The debate over whether to see Tipu Sultan, the 18th Century ruler of Mysore, as a patriot or a tyrant has in recent years fueled several political campaigns in Karnataka. Recently, Karnataka Higher Education Minister Ashwath Narayan's claim that Tipu was killed not by the British but by two Vokkaliga chieftans, Uri Gowda and Nanje Gowda, had caused a stir and criticised for being historically inaccurate. But the statement is also part of a carefully crafted narrative built by the British over the years. In killing 'Tiphoo the Tyrant', the colonial aggression of the Company had found its redemption. The siege of Seringapatam in 1799 must have been a remarkably significant event in British history. Why else would it be a favoured subject of British art and popular literature for several decades afterwards? The episode was a landmark moment for British imperial ambition in South Asia, marking the demise of possibly the most famous Indian, or rather 'villain' for the Empire, Tipu Sultan. The Mysore ruler is known to have been the last bulwark against British expansionism in India, and a rather formidable one. In her biography of the ruler, Kate Brittlebank, the leading authority on Tipu, noted how for 30 years, first father Haider Ali and then Tipu himself were at the forefront of British public consciousness. "Terrifying tales of attacks on British forces and threats to trading settlements such as Madras appeared in the newspapers of the day, embellished by distance as they were carried home by sea," she wrote. Through the four Anglo-Mysore wars, exaggerated stories of torture of British prisoners of war, along with their forcible conversions, made their way to the British public sphere with harrowing details. Tipu was perceived as the quintessential 'oriental despot' and frequently referred to as 'Tiphoo the tyrant'. Finally, on May 4, 1799, during the Fourth Anglo-Mysore War, the British managed to finish off Tipu. The attack had been planned quite meticulously by a combined force of the British under General George Harris, the Marathas and the Nizam of Hyderabad who just two years ago had signed a treaty of subsidiary alliance with the British. According to Brittlebank's description of the event, Tipu had stepped out of his palace to investigate a report that one of his generals had been killed. By this time, the enemy soldiers managed to enter the fort and attacked Tipu. Wounded, he fell on the ground. As one of the British soldiers attempted to remove his jewelled belt, the Sultan resisted with his sword. The soldier shot him immediately. News of Tipu's death set off a wave of celebration in Britain. Episodes from the war and the final attack fueled the creative imagination of playwrights, authors and artists. The significance of Tipu's death was also used by the British as moral justification for their imperial interests in the region. Historian Michael Soracoe in his doctoral dissertation written in 2013 noted how, through the attack on Tipu and his domains, the East India Company was able to overcome anxieties associated with the Empire and convince the British public of the legitimacy of its place within the British nation. Figures such as governors-general Charles Cornwallis and Richard Wellesly who, just a few years earlier, were held as figures of disgrace in Britain due to their acts of aggression in India, now suddenly found themselves being absolved of any culpability by historians. Their policies and acts of war were seen as necessary to maintain peace and security in the region. The popular media in Britain also represented Tipu as the oppressor of his own population in Mysore. As Soracoe wrote, it led to the claim that "the Company's invasion of the region were undertaken as acts of liberation, designed to protect the local population from the depredations of a mad tyrant in true paternalistic fashion". The impact this narrative had on the memories and historical consciousness of the local people of Southern India is best evidenced from the way Tipu is remembered by the Kodava community, an ethno-linguistic group living in the Kodagu district of Karnataka, and well known for their martial customs. In Kodava popular memory, Tipu is seen as a religious bigot who massacred several from their community and took thousands as prisoners of war to his fort in Seringapatam where they were forcibly converted. Although this claim is widely debated among historians, the community has remained staunchly attached to this sentiment towards Tipu. The sensitivity of the Kodavas towards the Tiger of Mysore became evident with the widespread protests carried out in the district after the announcement of the Tipu Jayanti celebrations by the Siddaramaiah-led Congress government in 2015. While popular history has its own place in the identity formation of a community, the villanisation of Tipu among the Kodavas must be seen in context of the fact that the community held a unique patron-client relationship with the British through the 19th Century. Kodagu was directly governed by the British between 1834 and 1947. One can speculate how the characterisation of Tipu by the British might have impacted the historical consciousness of a local community they governed and who had in large numbers fought with the British Army during the two World Wars. It is only much later, especially during the Independence movement in India, that Tipu's image was revisited and remodelled as an icon of defence against the British.
