshmukhs and jagirdars formed part of the support base of
the Nizam. A section of Dalits joined the Razakars' forces, and a number
of Hindu religious maths lent support to the Nizam's regime. Another historical
fact that is suppressed is the backlash against innocent Muslims after the
police action. Thousands of Muslims were massacred by Hindu communal elements
in Shahapur taluk in Gulbarga district of Hyderabad Karnatak, in Kushtagi
(Raichur district), and in Latur Omerga and in Osmanabad (Bombay presidency).
Muslims also participated in large numbers in the struggle against the Nizam.
"The famous and influential sufi from Gulbarga, Sajjad Darga Bande Nawaz,
spoke against the Razakars," recalled Maruti Manpade, Gulbarga district secretary
of the Communist Party of India (Marxist). "The CPI had Muslim leaders who
fought in the struggle in Gulbarga, like Makhdoom Moiuddin who came from
Hyderabad, 'Painter' Parothe, and Ghulam Nabi Azad, another Communist from
Hyderabad who came here during the struggle."

http://www.frontlineonnet.com/fl1521/15210360.htm

----

by truthbetold Sun Apr 22, 2012 8:54 am

Your contention that muslims were killed after police action could be a fact, but how does that relate to Nizam being a good king?

Do you just intend to throw irrelevant cut and pastes to widen a topic and confuse the discussion?

Kasim Razvi spoke regularly on Radio and most of his speeches were widely heard.

Your effort to reduce the despotism of Nizam by making generic statements that all kings of the time were despots. While feudal and monarchic rules were generally anti people and anti democratic, only a few reach the state of continuous mass murders, poorest population and stagnant cultural growth like Nizam's.

Also Nizam's incompetence in controlling his appointees cannot be his defense. He was responsible for the actions of Razakaars. Congress let him be to make peace with local muslim population. Any other country, Nizam and his clan would have been finished.

Finally, it is good to have interest in wide area of subjects. But one has to earn the right to make pronouncements by diligent research and prudent analysis. Cutting and pasting and demanding respect for foolish assertions is not the way to earn respect of others.

Recognize the error of your ways and learn to improve your research methods. one day we can have a decent discussion.

by MaxEntropy_Man Sun Apr 22, 2012 9:26 am

interesting postscript to the story.

by MaxEntropy_Man Sun Apr 22, 2012 9:40 am

more:

http://helloji.wordpress.com/2008/04/11/nizam-of-hyderabad-fifth-on-the-forbes-all-time-wealthiest/

by Guest Sun Apr 22, 2012 9:41 am

truthbetold wrote:Your contention that muslims were killed after police action could be a fact, but how does that relate to Nizam being a good king?

Do you just intend to throw irrelevant cut and pastes to widen a topic and confuse the discussion?

Kasim Razvi spoke regularly on Radio and most of his speeches were widely heard.

Your effort to reduce the despotism of Nizam by making generic statements that all kings of the time were despots. While feudal and monarchic rules were generally anti people and anti democratic, only a few reach the state of continuous mass murders, poorest population and stagnant cultural growth like Nizam's.

Also Nizam's incompetence in controlling his appointees cannot be his defense. He was responsible for the actions of Razakaars. Congress let him be to make peace with local muslim population. Any other country, Nizam and his clan would have been finished.

Finally, it is good to have interest in wide area of subjects. But one has to earn the right to make pronouncements by diligent research and prudent analysis. Cutting and pasting and demanding respect for foolish assertions is not the way to earn respect of others.

---
Several interesting facts in the Frontline article:
1. Razakars were comprised not exclusively of muslims; there were hindus who had joined Razakars.
2. Since Razakars were targeting those who were for merger of Nizam's state it is inevitable that there would have been clashes between Razakars and those muslims were for the merger. There is incontrovertible evidence from many sources (including this article) that a section of muslims were openly in favor of the merger.

3. Many Hindus supported the Nizam's rule.
4. The fact that Congress called Kasim Razvi 'Nizam's Frankenstein Monster' means they recognized Razvi was no longer under the control of the Nizam and that he (Razvi) had gone out of control.
5. The fact that at the time of the partition of India, the whole country had gone a little crazy (recall the killings of millions of people in north-west and also in eastern India) makes it easier to believe that people like Razvi were no longer under the control of the Nizam.
6. Razakars were only formed around the time of the partition of India.
7. Nizam made many mistakes in the 1940's, including his role in the formation of the Razakars (which was formed by the Nizam's prime minister). But that does not mean that we should overlook the good things the Nizam did in the 1920s and 1930s.
8. I am basing my assessment based on the facts given in the Hindu articles and Frontline article i have given in this thread.
9. My opinion on the Nizam is not dogmatic. I am willing to change my opinion if the facts given in the Hindu and Frontline articles are shown to be incorrect or false.

Falsifying history
PARVATHI MENON

....The autocracy of the Nizam undoubtedly had a pro-Muslim, anti-Hindu aspect
to it. The Nizam's administration was largely Muslim, Urdu was imposed on
his subjects, and the Razakars' actions were targeted against Hindus. The
Arya Samaj, which took up cudgels for the 'Hindu masses' against 'Muslim
oppressors', took over the leadership of the anti-Nizam movement partly owing
to the late arrival of the Congress; until 1940 the Indian National Congress
did not take up the people's struggle in the princely state.

What is not emphasised in the current debate is the fact that Hindu
deshmukhs and jagirdars formed part of the support base of
the Nizam. A section of Dalits joined the Razakars' forces, and a number
of Hindu religious maths lent support to the Nizam's regime. Another historical
fact that is suppressed is the backlash against innocent Muslims after the
police action. Thousands of Muslims were massacred by Hindu communal elements
in Shahapur taluk in Gulbarga district of Hyderabad Karnatak, in Kushtagi
(Raichur district), and in Latur Omerga and in Osmanabad (Bombay presidency).
Muslims also participated in large numbers in the struggle against the Nizam.
"The famous and influential sufi from Gulbarga, Sajjad Darga Bande Nawaz,
spoke against the Razakars," recalled Maruti Manpade, Gulbarga district secretary
of the Communist Party of India (Marxist). "The CPI had Muslim leaders who
fought in the struggle in Gulbarga, like Makhdoom Moiuddin who came from
Hyderabad, 'Painter' Parothe, and Ghulam Nabi Azad, another Communist from
Hyderabad who came here during the struggle."

http://www.frontlineonnet.com/fl1521/15210360.htm

by Guest Sun Apr 22, 2012 9:53 am

truthbetold wrote:Your contention that muslims were killed after police action could be a fact, but how does that relate to Nizam being a good king?

Do you just intend to throw irrelevant cut and pastes to widen a topic and confuse the discussion?

Kasim Razvi spoke regularly on Radio and most of his speeches were widely heard.

Your effort to reduce the despotism of Nizam by making generic statements that all kings of the time were despots. While feudal and monarchic rules were generally anti people and anti democratic, only a few reach the state of continuous mass murders, poorest population and stagnant cultural growth like Nizam's.

Also Nizam's incompetence in controlling his appointees cannot be his defense. He was responsible for the actions of Razakaars. Congress let him be to make peace with local muslim population. Any other country, Nizam and his clan would have been finished.

Finally, it is good to have interest in wide area of subjects. But one has to earn the right to make pronouncements by diligent research and prudent analysis. Cutting and pasting and demanding respect for foolish assertions is not the way to earn respect of others.

---

1. Razakars were comprised not exclusively of muslims; there were hindus who had joined Razakars.
2. Since Razakars were targeting those who were for merger of Nizam's state it is inevitable that there would have been clashes between Razakars and those muslims were for the merger. There is incontrovertible evidence from many sources (including this article) that a section of muslims were openly in favor of the merger.

3. Many Hindus supported the Nizam's rule.
4. The fact that Congress called Kasim Razvi 'Nizam's Frankenstein Monster' means they recognized Razvi was no longer under the control of the Nizam and that he (Razvi) had gone out of control.
5. The fact that at the time of the partition of India, the whole country had gone a little crazy (recall the killings of millions of people in north-west and also in eastern India) makes it easier to believe that people like Razvi were no longer under the control of the Nizam.
6. Razakars were only formed around the time of the partition of India.
7. Nizam made many mistakes in the 1940's, including his role in the formation of the Razakars (which was formed by the Nizam's prime minister). But that does not mean that we should overlook the good things the Nizam did in the 1920s and 1930s.
8. I am basing my assessment based on the facts given in the Hindu articles and Frontline article i have given in this thread.
9. My opinion on the Nizam is not dogmatic. I am willing to change my opinion if the facts given in the Hindu and Frontline articles are shown to be incorrect or false.

Falsifying history
PARVATHI MENON

....The autocracy of the Nizam undoubtedly had a pro-Muslim, anti-Hindu aspect
to it. The Nizam's administration was largely Muslim, Urdu was imposed on
his subjects, and the Razakars' actions were targeted against Hindus. The
Arya Samaj, which took up cudgels for the 'Hindu masses' against 'Muslim
oppressors', took over the leadership of the anti-Nizam movement partly owing
to the late arrival of the Congress; until 1940 the Indian National Congress
did not take up the people's struggle in the princely state.

What is not emphasised in the current debate is the fact that Hindu
deshmukhs and jagirdars formed part of the support base of
the Nizam. A section of Dalits joined the Razakars' forces, and a number
of Hindu religious maths lent support to the Nizam's regime. Another historical
fact that is suppressed is the backlash against innocent Muslims after the
police action. Thousands of Muslims were massacred by Hindu communal elements
in Shahapur taluk in Gulbarga district of Hyderabad Karnatak, in Kushtagi
(Raichur district), and in Latur Omerga and in Osmanabad (Bombay presidency).
Muslims also participated in large numbers in the struggle against the Nizam.
"The famous and influential sufi from Gulbarga, Sajjad Darga Bande Nawaz,
spoke against the Razakars," recalled Maruti Manpade, Gulbarga district secretary
of the Communist Party of India (Marxist). "The CPI had Muslim leaders who
fought in the struggle in Gulbarga, like Makhdoom Moiuddin who came from
Hyderabad, 'Painter' Parothe, and Ghulam Nabi Azad, another Communist from
Hyderabad who came here during the struggle."

http://www.frontlineonnet.com/fl1521/15210360.htm

by charvaka Sun Apr 22, 2012 1:13 pm

Rashmun wrote:
charvaka wrote:I recognize your innate need to praise and hero-worship despots; it is not something I can empathize with.

I only praised the Nizam based on the facts presented in your favourite Indian newspaper--The Hindu.

The only facts that The Hindu took a position on was that an event took place when people made some claims. There were many families that benefited from the Nizam's rapacious regime in Telangana, and they will only be too happy to defend the regime and rewrite history. Before you joined such apologists, you should have looked into the real history of the Nizam and his misdeeds.

by Guest Sun Apr 22, 2012 1:24 pm

charvaka wrote:
Rashmun wrote:
charvaka wrote:I recognize your innate need to praise and hero-worship despots; it is not something I can empathize with.

I only praised the Nizam based on the facts presented in your favourite Indian newspaper--The Hindu.
The only facts that The Hindu took a position on was that an event took place when people made some claims. There were many families that benefited from the Nizam's rapacious regime in Telangana, and they will only be too happy to defend the regime and rewrite history. Before you joined such apologists, you should have looked into the real history of the Nizam and his misdeeds.

Let us consider for instance the following facts from the Hindu according to which Nizam did a lot of good work in the field of education. Do you dispute these facts?

----

Today, everyone is on the fast track and very few stop to remember the
last Nizam -whose contribution to his people never was and never will be
matched. The ruler who was praised by great leaders like
C.Rajagopalachari, Jawaharlal Nehru, Dr. Ambedkar and even the imperial
British. Rabindranath Tagore wrote in praise of the first vernacular
University established in 1917 by the Nizam, "I have long been waiting
for the day when, free from the shackles of a foreign language our
education becomes naturally accessible to all our people.'' Up to 11 per
cent of the Nizam's budget was spent on education - schools, colleges,
universities and even a Department for Translation was set up. Primary
education was made compulsory and provided free to poor sections of
society.

http://www.hindu.com/thehindu/mp/2002/09/09/stories/2002090900640200.htm

by charvaka Sun Apr 22, 2012 1:37 pm

Rashmun wrote:
charvaka wrote:
Rashmun wrote:
charvaka wrote:I recognize your innate need to praise and hero-worship despots; it is not something I can empathize with.

I only praised the Nizam based on the facts presented in your favourite Indian newspaper--The Hindu.
The only facts that The Hindu took a position on was that an event took place when people made some claims. There were many families that benefited from the Nizam's rapacious regime in Telangana, and they will only be too happy to defend the regime and rewrite history. Before you joined such apologists, you should have looked into the real history of the Nizam and his misdeeds.

Let us consider for instance the following facts from the Hindu according to which Nizam did a lot of good work in the field of education. Do you dispute these facts?

----

Today, everyone is on the fast track and very few stop to remember the
last Nizam -whose contribution to his people never was and never will be
matched. The ruler who was praised by great leaders like
C.Rajagopalachari, Jawaharlal Nehru, Dr. Ambedkar and even the imperial
British. Rabindranath Tagore wrote in praise of the first vernacular
University established in 1917 by the Nizam, "I have long been waiting
for the day when, free from the shackles of a foreign language our
education becomes naturally accessible to all our people.'' Up to 11 per
cent of the Nizam's budget was spent on education - schools, colleges,
universities and even a Department for Translation was set up. Primary
education was made compulsory and provided free to poor sections of
society.

http://www.hindu.com/thehindu/mp/2002/09/09/stories/2002090900640200.htm

Yes, I do dispute them. Most of the education spending went to education in Urdu exclusively. Urdu was imposed even in primary education; no education was provided in Telugu at the primary level. Most villages in my home district did not have access to primary schools in the Nizam's time. Schools were set up after liberation.

by charvaka Sun Apr 22, 2012 1:40 pm

Rashmun wrote:So the first point to note is that when the Indian government called Kasim Razvi 'Nizam's Frankenstein Monster' they acknowledged the fact that although the Nizam may have had a role in creating him,

Why "may"?

Rashmun wrote:The second point to note is that it is not disputed that there were muslims in the state of hyderabad who were for the merger of the Nizam's state with India.

Yes, many poor Muslims fought alongside people like my ancestors in that struggle. The Razakars targeted Hindus for their campaign of terror, and the Muslim neighbors of their victims came to their aid.

Rashmun wrote:Kasim Rizvi was free to say what he wanted to but the fact is that Razakars did target muslims who were for the merger. One last point: i realize Kasim Rizvi was a crackpot but it is possible some fanatics may be imputing false quotes to him. For this reason it is better to give the url of the site from which one is copy pasting the purported quotes of Kasim Rizvi from.

Overall, on the Razakar question, this is what you are doing:
Nizam's generous side and love for books ClutchingStraws

by charvaka Sun Apr 22, 2012 1:46 pm

Rashmun wrote:Charvaka, can you give the source of these quotes (book or url)? Thank you.

K.M. Munshi's The End of an Era. Munshi was the Indian Union's Agent in Hyderabad, and was Sardar Patel's man on the ground.

Rashmun wrote:Meanwhile, consider the following:

-----
Falsifying history

PARVATHI MENON

....The autocracy of the Nizam undoubtedly had a pro-Muslim, anti-Hindu aspect
to it. The Nizam's administration was largely Muslim, Urdu was imposed on
his subjects, and the Razakars' actions were targeted against Hindus.

I considered it, and all my points are accepted as truth by the writer.

Rashmun wrote:What is not emphasised in the current debate is the fact that Hindu
deshmukhs and jagirdars formed part of the support base of
the Nizam. A section of Dalits joined the Razakars' forces, and a number
of Hindu religious maths lent support to the Nizam's regime.

Yes, there were rich Hindu landlords who took the Nizam's side. This fact is duly emphasized by the liberation song I posted: there is a verse that talks about what the jAgIrudArulu and zAminudArulu did.

Rashmun wrote:
Another historical
fact that is suppressed is the backlash against innocent Muslims after the
police action. Thousands of Muslims were massacred by Hindu communal elements
in Shahapur taluk in Gulbarga district of Hyderabad Karnatak, in Kushtagi
(Raichur district), and in Latur Omerga and in Osmanabad (Bombay presidency).

Yes, there were massacres of Hindus in the Marathi and Kannada speaking regions of the Nizam's state. Telangana did not see these reprisals to a similar extent.

Rashmun wrote: Muslims also participated in large numbers in the struggle against the Nizam.

Correct. This is exactly why I blame the Nizam and his Razakars, not the Muslims of Telangana, for what happened.

by Guest Sun Apr 22, 2012 1:52 pm

charvaka wrote:
Rashmun wrote:So the first point to note is that when the Indian government called Kasim Razvi 'Nizam's Frankenstein Monster' they acknowledged the fact that although the Nizam may have had a role in creating him,
Why "may"?

--> because the person who actually made the appointment of Kasim Razvi was not the Nizam, but the Nizam's Prime Minister.

charvaka wrote:
Rashmun wrote:The second point to note is that it is not disputed that there were muslims in the state of hyderabad who were for the merger of the Nizam's state with India.
Yes, many poor Muslims fought alongside people like my ancestors in that struggle. The Razakars targeted Hindus for their campaign of terror, and the Muslim neighbors of their victims came to their aid.

--> so i take it you agree that the muslims who fought alongside your ancestors must have also been targeted by the Razakars.

by charvaka Sun Apr 22, 2012 2:01 pm

MaxEntropy_Man wrote:more:

http://helloji.wordpress.com/2008/04/11/nizam-of-hyderabad-fifth-on-the-forbes-all-time-wealthiest/

The Nizams stole prodigious amounts of money from their people. Take that fortune of $210 billion and compare it with the population of Hyderabad state at the time -- about 10 million people. Let us say that an enlightened despot would have amassed just $20 billion, not $210 billion during his rule. (That number would still be higher than the fortunes of most Indian "royals"). The remaining $190 billion would amount to over 9 lakh rupees per capita. That is how much wealth was stolen by the Nizam from each of his subjects. Telangana's per-capita income today is Rs. 35,000 a year -- after decades of development and economic growth. If we assume just 2% annual growth post-liberation for 60 years, Back when the Nizam was overthrown, the per-capita income was Rs. 10,000 back then. To put this another way, the Nizams amassed 90 years of each person's per-capita income through their ruthless exploitation of the country.

by charvaka Sun Apr 22, 2012 2:04 pm

Rashmun wrote:
charvaka wrote:
Rashmun wrote:So the first point to note is that when the Indian government called Kasim Razvi 'Nizam's Frankenstein Monster' they acknowledged the fact that although the Nizam may have had a role in creating him,
Why "may"?

--> because the person who actually made the appointment of Kasim Razvi was not the Nizam, but the Nizam's Prime Minister.

Who appointed that Prime Minister, you? The buck stops at the sovereign leader -- the Nizam.

Rashmun wrote:
charvaka wrote:
Rashmun wrote:The second point to note is that it is not disputed that there were muslims in the state of hyderabad who were for the merger of the Nizam's state with India.
Yes, many poor Muslims fought alongside people like my ancestors in that struggle. The Razakars targeted Hindus for their campaign of terror, and the Muslim neighbors of their victims came to their aid.

--> so i take it you agree that the muslims who fought alongside your ancestors must have also been targeted by the Razakars.

No, they were not. The Razakars targeted the Hindus just for being Hindu; they attacked any Muslims who supported the Hindus, but did not go after Muslims just for being Muslims. That is the difference.

by Sponsored content