Contested Identities: Hindu–Missionary Interactions in Colonial Travancore—1800–1820s

Abstract

Studies on missionary activities and modernity in the colonial context of India tend to focus on developing new social identities, resistance movements, social reformation, and the agency of the missionaries. In these interpretations, Christian missionary work is seen as an active agency that has broken down caste structure and brought the lower castes to the forefront of society. Such narratives portray Christianity as an agency of social change, insisting on and fostering social equality. While it is true that missionary activities, education and even conversion have played a pivotal role in social transformation, such activities were not without opposition. The resultant social tensions and identity politics remain unexplored. Missionary attempts for proselytization and the resistance of the Hindus resulted in the construction of more complex religious identities. The social history of nineteenth-century Travancore, an erstwhile princely state in India’s south, demonstrates that missionary engagement created many Christians, but the resultant resistance and tensions strengthened Hinduism. The interaction of Hindu–Christian systems and their anxieties have enormously contributed to the strengthening of Hinduism. However, the historiographical narratives, mainly focusing on the role of missionary-Christian-colonial involvement in constructing a model state in the region, do not look at how the Hindus responded to the issues of proselytization and conversions.

1. Multiple Narratives and the Hindu Pretender

The role and contributions of Christian missionaries in the former colonies of South Asia gain wider scholastic attention. Along with the development of European political power, missionary activities and resistance to it strengthened in Travancore, but the academic trend to accept missionary contributions as the root of social change continues. While the development of colonial modernity, which emanates from challenges to the traditional social fabric and changes in the socio-economic order, methods of learning and access to education, gender- relations, modern family systems and legal developments, is examined within the ambit of pro-missionary ‘civilisational discourse’ (Nag 2023, pp. 13–26), the impacts of missionary discourse in constructing or strengthening Hindu identity remains unexplored. The result of negating the Hindu agency was that instead of looking at the dynamic interconnections within Travancore society, the colonial imagination approached them as pagan/heathen idolaters (Sheeju 2015, pp. 298–317). Similarly, the question of what reasons, other than social position, might have persuaded the lower castes to embrace Christianity remains unexplored. Most of the historical work follows the classic narrative of ‘missionary-centered social change’ as evident in the works of Dick Kooiman, Robin Jeffrey, Robert Eric Frykenberg, R.N. Yesudas and Koji Kawashima. Kooiman, in his masterpiece ‘Conversion and Social Equality in India: The London Missionary Society in South Travancore in the 19th century’ (Kooiman 1989), showed how missionary education and conversion influenced each other, negotiating social change. According to Kooiman, the untouchables viewed the missionaries as their arbitrates and leaders, which, over the years, inculcated a sympathetic attitude towards the untouchables. On the other hand, Robin Jeffrey examined the decline of Nayars, a dominant community, in the backdrop of colonial social engineering. Jeffrey showed that several factors accelerated the decline of the Nayar dominance, including missionary engagements that radically challenged the traditional social order in which the Nayars held sway. Robert Frykenberg’s Christianity in India from Beginnings to the Present (2008) attempted to trace the origin of Christianity from a more sophisticated approach. Frykenberg focused on the interconnections of various European missionaries and their role in constructing India’s Raj and geographical identity. Frykenberg’s Christians and Missionaries in India: Cross-Cultural Communication since 1500 attempts to refute the assumption that Christianity is a morbid Western ideology in India. Instead, Frykenberg shows how Christianity built cross-cultural contacts in Indian society by successfully navigating through colonialism and caste structure. Other works on Travancore, such as P Shungoonny Menon’s A History of Travancore from the Earliest Times (1878), Samuel Mateer’s Land of Charity (1871), Koji Kawashima’s Missionaries and a Hindu State: Travancore 1858–1936 (1994), A Sreedhara Menon’s A Survey of Kerala History (1967), R N Yesudas’ People’s Revolt in Travancore (1975), British Policy in Travancore (1977) and Colonel John Munro in Travancore (1977) deal with social issues of pre-colonial societies and the role of colonial missionaries as social agents. In a nutshell, while giving importance to colonialism and missionaries, most of these works map the social change in Travancore in a missionary-centred kaleidoscopic way. P. Sanal Mohan’s (2015) Modernity of Slavery: Struggles Against Caste Inequality of Colonial Kerala (2015) recognises the agency of slave castes in social change, but it depends on the dualism of Hindu evil versus missionary humanism. Recently, Dilip M Menon’s Writing History in Colonial Times (2015) attempted to trace the social cohesions beneath missionary engagements, and Menon argues that these efforts constructed a group of Hindu revivalists such as Chattampi Svamikal. Similarly, in his Religions, Women and Discourse of Modernity in Colonial South India M Christhu Doss has raised some pertinent questions regarding the nature of modernity and its interconnectedness with missionary engagements (Doss 2022, pp. 1–21). Doss argued that the missionaries were preoccupied with notions of secular modernity, employing terms such as equality and respectability to influence the local population.

The common element of these studies, except Doss’s work, is their focus on missionary engagement as an agency of social change. As colonialism and missionary engagements are seen in the larger context of an ‘oppressive heathenism’ and barbaric paganism, which generates the notion of the victims, most historical scholarship focused on explaining missionary engagements in terms of the resultant social change. While various aspects of missionary engagements, such as education, change, modernisation, and identity construction, are focused on, the nature of Hindus’ response to Christianity/missionary activities has not received much attention. There are likely to have been various responses to the actions of missionaries who had been intervening in Travancore society since at least the mid-eighteenth century. Although there is no clear evidence, British attempts, especially under Chief Factor William Gyfford, to subvert the native customs can also be seen in the Attingal Rebellion of 1721 against the British trade establishments. While it is generally accepted that there were religious reasons behind the riots in India in 1857, it is childish to argue that such feelings were absent at the local level. This serious lacuna of scholarship, especially in the context of colonial encounters with prejudices and misconceptions, continues to substantiate forked perceptions of Hindus. Such perceptions are precarious, especially in the context of Bellonoit’s arguments about the ‘educational enterprise’ of colonialism (Bellenoit 2007, pp. 369–94). Therefore, understanding the inter-dynamics of the missionary movement from the side of the Hindus is essential. Otherwise, any attempts to locate missionary policies as Christian Mass Movements or through the ‘voice of opposition or emancipation’ or simply through the missionary documents would substantiate the agonies of the entire Hindus and label them the custodians of caste, hegemony, oppression, or slavery (Joseph Mathew 2022, pp. 27–29).

A significant problem that curbs studies on Christian–Hindu interaction in colonial Travancore is historiographical. At the bottom line, the missionaries had succeeded in presenting themselves as having ‘charismatic authority’1 in their documents. The missionary documents narrate that the missionaries, who stood on the side of the Bible and represented the ‘true God and truth’, saved the primitive, uncivilised heathens of Travancore by using their charismatic authority. In this enigma of the ‘Hindu evils’ versus missionary goodness’, which the missionaries constructed by their privileged position in political-techno circles, the Hindu ethos of Travancore was misrepresented. The leading sources for the study of missionary–Hindu engagement are produced by either missionaries or their sympathisers. Since the amenities of education and propagation, such as European languages, the printing press, and publication techniques, remained under the exclusive custody of missionaries, the Hindus of Travancore in the eighteenth and mid-nineteenth centuries were left without historical sources. Travancore, terrified by the EIC’s economic exploitation and political power, did not have the intellectual capacity to effectively engage with the pro-Christian interpretations of the missionary discourse. Coupled with a lack of knowledge of English and a practical ignorance of missionary epistemology, the Hindus were terrified and unable to resist the flood of missionary narratives. In the practical spectrum, this feeling of ‘Christian domination’ has been evident since the arrival of Colonel Munro in 1810, who openly challenged the Hindu domination in Travancore’s administration (Hacker 1908, pp. 27–28). Since the time of Colonel Munro, the missionaries were regarded as privileged, and the privileged role of missionaries as a powerful community, in both power politics and epistemology, pushes us to accept the historical concepts they used. Such a lacuna also pushes the Hindus to be represented through the missionary lens. We are also forced to accept the missionary writings as first-hand evidence; the only possibility is to read them between the lines. Such an attempt is employed for this study.

This article attempts to explain missionary engagements from the side of the Hindus of colonial Travancore. This article admits that it is problematic to equate contemporary Hinduism with that of colonial period. Instead, this article defines Hinduism to refer to certain indigenous religious practices, customary rites and belief systems from which the modern, popular form of Hinduism stemmed since the early twentieth century.2 The point of taking such a position is to clarify that the system of religion we understand today as Hinduism is an amalgamation of continuity and constant change. This understanding is essential in distinguishing the relationship between Hinduism and Christianity in Travancore. While it is true that pre-colonial societies had a different set of socio- structural issues and that scholars on missionary education are interested in focusing on social transition in the missionary period, they seem to be cautious not to focus on how the intervention of the colonial missionaries bifurcated the social stratification and how such interventions constructed images of the Hindus of Travancore. Colonial administrators and missionaries always went high in their representation of the ‘beastly and weird character of the pagan Gentoos’ while preaching the civility/Bible to the natives. The missionary engagements in Travancore provide a classic example of how the missionary imagination misrepresented Hinduism as a set of pagan superstitions3. In addition, the missionary documents demonstrate that the missionaries had constructed the image of an irrational, pagan Gentoo by abusing and mimicking its credentials. What is more important in the missionary attitude towards Hinduism was their insistence on dualism, a classical ideology of Semitic religions. Besides employing the categories of Christians and non-Christians, the missionaries also invented the Savarna–varna dichotomy as a marker of Hinduism and represented it as a watertight compartment. Instead of seeing the Hindu identity, they employed terms such as Brahmins, Nayars, Shanars, Pulayas, etc., as social categories. The critics of Hinduism may argue that there was no Hinduism but only caste identities. While it is correct to ascertain that caste differences existed, it is also not proper to argue that the feeling of caste was the only criterion and that no commonality has been shared among the different Hindu sects or castes. Similarly, it is also not right to ascertain that caste acted as an agency to construct a closed society where no human interaction took place. On the contrary, caste and caste-feud existed, but social interaction navigated through trade, agriculture, festivals, medicine and education. However, the missionary narratives do not recognise how caste configured social interactions, but instead insist on caste as a pretext to justify missionary engagements. Such positions were part of the missionary agenda, and the missionaries could employ it as Hinduism remained an unorganised religion throughout the nineteenth century. Since early adversaries to European colonialists were all Hindus and Muslims, Europeans viewed Christians as fellow travellers. Ironically, Christians were considered supporters of colonial advancement, and the Hindus and Muslims as enemies. Such an imagination is well-reflected in the writings of Bartolomeo Paolino:

“But I will here repeat, that the native Indians are the strongest support of the Europeans. The Pagans and Mahometans are naturally enemies to the Whites, as they call the Europeans; because they have no familarity to them, either in their external appearance, or in regard to their manners, their religion, or their, interest. If the English and Dutch, therefore, do not endeavour to secure the friendship of the Christians in India, on whom can they depend? How can they hope to preserve their possessions in that remote country?”

(Paolino 1796, p. 207)

The Austrian Carmelite missionary Bartolomeo Paulino’s words share the expectations of missionaries on the one hand, and the Hindus’ perceptions on the other hand. Still, we cannot clarify whether the EIC officials acted according to Paolino’s line or were hesitant to take a direct step. However, later events show the development of cordiality between the EIC officials and missionaries, and that is clearly emphasised by Ringeltaube as:

“Protestant Christianity in its early phase was identified to a considerable degree with the British political power. Col. Macaulay, the first British Resident to Travancore, showed great interest in starting the work of Ringeltaube…The connection between the Resident and CMS missionaries continued for many decades. In 1814, when Col. Munro obtained a grant of two fields for the mission, Ringeltaube wrote, ‘this grant firmly establishes the Protestant religion in Travancore…The missionaries also received many other privileges as British subjects”

(Joseph Mathew 2022, p. 30)

2. Missionaries in a Hindu Land

William Tobias Ringeltaube, aged 36, a Prussian missionary associated with the London Missionary Society, arrived in Travancore on 30 April 1806. Also known in later times as ‘Ringeltaube the Rishi’ (Frykenberg 2008, p. 165), he chose Travancore as his destination in the hope that the lesser presence of Europeans would benefit evangelical services. In his letter to a friend dated 11 September 1806, Ringeltaube explained his anxieties as:

“Long experience has taught me that in large towns, especially where many Europeans are, the Gospel makes but little progress. Superstition is there too powerfully established, and the example of the Europeans too baneful”

(Lovett 1899, p. 22)

Ringeltaube came to create the Kingdom of Jesus through preaching the Bible. Still, he was unhappy about the condition of the ongoing missionary activities in the region. Many structural factors -language, taboos, caste, customs, conventions and beliefs- prevented the mission’s speedy success. However, the most potent barricade against proselytization was the opposition of the Hindus. Soon after his arrival, Ringeltaube wrote, “…My timid companions trembled at every step, being now on ground altogether in the power of the Brahmans, the sworn enemies of the Christian name.” (Hacker 1908, p. 18) This expression of Ringeltaube, made after his first entry into Travancore after obtaining a passport with the help of Colonel Macaulay, the British Resident, explains the ground reality of religious tensions. Ringeltaube’s only hope was generous officials, such as Col. Macaulay. Col Macaulay also helped Ringeltaube gain permission from Bala Rama Varma (r. 1798–1810), the king of Travancore, for a mission at Mayiladi near Kanyakumari. Ringeltaube’s expressions, ‘my timid companions trembled’ and ‘Brahmans, the sworn enemy of the Christian name’, indeed show the tension between Christianity and Hinduism. Ringeltaube’s feelings also show his impression that missionary work was dangerous in Travancore. Further, his expressions of relief in recovering his life after encountering the Hindus underline that the Hindus were not passive onlookers. For instance, Ringeltaube writes:

“…and, indeed, a little occurrence soon convinced us we were no more on British territory…As soon as I came to the village the Brahmins rushed out in a body from their street, and followed me wherever I went with a terrible noise. I was glad to escape into the fields. Having returned, I found refuge in a house, and exhorted the candidates for Christianity. At my leaving the village I had again the Brahmins at my heels, and sure no pack of hounds ever made a more hideous noise. What they said I could not understand, as they spoke in their own tongue”

(Holmes n.d., p. 10)

Ringeltaube’s apprehensions about Brahmins were not without a reason. In terms of inter-religious interactions, regions adjacent to south Travancore had already been tense since the 1730s. The murder of a Portuguese missionary named John de Britto by Raghunatha Kilavan Sethupathi, the King of Ramanathapuram, on charges of converting his feudal lord Thadiyathevan, was one of the earliest reactions of indigenous Hindus against missionary work in South India (Talwadi 2023, p. 19). Irrespective of such occasional setbacks, the missionaries had already succeeded in constructing a network of churches, fellow travellers and sympathisers through a line of devoted disciplines. While Bartholomäus Ziegenbalg and Heinrich Plütschau, pioneer German missionaries to south India in 1706, succeeded in launching missionary activities in and around Tranquebar, more devout European missionaries and native disciplines followed them. The Danes were established in Tranquebar as early as the 1620s, and ‘there are occasional references in official documents to the duty of converting the non-Christians’ (Neill 1985, p. 28). These European missionaries and their sympathisers, including Christian Frederick Schwartz, Johann Caspar Kohlhov, Rasa Clorinda, Vedamanickam,4 Serfoji Maharaja, Nellaiyan Vedanayakam Sastriar, Sathyanathan Pillai and Chinnamuttu Sundaranandam David, disseminated the new Veda to more regions. Frykenberg notes that by 1797, Sathyanathan Pillai and Sundaranandam David, a disciple of Schwartz, were making electrifying success in conversion (Frykenberg 2008, p. 209). While the influence of these ‘foreign elements’ was already alarming the Hindus, attempts of the recent converts to practice the customs of their now separate identity, jeopardized the existing social harmony.

Irrespective of the ‘Hindu concerns’, the missionaries continued proselytization. Their strategy was to choose a palpable native as a lead agent to push the proselytization program. Missionaries employed a strategy of creating indigenous followers capable of socialising, developing followership and reaching out to the entire community. Even when missionary documents claim that these indigenous lead-agents were attracted to the ideas of Christianity and pleased with the missionaries’ conduct, it was not so simple. The Missionary Register documents the concerns of missionaries about the ‘intelligent natives’, especially in Madras, who were ashamed of expressing the fact that they were baptised (The Missionary Register 1815, p. 82). Therefore, the missionaries meticulously ensured that their disciplines, known as ‘Helpers of God’, ‘Pilgrims of God’, or Upadesiars of God, were trained men devoted to converting more people to Christianity (Frykenberg 2008, p. 159). However, many lower castes took religious conversion to escape the baneful procedures of untouchability and social stigmatisation, as evident in the words of the uncle of Sundaranandam David; ‘I am glad to see that you behave so kindly towards us and make no distinction of caste (Frykenberg 2008, p. 209). While the acceptance of the new Veda, the Bible, protected its followers from purity-pollution norms, the elevated position of their former slaves added fuel to the already burning hearts of Savarna Hindus.

An inquiry into the reasons behind the apathy towards Christianity also shows that Hindus could sense the religious motives of Christian missionaries. An examination of missionary documents shows two reasons for the apathy of Hindus towards Christian missionary activities. On the one hand, the missionary attitudes towards the indigenous belief systems, worshipping patterns and ritual traditions expressed unwarranted contempt. For instance, Bhadrakali, a ferocious form of goddess associated with Lord Shiva, a prominent Hindu deity, was represented as a female demon (Mateer 1883, p. 61). While the goddess Bhadrakali is ferocious, she is not an offshoot of a demonised character, but her anger expresses a situation-specific behaviour that missionaries distorted. Similarly, Hindu gods and goddesses were deemed to be primitive and represented as worthless in the missionary imagination. For instance, a letter from Rev. Charles Mead dated 10 August 1819, reads:

“We attempted to expose the folly and wickedness of the sacrifices offered to the cruel goddess, insatiably greedy of blood. But to whom did we address ourselves ?——to persons pretending to be under the inspiration of Satan; and counting it their glory that the Devil had seized and possessed them! Crowds of people paraded every street, indulging themselves in gestures and lanage bordering on insanity; while there dishevelled hair, and horridly painted countenances, presented a picture of the confusion and wretchedness of the pit below!”

(The Missionary Register 1820, p. 219)

Such narrations, exaggeration and abusive vocabularies are abundant in nineteenth-century missionary writings, and they demonstrate the limitations of missionaries in developing cross-cultural understanding. That is the reason why Hindus were regularly represented as ‘Sattan worshipers, devil-priests, demons’ and their gods as ‘delights in blood, cruelty and lust’ (Mateer 1871, pp. 197–98). Lack of sensitive approaches towards the local systems and biased attitudes have persuaded the missionaries to distort Hindu belief systems, which they employed very well to strengthen proselytization. For instance, Isaac Henry Hacker, an LMS missionary, wrote:

“Maharasan (as he was then called) with his nephew had set forth from his home in Mylady, near Cape Comorin, to seek in the Hindu shrines of South India that enlightenment and spiritual peace denied him in the crude demon-worship of his own country. He passed from temple to temple till he reached the great shrine at Chidambaram, which was the goal he had set before him, and to which he had brought his offerings from his village house. But here he found wickedness and impiety rampant, and the worship was as crude and unspiritual as any he had ever seen. Here, as he slept in the temple court, he is said to have had a dream of one in white who rebuked him for coming there. He ordered him the next day to return southwards, where he would receive enlightenment. He set off homewards, and at Tanjore stayed with some Christian relatives, and here he found the Gospel, which was to him, as he said, “ like the sudden shining of a star to one wandering in thick darkness”

(Hacker 1908, pp. 20–21)

Words expressing White racial supremacy were not unusual in missionary vocabulary. Since missionaries came to convert and conquer souls, they employed the language of the master to depict indigenous systems as pagan and barbaric. For them, accepting anything positive in the native tradition meant abandoning the mission altogether. It was natural that Brahmins, as a dominant community, foresaw the danger of missionary philosophy that aimed to replace the Hindu way of life with that of Christianity. However, there can be a question of how the writings and representation of Hinduism provoked the Hindus who remained mainly outside the field of missionary literature. To answer this question, we must consider that proselytization is a multifaceted enterprise. The missionaries or their acolyte followers visited village after village, spreading stories about Jesus and his miracles. And, to glorify Jesus, they abused native traditions.

The Hindus were concerned about the rise of conversion, which was noted as early as the 1730s. The life of Neelakanda Pillai can be used to draw how conversion to Christianity created internal discord in Travancore. Pillai was a Nayar official in the court of Marthanda Varma (r. 1729–1758), the first ruler of modern Travancore. Pillai’s close friendship with Eustachius De Lannoy, the Dutch Commander of the Travancore army, took him to the Christian faith (Mackenzie 1901, p. 80). Pillai and his wife, Kunchu Veedu Bhargavi Amma, were baptised in 1745 by Father Bouttari Italus, a Jesuit missionary, and named Lazarus and Teresa. Though official records are scanty, Church Chronicles and travel writings show that both husband and wife were subjected to social ostracism and torture after conversion. It is believed that the chief priest of the kingdom and the Nair lords accused Lazerus of treason. While Theresa was forced to leave her village, fearing reprisal, Lazerus was arrested and deported from Travancore. It is reported that Lazerus, after going through torture and abuse, was shot on 14 January 1752 at Kattadimala in Kanyakumari District. Whether the reasons for Pillai’s mysterious death were more due to his conversion or, as has been alleged, to his Dutch connections is difficult to say5. What was certain about conversion to Christianity was that it was not accepted in Travancore or Cochin, a neighbouring state. This restraint was placed not only on the caste Hindus, but anyone converting to Christianity was not well-accepted. Such concerns are reflected in the writing of the Carmelite missionary Bartolomeo Paolino:

“The king of Travancore threatens with imprisonment and death every nobleman who shall quit his court to become a Christian and who shall afterwards fall into his hands; and indeed Nilampulla, an officer of a noble family, was shot at Arampalli because he refused to renounce the religion of Jesus Christ”

(Paolino 1796, p. 208)

Paolino also writes that he met four Nayars imprisoned at Trivandrum for embracing the Christian faith and that the civil magistrate of Paravur detained him for converting a family of eleven people (Paolino 1796, pp. 208–9). Paolino shows that he could save himself as the king awarded him Virasrimghala, a form of honour. The cases of Lazarus, Nayars and Paolino demonstrate a deep sense of anger against conversion to Christianity. They also show that the Travancore administration was concerned about the growing presence of foreign missionaries in the region.

3. The Hindu Response

We observed Travancore’s civil-political society’s apprehensions about the growing number of religious conversions. The Hindus had been opposed to missionary work and conversion efforts since the time of Rev. Ringeltaube. There are indications that many people, fearing Hindu resistance, had not cooperated with the missionaries (Joseph Mathew 2022, p. 28). To operate in such circumstances, the missionaries required diplomatic strategies. The early missionaries, including Ringeltaube, knew that proselytization needed political protection. Therefore, missionaries including Ringeltaube Engaged in proselytization while befriending the Company officials. Neither the East India Company (EIC herefater) nor its officials were involved in proselytization directly until 1813, but their friendship with the missionaries constructed the messages (Mackenzie 1901, pp. 43–44).6 While befriending the Company officials on either Christian or common European identity, missionaries hoped that enhancing the social position of the converts could help proselytization efforts. A classic example of the missionary-colonial relationship is well-demonstrated in the conversation between Ringeltaube and Velu Thampi. The conversation goes as,

“Of what religion are you? asked Velu Thampi

Of Colonel Macauly’s religion, answered the missionary [Ringeltaube]

I never knew there was such a religion,” [Diwan Velu Thampi].

(Mateer 1871, p. 262)

On the one hand, the missionary success in maintaining cordiality with colonial officials guaranteed special privileges and concessions for their converts. On the other hand, the Hindus were pushed to get acquainted with colonial hegemony, religious conversions, and sacrilege of their customs. The responses of the Hindus to missionary efforts were actually against these degrading social realities. Of these various Hindu movements that continued throughout the nineteenth century, the Hindu-centric struggle of Velu Thampi invites significant attention.

Velayudhan Chempaka Raman Thampi (1765–1809), a Hindu landlord and the Diwan of Travancore, was the first to come forward to oppose the excessive interference of missionaries, their religious conversion, and British political influence and to protect Hindu self-respect. We had previously examined Ringeltaube’s anxieties at the time of his arrival in Travancore and the assistance he received from Colonel Collins Macaulay. Macaulay (1760–1836), the son of a Scottish church minister, was very sympathetic to Christianity, and he found in Ringeltaube a fellow traveller. Ringeltaube accepted Macaulay’s warmth and wrote, ‘This worthy gentleman’s goodness towards me exceeded my warmest expectations and can only be accounted for by the Lord having inspired his heart to favour the missionary cause with all his might’ (Hunt 1920, p. 8). Macaulay requested Ringeltaube to stay in Cochin, but Ringeltaube expressed his love for Travancore (Joseph Mathew 2022, p. 28). Additionally, Ringeltaube requested Macaulay to sanction the erection of a church at Mailady7 in south Travancore, and Macaulay promised a church at his own cost (Yesudas 1980, p. 33). Ringeltaube returned to Travancore, hoping that he could now make a church, especially with the support of the British Resident. Dewan Velu Thampi, the Prime Minister of Travancore, turned down Ringeltaube ‘s request to build the church. Thampi’s argument that the construction of a church ‘was an innovation on established customs’ demonstrates the distrust that the natives had about missionaries. As the Dewan opposed the construction of a church at Mailady, Ringeltaube had no other option except to report the matter to Macaulay. Subsequently, Macaulay invited Velu Thampi to Cochin, where he was seated, to discuss the possibility of a church. The exact decision that Velu Thampi took in his discussion with Macaulay is unknown, but it could be assumed that he was persuaded to permit a church in Travancore. Velu Thampi, subordinate to the British Resident, could not directly discard demands from Macaulay. Instead, he devised a strategy to pass the time. The concerns of Hindus regarding the construction of a church and the growth of Christianity are evident from Velu Thampi’s strategy of prolonging the construction of the church at Mailady. Thampi’s reluctance partly explains the tense relationship that the Hindus developed with British administrators and missionaries. At this time, the Government of India had deputed Dr Claudius Buchanan, another missionary, to visit Travancore and report on the condition of Christianity in the region. Buchanan visited the ruler of Travancore and secured the permission to build the church:

“At last the Raja told me, he would himself soon visit the district of Moilady and would then point out a proper place for the church. The Brahmins, I first heard opposed the measure alleging that, the English would soon have the country if they were allowed to introduce the religion into it”

(Yesudas 1980, p. 34)

However, the ‘Hindu anxieties’ of Thampi dissuaded him from sanctioning a new church. Velu Thampi, just like any South Travancorean Hindu of his times, could sense the unethical relationship among the officials, missionaries and converts. To him, there was no difference between Christianity and British power (Pandian 1991, p. 6). Thampi’s experience with the Resident, missionaries, converts and the trio clique might have guided him against Christian influences. The trio clique of Travancore—Thachil Mattu Tharakan, Jayanthan Nambuthiri, and Sankara Narayanan—enjoyed unlimited power in the affairs of Travancore. In his rebellion against maladministration in Travancore, Velu Thampi confiscated Tarakan’s properties. Tarakan tried to escape by presenting his complaint to Macaulay, appealing that his Christian identity was the reason for Thampi’s grudge against him. Macaulay intervened, writing several letters to Velu Thampi not to persecute Tharakan. However, Diwan replied that the resident had no right to intervene in Travancore’s internal matters and punished Tharakan. An insulted and enraged Macaulay threatened Velu Thampi, and wrote, ‘I will not allow you from motives of base enmity to crush any man (though your subject or dependent) if I can and honourably prevent it’ (P. S. Menon 1878, p. 330).

Eventhough infuriated, Macaulay’s words appeared civilized and professional. However, as later events showed, he was personally hurt. The missionary-Macaulay clique exemplifies Macaulay’s interest in his religion, and it is right to think that Thampi’s Hindu sympathies jeopardize the Resident’s plan. The resultant rebellion of Thampi in 1809 was directed against Macaulay, missionaries, and the converts. While Marxist historians narrate the rebellion of Thampi as an example of early anti-colonial resistance, the root cause of the rebellion lies in religion. By the end of 1808, relations between Thampi and the British Resident had worsened. Thampi sought the possibility of establishing a political alliance with the French, Marathas, and Calicut and Cochin, and it is reported that Thampi had sent letters to the kings and chieftains of neighboring principalities, prompting them to initiate a political movement for religion. In his letter to Zamorin, the ruler of Calicut, Thampi explicitly shared his religious concerns that Hindus and Mussalmans would be ‘compelled to acknowledge and observe the faith of Christians and to pay them allegiance’ (Yesudas 1980, p. 38).

On 28 December 1808, Thampi’s forces, guided by Paliyath Achan, the Minister of Cochin, attempted to murder Macaulay. The religious nature of Thampi’s rebellion is underlined by Augur’s statement that ‘they destroyed the old residences of former Dutch Governors, and marched with guns embellished with garlands of flowers dedicated to Siva, the god of Destruction’ (Pandian 1991, p. 6). In the ensuing rebellion, the Resident escaped, but Thampi established himself at Kundara near Quilon and issued a proclamation on 16 January 1809. Through this declaration, which came to be known as the Kundara Proclamation, Thampi declared a clarion call also against Christianity (S. A. Menon 1964, pp. 134–37). In his proclamation, Thampi argued that British rule would lead to the success of Christianity and would destroy Dharma. Thus, declared Thampi; ‘It is the nature of the English nation to get possession of countries by treacherous means… & get low caste people to inflict heavy punishments for slight faults, put up Crosses and Christian flags in Pagodas, compel intermarriages with Brahmin women, without reference to caste or creed, and practice all the unjust and unlawful things which characterise kaliyuga’ (S. A. Menon 1964, pp. 134–37). While post-colonial historiography reluctantly recognized the religious zeal behind Thampi’s rebellion, the missionaries were cautious about it. Missionaries argued that the revolt of 1809 was also a war against the rising tide of Christianity in Travancore. According to Agur, over 3000 Christians, including women and children, were massacred and their dead bodies thrown into backwaters (Agur 1903, p. 536). The anti-Christian nature of Thampi’s revolt was so furious that Vedamanikkam and Ringeltaube were forced to flee (Joseph Mathew 2022, p. 29). Soon after the suicide of Velu Thampi on 28 March 1809, the construction of a church at Mailady began, and Travancore was opened to Christian missionaries. The establishment of a church in Mailady should be understood as the beginning of protestant Christianity in Travancore. The writing of Ringeltaube in June 1810, ‘I sat in the door of my first chapel, and six other chapels are almost built’, validates the connection between the fall of Thampi and the missionary movement (Hacker 1908, p. 24). Colonial-missionary imagination depicted the downfall of Velu Thampi as a marker of God’s compassion on the Christians of Travancore. The fall of Velu Thampi and the subsequent construction of the church at Mailady had already developed the image that missionaries could intimidate the Travancore kings. The success of missionaries in gaining special privileges, Christian judges and tax exemptions for the converts strengthened the image of missionaries as power brokers. Slowly, Travancoreans realised that conversion to Christianity would improve one’s capacity to fight caste and customs, making inroads for the missionaries to convert more people.

4. John Munro: The Gospelist Resident

While the credit of inventing a patron-client relationship between the company and missionaries goes to Macaulay, the reign of Major John Munro (r. 1810–19) shows how colonial administrators used their administrative high-handedness to act as agents of proselytization (Kawashima 1994, p. 96). Macaulay intervened on behalf of the missionaries within the constraints of a political advisor to the British Company. On the contrary, Munro not only crossed such limitations but also showed no difficulty in becoming the voice of the missionaries (Hunt 1920, p. 10). Upholding the contributions of Munro, the Missionary Register praises that Munro’ greatly favoured the mission, and used his influence on its behalf. He procured grants from the Ranee of the bungalow at Nagercoil, in which the missionaries resided, and 5000 rupees for the purchase of rice-fields as an educational endowment, from the income of which the English seminary, established in 1819, has ever since been supported. Similar aid was at the same time rendered to the Syrian Christians and the Church missionaries labouring amongst that people (Mateer 1871, p. 267). The tragic end of Velu Thampi frightened the Hindu dissidents against the missionaries, making Travancore suitable for Munro’s role as de jure and de facto ruler. The Velu Thampi incident forced Munro to believe that the Hindus of Travancore were untrustworthy and that their anti-Christian sentiments would not change. With this in mind, Munro approached the Syrian Christians as loyal subjects and such perceptions were reflected in Munro’s Travancore policies.

Therefore, Munro’s policy of intervention was double-edged, civil and religious. In civil life, he managed all -administrative- political decisions favouring Christianity. For this, he maintained a favourable political climate in the state by successfully mounting pressure on a twenty-year-old regent ruler, Gowri Lakshmi Bai, who Munro managed to appoint. For instance, the Prime Minister or Diwan, the most important position after the king or queen, required adherence to Hindu rituals. Munro discarded the Hindu opposition and pressured the queen to make him the Diwan. After establishing himself as the Diwan in 1811, he took over the administration of nearly 1800 temples in Travancore and put them under the government’s custody in 1812 (Kawashima 1994, p. 44). Although Munro took over the temples under the pretext of raising additional revenue, Munro’s goal was to eliminate the self-governance of the temples. In Travancore, a Hindu theocratic state, an ecosystem of temples was essential for political decisions, and they enjoyed sovereign powers (Aiyar 1912, p. 5). By bringing the temples under the control of the government, Munro eliminated the temple-centric system of the decentralised power structure. Similarly, Munro appointed many Syrian Christians to the government service in Travancore, and the Devaswom and Revenue departments were separated. Hindus were apprehensive about these challenges and opposed Munro’s religious repression and the excessive promotion of Christianity. The Hindus launched a rebellion in 1812 to remove Munro and appoint a Hindu as Diwan, but it was crushed.

In the religious field, he projected himself as the champion of Christianity and tarnished Hinduism by equating it with social evils. He invited the Church Missionary Society to Travancore and ensured they received the necessary assistance, including the service of English clergy (Mathew 2013, p. 31). Indeed, Munro projected social inequality to use the mask of social transformation to demean Hinduism and present Christianity as a modern, egalitarian religion. While the abolition of poll tax and slave labour provided a liberal social reformist image to Munro, his decision to appoint Christian judicial officials and grant holidays for Christians was represented as liberating. Munro’s writings make it clear that there was a distinctly Christian interest behind each of his decisions. While Christian judges were appointed to promote conversion, his goal was to reduce schisms within the Christian world and to secure influence through English education and establish Christianity. With the opening of a ‘college for the instruction of Syrian priests and laymen’, Munro’s fame was well-established in the Christian world. Indeed, Munro succeeded in articulating the colonial-missionary identity of the converts to end forced labour, known as Oozhiyam, and granting Sunday a holiday for converted Christians (Pandian 1991, p. 5). The exemption from tax, granting special protections, holidays and consideration led to a general perception in Travancore that Christianity was the religion of the colonial authorities and that the colonial authorities and the missionaries were trying to defy Hinduism and introduce English usages and customs in Travancore (P. S. Menon 1878, pp. 504–6). The ultimate result of this perception and Munro’s civil-religious policy combination was the Shanar rebellion in Travancore.

The Shanars were toddy-tapping agricultural labourers subjected to social discrimination in colonial Travancore. They stood below the Nairs but above the other untouchables in the social hierarchy. Although technically converted to Christianity, the Travancore government treated both converted and unconverted Shanars equally. In nineteenth-century Travancore, Shanar women were prohibited from covering their bosoms (Hardgrave 1969, p. 59). Munro’s legislation of 1812 granted converted Shanar women the right to cover their bosoms (Aiya 1906, p. 525). The Shanar rebellion began when the Nayars tried to tear the breast-clothes of Shanar women. As a result of occasional disturbances from the 1920s to 1960s, issues of caste, hierarchy, equality, legality, social exclusion, and subjectivity were problematised. During the rebellion, clashes between Hindus and Shanar Christians took place often, leading to violence against missionary schools, churches, and occasionally, the missionaries. The life of Charles Mead, a prominent missionary who won a legal battle for the converts, was attempted (Sheeju 2015, p. 304). Throughout the rebellion, the missionaries accused the Travancore government of supporting anti-Christian politics and that the government was practising intolerance under a profession of toleration. The missionaries also accused the Travancore State of being a ‘priest-ridden, and by no means the model, which it has long been represented to be’ and of persecuting the poor Christians. Frederick Baylis, a missionary, wrote:

“I have never yet known of any complaint bought by one of the lower classes against one of the highest in Travancore receiving proper attention in the police. All the officials are handed together against the unfortunate applicant for justice- all kinds of delays are purposely made, and all types of intimidation and oppression are resorted to until he is wearied out, finding that he only gets further trouble for all his efforts to redress his complaint”

(Yesudas 1977, p. 24)

While accepting the social reform aspect of the rebellion, there is ample evidence to demonstrate that the missionaries played significant roles in infuriating the Shanar rebellion. Travancore would have been plunged into political instability following the Shanar rebellion. The War of Independence in 1857 saved Travancore from not being like Goa under the Portuguese. After the uprising of 1857, the EIC ceased to exist, and the officers lost the right to interfere in the religious matters of the princely states.

5. Concluding Remarks

The article shows that social reform, humanitarianism, and modernisation were part of the missionary program, but they were not the end of the mission. We have evidence that social reform, humanity, religious-racial issues, and even personal egos were the deciding factors in missionary engagements. This article shows that the Hindus of Travancore were apprehensive about the efforts of the missionaries and remained silent, fearing the colonial-missionary alliance. However, whenever the opportunity arose, the Hindus responded in ways specific to protect their faith. In his letter dated 7 August 1815 to Mr Thompson, a missionary, Munro hints at this: ‘During my absence from Travancore, a considerable degree of animosity was manifested by certain Nairs and Brahmins against the Syrian Christians; a circumstance which I regard as fortunate, because it will convince these Christians of the advantages which they will derive from the presence and protection of an English Clergyman.’ Similarly, Jeffrey cites an incident that sheds more light on Hindu–Christian animosity; in 1853, an angry mob of Hindus attacked Charles Mault and Ebenezer Lewis, two missionaries, when they refused to take back their palanquins. They and their wives were on their way near the Suchindram temple. Lewis’s letter to Major General William Cullen, the Resident of Travancore, reveals the missionaries’ racial complex and their prejudice of Hindu beliefs; ‘It is not so much I as a man, but I as an Englishman that have been publicly dishonoured…it was not so much to avenge my personal wrongs, as to defend our common national honour’ (Jefferey 1976, p. 46).

The existing historical narratives tend to neglect such racial aspects of missionary engagements and their impact on constructing complex identities in the region. Instead, scholars, along with the critics of Hinduism, tend to look at the social evils- caste, untouchability, slavery, superstitions, etc- of pre-colonial societies to explain how the missionaries acted as agents of modernisation. Although the missionary involvements helped the lower castes build counter-hegemony and instil more inclusive notions among the caste Hindus, inter-caste and intra-caste identities remained complex. While aiming at proselytization, the missionary grand narratives placed the responsibility for social evils on the heads of Hindus. For example, when Munro decided to abolish slavery, he could do nothing to free either the enslaved people kept in the Dutch church at Cochin for divine service, or a number of ‘half-starved and naked natives in irons as slaves at the Dutch settlement at Changanassery’ (Pillai 1940, p. 55). Instead, the responsibility for slavery in Travancore was interpreted as the evil of Hinduism. Further, the extent to which the converts of Travancore understood the ‘inclusive philosophy’ of the Bible or their success in navigating their ‘elevated position’ in Travancore society needs to be examined. The context for doubting the converts’ immersion into Christianity stems from a more complex identity politics that persists among the Christians of Travancore, even today.

First, it has been pointed out that the early missionary focus on the Shanars ‘prevented other castes from giving attention to the claims of the gospel’, and that the Shanars ‘looked castes below them with contempt’ (Abbs 1870, p. 152). Second, one might think that the Christian communities of Travancore are part of a singular Christian identity. Still, the presence of Latin-Roman denominations, the category of Dalit Christians and their subjectivity as inferiors, and Christian communities who claim and rejoice in a Brahmin heritage indicate the existence of caste-centric identity politics among the Christian communities of Travancore. Such anxieties were represented as early as the 1850s. For instance, Robin Jeffrey quoted one Re. Jacob Chandy Sr saying that ‘Izhavas could not see any spiritual motive for embracing Christianity; rising in caste and freedom from the opposition of the high castes were all that [they] cared for. What did Iravas ask of Christianity? Chandy answered: to be raised to the position of Syrians in the country (Jefferey 1976, p. 146).

What is sure about Travancore’s lower-caste converts is that in their struggles against oppression, they used missionaries and colonial engagements to overcome the oppressive social order. These changes could not overthrow the integral caste consciousness- keeping their local customs, traditions and practices- of Travancore society, and this is one of the reasons why caste is an identifiable marker of Travancore’s Christianity even today. Also, conversion or congregation-making did not create amongst natives a meta-ontological change in the converts. Most often, the converts tried to transform the new spirit, Christianity, in ways specific to their cultural domains and reproduced indigenous categories of Christianity. Of course, missionaries were frustrated with this hybridisation of Indian and European, or in other words, protestant and lower-caste forms of belief systems as a means to escape the caste cruelties. This paper shows that a combined effort of missionaries and the colonial authorities attempted to produce a Christianised civilisation and the converts as their role models in Travancore. To what extent such a process has succeeded needs further investigation. While the combined efforts of colonial administrators and missionaries coerced the state to respond positively to Missionary efforts, the same factors also resulted in the construction of anti-missionary sentiments that define Travancore’s Hindu–Christian identities even today.