‘A straightforward narration’
MADRAS — A 400-Year Record of the First City of Modern India, Vol. 1 — The Land, the People & Their Governance. Edited by S. Muthiah; Palaniappa Brothers, Konor Maligai, 25, Peters Road, Royapettah, Chennai-600014. Rs. 900.
A.R. Venkatachalapathy
To mark the 300th anniversary of the founding of the modern city of Chennai, a landmark publication, The Madras Tercentenary Commemoration Volume, was published in 1939. This volume, the first of a projected set of three, at least in its form and bulk, is reminiscent of the earlier commemorative volume. The volume is edited by S. Muthiah who has over the last few decades almost single-handedly kindled scholarly and antiquarian interest in the history of this fascinating city. This volume is concerned with ‘Land, the people and their governance’, and comprises 17 essays by writers, many of whom are members of the Association of British Council Scholars, Chennai Chapter. The aspects covered include geography, archaeology, history, religions — Hinduism, Islam and Christianity — administration, and governance.
Geography
The first chapter on the geography of the city is useful, discussing the physiography, climate and ecosystem. The chapters on wildlife, demography and archaeology are the pick of the book. Theodore Baskaran, writing on the wildlife in the city, marshals a surprising amount of information on the flora and fauna, and of course the great danger they are facing with unplanned development, apathy and wanton destruction by the state as well as the populace. C. Chandramouli’s chapter on demography presents data covering more than a century since the earliest census. Valuable information on growth rate, density, sex ratio, migration, literacy, and religious and linguistic composition is provided in easily comprehensible maps, tables and charts. S. Suresh gives useful information on archaeological finds in the vicinity of the city.
The editor states in his prefatory note that the “volume attempts a straightforward narration of the history of the particular subject being covered, with … no opinions being expressed.” Presentation of facts implies selection which in itself implies a perspective. Facts may be likened to empty sacks; unless interpretation is put into them, they do not stand.
It is perhaps no coincidence that the most useful chapters are the shortest. Many others are needlessly prolix packed with too much information, a fair amount of it having little direct bearing on Chennai. The chapter on military history could easily have been pruned by half, and the ones on governance and administration, and law enforcement and judiciary could have been collapsed into a chapter each. The chapters on the history of Madras and on political parties add little to our existing knowledge, while the one on the empowerment of women is rambling and does not take into account new research especially on the role of the Dravidian movement in its self-respect phase.
Factual errors
A weakness of the volume is, in amassing so much information, there are many errors of fact. To cite only a few instances, Kalingattu Parani is not a Sanskrit work but a Tamil classic. The information on Subramania Bharati is misleading: he did not start the weekly India in Pondicherry but only moved it from Chennai when he took political refuge in French India. When M. Karunanidhi became Chief Minister in 1996 it was the fourth time he was sworn in, not the third. The absence of any reference to the anti-Hindi agitation of 1937-39 is a major omission. Shoddy copy-editing with inconsistent spelling also causes some confusion. The remarkable Muslim intellectual Dawood Shah’s name is spelt differently in different places.
Despite the avowed commitment of not expressing opinions there is a statist bias in many of the chapters. The paragraph on the Mappilla rebellions would have done our colonial masters and historians proud. The agrarian discontent at the root of the rebellions culminating in the great uprising of 1921 which was brutally suppressed by the colonial police and army is not even hinted at. It is treated as a law and order problem created by fanatics.
The touch of the editor who is the foremost authority on the history of the city is not much in evidence in this volume. It is hoped that the forthcoming volumes will make up for the weaknesses of the present endeavour.
Printer friendly
page
Send this article to Friends by
E-Mail
Book Review
