Nangeli – Unravelling The Mythicised Subaltern Feminist
By Deepthy Krishna D
‘What is history, but a fable agreed upon?’ is an oft quoted saying of Napolean. The words of Napolean keep on reverberating even in this 21st century constantly reminding us that history is nothing but a well-knit story accepted by the majority and that majority involves those in power. Mostly the mainstream history is written by people from upper class/caste having the ‘high culture’ prejudice of Mathew Arnold in mind and negate the narrative of subaltern voices to occupy the positions of voids in history. They resort to either evasion or mythification of such voices making them unable to perform the voice of agency in the power cycle. This brings to the forefront the question of legitimacy for the subaltern narratives in the paradigmatic framework of the accepted elite metanarrative. Such a similar chapter was the Nangeli chapter in Kerala modernity.
Nangeli was born to an era which witnessed the darkness of casteism in the form of caste oppression. ‘The caste atrocities aggravated in Travancore dynasty with the imposing of heavy taxes on the lower caste people by Queen Umayamma to counter the deep economic crisis occurred due to a Mughal invasion in Venad dynasty way back in 1680s. This has been recorded by historians like P Shankunni Menon who have written Travancore History’ says Dr Ajay Shekher. These taxes were numerous and included talakkaram, mulakkaram (breast tax), meeshakkaram etc amounting to a number of more than 100 infamous taxes per se!. The matter we need to ponder here is why the hell these economic burden upon the avarnas only and not everyone?. The reason was simple. They never obliged the caste varna system for they carried the legacy of Buddhism which was rooted in equality and brotherhood. This fact is often neglected by the mainstream historians. This is being recorded by many historians like Dr Sugathan, P C Alexander, Gail Omvedt ,Dr Ajay Shekher etc through their writings. The crude dehumanising practise of such tax imposition continued until 19th century. What made it to continue like this? People might have protested for sure and those who protested might have brutally repressed as well. In such a scenario, think about a lady from a lower stratum of the society, who is well aware of her fate daring to choose the path of protest against this heinous act of Mulakkaram in 1803! That too by cutting her breast and becoming a martyr! That was what make Nangeli a feminist! It’s not that she cut her breast to safeguard the morality of women but she dared to raise her voice against the injustice of heavy taxation even sacrificing her life when all men kept silent fearing death. For those who negate the possibility of Nangeli as a feminist saying that all men and women living in those times were subscribed to bare breast torso, should bear in mind that the same was a choice for women in upper caste and no tax were levied upon them either their breast were covered or not! No upper caste woman who dared to cover their breast in public sphere were humiliated through forceful striping! This was not the case with women from lower caste! The feudal lords of the time misused their authority to collect taxes forcefully from the Avarnas even resorting to dehumanising practises of physical power and authority. It is in this backdrop we need to assess Nangeli. Historians like Manu S Pillai who tries to negate Nangeli's voice of agency should evaluate these elemental realities of comparison between upper caste and lower caste woman of the times!
Her martyrdom in the year 1803 recorded by many local historians is being relegated as myth by many mainstream historians just because she is a third world Avarna woman, a “Subaltern” if said in the words of Gayatri Chakravarti Spivak. The perception of Subaltern is Brahminic mode of identity subversion of the oppressed classes by the hegemonic upper caste theoreticians per say! Considering the instance of suicide of Bhuvaneswari Bhaduri in Can the Subaltern speak?, one can draw parallels between Nangeli and Bhuvaneswari in the lines of how misappropriation in history happens in instance of women’s martyrdom. The land near Cherthala where Nangeli lived had been for a long time referred to as Mulachiparmabu. Many local historians like Dalitbandhu N K Jose have written books depicting the story of Nangeli under the title Mulachiparmbu. But the Collective amnesia have renamed the land tactfully erasing Nangeli’s history as myth. However, the story of Nangeli as a warrior still remains in the collective memory of the people of Kerala reluctant to fade away in the format of folktales. Those who tries to dig out the graveyard of Nangeli for an archival reference often seems to be oblivious of the fact that she resisted in an age of darkness and that too Infront of hegemonic and barbaric patriarchal forces who never give a way for any such documentation of valour from the lower caste section anywhere in history.
The observations of the critic J Reghu in his article in Madhyamam under the title Nangeli’s Martydom and Modern Kerala needs to be mentioned here. He points out that ,Nangeli’s martyrdom to safeguard the dignity of human body itself ascribes to her the position of being the first feminist in Indian and Kerala history. But the mainstream historiographers side-lined this revolutionary act of a woman due to her Avarna-Ezhava legacy; by mythicizing it. The ancestors of Nangeli while interviewed by many researchers including Dr Ajay Sekher (Nedumpurakkad , Veliyil family) records their persisting fear of being tormented as liars due to lack of documentation even in this 21st century. The unchallengeable valour of such a woman in history should not be devalued due to her lowly genealogy and lack of agency.
Kerala is known for its progressive left politics and modernity. This tradition dates back to the time of 3rd century BC when this land embraced the all-inclusive ethical elements of Buddhism into its folds. The regressive and dehumanising practises of Brahminic Hinduism engulfed the serene shores of this land around 10th to 12th century CE. The historical injustice meted out to those people who stood for justice and brotherhood is a continuing paradigm now. Nangeli was one among them. She is the precursor to Kerala modernity who questioned the hegemonic injustice even before many men of valour including Arattupuzha Velayudha Panicker, Sree Narayna Gurudevan etc came to the forefront to fight injustice. It’s high time we need to unravel the homogenised envelope of history that fails to acknowledge these real gaps within it.
(Deepthy Krishna D, Researcher, DEFL, Cochin University of Science and Technology (CUSAT))
References
Loaiza Peñafiel Estefanía, and Gayatri Chakravorty Spivak. Can the Subaltern Speak? Afterall Books, 2020.
Foucault, Michel. Discipline and Punish. Knopf Doubleday Publishing Group, 2012.
https://ajaysekher.net/2012/08/28/nangeli-mulachiparambu-breasttax-travancore/
Reghu,J. Nangeliyude Rekthasakshithwavum adhunika Keralavum , Madhyamam weekely.
By Deepthy Krishna D
Comments