CHAPTER – II

EMERGENCE OF PALAYAMS

The term “poligar” derives from Palayakaran in Tamil

indicating the holder of a palayam which usually meant an armed

camp.1 In Kannada it was called as ‘Peleyara’, in Telugu as

“Palegadu” and in Marathi “Palagar” conveyed the same meaning

as the holder of camp or barony on military tenure. They had

collected the revenues mainly for the maintenance of the military

force. The poligars of Tamilnadu controlled their pollams as that of

the feudal barons of Medieval Europe during the seventeenth and

eighteenth centuries and represented an important institution in the

history of southern part of the Indian peninsula.2

Before the advent of the Nayaks of Madurai, the old system of

Desakaval, Sthalamkaval were in vogue. But the Nayak rulers of

Madurai had modified and corrected the system and introduced in

such a way, so as to establish their hold over the territory since the

pancha pandyas were spearheading their struggle for independence

from Tenkasi and other Mavali chiefs such as from Manamadurai,

the Chola Princes, the local Chieftains, the Sethupathis of Ramnad

1
K. Rajayyan, “Indian in the Eighteenth Century”, Prof. A.P. Ibrahim, Kunju’s Felicitatin Volume,
Trivandrum, 1982, pp.1-3.
2
R. Sobhanan, “Origin of Poligar Systems” Poligars and Pattagars, p.53.
and others causing troubles, Narks maintained this institution.

Guided by these Viswanatha Nayak saw the wisdom of effecting a

settlement which would pacify the chieftains and serve the needs of

the times. The result was the acceptance of the Poligari system. K.

Rajayyan too conformed this view and points out that “the collapse

of the established order, the constant presence of the threat of

foreign invasions the independent spirit of the inhabitants and the

inability of the new sovereigns to assert their authority in

overwhelming strength created a situation favourable for the rise of

the poligari system”.3

With these end in view, Viswanatha and Ariyanatha allowed

the Poligari system in the areas with slight modifications. Hence

the palayams were not an invention of the Nayak rules but a

development of existing set up.4

As a result of these, Naik Viswanatha gave recognition to 72

palayams and entrusted the defence of each of the 72 bastions of

the Madurai fort with a poligar. Either through their inheritance

from the ruling houses of the past or by their military might or in

recognition of their distinguished service to the state, the poligars

gained possession of their territory.5 Out of the 72 palayams

3
K. Rajayyan, Rise and Fall of the Poligars of Tamilnadu, University of Madras, Madras, 174, p.
4
R. Sathianathaier, The History of the Navaks of Madurai, rpt., Asian Educational Service, New
Delhi, pp.58-62.
5
Ibid., p.6.

2
created, by that time, most of them were functioned under

Kambalattar as chieftains and were made poligars of the territory.

They rose to high position by sheer dint of their merit and devotion

to duty. S. Kadhirvel also says that it seems probable that a few

Nayak Palayams might have been created by the Nayaks to

maintain balance of power had paid good dividends.6 The

establishment of Kambalattar palayams might have accelerated the

Kambalattars to move in groups and to settle in those places where

their kith and kin were living in neighbouring parts of Tamil land.

Naturally it led to the migration of men and women of the

community from the Vijayanagar Empire resulted the rise of

Kambalattar population. Since they could not rely on local

inhabitants they were living with their own people. T.V. Mahalingam

points out that with the expansion of the Empire in the south, a

large class of dependents and fortune seekers migrated to

provincial courts.7 Telugu dynasty got the support of Telugu army

too resulted their expansion into every quarters of the empire.8

Viswanath also encouraged their immigration into particular place

of Tamil region with the intention of getting the tacit help of his own

men in resisting the native opposition.

6
S. Kadhirvel, A History of Maravas 1700-1802, Madurai Publishing House, Madurai, 1979, p.29.
7
T.V. Mahalingam, op.cit., p.10.
8
LA, Vol.XLIII, 1914, p.113.

3
 Koil Olugu records that Viswanatha built many houses and

encouraged their rehabilitation. Further, Poligar memoris states

that numerous adventurous chieftains migrated to the Tamil

Country accepting grants of lands. The availability of the large

tracts of uninhabited lands was also one of the factors which

attracted Kambalattars to penetrate into the various parts of Tamil

land. K. Rajayyan in his History of Madurai remarks that there were

31 palayams in the district of Tirunelveli. But Guruguhadasa Pillai in

his work Tirunelveli Seemai Charitram says that there were 32

palayams in the Tinneveli district. The following Palayams in the

Tirunelveli region and settlement with the East Indian Company for

Fasli 1199/1200 i.e. 1979-90.9

Madurai district records also confirm the list except one

palayam, namely Kolarpatty.10

From Nelson’s “The Madura Country” A Manual, we come to

know that there were 24 Palayams in Dindigul region. 11 But

9
Revenue Settlement Record Fazli 1199/1200, i.e., 1979-90, p.39.
10
The following are the thirty one palayam – 1. Sivagiri 2. Ettayapuram 3. Uthumalai 4.
Naduvakurichi 5. Thalaivancottai 6. Surandai 7. Kadumbur 8. Singampatty 9. Urkad 10. Maniachi 11.
Panchalamkurichi 12. Melmandai 13. Elayirampannai 14. Nagalapuram 15. Kadalkudi 16. Attankarai
17. Mannarkottai 18. Pavali 19. Alagapuri 20. Kollapatty 21. Kolarpatty 22. Chokampatty 23. Saptur
24. Sandaiyur 25. Elumalai 26. Sennelgudi 27. Kulathur 28. Peraiyur 29. Seithur 30. Avudaipuram 31.
Kollamkondan.
11
They were as follows: 1. Kombai 2. Erassakkanaickanur 3. Thevaram 4. Bodinaickanur 5.
Gundappanaickanur 6. Vadakarai 7. Devathanapatty 8. Thottiankottai 9. Nilakkottai 10.
Ammaiyanaickanur 11. Ambathurai 12. Thavasimadai 13. Emmakkalapuram 14. Maranoot 15.
Sukkampatty 16. Madur 17. Eriodu 18. ulliappanaickanur 19. Idaiyakottai 20. Mambarai 21. Ayakudi
22.Palani 23. Virupakshi and 24. Kannivadi.

4
Cumbum and Gudalur were under Amani or direct collectorial

management.

R. Gowri in her work points out that there were 10 palayams

in Madurai district and 6 palayams in Manaparai taluk.12

Among the Palayams of Madurai, the places like

pulliappanaickanur and Nilakkottai are repeated. The two palayams

included in the list of palayams of Dindigul region. Lingamanaick of

Natham was also one of the leading Palayams. Another hurdle is

whether Manapparai was a palayam or not? From the records

Manapparai was also treated as a palayam. From these factors we

can also include Natham in the list. If we take into consideration of

the above places as palayams the number arrives at 73. But the

popular and widely accepted notion is that there existed 72

palayams only.

Regarding the existence of 72 palayams there were different

accounts by different scholars. The poem quoted in the book

“Kathir Kamam”, by Kulasabanathan gives names of the different

Palayams. The details of Palayams as gleaned from the poem is as

follows:

12
Madurai Palayams – 1. Valayapatti 2. Pulliappa Naickanur 3. Valeakunrum 4. Sirupalai 5.
Nilakottai 6. Nadukkottai 7. Kilakkottai 8. Jothilnaickanur 9. Utthappa Naickanur 10. Doddappa
Naickanur. Manapparai Palayams – 1. Kumaravadi 2. Marungapuri 3. Veeramalai 4. Cadavoor 5.
Ramagiri 6. Togaimalai

5
 Of the above 72 palayams nearly 47 were the Kamabalattar

Palayams and were under the control of the Kambalattu Poliagars.

They were Panchalamkurichi, Ettayapuram, Melmandai,

Nagalapuram, Kadalkudi, Attankarai, Mannarkottai, Pavali,

Kollapatty, Saptur, Sandaiyur, Peraiyur, Elumalai, Senelgudi and

Kulattur in Tirunelveli region. Errasakanaickanur, Thevaram,

Bodinaickanur, Gundappanaickanur, Devadhanapatty,

Thottiankottai, Nilakottai, Ammaiyanaickanur, Ambathurai,

Thavasimadai, Emmakkalapuram, Maranootu, Sukkampatty, Madur,

Eriodu, Pulliappa Naickanur, Idaiyakottai, Mambarai, Ayakudi,

Virupakshi and Kannivadi in Dindigul region. Kumaravadi,

Marungapuri, Veeramalai, Cadavoor, Ramagiri and Togaimalai in the

Manapparai region and Nattam, Jothilnaickanur, Uttappanaickanur

and Doddappa Naickanur in Madurai district.

WARFARING ACTIVITIES OF KAMBALATTU POLIGARS

The Kambalattu poligars, according to Mackenizie

Manuscripts, were noted for their heroism, honesty, devotion to

duty, and aptitude for sacrificing themselves for the cause of their

sovereigns, the Nayaks of Madurai. Due to their valour and

unflinching loyalty they rose to the highest position and respect.

6
 The Kambalttu Cheiftains, afterwards Poligars of the

respective Palayams, accompanied Kotiam Nagama Nayak during

his southern expeditions and did an exemplary service for the

success of Nayak Chief. The noted among them were the Poligars

of Virupakshi, Idaiyakottai, Eriodu, Panchama Naick of

Ammayanaickanur. Kulappa Naick of Nilakottai and Sakara

Thammaya Nayak of Mambarai.13 The Poligar of Sukkampatty

accompanied Viswanatha when he was commanding the army to

the south so as to punish his disobedient father. Some of the

poligars of the community rendered their loyal support to

Viswanatha during his southern expeditions against the Pancha

Pandyas in the battle of Kayattar. Dhandu Kulappa Nayak of

Nilakkottai. Bala Muthaiah of Sukkampatty, Thoppula Naick of

Reddiambadi,14 Somayanaick of Ramagiri, Jothilnaick of Chensuvadi

and the poligar of Thottainkottai took a leading part in the battle.15

During the succession dispute between Ragunatha Thevan

and Thambi (illegitimate son of Kuttan) the Raya issued the

instruction forthwith to several poligars to furnish large bodies of

troops for the chastisement of the rebel Sethupathi Ragunatha

Thevan. Ramppayan, the commander-in-chief and prime minister,

13
Mackenzie Mauscript, D 3846.
14
Ibid., D 3161.
15
Ibid., D 3004.

7
was directed to march against Ramnad and bring the Dalavay to

Madurai dead or alive.

The gallant Ranghana Nayakkar was sent with him as his

second in command and every precaution was taken to ensure

speedy and decisive success.16 Poligars of Nilakkottai,

Sukkampatty, Chensuvadi, Ayakudi, Reddiambadi, Thottiankottai

and Virupakshi played a leading role towards the cause of their

sovereign in the struggle. When there was a ‘struggle between

Chokkanatha of Madurai and Vijayaragunatha of Tanjore, Kampanna

Kondammanaick of Ayakudi Thirumalai’ pappala Chinnappa Nayak

of Virupakshi and Somayya Naick of Ramagiri accompanied him and

proved their honesty in all possible ways.17

CLASHES AGAINST BRITISH

After the death of the Emperor Aurangazeb in 1707 and

Queen Meenakshi in 1737, a power vaccum arose as far as the

southern part of India was concerned. Both the indigenous and

foreign powers interfered in the power struggle relentlessly so as to

establish authority over others. The indigenous powers like the

Marathas, Nizam and Nawab of Arcot played a key role, the other

local rulers sohas Hyder and Tippu of Mysore, the Raja of Tanjore,

16
Ibid., D 3161.
17
Ibid., D 011.

8
the Tondaiman of Pudukkottai, the Sethupathis of Ramnad, etc. had

their own aspirations. So, southern province was a battle ground for

the foreign and auxiliary powers of the land. Between 1747 and

1792 (the treaty of Carnatic between the English and the Nawab of

Arcot) there were Kalaidoscopic political change and battles galore.

Eventually the English by having superior arms and tactics

succeeded. The Kambalattu poligars were freedom loving people

and hence they opposed the foreign domination whenever they

faced. As General Welsh points out the poligars of this community,

Thottia Naicker were “a race of rude warriors habitated to arms and

independence had been but lately sub-dued and those of

panchlamkurichy, were the hardiest and bravest of the whole”.18

The Board of Revenue urged the necessity of adopting

coercive measures for curbing the spirit of disobedience evinced by

the poligars in the Dindigul region, especially Vellaia Naick of Palani,

Gopia Naick of Devadhanapatty and Gopala Naick of Viruppakshi.19

The Devedhanapatty poligar was dispossessed of his palayam due

to his disobedience.20

The Poligars of Kannivadi gave protection to Gopia Naick of

Devadhanapatty and therefore warned seriously. 21

The collector
18
General Welsh, “Military Reminiscences”, p.57.
19
Madurai District Records, Vol.1106, dated 2295 of 1796.
20
Ibid., Vol.1113, dt. 30.6.95.
21
Ibid., Vol.1111, dt. 28.7.95.

9
also warned the Poligar of Kannivadi for oppressing his ryots and

protecting those who were disobedient to the East India Company

contrary to his promises. 22 Kamiah Nayak, the Poligar of Saptur had

been overthrown when he failed to pay tribute, was caught and

executed. 23

After 1763, the British interfered in the affairs of the native

rulers in collusion with one power against the other and accelerated

the rate of its sphere of interest in the southern parts slowly but

surely. The conclusion of company’s treaty with the Nawab of Arcot

in 1787, formulated and established a dual system of administration

in the southern region of Tamilnadu. The English excercised

military authority and controlled foreign affairs while the Nawab

administered revenue and justice in the territory. The British East

India Company had got also the right to collect the customary

tribute from the poligars. As K.Rajayyan points out that finally the

civil authority succumbed to the authority which wielded the power

of sword. The co-existence gave way to British hegemony.24

Hence the Poligars were required to serve two masters both

the Nawab and the East India Company. Since the Poligars were

permitted to retain their armed forces, intrigues, interferences,

22
Ibid., Vol.1113, dt. 30.6.95.
23
M.Wilks, Historical Sketches of the South India in an attempt to trace the History of Mysore, rpt.,
Asian Educational Publishers, New Delhi, 1989, Vol.1, p.389.
24
K.Rajayyan, History of Madurai, Madurai University, Madurai, 1973, p.322.

10
commotion, and conflicts were common between themselves and

seldom hesitated to defy the company’s authority.25 Mean while the

agents of the Nawab also instigated the Poligars to withhold their

tribute to the company.26 The earnest attempt of the company to

modify the provisions of the Treaty of 1792 bore no fruit till the

death of Nawab Mohammed Ali in October 1795. The company

directed the Poligars not to obey the orders of the new Nawab

Umdut-Al-Umra unless it was proceeded through the company’s

direction.27

There were many factors for the insurrections of the poligars

against the authority of the East India Company. The hereditary

rulers were treated in a humiliating way; the sons of the soil were

treated like dogs; scant respect was paid to the age old inherited

customs of the land; peasants were deprived of their right to due

share of their crops and what remained to them was “Vellum,

water”. The company had also deprived rulers of Carnatic and

Tanjore of their political rights.28 The company set aside the rulers

of the succession of Poligars in their pollams concerned and

nominated persons according to their whims and fancies. As a part

of its global struggle the French Directory sent its emissaries to the
25
Political dispatches to England, Vol.2, p.316.
26
Ibid., Vol.2, p.318.
27
Political dispatches to England, Vol.5, pp.83-84..
28
K.Rajayyan, op.cit., p.342.

11
southern province for propagating revolutionary principles and

kindling nationalist risings. The Sultan of Mysore also promised help

to the rebels. Bribery and corruption crept into every department of

the revenue administration. Inefficient administration and natural

calamities too intensified the unrest among the inhabitants.29

The company officials terrorized the inhibition and flourished

on the extracted wealth and the spoils of the artificial famine. In

1748 the monsoon also failed. Despite the starvation and mass

exodus, the evil forces combined together in oppressing the

people.30 The renters and assignees increased the prices of their

articles. The dual system also created ill-feelings between the

Company and Poligars. The Poligars paid tribute to the company on

the condition of protection from the latter, but the English refused

to defend Poligar’s interest as the sovereign rights of the Nawab

came in the way. At the same time the poligars could not appeal to

arms as the English undertook to enforce obedience of the chiefs to

sircar. So the poligars held that the English were responsible for

this predicament, and so their subsequent resistance to authority

assumed anti-British characters.31

VEERAPANDYA KATTABOMMAN AND POLIGAR WAR

29
Ibid., p.344.
30
R.C.Vol.91, p.4729.
31
K.Rajayyan, op.cit., p.325.

12
 The discontented people had made up their mind to support

the Poligars who were not in good terms with the Company. The

rebel Poligars of Panchalamkurichy, Virupakshi, Yelayirampannai

and Kulattur formed a confederacy besides the rebels of Sivaganga

and Ramnad.32 They had refused not only kist but also made

frequent incursions into the Sarkar village.33

William Collins Jackson, the Collector of Peiscush, Tirunelveli

was a rude man had insulted Kattabomman, the poligar of

Panchalamkurichy led to the Poligar rebellion of 1799.34 The

poligars refused to meet even the Collector Stephen Rumbold

Lushington despite his repeated requests in this regard. Hence Lord

Wellesly sent a large army to the south for the suppression of

Polligar rebellion.35

Maj. John Bannerman, the Cammander of the British forces

assumed its command in June 1799 and started his military

operations against the rebel poligars. Bannerman’s ultimatum to

Kattabomman to meet him at Palayamkottai on 4th September

ended in vain.36 So the British forces marched towards

Panchalamlkurichy “The Gibralter of the East” on the 5 th September.

32
Revenue Sundries, n.d., Vol.26, pp.450-451.
33
R.C.Vol.96, pp.1562-70.
34
Military Consultations, Vol.253, pp.50-51.
35
K.Rajayyan, op.cit., p.350.
36
R.C.Vol.98, p.2904.

13
Again the attempt of Bannerman for negotiation through Ramalinga

Mudaliar had also ended in failure.37 Therefore Bannerman ordered

his troops to advance so as to breach the walls of the mud fort and

seize it. The British thought that the fort was not a vulnerable one

for their attack. Now, to their surprise, the disappointed

commander of the forces recorded his feelings. Thus: “the attempt

was preserved in so long as there was a shadow of success and

never was European energy more gallantly displayed than the

officers on this unfortunate occasion”.38 The reverses of te

besiegers were partly due to the heroic resistance of the rebels and

partly the calculated indifference of the Indian troops in the

Company’s service.39

Despite the set back, the British forces under Bannerman

continued the siege and reinforcements came from different places

for further attack. At last the Company’s forces faced the

resistance of the rebels with great tenacity of purpose and dexterity

of skill. The poligars had no other way than to evacuate the

“Dreaded Fort”.

By that time the rebel forces at Nagalapuram, Kollarpatty and

Kovilpatty were defeated and several other poligars surrendered

37
R.C.Vol.98, pp.2706-11, Major Bannerman’s Letter dated 5th September, 1799..
38
K.Rajayyan, op.cit., p.354..
39
R.C.Vol.98, pp.2715-18..

14
and pledged their loyalty to the company. They captured

Sivasubramaniapillai, Minister of Kattabomman and Soundara

Pandya Nayak, brother of the poligar of Nagalapuram as prisoners

and hanged them publicly at Nagalapuram and Gopalapuram

respectively.40 Meanwhile Kattabomman and his supporters were

arrested from the jungles of Kalapore in Pudukottai and handed

over to the English by Raja Ragunatha Tondaiman. On the 16th

October 1799, Bannerman brought the rebel chief to an assembly of

the poligars at Kayattar and sentenced him to capital punishment

while the numerous chiefs witnessed the whole scene in awe and

astonishment. Kattabomman behaved like a rebel leader. Being

“undaunted, supercilious in the course of mock trial, he walked

with a firm and daring air and cast looks of sullen contempt on the

Poligars to his right and left. He was taken to a conscipicuous spot

and executed”.41

The Madras Council condemned the relatives of Kattabomman

to perpetual imprisonment and shut them in the fort of

Palayamkottai.42 They blocked the pollams of Panchalamkurichy,

Yelayirampannai, Nagalapuram, Kollarpatty, Kadalkudi and

40
M.C Vol. 296, p.2918.
41
R.C. Vol.98, pp.2877-84..
42
Lord Clive in Council, 8th November 1799, R.C.98, p.2879, Major Bannerman’s Letter dated
17.10.1799.

15
Kulattoor.43 Parts of the territory of Panchalamkurichy were ceded

to the Poligars; the fort was razed to the ground and their armed

men disbanded.44 In 1799 the Company assumed the

administration of the village watch from the Poligars and entered

into a settlement with the Nawab.

END OF UMATHURAI

After the hanging of Kattabomman, the British Government

imprisoned his brothers Umathurai and Sevathaih with some

relatives into prison at Palayamkottai.45 The Poligars of Kollarpatti,

Kulathur, Nagalapuram and Ezhayirampannai were captured and

imprisoned at other places.46 Despite these retaliatory measures,

the company had also resorted to enforce repressive measures,

against poligars and the common people. All the forts of the

poligars were razed down and forbidden. The company had also

ordered that all the inhabitants of pollams to surrender their fire

arms and prohibited them from manufacturing such weapons.47 The

company rewarded its allied poligars of Ettayapuram, Maniazhi and

Melmandai with honours.48 The British drastic measures against the

poligars has aimed to annihilate their spirit of independence and

43
R.C.Vol.98, p.2948..
44
Secret Sundries, 24th June 1800, Vol.21, pp.1080-81.
45
T.Welsh Military Reminiscences, Vol-I, p.51.
46
R.C.Vol.98, p.2797-2804..
47
Madras Council 8, November 1799.
48
A.C. Vol.110, p.1579-80.

16
power of resistance, but it had produced disastrous consequences.

However the repressive policy in consequence prepared the minds

of the people for more determined struggle against the English.

Of the seventeen persons imprisoned at Palayamkottai, after

the fall of Panchalamkurichi in 1799,two of them had been died

within fifteen months due to the unhygienic conditions prevailed in

the prison and the inhuman treatment meted out by them.49

Gopalnaick the poligar of Virupatchi and the organizers of

Dindigul league, were not only sympathetic towards the rebels of

Panchalamkurichi shut into the prison of Palayamkottai. Hence

planned a diplomacy to liberate them from their perpectual

imprisonment. Meanwhile the rebels in the prison had secretly

established communication with their outside leaders and planned a

scheme to liberate themselves from the clutches of the company.

In 1801 rebellion started in various parts of South India. The

rebel leaders held secret meetings at Kombadi Sillankulam and

Oddanatham and chalked out of secret plan to free the imprisoned

leaders kept in the prison of Palayamkottai.50 In January 1801, the

insurgents 336 in number led by Kaduvetti Naicker and Pandian

Sherogar started from Panchalamkurichi, in groups towards

49
Bishop Caldwell, Tirunelveli, p.172.
50
Jagavira Pandyanar-Panchalamkurichi Veera Charitram Vol-II, p.46-47..

17
Palayamkottai. In order to avoid suspicion with the enemy of its

agents, they disguised themselves as pilgrims going to the sacred

temple of Tiruchendure. Clad in yellow clothes, playing kavadi,

chanting man thrans, blowing the conch shells, distributing the holy

ash and securing offerings from the votaries, the rebels reached

Palayamkottai. The procession went through the streets around the

fort and the prisoners inferred that the relieving party had arrived.

A few days later they reappeared in the town as hawkers, carrying

loads of fire wood, plantain leaves and fruits. The local inhabitants

could not purchase from these people because of the exorbitant

prices they demanded from the buyers, finally the hawkers moved

to the street of the govt and shouted “Plantain leaves”, “Fire wood”

and “Fruits”. The sepoys of the fort wanted to make purchases, but

turned away on learning the high prices. Everything proceeded

according to the predetermined plan.

ESCAPE AND RENEWAL OF WAR

However, amidst the support of outsiders, and by the clever

strategy of rebel prisoners in the Palayamkottai for they escaped on

2nd February 1801 and renewed Poligar wars against the British.

The chief rebels escaped from the prison were Umathurai, Sevatiah

and Duraisingam, the brothers of Kattabomman and few others.51

51
M.C.Vol.281, p.217.

18
The fugitives joined by large groups of armed men at Palayamkottai

and on the way, rushed to the Walnaad hills, a rugged area of

difficult access situated on the borders of Panchalamkurichy.

Though the forces of the Company pursued the rebels in quick

succession they could not capture the fugitives.52 Despite the

situation the insurrections spread from the Walnaad Hills to other

parts. The rebels had taken the military posts in various parts of

the Panchalamkurichy surprisingly and established their authority.

Umathurai was declared as the chief Poligar of Panchalamkurichy

and all the inhabitants had been summoned to join their ranks.53

Responding cheerfully, the people revolted against the British

and reconstructed the demolished fort of Panchalamkurichy with

mud, sand and husk and put it in a defensible state within six days.

When large sectionof people belonging to various communities

rallied to the support of the rebel leaders, the rebellion became a

most popular movement. The inhabitants of the circar territory and

the servants of the Nawab had also joined the rebellion. Within a

short span of time, the rebels occupied all the territories extending

from Panchalamkurichy to Srivaikundam and Alwarthirunagari and

52
Ibid., Vol.289, p.2671.
53
Ibid.,Vol.296, pp.2504-06.

19
released the prisoners who were under the company’s military

custody.54

Subsequently the rebels rebuilt the demolished forts of

Nagalapuram, Kolarpatty, Cadalkudi, Kulattur and

Yezhayirampannai and converted them as their stronghold. 55 The

insurgents overpowered the Company’s garrisions at Tuticorin

easily and made all preparations to capture Tirunelveli and

Palayamkottai.56

However, Colin Macaulay, the Company’s commanding officer

on knowing at Tirunelveli deployed the company’s forces in the

strategic places and then marched their forces towards

Sankarankoil, then to Kayatar and reached Kadayanallur, six miles

short of Panchalamkurichy. Loyal Poligars to the company like

those of Ettayapuram and Sivagiri furnished information about the

rebel movements.57 Then the company’s forces encamped near

Panchalamkurichy on the next. To their astonishment they found

the demolished fort “raised as it were by magic in six days” and

every part of it well manned by thousands of armed men.58 The

rebel forces defended the pagoda of Ottapidaram and compelled

54
Ibid., Vol.279, p.988.
55
Ibid., Vol.279, p.728.
56
Ibid., Vol.279, p.880.
57
Ibid.,Vol.285, pp.881-882.
58
M.C.Vol.279, pp.886-887.

20
the alien army to retreat. They were also successful in repulsing

the attack of Captain Hazard over Kadalkudi. The rebels directed all

their efforts to reduce the Company’s military post at Srivaikuntam

under Maj. Sheppard and overwhelmed it.59

While the rebels were gaining victory the company sent

reinforcements into Tirunelveli. Macaulay assembled with the

forces at Kayattar on the 30th March 1801 and advanced towards

Panchalamkurichy to meet the challenges of the rebels. Despite the

heavy preparations, the English army could’nt overpower the

rebels. During the struggle, this was the fifth reverse of the British

forces at Panchalarnkurichi.60

The complete failure of the British forces in this savagous

battle appeared to them perfectly inexplicable as the success of the

insurgents in their defence of the breach seemed miraculous. The

rebels appearing on any part of the wall were instantly shot though

quickly replaced by others. But it was in the immediate defence of

the breach that the defenders wrought havoc on the hostile

columns.

The British could never reach the rebels and could seldom

imagine from where the blow was struck. Behind lines of the spikes
59
Ibid., Vol.280, pp.1781-83.
60
On previous occasions, Alexander Heron, Willam Fullarton John Bannerman, Colin Macaulay,
sought to storm the fort but miserably failed.

21
men the insurgents standing on an elevated spot kept up a heavy

fire, while others posted on the bastions engaged the advancing

troops in a deadly contest. The gallantry and devotion that

endowed them with what they lacked in discipline and striking

power, enabled them to repulse the successive assaults. Therefore

James Welsh declared “the system of defence adopted by these

savages would have done credit to any engineers.

Having failed to surmount the rebels, the English instituted a

blockade of the fort of Panchalamkurichi and waited for the arrival

of reinforcements from Madras, Arcot, Malabar etc. Hence the

grand army under the command of Agnew marched from Kovilpatti

to Panchalamkurichi on the 23rd of May. On the 26th May the British

forces advanced to the fort with a heavy cannon fire but the rebels

repulsed the enemy’s on slaught heroically. In the arduous contest

that ensued both the combating parties suffered equally heavy

loses. Yet the British fired heavily without interruption; made

breaches on the fort and was finally it was taken by strom. The

insurgents left the fort with a thousand of their compatriots dead.

The vanguished rebels led to the Marava states of Sivaganga,

Ramnad and also took shelter under Gopala Nayak of Virupakshi in

the Dindigul region.

22
 The leader of the rebellion was Umathurai, a deaf and dumb

brother of Kattabomman. He was called in different appellation by

different people like Dumby or Oomee among the English, as

Mookah by the Muslims and Swamy among his followers. As a man

of sickly appearance, he possessed a masterful mind and

commanded tremendous influence on the rebels. Colonel James

Welsh who had taken part in the second poligar war, describes, “the

Oomee was adored, his slight sign was an oracle and every man

flew to execute whatever he commanded. No council assembled at

which he did not preside, no daring adventure was undertaken

which he did not lead”.

Being a man of action mathurai executed all the schemes

which aimed at the annihilation of the Company’s administration.

He pursued the guerilla tactics against the enemy’s forces as he

was well aware of the inferiority of the Poligars in arms, ammunition

and strength of troops. He believed in the mass movement against

the English and sought the co-operation of the different sections of

the people but could not succeed in that endeavour. He took no

retailiatory measures on individuals, for they permitted the English

officer at Tutukudi to go off in safety and generously granted full

liberty to Macaulay’s troops after the discomfiture at

23
Panchalamkurichi. In general Umathurai was a brave, god-fearing

and a intelligent man.

As a dreadful enemy of the English, he master minded the

formulation and execution of the plans which were aimed at the

annihilation of imperialism. Together with his brother

Kattabomamn, he engineered the organization of the Tirunelveli

league against the company in 1789. He accompanied his brother

to Ramnad and when the sepoys appeared to arrest his brother,

alerted his followers and manoeus to escape. He method of

representing the English was extremely simple by which he

collected a few little pieces of straw and arranged them on the palm

of his left hand to represent the British force then with other signs

characteristic of a man and a whizzing sound, drew the other hand

across and swept them off. This was the signal for the attack.

After the fall of Panchalamkurichi the rebels headed by

Umathurai fled towards north. They were driven by the English and

Ettayapuram troops from pillar to post and the captured prisoners

were executed by Agnew himself on the 28th of May. Umathurai

with his wounds still unhealed joined in hands with the rebels of the

Maravas at Kamudi.61

61
K.Rajayyan, History of Madurai, Madurai, 1981, p.362.

24
 When Umathurai reached Kamudhi, Chinnamarudhu took him

to Siruvayal, his capital and attended solicitously to his welfare.

Anxious to relieve the hard pressed rebels of the east, Marudu

Pandyan sent a body of 3000 armed men under the command of

Umathurai, but as the threat to Kalayarkovil assumed serious

dimensions, he recalled him. The villagers came from the remote

places visited the rebel leader Umathurai and gave him with rich

presents. The women of the town collected sundry articles, and

distributed them to the poor and made offerings for the recovery of

the affected rebels.62 The women of Maruthu too distributed sundry

articles in charity seeking the mercy of the god for the safety of

Umathurai.

CONCLUSION

He was very considerate to the weak and helpless. His

qualities made James Welsh to pay a glowing tribute that “he was

one of the most extraordinary mortally I ever knew”.63

The role of palayam was quite considerable for the effective

administration of Naikhs in the beginning was transformed into

rebel activities in the later days with the emergence of poligars

systems. Being very strong, the poligars soon raised their arms and

62
Madras Council-1801 military 285-pp.5051-52..
63
James Welsh, op.cit.,p.33..

25
made insurgence when the English rulers interfered their affairs in

the form of collecting “Kisthi” tax. Kattabomman, being a victim,

became martyr saved the seed for the annihilation of British and

their upon all the neighbouring and successive poligars rallied under

their leaders such as Umathurai, GopalaNaik, Marudhu and others

and took consertive and continuous effort for their annihilations.

26